Political Forums  

Go Back   Defending The Truth Political Forum > Political Forum > Politicians

Politicians For topics and discussions about politicians, political leaders, or political figures


Thanks Tree44Thanks
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old February 5th, 2018, 09:01 AM   #41
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Oregon
Posts: 1,517
Quote:
Originally Posted by right to left View Post
These messages only seem to work on normal people! But I've been thinking for a long time now that we're ruled by psychopaths! Psychopaths have variations in their intelligence and levels of self-control, but these are not people who are forward thinking by nature, regardless of how book-smart they are! They roll the dice in business, politics, military or the crime world with little or no thought given to consequences of their actions. The Washington pundits who called the generals like "Mad Dog" Mattis the "adults in the room" are either delusional or psychopaths themselves.
You are not making me feel any better. Time for a good fantasy, to replace reality
Athena is offline  
Old February 5th, 2018, 09:07 AM   #42
RNG
Senior Member
 
RNG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Between everywhere
Posts: 29,269
And here's more scary facts:

Make sure you read the last sentence.

More, including links to the sources in the link at the bottom.

Quote:
The next U.S.-Russia nuclear arms race

"A new nuclear policy issued by the Trump administration on Friday ... is touching off a new kind of nuclear arms race. This one is based less on numbers of weapons and more on novel tactics and technologies, meant to outwit and outmaneuver the other side," the N.Y. Times' David E. Sanger and William J. Broad write at the bottom of A1.

Why it matters: "The report describes future arms control agreements as 'difficult to envision' in a world 'that is characterized by nuclear-armed states seeking to change borders and overturn existing norms,' and in particular by Russian violations of a series of other arms-limitation treaties."
"The Pentagon envisions a new age in which nuclear weapons are back in a big way its strategy bristles with plans for new low-yield nuclear weapons that advocates say are needed to match Russian advances and critics warn will be too tempting for a president to use."
https://www.axios.com/nuclear-arms-r...0deb1b330.html
RNG is offline  
Old February 5th, 2018, 09:08 AM   #43
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: massachusetts
Posts: 10,745
We need to revisit the the atomic hand grenade....
goober is online now  
Old February 5th, 2018, 09:15 AM   #44
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Oregon
Posts: 1,517
Quote:
Originally Posted by hoosier88 View Post
The old MAD doctrine name for those weapons was tactical nuclear weapons. The hope was that the name would help channel a Soviet or Warsaw Pact reaction, if it ever came to that. But the Soviets never accepted the idea of a limited nuclear escalation.

I haven't seen anything - not even speculation - about a limited strike on N. Korea, nuclear or not. & of course, any nuclear strike on N. Korea would have fallout for South Korea, our ally, & possibly Japan (another ally) & likely China - a major US trading partner & holding a considerable amount of US debt. N. Korea credibly argues that they would fire all their arty @ S. Korea (just across the border), & invade & fire their missiles & etc. if attacked. They might salvo their nuclear weapons @ the US - or Japan or S. Korea, just to prove whatever it is they're trying to prove.

First use of even a tactical nuclear weapon on N. Korea by the US is very likely unacceptable to the World @ large. US doctrine was against that first use, when the Cold War was still on.
All of that is about feelings and I don't think a threatening president helps. Roosevelt said, talk softly and carry a big stick.

Russia has a history of problems that are probably related to its geography and history of being invaded. What reasons do the Russians have being relaxed and happy people, as the people in mild climates without a history of invasion? Such peace is true for people who have lived on an island for 2 thousand years, but are losing it because of the ocean is rising. My point is, in the right environment, humans can be loving and peaceful. We can not change the climate of Russia, but we can act with understanding.

China has been a sleeping dragon that now faces serious threats because of the size of its population. Perhaps again, understanding and cooperation would work better than hostility? What does China need?
Thanks from right to left
Athena is offline  
Old February 5th, 2018, 09:28 AM   #45
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Oregon
Posts: 1,517
Let us talk about our reliance on nuclear weapons and we have spent money for this rather than education or medical science and care. It is all about fear and private interest that profit from our fear.

https://www.brookings.edu/the-econom...clear-weapons/

Quote:
American people were never given the opportunity to, for example, with the B-2, decide whether they would prefer $100 million of extra spending for schools in 20 additional American cities or one B-2 bomber.

Now there were a number of strategies we could have pursued. Each one carried with it the types of opportunity costs that the B-2 bomber I just cited, illustrate. Unfortunately an open discussion of these costs were precluded by, first of all, the lack of information that accompanied the Cold War environment and the secrecy that was attendant to that; the common misconception that nuclear weapons were cheaper, and, hence, needed no further rationale; the fact that weapons were so complicated in the nuclear arena; and that deterrence was such an esoteric concept that Congress was forced to rely on the advice of the very individuals who stood to profit if the programs were funded. Independent reviews such as this one were inordinately difficult to perform. And, finally, this massive level of spending was very narrowly focused on a few production sites around the United States and this made nuclear weapons spending ideal for pork-barrel projects.
Thanks from right to left
Athena is offline  
Old February 9th, 2018, 08:58 AM   #46
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Oregon
Posts: 1,517
Quote:
Originally Posted by goober View Post
We need to revisit the atomic hand grenade....
Oh for sure. I think there is an excellent market potential for those, especially if they have a safety device to protect children. They would probably sell well at gun shows, and maybe even Bi-Mart and Walmart could sell them.
Thanks from Clara007
Athena is offline  
Old February 9th, 2018, 09:12 AM   #47
Senior Member
 
Clara007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Arizona
Posts: 9,823
Quote:
Originally Posted by Athena View Post
Oh for sure. I think there is an excellent market potential for those, especially if they have a safety device to protect children. They would probably sell well at gun shows, and maybe even Bi-Mart and Walmart could sell them.


AND every teacher/professor should have one or two handy....just in case.
Thanks from Athena
Clara007 is offline  
Old February 9th, 2018, 09:31 AM   #48
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Oregon
Posts: 1,517
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clara007 View Post
AND every teacher/professor should have one or two handy....just in case.
Good idea Clara, this would keep the children safe.
Thanks from Clara007
Athena is offline  
Old February 11th, 2018, 07:55 AM   #49
end capitalism now
 
right to left's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Canada
Posts: 2,331
Quote:
Originally Posted by Athena View Post
All of that is about feelings and I don't think a threatening president helps. Roosevelt said, talk softly and carry a big stick.

Russia has a history of problems that are probably related to its geography and history of being invaded. What reasons do the Russians have being relaxed and happy people, as the people in mild climates without a history of invasion? Such peace is true for people who have lived on an island for 2 thousand years, but are losing it because of the ocean is rising. My point is, in the right environment, humans can be loving and peaceful. We can not change the climate of Russia, but we can act with understanding.

China has been a sleeping dragon that now faces serious threats because of the size of its population. Perhaps again, understanding and cooperation would work better than hostility? What does China need?
Right! The most assinine thing they do every Sunday on these arms merchant-funded so called 'morning news programs' is the constant use of the word "threat." As in Russian 'threat', Chinese 'threat', North Korean 'threat,' Iranian 'threat' etc.; when all along these are nations being surrounded by hostile US&NATO forces, naval fleets and land bases...and let's not forget, the constant running of wargames planning for future invasions, given the innocuous title "drills."

What has America got? Two oceans on each side, a populous, but largely impoverished neighbor to the south, and a wealthier..but economically dependent neighbor to the nort....so where and when does the US ever face a real security threat? A hill of beans compared to the existential threats posed by the US to other nations that are targeted for regime change or worse, because of their unfriendly responses to US banks and corporations that just want to help them "develop" their economies, while China is specifically threatened for ignoring the costs and burdens of militarization and putting all their marbles in competing(and winning)against the US in the globalization battleground. The US response(the Pivot to Asia)...that started under Obama is essentially the arrogant spoiled brat kicking over the boardgame when he loses a game of checkers! While Russia is a target cause they still present a modest military threat...especially with nukes, which make Russia the most dangerous foe to attack.

Like I've said elsewhere to a few amateur global strategists, Americans need to know what their Government is doing around the world on their behalf. And on that front, they have to make the effort to go to fringe and some foreign media sources to find out. How many times does CNN or the major networks and news sources even mention the ongoing genocide in Yemen? An illegal war that Barack gave the new Saudi king to carry out and thru two administrations, is still making it possible for the inept Saudi Air Force to conduct bombing raids of civilian populations...and the story is only told on Al Jazeera, RT, and the small independent outlets in the US that get marginalized, like DemocracyNow. Any US journalist who wants to cover the news that their government doesn't want them to, is summarily fired...regardless of the number of viewers their shows receive, and if they can't get a job on a foreign channel, or a more open newspaper like the Guardian, they have to follow the example of the recently deceased-Robert Parry, who took his severance and started his own news site- Consortium News. Average news consumers who don't make the effort are stuck with taking whatever CNN dishes out to them and thinking that's the important news of the day!
right to left is offline  
Old February 11th, 2018, 08:06 AM   #50
end capitalism now
 
right to left's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Canada
Posts: 2,331
Quote:
Originally Posted by RNG View Post
And here's more scary facts:

Make sure you read the last sentence.

More, including links to the sources in the link at the bottom.



https://www.axios.com/nuclear-arms-r...0deb1b330.html
I notice your story from Axios says:"Russian violations of a series of other arms-limitation treaties.", likely with a straight face, and without reading further I doubt they mention that it was the US who broke the SALT agreement that ended nuclear arms reductions to start with!

We've heard a lot in the news of late, that the Russian strategic nuclear planners are going back to their old strategy of "bigger is better," going with a few extra large 100 megaton warheads, rather than the proliferation of so called "mini" nukes or "tactical" nukes". And to get some perspective on how mini and tactical these bombs are, consider that they are planning for everything from 3 to 200 kilotons of blast...that's a lot less than the Russian plans, BUT also consider that the first atomic bomb to be used on a city - Hiroshima back in 1945 was 16 kilotons! Take a look at the videos of the damage done, the dead, injured, poisoned and maimed survivors in the City, and someone tell me how these things can be dressed up as a weapon to use instead of nuclear warfare!
right to left is offline  
Reply

  Defending The Truth Political Forum > Political Forum > Politicians

Tags
nuclear, trump, war



Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Iran nuclear: Trump extends Obama's 'worst deal ever' RNG Current Events 4 May 18th, 2017 04:53 PM
In Call With Putin, Trump Denounced Obama-Era Nuclear Arms Treaty RNG Americas 0 February 9th, 2017 02:39 PM
n nuclear threat REDUCED to safest level following Donald Trump vic Sabcat Current Events 4 November 17th, 2016 08:07 PM
Defcon nuclear threat REDUCED to safest level following Donald Trump victory excalibur Current Events 1 November 15th, 2016 12:16 PM
Putin ally tells Americans: Vote Trump or face nuclear war imaginethat Current Events 78 October 14th, 2016 10:55 AM


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed



Copyright © 2005-2013 Defending The Truth. All rights reserved.