I Wish Obama could do a third term

[Soko 128]

You're right, my memory was off. Usually I'm better than that, for crying out loud I'm a history major lol. And it also goes to show that we have backed some really crappy governments through the years and still do it to this day.

 

I believe Afghanistan was the only one which actually 'worked' and we all know how that turned out. Probably the only thing interesting that has come out of Trump's mouth is his disinclination to get involved in other countries problems and reduce the military excess. Unfortunately he followed that up by saying more countries should have nukes to protect themselves.

[echo88 74]

I believe Afghanistan was the only one which actually 'worked' and we all know how that turned out. Probably the only thing interesting that has come out of Trump's mouth is his disinclination to get involved in other countries problems and reduce the military excess. Unfortunately he followed that up by saying more countries should have nukes to protect themselves.

 

One of the reasons we are so despised by other nations is that we stockpile an absurd concentration of nuclear weapons and "police" or limit the number allotted to others. It's hypocritical.

 

Of course rogue states should not be permitted to have nukes, but only because they don't possess the resources so safeguard them (Iran) or their leadership is too volatile to practice restraint (DPRK).

Edited July 26, 2016 by echo88

[Soko 128]

One of the reasons we are so despised by other nations is that we stockpile an absurd concentration of nuclear weapons and "police" or limit the number allotted to others. It's hypocritical.

 

Of course rogue states should not be permitted to have nukes, but only because they don't possess the resources so safeguard them (Iran) or their leadership is too volatile to practice restraint (DPRK).

 

The less nuclear capable states the better. Most nukes are legacies of the cold war but adding countries capable of starting a nuclear holocaust is not smart.

 

Trump's idea is to let South Korea and Japan arm themselves with nukes so they can defend themselves in the Pacific. And this guy is neck and neck to be elected president? Wtf is going on.

[echo88 74]

The less nuclear capable states the better. Most nukes are legacies of the cold war but adding countries capable of starting a nuclear holocaust is not smart.

 

Trump's idea is to let South Korea and Japan arm themselves with nukes so they can defend themselves in the Pacific. And this guy is neck and neck to be elected president? Wtf is going on.

 

Nukes arent used for defense. They're used as deterrents. And his message is that the US should pull out of South Korea and let that region fend off DPRK and China themselves so that we can focus on securing our own borders. If that means handing the ace card of a nuclear deterrent to stable and responsible nations, so be it....

 

We have nukes for the same reason. What has South Korea or Japan done that warrants a nation halfway around the world deciding that they shouldnt have them?

 

We are more capable of starting a nuclear holocaust than any other nation on the planet except Russia.

Edited July 26, 2016 by echo88

[hawaiiirish 62]

I think only one country has actually used nuclear weapons on populations, and I think they did it twice!--

 

Pakistan has nukes and a nuclear exchange between India and Pakistan is a remote but real possibility.

 

The Persians will not use a nuke and I doubt they even want one if truth be known.

 

Russians will never use a nuke , we would likely be more of a possibility given the proper circumstances.

 

Israel might use the weapon , but again it would be under extreme duress and a remote chance.

 

France , England , I wouldnt' worry

 

South Africa deserves props here as the only country to literally ROLLBACK and eliminate its small but FINISHED nuclear arsenal of 6-10 bombs.

 

 

Realistically the two strongest possibilities of nuclear use would be the CULT of North Korea that could one day go all JIM JONES on the world.

 

And the MOST likely , would be an ATTACK on the United States or Europe by a terrorist group that gets their hands on the weapon from any of several possible options.....

 

This one is truly worrisome---unlike so many other scenarios they would have the MOTIVATION AND WILL to send everyone to Alah----all that is lacking there is the opportunity.

 

If we see a nuclear explosion in a population this century IMO---that is likely how it will come.

 

Unfortunately I would put the odds of nuclear use by 2100 as very high , human history does not bode well for our hopes in seeing either disarmament on a global scale or a century of restraint and reason.

 

aloha

[echo88 74]

I think only one country has actually used nuclear weapons on populations, and I think they did it twice!--

 

Pakistan has nukes and a nuclear exchange between India and Pakistan is a remote but real possibility.

 

The Persians will not use a nuke and I doubt they even want one if truth be known.

 

Russians will never use a nuke , we would likely be more of a possibility given the proper circumstances.

 

Israel might use the weapon , but again it would be under extreme duress and a remote chance.

 

France , England , I wouldnt' worry

 

South Africa deserves props here as the only country to literally ROLLBACK and eliminate its small but FINISHED nuclear arsenal of 6-10 bombs.

 

 

Realistically the two strongest possibilities of nuclear use would be the CULT of North Korea that could one day go all JIM JONES on the world.

 

And the MOST likely , would be an ATTACK on the United States or Europe by a terrorist group that gets their hands on the weapon from any of several possible options.....

 

This one is truly worrisome---unlike so many other scenarios they would have the MOTIVATION AND WILL to send everyone to Alah----all that is lacking there is the opportunity.

 

If we see a nuclear explosion in a population this century IMO---that is likely how it will come.

 

Unfortunately I would put the odds of nuclear use by 2100 as very high , human history does not bode well for our hopes in seeing either disarmament on a global scale or a century of restraint and reason.

 

aloha

 

I'd bet everything I own that this will happen before 2020.

[Domer Dude 0]

I'd bet everything I own that this will happen before 2020.

 

Agree. Bet Russia finds a use for tactical nukes.

 

I say 2025.

[AlabamaDuck 0]

All I know is a third Obama term would be a lot better than Clinton or Trump. Those two have got to be the worst candidates either party has churned out since Goldwater and they are on the same ballot!

 

It is thoroughly depressing. Talk of a third party will only benefit libertarians which will only detract in kind from republicans... which they probably deserve for serving up that turd Donald Trump.

 

We know how crooked and rich Clinton is. We also know that she has not done one good thing for our country or Arkansas.

We also know that she is the biggest and maybe the best liar ever.

I don`t know what Trump will be like, none of us do, but I do think that he will do the best for our country, not another country.

I am voting for Trump because he will at least appoint conservative judges to the Supreme Court.

[Soko 128]

 

We know how crooked and rich Clinton is. We also know that she has not done one good thing for our country or Arkansas.

We also know that she is the biggest and maybe the best liar ever.

I don`t know what Trump will be like, none of us do, but I do think that he will do the best for our country, not another country.

I am voting for Trump because he will at least appoint conservative judges to the Supreme Court.

 

You keep your head in the sand down there and vote for Trump as is your right. Just don't parrot his bullshit as fact.

 

If you don't know what he'll be like then you are a clearly not the sharpest tool in the shed. Go out and read some more to find out what this guys character really is all about. He is a shyster and fraud, megalomaniac, narcissistic existential threat to the future of the US and the world. Unfortunately Hillary is the other option but voting for Tump is suicidal.

[Kelly Gruene 26]

You keep your head in the sand down there...Unfortunately Hillary is the other option but voting for Tump is suicidal.

 

Keeping one's head down in the sand and being suicidal. Hmmm.

It seems to me that Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Obama are the ones keeping their heads down in the sand, seemingly not seeing or at least ignoring the hundreds if not thousands of murders in Europe and the United States (not even remotely including Iraq, Syria, Turkey, Saudi Arabia) perpetrated by fanatical members of one particular religion.

Sure, let's go ahead and let in thousands upon thousands of "vetted" people from countries where religious fanatics are chopping off heads, burning people alive, and stripping women naked and publicly checking their virginity up on podiums as the women are sold off into sexual slavery.

And how exactly does the US get these "vetted" individuals? They are "recommended" by the UN. Where does the UN get their recommendations? From the UN camps into which these people flow. Who goes into the UN camps? Only Muslims. Christians don't go into UN camps. Christians know they will be raped and otherwise victimized. They go into Church-sponsored camps. The UN plays no roll in those camps and cannot and will not recommend people in those church-sponsored camps. So, the UN draws from its camps, which are entirely Muslim. The vetting process relies on records from countries where records don't exist. Oh, wait, also on personal interviews, where the person swears the person says he/she says he/she is and swears that they will never ever do bad things where they go.

Sounds like college football players at the combine. "Do you promise me that you have quit doing those drugs?" "Oh, yes sir, I swear to you that is all in my past. I have given that up for sure". One year later the player begins a 10 game suspension for having 5 positive drug tests including at the combine (see Dallas Cowboys).

[Soko 128]

Keeping one's head down in the sand and being suicidal. Hmmm.

It seems to me that Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Obama are the ones keeping their heads down in the sand, seemingly not seeing or at least ignoring the hundreds if not thousands of murders in Europe and the United States (not even remotely including Iraq, Syria, Turkey, Saudi Arabia) perpetrated by fanatical members of one particular religion.

Sure, let's go ahead and let in thousands upon thousands of "vetted" people from countries where religious fanatics are chopping off heads, burning people alive, and stripping women naked and publicly checking their virginity up on podiums as the women are sold off into sexual slavery.

And how exactly does the US get these "vetted" individuals? They are "recommended" by the UN. Where does the UN get their recommendations? From the UN camps into which these people flow. Who goes into the UN camps? Only Muslims. Christians don't go into UN camps. Christians know they will be raped and otherwise victimized. They go into Church-sponsored camps. The UN plays no roll in those camps and cannot and will not recommend people in those church-sponsored camps. So, the UN draws from its camps, which are entirely Muslim. The vetting process relies on records from countries where records don't exist. Oh, wait, also on personal interviews, where the person swears the person says he/she says he/she is and swears that they will never ever do bad things where they go.

Sounds like college football players at the combine. "Do you promise me that you have quit doing those drugs?" "Oh, yes sir, I swear to you that is all in my past. I have given that up for sure". One year later the player begins a 10 game suspension for having 5 positive drug tests including at the combine (see Dallas Cowboys).

 

You are inventing issues in your head. Where the hell did anybody mention muslim immigration? Take your tinfoil hat off and have a good hard look at who you are voting for. Trump is a loose cannon, a bigoted racist whose business acumen is based off stiffing people his entire career. The worst candidate at the worst time you could possibly hope for. But it is your right to vote for him and I'm happy enough I don't have many, if any friends who will. I doubt you've ventured very far in your life so will give you a pass on the inane rubbish you have written above.

[Kelly Gruene 26]

You are inventing issues in your head. Where the hell did anybody mention muslim immigration? Take your tinfoil hat off and have a good hard look at who you are voting for. Trump is a loose cannon, a bigoted racist whose business acumen is based off stiffing people his entire career. The worst candidate at the worst time you could possibly hope for. But it is your right to vote for him and I'm happy enough I don't have many, if any friends who will. I doubt you've ventured very far in your life so will give you a pass on the inane rubbish you have written above.

 

I love how liberals assume they know everything about everyone and make personal attacks rather than factual arguments supported by documentation. But don't let facts disrupt a good emotion.

I have little doubt that I have ventured much further and accomplished leagues more than you could dream of, but hey, guess we may never know.

I am glad that you have friends. Thank you for confirming that. Some may have been wondering.

[Kelly Gruene 26]

I doubt you've ventured very far in your life so will give you a pass on the inane rubbish you have written above.

 

Here's some "rubbish":

http://www.aina.org/news/20160406154906.htm

http://www.refugeeresettlementwatch.wordpress.com/category/christian-refugees/

http://http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/patrick-goodenough/1037-syrian-refugees-admitted-may-two-christians-1035-muslims

http://https://stream.org/why-so-few-syrian-christian-refugees/

 

Now, I cannot attest to the exact numbers and statistics. But at least here are 4 articles from 4 widely disparate sources giving similar numbers and similar stories.

 

And here's a New York Times article about the sexual slavery:

http://http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/20/opinion/sunday/for-many-faith-comes-at-a-high-price.html

 

So, where exactly was the "rubbish" again? I must have missed something.

[jfschellcrna 11]

 

That said, i think both parties will learn from this and have better options in 2020.

 

 

Damn republicans had 8 years to figure this sh!t out and blew it royally!!! It just pisses me off to no end.... I'm afraid they'll never figure it out as long as they continue to lather themselves with the christian right and the NRA...:deadhorse:

[Soko 128]

Here's some "rubbish":

http://www.aina.org/news/20160406154906.htm

http://www.refugeeresettlementwatch.wordpress.com/category/christian-refugees/

http://http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/patrick-goodenough/1037-syrian-refugees-admitted-may-two-christians-1035-muslims

http://https://stream.org/why-so-few-syrian-christian-refugees/

 

Now, I cannot attest to the exact numbers and statistics. But at least here are 4 articles from 4 widely disparate sources giving similar numbers and similar stories.

 

And here's a New York Times article about the sexual slavery:

http://http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/20/opinion/sunday/for-many-faith-comes-at-a-high-price.html

 

So, where exactly was the "rubbish" again? I must have missed something.

 

Again, where is this coming from? I raised the point that Trump is a liar and fraud and your first reaction is to push the panic button on refugee immigration, it a classic straw man argument. It basically speaks exactly to the point that Trump's following are lapping up his scare tactic rhetoric and the core of his support is some sort of a bigoted, sectarian racist.

 

If you are afraid of taking some refugees from war to torn areas that the US helped decimate then it is your right. It is however not even close to be a hot button topic imo when there is the risk of appointing a lunatic like Trump into office. He is encouraging the Russians to hack his competitor ffs!! How people accept this because he is 'a straight shooter' or 'will make America great again' is beyond me.

[Kelly Gruene 26]

Again, where is this coming from? I raised the point that Trump is a liar and fraud and your first reaction is to push the panic button on refugee immigration, it a classic straw man argument. It basically speaks exactly to the point that Trump's following are lapping up his scare tactic rhetoric and the core of his support is some sort of a bigoted, sectarian racist.

 

If you are afraid of taking some refugees from war to torn areas that the US helped decimate then it is your right. It is however not even close to be a hot button topic imo when there is the risk of appointing a lunatic like Trump into office. He is encouraging the Russians to hack his competitor ffs!! How people accept this because he is 'a straight shooter' or 'will make America great again' is beyond me.

 

You made the comment, "You keep your head in the sand down there". It seems to me that a comment like that leaves a lot of doors open. I am merely commenting on the issue that half the U.S. population finds to be the single most important issue in this election. Record numbers of primary voters turned out for Trump for this reason above all else. It seems to me that one's head would need to be in the sand to not see that.

 

Democrats will do everything they can to paint Trump as a racist, bigot, lunatic. Republicans will do everything they can to paint Clinton as untrustworthy, of poor judgement, and a lifelong political insider. It's called politics, and this political season has spawned the two least desirable candidates I can remember.

 

Make personal attacks if you must. I teach my children to back their arguments with documented facts. Facts persuade me more than personal opinion influenced by the masses.

Edited July 31, 2016 by Kelly Gruene

[Soko 128]

You made the comment, "You keep your head in the sand down there". It seems to me that a comment like that leaves a lot of doors open. I am merely commenting on the issue that half the U.S. population finds to be the single most important issue in this election. Record numbers of primary voters turned out for Trump for this reason above all else. It seems to me that one's head would need to be in the sand to not see that.

 

Democrats will do everything they can to paint Trump as a racist, bigot, lunatic. Republicans will do everything they can to paint Clinton as untrustworthy, of poor judgement, and a lifelong political insider. It's called politics, and this political season has spawned the two least desirable candidates I can remember.

 

Make personal attacks if you must. I teach my children to back their arguments with documented facts. Facts persuade me more than personal opinion influenced by the masses.

 

But Trump is a racist bigot. It's very clear through his comments and business history. Paul Ryan has even had to admit his comments on the judge in Indiana were racist in nature. Not acknowledging this is burying your head in the sand and believing what you want to believe.

 

He is not a man of the people, his business model is stiffing people when bills are due and bankrupting companies. I know people like this who have operated construction companies like this and you take them for what they worth, untrustworthy people I would never do business with. This is Donald Trump.

 

You have posted some articles about refugees in Syria as if the US is going to become like Germany. Since when did America become so insecure? We bomb the living daylights out of the ME and now can't accept a small fraction of the most needy people dying in refugee camps? It is a pitiful state if that is where America is right now that every Muslim is the boogie man.

[hawaiiirish 62]

I won't argue about Trump's character , but be clear he's not running against mother Theresa----

 

The Clintons are the most character challenged couple I have seen in politics in my long lifetime......He is simply a disgrace , a sexual predator whose blowjobs seducing a young intern in the oval office itself should have driven him into self shun mode rather then the exact opposite--- groping Kathleen Willey when she comes to him for help after the death of her husband, getting the cop to send that girl (paula jones whom the Clintons settled with) up to his room where he simply "took it out". MY GOD---the idea of this azz back in the white house is grotesque.

 

And Hillary , who went from "flat broke" to 300 million dollars in 15 years of peddling influence.----GEEZ we are going to elect the WIFE of the former "predator president" to rule the country again....man BRAZIL and the Peron's have nothing on us---its so third world its embarrassing.

 

They are an unprincipled , greedy, self aggrandizing , hypocritical, pathological couple of liars....

 

He was disbarred and impeached for his charming ethics, she has been investigated for an endless parade of scandal from Tyson chicken insider trading to protecting her foundations secrets by flouting every rule in the book as secretary of state. She has been a WAR MONGER from Iraq to Lybia, holy mother, The Clintons have been the WORST influence on the democratic party since the early 20th century.

 

I liked Bernie and in philosophy lean left but sorry , any choice would be preferable to those two.

 

aloha's

Edited July 31, 2016 by hawaiiirish

[jbrown_9999 1,023]

If the DNC's email server has been successfully hacked multiple times by Russians, seems that they should get Hillary's people involved since she is so sure that her personal email server was never hacked.

[Kelly Gruene 26]

Since when did America become so insecure? We bomb the living daylights out of the ME and now can't accept a small fraction of the most needy people dying in refugee camps? It is a pitiful state if that is where America is right now that every Muslim is the boogie man.

 

9/11 probably started the insecurity. San Bernardino and Orlando have not helped matters. And no where, and I mean no where have I ever said or even implied that every Muslim is the boogie man. I have many Muslim friends and professional acquaintances. In my first job I was hired by, and remain friends with, a Muslim.

 

This election is going to come down, completely, to character issues. Democrats will drum into the public all of the Trump character flaws. No one that I know or have ever talked to or heard thinks he is without flaws. Republicans will drum into the public all of Clinton's character flaws. It seems to me that many democrats don't see her as having flaws, that Republicans keep bringing inquiries solely for political purposes, but she actually does have character flaws too.

 

Probably more than any election since the 1800 election between John Adams and Thomas Jefferson, this election will be the dirtiest, most underhanded, character-shaming election the country has seen. Issues will become secondary and character the focus. It is my opinion that information will surface on both candidates that makes them look even less desirable than they already are. The voting citizenry will decide whose character they like most and elect that person. Just watch as the actual issues fall by the wayside.

 

Soko, I don't know you and don't dislike you. You postings show real passion and belief. I don't love Donald Trump or many of the things he says or the way he conducts himself on a day-to-day basis. Believe it or not, I haven't made up my mind on who to vote for yet. I have been married for 26 years to a liberal democrat who personally worked on Bill Clinton's first campaign (see! You don't really know much about me). Many people on both sides, in my opinion, have "blinders" on. They watch certain channels or have certain apps that only provide limited viewpoints. I am not one of those. Every day I read liberal and conservative news sources, and I watch CNN much more than FOX. But I watch and read all types of media. I like BBC news best because it seems to be less opinionated and almost amused by American politics. Once a month I have drinks and socialize with a small group of friends that includes the Chair of our large County Democrat Party and several plaintiffs attorneys. So, I actually do base my opinions on wide-ranging sources, not just one or two single-viewpoint sources.

 

I'm leaving on vacation today and do not plan to post on this thread any more. I think if we sat down and had dinner and some drinks we would actually have fun and interesting conversations. My preference has always been to avoid personal attacks. To me those types of attacks imply knowledge about a person that I do not have, especially regarding people posting on the internet.

Edited July 31, 2016 by Kelly Gruene