OT: Trump "armada & submarines" on way...

[BigDrop]

 

[BigDrop]

At the 9:31 mark of the above interview with Maria Bartiromo on Fox Business News Trump tells her:

"We're sending an armada-very powerful.  We have submarines-very powerful.  Far more powerful than the aircraft carrier."

 

The aircraft carrier was 3,500 miles away.  There were no submarines.  But Trump said this to apparently posture and gain leverage with North Korea.

 

I believe he is endangering the United States with what Ted Cruz called "pathological lies"  For the 25.5 million South Koreans in the greater Seoul metro area (and 35 miles from the demilitarized zone) he is risking all of their lives.  This isn't playing poker or negotiating a real estate deal; this is lying to a (nother) madman who has nuclear weapons and a battery of artillery that could reach as far as Japan.

[concha]

This is America and you can believe what you like.

Where was all this energy and scrutiny of yours over the past eight years?

[TheRealCAJ]

7 minutes ago, concha said:

This is America and you can believe what you like.

 

Finally!......finally an Ivy League assertion

[concha]

1 minute ago, TheRealCAJ said:

Finally!......finally an Ivy League assertion

Chip apparently has an issue with my academic resume.

 

Here Chip, make the call and get started on your own. It might a year or two longer than normal for you to get there, but we have faith in you, Chip.

https://beautyschools.com/states/louisiana/new-orleans/

[TheRealCAJ]

7 minutes ago, concha said:

Chip apparently has an issue with my academic resume.

 

 

Not at all........just finally glad to see that academic prowess!

I knew you had it.

Carry on with what "you believe".

[concha]

4 minutes ago, TheRealCAJ said:

Not at all........just finally glad to see that academic prowess!

I knew you had it.

Carry on with what "you believe".

Make the call, Chip.

You can still make something of your life.

[TheRealCAJ]

Just now, concha said:

Make the call, Chip.

You can still make something of your life.

I can see you are a little flustered at the moment...that was your choice.

Cya, man.

We believe what you believe, concha. (wink)

[TheRealCAJ]

45 minutes ago, BigDrop said:

At the 9:31 mark of the above interview with Maria Bartiromo on Fox Business News Trump tells her:

"We're sending an armada-very powerful.  We have submarines-very powerful.  Far more powerful than the aircraft carrier."

 

The aircraft carrier was 3,500 miles away.  There were no submarines.  But Trump said this to apparently posture and gain leverage with North Korea.

 

I believe he is endangering the United States with what Ted Cruz called "pathological lies"  For the 25.5 million South Koreans in the greater Seoul metro area (and 35 miles from the demilitarized zone) he is risking all of their lives.  This isn't playing poker or negotiating a real estate deal; this is lying to a (nother) madman who has nuclear weapons and a battery of artillery that could reach as far as Japan.

Anyways........dude, it's cheeto!!

 

[NorCalRuss]

Wasn't it just last week we were all doomed and needed to find shelter.... 

[ECHS05]

2 hours ago, BigDrop said:

At the 9:31 mark of the above interview with Maria Bartiromo on Fox Business News Trump tells her:

"We're sending an armada-very powerful.  We have submarines-very powerful.  Far more powerful than the aircraft carrier."

 

The aircraft carrier was 3,500 miles away.  There were no submarines.  But Trump said this to apparently posture and gain leverage with North Korea.

 

I believe he is endangering the United States with what Ted Cruz called "pathological lies"  For the 25.5 million South Koreans in the greater Seoul metro area (and 35 miles from the demilitarized zone) he is risking all of their lives.  This isn't playing poker or negotiating a real estate deal; this is lying to a (nother) madman who has nuclear weapons and a battery of artillery that could reach as far as Japan.

The guy(KJU) isnt going to launch an attack on South Korea/Seoul, unless his country is attacked first. Because he knows the moment he does attack Seoul or Japan or the US, his country is done. He will be bombed back into the stone age.

[noonereal]

6 hours ago, ECHS05 said:

The guy(KJU) isnt going to launch an attack on South Korea/Seoul, unless his country is attacked first. Because he knows the moment he does attack Seoul or Japan or the US, his country is done. He will be bombed back into the stone age.

a fair opinion but this is not really the worry right now, is it? 

[thc6795]

OMG another we are doomed because of Trump thread.

[BigDrop]

9 hours ago, NorCalRuss said:

Wasn't it just last week we were all doomed and needed to find shelter.... 

There is absolute outrage in South Korea right now that Trump's comments about the Carl Vinson and the armada endangered their lives,  It could have stoked North Korea into a preeminent strike. " his latest remarks poses a challenge to the security of the Korean Peninsula and South Korea’s national interests "This is the headline on today's English language Korea Times:  http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www2/index.asp Trump also made a comment that "Korea was once part of China" which it never was.  Following is the headline and overview:

Can South Korea rely on Trump?

U.S. President Donald Trump has suffered a serious dent in his credibility among South Koreans after he “lied” about the whereabouts of a U.S. Navy strike group and quoting Chinese President Xi Jinping’s alleged false claim that “Korea actually used to be a part of China.” South Koreans have been familiar with Trump’s credibility gap and flip-flops on many issues in the U.S. _ his use of incorrect information and data as well as unsubstantiated claims. But they have been bewildered this time as his latest remarks poses a challenge to the security of the Korean Peninsula and South Korea’s national interests, according to analysts, Thursday.

'Korea used to be part of China': Trump's claim draws ire

S. Korea duped by Trump: US carrier not making way toward the peninsula

[BigDrop]

17 minutes ago, thc6795 said:

OMG another we are doomed because of Trump thread.

This is exactly that.  Please read the link I have supplied from the Korea Times which is the leading English language newspaper in South Korea.  Trump is playing with their lives-they are the ones who will be attacked first if North Korea makes a move.  Saying that an "armada" is on the way could have provoked them.

Again, there are 25.5 million human beings only 35 miles from the demilitarized zone where, on the other side, North Korea has a huge battery of missiles aimed at them and elsewhere.  The North Korean missiles have a range of up to 800 miles which includes much of Japan and part of China.

Also, yesterday, our Secretary of State said that we are reviewing the agreement with the Iranians (and the dozen or so of our partners who also signed it).  We don't have the right to review it.  It is posturing on Trump's part to his base.  We have signed it, we are committed to it.  The matters with Iran supporting terrorism and rogue nations are another matter.  That we can do something about.  But there is no relationship between the two.  The purpose of that agreement was to delay Iran's development of a nuclear weapon for ten or more years.  It is working.

[thc6795]

Just now, BigDrop said:

This is exactly that.  Please read the link I have supplied from the Korea Times which is the leading English language newspaper in South Korea.  Trump is playing with their lives-they are the ones who will be attacked first if North Korea makes a move.  Saying that an "armada" is on the way could have provoked them.

Again, there are 25.5 million human beings only 35 miles from the demilitarized zone where, on the other side, North Korea has a huge battery of missiles aimed at them and elsewhere.  The North Korean missiles have a range of up to 800 miles which includes much of Japan and part of China.

Also, yesterday, our Secretary of State says that we are reviewing the agreement with the Iranians (and the dozen or so of our partners who also signed it).  We don't have the right to review it.  It is posturing on Trump's part to his base.  

No, I will not. You spend your day worried about the world ending. I will not.

The Iran deal was a frigging horrible deal. We have every right to review it.

In news closer to home, Berkley announced they will not let Ann Coulter speak at their University. Why not outrage drop?  

[BigDrop]

14 minutes ago, thc6795 said:

No, I will not. You spend your day worried about the world ending. I will not.

The Iran deal was a frigging horrible deal. We have every right to review it.

In news closer to home, Berkley announced they will not let Ann Coulter speak at their University. Why not outrage drop?  

1.  It is the South Koreans' lives Trump is playing with.  If you prefer to read only the spin, that is your choice. Again, I have linked and quoted the major English language newspaper in South Korea.  Coincidentally, America has more than 28,000 troops stationed there, too.

2.  We can review the Iranian deal but we have signed it.  We legally do not have the right to back out of it; note the other countries who have signed it also.  Headline and lead story from this morning's Washington Post:  https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-and-his-aides-sow-confusion-by-sending-mixed-signals-on-foreign-affairs/2017/04/19/aefbbcc0-2506-11e7-bb9d-8cd6118e1409_story.html?hpid=hp_rhp-top-table-main_trumpconfusion-8pm%3Ahomepage%2Fstory&utm_term=.e53cd56c7354

3.  There would be violence at Berkeley.  Coulter speaking there would be inflammatory.  (An aside:  I was accepted as a student at Berkeley in the late '60's which was during the height of the protests and the Vietnam war.  I didn't have a scholarship and did not do my undergraduate work there.  But I know Berkeley.)  There was an effort with the Breitbart editor but this, with Coulter, would be ill timed given recent events.

[NYHSFAN33]

3 minutes ago, BigDrop said:

1.  It is the South Koreans' lives Trump is playing with.  If you prefer to read only the spin, that is your choice. Again, I have linked and quoted the major English language newspaper in South Korea.  Coincidentally, America has more than 28,000 troops stationed there, too.

2.  We can review the Iranian deal but we have signed it.  We legally do not have the right to back out of it; note the other countries who have signed it also.

3.  There would be violence at Berkeley.  Coulter speaking there would be inflammatory.  (An aside:  I was accepted as a student at Berkeley in the late '60's which was during the height of the protests and the Vietnam war.  I didn't have a scholarship and did not do my undergraduate work there.  But I know Berkeley.)  There was an effort with the Breitbart editor but this, with Coulter, would be ill timed given recent events.

You are a joke dude, give it rest or sell another tilt-a-whirl to Six Flags.  Going backwards:

3)"Inflammatory" to a liberal these days is any opinion that does not agree with their own.  Liberal mentality is the most hypocritical in existence (You fit the mold).  Inclusive of all ideas (unless they do not jive with left leaning rhetoric, then yo are not welcome to speak here).

2)You do not have any idea about the legal indemnities involved in any international deals.  We can review, recant, demand, anything we want.  The rest of the world or the UN doesn't have to play ball but there is no statutory clause saying we cant review or try to amend an agreed upon deal.  

1)Only a true idiot would see the actions of the US military as the worries for South Korea's population and not the literally insane dictator that is in the North.  

[thc6795]

13 minutes ago, BigDrop said:

1.  It is the South Koreans' lives Trump is playing with.  If you prefer to read only the spin, that is your choice. Again, I have linked and quoted the major English language newspaper in South Korea.  Coincidentally, America has more than 28,000 troops stationed there, too.

2.  We can review the Iranian deal but we have signed it.  We legally do not have the right to back out of it; note the other countries who have signed it also.  Headline and lead story from this morning's Washington Post:  https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-and-his-aides-sow-confusion-by-sending-mixed-signals-on-foreign-affairs/2017/04/19/aefbbcc0-2506-11e7-bb9d-8cd6118e1409_story.html?hpid=hp_rhp-top-table-main_trumpconfusion-8pm%3Ahomepage%2Fstory&utm_term=.e53cd56c7354

3.  There would be violence at Berkeley.  Coulter speaking there would be inflammatory.  (An aside:  I was accepted as a student at Berkeley in the late '60's which was during the height of the protests and the Vietnam war.  I didn't have a scholarship and did not do my undergraduate work there.  But I know Berkeley.)  There was an effort with the Breitbart editor but this, with Coulter, would be ill timed given recent events.

So the conservative students at Berkley should riot and destroy property every time a lib wants to speak. You know be violent?  Then it would be ok to not let the lib speaker on campus?

Coulter inflammatory? Oh that's right you don't agree with her therefor she is wrong and has no right to her opinion.

[concha]

20 minutes ago, BigDrop said:

1.  It is the South Koreans' lives Trump is playing with.  If you prefer to read only the spin, that is your choice. Again, I have linked and quoted the major English language newspaper in South Korea.  Coincidentally, America has more than 28,000 troops stationed there, too.

2.  We can review the Iranian deal but we have signed it.  We legally do not have the right to back out of it; note the other countries who have signed it also.  Headline and lead story from this morning's Washington Post:  https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-and-his-aides-sow-confusion-by-sending-mixed-signals-on-foreign-affairs/2017/04/19/aefbbcc0-2506-11e7-bb9d-8cd6118e1409_story.html?hpid=hp_rhp-top-table-main_trumpconfusion-8pm%3Ahomepage%2Fstory&utm_term=.e53cd56c7354

3.  There would be violence at Berkeley.  Coulter speaking there would be inflammatory.  (An aside:  I was accepted as a student at Berkeley in the late '60's which was during the height of the protests and the Vietnam war.  I didn't have a scholarship and did not do my undergraduate work there.  But I know Berkeley.)  There was an effort with the Breitbart editor but this, with Coulter, would be ill timed given recent events.

1) I'm betting the press you quote is probably as liberal/socialist as, or maybe even to the left of, most of the word's press and thus wakes up in the morning with indigestion about Trump no matter what he does.

2) We can back out of what we want to.

3) Nice to see you are happy to let radical Marxist and anarchist elements rule the day and subvert our basic rights.  They show up and threaten violence, and you and folks like you fold like cheap lawn chairs. But that's OK because basically the only violence shutting down free speech is coming from the left and therefore is shutting up the voices you disagree with. Pathetic.

[noonereal]

13 hours ago, BigDrop said:

 

OT: Trump "armada & submarines" on way...

as it turns out, this was just another alternative fact

WTF is all I can say. 

[noonereal]

1 hour ago, thc6795 said:

So the conservative students at Berkley should riot and destroy property every time a lib wants to speak. You know be violent?  Then it would be ok to not let the lib speaker on campus?

Coulter inflammatory? Oh that's right you don't agree with her therefor she is wrong and has no right to her opinion.

the ugliest women on television, inside and out

can a lib say that?call a women ugly?

nope, that is the domain of the gop

 then i must not be all lib 

[thc6795]

1 minute ago, noonereal said:

the ugliest women on television, inside and out

can a lib say that?call a women ugly?

nope, that is the domain of the gop

 then i must not be all lib 

Dude even I think she is a nut job. and for sure she is not easy on the eyes. However I think it is a crock of shit drop saying she is inflammatory and there would be violence so it is ok Berkley is censoring her right to talk. A total crock of shit.  

[noonereal]

1 minute ago, thc6795 said:

Dude even I think she is a nut job. and for sure she is not easy on the eyes. However I think it is a crock of shit drop saying she is inflammatory and there would be violence so it is ok Berkley is censoring her right to talk. A total crock of shit.  

I am unaware she was censored anywhere. I am aware she is ugly. 

[World Citizen]

13 hours ago, BigDrop said:

At the 9:31 mark of the above interview with Maria Bartiromo on Fox Business News Trump tells her:

"We're sending an armada-very powerful.  We have submarines-very powerful.  Far more powerful than the aircraft carrier."

 

The aircraft carrier was 3,500 miles away.  There were no submarines.  But Trump said this to apparently posture and gain leverage with North Korea.

 

I believe he is endangering the United States with what Ted Cruz called "pathological lies"  For the 25.5 million South Koreans in the greater Seoul metro area (and 35 miles from the demilitarized zone) he is risking all of their lives.  This isn't playing poker or negotiating a real estate deal; this is lying to a (nother) madman who has nuclear weapons and a battery of artillery that could reach as far as Japan.

I'm not sure if he is playing a game or not but it could be he just opened his mouth.  If you notice, every time he does that, a lie comes out.  Its kind of his thing.  Then again, he may have strategy in mind, giving out allies no confidence that we know what we are doing, not being clear on our position regarding a crazy dictator.   Which ever it is it feels like he's making it up as he goes.