Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Kot]

... did something happen to the poland missile base? Not seeing any news it was canceled.

2009.
The new one technically is planned but it's for 2018 at best. We heard that shit before. We've been hearing shit like that since at least 1683 and every time, it goes bad for us.
Obviously, back then nobody really appreciated the idea of Winged Hussar bases, but neither they do missile bases now.

Believe what you want, but a person who is unstable, vindictive, and worse than anything else incompetent as Trump places the whole world at risk when given control over the US Armed Forces. The dude has an explicit and open policy to encourage nuclear proliferation. Like, holy shit.

And everyone in America is going to jump on the truck and listen to his every retarded order, even if it's "Gas the Clintons" because...
... wait, it is America, after all.
Also, Trump says everything at once so at this point you can cherry pick what you want to belive.

@Kot: I was making a 'Hillary gunna git your gunz!'* joke while messing with you at the same time. Though I can't tell if the Cossacks post meant you got that I was messing with you or not.

*Some people think Hillary is going to go on a gun grab campaign, to you know, grab peoples guns and abolish the second amendment. Those same people thought the same thing of Obama, and likely George Bush and Bill Clinton.

That would actually be bad. I wonder if Trump gets elected, could he do it in reverse and give guns to the rest of world? After all, 2033 is not that far off.

If you want to talk about Russia, Trump is the one for a punk motherfucker with a badge and a gun who at least openly admires Putin's SOP and at most might actually be an honest to god Russian interests plant.

TBH, Putins great exploitation of Russian slavish mentality is something to be at least slightly respected.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

The President hardly has absolute power, but don't doubt what the executive can accomplish. As Commander in Chief, he has total control over the military. If Trump wants to deploy them to attack someone, then they will be attacked. He appoints the ambassadors. He appoints the heads of every department, including Defense and HomeSec, who serve at his pleasure. That's functionally the ability to dictate policy.

And, of course, he has the nuclear arsenal. That's not so out there given that he's already, in private not public meetings, advocated dropping nukes on ISIS multiple times.

Even the smallest fuckup of this nature will become seized and magnified all over the world.

Is Trump a stupid manchild? Obviously. Will he get impeached if he does something radical? Maybe, but if Republicans retain Congressional control I really have to wonder where that line is. They put him up for election, after all. It's the human tendency to say "it can't happen", but it absolutely can.

I don't think Trump will start a nuclear war (probably), but I absolutely believe he could kick off a cold or proxy war. The worst thing is, as I said, the incompetence. Trump blatantly does not have geopolitical ability. I have more geopolitical ability than Trump. He believes that the vague ideas of What To Do are equal to the actions he should undertake. He will exercise power in destructive ways that he is technically permitted to do but nobody does because they know better.

[smjjames]

He's not the only candidate to say or imply dropping nukes on ISIS, Cruz has said that he'd carpet bomb ISIS 'until the sand glows'. Whether that's because the sand melted from the heat of the bombs or whether it's glowing from radiation is up to your imagination.

[Frumple]

... yeah, I'unno, I'm tired enough right now I sorta think I also don't give a shit about Poland if it cares so little about the rest of the world it can't see a difference between trump and the GOP vs clinton and the dems. But I'm sure the warmongering xenophobes trying to get a guy in office whose expressed economic desires boil down to "global recession at best" and whose diplomatic savvy currently extends to pissing off pretty much everyone except maybe russia would... somehow... not be substantially worse for y'all than the folks advocating general diplomatic outreach and economic policies that are actually at least tentatively tied to reality, headed by someone that has an actual history working with your government. Not sure how the mechanics work there but whatev'.

[smjjames]

... yeah, I'unno, I'm tired enough right now I sorta think I also don't give a shit about Poland if it cares so little about the rest of the world it can't see a difference between trump and the GOP vs clinton and the dems. But I'm sure the warmongering xenophobes trying to get a guy in office whose expressed economic desires boil down to "global recession at best" and whose diplomatic savvy currently extends to pissing off pretty much everyone except maybe russia would... somehow... not be substantially worse for y'all than the folks advocating general diplomatic outreach and economic policies that are actually at least tentatively tied to reality, headed by someone that has an actual history working with your government. Not sure how the mechanics work there but whatev'.

Kot =/= ALL Poles though.

[Sergarr]

Both, in the end, proably want good relations with Russia

That's the weirdest accusation I've seen of Hillary Clinton as of yet. Usually, people always say that she'll be too aggressive with Russia and start WW3, or that she'll at least be harder on Russia than Obama. Neither her supporters nor her detractors have entertained the idea of her being "buddy-buddy" with Russia.

Hell, that's probably the only real reason why I support her for POTUS - an unreliable "friend" like Trump is significantly more dangerous than a reliable enemy like Hillary. To say that she'll suddenly reverse her position of Russia, despite no indications to the fact, is... quite paranoid.

[Criptfeind]

It really is bizarre, when looking at this presidential race though the lens of relationships with Russian there's very stark differences between the two candidates. Certainly one could draw their own lines and decide different which one one likes better on these issues, but I can't see how anything but.... Not knowing anything at all about their stated policies and opinions could bring about thinking that they are the same when looking at it in this lens.

[Kot]

Goddamn Russians didin't start off nuclear war just so, because one dude said no. Unless your nuke operating guys are as batshit insane as you claim Trump to be, there is nothing to worry about. If yhey do, then you already have bigger problems than Trump. Obviously if Trump orders Carrier groups to invade Europe, whole Army, Air Force, Navy and whoever else will exclaim HEIL TRUMP and go ahead with the nuking.
Fuck, I mean, thats actually completly possible considering it's America, but you'd think we already learned how well listening to aggresive leaders with hilarious hairdos goes.
And at this point with America engaging in proxy wars (even against itself) is... exactly what America has been doing until now, so it's nothing new.
And hell, fuck, I didin't said that objectively Trump isin't worse, but Clinton is bad too and it's your and retarded American two-party system fault that America ended choosing between two devils. I did say that from Polish Pov it's basically irrelevant who gets elected and Trump might at least suddenly start liking Winged Hussars. Or we'll build him a second tower or someshit.

Both, in the end, proably want good relations with Russia

That's the weirdest accusation I've seen of Hillary Clinton as of yet. Usually, people always say that she'll be too aggressive with Russia and start WW3, or that she'll at least be harder on Russia than Obama. Neither her supporters nor her detractors have entertained the idea of her being "buddy-buddy" with Russia.

Hell, that's probably the only real reason why I support her for POTUS - an unreliable "friend" like Trump is significantly more dangerous than a reliable enemy like Hillary. To say that she'll suddenly reverse her position of Russia, despite no indications to the fact, is... quite paranoid.

Yes. I mean, that's old stuff, but... the thing I'm saying that Hillary is exactly what you're saying - reliable. She isin't going to risk real confrontation with Russia because it would be retarded and might end really badly for both parties. While saying that she would be happy to sell rest of Ukraine/Poland to Putin is tinfoil, this is no way a good thing for Eastern Europe. Not to mention that most of what she's doing seems to be reffering to Syria while Ukraine gets at best mentions of "helping strenghtening Ukraine to defend itself". So, basically, she goes "we're not saying we won't help you but you're really on your own".

[Criptfeind]

Right, neither one is honestly that likely to make that big of a change either way (although who knows, maybe...) But you said both are a loss to the world, and when questioned on that you said that from your perspective they were the same because they were friendly with Russia, so presumably that's the lens you're viewing the election though... And Trumps certainly very friendly with Russia, but Clinton gets criticized all the time for not bending to Russia whims/being unfriendly with them. It's simply not true that their stance on Russia is the same.

[alway]

Nuclear retaliation has on the order of minutes to respond before the launch sites are non-operational. As such, nuclear weapons launches are actually on something of a hair trigger, to the point where several famous incidents in the past related to artifacts on radar and others have nearly resulted in nuclear annihilation.
Case in point: http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/the-administration/290410-the-need-to-reform-the-nuclear-weapons-launch-approval

To initiate a launch of weapons of mass destruction, it requires the approval of the National Command Authority (NCA). That’s an impressive sounding name, but the NCA consists of only two people: The President and his political appointee, the Secretary of Defense.

Congress can reject a President’s use of force, but only two months later.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Command_Authority

While the President does have unilateral authority as commander-in-chief to order that nuclear weapons be used for any reason at any time, the actual procedures and technical systems in place for authorizing the execution of a launch order requires a secondary confirmation under a two-man rule, as the President's order is subject to secondary confirmation by the Secretary of Defense. If the Secretary of Defense does not concur, then the President may in his sole discretion fire the Secretary.

[Max™]

I heard Kot was once asked to take over when the pilot of Air Force One had a heart attack en route to land at Warsaw, and their response was "I'm a simple Pole in a complex plane!"

[smjjames]

@alway: Yeah, the way it's set up, nothing short of an all out mutiny would stop a presidents orders to launch a nuke, unless the president him/herself cancel the launch. Though this is an all out barrage scenario, may play out differently for dropping one or two bombs on a target.

I heard Kot was once asked to take over when the pilot of Air Force One had a heart attack en route to land at Warsaw, and their response was "I'm a simple Pole in a complex plane!"

* smjjames lols at the physics joke. or is it a math joke?

[Kot]

Eh, fuck, I proably shouldn't have this discussion with almost 40C fever.

What I am saying in the end, this election seems to bog down to:
Hillary - LIAR, SHOULD BE IN PRISON DURR
Trump - RACIST, WILL CAUSE NUCLEAR WAR DURR
Third Party - MEME, THEY DON'T EVEN MATTER DURR (and quite truly, they don't)
No vote - VOTE YOU CUCK IT'S YOUR DUTY DURR

There is one thing that seems to be giving Trump a lot of good reputation in Poland - the idea of glassing Middle East with bombs.

@alway: Yeah, the way it's set up, nothing short of an all out mutiny would stop a presidents orders to launch a nuke, unless the president him/herself cancel the launch. Though this is an all out barrage scenario, may play out differently for dropping one or two bombs on a target.

If at this point the idea that all-out mutiny is in order in case of nuclear war is fucking required then I am worried about humanity. Even retaliation strikes should not be done by any sane person - the enemy already fucked himself by nuking half of the world and the point should be the survival of human race, not trying to get senseless venegance on the dudes from other side of the world. The idea of the stick should be there, but the actual stick should never be used unless in really special occurences (UFO invasion, Nazis from Earth core or something).

I heard Kot was once asked to take over when the pilot of Air Force One had a heart attack en route to land at Warsaw, and their response was "I'm a simple Pole in a complex plane!"

Considering Polish history with various "Air Force Ones", you should totally somehow arrange for both Trump and Clinton be on it and then give me control of that thing.

[Criptfeind]

What I am saying in the end, this election seems to bog down to:
Hillary - LIAR, SHOULD BE IN PRISON DURR
Trump - RACIST, WILL CAUSE NUCLEAR WAR DURR
Third Party - MEME, THEY DON'T EVEN MATTER DURR (and quite truly, they don't)
No vote - VOTE YOU CUCK IT'S YOUR DUTY DURR

It's really up to you to decide what the truth is. Because at least one of these can't be true. Or at the very least, is the right option anyway.

Edit: And, not to get sidetracked. Criminal doesn't really say much about her relationship with Russia. Nuclear war does of course, although I can't quite connect the dots between that and being friendly with Russia. So I'm not sure if these are really the most important parts of their descriptions, and certainly none of these options are that lacking in dimensions that this is all that there is too them.

[smjjames]

Eh, fuck, I proably shouldn't have this discussion with almost 40C fever.

Almost 104F? dang, hope ya feel better and also drink lots of water and whatever fever remedies you have around.