Jerzylvania wrote:Maybe the new thread's title should refer to the bombshell accusations of Bannon versus Trump. This is gonna leave a mark!
I doubt republicans will care. Trump could openly admit treason and theyd look the other way.
Advertisement
by San Lumen » Wed Jan 03, 2018 2:33 pm
Jerzylvania wrote:Maybe the new thread's title should refer to the bombshell accusations of Bannon versus Trump. This is gonna leave a mark!
by Conserative Morality » Wed Jan 03, 2018 2:34 pm
Arlenton wrote:I love the fact that Trump hates Bannon now. Every Republican should shun him for what he's doing.
by Camicon » Wed Jan 03, 2018 2:35 pm
Country of glowing hearts, and patrons of the artsThe Trews, Under The Sun
Help me out
Star spangled madness, united sadness
Count me out
No human is more human than any other. - Lieutenant-General Roméo Antonius Dallaire
Don't shine for swine. - Metric, Soft Rock Star
Love is hell. Hell is love. Hell is asking to be loved. - Emily Haines and the Soft Skeleton, Detective Daughter
by Arumdaum » Wed Jan 03, 2018 2:35 pm
by New haven america » Wed Jan 03, 2018 2:36 pm
Internationalist Bastard wrote:So, I don't really know economics, so I may be wrong, but doesn't the stock market going up really high also mean it will crash really low?
by Internationalist Bastard » Wed Jan 03, 2018 2:36 pm
by Internationalist Bastard » Wed Jan 03, 2018 2:37 pm
New haven america wrote:Internationalist Bastard wrote:So, I don't really know economics, so I may be wrong, but doesn't the stock market going up really high also mean it will crash really low?
Not necessarily.
How the stock market grows and collapses depends on a number of factors and variables, speed of growth, stability, etc... (You can see this with Bitcoin, which is undeniably bubbling). It's very possible that you can have a strong/high economy that's also stable.
by Conserative Morality » Wed Jan 03, 2018 2:37 pm
ArUmdAUM wrote:i can't believe that i have to agree with austria-bohemia-hungary here but this is just part of the wild reckless thinking typical of americans who dont give a shit about non-whites dying lol
by Washington Resistance Army » Wed Jan 03, 2018 2:39 pm
Conserative Morality wrote:ArUmdAUM wrote:i can't believe that i have to agree with austria-bohemia-hungary here but this is just part of the wild reckless thinking typical of americans who dont give a shit about non-whites dying lol
On the contrary, what about all of those who die under NK's regime? The famine in the 90s alone killed more than the entirety of the Korean War. What about all of those who could die in the event a serious nuclear power NK decides to flex nuts?
It would have been better to pay a smaller, more immediate cost than to put it off like this.
by Salandriagado » Wed Jan 03, 2018 2:39 pm
by San Lumen » Wed Jan 03, 2018 2:41 pm
Salandriagado wrote:The Derpy Democratic Republic Of Herp wrote:China has said multiple times that if NK shoots first, they lose there backing.
China is the only reason why NK even exists and they have grown to hate it.
Honestly, China annexing NK seems more plausible than SK doing the same, to me: they've got a much larger population, so can absorb those sorts of numbers more easily, and there's nobody likely to stop them.
by Arumdaum » Wed Jan 03, 2018 2:41 pm
by Salandriagado » Wed Jan 03, 2018 2:42 pm
Austria-Bohemia-Hungary wrote:Genivaria wrote:And we'd bounce back and we'd have multiple countries working together to put the situation right for the sake of regional stability that NOONE wants disrupted.
This isn't Syria we're talking about here, this is on the border of a UNSC member and a 'great power' if we're still using that term.
We DON'T want China's economy to tank, noone does.
Poisoning the South Korean economy, and the Chinese one by war and North Korean refugees will tank PRC's economy. Do you seriously believe that nobody is connected economically to what happens in South Korea?
by Arumdaum » Wed Jan 03, 2018 2:42 pm
Conserative Morality wrote:ArUmdAUM wrote:i can't believe that i have to agree with austria-bohemia-hungary here but this is just part of the wild reckless thinking typical of americans who dont give a shit about non-whites dying lol
On the contrary, what about all of those who die under NK's regime? The famine in the 90s alone killed more than the entirety of the Korean War. What about all of those who could die in the event a serious nuclear power NK decides to flex nuts?
It would have been better to pay a smaller, more immediate cost than to put it off like this.
by Shofercia » Wed Jan 03, 2018 2:44 pm
President Donald Trump's former campaign chairman sued special counsel Robert Mueller and the Justice Department on Wednesday, saying prosecutors had overstepped their bounds by charging him for conduct that he says is unrelated to Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election. The lawsuit by Paul Manafort, filed in federal court in Washington, is the most direct challenge to date to Mueller's legal authority and the scope of his mandate as special counsel. It comes amid Republican allegations of partisan bias among members of Mueller's team, which for months has been investigating whether the Trump campaign coordinated with Russia to influence the outcome of the U.S. election.
Manafort was indicted in October on charges related to his lobbying work on behalf of a Russia-friendly Ukrainian political party. He has pleaded not guilty. He alleges in his lawsuit that the investigation into "decade-old business dealings" is "completely unmoored" from the mandate Mueller was given when he was appointed in May by Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein. "Those alleged dealings had no connection whatsoever to the 2016 presidential election or even to Donald Trump. Nor were they uncovered in the course of the Special Counsel's probe into President Trump's campaign," the suit alleges. The lawsuit also argues that Rosenstein's order appointing Mueller was overly broad and arbitrary.
by Arumdaum » Wed Jan 03, 2018 2:45 pm
Salandriagado wrote:Austria-Bohemia-Hungary wrote:Poisoning the South Korean economy, and the Chinese one by war and North Korean refugees will tank PRC's economy. Do you seriously believe that nobody is connected economically to what happens in South Korea?
SK is an utterly trivial percentage of the PRC's trade. They could lose it and barely even notice.
by Conserative Morality » Wed Jan 03, 2018 2:46 pm
San Lumen wrote:and what makes you think China wouldn't launch nukes as well?
by Salandriagado » Wed Jan 03, 2018 2:46 pm
Austria-Bohemia-Hungary wrote:The Empire of Pretantia wrote:Iraq in 2003? You do know we were in Baghdad within a month, right? That we didn't need an entire fucking army group to handle Bumfuckistan?
Do you even have a leg to stand on anymore?
You were in Baghdad within the month, and then? NATO utterly crushed Iraq in 1990, with such force that even the Soviet Union took note. Compared to Desert Storm Iraqi Freedom was a fucking whimper.
by Petrasylvania » Wed Jan 03, 2018 2:48 pm
by Conserative Morality » Wed Jan 03, 2018 2:49 pm
ArUmdAUM wrote:An invasion of North Korea would cause immense devastation to the Korean peninsula and potentially Japan and China as well. There is also potential harm for the US, although it would certainly harm the US economically. 25 million people live in the Seoul Metro Area which borders the DMZ.
North Korea possesses missiles and nuclear weapons which would wreck East Asia if used. Furthermore, an attack would absolutely wreck the US' relations with China, Japan, South Korea, and Russia. North Korea's weapons exist as a deterrent rather than something to be used to irrationally attack other countries.
This kind of thinking is why South Koreans fear Trump more than they do Kim Jong-un.
by Washington Resistance Army » Wed Jan 03, 2018 2:51 pm
by Conserative Morality » Wed Jan 03, 2018 2:51 pm
San Lumen wrote:and if a nuke is launched at Pyongyang how would they know it wasn't aimed at Shanghai?
by Shofercia » Wed Jan 03, 2018 2:51 pm
ArUmdAUM wrote:Conserative Morality wrote:On the contrary, what about all of those who die under NK's regime? The famine in the 90s alone killed more than the entirety of the Korean War. What about all of those who could die in the event a serious nuclear power NK decides to flex nuts?
It would have been better to pay a smaller, more immediate cost than to put it off like this.
An invasion of North Korea would cause immense devastation to the Korean peninsula and potentially Japan and China as well. There is also potential harm for the US, although it would certainly harm the US economically. 25 million people live in the Seoul Metro Area which borders the DMZ.
North Korea possesses missiles and nuclear weapons which would wreck East Asia if used. Furthermore, an attack would absolutely wreck the US' relations with China, Japan, South Korea, and Russia. North Korea's weapons exist as a deterrent rather than something to be used to irrationally attack other countries.
This kind of thinking is why South Koreans fear Trump more than they do Kim Jong-un.
by Salandriagado » Wed Jan 03, 2018 2:53 pm
Austria-Bohemia-Hungary wrote:The Empire of Pretantia wrote:I don't even know what you're trying to say anymore. Probably something really stupid though.
The NATO in 2018 compared to the one in 1989 is a joke. An utter joke. None of the member countries can airlift or sealift anywhere without crying for America and even America can only do it with a few brigades. If war breaks out in North Korea the fighting will be mostly on ROKA because they are there, they're prepared and they haven't been busying themselves with such nonsense such as disarmament.
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Emotional Support Crocodile, Ifreann, Likhinia, Singaporen Empire, Soul Reapers, Stratonesia, Tarsonis, Tiami, Tumbra, Tungstan
Advertisement