Trump brings back nuclear weapons testing

[jmdrake]

I'm at a loss as to why anybody who ever voted for Ron Paul still supports Donald Trump.

 

[PAF]

I'm at a loss as to why anybody who ever voted for Ron Paul still supports Donald Trump.

I'm not a psychiatrist but possible reasons could be: Stockholm syndrome, fair weather friends, easily manipulated, lack of principles, a false sense of "winning", absolute power corrupts absolutely, acceptance of little bones in exchange for loss of liberty, faith/trust/hope in elections as opposed to noncompliance, my team is better than your team and if Trump does it it's ok, etc.

I don't think in terms of those spineless ways so maybe I'm not the one to ask

 

[otherone]

I'm not a psychiatrist but possible reasons could be: Stockholm syndrome, fair weather friends, easily manipulated, lack of principles, a false sense of "winning", absolute power corrupts absolutely, acceptance of little bones in exchange for loss of liberty, faith/trust/hope in elections as opposed to noncompliance, my team is better than your team and if Trump does it it's ok, etc.

I don't think those spineless ways so maybe I'm not the one to ask

Ah, yes. A new Cold War to fill the existential threat gap left by the covid hoax and diminishing climate hoax. Right on time.
Politics is binary. You can't root for a team that isn't on the field.

 

[TheTexan]

I'm not a psychiatrist but possible reasons could be: Trump is hilarious and awesome

 

[TheTexan]

I'm not a psychiatrist but possible reasons could be: Stockholm syndrome, fair weather friends, easily manipulated, lack of principles, a false sense of "winning", absolute power corrupts absolutely, acceptance of little bones in exchange for loss of liberty, faith/trust/hope in elections as opposed to noncompliance, my team is better than your team and if Trump does it it's ok, etc.

I resemble that remark

 

[TheTexan]

Politics is binary. You can't root for a team that isn't on the field.

 

[Invisible Man]

Ah, yes. A new Cold War to fill the existential threat gap left by the covid hoax and diminishing climate hoax. Right on time.
Politics is binary. You can't root for a team that isn't on the field.

That's like saying you shouldn't say, "Thou shalt not murder," since murders are going to keep happening even if you say that. You can only express approval or disapproval for some murders in comparison to others.

 

[acptulsa]

Politics is binary.

No it isn't.

 

[jmdrake]

Ah, yes. A new Cold War to fill the existential threat gap left by the covid hoax and diminishing climate hoax. Right on time.
Politics is binary. You can't root for a team that isn't on the field.

So a phony drug war in Venezuela and U.S. troops in American cities isn't enough drama?

 

[acptulsa]

So a phony drug war in Venezuela and U.S. troops in American cities isn't enough drama?

Certainly not. We're trying to create a Time of Tribulation here. We're trying to kick off the End of Days. There's no such thing as too much drama.

Why? Isn't that what Republicans voted for?

 

[otherone]

No it isn't.

Lol

 

[Dr.3D]

Every time there is an above ground test, the cancer rate goes up.

 

[nikcers]

The gentleman's agreement that existed at the end of the cold war 33 years ago to force other countries not to build nuclear weapons is over.

This happened in a large part because the country that had the 3rd largest nuclear weapons stockpile 33 years ago has been invaded and there have been millions of casualties in that war.

The perception many countries have is that if Ukraine had continued their nuclear program they wouldn't have been invaded. Whether that is true or not thats what people believe to be true.

The illusion of safety is a hell of a drug.

 

[acptulsa]

I can't believe I'm watching a machine trying to talk the human race into offing itself.

Dystopia has arrived.

 

[nikcers]

I can't believe I'm watching a machine trying to talk the human race into offing itself.

Dystopia has arrived.

Nuclear weapons didn't end the world 80 years ago. Reminding people that we have them and we haven't grown soft is the only way to keep the world sane.

In a mad world only the mad are sane.

 

[Invisible Man]

Nuclear weapons didn't end the world 80 years ago. Reminding people that we have them and we haven't grown soft is the only way to keep the world sane.

In a mad world only the mad are sane.

Nobody needs to be reminded of that. Everybody knows that we have enough nukes to destroy the world multiple times. Everybody also knows that we have the ability to make many more very quickly if we ever want to. But what is there to gain? What additional deterrence could there be from adding more nukes to an arsenal that's already redundant beyond reason?

I agree with the side of his mouth that Trump is talking out of when he says he's for denuclearization, rather than the other side that he talks out of one minute later when he says he wants us to have even more nukes.

 

[nikcers]

Nobody needs to be reminded of that. Everybody knows that we have enough nukes to destroy the world multiple times. Everybody also knows that we have the ability to make many more very quickly if we ever want to. But what is there to gain? What additional deterrence could there be from adding more nukes to an arsenal that's already redundant beyond reason?

I agree with the side of his mouth that Trump is talking out of when he says he's for denuclearization, rather than the other side that he talks out of one minute later when he says he wants us to have even more nukes.

You know what happened when we got rid of our peacemaker ICBM?

Russia and China increased their nuclear weapons programs.

So the modernization and renuclearization that started now 10 years ago- in which a lot of people don't know about is important.

Its important to come from a credible source. Especially when for the last 5 years you have had people like Tulsi Gabbard repeating Russian propaganda that Russia has more nukes than us now so therefore we don't have mutually assured destruction.

Since Trump is someone who actually has the top level security clearance to know what we have.

When you have mutually assured destruction you don't have to worry about people nuking you.

So when you have it you don't have to care about how many nukes other countries have.

 

[Invisible Man]

Since Trump is someone who actually has the top level security clearance to know what we have.

Good point. We should trust his judgment then.

 

[TheTexan]

When you have mutually assured destruction you don't have to worry about people nuking you.

So when you have it you don't have to care about how many nukes other countries have.

I don't really care how many nukes a specific country has, but I do care how many countries have nukes.

Every country that has nukes is an exponential increase to risk of global destruction

 

[nikcers]

I don't really care how many nukes a specific country has, but I do care how many countries have nukes.

Every country that has nukes is an exponential increase to risk of global destruction

There has always been a cost aspect to that.

The USA and the Soviet Empire could maintain a bunch of nuclear weapons because they were global super powers.

They could maintain powerful and reliable delivery systems because they had massive amounts of fuck you money to develop space programs.

A poor country like North Korea can have a few dozen tiny nukes but not a real good reliable way of maintaining them or delivering them.

If you really don't want more countries to develop nukes you have to act preemptively.

Kill Hitler while he is still a baby before they get nukes and kill 100 million people.