• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

American politics

wiziwig said:
Criticism is fine but there has to be a balance to it all ...

This thread has me thinking that most of the posters on here are youngsters, by that, I mean not past the age of 30 - 35 and if they're older, then they need to check their bias.....

History it seems is meaningless to them , something to be discarded. Blue check marks from twitter is now the go to, its where the edgy leftists now get their information from, their daily fix to jack up their Trump Derangement Syndrome...

This POTUS has his faults, of course he does but then when I recall his predecessors, I then have to say, that up to now in his presidency, he's the best POTUS in my lifetime...

In the 50's decade, President Eisenhower issued his warnings of the dangers of the USA military Industrial Complex, that it could become a law unto itself, that it could be taken away from the people and into the hands of a powerful corrupt few.

When in the early 60's President John F Kennedy sacked the leading CIA man Dulles for the CIA's role in the Bay of Pigs invasion of Cuba, this led to the Cuban missile crises and left the world's populace wondering if these were the end times.. JFK paid the price with his life for his attempts in draining the swamp and no sooner had his vice president Lyndon B Jonson got his feet under the table in the oval office, he were soon barking out orders to carpet bomb North Vietnamese peasants! The Vietnam war cost the lives of over two million Vietnamese and more than 50,000 young american conscripts, never mind the injuries and minds ruined, families devastated on all sides of that war..

Nixon, Ford, Carter, like Johnson were more of the same, weak corrupt men...

Reagan did pretty well at home and with Thatcher, helped Gorby to open up the Soviet Union to a semblance of freedom, however he had, Daddy Bush in the background constantly trying to take him out...

With the the Berlin wall coming down and the USA as the only remaining superpower, we were meant to be entering a new era of global peace and understanding of our differences.. Instead almost immediately, Daddy Bush was speaking of regime changes and a new world order and was desert storming in the middle east.

Clinton followed and when not launching Nato strikes on Serbia, was more interested in the deregulation of the financial fat cats that led us all to a financial utopia...Thanks for that Billy...

Baby Bush, how fantastic was this mass murderer alongside his accomplice Tony Blair?... How many third world countries did this POS bomb the fudge out of?

And Obama with his promoting the Arab Spring whatever the fudge that was...Oh yeah it were the destruction of the wealthiest country in Africa, Libya. He sent Libya into lawlessness where the US ambassador was slaughtered by Benghazi gunmen and his mutilated body was dragged through the streets. Gunmen we wanted to aid in their fight against Gaddafi wtf, how perceptive of Obama in choosing his allies...Meanwhile in the hearing to the ambassador's death, Foreign Secretary Hilary Clinton, a hopeful to become the next POTUS, screeched like an 8 year old princess "what's it matter now!"

Trump has calmed down the dear leader, who was lobbing missiles over both Japan and South Korea airspace, that's stopped now. The US economy was doing good things at home with the jobless numbers coming down.. There were optimism for the home economy whilst the same couldn't be said for Europe or, China for that matter.. ..

He's not done great by any means, in fact some may argue that he's been a bit of a let down on his election promises..But what great evil has he done compared to his predecessors that has so many millennials and others having sleepless nights over his time in the White House?

He has found out, that the swamp is more akin to a vast ocean with plenty of evil nasty sharks swimming around ..

Really, some of you need to cut him some slack.:D
Click to expand...

By law of averages its people like you who voted this buffoon into the most powerful job in the world. The Fox News watching, second amendment right bleating fcuktards are a cancer of society which unfortunately we are stuck with but insure as hell won't view them as civilised human beings.

As a result of his many many deficiencies a lot of people will die and a lot of lives ruined in the US which subsequently affects other countries. His unhinged self centred approach is the opposite of Obama. Lets leave the lengthy list of other former presidents out of this for now. He lacks even an average IQ or mental age to cope with complex situations. He can barely read from speech notes or teleprompter for fcuk sake. His ego is unchecked and we’re seeing the results, unfortunately at a time when we most needed a president who could, learn, adapt and lead.
 
Rorschach said:
If Biden was elected now then his position will be far left of the Obama/Biden position when they were in the hot seat. The current version of Biden is not the same animal as he was back then. He is more malleable, as his recent reacharound to Bernie Sanders has shown (there's a mental image you won't forget quickly ).
The dem primary has shown that the party has moved to more progressive policy positions across the board. This is largely down to the needs of the moment (e.g. climate change) but also the progressive wing of the democratic party in the guise of Sanders, Warren, AOC have pulled it that way.

Current version of Biden probably labour IMHO.
Click to expand...
I think there's a lot of wishful thinking there.

Biden needs to act as his campaign contributors expect him to. A quick read through his list tells me they're unlikely to want many of the things you do.
 
Rorschach said:
I think they were trying to provoke a bigger response with the Solemani killing. Rapture fiends like Pompeo have a hard-on for a war with Iran. A war with Iran is pretty unwinnable though without nuking the entire place, according to the commentary I have heard. It would end up being a mistake far worse than either of their other stupid forever wars, and that is a high bar. I don't think Trump has the stomach for it really and he doesn't really see the upside (as you mentioned).
Click to expand...
Depends what's considered winning.

I don't think any country will be attempting a boots on the ground kind of war - especially not with Russia likely to stick their filthy, new money noses in. If winning the war were to be considered the same as strategically neutering Iran from the air (or at least from a distance), then I'd say the US has both the ability and the technology.

Probably too nuanced a position for Trump to comprehend though.
 
scaramanga said:
I think there's a lot of wishful thinking there.

Biden needs to act as his campaign contributors expect him to. A quick read through his list tells me they're unlikely to want many of the things you do.
Click to expand...
Maybe he'll tack back to the centre if elected but it is not wrong to say his policy platform was far more progressive than Obama's. For example all the candidates were trying to outgreen each other in the primary. That's low hanging fruit to get the progressives on board IMO. Medicare for all would have been a harder sell but you'd have to think rona has moved the needle on that too at least a little. I would not be surprised to see a progressive as his vp. That'll be the litmus test.
 
Rorschach said:
Maybe he'll tack back to the centre if elected but it is not wrong to say his policy platform was far more progressive than Obama's. For example all the candidates were trying to outgreen each other in the primary. That's low hanging fruit to get the progressives on board IMO. Medicare for all would have been a harder sell but you'd have to think rona has moved the needle on that too at least a little. I would not be surprised to see a progressive as his vp. That'll be the litmus test.
Click to expand...
I think, given his other publicity issues right now, his VP will be the first woman to accept.
 
scaramanga said:
Depends what's considered winning.

I don't think any country will be attempting a boots on the ground kind of war - especially not with Russia likely to stick their filthy, new money noses in. If winning the war were to be considered the same as strategically neutering Iran from the air (or at least from a distance), then I'd say the US has both the ability and the technology.

Probably too nuanced a position for Trump to comprehend though.
Click to expand...
I can't really see an end game in attacking Iran unless it is to slap down their nuclear program, and the easy way to do that was through the nuclear agreement they just left. Bar ideology I just don't see the point strategically. To feed money into the war machine now they are drawing down troops in other places might be a reason I suppose.
 
Rorschach said:
Yeah it will be a woman. Who do you think?
Click to expand...
The bookies like Kamala Harris and I think she'd accept. I think she needs a run in something as high profile as VP in order to have a better run in the primaries next time.

Problem is, she's not very left. As you've said, Biden was at pains to push his left credentials, although that has far more strategic importance in the Dem primaries than it does the presidential race.
 
Rorschach said:
I can't really see an end game in attacking Iran unless it is to slap down their nuclear program, and the easy way to do that was through the nuclear agreement they just left. Bar ideology I just don't see the point strategically. To feed money into the war machine now they are drawing down troops in other places might be a reason I suppose.
Click to expand...
There's certainly moral hazard in a program that sends huge chunks of money to any nutjob theocracy that agrees to not build a nuclear arsenal.
 
Last edited:
scaramanga said:
The bookies like Kamala Harris and I think she'd accept. I think she needs a run in something as high profile as VP in order to have a better run in the primaries next time.

Problem is, she's not very left. As you've said, Biden was at pains to push his left credentials, although that has far more strategic importance in the Dem primaries than it does the presidential race.
Click to expand...
Yep Harris has a fair chance. I'd like to see Warren myself which is hardly surprising considering my views. But whoever it is will likely be running the country in a couple of years in a Cheneyesque fashion. Biden is old and it shows.
 
Last edited:
Rorschach said:
It was working by all accounts, and far cheaper than a war.
Click to expand...
Of course it was working - Iran were getting a load of money to do nothing.

Problem is then that just increases the incentive for nutjob theocracies to start a nuclear program. If it works, they become a nuclear power. If it fails, the West pays them a fortune in perpetuity.
 
scaramanga said:
Of course it was working - Iran were getting a load of money to do nothing.

Problem is then that just increases the incentive for nutjob theocracies to start a nuclear program. If it works, they become a nuclear power. If it fails, the West pays them a fortune in perpetuity.
Click to expand...
I'll take it over nutjob theocracies having nukes.
 
Rorschach said:
I'd be trying to avoid the bomb the brick out of people approach, because of death etc.
We are not going to agree on this ;)
Click to expand...
We won't, but clearly the entire setup in the US has calculated the deterrent option is the better one - on both sides of the divide.

Take Putin's rooster out of Trump's throat and I think we'd have seen a very different set of actions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back