Jump to content


Photo
* * * - - 5 votes

Trump said we need more nukes


  • Please log in to reply
75 replies to this topic

#41 Dr Johnny Fever

Dr Johnny Fever

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 13,369 posts

Posted 27 February 2017 - 04:03 PM

How would any of us know?Unless he has evidence that there is, or soon will be a nuke gap, what would be the rationale for making such a statement, in the first place? I guess it does help to appease and codify his brain-dead worshipers?I've heard it said that the only thing scarier than Trump having his hands on nukes, is Trump having his hands on more nukes.I don't wear "panties"? How about you? I like to "free flow"


What's the matter with spending a few billion more dollars on something we may never need to use?


Hmmm...

"Despite campaigning on a platform that endorsed having “a nuclear-free world” in the not so distant future, United States President Barack Obama is overseeing an administration that’s aim has taken another path, the New York Times reported this week.

According to the Times report, an effort to ensure that the antiquated nuclear arsenal being held by the US remains secure has since expanded to the point that upwards of $1 trillion dollars is now expected to be spent on various realms of the project during the next three decades, the likes of which are likely to keep the trove of American nukes intact and do little to discourage other nations from doing differently."

https://www.rt.com/u...-nuclear-times/

Relax.....it's the obama legacy.

#42 soulflower

soulflower

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 67,949 posts

Posted 27 February 2017 - 04:06 PM


Hmmm...

"Despite campaigning on a platform that endorsed having “a nuclear-free world” in the not so distant future, United States President Barack Obama is overseeing an administration that’s aim has taken another path, the New York Times reported this week.

According to the Times report, an effort to ensure that the antiquated nuclear arsenal being held by the US remains secure has since expanded to the point that upwards of $1 trillion dollars is now expected to be spent on various realms of the project during the next three decades, the likes of which are likely to keep the trove of American nukes intact and do little to discourage other nations from doing differently."

https://www.rt.com/u...-nuclear-times/

Relax.....it's the obama legacy.


Russia Today though? :)

One Trillion will probably seem like a bargain in 30 years
"...reality has a well-known liberal bias"

#43 Dr Johnny Fever

Dr Johnny Fever

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 13,369 posts

Posted 27 February 2017 - 04:13 PM

Russia Today though? :)
One Trillion will probably seem like a bargain in 30 years


http://www.ibtimes.c...arsenal-1474990

http://www.express.c...tin-world-war-3

http://billmoyers.co...ial-candidates/

It was first on the list-here are a couple more.

#44 soulflower

soulflower

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 67,949 posts

Posted 27 February 2017 - 04:15 PM

http://www.ibtimes.c...arsenal-1474990

http://www.express.c...tin-world-war-3

http://billmoyers.co...ial-candidates/

It was first on the list-here are a couple more.


I really don't care that you used Russia Today, I was just messing with ya
"...reality has a well-known liberal bias"

#45 Dr Johnny Fever

Dr Johnny Fever

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 13,369 posts

Posted 27 February 2017 - 04:19 PM

I really don't care that you used Russia Today, I was just messing with ya


I know you were, but some of your compadres would label me a comm-symp for using citing that source. ;)

#46 ms maggie

ms maggie

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 38,143 posts

Posted 27 February 2017 - 05:43 PM

So humans can blow up the world one time or hundreds of times, what difference does it make at this point if Trump adds more nukes to the US arsenal?


You answered your own question.

#47 dogstarman

dogstarman

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,903 posts

Posted 27 February 2017 - 06:10 PM

I have heard no plans to build a bunch of nukes, have you?  He merely said he won't allow us to fall behind.  OK.  We aren't behind right now, so untwist your panties.  

 

One does not simply bring up the topic of nuclear weapons, aggressively and multiple times, in an effort to assert the status quo.

 

The beautiful thing about the Donald and his sycophants is that all you have to do to refute them is to quote diarrhea-mouth directly: 

 

      "The United States must greatly strengthen and expand its nuclear capability until such time as the world comes to its senses regarding nukes"

 

I would not classify that as "merely saying" anything.

 

But then, the question remains, WHAT does he ACTUALLY mean by his talk?

 

Sorry, but the Donald doesn't understand that as president, he no longer has the luxury of talking like he's BS'ing with his drunk country-club buddies. At some point one has to put up or shut-up.



#48 JoyinMudville

JoyinMudville

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 11,560 posts
  • LocationBrooklyn

Posted 27 February 2017 - 06:33 PM

I have heard no plans to build a bunch of nukes, have you?  He merely said he won't allow us to fall behind.  OK.  We aren't behind right now, so untwist your panties.  

 

 

The United States is well underway on an extensive modernization of its entire nuclear weapons enterprise. Over the next decade, the US government plans to spend nearly $350 billion on modernizing and maintaining its nuclear forces and the facilities that support them (CBO

2015b). The results of this effort will include a new class of SSBNs, a new long-range bomber with nuclear capability, a new air-launched cruise missile (ALCM), a next-gen- eration land-based ICBM, and a new nuclear-capable tactical fighter aircraft. It will also include complete full- scale production of one nuclear warhead (the W76-1), initiation of production on two others (the B61-12 and W80-4), modernized nuclear command and control facil- ities, and new or upgraded nuclear weapon production and simulation facilities.

In addition to these programs, the United States is planning to significantly redesign warheads for ballistic missiles.  

 

http://www.tandfonli...needAccess=true



#49 Dr Johnny Fever

Dr Johnny Fever

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 13,369 posts

Posted 27 February 2017 - 06:43 PM


So trump is merely continuing the obama policy.

You guys should be ecstatic.

#50 flyboy56

flyboy56

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 20,444 posts

Posted 27 February 2017 - 06:44 PM

You answered your own question.

 

Exactly. It makes no difference at all. My question was rhetorical. I'm glad you caught that.  


Edited by flyboy56, 27 February 2017 - 06:45 PM.


#51 jdsample

jdsample

    The Doctor is In

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 27,758 posts
  • LocationColorado

Posted 27 February 2017 - 10:15 PM

One does not simply bring up the topic of nuclear weapons, aggressively and multiple times, in an effort to assert the status quo.

 

The beautiful thing about the Donald and his sycophants is that all you have to do to refute them is to quote diarrhea-mouth directly: 

 

      "The United States must greatly strengthen and expand its nuclear capability until such time as the world comes to its senses regarding nukes"

 

I would not classify that as "merely saying" anything.

 

But then, the question remains, WHAT does he ACTUALLY mean by his talk?

 

Sorry, but the Donald doesn't understand that as president, he no longer has the luxury of talking like he's BS'ing with his drunk country-club buddies. At some point one has to put up or shut-up.

 

I haven't seen a spending bill to make a bunch of nukes.  Maybe he can plagiarize JFK's bill to close the non-existent missile gap?


[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

We are all Keynesians now.
Richard M. Nixon

Cynicism--the intellectual cripple's substitute for intelligence.
Joseph Russell Lynes Jr.

Rudeness is the weak man's imitation of strength.
Eric Hoffer

#52 ms maggie

ms maggie

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 38,143 posts

Posted 27 February 2017 - 10:21 PM

I haven't seen a spending bill to make a bunch of nukes. Maybe he can plagiarize JFK's bill to close the non-existent missile gap?


My hat is off to you. Most Trump apologists point to Obama policies--him too, him too!!!

You go back 50 years. Bravo.

#53 jdsample

jdsample

    The Doctor is In

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 27,758 posts
  • LocationColorado

Posted 27 February 2017 - 10:44 PM

My hat is off to you. Most Trump apologists point to Obama policies--him too, him too!!!

You go back 50 years. Bravo.

 

LOL.  I'm obviously not concerned that we will be building massive new stockpiles.  I am trying to get used to a guy that speaks carelessly and with a lot of bluster but hopefully will do much of what he promised.  Yeah, I know, some of those promises were also bluster.  


[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

We are all Keynesians now.
Richard M. Nixon

Cynicism--the intellectual cripple's substitute for intelligence.
Joseph Russell Lynes Jr.

Rudeness is the weak man's imitation of strength.
Eric Hoffer

#54 ms maggie

ms maggie

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 38,143 posts

Posted 27 February 2017 - 11:06 PM

LOL. I'm obviously not concerned that we will be building massive new stockpiles. I am trying to get used to a guy that speaks carelessly and with a lot of bluster but hopefully will do much of what he promised. Yeah, I know, some of those promises were also bluster.

With all due respect, I think you fundamentally misunderstand Trump.

Really don't think he has any philosophy or core beliefs. It's all ad hoc. How can he dominate the news cycle? How can he strike back at critics?

His attention span is alarmingly short. He made a lot of promises. Well in any endeavor that is vast in scope, you have to focus. Dig in, do the tedious work of analysis and bringing in key stakeholders, have a long term actualization plan.

Trump? Case in point this immigration ban.

He foolishly "confides" to Guiliani he wants to keep Muslims out. That asshat can't keep his mouth shut--anything for 5 minutes on cable news. Then he lets a 32 year old with no relevant experience pen an EO that is handily shot down.

Well OK, rookie mistake. The sensible thing would be to rescind that EO and get some experts in to help write an EO that can pass muster.

But no. Rescinding the initial EO wouldn't be "winning". So they keep that out there, yet promise a revision--that is now days overdue. Meanwhile the DHS comes out basically refuting the logic of the EO. Clearly they weren't in the loop.

Fire, ready, aim.

Good grief.

Edited by ms maggie, 27 February 2017 - 11:08 PM.


#55 jdsample

jdsample

    The Doctor is In

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 27,758 posts
  • LocationColorado

Posted 27 February 2017 - 11:15 PM

With all due respect, I think you fundamentally misunderstand Trump.

Really don't think he has any philosophy or core beliefs. It's all ad hoc. How can he dominate the news cycle? How can he strike back at critics?

His attention span is alarmingly short. He made a lot of promises. Well in any endeavor that is vast in scope, you have to focus. Dig in, do the tedious work of analysis and bringing in key stakeholders, have a long term actualization plan.

Trump? Case in point this immigration ban.

He foolishly "confides" to Guiliani he wants to keep Muslims out. That asshat can't keep his mouth shut--anything for 5 minutes on cable news. Then he lets a 32 year old with no relevant experience pen an EO that is handily shot down.

Well OK, rookie mistake. The sensible thing would be to rescind that EO and get some experts in to help write an EO that can pass muster.

But no. Rescinding the initial EO wouldn't be "winning". So they keep that out there, yet promise a revision--that is now days overdue. Meanwhile the DHS comes out basically refuting the logic of the EO. Clearly they weren't in the loop.

Fire, ready, aim.

Good grief.

I certainly don't claim to understand him, but I doubt anyone of his critics in this first 30 days do either.

 

 But seriously, do you have to rescind an EO overturned by the court?  It is out of play.  Gone.  To rescind it is like burning your grandmother's ashes.  


[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

We are all Keynesians now.
Richard M. Nixon

Cynicism--the intellectual cripple's substitute for intelligence.
Joseph Russell Lynes Jr.

Rudeness is the weak man's imitation of strength.
Eric Hoffer

#56 ms maggie

ms maggie

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 38,143 posts

Posted 27 February 2017 - 11:35 PM

I certainly don't claim to understand him, but I doubt anyone of his critics in this first 30 days do either.

But seriously, do you have to rescind an EO overturned by the court? It is out of play. Gone. To rescind it is like burning your grandmother's ashes.

I don't think it was overturned, it was "stayed".

The latest from the admin was that they would rescind it once the new, improved version was issued. I assume you don't just leave an EO out there hanging once you have one that renders it moot.

On the 16th the admin stated the new EO would be announced " next week". That would have been last week.

https://www.google.c...-story,amp.html

Over promise. Under deliver.

My guess is cooler heads have advised Trump that the EO he wants isn't compatible with what can be defended in the appeals court.

Edited by ms maggie, 27 February 2017 - 11:35 PM.


#57 jdsample

jdsample

    The Doctor is In

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 27,758 posts
  • LocationColorado

Posted 27 February 2017 - 11:48 PM

I don't think it was overturned, it was "stayed".

The latest from the admin was that they would rescind it once the new, improved version was issued. I assume you don't just leave an EO out there hanging once you have one that renders it moot.

On the 16th the admin stated the new EO would be announced " next week". That would have been last week.

https://www.google.c...-story,amp.html

Over promise. Under deliver.

My guess is cooler heads have advised Trump that the EO he wants isn't compatible with what can be defended in the appeals court.

 

OK.  They seem to be reconsidering.  I guess we have to wait and see what they come up with next.  


[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

We are all Keynesians now.
Richard M. Nixon

Cynicism--the intellectual cripple's substitute for intelligence.
Joseph Russell Lynes Jr.

Rudeness is the weak man's imitation of strength.
Eric Hoffer

#58 ms maggie

ms maggie

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 38,143 posts

Posted 28 February 2017 - 01:19 AM

OK. They seem to be reconsidering. I guess we have to wait and see what they come up with next.


Perhaps. I think he's moved on. Not a quick win? He has no time for it.

Just my opinion.

#59 dogstarman

dogstarman

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,903 posts

Posted 28 February 2017 - 06:36 AM

... I am trying to get used to a guy that speaks carelessly and with a lot of bluster but hopefully will do much of what he promised.  Yeah, I know, some of those promises were also bluster.  

 

So, in other words, you're trying to accept a president who bull****'s contantly. 

 

That's a recipe for disappointment, buddy.



#60 SmarterThanYou

SmarterThanYou

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3,459 posts

Posted 01 March 2017 - 05:19 PM

LOL.  I'm obviously not concerned that we will be building massive new stockpiles.  I am trying to get used to a guy that speaks carelessly and with a lot of bluster but hopefully will do much of what he promised.  Yeah, I know, some of those promises were also bluster.


Which will come first in his list of promises: (1) The wall, or (2) "lock her up".

Personally, I'd like to see #2 first. Like the OJ trial, we can make a movie out of it.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users