POTUS 2016

[twiz]

It was not a non-proliferation statement.  That statement is perpetuating the issue.  Lead by example.  Don't expect everyone else to all of a sudden start reducing their stockpiles while the US is building more.  "well no one else is doing the right thing so we don't have to either!!" is not diplomacy.  Add on top of that, the stockpile in the US and Russia is already so obnoxiously and obviously "overkill" (literally.  fucking literally.) that any move to increase is just a dick-waving power play.  It does nothing in any realm of deterrence.  No one is saying "shit, well we would have nuked 'em back when they only had 6970 nukes, but now they have 7500!  Fuck that!".  It was pure grandiose, pure arrogance, flaunt-your-might bullshit.  It only serves to aggravate issues.  The bullshit, hypocritical line at the end only serves as a backdoor way out to say "no! See, I really don't like nukes! everything is fine!"

A non-proliferation message would have been a declaration that we would reduce our stockpile by 90-95% and invest instead in continuing development of anti-missile techs, as well as diplomacy.  Protect ourselves from the threat directly, instead of ever-escalating mutually assured destruction.

(by the way, if we reduced our stockpile by 95%, we'd still have the second-most nukes in the world.)

Edited December 27, 2016 by twiz

[D3ads]

You don't publicly state that you're to reduce your nuclear capabilities in response to a rival state declaring they will increase theirs, that's just idiocy. Nuclear weapons exist as a deterrent because MAD is guaranteed, the rational powers understand that mounting any kind of war against each other will lead to complete destruction of the world and thus no one is insane enough to challenge that. Still in order to maintain that doctrine, you have to actually possess those capabilities. in an age where the nuclear stockpile of the two superpowers has aged and many are fast becoming unfit for purpose, it makes sense to take steps to strengthen and replace munions since "expanding nuclear capability" doesn't necessarily mean increasing numbers, rather replacing old weapons and updating current systems to be more efficient.

Remember, the atom bomb prevented millions of lives being lost in the Pacific campaign of WWII, the Cold war remained cold because both sides were terrified of the prospect of any kind of hot war, nuclear weapons have contributed greatly to world peace. The greatest issue now is that whilst in the past those with nuclear capabilities understood the point was to prevent war, some of the actors with nuclear weapons today aren't nearly as rational and might not have any issues with setting the world on fire...

Anyway... in other news, the celebrities are at it again... Dear People who still don't fucking get it, this is the kind of shit that led to Trump securing victory in the first place... FUCKING STOP IT!

 

[-HP-]

 

lmao, this is going to be amazing!

[-HP-]

[Sprony]

On 1/10/2017 at 9:36 AM, (HP) said:

lmao, this is going to be amazing!

Check out the lady on the right. You can see her struggle trying to make sense of it and then basically giving up.

[-HP-]

So yeah.. it happened

 

And it's starting:

 

 

[Sprony]

[-HP-]

https://www.whitehouse.gov/america-first-energy

Quote

"President Trump is committed to eliminating harmful and unnecessary policies such as the Climate Action Plan"

 

 

Quote

The Trump Administration is also committed to clean coal technology, and to reviving America’s coal industry, which has been hurting for too long.

 

[Bastion]

I honestly don't see the point of trying to revive the coal industry, something with a limited lifespan does not seem practical when there are more effective ways of producing energy.

[-HP-]

27 minutes ago, Bastion said:

I honestly don't see the point of trying to revive the coal industry, something with a limited lifespan does not seem practical when there are more effective ways of producing energy.

Good luck fighting the republicans with logic, it's been tried before.. it doesn't work apparently.

[Sprony]

Since Obama didn't have a majority for the last 6 years, a lot of policies are based on executive orders. Something Trump can undo without effort. It must really hurt to see your legacy be destroyed like that. Not all of it of course, but most of it will go and rather quickly I might add.

[Vaya]

[Buddy]

13 hours ago, Sprony said:

Since Obama didn't have a majority for the last 6 years, a lot of policies are based on executive orders. Something Trump can undo without effort. It must really hurt to see your legacy be destroyed like that. Not all of it of course, but most of it will go and rather quickly I might add.

Yes, and sitting there behind Trump as he's shitting all over your work and then you have to smile, shake his hand and congratulate him on his speech.

Obama's a good actor.

[Squad]

Oscars 2017.

[D3ads]

Good, it's happened. Now let's see what he actually does.. People constantly obsessing over impeachment, assasination and other delusional visions of grandeur that will somehow lead to Madame President, really need to put on their big boy/girl/transgender pants and move on. 

Celebrities are here to entertain, if they want to be political they should quit their jobs and join a politicial party, couldn't give two fucks what any of them have to say otherwise.

People protesting against Trump in other countries is fucking idiotic, no.. he isn't your president because you don't live in the USA, morons!

Lastly...

The fuck is this shit? Taking photos of a flaming bin is NOT journalism!

Fin.