Jump to content

It is a sad day for America


SteelPenn

Recommended Posts

So basically your view is fuck everyone as long as I got cash and freedom and I don't give a single fuck about how anyone else lives right? They will never figure out a way, no way a country that big and powerfull which controls gas for the whole eastern europe would listen to somebody like the baltics or ukraine or finland and the rest. That's where you fells come in. Like it or not you're the only ones who got the actual power to do something about it, not just by sending troops and bombing shit. Why do you think Russia stopped attacking Ukraine once you guys put some sanctions on them? Because they work. Ruble went down faster than Ronda did agains Nunes, they just couldn' afford it anymore. I'd honestly love to see you live somewhere near a country like that and say "I honestly don't care if they invade us or not, I just want an orange man to ban muslims and build walls, because as history showed us, the Berlin wall was the greatest thing ever, yes it didn't help them to win the war, but at least it was a beautiful wall."

 

IT companies won't go away just like that, but if you got no new talent coming in how will you improve and expand? You just wont. And the new bans he might put in place could further damage them, what if he decides to deport every Iranian person? You lose not only employees who you spent money training and paying and potentially even losing projects that were in development. Let me be clear, you won't lose technology that's already invented, it will simply prevent improvement. And do you really think Europe would say no to someone like google or apple to come there? They would make the taxes as sweet as they can to bring them over.

 

 

Now it might look like I'm all against Donald, but I'm just against his current methods of fixing stuff. He has a great idea of filtrating immigrants which is good, but banning them is stupid right now. Instead how about all people coming in from there get extra checks while he puts normal border security in place? He needs to think ahead before doing anything quickly in my opinion or else it might backfire badly.

So you basically are saying because the U.S. is the only country that can stand up to Russia we should potentially risk our security, the lives of our citizens and our financial well being to defend countries that refuse to defend themselves. I wholeheartedly reject that argument as lacking any benefit to the U.S. and making no sense at all. If Russian tanks roll across your border tomorrow ( which is an absurd fear based fantasy) then the U.S. would be obligated to come to your aid due to NATO obligations. Ukraine is not a NATO member and there is no obligation there.

 

Trump has talked about pulling out of NATO and I would applaud that move. Too long the U.S. has been one of the few members actually fulfilling its NATO obligations for a pointless and obsolete alliance. Of the countries you listed, only Poland meets its military spending requirements. http://www.wsj.com/articles/nato-calls-for-rise-in-defence-spending-by-alliance-members-1434978193

http://money.cnn.com/2016/07/08/news/nato-summit-spending-countries/

The majority of NATO relies on the U.S. for security but refuses to fulfill their own obligations. I can't think of a single reason we should risk damaging our lives here for people who won't even take the steps necessary to defend themselves. Russia is your neighbor, you have to grow up and figure out how you are going to deal with it on your own.

 

Once again, your whole idea that American technology/business has some huge reliance on recruiting IT people from the 7 countries that received the temporary travel ban has no basis in reality.

  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bans make zero sence at all. Every terrorist in in Europe lately is born or has lived in Europe for a long time. The only thing it will do is drive more people to radical groupes. Up the Visa checks for all you want, even only let in people actually contributing to society, but straight up forbidding an entire group of people isn't going to do any good.

What entire group of people has been targeted in the temporary ban?

  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So you basically are saying because the U.S. is the only country that can stand up to Russia we should potentially risk our security, the lives of our citizens and our financial well being to defend countries that refuse to defend themselves. I wholeheartedly reject that argument as lacking any benefit to the U.S. and making no sense at all. If Russian tanks roll across your border tomorrow ( which is an absurd fear based fantasy) then the U.S. would be obligated to come to your aid due to NATO obligations. Ukraine is not a NATO member and there is no obligation there.

 

Trump has talked about pulling out of NATO and I would applaud that move. Too long the U.S. has been one of the few members actually fulfilling its NATO obligations for a pointless and obsolete alliance. Of the countries you listed, only Poland meets its military spending requirements. http://www.wsj.com/articles/nato-calls-for-rise-in-defence-spending-by-alliance-members-1434978193

http://money.cnn.com/2016/07/08/news/nato-summit-spending-countries/

The majority of NATO relies on the U.S. for security but refuses to fulfill their own obligations. I can't think of a single reason we should risk damaging our lives here for people who won't even take the steps necessary to defend themselves. Russia is your neighbor, you have to grow up and figure out how you are going to deal with it on your own.

 

Once again, your whole idea that American technology/business has some huge reliance on recruiting IT people from the 7 countries that received the temporary travel ban has no basis in reality.

Refuse to defend themselves, how are we, suppost to defend ourselves? For example, Lithuania has less than 3 million people right now, Latvia less than 2 million, Estonia 1.3 million. So if we put all that together lets say it's less than 6.3 million people. Russia has 144 million people, and that's by the official numbers, there are tons of illegal immigrants so it's closer to 154 million actually. So how are we, who have more than 10 times lower budgets, almost 23 times less people defend ourselves? Now if we put every countries in eastern europe together then yeah maybe we got a chance, but I don't really think so, because there are tons of russians living in Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, Ukraine, Poland and everywhere else here. For example, and humors can put the correct number here, in Riga it's more than 50% russian population there.

 

Absurd fear based fantasy, well if you would've asked me 6 or 7 years ago I would agree with you 100%, but today after seing how quickly Ukraine has fallen it's far from a fantasy. I understand that you live far away and feel safe from everyone, but if you lived in a place that has been occupied for years and see the same things happen really close to you I'm pretty sure you would talk different.

 

About meeting requirements, it's not that simple to just spend more on defense. We really really spend more, but we just can't magically say "well forget elderly, forget everyone and just buy weapons", it doesn't work that way. The prices are going up rapidly, everything is getting more expensive, so we should abandon every other economical sector and spend money on guns? Don't know how it's like in other baltic countries, but here we brought back conscription, we buy new weapons, tanks, etc. It just takes time to get economy up (and good government which we don't really have).

 

" I can't think of a single reason we should risk damaging our lives here for people who won't even take the steps necessary to defend themselves" But war is an absurd fantasy idea?

 

 

All in all, think less about yourself and more about the rest of the world who aren't so fortunate with geographical spots.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Refuse to defend themselves, how are we, suppost to defend ourselves? For example, Lithuania has less than 3 million people right now, Latvia less than 2 million, Estonia 1.3 million. So if we put all that together lets say it's less than 6.3 million people. Russia has 144 million people, and that's by the official numbers, there are tons of illegal immigrants so it's closer to 154 million actually. So how are we, who have more than 10 times lower budgets, almost 23 times less people defend ourselves? Now if we put every countries in eastern europe together then yeah maybe we got a chance, but I don't really think so, because there are tons of russians living in Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, Ukraine, Poland and everywhere else here. For example, and humors can put the correct number here, in Riga it's more than 50% russian population there.

 

Absurd fear based fantasy, well if you would've asked me 6 or 7 years ago I would agree with you 100%, but today after seing how quickly Ukraine has fallen it's far from a fantasy. I understand that you live far away and feel safe from everyone, but if you lived in a place that has been occupied for years and see the same things happen really close to you I'm pretty sure you would talk different.

 

About meeting requirements, it's not that simple to just spend more on defense. We really really spend more, but we just can't magically say "well forget elderly, forget everyone and just buy weapons", it doesn't work that way. The prices are going up rapidly, everything is getting more expensive, so we should abandon every other economical sector and spend money on guns? Don't know how it's like in other baltic countries, but here we brought back conscription, we buy new weapons, tanks, etc. It just takes time to get economy up (and good government which we don't really have).

 

" I can't think of a single reason we should risk damaging our lives here for people who won't even take the steps necessary to defend themselves" But war is an absurd fantasy idea?

 

 

All in all, think less about yourself and more about the rest of the world who aren't so fortunate with geographical spots.

Those are your problems not mine. You are also thinking only about yourself. Enough Americans have already died in euro wars. Non- interventionism is the way to go. Being the worlds police didn't benefit the U.S. one bit in the last century or the beginning of this one.

 

You guys need to man up and figure it out on your own. A good first step would be honoring NATO military spending commitments. A second step would be to realize that you don't have the right to dictate to other countries that they should make choices that go against their national interests just cause your unwilling/unable to stand up for yourselves.

  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The people that are from those countries, or have bonds to those countries.

Right. People traveling from currently unstable countries listed by Obama as "countries of concern" in regards to terrorism. Five of the seven countries were bombed liberally (illegally imo) by Obama. Iran hasn't been bombed yet and the Sudan was last bombed by Clinton in 98. But you'd have me believe that temporarily banning travel for 3 months is going to spike extremism? Is temporarily banning travel for 3 months going to create more extremism then bombing and killing people in that country? If bombing is worse, why wasn't there any protest during Obamas extensive bombing campaigns?

  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure how this has happened, but i think i am agreeing with JLP here. I think the USA has been getting involved into a lot of conflicts they did not need to and it seems Trump is looking for a different root for that. In regards to Lithuania / Baltic's being invaded by Russia (Shiftas is saying that is / could happen), i think there is about 0.1% chance of that happening. Russia does not go around randomly invading countries. The only way it can possibly occur is if the Baltic countries continue their ultra negative stance towards their much bigger neighbor. The fact that they are in the EU and NATO has given them this felling they are invincible and they are acting a bit naughty. If they stay calm and controlled, nothing will happen. A lot of people compare the situation there with that of the Ukraine, but they are 2 totally different cases.

 

Either way, one good thing has come out of Trump being president............................there is plenty of funny videos on youtube about him every day, lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The United States is the 3rd most populated country in the world, for that reason alone we should stop immigration. You know what the 3rd most populated country in the world looks like in 20 years? China.

 

 

We shouldn't harbor refuges imo. Various reasons.

 

 

I think America should focus on America for a while. Isolationism. Rebuild the country and educate the idiocracy we have in our population. Make peace, not war. Get away from war profiteering. There's way too many powerful people invested in companies that thrive and depend on war.

 

 

Ukraine and Syria are not America's problem. Russia didn't stop us from illegally invading Iraq 16 or 17 years ago. Not our problem.

 

 

Dealing with ISIS could be pretty simple. Sit their leader(s) down and ask them, "what do you want from us?" and they will answer:

  1. stop the military occupation of the middle east
  2. stop funding Israel

 

so what would I do?

  1. withdraw all troops
  2. stop funding Israel

 

or if I really, for some reason, needed to fund Israel, I'd keep that info classified. like sending secret planes or some shit with boat loads of cash on it :yawn: because by now, at this point in time, after billions and billions of dollars of aid, they should have a very Trump like Great Wall of fucking China on steroids with 50 caliber machine guns and gatling guns and homing laser missiles aligning their walls, surrounding the entire place and enough military technology to level any opposing/invading force. And if they don't, then those political leaders who have golden showers and golden toilets and golden statues of Yeshua should of invested their defense budget a little better.

 

 

I would also tell the leaders of ISIS that if we uphold our end of the agreement, and you attack American soil, we're going Nagasaki on everything they love until there's nothing left. Of course I'd coordinate with Russia, China, and all relevant allies to make sure we have the green light to go full nagasaki on them before we had this conversation, and if everybody was in an agreement, I'd pitch them that sales pitch.

 

 

You withdraw, you stop funding, you wait a year, maybe two, maybe three, and your priority targets from ISIS, their supporters, and their locations should be clear and visible if intervention is needed or necessary.

  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guess what, the rest of the world is full too. The USA has the 180th highest density in the world. And Trump isn't interested in educating anyone, the guy denies global warming for christ's sake.

 

 

Agree that's moronic. But that's irrelevant to what I said.

 

 

and Trump > Clinton. Still. Anybody who thinks otherwise, they're getting their strings pulled like a puppet.

 

Personally, I don't like Trump. I think he's funny, but I think he's a clown. Rand Paul, Ron Paul, Gary Johnson - in that order - would be who'd I'd like to see "leading" this country.

  • Upvote 2
  • Downvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Regarding immigration and taking on refugees, it is a tough subject. However, IMO refugees and immigration in general needs to be taken very seriously and cautiously, I am totally in favor of a very thorough vetting process - not just opening the flood gates to any man and his dog like Germany. They let in 1.1 million refugees last year alone half of which are seeking asylum. That is absurd and asking for trouble - not just because of the risk of a terror attack but also because of the effect it could have socially, culturally and economically in the long run (maybe even quicker than we think).

 

I am not the devil for saying this I am simply being realistic, well at least I think so. I do think we should be helping refugees but not allowing them through our borders in masses. Lebanon, Jordan and Turkey has let in a significant amount of refugees as they are neighboring countries and have undoubtedly helped a great deal. Countries such as UAE and Saudi have sent a great deal of funds in support of refugees but as far as I can see so far no refugees. Oh wait that's right UAE are going to allow 15K syrian refugees in over the course of 5 years. Perhaps Europe and america should be doing something similar to that - ok maybe more refugees than that but not an excessive amount.

 

 

For those in favor of more and more refugees I have a few questions:

1) What is the long term plan for them? Will they Stay in Europe/USA or will they return once the war/terror is over?

2) Would you be willing to take any into your household if there was no longer any space in the funded accommodation?

 

I'm sure USA will be fine as they are the other side of the world and Trump will not allow a huge influx of refugees anyway but I do think Europe need to be more cautious and a little more stern when it comes to this topic.

  • Upvote 2
  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Off-topic here

 

Whoever negs people here who have a different political opinion is an arse. Upvoted everyone who has been negged.

 

Agreed. Unless they act like an asshole just because they disagree with someones point.

 

Merging that back on topic....

 

I don't have proof to back this up but I think one of the reasons why the left did not win is because of the way they reacted to trump and his supporters - their choice of terminology to describe them 'nazi's, fascists, racists' etc isn't going to help your side win. Neither is rioting and protesting violently. I am not saying the republican supporters were always well behaved or anything but from what I saw the leftys took the biscuit and acted out of order. That makes neutral people not want to be any part of that movement thus pushing them towards the right.

 

SJW's, feminists, PC culture, BLM all didn't help much either - it is natural to want to disengage yourself from people like that.

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Agreed. Unless they act like an asshole just because they disagree with someones point.

 

Merging that back on topic....

 

I don't have proof to back this up but I think one of the reasons why the left did not win is because of the way they reacted to trump and his supporters - their choice of terminology to describe them 'nazi's, fascists, racists' etc isn't going to help your side win. Neither is rioting and protesting violently. I am not saying the republican supporters were always well behaved or anything but from what I saw the leftys took the biscuit and acted out of order. That makes neutral people not want to be any part of that movement thus pushing them towards the right.

 

SJW's, feminists, PC culture, BLM all didn't help much either - it is natural to want to disengage yourself from people like that.

I agree partially. There definitely was a "the boy who cried wolf" syndrome going on, where everything gets labeled sexist/racist, desensitising people to issues where that actually matered. The flip side to that is, for all the jokes that the right makes about "snowflakes", they have been very sensitive to any form of criticism. It's a bit hard to comment on the insult part, from over here it seemed like a lot of mudsswinging either way (libtards, snowflakes). Ultimately I believe the Democrats elected a very flawed, and more importantly, disliked candidate. The turnout was disastrous this year, and both parties are to blame for that, by picking two of the worst candidates in years
  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.part.lt/img/5484dbf44e6b5735b390605c5cdcb9fe891.jpg

I'd love to hear something said about this by a trump supporter :)

With Clinton that would be the same shit or worse, as they would keep this shitshow going without even banning the ISIS syrians lybians etc etc.

  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

SJW's, feminists, PC culture, BLM all didn't help much either - it is natural to want to disengage yourself from people like that.

 

PC culture and nerds with a thing for hentai and underage girls didnt helped the leftists and all the other zombies.

 

The problem with liberals is that they are totally disconnected with the real world events, as all they care is counting the Likes of Lady Gaga and Katy Perry, jerking on underage japanese girls with blonde hairs, be apologists with "black" (read all fucking immigrants, of all colors and of all pasts, deeds and crimes) even when it is not needed BUT it is needed for them, because you know, they must clean theyr white supremacist past, the horror!

 

But the final self-kick in the balls was the feminazism aand the SJW's in general, thats not a mainstream thingy for now, but it will be when all the people in the mid-30 and above will die out, i am very concerned about millenials and the generation of PC-hentai-pervert predators-apologists that they will be, they are destroyng the old society to make a new more zombified one.

 

Oh man, and whats wrong with all that sugar in the food by the way, zombies eheheh.

 

The change in society, Romero's zombies were slow and relentless, the new ones are fast and obnoxious, they dont seek brains anymore but dat sugar tho.

  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ultimately I believe the Democrats elected a very flawed, and more importantly, disliked candidate. The turnout was disastrous this year, and both parties are to blame for that, by picking two of the worst candidates in years

 

Trump is not the worst candidate, there have been much more worse candidates and PRESIDENTS than him, he is ok, he is not Hoover or T. Roosevelt ofcourse, he dont have his physique, but the mentality is there.

 

But ofcourse, if you listen to Saturday Night Live all day, Trump is certainly the worst candidate ever.

 

 

PS: the more the mainsteram media attack a person, the more it mean he is the right person.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Agree that's moronic. But that's irrelevant to what I said.

 

 

and Trump > Clinton. Still. Anybody who thinks otherwise, they're getting their strings pulled like a puppet.

 

Personally, I don't like Trump. I think he's funny, but I think he's a clown. Rand Paul, Ron Paul, Gary Johnson - in that order - would be who'd I'd like to see "leading" this country.

He is not like he and his advisers dont know about global warming, they perfectly know about that, it just doesnt fit the US being on top of the food chain policy.

 

USA is in direct competition with China like never before, the only true nation that can get that number one place in the world, do you think China care about global warming?

 

Trump is doing the right thing for the USA, but a bad thing for the rest of the world, cant blame him as he is both right as an american and wrong as an habitant of our sad little planet.

  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Right. People traveling from currently unstable countries listed by Obama as "countries of concern" in regards to terrorism. Five of the seven countries were bombed liberally (illegally imo) by Obama. Iran hasn't been bombed yet and the Sudan was last bombed by Clinton in 98. But you'd have me believe that temporarily banning travel for 3 months is going to spike extremism? Is temporarily banning travel for 3 months going to create more extremism then bombing and killing people in that country? If bombing is worse, why wasn't there any protest during Obamas extensive bombing campaigns?

It is not like there wasnt a "spike of terrorism" before the ban, so the rant about bans doesnt make any sense, better do something than nothing at all and still "spike terrorism", totally agree with you as usual.

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...