Trump doesn't understand why we can't use nuke

originally posted by: pirhanna
There sure is a hell of a lot of unsourced material flying out of the msm recently. Unnamed people, unknown sources...

This stuff wouldnt fly here as serious if any of us used "unnamed sources" and unsourced claims. Straight to skunk works.

In 3, 2, 1...

a reply to: Edumakated

Probably much the same...

I'm no fan of the Donald. But c'mon, people, really?

a reply to: seagull

I've been avoiding this thread all day but come on...

If this wasn't an option for the President of the USA then what purpose does the "Football" have?

People speak of the Cold War as if it never happened meanwhile, the President of the USA, Putin and I'm guessing here, the premier of China ALL have access to their Nukes, should the SHTF.

Grow up people, we live in a dangerous world.

a reply to: zazzafrazz

Howdy zazz

I can't bring myself to say he's a bad businessman; he's done a good sight better at it than both of us put together. Neither of us have the kind of real estate holdings he has. Of course, there are others who are maybe better than him, but none of them are running for office.

Government is not Business Management 101, I agree. But it does require some of the same skills as growing a successful business, like the ability to strike... I hate to use the term... 'good deals.' Good as in beneficial for our country. He also knows how to surround himself with people who can counter his weaknesses, like his unfamiliarity with foreign affairs.

What he is probably weak in is the tendency to spin results. Business does not have that; you succeed or you fail. How you say it does not matter.

We have spent, by my calculation, the last 28 years at least making disastrous trade deals, regulating industry within an inch of its life, and meddling in the affairs of other nations which do not involve us. The result is unemployment, under-employment, a strained military, international scorn and ridicule, inflation, civil unrest, accelerated racism, poverty, terrorism attacks, and unprecedented mistrust of the Federal government. All this happened while electing people to office who said pretty things in a pretty way and never spoke out of turn.

Maybe, since our previous actions led to such disaster, we should try something else? I think that's what a lot of the country is thinking... and you have to admit, Trump is definitely 'something else.'

TheRedneck

a reply to: SlapMonkey

That said, though, Trump's not the brightest bulb in the box when it comes to foreign policy or military policy.

Business wth foreign businesses is diplomacy first. He works wth Chinese and other foreign companies to secure contracts.

Military never enters into free trade and good relations with all, if done right. He's a successful business man, knows how to be diplomatic. Thats all it takes. Sadly he's not in control of "policy'. It won't matter. And why they'll pick errand girl Hillary to run around and manipulate foreign dignitaries, instead.

How long until the Dems haul the Daisy ad out of mothballs?

a reply to: SLAYER69

Of course it's an option.

That is not the premise of the thread, however...

The premise is that Trump, seemingly, can not fathom why using nukes would be a "bad thing".

If that's the case, then the man is, we can safely assume, stark raving bat-poop insane...out to lunch while being several fries short of a happy meal... ...and probably shouldn't be President.

Here, it's mentioned in this interview here. You guys are going to believe an unnamed "source".

originally posted by: intrptr
Business wth foreign businesses is diplomacy first. He works wth Chinese and other foreign companies to secure contracts.

Military never enters into free trade and good relations with all, if done right. He's a successful business man, knows how to be diplomatic. Thats all it takes. Sadly he's not in control of "policy'. It won't matter. And why they'll pick errand girl Hillary to run around and manipulate foreign dignitaries, instead.

He only knows how to be diplomatic if/when it directly affects him or his company. America is not and will not be his company if he becomes president, although I don't doubt that he will try his hardest, but with his immature temperament and inability to speak like a politician, effort only goes so far.

I'm unconvinced that, with Trump, we will look any better on the world scale or have any better deals than where we're at right now, because again, running a country is vastly different than running a business. What you're saying is akin to, "Well, he ran a local ice cream shop okay, so he'll be fine when he takes over running Walmart."

Just because he's decent at one thing doesn't mean that he will adapt well to something much larger with many more variables involved.

originally posted by: Mizzijr
Since Clinton's “nomination,”its really starting to look like Trump is a plant to actually make Hillary win.

That's been my suspicion since Day 1. Who knew it would actually take off?

Frankly, nor do I.

THe reason why the US has not been able to use nukes in the past is because of the risk of retaliation, but now consider ISIS...

- ISIS have no friends.
- ISIS have already said that they will use a nuke on the US if they get hold of one.
- ISIS have genocided anyone not supporting them in territory that they hold.

THere is ZERO problem with nuking ISIS and EVERYTHING to gain.

It is high time, someone with guts in the US wiped Mosul and Raqqa off the map in short order and start standing up to protect the people of the US, the WOrld and the Republic.

a reply to: SlapMonkey

Ever see, You've been Trumped?

He never acts immature in that, and in the end he backs out of the deal to build the golf course.

First of all, I don't think nukes should ever be used.

Having said that, there is no way a president should ever 100% rule out the use of nuclear weapons, because if that option is completely removed from the table, then what's the point of even having them?

Granted, the use of nukes should be more of a last resort than any last resort I can think of, but no president should ever say that he or she would absolutely never ever ever use them -- and no president HAS ever said this.

a reply to: TheAmazingYeti

Trump: I'd be the 'last one' to use nukes

Donald Trump on Saturday hit back at critics who question whether he should be entrusted with nuclear weapons, saying he would be the “last one” to ever authorize their use.

“Believe me, I would be the last one to use nuclear,” Trump said at a rally in Windham, N.H. “Because I understand what it represents. I understand what it means.”

Trump's comments came after a report earlier this week that the GOP presidential nominee had asked a foreign policy adviser repeatedly why the U.S. could not use its nuclear arsenal. The claim was made by MSNBC host Joe Scarborough on "Morning Joe" Wednesday.

Trump's campaign denied that report, with spokeswoman Hope Hicks telling The Hill "there is no truth to this" earlier this week.

thehill.com...