9 Terrifying Things Donald Trump Has Publicly Said About Nuclear Weapons

Professor Emeritus

Veteran
Poster of the Year
Supporter
Joined
Jan 5, 2015
Messages
51,331
Reputation
19,940
Daps
204,143
Reppin
the ether
None of that answers why they continue to be made and held.

Trump is saying that, okay, if we have them, their use shouldn't be ruled out. And if they can't be used under any circumstances, we shouldn't have them.

It's only controversial because Trump said it. Hillary was prancing around 8 years ago talking about how she'd nuke Iran.


If you read it, it's obviously why they continue to be made and held. Because people are scared, transition is tough, and we haven't found the exact pathway to getting where we want yet.


Trump's words show his ignorance/idiocy because, rather than engaging with the real debate around this issue, he starts off with a high-school level argument, "We got 'em, so why can't I use 'em?", and then proceeds to speak as if he considers them an open possibility with no awareness of the repercussions in almost any situation.

Look at the report of the foreign policy meeting they had, where he was quoted as saying, "If we have them, why can't we use them?" three different times. Does that show the slightest awareness of WHY it is a bad idea to use nuclear weapons? Does that show the slightest awareness of him having thought through the specific scenarios when they would be an option? It's not like we weren't already well aware that he doesn't have the knowledge and discernment for questions like that anyway.

The reports were that there was complete silence in the room each time Trump asked the question. Do you think that the best foreign policy experts that Trump can gather are just too stupid to answer an easy question, even to make up a lame pseudo-answer? Or do you think the question is just so stupid to them that they had no idea how to respond? Which do you find more likely - that Trump asks stupid questions about critical foreign policy decisions, or that his own experts are too stupid to even respond to Trump's questions?

We're talking about giving the button to someone who uses the arguments of teenagers to discuss killing millions of people.
 

JahFocus CS

Get It How You Get It
Joined
Sep 10, 2014
Messages
20,461
Reputation
3,755
Daps
82,445
Reppin
Republic of New Afrika
If you read it, it's obviously why they continue to be made and held. Because people are scared, transition is tough, and we haven't found the exact pathway to getting where we want yet.


Trump's words show his ignorance/idiocy because, rather than engaging with the real debate around this issue, he starts off with a high-school level argument, "We got 'em, so why can't I use 'em?", and then proceeds to speak as if he considers them an open possibility with no awareness of the repercussions in almost any situation.

Look at the report of the foreign policy meeting they had, where he was quoted as saying, "If we have them, why can't we use them?" three different times. Does that show the slightest awareness of WHY it is a bad idea to use nuclear weapons? Does that show the slightest awareness of him having thought through the specific scenarios when they would be an option? It's not like we weren't already well aware that he doesn't have the knowledge and discernment for questions like that anyway.

The reports were that there was complete silence in the room each time Trump asked the question. Do you think that the best foreign policy experts that Trump can gather are just too stupid to answer an easy question, even to make up a lame pseudo-answer? Or do you think the question is just so stupid to them that they had no idea how to respond? Which do you find more likely - that Trump asks stupid questions about critical foreign policy decisions, or that his own experts are too stupid to even respond to Trump's questions?

We're talking about giving the button to someone who uses the arguments of teenagers to discuss killing millions of people.

So Trump asks a hypothetical question and its the end of the world. Meanwhile his opponent is a woman who just a few years back threatened to nuke a large and powerful country in the Middle East.

What a fukking joke. Why not get at your Madame over her ACTUAL threats to nuke another country?

If nuclear weapons are so awful, then abolish them, instead of keeping them around and increasing the likelihood of a terrible accident, either in the form of inadvertent international war or a domestic mistake (like when that nuclear-equipped bomber flew cross-country a few years ago).
 

Professor Emeritus

Veteran
Poster of the Year
Supporter
Joined
Jan 5, 2015
Messages
51,331
Reputation
19,940
Daps
204,143
Reppin
the ether
So Trump asks a hypothetical question and its the end of the world.

A hypothetical question that displayed clear ignorance, lack of moral discernment, and suggested potential intent.



Meanwhile his opponent is a woman who just a few years back threatened to nuke a large and powerful country in the Middle East.

What a fukking joke. Why not get at your Madame over her ACTUAL threats to nuke another country?

Look, Trumpstans fall to the "But Clinton!" excuse yet again!

I have never caped for Clinton. I'm not voting for her. I can point out that Trump is a horrific candidate and unqualified for the presidency without having to defend Clinton.

And if you don't get why Trump's statements were significantly more ignorant and poorly thought-out than Clinton's...well, you're a Trumpstan, so I can't finish that sentence with anything we don't already know.



If nuclear weapons are so awful, then abolish them, instead of keeping them around and increasing the likelihood of a terrible accident, either in the form of inadvertent international war or a domestic mistake (like when that nuclear-equipped bomber flew cross-country a few years ago).

Yes, we'll do that with the magic "abolish nuclear weapons button". With a small percentage of our military budgets, the world could also end world hunger, take in all worldwide refugees, and reduce veteran homelessness to nothing. So why don't we just push the button and "do" those things too?

There are many things which any rational, moral person can agree should be our primary aim, which are still enormously difficult to put into practice, especially when we're talking about GLOBAL matters. If you can't understand that, you probably shouldn't be running for president.
 

JahFocus CS

Get It How You Get It
Joined
Sep 10, 2014
Messages
20,461
Reputation
3,755
Daps
82,445
Reppin
Republic of New Afrika
A hypothetical question that displayed clear ignorance, lack of moral discernment, and suggested potential intent.

Look, Trumpstans fall to the "But Clinton!" excuse yet again!

I have never caped for Clinton. I'm not voting for her. I can point out that Trump is a horrific candidate and unqualified for the presidency without having to defend Clinton.

And if you don't get why Trump's statements were significantly more ignorant and poorly thought-out than Clinton's...well, you're a Trumpstan, so I can't finish that sentence with anything we don't already know.

Yes, we'll do that with the magic "abolish nuclear weapons button". With a small percentage of our military budgets, the world could also end world hunger, take in all worldwide refugees, and reduce veteran homelessness to nothing. So why don't we just push the button and "do" those things too?

There are many things which any rational, moral person can agree should be our primary aim, which are still enormously difficult to put into practice, especially when we're talking about GLOBAL matters. If you can't understand that, you probably shouldn't be running for president.

:russell:

at the end of the day, none of y'all whining about Trump's comments have shown yourselves to be adamant supporters of the abolition of nuclear weapons (there is a movement pushing for this, ya know). so this is much ado about nothing. :snooze:
 

Professor Emeritus

Veteran
Poster of the Year
Supporter
Joined
Jan 5, 2015
Messages
51,331
Reputation
19,940
Daps
204,143
Reppin
the ether
:russell:

at the end of the day, none of y'all whining about Trump's comments have shown yourselves to be adamant supporters of the abolition of nuclear weapons (there is a movement pushing for this, ya know). so this is much ado about nothing. :snooze:


I'm an adamant supporter of the abolition of nuclear weapons. I don't spend a huge amount of time talking about it here because it's not something much of us can do much about at present.
 

EndDomination

Veteran
Supporter
Joined
Jun 22, 2014
Messages
31,857
Reputation
7,427
Daps
111,968
:russell:

at the end of the day, none of y'all whining about Trump's comments have shown yourselves to be adamant supporters of the abolition of nuclear weapons (there is a movement pushing for this, ya know). so this is much ado about nothing. :snooze:
I forgot to mention how I was a four-star General in the AF, my bad, my name is actually Lester Lyles.
 
Top