The Political Discussion Thread

[Gatefan1976]

You are so woefully uninformed it is frightening.

I read Russian media because Russian is my first language, and let me give you a short number of things Russia has done that is out of the ordinary for Russia - way out:

Russia's 2017-18 budget is entirely war-oriented, to the point that the finance minister is given carte blanche to cut 10% of any ministry's budget in favor of defense.

This I knew of, and FH, I'm afraid to say Womble is quite right here, Russia is putting itself on military footing, has been for awhile now.

Russia is creating a national payment system called Mir, independent of SWIFT. You know what it means? War-proofing of Russian economy; they're preparing to live under the kind of sanctions that North Korea and pre-ObamaIran lived under.

That I did not know, but is not surprising.

Russia tested disconnecting from the global Internet and maintaining an in-country intranet network.

They ran statistics in large cities like St. Petersburg to determine the size of bread allowance they would hand out to the population in case of war - apparently 300g of bread per person per day. They currently maintain a 20-day supply.

Unsurprising.

You should be afraid, my friend. The Americans - especially the ones you support the most- will not come and fight for Belgium when the time comes.

I am not sure about that. Putin is a chess player, but at least Hillary does not call her pieces horsey's and castles...........

(I really hope I'm wrong this time; I was disturbingly correct when I made the prediction - last time we argued - that terrorism would come to Brussels much faster than you expected).

I don't think FH disagreed with you.

Those guys at Politifact must be smoking something strong.

Russia's purchase of Uranium 1 gives them the ability to monitor USA's nuclear weapon production, for one. If they have eyes on the American uranium mining they have eyes on how much of the mined uranium goes where, when the mining volume increases etc. They can also sabotage that production if need be.

US uranium mining is negligible, they would have to monitor uranium imports. That however is beside the point politifact was making, that Trump was lying, as usual.

[aretood2]

You are so woefully uninformed it is frightening.

I read Russian media because Russian is my first language, and let me give you a short number of things Russia has done that is out of the ordinary for Russia - way out:

Russia's 2017-18 budget is entirely war-oriented, to the point that the finance minister is given carte blanche to cut 10% of any ministry's budget in favor of defense.

Russia is creating a national payment system called Mir, independent of SWIFT. You know what it means? War-proofing of Russian economy; they're preparing to live under the kind of sanctions that North Korea and pre-ObamaIran lived under.

Russia tested disconnecting from the global Internet and maintaining an in-country intranet network.

They ran statistics in large cities like St. Petersburg to determine the size of bread allowance they would hand out to the population in case of war - apparently 300g of bread per person per day. They currently maintain a 20-day supply.

You should be afraid, my friend. The Americans - especially the ones you support the most- will not come and fight for Belgium when the time comes.

(I really hope I'm wrong this time; I was disturbingly correct when I made the prediction - last time we argued - that terrorism would come to Brussels much faster than you expected).


Those guys at Politifact must be smoking something strong.

Russia's purchase of Uranium 1 gives them the ability to monitor USA's nuclear weapon production, for one. If they have eyes on the American uranium mining they have eyes on how much of the mined uranium goes where, when the mining volume increases etc. They can also sabotage that production if need be.

But Russia is our friend! Putin is a great leader, he's the best. We should abandon our NATO allies and allow Putin to do what he wants! I mean, that's what the pro-America conservatives want, and they are the only ones who care about America. Liberals are working for the terrorists and that's why they don't like Russia. Why else would Hillary delete emails? And don't forget, Obama is a Muslim. Putin hates Muslims, just ask Turkey. I mean, that's what Trump says anyway.

Honestly though, I would rather have Rubio in the white house. He knows the inns and out foreign policy. But Trump is the worst of the worst from the two parties in that regard. But hey, It's them illegals and free trade that represents the greatest threats to the US. Not a country clearly on the war path.

[Annoyed]

Isn't that the standard for Hillary's email?
You seem to have absolutely no problem not worrying about proof there........

Oh, and what's that other utterly horrible thing she did, Benghazi?
https://thinkprogress.org/gop-rep-i-...8ea#.yxajcliwf

I know I have linked these stories before, but it does not seem to sink in........

Oh, it's already been proven that Hillary was running a private mail server, after all, the domain name registration would show who owns it. if she didn't own the domain name, she couldn't set the MX records to send mail for [email protected] to a specific machine on the Internet.
Oh, and they've already got the physical hardware....

[Gatefan1976]

Oh, it's already been proven that Hillary was running a private mail server, after all, the domain name registration would show who owns it. if she didn't own the domain name, she couldn't set the MX records to send mail for [email protected] to a specific machine on the Internet.
Oh, and they've already got the physical hardware....

Oh, and look at all the people disputing that.........
*listens to crickets*

I always thought your problem was the "missing emails", guess what, you are trying to prove she is guilty based on no evidence, despite the fact that it has been looked into over and over again.
More ignore trump's -provable activities- and focus on what you feel might be missing.

So, two main charges against Hillary, one is guilt without proof, and the other is her fault even though it can be proven that she herself warned that the cuts made by republicans could, and did cost people their lives.

So much for cold republican logic and reason, sounds more like the filthy liberal feels to me.

[Coco Pops]

Who is Russia preparing to go to war with?

OK who upset Putin this time?

[mad_gater]

But Russia is our friend! Putin is a great leader, he's the best. We should abandon our NATO allies and allow Putin to do what he wants! I mean, that's what the pro-America conservatives want, and they are the only ones who care about America. Liberals are working for the terrorists and that's why they don't like Russia. Why else would Hillary delete emails? And don't forget, Obama is a Muslim. Putin hates Muslims, just ask Turkey. I mean, that's what Trump says anyway.

Honestly though, I would rather have Rubio in the white house. He knows the inns and out foreign policy. But Trump is the worst of the worst from the two parties in that regard. But hey, It's them illegals and free trade that represents the greatest threats to the US. Not a country clearly on the war path.

compared to what we've got now Genghis Kahn or Napoleon Bonaparte would probably look like a pretty good leader right about now

[Falcon Horus]

But.. but.. The closet would be so empty without you

And what would I say to FH Jr?

It would, but there's nothing this puny human can do about it. I really don't have that kind of power.

I'll just leave this here..

-- I think I saw it on George Takei's twitter and snorted very loudly.

How do you figure he would get impeached before he even takes the oath?

Doesn't he have a courtcase to go to in December? The new president takes office in January, right? So...

Have proof either those accusers never worked/were around the person during the time they claim the abuse happened, or have an alaby..

Good luck proving that...

Who is Russia preparing to go to war with?

The better question would be, who aren't they going to war with?
Assad is probably save. Erdogan might be to since they apologized for that kerfluffle with the fighter jet.

OK who upset Putin this time?

As far as I know, the US got in their face over Syria. Hollande of France said something about their involvement in Syria... basically everything's about Syria.

compared to what we've got now Genghis Kahn or Napoleon Bonaparte would probably look like a pretty good leader right about now

Comparing Trump to either Khan or Bonaparte is an insult to both.

[aretood2]

Who is Russia preparing to go to war with?

OK who upset Putin this time?

I think Russia wants to expand and is preparing for retaliatory strikes from the US and company. Why do you think they want Trump to win? A destabilized NATO, a weakened South Korea, A loyal ally in the Middle East (Syria)...do you see how that secures Russia on multiple fronts? Think about it this way, the Russians haven't done anything to make China angry or annoy them. If anything weakening South Korea could make China a bit happier and enbolden North Korea.

Should Russia make a move on Ukraine again, or some of the other former soviet states, Russia could use allies whose interests will align with them. A retreat of the US from several NATO nations would make it difficult to respond to Russian actions in Europe. North Korea could act out therefore splitting US forces and its allies thin. And guess who has North Korea's back? China, the awakening dragon. Having an in in the Middle East is helpful, and several Middle Eastern nations wouldn't mind making a move against the West, further spreading out US and allied forces. Oh, and Trump would like to abandon what little allies the US has there too. Except for Israel. And good luck getting Israel to get involved. Not to mention that if Israel were to get involved, they'd get swarmed by their neighbors requiring even more Western troops at yet another theater.

Now take Rubio. He made a case for getting rid of Russian influence by taking swift action, arming the Kurds, and so on. He would build up US presence in NATO territory and would not leave South Korea out to dry making North Korea think twice about doing anything funny. But these countries smell blood in the water, and it's color is orange.

compared to what we've got now Genghis Kahn or Napoleon Bonaparte would probably look like a pretty good leader right about now

Napoleon...um...not the best strategist when it comes to Russia

[Falcon Horus]

Napoleon...um...not the best strategist when it comes to Russia

LOL -- they're still talking about that one.

[Annoyed]

Just a random thought here.

If one of the most often levied criticisms of Trump is true, that he's an unpredictable and mercurial "loose cannon", I'm not sure the soviets would want his finger on the trigger of our military if they're planning on behaving badly.

They may be applying reverse psychology; convince the US electorate that they want Trump as POTUS, so US voters think "well, if they want Trump, it can't be good for us" and therefore vote for Hillary. They may want Hillary, not Trump. Historically, Democrats have always been weak on military matters, at least for the past 60 years or so, as shown by Carter and the LSoS's gutting military budgets.

Supposedly, the Wikileaks have been assisted or carried out by the Russians. But that information merely provides confirmation of what most anti-Hillary people already know, at least in their minds. By the same token, Hillary supporters can be predicted to ignore the information shown in those leaks. So I don't expect them to make a big impact. If they were indeed carried out by the soviets, I suspect that was just a mistaken strategy move on their part.

[Falcon Horus]

Just a random thought here.

There's a small problem with your random thought. One that I hear too often being used as a reason not to vote for Hillary Clinton.

If one of the most often levied criticisms of Trump is true, that he's an unpredictable and mercurial "loose cannon", I'm not sure the soviets would want his finger on the trigger of our military if they're planning on behaving badly.

That's not an IF-statement -- you just have to look at his behavior to know it to be true.
And the Russians would be able to control him, pull the strings as it were.

They may be applying reverse psychology; convince the US electorate that they want Trump as POTUS, so US voters think "well, if they want Trump, it can't be good for us" and therefore vote for Hillary. They may want Hillary, not Trump. Historically, Democrats have always been weak on military matters, at least for the past 60 years or so, as shown by Carter and the LSoS's gutting military budgets.

Now to the problem -- many times I hear that HRC is a warmongering person, so by that notion, Russia would not want her in charge -- no strings to pull when she's in charge. She'll send them a nice giftwrapped missile instead.

So, Trump would be the better choice for Russia. Putin could use Trump to rule by proxy.

[aretood2]

Just a random thought here.

If one of the most often levied criticisms of Trump is true, that he's an unpredictable and mercurial "loose cannon", I'm not sure the soviets would want his finger on the trigger of our military if they're planning on behaving badly.

They may be applying reverse psychology; convince the US electorate that they want Trump as POTUS, so US voters think "well, if they want Trump, it can't be good for us" and therefore vote for Hillary. They may want Hillary, not Trump. Historically, Democrats have always been weak on military matters, at least for the past 60 years or so, as shown by Carter and the LSoS's gutting military budgets.

Supposedly, the Wikileaks have been assisted or carried out by the Russians. But that information merely provides confirmation of what most anti-Hillary people already know, at least in their minds. By the same token, Hillary supporters can be predicted to ignore the information shown in those leaks. So I don't expect them to make a big impact. If they were indeed carried out by the soviets, I suspect that was just a mistaken strategy move on their part.

That's wishful thinking. I don't really think Trump would actually push the red button because an ambassador called him a stupid butt face. Let's be honest here, that's just hyperbolic if not irrational. But he would make rash choices which is a very bad thing when playing a game of chess. Especially when that game of chess actually involves human lives. Putin is playing rather well. He's guessed Western moves, he understands our weaknesses and has found out that we really wouldn't easily make a move. The last thing he needs is an American president who can think like him. And that's one of Hillary's issues...she is a warmonger. But warmongers do know how to play chess.

Johnson can't be president in this atmosphere, because he doesn't even know what chess is. And Stien? We could have had Rubio, or even Cruz. But you folks made the choice for us all when you choose Trump.

I have also learned (the media needs to talk about this more) that there is a large church of conservative white people who see Trump for what he is. The Church of Latter Day Saints, Mormons. Trump's support in the pulls in rocky mountain states is less than a third, so is Clinton's support. Those folks are looking for alternatives. Frankly, like Romney, they don't like Trump and they don't like the idea of trickle down racism.

Here's a CNN link http://www.cnn.com/2016/10/14/politi...-dilemma-2016/

But I've looked elsewhere. Apparently Mormons don't think he's nice and they are not fans of religious persecution (considering that they have been on the receiving end of it, it makes sense). They also tend to be better educated than the general public (Trump pulls much more support from those who only have high school education than those who are college or votech educated). And they are also better educated theologically than Evangelicals (trump's religious groupies). They see call his egomania and his supporters blind faith idol worship (I guess I'm not the only one then).

It's my contention, personal, that Christians who support Trump strongly, as opposed to begrudgingly, are poorly theologically educated. Disclaimer, it's a feeling. I have no real proof beyond Mormons and it is based on my own religious beliefs and understandings.

[Falcon Horus]

It's my contention, personal, that Christians who support Trump strongly, as opposed to begrudgingly, are poorly theologically educated. Disclaimer, it's a feeling. I have no real proof beyond Mormons and it is based on my own religious beliefs and understandings.

Kinda like poorly theologically educated Muslims following ISIS?

[Womble]

Unsurprising.

Right, because it's totally normal for countries during peacetime to calculate the minimum survivable caloric intake for their population in case of all-out war, and estimate how long they can maintain it.

Nothing to see here, nothing to do with anything else that's happening, move along, right?

I am not sure about that. Putin is a chess player, but at least Hillary does not call her pieces horsey's and castles...........

Hillary thinks they're backgammon pieces.

US uranium mining is negligible, they would have to monitor uranium imports. That however is beside the point politifact was making, that Trump was lying, as usual.

Did you borrow politifact's weed too?

"US uranium mining is negligible"? Sure, it's "only" 1271 tons, but it's domestic supply. Right now it is simply cheaper and more politically expedient to buy uranium from Canada and Australia than mine it from the Navajo lands. But were the USA to begin preparing to massively boost nuclear weapons production, their first move would be an equally massive increase in domestic uranium mining. If the Russians want to monitor USA nuclear weapons production patterns, domesitc uranium mining is the thing to watch. And sabotage.

[aretood2]

Kinda like poorly theologically educated Muslims following ISIS?

It also matters how that education is framed. Mormons, LDS church, focuses on saving people's souls. It's apolitical. Their goal in life (theologically speaking) is not to keep the US Christian. It's to go door to door saving as many people as possible through their understanding of Jesus' word. Evangelicals...their goals are political, their churches are political. Their role is to save America's soul, that is impose salvation on the unwelling.

Grant it, Mormons will vote with the rest of the religious right on social issues. But they do that as a result of their political upbringing, not their religious upbringing. Hispanic Mormons are more likely to be open to amnesty, for example. It's that for Mormons, religion trumps politics. For evangelicals, their religion is closely tied to politics where they don't see where one ends and the other begins. So that too plays a role, one think can be seen in ISIS.

But, I can't let my dislike of Evangelicals also make me ignore one thing. It's not 100% support either. Among white and republican Evangelicals, trump is in the 70's. But overall, he's in the high 40's (Clinton is in the low 30's).