monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

Yeah Blatham how DARE you cast aspersions upon the entirely legitimate concern Alex Jones has about who Michelle's baby daddy is?
The nerve! The gall! You don't know and have no way of verifying the facts about the matter, so stop passing moral judgements!

(WTF?)

1 Reply

@blatham,

It will increase the drive to holiday at home. We had a similar campaign a few years ago, but in the end it just increases the disconnection with the rest of the World.

0 Replies

@Olivier5,

Olivier5 wrote:

Finn dAbuzz wrote:

Then I hereby bequeath France with America's leadership role when it comes to Climate Change. Show us how it's done!

Well, the lessons from the French is that over and beyond the need to invest in renewable energy sources like wind and solar -- that still require costly subsidies to be profitable -- there are a few low-hanging fruits like good public transport systems, good house insulation, low-consumption cars, and yes, a rational use of nuclear power.

A population density about 3.3 times that in the United States makes public transport a good deal more efficient. Beyond that the only thing that distinguished France is that about 80 % of their electrical power is supplied by Nuclear reactors, compared to about 28% here.

1 Reply

@blatham,

blatham wrote:

From Trump's buddy, Alex Jones

Quote:
“The Word Is” President Obama’s Daughters “Aren’t Even His Kids”
Media Matters
Just one more reason why I have so much respect for Trump as a national leader. You'd want your own kids to reach for this sort of intellectual and moral standard.

I wonder though, had you not posted this, would anyone even know this was ever mentioned by him? Who is it that actually listens to Alex Jones? I would be willing to guess that at least 50% of his audience are critics.

1 Reply

@snood,

From what I've been able to glean from various news sources, it was the military commanders who decided that the use of that MOAB was necessary for that particular target at that particular time. I've not read a single negative report about its use either. It appears that the tunnels and caves being targeted were destroyed and at last count 97 ISIS fighters were killed.

0 Replies

@McGentrix,

Quote:

Who is it that actually listens to Alex Jones?

Trump is a big fan, and that's not insignificant.

2 Replies

@snood,

I volunteered into the USAF because I knew I didn't have to do the killing. I was assigned to work with nukes, and spent one year in Morocco. That experience changed my whole life, because I learned about world travel, and have since traveled to over 80 countries.
I kept in touch with one airman who I met in Morocco. We send each other christmas cards every year. He used to live in Kansas City, but now lives in Terrell, TX. Saw him a couple of times since returning to the states, but that was many years ago.
I think the military establishes a lot of life long friendships.
My older brother served in Korea during that war in the Army. My younger brother was a doctor in the Army, and served most of his time on the east coast at Newport News. He was considering re-upping, because he said he could make bird colonel, but I told him to get out and start his own practice. That's what he did with a partner, and they had two offices. One in Lodi, and the other in Stockton. I think he did much better in civilian life. He even served in the state legislature for two terms.

1 Reply

@snood,

Trump represented white supremacy which was quite obvious, and he still got blacks/minorities and women to vote for him.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

Not a lot of them, notwithstanding the propaganda numbers.

0 Replies

@snood,

I don't need to listen to people like Alex Jones, because Trump is a textbook racial bigot and misogynist. He's also a con.
It's good to see that Americans are waking up to this fraud, and his approval rating is below 40%. I hope that guarantees one term or an impeachment.

1 Reply

@snood,

I'd venture a guess and say that I doubt Trump has ever had time to sit and watch/listen to Alex Jones. He strikes me as someone that is always doing something. He may say he does, but only to pander to Jones' audience.

1 Reply

According to this site,

Quote:

infowars.com reaches over 5.9 million monthly people, of which 4.5 million (76%) are in the U.S.

https://www.quantcast.com/infowars.com#trafficCard

That's not an insignificant number.

2 Replies

@izzythepush,

More then I would have guessed by about 2 mill.

2 Replies

@McGentrix,

McGentrix wrote:

I'd venture a guess and say that I doubt Trump has ever had time to sit and watch/listen to Alex Jones. He strikes me as someone that is always doing something. He may say he does, but only to pander to Jones' audience.

I think your information is incorrect. Not only did Trump use talking points that Jones started, but he's appeared on Jones' show more than once.

0 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

Quote:

He's also a con.

There you go again, pointing fingers, CI, when you all are deeply involved in a huge, two plus centuries long con job of gigantic proportions. You folks banter the big con job back and forth incessantly, as if you are some great citizens debating important topics.

0 Replies

@giujohn,

giujohn wrote:

oralloy wrote:
giujohn wrote:
Respectfully disagree. Cruise missiles can take out anti-aircraft while simultaneously launching moab's... That's just one scenario.

Cruise missiles can only destroy known locations. Not useful against mobile radar/SAM sites. Not useful against fixed sites that we don't know about.

MOABs are simply not powerful enough to instantly kill an entire country before they have any chance to react. If North Korea manages to destroy Tokyo (or Chicago) while we are still in the process of destroying them, we'll have failed.

Again respectfully disagree. While triple A SAM sites may be surely mobile the are usually guarding sites that are not.

If you can't take out the mobile SAM sites, no cargo plane is going to get close enough to drop a MOAB.

giujohn wrote:

We already have the sites we would want plotted now.

The problem is though, there just aren't enough conventional weapon targets (and ability to hit them rapidly enough) to match the devastation of hundreds of nukes striking everywhere at once.

Launching a conventional attack against North Korea is just going to give them more of an opportunity to launch their nukes before they are destroyed. And probably shoot a fair number of artillery shells into Seoul too.

giujohn wrote:

If, again a very big if, they launched against the US it would not be Chicago. San Francisco...Yeah possibly, but then I wouldn't be sorry to see it go, ya know?

Right now they can't reach mainland US. But if we give them time, they will eventually be able to. I'd hate to lose San Francisco. It's a beautiful city.

giujohn wrote:

But much more likely would be a US military base in the ROK.

They can reach Tokyo and Guam with their current nukes.

1 Reply

@McGentrix,

McGentrix wrote:

Well, I am no expert by any means but I am sure Carrier Strike Group 1 carries a pretty good ordinance.

North Korea is only 46,541 square miles in size. Pretty sure most of the artillery aimed at Best Korea is on or near the DMZ pointing south. The provinces of North Hwanghae (3,148 sq mi), Kangwon (4,346 sq mi) and South Hwanghea (3,260 sq mi) would bear the brunt of the bombardment. I doubt you can throw a rock in that area without hitting something that goes boom.

Now, beside CSG-1 there is also a pretty good military presence in Best Korea and Okinawa. Though I doubt we will hear from GOB1 in terms of the amount of ordinance found in and around that area, I am sure it is enough to overwhelm what ever Worse Korea has.

Enough conventional ordnance to win a conventional war with a non-nuclear power over a period of time? Yes.

The ability to use conventional ordnance fast enough to take out all the North Korean artillery before it can do serious damage to Seoul? We'll do our best, but I think we can expect a lot of people to be killed.

Enough conventional ordinance (and the ability to use it fast enough) to prevent North Korea from launching nukes? Not even close.

Even a large nuclear strike can't give a 100% guarantee that there would be no nuclear retaliation, but it will be much more effective than any conventional effort.

0 Replies

@Finn dAbuzz,

Finn dAbuzz wrote:

If we do, it will be because NK has used theirs.

Attacking a nuclear power with conventional weapons is like bringing a knife to a gun fight. All it would do is give them more opportunity to launch their nukes at us or our allies.

0 Replies

@blatham,

blatham wrote:

MOABs (clearly the new "in" arsenal item).

Not with me.

W76-1 is the way to go when attacking a nuclear power.

0 Replies

@McGentrix,

I would have probably argued someone down who said Trump shaved a dude's head on a wrestling show. Until I saw it.

0 Replies

monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know