U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
View Poll Results: Do you support Warren's proposal that we first have to be attacked with nukes before we can use them
Yes, we should announce to the world we won't use a nuke until one is first used on us 31 27.93%
No, we shouldn't handcuff ourselves saying a city first has to be destroyed before we can use our most powerful weapons 80 72.07%
Voters: 111. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 08-04-2019, 03:22 AM
 
Location: USA
18,777 posts, read 9,186,556 times
Reputation: 14115

Advertisements

We should have the policy of not using nukes first, but not announce it. I want our enemies to fear us in every way.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-04-2019, 04:53 AM
 
1,182 posts, read 223,332 times
Reputation: 796
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pilot1 View Post
We should have the policy of not using nukes first, but not announce it. I want our enemies to fear us in every way.

Somebody has to be first..

When the US has the high ground... Russia will announce the same.. then China will also come crawling to the table with the big boys.
Then a smattering of smaller Nuclear states..


Its almost not rocket science...


.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-04-2019, 09:26 AM
 
Location: Out West
22,986 posts, read 17,024,406 times
Reputation: 26602
Quote:
Originally Posted by Northman83 View Post
She is a very smart and capable woman... Thats why Republicans are talking smack about her.

They can't handle women that actually stand up and talk back!


Claiming Native American heritage on a application (more then one??) based on stories she heard in her childhood is the only thing they have negativ on her.
If she's so smart and capable, she wouldn't have had to lie about being a Native American to get where she is. She could have done it all on her own without fake "diversity" to get her through.

A LOT of people have heard stories of NDN ancestry - they don't go around claiming to be NDNs. She was lying, she knew she was lying, and we now have the proof that she's only 1/1024th capable of anything.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-04-2019, 02:43 PM
 
1,246 posts, read 427,046 times
Reputation: 1700
Quote:
Originally Posted by bmw335xi View Post
.

During the recent debate, Warren said she would sign a pledge to not use a nuclear weapon unless one is used on us first.

This to me is a deal breaker... it's like having a gun and pledging you will never shoot unless you get shot first. Why do we need to see NYC blown up before we can protect ourselves?

.
So has Senator Warren said which US city she is willing to give up to Nuclear annihilation because a pledge was signed.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-04-2019, 05:59 PM
 
32,654 posts, read 26,649,543 times
Reputation: 19298
Quote:
Originally Posted by Northman83 View Post
She is a very smart and capable woman... Thats why Republicans are talking smack about her.

They can't handle women that actually stand up and talk back!


Claiming Native American heritage on a application (more then one??) based on stories she heard in her childhood is the only thing they have negativ on her.

she should never have claimed it in the first place without proof. my uncle and my cousin, as well as my mother and my aunt, all have researched our family history and have found strong evidence, but no proof as yet, that there is in fact indian blood in my family. thus we dont claim indian heritage. though we are related by marriage to to US presidents, we do have proof of that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-04-2019, 08:50 PM
 
Location: So Cal
40,724 posts, read 40,297,873 times
Reputation: 42165
She's a dumbass, never announce your moves or strategy. Jesus, chess 101. Half of it is the uncertainty of it all.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-04-2019, 10:15 PM
 
Location: The Heart of Dixie
7,956 posts, read 12,430,833 times
Reputation: 4894
I had a thread along these very same lines YEARS ago about liberals, before Trump even started running for office, speculating if a liberal from today was in charge in WW2 would we have dropped the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. And that thread was deleted for being anti-liberal.

So if Pocahontas was President in 1945, she would rather condemn hundreds of thousands of American soldiers to death with a Normandy type invasion of Japan rather than put American lives first????? Even though the atomic bomb actually saved more lives both American and Japanese though every leader has a duty to put their own people first.

Or maybe if Pocahontas, AOC, Bernie, Biden etc were President during WW2, they would have apologized to Japan after Pearl Harbor for offending them and just sued for peace.........
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-04-2019, 10:15 PM
 
Location: Washington State
19,096 posts, read 9,844,496 times
Reputation: 16270
Quote:
Originally Posted by bmw335xi View Post
.

During the recent debate, Warren said she would sign a pledge to not use a nuclear weapon unless one is used on us first.

This to me is a deal breaker... it's like having a gun and pledging you will never shoot unless you get shot first. Why do we need to see NYC blown up before we can protect ourselves?

.
She's lobbying for Putin's support.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-04-2019, 10:16 PM
 
Location: The Heart of Dixie
7,956 posts, read 12,430,833 times
Reputation: 4894
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pilot1 View Post
We should have the policy of not using nukes first, but not announce it. I want our enemies to fear us in every way.
Using nukes first in 1945 was the right decision. Thankfully modern day liberals were not in charge back then and America had more of a backbone.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-04-2019, 10:24 PM
 
Location: Florida
3,642 posts, read 986,831 times
Reputation: 2875
Quote:
Originally Posted by bmw335xi View Post
.

During the recent debate, Warren said she would sign a pledge to not use a nuclear weapon unless one is used on us first.

This to me is a deal breaker... it's like having a gun and pledging you will never shoot unless you get shot first. Why do we need to see NYC blown up before we can protect ourselves?

.
LOL, I don't believe a word she says. Sure, she can make all the pledges she wants, but I can guarantee if she was ever president and her secretary of defense and cabinets tell her a country has plans to attack the USA with nukes, she won't hesitate to order the hit first. Either that, or be the President that sat down and did nothing while millions of Americans died under her watch just because she wants to play political games.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top