Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Kimmo

What a joke

Recommended Posts

It's a PC world Leo, if he is actually joking he should make sure people know that.

 

Sorry, he's done it too many times - he's a dangerous fuckwit.

 

Cheers

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Whatever dude.

 

You think he’s a dangerous fuckwit based on the same people who maintain that a PC world is the best way to run national discourse.

 

The Presidential buffoon should not have to explain jokes to retards. Retards should simply not be employed by media companies.

 

But all it takes to be a journalist these days is a twitter account, primary school grammar and a woke social group of permanently virtue signalling gender-fluid-queer LGBTQIAlphabetSoup vegans.

Edited by Leonid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, chrisg said:

It's a PC world Leo, if he is actually joking he should make sure people know that.

a) Is it a PC world?

b) make sure who knows? PC people?  Yourself?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...Seems all it takes these days to be a president is a Twit account and a gift for disruption....

 

Cheers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even our media plays into Trump’s hands. There was more on his joke-as-serious Messiah BS then there was calling out Barnaby Joyce for headlining an anti-abortion rally on morality grounds barely a year after ditching his wife and kids for the woman he committed adultery with.

 

Every single media lie and every single manufactured outrage by the media plays into Trump’s hands.

 

Don’t believe he’s the caricature the media portray him as. Buffoon? Certainly. Underqualified? Definitely but so we’re the last 5 presidents excepting Clinton. Has he started a war? No. Has he actually done things every single president has promised to do but never did? Yes.

 

Does he like Nazis? No. Will he take their votes? Yes.

 

FFS, he’s a buffoon - but not inherently evil and there’s no indication that he wants the world to blow up in nuclear warfare.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If that is the case Leo why did he tear up the IRBM treaty releasing the USAF to test a cruise they had , as it happens, sitting in the wings, why did Russia attempt to test a nuclear powered cruise missile days after the treaty expired (it failed, 7 admitteded dead so far) Why is he chumming up to Kim Fat Boy whilst the idiot continues to throw missiles into the Sea of Japan, why is Putin on a Super Weapon splurge whilst Trump licks his ass and wants him back at the G7, why is he in a trade war with China that is wreaking our economies, why is he demonstrably on record over "pussy grabbing" ? (To end on a lighter note 🙂 )

 

Yes, he is a buffoon, but it is a very dangerous experiment to give a buffoon the controls to starship earth.....

 

Cheers

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Why is Putin experimenting with super weapons and Kim throwing missiles into the Sea of Japan a phenomenon of Trump?

 

You’re in that dangerous territory I already flagged - you’re saying that because Trump is ratcheting up what had already happened and should have been stopped earlier - that he is somehow at fault.

 

Churchill was no more at fault for the failures of previous PMs in confronting Hitler than Trump is at fault for failures of previous Presidents to confront Putin and Kim. 

 

Churchill brought matters to a head and yes, he escalated. But the fault for the war lies with those who made it inevitable.

 

There’s a word for people who don’t stand up to dictators on account of those dictators being volatile madmen with potent weapons and chips on their shoulders and visions of recovering or attaining superpower status.

 

That word is “appeasement”.

 

The biggest problem with it is that appeasement is the act of cooler heads prevailing while shit spins out of control.

 

How did we get to a world where Iran is months from the bomb, Pakistan has the bomb, North Korea is testing the bomb and Russia has been breaking the IRBM treaty and testing nuclear missiles in the Arctic circle while China has been purchasing land and ports through debt in strategic third world locations?

 

I’ll tell you how it happened. It happened because our fear of war was used against us in the knowledge that we had forgotten the golden rule that there is nothing worse than war except not going to war when required.

 

Our inaction, nay our appeasement, makes war more (not less) likely.

Edited by Leonid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First of all it is indeed a PC world Nich, step the least bit out of line if you are any kind of a person of note and social media, which pretty much thrives on tut-tutting people, will come baying for your blood.

 

There was an amusing case a couple of days ago where a news anchor somewhere in the states coming off some filler item about gorillas remarked they looked a bit like her co-host, who is black and frankly does look a bit gorilla-like. Twenty or thirty years ago it would have been taken in the light-hearted manner she meant it, not today. She had FaceBook and Twitter baying for her blood, demanding her resignation, in no time at all.

 

The same thing happened to Alan Jones. I'm no fan of the shock jock but if he can't express his opinion , an incorrect one  but his, that ScoMo should tell Ardern to put a sock in it over her comments re Australia without losing advertising and almost his job then we are indeed in a PC world.

 

Tell him he's wrong, call him an idiot, which he is, but don't go threatening his job, he  has it to be controversial, but if he is when referring to a person who is riding high on her gun reform  he gets threatened - makes no sense. Fortunately in both cases the the other person pretty much ignored it.

 

Leo...

 

Appeasement is precisely what Trump is doing when it comes to Putin and Kim, not China because he thinks that is just about money and he's sooo good with money, not, but with arms he does not have a clue.

 

Historically once America let the genie out of the bottle with nukes it was only a matter of time until other nations acquired them, Britain was quick off the mark, the then USSR caught up fast, France next, later India and by an inevitable knee-jerk Pakistan. Israel may not admit to it but it is an open secret they have had them for years. Whilst NK probably does not have a bomb they can weaponise they have shown they can at the least set off a fission bomb.

 

Did I miss anyone ? I don't think so but it would not matter anyway anything more than one and you have the potential for nuclear war. It amazes me Brazil does not have one and they may with the current lunatic in charge down there.

 

The only way, without taking us back to the stone age, to deal with nuclear weapons is via enforced treaties and, although it will never happen, a gradual disarmament, at least down to levels the world could survive through.

 

At the moment the overkill factor is staggering in its stupidity even after years, decades, of negotiation that was showing some progress.

 

Reagan may not have been the sharpest crayon in the box but he did what you are mistakenly believing Trump is doing - he faced Russia down and got the treaties that began the reduction. It happens it was a synchronous event because Russia was already in trouble financially and Gorbachev was on the other side wanting to reform the communist party .

 

Putin is not a Gorbachev, he is, as you have said yourself, a thug, he's also a lying, domineering idiot, but that is another story.

 

Escalation against a man like Putin is not going to work, we will, in fact we already have, spin out of control. Enforcement of treaties, whilst not transgressing on them yourself, will keep him contained, at least limit his ability to run amuck with new super weapons.

 

So what does Trump do?

 

He tears up the IRBM treaty, the very treaty that kept nukes out of NATO and also  out of Russia in terms of a short range strike capability against mainland Europe.

 

Before that treaty came into being the US was routinely deploying nukes into the U.K. and quite often into Germany - cruise missiles, mostly Tomahawk air-launched but in the UK for a time, until protests put a stop to it they were threatening to deploy BGM-109s, purportedly to counter the USSRs SS20s.

 

Under the Treaty the 109s were never deployed and both they and the SS20s were decommissioned.

 

(It's an imperfect world, both the UK. and France have a nuclear capability but it is reasonably certain neither would ever launch first and whilst France maintains some ground based missiles they are getting old. In reality their nuclear capability is primarily in their submarine fleet of four.)

 

Trump's justification for tearing up the treaty was that Russia was not honoring it.

 

That is not strictly true, any more than it is strictly true that the US was honoring it either. The fact is both sides still had, and have, conventional IRBMs, such as Tomahawk that are nuclear capable. Under mutual inspection agreements that were covered by the treaty however both sides have demonstrated for years that they have no immediate ability to install nukes onto those missiles.

 

In short some faceless hawks in Washington have convinced Trump that the Russians are not playing ball. The reality is they were. They have been finding it hard enough to even keep the missiles serviceable, let alone able to be quickly converted to nuclear capable.

 

The reality in fact is that the US could far more quickly switch nukes into their Tomahawks, except they do not currently manufacture warheads to fit them. Neither do, or did, the Russians for their IRBMS - they have in theory a few models but they hardly ever test them.

 

By tearing up the treaty all bets are off, and within next to no time we have the US testing a "new" no it wasn't, cruise missile in California and Russia having a very suspicious nuclear accident, almost certainly missile related, in the White Sea.

 

We are back where we started from, most probably the US is already gearing up to have suitable nuclear warheads available for their Tomahawks and Russia will be trying to bring back into service missiles they put on the shelf years ago and nuclear equip them.

 

I don't see much progress here...

 

The nuclear incident is probably a sideshow by the way - an embarrassment for the Russians. Best guess at the moment is that it was a test of a nuclear powered missile that went wrong.

 

Nuclear powered missiles are a doomsday weapon on steroids, I can only assume Putin wanted to prove he was capable of having one - one would be enough to have Washington scared.

 

Where he was going with that NFI unless it was purely and simply a case of strong-man tactics to keep the US in line, Russian paranoia, that would not surprise me.

 

Either way the failure will ultimately be an embarrassment to him  if it is not already and that is not really a good thing.

 

He has also announced a nuclear powered torpedo that is pretty scary, except if they can't get the engine to behave in the air - essentially it's the same motor, I don't like their chances in deep water.

 

We have two lunatics running the asylum, the real question is which one will lie the most convincingly and which one will run out of money first.

 

The US actually does not have to lie much, everything is proven and demonstrable. Russia is busier than a cat covering shit trying to look good. They have for example three SU-57s putting on an amazing show at MAKS 2019 this week, puts the American F-22 demo team to shame - trouble is that is at the moment about all the aircraft of that type that they have - there's an order in for 12, if f they can afford them.

 

Meanwhile the US has gone into full production on the F-35, having finally sorted out most of its problems and has around 400 delivered.

 

 Debatable given the game-changing network-centric combat nature of the F-35 if it is as good as the SU-57, but it doesn't really matter when you are 400 to 12...

 

So, why does Trump see any need to be appeasing Putin ?

 

He is after all - talks about the nice chats they have, wants him back at G7 etc.

 

I'll give him the benefit of the doubt and say he is afraid that Putin might if cornered lash out but I really do not see it, Putin is a survivor, he's not going to start a war he knows will kill him.

 

keeping a level degree of strain is all that is needed, neither appeasement nor aggression, and wait for Russia to go broke, again.

 

Kim the Fat Boy is an even bigger conundrum in terms of how Trump is dealing with him.

 

He had one meeting that seemed to go ok, one that never really even started, he's met him at the border and famously set foot on NK soil. Meanwhile Kim keeps shooting off missiles, bitching about exercises in SK, which have been a regular event for years, and looks set to test another nuke.

 

Trump's response ?

 

That he had a lovely note from Kim recently...

 

Lovely I'm sure.

 

Meanwhile Mr money man thinks he can win a trade war with China - good luck with that - you idiot.

 

Cheers

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

You can’t claim that Trump is going to start a war by Sabre rattling and blustering, and then say he’s the appeaser.

 

It doesn’t work that way.

Edited by Leonid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

🙂

 

Is he actually sabre rattling when he is claiming to get on so well with Putin and the Fat Boy ?

 

He is totally confusing the way he does business, keep your friends close so you can stab them seems to be his motto, with Foreign Affairs where you actually do need to honor your debts.

 

Cheers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Leonid said:

...a hooker you paid to say she loves you.

I paid her a lot tho.

And it's gotta be true love when she tells me not to worry about protection...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, chrisg said:

First of all it is indeed a PC world Nich, step the least bit out of line if you are any kind of a person of note and social media, which pretty much thrives on tut-tutting people, will come baying for your blood. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

How does that make it indeed a PC world, other than because you said so, DMB?

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ooo I say that gave me a serious chuckle ! hah DMB , nice one.

 

No, but really Nich, PC does encroach where it can ... A lady up this neck of the woods has lost her job due to a topic she chose to share on some site or other. Made news in the Cairns Post a day or so back.

Only good to have a personal opinion outside of work, but even then it can cause issues... unless of course you have some clout and then it's mostly okay, maybe 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

🙂

 

Now, if I were DMB just why would I have had those long, long debates with him years ago over the so-called 9/11 conspiracies ?

 

BTW, it's always been my experience that people generally start calling people names when they either feel they are inferior to the other person or they know he is right - hang on, suddenly I understand Trump, and you somewhat better 🙂

 

Cheers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, scruffy1 said:

 

what one ?

Chris only calls her stupid, among other names, because she's always right.  Some weird schoolyard crush, I guess.

This is all kind of insulting to DMB, to be using his name pejoratively, too.

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

🙂

 

That's convoluted enough to have me call you DMB....  🙂

 

BTW I think you or Ev actually started referring to me as DMB....'

 

Do me a favor - grow up....

 

Cheers

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe this is what you mean by a PC world: being held to account for what falls out of your mouth/hands.

Why, back in your day, I bet you'd just do a quick buzz over, then give me the choice of your guns or your 'guns' if I didn't show you the respect felt entitled to, without nary a repercussion in sight?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah I was at work when I read that from chrisg ... nearly dropped the phone .lol. I mean given the names and vitriol hurled at Trump over the last months I'd say the inferiority is definitely showing itself  :P

 

@chrisg it was me that suggested you might get a bit forgetful of what alt you were posting as

12 minutes ago, Nich... said:

Maybe this is what you mean by a PC world: being held to account for what falls out of your mouth/hands.

There's being held to account for being an idiot and there always should be, but to lose your livelyhood is at times more than is warranted imo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, eveln said:

There's being held to account for being an idiot and there always should be, but to lose your livelyhood is at times more than is warranted imo

It depends a bit, right? 
It depends on who is causing the loss of livelihood.  It depends what was said.  It depends how prominent a person they are.  It depends whether there's an absolute guaranteed right to free speech or just an implied one.

 

Like, I don't think people were complaining about things getting a bit too PC when heads were rolling in revolutionary France, or pre-war Germany.

I find that most people complaining about 'PC gone mad' are upset at being called, say, a racist for saying racist things, or insert your favourite variety of bigotry.  They usually don't like just openly saying they dislike feeling a little less empowered at the expense of other people tho', because then people start to look at them and ask questions.  So they tend to talk in circles and hope the matter is dropped - or go on the offensive and hope people get distracted and forget.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Heh,

 

Trump is somewhat different, he puts himself up as a genius on all things whilst being in fact the so-called leader of the free world , unfortunately - fair game  🙂

 

If you understand that being held to account  for being an idiot is acceptable then you should understand why Trump is attacked so much Ev.

 

Yes, it was you who first suggested I might be DMB- laughable - the only alt I've ever had  on here was as the "Secret Chef, " years ago.

 

No Nich - the PC world has come to us out of the US, it's the SUE!!! mentality that pushes everyone into being oh so careful of what they say or do.

 

Cheers

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Nich... said:
1 hour ago, eveln said:

There's being held to account for being an idiot and there always should be, but to lose your livelyhood is at times more than is warranted imo

It depends a bit, right? 

Of course it does.

What lead me to even bother with a comment on the subject is that a Chinese lady who held some sort of marketing position ( I think ) in a tourist business here had not nice things to pass on about the Chinese way of internets. It seems she wasn't the author just a passer onerrer

The company obviously felt it had to banish her. a rather large pic ( for someone previously unknown by most of us ) was printed in the paper along with her crime. So she's lost her job and pretty much any credibility within the tourist industry, for a while at the least.

Sure, there are some that might , maybe laud her daring-do, but will they risk employing her too ?

[ please excuse the half -hearted info I offer, I have a friend in the same type of biz, diff. company, who was showing me from her phone about this lady and the almost a page worth of media hype on it ]

 

edit: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7381641/Chinese-woman-working-Australia-sacked-saying-Hong-Kong-protesters-executed.html

" A Chinese saleswoman working in Queensland has been fired for posting online that Hong Kong civil rights protesters 'should all get executed by firing squad'.

Cairns-based helicopter firm Nautilus Aviation fired Chinese sales agent Coco Souter after she made a private social media post saying Hong Kong pro-democracy protesters 'should all get executed by firing squad'. 

Her sacking comes as tensions reach boiling point between pro-China and pro-Hong Kong protesters in Australia and overseas. 

The former tourism worker made the post - written in Mandarin - on Chinese social media platform WeChat."

I don't want to pay for the Cairns Post, but found this in The Daily Mail ... lordy ! Did not realise she was talking firing squad ... that is how you say a bit fucken rash of her maybe firing is okay 😉

 

 

1 hour ago, Nich... said:

 

Like, I don't think people were complaining about things getting a bit too PC when heads were rolling in revolutionary France, or pre-war Germany.

 well geez, a bit hard to ask headless corpses much of anything really. So you be making rash assumptions there Nich...

 

I don't think there's a person on this planet that is not now, or will not be in the future, an idiot chrisg

Edited by eveln
research
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

🙂

 

Sure, but Trump gets a n A++ for consistency   🙂

 

Cheers

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So anyway, I happened to wonder if Leo's opinion of Boris Johnson is similar to his opinion of Trump... 

 

Is that on record yet? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×