(08-05-2020 09:15 AM)appst89 Wrote:  

(08-05-2020 07:54 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(08-05-2020 07:14 AM)appst89 Wrote:  

(08-05-2020 06:49 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  It's like herding cats...he just goes on to the text talking point spewing lie after lie and you're left head spinning trying to nail one of them down as he's off down the road to the third or fourth distortion of reality.

Perfect description of you posting here.

I can see why a weak minded troll like yourself might think that. Sorry that you can't seem to keep up.

Oooooohhhhhh, it's angry, mean Tommy.

And a perfect example. Thank you.

Angry? Hardly. And perhaps a safe space for your feewings is apropos?

(08-04-2020 12:52 PM)fsquid Wrote:  What idiot in the WH thought putting Trump in front of Jonathan Swan would be a good idea?

Could be anyone, the WH is full of idiots...my guess is Trump himself wanted to do this...and Im sure he thinks he did great in the interview.

Trump did fine. Swan wanted to try to make him look bad. Trump wanted to get his points out there. How is that different from any other interview with the fake news media? The answer is it’s not different at all.

(08-05-2020 09:31 AM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(08-04-2020 11:01 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  I also think Trump needs to come out and say, "We are in Cold War II, and this time the enemy is not Russia, but China. We do not want a shooting war with China, just like we didn't want--and never had--a shooting war with the Soviet Union. But we do need to take steps to protect and defend ourselves, our freedom, and our rights to life, liberty, and property, and to help other freedom-loving countries in the region do the same. Just like Truman and Marshall did in western Europe after World War II."

he's not capable of such verbal elegance. needs more HUGE, BEST, GREATEST, BIGGEST, etc. and lots of commas.

so it's "bigly" vs. "decrepit"... ewes are too easy....

#walkinshite

@getshite

(08-05-2020 10:00 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(08-05-2020 09:15 AM)appst89 Wrote:  

(08-05-2020 07:54 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(08-05-2020 07:14 AM)appst89 Wrote:  

(08-05-2020 06:49 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  It's like herding cats...he just goes on to the text talking point spewing lie after lie and you're left head spinning trying to nail one of them down as he's off down the road to the third or fourth distortion of reality.

Perfect description of you posting here.

I can see why a weak minded troll like yourself might think that. Sorry that you can't seem to keep up.

Oooooohhhhhh, it's angry, mean Tommy.

And a perfect example. Thank you.

Angry? Hardly. And perhaps a safe space for your feewings is apropos?

If you think you affect my feelings in any way, then you're even more stupid than I thought.

(08-04-2020 04:36 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  I kinda like the strategy---my only issue with it is---whats in it for us? We dont need a presence in the S China Sea and we really dont really gain anything from trade in the Far East. Im fairly confident China will fall on its own---and even if it doesnt--its easy to choke off their oil supply with our navy without getting near to thier area denial capabilities. Honestly, Im thinking a Western Hemisphere-centric policy that mimics the old Monroe Doctrine might be what best fits our needs and our budget for the next 100 years or so.

To start with, a hell of a lot more than is in the Mideast for us. China is coming after us, sooner or later, and the quicker we can put a stop to their ambitions, the better. I don't see any way that China can invade the US mainland, unless we just totally defund the military, and even with that it would take a century or two for them to get here. But that doesn't mean they are not trying. I remember being struck in Beijing in 2005 by how cab drivers and people we would meet on the street were very open about saying, "You are American. We are going to dominate and conquer you." You don't get that in Shanghai or Hong Kong, because they are more commercially active than warlike, but we sure got it a bunch of times in Beijing--and that's where the seat of government is.

I really see it as analogous to western Europe in 1945. You have a strong land power that wants to expand its footprint, and a bunch of smaller countries that can't stand up to it individually. I think we believed, correctly, that if the Soviets gained control of all of western Europe, they would become an existential threat to us. I'm not sure China becomes a threat to us if they take over Taiwan, the Philippines, Indonesia, Vietnam, Thailand, and Malaysia. But they are certainly several steps closer to that objective. The Soviet Union never had, and China does not have, enough naval capacity to mount any sort of invasion. But they could sure as heck threaten with nukes, just like the Soviets.

I agree with a more Western-Hemisphere-centric policy.