Trump's State of the Union

[Saz]

[John Galt]

NPR had some interviews with people. Everyday voters in WI.

They think Trump is likely going to be the GOAT, and the speech pleased them. These are ex Democrats. They are the people that Dems have forgot about, and who handed Trump his victory

[JDHURF]

[Saz]

[JDHURF]

You're plainly delusional. The Financial Times is marxist is it? Go take your chlorpromazine.

[Kane]

[Kane]

[Kane]

[exploited]

I think the introduction of nuclear weapons to a war eliminates any certainty that leaders will remain rational.

As for China, they would be dealing with millions of refugees (less as you go though :/), not to mention the fallout literally right across the river. They would also see Americans right at their border, Americans who just nuked a country, the same country China fought a war over not many decades ago.

We cannot accurately predict how China, North Korea, South Korea, Russia, Japan or the US would respond to the use of nuclear weapons in this hypothetical conflict.

That said, I do believe the following statement is accurate: if the international community is ever to do anything about North Korea, it needs to happen before they develop ICBMs, which means in the near future.

Saz is correct to point out that once that happens, that batshit crazy family will rule NK until their nukes stop working or they get wiped off the face of the earth. Considering that the family is responsible for the starvation and murder of literally millions of its own people, under a system known for its exceptional cruelty, how much credence can we put in the idea that successive leaders will be less provocative, cruel and murderous?

Not much. And so now we must assess future risks, and how the stakes may be raised even further by an ICBM-armed NK.

These are extremely difficult questions, and wholesale dismissal of either side of the argument is the only truly ignorant position. That Trump already had this strategy fixed in his mind before he even assumed office is truly worrying to me - it is clearly an insanely complex strategic calculation, which requires looking at shit only the President can see, and deciding what you think is best before seeing that information is beyond reckless.

So HURF is correct to be worried here. As for me, I do not have faith that Donald Trump is capable of being an effective wartime President. I think the idea of him deciding any of the questions asked above is insane on the face of things. I think the incompetence of his administration in terms of diplomacy leaves a gaping soft power hole that is not apt to be enthusiastically filled if the US goes up against NK. I also think the fact that we are even discussing the possibility of Donald Trump being in charge of America's finest, in a real war, is truly offensive to the human spirit.

[Saz]