Rayvin
-
Posts
21528 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
15
Everything posted by Rayvin
-
Aye but there's a difference between 'Best striker we've ever had' and 'Best ever'. Unless you're saying that they genuinely are delusional I guess..?
-
Could be a false flag I suppose. Weird target for one thing.
-
"Best striker I've ever seen"
-
The longer we wait to tackle this, the better their tech will get though. To be honest, China could solve this so much more easily than the US could, but the Chinese government are, unfortunately, cowards (in almost all matters). Kind of agree with Renton that their capabilities should be able to be thwarted if done correctly and with sufficient force. But I think it would be incredibly unsettling for the world, and would represent an entirely irresponsible risk, if the situation escalated to the point where a nuke was fired in anger.
-
I believe they'd be psychotic enough to do that, I just don't know if they'd get the chance. Assuming Trump just attacks out of the blue, they'd flatten Pyongyang wouldn't they? Given that leadership is centralised into such a small group of people, who would call for the nuclear strikes if they cut off the head?
-
That isn't the full equation though - in the scenario we're talking about, where Trump attacks NK, it's a failed state plus war with the US against US ally on their border.
-
What if he actually solves the North Korea issue though
-
NK already is a failed state, so I don't know what that's supposed to mean? If it was absorbed into SK it would be better for China as an economic prospect. I actually think SK has the most to lose here. The last thing they want is millions of NK citizens suddenly becoming their responsibility and tanking their economy. I've heard this said a few times, it's not in SK's interests for this to happen. It is in China's, if they can do it without losing face.
-
I dunno about that... China are no fans of North Korea, considering them to be both an embarrassment and unpredictable. The problem is that China won't want a build up of US forces on their immediate border. But if they handle it like grown ups, China and the US could just pincer NK and get it over with, while preserving the integrity of China's national border. Of course they'd probably turn it into a land grab, but there we go. Still better than the current regime.
-
No, Trump's comments on the arms race were absolutely absurd. Economic sanctions on Russia, and 'diplomatic measures' against them, such as destabilising key allies, are what brought us to this point IMO. The Russian economy is struggling, of course, because of the US. The real question here, IMO, is why the West is so hellbent on provoking Russia at all.
-
I don't think Putin is enjoying this btw. He put heavy faith in a peace process and looking like an international statesmen, and Trump has prevented him from being able to do this now. Given that the Russians thought Trump was going to be a good thing for them, it seems clear that Trump is to Russia what Putin was to the West. An initially positive development that turned sour very quickly.
-
I see So you think Clinton would have backed down in the face of Putin's alpha male persona?
-
Is Trump actually going to solve the NK problem? I mean, is he serious? Fucking hell. Renton, fwiw, if he invades North Korea then I'll agree that he's more likely than Clinton to bring about WW3 One can only hope he has China's backing.
-
Given everything Clinton has said about putting Russia back in their box, I just don't think that's a supportable statement. You're basing this entirely on your 'feeling' that Trump is more likely to take us to war. To say again, as I note it has been entirely unanswered previously, as usual, Trump's response in Syria was less severe than what Clinton was calling for. Which was for all of his airbases to be destroyed. How do you think Russia would have responded to that, exactly?
-
That's quite possibly the most interesting thing I've read on here in some time
-
The video suggests that only about 5 people were involved, and the article mentions it lasted for 2 to 3 stops. Which is about 5 minutes
-
In that case maybe he'll forget that he's president eventually.
-
What exactly is Spicer's background? He looks like a village idiot kind of person. I don't actually understand why Trump, if he knows he's unsuited for this (As he presumably does, deep down) hasn't hired some astoundingly competent people instead of these cretins...
-
FFS. We really need to get over equating everything to the nazis, it's getting fucking ridiculous now.
-
I was messing around too tbf. I didn't actually mean you were a Tory
-
Hasn't it? Are...are we still living under feudalism?!? And yes, I can tell I'm not sure this is a recognised SJW issue though. Actual improvements to people's lives through addressing economic inequality isn't something they'd be interested in, as they're part of the bourgeois middle classes They're all about divide and rule. You sound like a Tory though
-
That would probably work, I grant you. For a generation at least. Maybe every couple of generations you need to bomb them so that living memory carries the threat of not submitting to the status quo. Alternatively, we can try and make positive change - controversial way to go of course. No money in it for those at the top.
-
I'm not elevating Pardew and Allardyce here, so much as saying there's probably not actually a lot to choose between many of them. I mean, even Guardiola has looked intransigent and tactically flawed this season - and he's supposedly the poster child for intelligent management.
-
You know the point I'm making. No one lives life thinking "well it was even shitter than this 100 years ago, so on that basis I should just pipe the fuck down".
-
Aye, you'd think so. So at the moment they're thinking "Fuck, I'm being left behind and have no hope for the future".
