And that’s a perfectly reasonable question. Why send people, of whom some may die, when you can send a nuke? And there are reasonable answers. But to fail to ask the question in the first place, that’s a mistake.
I say, let’s take him at his word (even though historically his word has never been and still isn’t worth a fuck). He says he wants these things. People voted for these things.
The simplest explanation…
There’s only one use for nuclear weapons. And that’s as an absolutely, no options left last resort. One last “fuck you” before the country goes up in a blaze of radioactive smoke and fire.
And ISIS is not that.
It’s scary that Trump can’t see that and it’s scary that you can’t either.
From here.
We WILL be going back to that bullshit. Some of us have a long memory and I for one can hold a grudge just as well as anyone.
Republicans now want to eliminate the filibuster.
The utter hypocrisy of the Republican Party is beyond belief.
I’m hoping that he’s doing that as a “Mad Bomber” bluff: that he wouldn’t use nuclear weapons against conventionally-armed enemies, but would like to scare the crap out of our conventionally-armed enemies, and so wants to convince them that he’s willing to consider it and may well do it if you mess with us, so don’t mess with us.
That’s your view. Others may think differently.
Remember, Trump “tells it like it is.” And that was during an interview, he wasn’t planning ahead, that was straight from seat of the pants to mouth.
That is fucking scary that you support bombing an entire country for the actions of a small terrorist group.
Trump has, though – repeatedly – driven into the ground that he says you never announce that you’re taking anything off the table; even if you are taking something off the table, you don’t say so, because, hey, element of surprise, don’t tell your enemy what you’re going to do, we knew it in WWII, those generals would be rolling over in their graves if they saw us spelling out what we will and won’t do, et cetera.
It’s possible his default, seat-of-pants go-to answer to would you do it is “maybe”.
I’d like to see a Democratic senator announce that their primary goal is to ensure that Trump remains a one-term president. I’d like to see a Democratic congressman shout “You lie!” at the president during a Congressional address.
But when THE DEMS do it, it’s treason. Duh.
The Democrats either don’t care or don’t understand the gop is not playing by the same set of rules.
That and I personally believe the Democrats like the gop filibuster because they can use it as an excuse for why they can’t pass progressive legislation. Taking it away would eliminate that excuse. Plus if the dems win in 2020 it’ll be easier to bring back whatever Trump eliminates.
Of course. They know they won’t be needing it in the future, because they have no intention of ever giving up control again – and all that implies.
Yeah, great question in a high school civics class.
A 70 year old man should very well know why we have nukes. We have nukes so that we never use them.
For real. It’s a fine question even in your undergrad intro to polisci class.
I want my president to be operating on some next-level post-doc motherfuckin metapolitical level where these stupid questions that teenagers have aren’t even on their minds.
What we’ve got instead is a guy who in preparation for a debate about foreign policy can’t be arsed to learn what Mosul is. That’s our next president.
Since the OP did a reverse Godwin, I’m going to mention one point of similarity between Donald and Adolph.
Hitler ran off the rails (militarily speaking) because his initial successes (overruling the advice of much more knowledgeable military leaders) led him to overvalue his judgment and ignore good advice.
Trump has succeeded to this point beyond all expectations by following his instincts and judgment and ignoring all the experienced politicians and pundits who told him to do things differently.
It’s comical to see the same people now telling him what he has to do to succeed in the Presidency. Given his personality and track record, he has every reason to ignore them and continue doing the same things that got him into the White House.
At some point (quite possibly many points) he will crash and burn, while blaming sinister outside forces for his troubles (like you-know-who did).
Now is a good time to see the difference between Trump and fascists.
When followers of non-fascists commit political violence, non-fascists condemn those actions in the strongest possible language and work to end it.
Violence is now being committed by Trump’s followers. What will he do?
Conservatives like allusions to the Roman Empire since they see immigrants as the barbarians at the gate.
Pledging that the top priority of their Senate caucus will be to ensure Trump is a one-term president?