Oh, all the nukes have expired by now since they haven’t been used in a war for a little bit? I didn’t know that.
And also, something that hasn’t happened in the memory of the person speaking, can’t happen.
Oh good. So if Trump launches a major conventional strike against North Korea that puts Kim Jong-Un in a “use 'em or lose 'em” situation with respect to his nukes, he won’t use 'em. Good to have your assurances on this.
For most of those 72+ years, the only nations that had nukes were Responsible Superpowers like the U.S. and Russia, and even so, we came within a hairsbreadth of massive nuclear war on at least two occasions during the first 40 years after Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
But now countries like Pakistan and North Korea have nukes, and things get a bit more problematic. And so you have tensions between a pair of nuclear powers - the U.S. and North Korea - where the leader of neither country can be trusted to act calmly and responsibly.
That’s never happened before. We’re very much on new and dangerous ground here.
Too young to have heard of Sam Rayburn, I guess. (Or, likely, a non-student of history.) 
Or Tip O’Neill. 
Ryan should not be too young to have known about Tip. (More evidence that he is historically ignorant.)
I think I heard Chris “Tweety Bird” Matthews say once that he was fairly close to Tip P’Neill. Maybe twice.
France and the U.K. are Superpowers?
They were the countries, following WWII, that helped partition Germany and Austria. Their economies are each larger than those of Pakistan and North Korea. And they have had nuclear capability for over a half century. Quibbling over the term superpower in this case is pointless.
Every generation of Republicans is worse then the last. And they are coming faster and faster.
I didn’t like him at all when he first ran.
I thought he was a good choice for VP. Even though I disagree with them on most everything I think Romney and Ryan could have done a decent job serving this country if it meant building broad based support and moderation. Instead it they failed because they weren’t crazy assed extreme enough.
I liked how he came in as Speaker. He apologized for some of the stuff in the campaign and tried to be his own man . I don’t know what I expect from a good Speaker to do in this kind of environment unless they were openly opposing the president and the party.
Perhaps the wild-eyed idealists will rise and counter the trend. Woodstock Republicans! “Make Money, Not War!”.
(That would explain where the brown acid came from…)
What tomndebb said. Meaningless nitpick.
I don’t think Paul Ryan operates maliciously the way that some within his party do. But he’s too much of a political animal, and his legacy will be that of a coward. By the time Ryan became speaker, his party had already painted itself into a corner of being the party of wealthy white men. It’s trapped in the corner until it finally suffers a massive rebuke at the ballot box that forces the party to reinvent itself, and who knows when that moment will arrive.
I disagree. Words have meaning. Your comment about only Responsible Superpowers is factually incorrect.
Surely you’re not suggesting that D’Anconia would hijack a thread with a pointless quibble about a triviality, instead of engaging substantively on the central important ideas. He’s better than that.
Yep, words have meaning.
Feel free to use some words to explain why this distinction matters. Take your time, I can wait.
Is there anything in RTFirefly’s post that would be substantially changed if we replace the term “superpowers” by “great powers”? If no, then go ahead and make that substitution. If yes, then tell us what it is that would be changed, and we’ll go from there.
Great powers comes with great responsibilities. Superpowers don’t have to take responsibility for anything.
Ah, to hell with France! Outside of inventing oral sex, what have they ever done for anyone?
I like their toast.