Trump ready to press the nuclear button

LoveCurryPies · Post by **LoveCurryPies** » Fri Aug 11, 2017 2:56 pm

The mad man in the White House tweeted 'Military solutions are now fully in place,locked and loaded,should North Korea act unwisely. Hopefully Kim Jong Un will find another path!' and retweeted photos of B-1 bombers waiting on Guam's runways.

I honestly think this guy is about to press the button. Nobody is stopping him. No one prepared to remove him from office.

If the bombs drop tonight....will you bother watching the Chelsea match tomorrow. Will we all be glued to news channels to see if Russia or China are going to join in?

Anyone else worried things are going to far?

ElectroClaret · Post by **ElectroClaret** » Fri Aug 11, 2017 2:57 pm

Can't he wait till we stuff Venkys again?

Manceau · Post by **Manceau** » Fri Aug 11, 2017 3:00 pm

Going, going, Guam

Rileybobs · Post by **Rileybobs** » Fri Aug 11, 2017 3:02 pm

Whata guam?

THEWELLERNUT70 · Post by **THEWELLERNUT70** » Fri Aug 11, 2017 3:02 pm

It'll bring a whole new meaning to deadline day

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Fri Aug 11, 2017 3:07 pm

I don't think it would help world security if he was sitting in the White House telling N Korea that they can do what they want. the USA won't fight back.

I doubt that the B1s had nuclear bombs in them anyway. The USA wouldn't need nuclear to beat North Korea. It'd be a mismatch as bad as USA v Iraq in Kuwait.

martintheaker · Post by **martintheaker** » Fri Aug 11, 2017 3:15 pm

THEWELLERNUT70 wrote:It'll bring a whole new meaning to deadline day

Maybe Jim White can move to the news studio and do a proper Nuclear countdown dressed in a yellow hazmat suit with reporters at key locations waving purple dildos representing the missile in flight.

gandhisflipflop · Post by **gandhisflipflop** » Fri Aug 11, 2017 3:16 pm

Relax everything will be fine. Get the popcorn out

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Fri Aug 11, 2017 3:17 pm

Best tweet ever about this

"It is kind of poetic that there is now a nuclear standoff between a literal Fat Man and Little Boy"

LoveCurryPies · Post by **LoveCurryPies** » Fri Aug 11, 2017 3:23 pm

The fact he is the most unpopular President ever means he has little to lose and might even pick up support (from more red neck crazies) if he launches an attack. We've never been so close. One negative response from Kim Jong Un will be the final straw.

(typed while hiding under my desk)

geopancake · Post by **geopancake** » Fri Aug 11, 2017 3:24 pm

I would like to watch the game tomorrow, but now i'm too scared.
I'm currently taking my doors off to make a protect and survive shelter in my living room. I have bought random tin products, just in case of WW3, so I can at least do a tinned food count, and reminisce about the good times. I've even got a woman called Madge coming round to help.

However, the level of apathy from populous is troubling, but I guess that's why this world is run by mad egomaniacs who would like nothing better than to cull the world of its useless eaters.
On second thoughts I'm going to reattach the doors and watch a box set of love island, and if the match is tomorrow I'll watch that too.

NottsClaret · Post by **NottsClaret** » Fri Aug 11, 2017 3:32 pm

It's noticeable how nobody.. China, Russia, Europe, the UK.. is really saying anything.

We're all just reading a couple of madmen's ramblings on Twitter thinking 'they're not really going to, are they?'

Up to now the whole world seems to have opted out, except the poor folk in Korea, Japan and Guam who don't get a choice.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Fri Aug 11, 2017 3:32 pm

This is so ******* stupid and is just another example of how unfit for office that orange turd is. North Korea ONLY has a first strike capability. What do you think will happen if they even think that is about to be taken away by an America attack? An attack doesn't even have to be planned for NK to think one is imminent, it just needs that ******* retarded orange threatening one for NK to decide it's better to use them before they lose them.

But i don't really think Trump doesn't know that. I think Trump just really wants to use nukes before he is thrown out of his job. The guy loves them and even openly questioned during his campaign why America doesn't use them more.

Woodleyclaret · Post by **Woodleyclaret** » Fri Aug 11, 2017 3:36 pm

It's not 1962 and Cuba all over again ,now that was scary

LoveCurryPies · Post by **LoveCurryPies** » Fri Aug 11, 2017 3:36 pm

Trump's 2 sons, Dumber & Dumber, should be serving on the frontline. That might make him think twice....

cricketfieldclarets · Post by **cricketfieldclarets** » Fri Aug 11, 2017 3:39 pm

Im not going the match now. Im gonna watch doctor strangelove instead

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Fri Aug 11, 2017 3:41 pm

Woodleyclaret wrote:It's not 1962 and Cuba all over again ,now that was scary

I'm sure it was scary but at least then the world had two intelligent, rational men in charge of the situation. Imagine if Donald Trump was president instead of Kennedy. And imagine if Kim Jong Un was in place of Khrushchev.

Steve1956 · Post by **Steve1956** » Fri Aug 11, 2017 3:42 pm

I wish he would hurry up and press the button and end it all,I'm sick of this transfer window.

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Fri Aug 11, 2017 3:46 pm

Imploding Turtle wrote:This is so ******* stupid and is just another example of how unfit for office that orange turd is. North Korea ONLY has a first strike capability. What do you think will happen if they even think that is about to be taken away by an America attack? An attack doesn't even have to be planned for NK to think one is imminent, it just needs that ******* retarded orange threatening one for NK to decide it's better to use them before they lose them.

But i don't really think Trump doesn't know that. I think Trump just really wants to use nukes before he is thrown out of his job. The guy loves them and even openly questioned during his campaign why America doesn't use them more.

If only Obama had followed a softly softly, look the other way and pretend there isn't a problem, approach - then maybe North Korea wouldn't have developed a first strike capability at all? Oh, hang on ...

With lunatics, treating them as reasonable men won't work. It didn't work with Hitler, and it didn't work with North Korea.

Braindead · Post by **Braindead** » Fri Aug 11, 2017 3:51 pm

Imploding Turtle wrote:I'm sure it was scary but at least then the world had two intelligent, rational men in charge of the situation. Imagine if Donald Trump was president instead of Kennedy. And imagine if Kim Jong Un was in place of Khrushchev.

Khrushchev? The man who built the Berlin Wall? Intelligent? Rational?

fidelcastro · Post by **fidelcastro** » Fri Aug 11, 2017 3:51 pm

dsr wrote:If only Obama had followed a softly softly, look the other way and pretend there isn't a problem, approach - then maybe North Korea wouldn't have developed a first strike capability at all? Oh, hang on ...

With lunatics, treating them as reasonable men won't work. It didn't work with Hitler, and it didn't work with North Korea.

So what should Obama have done? Nuked North Korea to show 'em who's boss?

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Fri Aug 11, 2017 3:53 pm

fidelcastro wrote:So what should Obama have done? Nuked North Korea to show 'em who's boss?

If this confrontation had been 8 years ago, it would have been a lot less dangerous. It's not just this week that North Korea have been testing nuclear weapons.

Zom Zom · Post by **Zom Zom** » Fri Aug 11, 2017 3:55 pm

It's a load of propaganda pushing bull from North Korea in my opinion. They have everything to lose and absolutely nothing to gain. He's just a pumped up little boy who is trying to flex his muscles in a bid to gain attention. It's laughable.

Mind you, Trump seems to be reveling in it.

JohnMac · Post by **JohnMac** » Fri Aug 11, 2017 3:55 pm

I think at the point of unleashing hell, both of the infantile idiots will be 'removed' from power by people with a modicum of common sense.

Am I worried?

Na.

fidelcastro · Post by **fidelcastro** » Fri Aug 11, 2017 3:56 pm

dsr wrote:If this confrontation had been 8 years ago, it would have been a lot less dangerous. It's not just this week that North Korea have been testing nuclear weapons.

You haven't answered the question. You'd make a good politician

Are you sure it's not just so you can have a go at Obama? I'm not sure what you expected him or anyone else to do.

elwaclaret · Post by **elwaclaret** » Fri Aug 11, 2017 4:00 pm

dsr wrote:I doubt that the B1s had nuclear bombs in them anyway. The USA wouldn't need nuclear to beat North Korea. It'd be a mismatch as bad as USA v Iraq in Kuwait.

Or the USA in Vietnam

elwaclaret · Post by **elwaclaret** » Fri Aug 11, 2017 4:00 pm

dsr wrote:I doubt that the B1s had nuclear bombs in them anyway. The USA wouldn't need nuclear to beat North Korea. It'd be a mismatch as bad as USA v Iraq in Kuwait.

Or the USA in Vietnam

Lowbankclaret · Post by **Lowbankclaret** » Fri Aug 11, 2017 4:08 pm

Not sure the US has much option other than to talk strong.

Trump will not fire first, China has already said it will not remain neutral if the US fires first. I suggest Russia would also get invlove if the US fires first. However if North Korea fires first, there will be no more North Korea.

The new weapon the US has is scary as ****, its called The Swarm. Virtually no damage to anything other than people. 1000's of 9 inch drones which work together. as soon as one gets close to you it explodes.

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Fri Aug 11, 2017 4:10 pm

fidelcastro wrote:You haven't answered the question. You'd make a good politician

Are you sure it's not just so you can have a go at Obama? I'm not sure what you expected him or anyone else to do.

He could have talked tough and meant it. Or even talked tough and pretended to mean it might have worked.

fidelcastro · Post by **fidelcastro** » Fri Aug 11, 2017 4:13 pm

dsr wrote:He could have talked tough and meant it. Or even talked tough and pretended to mean it might have worked.

Like Trump is now, you mean?

Should he have mentioned fire and fury?

Yeah, we'd have all been so much better off if he'd have done that!

TopCat · Post by **TopCat** » Fri Aug 11, 2017 4:15 pm

The battles in Game of Thrones are more realistic.

lovebeingaclaret · Post by **lovebeingaclaret** » Fri Aug 11, 2017 4:17 pm

dsr wrote:He could have talked tough and meant it. Or even talked tough and pretended to mean it might have worked.

And if he had it would have resulted in the lefties and snowflakes demonstrating against the evil West.

fidelcastro · Post by **fidelcastro** » Fri Aug 11, 2017 4:19 pm

lovebeingaclaret wrote:And if he had it would have resulted in the lefties and snowflakes demonstrating against the evil West.

Only America is allowed nuclear weapons. No one else can be trusted with them. It's not like America has ever used them or anything, is it?

Oh, hang on...

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Fri Aug 11, 2017 4:26 pm

fidelcastro wrote:Only America is allowed nuclear weapons. No one else can be trusted with them. It's not like America has ever used them or anything, is it?

Oh, hang on...

America has been quite lenient about who has nuclear weapons, Pakistan, for example. But do you think it's safe to let North Korea have them? And specifically to this question, do you think North Korea ought to be allowed to fire them around US territory?

elwaclaret · Post by **elwaclaret** » Fri Aug 11, 2017 4:30 pm

We know they are both egomaniacal nutters, we're about to find out which if either is the crazier.
Russia and China have been at loggerheads since Mow and Marx were boys so it doesn't follow that Russia would jump in, and say what you like about Putin he is no fool. He knows when to take the p!ss and when it is best to keep his head down; and world destruction isn't really serving his interest.

I think ultimately the USA would stop Trump (by whatever means) from starting the war, so I guess the question is- is Kim Yung crazy enough to fire with the full knowledge within minutes North Korea (and possibly the world) ceases to exist.

ClaretEngineer · Post by **ClaretEngineer** » Fri Aug 11, 2017 4:32 pm

dsr wrote:America has been quite lenient about who has nuclear weapons, Pakistan, for example. But do you think it's safe to let North Korea have them? And specifically to this question, do you think North Korea ought to be allowed to fire them around US territory?

In the interest of debate, who are America to tell who can and can't have nuclear weapons?

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Fri Aug 11, 2017 4:33 pm

elwaclaret wrote:I think ultimately the USA would stop Trump (by whatever means) from starting the war, so I guess the question is- is Kim Yung crazy enough to fire with the full knowledge within minutes North Korea (and possibly the world) ceases to exist.

I suspect the USA has some weapons that aren't powerful enough to destroy the world but are able to win a war with North Korea. The effect on the rest of the world will be the same as the first Iraq war.

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Fri Aug 11, 2017 4:35 pm

ClaretEngineer wrote:In the interest of debate, who are America to tell who can and can't have nuclear weapons?

They're the ones with the weapons. It would be better if nuclear weapons didn't exist, but if they do exist, I'd rather have them in the hands of the USA than North Korea. (Or Pakistan, for that matter, but that ship has sailed.)

fidelcastro · Post by **fidelcastro** » Fri Aug 11, 2017 4:35 pm

dsr wrote:America has been quite lenient about who has nuclear weapons, Pakistan, for example. But do you think it's safe to let North Korea have them? And specifically to this question, do you think North Korea ought to be allowed to fire them around US territory?

I see your agenda! You mention that America has been lenient in Pakistan having nuclear weapons, like it's up to America to choose!

I see you fail to mention Israel, who denied for years that they even had them!

In answer to your final question, I would prefer it if NO ONE had nuclear weapons. That would be safer all round, wouldn't it?

Colburn_Claret · Post by **Colburn_Claret** » Fri Aug 11, 2017 4:36 pm

I hope no one takes this as a support for Trump, who is everybit as bad as described.
But when anyone complains about a politician, or a course of action that they think is wrong, then I always ask 'what is the alternative? '
The world has done very little apart from tut tut, the most evil little **** on the planet for a decade. He starves, tortures and murders his own countrymen, for the pettiest of reasons. Actually reason is the wrong word, he does it without reason. Even his family aren't immune. The world has a choice, do you carry on sitting on your hands until the megalomaniac nukes South Korea or Japan, or do you bite the bullet and strike first.
It's hard to act rationally when dealing with someone so irrational.
The truth is I don't have an answer, and until I do I can't call anyone.

ClaretEngineer · Post by **ClaretEngineer** » Fri Aug 11, 2017 4:40 pm

dsr wrote:They're the ones with the weapons. It would be better if nuclear weapons didn't exist, but if they do exist, I'd rather have them in the hands of the USA than North Korea. (Or Pakistan, for that matter, but that ship has sailed.)

I agree wholeheartedly.

But, the viewpoint from everyone else is (and I suppose rightly so) that ''Well you have them, so why can't we?''

The USA have really brought this upon themselves, there really was no need to develop such a weapon in the first place. And even lesser need to drop them on Japan in 1945.

Inchy · Post by **Inchy** » Fri Aug 11, 2017 4:43 pm

I don't understand why N.Korea wasn't invaded years ago.

They are a bigger threat than the middle east countries that have been targeted. The North Korean people are either brain washed or desperately speaking help. Someone should have sorted this years ago. To allow them time to develop these weapons is stupid

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Fri Aug 11, 2017 4:44 pm

Hindsight claretengineer, hindsight

The US had knew how effective the submarine war was against Japan, or the air dropped mines, or the horrible fire raids where, but Japan still wouldn't surrender.

The casualties on Iwo Jima and Okinawa meant the casualties for Operation Olympic were forecasted to be in the millions.

Compared to that, what other choice did they have?

RattyClaret · Post by **RattyClaret** » Fri Aug 11, 2017 4:51 pm

Inchy wrote: To allow them time to develop these weapons is stupid

This is what happens when you have no summer football. 9 weeks without a match and you get bored, take up a hobby, argue with people about subjects you don't really have an opinion on just look at this message board over the past few weeks

fidelcastro · Post by **fidelcastro** » Fri Aug 11, 2017 4:53 pm

Inchy wrote:I don't understand why N.Korea wasn't invaded years ago.

They are a bigger threat than the middle east countries that have been targeted. The North Korean people are either brain washed or desperately speaking help. Someone should have sorted this years ago. To allow them time to develop these weapons is stupid

Wow! Still there are people who want America, no doubt with Britain at its side, to go around like the worlds' Policemen, telling other countries what to do!

It's worked so well up to now!

ClaretEngineer · Post by **ClaretEngineer** » Fri Aug 11, 2017 4:57 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:Hindsight claretengineer, hindsight

The US had knew how effective the submarine war was against Japan, or the air dropped mines, or the horrible fire raids where, but Japan still wouldn't surrender.

The casualties on Iwo Jima and Okinawa meant the casualties for Operation Olympic were forecasted to be in the millions.

Compared to that, what other choice did they have?

Look at the damage and destruction caused by conventional concentrated bombing on cities like Dresden and Hamburg (absolutely terrible I admit). It could have been done if the Americans were any good at dropping bombs accurately. They're only ever any good when the balance of power is tipped in their favour to begin with.

Having done a bit of further (quick reading) the problem with the Japs stems back to before WW2 started.

Anyway back on topic.

How has it come to be that Donald Trump is telling the world what to do? I mean seriously.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Fri Aug 11, 2017 5:00 pm

ClaretEngineer wrote: How has it come to be that Donald Trump is telling the world what to do? I mean seriously.

Stupid people thought Hillary would cause nuclear war, or something, and that she runs a paedophile club from the basement of a pizza restaraunt.

Vegas Claret · Post by **Vegas Claret** » Fri Aug 11, 2017 5:12 pm

tim_noone · Post by **tim_noone** » Fri Aug 11, 2017 5:20 pm

America bombed Iraq Britain bombed Iraq Britain bombed Kosovo America bombed Afghanistan Britain bombed Libya America bombed Vietnam.

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Fri Aug 11, 2017 5:20 pm

ClaretEngineer wrote:I agree wholeheartedly.

But, the viewpoint from everyone else is (and I suppose rightly so) that ''Well you have them, so why can't we?''

The USA have really brought this upon themselves, there really was no need to develop such a weapon in the first place. And even lesser need to drop them on Japan in 1945.

They felt they had to develop the weapon because Hitler was also developing it. (And that's not in doubt, because the USA got a jump ahead when they nicked one of Germany's leading research scientists.) If Hitler had got one first, would he have used it? There's no reason to doubt it.

As for using it, it stopped the USA and allies from suffering further casualties. In war, both sides look after their own people first, foremost, and possibly only; lket the other lot look after their people. The USA thought it better to lose Japanese lives than US lives, which was pretty much the UK attitude in the German war too.