Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page
TribalWar Forums
Page 23 of 626

TribalWar Forums (https://www.tribalwar.com/forums/index.php)
-   TWHOF (https://www.tribalwar.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=275)
-   -   This is for you Trump voters. (https://www.tribalwar.com/forums/showthread.php?t=683482)

Reggs 03-21-2016 22:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by KingSobieski (Post 18544314)
USA

USA

USA

U s.....ah **** it only a few more months.

Obama was looking for an easy good will mission to put a feather in his hat before he steps down.

Castro finished his speech, on point, serious, presidential, good showing.

Obama starts off taking a moment to talk about a dead USA soldier in Iraq, followed by a joke about raising teenage girls.

What a pathetic loser.

Either he was suffering from sudden retardedness or he simply couldn't give two ****s less about delivering a professional speech.

Plus he placed that question to raul about the political prisoners in cuba while we still have guantanoma open.

What message was that supposed to send besides pissing Raul off for no reason?

Way to **** up diplomatic relations before they even began.

Sent from my XT1030 using Tapatalk

What's beneficial about closing Guantanamo?

KingSobieski 03-21-2016 22:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reggs (Post 18544316)
What's beneficial about closing Guantanamo?

I hope you can see the irony of a US prison on Cuban soil at the same time the US is pointing fingers at Castro for holding political prisoners.

Besides that Raul handed Obama his ass on a silver platter when he slammed the human rights differences between Cuba and the USA.

Obama went for a stroll in the park and got mauled by a short man on a little island.

Solid win for Cuba upstaging the USA. Obama is an embarassment on the world stage.

Sent from my XT1030 using Tapatalk

LouCypher 03-21-2016 22:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reggs (Post 18544316)
What's beneficial about closing Guantanamo?

It costs almost $400 million/year to run.

Reggs 03-21-2016 23:03

Cuba has so much more to benefit from us opening up to them. It's going to absolutely transform their country. Why you would voluntarily close a prison is beyond me. That would be a really bad way to make a deal.

You should read Art of the Deal by Donald Trump to learn more about negotiation because you obviously know nothing about it at all. Sad! If Trump was making a deal in Cuba, Guantanamo would stay open and the political prisoners would be released. #MAGA #Highenergy

http://smile.amazon.com/Trump-Art-De...rt+of+the+deal

JoMo 03-21-2016 23:04

We should just kill Jihadi scum, much cheaper.

http://i.imgur.com/RC4kfVr.gif

KingSobieski 03-21-2016 23:05

It's Cuba's land. USA needs to learn the entire planet is not it's play box.

Sent from my XT1030 using Tapatalk

Reggs 03-21-2016 23:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by KingSobieski (Post 18544328)
It's Cuba's land. USA needs to learn the entire planet is not it's play box.

Sent from my XT1030 using Tapatalk

They had nuclear warheads there pointed right at us and you want to close Guantanamo to "be nice" or something. I don't even know if you're sure what reasons you think it should close. Cuba should be giving us more land to open up to them. Our good grace is the only thing that's going to keep them from living in squalor for the next 100 years. We don't owe them anything.

KingSobieski 03-21-2016 23:16

Uh, we supported the Batista regime and then tried to overthrow their government with the bay of pigs invasion.

Cuba might harbor some resentment....

We would crush the Communist regime through soft economic power.

Not surprising I have to explain basic history to reggs tho, all that hair gel has clearly seeped into your brain.

Sent from my XT1030 using Tapatalk

Reggs 03-21-2016 23:26

In retrospect, instead of the bay of pigs, we should have bombed them into the stone age, then the Cuban missile crisis would not of happened. Cuba today would have been much better off if Batista remained in power. He was a bad guy, but they would have flourished economically and had remained our friend. For the past many decades Cubans have had to worry about their citizens starving to death and they don't let them have boats in Havana because everyone wants to leave.

They got very close to starting a nuclear holocaust on American soil. Why would you want to appease them? You have no backbone.

MasterGnr 03-21-2016 23:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by slogg (Post 18544307)

See what I mean about lacking actual leadership?

Castro normally greets visiting leaders at the airport, but he snubbed Obama.

If President Trump landed, looked out and didn't see Castro, he would be like "turn this ****ing plane around...we are going home"

A tiny dictator on a tiny, means nothing island disrespects the US president...several times...and I bet Obama continues telling everyone how great Cuba is.

Sad

KingSobieski 03-21-2016 23:33

Cuba erradicated AIDS on the island and also produces the most doctors in Latin America. Cuba has done more for human rights in Latin America than the USA's destructive foreign policy has. All the USA can do is overthrow governments and assassinate heads of state. Defending the USA's foreign policy is a lost cause from the beginning. It's high point was the Marshall plan and the Berlin airlift. After that, it was a successive series of disastrous scizhophrenic policies.

Communism has this nasty habit of collapsing once the per capita income rises to $10k/year.

Opening trade relations with Cuba would precipitate the collapse of the Castro regime.

Most economic influx (and the greatest threat) to Cuba would be American tourism.

Even without the imposed embargo, I think Cuba would likely maintain high tarrifs and strict visa controls to protect its citizens from the American economic machine.

During the speech, Obama said the embargo is meaningless.

Why not take the high road to repairing foreign relations for once - the embargo actually galvinizes the communist machine against change even further - it's doing more damage than good.

There is no reason to maintain it.

Reggs 03-21-2016 23:48

Obama should not have even landed in Cuba until Castro apologized for the Cuban missile crisis, and taking more land should have been part of the deal.

antifreeze 03-21-2016 23:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by LouCypher (Post 18544322)
It costs almost $400 million/year to run.

that ain't **** to our 600 billion dollar a year budget on military

i say keep it open, because we landed on the moon and set off the atom bomb

or something

Pirate Steve 03-22-2016 00:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by KingSobieski (Post 18544342)
Cuba erradicated AIDS on the island and also produces the most doctors in Latin America. Cuba has done more for human rights in Latin America than the USA's destructive foreign policy has. All the USA can do is overthrow governments and assassinate heads of state. Defending the USA's foreign policy is a lost cause from the beginning. It's high point was the Marshall plan and the Berlin airlift. After that, it was a successive series of disastrous scizhophrenic policies.

Communism has this nasty habit of collapsing once the per capita income rises to $10k/year.

Opening trade relations with Cuba would precipitate the collapse of the Castro regime.

Most economic influx (and the greatest threat) to Cuba would be American tourism.

Even without the imposed embargo, I think Cuba would likely maintain high tarrifs and strict visa controls to protect its citizens from the American economic machine.

During the speech, Obama said the embargo is meaningless.

Why not take the high road to repairing foreign relations for once - the embargo actually galvinizes the communist machine against change even further - it's doing more damage than good.

There is no reason to maintain it.

why are you so angry?

KingSobieski 03-22-2016 00:06

I enjoy arguing :shrug:

Pirate Steve 03-22-2016 00:06

i see. continue on.

KingSobieski 03-22-2016 00:13

Anyways, there's multi-lateral nuclear missles deployed around the globe. Probably a 30 minute flight from a submarine launched nuke and see ya later washington DC.

The cuban standoff was just symbology. Beating of chests between two great nations.

Cuba wasn't actually a player as it was a coerced participant. It's like when Paraguay declared war against the whole continent of South America - it could result in nothing but total defeat.

Communism is the most outmoded form of governance currently practiced. The only way it can survive is by total isolation from the outside world, kind of like Jurassic Park.

The outside world is the greatest threat to a communist regime. The embargo strengthens the Castro regime by giving it relevance.

Imagine how many years of hard labor you'd have to serve in North Korea if they found a mickey mouse in your 50sq ft apartment.

Flash 03-22-2016 00:15

You guys still *****ing over this? None of your opinions matter.

KingSobieski 03-22-2016 00:16

You are the unfortunate recipient of my uninterrupted stream of conscious thought.

Besides, who the hell else am i going to talk foreign policy with in a backwood cabin in the appalachian highlands

Rooster128 03-22-2016 00:26

2 words: kanye west.

:S

also agreed with greedo. and as i've said before, the powers that be want us to fight amongst ourselves, it stops the masses from figuring it out. and well, its working...

Pagy 03-22-2016 00:55

ty for ur insight, guy who sells hipster clothes for min wage

Flash 03-22-2016 00:57

Peace fellas

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zHJu_nCaNAw

MC Hamster 03-22-2016 04:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by Greedo909 (Post 18544177)
Trump isn't really doing anything to crush the GOP, the GOP is intentionally tanking itself by refusing to support Trumps' nomination while blatantly disenfranchising the plurality, if not majority, of its own supporters. Winning the actual election is less meaningful than maintaining status quo establishment control over the two parties at this point--it is really just one party that creates fake opposition between two factions to keep people distracted from the fact that the entire political system is controlled by special interests and not democratic representation.

So a party should just endorse anyone who's popular enough to win them the election and wants to be considered their representative? Even if he doesn't actually represent their values?

Honestly, not picking that guy is actually showing a bit of backbone, standing up for the principles of the party even at its own expense. That's actually kinda admirable. That's saying "We know this guy is popular, and we know we could win with him.. but doing so would be sacrificing what we stand for, and we'd rather take the risk on losing the election than doing that."

As much as I despise party politics, I find it vaguely noble that those 'in the biz' can actually show some principle when it comes down to it.

MC Hamster 03-22-2016 04:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by KingSobieski (Post 18544317)
Obama is an embarassment on the world stage.

As someone who is part of that world stage: No. Bush was an embarassment for you guys. Trump is an embarassment for you guys. Obama is actually someone most of us out here kinda like.

Don't just take my word for it though, here's a Pew Research page asking the question all over:

http://www.pewglobal.org/database/in...r/6/survey/17/

Compare the Obama years to the Bush years. It's day and night.

Osiris 03-22-2016 05:10

Honestly, a damp cloth wouldve done better than Bush.

Kerosene31 03-22-2016 06:49

So, Trump supporters - John Oliver says Trump's wall will cost > $20 billion and more to maintain. Trump himself admits it could cost $10-12 billion. Let's forget Oliver's numbers as he's biased against it. Does a wall make sense financially?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vU8dCYocuyI

absent 03-22-2016 06:52

Yes.

samUwell 03-22-2016 08:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by absent (Post 18544453)
Yes.


Thingfish 03-22-2016 08:43

It would certainly get even more corporations sucking on the government teat.

Kerosene31 03-22-2016 08:50

That's just it, people rail against Bernie's free college (which I actually 100% agree is a waste of money), yet building a super expensive wall that would do little is ok?

Wasting money is still wasting money. Anyone who works with gov't contracts knows to take the highest estimate and double if not triple it.

NoGodForMe 03-22-2016 09:06

Yes. They can put advertising on the wall to pay for it. Make it a tourist attraction like the great wall of China.

Pagy 03-22-2016 09:11

goddamn mongorians

Reggs 03-22-2016 09:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kerosene31 (Post 18544451)
So, Trump supporters - John Oliver says Trump's wall will cost > $20 billion and more to maintain. Trump himself admits it could cost $10-12 billion. Let's forget Oliver's numbers as he's biased against it. Does a wall make sense financially?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vU8dCYocuyI

The video is stupid.

$2B just to build roads to get trucks to where the wall will be built? No one believes that.

Walls keep people out. Ask Israel. Illegal immigration amplifies economic troubles of the US. When the market went south in 2008 illegal immigration flourished and ate away at American jobs. Having a wall would protect against that for a long time to come.

Economic issues aside, it's very important for national security. Any would be terrorist could go to Mexico with cash and come across that way.

I could go on I guess, but the question itself is stupid. We are a sovereign nation and we have a boarder, and undocumented non-citizens are pouring across it. How on earth could building a wall be controversial?

How does it reach the point where some UK dimwit who preached about letting syrian refugees into Europe (before that whole mass murder and **** stuff, oops) capture the attention of an American such as yourself? His video had credibility with you?

Pagy 03-22-2016 09:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reggs (Post 18544483)
Any would be terrorist could go to Mexico with cash and come across that way.

but canada?

MasterGnr 03-22-2016 09:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by MC Hamster (Post 18544435)
As someone who is part of that world stage: No. Bush was an embarassment for you guys. Trump is an embarassment for you guys. Obama is actually someone most of us out here kinda like.

Don't just take my word for it though, here's a Pew Research page asking the question all over:

http://www.pewglobal.org/database/in...r/6/survey/17/

Compare the Obama years to the Bush years. It's day and night.

I don't want a leader that the other countries like. I want one who is capable and experienced, and by God proud to be an American. You guys are happy to see an apologizer in chief running the US cause it makes you feel better

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

Kerosene31 03-22-2016 09:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pagy (Post 18544487)
but canada?

You obviously don't understand geography. A multi-billion dollar wall in Texas will do a great job keeping ISIS out of Europe!

JoMo 03-22-2016 10:12

Hungary's border fence worked really well. Israel's wall works well.

Kerosene31 03-22-2016 10:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by JoMo (Post 18544495)
Hungary's border fence worked really well. Israel's wall works well.

The Atlantic ocean works really well too! :)

Seriously, do people not understand geography and the difference between Mexicans and Middle East people?

Hungary had tons of migrants literally wandering in. A wall makes sense. The wall isn't perfect but it doesn't have to be, they'll go to another country without a wall.

RandalltheVandal 03-22-2016 10:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by MC Hamster (Post 18544434)
So a party should just endorse anyone who's popular enough to win them the election and wants to be considered their representative? Even if he doesn't actually represent their values?

Honestly, not picking that guy is actually showing a bit of backbone, standing up for the principles of the party even at its own expense. That's actually kinda admirable. That's saying "We know this guy is popular, and we know we could win with him.. but doing so would be sacrificing what we stand for, and we'd rather take the risk on losing the election than doing that."

As much as I despise party politics, I find it vaguely noble that those 'in the biz' can actually show some principle when it comes down to it.

hey cool, another foreigner who is pretty clueless about the current state of american politics, keep going please

JoMo 03-22-2016 10:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kerosene31 (Post 18544497)
The Atlantic ocean works really well too! :)

Seriously, do people not understand geography and the difference between Mexicans and Middle East people?

Hungary had tons of migrants literally wandering in. A wall makes sense. The wall isn't perfect but it doesn't have to be, they'll go to another country without a wall.

It isn't just Mexicans that are problematic, there's a lot of countries south of Mexico as well. If you look at the FBI's most wanted (categories) you'll find that most of them have ties to Mexico.
https://www.fbi.gov/wanted/murders

The issue is that Mexico can't or won't properly enforce border security due to the cartels.

Let me know how many countries border Canada.......


Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 16:34.
Page 23 of 626

Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2003, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
All Content Copyright 1999-2020 Tribalwar.Com, LLC