ADVERTISEMENT

Tulsi Gabbard doing the Kremlin's work...

Bikini-Pics-of-Tulsi-Gabbard.jpg
That'd not Tulsi. That's Padma, but I'll allow it. :cool:
 
Everyone (but you, apparently) understands that references to Armageddon in the context of nuclear weapons isn't a Sunday school lesson.
What kind of point do you think being this obtuse makes?
Why won't you answer the question?

Armageddon can occur without nuclear weapons. I enjoy exposing your foolishness.
 
Why won't you answer the question?

Armageddon can occur without nuclear weapons.
But Biden is talking about nuclear weapons, so the Sunday school version isn't germane.
The context is specifically nuclear weapons.

If you have to drop the context to try and make your point, you don't actually have a point.
 
Everyone (but you, apparently) understands that references to Armageddon in the context of nuclear weapons isn't a Sunday school lesson.
What kind of point do you think being this obtuse makes?
Why do you believe Biden’s speculation about a possible outcome means the Democrats are dragging the world to nuclear war?

If a cop shoots a robber who has just killed someone, was it the cop who escalated the situation?
 
  • Like
Reactions: RileyHawk
But Biden is talking about nuclear weapons, so the Sunday school version isn't germane.
The context is specifically nuclear weapons.

If you have to drop the context to try and make your point, you don't actually have a point.
He's talking about destruction and fury that will rain down on Russia. It doesn't have to be nukes and likely would not be. You're simply wrong again.

Is you're point that the US should not get involved no matter what?

Again, why won't you answer the question?
 
Why do you believe Biden’s speculation about a possible outcome means the Democrats are dragging the world to nuclear war?

If it was a Republican president trying to gin up WW3 I'd give them credit too.

If a cop shoots a robber who has just killed someone, was it the cop who escalated the situation?
Instead of picking apart a bad analogy, let's stick with the reality:

If Putin nukes Ukraine, that is an escalation.
If the US goes to war with Russia, that is an escalation.
If the US goes to war with Russia that can lead to nuclear war.
For the sake of mankind, we want to avoid that escalation.

Imagine Musk's frustration if warmongers nuke the planet before he can get off of it!
 
If it was a Republican president trying to gin up WW3 I'd give them credit too.


Instead of picking apart a bad analogy, let's stick with the reality:

If Putin nukes Ukraine, that is an escalation.
If the US goes to war with Russia, that is an escalation.
If the US goes to war with Russia that can lead to nuclear war.
For the sake of mankind, we want to avoid that escalation.

Imagine Musk's frustration if warmongers nuke the planet before he can get off of it!
If Putin nukes Ukraine it would already be a nuclear war.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RileyHawk
He's talking about destruction and fury that will rain down on Russia. It doesn't have to be nukes and likely would not be. You're simply wrong again.

You know what, go ahead and run a poll let's see how many people share your interpretation of this statement:

“I don’t think there’s any such thing as the ability to easily use tactical nuclear weapons and not end up with Armageddon.”

Is you're point that the US should not get involved no matter what?
Correct.

Again, why won't you answer the question?
I did, Biden is using Armageddon in the nuclear war context the way it has been used your whole life.
Go ahead and post a poll and let's see how many think Biden means something else by that quote.

I don't think you'll do it, because you know you're full of shit.
 
If it was a Republican president trying to gin up WW3 I'd give them credit too.


Instead of picking apart a bad analogy, let's stick with the reality:

If Putin nukes Ukraine, that is an escalation.
If the US goes to war with Russia, that is an escalation.
If the US goes to war with Russia that can lead to nuclear war.
For the sake of mankind, we want to avoid that escalation.

Imagine Musk's frustration if warmongers nuke the planet before he can get off of it!
So I guess this gets to the question of what do you and Tulsi want out of this? Russia gets whatever it wants is your answer, apparently.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RileyHawk
You know what, go ahead and run a poll let's see how many people share your interpretation of this statement:

“I don’t think there’s any such thing as the ability to easily use tactical nuclear weapons and not end up with Armageddon.”


Correct.


I did, Biden is using Armageddon in the nuclear war context the way it has been used your whole life.
Go ahead and post a poll and let's see how many think Biden means something else by that quote.

I don't think you'll do it, because you know you're full of shit.
Post the ****ing poll yourself. It's your stupid idea. Why do you always want others to do your work for you?

Fact is you're demonstrating the same isolationist position as sympathizers like Lindbergh did before WWII. It falls in line with your other antiquated and foolish stances.
 
In the sense that WW2 was a nuclear war.

If Putin uses a nuke on Ukraine, what then has to happen for 'Armageddon' to follow?
Nothing for the area that gets nuked.

You're a freaking clown. Russia goes on a nuclear rampage and your position is for the US to do nothing. JFC.
 
What she has 'said and done' is point out the futility, waste and counterproductivity of the neocons' wars.
Hillary never met a neocon war she didn't support, so they inevitably clashed.

Hillary would rather avoid discussing how those wars have turned out, so she makes outlandish claims to dupe gullible people and get them talking about her lies, instead the results of her actions.

Consider yourself how often you've repeated Hillary's lies instead of discussed the consequences of the policies Hillary advanced while she had hands on the levers of power (wars in Iraq, Yemen, Syria, Libya, etc.).

You're a useful idiot. Repeating neocon lies and ignoring the reality neocon policies have created.
You lose your foreign policies credentials when your stance can be boiled down to give in to Putin.

I respect anyone who’s anti-war. Anyone with sense should be. But at some point you also have to stand up to bullies.
 
Introduced pro-life bills
She introduced a bill that would have mandated life-saving medical care for any baby that survived an attempted abortion. That’s not exactly extreme.
She's working on this - lots of her twitter videos feature her shooting now.
Has she changed her view on universal background checks? Lots of people, myself included, own and shoot guns but also support universal background checks and other reasonable restriction on firearms.
 
Post the ****ing poll yourself. It's your stupid idea.
I’m not the one who suggests Biden had some secret, as yet undetermined operative definition Armageddon when discussing nuclear weapons.

I knew you wouldn’t post it, because even you realize it is preposterous spin.

Even you don’t believe your bullshit, or you’d make your point by posting the poll.
 
I’m not the one who suggests Biden had some secret, as yet undetermined operative definition Armageddon when discussing nuclear weapons.

I knew you wouldn’t post it, because even you realize it is preposterous spin.

Even you don’t believe your bullshit, or you’d make your point by posting the poll.
Yes you are. You're the one making up what you think he meant. I gave another option, among many. You're a clown who throws out guesses as fact and then runs when exposed for it. Happens consistently.

I'm not posting it because it's your stupid claim and idea. You won't do it because you're a coward who tries to get others to do your bidding.
 
Dark Horse Republican nominee for president since Trump will either be dead or in prison and DeSantis losing steam nation and statewide.
LOL.

Unlikely, given her support for much of Bernie's positions in the past. OTOH, that's also why she would be the best possible GOP candidate. I'd certainly be a lot less worried with her as the R President vs any other R President under consideration.

Perhaps we libs should start a movement to get the Rs to nominate her.
 
LOL.

Unlikely, given her support for much of Bernie's positions in the past. OTOH, that's also why she would be the best possible GOP candidate. I'd certainly be a lot less worried with her as the R President vs any other R President under consideration.

Perhaps we libs should start a movement to get the Rs to nominate her.
Have you listened to her new podcast? You might not feel the same way after hearing her now. She sounds like a politician whose views are very much in flux.
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT