2024 US Presidential Election Thread

  • Thread starter ryzno
  • 1,845 comments
  • 94,451 views
What are you talking about? Everyone still hated everyone pretty much the same. There was no magic peace between 2016-2020.


@Imari put it best years ago:



Specifically this bit:


Not knowing to whom he owes money is exactly what makes him such a dangerous puppet.

And did Trump get a Nobel Peace prize for that? Absolutely not. Obama had gotten one just for showing up.
If Trump's debt is such a national security threat, you think it would have come out by now. With with all the government agencies having every modicum of information about him. The bigger worry is we don't know who Biden owes.
 
Last edited:
"Recently" on an attack that took place in 2018....
How its neglect that it was Russian asset and it was demolished after Trump order
Of course they do, Trump has already given it away that his idea of resolving this without any death is basically with holding aid to Ukraine.
Wat?
A former US President admits to knowing Putin had plans to invade & told no one.
Why its important? Intelligence knew about it for years, everyone knew about it since first half of 2021.
you just said they could resolve this undercover
Wat?
Trump himself said he could resolve this without taking office.
He already stopping the war - both Putin and Zelenskiy starting to mention peacetalks in public speeches.
Trump's idea of making Europe pay for itself was doubling the percentage of investment that the smaller NATO countries could not achieve. It effectively sets NATO up for failure.
Its % of GDP, not x billions per country. Every country could achieve it. No one would drop NATO after Ukraine.
 
I didn't realise Israel, the UAE and Bahrain constituted all allies and adversaries.
I know you'd like me to list them all. Because you can't grasp a simple statement. Russia is threatening all of NATO. Iran And it's proxies, could start WW3 on this own. China, is threatening Taiwan and North Korea seems to be itchy again. We also have Russian Navy in Cuba. To quote Joey "come on man"
 
Last edited:
Russia is threatening all of NATO. Iran And it's proxies, could start WW3 on this own. China, is threatening Taiwan and North Korea seems to be itchy again.
Things which famously only started in the last four years and haven't been long, complex geopolitical issues for decades, even centuries in some cases.
 
I guess linking stats does get through your head. You can see the imbalance of funding in 2014? Some paid in almost nothing. The US paid more than all combined! Not even our continent!
This would be called moving the goal post. It does not matter if the US paid more than all combined, that's not some requirement.

The bold is absolutely silly because the US also spends more than Russia, China, India, Saudi Arabia, UK, Germany, France, South Korea, Japan, & Ukraine all combined as well. We make up 37% of the world wide spending on military, of course we outspend all our NATO allies, we out spend everyone.
Why its important? Intelligence knew about it for years, everyone knew about it since first half of 2021.
It's highly concerning when a former US President is getting first hand knowledge from the invader himself & not informing intelligence. What else is he aware of & not sharing?
He already stopping the war - both Putin and Zelenskiy starting to mention peacetalks in public speeches.
You're so far into Trump's ass if you think he's got any hand in that.
Its % of GDP, not x billions per country. Every country could achieve it. No one would drop NATO after Ukraine.
If it was that easy to hit 4%, the 2% guideline would have been hit long ago.
 
I disagree that Biden is putting pressure on Israel. Pressure on Israel requires the admission that Israel has done something wrong. When the international community says Israel has done wrong, and the Biden administration rejects it, that's not pressure. It's the opposite. It's cover.

Calling for a ceasefire is not pressure. Pressure requires potential consequences. The Biden administration has repeatedly refused to impose consequences or even threaten to impose consequences. It has rejected conditioning weapons or aid on a promise not to commit war crimes (a condition which only matters if Israel commits war crimes). Not only that, it hasn't even asked Israel to accept a ceasefire, because it claimed Israel had proposed and therefore accepted the most recent ceasefire deal, even though it hadn't. How can you pressure someone when you claim they've already done what you've asked?

The only thing even approaching real pressure was the call not to invade Rafah, and when they did it anyway, the US not only didn't act, it denied that the invasion happened.

The Wikipedia entry for the Rafah offensive is well cited.

Here's a source (May 9th) for Biden saying he'd stop sending bombs to Israel if they invaded Rafah (which also includes and admission that US bombs have been used to kill civilians i.e. an admission of culpability in war crimes).



Here's a source (May 22nd) for Israeli infantry (Nahal Brigade) entering Rafah, the fifth infantry division to do so.

Here's a source (May 28th) for the US denying that attacks on Rafah cross their "red line", even after tanks were seen in central Rafah.

Here's a source (June 25th) for Israeli tanks going deeper into Rafah (how do you get tanks into a city without invading it?)

Here's a source (June 19th) for the US denying Netanyahu's claim it had withheld any weapons from Israel.

How can you put pressure on someone when you deny outright A) that they acted against your instructions and violated your terms and B) that you are imposing any consequences on them for doing so?



Perhaps Biden doesn't want a genocide. But I disagree that he has obvious moral opposition to it.

There are two options here.
  • Biden knows Israel is committing war crimes yet continues to provide them with weapons (he has basically admitted to this in that May 9th source). In this way he knows that he is facilitating war crimes and has made peace with it, whether or not he actually wants it to happen.
  • Biden doesn't think Israel is committing war crimes, which means he's either unfathomably uninformed, or just doesn't think what has happened counts as war crimes, which requires him to think crimes against Palestinians don't matter.
It's impossible to know what's inside his head, but based on his actions, I have no choice but to believe he's okay with what's happening because he continues to facilitate it. It's not just that he's failing to stop it. He's providing the means for it to happen and he can stop doing that any time he wants. I already pointed out that it's against US law to provide weapons to an entity committing war crimes. If he admits that Israel is committing war crimes it gives him legal means to stop the shipments.

It's easy to explain Biden's occasional "tough" talk on Israel. He knows it's political poison to publicly support war crimes. He knows it has to seem like he cares about what Israel does. Throughout this whole thing, the impression I have of Biden is a man who is deeply frustrated by the criticism of his handling of the situation and the damage to his image, and irritated with Israel's crimes for making his job harder. Even upset that it damages Israel's future as a Jewish state. Not a man who is so offended by Israel's callousness and treatment of Palestinians that he will do whatever he can within the bounds of his political strength to right the wrongs and fight for justice.

Can I prove what's in Biden's heart? Of course not. But I'm judging him by his actions, not his words. And to me, his actions say "I support Israel 100%".

It appears to consistent with what I described earlier. Biden had concerns about US arms being used to attack civilians, promised arms would stop flowing if they crossed a line, they did, and then the shipments were paused. Then the republicans came along and attached a Israeli arms shipment (for sometime in the future, I'm not sure when that shipment is supposed to go or even if it has already) to Ukrainian support bill. So you're left with the prospective that Biden cares more about funding Ukraine in their fight against Russian takeover than a continued pause in shipments to Israel over their offensive in Rafah.

Biden attempted to hold that line, and house republicans made it too painful for him.

The Israeli military support system is complex, it involves contracts set up months or years in advance, and ongoing contracts set up for months later. So what exactly is being paused and when. The old contracts? The new ones? It's easy to twist all of this around if one feels like it.

Biden believes in some kind of allied commitment to Israel, a country that believes it has suffered from state-sponsored terrorism and is waging war over it. He also appears to believe that Israel is over stepping and misusing US munitions. But US politics is ugly, and the republicans currently control enough of the US government that they can shut down any effort that that congress needs to approve over any issue they choose. So Biden's pause was unsustainable. That's how it looks to me. I think if democrats control the house, you'd be seeing a harder line.

I do not think that your two options are the only options. I'll give you a third.
- Biden knows Israel is committing war crimes. He did what he could do easily to get them to stop, but he wasn't willing to hold up Ukraine over it.

That's not "peace with it", it's the kind of ugly decision presidents get faced with.
 
Last edited:
Things which famously only started in the last four years and haven't been long, complex geopolitical issues for decades, even centuries in some cases.
You had your head in the sand 2016-2020 I guess.

This would be called moving the goal post. It does not matter if the US paid more than all combined, that's not some requirement.
Why is it so hard for you see it? Our percentage was more than double that of than any other! Yes it's not a requirement it's an obligation to defend your fellow signatories. I have to say it. but, these other countries were leeches. And it doesn't matter what we spend in so far as for our own defense. But it does matter what others put in for their common defense
 
Last edited:
Why is it so hard for you see it? Our percentage was more double that of than any other! Yes it's not a requirement it's an obligation to defend your fellow signatories. I have to say it. but, these other countries were leeches
No, the US was buying dirt cheap influence and support.

Your anti-social bent being projected onto the global stage is just what Putin wants, it makes things entirely too easy for him. We need our allies.
 
not informing intelligence
proofs?
You're so far into Trump's ass if you think he's got any hand in that.
All liberal media running in circles panicking, Zelenskiy government highly invested in Biden, Zelenskiy made his statement about peacetalks this year right after debates. Right, 0 references to Trump.
If it was that easy to hit 4%, the 2% guideline would have been hit long ago.
Did I said easy?
 
Why is it so hard for you see it? Our percentage was more double that of than any other!
At least 4 countries spent more than half of what we did, so that's not true. Croatia & France came within .04% as well.
Yes it's not a requirement it's an obligation to defend your fellow signatories. But it does matter what others put in for their common defense
Cutting out the nonsense, this is already being done by NATO allies provided by your very own link. Only Turkey, Croatia, UK, & the US have reduced spending.
It would have come out long ago that US intelligence gathered info from Trump himself about Putin invading Ukraine.
All liberal media running in circles panicking, Zelenskiy government highly invested in Biden, Zelenskiy made his statement about peacetalks this year right after debates. Right, 0 references to Trump.
Let me remind you of what you said just earlier:
You need to be in power to prevent anything

Therefore, by your account, no, he's not stopping the war because he's not in power.
Did I said easy?
So you admit it's not something they can just do at the drop of a pin. Maybe there's other deciding factors for each country to take into account that hesitates them from just doing it.
 
No, the US was buying dirt cheap influence and support.

Your anti-social bent being projected onto the global stage is just what Putin wants, it makes things entirely too easy for him. We need our allies.
Are you serious? Cheap?! We need our allies to show that they are allies. Not a bunch succulents. This has gone on since NATO was formed. I'd think we've given so much of our strategic stockpiles that we couldn't defend anybody right now. Not even ourselves. And, we have to pay for those replacements out of our budget.
And Trump is literally encouraging it.
Link?

To McLaren. Those stats your reference, there is a past and present. Are after Trump encouraged them to invest more. You really struggle with the math. US spends more than all but Poland right now. As a percentage. NATO is basically a "co-op", you know that right? What happens if you don't hold up your obligation? You get dropped.
 
Last edited:
You just mean because Trump would practically enter the war on Russia's side
No one knows what Trump would do. Most likely push both sides until they agree to sign peace.
It would have come out long ago that US intelligence gathered info from Trump himself about Putin invading Ukraine.
US intelligence knew about Putin invasion long before.
Therefore, by your account, no, he's not stopping the war because he's not in power.
Surprises can happen, but right now Trump is leader of the race, even liberal media agree. That's already pushing Ukraine into peace talks.
 
Are you serious? Cheap?! We need our allies to show that they are allies. Not a bunch succulents. This has gone on since NATO was formed. I'd think we've given so much of our strategic stockpiles that we couldn't defend anybody right now. Not even ourselves. And, we have to pay for those replacements out of our budget.
It is again projecting your failure at an interpersonal social level onto global politics. "Prove to me that you're worthy of friendship". It's gross.

This whole thing was formed (in part) BY THE US. Because the US saw the interest in creating a collective group of allies to fight against autocracy. It was formed out of a recognition that if every country goes it alone they are all weaker.

People are fundamentally good vs people are fundamentally bad. Social vs. anti-social. Partnership vs. being alone, crying on the playground because it's all just not fair enough for you.
 
This whole thing was formed (in part) BY THE US.
To battle with USSR. Poor thing collapsed 33 years ago. NATO isn't alliance that would fight with China for Taiwan, Russia cant deal with Ukraine. There are big question who needs NATO more - Europe or US.
 
It is again projecting your failure at an interpersonal social level onto global politics. "Prove to me that you're worthy of friendship". It's gross.

This whole thing was formed (in part) BY THE US. Because the US saw the interest in creating a collective group of allies to fight against autocracy. It was formed out of a recognition that if every country goes it alone they are all weaker.

People are fundamentally good vs people are fundamentally bad. Social vs. anti-social. Partnership vs. being alone, crying on the playground because it's all just not fair enough for you.
Wow. Global politics and personal friendships are widely different. If you had a friend that never pays would you still be friends with them? Yes, probably if they were a dear friend .and ,were going up in some hard times. But, if you were just a random person that I worked with and you never paid for lunch? yeah we would never be friends. And yeah I do know why NATO was formed. It seems like you're projecting on your failures with your behavior.
 
Are after Trump encouraged them to invest more.
They were already committed to investing more in 2014. I'm aware math in addition to civics is another class you skipped, but that's about 2 years before Trump ever took office....
You really struggle with the math.
You said the US percentage is more than double anyone else. That would imply nobody was even able to spend 1.86% in 2014, yet 4 countries did & 2 came in at 1.84%.
No one knows what Trump would do. Most likely push both sides until they agree to sign peace.
He's literally said he will only give aid to Ukraine if they enter peace talks, something that's already been floated numerous times. Trump's specific plan also been denounced as unachievable.
"I see the proposal as unbalanced in favor of Russia's aims and likely to reward aggression and brutal violence," he told Newsweek. "Western support is both a critical requirement and a critical vulnerability for Ukraine. Neither the West nor the U.S. and the West combined can exercise similar leverage against Russia."

Davis continued: "Threatening Russia with greater Western and U.S. support to Ukraine at this point in the war seems both ironic and unlikely to convince Putin to negotiate. Actually providing that greater support could."
US intelligence knew about Putin invasion long before.
That's called irrelevancy. A former US President should also be contributing information if he's getting it first hand.
Surprises can happen, but right now Trump is leader of the race, even liberal media agree.
But, he's not in office & therefore has no power. You set the line there.
That's already pushing Ukraine into peace talks.
Yes, the idea of peace talks has never been brought up before....

Global politics and personal friendships are widely different. If you had a friend that never pays would you still be friends with them? Yes, probably if they were a dear friend .and ,were going up in some hard times. But, if you were just a random person that I worked with and you never paid for lunch? yeah we would never be friends.
Unfortunately, this scenario you conjured up signifies the importance of NATO because in it, the "dear friend" you'd still pay for is NATO. These are not "random people", they are quite literally friends we've been with 75 years ago.
 
Last edited:
To battle with USSR. Poor thing collapsed 33 years ago. NATO isn't alliance that would fight with China for Taiwan, Russia cant deal with Ukraine. There are big question who needs NATO more - Europe or US.
Russia is still very much a threat and is an enemy nation. NATO still needs to exist and Putin shows why everyday. America needs NATO, too, since we actually share a border with Russia.
 
They were already committed to investing more in 2014. I'm aware math in addition to civics is another class you skipped, but that's about 2 years before Trump ever took office....
They were committed to spending more as a member when they joined. Prior to that they under-committed. Some, not all.
You said the US percentage is more than double anyone else. That would imply nobody was even able to spend 1.86% in 2014, yet 4 countries did & 2 came in at 1.84%.
Umm. Half of 4 is 2? Got it. Then <2 isn't 2. And again, the US's percentage is MORE than all but Poland.
 
Last edited:
He's literally said he will only give aid to Ukraine if they enter peace talks, something that's already been floated numerous times.
How its different with what I said?
But, he's not in office & therefore has no power. You set the line there.
He has power of man who has highest chances of becoming president of US.
idea of peace talks has never been brought up before.
Zelenskiy signed law that forbid any peace talks with Putin after nothing happened in Bucha. Switzerland summit was first time Ukrainian officials said about possibilities of peace talks and after Biden fiasco Zelenskiy started to speak loudly.
Russia is still very much a threat
Not to US, if not talking thermonuclear war.
since we actually share a border with Russia.
Wat? You mean Bering Strait? Logistics here are nonexistent, its easier to reach Japan than any mainland RF.
 
Last edited:
Russia is still very much a threat and is an enemy nation. NATO still needs to exist and Putin shows why everyday. America needs NATO, too, since we actually share a border with Russia.
Yes, America does need NATO and it's allies. And, we as a country have been the best ally to NATO.
 
Not to US, if not talking thermonuclear war.
The US is global and has bases everywhere. Russia is a threat, especially if they decide to get buddy-buddy with Cuba again. The Russkis parked warships off the coast of Florida just a couple of weeks ago.
Wat? You mean Bering Strait? Logistics here are nonexistent, its easier to reach Japan than any mainland RF.
Yes, here's the border:
1719766824379.png


And I don't care if the "logistics are nonexistent"; I'm still not cool having a hostile nation run by a dictator on our border. Plus between aircrafts and ships, you don't need roads.
 
How its different with what I said?
You also said no one knows what Trump will do. Except, everyone does b/c he said it. What you said was nothing more than assuming something we already knew.
He has power of man who has highest chances of becoming president of US.
Sorry, once again, you said he has to be in office to actually have power. Therefore, all this other stuff you've been saying only contradicts yourself.
Zelenskiy signed law that forbid any peace talks with Putin after nothing happened in Bucha. Switzerland summit was first time Ukrainian officials said about possibilities of peace talks and after Biden fiasco Zelenskiy started to speak loudly.
And once again, this is just moving your argument b/c you keep showcasing you are not at all informed on this topic, which is weirdly ironic given how active you are in the Ukraine thread.

You said it's pushing Ukraine into peace talks, yet there's a literal Wiki article detailing peace talks dating back to 2022.

Umm. Half of 4 is 2? Got it. Then <2 isn't 2.
Did you really just round 3.72% up to 4% and think that wouldn't apply to the rest of countries? :lol:

That's bloody fantastic. The amount of countries who meet half our percentage goes from 4 to 7 if we're going to round up percentages.
And again, the US's percentage is MORE than all but Poland.
Again? LOL, you ain't slick. You literally said more than everyone, but then edited in Poland. Not that it really matters, you've already decided the hole in your foot needed to be widened even more.
 
Last edited:
Our only aircraft is burned and in docs for hell knows no how long.

Horrific
I don't care how pathetic a country or its military is, I still don't want a hostile nation bordering America without some sort of alliance. And just because Russia is garbage at the moment doesn't mean it always will be. Russia has been an enemy for decades and I don't see that changing anytime soon.
 
Except, everyone does b/c he said it
He still lying moron, so I wouldn't be so sure.
you said he has to be in office to actually have power.
I don't. I said he needs power to be able to do something.
You said it's pushing Ukraine into peace talks, yet there's a literal Wiki article detailing peace talks dating back to 2022
That were the thing until truth about Bucha became publicly available and Zelenskiy said no one would make deals with dwarf
And just because Russia is garbage at the moment doesn't mean it always will be.
Point is that Europe should care more about NATO and spending more, not that US should leave NATO.

Whole Europe can't produce more than RF under heavy sanctions, its hilarious.
 
Last edited:
Did you really just round 3.72% up to 4% and think that wouldn't apply to the rest of countries? :lol:

That's bloody fantastic. The amount of countries who meet half our percentage goes from 4 to 7 if we're going to round up percentages.

Again? LOL, you ain't slick. You literally said more than everyone, but then edited in Poland. Not that it really matters, you've already decided the hold in your foot needed to be widened even more.
I guess editing small errors isn't allowed. Don't fluff your feathers bub. As is typical with you, the information speaks for itself, but you keep bringing it up. You really are a tiresome person.
 
Back