Trump: Empire Builder?

Quote: rxwine

I think it is probably a lot of drill, dig, and mine.

Here is my thing, Greenland is not a destitute or backwards country even if their economy is meh, they can get stuff done, and have connections to get even more stuff done.

So if they had resources that they could profitable and easily access today, they would be doing it. There is a reason their only export is fish.

I just don't see how people can say this will be a economical boon.

Quote: AZDuffman

You thought it because you are the type who does not understand history or human nature. Human nature is to expand empires. That never changes. Things do not change. We had a pause post-1945, but that is nothing in thousands of years of human history. The era probably...
I suggest you get a copy of "The Prince" to read.

Read it long ago, dude: I was a history major in college.

Of course it has been human nature to greedily seek more, to covet thy neighbor's property as well as his wife.

My point is that with the advent of nuclear weapons it is ridiculous to keep playing that game: it only takes one side to Let Fly The Thunder, then it's Game Over for us all.

But hey, you seem to think Trump is just the guy to imperialistically expand our borders: he thinks he's Teddy Roosevelt but he's more of a Ted Bundy morphed with a teddy bear.

Quote: missedhervee

Read it long ago, dude: I was a history major in college.

Of course it has been human nature to greedily seek more, to covet thy neighbor's property as well as his wife.

My point is that with the advent of nuclear weapons it is ridiculous to keep playing that game: it only takes one side to Let Fly The Thunder, then it's Game Over for us all.

But hey, you seem to think Trump is just the guy to imperialistically expand our borders: he thinks he's Teddy Roosevelt but he's more of a Ted Bundy morphed with a teddy bear.

If you were a history major then you know that basically every nuclear power has been attacked and/or lost a war since they got nukes? (Exception being North Korea). You would also have learned the the USA expanded time after time to give itself strategic depth and reach. Didn't they teach that at University of American Samoa?

No nuclear power has attacked another nuclear power with nukes...yet.

Give it time: perhaps within the next four years?

tick tick tick

As for what courses the University of American Samoa may have had available in prior years I haven't a clue: I thought that was your alma mater?

Oh wait...aren't you the one who quit junior high school to join the circus?

Quote: missedhervee

No nuclear power has attacked another nuclear power with nukes...yet.

Give it time: perhaps within the next four years?

Pakistan and India are always on the brink, as are India and China. But have been for decades. But of course a history major would know that is the most likely pairings.

Frankly i have little concern about Pakistan and Indian going nuke, one against the other.

That would not lead to WWIII.

WWIII will require either Russia or China to play along.

Just give it time, it'll happen...and there isn't a damned thing you can do to stop it.

Quote: missedhervee

Frankly i have little concern about Pakistan and Indian going nuke, one against the other.

That would not lead to WWIII.

You don't, but you are of low intellect. We know that based on your Trump statements.

Actually it has been wargamed out showing it would be impossible for it not to end up as WWIII. China or Russia will get dragged in. Iran would get dragged in. Then the USA would get dragged in.

Quote: AZDuffman

You don't, but you are of low intellect. We know that based on your Trump statements.

Actually it has been wargamed out showing it would be impossible for it not to end up as WWIII. China or Russia will get dragged in. Iran would get dragged in. Then the USA would get dragged in.

The problem with nukes is it makes the area you nuked unlivable for God knows how many decades. What would be the point of that. If you can't take over the land why bother bombing it.

Quote: Evenbob

The problem with nukes is it makes the area you nuked unlivable for God knows how many decades. What would be the point of that. If you can't take over the land why bother bombing it.

You don't have to blanket nuke. For example, if you were hitting the USA take out New Orleans or St. Louis. Either would cripple things hard. Then get a negotiated settlement. Of course we would nuke hard back, I am talking more about an equivalent in India/Pakistan with each other.

“It is my honor to announce Jon Voight, Mel Gibson, and Sylvester Stallone to be Special Ambassadors to a great but very troubled place, Hollywood, California,” he wrote. “They will serve as Special Envoys to me for the purpose of bringing Hollywood, which has lost much business over the last four years to foreign countries, BACK — BIGGER, BETTER, AND STRONGER THAN EVER BEFORE!”

Why does this make me happy.