In looking at Trump speeches for another thread, I came across this comment at 33:50 -- 34:52. In this one he asserts the military can't be beat.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
OK. Heres the IQ thread. Drum Roll for Donald Trump...
- Thread starter Twilight Hue
- Start date
tytlyf
Not Religious
We're weaker against Russia, China and Iran is what you're saying? Got an example? RW media likes to tell it's audience that Obama is always out and about around the world apologizing for America, is that what you mean? I don't hear Obama apologizing
I didn't address Iran.
And the way you phrased it is ambiguous.
My post was clearer about relative weakness changing over time.
China is developing in several areas.....
- Cyberwarfare
- Naval capability, eg, carriers
- Space warfare
Russia too....
- Supercavitating torpedoes (China too)
- Ultra quiet submarines
The above is not a comprehensive list.
I'm not addressing whether he's doing this or not.
tytlyf
Not Religious
We're doing the same thing, just smarter. I'd like to see certain outdated things in the military cut and focus that money on space technologies.
Twilight Hue
Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
Should an IQ threshold be made a standard requirement for voters , as well as candidates running for public office?
Doing the same thing does not mean that we're maintaining a constant level of superiority.
The difference is changing, & we become relatively weaker because they become relatively stronger.
Daemon Sophic
Avatar in flux
This is inevitable. The rate of information transfer makes 1950s and 60s military spy activity look like a snail on the O'Hare tarmac. They outnumber us 4:1. They ingrain education as an ideal, while we still laugh when jocks give nerds a wedgie. They praise and pay highly for intellectuals, while we pay for steroid abusing jocks to entertain us. They acknowledge the reality of climate change and other sciences, and react accordingly. Trump thinks the Chinese made up the "myth" of Climate change.
Bottom line, they SPEND on infrastructure, while Republicans since Reagan have considered it a waste of money. Trump wants more trickle-down, because 40 years of poor teacher salaries, crappy harbors and airports, rusting bridges and potholed roads, and nearly non-existant railways are utterly ignored by republicans (or tenaciously fought against).
http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/2015/03/25/478B-Infrastructure-Bill-Blocked-Senate-GOP
While those "economically foolish" Democrats want to equalize taxes on the rich to the rates paid by the middle class and get on track again.
The ONLY way to "win" is funding (taxing for) massive infrastructure improvements. But Trump would see us to 16th century aristocracy.
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
The fact we don't have bullet trains or other high speed trains yet says a lot about us, and is very shameful. Of course it would cost money, but it would open up many doors for many people if they had a cheaper and faster way to get around the country.
Can you clarify what you mean, please? There have been presidents who have suffered from depression.
Last edited:
Bashing Reagan isn't going to help us in the upcoming election.This is inevitable. The rate of information transfer makes 1950s and 60s military spy activity look like a snail on the O'Hare tarmac. They outnumber us 4:1. They ingrain education as an ideal, while we still laugh when jocks give nerds a wedgie. They praise and pay highly for intellectuals, while we pay for steroid abusing jocks to entertain us. They acknowledge the reality of climate change and other sciences, and react accordingly. Trump thinks the Chinese made up the "myth" of Climate change.
Bottom line, they SPEND on infrastructure, while Republicans since Reagan have considered it a waste of money. Trump wants more trickle-down, because 40 years of poor teacher salaries, crappy harbors and airports, rusting bridges and potholed roads, and nearly non-existant railways are utterly ignored by republicans (or tenaciously fought against).
http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/2015/03/25/478B-Infrastructure-Bill-Blocked-Senate-GOP
While those "economically foolish" Democrats want to equalize taxes on the rich to the rates paid by the middle class and get on track again.
The ONLY way to "win" is funding (taxing for) massive infrastructure improvements. But Trump would see us to 16th century aristocracy.
Trump actually wants to spend more on infrastructure than does Hillary.
Bullet trains are very sexy, but they aren't necessarily worth having.
They're very expensive, & the same money might be better spent on
ordinary mass transportation measures.
Daemon Sophic
Avatar in flux
Well, as far as dementia/senility, I think that we could rule out just about anyone over the age of 70. But that would be ageism. So give them a mental status exam, it checks for short term memory loss and a few other items. If they are perfect, then they can move on. (keep in mind that it is very rare for anyone over 70 to get 100%, and that is why I made the anti-aged remark
)Otherwise, symptomatic schizophrenia, daily life effecting narcissism (hmmmm...), prior attempt at suicide...... anything that would endanger him/herself or those around. Anything that could make them perceive a nonexistent world. That level of difficulty.
He wants many things, he states that he will do many things; better than anyone else could, believe me. ....but he seems to have very little idea on how to make them happen. Reagan did it, but TRIPLED our debt. (sorry for another easy Reagan dig).
http://www.bbc.com/news/business-37013670
..."According to the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center, Mr Trump's plan would reduce the amount of income the government takes in by $9.5tn over the next decade. Mrs Clinton's plan would add $1.1tn in revenue over the next 10 years....."
PS - I'm not bashing Reagan. Just his inane policies, along with any who would doom us to relive them.
With a choice of a candidate who wants to do more good things (& might fail),Well, as far as dementia/senility, I think that we could rule out just about anyone over the age of 70. But that would be ageism. So give them a mental status exam, it checks for short term memory loss and a few other items. If they are perfect, then they can move on. (keep in mind that it is very rare for anyone over 70 to get 100%, and that is why I made the anti-aged remark
Otherwise, symptomatic schizophrenia, daily life effecting narcissism (hmmmm...), prior attempt at suicide...... anything that would endanger him/herself or those around. Anything that could make them perceive a nonexistent world. That level of difficulty.
He wants many things, he states that he will do many things; better than anyone else could, believe me. ....but he seems to have very little idea on how to make them happen. Reagan did it, but TRIPLED our debt. (sorry for another easy Reagan dig).
http://www.bbc.com/news/business-37013670
..."According to the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center, Mr Trump's plan would reduce the amount of income the government takes in by $9.5tn over the next decade. Mrs Clinton's plan would add $1.1tn in revenue over the next 10 years....."PS - I'm not bashing Reagan. Just his inane policies, along with any who would doom us to relive them.
vs a candidate who wants to do more bad things (& might succeed), I'll take
the former. I don't factor in age.
Daemon Sophic
Avatar in flux
Then we are in agreement.
How boring!Then we are in agreement.
Fortunately, I'm watching Kill Bill.
The bride is eviscerating the Crazy 88 at the moment.