• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Russia says it's going to arm a secretive submarine with 6 nuclear 'doomsday' devices

You are the one avoiding. Being at war for 93% of its existence screams war mongering nation. Stealing land from Mexico screams war mongering nation.


Got it the first time.

You've been advised it's a false construct and that you're wrong.

Yet all you do is rinse and repeat.
 
It is well nigh on impossible but the US has been hanging tough to stay in the low 90%s. And it is highly illustrative of what I described. As we speak the USA has turned its war mongering against China, positioning missiles in countries that it has stolen from the rightful owners, like the Marshall Islands, Guam, Korea, the Chagos Islands, the latter the International Court of Justice has condemned the US and the UK for stealing the Chagos Islanders' lands.

Marshall Islands, liberated from Japan

Guam, liberated from Japan

South Korea, liberated from Japan then allowed self determination.
 
Got it the first time.

You've been advised it's a false construct and that you're wrong.

Yet all you do is rinse and repeat.


You are doing the norm, provide no evidence. Your opinion is not evidence. Check a dictionary for the difference in meaning.
 
Every week it seems Putin flings out yet another nuclear super-weapon.

It's a bit funny when their MIRV'd silo arsenal is perhaps enough to initiate nuclear winter.

Yes ever since Nikita banged his shoe at the U.N. the Russians have been hurling threats at us and some here seem to like Putin regardless. Are they becoming masochists or something?
 
Yes ever since Nikita banged his shoe at the U.N. the Russians have been hurling threats at us and some here seem to like Putin regardless. Are they becoming masochists or something?

Why do so many operate under the unwarranted assumption that countries threaten the USA? It simply has no support in reality. Consider that it is the USA that has threatened and illegally invaded five nations since 2001, all based on the usual US lies.
 
Why do so many operate under the unwarranted assumption that countries threaten the USA? It simply has no support in reality. Consider that it is the USA that has threatened and illegally invaded five nations since 2001, all based on the usual US lies.

Your "F"ing berserk mass murdering leader just revealed a desire for a doomsday machine meant to destroy all life on Earth. Putin is virtually Dr. Evil incarnate. He must be compensating for his diminutive elf-like size that most certainly continues"down there". :lamo

Putin-jako-Hitler-fot-time.jpg-x.jpg
 
Last edited:
You are doing the norm, provide no evidence. Your opinion is not evidence. Check a dictionary for the difference in meaning.

I'd rather you sue me. I'm sure you could find someone in authority to hear your opinion.

You'll lose because this is a voluntary general interest discussion board with an inherent bias toward politics. This is good of course. It would be the basis of my defense. Which means in the end you'd need to pay court costs.

The Board runs the gamut of approaches, to include narration, exposition, description, argument, persuasion, interrogatory, reason, rationality, emotive, classification, categorization and so on. You'd need to prove otherwise. Which means you'd need evidence to the contrary. Now there's your evidence thingy. Or you could simply argue from authority -- y'know, declaration, proclamation, pronouncement and the like. You could issue some bull same as the pope does.
 
Your "F"ing berserk mass murdering leader just revealed a desire for a doomsday machine meant to destroy all life on Earth. Putin is virtually Dr. Evil incarnate. He must be compensating for his diminutive elf-like size that most certainly continues"down there". :lamo

Russia isn't the country that has illegally invaded five nations since the lies of 2001. Russia isn't the country that has lined up hundreds of nukes on the USA's borders. Russia isn't the country that stole the lands of the Chagos Islanders, the Marshall Islanders, using them as nuclear guinea pigs. This would be the USA.
 
You are doing the norm, provide no evidence.

I see you're making broad and sweeping claims while avoiding questions that require details and specifics. Y'know, evidence. Facts.

So all we're getting from you is opinion.

Reminiscent of Mao actually more than Trotsky who liked argument. On the other side we had Reagan who liked emotion and persuasion. You might visit Reagan's shining city on a hill sometime. It's a much better place btw than Trump Tower.
 
You're talking about shrinking a 60,000 lb. bomb down into a torpedo warhead that would have to be - estimating liberally - 1,000 lbs. From a purely practical engineering standpoint, I'd say that's going to require some testing.

I take it you're talking about possibly initiating a submarine landslide with a nuclear device? I have no idea how feasible that would be... has anyone ever done a study on that?

Tsunamis are generally caused by the displacement or slide of undersea or in proximity to the sea land masses. [see the two Christmas tsunamis in Indonesia].

As far as the possible Russian doom's day scenario. It's not nice to mess with Mother Nature.
YouTube
 
I see you're making broad and sweeping claims while avoiding questions that require details and specifics. Y'know, evidence. Facts.

So all we're getting from you is opinion.

Reminiscent of Mao actually more than Trotsky who liked argument. On the other side we had Reagan who liked emotion and persuasion. You might visit Reagan's shining city on a hill sometime. It's a much better place btw than Trump Tower.

We have another Putinista on the board.
 
Tsunamis are generally caused by the displacement or slide of undersea or in proximity to the sea land masses. [see the two Christmas tsunamis in Indonesia].

As far as the possible Russian doom's day scenario. It's not nice to mess with Mother Nature.
YouTube

So you're talking about triggering a fault movement via transient strain from a thermonuclear detonation? I guess it'd be theoretically possible.... but I don't know of any scientific literature on the subject.
 
We have another Putinista on the board.

Indeed although this Putinista goes well beyond the Republicans / Conservatives who are Putinistas. Which is around 80% of each.

The couple of dozen denizen DP Republicans / Conservatives who have gone over to Putin pretty much limit themselves to defending Putin's lapdog Trump. This guy however goes whole hog out against the USA as his Evil Empire. I'd figure Putin who gets hives when he remembers Reagan has Reagan in his sights too, given Putin said the collapse of the USSR was the biggest bust up of the 20th century and much to be lamented. Grieved by good Russians throughout Russia and by good wannabe Russians everywhere, in the USA in particular and especially. By the European Right too of course.

And while Republicans / Conservatives used to praise Putin openly and in gushing terms, they've gone silent on Putin since the open emergence of Putin-Trump. Putinistas went underground on it thinking we'd forgot their blatant record of Putin Worship -- strong leader, chess master, strategic genius, defender of the rightist faith etc and so on.

What the Fanboys didn't know and are only beginning to recognize is that the Putin-Trump scheme and manipulation was never going to succeed. For one thing they didn't figure on Robert Mueller being called in as the contemporary incarnation of Eliot Ness the crime buster. And that we up here in the stormy city on the hill have assembled in huge numbers and strength to defend her and to drive away the newly emergent mass fascism of the American Right. The American 21st century Vichy Right.
 
Last edited:
Indeed although this Putinista goes well beyond the Republicans / Conservatives who are Putinistas. Which is around 80% of each.

The couple of dozen denizen DP Republicans / Conservatives who have gone over to Putin pretty much limit themselves to defending Putin's lapdog Trump. This guy however goes whole hog out against the USA as his Evil Empire. I'd figure Putin who gets hives when he remembers Reagan has Reagan in his sights too, given Putin said the collapse of the USSR was the biggest bust up of the 20th century and much to be lamented. Grieved by good Russians throughout Russia and by good wannabe Russians everywhere, in the USA in particular and especially. By the European Right too of course.

And while Republicans / Conservatives used to praise Putin openly and in gushing terms, they've gone silent on Putin since the open emergence of Putin-Trump. Putinistas went underground on it thinking we'd forgot their blatant record of Putin Worship -- strong leader, chess master, strategic genius, defender of the rightist faith etc and so on.

What the Fanboys didn't know and are only beginning to recognize is that the Putin-Trump scheme and manipulation was never going to succeed. For one thing they didn't figure on Robert Mueller being called in as the contemporary incarnation of Eliot Ness the crime buster. And that we up here in the stormy city on the hill have assembled in huge numbers and strength to defend her and to drive away the newly emergent mass fascism of the American Right. The American 21st century Vichy Right.

"Be extremely subtle, even to the point of formlessness. Be extremely mysterious, even to the point of soundlessness. Thereby you can be the director of the opponent's fate." --- Sun Tzu
 
"Be extremely subtle, even to the point of formlessness. Be extremely mysterious, even to the point of soundlessness. Thereby you can be the director of the opponent's fate." --- Sun Tzu

Sun Tzu lost his big war, the Seven Kingdoms War. In American terms Sun Tzu is Robert E. Lee, i.e., a savvy tactician whose weakness in strategic conception left his people defeated.

Also known as the 7 States War, Sun Tzu's state of Wu didn't make the finals as they were knocked out early on. Of the other six states Sun Tzu (Lao Tzu) defeated only one, the Chu.

The warlord of Qin (Chin) prevailed and he became the first emperor of China as we know it today. (Qin = Chin (pron.) = China in English.)

If Sun Tzu and his kindgom of Wu had prevailed we'd likely know China as Suna, or perhaps as Wuland. It's neither. It's China. It comes from the warlord conqueror of the 7 Kingdoms, Qin.



Caesar would wup Sun Tzu even today. Caesar was a conqueror while Sun Tzu submitted to his weakling king. In the China mindset the ruler is always paramount even when he's an idiot which is most of 'em. Caesar as master of his own fate in battle would have prevailed over Sun Tzu who relied on his enemy making numerous mistakes and errors. Caesar made precious few mistakes in battle. Caesar went right at you which Sun Tzu couldn't ever deal with. Neither would Caesar ever allow Sun time to prepare properly. Sun won some and he lost some while his victories were usually against commanders who were easily disrupted and deceived which Caesar was not. Caesar gave the enemy commander ulcers not vice-versa. While we know well Caesar's fate as emperor, he fought his way to the crown while Sun's state was absorbed by his kingdom's enemies one after another concluding with the warlord Qin. Indeed Western military commanders and theorists do much better at applying Sun than Sun himself could or did. Your own problem Cordelier is that you drop posts like they're dimes. Which makes your posts a dime a dozen. They come out of a cereal box they do.
 
Last edited:
Sun Tzu lost his big war, the Seven Kingdoms War. In American terms Sun Tzu is Robert E. Lee, i.e., a savvy tactician whose weakness in strategic conception left his people defeated.

Also known as the 7 States War, Sun Tzu's state of Wu didn't make the finals as they were knocked out early on. Of the other six states Sun Tzu (Lao Tzu) defeated only one, the Chu.

The warlord of Qin (Chin) prevailed and he became the first emperor of China as we know it today. (Qin = Chin (pron.) = China in English.)

If Sun Tzu and his kindgom of Wu had prevailed we'd likely know China as Suna, or perhaps as Wuland. It's neither. It's China. It comes from the warlord conqueror of the 7 Kingdoms, Qin.



Caesar would wup Sun Tzu even today. Caesar was a conqueror while Sun Tzu submitted to his weakling king. In the China mindset the ruler is always paramount even when he's an idiot which is most of 'em. Caesar as master of his own fate in battle would have prevailed over Sun Tzu who relied on his enemy making numerous mistakes and errors. Caesar made precious few mistakes in battle. Caesar went right at you which Sun Tzu couldn't ever deal with. Neither would Caesar ever allow Sun time to prepare properly. Sun won some and he lost some while his victories were usually against commanders who were easily disrupted and deceived which Caesar was not. Caesar gave the enemy commander ulcers not vice-versa. While we know well Caesar's fate as emperor, he fought his way to the crown while Sun's state was absorbed by his kingdom's enemies one after another concluding with the warlord Qin. Indeed Western military commanders and theorists do much better at applying Sun than Sun himself could or did. Your own problem Cordelier is that you drop posts like they're dimes. Which makes your posts a dime a dozen. They come out of a cereal box they do.

I take it, then, that you're not familiar with the Battle of Dyrrhachium?
 
I take it, then, that you're not familiar with the Battle of Dyrrhachium?

You'd need to make your case as I grant you nothing based on your post.

Then you and I might have a case constructed by you to discuss. At which point I would shred it.

I remind you I posited that Caesar would defeat Sun Tzu. That is the equation I presented. I recognized Sun Tzu won some and he lost some. And that between the two of 'em, Caesar would prevail. Your task should you choose to accept it is to identify how Sun Tzu would defeat Caesar's phalanx formations and his legions. Sun would need more than blue smoke and mirrors to do it, which he could not.
 
Last edited:
You'd need to make your case as I grant you nothing based on your post.

Then you and I might have a case constructed by you to discuss.

I remind you I posited that Caesar would defeat Sun Tzu. That is the equation I presented. I recognized Sun Tzu won some and he lost some. And that between the two of 'em, Caesar would prevail. Your task should you choose to accept it is to identify how Sun Tzu would defeat Caesar's phalanx formations and his legions. Sun would need more than blue smoke and mirrors to do it, which he could not.

You really don't see the relevance between my quotation and the Battle of Dyrrhachium? I would have figured that for a self-proclaimed strategic genius like yourself that it'd be abundantly clear from this line of thought where I was going.
 
You really don't see the relevance between my quotation and the Battle of Dyrrhachium? I would have figured that for a self-proclaimed strategic genius like yourself that it'd be abundantly clear from this line of thought where I was going.

You need to present your case.

I am eager to shred it.
 
You need to present your case.

I am eager to shred it.

My case is that the teachings of Sun Tzu are universal.... he didn't invent the laws of war, he just committed a lot of them to writing. I'm sure Caesar didn't know Sun Tzu from a hole in the ground... but that doesn't mean he didn't apply the lessons himself. The quotation's relevance to the Battle of Dyrrhachium is evidence of this in practice.
 
"Gentlemen! You cannot fight in here, this is the War Room!"

 
Back
Top Bottom