search results matching tag: weapon

» channel: learn

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.002 seconds

    Videos (1000)     Sift Talk (33)     Blogs (53)     Comments (1000)   

Three-Minute Video Explaining the Common Core State Standard

newtboy says...

CRT is not real outside of law school. It’s a big racist lie. It’s not taught in grade school.

Edit: Yes, if true, actual CRT, the law school class, was banned in grade school, nothing would change….but you want the intentional misuse and bastardization of the phrase to mean any mention of racial disparity, racist actions, slavery, Jim Crow, racist policies including those adopted by the Republican Party at the same time those racist policies were abandoned by Democrats in the late 60’s early 70’s, any mention of lynching, the KKK, the fact that non whites were not allowed to vote, the fact that non whites were not considered full human beings in the constitution, etc to all be under the name “CRT” and want it all to be removed from schools. You want to rewrite history so it resembles the false image you think you project. It’s absolutely moronic, attempted forced ignorance. The Republican plan for children because ignorance makes it easy to abuse and control the populace.

American history is real….and really racist.
By intentionally mislabeling anything about our racist history as “CRT”, a right wing buzz word they have stripped of any actual meaning to create some fantasy racial boogeyman they can point to to excuse blatant racist policy and actions, you think that allows you to pretend it doesn’t exist, to deny it, and to return to it. Removing any mention of our racist history is racist, stupid, and is a ploy to convince right wing morons that racism isn’t real, never happened, and so doesn’t need any fixing or even teaching. It erases an ENORMOUS part of American history, and all of black American history. You love that.

You bold faced liar. That’s EXACTLY what “anti CRT” is about, renaming the slave trade as “Africans immigrating”, calling slavery “job security”, pretending that Lincoln ended racism completely (but being confused because in your mind slavery is a hoax), ignoring the murderous atrocities during reconstruction, ignoring the blatant often deadly racism that was the norm through the 70’s, and the institutional racism that still exists, never mentioning and pretending attacks against blacks like Tulsa and others, mass murders, arsons, terrorism, all by law enforcement so there’s no legal remedies for the survivors….(The Tulsa race massacre took place on May 31 and June 1, 1921, when mobs of White residents, some of whom had been deputized and given weapons by city officials, attacked Black residents and destroyed homes and businesses of the Greenwood District in Tulsa, Oklahoma, US)…never happened. The anti CRT movement is about erasing that history so they 1)don’t feel guilty or uncomfortable for trying to defend or excuse having a murderously racist history, and 2)so it’s easier to return to that racist society with minimal effort because they won’t know where it leads.

Why? Because the senators that were complicit all switched to the Republican Party after the southern strategy, and those who believed in equality and rights for all switched to the Democratic Party. Another bit of racist history you personally love to deny despite it being the historical, undeniable record of our history. They don’t want to be asked, because they either answer truthfully and are proven to be racists, or lie and lose their racist voter base. Racists are nearly all…99%+-, right wingers. They do not belong to the party trying to eradicate racism. They belong to the party that openly accepts and fosters racism, and pretends, often insists it doesn’t exist when they’re in public….your party. The party of racists, white nationalists, insurrectionists, revisionists, anti American, pro Russian, sexist, anti democracy, anti education ignoramuses.

Quit bringing nothing but dishonest bold faced lies and rewritten history to the table. That means you leave, because dishonest bold faced lies and revisionist history are all you ever spout….because you are a dishonest liar and blatant consistent racist….and a sexist.

LBGTOW (little boys going their own way)….that describes you people well, we wish you would follow through. Go on now…shoo. Go your own way, buy your own country and go there. See for yourself just where unopposed right wing nonsense leads, just leave the US out of it. Ask Musk to forget Twitter and buy Guatemala or an island nation, invite Trump to lead for life, then GO! You have so many issues with other people having rights, so GTFO and create your own white male controlled, white right wing utopia…or move to Russia….but don’t expect to get to come back when it devolves into criminal despotism, economic collapse, and ecological disaster.

bobknight33 said:

If it is a CRT is another red herring than you have nothing to worry about. Let it be banned in schools and in you mind then nothing would be banned.

No one wants to ban the teaching of slavery or Jim Crow.

Why would any Republican want to ban the teaching this side of the Democrat party?

Quit bringing false arguments to the table.

The dangers of a Russian energy superpower

vil says...

Newt has it researched as usual, some minor points:
- Ukraine is in the UN
- Ukraine in its pre war state could not get into the EU, there are economic criteria for that to have a chance to work. What was proposed was a free trade zone and economic help. The EU was slow as fuck. The Ukrainian political situation was volatile.
- Ukraine could not be admitted into NATO after 2014 as it was already in a proxy war against Russia.

What a US president with a brain could have done in Trumps term was broker a deal with Putin that would make land concessions to Russia (russian speaking regions based on referendums maybe?) in exchange for future EU and NATO affiliation for the rest of Ukraine with vague promises of weapon and troop movement limitations. Nearly impossible but it could be tried if one stayed a step ahead of Putin.

Trump patted him on the back instead and took selfies.

Anonymous message to Vladimir Putin

BSR says...

Hero hackers claim to have breached Belarusian weapons firm

The international hacker collective Anonymous appears to have made good on its declaration of cyberwar against Russia and its allies, apparently exposing 200GB of emails from Belarusian weapons manufacturer Tetraedr.

Anonymous breached the firm’s defenses and released the most recent 1,000 emails from inboxes belonging to Tetraedr employees, passing them over in .EML format to the information transparency platform DDoSecrets. It also made public a complete archive of each inbox in .PST format, though the hackers noted that some files may have been corrupted by the export process.

Tetraedr is a private company founded in 2001 that specializes in making advanced radio-electronic weapons systems. It is based in Belarus, which has provided Vladimir Putin with logistical support in his invasion of Ukraine. Its dictatorial leader, Alexandr Lukashenko, has long been regarded as a puppet of Putin.

“Greetings, citizens of the world,” announced Anonymous in a statement on DDoSecrets, a non-profit whistleblower site set up in 2018. “We are the PWN-Bar Hack Team, we stand for equal opportunity pwnage and unrestricted access to information.”

https://cybernews.com/news/hero-hackers-claim-to-have-breached-belarusian-weapons-firm/

Americans Tell NBC, “Blown Away” By Bidenflation,

newtboy says...

I do….and I can list reasons why I think what I think, unlike yourself who is embarrassed to admit you never actually think yourself and all your arguments come from disgraced and debunked liars who’s jobs are to lie, almost exclusively when it comes to any political topic.

The ship only turns so fast. It needed SO much correction on SO many issues because the last demander in chief refused to steer the nation anywhere but into a reef for the last entire year of his term….the last 3 months totally intentionally while he drilled holes in the keel and cut holes in the sails.

The nation certainly needed serious and immediate correction. Glad to hear you admit it, even accidentally.
You’re complaining about more spending!? You must be joking! Compared to spendthrift Trump, he’s a fucking miser. Every major project he’s put forward has been paid for in the bill, not so with the last administration that thought they couldn’t overspend because they can print more money….the biggest deficit and fastest debt rise (both by dollar and percentage) EVER by a mile. And put us in a recession with high inflation, negative GDP, outrageous unemployment, and near a million dead for the privilege. Joe invested in American infrastructure. Complaining about spending will not be tolerated from you after supporting Trump. Not for a second, you unbelievable hypocrite.

He did many things, leading to a healthy economy and amazing jobs numbers and rising wages among other improvements. All work against inflation.

But you like to say he’s done nothing, so how’s 4 examples on the Afghanistan disaster alone work for you?
He negotiated 6 more months to be gone.
He evacuated any and all Americans that wanted out, including those that waited until the last day.
He set up and staffed new systems (granted too little and late) to assist Afghans that worked for us in getting at least refugee status if not visas. This should have been step 1 in February 2020….likely a big surprise to find nothing started or planned when Joe took office.
He pulled out billions worth of functioning, still owned by America weaponry (what you love to whine about is the weapons in Afghani’s hands, and decommissioned often scuttled vehicles we abandoned….yes, a waste) that before he took office were being left in country.
Simply put, he made a plan and implemented it, can’t say the same for his predecessor. It wasn’t perfect, but it was something….which is a massive improvement.

He’s a mile above the low bar set by your idol, who spent nearly a full 1/3 of his presidency off playing golf (after promising not to play at all), and >1/2 of every day on personal executive time eating junk food and watching TV (but only ever taking softball questions from far right outlets, refusing any non right wing reporters a question much less interview). The remaining 1/6 was largely filled with rage tweeting and executive toilet time (pooping or shredding, you choose).

Your position is old, dementia ridden, no leadership, no question taking, slow, incapable of speaking or thinking, doesn’t know who or where he is Joe kicked fat lazy dumb Don’s ass without even holding rallies, did it in his pjs without breaking a sweat or raising his voice. Odd you love to constantly degrade the guy who’s by every measure head and shoulders above your messiah and proved it by a historic landslide. Seems you wouldn’t want to keep putting Trump down as a massive total loser to such a sad, weak, incompetent opponent, but you gotta be you.

bobknight33 said:

If you think this is Trumps fault, think what you want?

But
This is on Biden, commander in chief. It is his job to steer the ship. To correct the direction of the nation.
What has he done to correct this? NOTHING, except more spending , making this worse.

Biden use by date has long expired. He has no leadership ability, He cant take questions He is kept from media and public for fear on looking tool old and too slow and unable to speak intellectually. His days are in the past.

Report” Blames Biden Administration For Chaotic Withdrawal

newtboy says...

So easy to make baseless, fact free opinion only statements, isn’t it?

You might try adult conversation wherein you are expected to back up opinion with facts. Try something new.

It’s true, the withdrawal plan is on Biden, because Trump did not have one at all.


The withdrawal, and the issues with the Taliban taking the billions in weapons we had given the Afghans are 100% on Trump, however. He negotiated the withdrawal with the Taliban after releasing them from prison. They instantly started attacking Afghan targets and Trump gave the Afghans, our allies, zero assistance….then blamed Biden for his mess and losses.
Can you explain why Trump apparently gave up and surrendered unconditionally to the Taliban in 2020? Can you explain not involving the Afghans or our military in his negotiations? Can you even explain setting the enemy free from prison, no strings attached?

The last 4 + months of his presidency, Trump forgot about policies because every waking moment was spent fomenting and perpetrating the big lie, knowing he would lose the election and a coup was his only shot at retaining the power to hide his crimes and debts.

Biden won. Trump isn’t president. No one expected him to be able to put out every dumpster fire Trump left him, he only had to get Trump out. Success. Winner.

Such a sad little man, bob. Defending a failed anti American wannabe dictator for a plan he never had for the withdrawal he negotiated. Why? Dictator Don failed….over and over and over and over and over…….thank goodness. Failure. Loser.

bobknight33 said:

The withdraw plan is on Biden.
Sleepy Joe failed.

bobknight33 (Member Profile)

newtboy says...

What did I tell you!?! States rights! Suckers! Bwaaaahahahahaha!

“I am outraged by yesterday’s U.S. Supreme Court decision allowing Texas’s ban on most abortion services to remain in place,” Newsom said. “But if states can now shield their laws from review by the federal courts that compare assault weapons to Swiss Army knives, then California will use that authority to protect people’s lives, where Texas used it to put women in harm’s way.” Newsom said he will work with his staff, the Legislature and California Attorney General Rob Bonta to craft a bill that would let citizens sue anyone who “manufactures, distributes, or sells an assault weapon or ghost gun kit or parts” in California. They could seek damages of at least $10,000 per violation plus costs and attorney’s fees, Newsom said.

Read more at: https://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article256524466.html#storylink=cpy

I told you this would happen.

BTW, the Presidential coup Plan PowerPoint handed over by Meadows pretty much obliterated the lies that 1) it wasn’t an attempted coup 2) it wasn’t expected 3) it wasn’t planned 4) it wasn’t Trump supporters being violent and 5) the white house wasn’t directly involved.
Contemporaneous records of the planning, including texts to organizers and militias claiming that the national guard is poised to protect Trump rioters from arrest or attack….as if any non cultist needed more evidence beyond the live broadcast of the coup attempt, but now there’s publicly available physical documentation/evidence directly from the highest levels in Trump’s cabinet of their own direct involvement in the planning to overturn the certified election by fraud and force.….which I’m certain you will dismiss as fake news with no hint of evidence because your little brain can’t handle facts.

the PowerPoint laid out a plan to effectively use the military to steal the election outright, undeniably. That’s treason.

The plan was to use the military, specifically the national guard, declare a state of emergency, throw out most of the ballots from the 2020 election, and then have the national guard run by people that Trump handpicked himself count only the paper ballots that they deemed to be legitimate. essentially giving them a free ride to throw out any ballots that were for Biden. Only count the ones for Trump and boom, Donald Trump gets all the electoral votes. That's how the coup was supposed to happen. So again, these lawmakers were briefed on this two days before the capital riot. So they knew exactly what Donald Trump was trying to do, what his administration, what his friends, what his allies had suggested to him. There is no indication at all that one of these lawmakers alerted the department of justice, the FBI, local authorities, anyone, they had this information and they did nothing with it.

Any official who knew and didn’t report to the FBI or DOJ should be removed immediately, get the firing squad, and their entire estate (and their spouses estate, and minor children’s estates) seized. That’s a lot of Republicans.

Also, Fox hosts, the same ones who now claim Jan 6 was a peaceful picnic, families calmly touring congress, and it was BLM and ANTIFA and the FBI that perpetrated the violence that didn’t happen, were all frantically trying to reach the president to stop the attack on January 6, outraged he wouldn’t tell his supporters to stop attacking America, explaining how not acting to stop the coup was destroying his legacy and theirs.

Let's talk about altering the Supreme Court....

newtboy says...

Democrats are denied even a hearing for even their centrist picks (Garland) outrageously unconstitutionally, then Republicans pick FAR RIGHT politicos to replace moderate leftist judges. That was new, never before seen in our history.
Sotomayor and Karen are centrists, dumb shit. Kavenaugh and Barrett are extremist far right wingers….Barrett is barely even a judge, rushed in by a lame duck traitorous seditionist and his lackeys, directly contradicting their own excuse for not hearing Obama’s nomination. They actually admitted they rammed her through as fast as possible with the barest minimum of examination in order to pack the court in anticipation of them contesting the election results….admitted it before the election.
Kavenaugh and Barrett are both extremist Far right wingers, political activist judges, who lied in their confirmation, one is a multiple rapist, never investigated, the other a religious extremist with zero experience who said she would recuse herself on any issue of faith, but hasn’t recused herself from any.
Throw down the gauntlet?! Opposition to his nomination centered on his perceived willingness to roll back the civil rights rulings of the Warren and Burger courts, and his role in the Saturday Night Massacre during the Watergate scandal. On October 23, 1987, the Senate rejected Robert Bork's nomination to the Supreme Court by a roll call vote of 42—58. Bork's margin of rejection by the Senate remains, by percentage, the third-largest on record and broke a 142-year record for largest defeat of a Supreme Court nomination. A historic immediate bipartisan rejection because he was totally unsuited, and had undeniably tried to help Nixon cover up Watergate as acting AG by firing the special prosecutor at Nixon’s direction (the AG and deputy AG had quit when Nixon insisted)….*.
Absolutely nothing similar to Obama being denied a hearing for his picks for a year until his term ended….*. Holy shit! What stupidity.

There are far fewer “conservatives” today, the Republican Party is 26% of the population, not a majority.

Yes, they are throwing cases to the packed court as fast as possible before their stolen majority evaporates. I support a 15 justice Supreme Court with a constitutional amendment halting any further additions without a 2/3 majority….add 6 hyper liberals…no judicial experience necessary or even preferred…AOC would be great.

Why bring a case you might lose? Because cases are supposed to be heard on their merits, not based on political affiliation you ignorant cow. You think the Supreme Court should be a political wing of the right, choosing and deciding cases based on political affiliation, not the law, science, common sense, ethics, or precedent….but only when it serves you.

So, gun rights should be up to states? That’s the next step if you win that fight…the constitution dies and states decide everything….as civil war erupts. Great plan, so patriotic. Remember, California is big enough that when they require fingerprint scanners on all guns sold in the state, manufacturers will add them to all guns….when semi auto guns are banned, manufacturers will move to single shot guns….just like auto manufacturers changed their cars to meet our requirements. Is that your plan? Had you even considered what individual states being in control means? It means California becomes the leader of America, controlling the other states by means of our size, wealth, and international clout. Enjoy.

Not like this, it hasn’t. Never in American history has the court been politicized and weaponized against the will of the majority to ignore precedent (contrary to their oaths and confirmation statements) in order to overturn established law and constitutional rights as a political act. Never.

bobknight33 said:

To say that Republicans are politicizing the supreme court is nonsense. Democrats pick left leaning and Republicans pick right leaning. This is not new. Where were your complaints of politicizing when Sotomayor or Kagen were appointed?

But if you want to go there it started with Senator Ted Kennedy within minutes of Bork being picked by POTUS Reagen to be appointed took to the floor of the senate and thrown down the gauntlet.


They may be lean more conservative today however Its been leaning left last 50 years.

The fact that cases are now before the court is because some conservatives feel there is a chance to have their cases win.

Why bring these case before the supreme court if you know you would have a high likely to loose. All the cost time and effort.


WRT to the abortion issue .If overturned it just means that the decision goes back to the states.


Overturning a previous opinions has occurred and will occur in the future .

Can Spinlaunch throw rockets into space?

newtboy says...

At those g forces, with few exceptions, it seems it would be useless to launch most satellites, and it’s definitely not for live cargo.
It would be great on the moon….as a super weapon to blackmail earth with. It could launch all the rocks the Moon Master desires at any earth target….like a moon mortar with unlimited ammo.

KrazyKat42 said:

I was thinking the same thing.
But I do agree with him that it would be great on the Moon.

RITTENHOUSE, Law, Verdict

vil says...

Yes, that is what I meant, as soon as he was approaching with an openly carried gun, wild west rules as I understand them say the moment he attempts to aim at anyone he is open game for anyone who can draw faster.

If you desperately want to live in the wild west that is.

I am totally lost on whether I should be using the sarcasm button on these posts. I am being sarcastic. I believe some form of gun limiting federal law is the only way out of this mess. But then the sarcasm does not make my claim invalid.

I knew an american who came to Prague (turns out he is still here and is still a film producer) who would carry his gun around all the time and randomly pull it out and show it to people at business meetings and in pubs. I thought at the time (early 90s) dude this is SO embarassing. Regular manners in a civilized society since roman times dictate that people do not carry weapons unless danger is imminent. You only carry weapons if you are directly employed to be in dangerous situations, otherwise you are putting yourself and others in danger and appear to be a reckless fool.

So if the USofA consider themselves the wild west to this day, then it is understandable that Kyle was let go, and I say disarm him or shoot him before he shoots you.

Hit him with that skateboard, only harder!

JiggaJonson said:

But what if he was coming towards me with a gun?

bobknight33 (Member Profile)

JiggaJonson says...

That's not what happened according to Rottenhouse on the stand. According to him, he was a threat when his hands were up, which is when he decided to fire.

Not to mention, in an open carry state, it seems incumbent on the public to accept that someone running towards you with and open carry weapon is not a threat the same way it would be in a concealed carry state.

He's not "running at me with a gun" he's "running at me" since he's got the right to do that with or without a gun in Wisconsin. If what you said was true, anyone running in my direction with a gun is a deadly and -this is important- imminent, threat.

bobknight33 said:

Man chased kid, kid falls , His gun faces the guy, he puts his hands up, kid does not fire.

Guy then steps forward and points gun at kid, kid fires.
Kid showed great restraint and defends himself.

Just like Jacob Blake they all received just reactions.

Even Federal prosecutors announced that they won't file charges against a the police officer who shot Jacob Blake in Wisconsin last year

Kyle Rittenhouse Trial Week 1 Summary

newtboy says...

No, he put himself in harms way by crossing state lines and playing cop and being violently aggressive and threatening towards the “thug”, following him, threatening him, brandishing rifles and pointing them at him…”thugs” an odd thing to call them since he was definitely being intentionally thuggish himself. He went there to play dirty cop with a rifle.

I’m upset because he travelled with weapons he couldn’t legally have in order to intentionally hunt the unarmed person he then murdered (or some other person, I don’t think it was personal), and is claiming he’s the victim.

No, I think all people with functioning brains want him to have never gone to another state to play thuggish untrained cop looking for targets to exercise his non existent authority over with illegal deadly weapons he’s not trained to properly use, because someone getting shot unnecessarily is an easily foreseeable consequence of doing that.

bobknight33 said:

He was put into harms way the the thugs.

You just upset because he defended himself.

Guess you wanted him to be beaten to a pulp.

Kyle Rittenhouse Trial Week 1 Summary

newtboy says...

Nice, way to not answer the question, as usual. Instead you pretend Rosenbalm followed and menaced Rittenhouse, even though every shred of evidence including the location of the shooting and statement from Rittenhouse say the opposite. It’s ok, we know you think it’s ok to hunt certain groups of people. You don’t have to say it publicly.

Rittenhouse first chased/followed him for blocks from the parking lot he “guarded”, armed, brandishing his weapon and pointing it at Rosenbaum. When Rosenbaum stopped retreating, Rittenhouse shot him in the head.

In his testimony, McGinniss said that as Rosenbaum lunged, Rittenhouse “kind of dodged around” with his weapon and then leveled the gun and fired.

Binger repeatedly tried to get McGinniss to say Rosenbaum was not “lunging” but “falling” when he was shot, as McGinniss said in a media interview days after the shooting,
McGinniss said: “He was lunging, falling. I would use those as synonymous terms in this situation because basically, you know, he threw his momentum towards the weapon.”
So, his unbiased testimony is the unarmed victim was lunging for the weapon after being shot in the head….not falling….or they’re the same thing.

bobknight33 said:

Lets see,
This guy got shot when he pointed his gut at Rit

1 guy got shot after hitting him with skateboard and tried to pull the guy away
The other guy said to Rit and his fried that he was going to kill them earlier. When he had the opportunity he chased Rit down and Rit defended himself.

Kyle Rittenhouse Trial Week 1 Summary

newtboy says...

So, Bob. What about the victim’s right to defend themself from an armed aggressor who had followed them for blocks and was confronting him with weapon cocked and at the ready? He should have shot Rittenhouse in the head when he allegedly pointed, but didn’t shoot his gun, right? That would have solved everything, no charges to be brought, no lawsuit for pedonazi’s parents, no harm, no foul, right? Pure self defense, not even a need to report it, right?

Rittenhouse hunted him for blocks. Chasing him down with an assault rifle as the victim retreated. Then murdered him when he stopped running away. Just want it on the record, you think that’s fine, as is shooting anyone who tries to stop you from leaving the scene of a murder you just committed. Go on. Say it. It’s fine to hunt and kill people you don’t like.
Now…is it fine if the shooter is black and the victim is a baby faced white Republican boy? Pretty sure I know the real answer already.

Trumpist crowds are dangerous and criminal. If they need to get shot up by liberals who get scared by their aggressiveness….. self defense! Aim for the head, guys, and claim you tried a non deadly area to shoot. There’s nothing up there to hurt.

bobknight33 said:

@JiggaJohnson
@bcglorg

Prosecution's Main Witness ( victim) Admits Kyle Rittenhouse Acted in Self-Defense




Having a illegally owned a gun and self defense are 2 different crimes

as else mentioned" Evidence wise though, it looks like self defense, after breaking many laws and putting himself in harms way, is still factually part of the night.
"

Let's talk about people defeating the Texas tip website....

newtboy says...

I love the idea, echoed by the Supreme Court, that if this methodology is found to be legal, there’s nothing at all stopping states from using it to outlaw things protected by the constitution, like arms, religions, hate speech, anything the state legislature decides is unwanted, and using cash prizes to incentivize citizens into enforcing them. One can only hope Republicans see the truth in that prognostication and quickly move to make these laws constitutionally invalid….otherwise these laws will quickly invalidate the constitution.

Edit: If California decides the bounty on anyone owning an “assault style weapon” is $1000000, what’s to stop them? What’s to stop Austonians and Houstonians voting for the same thing in Texas? Suddenly it doesn’t sound like such a great idea…..right? Republicans only love the constitution when it’s convenient….so we have to make it convenient (or make end running around it unthinkable).

Taiwan: Last Week Tonight with John Oliver (HBO)

StukaFox says...

I don't know, but there's a few things that concern me:

1. Underestimating your advisory. We did this with Japan in the lead up to WW2. Great powers always fight the last war they won. In our case, that's WW2. China learned from the war they lost as well: WW2, and they're not going to make the same mistakes twice.

2. Ambiguous defense posture. This is how England got dragged into WW1 due to an uncertain position if Germany invaded France. Germany gambled that England wouldn't get involved because it had no spoken mutual defense agreement with France. Had the defense pact been made readily clear, it's possible Germany wouldn't have invaded.

2. Use it or lose it weapons. In WW1, one of the main issues with the initial invasion was train schedules. Things had to go perfectly to get men and material to the front line and any hiccup could delay a military victory. Once the very first German troop train left the station, there was no way to stop the invasion. Now we've got a situation where a war over Taiwan would be won or lost in about an hour of the first shot. China knows that should the US get involved, China's military assets are going to be blown up and fast. This puts China in a situation where they might choose the launch everything in a maximum impact first strike. Faced with overwhelming damage, the US would be forced to make some hard choices about how to respond. Would it go nuclear? It's according to how much Taiwan means to us.

"It won't happen". Go to Europe and see how many tombstones bear that inscription.

I'd say 50/50.

bobknight33 said:

🦇

What % do yo think China will invade Taiwan under this administration?

60% chance?



Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

Beggar's Canyon