Liberals: Trump Is Going To Nuke Europe, World War 3 is Coming!!!

[TheStruggle]

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...ear-weapons-in-attack-on-europe-a6961101.html


CM: “Because of the old mutually assured destruction, which Reagan hated and tried to get rid of.”

DT: “I was against Iraq, I would be the last one to use the nuclear weapons because that’s sort of like the end of the ball game.”

CM: “Can you tell the Middle East we’re not using nuclear weapons?”

DT: “I would never say that. I would never take any of my cards off the table.”

CM: “How about Europe? We won’t use in Europe?”

DT: “I’m not going to take it off the table for anybody.”

CM: “You’re going to use it in Europe?”

DT: “No! I don’t think so. But…”

CM: “Just say it, say ‘I’m not going to use a nuclear weapon in Europe’.”

DT: “I am not taking cards off the table. I’m not going to use nukes – but I’m not taking any cards off the table.”

CM: “The trouble is, the sane people hear you, and the insane people are not affected by your threats. The real fanatics say good, keep it up.”

DT: “I think they are more affected than you think.”

 

[IDL]

He.. Must.. Be.. Stopped..

Before it's too late

 

[Bloody Pulp]

Cause if he said "i'll never use nukes" that would totally put this whole thing to bed and we wouldn't have to worry about it ever again.

 

[ShadowRun]

He must say it if he does this proves he wouldn't ! we need to feel good from words instead of actions it is vital.

 

[IDL]

Cause if he said "i'll never use nukes" that would totally put this whole thing to bed and we wouldn't have to worry about it ever again.

That would be a dumb thing to say. If the US was attacked with Nukes he wouldn't use them back?

Nukes are strategic mostly because of the threat of them, more than the use of them. Take the threat off the table and the strategic benefit is gone.

Of course, regardless of what Trump could say on the subject they will always remain 'on the table'. It's a pointless conversation.

 

[sloppypie]

lol, what's funny is matthew's questions were really shitty and stupid. using nukes in europe, the fuck is he talking about? is he talking about nuking east europe maybe if they fall under russian control? putting nukes back in europe as a red line deterrent to russian aggression?

it's almost like matthews really studied and anticipated trump's evasiveness and just caught him in being evasive, again, on a ridiculous position where there's no reason to be evasive like the david duke KKK thing.

it's the first time i've seen trump rattled in an interview. matthews really got to him.

 

[Fawlty]

Trump's line on nukes is essentially the same as every recent president, so what he said in the interview shouldn't be controversial. The question is whether Trump has good enough judgment to make the decision about whether to use them, and that answer should be a resounding FUCK NO.

 

[m52nickerson]

Matthews was trying to put words in Trumps mouth the entire interview. I don't support Trump, but even I wished he would have slapped Matthews and said "Stop interrupting me and I will explain my position."

 

[AnGrYcRoW]

Trump's line on nukes is essentially the same as every recent president, so what he said in the interview shouldn't be controversial. The question is whether Trump has good enough judgment to make the decision about whether to use them, and that answer should be a resounding FUCK NO.

Except the part about wanting the house of Saud , S Korea and Japan to have Nukes , non proliferation has been a corner stone of US foreign policy for 70 years , idiotic and ill thought out position, the guy is just winging it and just flailing about wildly now.

 

[TheStruggle]

I have a hardcore liberal friend who is now convinced Trump will start World War 3 and kill us all but if I tell him bringing 65K people from Syria is a bad idea, he tells me i'm buying into fear and ignorance.

 

[Tekk]

I wished he would have slapped Matthews and said "Stop interrupting me and I will explain my position."

The problem is Trump never explains his position.. Its always some vague answer, no details and then a deflection.

 

[Gutter Chris]

I have a hardcore liberal friend who is now convinced Trump will start World War 3 and kill us all but if I tell him bringing 65K people from Syria is a bad idea, he tells me i'm buying into fear and ignorance.

Should tell your friend hilldo as never met a war she didnt like and see how he contorts himself on answering that.

Both of these candidates completely suck and were screwed

 

[Fawlty]

Except the part about wanting the house of Saud , S Korea and Japan to have Nukes , non proliferation has been a corner stone of US foreign policy for 70 years , idiotic and ill thought out position, the guy is just winging it and just flailing about wildly now.

He is double talking and making completely nonsensical points on that subject, so I'm not gonna try to figure out what he means (I suspect he simply isn't knowledgeable enough to have formed an opinion there, other than "ally good, nuke okay"). But that is probably another hit against his judgment- he should be able to judge that specific issue, of nuclear proliferation, without sounding like an idiot.

 

[TheStruggle]

Should tell your friend hilldo as never met a war she didnt like and see how he contorts himself on answering that.

Both of these candidates completely suck and were screwed

Yep, two untrustable candidates...this is what America has come to

 

[Thames]

Meh, very poorly executed interview.
I fail to see the issue here. He's basically just saying "I don't know what will happen in the future. So I'm leaving all options open".

And who knows, we might get a new Hitler soon.

I mean, it would be the easiest thing in the world to bitchslap Trump around on policy issues, which is why I will never expect him to sign on to an interview with a competent journalist. Trump is spectacularly ignorant on pretty much every single policy issue. But this interview just forced a lame "gotcha" moment.

 

[Bloody Pulp]

That would be a dumb thing to say. If the US was attacked with Nukes he wouldn't use them back?

Nukes are strategic mostly because of the threat of them, more than the use of them. Take the threat off the table and the strategic benefit is gone.

Of course, regardless what Trump could say on the subject they will always remain 'on the table'. It's a pointless conversation.

It would also be dumb to say because anyone with any sense would know it's not true, as you said. Even if he said he wouldn't ever use them, if we got nuked by Best Korea you can be sure they would get melted in return. it's a silly question to try to insist on someone answering.

Reminded me of Wolf Blitzer feeling as though he needed to make Trump explicitly say that he doesn't agree with David Duke and he doesn't want the endorsement of neo nazis. Both fall into the "well ****ing duh" category of asinine questions. Not only because the questions themselves are retarded but because, as we know, Trump saying he didn't want Duke's support and doesn't like neo nazi's etc hasn't stopped him from being pinned as a bigot and racist even though he "said the right thing"

 

[Bloody Pulp]

I don't even consider myself a Trump supporter but the unabashed douchebaggery of the media around him is annoying as all hell.

 

[FinalFight]

Yeesh. Trump is really making a mockery of Americans right now. What a freak show.

 

[AnGrYcRoW]

He is double talking and making completely nonsensical points on that subject, so I'm not gonna try to figure out what he means (I suspect he simply isn't knowledgeable enough to have formed an opinion there, other than "ally good, nuke okay"). But that is probably another hit against his judgment- he should be able to judge that specific issue, of nuclear proliferation, without sounding like an idiot.

It almost like he was completely unprepared for questions about abortion and nuclear weapons. ... bizarre really

 

[Byron Carter]

He answered the questions clearly and perfectly in regards to nuclear weapons.

Listen. No one wants to use the nuke.

But much like a police officer doesn't want to shoot any women or children, you can't say "I will never shoot a woman or child."

There are horrible situations that arise sometimes. Children with suicide vests, or carrying a grenade running at you - like my own grandfather witnessed in Vietnam.