RugbyRebels

morepork wrote:It's like a special needs individual attempting to commit a burglary with flour, melted chocolate and their own semen on their hands, yet the authorities seem incapable of connecting the dots.

WaspInWales wrote:Tbh, what do these US/SK drills achieve that the previous one failed to achieve?

How many times can they fire a weapon or explode something and learn something new?

It's clearly provocation designed to let NK know that their neighbour has a powerful ally.

Surely in the current, or recent climate of improved diplomacy, someone would've had the common sense to cancel any more war games?!?

It’s a bit like asking why your company has a fire drill every six months, as everyone still knows what the alarm sounds like and where to stand in the car park after the one they had in 1997.

Stones of granite wrote:

WaspInWales wrote:Tbh, what do these US/SK drills achieve that the previous one failed to achieve?

How many times can they fire a weapon or explode something and learn something new?

It's clearly provocation designed to let NK know that their neighbour has a powerful ally.

Surely in the current, or recent climate of improved diplomacy, someone would've had the common sense to cancel any more war games?!?

It’s a bit like asking why your company has a fire drill every six months, as everyone still knows what the alarm sounds like and where to stand in the car park after the one they had in 1997.

And even then people can get confused whether they're supposed to evacuate or invacuate

Stones of granite wrote:

WaspInWales wrote:Tbh, what do these US/SK drills achieve that the previous one failed to achieve?

How many times can they fire a weapon or explode something and learn something new?

It's clearly provocation designed to let NK know that their neighbour has a powerful ally.

Surely in the current, or recent climate of improved diplomacy, someone would've had the common sense to cancel any more war games?!?

It’s a bit like asking why your company has a fire drill every six months, as everyone still knows what the alarm sounds like and where to stand in the car park after the one they had in 1997.

Really?

Digby wrote:And even then people can get confused whether they're supposed to evacuate or invacuate

Good point.

Let the war games commence.

Ok, so the US and SK will be the goodies and NK are the baddies. We're just going to simulate what might happen if a war starts. Seems straightforward enough.

The fact that this has been done a dozen or so times already, and many different annual simulations have been conducted many, many, many times before only proves the US and SK want to stay sharp in order to counter the threat from NK.

What utter bollocks.

You'd think that in thawing relations, there would be a thaw in behaviour.

Now Trump will accuse NK of reneging, or backing out at the same time as preparing and undertaking a hostile training exercise.

Again, utter bollocks.

How does he continue to get away with attacking political opponents like this:



In some circumstances and places, just posting crap/rumour/lies about someone online could land a person in trouble, but here we have the POTUS publicly trying to shame an opponent by suggesting they don't care about key issues, but that's ok.

I know the first amendment is pretty hallow in the US, but I thought that false statements and such that could cause harm to reputations of an individual or business are not covered by constitutional free speech, so I'm just amazed he can continue to do this.

WaspInWales wrote:

Stones of granite wrote:

WaspInWales wrote:Tbh, what do these US/SK drills achieve that the previous one failed to achieve?

How many times can they fire a weapon or explode something and learn something new?

It's clearly provocation designed to let NK know that their neighbour has a powerful ally.

Surely in the current, or recent climate of improved diplomacy, someone would've had the common sense to cancel any more war games?!?

It’s a bit like asking why your company has a fire drill every six months, as everyone still knows what the alarm sounds like and where to stand in the car park after the one they had in 1997.

Really?

Digby wrote:And even then people can get confused whether they're supposed to evacuate or invacuate

Good point.

Let the war games commence.

Ok, so the US and SK will be the goodies and NK are the baddies. We're just going to simulate what might happen if a war starts. Seems straightforward enough.

The fact that this has been done a dozen or so times already, and many different annual simulations have been conducted many, many, many times before only proves the US and SK want to stay sharp in order to counter the threat from NK.

What utter bollocks.

You'd think that in thawing relations, there would be a thaw in behaviour.

Now Trump will accuse NK of reneging, or backing out at the same time as preparing and undertaking a hostile training exercise.

Again, utter bollocks.

I bow to your greater expertise in matters of planning and exercise in complex, joint, inter-organisational context. Here was me foolishly thinking that it would be quite difficult to maintain a capability without regular practice, and it turns out you only have try it once.

Stones of granite wrote:

WaspInWales wrote:

Stones of granite wrote: It’s a bit like asking why your company has a fire drill every six months, as everyone still knows what the alarm sounds like and where to stand in the car park after the one they had in 1997.

Really?

Digby wrote:And even then people can get confused whether they're supposed to evacuate or invacuate

Good point.

Let the war games commence.

Ok, so the US and SK will be the goodies and NK are the baddies. We're just going to simulate what might happen if a war starts. Seems straightforward enough.

The fact that this has been done a dozen or so times already, and many different annual simulations have been conducted many, many, many times before only proves the US and SK want to stay sharp in order to counter the threat from NK.

What utter bollocks.

You'd think that in thawing relations, there would be a thaw in behaviour.

Now Trump will accuse NK of reneging, or backing out at the same time as preparing and undertaking a hostile training exercise.

Again, utter bollocks.

I bow to your greater expertise in matters of planning and exercise in complex, joint, inter-organisational context. Here was me foolishly thinking that it would be quite difficult to maintain a capability without regular practice, and it turns out you only have try it once.

Thank you, unless you're being sarcastic. It may just be too subtle for me.

Of course the military need to train, but I'm just not so sure the frequent joint US-SK exercises are particularly practical. It just seems like posturing and muscle flexing on a grand scale, at the same time as provoking an already delicate hornet's nest.

Now, more than ever, a little common sense would go a long way. We have Trump bigging himself up to the world as the saviour of peace, on the verge of brokering a deal of the likes that no-one has tried before and at the same time, the US seemingly wants to escalate the situation.

WaspInWales wrote:How does he continue to get away with attacking political opponents like this:


In some circumstances and places, just posting crap/rumour/lies about someone online could land a person in trouble, but here we have the POTUS publicly trying to shame an opponent by suggesting they don't care about key issues, but that's ok.

I know the first amendment is pretty hallow in the US, but I thought that false statements and such that could cause harm to reputations of an individual or business are not covered by constitutional free speech, so I'm just amazed he can continue to do this.

Stupidity is his saving grace. The public record resulting from his inane ramblings over the years documents that he is monumentally thick.

The US electorate's defining moment (well, one of the many):


Ok, so the US is going to decimate NK if a deal isn't reached.

Diplomacy 101.

The latest shooting may distract from the latest attack on Planned Parenthood, actually it's even latest shootings.

Perhaps he was hoping early reports would be good?

WaspInWales wrote:

Perhaps he was hoping early reports would be good?

Not sure which is more foolish. Thinking that more guns is the answer to gun crime or thinking that god is the answer to gun crime.

WaspInWales wrote:

Perhaps he was hoping early reports would be good?

Some key words to pick out of that depending on one's view

The Pro Trump view - Donald. J Trump, looking good

The Anti Trump view - Donald. J Trump, not looking good

Trump's view - Donald. J Trump, looking good god

"... beautiful clean coal..."

the rest almost doesn't matter

This motherfucker just does not stop whining. Jesus fucking christ.

#hysteria

#Manthefuckup

#calmyourtits

#lickmysweatyballs

#gasp

You sick bastard.

You're the one with sweaty huevos.. look in the mirror you heathen.

Bolas enormes

Are you two re-enacting a behind-the-scenes encounter between The Donald and Hillary?

I'm not sure... he didn't try to grab me by the p*$$y.