Discussion in 'Political Opinions & Beliefs' started by Dayton3, Dec 10, 2017.
Thanks. I'll take it.
You don't need to be president to do that.
Ending the Federal Reserve and switching from Federal Reserve notes to Debt free US Treasury notes is the key which will make all of the other goals possible. Our economy now is run like a horse racing track. An entity that contributes nothing rakes 20%-30% off the top. Get rid of that entity and we will thrive.
I've heard of this idea before. Can you refer me to sources that would allow me to investigate the idea further. ?
You can google a series of articles and essays called: The History Of Money or there is a great Documentary Movie produced and directed by the late great Aaron Russo called “America, Freedom To Fascism” which can be watched for free on YouTube.
Most so called "Christians" act very un-christ like. I have no faith in your agenda.
If I were prez I wouldn't give the Medal of Freedom to one of the most corrupt AG's the country has ever had.
Highlights Of Meese’s Legal Problems
2 MEESE AIDES RESIGN AFTER URGING OUSTER
I don't agree with #2
ILLEGAL is ILLEGAL so that number should be ZERO
I bolded all the stuff that costs money. You want to eliminate the 1.1 trillion dollars in federal deficit by decreasing federal spending in some ways and increasing it in a bunch of others. You want to try to get 5.2% GDP growth when at the same time you want to reduce immigration, our population growth is declining and we have an aging population. You list a whole bunch of policies but don't really show how they are going to produce this amazing growth. Even Trump with all his policies is only managing 2.2% growth this year, basically on par with Obama's second term. You also don't mention any tax cuts. Republicans usually use tax cuts to achieve high economic growth, but they also increase the deficit.
I suggest you start with just one thing and give a real workable plan backed by some numbers. That will do a whole lot more than a bunch of daydreaming.
Yes ... just as we are deterred .. what you want to do is remove some of the safeguards maintain deterrence ... on both sides - and ramp up the arms race.
There is nothing stopping putting nukes in low earth orbit ... they would not all be above the US at the same time but - if you put enough up there ... many would be over the US at any given time .... mere minutes away.
and easily destroyed with conventional anti satellite weapons. and I really doubt the ability of the Russians or Chinese to afford putting thousand or even hundreds of nuclear warheads in low Earth orbit. Not to mention that objects in low Earth orbit often fall to Earth and are destroyed in the atmosphere. I doubt either the Russians or Chinese would risk a substantial part of their nuclear arsenals turning into meteors.
Any satellite weapons can be destroyed with anti satellite weapons. Regardless - your suggestion that we start blowing things up in space would turn space into junk zone - confining us to earth as it would be too dangerous to go up there.
Russia/China will do what it takes to restabilize nuclear detente - should the idiots in the Trump administration continue trying to destabilize it.
This list of pipe dream is why you would never become president.
What makes you think the Russians and Chinese are not trying to "destabilize" what you call the "nuclear détente" already?
They aren't researching hypersonic boost glide weapons for nothing you know.
They were forced take counter measures in response to Bush destabilizing nuclear detente ... such weapons are part of those counter measures.
I wouldn't call building 40 or so ABMs "destabilizing nuclear détente".
What makes you think we have a "nuclear détente" in the first place?
It doesn't matter what you think - It matters what the Russians think. If Russia was to put ABMs on US borders .. the childbirth like screams from the Pentagon would be heard around the world...
The whole point of the ABM treaty was so that one nation would not get the hair brained idea that they could strike first and when the missiles were fired back they would be shot down.
Only someone who is doesn't know History does not realize that nuclear detente has been in place for many decades.
I think calling an armed standoff "détente" stretches the meaning of the word.
This conversation is stretching my patience...
The thing is Giftedone, I don't see any "behavior" on the part of the Russians and Chinese as being because they know they have an effective nuclear arsenal.
I'm not asking for you to agree with me. You trust the Russians, Chinese and something you called "nuclear détente".
I trust thousands of American ABMs.
I don't trust either the Russians or the Chinese - which is why we should not be forcing them to make better weapons - while making the world a more dangerous place at the same time - moving us towards weaponization of space.
Your trust in 1000s of ABMs (which we don't have and the one's we do have don't work well against Ballistic missiles - never mind the new stuff) misplaced or otherwise - is making the world a much less safe place.
If the OP were President we'd be even more screwed that we are
Most missiles don't work well. That is the reason you launch four or five at each target.
ABM's work best during the boost phase The ABM's must be close to Russia for a boost phase attempt - and these will be taken out prior to launch by nuclear cruise missiles - so these are pointless. Midcourse - they don't work very well - even testing under perfect conditions - which do not at all mirror the actual threat.
They don't work at all against cruise missiles or sub launched missiles ... or underwater doomsday Tidal wave weapons. ... or Biological weapons.
Ramping up the arms race - and making the world less secure in the process - on the basis of a fantasy of security - is dangerously irrational.
Just a few nukes hitting the US - along with taking out our communications in space - and some EMP blasts - would be devastating.
Give up on this fantasy. We can never be secure against the threat of annihilation from Russia in our lifetime .. so we might as well get used to it and try and ramp down the arms race instead of ramping up.
And you’d get none of that accomplished if you had opposing Congress.
POTUS is not a king.
Separate names with a comma.