Some people raised issue for proof or to prove if any Chinese App including Tik-Tok can be danger to American or non-Chinese people ? The word danger means mainly passing user's Data to Chinese Government agencies for whatever evil purpose. The Question is how you going to prove ? Ask Chinese Government or Chinese App companies whose survival is dictated by Chinese Government ? No company can protect users info against PRC. You can never find out what happens behind PRC iron curtain. No one outside of China should trust whatever justification is presented from Chinese side. Because there is no truth to it.
Oh! I get it! So we must act because China MIGHT do something we object to! Got it!
I think we should arrest you because you MIGHT rob a bank tomorrow. That will insure our safety from your evil ways.
Trump should be made to produce any evidence he has that these apps pose any danger to America or Americans. So far that evidence consists of two things: 1) American TikTok users humiliated him
2) Trump is using China as a scapegoat and a diversion from his own failures.
If he has anymore evidence then he should present it. But he won't. He can't. Like his smears against Huawei, he has no facts. He has no evidence. Just hate.
There was time before George Bush that America could trust their presidents and have faith in their word. No longer.
It's interesting that you haven't named, nor implied, a President whom you could trust with their word.
You did not understand what presidents mean?
George's statement was nonsensical, so I noted that he gave no indication of any specific President that he could have "faith in their word".
Myself, I continue to have complete faith in President Jimmy Carter's word, based on his life's work and history.
Trump should be made to produce any evidence he has that these apps pose any danger to America or Americans. So far that evidence consists of two things: 1) American TikTok users humiliated him
2) Trump is using China as a scapegoat and a diversion from his own failures.
If he has anymore evidence then he should present it. But he won't. He can't. Like his smears against Huawei, he has no facts. He has no evidence. Just hate.
There was time before George Bush that America could trust their presidents and have faith in their word. No longer.
It's interesting that you haven't named, nor implied, a President whom you could trust with their word.
You did not understand what presidents mean?
George's statement was nonsensical, so I noted that he gave no indication of any specific President that he could have "faith in their word".
Myself, I continue to have complete faith in President Jimmy Carter's word, based on his life's work and history.
Nonsensical? Only to a crazed Trumper!
What a fucking cryptic, moronic, nonsensical, statement you made that you can't even figure out, or state, which President(s) you "have faith in their word".
For starters, there were two George Bush's that were President. Presumably you were aware of that when you made the statement.
I'd guess Nixon is the President you could "have faith in their word".
Trump should be made to produce any evidence he has that these apps pose any danger to America or Americans. So far that evidence consists of two things: 1) American TikTok users humiliated him
2) Trump is using China as a scapegoat and a diversion from his own failures.
If he has anymore evidence then he should present it. But he won't. He can't. Like his smears against Huawei, he has no facts. He has no evidence. Just hate.
There was time before George Bush that America could trust their presidents and have faith in their word. No longer.
It's interesting that you haven't named, nor implied, a President whom you could trust with their word.
You did not understand what presidents mean?
George's statement was nonsensical, so I noted that he gave no indication of any specific President that he could have "faith in their word".
Myself, I continue to have complete faith in President Jimmy Carter's word, based on his life's work and history.
Nonsensical? Only to a crazed Trumper!
What a fucking cryptic, moronic, nonsensical, statement you made that you can't even figure out, or state, which President(s) you "have faith in their word".
For starters, there were two George Bush's that were President. Presumably you were aware of that when you made the statement.
I'd guess Nixon is the President you could "have faith in their word".
Jesus H Christ stop this pathetic squabbling. It's really not interesting that he didn't name, or imply a President whom he could trust with their word. Not even a little bit interesting.
And responding to anything resembling criticism by calling the criticiser a "Trumper" is beyond parody.
Now, show some stories of Uyghur families that have been brought back together, or young Uyghur women who weren't sterilized, or those that weren't send to reeducation camps.
Generally whenever the US empire is on the warpath it monsters its enemies. None of this stuff was reported in any major fashion until the recent trade war. In the opposite side though, once the US leaves a country in misery the flow of information stops. So nothing about the slave markets in Libya.
Problem here is that China can only be defeated by a nuclear war. Which is what some of the US hawks clearly want.
Libya is now a proxy war, so blaming its current status on the U.S. is not completely valid.
What’s the point of link dumps without commentary.
And Libya is a proxy war now, but getting rid of Gaddafi has destabilised the entire Mediterranean and region.
Btw the South China Sea is nowhere near Texas.
As for the links, I quite understand that you aren't interested in positing about anything other thatn nuclear war, and don't appear to be versed in any of the military and geopolitical operations that China is engaged in the region.
I am interested in this area actually. Link dumps are never useful though. A bit of explanation is needed.
This link for instance suggests that China is winning the range war:
Trump should be made to produce any evidence he has that these apps pose any danger to America or Americans. So far that evidence consists of two things: 1) American TikTok users humiliated him
2) Trump is using China as a scapegoat and a diversion from his own failures.
If he has anymore evidence then he should present it. But he won't. He can't. Like his smears against Huawei, he has no facts. He has no evidence. Just hate.
There was time before George Bush that America could trust their presidents and have faith in their word. No longer.
It's interesting that you haven't named, nor implied, a President whom you could trust with their word.
You did not understand what presidents mean?
George's statement was nonsensical, so I noted that he gave no indication of any specific President that he could have "faith in their word".
Myself, I continue to have complete faith in President Jimmy Carter's word, based on his life's work and history.
Nonsensical? Only to a crazed Trumper!
What a fucking cryptic, moronic, nonsensical, statement you made that you can't even figure out, or state, which President(s) you "have faith in their word".
For starters, there were two George Bush's that were President. Presumably you were aware of that when you made the statement.
I'd guess Nixon is the President you could "have faith in their word".
Jesus H Christ stop this pathetic squabbling. It's really not interesting that he didn't name, or imply a President whom he could trust with their word. Not even a little bit interesting.
And responding to anything resembling criticism by calling the criticiser a "Trumper" is beyond parody.
Grow up, both of you.
I get your point. But, sorry, but I consider any who, without logic or evidence support Trump, his policies, words and actions to be a "Trumper".
It's simply descriptive of the reality.
Trump (and the propaganda outlets that support him) tells them what to believe and they believe -- and propagate it as truth.
Now, show some stories of Uyghur families that have been brought back together, or young Uyghur women who weren't sterilized, or those that weren't send to reeducation camps.
Generally whenever the US empire is on the warpath it monsters its enemies. None of this stuff was reported in any major fashion until the recent trade war. In the opposite side though, once the US leaves a country in misery the flow of information stops. So nothing about the slave markets in Libya.
Problem here is that China can only be defeated by a nuclear war. Which is what some of the US hawks clearly want.
Libya is now a proxy war, so blaming its current status on the U.S. is not completely valid.
What’s the point of link dumps without commentary.
And Libya is a proxy war now, but getting rid of Gaddafi has destabilised the entire Mediterranean and region.
Btw the South China Sea is nowhere near Texas.
As for the links, I quite understand that you aren't interested in positing about anything other thatn nuclear war, and don't appear to be versed in any of the military and geopolitical operations that China is engaged in the region.
I am interested in this area actually. Link dumps are never useful though. A bit of explanation is needed.
This link for instance suggests that China is winning the range war:
China has an advantage in land based intermediate range missiles, due to the U.S. and Russia being signatories on the INF Treaty, but the U.S. has many intermediate range options that are sea based and air launched. The only U.S. territory that is in range of Chinese intermediate range missiles, is Guam.
China is unsurprisingly not pleased by the fact that the U.S. withdrew from the INF Treaty, and will have the capability to produce and deploy land based intermediate range weapons systems into the Indo Pacific theater of operations, directly countering China's missiles.
The U.S. would likely not find an ally that would be willing to base these within range of the Chinese mainland, a huge provocation, but it would be relatively easy to deploy these quickly in a crisis if China was sufficiently threatening their security.
Like all other nations, the U.S. will be deploying a wide range of hypersonic missiles that are difficult to detect, and given that the U.S. is continuing to deploy a range fo stealth aircraft including the B-21 Raider and F-35 Lightnings, which are also being deployed by our allies, China PLAA is at a significant disadvantage.
Moreover, the U.S. has been engaged in conflicts for decades, giving them an operational and experience advantage.
Trump should be made to produce any evidence he has that these apps pose any danger to America or Americans. So far that evidence consists of two things: 1) American TikTok users humiliated him
2) Trump is using China as a scapegoat and a diversion from his own failures.
If he has anymore evidence then he should present it. But he won't. He can't. Like his smears against Huawei, he has no facts. He has no evidence. Just hate.
There was time before George Bush that America could trust their presidents and have faith in their word. No longer.
It's interesting that you haven't named, nor implied, a President whom you could trust with their word.
You did not understand what presidents mean?
George's statement was nonsensical, so I noted that he gave no indication of any specific President that he could have "faith in their word".
Myself, I continue to have complete faith in President Jimmy Carter's word, based on his life's work and history.
Nonsensical? Only to a crazed Trumper!
What a fucking cryptic, moronic, nonsensical, statement you made that you can't even figure out, or state, which President(s) you "have faith in their word".
For starters, there were two George Bush's that were President. Presumably you were aware of that when you made the statement.
I'd guess Nixon is the President you could "have faith in their word".
Jesus H Christ stop this pathetic squabbling. It's really not interesting that he didn't name, or imply a President whom he could trust with their word. Not even a little bit interesting.
And responding to anything resembling criticism by calling the criticiser a "Trumper" is beyond parody.
Grow up, both of you.
Looks like you volunteered to deal with George, and thanks in advance.
Now, show some stories of Uyghur families that have been brought back together, or young Uyghur women who weren't sterilized, or those that weren't send to reeducation camps.
Generally whenever the US empire is on the warpath it monsters its enemies. None of this stuff was reported in any major fashion until the recent trade war. In the opposite side though, once the US leaves a country in misery the flow of information stops. So nothing about the slave markets in Libya.
Problem here is that China can only be defeated by a nuclear war. Which is what some of the US hawks clearly want.
Libya is now a proxy war, so blaming its current status on the U.S. is not completely valid.
What’s the point of link dumps without commentary.
And Libya is a proxy war now, but getting rid of Gaddafi has destabilised the entire Mediterranean and region.
Btw the South China Sea is nowhere near Texas.
As for the links, I quite understand that you aren't interested in positing about anything other thatn nuclear war, and don't appear to be versed in any of the military and geopolitical operations that China is engaged in the region.
I am interested in this area actually. Link dumps are never useful though. A bit of explanation is needed.
This link for instance suggests that China is winning the range war:
China has an advantage in land based intermediate range missiles, due to the U.S. and Russia being signatories on the INF Treaty, but the U.S. has many intermediate range options that are sea based and air launched. The only U.S. territory that is in range of Chinese intermediate range missiles, is Guam.
China is unsurprisingly not pleased by the fact that the U.S. withdrew from the INF Treaty, and will have the capability to produce and deploy land based intermediate range weapons systems into the Indo Pacific theater of operations, directly countering China's missiles.
The U.S. would likely not find an ally that would be willing to base these within range of the Chinese mainland, a huge provocation, but it would be relatively easy to deploy these quickly in a crisis if China was sufficiently threatening their security.
Like all other nations, the U.S. will be deploying a wide range of hypersonic missiles that are difficult to detect, and given that the U.S. is continuing to deploy a range fo stealth aircraft including the B-21 Raider and F-35 Lightnings, which are also being deployed by our allies, China PLAA is at a significant disadvantage.
Moreover, the U.S. has been engaged in conflicts for decades, giving them an operational and experience advantage.
I don't know if overthrowing a few Arab micro states with huge advantages in fire power is much in the way of operational experience. As for how easy it is to deploy, assuming this is on sea, the Chinese missiles have a chance to counter. The Chinese have never been signatory to the INF and have a head start. Maybe they want to start a shooting match right now.
We can only hope that in any even of a war the US gets a good kicking, and doesn't go nuclear.
Now, show some stories of Uyghur families that have been brought back together, or young Uyghur women who weren't sterilized, or those that weren't send to reeducation camps.
Generally whenever the US empire is on the warpath it monsters its enemies. None of this stuff was reported in any major fashion until the recent trade war. In the opposite side though, once the US leaves a country in misery the flow of information stops. So nothing about the slave markets in Libya.
Problem here is that China can only be defeated by a nuclear war. Which is what some of the US hawks clearly want.
Libya is now a proxy war, so blaming its current status on the U.S. is not completely valid.
What’s the point of link dumps without commentary.
And Libya is a proxy war now, but getting rid of Gaddafi has destabilised the entire Mediterranean and region.
Btw the South China Sea is nowhere near Texas.
As for the links, I quite understand that you aren't interested in positing about anything other thatn nuclear war, and don't appear to be versed in any of the military and geopolitical operations that China is engaged in the region.
I am interested in this area actually. Link dumps are never useful though. A bit of explanation is needed.
This link for instance suggests that China is winning the range war:
China has an advantage in land based intermediate range missiles, due to the U.S. and Russia being signatories on the INF Treaty, but the U.S. has many intermediate range options that are sea based and air launched. The only U.S. territory that is in range of Chinese intermediate range missiles, is Guam.
China is unsurprisingly not pleased by the fact that the U.S. withdrew from the INF Treaty, and will have the capability to produce and deploy land based intermediate range weapons systems into the Indo Pacific theater of operations, directly countering China's missiles.
The U.S. would likely not find an ally that would be willing to base these within range of the Chinese mainland, a huge provocation, but it would be relatively easy to deploy these quickly in a crisis if China was sufficiently threatening their security.
Like all other nations, the U.S. will be deploying a wide range of hypersonic missiles that are difficult to detect, and given that the U.S. is continuing to deploy a range fo stealth aircraft including the B-21 Raider and F-35 Lightnings, which are also being deployed by our allies, China PLAA is at a significant disadvantage.
Moreover, the U.S. has been engaged in conflicts for decades, giving them an operational and experience advantage.
I don't know if overthrowing a few Arab micro states with huge advantages in fire power is much in the way of operational experience. As for how easy it is to deploy, assuming this is on sea, the Chinese missiles have a chance to counter. The Chinese have never been signatory to the INF and have a head start. Maybe they want to start a shooting match right now.
We can only hope that in any even of a war the US gets a good kicking, and doesn't go nuclear.
Rooting for the PRC authoritarians doesn't seem like a great strategy, but knock yourself out. China isn't ready to take on the U.S., and they are quite aware of that.
More to the point, China would kill its export economy overnight, which would probably bring Xi Jinping down.
Now, show some stories of Uyghur families that have been brought back together, or young Uyghur women who weren't sterilized, or those that weren't send to reeducation camps.
Generally whenever the US empire is on the warpath it monsters its enemies. None of this stuff was reported in any major fashion until the recent trade war. In the opposite side though, once the US leaves a country in misery the flow of information stops. So nothing about the slave markets in Libya.
Problem here is that China can only be defeated by a nuclear war. Which is what some of the US hawks clearly want.
Libya is now a proxy war, so blaming its current status on the U.S. is not completely valid.
What’s the point of link dumps without commentary.
And Libya is a proxy war now, but getting rid of Gaddafi has destabilised the entire Mediterranean and region.
Btw the South China Sea is nowhere near Texas.
As for the links, I quite understand that you aren't interested in positing about anything other thatn nuclear war, and don't appear to be versed in any of the military and geopolitical operations that China is engaged in the region.
I am interested in this area actually. Link dumps are never useful though. A bit of explanation is needed.
This link for instance suggests that China is winning the range war:
China has an advantage in land based intermediate range missiles, due to the U.S. and Russia being signatories on the INF Treaty, but the U.S. has many intermediate range options that are sea based and air launched. The only U.S. territory that is in range of Chinese intermediate range missiles, is Guam.
China is unsurprisingly not pleased by the fact that the U.S. withdrew from the INF Treaty, and will have the capability to produce and deploy land based intermediate range weapons systems into the Indo Pacific theater of operations, directly countering China's missiles.
The U.S. would likely not find an ally that would be willing to base these within range of the Chinese mainland, a huge provocation, but it would be relatively easy to deploy these quickly in a crisis if China was sufficiently threatening their security.
Like all other nations, the U.S. will be deploying a wide range of hypersonic missiles that are difficult to detect, and given that the U.S. is continuing to deploy a range fo stealth aircraft including the B-21 Raider and F-35 Lightnings, which are also being deployed by our allies, China PLAA is at a significant disadvantage.
Moreover, the U.S. has been engaged in conflicts for decades, giving them an operational and experience advantage.
I don't know if overthrowing a few Arab micro states with huge advantages in fire power is much in the way of operational experience. As for how easy it is to deploy, assuming this is on sea, the Chinese missiles have a chance to counter. The Chinese have never been signatory to the INF and have a head start. Maybe they want to start a shooting match right now.
We can only hope that in any even of a war the US gets a good kicking, and doesn't go nuclear.
Since we haven't won a war since WW-II, and all China has to do is sink our boats, my money would not be on the U.S.
But thanks for the heads up that the crazy Trumpers are progressing from a a trade war to a cold war and now to a hot war. I will invest accordingly.
Now, show some stories of Uyghur families that have been brought back together, or young Uyghur women who weren't sterilized, or those that weren't send to reeducation camps.
Generally whenever the US empire is on the warpath it monsters its enemies. None of this stuff was reported in any major fashion until the recent trade war. In the opposite side though, once the US leaves a country in misery the flow of information stops. So nothing about the slave markets in Libya.
Problem here is that China can only be defeated by a nuclear war. Which is what some of the US hawks clearly want.
Libya is now a proxy war, so blaming its current status on the U.S. is not completely valid.
What’s the point of link dumps without commentary.
And Libya is a proxy war now, but getting rid of Gaddafi has destabilised the entire Mediterranean and region.
Btw the South China Sea is nowhere near Texas.
As for the links, I quite understand that you aren't interested in positing about anything other thatn nuclear war, and don't appear to be versed in any of the military and geopolitical operations that China is engaged in the region.
I am interested in this area actually. Link dumps are never useful though. A bit of explanation is needed.
This link for instance suggests that China is winning the range war:
China has an advantage in land based intermediate range missiles, due to the U.S. and Russia being signatories on the INF Treaty, but the U.S. has many intermediate range options that are sea based and air launched. The only U.S. territory that is in range of Chinese intermediate range missiles, is Guam.
China is unsurprisingly not pleased by the fact that the U.S. withdrew from the INF Treaty, and will have the capability to produce and deploy land based intermediate range weapons systems into the Indo Pacific theater of operations, directly countering China's missiles.
The U.S. would likely not find an ally that would be willing to base these within range of the Chinese mainland, a huge provocation, but it would be relatively easy to deploy these quickly in a crisis if China was sufficiently threatening their security.
Like all other nations, the U.S. will be deploying a wide range of hypersonic missiles that are difficult to detect, and given that the U.S. is continuing to deploy a range fo stealth aircraft including the B-21 Raider and F-35 Lightnings, which are also being deployed by our allies, China PLAA is at a significant disadvantage.
Moreover, the U.S. has been engaged in conflicts for decades, giving them an operational and experience advantage.
I don't know if overthrowing a few Arab micro states with huge advantages in fire power is much in the way of operational experience. As for how easy it is to deploy, assuming this is on sea, the Chinese missiles have a chance to counter. The Chinese have never been signatory to the INF and have a head start. Maybe they want to start a shooting match right now.
We can only hope that in any even of a war the US gets a good kicking, and doesn't go nuclear.
Rooting for the PRC authoritarians doesn't seem like a great strategy, but knock yourself out. China isn't ready to take on the U.S., and they are quite aware of that.
More to the point, China would kill its export economy overnight, which would probably bring Xi Jinping down.
LOL....
Recognizing that we don't stand a chance in a war with China is not "rooting for the PRC'!
I too am of the firm belief that WeChat is spyware insofar as the Chinese government has tapped into it and no doubt uses it as a surveillance tool. For that reason, I am not opposed to seeing it banned in the US, if indeed that is the will of the American people. However, banning it in China too is going to far. The Chinese people seem content to allow their government to spy on them (which is very scary but a reality), so who are we to tell them they are wrong in that regard? If doing that is okay, so would be regime change. Might as well barge into China and take over.
What we do in our country is our business, and although what China does in their country can affect us, we really only have the moral right to solve the problems that affect America directly. That does not include a ban on WeChat within China. That's going too far.
Ever since the Patriot Act it is the U.S. who leads the world in spying on its people -- and all people's.
Why are you obsessed with China?
It’s not being “obsessed” to be concerned with a nuclear super power authoritarian regime with a poor human rights track history, from the Tank Man days to modern day ethnic cleansing of religious minorities, as is well documented by non-partisan global observers. From your constant defense of all that the CPC does you have an apparent pro-China bias undisclosed to this forum.
I too am of the firm belief that WeChat is spyware insofar as the Chinese government has tapped into it and no doubt uses it as a surveillance tool. For that reason, I am not opposed to seeing it banned in the US, if indeed that is the will of the American people. However, banning it in China too is going to far. The Chinese people seem content to allow their government to spy on them (which is very scary but a reality), so who are we to tell them they are wrong in that regard? If doing that is okay, so would be regime change. Might as well barge into China and take over.
What we do in our country is our business, and although what China does in their country can affect us, we really only have the moral right to solve the problems that affect America directly. That does not include a ban on WeChat within China. That's going too far.
Ever since the Patriot Act it is the U.S. who leads the world in spying on its people -- and all people's.
Why are you obsessed with China?
It’s not being “obsessed” to be concerned with a nuclear super power authoritarian regime with a poor human rights track history, ....
That's no way to talk about your own country! ... Oh! That's right! That's why the authoritarian regime is trying to distract you with a bogeyman.
Perhaps we should be asking what that authoritarian regime is doing to stop Russia from attacking our third election in a row in order to install their shill?
Trump should be made to produce any evidence he has that these apps pose any danger to America or Americans. So far that evidence consists of two things: 1) American TikTok users humiliated him
2) Trump is using China as a scapegoat and a diversion from his own failures.
If he has anymore evidence then he should present it. But he won't. He can't. Like his smears against Huawei, he has no facts. He has no evidence. Just hate.
There was time before George Bush that America could trust their presidents and have faith in their word. No longer.
It's interesting that you haven't named, nor implied, a President whom you could trust with their word.
You did not understand what presidents mean?
George's statement was nonsensical, so I noted that he gave no indication of any specific President that he could have "faith in their word".
Myself, I continue to have complete faith in President Jimmy Carter's word, based on his life's work and history.
Nonsensical? Only to a crazed Trumper!
What a fucking cryptic, moronic, nonsensical, statement you made that you can't even figure out, or state, which President(s) you "have faith in their word".
For starters, there were two George Bush's that were President. Presumably you were aware of that when you made the statement.
I'd guess Nixon is the President you could "have faith in their word".
Jesus H Christ stop this pathetic squabbling. It's really not interesting that he didn't name, or imply a President whom he could trust with their word. Not even a little bit interesting.
And responding to anything resembling criticism by calling the criticiser a "Trumper" is beyond parody.
Grow up, both of you.
I get your point. But, sorry, but I consider any who, without logic or evidence support Trump, his policies, words and actions to be a "Trumper".
It's simply descriptive of the reality.
You described tmay as a Trumper up there when he'd done none of that, he'd simply criticised your rather vacuous statement aboout Geoorge ? Bush. I've seen you do similar multiple times. And your quest to drag every thread into partisan bickering is also very apparent; give it a rest.
No one is calling you names or screaming at you, show them the same courtesy. If for no other reason than because you know who else likes to shout and call people names? You really want to be that kind of person?
Trump should be made to produce any evidence he has that these apps pose any danger to America or Americans. So far that evidence consists of two things: 1) American TikTok users humiliated him
2) Trump is using China as a scapegoat and a diversion from his own failures.
If he has anymore evidence then he should present it. But he won't. He can't. Like his smears against Huawei, he has no facts. He has no evidence. Just hate.
There was time before George Bush that America could trust their presidents and have faith in their word. No longer.
It's interesting that you haven't named, nor implied, a President whom you could trust with their word.
You did not understand what presidents mean?
George's statement was nonsensical, so I noted that he gave no indication of any specific President that he could have "faith in their word".
Myself, I continue to have complete faith in President Jimmy Carter's word, based on his life's work and history.
Nonsensical? Only to a crazed Trumper!
What a fucking cryptic, moronic, nonsensical, statement you made that you can't even figure out, or state, which President(s) you "have faith in their word".
For starters, there were two George Bush's that were President. Presumably you were aware of that when you made the statement.
I'd guess Nixon is the President you could "have faith in their word".
Jesus H Christ stop this pathetic squabbling. It's really not interesting that he didn't name, or imply a President whom he could trust with their word. Not even a little bit interesting.
And responding to anything resembling criticism by calling the criticiser a "Trumper" is beyond parody.
Grow up, both of you.
I get your point. But, sorry, but I consider any who, without logic or evidence support Trump, his policies, words and actions to be a "Trumper".
It's simply descriptive of the reality.
You described tmay as a Trumper up there when he'd done none of that, he'd simply criticised your rather vacuous statement aboout Geoorge ? Bush. I've seen you do similar multiple times. And your quest to drag every thread into partisan bickering is also very apparent; give it a rest.
No one is calling you names or screaming at you, show them the same courtesy. If for no other reason than because you know who else likes to shout and call people names? You really want to be that kind of person?
He's a Trumper.... And attack any way they can is what Trump and Trumpers do. It derives from Trump's & Nixon's dirty trickster who teaches attack, attack, attack and only attack -- never back down and never apologize.
Do I drag threads into "partisan bickering"? No. I merely respond to right wing bullshit and propaganda. But the Trumpers see it as their duty to spread that bullshit and propaganda at every opportunity and they get all pissy when it is challenged. Trumpism is their religion. And, by the way, I am attacked by those Trumpers (as you witnessed) on a pretty regular basis with a variety of attacks --- including name calling. The problem is that I undermine their blind faith in their leaders, their lies and their propaganda with reality -- and they can't tolerate that because reality and truth are their enemy. So, they do what Trumpers do.... attack and smear and slander.....
Trump should be made to produce any evidence he has that these apps pose any danger to America or Americans. So far that evidence consists of two things: 1) American TikTok users humiliated him
2) Trump is using China as a scapegoat and a diversion from his own failures.
If he has anymore evidence then he should present it. But he won't. He can't. Like his smears against Huawei, he has no facts. He has no evidence. Just hate.
There was time before George Bush that America could trust their presidents and have faith in their word. No longer.
It's interesting that you haven't named, nor implied, a President whom you could trust with their word.
You did not understand what presidents mean?
George's statement was nonsensical, so I noted that he gave no indication of any specific President that he could have "faith in their word".
Myself, I continue to have complete faith in President Jimmy Carter's word, based on his life's work and history.
Nonsensical? Only to a crazed Trumper!
What a fucking cryptic, moronic, nonsensical, statement you made that you can't even figure out, or state, which President(s) you "have faith in their word".
For starters, there were two George Bush's that were President. Presumably you were aware of that when you made the statement.
I'd guess Nixon is the President you could "have faith in their word".
Jesus H Christ stop this pathetic squabbling. It's really not interesting that he didn't name, or imply a President whom he could trust with their word. Not even a little bit interesting.
And responding to anything resembling criticism by calling the criticiser a "Trumper" is beyond parody.
Grow up, both of you.
I get your point. But, sorry, but I consider any who, without logic or evidence support Trump, his policies, words and actions to be a "Trumper".
It's simply descriptive of the reality.
You described tmay as a Trumper up there when he'd done none of that, he'd simply criticised your rather vacuous statement aboout Geoorge ? Bush. I've seen you do similar multiple times. And your quest to drag every thread into partisan bickering is also very apparent; give it a rest.
No one is calling you names or screaming at you, show them the same courtesy. If for no other reason than because you know who else likes to shout and call people names? You really want to be that kind of person?
He's a Trumper.... And attack any way they can is what Trump and Trumpers do. It derives from Trump's & Nixon's dirty trickster who teaches attack, attack, attack and only attack -- never back down and never apologize.
Do I drag threads into "partisan bickering"? No. I merely respond to right wing bullshit and propaganda. But the Trumpers see it as their duty to spread that bullshit and propaganda at every opportunity and they get all pissy when it is challenged. Trumpism is their religion. And, by the way, I am attacked by those Trumpers (as you witnessed) on a pretty regular basis with a variety of attacks --- including name calling. The problem is that I undermine their blind faith in their leaders, their lies and their propaganda with reality -- and they can't tolerate that because reality and truth are their enemy. So, they do what Trumpers do.... attack and smear and slander.....
The problem is that I undermine their blind faith in their leaders, their lies and their propaganda with reality -- and they can't tolerate that because reality and truth are their enemy. So, they do what Trumpers do.... attack and smear and slander.....
If you can't see it then there may be no hope for you.
Please stop talking about "them" and assuming you know anything about "their" mental state. You don't, you're just another idiot screaming at the internet and achieving nothing.
Being unreasonable and rude is not how you oppose Donald Trump, it's how you become him.
The problem is that I undermine their blind faith in their leaders, their lies and their propaganda with reality -- and they can't tolerate that because reality and truth are their enemy. So, they do what Trumpers do.... attack and smear and slander.....
If you can't see it then there may be no hope for you.
Please stop talking about "them" and assuming you know anything about "their" mental state. You don't, you're just another idiot screaming at the internet and achieving nothing.
Being unreasonable and rude is not how you oppose Donald Trump, it's how you become him.
LOL.... "THEY" expose their mental state and well washed brains almost every time they post.
The problem is: for 20 years conservative propaganda has been blasted out and gone unopposed and unrefuted -- so in their minds it became reality. KellyAnne Conway summarized that neatly by calling it "Alternative Facts" which in their minds are the same as actual facts -- while Trump has normalized lies and fabrications. Now, when I or anybody refutes it, calls bull to the bull, their heads explode in outrage and indignation. Meanwhile, they think that it is acceptable to just spew out their propaganda, smear campaigns and conspiracy theories thinking that we all live in their make believe right wing world.
Comments
Nonsensical? Only to a crazed Trumper!
For starters, there were two George Bush's that were President. Presumably you were aware of that when you made the statement.
I'd guess Nixon is the President you could "have faith in their word".
And responding to anything resembling criticism by calling the criticiser a "Trumper" is beyond parody.
Grow up, both of you.
This link for instance suggests that China is winning the range war:
https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/china-army-rockets/
Trump (and the propaganda outlets that support him) tells them what to believe and they believe -- and propagate it as truth.
https://thediplomat.com/2019/11/u-s-intermediate-range-missiles-in-east-asia-critical-deterrent-or-needless-provocation/
China is unsurprisingly not pleased by the fact that the U.S. withdrew from the INF Treaty, and will have the capability to produce and deploy land based intermediate range weapons systems into the Indo Pacific theater of operations, directly countering China's missiles.
The U.S. would likely not find an ally that would be willing to base these within range of the Chinese mainland, a huge provocation, but it would be relatively easy to deploy these quickly in a crisis if China was sufficiently threatening their security.
Like all other nations, the U.S. will be deploying a wide range of hypersonic missiles that are difficult to detect, and given that the U.S. is continuing to deploy a range fo stealth aircraft including the B-21 Raider and F-35 Lightnings, which are also being deployed by our allies, China PLAA is at a significant disadvantage.
Moreover, the U.S. has been engaged in conflicts for decades, giving them an operational and experience advantage.
We can only hope that in any even of a war the US gets a good kicking, and doesn't go nuclear.
Rooting for the PRC authoritarians doesn't seem like a great strategy, but knock yourself out. China isn't ready to take on the U.S., and they are quite aware of that.
More to the point, China would kill its export economy overnight, which would probably bring Xi Jinping down.
... Oh! That's right! That's why the authoritarian regime is trying to distract you with a bogeyman.
Perhaps we should be asking what that authoritarian regime is doing to stop Russia from attacking our third election in a row in order to install their shill?
No one is calling you names or screaming at you, show them the same courtesy. If for no other reason than because you know who else likes to shout and call people names? You really want to be that kind of person?
Please stop talking about "them" and assuming you know anything about "their" mental state. You don't, you're just another idiot screaming at the internet and achieving nothing.
Being unreasonable and rude is not how you oppose Donald Trump, it's how you become him.