Support NeoGAF

[metalslimer]

Pretty much, yeah. Nuclear non-proliferation has been pretty much off the table for the whole of the Obama administration. This is massive news for those of us who have been trying to push this back on to the table. Look, I understand that most people campaigning for non-proliferation are also opposed to Trump's other views, but that's not the point, this is a massive opportunity to reduce the world's nuclear weapons, and those that oppose that due to their personal political views of the US president are idiots.

What good does reducing the nuclear weapons do that it is worth throwing Crimea under the bus for?

 

[BlackLagoon]

Anyway, seems to me that most people care more about which people stops Nuclear proliferation rather than the actual act of stopping Nuclear proliferation. So yeah, really partisan times that we live in.

So you're fine with Russia invading a sovereign country and annexing their territory? Which other areas/countries do you think it would be reasonable to cede to Putin in exchange for an unspecified reduction in Russia's ageing nuclear arsenal? I'm sure there are a lot of Europeans who would love to know!

 

[PatThePassive]

Pretty much, yeah. Nuclear non-proliferation has been pretty much off the table for the whole of the Obama administration. This is massive news for those of us who have been trying to push this back on to the table. Look, I understand that most people campaigning for non-proliferation are also opposed to Trump's other views, but that's not the point, this is a massive opportunity to reduce the world's nuclear weapons, and those that oppose that due to their personal political views of the US president are idiots.

I still don't see why we should pursue this with Russia, I'm not even factoring in trump into this but we saw no more than a couple years ago how mush Russia cares.

I would rater focus on smaller states with nuclear weapons and show that it is possible.

Russia has alone set that goal far more back then the past 8 years of Obama doing nothing for nuclear disarmament

 

[Ollie Pooch]

Possibly it's all a con, but it has to be worth taking a chance that it's not no?

Do you honestly trust Donald Trump to do the right thing? Serious question.

 

[metalslimer]

Dear lord no its not worthing letting Russia run all over eastern Europe for some token reduction in arms that will still leave every party involved with another weapons to destroy the world 10x over

 

[Breads]

So far Russia is the big winner from the US presidential election.

Meanwhile 20 million people in the US stand to lose health insurance.

Let's see how far down this shit goes.

 

[DontBeThatGuy]

Sanctions exists for a reason, and instead of Russia not continuing to be a nightmare, they fucked with our elections and are potentially getting rewarded with one hell of a sweet deal(for them, and only them) from the tangerine nightmare.

 

[mlclmtckr]

Pretty much yeah, that's the whole concept of MAD. Realpolitik.

So Russia just keeps building and then dismantling ICBMs while steamrolling Eastern Europe with no opposition from the USA. Brilliant.

In ten years Europe is in turmoil, millions more people live under an imperialist dictatorship, and Russia still has nuclear weapons.

I bet they design a nuke that you can take apart with an Allen key. It'll be like Ikea furniture.

 

[SenjutsuSage]

Trump trying to use a distraction in the form of a symbolic nuclear weapons reduction deal to provide him cover for lifting sanctions, which is what they've wanted to do from the start.

 

[BKK]

What good does reducing the nuclear weapons do that it is worth throwing Crimea under the bus for?

Crimea isn't coming back, get real. We had a chance to stop that, we failed. I'm not happy about that, but Crimea is different, it was Russian, but transferred to Ukraine whilst part of USSR. That's not me excusing what Russia did, just acknowledging what happened, and being realistic that Russia won't give Crimea back. If we wanted to go to war over it, we waited too long.

 

[Mr_Moogle]

Possibly it's all a con, but it has to be worth taking a chance that it's not no?

You should really open a history book and see what happens when you start appeasing tyrants.

 

[Plywood]

Do you honestly trust Donald Trump to do the right thing? Serious question.

"Give him a chance" Haha, ha.

 

[metalslimer]

Crimea isn't coming back, get real. We had a chance to stop that, we failed. I'm not happy about that, but Crimea is different, it was Russian, but transferred to Ukraine whilst part of USSR. That's not me excusing what Russia did, just acknowledging what happened, and being realistic that Russia won't give Crimea back. If we wanted to go to war over it, we waited too long.

You haven't provided the benefits to a nuclear reduction that isn't just feeling good. You are also ignoring Russia destabilizing our election which is worth its own set of sanctions.

This doesn't even get into them using cyberwarfare to destabilize the places all over the world. And you want to end the on effective tool we can use against them

 

[Ollie Pooch]

"Give him a chance" Haha, ha.

Hahahaa.. I love it. Ass kissing of Putin for years, proof of Russia hacking the US election in his favor, a document being investigated by intelligence agencies suggesting he's literally been co-opted by the Russian government over blackmail through a sex tape - and people still want to wait and see if he's trustworthy. Unbelievable.

 

[BKK]

So Russia just keeps building and then dismantling ICBMs while steamrolling Eastern Europe with no opposition from the USA. Brilliant.

In ten years Europe is in turmoil, millions more people live under an imperialist dictatorship, and Russia still has nuclear weapons.

I bet they design a nuke that you can take apart with an Allen key. It'll be like Ikea furniture.

Eastern European countries are part of NATO, UK supports that, Russia accepts that. It's not a problem for current EU members, but for new ones like Ukraine it is.

 

[rokkerkory]

Smoke and mirrors smoke and mirrors

 

[diunxx]

So now instead of being able to destroy the world 20 times over they will only be able to destroy it 15 times AND keep doing whatever the fuck they want without consecuence.

The art of the deal folks!

 

[BKK]

You haven't provided the benefits to a nuclear reduction that isn't just feeling good. You are also ignoring Russia destabilizing our election which is worth its own set of sanctions.

I don't support any of that. Just support the potential for nuclear non-proliferation deals. I don't think there's anything controversial in that ....

 

[Carpe Libertatem]

Eastern European countries are part of NATO, UK supports that, Russia accepts that. It's not a problem for current EU members, but for new ones like Ukraine it is.

You should look at what Trump has to say about NATO and the EU. Then come back and tell us this wouldn't be a problem for Eastern Europe.

 

[Ac30]

Eastern European countries are part of NATO, UK supports that, Russia accepts that. It's not a problem for current EU members, but for new ones like Ukraine it is.

The PEOTUS just said NATO is essentially no longer needed, then what? No US, no NATO. Simple.

 

[mlclmtckr]

Eastern European countries are part of NATO, UK supports that, Russia accepts that. It's not a problem for current EU members, but for new ones like Ukraine it is.

Really? Because 'many people are saying' that NATO is obsolete.

 

[metalslimer]

I don't support any of that. Just support the potential for nuclear non-proliferation deals. I don't think there's anything controversial in that ....

The deal isn't worth ending the sanctions. If they want to actually put together a deal where it involves us both disarming I'll support it but you know that will not happen. You have to know that.

 

[Nafai1123]

Yeah this is straight up con-artist bullshit. "Look over here" while we fuck you and your entire country.

 

[Mechanized]

This seems like some kinda bullshit that will result in Russia having more nuclear power than the US.

 

[SenjutsuSage]

Yeah this is straight up con-artist bullshit. "Look over here" while we fuck you and your entire country.

And it's incredibly annoying that there will be so many too stupid to realize what he's doing.

 

[Slaythe]

Sure Donald, sure.

 

[SenorArdilla]

Lift sanctions in return for decommissioning Cold War relics. Best deal ever.

 

[BKK]

You should look at what Trump has to say about NATO and the EU. Then come back and tell us this wouldn't be a problem for Eastern Europe.

I know exactly what he's said, and it has been widely mis-reported in the "mainstream media". So liberal media basically report on the election with extreme bias for their favoured candidate. When their favoured candidate loses, they blame it on "fake news" and then instead of reporting unsourced ludicrous acusations themselves, they wait for some non-mainstream site to report it, and then report on other sources reporting it as if it has any sort of legitimacy.

Anyway, what did Trump actually say about NATO and Eastern EU countries? They should aim to pay 2% GDP towards defense. This is what all NATO countries have commited to, and what US under Obama have been moaning about for ages. Only difference was that Trump threatened consequences for not paying your way.

 

[metalslimer]

I know exactly what he's said, and it has been widely mis-reported in the "mainstream media". So liberal media basically report on the election with extreme bias for their favoured candidate. When their favoured candidate loses, they blame it on "fake news" and then instead of reporting unsourced ludicrous acusations themselves, they wait for some non-mainstream site to report it, and then report on other sources reporting it as if it has any sort of legitimacy.

Anyway, what did Trump actually say about NATO and Eastern EU countries? They should aim to pay 2% GDP towards defense. This is what all NATO countries have commited to, and what US under Obama have been moaning about for ages. Only difference was that Trump threatened consequences for not paying your way.

Oh I thought you were actually serious. Carry on then.

 

[SRG01]

Dont forget that the Ukraine disarmed its nuclear arsenal as a sign of good faith and was invaded by Russia no more then 2 years later when the Ukraine got serious about joining the EU.

The world isn't ready for nuclear disarmament if one player on the board is set on brinkmanship and invading it's neighbours.

 

[sc0la]

Let's assume he is actually co-opted by Putin in the form of blackmail / tapes (and isn't just a personal enrichment con). The tapes will get realeased right at the end of Donald's term/terms as a means of further destabilizing the west. Donald gets nothing from playing along except the inevitable getting delayed. if he were smart he would just call the bluff now.

 

[Carpe Libertatem]

I know exactly what he's said, and it has been widely mis-reported in the "mainstream media". So liberal media basically report on the election with extreme bias for their favoured candidate. When their favoured candidate loses, they blame it on "fake news" and then instead of reporting unsourced ludicrous acusations themselves, they wait for some non-mainstream site to report it, and then report on other sources reporting it as if it has any sort of legitimacy.

Anyway, what did Trump actually say about NATO and Eastern EU countries? They should aim to pay 2% GDP towards defense. This is what all NATO countries have commited to, and what US under Obama have been moaning about for ages. Only difference was that Trump threatened consequences for not paying your way.

That NATO is obsolete. In the same interview that this thread is based on, if I'm not wrong.

Didn't take long for you to show your true colors, though.

 

[BKK]

Oh I thought you were actually serious. Carry on then.

Really, you don't think that CNN was biased towards Hillary? (and obviosly Fox was biased towards Trump).

 

[PepsimanVsJoe]

I know exactly what he's said, and it has been widely mis-reported in the "mainstream media". So liberal media basically report on the election with extreme bias for their favoured candidate. When their favoured candidate loses, they blame it on "fake news" and then instead of reporting unsourced ludicrous acusations themselves, they wait for some non-mainstream site to report it, and then report on other sources reporting it as if it has any sort of legitimacy.

lol

Thanks for this nonsense.

 

[Got]

I know exactly what he's said, and it has been widely mis-reported in the "mainstream media". So liberal media basically report on the election with extreme bias for their favoured candidate. When their favoured candidate loses, they blame it on "fake news" and then instead of reporting unsourced ludicrous acusations themselves, they wait for some non-mainstream site to report it, and then report on other sources reporting it as if it has any sort of legitimacy.

Really, you don't think that CNN was biased towards Hillary? (and obviosly Fox was biased towards Trump).

CNN hires a Trump mouthpiece but they were biased towards Hillary. You can't make this shit up.

 

[Ollie Pooch]

Really, you don't think that CNN was biased towards Hillary? (and obviosly Fox was biased towards Trump).

Between their endless coverage of Trump and focus on her emails?

I wish when people claimed 'liberal media' they could actually provide specific examples of bias or favouritism.

 

[KO Traveling Hobo]

Pretty much, yeah. Nuclear non-proliferation has been pretty much off the table for the whole of the Obama administration. This is massive news for those of us who have been trying to push this back on to the table. Look, I understand that most people campaigning for non-proliferation are also opposed to Trump's other views, but that's not the point, this is a massive opportunity to reduce the world's nuclear weapons, and those that oppose that due to their personal political views of the US president are idiots.

This is part of why Trump won, and why I hesitate to brand them all as malicious bigots: Trump flip flops constantly and lies through his teeth, and people like BKK just cherrypick which parts they want to believe and tune out everything else.

 

[metalslimer]

Really, you don't think that CNN was biased towards Hillary? (and obviosly Fox was biased towards Trump).

Yes Clinton news network blah blah blah we've heard it from your types. As if they didn't spend months only talking about her emails

But continue on please. I want to hear more Breitbart level analysis

 

[Volimar]

^Or months of giving equal weight to the words of Trump and his cheerleaders on CNN.



I love that threads keep pointing to these interview(s) and taking Trump seriously as if he has any plans to follow through. As if he hasn't just been vomiting bile and calling them plans since he began his campaign. There's no reason to take him at his word unless he actually tries to DO any of what he's promising.

 

[chrislowe]

So we reduce our nuclear arms and stop the sanctions and Russia will reduce their nuclear arms? How is the a win for the US?

Maybe a economical win which means more jobs in usa in companys exporting to russia aswell less chance of a nuclear war.

 

[Ac30]

I know exactly what he's said, and it has been widely mis-reported in the "mainstream media". So liberal media basically report on the election with extreme bias for their favoured candidate. When their favoured candidate loses, they blame it on "fake news" and then instead of reporting unsourced ludicrous acusations themselves, they wait for some non-mainstream site to report it, and then report on other sources reporting it as if it has any sort of legitimacy.

Anyway, what did Trump actually say about NATO and Eastern EU countries? They should aim to pay 2% GDP towards defense. This is what all NATO countries have commited to, and what US under Obama have been moaning about for ages. Only difference was that Trump threatened consequences for not paying your way.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/jan/15/angela-merkel-refugees-policy-donald-trump

”Of course. Indeed. I know that. I mean, I understand what's going on there. I've been saying for a long time, Nato has problems. It is obsolete because, for a start, it was created many many years ago and secondly, because countries don't pay what they should pay."

NATO isn't obsolete "because it was created many years ago". The question was about the Eastern Bloc fearing Russian aggression and he gives the above amazing non-answer.

 

[Dash_Riprock]

I know exactly what he's said, and it has been widely mis-reported in the "mainstream media". So liberal media basically report on the election with extreme bias for their favoured candidate. When their favoured candidate loses, they blame it on "fake news" and then instead of reporting unsourced ludicrous acusations themselves, they wait for some non-mainstream site to report it, and then report on other sources reporting it as if it has any sort of legitimacy.

Anyway, what did Trump actually say about NATO and Eastern EU countries? They should aim to pay 2% GDP towards defense. This is what all NATO countries have commited to, and what US under Obama have been moaning about for ages. Only difference was that Trump threatened consequences for not paying your way.

I tuned you out the moment you started bitching about "Liberal Media."

Way to discredit yourself.

 

[chicko1983]

Let's assume he is actually co-opted by Putin in the form of blackmail / tapes (and isn't just a personal enrichment con). The tapes will get realeased right at the end of Donald's term/terms as a means of further destabilizing the west. Donald gets nothing from playing along except the inevitable getting delayed. if he were smart he would just call the bluff now.

My thoughts are that if he plays ball, Russia will wipe all his debts, that is what he gets for lifting sanctions.

Or there is something on the tape that is illegal.

 

[BKK]

Yes Clinton news network blah blah blah we've heard it from your types. As if they didn't spend months only talking about her emails

But continue on please.

lol, what does "my type" even mean? The kind of bias that I saw on US "news" networks wouldn't even be allowed in the UK (I remeber fox news got fined for bias in the UK before). Now yes, our newspapers are biased, but news channels? They're pretty restricted. That's why they only broadcast CNN International, and not the US CNN in the UK.

 

[Carpe Libertatem]

That's why they only broadcast CNN International, and not the US CNN in the UK.

Or because.. the UK is an international market to CNN. Why show a US-focused news channel in another country?

 

[metalslimer]

lol, what does "my type" even mean? The kind of bias that I saw on US "news" networks wouldn't even be allowed in the UK (I remeber fox news got fined for bias in the UK before). Now yes, our newspapers are biased, but news channels? They're pretty restricted. That's why they only broadcast CNN International, and not the US CNN in the UK.

I'm sorry US news didn't live up to your standards of defending Trump enough after admitting to sexually assaulting women.

 

[Subpar Spatula]

"Disarm 100 nukes and we'll lift sanctions" is pretty much what this means. Doesn't stop Russia's military from bullying around Eastern Europe.

 

[JoeyJungle]

HOLY FUCKING SHIT

WE ALREADY HAVE A NUCLEAR REDUCTIONS TREATY WITH RUSSIA

IT'S IN PLACE UNTIL 2021

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_START

 

[KO Traveling Hobo]

My thoughts are that if he plays ball, Russia will wipe all his debts, that is what he gets for lifting sanctions.

Or there is something on the tape that is illegal.

There is almost no reason for Putin to uphold his end of that bargain.

 

[BKK]

I'm sorry US news didn't live up to your standards of defending Trump enough after admitting to sexually assaulting women.

You're missing the point, Trump had plenty of coverage over that in the UK. But during elections TV stations have to give equal coverage to all parties.