Not to sound ignorant

[Pat Vegas]

I really don't give 2 ****s about North Korea and not quite sure where Guam is.

Should I be concerned?

I don't follow the news much and my life is better for it imo.

[IUFG]

Should I be concerned?

Nah. other side of the World innit

[Pat Vegas]

Nah. other side of the World innit

I am concerned that this season is going to be a **** won for Arsenal.

Should I be concerned?

[IUFG]

I am concerned that this season is going to be a **** won for Arsenal.

Should I be concerned?

Don't be concerned, f.

It WILL be a **** season for The Arsenal.

Starting with a loss on Friday. Lester are 11/2
*****************FREE MONEY*****************

[Burney]

I really don't give 2 ****s about North Korea and not quite sure where Guam is.

Should I be concerned?

I don't follow the news much and my life is better for it imo.

All you need to know is that North Korea is a belligerent rogue state that has repeatedly and explicitly threatened its neighbours and US territory with nuclear attack, but everything is still Donald Trump's fault for trying to actually do something about it.

[Billy Goat Sverige]

All you need to know is that North Korea is a rogue state that has explicitly threatened its neighbours and US territory with nuclear attack, but everything is still Donald Trump's fault for trying to actually do something about it.

There's actually people seriously discussing which one is madder :hehe:

[Monty92]

There's actually people seriously discussing which one is madder :hehe:

To be fair, none of us know quite how mad Trump is.

[Pat Vegas]

To be fair, none of us know quite how mad Trump is.

I thought it was going to be entertaining with him being president but it's ruined by all the constant outcry and trump discussions :-(

The world is a very extremely boring place these days.

[Burney]

There's actually people seriously discussing which one is madder :hehe:

Better than that, here's one (by keen Islamist Mehdi Hasan) that says Trump is definitely madder. Seriously, there appears to be no depth to which the frothing-at-the-mouth anti-Trump lobby won't sink.

https://theintercept.com/2017/08/09/the-madman-with-nuclear-weapons-is-donald-trump-not-kim-jong-un/

[Pat Vegas]

Don't be concerned, f.

It WILL be a **** season for The Arsenal.

Starting with a loss on Friday. Lester are 11/2
*****************FREE MONEY*****************

we finished 5th last season and I actually think we are weaker as a team.
this is assuming that Sanchez will not stay.

Lacazette will be good but he won't get as many goals as Sanchez did. I think we bought him just to fill the gap of Sanchez's goals.

However I do expect Xhaka to be brilliant this season and the other new fella will be good. We may re enter the top 4 but will be more of the same I reckon.

[Burney]

To be fair, none of us know quite how mad Trump is.

It's not really germane because the term is meaningless and entirely subjective. We can only judge by the actions of the individuals and, since the Donald has never had people torn apart by dogs, blown apart by heavy calibre machine guns, publicly murdered any of his relatives, tortured, starved or brutalised his population, I'm going to take his side against the guy who's done all those things.

[Rich]

All you need to know is that North Korea is a belligerent rogue state that has repeatedly and explicitly threatened its neighbours and US territory with nuclear attack, but everything is still Donald Trump's fault for trying to actually do something about it.

It's all just posturing from Kim though, isn't it? Designed purely to impress his people and make him seem powerful. The Don knows that the Kim dynasty isn't suicidal and launching an attack on Guam or indeed any other US ally would result in the country being blown to kingdom-come and therefore the end of said dynasty.

[Pat Vegas]

It's all just posturing from Kim though, isn't it? Designed purely to impress his people and make him seem powerful. The Don knows that the Kim dynasty isn't suicidal and launching an attack on Guam or indeed any other US ally would result in the country being blown to kingdom-come and therefore the end of said dynasty.

:-( Does this mean later on there will be Korean version Allans attacking us?

[Monty92]

It's not really germane because the term is meaningless and entirely subjective. We can only judge by the actions of the individuals and, since the Donald has never had people torn apart by dogs, blown apart by heavy calibre machine guns, publicly murdered any of his relatives, tortured, starved or brutalised his population, I'm going to take his side against the guy who's done all those things.

Of course, but the bar for judging Trump's madness should be higher than it is Kim's and should be considered relative to the fundamental requirements for being President of America. The simple fact is that we can't rule out the possibility that Trump is sufficiently psychologically unhinged that he could lead us into a nuclear confrontation with NK for reasons more about his own psychological comfort than bumbling politics. That is a mad situation, at the very least.

[Rich]

we finished 5th last season and I actually think we are weaker as a team.
this is assuming that Sanchez will not stay.

Lacazette will be good but he won't get as many goals as Sanchez did. I think we bought him just to fill the gap of Sanchez's goals.

However I do expect Xhaka to be brilliant this season and the other new fella will be good. We may re enter the top 4 but will be more of the same I reckon.

How can you seriously be unhappy with top 4? We obviously won't compete with City or United because they can spend vastly more money than us. We need to be happy with the best we can realistically achieve.

Also, Sanchez won't leave. Wenger has been very clear on this on multiple occasions. Think how silly he'd look if he let him go after saying 4/5 times that he will definitely, without a doubt be an Arsenal player this season.

[IUFG]

We may re enter the top 4 but will be more of the same I reckon.

agree. plus ça change and all that

[Rich]

:-( Does this mean later on there will be Korean version Allans attacking us?

I doubt it considering that very few of them have set up colonies in other lands. All the ones that are locked in there will be deaded.

[Burney]

It's all just posturing from Kim though, isn't it? Designed purely to impress his people and make him seem powerful. The Don knows that the Kim dynasty isn't suicidal and launching an attack on Guam or indeed any other US ally would result in the country being blown to kingdom-come and therefore the end of said dynasty.

Who knows? How long can such a regime be allowed to destabilise the region and threaten key US interests? There is no doubt he's building a nuclear weapons programme and wants ICBMs. At what point does the US act? Before he's achieved that or after?

[Pat Vegas]

How can you seriously be unhappy with top 4? We obviously won't compete with City or United because they can spend vastly more money than us. We need to be happy with the best we can realistically achieve.

Also, Sanchez won't leave. Wenger has been very clear on this on multiple occasions. Think how silly he'd look if he let him go after saying 4/5 times that he will definitely, without a doubt be an Arsenal player this season.

Come on Rich. Wenger has made this strong 'he will stay' stance in order to fish for a big offer. also makes the fans thing he is staying.

Now the season has started he is mysteriously injured. :sherlock:

Plus 'competing' spending money with other clubs is a myth that Arsenal fans like to use. We don't need to spend that money. We've been a better team than united for a few years and they have spent **** loads.

We are good squad with a few additions we'd be right up there. Leicester City won the league how did they compete?

tottenham don't spend huge but they are doing well too.

he will be sold at the deadline and not enough time to replace him.

[Rich]

Who knows? How long can such a regime be allowed to destabilise the region and threaten key US interests? There is no doubt he's building a nuclear weapons programme and wants ICBMs. At what point does the US act? Before he's achieved that or after?

Well my opinion is that he wants a nuclear arsenal to protect his dynasty from being overthrown in the same way that Gadaafi was. I assume that Kim is actually a very intelligent man and even if he believes his own bravado, will know that the use of a nuclear/conventional weapon on South Korea/Japan/US territory would result in the entire world (including maybe even China) deciding that he needed to be removed ASAP. This is not a battle that he would want.

[Burney]

Of course, but the bar for judging Trump's madness should be higher than it is Kim's and should be considered relative to the fundamental requirements for being President of America. The simple fact is that we can't rule out the possibility that Trump is sufficiently psychologically unhinged that he could lead us into a nuclear confrontation with NK for reasons more about his own psychological comfort than bumbling politics. That is a mad situation, at the very least.

Of all US Presidents, Kennedy came closest to tipping the world into nuclear war. Was he mad? Could you argue that even to consider the use of nuclear weapons is a sign of madness? He certainly had some very odd ideas.

Ultimately, I don't believe the whole armchair psychiatrist bit is very helpful. It's a stick to beat Trump with and nothing more. Viewed objectively, there is nothing inherently unhinged about the US making it clear that it is prepared to use its military capability to protect its allies and interests against what is plainly and explicitly a real threat posed by a belligerent power.

[Rich]

Come on Rich. Wenger has made this strong 'he will stay' stance in order to fish for a big offer. also makes the fans thing he is staying.

Now the season has started he is mysteriously injured. :sherlock:

Plus 'competing' spending money with other clubs is a myth that Arsenal fans like to use. We don't need to spend that money. We've been a better team than united for a few years and they have spent **** loads.

We are good squad with a few additions we'd be right up there. Leicester City won the league how did they compete?

tottenham don't spend huge but they are doing well too.

he will be sold at the deadline and not enough time to replace him.

Alexis will be an Arsenal player in May. When his contract expires, he will cease to be so.

[Pat Vegas]

Alexis will be an Arsenal player in May. When his contract expires, he will cease to be so.

He will never play for us again imo

[Burney]

I assume that Kim is actually a very intelligent man

I have literally no idea why you would assume that. His actions have increased his regime's chances of annihilation, not decreased them.

[Rich]

I have literally no idea why you would assume that. His actions have increased his regime's chances of annihilation, not decreased them.

Wasn't he educated in one of the finest schools in Switzerland? Granted, that doesn't give you intelligence but he's certainly had all the assistance he could want for.

[Burney]

Wasn't he educated in one of the finest schools in Switzerland? Granted, that doesn't give you intelligence but he's certainly had all the assistance he could want for.

He was educated in a very expensive school in Switzerland, from which he emerged without even the equivalent of a single GCSE, with OK English and poor German.

[Mo Britain less Europe]

If the Koreans attack they will end up eating dog.

[redgunamo]

Of course, but the bar for judging Trump's madness should be higher than it is Kim's and should be considered relative to the fundamental requirements for being President of America. The simple fact is that we can't rule out the possibility that Trump is sufficiently psychologically unhinged that he could lead us into a nuclear confrontation with NK for reasons more about his own psychological comfort than bumbling politics. That is a mad situation, at the very least.

Not really. That's just what the news business wants you to think, as their bogus anti-Donald narratives are a yuge money-spinner for them right now.

[World's End Stella]

Of all US Presidents, Kennedy came closest to tipping the world into nuclear war. Was he mad? Could you argue that even to consider the use of nuclear weapons is a sign of madness? He certainly had some very odd ideas.

Ultimately, I don't believe the whole armchair psychiatrist bit is very helpful. It's a stick to beat Trump with and nothing more. Viewed objectively, there is nothing inherently unhinged about the US making it clear that it is prepared to use its military capability to protect its allies and interests against what is plainly and explicitly a real threat posed by a belligerent power.

You would describe the Cuban missile crisis as Kennedy coming close to tipping the world into nuclear war?

You could make a pretty strong argument that he did very well to stop it from happening.

[Burney]

You would describe the Cuban missile crisis as Kennedy coming close to tipping the world into nuclear war?

You could make a pretty strong argument that he did very well to stop it from happening.

In response to a nuclear threat to US territory, he chose to escalate the situation to the brink of nuclear war. That he may have been right to do so and the fact that we got back from that brink don't alter that fact.
My point is that nobody calls him mad for those actions.

[Monty92]

In response to a nuclear threat to US territory, he chose to escalate the situation to the brink of nuclear war. That he may have been right to do so and the fact that we got back from that brink don't alter that fact.
My point is that nobody calls him mad for those actions.

People aren't calling Trump mad for his actions on NK so far. They're expressing concern that if he is indeed mad, or more likely of a psychologically imbalanced personality type, then we have reason to fear that the racheting up of the rhetoric that we've heard from him is a harbinger of his inclinations to actually put his threats into practice, even if doing so was a terrible idea.

Of course, his willingness to put his threats into practice must be real, otherwise they are meaningless as a deterrent. But that benefit is predicated on the assumption that doing so would be the right and neccesary decision.

[World's End Stella]

In response to a nuclear threat to US territory, he chose to escalate the situation to the brink of nuclear war. That he may have been right to do so and the fact that we got back from that brink don't alter that fact.
My point is that nobody calls him mad for those actions.

The way you phrased it implied that he had initiated the conflict that brought us close to nuclear war when in fact he reacted to extreme provocation very cautiously and diplomatically. He was under a lot of pressure from people like Lemay to bomb the Cuban missile sites (now that would have been escalation) but chose instead to use the embargo and diplomacy to resolve the situation.

Not sure anyone would consider him mad for the way he handled it, it was one if his finest moments.

[Burney]

The way you phrased it implied that he had initiated the conflict that brought us close to nuclear war when in fact he reacted to extreme provocation very cautiously and diplomatically. He was under a lot of pressure from people like Lemay to bomb the Cuban missile sites (now that would have been escalation) but chose instead to use the embargo and diplomacy to resolve the situation.

Not sure anyone would consider him mad for the way he handled it, it was one if his finest moments.

To be fair, that 'extreme provocation' was only the same provocation the Russians endured when the US Atlas missiles were stationed in Turkey (Americans don't tend to mention that aspect). It could be argued that Kennedy's reaction was excessively precipitous - although whether he had any choice other than to react that way in the face of public reaction to missiles in Cuba is another question.

In all honestly, though, the situation you describe is analogous - albeit not identical - to Trump's vis-a-vis North Korea. Extreme nuclear provocation and threats to US territory, interests and allies. My beef is that Trump as POTUS is legitimately entitled to react in the way he has, but is castigated for it purely because people don't like him rather on the merits of his actions.

[Burney]

People aren't calling Trump mad for his actions on NK so far. They're expressing concern that if he is indeed mad, or more likely of a psychologically imbalanced personality type, then we have reason to fear that the racheting up of the rhetoric that we've heard from him is a harbinger of his inclinations to actually put his threats into practice, even if doing so was a terrible idea.

Of course, his willingness to put his threats into practice must be real, otherwise they are meaningless as a deterrent. But that benefit is predicated on the assumption that doing so would be the right and neccesary decision.

Well that presupposes an awful lot of things, though, doesn't it? First that Trump's idiosyncracies mean he's psychologically imbalanced. That's seems to be more about the prejudices of his critics than anything else.

The other supposition, of course, is that smashing NK would be a bad idea.

[Monty92]

Well that presupposes an awful lot of things, though, doesn't it? First that Trump's idiosyncracies mean he's psychologically imbalanced. That's seems to be more about the prejudices of his critics than anything else.

The other supposition, of course, is that smashing NK would be a bad idea.

There may well be scenarios in which smashing NK was a good idea. But the fears are based on a concern that he is also capable of smashing NK when it is a fundamentally bad idea. Clever types often talk about the risks of political/military miscalculations that can forge an unintended and irreversible path to war. Someone with Trump's manifest personality idiosyncracies strikes most of us as the clearest example of someone more likely to commit such an error than most others you may expect to find in such a position of power.

[Burney]

There may well be scenarios in which smashing NK was a good idea. But the fears are based on a concern that he is also capable of smashing NK when it is a fundamentally bad idea. Clever types often talk about the risks of political/military miscalculations that can forge an unintended and irreversible path to war. Someone with Trump's manifest personality idiosyncracies strikes most of us as the clearest example of someone more likely to commit such an error than most others you may expect to find in such a position of power.

If you're saying that personality often dictates action, well duh. However, I think the mistake with Trump is to let his presentational and rhetorical tics blind you to his actual actions. When it comes to actual executive action, there isn't actually much evidence of him being this hot-headed wildcard he's made out to be.

[Monty92]

To be fair, that 'extreme provocation' was only the same provocation the Russians endured when the US Atlas missiles were stationed in Turkey (Americans don't tend to mention that aspect). It could be argued that Kennedy's reaction was excessively precipitous - although whether he had any choice other than to react that way in the face of public reaction to missiles in Cuba is another question.

In all honestly, though, the situation you describe is analogous - albeit not identical - to Trump's vis-a-vis North Korea. Extreme nuclear provocation and threats to US territory, interests and allies. My beef is that Trump as POTUS is legitimately entitled to react in the way he has, but is castigated for it purely because people don't like him rather on the merits of his actions.

Isn't it just the words he used that people didn't like? Fire and fury? If he'd have just said "the gravest issues would arise", a la JFK at the start of the Cuban crisis, no-one would have had much beef.

[Burney]

Isn't it just the words he used that people didn't like? Fire and fury? If he'd have just said "the gravest issues would arise", a la JFK at the start of the Cuban crisis, no-one would have had much beef.

And yet old Barry O'Bama said this and no-one gave a shít. :shrug:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/04/26/us-developing-missile-shield-to-guard-against-nuclear-attack-fro/

[Monty92]

And yet old Barry O'Bama said this and no-one gave a shít. :shrug:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/04/26/us-developing-missile-shield-to-guard-against-nuclear-attack-fro/

Bit of a naughty headline that rather distorts the sentiment expressed.

Listen, I'm not going to deny that Trump is treated by different standards. But that's partly just the kind of politics we all engage in, if we're honest, but also a reflection of the fact that his behaviour entitles others to treat him by different standards, imo.

[Luis Anaconda]

And yet old Barry O'Bama said this and no-one gave a shít. :shrug:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/04/26/us-developing-missile-shield-to-guard-against-nuclear-attack-fro/
Wasn't criticised by whom, b? Given that his every step was dogged by certain opponents who challenged his legitimacy as an American citizen and the basis of absolutely bugger all evidence - oh, wait, who was the main cheerleader for that little movement?

What you regard as prejudices can just as easily be seen as well-grounded fears that his braggadocio makes him completely unfit to deal with situations like this and it's hardly unfair to point this out when it makes the sort of wild statements he did the other day. I do agree that his hasn't actually "done" anything wrong but that doesn't make him any less scary. In fact, for all the fuss about him, he doesn't seem to have done an awful lot apart from talk a lot on Twitter (bearing out the point you've made many times about the President having very little power).

[Burney]

Wasn't criticised by whom, b? Given that his every step was dogged by certain opponents who challenged his legitimacy as an American citizen and the basis of absolutely bugger all evidence - oh, wait, who was the main cheerleader for that little movement?

What you regard as prejudices can just as easily be seen as well-grounded fears that his braggadocio makes him completely unfit to deal with situations like this and it's hardly unfair to point this out when it makes the sort of wild statements he did the other day. I do agree that his hasn't actually "done" anything wrong but that doesn't make him any less scary. In fact, for all the fuss about him, he doesn't seem to have done an awful lot apart from talk a lot on Twitter (bearing out the point you've made many times about the President having very little power).

But the point is that they aren't 'well-grounded' fears. They're just prejudices based on a personal distaste for him. You say yourself that he hasn't actually 'done' anything wrong.
To my mind, Trump has to reassure his regional allies that the US will act if they come under real threat and that he isn't going to be a massive pussy like Obama was with his ever-disappearing 'lines in the sand'. A bit of intemperate language was definitely merited.

[redgunamo]

But the point is that they aren't 'well-grounded' fears. They're just prejudices based on a personal distaste for him. You say yourself that he hasn't actually 'done' anything wrong.

:hehe: As kids growing up in the sticks, this was how racial prejudice was always explained to us. Waste of time, of course; there were so few darkies and whatnot about that nobody had ever actually bothered to develop a mechanism for dealing with the topic. There simply wasn't "racism", as urban sorts understood it.

[Peter]

You would describe the Cuban missile crisis as Kennedy coming close to tipping the world into nuclear war?

You could make a pretty strong argument that he did very well to stop it from happening.

And was labelled as a communist for doing so.

[Mo Britain less Europe]

Not sure what the point of raking old ground is. You have a state here which survives on aid it receives from countries it is threatening. It gets away (literally) with murder and it develops weapons of mass destruction so that it can up the ante on its blackmail. Meanhile its people starve while the ruling family enjoys fabulous wealth.

Simple. It has to finish. they either live quietly within their means or they try and conquer countries to subjugate them in order to pay for their excesses. Since the second option is simply not going to happen they will have to be forced to backtrack. And if that means droppong nukes on them - always in response to their attacking first - then so be it.