You should probably come to terms with that some day soon before you die an early death. Or before it causes you to judge an entire culture based off its leaders/military (too late).
He's talking about the total populace of a country. You are talking about the portion of our populace that supports Trump. This is not an apples to apples comparison.
I don't judge any culture based on Trump. He's essentially the antithesis of culture. Also, what TwoPoor said above, but that's probably too bookish for your tastes.
Lmao yes it is. Trump supporters are routinely mislabeled and falsely accused of supporting shit based on their vote for trump. All you have to do is read a few pages of the kill Trump thread. Ignorant to think otherwise.
All a Pakistani person did was be born in Pakistan. A Trump supporter, you know, voted for and actively supports Trump. There is an active component to it that nation of origin lacks. I know your main thing is wanting to claim martyrdom and persecution as a Trump supporter, but this comparison does not track to anyone who thinks about it objectively.
So this is all from a terrorist bombing? Seems like Pakistan coulf have an easy way out in killing the terrorist groups.
I am by no means an expert, but that doesn't seem like a course of action they particularly care for, considering past harboring of these organizations.
Instead of nuclear attack, they should just deploy their outsourced call centers to blow up the phone lines in Pakistan
I get that, and its homegrown out of hate for their government. Thats what confuses me. You face getting into an all out war, or you deal with the terrorist that hate your guts. Seems like an easy choice. Has to be more to it, right?
Some of y'all should seriously try reading a couple of wikipedia pages or, idk, a book once in a while.
By "mature" I meant in their nuclear weapons development and force structure, not their foreign policy conduct. One would naturally expect some posturing for domestic audiences on both sides. But even the NYT article from last night indicates that neither side has any interest in this getting out of hand.
"As Narang himself admitted, there’s little reason to believe that India is abandoning its no-first-use nuclear doctrine in favor of a first-strike one. Still, keeping in mind Krepon’s point about miscalculation, that doesn’t mean that these technological changes don’t increase the potential for a nuclear war. It is not hard to imagine a scenario where the two sides stumble into a nuclear war that neither side wants. Perhaps the most plausible scenario would start with a Mumbai-style attack that Indian leaders decide they must respond to. In hopes of keeping the conflict limited to conventional weapons, Delhi might authorize limited punitive raids inside Pakistan, perhaps targeting some of the terrorist camps near the border. These attacks might be misinterpreted by Pakistani leaders, or else unintentionally cross Islamabad’s nuclear thresholds. In an attempt to deescalate by escalating, or else to halt what they believe is an Indian invasion, Pakistani leaders could use tactical nuclear weapons against the Indian troops inside Pakistan." God damn...
keep in mind that imran khan is a person who has huge respect in india as well on account of his former life
https://www.firstpost.com/india/pak...an-ill-afford-to-lower-its-guard-6156621.html What could possibly go wrong?
two things people can follow more than one thing at a time the presidents personal lawyer for a decade, executive in the RNC, publicly testifying that the President committed multiple felonies is a very big deal
All the while, this board as well as most of the country, is glued to the Cohen hearing Most aren’t following two things at a time. I’m saying this is far more important than the trump circus, yet it’s getting hardly any attention