[27 / 4 / ?]
Let's suppose that you're the president of the united states of america, and you have 100% total unconditional unilateral unquestionable support of your people under the citizenship classifications of the country. And then if you attack any soldier in a foreign country, and the foreign country promptly promises retaliation for this act, do you support the use of over the 3/4 to 4/4 of the weapons in stock to attack, destroy and annihilate soldiers and civilians of the foreign nation? And, remember, this includes the killing of women, children, elderly, disabled, etc (basically, no people should be exception or exempted from the killing rule).
Anonymous
No I don't because I believe that killing innocent people is wrong and it is better to settle things through diplomatic discussion.
random_username
I don't think this way. Why play a game of enduring suffering against one nation when you can exterminate all the population while displaying your military power superiority? When all the international organizations will be subjected to the biggest military power in the world, why discuss this problem? Why don't let an entire population, language and culture disappear completely if this fulfills your own expectations of peace?
Anonymous
im pretty sure it says in the constitution to try diplomacy first
Anonymous
Quoted By:
also it would effect you because of globalisation
Anonymous
qbert
>>9410357 Are you some goddamn psychopath or you seriously can't figure you why?
Anonymous
oh yeah yeah if i was the king of the USA i think i would set a few things straight with my absolute rule
Q
>>9410400 lay those rulez on me chief
Anonymous
>>9410402 disband nato
disband ue
disband the internet
cut funding to greater israel and instead fund great romania
sack all multinationals
disband all foreign military bases
discriminate against all mutts
bring back jim crow laws
and more
qbert
No, and my question is perfectly reasonable as I specified a lot of things. And, given the fact that being a top politician will ruin your sanity, this question is justified by the existence of certain governments in the world.
random_username
>>9410 No, and my question is perfectly reasonable as I specified a lot of things. And, given the fact that being a top politician will ruin your sanity, this question is justified by the existence of certain governments in the world.
Anonymous
random_uername
>>9410438 >0438▶ >No, AnD mY QuEstIoN iS PeRfeCtlY ReAsOnAblE Killing a bunch of people who had nothing to do with your bullshit power game is not reasonable for a normal person desu
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>9410468 it's reasonable to an american and those who are american sympathizers
Anonymous
Quoted By:
i would nuke America and Israel
random_username
Quoted By:
>>9410372 The president itself have more powers than a piece of paper that he even didn't wrote. Himself is the man who can write the rules even if the rest of the government doesn't believe in him as he can have a secret police or special army/air force/navy team to reinforce his position towards the society.
Q
Quoted By:
>>9410429 chief called, he said this is it
random_username
Quoted By:
>>9410468 It's completely reasonable as you're in power to decide who lives or not based on your own judgment. Reducing the entire population of the enemy country to less than 1% it's the only real possibility to cut any chance of rebirth of the enemy population. Even if other nations try to intervene in the conflict, your stockpile of mass destruction weapons is a very suggestive argument to keep them out of your business.
random_username
Quoted By:
>>9410468 I've seen a lot of people pretending to be honest, careful and kind in this world, and I can assure you that I should kill myself if just one innocent die in my government. Is a thing that can touch me more than the death of a parent, a friend or any famous person in this planet, because it shows me that I failed as a politician and as a human being. The next time someone tell you that you live in a democracy, start to look around and tr to figure out if every single person is democratic as they think they act.
random_username
Quoted By:
>>9410429 Let's assume that Romania will be destroyed in less than 3 hours. An entire population, culture and language dissipated by nuclear fallout and double-citizenship people living abroad being killed secretly by SEALs, US Marshalls, FBI and others. 30 million doesn't seem to hard for a fleet of 10 subs and 20 surface ships in the Black Sea. And let's enlarge the special forces to around 200,000 soldiers. Every other country in the world will not speak about romanians and not mention their existence for the rest of the other people lives. Feeling safe?
random_username
Quoted By:
>>9410389 A lot of politicians, military personnel, CEOs have traits of psychopathy. If you take a closer look upon their speeches and acts, just building up a small vision of what his entire life was you can tell it if he/she thinks his life is more important to him than the other ones around it.
random_username
>>9410196 I tried to believe in diplomacy, but innocent people are killed because mistakes in diplomacy. If I only had a neutral country and that massive military power to argue against conflicts...
Anonymous
>>9410648 Sweden has everything but a massive military and being a neutral country does not just mean not having enemies, it also means not having any Allies.
Anonymous
>>9409497 Mmmm yes I like this thread
random_username
random_username
Quoted By:
>>9411624 For a country like Sweden it's easier to impose another culture, but to launch a military campaign against it is way quicker than my example against Romania. If you're in the control of your special forces you'll not spare the sick and the infants. Send a fully armed platoon to haze an entire hospital in the occupied area. When you have over than 60,000 ICBMs equipped with +4 nuclear charges, who will discuss the death of innocent people by your orders?