Remember these articles during the Obama and Clinton administrations?
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-75 next last
To: 2ndDivisionVet
Tell it to the NORK Young Un and then get back with us.
2 posted on
08/13/2017 12:51:00 PM PDT by
FlingWingFlyer
(Good morning FR! Is Ruth Buzzi Ginsberg still breathing?)
To: 2ndDivisionVet
I remember Pickles was the one demanding how launch commands had to be obeyed and blabbing about response time.
3 posted on
08/13/2017 12:51:38 PM PDT by
wally_bert
(I didn't get where I am today by selling ice cream tasting of bookends, pumice stone & West Germany)
To: 2ndDivisionVet
They were daily, correct?
4 posted on
08/13/2017 12:51:48 PM PDT by
EEGator
To: 2ndDivisionVet
No. I had given up on SA by the end of the Reagan Administration.
To: 2ndDivisionVet
As if Scientific American has the ability to prevent the porcine dictator in North Korea from launching his.
Ludicrous concept.
6 posted on
08/13/2017 12:53:15 PM PDT by
Vaquero
(Don't pick a fight with an old guy. If he is too old to fight, he'll just kill you.)
To: 2ndDivisionVet
...because we need a committee to approve a counter-strike when inbounds are on the way.
-PJ
7 posted on
08/13/2017 12:53:50 PM PDT by
Political Junkie Too
(The 1st Amendment gives the People the right to a free press, not CNN the right to the 1st question.)
To: 2ndDivisionVet
🚀. Or Kim Jong dung. And, he don't care.
8 posted on
08/13/2017 12:54:05 PM PDT by
rktman
(Enlisted in the Navy in '67 to protect folks rights to strip my rights. WTH?!)
To: 2ndDivisionVet
Editors of, "Scientific American"
10 posted on
08/13/2017 12:55:06 PM PDT by
BigEdLB
(To Dimwitocrats: We won. You lost. Get used to it.)
To: 2ndDivisionVet
“Scientific American” is neither ...
11 posted on
08/13/2017 12:55:38 PM PDT by
SecondAmendment
(Restoring our Republic at 9.8357x10^8 FPS)
To: 2ndDivisionVet
I agree but only if I am the second person.
12 posted on
08/13/2017 12:56:36 PM PDT by
freedumb2003
(The UK has no death penalty, unless you are an 11 month old infant with no arrest history)
To: 2ndDivisionVet
Launching should not be a vote by a committee decision.
13 posted on
08/13/2017 12:57:25 PM PDT by
SkyDancer
(You know they invented wheelbarrows to teach FAA inspectors to walk on their hind legs.)
To: 2ndDivisionVet
In just five minutes an American president insane, loonytoons NORK dicatator could put all of humanity in jeopardy. Added some truth to this fiasco. Scientific American is nothing but a liberal rag. It has really gone downhill since I subscribed to it back in the 60s and 70s.
15 posted on
08/13/2017 12:58:57 PM PDT by
FlingWingFlyer
(Good morning FR! Is Ruth Buzzi Ginsberg still breathing?)
To: 2ndDivisionVet
Sorry, but entire article is BS. POTUS cannot launch on his own. SECDEF, SECSTATE, AG or others at that level must "confirm" order.
16 posted on
08/13/2017 12:58:58 PM PDT by
Strac6
("Mrs. Strac, Pilatus, and Sig Sauer: All the fun things in my life are Swiss!")
To: 2ndDivisionVet
Nope...but I remember them in the 1980s. Liberals project their own traits on their opposition.
Also, the silence during Barry’s Lybia excursion was deafening, compared to the calls for Bush to have congressional authorization in Iraq...a delay that likely enabled the smuggling of wmd out of the country.
17 posted on
08/13/2017 12:59:47 PM PDT by
lacrew
To: 2ndDivisionVet
“In the News/Activism forum, on a thread titled No One Should Have Sole Authority to Launch a Nuclear Attack, 2ndDivisionVet wrote:
Remember these articles during the Obama and Clinton administrations?”
My immediate thought as well.
SciAm has gone downhill fast.
18 posted on
08/13/2017 12:59:50 PM PDT by
ifinnegan
(Democrats kill babies and harvest their organs to sell)
To: 2ndDivisionVet
Let the US Senate vote on it. LOL!
To: 2ndDivisionVet
Yes, they were quite plentiful weren’t they?
Especially when the Frank Davis-trained ‘community organizer” took office
The PARANOIA was just overwhelming, wasn’t it?
21 posted on
08/13/2017 1:01:20 PM PDT by
A_Former_Democrat
("Liberalism is a mental disorder" On FULL Display NOW! Boycott Mex/Can, nba NFL PepsiCO Kellogg'sB)
To: 2ndDivisionVet
And editors from Scientific American get their credentials in military and diplomatic issues from where?!
This article freely mixes apples and potatoes. Trump is not even close to expending our entire nuclear arsenal on this windbag. Mentioning the launching of 400 missiles is ridiculous. Four would probably be more than sufficient.
The slams on President Trump in this article are obvious. This includes the statements about how the handlers of the launch codes have to pass mental exams.
Liberals have never understood the deterrence afforded by a nuclear arsenal. They have demonstrated that their brand of diplomacy has not deterred North Korea one bit. But they are certain that when someone arrives who speaks brashly to this punk N.K. dictator in his own language, that that is really dangerous.
To: 2ndDivisionVet
Remember these articles during the Obama and Clinton administrations?
They wanted Obama and the USA to Surrender to the Rogue Regimes Worldwide, I bet Obama is pissed off as hell he missed out on his chance to Formally waive the White Flagn on behalf of the USA, not much has changed, they are just pissed Trump might stand up and fight for WE THE PEOPLE!
23 posted on
08/13/2017 1:02:41 PM PDT by
eyeamok
(Idle hands are the Devil's workshop)
To: 2ndDivisionVet
When precious minutes count, how about we get Mitch McConnell and Paul Ryan to hammer out a plan?
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-75 next last
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson