brainbomb - when you stop being insulting and demeaning to those that you disagree with, when you stop accusing people with different opinoins of horrible things in order to try to silence them, etc -- when you actually live the life by the standard that you set for others, I'll stop flinging my poo at you.

Your only problem is that I'm better at it than you.

You basically are Trump. Its how you argue with people. Literally you and ND sometimes are indistinguishable from one another and Trump. I swear sometimes I see ND type something that is word for word what Trump says. If I ever start quoting Hillary Clinton and blindly believing every word she says, please punch me in the face.

"Democrats are the only people to use nuclear weapons against anyone. Democrats got us involved in Vietnam."

@TrPrado - Republican president Eisenhower sent the first US troops to Vietnam as "advisors."

Republican president Reagan sent an admiral aboard a submarine to authorize nuclear cruise missile launches during his bombing of Libya if the Russians interfered. The submarine was forced to abort the mission after it was damaged in a collision with the sea floor and could no longer stay hidden. One of my friends was a sailor on board.

Trump is already saying he would go nuclear.

Eisenhower didn't get directly involved in the war. He didn't send troops. If you're speaking of MAAGs, Truman sent them as well.

http://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2016/10/13/donald-trump-report-women-touched-inappropriately-nyt-sot-ac.cnn

Im laughing at this Republican strategist whose defense of Trump is that if these allegations by women are true they should take place in court....

Pretty sure Hillarys email scandal was just that and no charges were brought against her... but when its trump its not okay until they go to court.

No charges were brought because the rule of law doesn't apply to Hillary Clinton.

Apparently is doesnt for rapists either. Are all these women lying ND? Just political stunts?

"Shes not attractive enough for me to rape". -sounds totally like a guy whos never done it right...

These stories are very detailed. Wow this is some amazing works of fiction right ND?

Trump is suing the NYT for fabricating a story. He has also called these stories fabrications. http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/14/us/politics/donald-trump-women.html?_r=0

I tend to believe him.

Of course you do. If Trump killed Harambe youd still love him.

Republicans who've been president at the start of a war:
Lincoln
McKinley
Reagan
Both Bush

Democratic
Jackson
Polk
Wilson (it is my disposition to not include Wilson it Roosevelt because these were global wars which one way or another the US was probable to be involved in.)
Roosevelt
Truman
Johnson
Clinton

Just saying 7 including the 2 WW presidents VS 5 is not that damning. Realistically war is usually an inevitability and it just depends on who can put it off longer. For example we have a war with Russia brewing, it's been brewing since the Cold War. Luckily in the 90s we got a long pause on the threat. Now it's coming back, it's going to be fun to see how different leaders manage to pass the ball on each election. Personally I feel as though Clinton can pass the ball but may choose not too and instead war with Russia. Trump I feel will want to pass the ball but won't be able to and instead war with Russia. The question now is do we want the guy who is easily manipulated by Russian media and propaganda or the war hawk who likely has been planning for this her whole life. From a purely self preservation level I'm going with Hillary. (Note I am actually a G.Johnson supporter but if I had to choose between the two big heads Hillary is atleast a bad choice that's been planning for years. Trump seems to throw his stuff together as he goes.)

Note I didn't include every time military force has been projected as that'd be ludicrous. But I did include minor conflicts such as reagans multiple interventions during his tenure because his did include massive movement of us forces. I did not include CIA operations during kennedys time as they did not include massive amounts of military movement.

War with Russia is impossible until we develop reliably successful BMD systems. Which is why some advocate we shouldn't even be trying.

Impossible is a strong word. War doesn't have to come to a unconditional end. Wars can be drawn, postponed, I mean look at Korea. I project that we will fight Russia in the next 20 years or less and when we do it won't be in Russia or in the US it'll be in Asia or Europe and well be on opposite sides of a global conflict. I foresee both of our nations throwing down the nuclear weapons to brawl it out in hopes one can triumph over the other without ending the world. And the sudden war culture will expedite military tech to a point that one side gets to launch their nukes first. With the other being none the wiser

A proxy war is much more likely, but I highly doubt a large scale conflict unless the Russians launch a preemptive strike because the US is too close to neutralizing the threat of their BMs, or the US launches a first strike, knowing that Russia's second strike capabilities will not pass their defenses.