Trump pulling U.S. out of U.N. arms treaty, heeding NRA

[metisdead]

Some posts containing unsubstantiated facts have been removed.  A post with a derogatory misuse of Trump's name has been removed. 

[thaibeachlovers]

13 hours ago, ronrat said:

If Trump disrespects the UN so much why doesn't he kick them out of New York or what that just empty out half of Trump towers.

In my opinion, he needs it so he can save Israel from all the countries that oppose it, with the veto.

If the UN moved elsewhere without the US on the security council, Israel would probably be a pariah state within a month, in my opinion.

Edited April 29, 2019 by thaibeachlovers

[thaibeachlovers]

22 minutes ago, car720 said:

Amazing actually how this has become a Rest of the World against America style argument.  I wonder why.

Don't include me in that. The US is the only thing preventing a certain country taking over my part of the world, IMO.

I want a US military with a huge budget, that Trump is pushing for.

[riclag]

23 minutes ago, car720 said:

Amazing actually how this has become a Rest of the World against America style argument.  I wonder why.

How many countries are feelin the no more hand outs and pay your way agenda in the UN

[metisdead]

Some more off topic bickering posts and replies have been removed. 

[Snow Leopard]

On 4/28/2019 at 4:03 AM, bluesofa said:

Surely, the end result of all this is so many guns used to kill so many of your own population?

Let them kill each other. I can never understand why you would need an assault rifle to go hunting. 

[4675636b596f75]

22 minutes ago, Snow Leopard said:

I can never understand why you would need an assault rifle to go hunting

What you call an assault weapon, is a weapon that someone disabled or old can handle.  

[stevenl]

1 hour ago, 4675636b596f75 said:

yes

I must admit I had to look up the raincoat guy.

[metisdead]

Off topic posts and replies have been removed.  Please stay on topic. 

[4675636b596f75]

On 4/28/2019 at 6:22 AM, rooster59 said:

and embraced an NRA proposal for arming teachers to defend schools.

I have mixed feelings about this.  Arming what would be mostly LIBERAL teachers puts conservative students in danger of being shot in anger by those LIBERAL teachers who suffer from TDS.

 

 

 

1

On 4/28/2019 at 6:22 AM, rooster59 said:

On Twitter, Trump called the decision a defence of "American sovereignty." In reversing the U.S. position on the pact, he wrote, "We will never allow foreign bureaucrats to trample on your Second Amendment freedoms."

This is why Donald J Trump is the Patriot President.

 

On 4/28/2019 at 6:22 AM, rooster59 said:

With Friday's announcement, Trump continued his drive to roll back Obama-era initiatives.

 

Initiatives of a President who relished killing Americans, including an American Boy, is what he should do.  Obviously, President Obama was a very sick man.

 

On 4/28/2019 at 6:22 AM, rooster59 said:

Friday's speech marked the third consecutive year Trump has spoken to the annual meeting of the NRA. Since his election, he has been a vocal proponent of gun rights, a position that plays well with his political base.

 

Gun rights are paramount.  Go Mr. Patriot President.

 

On 4/28/2019 at 6:22 AM, rooster59 said:

In May, 2018, Trump pulled the United States out of a 2015 international deal that eased sanctions on Iran in exchange for strict limits being placed on Iran's nuclear activities. The United States has since reimposed some sanctions that had been suspended under the deal.

The same President Obama who murdered an American Boy in Yemen also gave millions to Iran.  It boggles the mind.

[malagateddy]

Amazing actually how this has become a Rest of the World against America style argument.  I wonder why.

As a British Royalist and Unionist..I tell you to speak for yourself..

Sent from my SM-G7102 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[Scott]

Off-topic posts and replies removed.

 

[Scott]

Off-topic, troll posts and reply removed.  

 

Continue and face a suspension.  

[Nyezhov]

On 4/28/2019 at 2:21 PM, Redline said:

The reason for the amendment was to keep slaves in check-a bit out of context now

Bullpucky. Show us where you learned that little tidbit of silliness

[Nyezhov]

17 hours ago, car720 said:

Amazing actually how this has become a Rest of the World against America style argument.  I wonder why.

Always like that. Same way folks take potshots at Robby Keane, when you are the best and the baddest.....

[Redline]

7 hours ago, Nyezhov said:

Bullpucky. Show us where you learned that little tidbit of silliness

It’s documented, don’t be lazy

[Nyezhov]

5 hours ago, Redline said:

It’s documented, don’t be lazy

In other words, you got nothing.

[bristolboy]

On 4/30/2019 at 4:58 PM, Nyezhov said:

In other words, you got nothing.

Or, in still other words, I've got something:

Was Slavery a Factor in the Second Amendment?

For many Americans, if there is an image that comes to mind when they think about that amendment, it is the musket in the hands of minutemen at Lexington and Concord.

A dramatic but little-known story reveals that a more accurate image may be the musket in the hands of slave owners. It explains why, when he entered Congress and wrote a Bill of Rights, James Madison included a right to bear arms, and why it included the clause “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State …”

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/24/opinion/second-amendment-slavery-james-madison.html

[atyclb]

On 4/30/2019 at 6:44 PM, bristolboy said:

Or, in still other words, I've got something:

Was Slavery a Factor in the Second Amendment?

For many Americans, if there is an image that comes to mind when they think about that amendment, it is the musket in the hands of minutemen at Lexington and Concord.

A dramatic but little-known story reveals that a more accurate image may be the musket in the hands of slave owners. It explains why, when he entered Congress and wrote a Bill of Rights, James Madison included a right to bear arms, and why it included the clause “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State …”

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/24/opinion/second-amendment-slavery-james-madison.html

 

some may have been thinking that but it does in no way mitigate the second amendment as a safety clause in the event a tyrannical government should develop in the future.

[Spidey]

2 minutes ago, atyclb said:

 

some may have been thinking that but it does in no way mitigate the second amendment as a safety clause in the event a tyrannical government should develop in the future.

You've already got one. Break out the muskets!

[atyclb]

30 minutes ago, Spidey said:

You've already got one. Break out the muskets!

 

i don't perceive it as tyrannical 

[Nyezhov]

36 minutes ago, atyclb said:

 

some may have been thinking that but it does in no way mitigate the second amendment as a safety clause in the event a tyrannical government should develop in the future.

citing the ny times for anyhting means nothing

[stevenl]

35 minutes ago, atyclb said:

 

some may have been thinking that but it does in no way mitigate the second amendment as a safety clause in the event a tyrannical government should develop in the future.

Yes, if the king of England tried to retake the USA. 

[Spidey]

3 minutes ago, stevenl said:

Yes, if the king of England tried to retake the USA. 

You can laugh. When William is King he'll no doubt send his brother over to sort you out.

 

He's already been over, violated and carried off one of your maidens.

[stevenl]

6 minutes ago, Spidey said:

You can laugh. When William is King he'll no doubt send his brother over to sort you out.

 

He's already been over, violated and carried off one of your maidens.

Not exactly mine, and I don't think she could be called a young girl anymore.

[atyclb]

3 hours ago, stevenl said:

3 hours ago, atyclb said:

 

some may have been thinking that but it does in no way mitigate the second amendment as a safety clause in the event a tyrannical government should develop in the future.

Yes, if the king of England tried to retake the USA. 

 

 

is that the only scenario you can think of?

[atyclb]

3 hours ago, Nyezhov said:

citing the ny times for anyhting means nothing

 

when i was growing up it did mean something.

[Redline]

3 hours ago, Nyezhov said:

citing the ny times for anyhting means nothing

I would totally believe Trump, as he has topped 10,000 lies or untruths since he started his presidency.  Although, it is second nature, as it is well known, he has been a chronic lier for most of his childhood/life.  I guess your word means something?  Maybe it’s time to familiarize yourself with the NYTs?  I’m sure you will have your platform of millions someday ????

[bristolboy]

4 hours ago, Nyezhov said:

citing the ny times for anyhting means nothing

Actually it was an historian writing an article for the New York Times. Dismissing it is the expected bloviating retreat. What it means is you got nothing.

[Nyezhov]

55 minutes ago, Redline said:

I would totally believe Trump, as he has topped 10,000 lies or untruths since he started his presidency.  Although, it is second nature, as it is well known, he has been a chronic lier for most of his childhood/life.  I guess your word means something?  Maybe it’s time to familiarize yourself with the NYTs?  I’m sure you will have your platform of millions someday ????

My word means nothing until history reads this topic in a hundred years. History is history. The Times is opinion.

 

 

Edited April 30, 2019 by Nyezhov