Important Announcement regarding the Alternative Views Subforum

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

Well I guess this defines your "Trump is more powerful than Constantine" comment. If you have nuclear bomb and might commit suicide similar to Samson, then that makes you powerful in Evangelical's definition.

What is your definition of powerful then? Trump has been showing off the military hardware of the US to demonstrate the power of the US.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

What is your definition of powerful then? Trump has been showing off the military hardware of the US to demonstrate the power of the US.

Matthew 18 explains who is the greatest in the kingdom, I would defer to that chapter.

Being able to kill does not make you powerful, being able to raise you from the dead, that is real power.

Being able to stir up a war does not make you powerful, being able to make peace and reconcile the warring parties, that is true power.

[OBW]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

Being able to kill does not make you powerful

For all the nonsense in Star Wars, Yoda got something right:

"War not make one great. "

[awareness]

Originally Posted by OBW

For all the nonsense in Star Wars, Yoda got something right:

"War not make one great. "

Yoda right something got. But if Trump fails to live up to his hype about being great he's gonna need a war to regain his greatness. So to him war will make one great ... him. And that's the most important thing to Trump. Look for WWIII. It's necessary to make Trump great.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by awareness

Yoda right something got. But if Trump fails to live up to his hype about being great he's gonna need a war to regain his greatness. So to him war will make one great ... him. And that's the most important thing to Trump. Look for WWIII. It's necessary to make Trump great.

So is that what made FDR so great?

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Ohio

So is that what made FDR so great?

Was FDR claiming to make everything great?

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by awareness

Was FDR claiming to make everything great?

Trump -- make america great again

FDR -- Happy days are here again

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

Matthew 18 explains who is the greatest in the kingdom, I would defer to that chapter.

Being able to kill does not make you powerful, being able to raise you from the dead, that is real power.

Being able to stir up a war does not make you powerful, being able to make peace and reconcile the warring parties, that is true power.

Why does the USA have weapons then, and nukes. Why does it have so many guns. Take them all away, let's see the "real power" you speak of. Give everyone a trumpet and tell them to march around North Korea 7 times. If only America was Israel. Unlike Israel, the USA's "trust in God" is hidden behind the largest and most powerful military in the world, and one of the largest nuclear arsenals, just in case God does not show up.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

Why does the USA have weapons then, and nukes. Why does it have so many guns. Take them all away, let's see the "real power" you speak of. Give everyone a trumpet and tell them to march around North Korea 7 times. If only America was Israel. Unlike Israel, the USA's "trust in God" is hidden behind the largest and most powerful military in the world, and one of the largest nuclear arsenals, just in case God does not show up.

There are many kinds of power. A locomotive can have the power to pull thousands of tons of train. That is power.

A nuclear bomb has the power to kill many people.

The resurrection has the power to bring in a new creation.

But you didn't say that the US was more powerful than the Roman Empire, you said that Trump was more powerful than Constantine.

Does Trump have the "power" to obliterate at will? I don't believe so. I believe we have many checks and balances before a president could push the button (except in self defense). But even in self defense Trump would give the order which would then have to be carried out by ranking officers.

I don't believe that Constantine was constrained nearly as much as Trump is. He may not have had nuclear bombs yet he may have killed more people.

So if you are measuring "power" in the number you can kill, potentially Trump can kill more, but realistically, practically, factually Constantine killed more. It is extremely hypothetical to think that Trump, on his own, could decide to nuke another country.

No one who took issue with your comment doubts that the US with a nuclear arsenal has the potential to destroy more people and material than the Roman Empire. We took issue with the comment that Trump was more powerful than a dictator as though the US constitution and all the checks and balances don't apply to him.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

There are many kinds of power. A locomotive can have the power to pull thousands of tons of train. That is power.

A nuclear bomb has the power to kill many people.

The resurrection has the power to bring in a new creation.

But you didn't say that the US was more powerful than the Roman Empire, you said that Trump was more powerful than Constantine.

Does Trump have the "power" to obliterate at will? I don't believe so. I believe we have many checks and balances before a president could push the button (except in self defense). But even in self defense Trump would give the order which would then have to be carried out by ranking officers.

I don't believe that Constantine was constrained nearly as much as Trump is. He may not have had nuclear bombs yet he may have killed more people.

So if you are measuring "power" in the number you can kill, potentially Trump can kill more, but realistically, practically, factually Constantine killed more. It is extremely hypothetical to think that Trump, on his own, could decide to nuke another country.

No one who took issue with your comment doubts that the US with a nuclear arsenal has the potential to destroy more people and material than the Roman Empire. We took issue with the comment that Trump was more powerful than a dictator as though the US constitution and all the checks and balances don't apply to him.

Your post here is way more common sense than EvanGelly can handle in one sitting.

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Your post here is way more common sense than EvanGelly can handle in one sitting.

Well this "non-American" is explaining to you how things really work in your own country. Embarrassing.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

Well this "non-American" is explaining to you how things really work in your own country. Embarrassing.

You liberals will never get it.

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

There are many kinds of power. A locomotive can have the power to pull thousands of tons of train. That is power.

A nuclear bomb has the power to kill many people.

The resurrection has the power to bring in a new creation.

But you didn't say that the US was more powerful than the Roman Empire, you said that Trump was more powerful than Constantine.

Does Trump have the "power" to obliterate at will? I don't believe so. I believe we have many checks and balances before a president could push the button (except in self defense). But even in self defense Trump would give the order which would then have to be carried out by ranking officers.

I don't believe that Constantine was constrained nearly as much as Trump is. He may not have had nuclear bombs yet he may have killed more people.

So if you are measuring "power" in the number you can kill, potentially Trump can kill more, but realistically, practically, factually Constantine killed more. It is extremely hypothetical to think that Trump, on his own, could decide to nuke another country.

No one who took issue with your comment doubts that the US with a nuclear arsenal has the potential to destroy more people and material than the Roman Empire. We took issue with the comment that Trump was more powerful than a dictator as though the US constitution and all the checks and balances don't apply to him.

I am surprised that you and Ohio don't know very much about how this all works under your dictator Trump. Yes Trump has that power to obliterate at will, the Commander in Chief has that ability.

Now they’re his. When Trump takes office in January, he will have sole authority over more than 7,000 warheads. There is no failsafe. The whole point of U.S. nuclear weapons control is to make sure that the president — and only the president — can use them if and whenever he decides to do so.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poste...=.b9dba136a1b0


Trump does not need approval to fire Nukes. No checks and balances stopped Trump firing 59 cruise missiles into Syria, or stopping Obama firing missiles from UAVs in other sovereign countries. The President has to go to Congress only if there is a declaration of war. It's rare for a President to go to Congress before military action is taken.

Trump is more powerful than Constantine because Constantine could only dream of having the power to send 59 cruise missiles or a nuke into another country at will while having dinner with a Chinese president, all without Congressional, or even UN approval.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

I am surprised that you and Ohio don't know very much about how this all works under your dictator Trump. Yes Trump has that power to obliterate at will, the Commander in Chief has that ability.

Your boy Obama had the same "power," yet I never heard you express any concerns.

Putin has even more "power" in his arsenal (remember that the US unilaterally disarmed during the last 8 years) and you kept your mouth silent. Why is that?

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Your boy Obama had the same "power," yet I never heard you express any concerns.

Putin has even more "power" in his arsenal (remember that the US unilaterally disarmed during the last 8 years) and you kept your mouth silent. Why is that?

Because Obama and Putin weren't/aren't provoking Kim King Kong.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

I am surprised that you and Ohio don't know very much about how this all works under your dictator Trump. Yes Trump has that power to obliterate at will, the Commander in Chief has that ability.

Now they’re his. When Trump takes office in January, he will have sole authority over more than 7,000 warheads. There is no failsafe. The whole point of U.S. nuclear weapons control is to make sure that the president — and only the president — can use them if and whenever he decides to do so.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poste...=.b9dba136a1b0


Trump does not need approval to fire Nukes. No checks and balances stopped Trump firing 59 cruise missiles into Syria, or stopping Obama firing missiles from UAVs in other sovereign countries. The President has to go to Congress only if there is a declaration of war. It's rare for a President to go to Congress before military action is taken.

Trump is more powerful than Constantine because Constantine could only dream of having the power to send 59 cruise missiles or a nuke into another country at will while having dinner with a Chinese president, all without Congressional, or even UN approval.

Spoken like someone who is not a US citizen.

When asked if he approved of the missile strike it was very clear from his response that he had merely given the military approval to do what was necessary. He didn't plan the strike, give the order for the strike, or fire the missiles. Yes, technically he could have, but there are many layers in our government, and as you can see our news reports to the entire world everything that happens, unlike ancient Rome.

Now if Trump were to go off the rails and order a nuclear strike there would be a general who would give the order to fire those missiles, which order would then be carried out by all of the subordinate officers.

In the US, unlike ancient Rome, refusing an order from the President is not seen as treasonous (ask Sally Yates), especially a bogus order to start a nuclear war. In the past people were trained to obey authority, in our country ever since JFK assassination we have been trained more and more to question and be suspicious of authority.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

Spoken like someone who is not a US citizen.

Now if Trump were to go off the rails and order a nuclear strike there would be a general who would give the order to fire those missiles, which order would then be carried out by all of the subordinate officers.

It's just incredible to see how the liberal media makes their heads explode with fear. They have taken fearmongering into the 21st century. We got liberals on this forum that scoff at the idea of a future Armageddon, based on biblical prophecy, and now all of a sudden they have all become "believers", claiming Trump will start WWIII.

When it comes to decisions, Trump is a careful and strategic planner. How else does one become so successful? He is a real patriot first, and not a One World Order guy like our last 4 presidents. Yet he is portrayed by the Press as flaky, impulsive, and whimsical as Kim in NK.

It's just amazing to me to see how little negative press that George Soros gets. Here is a wealthy genius hell-bent on taking down all western democracies. The guy is famous for destroying the British pound and the Bank of England. He is funding every liberal activist group out there.

If liberals had a brain, they would know who to fear and who not to fear. Here read this -- Top 10 Reasons George Soros Is Dangerous

9. Currency manipulation: A large part of Soros’ multibillion-dollar fortune has come from manipulating currencies. During the 1997 Asian financial crisis, Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir bin Mohamad accused him of bringing down the nation’s currency through his trading activities, and in Thailand he was called an “economic war criminal.” Known as “The Man who Broke the Bank of England,” Soros initiated a British financial crisis by dumping 10 billion sterling, forcing the devaluation of the currency and gaining a billion-dollar profit.

10. Delusions: Soros has repeatedly said that he sees himself as a messianic figure. Who but a megalomaniac would make these comments? “I admit that I have always harbored an exaggerated view of my self-importance—to put it bluntly, I fancied myself as some kind of god” or “I carried some rather potent messianic fantasies with me from childhood, which I felt I had to control, otherwise I might end up in the loony bin.” If only the loony bin were an option. As it is, one of the wealthiest men in the world is using his billions to impose a radical agenda on America.

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

Spoken like someone who is not a US citizen.

When asked if he approved of the missile strike it was very clear from his response that he had merely given the military approval to do what was necessary. He didn't plan the strike, give the order for the strike, or fire the missiles. Yes, technically he could have, but there are many layers in our government, and as you can see our news reports to the entire world everything that happens, unlike ancient Rome.

Now if Trump were to go off the rails and order a nuclear strike there would be a general who would give the order to fire those missiles, which order would then be carried out by all of the subordinate officers.

In the US, unlike ancient Rome, refusing an order from the President is not seen as treasonous (ask Sally Yates), especially a bogus order to start a nuclear war. In the past people were trained to obey authority, in our country ever since JFK assassination we have been trained more and more to question and be suspicious of authority.

Of course the president did not fire the missiles himself. What a silly thing to say. He gives the orders. Same with any leader, they give orders, others follow. But what if that person firing the missile was a Trump supporter and believed everything Trump said? Your argument is shot to pieces.

And why did Trump's presidency get people worried about his new found power?

see

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/05/s...odes.html?_r=2


Some scholars (and Wikipedia entries) insist that a system of checks and balances puts the secretary of defense in the decision loop. But Bruce G. Blair, a research scholar at Princeton University who as an Air Force officer would have launched a nuclear missile if an order had come from the president, said that rule applied in the silos but not at the top of the command chain.

“There’s nothing the secretary of defense can do,” Dr. Blair, who wrote a book on nuclear command and control, said in an interview. “He has no authority to refuse or disobey that order.”



Your argument fails because ancient Rome also had checks and balances in their power structure.

https://www.reference.com/history/ch...f9ac785247b74a

The Roman Republic had several items in place to keep any one part of the government from having all the power, including a group of men called tribunes who could veto select items and completely stop acts of administration, limited terms and specific requirements for members in order to move up in the government. Many governments in the modern world are based, at least in part, on the model of the Roman Republic, including the United States.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-man_rule
"The two-man rule only applies in the missile silos and submarines; there is no check on the president's sole authority to order a nuclear launch"

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

Why does the USA have weapons then, and nukes. Why does it have so many guns. Take them all away, let's see the "real power" you speak of. Give everyone a trumpet and tell them to march around North Korea 7 times. If only America was Israel. Unlike Israel, the USA's "trust in God" is hidden behind the largest and most powerful military in the world, and one of the largest nuclear arsenals, just in case God does not show up.

If the USA were not a strong country, fighting for the freedoms of others around the world, then you and your country would have no freedoms whatsoever. Ever think of that?

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by Ohio

If the USA were not a strong country, fighting for the freedoms of others around the world, then you and your country would have no freedoms whatsoever. Ever think of that?

I agree and I note you define a "strong country" as one that has a powerful military, as I do.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

What is your definition of powerful then? Trump has been showing off the military hardware of the US to demonstrate the power of the US.

And this is worse than Obama's use of the latest drones?