Posted on 04/03/2016 6:10:02 PM PDT by Innovative
They already have nukes in Pakistan paid by Saudi and Gaddafi.
I’m a gambling man, too. And I know that when I vote for Trump (if he gets the nod), he is 100% hostile to my manufacturing job (according to his statements). And if I personally meet a Trump supporter who claims that Trump is all about manufacturing jobs, I’ll have some choice words.
What do you manufacture and how has Teump shown he’s hostile to it?
Both serious questions.
L
What does your factory manufacture?
However, Sarah Palin has endorsed him. And I respect Palin. That's one reason I'm sticking with Trump. I just don't see any other bold alternatives.
But I feel as if I'm going all-in with pocket Jacks. It's not a very comfortable feeling. But nevertheless it feels right.
My company makes auto and truck (and tank) parts. For all the major manufacturers, foreign and domestic. We ship Ford parts to Mexico, for example. My parts. That Trump has his panties in a wad about.
And if we do not put the country on a different course, their is a 100% chance that jobs and the country are done for. I'll take the 80% trump risk over the 100% failure of the Uniparty.
Hmm. So you would lose your job of those parts were shipped somewhere in the US rather than Mexico?
Who have we stopped from getting nukes that wanted them? Did we stop North Korea, Pakistan or Iran? If the Saudis want them I would be surprised if they had not already bought some from Pakistan.
It sounds good to me because unlike other candidates Trump can give a general idea and direction while the others don’t have a clue, Trump has been a businessman all his life, he knows many people go into brainlock if they knew details. So i would trust Trump far more than any “politician”. He has a plan, he won’t say when because in many ways its strategic, why blab out details ahead of time?
He never said cut defense. In fact he has said our military has been weakened. What he is saying, and rightfully so, is we can no longer support and protect everyone. We are in debt 19 trillion. It makes no sense to continue at our expense to be the world’s bodyguard. Usually with little or no appreciation.
I punch in at the factory, and Trump may end up costing me my job. “
I doubt it — he may bring back more manufacturing to the US, which means more manufacturing jobs, not fewer.
Where did your company ship parts to before Ford built plants in Mexico?
Japan is paying quite a bit, if not the most out of all of our allies for protection. I would prefer anything related to defense is the last part to be modified. I’m sure there are many other useless regions/nations (case in point, the entire continent of Africa) that is not of strategic importance that we can cut first.
If Trump was saying we will stop any more proliferation and address the source, China, and we will take away Paki nukes and N Korea nukes, I’d be cheering him.
“And I do not see how it would be better if Saudi Arabia had nukes”
Who says they don’t have them already??
It’s been rumored since the 80’s that the Saudi’s “Bought Paki warheads, for delivery when needed, after they shut down their own program.
“I don’t think he said he wants to cut defense and I don’t think he would. Having a strong defense is one of the things we need “to make America great again”.”
Trump has been following Teddy Roosevelt’s programs, almost to the letter. This is a modern extension of Teddy’s “Walk Softly, but carry a BIG STICK” in international relations.
And that “BIG STICK” was The Great White Fleet.
I would be good with that too. My point is that nobody is saying or will say that. Taking nukes from a country that already has them and does not want to give them up could get messier than anybody wants to get.
“Did Trump say the other nations should pay to build their own nuclear weapons? I didn’t hear that.”
I did not hear him say that either.
The problem as I see it is that nuclear weapons are a 70 year old technology. A gun type Uranium bomb like the one dropped on Hiroshima, could be built in your basement with a few metal working tools provided you had the right amount of enriched uranium.
Try telling a nation you can’t build the equivalent of a 1945 Chevrolet. The technology is THAT old and a gun type uranium bomb is that simple. Oppenheimer and the Los Alamos scientist didn’t even need to test it. They knew it would work.
An implosion bomb is trickier but but in, I think 1972 a Princeton physics student designed one as a PhD dissertation using industrial explosives. The only thing that was not readily available.
How do you regulate a 70 year old technology?
The US might be better off defending against an attack.
Maybe. But Paki’s didn’t have them in the 80’s. The time frame is off.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.