May as well have said my dog ate it.The best people
No, they are changing defence budgets because he's a fucking idiot who's in bed with war criminals.
Or we're changing our defence budgets because his actions are making the world much more unstable and we doubt whether we can rely on supposed partners if it all goes to shit.
Given there's supposedly no money even if we are appeasing Trump I'm sure we're looking to reduce it back ASAP. Or if they've got any brains they'll just be reclassifying stuff as national security/military spending. Not like he's going to check.
I'm hoping we get through this and we can see how much we 'fawn' over him when he's gone and people start telling the truth.
We all know in a few decades time they'll be queueing up to say how Trump has shit for brains and the temperament of a child.
But we are sending "him" around a billion dollars for 12 nuclear bombers - that aren't actually nuclear bombers unless the US President says the nuclear bombs can be used as he owns the bombs. Knee jerk nonsense.So I assume we will refuse to allow the US to use our airbases as he presents a threat to our sovereignty?
But we are sending "him" around a billion dollars for 12 nuclear bombers - that aren't actually nuclear bombers unless the US President says the nuclear bombs can be used as he owns the bombs. Knee jerk nonsense.
That's not what NATO, UK and US Govts say. America owns the weapons and are responsible for their maintenance etc. the nuclear non-proliferation makes this clear.When people say we can’t fire the nukes without the US they don’t mean we need to ring up for permission lol.
The support systems and guidance systems are US run, but command and control of the bombs is entirely within the UK. If the US went rogue tomorrow we’d just have to learn maintenance before they broke and replace guidance systems, but then we’d have to do that for everything that used GPS.
We are living after all on Airstrip One.That's not what NATO, UK and US Govts say. America owns the weapons and are responsible for their maintenance etc. the nuclear non-proliferation makes this clear.
The US government has forever been a representative of the US private sector in its international operations. Trump is not secret about this.Of course we should increase spend, regardless of Trump. If anything we should increase spend because of Trump - not because he tells us to, but because he makes the world a more unstable place.
Also 'buying off Trump' - the money doesn't go to the US government.
The US government has forever been a representative of the US private sector in its international operations. Trump is not secret about this.
He is. Not quite sure to how many children yet though.Trump's the Daddy
Every Govt is.The US government has forever been a representative of the US private sector in its international operations. Trump is not secret about this.
Every Govt is.
I think there is a bit of confusion here? If I am not mistaken, you are referring to the UK's recent announcement it intends to purchase F-35As with nuclear weapon deployment capability and the commitment to join NATO's nuclear sharing program, and shmmeee is referring to Trident.That's not what NATO, UK and US Govts say. America owns the weapons and are responsible for their maintenance etc. the nuclear non-proliferation makes this clear.
Evil Muslims promising free bus travelPretty crazy that a member of Congress can come out with this stuff and it’s just not even remotely a story
View attachment 43945
Pretty crazy that a member of Congress can come out with this stuff and it’s just not even remotely a story
It’s what they did around when they invaded IraqMust be frightening for a lot of people in the US right now. If you've got elected officials sending out this message it's gonna enable so much sh*t in the wider public. You're essentially telling your followers that it's open season - just abuse brown(ish) people. Fill your boots!
That’s a real problem if even the lawyers are hell bent on supporting trumpMassive Supreme Court decision on the power of lower courts to apply nationwide injunctions. republicans used it themselves to block Biden but now a precedent has been set. Whether it's constitutionally correct or not is another matter as again the court ruled 6-3 along ideological/political lines.
This is just a phase of the SC with a Republican-appointed majority. Both parties have politicised the lower courts. One of the big issues when US claims to be the "world's greatest democracy" is the politicisation of its court system. This SC decision won't stop Democrats and their appointed judges trying alternative ways to disrupt Trump much as the Republicans & their judges will do during the next Democratic Presidency.That’s a real problem if even the lawyers are hell bent on supporting trump
This is just a phase of the SC with a Republican-appointed majority. Both parties have politicised the lower courts. One of the big issues when US claims to be the "world's greatest democracy" is the politicisation of its court system. This SC decision won't stop Democrats and their appointed judges trying alternative ways to disrupt Trump much as the Republicans & their judges will do during the next Democratic Presidency.
How would that work?Massive Supreme Court decision on the power of lower courts to apply nationwide injunctions. republicans used it themselves to block Biden but now a precedent has been set. Whether it's constitutionally correct or not is another matter as again the court ruled 6-3 along ideological/political lines.
I think our courts are slightly better protected, though not completely, from this sort of political machinations.Trump is really showing what a banana republic the US is constitutionally. Would be interesting to see how our democracy would survive a similar assault from the likes of Farage.
I think our courts are slightly better protected, though not completely, from this sort of political machinations.
I have wondered if Trump could basically get members of the SC arrested and convicted (or bumped off) and thus replace them with his own picks.
The SC would then decide, it's what it is there for.How would that work?
What if two courts in two different states are ruling on effectively the same issue? How could they both apply nationwide when they could totally contradict each other?
Americans are tied by having a written constitution and that it (and many key amendments) were written for another time. This obsessive adherence to documents from another time is absurd - much like the various religions that want firm adherence to things written often over a thousand years ago. Gun rights argumment is that the Constitution couldnever have envisioned the weapons now available to citizens, immigration arguments are that the Constitution could never have envisoned the huge numbers of people involved (population was only a shade under 4 million when it was written).Trump is really showing what a banana republic the US is constitutionally. Would be interesting to see how our democracy would survive a similar assault from the likes of Farage.
Goes through the various federal court levels until it reaches the SC. In these most recent cases SC has "jumped in" and fast-tracked them for quick decisionsHow would that work?
What if two courts in two different states are ruling on effectively the same issue? How could they both apply nationwide when they could totally contradict each other?
Americans are tied by having a written constitution and that it (and many key amendments) were written for another time. This obsessive adherence to documents from another time is absurd - much like the various religions that want firm adherence to things written often over a thousand years ago. Gun rights argumment is that the Constitution couldnever have envisioned the weapons now available to citizens, immigration arguments are that the Constitution could never have envisoned the huge numbers of people involved (population was only a shade under 4 million when it was written).
Farage would have to get UK out of ECHR & abloish the HouseofLords before he could inflict too much damage. Then the "beauty" of not having a written constitution is that subsequent Govts could unravel much of any damage Farage might try to inflicton on democracy.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?