You are either not logged in or not registered with our community. Click here to register.
 
December 10, 2016, 06:57:01 AM

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length

Click here if you are having problems.
Default Wide Screen Beige Lilac Rainbow Black & Blue October Send us your theme!

Hark!  The Herald!
Holiday Issue 2016

Wiki Blogs Dicebot

Author Topic: The Third Presidential Debate  (Read 1837 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Trieste

  • Faerie Queen; Her Imperial Lubemajesty; Willing Victim
  • Dame
  • Carnite
  • *
  • Join Date: Apr 2005
  • Location: In the middle of Happily Ever After with a dark Prince Charming.
  • Gender: Female
  • I am many things - dull is not one of them.
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 4
Re: The Third Presidential Debate
« Reply #25 on: October 22, 2012, 08:44:19 PM »
"Our navy is the smallest it's been since 1917."

Uhhhhhh, hello, does a World War ring a bell?

Correct me if I'm wrong.. wasn't this on foreign policy?

Mitt Romney has exhausted all his knowledge on foreign policy, so now he's talking about military.

Offline ShadowFox89

Re: The Third Presidential Debate
« Reply #26 on: October 22, 2012, 08:44:34 PM »
We also have less horses and bayonets.

Offline ChelemarTopic starter

Re: The Third Presidential Debate
« Reply #27 on: October 22, 2012, 08:44:57 PM »
AND ZING the PODUS goes sarcastic!  We have these things called aircraft carriers.

Offline gaggedLouise

  • Quim Queen | Collaborative juicy writer
  • Champion
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: Jan 2011
  • Location: Scandinavia
  • Gender: Female
  • Bound, gagged and unarmed but still dangerous.
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: The Third Presidential Debate
« Reply #28 on: October 22, 2012, 08:47:47 PM »
Medicare is a program for the poor. The poor only need one program, right? Right?

I love how he says the ACA doesn't sound good. Reducing national bankruptcies due to overburdening with medical bills SOUNDS AWFUL GOOD TO ME!

But letting an all-state level Medicaid do what the ACA was supposed to do, that isn't gonna be bureaucratic at all is it? Very efficient and no shirked bills...


"Somebody's gotta leave the boat" as some folks allegedly observed in the lifeboats of the Titanic - after the big ship had gone down...

Offline Callie Del Noire

Re: The Third Presidential Debate
« Reply #29 on: October 22, 2012, 08:48:17 PM »
"Our navy is the smallest it's been since 1917."

Uhhhhhh, hello, does a World War ring a bell?

Mitt Romney has exhausted all his knowledge on foreign policy, so now he's talking about military.

He went on a 2 minute rant on his state education policies when I was posting.

Offline ShadowFox89

Re: The Third Presidential Debate
« Reply #30 on: October 22, 2012, 08:51:02 PM »
 Obama has 1 thing to do this debate. Make Mitt Romney look like an idiot.

Offline Callie Del Noire

Re: The Third Presidential Debate
« Reply #31 on: October 22, 2012, 08:51:35 PM »
Obama has 1 thing to do this debate. Make Mitt Romney look like an idiot.

Mitt is doing that himself.. he can't stay on a TOPIC.

He reminds me of me off of mood stabalizers. (I'm a mild bipoloar)

Offline ChelemarTopic starter

Re: The Third Presidential Debate
« Reply #32 on: October 22, 2012, 08:56:37 PM »
Meep, I gotta go to bed.  Can't keep my eyes open darn it.

*huggles all* can't wait to watch tomorrows spin.

Offline ReijiTabibito

  • Gatecrasher
  • Lord
  • Addict
  • *
  • Join Date: Jun 2009
  • Location: Titanian Autonomous University, Gate Studies Dept.
  • Gender: Male
  • There cannot be another Fall.
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 2
Re: The Third Presidential Debate
« Reply #33 on: October 22, 2012, 08:59:00 PM »
And to think that I actually was worried about what the post-debate result was going to be.  Though, to be fair, the candidates are neck and neck right now.

Oh, sorry, lemme clarify that.

Neck and Undeserving Organ that is receiving the unwarranted support of the body, only because it happens to live in the same approximate space as the Job Creating Head.

:P

Offline gaggedLouise

  • Quim Queen | Collaborative juicy writer
  • Champion
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: Jan 2011
  • Location: Scandinavia
  • Gender: Female
  • Bound, gagged and unarmed but still dangerous.
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: The Third Presidential Debate
« Reply #34 on: October 22, 2012, 09:09:52 PM »
Wow, Romney was supposed to answer the question "if it's obvious in 2014 that the Afghan military isn't ready to take on the job of keeping up order" (and protecting democracy) - and he waxes into a disconnected ramble on everything else, to press his point "we need more U.S. military at all times".

"Can we set this amp to eleven?" (This is Spinal Tap)

Offline elone

Re: The Third Presidential Debate
« Reply #35 on: October 22, 2012, 10:07:28 PM »
Romney did a good job, he basically agreed with everything that President Obama has done on foreign policy. I guess he figures that will make him look like he knows his stuff. Once again he shows his prowess on saying nothing new or giving an inkling as to where he really stands on any issue.

Offline Callie Del Noire

Re: The Third Presidential Debate
« Reply #36 on: October 22, 2012, 10:14:23 PM »
I'm sorry Russia is NOT our biggest geopolitical foe. China is. The are 20 years at most from making Asia their private marketplace.

Offline ReijiTabibito

  • Gatecrasher
  • Lord
  • Addict
  • *
  • Join Date: Jun 2009
  • Location: Titanian Autonomous University, Gate Studies Dept.
  • Gender: Male
  • There cannot be another Fall.
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 2
Re: The Third Presidential Debate
« Reply #37 on: October 22, 2012, 10:17:24 PM »
Cal, are we even so sure that China will still be a communist country in 20 years?  Hell, in 50?  By the time the century ends?  Communism doesn't work, the Soviet Union proved it.  Plus if you think about human nature, the drive to gather more for oneself is counterproductive to communism.

Now, don't get me wrong.  China is still a threat, while Russia is still sobering up from...whatever they did most recently, they're not in a shape to be a 'foe.'  I just have trouble believing Communist China will still be here in 50 years.

Offline Callie Del Noire

Re: The Third Presidential Debate
« Reply #38 on: October 22, 2012, 10:21:50 PM »
Cal, are we even so sure that China will still be a communist country in 20 years?  Hell, in 50?  By the time the century ends?  Communism doesn't work, the Soviet Union proved it.  Plus if you think about human nature, the drive to gather more for oneself is counterproductive to communism.

Now, don't get me wrong.  China is still a threat, while Russia is still sobering up from...whatever they did most recently, they're not in a shape to be a 'foe.'  I just have trouble believing Communist China will still be here in 50 years.

Didn't say Communist China.. they are a very pragmatic government. They will allow changes.. so long as they are in power at the end of them. They are building a fleet designed to counter our pacific fleet. Fast strike missiles, stealth aircraft, surge capable ships and aircraft carriers and subs.

Taiwan is going to get a wakeup call within twelve years and if we move to render aid like we did in 96 when I was deployed, they will do their damndest to put us on the bottom of the ocean.

Offline Ironwolf85

  • Eletronic Scribe of naughty things.
  • Lord
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: May 2010
  • Location: New England Somewhere I won't tell you
  • Gender: Male
  • Here to have fun, Role play, and maybe get laid
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: The Third Presidential Debate
« Reply #39 on: October 22, 2012, 11:16:40 PM »
China will be a fellow superpower, they practacally are now, but things depend greatly on how things change within The Party, and how they respond to the changing pressures as people want an increasingly democratic system, demand civil rights, and the other pressures as china advances.
They could easily erupt into a bloody civil war years from now if the old guard refuses to sede power, which would pretty well crack their plans on a global scale.
By the same tolken they could simply ride the wave...

You also have to take into account china's military inexperience, the current generation of chinese soldiers and commanders have never seen conflict against an equal power, shooting tebetian monks or putting down dissidents makes poor practice. Whereas the US has been doing wars and peacekeeping, albiet more than we should have.

Moreover both sides have a good reckoning of each other's abilities, stratigy, and tactics.

Chinese commanders have studied US/Western tactics on paper and in simulated battles, it's one thing to say "okay, we know what they can do, we can take them..." and an entirely other thing to actually wage a war against a foe that is far more experienced than yourself.
I'm not saying war would be a good thing, nor that "we'd win cuz we're americans by golly" i'm just saying should a scermish erupt it would be a pretty even fight.
Besides both sides would loose economically, we are co-dependent especally in this international market. If we crash, they crash. If they crash, we crash.

On their side of things imagine hundreds of millions of tons of products just rotting on the docks. while nearby markets might see a surplus in chinese goods, the US buys about half of all goods prodouced in china. So their unemployment would skyrocket, and many fortunes would dissapear overnight.

Offline Callie Del Noire

Re: The Third Presidential Debate
« Reply #40 on: October 22, 2012, 11:26:56 PM »
They have a lot less economic depth to fall if thing crash. There are some provinces where it would be a blessing.. since it would be likely they would slip through the cracks in crash.

China is going to be under EXTRAORDINARY pressures in the next four decades as the gender gap expands. In some areas the gender disparity is as high as 5:1 Male/Female.  Five to One.. that makes for a very very disgruntled public to deal with and I'm quite sure the leadership would LOVE to have a nice distracting war.

They ARE planning to take Taiwan. If you think they aren't.. you're in denial (looks at some of the GOP AND Democrats out there) They bought a handful of russian diesels in the 90s.. half went into dry dock to be taken apart. They are looking into and ARE building aircraft carriers (modelled on the Russian style  rather than our longer/bigger ones.. ), they are working very closely in the area of fast strike missiles that will be nearly impossible even with ship defenses that we have to avoid. Steath strike assets. Want to bet that drones might be investigated as well.

The people in power WILL give ground, offer more capitalistic style gains and options to the public..they will NOT give up their power and offices. And don't ssume just because they are better at surpressing the dissendents that the military is paper tiger. That would be a very very big mistake. They are organized, smart, and totally ruthless. They have a much LARGER base of man power than we do. (5:1 gender disparity remember?)

Offline Ironwolf85

  • Eletronic Scribe of naughty things.
  • Lord
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: May 2010
  • Location: New England Somewhere I won't tell you
  • Gender: Male
  • Here to have fun, Role play, and maybe get laid
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: The Third Presidential Debate
« Reply #41 on: October 22, 2012, 11:45:28 PM »
They have a lot less economic depth to fall if thing crash. There are some provinces where it would be a blessing.. since it would be likely they would slip through the cracks in crash.

China is going to be under EXTRAORDINARY pressures in the next four decades as the gender gap expands. In some areas the gender disparity is as high as 5:1 Male/Female.  Five to One.. that makes for a very very disgruntled public to deal with and I'm quite sure the leadership would LOVE to have a nice distracting war.

They ARE planning to take Taiwan. If you think they aren't.. you're in denial (looks at some of the GOP AND Democrats out there) They bought a handful of russian diesels in the 90s.. half went into dry dock to be taken apart. They are looking into and ARE building aircraft carriers (modelled on the Russian style  rather than our longer/bigger ones.. ), they are working very closely in the area of fast strike missiles that will be nearly impossible even with ship defenses that we have to avoid. Steath strike assets. Want to bet that drones might be investigated as well.

The people in power WILL give ground, offer more capitalistic style gains and options to the public..they will NOT give up their power and offices. And don't ssume just because they are better at surpressing the dissendents that the military is paper tiger. That would be a very very big mistake. They are organized, smart, and totally ruthless. They have a much LARGER base of man power than we do. (5:1 gender disparity remember?)

I never said anything to the contary.
But I'm saying there is going to be a difference between US and Chinese forces in terms of combat experience. Not to mention that I'm guessing many on the chinese side believe the US to be a paper tiger as well. More wars result from the idea that "oh we'll win and it will be over quickly." and more often than not that turns out to be totally false and just creates a bigger bloodbath.
Moreover suckerpunching the US military would likely result in an outpouring of support, ala pearl harbor.
One fact that has to be faced, for most of our existence the US as been at war with someone, somewhere, and war is the one thing, we as americans, have always done well.

Persionally I think they are going to be able to take and hold taiwan, but would be moronic to push their luck any further than that.
Basicly I believe it would be a fair fight.
That is of course not counting where PMC's would stand in the conflict some of those companies have serious weight... not as much as the US, Russia, China, or the EU. or if they might sit it out.

Offline Callie Del Noire

Re: The Third Presidential Debate
« Reply #42 on: October 22, 2012, 11:51:16 PM »
I never said anything to the contary.
But I'm saying there is going to be a difference between US and Chinese forces in terms of combat experience. Not to mention that I'm guessing many on the chinese side believe the US to be a paper tiger as well. More wars result from the idea that "oh we'll win and it will be over quickly." and more often than not that turns out to be totally false and just creates a bigger bloodbath.
Moreover suckerpunching the US military would likely result in an outpouring of support, ala pearl harbor.
One fact that has to be faced, for most of our existence the US as been at war with someone, somewhere, and war is the one thing, we as americans, have always done well.

Persionally I think they are going to be able to take and hold taiwan, but would be moronic to push their luck any further than that.
Basicly I believe it would be a fair fight.
That is of course not counting where PMC's would stand in the conflict some of those companies have serious weight... not as much as the US, Russia, China, or the EU. or if they might sit it out.

Depends on how the 'punch out' occurs. Techincally..and politically.. China has steadfastly maintained that Taiwan was a 'rebelling province' and if you look at Taiwan's political standing in the world DAMN few states have said word ONE about recognizing their nation status internationally. INCLUDING the US.

The Chinese simply need to have the right moment..and the right incident.. and bang.. they are 'defending their soveriegnty' from an 'aggressor state' who is interfering in a 'domestic issue'. If you think there aren't a bunch of military boys planning this for a decade?

Good example below..the GREEN countries have formal embassies and recognize Taiwan as an independent nation

« Last Edit: October 23, 2012, 12:00:25 AM by Callie Del Noire »

Offline Ironwolf85

  • Eletronic Scribe of naughty things.
  • Lord
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: May 2010
  • Location: New England Somewhere I won't tell you
  • Gender: Male
  • Here to have fun, Role play, and maybe get laid
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: The Third Presidential Debate
« Reply #43 on: October 23, 2012, 12:13:23 AM »
Depends on how the 'punch out' occurs. Techincally..and politically.. China has steadfastly maintained that Taiwan was a 'rebelling province' and if you look at Taiwan's political standing in the world DAMN few states have said word ONE about recognizing their nation status internationally. INCLUDING the US.

The Chinese simply need to have the right moment..and the right incident.. and bang.. they are 'defending their soveriegnty' from an 'aggressor state' who is interfering in a 'domestic issue'. If you think there aren't a bunch of military boys planning this for a decade?

Thus the Taiwaneese are dancing on eggshells.

I've actually read enough reports, including the crap on wikileaks (yep they leaked more than just US military stuff) and a few military tech books, and so on. I'm no professional Callie.

But from what I can put togeather the chinese conquest of Taiwan relies on, once they fing the right reason mind you, taking the "rouge provence" quickly before the US Pac-fleet can respond, of course they aren't dumb enough to think we haven't also figured it out, thus they are lining up a fleet to keep ours at bay while the ground pounders do their work.
But from the looks of things the Chinese Government doesn't want a full on war with the United States as both sides would be decimated militarily, and politically, regardless of who stands where on the military flowcharts.

The chinese are basicly playing Go, and setting up a play. The US has learned to play Go as well. Problem is we're the ones people come to when they need a cop.

Offline Callie Del Noire

Re: The Third Presidential Debate
« Reply #44 on: October 23, 2012, 12:20:46 AM »
Thus the Taiwaneese are dancing on eggshells.

I've actually read enough reports, including the crap on wikileaks (yep they leaked more than just US military stuff) and a few military tech books, and so on. I'm no professional Callie.

But from what I can put togeather the chinese conquest of Taiwan relies on, once they fing the right reason mind you, taking the "rouge provence" quickly before the US Pac-fleet can respond, of course they aren't dumb enough to think we haven't also figured it out, thus they are lining up a fleet to keep ours at bay while the ground pounders do their work.
But from the looks of things the Chinese Government doesn't want a full on war with the United States as both sides would be decimated militarily, and politically, regardless of who stands where on the military flowcharts.

The chinese are basicly playing Go, and setting up a play. The US has learned to play Go as well. Problem is we're the ones people come to when they need a cop.

Actually I don't think they will asset themselves till one of two or three tricks happen.

There IS a pro-unificaiton movement in the Taiwanese government. And a move to push through a referendum through. Right now.. tis no looking good. I would say that if the referendum DID go the way the People Republic liked it..we'd see them moving before the words 'I want a recount' could be said by ANYONE.

Two.. Taiwan is NOT geologically stable. If a sufficently nasty quake shook the island up well enough, the People's Republic might move in to 'help the province' without being called upon.

Three.. if we get some 'head in the sand leaders' who aren't going to stand up to China (or are INTENSELY invested in the People Republic like.. oh.. a guy with the initials M. R. ) They might just move on it..and tell us to get bent. With Russia and another suitable nation in the Security Council..the UN is a non-issue.. we got enough 'head in the sand' isolationists in the Tea Party that this could be a very likely happening in the next twenty years. And a nice 'reunification/suppression campaign' would be PERFECT for the Chinese to thin out some of those 5:1 gender ratios.

As would expanding their borders into Siberia.

Offline ReijiTabibito

  • Gatecrasher
  • Lord
  • Addict
  • *
  • Join Date: Jun 2009
  • Location: Titanian Autonomous University, Gate Studies Dept.
  • Gender: Male
  • There cannot be another Fall.
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 2
Re: The Third Presidential Debate
« Reply #45 on: October 23, 2012, 12:23:50 AM »
That is a problem China is going to have to deal with, I'd say, in the next 50 years.  Although, to be fair, they should have seen this coming.  Culture that venerates having one gender of child over another.  Nothing wrong with that.  Mandated single child policy.  Nothing wrong with that either.  Actually a good way to control a huge population.

Put them together?  Disaster.

Although, and correct me if I'm wrong, I have been hearing noises about China reconsidering its 1-child policy?

Offline Ironwolf85

  • Eletronic Scribe of naughty things.
  • Lord
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: May 2010
  • Location: New England Somewhere I won't tell you
  • Gender: Male
  • Here to have fun, Role play, and maybe get laid
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: The Third Presidential Debate
« Reply #46 on: October 23, 2012, 12:35:51 AM »
it's been silently repealed actually, but it hasn't made much of an impact

Offline Callie Del Noire

Re: The Third Presidential Debate
« Reply #47 on: October 23, 2012, 10:58:36 AM »
Damage has been done.. right now, as I have stated before, in some districts and provinces you're looking at gender proportions are at such a horrible level that it will literally destroy family lines in some areas. There are simply not enough women to ensure some areas will grow population wise for a generation or so. You'll have men who have to leave to find a woman.. and possible go very far.

I can't imagine the effect that will have on those areas.

Offline Oniya

  • StoreHouse of Useless Trivia
  • Oracle
  • Carnite
  • *
  • Join Date: Sep 2008
  • Location: Just bouncing through. Hi! City of Roses, Pennsylvania
  • Gender: Female
  • One bad Motokifuka. Also cute and FLUFFY!
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 3
Re: The Third Presidential Debate
« Reply #48 on: October 23, 2012, 01:42:07 PM »
I think he means that the repeal hasn't had much impact on the families still adhering to the 'one-child-per-family' rule and consequent gender-selective child-bearing.

Of course, if the repeal was silent, that might explain why it hasn't had any impact.

Offline gaggedLouise

  • Quim Queen | Collaborative juicy writer
  • Champion
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: Jan 2011
  • Location: Scandinavia
  • Gender: Female
  • Bound, gagged and unarmed but still dangerous.
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: The Third Presidential Debate
« Reply #49 on: October 23, 2012, 02:11:46 PM »
Sure, the family planning policy has been put through with some grisly means. If Chinese society opens up a bit more over the next few decades though, there will probably be much more people from other countries - East Asia, America and Europe - moving to live in China and more Chinese settling abroad, or marrying foreigners. In those ways the imbalance of genders could be weighed out reasonably fast, at least for some of the population. - I think Reiji is right, there's no certainty that China will still be communist in thirty or fifty years time.

And yes, those kinds of movement would boost the growth of populations once again, both here and there. Emigration near always stimulates building large families and even clans in the new country: that's a way to create solid family bonds, keep up traditions from the old country and guarantee a safe old age for the parents who made the move.
« Last Edit: October 23, 2012, 02:18:09 PM by gaggedLouise »