Secret CIA assessment says Russia was trying to help Trump

[Elegiac]

Speculating and confirming are 2 different things, and pretty strong statement. People are worried Trump is going to start a war with China and here we are the CIA accusing Russia of shit that could start another cold war.

China poses a more severe threat to the US than Russia does.

Also no proof of RNC hacking - http://www.cnn.com/2016/12/10/politi...acked-russian/

Spicer is saying 'nuh uh', not providing evidence.

[zenkai]

China poses a more severe threat to the US than Russia does.

That's like saying it's ok pissing off the man with the gun we should only worry about pissing off the man with the 2 guns.

[Thimagryn]

People are worried Trump is going to start a war with China and here we are the CIA accusing Russia of shit that could start another cold war.

Wait, but you're the only one making this assertion. No one mentioned war with China here, no one is even close to mentioning this leading to a possible Cold War. I think you're addressing a fictional situation here.

[Elegiac]

That's like saying it's ok pissing off the man with the gun we should only worry about pissing off the man with the 2 guns.

It's more like, pissing off the man with a penknife while holding a gun, rather than pissing off the man holding a gun.

[zenkai]

Wait, but you're the only one making this assertion. No one mentioned war with China here, no one is even close to mentioning this leading to a possible Cold War. I think you're addressing a fictional situation here.

You don't think accusing Russia of manipulating the election without proof would cause hostilities with our country? Good thing you're not in politics.

- - - Updated - - -

It's more like, pissing off the man with a penknife while holding a gun, rather than pissing off the man holding a gun.

Yeah a nuke wielding country is just like a penknife. LOL!!!!

[NYC17]

Questions that can be answered with yes/no/I don't know answer are not complex by default. All the complex situations, as you called them, are made up of simple constructs. Clarifying people's thoughts on those simple parts makes their opinion on the whole matter as close to crystal clear as possible. You refusing to acknowledge that and starting the whole diatribe about my questions indicates either that you are mentally challenged or refusing to back down from something you clearly shouldn't have started and already lost; at this point, resorting to saying stupid, dishonest shit, because the only other alternatives are either to shut up or admit being wrong. Of course, that will never happen. Expecting your 'I'm fed up with your shit, I'm ignoring you' exit post soon to cover your ass at least a bit on the way out.

You saying they know my games or w/e is exactly speaking on someone's behalf. It is not offering a reason, it is called making a claim, one that can only be made if you either communicated with said someone explicitly on that matter, or if you're a mind reader. Or if you're full of shit.
Do point out my whining about not being answered. Will be waiting for an exact quote of it.

The part where you "cleverly" say "failed nonsense" is contained in every one your responses to me in this thread, you've already overfilled the quota.

Except you aren't actually attempting to clarify people's thoughts. You're attempting the tried and true method of "gotcha", because those questions have been answered beyond the yes or no paradigm. For example, when I pointed out that Powell discussed aluminum tubes for enriched uranium it was a direct answer to your question about "shaking a can of enriched uranium". Instead of saying "hmm, yea that does show he was indicating nuclear weapons" you whined about it not being a simple yes or no. Since the situation is more complex than a yes or no, it's an irrelevant question to ask. I mean, you certainly can insist that it be answered, but not many people are interested in entertaining pointless questions. But no, I'm sure it's about what other people don't get, and not you. I'd eyeroll here, but that's not really my thing. You can still borrow a quarter though.

They know your game simply because it is done here endlessly. It's not new, refreshing, thought provoking, or the veneer of some wonderfully salient point. It's just you being petty. Things that are obvious don't require explicit communication. Otherwise you could have made your point, since you're so clearly desperately trying to make one. Go...make it.

I don't have a quota, i just go by what you give me. Whatever repetitiveness you find in it is on you.

[Elegiac]

Yeah a nuke wielding country is just like a penknife. LOL!!!!

You're assuming Russia still possesses first strike capability.

[zenkai]

You're assuming Russia still possesses first strike capability.

Thanks to Clinton telling the world our response time, they now have a goal to aim for.

[Elegiac]

Thanks to Clinton telling the world our response time, they now have a goal to aim for.

Which they won't reach any time soon.

[Noxx79]

Thanks to Clinton telling the world our response time, they now have a goal to aim for.

That was already known. Jesus, I hope you're kidding, because for someone so "independent" you have a horrible habit of falling for whatever the right wants to believe.

[Bullettime]

Thanks to Clinton telling the world our response time, they now have a goal to aim for.

That time was already known well in advance.

The time also doesn't matter as much. First strike capability isn't just mobilization time, it's also carrier capabilities and such. Russia is beating the US in terms of cyber warfare but their military technology is third world compared to what the US has rolling out.

[Extremities]

Russia was right to be against Hillary. She would have destabilized the US by encouraging mass illegal migration. Glad we dodged that bullet.

You know what's funny? I'd bet you all the money in my bank account that the people(Not all, but a vast majority) protesting over Trump winning, the latino community here in Southern Cali who are rioting/protesting, ARE Illegal. The ones who are rioting and destroying shit are only further proving Trumps point on immigration. My room mate is Mexican and he says the exact same thing, ironically. On the other hand my room mates girlfriend is illegal as well as her whole family so he's in a bit of a pickle. He is worried as all hell... so much I am afraid he would follow her down to mexico should she be deported(which I highly doubt will happen)

[Gaexion Ramza Beoulve]

What if I told you Russia and the USA are controlled by the same people?

[Elegiac]

What if I told you Russia and the USA are controlled by the same people?

The International Conspiracy of Homosexual Bankers and Jewish Illuminati.

Wait, I think I got that wrong.

[Elim Garak]

What if I told you Russia and the USA are controlled by the same people?

Now they are *wink*

[Thimagryn]

You don't think accusing Russia of manipulating the election without proof would cause hostilities with our country? Good thing you're not in politics.

I don't presume to jump to conclusions and debate a point that doesn't exist in the context of discussion. None of what you're bringing up has relevance to the actual topic, rather it is factless fear-mongering and irrational rhetoric.

"Oh look, the left is scared of war. They're stupid for being irrational". Try harder.

[zenkai]

I don't presume to jump to conclusions and debate a point that doesn't exist in the context of discussion. None of what you're bringing up has relevance to the actual topic, rather it is factless fear-mongering and irrational rhetoric.

"Oh look, the left is scared of war. They're stupid for being irrational". Try harder.

Yet you will say someone did something without proof? I guess you pick and chose your "facts"

[Thimagryn]

Yet you will say someone did something without proof? I guess you pick and chose your "facts"

No, because I haven't made any statements in this discussion yet. All I've done is point out how you're using fictional claims to support your own argument, which has no precedence to begin with consider no one was making those claims. Which of my "facts" would you be referring to?

I can tell that you're projecting your idea of 'someone who doesn't agreeing with me' as being the same as 'someone who trusts the CIA's claims without proof'. That, again, is jumping to a false conclusion, which you seem to have a habit of doing. I don't know why you're so quick to judge and draw conclusions when you don't even have a good grasp of what's been said in this discussion. You are the last person to be talking about 'facts'.

[zenkai]

No,because I didn't say anyone did anything without proof. All I've done is point out how you're using fictional claims to support your own argument, which has no precedence to begin with consider no one was making those claims.

You're also projecting your idea of 'someone who doesn't agreeing with me' and you believe that I'm in agreement with the opposition just because I'm pointing out how you are being irrational. That again is jumping to a false conclusion, which you seem to have a habit of doing. I don't know why you're so quick to judge and draw conclusions when you don't even have a good grasp of what's been said in this discussion.

WTF this is like talking to a crazy ex gf, "my friend told me, that her friend told her, that sister told her that you said something mean about me. "


I have a perfect grasp on what's going on and you're trying to derail what's going on with an attack. If you want to reply to my OP that started this whole chain and actually discuss the topic I am all for willing having a discussion. Your false conclusions and silly narrative are not entertaining to anyone but yourself.

[Thimagryn]

I have a perfect grasp on what's going on and you're trying to derail what's going on with an attack. If you want to reply to my OP that started this whole chain and actually discuss the topic I am all for willing having a discussion. Your false conclusions and silly narrative are not entertaining to anyone but yourself.

If your grasp is perfect, then why are you jumping to the conclusion that you think I believe the CIA rumors are true, or that I don't think the Russia hacks won't do harm to the country?

I'm not going to reply to your OP because it had nothing to do with the irrational arguments that you made. I gave you the option to explain yourself, but instead you choose to attack 'my statements' (which were never made).

I don't see what narrative you think I'm building here. You're destroying your own credibility all by yourself.