Biden promises more warmongering if elected

Started by Robtard8 pages

*sigh*

HYG, NASA stands for: The National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Aeronautics is the science or art involved with the study, design, and manufacturing of air flight–capable machines, and the techniques of operating aircraft and rockets within the atmosphere -snip

I'll consider you educated now and we'll move on. YW

How did that negate what I just said?

If the sun is the main engine of the climate and that's in space and NASA does space then...

"WASHINGTON — Former Vice President Joe Biden said Thursday that he supports drawing down troops in the Middle East but if elected president would keep a small force there to prevent extremists from posing a threat to the United States and its allies."

"He said the force in Afghanistan will drop from about 8,600 to 4,500 by November, as President Trump seeks to fulfill a key campaign promise to end “endless wars.”

“I think we need special ops capacity to coordinate with our allies,” Biden said, adding there should be a maximum of “1,500 to 2,000” on the ground, a smaller force that what he would likely inherit from Trump.

"However, Biden said the military should not meddle in the political dynamics of the countries where they operate. He said U.S. forces must be able to coordinate with allies to train and lead to “take out terrorist groups who are going to continue to emerge.”

“I don’t think [budget cuts] are inevitable, but we need priorities in the budget,” Biden said."

"Biden said, however, that the Defense Department desperately needs to innovate in emerging technology such as beefing up its cyberwarfare capabilities and unmanned aircraft."

“We have to focus more on unmanned capacity, cyber and IT, in a very modern world that is changing rapidly,” Biden said. “I’ve met with a number of my advisors and some have suggested in certain areas the budget is going to have to be increased.”

"He has vowed to better equip the National Guard, which often trains and deploys with outdated equipment"

Which part is the bad part?

Reducing the number of troops in the middle east?

Keeping a small force to help prevent threats to the country?

Or prioritising parts of the defense budget towards more modern technologies and equipment?

NASA Vision

NASA's Vision: To discover and expand knowledge for the benefit of humanity.

WEEEEE, look at all the neat stuff they do:

https://www.nasa.gov/topics/benefits/index.html

I say we boost their budgets, I like these guys....ALOT

Originally posted by jaden_2.0
If the sun is the main engine of the climate and that's in space and NASA does space then...

Then...this negates that if climate change is so serious it should have an agency solely dedicated to it because...?

Originally posted by dadudemon
What an utter waste of money and scientific minds on such a bullshit agenda like "climate change." It's certainly not as bad as Trump putting money into a useless wall, though.

How about funding NASA to do what NASA's original mission is to do which is related to super awesome amazing Sci-Fi space exploration?

Like Reagan's proposed "star wars" plan that meant having turrets in space? 😂

Originally posted by Surtur
I understand just fine and think if you think climate change is this yuge threat you'd want a place dedicated solely to that.
We've got astronauts to help our globe stay nice and healthy. Idiot.

Originally posted by Surtur
Then...this negates that if climate change is so serious it should have an agency solely dedicated to it because...?

Maybe Space Force will do it. Like attack the sun for causing climate change or something.

Originally posted by Surtur
Then...this negates that if climate change is so serious it should have an agency solely dedicated to it because...?

The agency should be to ban the pollution and trash from Asia while prevent them from further populating..........that would do more for global warming than anything NASA could hope to produce😛

Originally posted by jaden_2.0
Maybe Space Force will do it. Like attack the sun for causing climate change or something.

So with no valid answer you resort to humor. Noted.

Originally posted by Raptor22
"WASHINGTON — Former Vice President Joe Biden said Thursday that he supports drawing down troops in the Middle East but if elected president would keep a small force there to prevent extremists from posing a threat to the United States and its allies."

"He said the force in Afghanistan will drop from about 8,600 to 4,500 by November, as President Trump seeks to fulfill a key campaign promise to end “endless wars.”

“I think we need special ops capacity to coordinate with our allies,” Biden said, adding there should be a maximum of “1,500 to 2,000” on the ground, a smaller force that what he would likely inherit from Trump.

"However, Biden said the military should not meddle in the political dynamics of the countries where they operate. He said U.S. forces must be able to coordinate with allies to train and lead to “take out terrorist groups who are going to continue to emerge.”

“I don’t think [budget cuts] are inevitable, but we need priorities in the budget,” Biden said."

"Biden said, however, that the Defense Department desperately needs to innovate in emerging technology such as beefing up its cyberwarfare capabilities and unmanned aircraft."

“We have to focus more on unmanned capacity, cyber and IT, in a very modern world that is changing rapidly,” Biden said. “I’ve met with a number of my advisors and some have suggested in certain areas the budget is going to have to be increased.”

"He has vowed to better equip the National Guard, which often trains and deploys with outdated equipment"

Which part is the bad part?

Reducing the number of troops in the middle east?

Keeping a small force to help prevent threats to the country?

Or prioritising parts of the defense budget towards more modern technologies and equipment?

Because it's Biden and not Trump.

Originally posted by snowdragon
The agency should be to ban the pollution and trash from Asia while prevent them from further populating..........that would do more for global warming than anything NASA could hope to produce😛

Yeah I think scientists have said that we won't make so much as a dent in this climate change endeavor unless EVERYONE pitches in, including places in Asia like China.

But they are supposedly building more coal plants, etc.

Originally posted by Surtur
So with no valid answer you resort to humor. Noted.

Did you not note it the first time?

What people like makes better neighborhoods so that business will invest. Instead of the separate party pretense.

Originally posted by jaden_2.0
Did you not note it the first time?

Stop policing my notes!

Originally posted by Surtur
Stop policing my notes!

Stop noting my joking.

If the sun is the cause of all this "climate change" nonsense that the left keeps pushing (yeah, I know, 99.99999999999% of all scientistis supposedly say it's "real" or whatever as I'm sure some snowflake lefty will remind me of) then I guess there isn't shit we can do about stopping it is there?

If jaden now replies that he never said or implied that then why bring up the sun as being the main source of our climate when people are arguing about whether or not NASA should be the ones to monitor climate change or whatever?

WOOOOSSHHHH

Originally posted by jaden_2.0
WOOOOSSHHHH

I edited and that's not an answer. Let's see if you can actually answer without using insults.

You're not nearly as bad about doing that as most leftists on this forum are so I hope you don't disappoint me now.

Maybe Biden is just biding his time.