+32 32 0
Published 7 years ago by rti9 with 9 Comments

Join the Discussion

  • Auto Tier
  • All
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
Post Comment
  • Appaloosa
    +4

    This is a legitimate question, a legal one, not a moral one.

    • drunkenninja (edited 7 years ago)
      +5

      Sure, but the state of mind someone has to be in in order to ask such a question, and multiple times at that! Even if it's just from a legal standpoint, I would figure the answer is obvious. Here is one, why can't we use chemical warfare to eradicate our enemies? I mean, it's way more effective than boots on the ground, we go in, deploy the gas, and watch everyone choke on their own lung juices like an exterminator in a room full of cockroaches. Simple, effective and undeniably cheaper than completely scorching everything.

      • Appaloosa
        +3

        Well I prefer neutron bombs, but that's just me. I am always dubious of these stories, and suspect there is more behind them.

        • drunkenninja
          +5

          For maximum amount of pain and suffering, those are definitely the way to go!

  • SMcIntyre
    +3

    Joe Scarborough said on the air Wednesday, citing an unnamed source who claimed he had spoken with the GOP presidential nominee.

    Translation: Joe Scarborough made that shit up.

  • RoamingGnome
    +3

    We already did. Twice. Nukes are kind of a "weapon of last resort", Don. You fucking blithering idiot.

  • MAGISTERLUDI (edited 7 years ago)
    +2

    One can claim most any/everything, "citing an unnamed source". "Journalism" at its finest.

    LOL

  • rti9
    +2

    Even if it is an unnamed source, what is interesting is that after everything Trump has said, it sounds plausible he said it.

Here are some other snaps you may like...