-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Putin challenges Biden to a live debate after "killer" comment.
- Thread starter Twilight Hue
- Start date
Twilight Hue
Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
A bit off topic, yet good post and nice point. There is nothing wrong with a physical handicap.
It's certainly not a sign of weakness if a world leader requires assistance in terms of a cane, wheelchair, stair assistance etc.
Biden is obviously old and aging, and I think its admirable he's staying mobile in spite of physical limitations. Still, I wouldn't hold things against him if he would utilize aids to help his physical limitations.
I agree it might be ok for comedy, there is humor there, but you can still be a strong leader as long as your mind stays stronger than your body.
Kind of reminds me of a fav police show awhile back where physicality isn't required to do the job.
The list of disabled world leaders and politicians is impressive.
List of Physically Disabled World Leaders and Politicians
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
In a previous post, I mentioned having a conversation with Gerald Ford, although this is when he was Speaker, which was about a year prior to him taking over as president because of Nixon's withdrawal.
He was speaking where I taught, and afterwards several of us on the staff went to meet and talk with him. At one point, one of the other staff members asked him about what he felt about President Eisenhower making the decision not to observe that stipulations found in the Geneva Accords dealing with the separation of the Vietnams, North & South. Ford then asked us what are the "Geneva Accords"?
That blew our minds since this would be the equivalent of trying to make legal decisions at the national level minus having any knowledge of the Constitution. We didn't say anything at the time because we were so stunned that he didn't know about them even though he voted on myriads of bills dealing with the Vietnam "War".
When driving home, I realized that I was being overly harsh about this as this is the job for clerks that work for them, namely to study and advise. However, he still should have known at least that much, imo.
He was speaking where I taught, and afterwards several of us on the staff went to meet and talk with him. At one point, one of the other staff members asked him about what he felt about President Eisenhower making the decision not to observe that stipulations found in the Geneva Accords dealing with the separation of the Vietnams, North & South. Ford then asked us what are the "Geneva Accords"?
That blew our minds since this would be the equivalent of trying to make legal decisions at the national level minus having any knowledge of the Constitution. We didn't say anything at the time because we were so stunned that he didn't know about them even though he voted on myriads of bills dealing with the Vietnam "War".
When driving home, I realized that I was being overly harsh about this as this is the job for clerks that work for them, namely to study and advise. However, he still should have known at least that much, imo.
Why should Biden give Putin the time of day or treat him like he's worthy of Biden's time? Who cares what Putin wants to say? Who cares what he thinks of Biden? Let Putin make a YouTube. Maybe Trump would like to be in it, or Moscow Mitch.
Twilight Hue
Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
Because Biden created this in the first place.
Dave Watchman
Active Member
Biden’s tough-guy flexing at ‘soulless killer’ Putin would be funny if the consequences weren’t so serious
Trump famously bristled at Fox’s Bill O’Reilly, who said of the Russian president, “Putin’s a killer.” Trump responded, “There are a lot of killers. We’ve got a lot of killers. What, do you think our country’s so innocent?”
The fact that Biden’s posturing is all fluff and no substance is beside the point. His words and visage will be disseminated across the width and breadth of the American media establishment, helping cement as fact yet another chapter in the ongoing work of fiction that defines the US’ newest superhero, Joe Biden. This would be comical if the potential consequences of Biden’s actions were not so serious. In a world where Russian and American nuclear weapons are but one push of a button away from ending life as we know it, perhaps playing the tough guy is not the best look.
Biden’s tough-guy flexing at ‘soulless killer’ Putin would be funny if the consequences weren’t so serious
The fact that Biden’s posturing is all fluff and no substance is beside the point. His words and visage will be disseminated across the width and breadth of the American media establishment, helping cement as fact yet another chapter in the ongoing work of fiction that defines the US’ newest superhero, Joe Biden. This would be comical if the potential consequences of Biden’s actions were not so serious. In a world where Russian and American nuclear weapons are but one push of a button away from ending life as we know it, perhaps playing the tough guy is not the best look.
Biden’s tough-guy flexing at ‘soulless killer’ Putin would be funny if the consequences weren’t so serious
Since the only value to come out of it would be entertainment value i suggest an "Epic Rap Battles of History" style debate.
Here is one about Bill Gates vs Steve Jobs to give an example of what im talking about;
I rather doubt that you (or any of us) could know what JFK would do in such a situation. Although I am more of an age than you are, as I was at least in highschool when JFK was assassinated.
Let's be frank, President Biden was, I think ill-advised to use the word "killer" in reference Putin. Much better to have said something that could be verified, for instance "too many people have died in very suspicious circumstances, often pointing to the Russion leader." The moment he labeled Putin a "killer," that becomes something that can be tried in court -- and that's not a fit subject for a US President to then get into a debate about.
Few, unless avid followers of Putin (like Trumpski), would not believe he was behind the Polonium and Novichok killings, just as the Saudi Arabian prince was for his, and the former might be a bit exotic but would undoubtedly be found out (as they were), so it seems more about boasting of his power - to kill his enemies in any fashion he wanted, and simply to threaten his enemies. But putting him in the spotlight does enable the world to see how the Russian regime cannot stand any opposition, often encouraging others to do the same (Trumpski again), and that he is basically a thug at heart. Is this what we want for future nations - to be led by such?
ImmortalFlame
Woke gremlin
So you admit that you are too much of a coward to call a killer a killer?
I also find this attitude extremely odd coming from someone who has no problems at all saying "if X person was in charge, they would do Y". It seems you're keen make value judgements when they favour people of your political position, and much less keen to make value judgements when it comes to condemning murderous tyrants.
Kinda shows up your values, really.
It is not always so.
Reagan negotiated directly with Gorbachev. But regarding
Biden, he doesn't seem up to the task of doing this with Putin.
His insult, the "killer" faux pas, can be easily overcome, but
the real issue is Biden's intention...does he seek greater peace
with Russia, or more conflict?
Parenthetical aside....
Were Biden a Republican, the left would be all "Chickenhawk!",
since Biden (an athlete at the time) escaped the draft by claiming
asthma. Yet he voted in the Senate (2002) to start the Iraq War.
Now I don't believe that military service is necessary for being
President. But the lefties here made a big deal of Cadet Bone
Spurs (Trump) not serving. They don't apply this double standard
to Admiral Asthma.
Last edited:
Suave
Simulated character
I doubt Biden is fit enough to win a debate against Putin. If Biden can't stand against a 25 m.p.h. breeze, then I doubt Joe Biden could withstand wind blowing from the mouth of a former KGB agent like Vladimir Putin who is much healthier than Joe Biden. In my progressive minded opinion, I'd rather have Kamala Harris than Joe Biden as P.O.T.U.S.
Dave Watchman
Active Member
Excellent analysis.
And if it's the latter, this is the Sukhoi Su-57
And this is the unique sound that it makes when it flies overhead:
Let Yulia Shapovalova sell you one:
Peaceful Sabbath.
Last edited:
Twilight Hue
Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
Harris would have never been elected in her own so they used Biden as a back door way to appoint her president instead.
I think you have your wish. I suspect she's running things already behind the scenes with Biden as the front man , a puppet president.
It's a great way to legally 'rig' the election and I think it was intentionally planned this way.
Biden created what?
And whatever it is you mean, how does that obligate Biden to debate Putin? You understand, don't you, that they're not competing for an elected seat, which is why Biden debated the rabid Trump.
But why would Biden give an enemy of America a platform or dignify him by treating Putin as an equal? Your answer above doesn't address that question.
So who will you be rooting for if a debate transpires, the American or his enemy (should be your enemy, too). I suspect that most of the right is rooting for the murderous thug in the hopes that he humiliates the American president. How about you?
And would you like to address the entire post this time rather than a cryptic deflection of one part of it?
That must not be stealth mode.
I recall hearing Northrop's YF17 (prototype for F18) fly
over the factory. It was barely audible in its quite mode.
Dave Watchman
Active Member
Yes they are stealth, a first for the Russians.
They can't be seen by radar.
The sound is to strike terror into the boots on the ground.
From the comments in the video:
"The sound of death. The last thing the enemies of Russia will hear.
Yulia Shapovaloval, in the second video, said that they are more maneuverable than their American counterparts.
Stealth
The Su-57 is planned to be the first operational aircraft in Russian Air Force service to use stealth technology. Similar to other stealth fighters such as the F-22, the airframe incorporates planform edge alignment to reduce its radar cross-section (RCS); the leading and trailing edges of the wings and control surfaces and the serrated edges of skin panels are carefully angled to reduce the number of directions the radar waves can be reflected.[111] Weapons are carried internally in weapons bays within the airframe and antennas are recessed from the surface of the skin to preserve the aircraft's stealthy shape. The infrared search-and-track sensor housing is turned backwards when not in use and its rear is treated with radar-absorbent material (RAM) to reduce its radar return. To mask the significant RCS contribution of the engine face, the walls of the inlet ducts are coated with RAM and the partial serpentine ducts obscure most of the engines’ fan and inlet guide-vanes (IGV); the remaining exposed engine face is masked by a radar blocker similar in principle to that used on the F/A-18E/F. According to Sukhoi's radar blocker patent, the slanted blocker grid is placed in front of the IGV at a distance of 0.7—1.2 times the diameter of the duct. The fuselage of the aircraft is coated with RAM to absorb radar emissions and reduce the reflection back to the source.[112][113][114]
Sukhoi Su-57
The Su-57 is planned to be the first operational aircraft in Russian Air Force service to use stealth technology. Similar to other stealth fighters such as the F-22, the airframe incorporates planform edge alignment to reduce its radar cross-section (RCS); the leading and trailing edges of the wings and control surfaces and the serrated edges of skin panels are carefully angled to reduce the number of directions the radar waves can be reflected.[111] Weapons are carried internally in weapons bays within the airframe and antennas are recessed from the surface of the skin to preserve the aircraft's stealthy shape. The infrared search-and-track sensor housing is turned backwards when not in use and its rear is treated with radar-absorbent material (RAM) to reduce its radar return. To mask the significant RCS contribution of the engine face, the walls of the inlet ducts are coated with RAM and the partial serpentine ducts obscure most of the engines’ fan and inlet guide-vanes (IGV); the remaining exposed engine face is masked by a radar blocker similar in principle to that used on the F/A-18E/F. According to Sukhoi's radar blocker patent, the slanted blocker grid is placed in front of the IGV at a distance of 0.7—1.2 times the diameter of the duct. The fuselage of the aircraft is coated with RAM to absorb radar emissions and reduce the reflection back to the source.[112][113][114]
Sukhoi Su-57
The engine nozzles move all around, 7:37 min, not just up and down like the F22 Raptor's.
They were designed to also win any old fashioned dog fight when required.
No need for a copilot, that job is done by AI.
Peaceful Sabbath.
A Vestigial Mote
Well-Known Member
No thanks. Best stick to peddling your wares to those who believe they have any value at all.
Last edited:
A Vestigial Mote
Well-Known Member
I have no one on ignore. I see absolutely no point.
stvdv
Veteran Member: I Share (not Debate) my POV
Very true.
I replied to @Windwalker, and you felt the need to reply offensive and sarcastic to me
I just replied to you, stating two facts. So, I was not peddling my wares to you
Hence the proverb "follow your own advice" is applicable here