MAYBE THAT'S WHY THE FIRST ONE WAS CALLED "LITTLE BOY"

It's a virtual certainty at this point that our President is going to use nuclear weapons on someone – Does it matter who? – just to do it.

Having already prevailed upon the Pentagon to drop "the biggest bomb you have" on a rural area in a country that is essentially medieval, it's clear that he believes that this "sends a message." He's not entirely wrong. It sends the message "I am completely insane," after all.

Aside from its obvious saber-rattling and dick-waving value, using nuclear weapons appeals to his belief that doing something that no one else would do is a sign of bold leadership. Add in the fact that it will send all the right people into fits of apoplexy – the U.N., Europe, liberals, the media, people who read books – and it becomes more a question of when rather than if.

Recognizing that there is virtually nothing of value to bomb in Afghanistan – we've heard the bullshit about "underground tunnel complexes" that turned out to be fantasy before, remember – North Korea seems like the more likely target. Or who knows, maybe he'll blow one up at random just to make himself feel tough.

It isn't hard to picture him yelling about "a real big bomb, the biggest one!" because we have seen that this is his entire worldview in a nutshell; things that are real big are better than things that are not, and the biggest thing is definitely the best thing because it's big. In short, he thinks like a 10 year old boy. We've known that for a long time. What is beginning to sink in is exactly what the consequences of that mindset are going to look like. Remember all that talk during the election about making sure that an unhinged egomaniac didn't get his finger on the nuclear trigger? That wasn't idle talk, it turns out.

Be Sociable, Share!

51 Responses to “MAYBE THAT'S WHY THE FIRST ONE WAS CALLED "LITTLE BOY"”

  1. Native Lemurian Says:

    Someone remind him that if South Korea gets it, no more shiny new Samsung phones to tweet with anymore…

  2. Ellis Weiner Says:

    I don't agree, based on nothing more than the assumption that even he isn't THAT insane. And those around him aren't that insane either, however greedy, dishonest, or grandiose they are. I know that crazy is crazy. But using nukes would be a level of crazy on a par with pulling out a gun and shooting Reince because Trump was displeased with something. There's crazy, and there's insane.

  3. other bill Says:

    WASF

  4. Leon Says:

    Insofar as I still have hope at all, I hope you're wrong.

  5. Anon Says:

    Hi Ed-

    Hi Ed-

    Sorry to post this on two threads…

    Off-topic, but for professional reasons I'd love to be able to get a particular comment off of an old thread. I can't figure out how to e-mail you…

    Is there any way to do it?

    Thanks.

  6. Anon Says:

    Hi Ed-

    Sorry to post this on two threads…

    OT: for professional reasons it'd be good if I could remove particular comment off of an old thread.

    Is there any way to do it?

    Thanks.

  7. bill Says:

    The fact that we even need to worry about this is troubling at best. I am a military aged man (by draft standards) and I have to worry about whether or not I am going to have to go kill people (and likely die, based on my cowardice) because the person who most people didn't want to be President decided that going to war a country to make sure we don't make fun of his tiny hands.

  8. bill Says:

    *war with a country

  9. Bill Says:

    Andrew J. Bowen, I presume?

    You're in the big leagues now, Ed. The State Department is gonna stop by!

    /snark

  10. Bill Says:

    lol, another bill posted as I was posting!

    That snark was directed at Anon.

  11. wetcasements Says:

    As a resident of Daegu, South Korea, I'll die before the rest of you. But by only about 48 hours. China will not sit by idly if the US pre-emptively attacks NK.

    Neither will Russia.

    But hey, Hillary's e-mails….

  12. Anon Says:

    Nope, not Andrew Bowen… I've only posted maybe twice over the years here.

  13. Talisker Says:

    So basically, the Tomahawk missile is a gateway bomb.

    In a matter of days Trump has progressed from Tomahawk to MOAB. At this rate he'll have killed 10 million people in Korea by Memorial Day and started a nuclear war with Chis (or maybe France) a few weeks after that.

  14. Talisker Says:

    * China

  15. Rich S Says:

    I hope you're wrong. I harbored the belief that guys like Mattis would refuse to give him the codes for some insane nuking. They are supposed to resist orders they feel are illegal.

  16. Wim Says:

    Rich–So the best we can hope for is a military coup? Indeed, WASF.

  17. Mark Says:

    President Trump is not going to indiscriminately drop a nuclear bomb on any country. This is just fear mongering and fanning the flames by a Trump hater in an attempt to bring attention to himself. Over the top liberal twaddle.

  18. Safety Man! Says:

    I heard that Trump gave the approval for the Syria strike over dessert with the Chinese Minister and then bragged about it, and that the Minister, dumb with disbelief, asked his interpreter if he was absolutely sure he got the translation right… Can anybody confirm that?

    Like Syria I dunno what to feel about N. Korea, it wasn't that long ago when they sank (with a torpedo, none of this Whale Wars ramming nonsense) a S. Korea frigate and killed 50ish people, that was an act of war by any sane metric. Even without Trump in the mix I wouldn't call them (and by extension their involvement with China and Russia) particularly stable.

  19. Rich S Says:

    I guess that's where we are after you helped put him in office. What else is there at this point? Reason?

  20. The Empty Subject Says:

    I would like more of this cutting edge, sophisticated analysis on how trump is an immature idiot. Maybe I'll finally start feeling terrified and disgusted like an intelligent person.

  21. Zer04 Says:

    An oldie, but a goodie regarding Tora Bora.
    http://www.somethingawful.com/photoshop-phriday/bin-ladens-mountain/1/

  22. DRickard Says:

    500 quatloos the shitgibbon nukes San Francisco as an object lesson to all the other sanctuary cities not helping him oppress Mexicans.

  23. ronzie Says:

    http://www.militarytimes.com/articles/officials-no-need-for-trumps-approval-for-moab-use

  24. Jestbill Says:

    Schizophrenia.

    HRC is a warmonger so Trump is the safe choice.
    Trump dropped a bomb.
    His bomb was more photogenic than any of Obama'a bombs so he's the warmonger.

    G&T says he might nuke someone. What does that mean?
    1. G&T thinks Trump is insane.
    2. G&T has fallen under the spell of propaganda.
    a. It's Chinese propaganda to distract Trump from Tibet and the South China sea.
    b. It's Russian propaganda to distract Trump from Ukraine.
    c. It's NK propaganda to get Americans to make Trump leave 'em alone.
    d. It's Liberal propaganda to prove that their votes against Trump were justified.
    e. It's RW propaganda to prove that their votes for Trump were justified.
    f. Homeland Security is trying to protect their budget.
    g. The Reagan era SDI dimwits still think it's reasonable to shoot down missile attacks with lasers.

  25. scott Says:

    I don't think I'm just engaging in wishful thinking—I feel like I abandoned that long ago…on the night of November 8, 2016 to be precise—when I say he won't do it because Putin/Russia will make it crystal fucking clear what happens if he does. And it will not be something he likes.

  26. Spacegeek Says:

    "Maybe I'll finally start feeling terrified and disgusted like an intelligent person."

    That seems like it might be a bit much to hope for.

  27. Steve Holt! Says:

    Judging by the comments on my local newspaper page, nuking any non-white country on the planet for any reason would be the most enthusiastically well received act that any president of any nation that has ever existed. You would think that these people jerk it abattoir videos to relax.

  28. Skepticalist Says:

    No matter how much fun for him it would be, he made one serious mistake. His billionaire friends aren't about to have him rock the boat. They are doing just fine and will do most anything to keep it that way.

  29. Dan C. Says:

    @Ellis Weiner Says: "I know that crazy is crazy. But using nukes would be a level of crazy on a par with pulling out a gun and shooting Reince because Trump was displeased with something."

    Trump: "I could stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn't lose voters," Trump said at a campaign rally [in Iowa, January 2016]

    http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/23/politics/donald-trump-shoot-somebody-support/index.html

  30. Brian M Says:

    My crazy libertoonian brother told us it was because Hillary gave the Chinese our nukleahr sekrets in exchange for campaign donations. Somehow the "Deep State" was also involved.

    Just proves that smart (my brother is very smart) does not negate KRAZZZZZY.

  31. April Says:

    @Wet – you and me both, brother. (Linhai, China) I'll wave to you as the bomb falls.

    OT – It turns out that the high school where my program is situated is in the final playoffs of basketball. That is, the high school in my little tiny (only about 1 million people – hey, this is China. There are MALLS that hold more people than that!) town is in the final playoffs with some Beijing school for the title of best High School basketball team IN ALL OF CHINA!

    @Talisker – Thanks for my morning laugh!

  32. Jado Says:

    Here's a thought experiment.

    ASSUMING Trump uses nukes somewhere effectively unprovoked, will we as a country allow him to be arrested and tried for crimes against humanity? Or do we circle the wagons and "support" him even though he uses a nuclear weapon? Which is more likely?

  33. Schmitt trigger Says:

    April, congratulations!

    At least some good news in a sea of insanity.

  34. quixote Says:

    Fun fact re the Dumpsterfire.

    I just happened on a good picture of the man's left hand (waving at reporters through a car window). He really does have unusually short fingers. Most people's fingers are about as long as their palms, but his are about two-thirds. Odd, but not the interesting part.

    Testosterone during fetal development causes the ring finger to lengthen relative to the index finger. (What's the use of this? Can't imagine.) Check the hands of men and women you know. Men's ring fingers are obviously longer, women's ring and index fingers are about equal. It's not a 100% pattern, nothing biological ever is, but it's consistent enough that it can be used to sex skeleton hands found in archeological digs.

    Well, guess what. The Dumpsterfire has equal length index and ring fingers. Maybe his whole life really has been an exercise in compensating for "low T."

  35. wetcasements Says:

    "President Trump is not going to indiscriminately drop a nuclear bomb on any country."

    The burden of proof is on those of you who voted for The Pussygrabber, not us.

    That said, even a conventional pre-emptive strike on NK could lead to World War III. Again, China is not going to allow it. (It would definitely lead to the death of millions of South Koreans through simple use of conventional artillery.)

    Russia will follow suit.

    Like I said, give or take 48 ours we'll all be dead or dying of fallout.

  36. mago Says:

    Quixote: Trump's hands are called "simian" in palmistry parlance. First example I ever saw. It means the obvious.

    As for the rest, I maintained faith that reason would dominate over impulse concerning the nuclear option, but given this shit salad, faith stands feeble and all bets are off.

    Duck (or is it cuck?) under your desk while your shadow's splashed against the wall. That's from the sixties if the reference fails.

  37. April Says:

    My younger daughter went to a tax march in LA. She said that, unlike previous marches she had attended, this one had a lot more "old people" (like her mother. Ahem.) She also said that they seemed really pissed off. I was thinking just yesterday that, as a child of the 50's, I lived under the threat of a nuclear war pretty much all of my childhood, and now, here we are again. I thought we were done with this shit. It may be that there are a lot of old people who are thinking the same way, hence the angry attitude.

    @Schmitt – Thanks! This is a five game play-off, so when it's done I'll post whether we won or not.

  38. April Says:

    https://www.scribd.com/document/320101685/TrumpsHand-Outline#from_embed?keyword=4417&content=10079&ad_group=Online+Tracking+Link&campaign=Skimbit%2C+Ltd.&source=impactradius&medium=affiliate&irgwc=1

    It's from his fitting at the wax museum.

  39. quixote Says:

    The handprint confirms the impression I had that his ring & index fingers are equal in length. How funny. I bet if the biology of it was brought to his attention, he wouldn't get a thing done, ever again, cuz he'd be so busy twittering about he did too have lots of testosterone. The best, even.

  40. April Says:

    "A bigly amount!" Sheesh, Q, get it right, willya?

    (grin)

  41. Major Kong Says:

    There is no telling what an unstable dictator with access to nuclear weapons is capable of.

    Or Kim Jong Un for that matter.

  42. Mark Says:

    @wetcasements – "The burden of proof is on those of you who voted for The Pussygrabber, not us."

    Wrong again. Offer proof that the president will launch a nuclear attack or go home.

  43. Bokata Says:

    Trump vows to put a MOAB in Kim Chong An's undershorts. An official response to this from Pyongyang states that the beloved leader already has one, rendering Trump's efforts along this line superfluous.

  44. Major Kong Says:

    There needs to be some corollary to Godwin's Law for when the thread breaks down into:

    "Will not!"
    "Will too!"
    "Will not times infinity!"

    We can call it "Playground Law" or something.

  45. mothra Says:

    Once again, I am just glad I live in a city that is a high-value target. Hell, the entire state is a high-value target. When I was in my 20's, I used to annoy my mother by telling her that I was banking on oblivion as a life plan. Looks like I can pull that plan out again and dust it off.

  46. Katydid Says:

    @Major Kong; good one!

  47. grubert Says:

    As much fun as it is to malign Trump's 2d/4d ratio, the ratio doesn't correlate with general adult testosterone levels but rather with fetal development testosterone levels.

    Which may or may not help explain his "issues."

  48. Net Denizen Says:

    I can't believe I just now noticed that your post about nuclear war was filed under "quick hits". Well played, Mr. AndTacos….

  49. democommie Says:

    "Duck (or is it cuck?) under your desk while your shadow's splashed against the wall. That's from the sixties if the reference fails.…"

    I think that the thing is you BECOME your shadow.

  50. zero Says:

    I expect he will use cruise missile strikes to destroy NK's launch and testing facilities, to the extent such is feasible. Such an act would be defensible (although monumentally stupid as a unilateral act), and neither Russia nor China are likely to make much noise about it. When that fails to cause world war 3 and also fails to cause NK to abandon nuclear weapons, he might just be insane enough to nuke them.

    At that point, what does China stand to gain by retaliating with nuclear weapons against the US? If they do nothing, they are not significantly harmed by the event. If they retaliate, the US counterattacks with a sizeable arsenal and a couple billion people die. Chinese leadership is pragmatic, perceptive and fiercely intelligent. They won't fire unless we actually threaten them. They might back NK in a replay of the Korean War, offering them dominance of SK as compensation; US troops would likely die as a result, but far from North America.

    Russia has even less financial reason to get involved. If NK collapses then demand for Russian minerals rises. I'm sure they would make strong pronouncements, and I'd bet on some US casualties due to conventional-arms 'incidents' in the middle east, but no way are they going to nuke us over North Korea.

    The UN might censure the US, but as a permanent member of the security council there is little that could be done in response.

    The insidious result could potentially be the normalization of one-off nuclear strikes. Once the US does it, why wouldn't Russia do the same in Syria (for example)?

  51. democommie Says:

    Tip O'Neill famously said, "ALL politics are local.".

    No nuclear weapons use is local.

    The amount of fallout from one Hiroshima sized weapon would cause whatever level of dislike the U.S. already engenders abroad to multiply exponentially. I'm pretty sure the Chinese would be more than a bit resentful if they have to deal with a population explosion on their Korean border. Not to mention that South Koreans would be affected in material and psychological ways that cannot be easily calculated or foreseen.

    Use of nuclear weapons is insane.

Leave a Reply