Trump asked how he will make Mexico pay for his wall...

[GMDino]

And while I have kept most of the Trump stuff in one thread this one is a little different so I started a new one.  I apologize.

Quote:Trump: 'Mexico isn't playing with us with war'
By ELIZA COLLINS
 
03/09/16 12:10 PM EST


In a Donald Trump administration, the U.S. military will be so strong that Mexico won’t dare go to war over the wall Trump wants to build between the two counties.

On MSNBC on Wednesday, journalist Bob Woodward asked Trump, “Would you be willing to go to war to make sure we get the money to pay for this wall?”


“Trust me, Bob, when I rejuvenate our military, Mexico’s not going to be playing with us with war, that I can tell you. Mexico isn't playing with us with war,” Trump responded Wednesday.

One of Trump’s signature proposals is a promise to build a wall between the United States and make Mexico pay for it, despite Mexican officials' emphatic insistence that they'll never cough up the dough.

Mexican President Peña Nieto blasted Trump in two separate interviews this week, slamming the billionaire's “strident expressions” to a Mexico City newspaper and warning that the kind of rhetoric he uses has led to “very fateful scenes in the history of humanity.”

“That's the way Mussolini arrived and the way Hitler arrived,” Peña Nieto said. Trump's comments, he told El Universal, have "hurt the relationship we have sought with the United States."

The Democratic National Committee immediately jumped on Trump's latest remarks, firing out a statement Wednesday that attempted to lump the entire Republican Party under Trump's umbrella.

“Just when you think we’ve hit rock bottom with Donald Trump, he somehow manages to dig a little deeper,” DNC National Press Secretary Mark Paustenbach said in the statement. “And with Cruz, Rubio, Kasich, and now 29 Republican senators all pledging to support Trump as the GOP’s nominee, it’s clear that the Party of Trump will have to own its frontrunner’s outrageous and divisive policies all the way through November.”

Read more: http://www.politico.com/blogs/2016-gop-primary-live-updates-and-results/2016/03/donald-trump-mexico-isnt-war-220497#ixzz42anTPkii 

Follow us: @politico on Twitter | Politico on Facebook

So those of you (like me) who have draft age children prepare yourselves.  "President Trump" plans on using is vast military knowledge to go to war with whoever he thinks won't listen to his next brilliant plan.  And our kids will be the way we all pay for his ego.

[Benton]

at least they'll get college free.

[*bfine32*]

1) I missed the part where Trump said we would go to war with Mexico to build the wall. I did see a baited question to which he gave a diplomatic response.

2) Those comparing Trump to Hitler may want to do a little more research on the Brown Shirts and their Political agenda

3) We provide Billions of dollars to Mexico every year. Stopping that aid equals mexico "paying" for the wall.

4) There can never be enough Trump threads/articles. I wonder why he's leading the polls.

[*michaelsean*]

We have to rejuvenate our military to beat Mexico? Obama really has messed things up.

[Vlad]

(03-11-2016, 10:18 AM)bfine32 Wrote: 1) I missed the part where Trump said we would go to war with Mexico to build the wall. I did see a baited question to which he gave a diplomatic response.

2) Those comparing Trump to Hitler may want to do a little more research on the Brown Shirts and their Political agenda

3) We provide Billions of dollars to Mexico every year. Stopping that aid equals mexico "paying" for the wall.

4) There can never be enough Trump threads/articles. I wonder why he's leading the polls.

Its amazing that something so simple still needs to be explained to lefties.

[Benton]

(03-11-2016, 10:18 AM)bfine32 Wrote: 1) I missed the part where Trump said we would go to war with Mexico to build the wall. I did see a baited question to which he gave a diplomatic response.

2) Those comparing Trump to Hitler may want to do a little more research on the Brown Shirts and their Political agenda

3) We provide Billions of dollars to Mexico every year. Stopping that aid equals mexico "paying" for the wall.

4) There can never be enough Trump threads/articles. I wonder why he's leading the polls.

1. It was when he said “Trust me, Bob, when I rejuvenate our military, Mexico’s not going to be playing with us with war, that I can tell you. Mexico isn't playing with us with war,” Trump responded Wednesday.

When the question is "Would you be willing to go to war" and the answer isn't "no" but instead "Mexico isn't playing war with us" you're  threatening war.

2. So... what? You might not want to regurgitate Bill O'Reilly.

3. Which isn't what he's saying. He's said he will have Mexico pay for the wall, not that he will end aide and use that to pay for the wall.

Not giving your kid an allowance to pay for something isn't the same as having them get a job and pay for it.

4. Good point.

[Benton]

(03-11-2016, 10:41 AM)michaelsean Wrote: We have to rejuvenate our military to beat Mexico?  Obama really has messed things up.

Rubio said something similarly silly last night, about how Obama had shrunk the military and it was the smallest it's been since WWII, and we needed to make it bigger to fight terrorism.





That's our military budget going back to Fiscal Year 1947. Obama and Congress are spending six times what was spent then, and that number has gone up every budget since Sept. 11.

I had some hope for Rubio, but statements like that just make him (and Trump and Cruz) look like an idiot.

[GMDino]

(03-11-2016, 10:18 AM)bfine32 Wrote: 1) I missed the part where Trump said we would go to war with Mexico to build the wall. I did see a baited question to which he gave a diplomatic response.

2) Those comparing Trump to Hitler may want to do a little more research on the Brown Shirts and their Political agenda

3) We provide Billions of dollars to Mexico every year. Stopping that aid equals mexico "paying" for the wall.

4) There can never be enough Trump threads/articles. I wonder why he's leading the polls.

1) Probably the part where he's gonna swing his dick around with the size and might of our military.  Or do you think he'd make an idle threat to the Mexicans and then not follow through?

2) Take that up with the guys from Mexico.  Trump probably doesn't have the ability to plan like Hitler did.

3) Sure...if Trump had said that.

4) If it worked that way the Muslims would lead the polls around here. 

[*bfine32*]

(03-11-2016, 11:49 AM)Benton Wrote: 1. It was when he said “Trust me, Bob, when I rejuvenate our military, Mexico’s not going to be playing with us with war, that I can tell you. Mexico isn't playing with us with war,” Trump responded Wednesday.

When the question is "Would you be willing to go to war" and the answer isn't "no" but instead "Mexico isn't playing war with us" you're  threatening war.

2. So... what? You might not want to regurgitate Bill O'Reilly.

3. Which isn't what he's saying. He's said he will have Mexico pay for the wall, not that he will end aide and use that to pay for the wall.

Not giving your kid an allowance to  pay for something isn't the same as having them get a job and pay for it.

4. Good point.

1. Again he did not say he would go to war with Mexico over the wall; that's just some "fear mongering".  Of course we threaten war; you do know that is one of the perks of having the world's largest Military (tangent opportunity).

2. It appears only one of us watches Bill O'Reilly. I personally cannot stand the man.

3. You do realize if we cut aid to Mexico and we redirect that money to construct a wall, Mexico is in a sense paying for the wall. Lefties ask "How's he going to make Mexico pay for the wall?" and when a reasonable method is given that falls into the "that doesn't count' category.

Analogy makes little sense

4. They all were, you just disagreed with 3 of them.

[*bfine32*]

(03-11-2016, 11:57 AM)GMDino Wrote: 4) If it worked that way the Muslims would lead the polls around here. 

1-3) See Benton retort

4) Worked in '08

[GMDino]

(03-11-2016, 12:12 PM)bfine32 Wrote: 1-3) See Benton retort

4) Worked in '08

Has he ever proposed what you are saying in #3?  If not it is as pure speculation as you think saying Mexico won't want to go to war with us isn't saying we would go to war to make them pay for the wall.

[Benton]

(03-11-2016, 12:11 PM)bfine32 Wrote: 1. Again he did not say he would go to war with Mexico over the wall; that's just some "fear mongering".  Of course we threaten war; you do know that is one of the perks of having the world's largest Military (tangent opportunity).

2. It appears only one of us watches Bill O'Reilly. I personally cannot stand the man.

3. You do realize if we cut aid to Mexico and we redirect that money to construct a wall, Mexico is in a sense paying for the wall. Lefties ask "How's he going to make Mexico pay for the wall?" and when a reasonable method is given that falls into the "that doesn't count' category.

Analogy makes little sense

4. They all were, you just disagreed with 3 of them.

1. So if he's threatening to go to war with Mexico ("Of course we threaten war; you do know that is one of the perks of having the world's largest Military (tangent opportunity).) then either a- he said he's willing to go to war, or b- he's willing to make empty threats of violence to our allies. Outstanding!

2. Good timing then. It was only a day or two ago he was talking about Brown Shirts, Hitler and Trump.

3. You do realize, in a sense, that you're making no sense.

You've got two problems here. First, that's not at all what Trump has said. What he said is: " “I will build a great wall — and nobody builds walls better than me, believe me —and I’ll build them very inexpensively. I will build a great, great wall on our southern border, and I will make Mexico pay for that wall. Mark my words.”

Make Mexico pay for it. Not the U.S.

And second, even if he meant what you say and not what he said, who is paying for the wall if we use money we give to Mexico? (Hint: rhymes with U.S. racksprayers)

So... short version... that's not at all what he said and your interpretation has the U.S. still paying for the wall.

4. Common sense disagreed with two of them. The other one appears to be a coincidence that you and he say the same things.

[*bfine32*]

(03-11-2016, 12:30 PM)GMDino Wrote: Has he ever proposed what you are saying in #3?  If not it is as pure speculation as you think saying Mexico won't want to go to war with us isn't saying we would go to war to make them pay for the wall.

He has not provided specifics as he may give them options on how to fund the wall once in charge.

Why is it important? If they write a check for the wall or if we redirect funds to Americans to build the wall; Mexico is still paying for the wall. Him saying mexico will pay for the wall is not speculation.

As to the other: Why would anyone ask would we go to war with Mexico to make them build a wall? What kind of mentality even thinks that is a possibility. Trump gave the perfect answer: :"They don't want none". I know that type of talk in converse to those that do not want America to be viewed in a sense of power.

[*bfine32*]

(03-11-2016, 12:39 PM)Benton Wrote: 1. So if he's threatening to go to war with Mexico ("Of course we threaten war; you do know that is one of the perks of having the world's largest Military (tangent opportunity).) then either a- he said he's willing to go to war, or b- he's willing to make empty threats of violence to our allies. Outstanding!

2. Good timing then. It was only a day or two ago he was talking about Brown Shirts, Hitler and Trump.

3. You do realize, in a sense, that you're making no sense.

You've got two problems here. First, that's not at all what Trump has said. What he said is: " “I will build a great wall — and nobody builds walls better than me, believe me —and I’ll build them very inexpensively. I will build a great, great wall on our southern border, and I will make Mexico pay for that wall. Mark my words.”

Make Mexico pay for it. Not the U.S.

And second, even if he meant what you say and not what he said, who is paying for the wall if we use money we give to Mexico? (Hint: rhymes with U.S. racksprayers)

So... short version... that's not at all what he said and your interpretation has the U.S. still paying for the wall.

4. Common sense disagreed with two of them. The other one appears to be a coincidence that you and he say the same things.

1-2 Is just talking in circles trying to support the assumption of the article and not the actual words of the person asked the question. So we can dismiss that. I know some on here frown at assumptions.

3.An assumption you say? let me try the chiild anaology and see if it sticks (my guess is no):

You give your child an allowance, he breaks your vase, you with hold his allowance to pay for the vase, who "paid"/suffered for the cost of the vase. You did not because you had allocated the money regardless if the vase was broken or not.

As to the O'Rielly thing: If I had a nickle for every time liberals said the same thing I would be a very rich man.

[GMDino]

(03-11-2016, 12:41 PM)bfine32 Wrote: He has not provided specifics as he may give them options on how to fund the wall once in charge.

Why is it important? If they write a check for the wall or if we redirect funds to Americans to build the wall; Mexico is still paying for the wall. Him saying mexico will pay for the wall is not speculation.

As to the other: Why would anyone ask would we go to war with Mexico to make them build a wall? What kind of mentality even thinks that is a possibility. Trump gave the perfect answer: :"They don't want none". I know that type of talk in converse to those that do not want America to be viewed in a sense of power.

It is important because it is an glaring, brilliant, great example of him being a moron.  He says something stupid "We'll build a great wall...the greatest wall" and gives zero specifics and the poorly educated (who he "loves") eat it up.  And that ignores the fact that even the "most perfect wall ever" won't stop illegals who tunnel under it.  

"They don't want none" is ego talk.  I'd rather not have a president / CIC who wants to use the military as his personal toady to back him up when one of his vanity projects doesn't go as he thought it would.

I have no problem with America being a power.  I see no need for it to be a bully.  Or worse, the power some loudmouth uses because he has no real power himself.

Although I am sure there are some who measure the size of their dicks while the guys with real "hogs" do all the dirty work.

[Benton]

(03-11-2016, 12:47 PM)bfine32 Wrote: 1-2 Is just talking in circles trying to support the assumption of the article and not the actual words of the person asked the question. So we can dismiss that. I know some on here frown at assumptions.

3.An assumption you say? let me try the chiild anaology and see if it sticks (my guess is no):

You give your child an allowance, he breaks your vase, you with hold his allowance to pay for the vase, who "paid"/suffered for the cost of the vase. You did not because you had allocated the money regardless if the vase was broken or not.

As to the O'Rielly thing: If I had a nickle for every time liberals said the same thing I would be a very rich man.

I gotta say, I'm pretty surprised. You and I normally disagree on a lot, but you are fairly consistent. This whole 'using U.S. tax dollars is really having Mexico pay for it' thing is pretty surprising. Never pegged you for being a liberal.

As far as the war issue, either he's making a threat of war if they refuse, or he's making an empty statement. If you threaten someone, you either have to back that up or put on your lady garments when they tell you to **** off (which, so far, Mexico has said they'll tell Trump to **** off).

[GMDino]

(03-11-2016, 12:47 PM)bfine32 Wrote: You give your child an allowance, he breaks your vase, you with hold his allowance to pay for the vase, who "paid"/suffered for the cost of the vase. You did not because you had allocated the money regardless if the vase was broken or not.

Your money pays either the child who pays you back...or pays for the vase.

Your money.

The child did not go out and get a different job and pay you THEIR money.

You're wrong on that one.

[*bfine32*]

(03-11-2016, 12:48 PM)GMDino Wrote: It is important because it is an glaring, brilliant, great example of him being a moron.  He says something stupid "We'll build a great wall...the greatest wall" and gives zero specifics and the poorly educated (who he "loves") eat it up.  And that ignores the fact that even the "most perfect wall ever" won't stop illegals who tunnel under it.  

"They don't want none" is ego talk.  I'd rather not have a president / CIC who wants to use the military as his personal toady to back him up when one of his vanity projects doesn't go as he thought it would.

I have no problem with America being a power.  I see no need for it to be a bully.  Or worse, the power some loudmouth uses because he has no real power himself.

Although I am sure there are some who measure the size of their dicks while the guys with real "hogs" do all the dirty work.

As to the obvious point that is not sticking home. He did not threaten to use military power against Mexico to build the wall. That's just something someone said in an attempt to increase circulations. The lefties eat it up. Even if he did threaten you have no ides if he "wants" to.

I wonder if the sold shovels or ladders in East Germany or in North Korea/

[*bfine32*]

(03-11-2016, 12:54 PM)GMDino Wrote: Your money pays either the child who pays you back...or pays for the vase.

Your money.

The child did not go out and get a different job and pay you THEIR money.

You're wrong on that one.

So if we continue to give $2 Billion in aid and Mexico writes us a check for $1 Billion Then you would consider Mexico paying for the wall?

[Vas Deferens]

(03-11-2016, 12:11 PM)bfine32 Wrote: 1. Again he did not say he would go to war with Mexico over the wall; that's just some "fear mongering".  Of course we threaten war; you do know that is one of the perks of having the world's largest Military (tangent opportunity).

2. It appears only one of us watches Bill O'Reilly. I personally cannot stand the man.

3. You do realize if we cut aid to Mexico and we redirect that money to construct a wall, Mexico is in a sense paying for the wall. Lefties ask "How's he going to make Mexico pay for the wall?" and when a reasonable method is given that falls into the "that doesn't count' category.

Analogy makes little sense

4. They all were, you just disagreed with 3 of them.

I've tuned Trump out so much that I really hadn't heard this 'we'll end aid to mexico' funding explanation as of yet.  Fair point.  Was that his explanation, or was it offered up by someone else?  Not that it matters, just curious.  Couple of additional questions..

Ok.  I'll bite on 1 Billion in aid as of 2013.  Actually looks like just shy of a billion, but who's counting?  

1.  How long will it take us to build said wall?  Could it conceivably be done within his time in office?

2.  How much does a wall like that cost?  I mean, aren't most stadiums these days $1B themselves?  I know we're not putting up flat screens and whatnot, but damn sure seems like its going to cost more than 10 - 20B right? 

3.  Won't cutting the aid to mexico in effect exacerbate their problems and increase the number of immigrants coming across the border why the 'wall' is incomplete?

4.  We're going to wall off all the seaside property along the gulf of mexico and southern california too, right?

Sorry.  I'm just a dumb 'liberal' (really appreciate the incessant reminder, definitely advances the 'dialogue') who doesn't understand complexity and/or [insert stock head in sand picture]  But I certainly appreciate the mental elite of these boards giving me the straight talk.