Not true. Many nations stock thermonuclear torpedoes for the specific purpose of a precise strike on a carrier group. 

Kim isn’t planning on using a nuke. He needs the capability to deter a US led regime change. That’s his end game. Nuclear strike capability ensures that the US will not use direct action against him.

Truman, Eisenhower, JFK and LBJ were all crazy enough to drop a nuke. Truman did, the others all came minutes away from doing it on several occasions.

Your definition is the problem. Here’s Webster:

What 8 years were those? Surely you don’t mean the Obama administration who had US servicemembers fighting in Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen, Philippines, Libya, and the Central African Republic. He quintupled troop levels in Afghanistan and involved the US in more small conflicts than any president in history.

It a dumb argument because I could one up you by saying the whole damn thing was under US command. But that would look like an attempt to diminish the actions of the Brits and other nations.

You guys broke the Gothic Line in Italy (BC Dragoons). Don’t sell yourselves short.

The reason you often hear that the American’s “saved” Europe is because they are not a European nation. It was a completely expeditionary effort and some still argue, not necessary for the US’s own interests. Largely, it was the US holding up its end of an alliance. Without the US contributions, the UK does not…

Lumping the Brits, Canucks and Aussies as a “Commonwealth” Army is cheating. The US provided the most Soldiers, followed by the Brits, then Canadians, then Australians.

I don’t think your assumptions are all that likely. You particularly overstate Russia’s expeditionary capability at the time. They had a massive land army that was powerful, yet horribly outdated. Consider the lack of naval and air power combined with very limited logistical capability to merely provide fuel, food…

Innocent.

Sorry, just thought we shouldn’t be a bunch of misogynistic swine merchants. I was wrong. Carry on.

The irony of your statement is the Merkel IS a Putin supporter. It was Merkel that championed the oil/gas exemption for Russian sanctions following the Ukraine invasion. Merkel has shifted EU energy policy in a pro-Russian posture and Germany buys more oil/gas from Putin than all other nations combined.

“Balls deep in Ivanka” is degrading to Ivanka.

Riiiiiight, Hondo.

Yes, but the article you are commenting on is about a vote in the Armed Forces Committee. A committee that is 50% democrat. During this vote, it was the democrats that unanimously supported the Space Army with the only opposition coming from a republican.

Degrading women is wrong regardless of party. Slut shaming is wrong. Rape jokes are wrong and unfunny.

I’ll protect the dignity of women regardless of party.

That’s borderline. Definitely doesn’t excuse some rapey incestial slut shaming.

Has what?