Yes I do ! What are you looking to trade for it ? <| sep |> literally none work <| sep |> No puppet . You ' re the puppet ! Trump , out of context . <| sep |> It ' s kind of weird . That third picture screams ammonite to me , but I don ' t see any other diagnostic features on it . Probably a coincidence <| sep |> Definitively highly unlikely right now , yes . I ' m just saying that no one knows what will change in the next few decades , so just because it ' s unlikely now , doesn ' t mean it will remain so forever . Nuclear arms are certainly a strong deterrence , but no defense is perfect . No country rely solely on nuclear arms for defense , because you cannot guarantee it ' s effectiveness . Existing conventional wisdom has collapsed dramatically before , both because of changing political climate and because of the advance of military technology rendering existing strategies outdated which can happen quicker than a country can adapt to . The reliance of the alliance systems to prevent war in Europe before WWI , or the allies expecting another trench war in WWII only to be devastated by German tanks , are both examples of times when existing assumptions have been proven wrong , and they should teach us a lesson about taking the status quo for granted . One possible weakness that could compromise nuclear deterrence , is the advancing laser technology that in some decades time might be able to shoot missiles out of the sky with unprecedented efficiency . While one should not fall victim to fear mongering and alarmism , one should also be careful about dismissing future threats entirely . When it comes to the future , there are no guarantees .