What's the main Dutch centre-right party? I assume it's not Wilders.
Though since CDA abandoned their religious main course, they became centre-left.
I dont know what i'll be voting, I'd like to see defence getting more funding though.
You are Dutch, I assume?Yes :P. All (read: Most) got some valid points. The only politician i somewhat like is Alexander Pechtold.
The wave of right-wing populism in the world as of late is absolutely disgusting.Fuck off Che lover
I think Pim Fortuyn was the best leader the Netherlands never had-great shame he was assassinated he was better than Wilders. If I were Dutch I'd vote for Baudet.
The wave of right-wing populism in the world as of late is absolutely disgusting.It's a perfectly natural response to the perceived rise of the extreme social and economic left. (So, you)
Maybe if you started using rational thought in response to knee jerk emotional reaction you'd have more success bringing people to your cause, lol.In my eyes, the rise of right wing populism is based on xenophobia, bigotry and racism. My response is not really a knee jerk reaction, its literally trump in the US, UKIP and others with Brexit and now other european nations. The central theme seems to be to keep out foreigners...
The rise of right wing populism is due to the rise of the social democratic left, and it's perceived power in society.
I wonder why Merkel hates Germany so muchMaybe because Germany hates Germany.
Just out of question Theodin, who are you hoping to win the conservative leadership race?I want Harper to raise from the dead and run again :P No honestly I have no clue. I haven't looked into it much, when the race narrows i'll look more closely. Perhaps someone like Michael Chong or Lisa Rait, someone who can grab some of the social vote. While i'm not socially left, I don't think a Conservative can win without being at least socially centre, so as long as whoever wins is socially centre and economically right i'll support them. Meaning i'm not enjoying O'Leary being the favorite, as it's clear he's not a very centrist person. But then again, as I said, i'm not really following it very closely.
I really hope Merkel will be elected another time, there is no good alternative.....there is an alternative my freund
I really hope Merkel will be elected another time, there is no good alternative.....there is an alternative my freundSpoiler(https://www.fsegames.eu/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fpuu.sh%2FtHF15%2Fff9b1ca4f7.jpg&hash=27289a2e4943f70c4f4a5559738fc8fb725feef2)[close]
Not sure there is still a lot of people eligible to vote here :D
For France, briefly, it will be interesting. Le Pen (despite multiple judicial affairs) will pass the first round, but i'm not that worried, it will be like in 2002 with her father. What is interesting is there is an explosion of the tradtionnal parties : Socialists are weakeaned and heavily divided, Right is showing unity but it's just for the show and the "tchatcher-like" Fillon candidacy is very fragile. As far I see, there is a strong chance that Macron, liberal independant will pass.
Yeah no.I really hope Merkel will be elected another time, there is no good alternative.....there is an alternative my freundSpoiler(https://www.fsegames.eu/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fpuu.sh%2FtHF15%2Fff9b1ca4f7.jpg&hash=27289a2e4943f70c4f4a5559738fc8fb725feef2)[close]
It is the only alternative.L I T E R A L L Y
I think Pim Fortuyn was the best leader the Netherlands never had-great shame he was assassinated he was better than Wilders. If I were Dutch I'd vote for Baudet.
I think Pim Fortuyn was the best leader the Netherlands never had-great shame he was assassinated he was better than Wilders. If I were Dutch I'd vote for Baudet.
Baudet? What? Why?
Everyone that's anti EU is the best.I think Pim Fortuyn was the best leader the Netherlands never had-great shame he was assassinated he was better than Wilders. If I were Dutch I'd vote for Baudet.
Baudet? What? Why?
The wave of right-wing populism in the world as of late is absolutely disgusting.Says the communist lol
gross...liberals...Everyone that's anti EU is the best.I think Pim Fortuyn was the best leader the Netherlands never had-great shame he was assassinated he was better than Wilders. If I were Dutch I'd vote for Baudet.
Baudet? What? Why?
Btw (if anyone cares) I might run as a muncipial candidate for the liberals in the next Swedish election.
Mainly because my muncipality have been fucked by Socialdemocrats for ages, highest tax rates in all of Sweden yay.
Not sure there is still a lot of people eligible to vote here :DYe Le Pen will pass the first round of course ::) not the second.
For France, briefly, it will be interesting. Le Pen (despite multiple judicial affairs) will pass the first round, but i'm not that worried, it will be like in 2002 with her father. What is interesting is there is an explosion of the tradtionnal parties : Socialists are weakeaned and heavily divided, Right is showing unity but it's just for the show and the "tchatcher-like" Fillon candidacy is very fragile. As far I see, there is a strong chance that Macron, liberal independant will pass.
It almost seems too easy for leftists to blame racism and bigotry to detract from their own failings.Maybe if you started using rational thought in response to knee jerk emotional reaction you'd have more success bringing people to your cause, lol.In my eyes, the rise of right wing populism is based on xenophobia, bigotry and racism. My response is not really a knee jerk reaction, its literally trump in the US, UKIP and others with Brexit and now other european nations. The central theme seems to be to keep out foreigners...
The rise of right wing populism is due to the rise of the social democratic left, and it's perceived power in society.
You can say that it's a response to the left and in some ways that may be true but the more likely case is that some folks became scared of people who look different.I wonder why Merkel hates Germany so muchMaybe because Germany hates Germany.
Whose failings exactly? Mine? That of the neo-liberal establishment before trump? SJWs? I'm not a neo-liberal and i don't really identify much with the cause of identity politics (ie: SJWs).It almost seems too easy for leftists to blame racism and bigotry to detract from their own failings.Maybe if you started using rational thought in response to knee jerk emotional reaction you'd have more success bringing people to your cause, lol.In my eyes, the rise of right wing populism is based on xenophobia, bigotry and racism. My response is not really a knee jerk reaction, its literally trump in the US, UKIP and others with Brexit and now other european nations. The central theme seems to be to keep out foreigners...
The rise of right wing populism is due to the rise of the social democratic left, and it's perceived power in society.
You can say that it's a response to the left and in some ways that may be true but the more likely case is that some folks became scared of people who look different.I wonder why Merkel hates Germany so muchMaybe because Germany hates Germany.
In my eyes, the rise of right wing populism is based on xenophobia, bigotry and racism. My response is not really a knee jerk reaction, its literally trump in the US, UKIP and others with Brexit and now other european nations. The central theme seems to be to keep out foreigners...
You can say that it's a response to the left and in some ways that may be true but the more likely case is that some folks became scared of people who look different.
I remember there were bombings and kidnappings and shootings happening, just 40 years ago in Germany, because of Political "left vs. right" shit.
So, I am guessing it has calmed down a lot since then.
Whose failings exactly? Mine? That of the neo-liberal establishment before trump? SJWs? I'm not a neo-liberal and i don't really identify much with the cause of identity politics (ie: SJWs).It almost seems too easy for leftists to blame racism and bigotry to detract from their own failings.Maybe if you started using rational thought in response to knee jerk emotional reaction you'd have more success bringing people to your cause, lol.In my eyes, the rise of right wing populism is based on xenophobia, bigotry and racism. My response is not really a knee jerk reaction, its literally trump in the US, UKIP and others with Brexit and now other european nations. The central theme seems to be to keep out foreigners...
The rise of right wing populism is due to the rise of the social democratic left, and it's perceived power in society.
You can say that it's a response to the left and in some ways that may be true but the more likely case is that some folks became scared of people who look different.I wonder why Merkel hates Germany so muchMaybe because Germany hates Germany.
I don't really agree with that notion. There has always been a 'left=commies' and 'right=racist' mentality, which leads to the 'us-versus-them' feeling in politics, but this is relatively on a pretty harmless scale. Politics will always divide us and it isn't, and shouldn't, anything to worry about.
I remember there were bombings and kidnappings and shootings happening, just 40 years ago in Germany, because of Political "left vs. right" shit.
So, I am guessing it has calmed down a lot since then.
Eh, how old are you?
I remember there were bombings and kidnappings and shootings happening, just 40 years ago in Germany, because of Political "left vs. right" shit.
So, I am guessing it has calmed down a lot since then.
Eh, how old are you?
What role does that play?
All I am saying is, that the political environment is a lot calmer now than it used to be...
What a devastating trap card activation from Apoc
I remember there were bombings and kidnappings and shootings happening, just 40 years ago in Germany, because of Political "left vs. right" shit.
So, I am guessing it has calmed down a lot since then.
Eh, how old are you?
What role does that play?
All I am saying is, that the political environment is a lot calmer now than it used to be...
Except the SPD doesn't have a candidate yet. So they would vote for Merkel, even tho she is in a different Party.hasn't schulz become the official candidate recently? ???
I find it hard to understand that someone from Sweden thinks leaving the EU is a good idea.
What i mean by "not identifying much with the cause of identity politics" is that i see it as less important than classism. Even though others may disagree with feminists, the concept of 'privilege' still exists. To what extent it exists is what is debated. I'll use an example, there is a homeless white man and a rich black trans woman, who has more privilege? The rich black trans woman because classism is more important than your identity. This is what i mean when i say that i don't identify as much with identity politics.SpoilerWhose failings exactly? Mine? That of the neo-liberal establishment before trump? SJWs? I'm not a neo-liberal and i don't really identify much with the cause of identity politics (ie: SJWs).It almost seems too easy for leftists to blame racism and bigotry to detract from their own failings.Maybe if you started using rational thought in response to knee jerk emotional reaction you'd have more success bringing people to your cause, lol.In my eyes, the rise of right wing populism is based on xenophobia, bigotry and racism. My response is not really a knee jerk reaction, its literally trump in the US, UKIP and others with Brexit and now other european nations. The central theme seems to be to keep out foreigners...
The rise of right wing populism is due to the rise of the social democratic left, and it's perceived power in society.
You can say that it's a response to the left and in some ways that may be true but the more likely case is that some folks became scared of people who look different.I wonder why Merkel hates Germany so muchMaybe because Germany hates Germany.[close]
Hold on there, you just activated my trap card, "Check yourself before you rek yourself". When an opponent tries to distance themselves from identity politics, remind them that they blamed the rise of the populist right on racism and xenophobia, which is basically identity politics.
It also allows me to draw 2 more cards.
What i mean by "not identifying much with the cause of identity politics" is that i see it as less important than classism. Even though others may disagree with feminists, the concept of 'privilege' still exists. To what extent it exists is what is debated. I'll use an example, there is a homeless white man and a rich black trans woman, who has more privilege? The rich black trans woman because classism is more important than your identity. This is what i mean when i say that i don't identify as much with identity politics.SpoilerWhose failings exactly? Mine? That of the neo-liberal establishment before trump? SJWs? I'm not a neo-liberal and i don't really identify much with the cause of identity politics (ie: SJWs).It almost seems too easy for leftists to blame racism and bigotry to detract from their own failings.Maybe if you started using rational thought in response to knee jerk emotional reaction you'd have more success bringing people to your cause, lol.In my eyes, the rise of right wing populism is based on xenophobia, bigotry and racism. My response is not really a knee jerk reaction, its literally trump in the US, UKIP and others with Brexit and now other european nations. The central theme seems to be to keep out foreigners...
The rise of right wing populism is due to the rise of the social democratic left, and it's perceived power in society.
You can say that it's a response to the left and in some ways that may be true but the more likely case is that some folks became scared of people who look different.I wonder why Merkel hates Germany so muchMaybe because Germany hates Germany.[close]
Hold on there, you just activated my trap card, "Check yourself before you rek yourself". When an opponent tries to distance themselves from identity politics, remind them that they blamed the rise of the populist right on racism and xenophobia, which is basically identity politics.
It also allows me to draw 2 more cards.
However that being said, i'm not going to ignore identity politics when it is relevant, such as the case with Donald Trump. The Muslim ban is racist, it's targeting a specific group of people with a specific religion different to ours. The ban contradicts itself because saudi arabia is mysteriously nowhere to be found on the list (15 of the 19 planners of 9/11 were saudis) while Iraq which has never caused a single terror attack against the united states just so happens to be on the list.
I'm attacking you directly for 500 lifepoints.What i mean by "not identifying much with the cause of identity politics" is that i see it as less important than classism. Even though others may disagree with feminists, the concept of 'privilege' still exists. To what extent it exists is what is debated. I'll use an example, there is a homeless white man and a rich black trans woman, who has more privilege? The rich black trans woman because classism is more important than your identity. This is what i mean when i say that i don't identify as much with identity politics.SpoilerWhose failings exactly? Mine? That of the neo-liberal establishment before trump? SJWs? I'm not a neo-liberal and i don't really identify much with the cause of identity politics (ie: SJWs).It almost seems too easy for leftists to blame racism and bigotry to detract from their own failings.Maybe if you started using rational thought in response to knee jerk emotional reaction you'd have more success bringing people to your cause, lol.In my eyes, the rise of right wing populism is based on xenophobia, bigotry and racism. My response is not really a knee jerk reaction, its literally trump in the US, UKIP and others with Brexit and now other european nations. The central theme seems to be to keep out foreigners...
The rise of right wing populism is due to the rise of the social democratic left, and it's perceived power in society.
You can say that it's a response to the left and in some ways that may be true but the more likely case is that some folks became scared of people who look different.I wonder why Merkel hates Germany so muchMaybe because Germany hates Germany.[close]
Hold on there, you just activated my trap card, "Check yourself before you rek yourself". When an opponent tries to distance themselves from identity politics, remind them that they blamed the rise of the populist right on racism and xenophobia, which is basically identity politics.
It also allows me to draw 2 more cards.
However that being said, i'm not going to ignore identity politics when it is relevant, such as the case with Donald Trump. The Muslim ban is racist, it's targeting a specific group of people with a specific religion different to ours. The ban contradicts itself because saudi arabia is mysteriously nowhere to be found on the list (15 of the 19 planners of 9/11 were saudis) while Iraq which has never caused a single terror attack against the united states just so happens to be on the list.
You could've ended it after your first paragraph and I would have been more or less like "Fair Enough", even though you never explained why everyone (especially the working class you communists love) suddenly decided to be xenophobic and racist. But then ya fucked up.
Your first mistake is CNN
Your second mistake is that Islam is not a race, therefore it literally cannot be racist. For example, if I were to found a Death Cult in which we worshipped Shia Labeouf and partook in Human Sacrifices, and our religion was subsequently banned from the United States, it wouldn't be racist as we would be a religion not a race. I'm guessing when you say Muslim you mean Arabs, but referring to Arabs as Muslims is far from politically correct to the point it could actually be racist, as you are saying that all Arabs are Muslim, and nobody else besides Arabs can be muslim.
Your third mistake is saying that it is a Muslim Ban, which it's not. Referring to it as a Muslim ban is purposefully misleading in a number of ways. The first of which, you make it sound like Islam itself is banned in the United States, which it is definitely not. Secondly, it is a ban on a number of countries identified by the Obama Administration as sources of terror. My guess is that the list was compiled by data from Terror attacks around the world, and not just America, so the nationality of terrorists who have committed terror attacks on American soil might not necessarily reflect the nationality of a majority of terrorists worldwide. But of course, I know the left likes to shy away from statistics and data when it comes to Terrorism.
Your last mistake is bringing up the nationalities of the terrorists from countries we haven't banned, and I am still not entirely sure why the hell you would do that. Are you trying to argue that we should ban more countries? Bringing them up is literally an argument to ban MORE countries. It is definitely not an argument against the ban. You call it the ban contradicting itself, I call it Trump being soft. It shocks me that you wanted him to be tougher.
Conclusion: Even "when relevant", Identity Politics is still stupid.
I will then play two cards face down and end my turn.
Sorry for the doublepost, but it's just great
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Sq-VPDtNK4
Sorry for the doublepost, but it's just greatMeh.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Sq-VPDtNK4
What i mean by "not identifying much with the cause of identity politics" is that i see it as less important than classism. Even though others may disagree with feminists, the concept of 'privilege' still exists. To what extent it exists is what is debated. I'll use an example, there is a homeless white man and a rich black trans woman, who has more privilege? The rich black trans woman because classism is more important than your identity. This is what i mean when i say that i don't identify as much with identity politics.SpoilerWhose failings exactly? Mine? That of the neo-liberal establishment before trump? SJWs? I'm not a neo-liberal and i don't really identify much with the cause of identity politics (ie: SJWs).It almost seems too easy for leftists to blame racism and bigotry to detract from their own failings.Maybe if you started using rational thought in response to knee jerk emotional reaction you'd have more success bringing people to your cause, lol.In my eyes, the rise of right wing populism is based on xenophobia, bigotry and racism. My response is not really a knee jerk reaction, its literally trump in the US, UKIP and others with Brexit and now other european nations. The central theme seems to be to keep out foreigners...
The rise of right wing populism is due to the rise of the social democratic left, and it's perceived power in society.
You can say that it's a response to the left and in some ways that may be true but the more likely case is that some folks became scared of people who look different.I wonder why Merkel hates Germany so muchMaybe because Germany hates Germany.[close]
Hold on there, you just activated my trap card, "Check yourself before you rek yourself". When an opponent tries to distance themselves from identity politics, remind them that they blamed the rise of the populist right on racism and xenophobia, which is basically identity politics.
It also allows me to draw 2 more cards.
However that being said, i'm not going to ignore identity politics when it is relevant, such as the case with Donald Trump. The Muslim ban is racist, it's targeting a specific group of people with a specific religion different to ours. The ban contradicts itself because saudi arabia is mysteriously nowhere to be found on the list (15 of the 19 planners of 9/11 were saudis) while Iraq which has never caused a single terror attack against the united states just so happens to be on the list.
You could've ended it after your first paragraph and I would have been more or less like "Fair Enough", even though you never explained why everyone (especially the working class you communists love) suddenly decided to be xenophobic and racist. But then ya fucked up.
Your first mistake is CNN
Your second mistake is that Islam is not a race, therefore it literally cannot be racist. For example, if I were to found a Death Cult in which we worshipped Shia Labeouf and partook in Human Sacrifices, and our religion was subsequently banned from the United States, it wouldn't be racist as we would be a religion not a race. I'm guessing when you say Muslim you mean Arabs, but referring to Arabs as Muslims is far from politically correct to the point it could actually be racist, as you are saying that all Arabs are Muslim, and nobody else besides Arabs can be muslim.
Your third mistake is saying that it is a Muslim Ban, which it's not. Referring to it as a Muslim ban is purposefully misleading in a number of ways. The first of which, you make it sound like Islam itself is banned in the United States, which it is definitely not. Secondly, it is a ban on a number of countries identified by the Obama Administration as sources of terror. My guess is that the list was compiled by data from Terror attacks around the world, and not just America, so the nationality of terrorists who have committed terror attacks on American soil might not necessarily reflect the nationality of a majority of terrorists worldwide. But of course, I know the left likes to shy away from statistics and data when it comes to Terrorism.
Your last mistake is bringing up the nationalities of the terrorists from countries we haven't banned, and I am still not entirely sure why the hell you would do that. Are you trying to argue that we should ban more countries? Bringing them up is literally an argument to ban MORE countries. It is definitely not an argument against the ban. You call it the ban contradicting itself, I call it Trump being soft. It shocks me that you wanted him to be tougher.
Conclusion: Even "when relevant", Identity Politics is still stupid.
I will then play two cards face down and end my turn.SpoilerI'm attacking you directly for 500 lifepoints.I know this isn't super relevent to our discussion but it's worth noting that a majority of the working class did not vote for trump. 241 million people can vote. Cut out 1 million for the bougie folks, trump got about 62 million votes. That's about 38%. I know my math is off a bit but that's a general area of the percentage.SpoilerYou could've ended it after your first paragraph and I would have been more or less like "Fair Enough", even though you never explained why everyone (especially the working class you communists love) suddenly decided to be xenophobic and racist. But then ya fucked up.[close]wotSpoilerYour first mistake is CNN[close]I get that Islam is not a race...however the predominate population within the banned countries are Arab Muslims. It is racist because it is targeting people of a particular race that just so happens to have their own dominate religion. So he's not JUST racist, he's also Islamophobic and Xenophobic. I hate having to throw these words around because i don't think that form of disourse is particularly effective but in the case of Trump where is so blatant, so obvious, it's honestly disgusting, I make the exception because I genuinely believe it's true.SpoilerYour second mistake is that Islam is not a race, therefore it literally cannot be racist. For example, if I were to found a Death Cult in which we worshipped Shia Labeouf and partook in Human Sacrifices, and our religion was subsequently banned from the United States, it wouldn't be racist as we would be a religion not a race. I'm guessing when you say Muslim you mean Arabs, but referring to Arabs as Muslims is far from politically correct to the point it could actually be racist, as you are saying that all Arabs are Muslim, and nobody else besides Arabs can be muslim.[close]I call it a Muslim ban because it's mostly Arab Muslims who are being banned...maybe it's misleading, but whatever. Okay, so it's about terror statistics then...what exactly are we scared of? A terror attack that we have no evidence will happen? These "terror" attacks are mostly happening on their own soil because they are in active civil wars which we are at least partially responsible for.SpoilerYour third mistake is saying that it is a Muslim Ban, which it's not. Referring to it as a Muslim ban is purposefully misleading in a number of ways. The first of which, you make it sound like Islam itself is banned in the United States, which it is definitely not. Secondly, it is a ban on a number of countries identified by the Obama Administration as sources of terror. My guess is that the list was compiled by data from Terror attacks around the world, and not just America, so the nationality of terrorists who have committed terror attacks on American soil might not necessarily reflect the nationality of a majority of terrorists worldwide. But of course, I know the left likes to shy away from statistics and data when it comes to Terrorism.[close]The point of the ban is to protect AMERICANS. So it's relevant to bring up evidence that suggest certain people of certain nationalities may be more harmful than others, hints the nationalities of prior attacks. If we were to go by that logic, saudi arabia seems very unfriendly towards americans and should really be at the top of trump's list. I am in no way advocating a larger ban or any ban at all, i'm simply pointing out that this ban is pointless...it serves no purpose if he cannot provide any evidence that the nations or people within the nations that he banned had any reason to attack us which he cannot provide.SpoilerYour last mistake is bringing up the nationalities of the terrorists from countries we haven't banned, and I am still not entirely sure why the hell you would do that. Are you trying to argue that we should ban more countries? Bringing them up is literally an argument to ban MORE countries. It is definitely not an argument against the ban. You call it the ban contradicting itself, I call it Trump being soft. It shocks me that you wanted him to be tougher.[close][close]
Why do French Elections always seem to be solely about personal issues?
If you're gonna discuss Trump's wall and his foreign policy, don't do that here. You have the US politics thread for that.
Now back on topic, it's really interesting to note the amount of scandals coming of ex-Sarkozy supporters. I wonder if Fillon will hold.
If you're gonna discuss Trump's wall and his foreign policy, don't do that here. You have the US politics thread for that.
Now back on topic, it's really interesting to note the amount of scandals coming of ex-Sarkozy supporters. I wonder if Fillon will hold.
If you're gonna discuss Trump's wall and his foreign policy, don't do that here. You have the US politics thread for that.
Now back on topic, it's really interesting to note the amount of scandals coming of ex-Sarkozy supporters. I wonder if Fillon will hold.
Discuss: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-02-08/germanys-muslim-demographic-futureI'll take the bait
I hate how both the right wing extrememists and the left wing extrememists completely stop any serious discussion about the problems that Islam has :(
true :( Tbh I think we are pretty much fucked. Radical lefties in charge led to people turning to radical right groups and both are severly retarded.I hate how both the right wing extrememists and the left wing extrememists completely stop any serious discussion about the problems that Islam has :(
Tbf, that is very much the case in all modern day problems and debates.
I can assure you that no radical leftists are "in charge" even though i wish it were true.Well, the SJW/Antifa crap is part of the radical left, or atleast they hijacked it. And they control campuses as far as im aware.
Radical lefties in charge led to people turning to radical right groups and both are severly retarded.I'm just trying to figure out what radical leftists you're referring to.
The radical left controls university campuses. As a university student in North America you must realize that
The radical left controls university campuses. As a university student in North America you must realize thatThey don't 'control' universities, they just have influence there.
Well when you surround yourself in an environment filled with professors and staff who constantly reinforce a leftist worldview for 4 years and you don't make an effort to research differing ideologies, then yeah, you essentially become indoctrinated through social pressure. This isn't necessarily exclusive to leftist views, it can happen in pretty much any community where everyone is conservative, liberal, etc. it's just that college campuses are overwhelmingly leftist (This study says that the ratio of registered Democrats to Republicans among University professors is 11.5:1 http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/oct/6/liberal-professors-outnumber-conservatives-12-1/ ). This is a very simple concept I don't see how anyone can't understand thisThe radical left controls university campuses. As a university student in North America you must realize that
What does this 'control' even mean?
Well when you surround yourself in an environment filled with professors and staff who constantly reinforce a leftist worldview for 4 years and you don't make an effort to research differing ideologies, then yeah, you essentially become indoctrinated through social pressure. This isn't necessarily exclusive to leftist views, it can happen in pretty much any community where everyone is conservative, liberal, etc. it's just that college campuses are overwhelmingly leftist (This study says that the ratio of registered Democrats to Republicans among University professors is 11.5:1 http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/oct/6/liberal-professors-outnumber-conservatives-12-1/ ). This is a very simple concept I don't see how anyone can't understand thisThe radical left controls university campuses. As a university student in North America you must realize that
What does this 'control' even mean?
Certainly, there is a leftist trend in universities, but from what I have experienced, have heard, seen and read, there is no actual political agenda, or any matter of control.
The leftist trend might be the case in the US, but it currently is not by any means in Europe.L M A O
The leftist trend might be the case in the US, but it currently is not by any means in Europe.
It certainly wasn't organized by the professors. So how did this come about?
'They control campuses'. What is that even supposed to mean?You can savely say that left tendencies have been in charge of the agenda setting in most of western society. And Campuses are mostly politically left, look at student movements and most professors. In Germany a mathematics prof was fired because he let his students calculate how likely it is that a terrorist is also a muslim.
How are SJWs and ANTIFA in anyway in a position of actual power? Remember, you said this,QuoteRadical lefties in charge led to people turning to radical right groups and both are severly retarded.I'm just trying to figure out what radical leftists you're referring to.
Also, they don't really 'control' campuses, they have influence in a few campuses. Just because ANTIFA made a big stand at UC Berkeley doesn't mean that radical leftists control all college campuses, that's just ridiculous.
In addition, as a leftist yourself, would you agree with this statement?Spoiler(https://scontent.ford1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/16299172_1249810258445716_3515009147934957555_n.jpg?oh=182c16014bafe3bb06f54281d920cefc&oe=59054410)[close]
The radical left controls university campuses. As a university student in North America you must realize thatThey don't 'control' universities, they just have influence there.
Oh dear god, opinions and ideas different from your own!? That must be fucking awful. Poor conservatives, having to listen to these stupid fucking feminists and socialists with their "equality" nonsense. You must really be having a hard time theo :(
Perhaps it has more to do with knowledge regarding how thinks actually work, rather than political ideologies. Certainly, there is a leftist trend in universities, but from what I have experienced, have heard, seen and read, there is no actual political agenda, or any matter of control. It is more a matter of transferring facts, something that the rigth and most notably the conservatives are known for.
The reason why most Professors in the US rather vote Democrat than Republican, is because those Professors are Scientists. And Scientist like to believe that evolution exist and stuff. So they are more likely to vote Democrat than Republican, because as we know Republicans hate Science, because JESUUUUUUUS and OIIIIIIIIIIIILLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL!...
If I were a Scientist in the US and I had to choose between someone who will cut all my funding and between someone who will not necessarily increase it, but at least keep it more or less the same, I obviously choose the 2nd one.
But lets face it. Probably just the DNC and George Soros sending "donations" to all of the universities across the western world.
Nobody is even talking about social studies.
Its amazing how the Frankfurt School keeps triggering right wingers to this day.
>putting real professors in the same boat as social studies professors
Well, a lot of people now days take stupid uni courses like Religious Studies, Gender Studies and shit like that. They are bound to produce leftist thoughts simply because of the very natures of courses in contrast with right-wing ideals. Useless courses, but its what people take. Actual scientist are left leaning generally because conservative governments only care about science so long as they don't contradict the policy of their government. Trump clamping down on climate change is an example of this. If you're a professional on the subject, and you can clearly see the evidence of evolution or climate change. Why would you actively support a political party who refuses to accept these facts so as to not anger their constituents?
But lets face it. Probably just the DNC and George Soros sending "donations" to all of the universities across the western world.
1. Your definition of useful is loaded and completely uneducated.>putting real professors in the same boat as social studies professors
I am assuming that most Professors actually do something useful. You know, Physics, Math, History and stuff.Well, a lot of people now days take stupid uni courses like Religious Studies, Gender Studies and shit like that. They are bound to produce leftist thoughts simply because of the very natures of courses in contrast with right-wing ideals. Useless courses, but its what people take. Actual scientist are left leaning generally because conservative governments only care about science so long as they don't contradict the policy of their government. Trump clamping down on climate change is an example of this. If you're a professional on the subject, and you can clearly see the evidence of evolution or climate change. Why would you actively support a political party who refuses to accept these facts so as to not anger their constituents?
But lets face it. Probably just the DNC and George Soros sending "donations" to all of the universities across the western world.
Are they really? I know that at the local universities here, there are way to many people studying business/economy and stuff like that and way to few people studying anything actual sciency. A lot of people are afraid of Mathematics. Not saying economy is not science, but you get what I mean. Everyone is studying something business related and engineers and scientists are struggling to find replacements.
Overall, there are to many students, the universities are overflowing and a lot of jobs that do not require any higher education do not find enough workers. (I guess that's where refugees are supposed to step in or something, I don't know)
I am exaggerating ofc, its not all that bad, but this is where the current trend is leading to anyway.
You can savely say that left tendencies have been in charge of the agenda setting in most of western society. And Campuses are mostly politically left, look at student movements and most professors. In Germany a mathematics prof was fired because he let his students calculate how likely it is that a terrorist is also a muslim.As a student at a German university I can promise you there are most certainly right wing student movements and clubs. At my University there are at least 2 that are known for being right wing (not extremist, just very conservative) and 1 more is being rumoured to be too. I have to agree that there are more left leaning organisations around, though.
Again, those groups (or lesser groups) are (in my subjective view) in charge of agenda setting, or atleast the public media output follows a "left" mainstream. Since we are on a international forum this is hard to proof for all countries, so I can only talk about German media. For example, media outlets were asked to not talk about the heritage if they reported any sort of crime related to immigrants.Who asked the media to not publish heritage? Leftist extremists? Certainly not. It was probably the government to prevent any more right wing hate crimes like there have been a ton of in Saxony with the refugee camp burnings.
This, again, is NOT the case for all media outlets. You can see tendencys though.
There is a difference between actually discussing different opinions (wich is sometimes happening here) and outright refusing to listen to someone because you assume you have the moral highground(wich is happening here most of the time, from BOTH sides).Unlike you most right wing people are brainwashed into oblivion and refuse to listen to any arguments. I very rarely encounter left wing extremists on the internet but they are the same, I guess the internet is just an outlet for all the hate people don't dare to let lose in public.
I know its a shitty personal experience argument, but every time I try to talk about the problems that occur with bringing over a million immigrants into your country in less then 2 years I get called a nazi or im being "intolerant".That is unfortunately a very German problem, undoubtedly fueled by our past. Yes there are problems with the way the situation was handled, but I am proud of our chancellor, that she as the only western leader stood up for the principles, morals and values the EU stands for. Sure we could have closed our doors and not let people in, after all it's not our problem if they all die in their puny conflict down there, right? But that goes against everything we have been trying to achieve in Europe for the past 70 years.
Yeah sure, the left is just more intelligent than the right! Not like the left EVER ignores facts right?! *stares at obvious issues with mass immigration* ::)Look at the the people who vote AfD and march with Pegida and you have your answer.
1. Your definition of useful is loaded and completely uneducated.
2. You're ignoring a significant number of professors.
3. Either European universities are completely different than North American ones, your perspective sucks, or you're just completely mislead.
Could you give me links to these "tons" of camp burnings? I heard of Freital, but I wasnt aware of any others.http://www.tagesspiegel.de/politik/auflistung-der-regierung-in-nrw-und-sachsen-gab-es-die-meisten-angriffe-auf-fluechtlingsheime/12955304.html
It was the goverment that told them to not publish heritage yes, but I still think it A: happened out of tendencies to protect ones own agenda and B: its not helping any actual public discussion about the topic.
Towards your bigger wall of text: I do not disagree with that. But I do believe that most of the people that came into our country are NOT infact fleeing from Muslim oppression or war but simply come here due it being a better style of living.
"Look at the the people who vote AfD and march with Pegida and you have your answer."
Look at the Amadeus Antonio Stiftung and Islam Apologists and you have the same.
My point is, extremists on both sides are shit, ad hominems are shit, lets look at facts instead:
Islam is homophobic.Yes, so is Christianity, but through internal reforms tolerance to homosexuals is starting to rise in the churches (especially in the Protestant churches).
Islam is sexist.So is Christianity. Yet again the religion is trying to reform that.
Islam is not in line with our basic rights.By your logic neither is Christianity. Should all Christians be deported then? I hope you see the logical fallacy here in your argument.
Many Immigrants are from radical muslim countries AND believe in Islam and the teachings of the KoranAs long as these immigrants do not break the law while practising their religion they are allowed to keep their opinions and religion, that is part of our Grundgesetz (Basic Law for the Federal Republic of Germany), you know that. Your personal opinion whether or not Muslims belong to Germany is irrelevant in that matter.
>those people should not live here.
QuoteIslam is homophobic.Yes, so is Christianity, but through internal reforms tolerance to homosexuals is starting to rise in the churches (especially in the Protestant churches).
Hadhod we are not really disagreeing are we? You are simply raising the point that Christianity is also bad(wich I agree with, while also stating that most Christians dont really practice their religion) and that we shouldnt blame people for trying to improve their condition of life. Still, dont disagree with that.Then I must have articulated myself wrongly here. I didn't say Christianity is bad, I stated that parts of the Christian believes are outdated (thus bad) and should therefore be reformed (like the anti homosexual part you mentioned).
"Islam is homophobic!" "Yea, but protestantism is reforming though!" watI should have probably quoted if altogether to make for easier formatting. With those comments I was trying to say that Christianity and its values (whatever you may think of it) is/are an integral part even of today's western society despite being old. That is because it was reformed time and time again. Islam needs these reforms too or in the long run western ideology and Islam will not be able to coexist.
You should inform yourself about the Amadeus Antonio Stiftung, its led by an Ex Stasi Member is basically the tip of the cancer berg that is radical SJW´s :^)They must be rather small to never make it into any news or talks I have read and had over the past years.
how is he a stormfag? watBut lets face it. Probably just the DNC and George Soros sending "donations" to all of the universities across the western world.Spoiler(https://i.imgur.com/BB8wm2W.png)
(https://i.imgur.com/0NmIlfb.png)[close]
Life isn't a videogame, stormfag. Soros is not the big meanie at the end.
Soros' little buddy was handpicked by Trump to effectively be in-charge of US Gov revenue.
exdeehow is he a stormfag? watBut lets face it. Probably just the DNC and George Soros sending "donations" to all of the universities across the western world.Spoiler(https://i.imgur.com/BB8wm2W.png)
(https://i.imgur.com/0NmIlfb.png)[close]
Life isn't a videogame, stormfag. Soros is not the big meanie at the end.
Soros' little buddy was handpicked by Trump to effectively be in-charge of US Gov revenue.Spoiler(https://i.imgur.com/BAGkEIP.jpg)
Bottom-most book is an actual copy of Mein Kampf btw.[close]
Apparently Trump is a fascistI don't get it?
I'm disappointed. Apparently Trump is a fascist but we haven't sent out the death squads or burned any books yet.I've been sitting here with my Hitler Youth uniform, Art Of The Deal, and MAGA hat for a while. When're you invading Canada? I'm getting impatient.
Starting to regret my vote :'( woulda been nice to burn required reading for class cause its evil.
soon... make sure your fashy goy haircut is in regsI'm disappointed. Apparently Trump is a fascist but we haven't sent out the death squads or burned any books yet.I've been sitting here with my Hitler Youth uniform, Art Of The Deal, and MAGA hat for a while. When're you invading Canada? I'm getting impatient.
Starting to regret my vote :'( woulda been nice to burn required reading for class cause its evil.
If you kill your enemies they win, so joke is on the US if it invades Canada.We're gonna go all 1812 on their asses
If you kill your enemies they win, so joke is on the US if it invades Canada.We're gonna go all 1812 on their asses
And the EU is jsut here to sit back, relax and enjoy the comedy.
It violates Due Process and Equal Protection under the constitution.Just curious, where does the American Constitution extend to foreign nationals who aren't even in our country and therefore have no protections from the American Constitution? I would think no where because the American constitution applies to people within the United States only. Although it's something else to say that America apparently claims the entire world as it's own? I guess the Illuminati plot to enslave us goes deeper than I thought
Essentially why this violates these two things is because the people within the banned countries did not commit a crime against the united states (maybe a few individuals but not the general populous) and therefore do not deserve repercussions as a result. There are various other legal arguments that you can approach from, all a little different from each other, yet they all seem to stem from Due Process and Equal Protection. I don't pretend to be a lawyer but I am a poli-sci major which is typically seen as a prerequisite to law. The simple fact that the courts denied trump's EO just proves my point.
It would have cost any politician's their career had they done something like this.Yes, enjoy your comedy as Europe destroys itself with dindu nuffin arabs protected by the left and the MSM but yes, lecture us on how we are sheep for wanting to control who comes into our country and actually trying to address the problem that is Radical Islamic Terrorism and its implications
Looks like the Americans really did become sheep. And the EU is jsut here to sit back, relax and enjoy the comedy.
Fuckin right wingers always go on about how they want to protect the constitution cuz 'muh rights are bein violated' yet have no idea what the constitution actually fucking says. It says a lot more than just 'freedom of speech' and 'muh guns.'
And the EU is jsut here to sit back, relax and enjoy the comedy.
Doesn't the Constitution also grant to freedom of religion? Isn't targeting one specific religion or prioritizing one over another a breach of that? The ban on refugees is stupid anyways. Not one single refugee has committed an act of terror. Meanwhile people continue to die in Syria while the alt-right works to send refugees back into the war zone.
Meanwhile people continue to die in Syria while the alt-right works to send refugees back into the war zone.
He has stated that Christians will be given priority which would?
(...)
The whole prospect behind refugees it that they are fleeing away from a conflict or persecution to find a better life.
It's far to out there of an idea to think that they are leaving the middle east because to specifically enact terrorism against the U.S. People are not risking their lives in crossing the Mediterranean to blow up a church.
That's why Irish people fled to to the U.S rather then France. That's why Jews fled to the U.S rather then France if they were given the chance. If your life is shit, try to find the best one you can.
If your life is shit, try to find the best one you can.
Christians make the most legitimate refugees, and I can understand why Trump is willing to let them in. They will be much easier to integrate into society, also.
It certainly does... except this isn't targeting a religion
I wasn't saying if the Christians were in more or less danger. 1) It's without a doubt that they are in more. 2) I was debating the legality of specifically accepting Christian's above people in equal danger.
I was debating the legality of specifically accepting Christian's above people in equal danger.
Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate.
So you're saying...it isn't targetting a specific religion...but at the same time certain people from certain religions are/should be exempt? Mind elaborating on that?
But Rick, taking in one person above another based on his religious orientation is infringing on the separation of state and religion. It means that the government favors one faith over another.
Trump probably doesn't give to fucks about the Christians over there. Any money its just to appeal to the largely Christian Republican voting demographic but then again, its not like any other president did things better.
But Rick,
Fact is that Trump's ban bans people from countries whose nationals have not killed an American citizen in a terrorist attack since, I think, 1975. Anyway, it's a badly written executive order as it is unclear and ambigious. Executive agencies had no real clear idea what they were supposed to and foreign governments had no idea whether it could apply to their immigrant citizen.
Tl;dr, deciding whether it's unconstitutional is not really up to us.
Deciding whether it's morally right of course is.
What pains me the most is that apparantly, allowing people that worked as translators for the US Armed Forces into the country is 'detrimental to the interests of the United States'. Why did his order not make an exception to this? Why are people who endanger the lives of themselves and their families a danger to the United States? This just feels like plain injustice, and even if you do not agree with that, then consider the fact that not harbouring these people if their lives are in danger will make it very hard for the US to find new translators or other local support.
Pls, no Commie. Centre-Left at a worst. I'm completely centrist concerning Canadian politics. I'd make an edgy fascist joke but I genuinely don't know if you'd object ;)
imblying gommies should not be killed at all costsThe fact that they fought the communists displays in itself the inherit flaws of fascism. The high command knew it would be a stretch but the risks didn't matter. Things might have been ok if he didn't lose his mind from 1940 onwards.Pls, no Commie. Centre-Left at a worst. I'm completely centrist concerning Canadian politics. I'd make an edgy fascist joke but I genuinely don't know if you'd object ;)
Hey, I'm no fascist but you can't knock it; it worked perfectly fine for the Nazis, and only failed because of the Communists ;D
Yes, enjoy your comedy as Europe destroys itself with dindu nuffin arabs protected by the left and the MSM but yes, lecture us on how we are sheep for wanting to control who comes into our country and actually trying to address the problem that is Radical Islamic Terrorism and its implications
Although letting the 9th Circuit Court decide - a liberal court governing a massive liberal majority - should CERTAINLY not decide either.
However, no part of the law even politely asks a judge for his opinion on the matter. It leaves the decision up to the PRESIDENT.
Since "Merkled opened the doors" (Which she did not btw... The law was already there,) nothing has changed for me... I have not seen any difference. Most people still talk German, the infrastructure has not collapsed, public schools still function, the military and police still have a budget, the courts still function, there have been no real terrorist attacks (Unless you count 2 random dudes with a machete and a dude with a truck as major terrorist attack...), there are not 1000000 million of refugees roaming the streets, women can still go out at night without getting robbed, stabbed or raped...https://www.google.com/maps/d/viewer?mid=1_rNT3k2ZXB-f9z-2nSFMIBQKXCs&hl=en_US&ll=51.36119443931468%2C6.969721633496192&z=6
Edit:
In response to riddlez:
Yeah, I was thinking the same. There are like a billion gun murders every day in the US. There are huge gang wars and entire city blocks owned by gangs. There are city blocks that a non-gang member should not visit and the US has a huge drug problem and has way to much debt to be believable. (Sure I am exaggerating, it is not like that everywhere, but still, you know it is at least partly true) Yet the US people think that refugees are killing Europe, where practically none of the shit noted above is happening.
Yet the US people think that refugees are killing Europe, where practically none of the shit noted above is happening.
https://www.google.com/maps/d/viewer?mid=1_rNT3k2ZXB-f9z-2nSFMIBQKXCs&hl=en_US&ll=51.36119443931468%2C6.969721633496192&z=6
Yet the US people think that refugees are killing Europe, where practically none of the shit noted above is happening.
They're certainly killing the tourism industry, especially in places like France and Turkey. And again in France they are quite literally roaming the streets and making a mess.
Yet the US people think that refugees are killing Europe, where practically none of the shit noted above is happening.
They're certainly killing the tourism industry, especially in places like France and Turkey. And again in France they are quite literally roaming the streets and making a mess.
What ? I suppose after all Fox News knows better about my country than myself
Carabino, whenever you post here it's always some rhetoric about Fox News that has little to no relevance to the current discussion. Grow the fuck up
Yet the US people think that refugees are killing Europe, where practically none of the shit noted above is happening.
They're certainly killing the tourism industry, especially in places like France and Turkey. And again in France they are quite literally roaming the streets and making a mess.
What ? I suppose after all Fox News knows better about my country than myself
shut up and give money whiteySpoilerhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mb3rNkkCAJY[close]
The fact the office of President, the head of the executive branch, can appoint members of the supreme court, members of the judiciary branch, already shows that Checks and Balances in the US is a damn joke.
This may be one of the most cucked things I've ever seen. I legitimately feel bad for you and hope that you continue to live in peaceful blissful ignorance for the rest of your life. I sincerely hope that this was a bait for the sake of all Europe
Yes, enjoy your comedy as Europe destroys itself with dindu nuffin arabs protected by the left and the MSM but yes, lecture us on how we are sheep for wanting to control who comes into our country and actually trying to address the problem that is Radical Islamic Terrorism and its implications
funny you bring that up. Somehow terrorism gets all the attention nowadays. Stll it's no more or less a factual problem than it was 10 years ago - when immigration wasn't an item, an defense budget cuts were massively happening throughout Europe.
The anti-terrorism campaign and the 'radical islam problem' is no more than fearmongering. Terrorism ahsn't ever, is currently not and probably won't ever be an actual threat to the stability of Western countries. I'll start worrying when something like that kills more people than traffic accidents.SpoilerOh wait. Guns do in the US. Makes one think, doesn't it?[close]
But it isn't going to destroy the system. It's just going to cost some money.
Money that simply isn't there.Gotta disagree there. Its just not being spent properly. The current German administration is doing the so called "Schwarze Null", meaning they are trying to spent the least possible amount of money, wich not only hurts immigration but also infrastructure and such.
But it isn't going to destroy the system. It's just going to cost some money.
You're probably the least qualified person on this thread to make such a bold statement. Do you honestly ever learn?
This may be one of the most cucked things I've ever seen. I legitimately feel bad for you and hope that you continue to live in peaceful blissful ignorance for the rest of your life. I sincerely hope that this was a bait for the sake of all Europe
Yes, enjoy your comedy as Europe destroys itself with dindu nuffin arabs protected by the left and the MSM but yes, lecture us on how we are sheep for wanting to control who comes into our country and actually trying to address the problem that is Radical Islamic Terrorism and its implications
funny you bring that up. Somehow terrorism gets all the attention nowadays. Stll it's no more or less a factual problem than it was 10 years ago - when immigration wasn't an item, an defense budget cuts were massively happening throughout Europe.
The anti-terrorism campaign and the 'radical islam problem' is no more than fearmongering. Terrorism ahsn't ever, is currently not and probably won't ever be an actual threat to the stability of Western countries. I'll start worrying when something like that kills more people than traffic accidents.SpoilerOh wait. Guns do in the US. Makes one think, doesn't it?[close]
Terrorism is on a all-time-low in Europe, though. Political terrorism was more active and and more deadly in the seventies and eighties. Can immigration or radical islam lead to problems that we must overcome? Yeah, sure. But it isn't going to destroy the system. It's just going to cost some money.
I also read that your current PM won't work with Wilders. True?
. We noticed, though, that the closer we got to soldiers, the less the buskers pushed.
Hell, Capitol Hill seemed less guarded than the Eiffel Tower
The Eiffel Tower. So many illegal buskers, aggressively pushing wares on any timid looking English family. We noticed, though, that the closer we got to soldiers, the less the buskers pushed. A pair of them grabbed me and fast talked their way into (basically) mugging my dad.
Apart from that, the sheer amount of soldiers on the streets made us feel fairly safe.
Hell, Capitol Hill seemed less guarded than the Eiffel Tower
Some people are of the opinion that the most succesfull security operations require only a few actual bodies on-site.
Source? Post shooting the security is streamlined and more forcefulI think they probably just ramped up guards and surveillance. Nortre-Dame has military patrols with assault rifles. The most you see at parliament is pistols.
I read somewhere that SMG's were being deployed on-site.Source? Post shooting the security is streamlined and more forcefulI think they probably just ramped up guards and surveillance. Nortre-Dame has military patrols with assault rifles. The most you see at parliament is pistols.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y1_viPSD-bY
Except it wasn't a terrorist attack and it wasn't on friday.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y1_viPSD-bY
"Let's talk about Swedish issues so we can all forget that our president is an idiot" - American People
Except it wasn't a terrorist attack and it wasn't on friday.
"Let's talk about Swedish issues so we can all forget that our president is an idiot" - American People
EU is trash and needs a reform but it's still better than no EU.
I agree on the EU thing with Furrnox because im German :D
Besides that, saying that Trump meant Terror Attacks specifically is a bit....odd.
"Look at Germany, look what's happening, or what happend last night in Sweden. Sweden, who would believe this. Sweden. They took in large numbers. They're having problems like they never thought possible. You look at what's happening in Brussels. You look at what's happening all over the world. Take a look at Nice. Take a look at Paris."
I mean call me retarded but to me it just sounds like he comments on the increased crime rate and the constant raping cases happening in sweden.
Except it wasn't a terrorist attack and it wasn't on friday.
"Let's talk about Swedish issues so we can all forget that our president is an idiot" - American People
Hahaha, God forbid anyone critize your beloved Trump. I think by even trying to defend some of Trumps worst choices you're really just showing us to what extent you'll blindly defend your failing project.
*something something I pretend to be sitting on the fence so nobody can insult me*Except it wasn't a terrorist attack and it wasn't on friday.God forbid anyone critize your beloved EU. I think by even trying to defend some of the EU's worst choices of 2016 you're really just showing us to what extent you'll blindly defend your failing project.
"Let's talk about Swedish issues so we can all forget that our president is an idiot" - American People
I think that saying Trump is fool is just wrong.I see where you're coming from. It seems like he's picking most of his cabinet members based off their loyalty or ideological alignment rather then experience or knowledge on their jurisdiction. That would show hes smarter then what people say. I don't think he'll be an effective President as in he makes the country better long term, I think he'll leave a total mess like Bush did but people will say hes doing a great job while hes in office.
Reality is not a Forrest Gump movie. You don't just blunder your way into becoming a billionaire. You don't just blunder your way into becoming president of the United States in a landslide victory.
I think there is a key difference between Trump the persona and Trump the person, and I think that is where Trump's brilliance shows. If you look less at what he says and more at why he says it, you begin to see that. For example, this thing with Sweden and all that. Did something actually really happen in Sweden last night? Not really. But it causes controversy and it brings attention to the issue. He wants that spotlight on Sweden, as it is a great case as to why this travel ban (which he is currently rewriting) is a good thing and he has succeeded in doing that as so many people knee jerked like "REEEE NOTHING HAPPENED IN SWEDEN REEEEEEEE".
Really, when you think about it, a lot of the "outrage" and "controversy" about Trump really ends up helping him, and I think that is completely intentional on Trump's part.
I think that saying Trump is fool is just wrong.I see where you're coming from. It seems like he's picking most of his cabinet members based off their loyalty or ideological alignment rather then experience or knowledge on their jurisdiction. That would show hes smarter then what people say. I don't think he'll be an effective President as in he makes the country better long term, I think he'll leave a total mess like Bush did but people will say hes doing a great job while hes in office.
Reality is not a Forrest Gump movie. You don't just blunder your way into becoming a billionaire. You don't just blunder your way into becoming president of the United States in a landslide victory.
I think there is a key difference between Trump the persona and Trump the person, and I think that is where Trump's brilliance shows. If you look less at what he says and more at why he says it, you begin to see that. For example, this thing with Sweden and all that. Did something actually really happen in Sweden last night? Not really. But it causes controversy and it brings attention to the issue. He wants that spotlight on Sweden, as it is a great case as to why this travel ban (which he is currently rewriting) is a good thing and he has succeeded in doing that as so many people knee jerked like "REEEE NOTHING HAPPENED IN SWEDEN REEEEEEEE".
Really, when you think about it, a lot of the "outrage" and "controversy" about Trump really ends up helping him, and I think that is completely intentional on Trump's part.
I think that saying Trump is fool is just wrong.that was not a landslide victory. Not even close to it.
Reality is not a Forrest Gump movie. You don't just blunder your way into becoming a billionaire. You don't just blunder your way into becoming president of the United States in a landslide victory.
Yea true, not even for the electoral college given its historyI think that saying Trump is fool is just wrong.that was not a landslide victory. Not even close to it.
Reality is not a Forrest Gump movie. You don't just blunder your way into becoming a billionaire. You don't just blunder your way into becoming president of the United States in a landslide victory.
Yea true, not even for the electoral college given its historyI think that saying Trump is fool is just wrong.that was not a landslide victory. Not even close to it.
Reality is not a Forrest Gump movie. You don't just blunder your way into becoming a billionaire. You don't just blunder your way into becoming president of the United States in a landslide victory.Spoilerhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TJtskViDg7g[close]
I am guessing Apoc said it to trigger someone, bait someone(yay me) or just wants to make trumps victory sound greater than it was for one reason or another. none of which are really necessary. Unless he believes any victory, however small is a landslide, which makes nearly every election a landslide, which means none of them really were.
Numbers wise it wasn't a landslide. However, predictions/polling wise it was, solely because of the probabilities before the election.I am guessing Apoc said it to trigger someone, bait someone(yay me) or just wants to make trumps victory sound greater than it was for one reason or another. none of which are really necessary. Unless he believes any victory, however small is a landslide, which makes nearly every election a landslide, which means none of them really were.
Trump's win wasn't a landslide but it was more impressive than just about every other US election in modern history, certainly far bigger than Obama's wins in 2012 and 2008. This was a David vs Goliath contest-Trump had just about every disadvantage going yet still came out on top and proved everyone wrong in the process. I think it was the first time ever that the candidate who spent less actually won, and given the US is a plutocracy that's the most significant point to take away.
I am guessing Apoc said it to trigger someone, bait someone(yay me) or just wants to make trumps victory sound greater than it was for one reason or another. none of which are really necessary. Unless he believes any victory, however small is a landslide, which makes nearly every election a landslide, which means none of them really were.
Trump's win wasn't a landslide but it was more impressive than just about every other US election in modern history, certainly far bigger than Obama's wins in 2012 and 2008. This was a David vs Goliath contest-Trump had just about every disadvantage going yet still came out on top and proved everyone wrong in the process. I think it was the first time ever that the candidate who spent less actually won, and given the US is a plutocracy that's the most significant point to take away.
I am guessing Apoc said it to trigger someone, bait someone(yay me) or just wants to make trumps victory sound greater than it was for one reason or another. none of which are really necessary. Unless he believes any victory, however small is a landslide, which makes nearly every election a landslide, which means none of them really were.
Trump's win wasn't a landslide but it was more impressive than just about every other US election in modern history, certainly far bigger than Obama's wins in 2012 and 2008. This was a David vs Goliath contest-Trump had just about every disadvantage going yet still came out on top and proved everyone wrong in the process. I think it was the first time ever that the candidate who spent less actually won, and given the US is a plutocracy that's the most significant point to take away.
(https://i.gyazo.com/ee2f2848c7d9b09a1e691199f2193592.png)It's too late in terms of stopping the hate train from the MSM. They've amplified a statement, twisted it out of context and will proceed to try and crucify him, but just like the real Christ, he will arise to finish his work. It also means he can grow his brand out without tying it to Breitbart, the racist and alt-right haven /s
(my take on the Milo situation)
What happened with milo?
he kinda did defend pedo's though...I cant really tell when you just meme or when you are legit an edgy neo nazi.
Think about how fucked up the world is now that orbiting a fucking gay man is seen as conservative. Just end me now fam
he kinda did defend pedo's though...
how is anything I wrote edgy. I simply pointed out that the symbol of anti traditionalism (the homosexual lifestyle) can now be compatible with conservatismhe kinda did defend pedo's though...I cant really tell when you just meme or when you are legit an edgy neo nazi.
Think about how fucked up the world is now that orbiting a fucking gay man is seen as conservative. Just end me now fam
using a buzzword doesn't mean that the argument is invalid. We're talking about a 13 year old boy being molested which I and the laws of many countries strangely believe is wrong. I dont hate Milo but im not going to agree with everything someone says just because we agree on a few things, especially if those things are ridiculous as saying child molestation is ok and that it can be a positive experience.he kinda did defend pedo's though...
He didn't, he said the priest was "young and hot" and wanted to diddle him.
It's different from "pedophilia" (the buzzword the media is using to make people gasp), as I said above - it's pederasty.
Tbh, after watching his appearance on the drunken peasants podcast I can understand the medias kind of view. Obviously I disagree with now disregarding everything he says. But his view on homosexuality and how he describes his experience with the priest is so odd and weird its just...very lunatic.
The democrats lost an election over something that happened 4 years ago. kek. Doesn't really matter when you say it does it?Tbh, after watching his appearance on the drunken peasants podcast I can understand the medias kind of view. Obviously I disagree with now disregarding everything he says. But his view on homosexuality and how he describes his experience with the priest is so odd and weird its just...very lunatic.
Its understandable, yes, but it was a very strategic hit piece that was made to come out at a particular time. Milo lost his job, a book deal, and an upcoming speech he was doing..
for something he said over a month ago.
The democrats lost an election over something that happened 4 years ago. kek. Doesn't really matter when you say it does it?Tbh, after watching his appearance on the drunken peasants podcast I can understand the medias kind of view. Obviously I disagree with now disregarding everything he says. But his view on homosexuality and how he describes his experience with the priest is so odd and weird its just...very lunatic.
Its understandable, yes, but it was a very strategic hit piece that was made to come out at a particular time. Milo lost his job, a book deal, and an upcoming speech he was doing..
for something he said over a month ago.
There's isn't a conspiracy behind every corner.
They have to stop calling "non-white" people "coloured". That's a racist term dating back some 50 years. How do these people not see how classifying an entire group of people as being "coloured", ie. their skin is not of the "normal" colour, as not being supremely racist.It wasn't really a racist term it was just how blacks were described in the ~50's and 60's. "Negro" was considered to be too racist so "Colored" was the PC term for the time.
They have to stop calling "non-white" people "coloured". That's a racist term dating back some 50 years. How do these people not see how classifying an entire group of people as being "coloured", ie. their skin is not of the "normal" colour, as not being supremely racist.It wasn't really a racist term it was just how blacks were described in the ~50's and 60's. "Negro" was considered to be too racist so "Colored" was the PC term for the time.
It doesn't really matter anyway there will be a new adjective in 5 years that will be the new not racist term
if i get muted for using "Negro" I'll have to commit FSE genocide as retribution
(https://img.4plebs.org/boards/s4s/image/1440/91/1440918631475.gif)They have to stop calling "non-white" people "coloured". That's a racist term dating back some 50 years. How do these people not see how classifying an entire group of people as being "coloured", ie. their skin is not of the "normal" colour, as not being supremely racist.It wasn't really a racist term it was just how blacks were described in the ~50's and 60's. "Negro" was considered to be too racist so "Colored" was the PC term for the time.
It doesn't really matter anyway there will be a new adjective in 5 years that will be the new not racist term
if i get muted for using "Negro" I'll have to commit FSE genocide as retribution
(https://i.imgur.com/vvDLkus.png)
Interesting: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/02/25/netherlands-holds-inquiry-whether-could-ditch-euro/
They have to stop calling "non-white" people "coloured". That's a racist term dating back some 50 years. How do these people not see how classifying an entire group of people as being "coloured", ie. their skin is not of the "normal" colour, as not being supremely racist.It wasn't really a racist term it was just how blacks were described in the ~50's and 60's. "Negro" was considered to be too racist so "Colored" was the PC term for the time.
It doesn't really matter anyway there will be a new adjective in 5 years that will be the new not racist term
if i get muted for using "Negro" I'll have to commit FSE genocide as retribution
Interesting: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/02/25/netherlands-holds-inquiry-whether-could-ditch-euro/
Generally these things make international press beacuse of supposed 'bold statement' like 'ditchgin the euro'. It isn't even close to something like that. It's really nothing more than literally investigating all possible options - whether or not they're realistic. They do the same every now and again to see how they could close the budget deficit, and each time 'abolishing the army' is one of them. Which is technically true, but would be political dynamite. ERgo: the council of state won't look into how realistic any choice would be, just the possible ones.
The moderation team isn't quite keen on opening the US politics thread. Not suprising since it gets shut down every month or so because quite a number of people can't keep themselves from becoming majorly triggered and calling anything disagreeing with them a retard.
You dirty racistThe moderation team isn't quite keen on opening the US politics thread. Not suprising since it gets shut down every month or so because quite a number of people can't keep themselves from becoming majorly triggered and calling anything disagreeing with them a retard.
Threads only started being closed after nationalism utterly raped globalism late 2016... how strange.
You dirty racistThe moderation team isn't quite keen on opening the US politics thread. Not suprising since it gets shut down every month or so because quite a number of people can't keep themselves from becoming majorly triggered and calling anything disagreeing with them a retard.
Threads only started being closed after nationalism utterly raped globalism late 2016... how strange.
Just ban fancy and fraudbear and the thread will be goldenjokes on u, i wont even be here after next month. I'll be the next martyr
I am the OG martyr of the right on here.Just ban fancy and fraudbear and the thread will be goldenjokes on u, i wont even be here after next month. I'll be the next martyr
I am the OG martyr of the right on here.Just ban fancy and fraudbear and the thread will be goldenjokes on u, i wont even be here after next month. I'll be the next martyr
The moderation team isn't quite keen on opening the US politics thread. Not suprising since it gets shut down every month or so because quite a number of people can't keep themselves from becoming majorly triggered and calling anything disagreeing with them a retard.
Threads only started being closed after nationalism utterly raped globalism late 2016... how strange.
Shhhh Riddlez let him think he's right.
Checked.Shhhh Riddlez let him think he's right.
1) Almost 6000 posts of garbage (look how active I am mods!!)
2) Constantly agrees with moderators
3) Donator
4) Panda wearing a red star as avatar
Yup, everything checks out.
it was shutdown because of the same people each time. #BanFancyThe moderation team isn't quite keen on opening the US politics thread. Not suprising since it gets shut down every month or so because quite a number of people can't keep themselves from becoming majorly triggered and calling anything disagreeing with them a retard.
Threads only started being closed after nationalism utterly raped globalism late 2016... how strange.
You know this isn't true, the US politics thread was shut down on multiple occasions, throughout 2016, and before.
Shhhh Riddlez let him think he's right.
1) Almost 6000 posts of garbage (look how active I am mods!!)
2) Constantly agrees with moderators
3) Donator
4) Panda wearing a red star as avatar
Yup, everything checks out.
(https://www.fsegames.eu/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi2.kym-cdn.com%2Fphotos%2Fimages%2Foriginal%2F000%2F948%2F911%2Fed7.jpg&hash=baf331bcab61a55351f103460784a11f2d860deb)Checked.Shhhh Riddlez let him think he's right.
1) Almost 6000 posts of garbage (look how active I am mods!!)
2) Constantly agrees with moderators
3) Donator
4) Panda wearing a red star as avatar
Yup, everything checks out.
Classic Clearly, disappearing for months on end to show his activity :)Shhhh Riddlez let him think he's right.
1) Almost 6000 posts of garbage (look how active I am mods!!)
2) Constantly agrees with moderators
3) Donator
4) Panda wearing a red star as avatar
Yup, everything checks out.
Classic Clearly, disappearing for months on end to show his activity :)Shhhh Riddlez let him think he's right.
1) Almost 6000 posts of garbage (look how active I am mods!!)
2) Constantly agrees with moderators
3) Donator
4) Panda wearing a red star as avatar
Yup, everything checks out.
What a great roast.Checked.Shhhh Riddlez let him think he's right.
1) Almost 6000 posts of garbage (look how active I am mods!!)
2) Constantly agrees with moderators
3) Donator
4) Panda wearing a red star as avatar
Yup, everything checks out.
Now Im confused.
I haven't posted here in months. Where did the four posts a day thing come from?
Is my rate still that high from when I was active here?
Also to this obviously politically charged username dude, Im stating evidence from the past. The US thread was shut down a horrific amount of times from 2014-2015 because shit generally just got messy.
Sorry you took it personally man, but you're just not correct here.
Now Im confused.
I haven't posted here in months. Where did the four posts a day thing come from?
Is my rate still that high from when I was active here?
Also to this obviously politically charged username dude, Im stating evidence from the past. The US thread was shut down a horrific amount of times from 2014-2015 because shit generally just got messy.
Sorry you took it personally man, but you're just not correct here.
Correct me if I am wrong
But I am pretty sure the US Politics Thread was started in 2016.
I believe a UK thread was made around Brexit time/abit before
and then BabyJesus decided to make the US politics thread saying "Since there is a UK thread I'm guessing this is allowed." during like November of 2016.
So how would it be possible it was locked a horrific amount of times in 2014-2015?
I think it was just 2016 that Duuring really kept his hand on the Lock trigger to be honest.
What a great roast.
A modern classic.
Right, what Chinton said. Sorry, my memory's utter trash.
But yeah, the Gen Politics thread always ended up getting locked and purged and edited and yada yada yada. Shit, this was before Duuring was even a mod. Back when Riddlez was still outside of the community. Does anyone remember who the forum mods were back then?
Either way my point stands, stuff always got ugly.
*Shrug* Hey man, Im just one dude with a keyboard. I've got the same weight as you do, or any other dude with a keyboard....he thinks he has the same weight as me
What were we talking about again?
*Shrug* Hey man, Im just one dude with a keyboard. I've got the same weight as you do, or any other dude with a keyboard....he thinks he has the same weight as me
What were we talking about again?
(https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/95/e9/cd/95e9cd2a14f19068f8478a296a5903a3.jpg)
Go get the Sheriff.
No, I won't lock this thread, or any thread, as easily as some other moderators.
That said, I will ask you one more time to get this topic back on topic, or this:Go get the Sheriff.
Is exactly what I'll do.
This thread is for : Dutch, German & French Elections Thread, or The General Political Thread, not for whatever thing you dislike about mods, the rules, CRs, or for whatever other offtopic topic.
Now get back on topic, and pm/steam duuring if you want to talk to him about something, or talk to a CR.
Lmao. Bears actually put a school on lockdown. God bless Betsy Devoss
http://www.freep.com/story/news/nation/2017/03/02/betsy-devos/98635018/ (http://www.freep.com/story/news/nation/2017/03/02/betsy-devos/98635018/)
"The General Political Thread"
doesn't this include the politics of FSE?
I wouldn't discount the possibility that the polls are completely wrong and understate the support for Wilders, much like they did for Brexit and Trump. If Wilders does far better than the polling implies then perhaps Le Pen could be on course for victory (which the polls state can't happen).
I wouldn't discount the possibility that the polls are completely wrong and understate the support for Wilders, much like they did for Brexit and Trump. If Wilders does far better than the polling implies then perhaps Le Pen could be on course for victory (which the polls state can't happen).
Inshallah Dutch Trump will win.French Trump? Inshallah?
So...... Turkey is trying to interfere with the sovereignty of my country?
Top kek. Bring it.
Shows you how great integration worked lel
What worries me more is the behavior of Turkish Dutchmen in this whole incident.
It's Erdogan's typical response to everything these days:imo, Erdocunt is the biggest nazi around.
'You don't agree with me, so that means you must be Nazis. You're wrong and I am right.'
It raises the question why they want to have Dutch citizenship when they support Erdogan, a man who is against every principle our country stands for.
They don't understand that when you are guest (or well... "part of it") in a different country you should behave to their rules. I think it's just Turkish mentality.
While Turkey and the Netherlands have their war of words we are low key invading Syria 8)
Lol, I think you mean they're Turkish people who happen to have Dutch passports. Clearly they're more loyal to Ankara than to Amsterdam.
While Turkey and the Netherlands have their war of words we are low key invading Syria 8)
I read it on a military news site, indeed. Quite interesting. Especially the part where they were deploying infantry, but they wouldn't at all be deployed to the front *rolls eyes*Lol, I think you mean they're Turkish people who happen to have Dutch passports. Clearly they're more loyal to Ankara than to Amsterdam.
The Hague* but I agree completely.
The mayor of Rotterdam handled the situation very well, though. The riots could've been much worse.
Does Erdogan want to fight every country?
Kek
https://www.thelocal.se/20120614/41442 (https://www.thelocal.se/20120614/41442)
"The 19-year-old, who came to Sweden as a refugee in 2010, had lived with the royal couple, and Magnuson had acted as his mentor"This is getting funnier and funnier ahahah SWEDEN YES!
Crown Jewel stealing refugees. Alrite.
82nd... kekWith over 700 there already it's pretty much an invasion, and on my mil hub there's a deployment of nearly 3000 82nd airborne boys to Syria very soon.SpoilerWhile Turkey and the Netherlands have their war of words we are low key invading Syria 8)
I read it on a military news site, indeed. Quite interesting. Especially the part where they were deploying infantry, but they wouldn't at all be deployed to the front *rolls eyes*Lol, I think you mean they're Turkish people who happen to have Dutch passports. Clearly they're more loyal to Ankara than to Amsterdam.
The Hague* but I agree completely.
The mayor of Rotterdam handled the situation very well, though. The riots could've been much worse.[close]
Does Erdogan want to fight every country?
I thought nazi's and muslims where friendly?Yea, hitler had many Muslim allies
Erdogan has started talking about Dutch cowardice in Srebrenica. Damn he went there lol.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-39270095
So according to Erdocunt, We killed our friends?
In the islam you have mohammed. Mohammed was a war-lord, as it is called, a warlord(but he uses different word now but same meaning). (he) was a pedophile. (he) Was somebody who beheaded jews in forests. (he) Was somebody who, in his mekka and medina time, very aggresive was. Is until this day, in contradiction to jesus, an inspiration to people along with allah. You know that last year with all those attacks in Germany and entire Europe, They all shouted ''allahu akbar'' before they slit the throat of priests in Paris. That is the islam. I dont have to tell you that mohammed isnt jesus right? And if we dont defend ourself from that, if we dont have the courage to see the islam for what it is, and it isnt only jihad, its islam itself who is making sure that if we are looking (politically) correct away, that we will soon as the netherlands and the free West will cease to exist. And we can never tolerate that.
...but, if you treasure freedom, if you enjoy it and appreciate it, then you also give that to others, even if they don't share [your religion], and that is a freedom that is stronger than any threat, and that is a freedom that I defend.
That's a nice bulletproof vest he's wearing.
@William Don't just leave out the response regarding freedom of religion.Quote...but, if you treasure freedom, if you enjoy it and appreciate it, then you also give that to others, even if they don't share [your religion], and that is a freedom that is stronger than any threat, and that is a freedom that I defend.
Can't the Dutch MPs just block Wilders by defecting to other parties? Correct me if I'm wrong, though.
Freedom or the concept of democracy doesn't exist in Europe and is shunned when proposed, it seems.
Well, since nobody's brave enough to make a prediction, I'll say the polls will be proven wrong and PVV will be the biggest party. Wilders has no chance of becoming PM of course.
Well, since nobody's brave enough to make a prediction, I'll say the polls will be proven wrong and PVV will be the biggest party. Wilders has no chance of becoming PM of course.
Well, you seem to be wrong.
Well, he got more seats than UKIP at least.That's because the Dutch use a democratic system which awards political power based on the proportion of the vote rather than a broken ass FPTP system like the UK and US.
We do FPTP toBut Theodin, Papa Trudeau said 2015 was the last time we'll use FPTP!
Notice us
Holy shit that guy looks like Trudeau
letting a bunch of poor people who have made bad life choices decide a leader.... democracy is gayLuL
Well, since nobody's brave enough to make a prediction, I'll say the polls will be proven wrong and PVV will be the biggest party. Wilders has no chance of becoming PM of course.
Well, you seem to be wrong.
Pretty much lol. I think the MSM are going to massively exaggerate this and claim it as a great victory against populism etc.
https://www.ft.com/content/c10aa4f8-08a5-11e7-97d1-5e720a26771b
Merkel's getting busy in preparation for September.
The German government has presented a draft law that would impose fines of up to €50m on social networks that fail to delete hate speech or fake news, in what amounts to the most draconian clampdown by a European country against internet platforms such as Facebook and Twitter. The law reflects mounting concern in German political circles about the potential influence fake news and hate speech could have on Germany’s federal election later this year, where Angela Merkel’s ruling conservatives are facing a strong challenge from the populist, anti-immigration Alternative for Germany (AfD).
Wilders is way too radical in my opinion, FvD seems like an alright right-wing party, and a good alternative to PVV, although I don't really know their party programme all to well.
"Do not make three, but five children, because you are the future of Europe," Erdogan said Friday in Eskisehir in the West of Turkey."he said that because he wants to go to more birthday parties
Still laughing at Brexit? :)
LARGE minorities what? :P
[citation needed] (http://)
Yeah so? If a large part of the population is Muslim they have a right to exert political influence. Even if it is a small part of the population they have a right to do that. If you do not like it, do not vote for their Parties. That is how democrazy works...
This is mostly being driven by migration levels rather than fertility rates. We'll see in time whether the birthrates decline to native levels-I doubt they will because they are generally among the least integrated migrants groups, and Pew seem to think they won't decline that dramatically, but who knows. I think they will go down a bit but not to contemporary native European levels.
As I said that is how Democracy works.
And if a law like this still passes, fair game, as long as they did everything by the rulebook you can not do anything about it. (Try again next election, I guess?) As I said, that is how democracy works.
This is mostly being driven by migration levels rather than fertility rates. We'll see in time whether the birthrates decline to native levels-I doubt they will because they are generally among the least integrated migrants groups, and Pew seem to think they won't decline that dramatically, but who knows. I think they will go down a bit but not to contemporary native European levels.
Figures show an incredible fast decline in birth rates under immigrants yet you still doubt it based on how you feel about them. Acceptance of LGBT's is also increasing steadily. We are changing their views, not the other way around. At least in my country. Maybe the United Kingdom is just fucked up, who knows.
This is where I got my information from: https://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2011/jan/28/muslim-population-country-projection-2030I still don't get the whole "25% of the population in some places" bit. By some places I assume you mean relevant countries in Europe, where it simply isn't true. Large Western countries we're talking about 7-10% by 2030, with the UK at 8.2%, Sweden at 9.9%, Netherlands at 7.8%, France at 10.3% and Germany at 7.1%.
That '8% by 2030' figure is for the whole of the European continent and therefore highly misleading. European Muslims are highly concentrated in Western European countries-for instance in France the Muslim population was already around 8% in 2011. The Pew Forum data was also compiled before Merkel's 2015 'Open Door' policy. I think it's very fair to say the Muslim population of many European countries will approach 20% or more within our lifetimes supposing current trends continue.
Keep in mind 17% of the current US population is Hispanic and look how much political power they wield as a group in an electoral system that operates FPTP.
in the UK it's the other way round. The younger generations are actually more likely to hold extreme views on most things, though some are more accepting of LGBT people (though when I say 'some' they're still very much a minority viewpoint among their age group).And the video doesn't play in the UK :/
You guys let media headlines influence you way too much.
I read the news every damn day, I just don't accept everything I read at face value for obvious reasons, with Tory Cabinet Ministers getting part time jobs as Editors. All I'm asking for is a little evidence to back it up.You guys let media headlines influence you way too much.Seems like you don't read the news at all, Tiki. Do you really need a study to tell you that the younger generation of British Muslims are more extreme than the older generation? Do you live in the UK? Have you ever? lmao
So we're probably getting a coalition of three pro-European parties and one Christian-Democrat centrist. Le Pen is trailing in every poll. Germany is between CDU and the more pro-European SPD.
Where's that 'patrioting spring' at, boys?
It was painfully obvious from the get-go that Wilders would basically suffer a defeat if he didn't get anything BUT being the largest party. Now that Rutte can actually form a coalition, Wilders has become as isolated as he can be. Sure he got 19 seats, but he's still as poltically irrelevant as ever, as literally no party you can take seriously politically speaking will be working together with him.Well it did force Rutte's party to partially adopt right-leaning ideas. It isn't the stance that Wilders has but he did leave a slight impact on the overall politics of the United Provinces. However, I don't know if they'll actually follow through.
Oh and the senate is not an issue for Rutte as well, at least less than the last two years.
Wilders will be poltically dead until the next election.
Or as soon as ISIS hits Amsterdam.
It was painfully obvious from the get-go that Wilders would basically suffer a defeat if he didn't get anything BUT being the largest party. Now that Rutte can actually form a coalition, Wilders has become as isolated as he can be. Sure he got 19 seats, but he's still as poltically irrelevant as ever, as literally no party you can take seriously politically speaking will be working together with him.Well it did force Rutte's party to partially adopt right-leaning ideas. It isn't the stance that Wilders has but he did leave a slight impact on the overall politics of the United Provinces. However, I don't know if they'll actually follow through.
Oh and the senate is not an issue for Rutte as well, at least less than the last two years.
Wilders will be poltically dead until the next election.
Or as soon as ISIS hits Amsterdam.
I wonder what happens to easyjet and all the other british low cost airlines, once Brexit kicks in.
I wonder what happens to easyjet and all the other british low cost airlines, once Brexit kicks in.
They'll have to fly a little higher because we're going to build a massive f*cking wall in the middle of the English Channel and Luxembourg's going to pay for it.
I thought you lived in North America?
Putin has no interest but his own. And I very strongly doubt he wants to 'save' Europe. If anything, I think he would rather see it divided and weak.a country having their own intrest in mind... what a monster
No, but he might invade Belarus.Lmfao I like that
I mean, Putin does what he wants. I don't think Russia or its people really factors into any choice he makes.Putin has no interest but his own. And I very strongly doubt he wants to 'save' Europe. If anything, I think he would rather see it divided and weak.a country having their own intrest in mind... what a monster
Not sure more refugees is what we need right now.The Belarusians would integrate much better though
Lose eastern Europe in its entirety, or nuclear holocaust?
Take a bit of Lithuania, or nuclear holocaust?I mean, I'd honestly say Putin would steal eastern Europe given the chance.
Take a bit of Poland, or nuclear holocaust?
The nuclear deterrent goes both ways - any land loss is due to the EU failing to protect its member states sufficiently. The responsible falls onto the cash cow union. They must accept the fact that they must also embrace the downsides of forcing a political union.Lose eastern Europe in its entirety, or nuclear holocaust?
let's not sensationalize any of their intentions
Its economy is in the shit, its demographics are terrible, but Duuring seriously believes Russia is poised to annex parts of Eastern Europe. Lol.Russia could easily annex the Baltic states, Belarus and Ukraine without much opposition. I'd say it'd be a struggle against Poland or any other European country but it could definitely wipe the ones I mentioned. Its not like it would though.
Even if Russia had the capability to do that (it doesn't) it makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. Doing that would provoke Eastern Europe into ever greater reliance upon Brussels and would re-invigorate EU integration at a time when it's falling apart. That's probably why EU officials are busy putting out propaganda about the 'Russian menace' to the East. He would be far better off, as Putin knows perfectly well, sitting back doing nothing and watching the EU fall apart. He'll probably give things a subtle prod in the right direction with a coordinated leak to WikiLeaks or whatever every once in a while but that's about it.
Anyway even if pigs fly and Russia does decide to invade Europe and do a reverse Hitler/Napoleon the UK will be perfectly safe because we're an island. Putin only has one aircraft carrier that barely floats (it needs its own support ship to pull it along in case it breaks down, which is quite often). I mean just read this it's hilarious and should dispel any thoughts you might have that Russia is some kind of military superpower: https://warisboring.com/your-aircraft-carrier-is-a-piece-of-crap-f3f52d299588#.mksi3nys7
without much opposition
Its economy is in the shit, its demographics are terrible, but Duuring seriously believes Russia is poised to annex parts of Eastern Europe. Lol.
I agree with you commie shill but what other choice do we have? its been the only reason another major global conflict hasn't broken out since WW2Its economy is in the shit, its demographics are terrible, but Duuring seriously believes Russia is poised to annex parts of Eastern Europe. Lol.
I never said that. I said that relying on nuclear weapons to avoid conflict is retarded.
Its economy is in the shit, its demographics are terrible, but Duuring seriously believes Russia is poised to annex parts of Eastern Europe. Lol.
I never said that. I said that relying on nuclear weapons to avoid conflict is retarded.
Its economy is in the shit, its demographics are terrible, but Duuring seriously believes Russia is poised to annex parts of Eastern Europe. Lol.
I never said that. I said that relying on nuclear weapons to avoid conflict is retarded.
No, but he might invade Belarus.
Surely an attack on the Netherlands would have resulted in all other nations throwing nukes around?
Who cares anyway. It's only the fucking Dutch.
why did we even bother to spend zillion of dollars in conventional forces? Any attack would have surely resulted in nuclear war, right?
That can't possibly be true. The US military spent long periods of the Cold War in active warzones like Vietnam, Korea, the Gulf, etc. Highly doubt military planners would neglect the army/navy with all that going on. Source?Vietnam was great
When Americans starts seeing Russia as a potential ally.. What a meme.Keep your friends close and enemies closer? idk why the two largest nuclear powers in the world having close cooperation is a bad thing.
Source?
When Americans starts seeing Russia as a potential ally.. What a meme.
FSE only recognise two genders, that's discriminatory against trans-people.
(https://i.gyazo.com/a198df41bfab4ac36a543f4f4d582c13.png)
Come on Olafson, it's 2017-there are over 71 genders and more are being discovered every day.
It's not about the fact that they're both large, powerful and have nuclear weapons. The issue with befriending Russia is their blatant corruption, silencing of the press, locking up political opponents/dissidents and disregard for modern borders. Pretending that it isn't happening does nothing to help the US's image as a supposed bastion of liberty and justice.When Americans starts seeing Russia as a potential ally.. What a meme.Keep your friends close and enemies closer? idk why the two largest nuclear powers in the world having close cooperation is a bad thing.
Has international pressure to change Russia's ways changed anything? Doesn't seem like it
Russia-NATO talks about Ukraine conflict failed. A very positive thing is that NATO and Russia did exchange information about troop building and exercises on the borders, to prevent accidents.
This really shows: "we really don't like each other, but we also really don't want to fight each other."
Who are you addressing when you say "they"Russia-NATO talks about Ukraine conflict failed. A very positive thing is that NATO and Russia did exchange information about troop building and exercises on the borders, to prevent accidents.
This really shows: "we really don't like each other, but we also really don't want to fight each other."
Ah ha they still move troops into Ukraine without reprocussion and Trump seems to be fine with it.
But now that both sides shared, at least it shows some measure of goodwill.
But now that both sides shared, at least it shows some measure of goodwill.
Ukrainians are dying every day and you rejoice about Russian goodwill through an action considered standard procedure.
Lol that war is still going on, rest of world is like, wuh ???But wait Trump is still saying stupid things so lets pay attention to him instead of the conflicts around the world that are still ongoing!
It's a shame not so many people care about Ukraine anymore :/
Careful mate, that much edge and you might hurt someone.
I is confucius now....We can always hope (https://forums.taleworlds.com/Smileys/phpbb/contrib_fruity.gif)
Side note though.... it's not like an EU military would be deployed to Ukraine.
Riddlez tone it down mateI mean it can't exactly be a surprise that there are jobs out there that I'm very glad are done by other people (manual and menial labour, military stuff etc). I'm just highlighting your facetiousness with shitposts.
So when are we going to talk about African politicsI mean the Gambian National Assembly election is on Thursday you wanna talk about that Nero?
is gambia like a province in africa?So when are we going to talk about African politicsI mean the Gambian National Assembly election is on Thursday you wanna talk about that Nero?
is gambia like a province in africa?Gambia belongs to Africa in the same way a fire belongs to ancient Rome.
good reference to my name misteris gambia like a province in africa?Gambia belongs to Africa in the same way a fire belongs to ancient Rome.
good reference to my name misteris gambia like a province in africa?Gambia belongs to Africa in the same way a fire belongs to ancient Rome.
yes the statistics showgood reference to my name misteris gambia like a province in africa?Gambia belongs to Africa in the same way a fire belongs to ancient Rome.
Eh? I thought this was Milo Yiannopoulos' FSE account.
i was refering to milo always talking about statistics sozcuck
The suspense is killing me NeroClassic, racist remark that has become typical of you Ricky .P - Making such sarcastic remarks in such a snide tone about Gambia is honestly disgusting. No wonder you're a UKIP supporter. Gambia is a sovereign nation that deserves equal respect like any other nation.
What do the statistics show?!
The suspense is killing me NeroClassic, racist remark that has become typical of you Ricky .P - Making such sarcastic remarks in such a snide tone about Gambia is honestly disgusting. No wonder you're a UKIP supporter. Gambia is a sovereign nation that deserves equal respect like any other nation.
What do the statistics show?!
Absolutely correct, I sincerely apologise for anything I've said that may have been insensitive in regards to Gambia.
The suspense is killing me NeroClassic, racist remark that has become typical of you Ricky .P - Making such sarcastic remarks in such a snide tone about Gambia is honestly disgusting. No wonder you're a UKIP supporter. Gambia is a sovereign nation that deserves equal respect like any other nation.
What do the statistics show?!
Absolutely correct, I sincerely apologise for anything I've said that may have been insensitive in regards to Gambia.
It's 'The Gambia' not 'Gambia' you racist xenophobes.
http://www.foxnews.com/world/2017/04/06/us-launches-missiles-into-syria-in-response-to-chemical-weapons-attack.htmlI doubt much will come of it.
oh no
The likelihood Assad used chemical weapons is incredibly small, but whatever. I'd wager the whole thing is a set-up, though between who and why I have no idea.Nah, it's not in this day and age where it can be set up. US has 24/7 reconnaissance and surveillance over syrias Air Force activity, its more geospatial intelligence, so it would be pretty easy to identify if it was a Syrian based helicopter dropping chemical gas bombs on civilians, or any other Syrian operated aircraft.
The likelihood Assad used chemical weapons is incredibly small, but whatever. I'd wager the whole thing is a set-up, though between who and why I have no idea.Nah, it's not in this day and age where it can be set up. US has 24/7 reconnaissance and surveillance over syrias Air Force activity, its more geospatial intelligence, so it would be pretty easy to identify if it was a Syrian based helicopter dropping chemical gas bombs on civilians, or any other Syrian operated aircraft.
Good for Trump, he actually had the balls to do something about it and I support that sort of response. Don't think it will escalate to a full out war, Syria knows it would obviously loseIt was a surprisingly fast response and sent a clear message that he handles things differently than Obama. I for one did not think the Trump administration would involve themselves, even after the chemical attack. However, I am rather pleased with it. It's about time someone stepped up and did something.
Exactly. Why risk international attention when you're about to shutdown these CIA backed rebels once and for all?!The likelihood Assad used chemical weapons is incredibly small, but whatever. I'd wager the whole thing is a set-up, though between who and why I have no idea.Nah, it's not in this day and age where it can be set up. US has 24/7 reconnaissance and surveillance over syrias Air Force activity, its more geospatial intelligence, so it would be pretty easy to identify if it was a Syrian based helicopter dropping chemical gas bombs on civilians, or any other Syrian operated aircraft.
Oh please, as if intelligence is always that clear cut. Obama and Kerry were bragging 24 months ago that Assad had given up 100% of his chemical weapons (hint: he had almost none anyway). Makes no sense for Assad to use chemical weapons, allegedly he didn't have any to begin with, and the footage of the 'attack' is a bit suspicious (shows people handling victims without gloves for a start, which is the very first thing I was taught not to do when I did my CBRN training as a reservist). Anyway the US response makes no sense either-you don't blow up a area where you suspect chemical weapons are being stored that's just dumb.
It is strange how as soon as they are finally getting the rebels under control they bring international attention to themselves. Something definitely reeks here but I'm afraid we will never truly know what happened.Exactly. Why risk international attention when you're about to shutdown these CIA backed rebels once and for all?!SpoilerQuoteThe likelihood Assad used chemical weapons is incredibly small, but whatever. I'd wager the whole thing is a set-up, though between who and why I have no idea.Nah, it's not in this day and age where it can be set up. US has 24/7 reconnaissance and surveillance over syrias Air Force activity, its more geospatial intelligence, so it would be pretty easy to identify if it was a Syrian based helicopter dropping chemical gas bombs on civilians, or any other Syrian operated aircraft.
Oh please, as if intelligence is always that clear cut. Obama and Kerry were bragging 24 months ago that Assad had given up 100% of his chemical weapons (hint: he had almost none anyway). Makes no sense for Assad to use chemical weapons, allegedly he didn't have any to begin with, and the footage of the 'attack' is a bit suspicious (shows people handling victims without gloves for a start, which is the very first thing I was taught not to do when I did my CBRN training as a reservist). Anyway the US response makes no sense either-you don't blow up a area where you suspect chemical weapons are being stored that's just dumb.[close]
There's just something so fishy about a leader liked by his own people and a person who had a secular government which provided a haven for Christians, having a mysterious rebellion break out and and then having those rebels backed by U.S. only to find out they're ISIS. FeelsBadMan
Looking at the facts and how the civil war was going for Assad, I just cannot see him ordering a chemical weapon strike. Trump had literally just wrote him off saying he'll more or less leave Assad alone, then Assad orders a chemical strike knowing Trump won't be able to turn a blind eye?Did the rebels have the capability to do so? I mean considering they're flying jets (multiple times remember, considering the followup attacks on the hospitals/clinics) in what is largely Russian/Regime controlled territory. As of March 8th there had been no Coalition airstrikes in that region, only Russian, which leads me to believe that there is air superiority in favour of Russia/Assad there. Surely they'd just have been shot out of the sky?
It's not the first time the rebels have tried to pull a false flag, either.
yes... Trump is being a very good goy it seemsGood for Trump, he actually had the balls to do something about it and I support that sort of response. Don't think it will escalate to a full out war, Syria knows it would obviously loseIt was a surprisingly fast response and sent a clear message that he handles things differently than Obama. I for one did not think the Trump administration would involve themselves, even after the chemical attack. However, I am rather pleased with it. It's about time someone stepped up and did something.
I agree. I think it sends a clear message that we aren't going to let innocent people get attacked in anyway. Under Obama, nothing would have happened. I am glad Trump sends a message. Also, Hillary said we should have hit all the air fields; however, Trump's response was direct, limited, and targeted one.
It'd be proper banter if Assad chemical struck a US baseThat would be some awesome banter
Getting back to French politics, I saw this being shared on Twitter and it looks interesting. Couple of spelling mistakes but it's written by a French journalist so that's to be expected: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C8_-ZtIWsAAvZ8X.jpg
All aboard the banter nuke.It'd be proper banter if Assad chemical struck a US baseThat would be some awesome banter
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/syria-trudeau-assad-attacks-1.4063464+1 to that.
I hope he falls down a well.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/syria-trudeau-assad-attacks-1.4063464+1 to that.
I hope he falls down a well.
StillNotReadyhttp://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/syria-trudeau-assad-attacks-1.4063464+1 to that.
I hope he falls down a well.
Nice hair though
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/syria-trudeau-assad-attacks-1.4063464
I hope he falls down a well.
nah, lets remove the only secular and semi stable government in the regionI mean it doesn't make it any better. Its retarded to think that Syria will become more stable if Assad capitulates.http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/syria-trudeau-assad-attacks-1.4063464
I hope he falls down a well.
You know that's literally what the coalition at first proclaimed? Literally almost all of Europe went into the operation with this in mind.
Well lets put it this way, if you're going to openly attack a sovereign nation, you'd better have a damn good reason (like intending to depose the leader for using chemical weapons against civilians).True, those missiles cost over 100 million and where basically a waste of time.
If you're not willing to do that, then why attack them at all? Just leave them alone to keep fucking themselves over and make America great again. I mean that's what Trump kept telling people that they should be doing, at least while it wasn't him calling the shots.
True, those missiles cost over 100 million and where basically a waste of time.
I mean it doesn't make it any better. Its retarded to think that Syria will become more stable if Assad capitulates.
Each missile costs over 1 million to make, and he fired 59. The number found on Wikipedia is 1.87m per unit.True, those missiles cost over 100 million and where basically a waste of time.
more like a million, but yeah.I mean it doesn't make it any better. Its retarded to think that Syria will become more stable if Assad capitulates.
That's not what they're saying. They don't need Assad to capitulate. They want a regime change. A new leader, who will negotiate with..... well, the rest of the world.
Don't think that Russia is really negotiating with him. They're strongarming him. Assad doesn't talk to anyone and the reason the West wants him gone is not only because of what he did DURING the Syrian civil war, but also before it. He is a completely loose cannon.
"Assad is a lose cannon"good goy
OYYY VEYYY
Lmao, Erdogan won his referendum.Oh sweet Jesus.
It currently stands at 51% in favour ater 98% of the votes counted. I can't say I am surprised, I kinda suspected this would happen. I had hoped the referendum would fail, but alas. What I do find interesting is how really close it is, 51% is a really low majority. I was expecting somewhere around 55-60% in favour, not 51. I guess Turkey is way more divided than we thought.Won't be divided any more. All hail Erdogan.
Jesus, the majority of Turks living in Europe and which voted in the referendum voted 'Yes'
I'm sure everyone is truly shocked that you, Furrnox, of all people support the globalist money whore who apologised for colonisation...I'm shook right now.
You are aware that globalism and the EU are one of the main reasons peace lasted for so long on our planet?I'm sure everyone is truly shocked that you, Furrnox, of all people support the globalist money whore who apologised for colonisation...I'm shook right now.
however, I think this is going to be a really hard victory for Le Pen because everyone else is supporting the globalist and she only advanced due to there being so many other choices in the first round. Hopefully nationalism and the love for rational thinking will triumph but if it doesn't, the EU will continue to take sovereignty away from countries and populism will take a serious blow.
You are aware that globalism and the EU are one of the main reasons peace lasted for so long on our planet?I'm sure everyone is truly shocked that you, Furrnox, of all people support the globalist money whore who apologised for colonisation...I'm shook right now.
however, I think this is going to be a really hard victory for Le Pen because everyone else is supporting the globalist and she only advanced due to there being so many other choices in the first round. Hopefully nationalism and the love for rational thinking will triumph but if it doesn't, the EU will continue to take sovereignty away from countries and populism will take a serious blow.
You are aware that globalism and the EU are one of the main reasons peace lasted for so long on our planet?I'm sure everyone is truly shocked that you, Furrnox, of all people support the globalist money whore who apologised for colonisation...I'm shook right now.
however, I think this is going to be a really hard victory for Le Pen because everyone else is supporting the globalist and she only advanced due to there being so many other choices in the first round. Hopefully nationalism and the love for rational thinking will triumph but if it doesn't, the EU will continue to take sovereignty away from countries and populism will take a serious blow.
Mutually Assured Destruction is great.You are aware that globalism and the EU are one of the main reasons peace lasted for so long on our planet?I'm sure everyone is truly shocked that you, Furrnox, of all people support the globalist money whore who apologised for colonisation...I'm shook right now.
however, I think this is going to be a really hard victory for Le Pen because everyone else is supporting the globalist and she only advanced due to there being so many other choices in the first round. Hopefully nationalism and the love for rational thinking will triumph but if it doesn't, the EU will continue to take sovereignty away from countries and populism will take a serious blow.
Yeah, that or nuclear weapons.
Darn that gif was a great argument, im really convinced now.
Wars are mostly fought for economical reasons. Due to globalism war hurts economy more then it gives you anything. If im wrong pls tell me why and dont answer in shitty futurama gifs.
On another note: Anyone here watch Designated Survivor on Netflix? The PC narrative is horrible and really hurts a good show.
Nationalism and rational thinking don't really mix bud. ;)Oil (Islam) and Water (Secularism/Christians) cannot mix no matter how much you stir the mixture. You fools keep trying to coexist but how can you coexist with something that shares little to no common values and morals.
Nationalism and rational thinking don't really mix bud. ;)putting your country first and wanting to improve it is now irrational
Hell hath no fury like a Swede lusting for brown cockNationalism and rational thinking don't really mix bud. ;)putting your country first and wanting to improve it is now irrationalwho else but...(https://i.redd.it/uoo7eb3rhvgy.png)[close]
What sucks is that the world population is growing at an extreme rate and we won't have the resources to support this many people. It's time for a good war honestly so we can remedy this problem /s
when you don't even acknowledge the plebbit tier "/s"What sucks is that the world population is growing at an extreme rate and we won't have the resources to support this many people. It's time for a good war honestly so we can remedy this problem /s
When you claim to be a rational thinker and say the solution to the worlds problems is a "good war".
Anyone who believes in the mighty protective power of MAD just hasn't watched enough "Yes Minister".
But seriously though, nuclear weapons are only a last resort, and as such are something we would only ever use ifthe USSRRussia were to nuke/invade us personally. What if they fly planes into our airspace? No nukes. What if they annex part of Ukraine? No nukes. What if they annex all of Eastern Europe? Still no nukes. What if they take over the entire planet except for nations with nuclear weapons? No thermonuclear annihilation.
And anyway it's not like they'll stop terrorist attacks or guerrilla style attacks a la Crimea. They're essentially only for use against other nuclear attacks, ergo, they're completely pointless.
Just scrap them (pretend we still have some if you must?). They're a huge waste of money.
http://www.breitbart.com/video/2017/04/25/schumer-its-not-a-negotiation-no-wall/Spoiler(https://media.8ch.net/file_store/0e89093ab333d775273444f67673c2c70d106322cb156912e30e264b4b42bd2e.png)[close]
J U S T
U
S
T
What sucks is that the world population is growing at an extreme rate and we won't have the resources to support this many people. It's time for a good war honestly so we can remedy this problem /sNationalism and rational thinking don't really mix bud. ;)Oil (Islam) and Water (Secularism/Christians) cannot mix no matter how much you stir the mixture. You fools keep trying to coexist but how can you coexist with something that shares little to no common values and morals.
Yeah, reassuring foreign leaders that a multinational important trade deal isn't going to be arbitrarily blown up immediately is such an inconsistent move from his campaign goals. Lol.lol, like the U.S hasn't done enough to the lumber industry.
The US dept of commerce recently informed the Canadian government that a duty would be applied on Canadian lumber exports ( I think), so I don't think he's thrown protectionism out of the window.
The only thing I was really worried about with Trump was his protectionism. Our economy has suffered enoughYeah, reassuring foreign leaders that a multinational important trade deal isn't going to be arbitrarily blown up immediately is such an inconsistent move from his campaign goals. Lol.lol, like the U.S hasn't done enough to the lumber industry.
The US dept of commerce recently informed the Canadian government that a duty would be applied on Canadian lumber exports ( I think), so I don't think he's thrown protectionism out of the window.
Might want to extend your sources to be broader than WSJ, NYT and /pol/ baitYes
Someone want to write my political science final exam for me?I gotchu. Got 40.5/50 on my political theory exam
NAFTA is a waste, we don't need Canada or Mexico cuz we are America 8)no plz
NAFTA is a waste, we don't need Canada or Mexico cuz we are America 8)Yea the U.S has never needed Canada or Mexico.
Mexico better than Canada and Great Britain confirmed?NAFTA is a waste, we don't need Canada or Mexico cuz we are America 8)Yea the U.S has never needed Canada or Mexico.Spoiler(https://i.imgur.com/uc5wMTW.jpg)[close]
No mass deportations: Glad to see you're always high, or just not in touch with anyone in the US south - deportations on masse have for sure been occuring :En masse means happening all at once.
http://www.businessinsider.com/mexico-preparations-for-mass-deportations-by-donald-trump-2017-2
For some reason, I was thinking on mass, but wanted to say en masse, and typed the middle. Canadian education system!No mass deportations: Glad to see you're always high, or just not in touch with anyone in the US south - deportations on masse have for sure been occuring :En masse means happening all at once.
http://www.businessinsider.com/mexico-preparations-for-mass-deportations-by-donald-trump-2017-2
As for mass deportations, well...
>135 deportees
France mimicking the US
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/world-europe-39779548/watch-le-pen-plagiarises-fillon-speech
Does that travel warning apply to every country in Europe?https://travel.state.gov/content/passports/en/alertswarnings/Europe.html
Its silly anyway. It's not like Europe is in a Civil War or something.
Travel warning issued against all of Europe, all Europeans are terrorists confirmed 8)
But hey, if it makes muh voter base feel safe.
That's standard following terrorist attacks etc, although applying it to the entirety of Europe is a bit pointless; IS aren't about to bomb Portugal.
Because its discount Spain.That's standard following terrorist attacks etc, although applying it to the entirety of Europe is a bit pointless; IS aren't about to bomb Portugal.
Why wouldn't they?
Hang on though, a travel warning is very different. Surely that means that the US is saying "be careful travelling to these countries" rather than doing anything to limit immigration.No putting a travel alert administered by the state dept is not normal for Europe, this is a first. And I know schools and universities do take it seriously, regarding summer programs and trips to Europe I'm sure there will be a decline
That's standard following terrorist attacks etc, although applying it to the entirety of Europe is a bit pointless; IS aren't about to bomb Portugal.
So ridiculous that Trump is placing checks on EU travellers, all we've done is let several million unchecked people from a warzone into our countries jeez what a tyrant.
Yeah I read through the list. Afghanistan, Sudan, Eritrea...
Isreal and Turkey also make sense, kind of. Then comes Europe :P All of it...
How often does one have to point out that nearly all terrorist attacks weren't performed by refugees?
By all accounts, the European continent hasn't ever been as safe as it is at the moment.
The IRA was more of threat than ISIS ever was/will be.When you look in mirrors do you even see yourself?
The IRA was more of threat than ISIS ever was/will be.Err wouldn't go to that extent...
Oh please, the murder rate in the US is 4.3 times higher than the murder rate in Germany or 5.57 times higher than the murder rate in the Netherlands...
Is the US save, yes! Is the EU save, yes!
And it is true, it is probably the safest time on the European continent since like ever.
And while ISIS fighters posed a refugees on 13/11, they were still French. THe Brussels attacks were performed by Belgiums... Nice attacks were performed by a Tunesian who had been living in France since 2005 (6 years before the Syrian civil war started)
Granted the German 2016 attacks were performed by someone who entered as a refugee, but that is it for the larger terror attacks. The rest were so small scaled and only perpetrated in name of ISIS rather than the terrorists themselves being likely to actually have been part of ISIS that I still cannot see the point of how enormous a threat ISIS is to the EU.
The IRA was more of threat than ISIS ever was/will be.
given the EU’s larger population, the per million people fatality rate for the US and the EU as a whole are virtually identical (0.62 for the US and 0.60 for the EU). By contrast, the injury rate in the EU is much higher (0.61 for the US and 1.34 for the EU).
Btw. from your own link:Quotegiven the EU’s larger population, the per million people fatality rate for the US and the EU as a whole are virtually identical (0.62 for the US and 0.60 for the EU). By contrast, the injury rate in the EU is much higher (0.61 for the US and 1.34 for the EU).
So my point still stands, the US is just as save as the EU.
Also RickPerry, you realise that the EU has over double the US population right? That's including the Paris attacks, which are single handedly half of the total number killed. I'm not saying not to include it, but if you were to look up until October 2015 instead it'd be a ridiculous difference (over twice as many deaths per capita in the US if I'm not mistaken). If you were to extend it to include 2016, you'd have a massive relative drop in the EU and a massive increase in the US (Orlando etc).
"Obama doesn’t need to look any further than France, which last year suffered 532 casualties (killings and woundings) versus 396 in the US during the first seven full years of the Obama administration from 2009 through 2015."
Yeah. Wasnt trying to discredit it.
Figures differ on the source, hence the roughly. Also, im pretty sure the 400 is with Turkey as well, otherwise it is moreso 300ish.
Great memes here tbh
A considerable number of clips from that vid were from riots cuaed by football, political protests in South-America and anti-government protests in TurkeyArguably the most concerning part of that was the comments made by some of the Muslims in the video, and the ideology they carry. Also the clips from that German University, this all is just a big problem and to be perfectly honest Europe should not be taking in these refugees in such high numbers with so little concern over who they are.
A considerable number of clips from that vid were from riots cuaed by football, political protests in South-America and anti-government protests in Turkey
Arguably the most concerning part of that was the comments made by some of the Muslims in the video, and the ideology they carry. Also the clips from that German University, this all is just a big problem and to be perfectly honest Europe should not be taking in these refugees in such high numbers with so little concern over who they are.
Pretty much. Though the """refugees""" chimping out and screaming "MONEYYYY!" at the camera isn't enough evidence of ill intent for Riddlez and Mr "The IRA are worse than ISIS" Olafson.
I'm pretty sure most EU apologists would take it up the ass by a rapeugee and still claim that it's good because they've been culturally enriched like never before ¯\_(ツ)_/¯wat
Given all refugees from Syria had to pass through at least one safe country to get to Europe, under international law they are no longer classed as refugees.
Given all refugees from Syria had to pass through at least one safe country to get to Europe, under international law they are no longer classed as refugees.
Then my other points still stand.
Can't blame them for choosing Germany, The Netherlands over 'safe' countries. Besides, those countries are at maximum capacity anyways.
Definitely not cultural enrichtment... really dont get that argument. At the moment it doesnt nessecarily benefit anything really... though there will come a time in the foreseeable future where we either need to fuck more, or need moor immigrants.
Definitely not cultural enrichtment... really dont get that argument. At the moment it doesnt nessecarily benefit anything really... though there will come a time in the foreseeable future where we either need to fuck more, or need moor immigrants.No we dont need to fuck more and we dont need more fucking immigrants.
On a completely seperate note: the Dutch commander of the armed forces went on record stating populism is an indirect threat to our country's safety. I don't disagree, I am suprised he is getting involved in political affairs publicly... the military usually tries to stay well clear of that.
Anyone who opposes the EU is alt-right!I mean they've basically been held in providence by the alt-right, despite all of them being relatively shitty politicians.
You Europhiles and your labels ::)
I just love how the media blacked out and didn't report on the emails as if the bias wasn't already strong enough. I
"Next time guys! Surely, next time!"-Democracts in 2016
Also, the army was put in place because of the massive rioting of the people that did not want to vote for either Macaroni or Le Penis. Not because of "le scary Muslims", you massive sperg.
massive rioting
"Speaking after an emergency meeting of top security officials, Prime Minister Bernard Cazeneuve said all elite units were on top alert for the election to back up the 50,000 police already earmarked for special election duty."
"Nothing must be allowed to impede the fundamental democratic process of our country. It falls to us not to give in to fear and intimidation and manipulation which would play into the hands of the enemy."
QuoteDo the French consider their own civilians "the enemy"?
Isn't that the reason behind all the support for Le Pen? Because she is going to fight for "their interests."?
So which is it?
Not trying to gloat, but are things seriously that bad that France (and other EU countries) had to put armed police and the actual military on the streets during an election? From a British perspective that seems insane.
As for other countries, there were no soldiers deployed to guard polling booths during the Dutch elections.
This is coming from the guy that thinks the EU is some sort of race mixing project lel.
Well that didn't take long.
http://www.politico.eu/article/juncker-the-french-spend-too-much-money/
And this from a man who was allegedly drunk again at a UN summit in Cyprus last week. Juncker has already ruled out a second term (quite unusual I might add-he's basically admitted he's not up to it) but he should go now to spare himself further embarrassment.
Can't argue with democracy, even if it voted in the other favor. I just love how the media blacked out and didn't report on the emails as if the bias wasn't already strong enough. I hope there's some rife stuff in there for the next few years.
Anyhow, to close with some final words: France, once the people that stopped the Muslim invasion of Europe, have now embraced Islam. It's all come full circle.
They are, but that's not related to the elections. A massive number of soldiers and police are already deployed 24/7 in France atm. It's been that way for ages, which from what I heard has been really taking its toll on both military and police forces through exhaustion from the sheer number of hours they're having to put in.
Wasn't there also suspicions that some of the "leaks" where fake?
Anyhow former PM Manuel Valls links up with En Marche! Opinions?
Anyhow former PM Manuel Valls links up with En Marche! Opinions?
Though, really... The fact you need to report on it either means:
- Your country has so few problems there is nothing else to report
- There genuinly is nothing to report that day
- Your journalists aren't capable of doing more
- There is news, but it's too complex to dumb down for a news reportSpoilerNah really those reporters were all hoping for a scandal, couldn't find one, so they created one.
It's all a leftist conspiracy of the Goldman-Sachs news agencies who want to reinstall communism.SpoilerNah really it was the democrats[close][close]
Saudi Arabia one of the most oppressive countries in the middle east and ally to the USA "the land of the free".at least the Saudi country is not deeply enveloped in civil war from a series of terrible dictators. They can at least be worked with to be less oppressive in the future, whereas most other countries in the middle east (excluding Israel) literally have no government in power and instead are fighting each other.
Saudi Arabia one of the most oppressive countries in the middle east and ally to the USA "the land of the free".They aren't a great country and SA funds a lot of Sunni terrorists but they're a major trade ally and military ally in the region. It's better to have a friend, however bad he may be, then be alone when you charge in.
I can see why they are valuable to the U.S in the region. But its honestly stupid to sell them a fuckton of weapons seeing they don't really co-operate with the U.S as much as they should and, you know. Hate Israel.
Besides, it's better to have Saudia Arabia as a stable ally in the Middle East, with Iraq and Syria in shambles and Iran as a religious state.Saudi Arabia one of the most oppressive countries in the middle east and ally to the USA "the land of the free".They aren't a great country and SA funds a lot of Sunni terrorists but they're a major trade ally and military ally in the region. It's better to have a friend, however bad he may be, then be alone when you charge in.
From what I've heard there is a massive trade deal that is/went down but I'd be interested to see if Trump could get SA to take in Syrian refugees so Europe can stop cucking itself over them
Theodin, Canada's oil industry (or should I say, Alberta's oil industry) is fucked mainly by Quebec, especially that moron Coderre in Montreal who objects to pipelines on environmental grounds but then dumps 8 billion litres of raw sewage into the Saint Lawrence River. Naturally the Quebecois expect their equalisation payments to be funded by Albertan oil however. Tbh we should have done what the Americans did in Louisiana with the Cajun and properly make them integrate, but it's way too late for that now.A lot of the Frenchies in Louisiana where forced out of Newfoundland and Acadia by the British Government. Would have been to many in Quebec, they caused enough rebellions as it was.
Theodin, Canada's oil industry (or should I say, Alberta's oil industry) is fucked mainly by Quebec, especially that moron Coderre in Montreal who objects to pipelines on environmental grounds but then dumps 8 billion litres of raw sewage into the Saint Lawrence River. Naturally the Quebecois expect their equalisation payments to be funded by Albertan oil however. Tbh we should have done what the Americans did in Louisiana with the Cajun and properly make them integrate, but it's way too late for that now.Oh for sure. Also the fact that BC won't let pipelines through either, leaving all the oil trapped in Alberta with no real way to get it out.
BC can do no wrong, they have the word 'British' in the title ;)True I forgot
Besides, it's better to have Saudia Arabia as a stable ally in the Middle East, with Iraq and Syria in shambles and Iran as a religious state.Saudi Arabia one of the most oppressive countries in the middle east and ally to the USA "the land of the free".They aren't a great country and SA funds a lot of Sunni terrorists but they're a major trade ally and military ally in the region. It's better to have a friend, however bad he may be, then be alone when you charge in.
From what I've heard there is a massive trade deal that is/went down but I'd be interested to see if Trump could get SA to take in Syrian refugees so Europe can stop cucking itself over them
You realize those states don't accept refugees because those countries already repress political liberty, right? Taking in refugees from an active rebellion in a close country doesn't seem like the best move for your political stability. They also control OPEC (which fucked Canada, by the way) and as Steven said, they aren't hellbent on destroying Israel. Doesn't make them a 10/10 ally but it's more like 7/10, and in the mid east you take what you can get
Edit: Holy shit, anyone else see the deals reaching in Saudi Arabia? this is truly history
Where did I say that Saudi Arabia wasn't? Of course they're a religious state, but the difference is Iran believes in the destruction of infidelity, and Saudi Arabia doesn't. There's difference between a religious fanatic state and a religious stateBesides, it's better to have Saudia Arabia as a stable ally in the Middle East, with Iraq and Syria in shambles and Iran as a religious state.Saudi Arabia one of the most oppressive countries in the middle east and ally to the USA "the land of the free".They aren't a great country and SA funds a lot of Sunni terrorists but they're a major trade ally and military ally in the region. It's better to have a friend, however bad he may be, then be alone when you charge in.
From what I've heard there is a massive trade deal that is/went down but I'd be interested to see if Trump could get SA to take in Syrian refugees so Europe can stop cucking itself over them
You realize those states don't accept refugees because those countries already repress political liberty, right? Taking in refugees from an active rebellion in a close country doesn't seem like the best move for your political stability. They also control OPEC (which fucked Canada, by the way) and as Steven said, they aren't hellbent on destroying Israel. Doesn't make them a 10/10 ally but it's more like 7/10, and in the mid east you take what you can get
Edit: Holy shit, anyone else see the deals reaching in Saudi Arabia? this is truly history
Like Saudi Arabia isn't a religious state..
Saudi Arabia is worse towards women than even Iran is.
Good, I'm still sad that Donald Trump is your president constantly making a fool of himself.Who are you virtue signalling to?
(Also he's making policies which are bad for the entire planet.)
Trump met with world leaders at the NATO headquarters today, hilarity ensued:Very short videos of the highlightshttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cWISsAanWWw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-WqJkWntgSg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nH5XeHaEEaY[close]
Trump met with world leaders at the NATO headquarters today, hilarity ensued:Very short videos of the highlightshttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cWISsAanWWw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-WqJkWntgSg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nH5XeHaEEaY[close]
This man Trump is the biggest meme to ever touch the earth. That fucking NATO diss had me lmfao!!! and the fucking Montenegro guy getting pushed to the side honestly had me on the floor rofling!!!
You may get the impression that Trump was off the rails during the meet up, but that's not really the case. If you watch the full broadcast you'll notice there's was A LOT of tension between Trump and the Europhile leaders, with both sides playing games throughout the day.LOL
Especially Macron! He was... less than respectful.
You may get the impression that Trump was off the rails during the meet up, but that's not really the case. If you watch the full broadcast you'll notice there's was A LOT of tension between Trump and the Europhile leaders, with both sides playing games throughout the day.
Especially Macron! He was... less than respectful.
Trump is such a moron it hurts. He brought up this retarded primal alpha male demeanour and when other country leaders start paying him back in his own coin he starts to behave like a petulant child.
I don't think you regret joining a military alliance with half of Europe and the only superpower remaining because your head of state gets moved aside at a conference by the US President. Where's the logic there???Trump met with world leaders at the NATO headquarters today, hilarity ensued:Very short videos of the highlightshttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cWISsAanWWw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-WqJkWntgSg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nH5XeHaEEaY[close]
This man Trump is the biggest meme to ever touch the earth. That fucking NATO diss had me lmfao!!! and the fucking Montenegro guy getting pushed to the side honestly had me on the floor rofling!!!
And Montenegro who just joined NATO... I'm sure they're regretting it already hahah
Looks like we have a late entry as to which world "leader" can be the biggest douche-bag at the NATO summit, so Trump and Macron may have to step up their game if they wish to compete...FacePalmSpoiler(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DAxVI_1WAAAUBrP.jpg:large)[close]
One more day until the Tories get a new leader. Please god have it be Bernier. If O'Leary gets it I'm voting NDP probably.He dropped out ages ago lol
I got worried for a second and though Bernier dropped out, cool that he'll be the next leader then.One more day until the Tories get a new leader. Please god have it be Bernier. If O'Leary gets it I'm voting NDP probably.He dropped out ages ago lol
With all the fuck ups Trump has made I am suprised there isn't yet an uproar... Literally if ANY other country leader did this, they'd be cast aside and sent to the shitters.Political drama and accusations are nothing. Sure he isn't the best president, but he certainly started off with a hell of a disadvantage considering half of the US is brainwashed and the other half are stubborn, so you pick your poison but the amount of people who can make their own decisions is very low. Anyone who thinks Trump shouldn't be president right now is just stupid, and removing him does no good either. Hell, you can even impeach him and still not remove him, but the fact of the matter is at the end of 4 years you can see what he did and didn't do, and judge him then. I can guarantee you he will make America stronger in the world standing, whether it be through reminding NATO members to pay their dues or increasing military spending, or up scaling general soldiers and personnel equipment.
With all the fuck ups CNN has manufactured with 0 evidence and baseless, vague rumors from "anonymous sources" about memos that may or may not exist
One more day until the Tories get a new leader. Please god have it be Bernier. If O'Leary gets it I'm voting NDP probably.
When Hillary Clinton used her email to send classified information to people with clearance Republicans freaked out.While everyone's heard that sensational story, what no one knows is:
Donald Trump gave classified information to the Russians but when he did it Republicans where okay with it.
Also "I just fired the head of the FBI. He was crazy, a real nut job... I faced great pressure because of Russia. That's taken off." -Donald J Trump
Why do people care if US and Russia are working together and are becoming closer allies? As a citizen of the US i would love to see US and Russia form a tightly knit alliance that no other nation's on earth could contest. Why does the US always have to be the "good guy" cant we stop with the caring big brother act and start looking out for ourselves.
US the new edgy bad boy.
All it takes to be an edgey bad boy is not hating Russia?
I better start cutting my wrists then.
All of your points are irrelevant Trump commited high treason and he's to stupid to realize it.When Hillary Clinton used her email to send classified information to people with clearance Republicans freaked out.While everyone's heard that sensational story, what no one knows is:
Donald Trump gave classified information to the Russians but when he did it Republicans where okay with it.
Also "I just fired the head of the FBI. He was crazy, a real nut job... I faced great pressure because of Russia. That's taken off." -Donald J Trump
1. The relevance of the intelligence
2. The classification level
3. Whether Israel/CIA told him he could
4. What Russia gave in return
etc. But oh, Trump gave someone intelligence, must be a Russian puppet!
It's like you all ignored that Comey, in typical Comey fashion, told a high ranking politician that they weren't under investigation when he was ready to commence investigation. He also mislead CONGRESS, which is a big no no. But because Trump's been accused of being a Russian puppet, and he fired an incompetent FBI director, he MUST be a Russian puppet!
Why do people care if US and Russia are working together and are becoming closer allies? As a citizen of the US i would love to see US and Russia form a tightly knit alliance that no other nation's on earth could contest. Why does the US always have to be the "good guy" cant we stop with the caring big brother act and start looking out for ourselves.
US the new edgy bad boy.
It is exactly this kind of stunts that I meant.... International politics is literally about details like that. It wouldn't be suprising at all if during negotiations this would be brought up.
It is exactly this kind of stunts that I meant.... International politics is literally about details like that. It wouldn't be suprising at all if during negotiations this would be brought up.
Shit boys the Italians are pissed that Trump didn't wear the stylin headphones they provided.
Guess I better stock up on Dejornos
Good talk, i'm convinced nowAll of your points are irrelevant Trump commited high treason and he's to stupid to realize it.When Hillary Clinton used her email to send classified information to people with clearance Republicans freaked out.While everyone's heard that sensational story, what no one knows is:
Donald Trump gave classified information to the Russians but when he did it Republicans where okay with it.
Also "I just fired the head of the FBI. He was crazy, a real nut job... I faced great pressure because of Russia. That's taken off." -Donald J Trump
1. The relevance of the intelligence
2. The classification level
3. Whether Israel/CIA told him he could
4. What Russia gave in return
etc. But oh, Trump gave someone intelligence, must be a Russian puppet!
It's like you all ignored that Comey, in typical Comey fashion, told a high ranking politician that they weren't under investigation when he was ready to commence investigation. He also mislead CONGRESS, which is a big no no. But because Trump's been accused of being a Russian puppet, and he fired an incompetent FBI director, he MUST be a Russian puppet!
All of your points are irrelevant Trump commited high treason and he's to stupid to realize it.When Hillary Clinton used her email to send classified information to people with clearance Republicans freaked out.While everyone's heard that sensational story, what no one knows is:
Donald Trump gave classified information to the Russians but when he did it Republicans where okay with it.
Also "I just fired the head of the FBI. He was crazy, a real nut job... I faced great pressure because of Russia. That's taken off." -Donald J Trump
1. The relevance of the intelligence
2. The classification level
3. Whether Israel/CIA told him he could
4. What Russia gave in return
etc. But oh, Trump gave someone intelligence, must be a Russian puppet!
It's like you all ignored that Comey, in typical Comey fashion, told a high ranking politician that they weren't under investigation when he was ready to commence investigation. He also mislead CONGRESS, which is a big no no. But because Trump's been accused of being a Russian puppet, and he fired an incompetent FBI director, he MUST be a Russian puppet!
commited high treason and he's to stupid to realize it.
commited high treason and he's to stupid to realize it.
Lmao, Trump is hilarioustrump probably is fluent in Italian and has his eyes closed so he could hear betterSpoilerhttps://twitter.com/BBCJLandale/status/868418708502441986[close]
Lmao, Trump is hilarioustrump probably is fluent in Italian and has his eyes closed so he could hear betterSpoilerhttps://twitter.com/BBCJLandale/status/868418708502441986[close]
Lmao, Trump is hilarioustrump probably is fluent in Italian and has his eyes closed so he could hear betterSpoilerhttps://twitter.com/BBCJLandale/status/868418708502441986[close]
-snip-
Any Canadians following the Conservative leadership election? Looking very close between Bernier and Scheer but looks like latter might just nudge it.Didn't even realize Bernier had competition :o. Will be interesting to see.
Scheer comes across as a really nice guy, none of this fake shit Trudeau does either, he's pretty genuine from what I can see. He also wasn't hankering after the job for years like a lot of the others and probably just wanted to be Speaker. Hope he wins at the next election.I'd say he'll have a fair chance honestly. If he can grill Trudeau in the house of commons and is a decent campaigner that's all it should take.
he's pretty genuine from what I can see.
Scheer comes across as a really nice guy, none of this fake shit Trudeau does either, he's pretty genuine from what I can see. He also wasn't hankering after the job for years like a lot of the others and probably just wanted to be Speaker. Hope he wins at the next election.I'd say he'll have a fair chance honestly. If he can grill Trudeau in the house of commons and is a decent campaigner that's all it should take.
June you do occasionally say things that I can respect, but when you start criticising people based on their use of a second language you lose all credibility and just come across as an asshole.
Mfw Canada's emissions were already meeting clean standards before we introduced a carbon tax but apparently introducing more useless taxes means we want to destroy the environmentScheer comes across as a really nice guy, none of this fake shit Trudeau does either, he's pretty genuine from what I can see. He also wasn't hankering after the job for years like a lot of the others and probably just wanted to be Speaker. Hope he wins at the next election.I'd say he'll have a fair chance honestly. If he can grill Trudeau in the house of commons and is a decent campaigner that's all it should take.
I read up a little on his Wikipedia page (I know great source) but according to the page he wants to remove the carbon tax. So is he one of those cuckservatives who don't believe in global warming?
If that is the case then that would make him a terrible candidate on it's own.
Furrnox, its not that he doesn't believe in global warming. Its that the carbon tax is pointless and just ramps up the price on everything for almost no environmental benefit. The extra 2000$ it may cost some people will be hard on poor families or people with only minimum wage jobs. And if you live in Canada (it being very big) you need to travel quite a bit so its not even going to stop people from using cars because no one is biking 2 hours to pickup groceries. We're around number 10 in terms of Greenhouse emissions. Even if the tax did drop our emissions it wouldn't make a dent in the grand scheme of things.Scheer comes across as a really nice guy, none of this fake shit Trudeau does either, he's pretty genuine from what I can see. He also wasn't hankering after the job for years like a lot of the others and probably just wanted to be Speaker. Hope he wins at the next election.I'd say he'll have a fair chance honestly. If he can grill Trudeau in the house of commons and is a decent campaigner that's all it should take.
I read up a little on his Wikipedia page (I know great source) but according to the page he wants to remove the carbon tax. So is he one of those cuckservatives who don't believe in global warming?
If that is the case then that would make him a terrible candidate on it's own.
Furrnox, its not that he doesn't believe in global warming. Its that the carbon tax is pointless and just ramps up the price on everything for almost no environmental benefit. The extra 2000$ it may cost some people will be hard on poor families or people with only minimum wage jobs. And if you live in Canada (it being very big) you need to travel quite a bit so its not even going to stop people from using cars because no one is biking 2 hours to pickup groceries. We're around number 10 in terms of Greenhouse emissions. Even if the tax did drop our emissions it wouldn't make a dent in the grand scheme of things.Scheer comes across as a really nice guy, none of this fake shit Trudeau does either, he's pretty genuine from what I can see. He also wasn't hankering after the job for years like a lot of the others and probably just wanted to be Speaker. Hope he wins at the next election.I'd say he'll have a fair chance honestly. If he can grill Trudeau in the house of commons and is a decent campaigner that's all it should take.
I read up a little on his Wikipedia page (I know great source) but according to the page he wants to remove the carbon tax. So is he one of those cuckservatives who don't believe in global warming?
If that is the case then that would make him a terrible candidate on it's own.
Furrnox, its not that he doesn't believe in global warming. Its that the carbon tax is pointless and just ramps up the price on everything for almost no environmental benefit. The extra 2000$ it may cost some people will be hard on poor families or people with only minimum wage jobs. And if you live in Canada (it being very big) you need to travel quite a bit so its not even going to stop people from using cars because no one is biking 2 hours to pickup groceries. We're around number 10 in terms of Greenhouse emissions. Even if the tax did drop our emissions it wouldn't make a dent in the grand scheme of things.Scheer comes across as a really nice guy, none of this fake shit Trudeau does either, he's pretty genuine from what I can see. He also wasn't hankering after the job for years like a lot of the others and probably just wanted to be Speaker. Hope he wins at the next election.I'd say he'll have a fair chance honestly. If he can grill Trudeau in the house of commons and is a decent campaigner that's all it should take.
I read up a little on his Wikipedia page (I know great source) but according to the page he wants to remove the carbon tax. So is he one of those cuckservatives who don't believe in global warming?
If that is the case then that would make him a terrible candidate on it's own.
This is fucking beautiful.Spoilerhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NLdEYw3ginA[close]
I don't think you regret joining a military alliance with half of Europe and the only superpower remaining because your head of state gets moved aside at a conference by the US President. Where's the logic there???Trump met with world leaders at the NATO headquarters today, hilarity ensued:Very short videos of the highlightshttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cWISsAanWWw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-WqJkWntgSg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nH5XeHaEEaY[close]
This man Trump is the biggest meme to ever touch the earth. That fucking NATO diss had me lmfao!!! and the fucking Montenegro guy getting pushed to the side honestly had me on the floor rofling!!!
And Montenegro who just joined NATO... I'm sure they're regretting it already hahah
OhI don't think you regret joining a military alliance with half of Europe and the only superpower remaining because your head of state gets moved aside at a conference by the US President. Where's the logic there???Trump met with world leaders at the NATO headquarters today, hilarity ensued:Very short videos of the highlightshttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cWISsAanWWw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-WqJkWntgSg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nH5XeHaEEaY[close]
This man Trump is the biggest meme to ever touch the earth. That fucking NATO diss had me lmfao!!! and the fucking Montenegro guy getting pushed to the side honestly had me on the floor rofling!!!
And Montenegro who just joined NATO... I'm sure they're regretting it already hahah
It was a joke :P
My god people were mocking Trump for his signature but take a look at Merkel's... and wtf is Juncker's even?Spoiler(https://www.fsegames.eu/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.4cdn.org%2Fpol%2F1496085788947.jpg&hash=6e5b43504a985a39f773b158a2cd9ca35dce30ed)[close]
Trump pulled back from the Paris Agreement.No warming in 10 years.
Way to go.
Well it's still better than uf they'd stayed in. Tney'd have delayed everything and caused nothing but trouble.
The sheer meme this guy is, though. Calling accelerated global warming a 'fairy tale'.
Theodin yes let's just go against all scientific evidence.Nice try tho
Trump pulled back from the Paris Agreement.
Way to go.
Well it's still better than uf they'd stayed in. Tney'd have delayed everything and caused nothing but trouble.
The sheer meme this guy is, though. Calling accelerated global warming a 'fairy tale'.
Than I won't too! Look how easy that wasTheodin yes let's just go against all scientific evidence.Nice try tho
Well, it's not blindly. And I dont see any facts that have been posted on this thread.Than I won't too! Look how easy that wasTheodin yes let's just go against all scientific evidence.Nice try tho
Blindly defending someone and ignoring facts. What's your IQ Theo?
Climate change is a myth created by the Chinese in order to make America less competitive:/
Well, it's not blindly. And I dont see any facts that have been posted on this thread.Than I won't too! Look how easy that wasTheodin yes let's just go against all scientific evidence.Nice try tho
Blindly defending someone and ignoring facts. What's your IQ Theo?
And his IQ is probably higher than yours. He did get CR afterall.
I believe in climate change, but calling them science deniers is outright wrong and completely different from what your post used to say.Well, it's not blindly. And I dont see any facts that have been posted on this thread.Than I won't too! Look how easy that wasTheodin yes let's just go against all scientific evidence.Nice try tho
Blindly defending someone and ignoring facts. What's your IQ Theo?
And his IQ is probably higher than yours. He did get CR afterall.
CR means jack shit.
People who deny global warming are science deniers.
I believe in climate change, but calling them science deniers is outright wrong and completely different from what your post used to say.Well, it's not blindly. And I dont see any facts that have been posted on this thread.Than I won't too! Look how easy that wasTheodin yes let's just go against all scientific evidence.Nice try tho
Blindly defending someone and ignoring facts. What's your IQ Theo?
And his IQ is probably higher than yours. He did get CR afterall.
CR means jack shit.
The overwhelming majority of scientists agree that global warming is real. So I don't see why we would need to post any evidence when it's clearly accepted science.
Global warming is natural, and the only thing that I've seen to be true is that with the oceans heating up it releases more carbon dioxide into the air, but other than that we're not doing that much. Almost everyone believes in science, and I'm sure Theodin does too, so before you just go out and generalize everyone, you should probably say something that doesn't make you look like an idiot. The equivilant to what you just said is "People who don't eat meat condemn food production."
Well, it's not blindly. And I dont see any facts that have been posted on this thread.Than I won't too! Look how easy that wasTheodin yes let's just go against all scientific evidence.Nice try tho
Blindly defending someone and ignoring facts. What's your IQ Theo?
And his IQ is probably higher than yours. He did get CR afterall.
That global warming have stagnated is great but that doesn't mean we should go back to no regulations and pumping out as much CO2 & CH4 as we want as Trump suggests.Not what I said.
We should continue to look for renewable and envioromental friendly alternatives to prepare for the future.
97% of scientists say that national review is a poor source.Damn.
Deny that, bitch.
Than I won't too! Look how easy that wasTheodin yes let's just go against all scientific evidence.Nice try tho
Blindly defending someone and ignoring facts. What's your IQ Theo?
Than I won't too! Look how easy that wasTheodin yes let's just go against all scientific evidence.Nice try tho
Blindly defending someone and ignoring facts. What's your IQ Theo?
Well Theodin just provided both, now where are your alternative facts marceaux? We are waiting tic tic
I expect big things from someone who must have such a high IQ as yours.
Guys come on stop getting at each other even though I'm know for starting a lot of shit in my past. Lets all please enjoy this amazing game while it lasts, there is no need to be fighting over some IQ bullshit when it has nothing to do with really anything... I really hope we can just get over this and move on and I know for a 100% fact after I post this comment I'm gonna get shat on by a lot of people, but please lets just enjoy each other and have fun. I'm not respected by the NW Community but lets please drop it thanks.You're clearly new around here. This is the politics thread, and this thread is meant for stuff like this. Just because you want to stick up for your reg leader's perverted sense of "higher IQ" and his upper intelligence when realistically he's failed to prove anything to this forum.
Jake I'm not new around here no offense but ive been in this game longer than you. I'm just saying the kind of things said between Marc and other players... Needs to end. Also I never was sticking up for anyone wherever you got that from I'm just saying it probs needs to be dropped. I'm done now dadGuys come on stop getting at each other even though I'm know for starting a lot of shit in my past. Lets all please enjoy this amazing game while it lasts, there is no need to be fighting over some IQ bullshit when it has nothing to do with really anything... I really hope we can just get over this and move on and I know for a 100% fact after I post this comment I'm gonna get shat on by a lot of people, but please lets just enjoy each other and have fun. I'm not respected by the NW Community but lets please drop it thanks.You're clearly new around here. This is the politics thread, and this thread is meant for stuff like this. Just because you want to stick up for your reg leader's perverted sense of "higher IQ" and his upper intelligence when realistically he's failed to prove anything to this forum.
Now, hopefully leftist globalism doesn't destroy Europe before its too late. Continue standing strong Poland, and your friends in Eastern Europe! Don't let refugees in if you don't want them!
LOLJake I'm not new around here no offense but ive been in this game longer than you. I'm just saying the kind of things said between Marc and other players... Needs to end. Also I never was sticking up for anyone wherever you got that from I'm just saying it probs needs to be dropped. I'm done now dadGuys come on stop getting at each other even though I'm know for starting a lot of shit in my past. Lets all please enjoy this amazing game while it lasts, there is no need to be fighting over some IQ bullshit when it has nothing to do with really anything... I really hope we can just get over this and move on and I know for a 100% fact after I post this comment I'm gonna get shat on by a lot of people, but please lets just enjoy each other and have fun. I'm not respected by the NW Community but lets please drop it thanks.You're clearly new around here. This is the politics thread, and this thread is meant for stuff like this. Just because you want to stick up for your reg leader's perverted sense of "higher IQ" and his upper intelligence when realistically he's failed to prove anything to this forum.
Now, hopefully leftist globalism doesn't destroy Europe before its too late. Continue standing strong Poland, and your friends in Eastern Europe! Don't let refugees in if you don't want them!
Excuse yourself I didn't cause jack kiddo it was my Colonel and you talking about IQ LOOOOOL yeah shut the fuck up I'm just trying to make this a fun community and place to be around. Unlike you being a regular shit hole to everyone acting like you're a know it all or a someone and you always get in peoples business shut up. And the "Keep your shit off of it" motherfucker what are you gonna do about it you're a joke to me right now what could you POSSIBLY do lmaoLOLJake I'm not new around here no offense but ive been in this game longer than you. I'm just saying the kind of things said between Marc and other players... Needs to end. Also I never was sticking up for anyone wherever you got that from I'm just saying it probs needs to be dropped. I'm done now dadGuys come on stop getting at each other even though I'm know for starting a lot of shit in my past. Lets all please enjoy this amazing game while it lasts, there is no need to be fighting over some IQ bullshit when it has nothing to do with really anything... I really hope we can just get over this and move on and I know for a 100% fact after I post this comment I'm gonna get shat on by a lot of people, but please lets just enjoy each other and have fun. I'm not respected by the NW Community but lets please drop it thanks.You're clearly new around here. This is the politics thread, and this thread is meant for stuff like this. Just because you want to stick up for your reg leader's perverted sense of "higher IQ" and his upper intelligence when realistically he's failed to prove anything to this forum.
Now, hopefully leftist globalism doesn't destroy Europe before its too late. Continue standing strong Poland, and your friends in Eastern Europe! Don't let refugees in if you don't want them!
But seriously, this thread is for actual talk, not the senseless banter which you are known for. Keep your shit off of it.
Funny thing is... Even if you don't believe in global warming (of which there are far more sceptics than climate change) or climate change in general, you'd have to be a complete science denier to say humanity isn't destroying this planet.
I mean, everything that causes climate change is also doing something else to harm this planet (acidifying ocean as an example).
Even if you don't believe in that, renewable energy is a must since we're not going to last much longer on carbon-based fuel from fossil sources.
And if you deny that.... Well you're either overoptimistic about space travel or you should start primary school.
I do not need to prove a point when your idiotic arguments make the point for me. I could type out 10 pages of reasoning but no matter how much i type or whatever facts/evidence i provide it wont magically cure your retardation and make your brain start working properly.
I think the main current issue is that Trump wants to ignore climate change & renewable energy altogether and go back to "clean coal".
Even going as far as to cut almost all government research on the subject.
I do not need to prove a point when your idiotic arguments make the point for me. I could type out 10 pages of reasoning but no matter how much i type or whatever facts/evidence i provide it wont magically cure your retardation and make your brain start working properly.
Shut up, you literally think Paladins is better than Overwatch. Everything that comes out of your mouth is nonsense. Please make an argument so you can get thrashed.I think the main current issue is that Trump wants to ignore climate change & renewable energy altogether and go back to "clean coal".
Even going as far as to cut almost all government research on the subject.
Taking the focus away from climate change & renewable energy =/= ignoring it. It just is not one of his top concerns, nor should it be.
Stop. Literally every-time you post I can literally visual you frothing at the mouth. You can call it little man syndrome, but the only little man here is you. Anytime someone tells you the truth about how you (and for the most part, your whole regiment) are trash at NW, you throw out pages of rants clawing at whatever small achievements you managed to scrap together. I alone have probably accomplished more than your whole regiment, and that is pretty sad.
Please, you are gonna have to do better than that my boy.
Please take regimental fights off this thread, Marceaux and Apoc. Discuss politics or nothing at all.
I do not need to prove a point when your idiotic arguments make the point for me. I could type out 10 pages of reasoning but no matter how much i type or whatever facts/evidence i provide it wont magically cure your retardation and make your brain start working properly.We're not running out of carbon based fuels, so I'm not quite sure what you're talking about there. We will be able to use oil and other fuels for a long time to come. And to point at the USA and Europe as the problems for climate change is unrealistic and really just childish, isn't it. The problem is that even with this Paris accord, with climate change efforts, that the big problems come from China and Russia. China will not hinder itself like the USA has for the past years in the name of the world, or the environment, so your best bet is to just adapt to the new climate. Russia and China are both guilty about lying on how much they're polluting, and it seems like the international community doesn't care about them, but when the U.S. puts serious strains on its economy for multiple years in an attempt to reduce a tiny amount of emissions, its ridiculous. Any progress the world tries to make is completely reversed by China alone, so until they change nothing will change. No, you cannot SJW your way into China and force them to change -- they won't. You can't ask them to save the planet, because they'll talk the talk and won't take any action. The US is acting in it's best interest for its own people by leaving the Paris accord, and if you think it's not for the best of America then you're just wrong.Funny thing is... Even if you don't believe in global warming (of which there are far more sceptics than climate change) or climate change in general, you'd have to be a complete science denier to say humanity isn't destroying this planet.
I mean, everything that causes climate change is also doing something else to harm this planet (acidifying ocean as an example).
Even if you don't believe in that, renewable energy is a must since we're not going to last much longer on carbon-based fuel from fossil sources.
And if you deny that.... Well you're either overoptimistic about space travel or you should start primary school.
^ This
The problem is this, do you do what is better for the world or for your country. If no nation chooses the world then we all die eventually and no countries win.
I do not need to prove a point when your idiotic arguments make the point for me. I could type out 10 pages of reasoning but no matter how much i type or whatever facts/evidence i provide it wont magically cure your retardation and make your brain start working properly.We're not running out of carbon based fuels, so I'm not quite sure what you're talking about there. We will be able to use oil and other fuels for a long time to come. And to point at the USA and Europe as the problems for climate change is unrealistic and really just childish, isn't it. The problem is that even with this Paris accord, with climate change efforts, that the big problems come from China and Russia. China will not hinder itself like the USA has for the past years in the name of the world, or the environment, so your best bet is to just adapt to the new climate. Russia and China are both guilty about lying on how much they're polluting, and it seems like the international community doesn't care about them, but when the U.S. puts serious strains on its economy for multiple years in an attempt to reduce a tiny amount of emissions, its ridiculous. Any progress the world tries to make is completely reversed by China alone, so until they change nothing will change. No, you cannot SJW your way into China and force them to change -- they won't. You can't ask them to save the planet, because they'll talk the talk and won't take any action. The US is acting in it's best interest for its own people by leaving the Paris accord, and if you think it's not for the best of America then you're just wrong.Funny thing is... Even if you don't believe in global warming (of which there are far more sceptics than climate change) or climate change in general, you'd have to be a complete science denier to say humanity isn't destroying this planet.
I mean, everything that causes climate change is also doing something else to harm this planet (acidifying ocean as an example).
Even if you don't believe in that, renewable energy is a must since we're not going to last much longer on carbon-based fuel from fossil sources.
And if you deny that.... Well you're either overoptimistic about space travel or you should start primary school.
^ This
China sees the strategic relevance of investing in renewable energy. Something the Dutch military is only starting to grasp now... still a ways ahead of the rest of NATO though.? More like the Chinese are tired of their terrible air quality (http://www.popsci.com/why-is-smog-in-china-so-bad).
As far as I know nuclear isn't currently renewable.
Nuclear energy is the way too go, and we don't have smog pollution on any scale close to China. There are so many nuclear plants on the east coast
Nuclear energy is the way too go, and we don't have smog pollution on any scale close to China. There are so many nuclear plants on the east coast
(https://www.ccair.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/LA-smog.jpg)
"On any scale close to China"
Lol that's nothing Marceaux
"On any scale close to China"
Lol that's nothing Marceaux
Nuclear energy is the way too go, and we don't have smog pollution on any scale close to China. There are so many nuclear plants on the east coast
(https://www.ccair.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/LA-smog.jpg)
False - https://gispub.epa.gov/air/trendsreport/2016/"On any scale close to China"
Lol that's nothing Marceaux
Clearly its nothing close to China. But it is getting worse and this could happen in a variety of cities across the country if we do not switch to alternative energy sources and cleaner/healthier standards across the board.
Do you think its ok to continue bad trends until a problem arises? Why not be proactive and prevent it before it happens?
False - https://gispub.epa.gov/air/trendsreport/2016/"On any scale close to China"
Lol that's nothing Marceaux
Clearly its nothing close to China. But it is getting worse and this could happen in a variety of cities across the country if we do not switch to alternative energy sources and cleaner/healthier standards across the board.
Do you think its ok to continue bad trends until a problem arises? Why not be proactive and prevent it before it happens?
Let's break this downFalse - https://gispub.epa.gov/air/trendsreport/2016/"On any scale close to China"
Lol that's nothing Marceaux
Clearly its nothing close to China. But it is getting worse and this could happen in a variety of cities across the country if we do not switch to alternative energy sources and cleaner/healthier standards across the board.
Do you think its ok to continue bad trends until a problem arises? Why not be proactive and prevent it before it happens?
So you think the US is perfect and clean? Do you not think we can do better? Do you not believe change as a whole is necessary for the countries of the world to advance? I guess you prefer the barbaric world we have atm and are content with maintaining the idiocy that goes on across the globe.
I just fail to see your point of view completely, you constantly defend actions that will have harmful repercussions for every living creature on this planet. Are financial gains for the US that important to you as an individual human being?
I am genuinely not trying to argue with or trigger you i just do not see where you stand really.
Let's break this downFalse - https://gispub.epa.gov/air/trendsreport/2016/"On any scale close to China"
Lol that's nothing Marceaux
Clearly its nothing close to China. But it is getting worse and this could happen in a variety of cities across the country if we do not switch to alternative energy sources and cleaner/healthier standards across the board.
Do you think its ok to continue bad trends until a problem arises? Why not be proactive and prevent it before it happens?
So you think the US is perfect and clean? Do you not think we can do better? Do you not believe change as a whole is necessary for the countries of the world to advance? I guess you prefer the barbaric world we have atm and are content with maintaining the idiocy that goes on across the globe.
I just fail to see your point of view completely, you constantly defend actions that will have harmful repercussions for every living creature on this planet. Are financial gains for the US that important to you as an individual human being?
I am genuinely not trying to argue with or trigger you i just do not see where you stand really.No country is perfect or clean. In fact, the poorer the country gets, the less clean it is, so I think we can do better through technological advancement and innovation, and if perfection isn't possible, at least we can get close. Idk what you mean by saying barbaric - what's barbaric to you that relates to pollution? Dung fires and burning sticks for heat because you can't afford energy? Or nuclear fuel that provides clean power that fuels the economy that drives innovation? I prefer the latter, thanks. I don't really think "change" should harm the economy if the economy drives change.SpoilerSo you think the US is perfect and clean? Do you not think we can do better? Do you not believe change as a whole is necessary for the countries of the world to advance? I guess you prefer the barbaric world we have atm and are content with maintaining the idiocy that goes on across the globe.[close]What am I defending? Trump getting out of the Paris agreement when the US didn't even ratify Kyoto but yet managed to reduce emissions at record levels? Or advocating caution in abandoning the energy sector? You're being overly dramatic - who is being killed by taking the US out of the Paris agreement? That is not a logical argument or connection in any sense of the word.SpoilerI just fail to see your point of view completely, you constantly defend actions that will have harmful repercussions for every living creature on this planet. Are financial gains for the US that important to you as an individual human being?[close]Well, that's what an argument looks like, but who am I to know, all I do is source statistics anywaysSpoilerI am genuinely not trying to argue with or trigger you i just do not see where you stand really.[close]
Spoiler"Firstly overall i am not being specific to the Paris agreement or energy. Although i feel strongly we should have went along with it."[close]
Then what specifically are you talking about?Spoiler"I just see you deny things without putting your pov out there. So what is your suggestion then for environmental policies not only stateside but globally and the future of energy? Because it seems like you support every thing that comes out of Trump and his administration. And that is where i have a problem."[close]
It doesn't seem you like you've read my previous posts. I'd also like to know where I said that I support everything that comes out of Trump and his administration. Otherwise you're putting words into my mouth.Spoiler"My opinion is fact and no one or nothing has any argument against it. Because i heard this or i read that. Or Trump said this." You refuse to even consider the opposition or put thought behind it before you jump up to defend the things you think to be true. You seem unwilling to discuss and consider alternatives."[close]
All I have done is present facts. What are you refuting here? I don't understand - all I've done is show why you're wrong in saying the US has a damaged environment that's getting worse. What have I heard and what have I read? And where are you getting all this???? When did I quote Trump?????????????? What am I refusing to consider or discuss?????????????????????????
Spoiler"Firstly overall i am not being specific to the Paris agreement or energy. Although i feel strongly we should have went along with it."[close]
Then what specifically are you talking about?Spoiler"I just see you deny things without putting your pov out there. So what is your suggestion then for environmental policies not only stateside but globally and the future of energy? Because it seems like you support every thing that comes out of Trump and his administration. And that is where i have a problem."[close]
It doesn't seem you like you've read my previous posts. I'd also like to know where I said that I support everything that comes out of Trump and his administration. Otherwise you're putting words into my mouth.Spoiler"My opinion is fact and no one or nothing has any argument against it. Because i heard this or i read that. Or Trump said this." You refuse to even consider the opposition or put thought behind it before you jump up to defend the things you think to be true. You seem unwilling to discuss and consider alternatives."[close]
All I have done is present facts. What are you refuting here? I don't understand - all I've done is show why you're wrong in saying the US has a damaged environment that's getting worse. What have I heard and what have I read? And where are you getting all this???? When did I quote Trump?????????????? What am I refusing to consider or discuss?????????????????????????
You are denying with anything possible that the US is damaging its environment, which it is and will now be worse due to Trump having no care at all for the environment and protecting it "Clean Coal etc". And you are basing your opinion directly off the ideas and plans presented by Trump and have continued to defend those actions without giving any merit or credibility to the other sides concerns. Which is where my problem arises.
"You are denying with anything possible that the US is damaging its environment"SpoilerSpoiler"Firstly overall i am not being specific to the Paris agreement or energy. Although i feel strongly we should have went along with it."[close]
Then what specifically are you talking about?Spoiler"I just see you deny things without putting your pov out there. So what is your suggestion then for environmental policies not only stateside but globally and the future of energy? Because it seems like you support every thing that comes out of Trump and his administration. And that is where i have a problem."[close]
It doesn't seem you like you've read my previous posts. I'd also like to know where I said that I support everything that comes out of Trump and his administration. Otherwise you're putting words into my mouth.Spoiler"My opinion is fact and no one or nothing has any argument against it. Because i heard this or i read that. Or Trump said this." You refuse to even consider the opposition or put thought behind it before you jump up to defend the things you think to be true. You seem unwilling to discuss and consider alternatives."[close]
All I have done is present facts. What are you refuting here? I don't understand - all I've done is show why you're wrong in saying the US has a damaged environment that's getting worse. What have I heard and what have I read? And where are you getting all this???? When did I quote Trump?????????????? What am I refusing to consider or discuss?????????????????????????
You are denying with anything possible that the US is damaging its environment, which it is and will now be worse due to Trump having no care at all for the environment and protecting it "Clean Coal etc". And you are basing your opinion directly off the ideas and plans presented by Trump and have continued to defend those actions without giving any merit or credibility to the other sides concerns. Which is where my problem arises.[close]
I'd like to know where I do that.
"which it is and will now be worse due to Trump having no care at all for the environment and protecting it "Clean Coal etc"."
You're ignoring the trends and statistics. I bet next year the emissions will continue to fall, as they have for the last 20 years.
"And you are basing your opinion directly off the ideas and plans presented by Trump"
I'd like to know where you see me do that
"have continued to defend those actions without giving any merit or credibility to the other sides concerns."
Why do I have to? You haven't presented any evidence to give me reason to
Congratulations Marceaux, you've rustled all 130 of my jimmies.
First of all, saying that the earth hasn't warmed in 14 years isn't me being an uninformed dingus - it's a paraphrase of the IPCC's 5th assesment report's findings on warming, which were confirmed by basically everyone in saying that the earth's average temperature has not gone up since late 1990's - here's a good article from The Economist explaining the hiatus: http://www.economist.com/news/science-and-technology/21598610-slowdown-rising-temperatures-over-past-15-years-goes-being
Now, you talk about consensus. It's always thrown around that there's a huge consensus among the science community that global warming is anthropogenic and humans, mostly in the form of C02 emissions, are the cause. As Politifact says, it's a lot broader than that:From the limited means we have to survey world temperature, we can say with relative confidence two things: that A) the earth is warming and B) human activity does cause warming. Climate skeptics do not disagree with this statement - why challenge basic data?Spoiler(https://i.gyazo.com/5debac155892facf0c1c107c439747ef.png)[close]good forbes articlehttps://www.forbes.com/sites/alexepstein/2015/01/06/97-of-climate-scientists-agree-is-100-wrong/#7fa552423f9f[close]politifact articlehttp://www.politifact.com/virginia/statements/2016/apr/04/don-beyer/don-beyer-says-97-percent-scientists-believe-human/[close]
What climate skeptics challenge is the effect this will have on society, how accurately we can model climate changes, and whether treaties like Paris and Kyoto will be effective for the environment and for the economy. A perfect example of this is the Green Energy Act in Ontario, which crippled our energy infrastructure, drove away industry, made Ontarians at times pay triple the cost they used to pay to give subsidies to energy providers that only provide 2 percent of their total power, and put the province in immeasurable debt. Climate skeptics think we shouldn't bankrupt overselves on the altar of questionable climate models. Here's a good article that you should read on this topic:if you say national review is a poor source without reading the article i'm banning youhttp://www.nationalreview.com/article/447215/climate-change-activists-science-deniers-environmentalism-public-policy[close]
But I'm just a stupid science denier.
More London attacks. A shame some Europeans (not all) still fail to address radical Islam as a real and actual threat. Oh and I guess our travel alert was justified after all (since I last posted it lol)
More London attacks. A shame some Europeans (not all) still fail to address radical Islam as a real and actual threat. Oh and I guess our travel alert was justified after all (since I last posted it lol)SpoilerRly makes you think (https://i.redditmedia.com/ABX2RSOfGDrl5XcdS5T-a9yGpJAputVI5kqr8o5jWvQ.jpg?w=490&s=046024523768d926fb8addef2f5306fa)[close]
More London attacks. A shame some Europeans (not all) still fail to address radical Islam as a real and actual threat. Oh and I guess our travel alert was justified after all (since I last posted it lol)Is this really the time for an "I told you so"? No wonder no one likes you.
More London attacks. A shame some Europeans (not all) still fail to address radical Islam as a real and actual threat. Oh and I guess our travel alert was justified after all (since I last posted it lol)
Is this really the time for an "I told you so"? No wonder no one likes you.
Well it is Ramadan... so it's been at an increase due to "celebrations".
people actually read the Atlantic?More London attacks. A shame some Europeans (not all) still fail to address radical Islam as a real and actual threat. Oh and I guess our travel alert was justified after all (since I last posted it lol)
Radical Islam is a threat in the middle east they don't scare me here.
https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2016/07/iraq-terrorism-isis-world/489974/
More London attacks. A shame some Europeans (not all) still fail to address radical Islam as a real and actual threat. Oh and I guess our travel alert was justified after all (since I last posted it lol)
Radical Islam is a threat in the middle east they don't scare me here.
https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2016/07/iraq-terrorism-isis-world/489974/
More London attacks. A shame some Europeans (not all) still fail to address radical Islam as a real and actual threat. Oh and I guess our travel alert was justified after all (since I last posted it lol)
Radical Islam is a threat in the middle east they don't scare me here.
https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2016/07/iraq-terrorism-isis-world/489974/
Not a threat in europe cause they havent managed to kill as many children yet so we should ignore it and wait until one plot succeeds in killing thousands. Bold strategy cotton lets see if it pays off.
More London attacks. A shame some Europeans (not all) still fail to address radical Islam as a real and actual threat. Oh and I guess our travel alert was justified after all (since I last posted it lol)
Radical Islam is a threat in the middle east they don't scare me here.
https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2016/07/iraq-terrorism-isis-world/489974/
Not a threat in europe cause they havent managed to kill as many children yet so we should ignore it and wait until one plot succeeds in killing thousands. Bold strategy cotton lets see if it pays off.
More like I don't think they're a threat because they can't achieve anything but killing some people (which in itself horrible of course) since they'll never be able to create a caliphate or topple a regieme here.
More London attacks. A shame some Europeans (not all) still fail to address radical Islam as a real and actual threat. Oh and I guess our travel alert was justified after all (since I last posted it lol)
Radical Islam is a threat in the middle east they don't scare me here.
https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2016/07/iraq-terrorism-isis-world/489974/
Not a threat in europe cause they havent managed to kill as many children yet so we should ignore it and wait until one plot succeeds in killing thousands. Bold strategy cotton lets see if it pays off.
More like I don't think they're a threat because they can't achieve anything but killing some people (which in itself is horrible of course) since they'll never be able to create a caliphate or topple a regime here.
More London attacks. A shame some Europeans (not all) still fail to address radical Islam as a real and actual threat. Oh and I guess our travel alert was justified after all (since I last posted it lol)
Radical Islam is a threat in the middle east they don't scare me here.
https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2016/07/iraq-terrorism-isis-world/489974/
Well when certain people think it's a joke, it's obviously not. Sorry if it offended you, and no one likes me? No offense my political ideologies probably align with mostly everyone I hate, they don't like me cause of NW reg stuff bruhMore London attacks. A shame some Europeans (not all) still fail to address radical Islam as a real and actual threat. Oh and I guess our travel alert was justified after all (since I last posted it lol)Is this really the time for an "I told you so"? No wonder no one likes you.
damnWell when certain people think it's a joke, it's obviously not. Sorry if it offended you, and no one likes me? No offense my political ideologies probably align with mostly everyone I hate, they don't like me cause of NW reg stuff bruhMore London attacks. A shame some Europeans (not all) still fail to address radical Islam as a real and actual threat. Oh and I guess our travel alert was justified after all (since I last posted it lol)Is this really the time for an "I told you so"? No wonder no one likes you.
More like I don't think they're a threat because they can't achieve anything but killing some people (which in itself is horrible of course) since they'll never be able to create a caliphate or topple a regime here.
Jake i bet your not even registered to vote yet kid. I am a republican you fucking moron. And Trump isn't even a true republican but you think my criticism of him makes me left wing.Can we not lash out in anger when people critique you?
Jake i bet your not even registered to vote yet kid. I am a republican you fucking moron. And Trump isn't even a true republican but you think my criticism of him makes me left wing. Another stupid Trump follower spotted.This is bait ::) and I took it. AMA
Jake i bet your not even registered to vote yet kid. I am a republican you fucking moron. And Trump isn't even a true republican but you think my criticism of him makes me left wing.Can we not lash out in anger when people critique you?
Jake i bet your not even registered to vote yet kid. I am a republican you fucking moron. And Trump isn't even a true republican but you think my criticism of him makes me left wing.Can we not lash out in anger when people critique you?
"Left Wing Nut" ok criticism. Sure. Warn the person on the opposite end of your argument. Sure.
Jake i bet your not even registered to vote yet kid. I am a republican you fucking moron. And Trump isn't even a true republican but you think my criticism of him makes me left wing. Another stupid Trump follower spotted.This is bait ::) and I took it. AMA
Also, "everyone that disagrees with me is stupid" is your only arguement ever.
Jake i bet your not even registered to vote yet kid. I am a republican you fucking moron. And Trump isn't even a true republican but you think my criticism of him makes me left wing.Can we not lash out in anger when people critique you?
"Left Wing Nut" ok criticism. Sure. Warn the person on the opposite end of your argument. Sure.
Gunna stop you right there. This entire forum has been "Warn the person on the opposite end of your argument" for us "right wing" folks around here. Might not wanna pick that argument here.
"I'm going to make general statements The Post™." - Marceaux
"I'm going to make general statements The Post™." - Marceaux
How to post like Marceaux
- try to bait
- insult intelligence of anyone who disagrees with you
- get bitchslapped with stats and facts from theodin
- Insult their intelligence again
- make an intellectually smug statement with no evidence
- change the subject
- never actually respond to opponent's argument/stats
- repeat
Marceaux, why do you call yourself a republican? What views of your actually are right leaning? You seem to favor the left a lot more when it comes to anything we've discussed.He doesn't like taxes and red's his favourite colour
Marceaux, why do you call yourself a republican? What views of your actually are right leaning? You seem to favor the left a lot more when it comes to anything we've discussed.He doesn't like taxes and red's his favourite colour
Marceaux, why do you call yourself a republican? What views of your actually are right leaning? You seem to favor the left a lot more when it comes to anything we've discussed.Jake what are you Democratic or Republican out of curiosity?
Can't be Republican unless you have anti-muslim sentiment and don't care about renewable energy.kek.
I chose neither, and consider myself generally central with certain topics being right or left. For instance, women should have the choice on whether they have abortions or not.Marceaux, why do you call yourself a republican? What views of your actually are right leaning? You seem to favor the left a lot more when it comes to anything we've discussed.Jake what are you Democratic or Republican out of curiosity?
Let me be your abortion doctor please.I chose neither, and consider myself generally central with certain topics being right or left. For instance, women should have the choice on whether they have abortions or not.Marceaux, why do you call yourself a republican? What views of your actually are right leaning? You seem to favor the left a lot more when it comes to anything we've discussed.Jake what are you Democratic or Republican out of curiosity?
I chose neither, and consider myself generally central with certain topics being right or left. For instance, women should have the choice on whether they have abortions or not.Marceaux, why do you call yourself a republican? What views of your actually are right leaning? You seem to favor the left a lot more when it comes to anything we've discussed.Jake what are you Democratic or Republican out of curiosity?
More London attacks. A shame some Europeans (not all) still fail to address radical Islam as a real and actual threat. Oh and I guess our travel alert was justified after all (since I last posted it lol)Yeah thanks for the attacks USA goverment. Bit suspicious there isn't any attacks in USA.
More London attacks. A shame some Europeans (not all) still fail to address radical Islam as a real and actual threat. Oh and I guess our travel alert was justified after all (since I last posted it lol)Is this really the time for an "I told you so"? No wonder no one likes you.
(https://i.imgur.com/hLuHCTn.png)My dot was directly in the middle with 1 line to the right..
This... surprised me.
It's not about taking in terrorists. It's about saving fugitives from a wartorn country.
That might be but it's nothing like that here even if both leftists and rightists claims so. In Sweden we don't have any comprehensive integration policies which could quickly put migrants to work. The only party that have put forward such plans is the Liberals who sit on a steady 6%..That is why you need to stop accepting these migrants, develop a plan so that they don't keep disrupting your country, and then once you have policies in place allow them to enter if they're willing to work and contribute to your country. I don't understand how you could accept migrants knowingly not having jobs or housing for them, its almost like you're asking for trouble.
It's not about taking in terrorists. It's about saving fugitives from a wartorn country.
Except by the EU's own admission 60% are actually plain old economic migrants and 80% arent even from Syria.
You have an attacker who literally shows up on a documentary about jihadis next door and years later is allowed to carry this attack out. That's an even bigger problem, homegrown radicalization being fostered and not monitored at all
Obviously, when you have so many enemies as a nation, this is kinda what you can expect. 7 deaths is objectively not even interesting. More people have died within a single car crash, with less media coverage.
Obviously, when you have so many enemies as a nation, this is kinda what you can expect. 7 deaths is objectively not even interesting. More people have died within a single car crash, with less media coverage.
Obviously, when you have so many enemies as a nation, this is kinda what you can expect
7 deaths is objectively not even interesting
More people have died within a single car crash, with less media coverage.
Obviously, when you have so many enemies as a nation, this is kinda what you can expect. 7 deaths is objectively not even interesting. More people have died within a single car crash, with less media coverage.
I knew you were a moron when you started picking fights against Chilton, but this is just comedic. Those 7 deaths could have been avoided if people with your virtue-signalling brain-dead mindset weren't weighing on the minds of the authorities.
Its not like its pretty easy to crack down on what is causing these attacks tho *thinking emoji*Obviously, when you have so many enemies as a nation, this is kinda what you can expect. 7 deaths is objectively not even interesting. More people have died within a single car crash, with less media coverage.
I knew you were a moron when you started picking fights against Chilton, but this is just comedic. Those 7 deaths could have been avoided if people with your virtue-signalling brain-dead mindset weren't weighing on the minds of the authorities.
Sure, it could have been prevented, IF the attackers would have been discovered quicker, IF the intel agencies thought they were a legitimate threat, IF they'd've had the oppertunity to close the cell down. It has nothing to do with people having the same kind of brain (?) as I do.
As for June:
You go from the perspective of a random citizen. Of course they don't deserve this, nobody really does deserve to be killed randomly. OKay yes I was generalising a bit when it is something you can expect when you have so many enemies, but still, with the kind of terrorism that is out there, it isn't a matter of 'if', it's a matter of 'when' it is going to happen. This is not, in any way, meant to ignore the severity of terrorism as a whole. Still, All things considered, 7 deaths is not that much for a terror attack. So yes, in the broader scheme of thigs, it isn't worth much, in terms of the radical islamists 'winning a war against the West'.
Perhaps it may be a false comparison between car accidents and terrorism deaths, but truly, the terrorism we see isn't half as powerful as it could be.
There are incredibly easy ways of shutting down parts of a country and completely fucking up, for example, Wall Street, The capitol, JFK Airport or the Transatlantic Communications Cable.
I won't go into how, but you'll have to trust me, it's stupendously easy.
There would, however, not have to be a single death involved (of course, in the aftermatch the most vulnerable would die, or at least some of them).
This is the point I am trying to make, for the past 37.000 times terrorism came up.
It is not the goal of terrorists to target the weakest spots in out infrastructure, they don't seek for the most destructive ways to target our countries. They only mean to put fear into us.
To quote Thatcher (which is dodgy, I know)
"All attempts by terrorists to destroy democracy, will fail".
there is a truth to that, because 7, 22, 87, or even 137 people at a time, will not even put a minor dent in our society. But that ius only, if we won't let them achieve the soul purpose of their attacks: installing fear.
it is pretty hard to crack down on. You'd be waging a conventional war on an idea.Well everyone ignoring the fact that Islam is the cause for these attacks will SURELY help :) :)
It's estimated there are 23,000 Islamic extremists living in the UK.Hmm maybe you should have a British NSA 8)
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/huge-scale-of-terror-threat-revealed-uk-home-to-23-000-jihadists-3zvn58mhq
To monitor someone 24/7 it takes at minimum 12 officers, and perhaps as many as 20. 12 x 23,000 would be 276,000 officers. It's plainly impossible to have that many people working for MI5 (even more so when you consider that at its height the East German Stasi had 91,000 personnel).
It's estimated there are 23,000 Islamic extremists living in the UK.Hmm maybe you should have a British NSA 8)
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/huge-scale-of-terror-threat-revealed-uk-home-to-23-000-jihadists-3zvn58mhq
To monitor someone 24/7 it takes at minimum 12 officers, and perhaps as many as 20. 12 x 23,000 would be 276,000 officers. It's plainly impossible to have that many people working for MI5 (even more so when you consider that at its height the East German Stasi had 91,000 personnel).
Might help
Yes, more surveillance is the thing we need! Fuck rights of citizen, we need to protect them from the shit WE brought upon them! hahahahahahahahahahaIwannadiehahahahahahahahaIt's estimated there are 23,000 Islamic extremists living in the UK.Hmm maybe you should have a British NSA 8)
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/huge-scale-of-terror-threat-revealed-uk-home-to-23-000-jihadists-3zvn58mhq
To monitor someone 24/7 it takes at minimum 12 officers, and perhaps as many as 20. 12 x 23,000 would be 276,000 officers. It's plainly impossible to have that many people working for MI5 (even more so when you consider that at its height the East German Stasi had 91,000 personnel).
Might help
One guy was on a British TV program and was even confronted by counter-terrorism agents and still nothing happened. I doubt another agency would make a difference lol
One guy was on a British TV program and was even confronted by counter-terrorism agents and still nothing happened. I doubt another agency would make a difference lol
They'd have convicted him if they could have. Perhaps not enough evidence?
One guy was on a British TV program and was even confronted by counter-terrorism agents and still nothing happened. I doubt another agency would make a difference lol
They'd have convicted him if they could have. Perhaps not enough evidence?
There's more, though: the Moroccan-Italian was stopped trying to travel to Syria and was found with ISIS literature in his travel bag. He was placed on an Italian watch list and allowed back into the UK.
Did they really not have enough evidence that he may have been an extremist and take action?
We jailed 100 Americans in guantanemo during our wars because of ties to extremists, just do the same
Last time I checked, only humans are subject to humanitarian war laws. Subhumans are not.We jailed 100 Americans in guantanemo during our wars because of ties to extremists, just do the same
Yeah, but some regions of the world like to stick to humanitarian war law slightly more than others.
We jailed 100 Americans in guantanemo during our wars because of ties to extremists, just do the same
Limited government has always been, and remains to this day, the best form of protection for personal freedoms.
Limited government has always been, and remains to this day, the best form of protection for personal freedoms.
Has it? Like how slavery and institutionalized racism went away all by itself over the last two centuries in the USA?
He could have, considering his power rise was mostly due to propaganda and letting his people 'choose' their dictator. He sued the means in place provided by the state mostly making use of military success. That would still have been possible with a limited government.
Has it? Like how slavery and institutionalized racism went away all by itself over the last two centuries in the USA?
Yea affirmative action is pretty much a joke.Has it? Like how slavery and institutionalized racism went away all by itself over the last two centuries in the USA?
I'd like to see you sit down with an Asian American student and explain that he's going to have to work twice as hard as an African American student to get a good SAT result, but it's OK because institutionalized racism has gone away thanks to government introduced affirmative action.
Going slightly off topic - anyone been following the situation in the Phillipines?
Yes, considering minorities commit the most crimes against other minorities (African Americans), that in itself is its own problem. Politics is apart of that but not the solution nor will it ever effect anything really. It's the lack of education and upbringing in mostly dense populated areas such as inner cities that leads to a violent life. Not denying we still have racists, but the bigger issue is clearly black on black inner city crime.Yep. A nice example is how black people fear the police to death but the bottom line is that there's a huge chance they'll be killed by other black people rather then the police.
I think other Western countries have violence problems, too. It's also helpful to consider population density as a factor leading to crime.
Obviously there's a history of racism, but the clear majority of crimes committed against minorities are dohe by minorities.
Yes, considering minorities commit the most crimes against other minorities (African Americans), that in itself is its own problem. Politics is apart of that but not the solution nor will it ever effect anything really. It's the lack of education and upbringing in mostly dense populated areas such as inner cities that leads to a violent life. Not denying we still have racists, but the bigger issue is clearly black on black inner city crime.
Yes, considering minorities commit the most crimes against other minorities (African Americans), that in itself is its own problem. Politics is apart of that but not the solution nor will it ever effect anything really. It's the lack of education and upbringing in mostly dense populated areas such as inner cities that leads to a violent life. Not denying we still have racists, but the bigger issue is clearly black on black inner city crime.Yep. A nice example is how black people fear the police to death but the bottom line is that there's a huge chance they'll be killed by other black people rather then the police.
I don't really know how we can fix this but our inner cities are definitely in their worse state with the single motherhood rate, dropout rate, abortion rate, and rampant gang activity. I personally think we should just build a ton of covered basketball courts so the kids can hoop instead of shooting dope.
Gentrification is a solution, if applied properly. It's a vast success in the NL and Germanyno, it is not. It just pretty much moves the Problem, while making every inner city look like its been designed by a retarded Hipster architekt who just graduated
But it seems some of you do not live in the inner cities so how can you pretend to know the solution and also the cause of these problems. Go out and meet these people. Several of you talk like "black people" are some foreign species that you have never encountered personally besides seeing some b.s racist news or some YouTube videos of the hood. These people do have real issues and to constantly tell them otherwise is the reason half of them have issues. You are not in their shoes and most of you seem to have no real personal experiences with this side of life so why try to put your 2 cents in and tell them how to fix it.
See a few hood niggas and now all black people are against the police and are killing each other and degrading the inner cities with drugs etc. Whites have nothing to do with it... ::)
Honestly there are just as many trashy white people that contribute to the downfall of certain parts of cities and even neighborhoods outside of the cities as black people. And when you keep turning the blame towards one racial group of people you are in fact being racist and adding to the problem. It appears as if some of you live in nice suburbs far away from any of the real world things discussed here especially when regarding race. I live in pretty large diverse city and i can tell you moving people out of the city isn't going to just magically clean up their lives as the problem is not their urban surrounding. These problems and issues such as drug abuse and gang activity spread far out from the inner cities already. I have been in more dangerous places in neighborhoods outside of the city more times then when i was downtown.
But it seems some of you do not live in the inner cities so how can you pretend to know the solution and also the cause of these problems. Go out and meet these people. Several of you talk like "black people" are some foreign species that you have never encountered personally besides seeing some b.s racist news or some YouTube videos of the hood. These people do have real issues and to constantly tell them otherwise is the reason half of them have issues. You are not in their shoes and most of you seem to have no real personal experiences with this side of life so why try to put your 2 cents in and tell them how to fix it.
See a few hood niggas and now all black people are against the police and are killing each other and degrading the inner cities with drugs etc. Whites have nothing to do with it... ::)
Honestly there are just as many trashy white people that contribute to the downfall of certain parts of cities and even neighborhoods outside of the cities as black people. And when you keep turning the blame towards one racial group of people you are in fact being racist and adding to the problem. It appears as if some of you live in nice suburbs far away from any of the real world things discussed here especially when regarding race. I live in pretty large diverse city and i can tell you moving people out of the city isn't going to just magically clean up their lives as the problem is not their urban surrounding. These problems and issues such as drug abuse and gang activity spread far out from the inner cities already. I have been in more dangerous places in neighborhoods outside of the city more times then when i was downtown.
I find it disturbing just how eager you are to blame others, particularly outsiders and white people, for the problems of these gangsters. Bad parenting, poor economic decisions and a lack of respect for themselves and the law is what landed them in their dire situations. Refusing to address that the majority of a particular race is problematic because it's "racist" is politically correct nonsense. You cannot blame outsiders for the problems in the inner cities and then bar them from addressing the issue.
Are you aware that in case of blacks in the U.S., the underlying problem is not that blacks are violent, but that they're usually poor and the subject of systematic racism?From what system?
Just throwing ideas out there.
they're usually poor
the subject of systematic racism?
i win againaint that hard if you are simply right.
Are you aware that in case of blacks in the U.S., the underlying problem is not that blacks are violent, but that they're usually poor and the subject of systematic racism?From what system?
Just throwing ideas out there.
Oh please, it may have decreased over time, but certainly it is a remnant of government racism, and yes, this does go back to the '60s and '80s.
Oh please, it may have decreased over time, but certainly it is a remnant of government racism, and yes, this does go back to the '60s and '80s.
[citation needed]
That's a lot of claims and no supporting evidence. Still haven't told me which system is systematically racist.Oh please, it may have decreased over time, but certainly it is a remnant of government racism, and yes, this does go back to the '60s and '80s.
[citation needed]
Oh please, you need not a citation to now there wqas constructive racism just 40 years ago in the U.S. That sort of shit doesn't just erase after that short a time.
Are you aware that in case of blacks in the U.S., the underlying problem is not that blacks are violent, but that they're usually poor and the subject of systematic racism?From what system?
Just throwing ideas out there.
What's LA, for the non-Muricans here?Unless I'm mistaken (didn't watch the video, either) it's an abbreviation for Los Angeles?
Yeah, let's focus on that, instead of the Nazi-like behavior of these Trump-fans. Priorities.
By arming themselves I meant forming their own SA or whatever,Yeah, let's assume that they're stupid enough to attempt a political tactic that is illegal and will immediatly lose them political legitimacy due to the obvious Nazi resemblence. Then again, if they can get away with doing Hitler salutes and the English for 'Sieg Heil' without people like you thinking this is something to worry about, somehow I'm led to believe people like you will even at that point continue to defend them ("IT'S BECAUSE THEY ARE FORCED TO DEFEND THEMSELVES FROM THE SJW'S!!!11!") and state that they're not real Nazi's until they're actually shipping people off to the deathcamps.
Why is it that neo-Nazi's are (rightfully) disdained and suppressed when neo-Communists (with a much worse body count based on ideological history) are given an essentially free pass?QuoteBy arming themselves I meant forming their own SA or whatever,Yeah, let's assume that they're stupid enough to attempt a political tactic that is illegal and will immediatly lose them political legitimacy due to the obvious Nazi resemblence. Then again, if they can get away with doing Hitler salutes and the English for 'Sieg Heil' without people like you thinking this is something to worry about, somehow I'm led to believe people like you will even at that point continue to defend them ("IT'S BECAUSE THEY ARE FORCED TO DEFEND THEMSELVES FROM THE SJW'S!!!11!") and state that they're not real Nazi's until they're actually shipping people off to the deathcamps.
Yes, recent attacks in Europe have caused great loss of life, even if it's still a tiny fraction of total deaths in any given country. But then we aren't worried about school shootings here, nor gang killings, police shooting at traffic stops and so on.
I missed the bit about collectivism before, but it could just as easily be argued that Trump now follows the same propaganda (America First, eerily reminiscent of Deutschland uber alles?), or argue the opposite, that Hitler was actually dividing the nation up into Us and Them (dehumanising them too), which again could be related to Trump (de jure Americans being called Mexicans, wanting a national register of a religious group).
Hitler was actually dividing the nation up into Us and Them (dehumanising them too), which again could be related to Trump (de jure Americans being called Mexicans, wanting a national register of a religious group).
Whatever your views on socialism and the welfare state may be, they were not the root of Hitler's evil, only a populist method of acquiring power (even though he probably did genuinely believe them). In economic strife nations will always look to the left, hoping to be looked after by the government, while in prosperity they will want to shrug free of welfare states, saying they hold them back despite everything.
"State-sponsored social programmes" aren't some sort of integral part of Socialism you fucking imbecile.
Lemme dumb it down for you anyway:
On "Socialism is literally Hitler"
-Nazi Germany privatized industry whereas other countries at that time were nationalizing
-Hitler purged Left wingers in and out of his party
-Hitler was supported by capitalista.
During the 12 years of the Third Reich, government ownership expanded greatly into formerly private sectors of strategic industries: aviation, synthetic oil and rubber, aluminum, chemicals, iron and steel, and army equipment. The capital assets of state-owned industry doubled during this same period, whereby the nationalization caused state-ownership of companies to increase to over 500 businesses. Further, government finances for state-owned enterprises quadrupled from 1933 to 1943. Albert Speer in his memoirs remarked that “a kind of state socialism seemed to be gaining more and more ground” among many Nazi party functionaries, warning that Germany’s industry was becoming “the framework for a state-socialist economic order.”You can read the whole section for yourself but it's essentially a summary of the writings of RJ Overy and Richard Evans (personally I've only read Overy).
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Nazi_Germany#Pre-war_economy:_1933.E2.80.931939
https://www.thelocal.de/20170721/german-media-failed-to-report-refugee-crisis-honestly-study-claimsSo you are stating that the "Mainstream Media" lied to the people based on an article published in one of the biggest German Newspapers (="Mainstream Media")?
https://www.thelocal.de/20170721/german-media-failed-to-report-refugee-crisis-honestly-study-claims
Dont you people understand that there is no such thing Like "neutral" Media? Every Newspaper, specially in Germany,follows some Kind of political View.
Everyone is biased, no such thing as a neutral viewpoint, but don't try and pretend you're shocked that the German press by and large reported the migrant crisis poorly. Same happened in Sweden and other EU states.
For instance this article on a similar study from last year reached the same conclusions. It puts a laughable spin on it, essentially claiming the British press presented a range of viewpoints vs continental press which all said the same thing, which is for some reason bad for the UK (lmao, apparently press plurality is bad if they're not unified in defending a certain viewpoint): http://theconversation.com/uk-press-is-the-most-aggressive-in-reporting-on-europes-migrant-crisis-56083SpoilerMy favourite passage:
"But the most striking finding in our research is how polarised and aggressive British press reporting was compared to that of other countries.
In most countries, newspapers, whether left or right wing, tended to report using the same sources. They also featured the same kinds of themes and provided similar explanations and solutions to the crisis.
But the British press was different. While The Guardian and – to a lesser extent, the Daily Mirror – featured a range of humanitarian themes and sources sympathetic to the plight of refugees, the right-wing press consistently endorsed a hardline anti-refugee and migrant, Fortress Europe approach."[close]
So what was Merkel's solution?More migrants, i guess
So what was Merkel's solution?I can tell you that the german administration i working on handling all asylum applications at the moment. By far we got no major problems with refugees in Germany. Sure there are some of them who commit crimes, but i think that is normal in 1.000.000 human beeings. I do undestand that for you people outside of germany it seems like we got big Trouble with Refugees commiting crime, but always remember that a refugee harrasing a woman is way more interesting for a newspaper to write about, then thousands of refugees doing absolutely nothing wrong. So all in all we are doing fine and working on a way to integrate those thousands of people with working potential in our Job Market #wörk #wörk
So, the migrant crisis problem coud be simply overrated? And the the real situation is not that bad as shown?So what was Merkel's solution?I can tell you that the german administration i working on handling all asylum applications at the moment. By far we got no major problems with refugees in Germany. Sure there are some of them who commit crimes, but i think that is normal in 1.000.000 human beeings. I do undestand that for you people outside of germany it seems like we got big Trouble with Refugees commiting crime, but always remember that a refugee harrasing a woman is way more interesting for a newspaper to write about, then thousands of refugees doing absolutely nothing wrong. So all in all we are doing fine and working on a way to integrate those thousands of people with working potential in our Job Market #wörk #wörk
Not bad as shown as in non-german media. And if you dont believe me and think the country is a whole fucking mess atm, please note that there in only one major Party in Germany that doesnt supports refugees-welcome-politics in germany right now (the far right winges "Afd"), and they got only 7/8% in the latest polls, while the other big partys that support refugees-welcome-politics combine around 90% of the votes in the latest polls.So, the migrant crisis problem coud be simply overrated? And the the real situation is not that bad as shown?So what was Merkel's solution?I can tell you that the german administration i working on handling all asylum applications at the moment. By far we got no major problems with refugees in Germany. Sure there are some of them who commit crimes, but i think that is normal in 1.000.000 human beeings. I do undestand that for you people outside of germany it seems like we got big Trouble with Refugees commiting crime, but always remember that a refugee harrasing a woman is way more interesting for a newspaper to write about, then thousands of refugees doing absolutely nothing wrong. So all in all we are doing fine and working on a way to integrate those thousands of people with working potential in our Job Market #wörk #wörk
Well, i dont think that Germany is a mess, but i dont personally think, that flow of migrants in Europe wont cause the problems. Collisions of cultures, customs and religions wont maketheir integration process that smooth.sure there is a big potential for problems as you are saing, and i personally am not willing to dont let you think such thing. But what i am trying to say is: We got 1.000.000 refugees in round about one year here, and the world is still spinning. We are still living the same Way, we are handling the problem. And we wont loose our Culture, our Beliefs, our Way of Life. We are a strong democracy that is able to work with a lot of people coming with different culture etc. We did it in the 60ts with the turks/greeks, we did it in the 90s with the balcan people and we will do it with the syrians/mahgrebs
Lol, Merkel messed up with her migrant policies in 2015 don't event try to pretend there are no problems. She had to massively backtrack after several disastrous election results (and had to publicly humiliate herself by admitting she made mistakes in order to stave off a challenge to her leadership). She had to get tough and now says:
a) They are only here temporarily and have to go back when the war ends
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/germany/12132657/Merkel-warns-asylum-seekers-that-German-refuge-is-temporary.html
b) She's reduced to having to pay them off at £1000 a pop to leave the country.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/germany-offer-asylum-seekers-1200-euros-voluntarily-return-home-countries-refugees-crisis-merkel-a7561701.html
Oh and there's a backlog of 400,000 claims in the system but I'm sure as you say that everything is fine. I have a German friend who works as a government lawyer and got drafted in to help with the refugee system-she tells me the exact opposite of your 'everything is fine, nothing to see here' line. She says the whole thing is totally screwed, you've got mass fraud in the system, total chaos, ethnic/religious tensions within the shelters that frequently explode into violence, male 'refugees' frequently refusing to speak to her as she's a woman (management are now restricting female staff on 'frontline' duties as this is a recurring problem apparently), and people complaining that the streets aren't littered with gold as the smugglers had promised them. Indeed a migrant complained to her that he had 'lost everything' because he'd paid the smugglers £10,000 and wouldn't be able to get the money back and make a profit off coming to Germany.
The whole thing is perfectly encapsulated by this hilarious story from last year: http://www.reuters.com/article/us-europe-migrants-tourist-idUSKCN10J206
so why the hell they have to return to destroyed and devastated lands in their countries. I bet, those who came now will stay for awhile if not forever.
Is FSE ✔ the trans ban or ❌?
Some Murican, what was the previous vote that McCain supported?Not sure but the latest vote was a skinny vote, to repeal only certain provisions in obamacare. That vote failed, with 3 republicans voting against. It's a mess right now
I thought the video like a week ago of him walking in voting in favour of some bill or other was the whole repeal Obamacare thing, but now I hear he's voted against that bill. Were they two different bills?
American military is different.Is FSE ✔ the trans ban or ❌?
As someone who experienced people of different Sexual identity in the German army and served side by side with them without any problems, ❌ from me.
I have served with American, british, dutch, belgian, french,lithuanian, polish and even viatnamese soldiers (if you Wonder why: i was in a unit that trained Future Officers Up from the Rank of an Lieutenant) and let me Tell you: The people in the Military are all the Same Kind, No matter where they are from. And i can also Tell you that Most soldiers dont give a shit about how someone Looks Like, where he is from, what is is Sexual identy or anything Else that you can divide people with. As Long as the person does a good Job, No One cares.Some Murican, what was the previous vote that McCain supported?Not sure but the latest vote was a skinny vote, to repeal only certain provisions in obamacare. That vote failed, with 3 republicans voting against. It's a mess right now
I thought the video like a week ago of him walking in voting in favour of some bill or other was the whole repeal Obamacare thing, but now I hear he's voted against that bill. Were they two different bills?American military is different.Is FSE ✔ the trans ban or ❌?
As someone who experienced people of different Sexual identity in the German army and served side by side with them without any problems, ❌ from me.
Maybe their suicide rates are so high because people keep calling them mentally illMakes sense, they get bullied more leading to higher depression rates leading to higher suicides
VomBergen I'm a reservist in the Air Force here I know, but in my ROTC class let's just say it was definitely different then what you may think.. in the sense if someone was gay or trans they would definitely struggle more or have a sense of 'don't ask don't tell'. Again not in all instances, when it comes down to combat it doesn't matter what you look like or who you areOf course i never experienced high instances of US Military, so i will believe you on that.Maybe their suicide rates are so high because people keep calling them mentally illMakes sense, they get bullied more leading to higher depression rates leading to higher suicides
And btw Steven, I googled ICD-10 and it was started in the 80s and finished in 1992. It's probably not that good a source to use since modern attitudes have changed many people's opinions on transgender individuals. I'm sure, if WHO had a website in the 40s, being gay would have been listed as a mental illness. Doesn't mean that it is imo.
Edit: I may be wrong with the dates btw. That's just what a quick google search threw up
Maybe their suicide rates are so high because people keep calling them mentally illMakes sense, they get bullied more leading to higher depression rates leading to higher suicides
Trans people are mentally ill and clearly unfit to serve in the military.
Because if you were to be going by that standard, then every single European Nation-state from the 30s to the 80s would be fucking socialist.
Trans people are mentally ill and clearly unfit to serve in the military. Suicide attempt rates in the trans community is around 40% verses 3% in the population as a whole. I'm sure medical professionals on this thread will back me up given the World Health Organisation lists transsexualism as a gender identity disorder in its current edition of International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems (ICD-10): http://apps.who.int/classifications/icd10/browse/2016/en#/F60-F69Steven you're back to talking utter shit again.
These people need medical help rather than being encouraged to stay ill. That is all.
I don't know anything about Dutch politics Riddlez but I've heard the netherlands is socialist? Is that true?
Ah fair enough I must be thinking of somewhere else :)I don't know anything about Dutch politics Riddlez but I've heard the netherlands is socialist? Is that true?
I'm not entirely sure what counts as 'socialist state' in your books, but I'd argue the Netherlands isn't. Our current government are centre-right, classical liberals and conservatives. We do not have a single payer healthcare system like the UK, instead private insurance companies offer healthcare here. Our welfare system is extensive, but not as much as some of the Scandinavian models. Capitalism reigns supreme, the Netherlands is in fact a tax haven for a lot of international businesses.
Capitalism reigns supreme, the Netherlands is in fact a tax haven for a lot of international businesses.
Capitalism reigns supreme, the Netherlands is in fact a tax haven for a lot of international businesses.
Sounds like a country done right, especially given the hefty tax rates in the rest of Scandinavia.
Netherlands and "the Rest of scandinavia"? ???Capitalism reigns supreme, the Netherlands is in fact a tax haven for a lot of international businesses.
Sounds like a country done right, especially given the hefty tax rates in the rest of Scandinavia.
Netherlands and "the Rest of scandinavia"? ???Capitalism reigns supreme, the Netherlands is in fact a tax haven for a lot of international businesses.
Sounds like a country done right, especially given the hefty tax rates in the rest of Scandinavia.
I was mainly talking about that the netherlads are part of the benelux states in central europe while scandinavia is in northern europe :DNetherlands and "the Rest of scandinavia"? ???Capitalism reigns supreme, the Netherlands is in fact a tax haven for a lot of international businesses.
Sounds like a country done right, especially given the hefty tax rates in the rest of Scandinavia.
Late night post, *Scandinavia hahaha
I'm really confused who fraudbear is talking to. Did I miss a ww2 argument? 😕
The Netherlands can indeed be counted as socialist.
If you haven't noticed, just a little further down the page fetishism and voyeurism are described, but I don't feel that anyone here would classify people with those particular sexual interests as mentally ill.
There is no evidence that transgender individuals have any "weakness" in them any more than any other soldier. You're making baseless claims that they are "not much use in combat". I'm curious as to where you're getting that from, as it sounds like a personal anecdote, but I somehow doubt that.
Moving on, even if it were a mental health condition, you're essentially saying that nobody with a mental health problem may serve in the military, regardless of impact on performance.
What about everyone who's depressed? What about people with dysthymia? What about low mood? You're going to exclude 90% of all military applicants if you go down that road.
I like the way labour want to do things. The thing is that they get slated for taxing corporations too much even though their new plans will still have it at the lowest in the G7
The mental health of transsexuals is questionable
The thing is though is that Labour's manifesto was entirely costed and the conservatives wasn't. Probably cos all they wanted to do was cut everything ::)
His policies give equal opportunity and makes sure everyone in our society is looked after, something which a civilised country should pride itself on.
Lol what-you're as confused as Bernie Sanders (also a social democrat who thinks he's a socialist). Dutch system is a centrist model that leans towards social democracy. I don't think it's recognised as a socialist country by Socialist International or any other such organisation. As you say yourself your healthcare system is based on the free market for a start...
I meant that the Tories, at best, are neoliberals. I like to think that them using the name "Conservatives" is a bad joke on their part.I get that it's a lot to aim for but better to strive for something good than never try at allHis policies give equal opportunity and makes sure everyone in our society is looked after, something which a civilised country should pride itself on.
That's easier said than done. I think he has a habit of making a lot of empty promises. Live liberal, vote conservative ;)
The mental health of transsexuals is questionable
That is a massive blanket statement and I really wanna how you got to that conclusion.
When it comes to children and transsexualism I think making them undergo treatment is child abuse. Again the studies I've read suggest that 70-80% of children with transsexual feelings and gender confusion stop being confused by the time they're adults. Knowing that I think any doctor who administers puberty delaying drugs to a confused child is guilty of child abuse.
I would also like to see sources that are showing 'weaknesses' of transgenders in the military. Although I will say there are obviously enough sources for weaknesses with women in combat roles, that I would say are more important to look at than the transgender issue.Trans people are mentally ill and clearly unfit to serve in the military. Suicide attempt rates in the trans community is around 40% verses 3% in the population as a whole. I'm sure medical professionals on this thread will back me up given the World Health Organisation lists transsexualism as a gender identity disorder in its current edition of International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems (ICD-10): http://apps.who.int/classifications/icd10/browse/2016/en#/F60-F69Steven you're back to talking utter shit again.
These people need medical help rather than being encouraged to stay ill. That is all.
The ICD is purely a method by which peoples' overall condition is described, including social situation (where under sexuality). If you haven't noticed, just a little further down the page fetishism and voyeurism are described, but I don't feel that anyone here would classify people with those particular sexual interests as mentally ill.
You're not encouraging them to stay "ill" by allowing them to serve in the armed forces, nor can any "medical help" short of surgery impact them. If you recall we stopped the whole "gay conversion" thing a while ago when we realised it was torture and (like torture) achieved nothing.
There is no evidence that transgender individuals have any "weakness" in them any more than any other soldier. You're making baseless claims that they are "not much use in combat". I'm curious as to where you're getting that from, as it sounds like a personal anecdote, but I somehow doubt that.
Moving on, even if it were a mental health condition, you're essentially saying that nobody with a mental health problem may serve in the military, regardless of impact on performance.
What about everyone who's depressed? What about people with dysthymia? What about low mood? You're going to exclude 90% of all military applicants if you go down that road.
So what're your thoughts on the ban Karth?I think it's wrong, this is a full ban on transgender, forget combat roles, but if any American wants to serve their country they should be given that opportunity (as long as they pass the obvious physical and other requirements). That said I'm not knowledgable on people who identify as transgender and I think the ban was geared more towards the government not being able to pay for transgender military personnel healthcare costs..
I think the ban was geared more towards the government not being able to pay for transgender military personnel healthcare costs..
Pennsylvania most hunters, sounds about right (went hunting yesterday with my new Remington lmfao)Michigan hunting>Pennsylvania hunting
It's fine, we have been occupying Germany for decades, will keep an eye on them
That is so next levelIt's fine, we have been occupying Germany for decades, will keep an eye on them
Given that the vast majority of white Americans share a German ancestry, perhaps it is them that have been occupying you?¿?¿?¿?
Meh I am all for Germany being allies... But that is more because of cultural and doctrine similiarities with us than anything else.
I do not know how much of this is publicly obivous, but Germany's mandates where they are deployed, are ridiculous.
Usually mandates are thoughly devided like this (NATO setting):
- The U.S. is veerywhere and is involved in every aspect of the war
- So are the Britis
- The French do pretty much whatever the fuck they want. Usually Belgium plays along
- THe Italians only do something if they care.
- The Dutch (and usually Denmark as wel) have a small yet significant contribution, and are peculiarly free in their mandate. The Dutch get spammed with Air Mission requests from the Brits and US.\
- Somewhere Australia is doing their thing. Nobody knows what they're doing there and they are usually GB's bitch. A common relieve party for the Dutch, Germans, or English
- Germany is technically there, but their mandates are sooo narrow they are usually not even allowed off-base.
Even more reason why an integrated EU military cannot work as it relies too much on Germany. Come back in 50+ years when Germans are less ashamed of 1914-1918 and 1933-1945.
Even more reason why an integrated EU military cannot work as it relies too much on Germany. Come back in 50+ years when Germans are less ashamed of 1914-1918 and 1933-1945.1914-18, nothing to be ashamed of really except a not very bright emperor.
Even more reason why an integrated EU military cannot work as it relies too much on Germany. Come back in 50+ years when Germans are less ashamed of 1914-1918 and 1933-1945.1914-18, nothing to be ashamed of really except a not very bright emperor.
I wish the EU would focus more on economic cooperation and interfere less with politics of individual member states. That is kind of what it was founded for, and "peace in Europe" of course.
This isn't a historical discussion-thread.We're discussing something which directly relates to the reasons behind Germany's political motivations in modern-day Europe. Not like it's off topic.
Wait so remind me again why we don't want the people in charge of military intervention to be cautious?
I seem to recall something involving Iraq a little while ago?
I wish the EU would focus more on economic cooperation and interfere less with politics of individual member states. That is kind of what it was founded for, and "peace in Europe" of course.
Pretty much all the EU has focused on is economy-related and they haven't really meddled directly with national politics... because they can't. Of course they have made comments about it in parliament but nobody really listens to that. The only thing they've begun to really interfere with is Poland, adn that shit is from last week.
Yeah because that is how you Work in a guerilla war man. We are Not Back in fucking Vietnam where you Just Napalm the Shit Out of a Village because you suspect enemys in there. In most cases you can Not Tell one of the afghans is a Taliban because they Look the Same Like civilians apart from theire AK-47. So If you dont See a weapon you cant Just shoot them. And that is Just for the people without weapons. When i was in the army our Sarge, who has been to Afghanistan several Times, showed us a Video he filmed on a patrol: Because it is a Civil/Guerilla war Most of the people there carry weapons with them to protect themself in a dailly Routine (remembers me of some big Nation in the northern Part of the American continent eh?).Wait so remind me again why we don't want the people in charge of military intervention to be cautious?
I seem to recall something involving Iraq a little while ago?
There's cautious and then there's German level cautious-even when they get deployed the kind of restraints they're under makes it pointless them being there (in Afghanistan they weren't allowed to pro-actively engage the enemy and had to wait to be shot at first).
(in Afghanistan they weren't allowed to pro-actively engage the enemy and had to wait to be shot at first).
We are Not Back in fucking Vietnam where you Just Napalm the Shit Out of a Village because you suspect enemys in there.
Then they are free to leave. Nobody forces membership upon anyone.
No, it's the European way or the highway.
Nobody fucking likes British people anyway Steven
At first I thought Steven quoted thisNobody fucking likes British people anyway Steven
The Poles gladly accept every financial benefit they can from the EU but are unwilling to also accept also some of the more negative aspects of the EU. That's not how it works, you're in all the way or you're not. If you don't want to be in all the way, you leave. It's what the UK did.
Uhm... you do know the current Polish government is quickly going towards an autocracy ya?
The Dutch won't pay. Not much they'll be able to do about it
Budget changes must be made by consensus, so we have veto power. ::)
We just pay like 3,5 % of the European Budget anyway. In fact, I think that will even go down considering we no longer have to pay the British rebate.
Is there even one MEP who doesn't want the moving around stopped? It's such an easy thing to shoot at for EU-haters, yet it's a result of national stupidity, not European wishes.Isn't that the core issue with the EU - easily hijacked by individual national stupidity that affects the whole union?
Pretty much.The solution to that would seem to me to be increased national freedom and more decentralization to avoid portions of Belgium being able to dictate trade policy.
Is there even one MEP who doesn't want the moving around stopped? It's such an easy thing to shoot at for EU-haters, yet it's a result of national stupidity, not European wishes.Isn't that the core issue with the EU - easily hijacked by individual national stupidity that affects the whole union?
Is there even one MEP who doesn't want the moving around stopped? It's such an easy thing to shoot at for EU-haters, yet it's a result of national stupidity, not European wishes.
Pretty much.The solution to that would seem to me to be increased national freedom and more decentralization to avoid portions of Belgium being able to dictate trade policy.
Not just about vacations though is it. Think trade.
Was talking to a family member today who works for EDF. He says that if we leave the EU we'll be forced to renegotiate certain treaties with separate nations in regards to our nuclear fuel. This will take time and, in the mean time, we'll apparently lose a significant portion of our energy production.I mean, a few member states already crippled their energy industries in the name of green energy, so if you're worried about losing energy capability blaming any potential EU exit is a definite cop out..
Hardly a cop out. The causes of the aforementioned energy loss is directly related to exit from the EU.Was talking to a family member today who works for EDF. He says that if we leave the EU we'll be forced to renegotiate certain treaties with separate nations in regards to our nuclear fuel. This will take time and, in the mean time, we'll apparently lose a significant portion of our energy production.I mean, a few member states already crippled their energy industries in the name of green energy, so if you're worried about losing energy capability blaming any potential EU exit is a definite cop out..
Major win for Poland/HungaryWhat major win exactly? Poland is about to turn into a undemocratic dictatorial state ruled by the PiS party (voted by 19% of adult population, with many regret) The PiS party itself is ruled by a single guy, Lech Kaczyński, any negative voice within their party gets removed, by now he only has Yes men running around him..
https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/837904/European-Union-EU-tries-mend-fences-East-West-migration
The worst thing you can do is draw a line in the sand, make a threat (Article 7), and then don't go through with it when it's crossed. I'd say the increasing East/West divide is a bigger problem for the EU than Brexit.
A hysterical reaction to what is basically just PiS taking on cultural Marxism in Poland.
A hysterical reaction to what is basically just PiS taking on cultural Marxism in Poland.You cannot be serious right, your trolling I assume? Ok then.
A hysterical reaction to what is basically just PiS taking on cultural Marxism in Poland.
Which included labeling Lech Walesa a anti-Polish traitor. You know, the guy that actually lead the Polish drive against communist rule. Are you really this thick in the head?
A hysterical reaction to what is basically just PiS taking on cultural Marxism in Poland.You cannot be serious right, your trolling I assume? Ok then.
Which begs the question, does one justify the other? Doesn't seem like the Polish have had problems maintaining social conservatism since the fall of the USSR. (From what I can see)A hysterical reaction to what is basically just PiS taking on cultural Marxism in Poland.
Which included labeling Lech Walesa a anti-Polish traitor. You know, the guy that actually lead the Polish drive against communist rule. Are you really this thick in the head?
Would that be after the 2016 documents that came to light and revealed pretty much conclusively that he was an informant for a number of years? Context is important Duuring.A hysterical reaction to what is basically just PiS taking on cultural Marxism in Poland.You cannot be serious right, your trolling I assume? Ok then.
I'm half serious. Not really a fan of what they're doing on the law and liberty side of things but I admire their social conservatism a great deal.
A hysterical reaction to what is basically just PiS taking on cultural Marxism in Poland.
Which included labeling Lech Walesa a anti-Polish traitor. You know, the guy that actually lead the Polish drive against communist rule. Are you really this thick in the head?
Would that be after the 2016 documents that came to light and revealed pretty much conclusively that he was an informant for a number of years? Context is important Duuring.
Seems Canada is doing just fine with their migrants. It's not impossible you know.
Which begs the question, does one justify the other? Doesn't seem like the Polish have had problems maintaining social conservatism since the fall of the USSR. (From what I can see)
You're also on another continent.With a climate totally hostile and unknown to Syrians. And also not enough people to really justify thousands more refugees.
You're also on another continent.
He meant another continent to Germany. Europe is a lot closer to Syria, Iraq etc than North America is.You're also on another continent.
As is Germany.
Interesting turn in development. Looks like we'll just see a war of words for the time being
http://www.foxnews.com/world/2017/08/11/china-pledges-neutrality-unless-us-strikes-north-korea-first.html (http://www.foxnews.com/world/2017/08/11/china-pledges-neutrality-unless-us-strikes-north-korea-first.html)
Nothing is going to happen. It's just rhetoric.^
http://www.dailywire.com/news/19610/candidate-set-be-first-female-navy-seal-quits-amanda-prestigiacomo?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_content=062316-news&utm_campaign=dwbrand (http://www.dailywire.com/news/19610/candidate-set-be-first-female-navy-seal-quits-amanda-prestigiacomo?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_content=062316-news&utm_campaign=dwbrand)
xd
The article even states that there is still another female in training so what's the point in broadcasting the fact that she quit. I'm sure many men have quit at that stage as well.I dont think the other woman is going to be a navy seal. She is training to be a Special Warfare Combatant-Craft Crewman, which Wikipedia says has a different training program
My point still stands either way. Just because one woman failed the training it doesn't mean that every woman will. Both the article and you are over generalising for the sake of your point.I never said that women shouldnt be allowed to serve. As long as they meet the requirements, go for it. Although, it turns out many of them dont.
You may not believe that women shouldn't be allowed to serve but the previous article you linked sure did present something correlating to that opinion. They decided to reference a supposed fact that mixed gender units have a poorer combat record than those of all-male units, without linking any evidence I might add.There is a link to mixed groups performing worse. The bolded, underlined text are links to studies/other articles that have links to studies :o. Although some of them dont work anymore so rip. And yes I am aware that the articles are heavily biased. The Daily Wire is a conservative site and both the articles are made by the same person. I guess i should have have mentioned that.
You're right many women don't meet the requirements to be at the highest levels of the armed forces, but neither do many men. How many of us here could be a Navy Seal? I know I certainly couldn't be one. Maybe we ought to start encouraging those brave enough to want to protect our societies rather than constantly put them down. The article makes an obvious attempt to say that women perform worse than men in combat situations (even if it does not state it explicitly), which obviously will be true in some cases just as it will not be in others.
The second article that you linked might be one of the worst pieces of journalism I have ever seen. It could have been written by a TD reddit user. If women weren't capable of being in their units then they wouldn't have passed their training, the article even admits that officials have said this and yet it still goes on to accuse the American military of being some social justice warrior institution.
Furthermore, the article even makes a crass statement about the fact that women are promoted more than men, stating that it's obvious gender bias without any actual evidence that this is true.
I'm not saying that all women are up to the task. There is a higher female failure rate than men in regards to training. But that doesn't mean such heavy generalisations should be placed on women in the armed forces. I'm sure I could find many examples of exemplary female soldiers with a simple google search. The articles you have both linked carry a heavy bias.
I say let women join so long as they are able to meet the same physical testing/performance standards as anyone else.Yeah this is my way of thinking too
I say let women join so long as they are able to meet the same physical testing/performance standards as anyone else.Yeah this is my way of thinking too
But the whole point of Steven's argument (from what I can tell) is that most women don't meet the standards and therefore don't serve.I say let women join so long as they are able to meet the same physical testing/performance standards as anyone else.Yeah this is my way of thinking too
I was more disputing Babyjesus' point that women aren't capable of combat as a group. Obviously some aren't, as many men aren't. Its condescending, rude and a massive generalisation to label all women is incapable when many female soldiers carry out their roles with pride and at exemplary standards.O when did i say that women are incapable? Literally fucking no where. I think you are confusing me with steven tbh.
I say let women join so long as they are able to meet the same physical testing/performance standards as anyone else.I actually agree with this statement. Its literally what i said in every single one of my posts. The point of that article is to show that most women cant meet those standards, and that in order to "diversify and make the military more equal" the military would make it easier for women to join, which i am against.
Yeah I did confuse you two, one of you change profile pic pls.Yea it did. But I just think in the future something like that will be done
Didn't the article you link mention that the army said that they wouldn't be lowering standards? You can't say that they are when there isn't any evidence for it.
And as I've already said, many women serve in the military exceptionally. I don't know how you can say that women don't deal with poor sleeping patterns well...many mothers do every day.
Also dont give me the lower standards bullshit. This doesnt happen here.
Also dont give me the lower standards bullshit. This doesnt happen here.
Are you sure? This article (http://www.omroepgelderland.nl/nieuws/2137716/Fysieke-eisen-voor-mannen-en-vrouwen-hoe-doen-ze-dat-bij-andere-beroepen) in a regional Dutch newspaper suggest otherwise, and I've heard the same from a Dutch veteran.
Actually the conservatives said they want a "temporary customs union" for a period after brexit. I assume we read the same BBC article which, yes, also mentioned the frictionless cooperation post brexit but I was personally referencing the fact that the conservatives will be hard pressed to gain anything at all from the EU in this regard.
What's CANZUK?
Or you could just explain something which you brought into the conversation...What's CANZUK?
Is Google down or something?
Another Contribution by the Religion of Peace.
I bet one 30€ Steam Game that it was a muslim.
Many religions have a bad past including Christianity. If you think I need to read up on Islamic history then maybe you need to read up on Cristian scripture. Pretty sure it says in the bible that if a women has had sex before marriage then you stone them to death. I think we can all agree that most Cristians don't practice that.
So what if it was a Muslim? They're a terrorist not a true representation of the entire religion. The guy who shot up that church in America doesn't represent all of the white people in the world so why does radicalised Muslims represent all of Islam?https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g7TAAw3oQvg
A lot of this stuff is to do with a very modern interpretation of Islam that has become widespread and deeply embedded. 27:47 onward:
https://youtu.be/-fny99f8amM?t=27m47s
Yes all Muslims are bad.In what idealistic bubble world do you live in if terrorism is not a threat to our society?
Terrorism is a threat to our society.
What's new on the fairy tales channel?
He was referencing the fact that everyone is placing Muslims and terrorism in the same bracket without any leeway as though someone was saying "Terrorism is a threat to society so we have to get rid of all Muslims". Obviously he wasn't denying that terrorism was a threat.Yes all Muslims are bad.In what idealistic bubble world do you live in if terrorism is not a threat to our society?
Terrorism is a threat to our society.
What's new on the fairy tales channel?
Terrorism is a threat to our society.
What's new on the fairy tales channel?
Are the US navy incapable of steering their ships or something?Largest navy in the world. Bound to have accidents every now and then.
Are the US navy incapable of steering their ships or something?Largest navy in the world. Bound to have accidents every now and then.
Not really how it works. If they're the largest navy in the world then surely they can find some officers who are capable of not crashing their multi million dollar ships.Are the US navy incapable of steering their ships or something?Largest navy in the world. Bound to have accidents every now and then.
NK's navy doesn't suffer any crashes...Islam is also a religion of peace.
William also understands IslamNK's navy doesn't suffer any crashes...Islam is also a religion of peace.
I was stating a fact but you are stating something that is wrong for I do not know much about Islam.William also understands IslamNK's navy doesn't suffer any crashes...Islam is also a religion of peace.
NK's navy doesn't suffer any crashes...Islam is also a religion of peace.
Easily the most peaceful religion, without a doubt.NK's navy doesn't suffer any crashes...Islam is also a religion of peace.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invasion_of_Banu_Qurayza
Headsman's Axe of Peace
And Christianity hasn't committed atrocities? Ever heard of the crusades? The siege of Jerusalem? You think Islam is the only religion with a bloody history?> Comparing a war that stemmed from never ending Muslim aggression
Religous War has always happened. It's not easily traceable back to the first instances of who started what and that doesn't mean you can go around killing innocents because "he started it".
What do you say to the fact that many inside Jerusalem were Christian and ended up being killed by followers of their own religion who were in a blood lust. Or maybe the fact that Constantinople (a Christian city) was looted and pillaged by a Christian army on its way to the fourth crusade.
Oh and I've read that Christians were actually treated quite well in the Muslim held holy land (which had been held by them since the 600s) at the time. I also forgot to mention the Christian treatment of Jews in the Rhineland.
I'm showing that Christianity has been just as violent as Islam do to label one being violent whilst the other not is ridiculous. I'm not really sure what you mean saying that the crusaders abandoned Constantinople since they didn't abandon it in the thirteenth century but full on sacked it and carved their own territories out of the Byzantine empire.
You do realise that Christians believe that the Pope is God's representative on earth so in many ways he is a prophet, he is their religous head so your point about their leader not being Jesus is flimsy to say the least.
And I wasn't talking about modern times. You should have noted the past tense 'were'. As I said it was just something I've read. But I suppose it doesn't matter either way because killing children is okay since we're overthrowing a violent regime (see the irony?).
Doesn't Islam still support honor killings?Some Muslims may do but some don't. The bible says that women who have sex before marriage should be stoned to death but we don't all do it,
But a large amount of Muslims do, or at least support it. In some Islamic countries its the law. Christian nations have become civilized and their people follow the secular laws of each nation rather then their own personal religious laws. Where as in most Muslim nations religion is the law. I don't see how the you compare a religion where people worship a peaceful and gentleman to a religion that was founded by a blood thirsty warlord.Doesn't Islam still support honor killings?Some Muslims may do but some don't. The bible says that women who have sex before marriage should be stoned to death but we don't all do it,
Christianity has had many warlords over the years I assure you. Once again you're referring to Radical Islam which I agree is a problem but there are many Muslims who also don't believe in that and live peacefully within our societies and also abide by the laws of the nation. They prove that being Muslim doesn't nessecarily make someone as you've described. Islam is capable of being peaceful just as much as any other religion.But a large amount of Muslims do, or at least support it. In some Islamic countries its the law. Christian nations have become civilized and their people follow the secular laws of each nation rather then their own personal religious laws. Where as in most Muslim nations religion is the law. I don't see how the you compare a religion where people worship a peaceful and gentleman to a religion that was founded by a blood thirsty warlord.Doesn't Islam still support honor killings?Some Muslims may do but some don't. The bible says that women who have sex before marriage should be stoned to death but we don't all do it,
Capability doesn't matter. Communism is capable of producing peaceful economic cooperation but has utterly failed in reality to achieve both, just like Islam has failed to provide peace.It hasn't failed in many areas though. The majority of Muslims in the UK live peacefully. Seems to me that they've succeeded.
If you say that Islam has no central leader then how can you classify it as more violent when it is not represented by any one group in particular? My point about the warlords is there have been many famous Christians who have been just as violent. RADICAL Islam is more violent but isn't a true representation in the eyes of many and you should properly differentiate between the two, Islam is a central religion capable of being practiced in peace (just like Christianity).You're constantly using the belief that violence is sowed into their teachings, but this is no different to Christianity which has many violent passages in the bible.Chrisitianity literally has a reformation which was people looking at the Bible and the bad stuff in it and saying "no, that's bad, we won't follow that". The secular nature of Europe that followed far outweighs any attempt of Islamic reform. Most modern Muslim reformers are threatened by other Muslims or shunned because of their beliefs. Even "secular" leaning countries like Jordan still convict people for crimes against Islam such as the depiction of the Warlord Prophet
Sure Islam's founder was violent, but many have come after him who are not so. Saladin was a warrior, but showed mercy to Christian prisoners whilst his enemies were slaughtering Muslims by the thousands. Radical Islam is certainly a problem but it is important that we learn to differentiate between a moderate view of Islam and the extreme versions of it. There have been periods throughout history where Christianity has been equally as extreme but it's just that it isn't as prevalent within modern society. Just like Christianity with different versions of beliefs, Moderate Muslims should be allowed to be differentiated from the radical aspects of Muslim society. You wouldn't label a protestant and a catholic together in terms of view points so don't do the same for Muslims. We need to be wary of radicalisation within Islam, not all of the religion as it is not fundamentally any more evil than any other religion in the world. I think it's important to correct yourself with the statement *radical Islam is more violent, not Islam in it's entirety.
I didn't say just Catholicism I said Christianity. I would love to see where Islam encourages violence as a core belief and if anything you say is taken from the Quaran then I will just bring the bible in to this which is just the same.The difference is that Christians don't take the Bible literally. They had a reformation to basically stop using the Old Testament as law and instead focus on the New Testament which is based on Jesus.
Jesus was a good guy, we know that but many of his followers weren't and if you think that there haven't been Cristian figures calling for he destruction of their enemies then you need to read a history book. And Gordo why are you using quotations of Toffee and virtue signalling sjw? It just looks ridiculous. I've noticed you tend to spurt that phrase out whenever I disagree with you since you can't seem to form an argument without it.
I'm not using Christianity as a scapegoat at all
I would love to see where Islam encourages violence as a core belief and if anything you say is taken from the Quaran then I will just bring the bible in to this which is just the same.
And Gordo that was clearly not the point of my argument. You're ability to take everything out of the context of their meaning is astounding.
If you label Islam a religion of violence then you should label Christianity one too.
*snip*
So, Trudeau is accepting asylum seekers from the USA now.At my grandparents house in border Manitoba, we can drive across the border without checks because we've been family friends with the border guard for generations.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/asylum-seekers-border-crossing-1.4258928
I already have a Canadian passport but if anyone wants one just fly to New York and walk across into Quebec. Much easier than applying via Immigration Canada and dealing with all that paperwork tbh.
Are they mostly from Haiti? Why don't they want to stay in the USA?
So, Trudeau is accepting asylum seekers from the USA now.At my grandparents house in border Manitoba, we can drive across the border without checks because we've been family friends with the border guard for generations.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/asylum-seekers-border-crossing-1.4258928
I already have a Canadian passport but if anyone wants one just fly to New York and walk across into Quebec. Much easier than applying via Immigration Canada and dealing with all that paperwork tbh.
Anybody know what the consequences would be if this turned out to be true? A hefty fine?Probably another resignation and election. Mind you Labour still wouldn't win.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-41048608
If the communists win then there will be hell to pay in the U.K.I really hope you're trolling because if you think Jeremy Corbyn is a communist then you don't know what communism is.
Corbyn's catching a ride off of May's incompetence. Hopefully yet another scandal to add to the many others will make her at least *consider* stepping down.Theresa May won't step down until after Brexit happens at least. There is no way the party wants to replace her before that
Wouldn't bet on it, though.
Well last time I checked Jeremy Corbyn was ahead in the polls so I wouldn't be so sure ;)If you think opinion polls matter in a first past the post system you don't know very much.
Of course polls matter because they indicate general public opinion. If they didn't matter then nobody would do them. Remember the exit poll successfully predicted a loss of the Tory majority. And Conway no she couldn't. The tories only have a slim majority. If they lost a further fifty seats then they wouldn't be in government for sure.Well last time I checked Jeremy Corbyn was ahead in the polls so I wouldn't be so sure ;)If you think opinion polls matter in a first past the post system you don't know very much.
Labour has most of the major population centers. But there are far more rural counties. She could lose 50 seats and still be Prime Minister.
Conway who do you think would want to partner with them? The DUP are essentially Tories
Conway who do you think would want to partner with them? The DUP are essentially Tories, they just wanted more money for NI. If they had to partner with 2 or more other parties there'd be too many compromises and they'd never be able to trust anything or get anything done. Even the current one that they bought for 100k per seat is literally only budget and votes of no confidence.A hung parliament doesn't mean there isn't a prime minister. I'm saying that even if her opinion polls are low its still very likely the Tories would stay in power. Even if he government wouldn't be very effective.
Oh fuck, my bad, forgot about coalition governments. They're not very common here :PUnfortunately they seem to be becoming very common here :(
The issue is that wages in Poland are far lower than they are in western Europe. If someone from Poland comes to work in western europe, they are paid according to the standards of Poland. No one in western Europe can compete with wages that low, no one. It's like illegal Mexicans in the US who push normal Americans out of the job market because they are willing to work for almost nothing. It creates unfair competition in the job market. This isn't about the survival of the single market, it is about making the single market fair.
(https://i.imgur.com/SAqW9FA.png)The issue is that wages in Poland are far lower than they are in western Europe. If someone from Poland comes to work in western europe, they are paid according to the standards of Poland. No one in western Europe can compete with wages that low, no one. It's like illegal Mexicans in the US who push normal Americans out of the job market because they are willing to work for almost nothing. It creates unfair competition in the job market. This isn't about the survival of the single market, it is about making the single market fair.
Given the EU, and France especially, spent the whole of 2015 telling David Cameron to go away when he tried to reform free movement and labour rules I hope Macron fails. Also it's about time someone told France the word 'No'. The most stinging part of the Polish put-down was telling the French they were 'merely equal members of the EU' which is not how the French see it.
I wouldn't call adding in a few bollards as beginning to change our way of lifeIn the literal sense, yes.
In the literal sense, yes.
In the psychological sense, no.
I wouldn't call adding in a few bollards as beginning to change our way of life
At least they dont have a Police with Military weapons (and i am Not Just talking about asault Rifles) Like in the USAI wouldn't call adding in a few bollards as beginning to change our way of life
Did you not read the second sentence of what I wrote? As I said, it's little things over time that build up. Go to any major UK city and you'll see that armed police are now a common sight-major change for a country that prides itself on having an unarmed police force, or at least used to.
That's a bad comparison - the IRA was a different type of animal completely. Most of the IRA's soldiers were uniformed and we could fight them directly. More so, we knew what their end game and goal was.
Non of which can be said for ISIS. We cannot negotiate for a caliphate.
The IRA did countless bombings and even managed to kill several MP's. The Provisional IRA killed at least 500 civilians, and maybe as much as 630. Besides, most of ISIS soldiers (like 99,9%) are also uniformed and fought directly in Iraq, Syria, Libanon and Libya. You're really in denial at this point.
Don't forget that proposed bulletproof wall around the Eiffel Tower and the large armed police presence at any gathering/event such as the Christmas markets.Bollards are temporary and a uniformed police presence isn't, as others have pointed out, anything really new. The IRA is a decent example as saying terror has existed for longer than radical Islam. However, the psychological sense is changed because the IRA had a clear set of goals, which could be negotiated with. There's a difference between:In the literal sense, yes.
In the psychological sense, no.
Could be argued "yes" for both imo. Kids having to see soldiers and SWAT on the streets isn't something I had to put up with at their age. Yeah, the psychological effect may not be great, but it's still there.
Not even a worldwide capliphate. Only like.... half of Europe, the south except Spain and going no further north than Bavaria I think, and going not further west than India, not further north than the Himalayas, and almost all of Africa.my bad
So really they're quite modest in their demands
Depends. Most polls were fairly accurate during the Dutch and French elections. Doesn't mean it's a guarantee they'll be right but I wouldn't instantly discard them either.It was a joke about all the polls that have been wrong recently but okay
It's safe to say Merkel's secured her chancellorship yet again. Probably for the best, given Schulz's lunacy.Who knows....
I don't know if I should be happy about it, or sad.
If there was a large part of the country that held socially conservative views then there would be a social conservative party
If there was a large part of the country that held socially conservative views then there would be a social conservative party
If the polls are right it'll be another coalition between CDU/SPD. Only major change will be AfD representation in the Bundestag, possibly as third largest party. Looks like Merkel has appeased German anger enough over her refugee policy in order to stay on as Chancellor.
How many times in recent weeks have the home office fucked up and told someone who is legally allowed to be in the UK to leave..
Or maybe they're just nob edsHow many times in recent weeks have the home office fucked up and told someone who is legally allowed to be in the UK to leave..
It's almost as if sprawling state bureaucracies are inefficient and make loads of mistakes so it's a bad idea to base your entire economic system on it...
It's almost as if the aforementioned issues are related to BrexitBrexit isn't a great excuse for utter stupidity to be honest
^It's almost as if the aforementioned issues are related to BrexitBrexit isn't a great excuse for utter stupidity to be honest
Brexit isn't a great excuse for utter stupidity to be honest
Okay?Brexit isn't a great excuse for utter stupidity to be honest
That's nice
Well, that should stir things up in the Asia-Pacific even further...For a guy who is supposed to be preventing further escalation he isn't doing very well
https://twitter.com/FoxNews/status/904415719793745920
But remember, Shillary's the warhawk.It's good to remind us of this. Good to see what the US avoided
The US isn't avoiding it very well. More like hurtling straight towards it.But remember, Shillary's the warhawk.It's good to remind us of this. Good to see what the US avoided
Forgive me if I don't believe a conflict with NK comes soon.The US isn't avoiding it very well. More like hurtling straight towards it.But remember, Shillary's the warhawk.It's good to remind us of this. Good to see what the US avoided
I agree with you on the fact that the issue should have been dealt with earlier. For once I actually agree that Trump's hard stance on North Korea should be commended but for me it is the way he's going about it with threats via social media rather than dealing with the issue directly with talks with NK like a president should.What the hell is he going to say to NK? Would you kindly give use those missiles that you spent years developing? Like thats going to happen. There really isn't a negotiable way about solving this problem.
Obviously not. But what is the alternative? All out war with Korea and the Chinese? Yeah that'll be great. When I said talk I didn't say ask nicely. He needs to have the aggressive negotiation tactic he seems to possess on twitter and take it to the North Koreans. The UN has shows that it can seriously damage the Korean economy so we have to tighten the fist and show them that we won't back down, as diplomats rather than over active twitter browsers.I agree with you on the fact that the issue should have been dealt with earlier. For once I actually agree that Trump's hard stance on North Korea should be commended but for me it is the way he's going about it with threats via social media rather than dealing with the issue directly with talks with NK like a president should.What the hell is he going to say to NK? Would you kindly give use those missiles that you spent years developing? Like thats going to happen. There really isn't a negotiable way about solving this problem.
we can invade.
I find it very unlikely that China would risk a war with the U.S. The U.S has a far larger and more advanced military than China, and the U.S has a far more deadly and larger nuclear arsenal than China. The U.S also has far more compotent allies than China. You're telling me China is going to risk inhalation for this tiny rump state that it doesn't even really like?
It might not be a question of if the US will win but what the cost will be both financially and in terms of lives. You're saying China's words are empty and yet have no evidence to suggest that it's true. China has interests in stopping the fall of the regime.I'm China's word are empty because if a 17 year old in Canada can determine the U.S would win, so would the Chinese government. And the Chinese government doesn't really want to lose a large scale war. It would basically mean the end of a communist China. They issue the warnings hoping the U.S would back down from any potential threat and so leave NK alone, which is better for China. But NK falling isn't the end of the world for China, it just makes it a little shittier so its in their interest to keep it communist.
A war with Nk would prodce losses on the U.S. side to which the populace is not accustomed. Support of the war would dissipate as soon as the coffins roll back home.Completely agree. Both the British and the American public were horrified at the casualties in Afghanistan and Korea will be ten times worse.
it's just typical saber rattling and trump isn't stupid. He has better things on his mind such as lowering taxes.(https://www.fsegames.eu/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi0.kym-cdn.com%2Fentries%2Ficons%2Ffacebook%2F000%2F023%2F021%2Fe02e5ffb5f980cd8262cf7f0ae00a4a9_press-x-to-doubt-memes-memesuper-la-noire-doubt-meme_419-238.jpg&hash=31a89e67c7c9e204472b3ba8447d8fa458c58ab8)
I think you're forgetting about all those generals and top military strategists Trump has at his command, lol. What few moves the US is going to make in regards to NK will be calculated.Are these the same group of generals which coordinated Afghanistan and Iraq?
Let's not forget both invasions were excellently planned and executed. It was the occupation which wasn'tI think you're forgetting about all those generals and top military strategists Trump has at his command, lol. What few moves the US is going to make in regards to NK will be calculated.Are these the same group of generals which coordinated Afghanistan and Iraq?
+1Let's not forget both invasions were excellently planned and executed. It was the occupation which wasn'tI think you're forgetting about all those generals and top military strategists Trump has at his command, lol. What few moves the US is going to make in regards to NK will be calculated.Are these the same group of generals which coordinated Afghanistan and Iraq?
I think you're forgetting about all those generals and top military strategists Trump has at his command, lol. What few moves the US is going to make in regards to NK will be calculated.Are these the same group of generals which coordinated Afghanistan and Iraq?
I wouldn't have to write an essay. Former commanders have come out and openly said that British troops were inadequately prepared for Afghanistan. The chilcot enquirey even found that the British forces were ill equipped and planning was poor in iraq as well as the army being slow to adapt to what was happening on the ground such as the threat of IEDs. And Theodin the invasion went well sure, but that was only the first part of the involvement in Iraq. The military still failed to achieved their objectives during the occupation. Besides, fighting China and North Korea would be a whole different ball game.I think you're forgetting about all those generals and top military strategists Trump has at his command, lol. What few moves the US is going to make in regards to NK will be calculated.Are these the same group of generals which coordinated Afghanistan and Iraq?
Please, the failure of the Afghanistan mission was due to a failure in political strategy, not a military failure.
If you really want me to explain this I can write a small essay about this but I'd be happier not to.
With your logic Toffe, the 1940 German invasion of France and the low countries was a failure as it didn't end their resistance. See, how it doesn't really make sense?There is a big difference between a conventional war where the aim is to take land like in the Second World War and a guerilla war where the main objective is to kill your enemy. The military intervention in Iraq was a failure because they didn't achieve their mission which was to leave behind a stable country. Germany were successful because their aim was to conquer France, which they did. Now if their aim was to put down the French resistance then they wouldn't have been successful. You can't say Iraq was a success when the entire focus for the invasion ended up being futile.
The U.S led coalition invasion destroyed the Iraqi army and capitulated the Saddam regime in 2 months. The mission was to remove Saddam from power and neutralize any WMD's. This was done and completed in two months. There was never a preset "We're invading Iraq to make it stable". The U.S didn't invade Iraq to fight insurgents, they fought insurgents due to their invasion of Iraq, just as the Germans battled the Dutch and French in WW2. Eliminating the insurgents and creating a stable Iraq became an objective after the main goal had been completed. The infamous "Mission Accomplished Speech" given by Bush was given after the defeat of organized Iraqi forces. Which is technically correct seeing the mission had been accomplished.
For that money germany could invade poland a 2nd time.
For that money germany could invade poland a 2nd time.I've started the first part of the invasion, I'm successfully undercover living in Ostpreußen. I have not been detected yet, nobody will expect the coming invasion.
You re Dutch mate, tone it down a notchWe are all Deutschers! 8)
http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/851707/Germany-WW2-Poland-reparations-compensation-Angela-Merkel-NazisWhat a meme, would make sense if Nazis were still in power
A P O L O G I S E.
http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/851707/Germany-WW2-Poland-reparations-compensation-Angela-Merkel-NazisWhat a meme, would make sense if Nazis were still in power
A P O L O G I S E.
So poland should give back the regions of Pommern, Silesien, West and east prussia to Germany? or pay for the land they gained during the soviet occupation?http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/851707/Germany-WW2-Poland-reparations-compensation-Angela-Merkel-NazisWhat a meme, would make sense if Nazis were still in power
A P O L O G I S E.
The amount they want is ridiculous but they have a point-they were an unwilling Soviet satellite state post-1945 and the USSR stopped them claiming reparations they were legitimately owed. Germany got off pretty lightly if you look at reparations paid vs damage caused in Poland.
So poland should give back the regions of Pommern, Silesien, West and east prussia to Germany? or pay for the land they gained during the soviet occupation?http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/851707/Germany-WW2-Poland-reparations-compensation-Angela-Merkel-NazisWhat a meme, would make sense if Nazis were still in power
A P O L O G I S E.
The amount they want is ridiculous but they have a point-they were an unwilling Soviet satellite state post-1945 and the USSR stopped them claiming reparations they were legitimately owed. Germany got off pretty lightly if you look at reparations paid vs damage caused in Poland.
This whole reparations shit is stupid and out of sense.. even in the latest 2004 treaty Poland agreed with the membership of the EU to not pursue any further reparations.
Things are how they are now in europe. and history cannot be changed. the people that suffered from the war are mostly dead themselves now, can we finally move on? The current German government and the current German people are not at all responsible for what happened so many years ago.
But once again, its only a Polish political ploy to make people hate Germans and keep the polish population from talking about internal problems, which Poland have many.
I guess we better compensate all the desendents of the people caught up in the slave trade then. Maybe say sorry to the French for the Hundred Years' War whilst we're at it.I don't remember when the descendants of the slave trade and the French were promised reparations and then taken over by a foreign power and turned them down against the interests of those people
So because something happened which prevented them from receiving the funds then means that a country which has nothing to do with Nazism anymore has to cough up money? My point is that you can't come back over 70 years later to try and reverse something that has happened through no fault of the German government. The world has moved on and demanding money only creates divisions rather than doing any real justice.I guess we better compensate all the desendents of the people caught up in the slave trade then. Maybe say sorry to the French for the Hundred Years' War whilst we're at it.I don't remember when the descendants of the slave trade and the French were promised reparations and then taken over by a foreign power and turned them down against the interests of those people
Yeah I'd somewhat agree with you. Just saying your analogy is faultySo because something happened which prevented them from receiving the funds then means that a country which has nothing to do with Nazism anymore has to cough up money? My point is that you can't come back over 70 years later to try and reverse something that has happened through no fault of the German government. The world has moved on and demanding money only creates divisions rather than doing any real justice.I guess we better compensate all the desendents of the people caught up in the slave trade then. Maybe say sorry to the French for the Hundred Years' War whilst we're at it.I don't remember when the descendants of the slave trade and the French were promised reparations and then taken over by a foreign power and turned them down against the interests of those people
Hang on why should Germany be the one to pay Poland? As you said, Poland gained German land but lost land to Russia. Surely it should be the Russians to pay. The only reason they're going after Germany is because guilt is still part of the national identity and Russia would probably invade them for the insult of demanding land.
There's a difference between spending money how their government wants to and strong arming them in paying something which happened decades ago. They don't have a moral obligation to do anything. Current Germany has no association with Nazi Germany whatsoever. As mentioned before, demanding concessions like this only leads to divisions rather than true justice.Hang on why should Germany be the one to pay Poland? As you said, Poland gained German land but lost land to Russia. Surely it should be the Russians to pay. The only reason they're going after Germany is because guilt is still part of the national identity and Russia would probably invade them for the insult of demanding land.
Because as part of the 1953 agreement the USSR forced Poland to waive a large proportion of the reparations they were owed from East Germany. And yeah, they're going after Germany because Berlin has been handing out free money recently and has a moral obligation to pay up.
There's a difference between spending money how their government wants to and strong arming them in paying something which happened decades ago. They don't have a moral obligation to do anything. Current Germany has no association with Nazi Germany whatsoever. As mentioned before, demanding concessions like this only leads to divisions rather than true justice.
Yes and do we all remember what that lead to?There's a difference between spending money how their government wants to and strong arming them in paying something which happened decades ago. They don't have a moral obligation to do anything. Current Germany has no association with Nazi Germany whatsoever. As mentioned before, demanding concessions like this only leads to divisions rather than true justice.
The Versailles peace negotiations ended with the Weimar Republic paying up for the actions of the German Empire, it's happened before.
Yes and do we all remember what that lead to?
Yes and that wasn't even 20 years after the war. Poland is now demanding money all of the sudden after 70 years...
How do you think Hitler became leader of the Nazi party in the first place? He was famed for his Nationalistic speeches centred around the treaty of Versailles. Sure his popularity was waning before the hit of the great depression but he used this as a platform to gather support for the reversal of the treaty as he placed great emphasis on it's role in Germany's misfortunes. His entire foreign policy during his first years in power were focused upon the reversal of the treaty of Versailles, hence why many had sympathetic views towards his cause and supported him. Both had a great contribution and it's pretty fair to say that Hitler might not have come to power had the treaty not been so harsh.Yes and do we all remember what that lead to?
The Treaty of Versailles certainly drummed up anger, but I think it's safe to say that the Great Depression was a much larger factor in Hitler's success climbing to power.
Anyway that's a bit of a digression, and Poland's claim has already been denied.
Also note that any destruction is by now already way back when repaired probably during communistic times or by EU subsidies in more recent times. And the people that suffered are long dead. or dieing. it's insane to think a current living pole should get any money for the suffering his dead great grandpa did.. lol.Unnecessary hyperbole is unnecessary
About Poland destruction actually..
Every step i take here in Poland I can see the glorious EU flag next to a board telling that this reconstruction project was sponsored by the EU.
Who you think builds all those highways in poland.. those trams, those repaired buildings.. those museums.. those sewer systems.. oh wait.. EU money.. who pays that EU money to Poland? Everyone, but mostly Germans.
I would say the Polish government are complete idiots.
This guy did GCSE English 👌Also note that any destruction is by now already way back when repaired probably during communistic times or by EU subsidies in more recent times. And the people that suffered are long dead. or dieing. it's insane to think a current living pole should get any money for the suffering his dead great grandpa did.. lol.Unnecessary hyperbole is unnecessary
About Poland destruction actually..
Every step i take here in Poland I can see the glorious EU flag next to a board telling that this reconstruction project was sponsored by the EU.
Who you think builds all those highways in poland.. those trams, those repaired buildings.. those museums.. those sewer systems.. oh wait.. EU money.. who pays that EU money to Poland? Everyone, but mostly Germans.
I would say the Polish government are complete idiots.
the hell is GCSEThis guy did GCSE English 👌Also note that any destruction is by now already way back when repaired probably during communistic times or by EU subsidies in more recent times. And the people that suffered are long dead. or dieing. it's insane to think a current living pole should get any money for the suffering his dead great grandpa did.. lol.Unnecessary hyperbole is unnecessary
About Poland destruction actually..
Every step i take here in Poland I can see the glorious EU flag next to a board telling that this reconstruction project was sponsored by the EU.
Who you think builds all those highways in poland.. those trams, those repaired buildings.. those museums.. those sewer systems.. oh wait.. EU money.. who pays that EU money to Poland? Everyone, but mostly Germans.
I would say the Polish government are complete idiots.
British qualification awarded in secondary schoolOh. We have a literacy test in grade 10 in Canada (which, for a lot of questions, is literally just "can you read this"?).
Just a joke ;D and if grade 10 is aged 16 in Canada then yes it's the sameBritish qualification awarded in secondary schoolOh. We have a literacy test in grade 10 in Canada (which, for a lot of questions, is literally just "can you read this"?).
If that was a dig at my vocabulary, I'll have you know my mom says I know lots of words!
How do you think Hitler became leader of the Nazi party in the first place? He was famed for his Nationalistic speeches centred around the treaty of Versailles. Sure his popularity was waning before the hit of the great depression but he used this as a platform to gather support for the reversal of the treaty as he placed great emphasis on it's role in Germany's misfortunes. His entire foreign policy during his first years in power were focused upon the reversal of the treaty of Versailles, hence why many had sympathetic views towards his cause and supported him. Both had a great contribution and it's pretty fair to say that Hitler might not have come to power had the treaty not been so harsh.
Yes Gordo we've all done GCSE history
The treaty of Versailles contributed greatly to Hitler's initial break into the political scene and shaped his foreign policy for his first few years of his dictatorship. That was his entire ruse when it came to appeasement right up until Czechoslovakia. No denying that. Germany was ruined by WW1 and the treaty of Versailles rubbed salt in the wounds.
I mean a whole lot of his criticism of the Weimar regime came from the idea that they had stabbed the german people in the back at Versailles, and many people felt that way in Germany. My point isn't that the Great Depression didn't contribute significantly to his rise to power, but that it wasn't the only factor, and what gained Hitler his initial support was discontent caused by the TOV. I'm talking much earlier in his timeline when the Nazis first became a large political power than when they took complete control.
It's true though. When I visited Vince in Poland last year it become sorta a meme between us to point out European Union-signs - of which there are, seriously, a lot.It's pretty much the same thing the greek government did in 2015 (with a different background), empty shitposting. I do enjoy the memes though.
The PiS-government doesn't seriously want or expect the Germans to pay. Like Vince says, it's just a political ploy to draw attention away from uninteresting shit like healthcare, employment, democracy and human rights.
Mixed messages from Trump:That tweet is from 2013 nigga. Politicians flip flop all the time, their only real interest in a liberal democracy is to preserve and expand bourgeoisie private property, which allows this class of people to control democracy in the first place.Spoiler(https://i.imgur.com/Ha3qznA.jpg)[close]
I'm not going to draw any conclusions just yet.
Welcome to Trump's twitter account, full of contradictions.Mixed messages from Trump:That tweet is from 2013 nigga. Politicians flip flop all the time, their only real interest in a liberal democracy is to preserve and expand bourgeoisie private property, which allows this class of people to control democracy in the first place.Spoiler(https://i.imgur.com/Ha3qznA.jpg)[close]
I'm not going to draw any conclusions just yet.
It's still a bit weird how Trump would stick his neck out for the members of the Charlottesville rally one week, then post stuff like this the next.
Jesus do people still think that communism works?Fraudbear are you a commie?You just noticed this?
Half the replies here could qualify as memesYeah but yours are the worst because communism is shite
'socialism/communism works'rabbits are good
In other news they're now eating rabbits in Venezuela.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-41265474
Karth it's not like that kind of information is classified. If a person is expected to change their views upon taking office then surely that means what they were voted in based upon is simply wrong? Are you saying trump is wrong?Are you kidding? There's a lot the CBO reports along with info accessed with security clearances that is not made public. I'm saying Trump adapted and changed his views based upon the information he had access to when he was in office, not for everything of course (mostly social issues). He's the only President in modern day who has not had access to that sort of information, because again he's not a career politician like every recent President.
this here is a memeThe Latin American country who has an economy of a 70% in the private sector which operates under a market and has entered a crisis due to the global price of oil falling drastically and having no way to make up for it because it made zero efforts to industriaize in the entire century it has been a client state to Western powers...is a failure of Socialism.'socialism/communism works'rabbits are good
In other news they're now eating rabbits in Venezuela.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-41265474
Sasuga, Chilton-san!
So genuine question Karth. What is it that every other politician has access to that Trump didn't? I would like to understand it in more detail.Trump never even had any security clearances prior to office, or access to Congressional Budget Office reports. CBO has the top analysts who have no political agenda, and map out the consequences for any economic/financial decision on an upcoming bill, along with analytics on a variety of economic issues. These are mostly not made available public, politicians have direct access to them. The next big thing is everything else that comes with an SC, from nuclear weapons info to foreign affairs. Literally probably thousands of hours of information. Actually pretty sure there was a documentary on 60 minutes or somewhere that explains all this lol
And Fraudbear can you please explain to me your perfect society. I would like to understand how it would work and actually create a functioning economy.
The Latin American country who has an economy of a 70% in the private sector which operates under a market and has entered a crisis due to the global price of oil falling drastically and having no way to make up for it because it made zero efforts to industriaize in the entire century it has been a client state to Western powers...is a failure of Socialism.'socialism/communism works'rabbits are good
In other news they're now eating rabbits in Venezuela.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-41265474
Sasuga, Chilton-san!
Why dedicate yourself to one political ideology? When life constantly demands a balance of forces and opinions. There must be middle ground yet to be discovered/created so why claim to support these ideas that are so primitive instead of looking for something new and better.This is rich coming from you
Why dedicate yourself to one political ideology? When life constantly demands a balance of forces and opinions. There must be middle ground yet to be discovered/created so why claim to support these ideas that are so primitive instead of looking for something new and better.This is rich coming from you
Yeah, because in normal democracies everybody in the opposition just stops working until next election day.He's not working though, his own state passed the single payer system then they realized they didn't have money to pay for it so it failed lmao
Please continue discussing recent events, not historical ideologies.
'Discussions' on political theories always end up with someone defending one totalitarian shit regime that killed millions or the other. Sadly for those people, this forum isn't called '/pol' or '/shitideas'. You are free to be as much a dipshit as you want in your own personal life, but this forum is not and will never be a place for you to discuss how much you love being a dipshit.
Discuss recent politics, or discuss ideology within the modern context. Please do not think you can convince me how wrong I am in taking this discussion, you know very well that's a lost cause. To give everybody time to reflect on that, I'll lock this thread for a day.
Aye, our glorious US senate just approved an $80 billion increase in military spending, Trump only asked for $47B. Oh and only 8 out of 100 senators voted against ;DWhy on earth does the USA need to spend more on defence?
We preparing to take over all you scum
in the words of all mighty karth, we preparing to take over you scumAye, our glorious US senate just approved an $80 billion increase in military spending, Trump only asked for $47B. Oh and only 8 out of 100 senators voted against ;DWhy on earth does the USA need to spend more on defence?
We preparing to take over all you scum
Why on earth does the USA need to spend more on defence?
The US may be $20 trillion in debt and already has the largest military budget of any nation, but there's always room for more military spending. Sounds like the USSR in the 1980s.
It's okay guys they can just cut the budget of the environmental departmentEasily, if 94 percent of it is non-essential then it's perfect
It's okay guys they can just cut the budget of the environmental department
I think what you mean is he still believes that humans are causing catastrophic and unnatural climate change, not just climate change in generalIt's okay guys they can just cut the budget of the environmental department
*record scratch*
You don't actually still believe in climate change, do you...?
I think what you mean is he still believes that humans are causing catastrophic and unnatural climate change, not just climate change in general
the climate does change
Guys you know the Earth is flat.This is the equivalent of saying that the climate doesn't change
It is known.
Guys you know the Earth is flat.
It is known.
So let's talk about communism then boysCommunism did nothing wrong.
So let's talk about communism then boys
So let's talk about communism then boysCommunism did nothing wrong.
It's okay guys they can just cut the budget of the environmental department
If freedom is the goal, there are much better ways to spend that money.Economically I'm not saying it's great, but it provides jobs and more work for thousands of engineers, among other roles. $800 billion or whatever total for the military is huge, but the amount of jobs and work that money provides is also enormous. The rest $3 trillion spending goes to social security, Medicare, Medicaid, etc...
Sure but if you would spend that 800 billion somewhere else, you could still create jobs and actually achieve something better than new tools of destruction.but then who would save us from those darn Russians
Sure but if you would spend that 800 billion somewhere else, you could still create jobs and actually achieve something better than new tools of destruction.Like what?
Sure but if you would spend that 800 billion somewhere else, you could still create jobs and actually achieve something better than new tools of destruction.Like what?
Like maybe making sure all of your citizens are given proper healthcare. Not fucking the environment could be a priority too.So you want to take away thousands of jobs and GDP to instead use that money to increase spending on already trillion dollar programs? Nice
Did I say that? Just it's clear that America chooses to increase its budget in a department that doesn't need extra funding and cut funding for areas that do need it.Like maybe making sure all of your citizens are given proper healthcare. Not fucking the environment could be a priority too.So you want to take away thousands of jobs and GDP to instead use that money to increase spending on already trillion dollar programs? Nice
Did I say that? Just it's clear that America chooses to increase its budget in a department that doesn't need extra funding and cut funding for areas that do need it.Like maybe making sure all of your citizens are given proper healthcare. Not fucking the environment could be a priority too.So you want to take away thousands of jobs and GDP to instead use that money to increase spending on already trillion dollar programs? Nice
c) AfD at 13.5% making them third largest party and almost certainly the official opposition.
. Only possible coalition is continuation of CDU/SPD. If the exit polls are right of course....
Welcome to Weimar: Where the parliament is going to paralyze itself. Bundesrepublik Deutschland in 2017.
Lol it doesn't matter democrat or republican or trump, military spending will always increase because freedom!
It has been established that militairy spending is probably the shittiest investment a state can do in terms of economy. It does create jobs, but not even close as much as other (government) departments would, like medical, education or infrastructure. (Source: my academy reading material: Peace and Conflict Stues, chapter 1)If freedom is the goal, there are much better ways to spend that money.Economically I'm not saying it's great, but it provides jobs and more work for thousands of engineers, among other roles. $800 billion or whatever total for the military is huge, but the amount of jobs and work that money provides is also enormous.
Medical is complicated and I won't deny that, but U.S education investment provides useless jobs, without any empirical improvement, and infrastructure jobs are mostly temporary
Maybe that's why America should reform it's fucked up systems. It's funny how everyone else manages to provide universal healthcare but it's too expensive for the self proclaimed greatest country on Earth.
It's abundantly clear that education investments doesn't give results in the US.I don't claim to have an answer but you can't deny it isn't broken when you spend much more per capita than any other country. If you want things to be cheaper then fix them instead of just blindly following the same path which everybody can clearly doesn't work.Maybe that's why America should reform it's fucked up systems. It's funny how everyone else manages to provide universal healthcare but it's too expensive for the self proclaimed greatest country on Earth.
Ah, I'd like to hear how you'd reform the US healthcare industry into a socialized system.
They already did a study, every $1b spent on military equates to around 11,000 jobs, so this $80B increase will provide hundreds of thousands of jobs in a skilled sector which relies on military contracts.
http://watson.brown.edu/costsofwar/costs/economic/economy/employmentThey already did a study, every $1b spent on military equates to around 11,000 jobs, so this $80B increase will provide hundreds of thousands of jobs in a skilled sector which relies on military contracts.
Rubbish. That money comes from taxation or borrowing (and the latter gets paid back by taxation anyway). You're taking money out of people's pockets in order to pay for ships and missiles. If you didn't take it out their pockets they'd spend it themselves in ways that would create just as many jobs if not more (since it's inefficient to tax and spend given you need to pay the bureaucrats to administrate it).
If the aim is to create jobs then increasing government spending makes no sense unless you're in a recession, and even then you always borrow the money rather than increase taxes.
http://watson.brown.edu/costsofwar/costs/economic/economy/employmentThey already did a study, every $1b spent on military equates to around 11,000 jobs, so this $80B increase will provide hundreds of thousands of jobs in a skilled sector which relies on military contracts.
Rubbish. That money comes from taxation or borrowing (and the latter gets paid back by taxation anyway). You're taking money out of people's pockets in order to pay for ships and missiles. If you didn't take it out their pockets they'd spend it themselves in ways that would create just as many jobs if not more (since it's inefficient to tax and spend given you need to pay the bureaucrats to administrate it).
If the aim is to create jobs then increasing government spending makes no sense unless you're in a recession, and even then you always borrow the money rather than increase taxes.
That's my source, analyze it yourself, I just had it saved from a paper I had to do last year
As well as education , healthcare and clean energy.lol this is so wrong
Karth's source says otherwiseAs well as education , healthcare and clean energy.lol this is so wrong
case study: ontario
Yeah, my bad, that's true, but the important difference between healthcare/education and green energy is investment into the former two are a government sponsored commodity, while green energy is subsidy masquerading as industry. Green energy doesn't make money without government fundingKarth's source says otherwiseAs well as education , healthcare and clean energy.lol this is so wrong
case study: ontario
Frauke Petry just announced she'll enter the Bundestag as an independent. Interesting development.What difference does that make? She hold the same political views, right?
Frauke Petry just announced she'll enter the Bundestag as an independent. Interesting development.What difference does that make? She hold the same political views, right?
(https://www.fsegames.eu/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.fouroverfour.jukely.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2017%2F07%2F20170726_225321_2506_1004325-300x192.png&hash=589456a8ce49be4e1f799ddcf60389f2aab713c4)sad thing is he might actually win and he would be my senator
So you're saying she got elected first and then after she got elected she revealed her true political views isn't that illegal or something?Frauke Petry just announced she'll enter the Bundestag as an independent. Interesting development.What difference does that make? She hold the same political views, right?
If she did, she'd have stayed in the faction.
don't you vote for the candidate rather than the party?So you're saying she got elected first and then after she got elected she revealed her true political views isn't that illegal or something?Frauke Petry just announced she'll enter the Bundestag as an independent. Interesting development.What difference does that make? She hold the same political views, right?
If she did, she'd have stayed in the faction.
So you're saying she got elected first and then after she got elected she revealed her true political views isn't that illegal or something?Frauke Petry just announced she'll enter the Bundestag as an independent. Interesting development.What difference does that make? She hold the same political views, right?
If she did, she'd have stayed in the faction.
Iraqi Kurdistan is holding a referendum for independence in the middle of a war what a meme.Legally?
He holds more votes than any other Republican combined in Michigan, right? lmao(https://www.fsegames.eu/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.fouroverfour.jukely.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2017%2F07%2F20170726_225321_2506_1004325-300x192.png&hash=589456a8ce49be4e1f799ddcf60389f2aab713c4)sad thing is he might actually win and he would be my senator
He holds more votes than any other Republican combined in Michigan, right? lmao(https://www.fsegames.eu/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.fouroverfour.jukely.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2017%2F07%2F20170726_225321_2506_1004325-300x192.png&hash=589456a8ce49be4e1f799ddcf60389f2aab713c4)sad thing is he might actually win and he would be my senator
You do vote for the party. More specifically you vote for seats in parliament for that party; the party with the most seats provides the chancellor (their candidate) for the goverment.don't you vote for the candidate rather than the party?So you're saying she got elected first and then after she got elected she revealed her true political views isn't that illegal or something?Frauke Petry just announced she'll enter the Bundestag as an independent. Interesting development.What difference does that make? She hold the same political views, right?
If she did, she'd have stayed in the faction.
"Where men are forbidden to honour a king, they honor millionaires, athletes, or film stars instead; even famous prostitutes or gangsters. For spiritual nature, like bodily nature, will be served; deny it food and it will gobble poison."
Yeah, China is exactly never going to war with the USA over North Korea. More likely they'll invade North Korea themselves.Hopefully
A war between the United States and the People's Republic of China isn't likely to escalate beyond some minor, localized skirmishes over North Korea; the United States loses out on those cheap, slave labor consumer goods and the Chinese lose massive amounts of cash for those goods. The PRC would probably pretty excitedly work out a deal where they get to change the North Korean regime to something of their liking that is less volatile.It definitely seems to work that way but China also seems to be contempt with just sitting on the sideline. They seem to be extremely patient and only playing their hand when absolutely forced to. I'd imagine they don't want to risk conflict with the U.S. seeing as how they're still expanding their pacific holdings and exerting influence on their neighbors but as you all have pointed out, that N.K. buffer is something China will not let dissolve.
I think losing the North Korean buffer isn't something they are necessarily completely stalwart on anymore. With Russia no longer as likely an ally (keep in mind that these days, both Russia and the PRC have troop buildup on their shared border), defending the Korean peninsula no longer possesses the prior ability of a natural bottleneck. Additionally, the PRC may wish to give a little ground to the United States for some extra leniency dealing with the land disputes with India.congrats on your title
Yeah, they won't give up on it - so they'll storm in and put in place a new, more China-dependent regime. That's much cheaper then going to war with the USA over a shitty bufferzone.
Frauke Petry wants to start her own faction in the Bundestag named 'Die blauen', which might mean more AfD-MP's will break away.
So did UKIP who are now irrelevant. Right wing parties gain power in times of mass hysteria and lose it when it dies down.
My point is that the afd probably won't ever become a permanent major player in German politics and they'll never get into government.
I'm still correct either way. My statement isn't wrong. I didn't state that the afd weren't far right so I don't know what about my post that you're taking issue with.Like you can measure numerically how extreme someone is.
There's no room for extremes in modern politics. The furthest you'll ever get is someone like Jeremy Corbyn who isn't nearly as far left as the afd are far right. I doubt they'll take hold.
There's no room for extremes in modern politics. The furthest you'll ever get is someone like Jeremy Corbyn who isn't nearly as far left as the afd are far right. I doubt they'll take hold.
I speculate it'll be quite the contrary: the situation will only get worse as more economic migrants come into Germany, resulting in even more social strife on top of that already caused by the poor integration of migrants from 2015 on wards.I don't think the Afd will be able to capitalise on the refugee situation in the next election as much as they did this year. Like the financial crisis of 2008 it will eventually settle down as the years go by. That being said, I hope we're gonna see a new coalition because another CDU/SPD term wouldn't do both parties any good.
No Theodin but you can use your brain.Our brains are very biased tho
I'm just talking about the general trend. Sure they became a big part of german politics but let's not get ahead of ourselves.
I'm not speaking from a biased position. It's the truth. Extreme parties flourish in times of fear and then they die out in time.No Theodin but you can use your brain.Our brains are very biased tho
I'm just talking about the general trend. Sure they became a big part of german politics but let's not get ahead of ourselves.
A ‘joke’ that won a massive section in German Parliament in an extremely short time span in a country that can’t go 5 minutes without blaming itself for the world wars. Either way it’s too late; Germany is lost as well as most of mainland Europe.
I heard some rumor about Frauke Petry forming her own party with her supporters (die blauen?).
That's what I'm basing my "bad organization" of but I haven't really keept up in the last couple of days.
Grim scenes coming out of Catalonia-riot police beating people trying to vote, including old women. Yet another massive own goal from Madrid and independence is looking increasingly inevitable...
Results for the Iraqi Kurdistan referendum are in 93% yes for independece.I recognise Kurdistan referendum legal. Iraq couldn't protect them from ISIS so these people are free to make their own laws. Catalonian one is illegal, selfish bastards.
Now let's get ready for another illegal referendum tomorrow bois!
Grim scenes coming out of Catalonia-riot police beating people trying to vote, including old women. Yet another massive own goal from Madrid and independence is looking increasingly inevitable...
Then again, what should they do? Like it or not, the Spanish government is working within its legal power, the Catalonian regional government isn't. That's something too many people easily forget.
That's not how law works mcperoNo but it is how life works. Iraq might be still lawful owner of Kurdistan but nobody will give a shit about that when Kurdistan has huge army and support of Russia (this is blind guess but it makes sense, because Iraq is US colony and Kurdistan would be Russian ally since Russia defeated ISIS) to enforce their referendum. Saying this referendum is illegal is like saying rebel groups in Nazi reich in WW2 were illegal, if you view Nazi Reich occupation as legal (no war declaration on Poland, attacking ally (Kingdom of Yugoslavia)) than they are illegal.
That's not how law works mcperoNo but it is how life works. Iraq might be still lawful owner of Kurdistan but nobody will give a shit about that when Kurdistan has huge army and support of Russia (this is blind guess but it makes sense, because Iraq is US colony and Kurdistan would be Russian ally since Russia defeated ISIS) to enforce their referendum. Saying this referendum is illegal is like saying rebel groups in Nazi reich in WW2 were illegal, if you view Nazi Reich occupation as legal (no war declaration on Poland, attacking ally (Kingdom of Yugoslavia)) than they are illegal.
I agree completely with that. It doesn't mean that those actions suddenly are illegal though.
Yeah Putin and Erdogan are so such allies they shoot down each other's planes. Erdogan is going away from EU because if Turkey joins EU he can't have as much power over Turkey not because Russia wants to ally Turkey. Turkey and Russia can't be friends because: Syria and Russia are fighting ISIS that is US dog to remove Russia from middle East (Fleet in Syria). Kurds are fighting against ISIS and Turkey joined fights against ISIS only to kill Kurdish rebels saying it was ISIS units. Russia also asked for Kurdistan to be represented in peace talks with US. So yes they are allies. Kurds and Russians just have common enemies Iraq, ISIS.That's not how law works mcperoNo but it is how life works. Iraq might be still lawful owner of Kurdistan but nobody will give a shit about that when Kurdistan has huge army and support of Russia (this is blind guess but it makes sense, because Iraq is US colony and Kurdistan would be Russian ally since Russia defeated ISIS) to enforce their referendum. Saying this referendum is illegal is like saying rebel groups in Nazi reich in WW2 were illegal, if you view Nazi Reich occupation as legal (no war declaration on Poland, attacking ally (Kingdom of Yugoslavia)) than they are illegal.
When the fuck have the Kurds had the support of Russia? If Russia decided to ally itself with Kurdistan it would sour the Russian/Turkey relation that Putin have tried to achieve greatly maybe even making Turkey move towards the west again. He would not take that risk if he knows what's good for him.
Assad sure handled the Arab Spring nicely what a great leader wow.Did his government get overthrown? Nope they didn't.
Stop chatting shite piercee
If Hitler had won we wouldnt have bullshit like this
Most of it tbh. That territory is legally part of Iraq, there is no 'fair and square' about it. You think by creating a new state the threat to the Kurdish people from ISIS will suddenly disappear? If you do then you're incredibly naïve. Assad has committed war crimes on more than one occasion. You have extremely low standards if you think he's anything other than a vile human being.
If Hitler had won we wouldnt have bullshit like this
I can't be arsed having this conversation cos most of that paragraph was just a load of waffle
That's why I lost pretty much any trust I had in Trump when he decided to bomb Syria.
That's why I lost pretty much any trust I had in Trump when he decided to bomb Syria.
That's Ivanka and Kushner's influence for you, which sadly shows no signs of waning.
Assad sure handled the Arab Spring nicely what a great leader wow.Tell me if there was no ISIS and other "rebel" forces which are created by CIA causing war, would you rather live in Syria or Egypt where Arab Spring was successful? Assad keeps peace and stability in his country while countries where Arab Spring was successful are just some chaotic states where new dictators are taking over. Life in Syria was pretty good, you just shouldn't oppose the goverment and you were fine xd.
Assad sure handled the Arab Spring nicely what a great leader wow.Did his government get overthrown? Nope they didn't.
That's a success in the middle-east.
Also that his regime kills far, far more civilians then IS or even all other sides combined. Whatever you can say about the other sides, Assad is a murdering dictator that, like most dictators, created the situation where his regime is necessary to provide some form of stability, much like organized crime creates the situation that requires shop-owners to pay 'protection money' for protection they wouldn't require if there wasn't maffia around in the first place.USA caused much more deaths and destruction of Syria than Assad did. That is why Syrians now want Assad to be president. Syria would be just fine without USA supporting "rebels" and ISIS in Syria. Fine as the things can be fine when USA supports decolonization only to neocolonize everything. So it is USA's fault Assad even became dictator in first place.
I can't tell if mcpero is trolling or if he genuinely thinks Assad is a stand up bloke?Assad is dictator that kills and imprisons opposition. Like 90% of former colonies. Still better than a war.
Being a bad person isn't relative to anyone else. I might kill ten people but just because somebody else has killed more that doesn't mean I'm not a bad person or a bad leader.Never said he is a good person. But he is fighting on the right side.
And what side is that? The side of being a cunt? Maybe you need to stop seeing things so linear and start realising that not everything is as black and white as you make it out to be. The rebels might be knobs as well but that doesn't make Assad the good guy. All it makes is a group of war weary civilians stuck in the middle of two or more factions fighting for controlBeing a bad person isn't relative to anyone else. I might kill ten people but just because somebody else has killed more that doesn't mean I'm not a bad person or a bad leader.Never said he is a good person. But he is fighting on the right side.
He is fighting USA, which is fucking up world pretty hard with their neocolonisation and constantly starting new wars. And yeah exactly civilians suffer the most but there would be no war if it wasn't for USA foreign policy. So in this case you can see things white and black unless you are looking from nature's point of view then everything is neutral.And what side is that? The side of being a cunt? Maybe you need to stop seeing things so linear and start realising that not everything is as black and white as you make it out to be. The rebels might be knobs as well but that doesn't make Assad the good guy. All it makes is a group of war weary civilians stuck in the middle of two or more factions fighting for controlBeing a bad person isn't relative to anyone else. I might kill ten people but just because somebody else has killed more that doesn't mean I'm not a bad person or a bad leader.Never said he is a good person. But he is fighting on the right side.
Even the NRA is now calling for additional legislation on bump stocks...When people dump the bodies of the victims on the NRA before they even say anything and then they say something reasonable but fuck the NRA anyways amiright
Even the NRA is now calling for additional legislation on bump stocks...When people dump the bodies of the victims on the NRA before they even say anything and then they say something reasonable but fuck the NRA anyways amiright
Like publically not giving a fuck about an American territory with over 3 million American citizens? Damn media.
Not at all my intention. It is comepletely out of character for the NRA to be for any type of gun control measure. Why this? Why now? Why not call for legislation against large-calibre rifles? What is it that makes bump stocks so special that it warrants legislation? And why not something else?
Trump hinting at calm before storm --> Reports of North Korea testing a missile capable of hitting mainland U.S. soon. My body is not ready.
and apparently some fuckers in the military leaked that we only have a months worth of smartbombs in the Korean Peninsula. Whoever leaked that needs to be court-martialed because that is something of extreme strategic importance and should never be leaked to the press under any circumstances.
205 days so far, maybe one more or less. Pretty sure it set the national record.Damn that sucks
Directly hitting US soil is a splendid idea. It'll give the most powerful military in the world a mandate to remove your country from google maps entirely.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6se66gQRJcw
205 days so far, maybe one more or less. Pretty sure it set the national record.Like Netherlands need goverment lol
205 days so far, maybe one more or less. Pretty sure it set the national record.Damn that sucks
Exactly better no goverment than dutch trump205 days so far, maybe one more or less. Pretty sure it set the national record.Damn that sucks
Why? I mean, 205 days is a little bit excessive, of course, but it's not like we're some form of crisis for 205 days.
That, and because saving money on gear will actualy produce more costs down the line..
When they make changes to military budgets it's usually technical equipment etc anyway right? Like they buy more choppers, missiles and so on, not better backpacks lol
When they make changes to military budgets it's usually technical equipment etc anyway right? Like they buy more choppers, missiles and so on, not better backpacks lol
Not always, basic infantry equipment is actually something that is often upgraded on, or atleast should be since alot of countries do it like this.
New weapon lines are being tested for that reason, new uniforms are constantly being developed for that reason and overall equipment like vests + helmets were done in that exact reason.
Look at the middle-east, CQB happens every day. You can only do that with infantry, that's why infantry equipment needs to be also top notch to compete.
Like I'm glad my country's army uses the HK417 for example, it's a good rifle. Now we just need more fitting uniforms for tactical purposes, our armour plating in our vests is fine.
When they make changes to military budgets it's usually technical equipment etc anyway right? Like they buy more choppers, missiles and so on, not better backpacks lol
By googling the rifle it would appear Pierce is from Germany or pretty much any other country in the worldHis description says "dutch cunt", no clue where is he from, aren't Dutch nation in Northwest India?
Where you from, Pierce?
When they make changes to military budgets it's usually technical equipment etc anyway right? Like they buy more choppers, missiles and so on, not better backpacks lol
Yeah. Those backpacks, like all equipment, have a life expectancy. They're not going to be replaced before their time.QuoteNot always, basic infantry equipment is actually something that is often upgraded on, or atleast should be since alot of countries do it like this.
New weapon lines are being tested for that reason, new uniforms are constantly being developed for that reason and overall equipment like vests + helmets were done in that exact reason.
Just because they do tests, doesn't mean they actually get purchased. Those tests usually are done by private companies who want to make money, not the actual militairy.QuoteLook at the middle-east, CQB happens every day. You can only do that with infantry, that's why infantry equipment needs to be also top notch to compete.
Like I'm glad my country's army uses the HK417 for example, it's a good rifle. Now we just need more fitting uniforms for tactical purposes, our armour plating in our vests is fine.
You're thinking from the perspective of a general, not of a politician. If we were to update our army everytime something better is created, you'd be spending money every year on new gear. It's not how it works. When it is time to replace a certain item (Its life expectancy has run out), it's decided with what to replace it. A compromise between quality and price is found, and because it's so easy to defund the army (Because they don't strike), usually it's the price that is the most important factor. And more often then not, it doesn't actually get replaced until long after its life expectancy because 'hey you're not gonna throw away this perfectly almost always working radio?!!!".
The testing actually leads to new weapon lines being developed, Russia just did it aswell with the AK12/AK15 that is competing with the A545.
They do testing and then whichever guns proves to be the best in every test will be the one which will be massively produced for their army.
The army could strike though but I guess it'd cause a heavy backlash, it's not something Western militaries do quite often but I remember seeing documentaries about militaries in the regions of Africa just deciding to say ''fuck it'' and leave with the people who didn't agree with the payment they were receiving. Quite funny to watch actually.
That's the whole case with the Dutch Woodland camo, it's quite outdated and it's so easy to get nowadays that sometimes it can also be hard to identify which troops are which.
Rebels own woodland pretty much all over the place.
But having sensible gunlaws wouldn't hurt.
Except how many gun attacks do you see in the UK? Not many. It's not hypocritical it's just common sense. Stricter laws on acid are coming to pass and I'm pretty sure it's already illegal to carry large knives in public. Yes that doesn't stop knife crime but it certainly makes it easier to police.
On the contrary, France doesn't border a crime ridden country that is home to the cartel. I doubt there's crates full of cheap rifles and small arms coming in from Germany.
Right so you don't have any actual evidence. A quick google search brings up results telling me that the majority of mass shooters obtained their firearms legally.
Poland and other ex-Communist Block countries are a haven for illegal weapons. Pretty much the entirety of Dutch organized crime is armed with AKs. So actually, yes, there are.
but people aren't being mown down by gunmen every other week.
More EU hypocrisy plainly visible re: the Catalonia Referendum.
Enforce your nation's immigration/border laws and the EU Commission freaks the fuck out about "human rights" and collective responsibility. Send in national police to beat up peaceful groups and storm voting locations and they boldly declare that such "proportionate force" is needed to uphold the rule of law (still waiting for an explanation as to how voting can be illegal in a so called democracy).
Right so you don't have any actual evidence. A quick google search brings up results telling me that the majority of mass shooters obtained their firearms legally.
You're correct, I sadly do not have any documentation on the exact number of illicit firearms coming from Mexico into the United States. In case you didn't know, illegal firearms are not registered. And now it seems we've switched from the majority of gun criminals to mass shooters. Nice.Poland and other ex-Communist Block countries are a haven for illegal weapons. Pretty much the entirety of Dutch organized crime is armed with AKs. So actually, yes, there are.
There's a clear-cut difference between old weapons being circulated like in formerly communist countries, and weapons being produced in addition to being circulated like in countries south of North America.
As for the Netherlands:Spoiler(https://i.gyazo.com/dab3cb048c1d243226867c751fb37008.png)
(https://i.gyazo.com/b8cbbb0cded8d63fd49971a1d33a62e6.png)
http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/region/netherlands[close]
So as I thought, not nearly comparable to the scale amount of illicit firearms in the US.
Various things to keep in mind re: gun control.
1) Take away the guns and they'll find other ways to kill one another. In London someone is stabbed to death on average every 6 days. London police respond to stabbing incidents on average 5 times a day. Of course mass shootings are rare in the UK as a result of strict gun control, but it doesn't do much to reduce gang related violence which is where the bulk of the casualties are.
2) Gun control just isn't going to work in the USA, a country where there are already more guns than people. You can do various things to make the rules tighter but it's still going to be very easy for someone living there to get a gun.
3) I suspect this is more to do with the fairly poor way the US treats those with mental health issues. Americans have always had the right to bear arms yet mass shootings have only been a significant problem since the 1970s. The safest decade in modern American history was the 1950s when you had mass gun ownership, even laxer gun control laws than you have now, and an adult population with a higher degree of military experience than any previous generation.
In crime ridden cities, its the opposite. That's what should be looked at more than the occasional mass shooter, considering how many people die in inner cities due to gun violence. Take a look at this study: https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/htus8008.pdfOf course you don't have evidence, so what is the basis of your claim. My point is that the majority of shooter's firearms are bought legally in the USA. This was always a conversation about mass shooters as that is the entire reason for the calls for gun control in the USA. Have you not been reading the news since forever?SpoilerRight so you don't have any actual evidence. A quick google search brings up results telling me that the majority of mass shooters obtained their firearms legally.
You're correct, I sadly do not have any documentation on the exact number of illicit firearms coming from Mexico into the United States. In case you didn't know, illegal firearms are not registered. And now it seems we've switched from the majority of gun criminals to mass shooters. Nice.Poland and other ex-Communist Block countries are a haven for illegal weapons. Pretty much the entirety of Dutch organized crime is armed with AKs. So actually, yes, there are.
There's a clear-cut difference between old weapons being circulated like in formerly communist countries, and weapons being produced in addition to being circulated like in countries south of North America.
As for the Netherlands:Spoiler(https://i.gyazo.com/dab3cb048c1d243226867c751fb37008.png)
(https://i.gyazo.com/b8cbbb0cded8d63fd49971a1d33a62e6.png)
http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/region/netherlands[close]
So as I thought, not nearly comparable to the scale amount of illicit firearms in the US.[close]
Of course a nation with more firearms is going to have more firearm related crime.
So you're saying that access to firearms doesn't correlate with their use in crime?Not every country is the same. Clearly there is something different in America which makes its society a lot more dangerous in regards to firearms. I don't know what that is though.
I don't know what that is though.
Well it must be something. I'm speculating. I should have guessed you were American though due to the instant defensive tone when the issue was brought up.I don't know what that is though.
And yet just a short while ago you were very definitively stating that it was due to our "gun culture".
Ah, emotional appealsGlad to see nearly 60 dead people doesn't spur you into action
Well we're both A) in the wrong country and B) not part of the decision making processAh, emotional appealsGlad to see nearly 60 dead people doesn't spur you into action
well they were most likely republicans who voted Trump so I have no sympathy for themAh, emotional appealsGlad to see nearly 60 dead people doesn't spur you into action
How do you tackle crime then boberton? You limit the ways the crime can be committed, which in the USA is firearms.
Ah, emotional appealsGlad to see nearly 60 dead people doesn't spur you into action
Mass shooting occur once a year on average
Toffee you realize 93 people die by guns on average every day in the US? Should we be forgetting about the majority of them being innocent people as well? Mass shooting occur once a year on average, yes it is an issue but when you look at it from an utopian point of view thousands of people are dying from gun violence (including kids). It's important to address that first, and the solution is not taking away guns, but again addressing the societal and economic situations which foster that sort of gun culture (as the CDC and Justice studies both validate occur in predominately African American poverished inner cities )Yes but both need to be done. Mass shootings happen way too often. You need to take away the means. How are you going to address these issues? Offering better mental health help for people? We both know that won't happen in the US with your healthcare track record.
Offering better mental health help for people? We both know that won't happen in the US with your healthcare track record.
Failure to pass legislation in the past is really no argument why no attempt should be made. All new legislation failed before.This. Your entire argument Boberton is that is hasn't been done before...
Also I'm Dutch, I come from quite a military family so that's why I'm interested in this. Trying to enlist myself aswell.
Wikipedia says the Commandos get them.
Failure to pass legislation in the past is really no argument why no attempt should be made. All new legislation failed before.
This. Your entire argument Boberton is that is hasn't been done before...
I am not against gun ownership per se personally, but what Ican't understand is why people are so imcredubly fucking spastic when it comes to just implementing a simple background check...
Of course it's a major problem that's why measures need to be taken against extremism and they will be. But you can't just sit back idly and wait for another mass shooting to occur. I'm done trying to convince you guys because clearly you don't care. You'll be the first to shout tragedy when another one happens and the first to do nothing about it.Wait, I thought you finished trying here, Toffee!
And Theodin don't be an arse. You love to cry virtue signalling when you can't think of a proper argument. Clearly we need to prevent people from fucking dying. That's not virtue signalling that's just common fucking sense.
I'm not saying it's possible to get rid of all guns but clearly some restrictions have to be put in place. It's not virtue signalling if I'm talking about hiw the discussion started in the first place. I'm pretty sure the US constitution doesn't state that all weapons must be allowed so maybe a restriction on high capacity magazines, high calibre rifles or something along those lines to try to limit their usage (I don't know guns). In the period that the Iraq war happend. More women were killed with guns by their partners than the US dead in the war. It needs to become harder for potential risks for gun violence to gain access to these weapons. Switzerland has background checks and requires liscenses and this obviously leads to fewer deaths. There have been almost half a million gun deaths in the ISA between the late nineties and 2013. Surely steps must be taken to protect citizens.
Yes they exist, sure. Not everywhere though.
I mean... I was in Salt Lake City this summer and went to the range.
I could, as a foreigner, buy any rifle or pistol I wanted. No background checks involved, I didn't even need to register myself.
Gun ownership is fine when fopr recreation, but don't give me the bullshit argument about protecting yourself from the government. Given that the U.S. government can't even pass proper healthcare laws or educate its people let alone overthrow the democracy and create a dictatorship.
Not to even mention the fact that if a dictatorship ever comes to be in the U.S., it'll be self-inflicted and not forced.
The self defense argument is not that strong either. Sure home defense, I can get behind that to some degree, but having a 9mm glock protecting your house or a 7.62 FN SCAR will seriously not make a difference and I hope you can argue that having high powered rifles out and about isn't that ideala situation considering you can blow the tits off of someone with that thing from 800 metres away and there's only so much police weapons can do about that.
Open carry to protect against an active shooter situation? Hilarious. Even police officers, fuck me even regular army infantry personnel aren't equipped and/or trained enough to handle an active shooter event. That's why there are tactical response teams to begin with. And you're telling me 52-year-old uncle Bob from Tennessee, the old cowboy indoor range tiger, is capable enough to stop a shooter at church on Sunday next week without killing a few more extra innocents? That's not sensible at all.
Besides that, there have already been instances when an active shooter event was happening where civilians were carrying weapons... That turned out to be a significant clusterfuck because as soon as there were multiple armed people out and about nobody knew anymore who the shooter was in the first place.
And the Us constitution specifically mentions the necessity of a well regulated militia in regards to the right to bear arms. It's actually pretty ambiguous to be honest.
The self defense argument is not that strong either. Sure home defense, I can get behind that to some degree, but having a 9mm glock protecting your house or a 7.62 FN SCAR will seriously not make a difference and I hope you can argue that having high powered rifles out and about isn't that ideala situation considering you can blow the tits off of someone with that thing from 800 metres away and there's only so much police weapons can do about that.
Surely as a soldier you recognize the value of an autoloading long arm in the defense.
I mean... I was in Salt Lake City this summer and went to the range.
I could, as a foreigner, buy any rifle or pistol I wanted. No background checks involved, I didn't even need to register myself.
7.62's just punch big holes and is the best suitable for long range precision shooting.
Yes it states that people have the right to bear arms. It also precursors that by talking about a regulated militia. Evidently that is quite outdated at the minute so using it as a reason not to regulate high powered rifles/ magazines etc is a bad argument.
Also if background checks are adequate then how did a mentally ill bloke get hold of those guns?
You seriously think states are gonna raise a militia in 2017?The states could easily raise militias, whether it be some form of the states national guard, a combination of ex-police/military, or just concerned citizens.
And I've read that only federal law requires background checks for liscensed sale but not for private sales. Only nine states have universal background checks
You seriously think states are gonna raise a militia in 2017?Michigan has a militia. Its pretty small. Only a couple hundred people are active, with more as reserves.
And I've read that only federal law requires background checks for liscensed sale but not for private sales. Only nine states have universal background checks
Also if background checks are adequate then how did a mentally ill bloke get hold of those guns?Sometimes people show no signs of mental illness and have no previous symptoms. As someone who actually believes in background checks, they can only do so much
Well if the check didn't find anything incriminating then it was a damn shitty check. You came in patronising people for not knowing gun laws. Don't try and frame it as though you were only pointing out that there are already background checks because, in some cases there aren't.
You seriously think states are gonna raise a militia in 2017?
You came in patronising people for not knowing gun laws.
Don't try and frame it as though you were only pointing out that there are already background checks because, in some cases there aren't.
If that were the case the Russians would not have adopted a new caliber for their small arms more akin to the 5.56x45 NATO.
I would say, the AK with 5.45 round is more deadlier than a 7.62 one, so you have to match 5.56 with 5.45 round, not 7.62.Trust Ukrainians, after all who else has more experience with fighting AK's ::)
still dre day niggainb4 muted again. You don't care about your life do you nero?
ak nigga
On AK you dont have to switch to 5.56 when you have 5.45, it's obvious. Also, tfw when someone calls AK usefull for a long range firefight. AK is very unstable in accuracy, also it has major problems after firing 2-3 mags - accuracy drops so much.I agree, Short-Medium combat range AK is the coolest weapon :P
I think I the debate over which ammunition is better has become slightly off topicCommunism did nothing wrong.
I think I the debate over which ammunition is better has become slightly off topicCommunism did nothing wrong.
tfw in the Czech election the guy from the party leading the polls owns the largest Czech media company :>I don't see a problem xxxxxx
::)tfw in the Czech election the guy from the party leading the polls owns the largest Czech media company :>I don't see a problem xxxxxx
Also, tfw when someone calls AK usefull for a long range firefight. AK is very unstable in accuracy, also it has major problems after firing 2-3 mags
Yes, Iraqi forces were good with those AK, because they used tactics of shooting just where they were looking at. But yes, the poing of AK is to provide suppressive fire. But AK cant stand for a long time shooting, after 2 mags you experince weird bullet drop.
I didn't say AK are in particular good for long range, but it was experience quite often by coalition forces in Iraq and Afghanistan that they were often outranged by AK fire. Don't forget that for a firefight it is never expected to have pinpoint accuracy. The point of fighting in groups is that you put suppressive fire downrange. You''l hit someone eventually when you get close enough. The AK can still be reasonably accurate at 600 metres, with a max range of suppressive fire at 800 metres. Sure that would require a skilled shooter, which terrorists usually are anything but. It was still prblematic considering the M4 has an effective range of 300-400 metres and suppressive fire at a max of roughly 600
Also, tfw when someone calls AK usefull for a long range firefight. AK is very unstable in accuracy, also it has major problems after firing 2-3 mags
I didn't say AK are in particular good for long range, but it was experience quite often by coalition forces in Iraq and Afghanistan that they were often outranged by AK fire. Don't forget that for a firefight it is never expected to have pinpoint accuracy. The point of fighting in groups is that you put suppressive fire downrange. You''l hit someone eventually when you get close enough. The AK can still be reasonably accurate at 600 metres, with a max range of suppressive fire at 800 metres. Sure that would require a skilled shooter, which terrorists usually are anything but. It was still prblematic considering the M4 has an effective range of 300-400 metres and suppressive fire at a max of roughly 600
The US Army I believe is looking into reintroducing the 7.62 round as a standard issue round for the grunts.
Seems like they're falling back into time with that... there were, and still are, good reasons to switch to 5.56.
The problem the US army has is that they don't really have a weapons on the squad that quite gets the job done at 600 metres...
It is strange because no other military seems to have a problem as bad as that... Or willing to change to combat it, perhaps.
Question for people who know this, is the M240 still a crew-served weapon that is carried by a squad? or is that just the M249?
Also, implementation of swords and sabres as individual cold weapon. Also the attachment of horses for armoured units and artillery.The US Army I believe is looking into reintroducing the 7.62 round as a standard issue round for the grunts.
Seems like they're falling back into time with that... there were, and still are, good reasons to switch to 5.56.
The problem the US army has is that they don't really have a weapons on the squad that quite gets the job done at 600 metres...
It is strange because no other military seems to have a problem as bad as that... Or willing to change to combat it, perhaps.
Question for people who know this, is the M240 still a crew-served weapon that is carried by a squad? or is that just the M249?
For this reason I suggest introducing the 4 pounder cannon into the squad level. A small mortar might also do the job.
So can helicopters...Pf, who needs heli when you have a vintage animals in use ::)
The US Army I believe is looking into reintroducing the 7.62 round as a standard issue round for the grunts.We already use the M4 Carbines and M16s 5.56, haven't heard about switching to 7.62 (Idk why we would). M240's atleast in the Air Force are on our UH-1s, I know the M249 is def squad carried, but I've heard that marines are replacing it with M27's
Seems like they're falling back into time with that... there were, and still are, good reasons to switch to 5.56.
The problem the US army has is that they don't really have a weapons on the squad that quite gets the job done at 600 metres...
It is strange because no other military seems to have a problem as bad as that... Or willing to change to combat it, perhaps.
Question for people who know this, is the M240 still a crew-served weapon that is carried by a squad? or is that just the M249?
Lol a M61 Vulcan shredding vintage cavalry would be a glorious sightSo can helicopters...Pf, who needs heli when you have a vintage animals in use ::)
No jokes, in combat rules and regulations we have a statement which says - every mechanised and armoured brigade must have horses attached to it lolLol a M61 Vulcan shredding vintage cavalry would be a glorious sightSo can helicopters...Pf, who needs heli when you have a vintage animals in use ::)
I looked into it a bit more and I seems that the M240 is still used frequently by army squads... I figured it might have been one of the causes why the Army would consider switching to a 7.62 rifle. If they have not a single weapon on-squad with longer range it is indeed hard to counter enemies with such rifles.
So can helicopters...
So can helicopters...
The West is going to support stability in the region. Western militaries know that iraq as a country is never going to happen again, wihch hopefully will trickle down to politics.
The West has the safest and most sustainable ally in the Kurds, tohugh let's just hope Turkey won't go tits up.
Kurds can beat the Iraqi military no problem
Ah yes the proven islamic model, what a meme.
Biggest meme of the week:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/north-korea-us-attack-emp-power-grid-kill-90-per-cent-american-population-electromagnetic-pulse-a8002756.html
Kurds can beat the Iraqi military no problem
Guess not.
Biggest meme of the week:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/north-korea-us-attack-emp-power-grid-kill-90-per-cent-american-population-electromagnetic-pulse-a8002756.html
I envy your ability to be oblivious of your dependance on the power gridBiggest meme of the week:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/north-korea-us-attack-emp-power-grid-kill-90-per-cent-american-population-electromagnetic-pulse-a8002756.html
Are all americans robots, or how the hell are 90% of all americans going to die by shutting down the power grid?
They can't get you if you wear a tinfoil hat!I envy your ability to be oblivious of your dependance on the power gridBiggest meme of the week:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/north-korea-us-attack-emp-power-grid-kill-90-per-cent-american-population-electromagnetic-pulse-a8002756.html
Are all americans robots, or how the hell are 90% of all americans going to die by shutting down the power grid?
Kurds can beat the Iraqi military no problem
Guess not.
I envy your ability to be oblivious of your dependance on the power gridBiggest meme of the week:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/north-korea-us-attack-emp-power-grid-kill-90-per-cent-american-population-electromagnetic-pulse-a8002756.html
Are all americans robots, or how the hell are 90% of all americans going to die by shutting down the power grid?
The entire system is build to withstand a major nuclear attack. Or at least it was 30 years ago.The military yes, the electrical grid? I don’t think so, especially the never equipment
I am sure the government will do fine.
Are all americans robots, or how the hell are 90% of all americans going to die by shutting down the power grid?
Terror suspects including jihadis returning from fighting in Syria are to be offered taxpayer-funded homes, counselling and help finding jobs to stop them carrying out attacks in Britain.
The top-secret Government strategy, codenamed Operation Constrain, could even allow fanatics to jump to the top of council house waiting lists.
Official documents seen by The Mail on Sunday reveal that up to 20,000 extremists previously investigated by MI5 will be targeted with what critics last night described as ‘bribes’ aimed at turning them away from extremism.
Ignoringpeoples feelingsbasic logic that anyone fanatical enough to kill innocent men, women, and children for their interpretation of islam will never be dissuaded by material goods (what is a house compared to eternal gifts from Allah?) completely, this is actually a very smart solution
known terrorists
known terrorists
Suspected terrorists. If they were known terrorists, they'd be in prison
OKay, so as a government, you have a returned jihadi. You kind of want to know what he or she is up to when theyre back in your country and youre kind of that they want to kill more people.
What better way to keep an eye on them is to put them in a location of your choosing (in other words, social housing in te middle of Dundee, Scotland, so no chance of there being fellow radicals). You can bug the shit out the house and basically keep an eye on the jihadi almost all the time. That also increases the chance of getting to know his or her network.
If this isnt entirely the case and the jihadi has returned slightly cured of his ISIS zealotry, it may be a decent shot at reintregration thereby making sure attacks dont happen too.
I get that it goes against a more conservative approach of people having to be punished for what theyve done, but youre not going to stop radicalisation if you just put them in a cell. This is controversial, but pragmatic.
Dont forget these kinds of decisions arent usually made by politicians, but by the intelligence services. They kind of know what theyre doing.
And these suspected terrorists often get away with what they were planning because they haven’t been watched close enough. The bloke who carried out the London attack was known to MI5 and that didn’t help much.known terrorists
Suspected terrorists. If they were known terrorists, they'd be in prison
OKay, so as a government, you have a returned jihadi. You kind of want to know what he or she is up to when theyre back in your country and youre kind of that they want to kill more people.
What better way to keep an eye on them is to put them in a location of your choosing (in other words, social housing in te middle of Dundee, Scotland, so no chance of there being fellow radicals). You can bug the shit out the house and basically keep an eye on the jihadi almost all the time. That also increases the chance of getting to know his or her network.
If this isnt entirely the case and the jihadi has returned slightly cured of his ISIS zealotry, it may be a decent shot at reintregration thereby making sure attacks dont happen too.
I get that it goes against a more conservative approach of people having to be punished for what theyve done, but youre not going to stop radicalisation if you just put them in a cell. This is controversial, but pragmatic.
Dont forget these kinds of decisions arent usually made by politicians, but by the intelligence services. They kind of know what theyre doing.
I sincerely hope you're playing devil's advocate.
And these suspected terrorists often get away with what they were planning because they haven’t been watched close enough. The bloke who carried out the London attack was known to MI5 and that didn’t help much.
This may hurt someone, but i'm personally extremly against muslims polluting lands of Europe.If you can't contribute anything but trash talk and generalise, you should probably just fuck off.
I do contribute some, actually.This may hurt someone, but i'm personally extremly against muslims polluting lands of Europe.If you can't contribute anything but trash talk and generalise, you should probably just fuck off.
I can actually sympathise with the rational side of giving them housing. It's effective.
You have to take into account that the intelligence community thinks about this completely rationally and really doesn't give a shit what the public thinks about their plans.
So long as they catch terrorists (which they do, more than you'd like to know) they don't give a shit about what people think.
And it does work, you can't really deny that. You just think it's morally deplorable. You're not wrong, but as I said, the Intel community doesn't really take that into account.
Exactly this. The benefits systems are stretched thin as it is. Are we gonna give money to terrorists over innocent people. If we let terrorists back into the UK you're asking for something to happen. It's like playing bait with the public. The United Kingdom's policy is no negotiation with terrorists. There can't be any leeway.I can actually sympathise with the rational side of giving them housing. It's effective.
You have to take into account that the intelligence community thinks about this completely rationally and really doesn't give a shit what the public thinks about their plans.
So long as they catch terrorists (which they do, more than you'd like to know) they don't give a shit about what people think.
And it does work, you can't really deny that. You just think it's morally deplorable. You're not wrong, but as I said, the Intel community doesn't really take that into account.
Do you have any evidence to prove it's effective? Considering the intelligence services are stretched thin enough as it is and they do in fact care about giving public money to genocide enablers (at least in the UK) that can't possibly be true. Given most terrorist attacks are carried out by people already known to police/intelligence services it makes no sense to do what you're proposing. There simply aren't the resources to fully check what these people are up to.
I can actually sympathise with the rational side of giving them housing. It's effective.
You have to take into account that the intelligence community thinks about this completely rationally and really doesn't give a shit what the public thinks about their plans.
So long as they catch terrorists (which they do, more than you'd like to know) they don't give a shit about what people think.
And it does work, you can't really deny that. You just think it's morally deplorable. You're not wrong, but as I said, the Intel community doesn't really take that into account.
I can actually sympathise with the rational side of giving them housing. It's effective.
But they're not terrorists. They are suspected terrorists, which gives security services justifications for certain actions. If there is enough proof to convict them, they will. But no judge will convict someone of terrorism just because the prosecution can prove he or she visited IS-controlled area. This isn't a political issue.
Point is that it's very hard to prove membership of a terrorist organisations (because they don't exacttly keep archives) or that they commited warcrimes. Pretty much all returnee's claim to have been a humitarian aid worker or a nurse and you can't imprison someone based on a likelihood. I mean, stupid rule of law, amirite?
we don't know how many terrorist attacks have been avoided by the security forces. Quite a lot, apparantly.Well not publicly, no. But even for countries such as the netherlands, it's more than we'd like.
our intelligence agencies are completely overwhelmed with the sheer amount of terrorists polluting this country?
Point is that it's very hard to prove membership of a terrorist organisations (because they don't exacttly keep archives) or that they commited warcrimes. Pretty much all returnee's claim to have been a humitarian aid worker or a nurse and you can't imprison someone based on a likelihood. I mean, stupid rule of law, amirite?
Rubbish. In the UK at least we know who the vast majority of them are and what they did/are doing, see here for instance: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-32026985
That's just what's been made public, the security agencies will obviously have much more extensive private files. Most of them are actually quite thick and it's easy to prove.
Anyone catch Trump's arrival in China? Looks like all that tough talk actually paid off, lol.What do you mean? Him getting a nice welcome doesn't mean anything when they come to negotiations.
You'll have to use Chrome to translate the page if you don't speak frog though.
The Chinese know Trump is a fantastic US President...for Chinese interests. Beijing has spent years trying to undermine TPP and Trump blew it up in his first week. His dumb comments about US troops stationed in Asia has also undermined America's position in the region. US allies are prepared to put up with it as a kind of 'one off' for four years but if he get's a second term countries will start to peel off and look to Beijing instead.
Essentially the Chinese want the US out of the Asia-Pacific as much as possible and Trump is a dream come true. He might talk tough on trade and NK but that's a minor compromise for them to accept. End result=Trump's sped up US decline by about 10 years.
You guys assume we are in decline when in reality our economy is at its 3rd highest since World War II. We are far from any recession let alone depression. In terms of Trump, he clearly has gain more relations with several Asian countries such as Japan/India/Singapore, etc... Maybe European countries are distancing themselves but the major trade partners have been emboldened if anythingAnd yet China's economy is growing faster than yours. Soon they'll become the world leader and America will lag behind. Europe distancing itself is exactly the issue seeing as they make up a large portion of NATO and the US's influence. It's clear to anybody that America isn't as dominant on the world stage as it used to be.
gimme a link to that test ledger so I can see how far gone I am
'Orc attacks are just part and parcel of living in Gondor. Gondor's ignorant view of Sauron could make both our countries less safe. Osgiliath has proven them wrong.'Banter
- Witch King, recently elected Mayor of Osgiliath.
If you have more than 0% on Communism then don't talk, thanks.ayy
To be fair that part of the test is a meme. Capitalism and Socialism are modes of production. Capitalism is generalized production for exchange (that is, the exchange of goods and services for money and such, making them commodities), while Socialism is production for use, where there wouldn't be commodities to be exchanged for money, simply products.
You cannot have "a mix between the two" as they are basically oil and water.
I suppose it’s talking in the sense of mentality rather than the actual pragmatics of how each would work.
What do you think eradicated traditional culture? Why do rightcucks complain consumerism and the inauthentic, superficial values of modern society but don't have the balls or brains to find the root cause?
Capitalism mainly destroys culture through two different avenues
First of all, it destroys what we now call folk -or "people's"- culture. Man used to have a lot of his time devoted in creating the things that made life enjoyable: poetry, music, games, tales, even the mythology and religion he used to explain the world around him. He was also a participant in its survival and circulation, forming a common heritage whom he shared with his fellow man, passing down his knowledge and traditions from father to son, mother to daughter, etc.
Now he isn't nearly as capable of such as he no longer has the time or the energy. Half his waking hours -or even more- are spent generating profit for someone else, while his children are taught how to "sell themselves" to their future employers, or "finding their own brand".
He can no longer participate in the creation and maintenance of culture with his community either as he now also finds himself atomized in these little privatized spaces called Suburbia.
Furthermore, what ends up filling the void is not culture as naturally emerging from humans like before, but through this Culture Industry. What I mean by this is that Culture itself is subjected to a division of labor where certain people, mostly those working in the media industry, have the specific jobs to produce culture, not to create it.
Culture is now subjected to the rigorous logic of the assembly line. It is there to generate profit, to minimize cost and maximize revenue through appealing to the lowest common denominator consisting of the now desensitized people. Worse still, whom it generates profit for and is accountable only to are the shareholders and the owners, which in spite of owning nearly 90% of American media through a series of conglomerates, only seem ever more intent in increasing the size of their coffers.
What results is the consumerist culture, the homogeneous throwaway culture that spreads like cancer throughout the Globe in this epoch of Neoliberalism and mass media, only to be replaced by yet another manufactured fad after it inevitably burns out from the saturation.
lol andy stfuCapitalism mainly destroys culture through two different avenues
First of all, it destroys what we now call folk -or "people's"- culture. Man used to have a lot of his time devoted in creating the things that made life enjoyable: poetry, music, games, tales, even the mythology and religion he used to explain the world around him. He was also a participant in its survival and circulation, forming a common heritage whom he shared with his fellow man, passing down his knowledge and traditions from father to son, mother to daughter, etc.
Now he isn't nearly as capable of such as he no longer has the time or the energy. Half his waking hours -or even more- are spent generating profit for someone else, while his children are taught how to "sell themselves" to their future employers, or "finding their own brand".
He can no longer participate in the creation and maintenance of culture with his community either as he now also finds himself atomized in these little privatized spaces called Suburbia.
Furthermore, what ends up filling the void is not culture as naturally emerging from humans like before, but through this Culture Industry. What I mean by this is that Culture itself is subjected to a division of labor where certain people, mostly those working in the media industry, have the specific jobs to produce culture, not to create it.
Culture is now subjected to the rigorous logic of the assembly line. It is there to generate profit, to minimize cost and maximize revenue through appealing to the lowest common denominator consisting of the now desensitized people. Worse still, whom it generates profit for and is accountable only to are the shareholders and the owners, which in spite of owning nearly 90% of American media through a series of conglomerates, only seem ever more intent in increasing the size of their coffers.
What results is the consumerist culture, the homogeneous throwaway culture that spreads like cancer throughout the Globe in this epoch of Neoliberalism and mass media, only to be replaced by yet another manufactured fad after it inevitably burns out from the saturation.
There are two issues with your arguments. Firstly, regarding cultural development and individual manifestation. Most people fall apart unless they have a job or some sort of an activity to keep them preoccupied and have a sense of value to society and this isn't achieved proactively where the individual takes initiative. A very small percentage of extraordinary, conscientious and talented individuals manage to busy themselves without an outside need; It's human psychology. There's a a reason why people have mental breakdowns when they're fired and fail to find a job / activity that would make them feel valuable to society.
Regarding your "It's all for malicious profit and exploitation of the poor". The free market adapts to the most efficient and effective way of maintaining itself resulting in technological and cultural progress. Furthermore, it has inadvertently become the best vessel for globalization, human progress and unification. Socialism has been tried and failed all through out history and its ideas are the anathema of what you people fight for.
First of all, it destroys what we now call folk -or "people's"- culture. Man used to have a lot of his time devoted in creating the things that made life enjoyable: poetry, music, games, tales, even the mythology and religion he used to explain the world around him.
It's kind of ironic how Fraudbear mentions the destruction of religion even though Communism is an atheist ideology.
Meaning that he’s accusing capitalism of destroying religious values even though his own ideology is one of atheism?It's kind of ironic how Fraudbear mentions the destruction of religion even though Communism is an atheist ideology.
Meaning what?
Meaning that he’s accusing capitalism of destroying religious values even though his own ideology is one of atheism?It's kind of ironic how Fraudbear mentions the destruction of religion even though Communism is an atheist ideology.
Meaning what?
Your vocabulary honestly makes you look 12 and that you've just learnt a naughty word that you're trying to impress your mates with.Are we still arguing about communism?We were arguing about Capitalism and culture. These faggots just like to move the goalposts.
You chat so much shite it’s unreal. Just because the institution that was replaced was bad that doesn’t make the replacement good. The Soviet Union was a dictatorship without free speech (not religion) led by an oppressive regime that murdered millions of its own people. Nice to see that you support that.And you think religion flourished in the Soviet Union? Free speech certainly died when the Communists came to power. There’s some equality for you.Yeah and do you know anything about the Orthodox Russian Church in the early 20th century? Most peasants saw the church as a corrupt institutions from the days of the Tsar. The main campaign against religion finished in 1941. Under Kruschev, you were free to be a member and practice any faith, but it was discouraged by the State.
Islam in Central Asia was also equally retrograde shit. No regrets there.
QuoteSocialism has been tried and failed all through out history and its ideas are the anathema of what you people fight for.But we are not talking about Socialism. We are talking about the erosion of culture under Capitalism. Not an argument.
I always wondered why people in the West want communism so badly when the people that actually lived under it do everything to escape it. :thinking:but that wasn't REAL communism /s
So basically we're in Germany?
If the University is a private institution then they’re entitled to have their members of staff have certain rules. Not creating an uncomfortable situation for their students would probably come into line with those rules. I suppose the controversy could have been alleviated with some kind of warning in place beforehand so that students who might be offended could have the opportunity to leave. Her free speech wasn’t violated. In the Uk teachers aren’t allowed to advocate for a political party over another, or at least my teachers weren’t, that’s not a violation of free speech it was just school policy.Whether her actions broke some rule or not, I find it absolutely despicable that someone who clearly presented the opinions in a neutral manner of a current political issue gets sanctioned for not taking sides. That's what happened here - she got sanctioned for not taking sides. Moreover she got sanctioned for fulfilling the university's core mission, presenting a current issue with the invitation for critical thought. Besides, it's The Agenda, which is Ontario's public political broadcast, which is a very well moderated debate on current issues. It's not an offensive show, nor is it anything more than presentation of well articulate ideas. There is no excuse for it, and it's disturbing that it happened.
I do think comparing it to Hitler was slightly excessive thogh and it does irritate me how the government spokeswomen basically refused to give a straight answer so you have to wade trough her question parrying to find her actual position on the matter.
I swear to god if the university I go to next year is like this I'll shoot myself.Sadly it probably will. Take a look at the ratings to see how it'll be: http://campusfreedomindex.ca/
I don’t see what your point is Gordo?
Looks ugly imo
Trump’s PR team having another bad dayNo one cares besides the liberal media lol
And the rest of the world. Even the British Primeminister has said he was wrong. If you don’t know who Britain First are then you should know that they’re known as being racist and Islamaphobic. The President of the USA sharing their stuff is basically saying he’s anti Muslim.Trump’s PR team having another bad dayNo one cares besides the liberal media lol
I mean I agree he's a moron when it comes to tweeting but more importantly if our tax reform passes your country will suffer a hit, unless you guys compete and lower corporate tax rates for foreign entities. That should be bigger news than anything elseOther than the fact that the President of the biggest superpower in the world is an Islamaphobe? That’s pretty huge news
Trump re-tweets controversial stuff on Twitter, well f*** me what a surprise. The worst thing is Trump probably won't get re-elected in 2020, and will replaced with an uber-liberal 'anti-Trump' Democrat and I'll hear no end to BBC stories about gender-neutral toilets being installed in the White House or whatever.
Other than the fact that the President of the biggest superpower in the world is an Islamaphobe? That’s pretty huge news. Even the British Primeminister has said he was wrong.
It’s quite shocking that he would align himself with a far-right group, yes. And Britain is the USAs closest ally. Trump is severing relations quickly.As yes, because Tweets dictate foreign policy with the most powerful country in the world ::)
No they don’t, but a denunciation from 10 Downing Street certainly reflects an attitude towards his actions, wouldn’t you say? The Primeminister is distancing herself from him.It’s quite shocking that he would align himself with a far-right group, yes. And Britain is the USAs closest ally. Trump is severing relations quickly.As yes, because Tweets dictate foreign policy with the most powerful country in the world ::)
To be fair when you're a head of state it should take more thought than simply reading a headline before sharing something. I don't think its to much to ask to at least exercise that amount of competency.It’s quite shocking that he would align himself with a far-right group, yes. And Britain is the USAs closest ally. Trump is severing relations quickly.As yes, because Tweets dictate foreign policy with the most powerful country in the world ::)
Lol he didn't align himself with anyone, he saw something on his feed and retweeted it, big deal he's obviously not a traditional president. It's no surprise at all he's anti-Muslim, he made that very clear from day one lmao+1
Meh. The PM already publically distanced herself from Trump; however, like other world leaders who've done this, it's clear that that's mostly to score points from the anti-Trump crowd. I mean, look at the Chinese - they've been wary of Trump from day 1, published statements about his antics, disapproved of him publically, and yet they're investing hundreds of millions of dollars in American energy and deepening military and economic ties.No they don’t, but a denunciation from 10 Downing Street certainly reflects an attitude towards his actions, wouldn’t you say? The Primeminister is distancing herself from him.It’s quite shocking that he would align himself with a far-right group, yes. And Britain is the USAs closest ally. Trump is severing relations quickly.As yes, because Tweets dictate foreign policy with the most powerful country in the world ::)
You guys confuse the workings of international politics with national politics.This is very true
International politics is over the top super fucking sensitive. Yes, leaders do give a shit what kund of video you share. Leaders do care if you spell their names correctly.
It affects deals, trade, possible compromises. If an individual representative of government doesn't like you because of what you tweet... Yes, that does affect any deal, however childish that may seem.
Especially Asian countries are good at that shit but Europe,especially south and eastern EU can be a real bitch. And if you want to or not, you'll HAVE to deal with almost all countries.
You guys confuse the workings of international politics with national politics.
International politics is over the top super fucking sensitive. Yes, leaders do give a shit what kund of video you share. Leaders do care if you spell their names correctly.
It affects deals, trade, possible compromises. If an individual representative of government doesn't like you because of what you tweet... Yes, that does affect any deal, however childish that may seem.
Especially Asian countries are good at that shit but Europe,especially south and eastern EU can be a real bitch. And if you want to or not, you'll HAVE to deal with almost all countries.
You're overgeneralising on the military sales. For starters it are not 'vast quantities' and they certainly do not send quality material to Saudi-Arabia. Most countries aren't even permitting their industries to sell to most middle-eastern countries considering the war SA is waging in Yemen.
It is these kinds of deals between governments and private companies that are usuall signed into law and policy that make it look like a big deal that Saudi Arabia is buying equipment from European companies (which is hard to stop, actually, I mean, it's still a private company) but really doesn't matter that much because European equipment won't be Tsignificantly better than what other countries will offer, and it will certainly not come close to EU military power.
He also once aired his scepticism about climate changeWhat a sin
What you said is a bit misleading. The guy said the whole arrest thing as a means the ambassador should use to persuade Trump not to come to the UK.Spoilerhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ODRJiC3u7EQ[close]
0:29: "We need to ARREST Drumpf."
(And some of you thought Labour couldn't be any worse than the Tories? Lol.)
Well it’s generally accepted that climate change is a thing..QuoteHe also once aired his scepticism about climate changeWhat a sin
Imagine a Ukip MEP calling women sluts at a party. Imagine one claiming that he lost friends in the hullsborough disaster when he didn’t. Imagine saying he wouldn’t be opposed to bringing back internment camps. Or maybe when Nuttall wrote about how the existence of the NHS was a bad thing. He also once aired his scepticism about climate change and opposition to a ruling where a couple were charged with discrimination for not allowing two gay men to sleep in the same bed. Does this represent UKIP?
UKIP is only a small and obscure party because they did these things. They were big players until they exhausted their usefulness. I honestly can’t believe your excuse is that they’re not professional enough as if that’s okay.So are you saying that the Green party is small and obscure because they act like UKIP? Interesting thought.
Why would labour abandon their merits and the core beliefs of their party over Donald Trump. He’ll be gone by the next UK election anyway.
What do you mean? UKIP are unpopular because they were overly controversial and kind of irrelevant after the Brexit vote. How does that relate to green?UKIP is only a small and obscure party because they did these things. They were big players until they exhausted their usefulness. I honestly can’t believe your excuse is that they’re not professional enough as if that’s okay.So are you saying that the Green party is small and obscure because they act like UKIP? Interesting thought.
Why would labour abandon their merits and the core beliefs of their party over Donald Trump. He’ll be gone by the next UK election anyway.
UKIP is only a small and obscure party because they did these things. They were big players until they exhausted their usefulness. I honestly can’t believe your excuse is that they’re not professional enough as if that’s okay.
Why would labour abandon their merits and the core beliefs of their party over Donald Trump. He’ll be gone by the next UK election anyway.
You're implying the party is small because of it being controversial and loud. Implying first past the post and their sole objective as a protest party isn't the actual reasons for their size. No one will elect a government of a protest party because they often have no plans aside from one or two big ones. Which is why UKIP died after the vote. The sole use of UKIP was to get the Brexit vote, thats the reason why its obscure. The way they acted is what allowed them to have some influence despite being small. Maybe if the greens where more controversial they'd do better as well.What do you mean? UKIP are unpopular because they were overly controversial and kind of irrelevant after the Brexit vote. How does that relate to green?UKIP is only a small and obscure party because they did these things. They were big players until they exhausted their usefulness. I honestly can’t believe your excuse is that they’re not professional enough as if that’s okay.So are you saying that the Green party is small and obscure because they act like UKIP? Interesting thought.
Why would labour abandon their merits and the core beliefs of their party over Donald Trump. He’ll be gone by the next UK election anyway.
And when talking about Labour’s policies I was referencing their left wing beliefs that counter those of Donald Trump, showing why they would oppose him rather than talking about the comments of the labour MP. I assume you vote UKIP though because they can do no wrong in your eyes.
UKIP were influential in UK politics, no chance of getting into government but to say that they had no effect would be a lie. Donald Trump has a terrible approval rating. He won’t get re-elected. And in the UK the next government will almost certainly be a labour one.
..... i'm not even going to dignify this with a response as you clearly have no knowledge of the issueWell it’s generally accepted that climate change is a thing..QuoteHe also once aired his scepticism about climate changeWhat a sin
Well it’s generally accepted that climate change is a thing....... i'm not even going to dignify this with a response as you clearly have no knowledge of the issue
Okay!Well it’s generally accepted that climate change is a thing....... i'm not even going to dignify this with a response as you clearly have no knowledge of the issue
You obviously cared enough to take the time to type out that response. So please, go a bit further and put forward your arguements because I am now genuinely curious as to how one can deny climate change in itself.
“I sympathise with the resignation of renowned professor Harold Lewis who has called global warming a money led scam”..... i'm not even going to dignify this with a response as you clearly have no knowledge of the issueWell it’s generally accepted that climate change is a thing..QuoteHe also once aired his scepticism about climate changeWhat a sin
Note an important distinction that you're both guilty of:
The original quote from Toffee was "aired his skepticism about climate change" but yet you both switched from skepticism to denial. Denial of a phenomena is different than skepticism of its variances or implications, but to you people with a very dainty black and white political worldview it's either embrace my positions or be against them. Hah.
Very impressive first paragraph, someone like Toffee would just respond with a boiler plate "you're just wrong" so kudos.Note an important distinction that you're both guilty of:
The original quote from Toffee was "aired his skepticism about climate change" but yet you both switched from skepticism to denial. Denial of a phenomena is different than skepticism of its variances or implications, but to you people with a very dainty black and white political worldview it's either embrace my positions or be against them. Hah.
The extreme wording you used in your response to Toffee led me to believe you sit in the denial camp. An incorrect assumption, you're right on that. And no, my world view isn't as black and white as you like to think. Criticism of climate change is always valid criticism since we don't understand the science behind the issue enough to really make one claim or another. I personally believe it is a natural process on its own that is now being increased and speed up by human actions.
Now, onto another topic I wanna know from you, seeing as you are an actual skeptic, what is your view on reneweable energy? If we just push aside the issue of climate change, we still face the possibility of running out of fossil fuels before the century is at it's end. That still means we have to invest in new sources of energy sooner or later. What do you think of that?
“Someone like Toffee”. Kind of a stupid statement since I proved exactly what I wanted to prove by quoting Nuttall. Didn’t mention that in your essay though did you?
I wasn’t denying that there was a discussion to be had on climate change, merely that to disregard in the way that’s Nuttall has come across is stupid. Maybe I should have worded my original paragraph better so as to not trigger your superiority complex, Theodin.
I don't know what the UKIP guy said, by the way. If he denies the climate changes, well, that's nice and very inaccurate, but if he's skeptical about the things at issue I presented then it's hilarious you present that as a sin.
Because word choice matters, especially on this issue, and you're flippant about your use of it. If you can't see that then I'm glad you don't want to discuss it, because you probably shouldn'tWord choice does matter, which is why I corrected myself. But you acknowledged previously that you knew I was talking about denial rather than scepticism and yet you still continued to press me over it. It seems you may be slightly pedantic Theodin, as well as slightly stuck up.
at least i dont use words like pedanticWait...what?
We just passed a huge tax reform bill in the Senate, no longer will we have the highest corporate tax rates in the industrialized world, ayeThoughts on Flynn?
He obviously should be held liable for lying to the FBI about talking to Russia. But what's sad is they spent since May and could only charge him with lying about that... was expecting a bit more given the intensity of the investigation. Flynn is a good guy otherwise, he has a decorated career and has definitely given a lot to this country, so it's sad when his career ends like thisWe just passed a huge tax reform bill in the Senate, no longer will we have the highest corporate tax rates in the industrialized world, ayeThoughts on Flynn?
He obviously should be held liable for lying to the FBI about talking to Russia. But what's sad is they spent since May and could only charge him with lying about that... was expecting a bit more given the intensity of the investigation. Flynn is a good guy otherwise, he has a decorated career and has definitely given a lot to this country, so it's sad when his career ends like thisWe just passed a huge tax reform bill in the Senate, no longer will we have the highest corporate tax rates in the industrialized world, ayeThoughts on Flynn?
We just passed a huge tax reform bill in the Senate, no longer will we have the highest corporate tax rates in the industrialized world, aye
(Occasional reminder that tax cuts are only a good thing if followed by sensible cuts to public expenditure, otherwise you'll have to borrow to meet your commitments)
Don't worry. They won't cut anything, they never do. Democrats will do everything they can to block cuts to [insert these programs] and the Republicans will refuse to cut [Insert Other Programs]; the Federal Government hasn't known how to become fiscally responsible for a while now because constituents would rather keep spending other people's money for their own comfort, even if we're out of other people's money to spend; combined with certain people's unwillingness to leave the world be.
They're called third parties or unemployed.Don't worry. They won't cut anything, they never do. Democrats will do everything they can to block cuts to [insert these programs] and the Republicans will refuse to cut [Insert Other Programs]; the Federal Government hasn't known how to become fiscally responsible for a while now because constituents would rather keep spending other people's money for their own comfort, even if we're out of other people's money to spend; combined with certain people's unwillingness to leave the world be.
But surely leaders in our democratic system would do something more than just look out for their own (Or their party's) reelection? Someone must look to the future, beyond the lining of their own pockets with public money, right?
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/12/04/supreme-court-permits-full-enforcement-trump-travel-ban.htmlwell that just made all of the other justices who blocked the order look like fools
Well... that took a while.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/12/04/supreme-court-permits-full-enforcement-trump-travel-ban.html
Well... that took a while.
Yes, he was really democratically elected. If you're using popular vote to justify democracy than there is no democracy in the world except for Switzerland.http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/12/04/supreme-court-permits-full-enforcement-trump-travel-ban.html
Well... that took a while.
Was he really democratically elected though? He got way less votes than Hillary, Donald Trump is a president of the minority not the majority.
Also look up Felix Sater & Tevfik Arif.
If you're using popular vote to justify democracy than there is no democracy in the world except for Switzerland.
Obviously he was democratically elected. That's been in our constitution for a while lolhttp://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/12/04/supreme-court-permits-full-enforcement-trump-travel-ban.html
Well... that took a while.
Was he really democratically elected though? He got way less votes than Hillary, Donald Trump is a president of the minority not the majority.
Also look up Felix Sater & Tevfik Arif.
Muh constitution is purfect hur durr.How many governments of major countries in the world actually use proportional representation?
I know it's in the constitution but that doesn't change the fact that he was elected by the minority.
Muh constitution is purfect hur durr.That doesn't change the fact that America is the greatest country in the world with the greatest democracy ever 8)
I know it's in the constitution but that doesn't change the fact that he was elected by the minority.
That's why most countries with proportional voting have coalitions, just like how Conservatives now relies on DUP to get anything through parliament.Which is why nobody ever gets anything done and voters are never left satisfied. If I vote for a party I don’t want somebody else holding them to ransom 24/7 over their major policy promises
Nah you're just bad at it.U wot
The UK has literally been a testimony over the past few government terms to how much a coalition can fuck shit up
No. What you just mentioned is why you have senators & house representatives, the electoral college is just a scam.Lol you clearly don't understand the power of the executive branch and the impact of federal laws and regulations over state governments. Senators and the House only do so much in terms of voting on behalf of their constituents, but there is a gazillion more issues that the president himself Must act on; that won't be effectively represented by ones senator or house of representative, and this forces candidates to campaign on a state by state basis. Why do you think trump won? Clinton campaigned in only big cities and already democratic strongholds, while trump went to middle America, small towns, etc... places which have different issues than others
the electoral college is just a scam.
the electoral college is just a scam.
The electoral college has been a mechanism from the beginning to trying to prevent pure, direct democracy - as its nothing but mismanagement by the mob; it also protects, in some small part, "geographic minorities" from getting brute forced in Federal politics. It's also the only reason we aren't even more fractured, or perhaps even already balkanized, as a country.
But for real, this was setup to protect states rights, otherwise you'd have a few of the largest states deciding the election every year.
I'm not so sure that holds much water. States are still going through all the trouble of holding elections, those votes are just not being calculated for a national plurality/majority. Amusingly, it was a measure to ensure that Virginia and its similar southern States would not impose its will through brute political force on New England (remembering that back then, Virginia was basically the mack daddy); it's basically the reverse now but it's the same purpose.
EDIT Also note that it wasn't even particularly difficult to hold election, as not many people even actually voted. Remember that it was restricted to adult white men who were at least (40? I can't remember the age requirement) and owned land or some form of real estate (house or business that wasn't rented).
It’s also a fun thing to notice that after every election it’s the losing party that complains about the E.C, but not the winner. :thinking:
"Majority systems create stronger trust in politics! They create stability!!!!1111 THINK OF THE WEIMAR REPUBLIC!!11".
"Majority systems create stronger trust in politics! They create stability!!!!1111 THINK OF THE WEIMAR REPUBLIC!!11".52% of germans in 1932 voted for a party that was against democracy which is exactly what they got. Evening using popular vote Hitler would be justified enough to be named chancellor as his party was the most popular. Which wouldn't really change much.
The most Hitler got in a "real" election was 44%.Yes but a total of 52% voted for NSDAP and KPD, both anti-democratic parties. So based on a strictly democratic mandate, Germany didn't want democracy.
Proportional representation sucks, so does multi-party FPTP. The best electoral system is what the US has, i.e. two major parties within a FPTP voting system but with primary elections too. It's the primary elections that are the key feature since they tend to encourage there to be only two big tent main parties, which makes FPTP fair. Also your average American has far more democratic control over who represents them than your average European living in a PR system, since the American decides candidate selection too. That's not really possible under PR. Not only does that mean candidates who better reflect who they represent but it also keeps them honest after they're elected.
Also your average American has far more democratic control over who represents them than your average European living in a PR system, since the American decides candidate selection too
The most Hitler got in a "real" election was 44%.Yes but a total of 52% voted for NSDAP and KPD, both anti-democratic parties. So based on a strictly democratic mandate, Germany didn't want democracy.
Complaining about massive politically homogenious voting blocks yet having a system that pretty much forces people into a massive politically homogenious voting block. Love it.Of course there are swing states. The way I see it those states are those which don't vote consistently for party (such as NY, IL, CA) but the ones that play kingmaker in elections (FL, OH, WN). Those states fluctuate in voting patterns, and decide elections.
For the love of God stop argueing that states win elections. They don't. There are no 'swing states'. States do not swing. In the presidential elections, they are just geographical boundaries in which the population within that boundary happen to be roughly evenly divided politically. That's it. That's a swing state. You know the definition of a 'safe' state? It's a state in which the political division is so strongly in favour of one political side that everybody can just safely ignore their entire population and everything they want, because their electoral votes have been decided.QuoteIt’s also a fun thing to notice that after every election it’s the losing party that complains about the E.C, but not the winner. :thinking:
It's why people need to stop blindly repeating the arguments made by politicians. Electoral reform is so hard exactly because people lose the will to reform once the system favours them. That doesn't make the system suddenly fair. And then they just copy the same bullshit arguments of their opponents. "Majority systems create stronger trust in politics! They create stability!!!!1111 THINK OF THE WEIMAR REPUBLIC!!11".
(https://i.gyazo.com/fe4dbf5ba9f34ce0cfdabffc691cbbcf.png)I'm more concerned with the fact that the caption says Schulz is waving when he is actually giving the thumbs up.
https://www.politico.eu/article/spds-martin-schulz-wants-united-states-of-europe-by-2025
Whoa! Who could have seen this coming?
(https://i.gyazo.com/fe4dbf5ba9f34ce0cfdabffc691cbbcf.png)Let that moronic alcoholic ramble in peace.
https://www.politico.eu/article/spds-martin-schulz-wants-united-states-of-europe-by-2025
Whoa! Who could have seen this coming?
Not to mention that governments coming to power in a FPTP system almost never actually gain the actual majority of votes. The Conservatives in 2015 got only 36.6%. Almost 2 of every 3 British voters who actually cast their vote (Because 1 in 3 of voters actually didn't even bother going to the polls) voted something else then Conservatives, yet the government consisted solely of Conservatives and persued only Conservative policies. With PR systems, the coalition government is the combined position of parties that actually represent a majority of the citizens.
Also having big-tent parties under a FPTP system gives voters more choice since you don't have major party machines shutting down the little guys but instead giving them a platform. Once Bernie Sanders worked out (better late than never lol) he was better off working within the Democratic Party than against it he almost made it to the White House, and his faction could quite conceivably win in 2020.
Literally at the end of every election under PR it's personality politics and backroom negotiations that shape what the government will look like.
Having big-tent parties with primary elections means the infrastructure is already there for an outsider to come in and win,
You focus too much on the presidential elections, an office the UK doesn't have. When you look at the congressional level, primary challenges are not really that common, let alone succesful ones. They're only really interesting once the incumbent doesn't run anymore and the seat is 'open'. Yeah, of course, once in a while a challenger wins and that's always a big deal exactly because it's so uncommon. And because primaries are pretty meaningless, people don't care about them: Turn-out in the USA 2014 (mid-terms are great because it actually shows interest in congressional elections and not just the presidential hype) was 18.7% of all registered voters. And because most people believe their vote is meaningless anyway, turn-out during the actual elections is also insanely low: around 35%. People stop voting if their vote is meaningless, and that's a direct consequence of having FPTP.QuoteLiterally at the end of every election under PR it's personality politics and backroom negotiations that shape what the government will look like.
And the UK and the USA are anything different? Who decided Johnson would become Foreign Secretary? Surely no backroom deals were involved there, were there?QuoteHaving big-tent parties with primary elections means the infrastructure is already there for an outsider to come in and win,
But you're really kidding yourself when you think big-tent parties actually represent all the people they gain votes from.
American turnout has always been low, that's probably more to do with the education system and poor diet. Most primary challenges aren't successful because lawmakers know not to get on the wrong side of voters-that's a massive incentive for them to behave and it clearly works.
Actually big tent parties do represent the people who vote for them-there's much more diversity in the US Democrats than there is in the British Liberal Democrats. Same goes for US Republicans vs UK Tories.
How Johnson became Foreign Sec has nothing to do with the electoral system.
DeutschlandAusfahrt isn’t as catchy as BrexitWhat kind of Google Translate did you rape?
I just put Germany and exit together xDDeutschlandAusfahrt isn’t as catchy as BrexitWhat kind of Google Translate did you rape?
lmao.I just put Germany and exit together xDDeutschlandAusfahrt isn’t as catchy as BrexitWhat kind of Google Translate did you rape?
US system seems to be a sensible compromise.
Theresa loses in the commons with her own backbenchers being the catalyst.Worrisome but not the end of the world
Theresa loses in the commons with her own backbenchers being the catalyst.
I'm not, I never said I was. Just commenting on it.Theresa loses in the commons with her own backbenchers being the catalyst.
I'll be worried if you are genuinely surprised by this.
But I wanted Parliament to be sovereign, and now they're meddling by having another vote to prove their sovereignty and that's not why I voted to Brexit >:(^
But I wanted Parliament to be sovereign, and now they're meddling by having another vote to prove their sovereignty and that's not why I voted to Brexit >:(
Dunno why people are mad over this-Parliament can say either 'yes' or 'no' on the final deal. That's it. It's not really something you can say 'no' to anyway as it's either the deal on offer or WTO rules.
Guess it's time for a brexit pollQuoteDunno why people are mad over this-Parliament can say either 'yes' or 'no' on the final deal. That's it. It's not really something you can say 'no' to anyway as it's either the deal on offer or WTO rules.
Or the UK has to negotiate a new deal and Brexit gets postponed.
You say that like you want foreign involvement in your politics. Sure the Russians exposed the DNC (in an illegal way btw) but they also spread tons and tons of misinformation through different medias such as Facebook.
They did the same thing during the French election to support Le Pen.
You say that like you want foreign involvement in your politics. Sure the Russians exposed the DNC (in an illegal way btw) but they also spread tons and tons of misinformation through different medias such as Facebook.
Well first of all, I think it's shameful that a third party had to intervene and expose the criminal activity of the DNC and its politicians. As such, I hope we both share the opinion that such activities should have been much more widely covered by the American media, regardless of how the information was acquired (I understand that using criminal methods to incriminate an individual(s) is contradictory in a sense, but this is the DNC we're talking about, and think of the implications of such people holding one of the most powerful offices in the world). I don't believe Russia did hack the DNC in fact; government hackers as adept as Russia's certainly do not leave digital breadcrumbs.
As for the recent developments of Facebook, I ask that you consider this: is your political agenda more important than free speech? Historically speaking, AI-assisted crackdown of "misinformation" has always led to an Orwellian-esque crackdown of political views that oppose that of the platform hosting the AI and such opinions. The most prominent example of this is when Google rolled out its own AI to combat 'misinformation' and 'fake news' - then went on to wage to war against users and channels refuting Google's propaganda funneling through YouTube. Twitter used to do the same thing but has toned it down massively, most likely as a result of people from both sides of the spectrum ditching it.
Correct, and I have no objection to the elimination of misinformation and fake news. It's when legitimate criticisms and arguments start getting brushed under the rug too that I get concerned.
Why would it? It's an internal Spanish affair and the only ones opposing the rule of law are the seperatists.
Catalan Separatists keep winning elections. This is the fourth time in a row the separatist parties have won an overall majority in the regional parliament. Madrid can't keep playing this game.
Anyway the EU is constantly proving that legally impossible things can happen extremely easily when there's a political need.
If Madrid thought there was a pro-Spain majority they'd have called a referendum and won.
b) Madrid and Barcelona agree on a gradual separation that takes years
Won by incredibly small margins. Yes, it's entirely possible 51% of the people in Catalonia support independence, maybe even 52%, but more then that? There are several districts with strong pro-unity votes, including the whole city of Barcelona. Are you really expecting that 45-48% of people to just accept illegal secession?QuoteAnyway the EU is constantly proving that legally impossible things can happen extremely easily when there's a political need.
Like?
The EU lacks enforcement, sure, but Spain, with its rather active supreme court, does not. You really think the EU is going to command Spain to break its own constitutional law? More importantly, do you want that?
And Euros mock US constitutionalistsTo be fair not many EU countries give their citizens constitutional rights to hellfire missiles and nuclear bombs.
Not sure who doesAnd Euros mock US constitutionalistsTo be fair not many EU countries give their citizens constitutional rights to hellfire missiles and nuclear bombs.
"the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed"Not sure who doesAnd Euros mock US constitutionalistsTo be fair not many EU countries give their citizens constitutional rights to hellfire missiles and nuclear bombs.
The EU can punish member states when it wants to it just doesn't apply the rules equally. Spain can fudge it, it's not actually that hard these days to ignore the law, and the EU doesn't need to get involved.
Nope, I've said the EU should not get involved. If Brussels didn't have the moral courage to stand up to Spain after the police were filmed assaulting civilians en masse (an infringement of the fundamental rights of EU citizens as set out in Lisbon if ever there was one, and yet another example of the EU ignoring its own rules for political ease)
the police can actually use proportional violence if people physically resist. No laws or fundamental rights are broken by doing this. If people think that the violence was unproportional, they can sue the state.
No, like I saidQuotethe police can actually use proportional violence if people physically resist. No laws or fundamental rights are broken by doing this. If people think that the violence was unproportional, they can sue the state.
Spanish and European Courts work perfectly fine as far as I know, so other EU institution do not need to (and should not) interfere. Whether violence was proportional or not is a legal matter, not a political one. I oppose the (rather widespread) notion that police action is police brutality by default. I'm not saying everything Spain did in the course of this period was perfectly unquestionably legal. There needs to be due process, and if the courts decide the violence was unproportional, then obviously, it was illegal. But none of this would have happened in the 1st place if the Catalan regional government hadn't pushed on with their unquestionably illegal referendum.
But rights are not infringed upon if A. the courts work according to B. certain standards.
In order to ensure our security and continuing stability, the European Union will be reorganized into the first United European Empire, for a safe and secure society, which I assure you will last for ten thousand years
In order to ensure our security and continuing stability, the European Union will be reorganized into the first United European Empire, for a safe and secure society, which I assure you will last for ten thousand years
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=american+political+systemIn order to ensure our security and continuing stability, the European Union will be reorganized into the first United European Empire, for a safe and secure society, which I assure you will last for ten thousand years
Complains about EU democracy while living in an oligarchy, lol.
Yeah it's not like coperations are sponsering politicians campaigns and lobbies in congress or anything.Ah yes, because money in politics suddenly changes the whole system from a republic to an oligarchy. Cool
Seems like you're oblivious to the state of US politics.Because a Swede knows better, and a Swede with a history of anti-Americanism to begin with. You're doing great, sweetie.
Seems like you're oblivious to the state of US politics.Because a Swede knows better, and a Swede with a history of anti-Americanism to begin with. You're doing great, sweetie.
There is obviously a question of how much money influences policy, but it's more complicated than declaring a republican democracy as an oligarchy because your views make that a reality.
Those who think he did: anonymous aides, Dick Durbin (D)
Those who think he didn’t: three Republican lawmakers
Hyperpartisanship, everybody! Making truth what your side wants it to be
Seems like you're oblivious to the state of US politics.Because a Swede knows better, and a Swede with a history of anti-Americanism to begin with. You're doing great, sweetie.
There is obviously a question of how much money influences policy, but it's more complicated than declaring a republican democracy as an oligarchy because your views make that a reality.
Tbh the US is still more democratic than Sweden, which is barely a democracy.Please do explain your reasoning behind that statement.
Tbh the US is still more democratic than Sweden, which is barely a democracy.Please do explain your reasoning behind that statement.
Sure-how many British ministers could you vote for? Is there a mechanism for you as a voter to remove them from office if you don't like what they're doing?
Yes, ministers are also MPs and are elected on at every general election, if the Brits still use the Westminster modelQuoteSure-how many British ministers could you vote for? Is there a mechanism for you as a voter to remove them from office if you don't like what they're doing?
They're elected them as MP, a legislative function. They receive no mandate for a executive position as minister they are appointed to, apart from the fake majority their party gets.Except the sovereign has the power to appoint ministers under the system, not the party, that’s where the legitimacy of the ministers comes from. It’s the Queens mandate through the Cabinet
Technically speaking the Queen is the representative of the people's sovereignty (Goes all the way back to Magna Carta, but particularly with 1689 Claim of Right, etc) so it is in fact power to the people. She's a constitutional monarch and if she breaks that pact she automatically abdicates the crown.That’s fair. The Canadian constitution was written with that whole “power to the people” in mind - trying to avoid that. Our founders worried about the reliability of a US type constitution so took power away from the people and placed it in the institution
https://www.nederlandseleeuw.nl
See you there, Riddlez!
Funny enough, they have a surprisingly varied mix of speakers from both the left and the right wing and pro- and anti- immigration.
Funny enough, they have a surprisingly varied mix of speakers from both the left and the right wing and pro- and anti- immigration.
In my opinion, it's hard to justify libertarian policy if you don't believe it, eventually, benefits the entirety of society. It's not exactly a moderate point of view.But there are many types of libertarianism that are moderate - just like there are elements of the left that are extreme and elements that are merely liberal. It’s all about individual policy, not the whole name itself
Fair point. Like I said, the example was simplified. Though in the Dutch context, liberatarianism itself is the extremist wing of the right-wing liberals, so I am yet to meet a non-ideological liberatarian. The North American context is different, of course.Yes, indeed, geopolitics is often a factor underestimated
I used to attend communist meetings/lectures while doing my degree (mainly for the women and the occasional comedy), so I've had my fair share of 'broad, weird statements about the order of society'.
I used to attend communist meetings/lectures while doing my degree (mainly for the women and the occasional comedy), so I've had my fair share of 'broad, weird statements about the order of society'.
These are the best, but they never seem to escalate outside of university.
Only in your eyes does it do so.And in your eyes it doesn’t, which, in case you were wondering, is what bias is
https://gop.com/the-highly-anticipated-2017-fake-news-awards/
It sure was close this year!
It’s the GOP websitehttps://gop.com/the-highly-anticipated-2017-fake-news-awards/
It sure was close this year!
Doesn't mention any Conservative media, hm not biased at all.
No shit, Sherlock.Raising an issue just to brush it off under the 'obviously I knew that' sort of guise. EDGE INTENSIFIES
No shit, Sherlock.What’s no shit is that it wouldn’t mention pro-Trump media but you brought it up like it was news anyways ::)
Meh just saying it's typical.No shit, Sherlock.What’s no shit is that it wouldn’t mention pro-Trump media but you brought it up like it was news anyways ::)
What about more objective news agencies? I know they're a novelty in the U.S. but really they're rather nice over here.We’ve got the National Post
When calculating bias we are not just looking at political bias, but also how factual the information is and if they provide links to credible, verifiable sources. Therefore, the yellow dot may indicate political bias or how factual a source is, or in many cases, both.
Further, we have placed a voting poll on each page for readers to vote on the bias of the source. This is similar to how a movie sites such as IMDB or Rotten Tomatoes rate their movies.
Political Affiliation: How strongly does the source endorse a particular political ideology? In other words how extreme are their views. (This can be rather subjective)
The site could be accurate. But there is absolutely no reason to assume it actually is.oh quite, but we shouldn't also assume that it isn't, either. merely use it as an interesting tool
The site could be accurate. But there is absolutely no reason to assume it actually is.oh quite, but we shouldn't also assume that it isn't, either. merely use it as an interesting tool
Glad we’re not doing science here then ehThe site could be accurate. But there is absolutely no reason to assume it actually is.oh quite, but we shouldn't also assume that it isn't, either. merely use it as an interesting tool
Scientifically, no. You cannot use it, and using it would discredit any conclusions you might reach.
So you cannot, in fact, show me scientific evidence that (certain) media is biased?
All the Canadian media endorsements reflected the leanings of the org - which was also accurately reflected by the media websiteSo you cannot, in fact, show me scientific evidence that (certain) media is biased?
Most if not all newspapers in Sweden have openly declared what their political leanings are (it might be a law not sure).
They're all usually pretty good at objective reporting outside of the 2nd page where they usually discuss politics.
Not sure how it is in other countries though.
Can you back up the claimed existance of that bias by actual scientific, methodological sound, research? And not by 'Should be clear to anyone!11' or 'just read this article I don't like'. I know of only one study, in Belgium, that showed no left-wing bias and a very slight anti-sitting government bias.
There are multiple scientific studies reasearching media bias. So I can, yes. But I find it suspect to hold out for objective scientific methodology here when the media outlets tell you by themselves - look at endorsements of political candidates and you will find the political biases of the media outlets. Also, in that same vein, it is not realistic to say that Fox is an unbiased source, but if we hold out for objective methodology I guess it is
Also, in that same vein, it is not realistic to say that Fox is an unbiased source, but if we hold out for objective methodology I guess it is
Tbh everyone's waiting for the Italian election results which will probably return the most eurosceptic government in Italian history, ever.
QuoteTbh everyone's waiting for the Italian election results which will probably return the most eurosceptic government in Italian history, ever.
And even they ruled out a referendum on the Euro.
It's increasingly obvious Europe is splitting into two cultural camps, Merkel-led liberals vs Eastern/Central European conservatives
Merkel's CDU is a Christian-Conservative centre-right party that does also pursue a market Liberal economic policy, which I believe is what is being refered to here.Ah I see, thanks for clarifying.
Merkel's CDU is a Christian-Conservative centre-right party that does also pursue a market Liberal economic policy, which I believe is what is being refered to here.Ah I see, thanks for clarifying.
Is she on more of the centralist part of her party then in terms of social beliefs?Merkel's CDU is a Christian-Conservative centre-right party that does also pursue a market Liberal economic policy, which I believe is what is being refered to here.Ah I see, thanks for clarifying.
Partly that, but it's also about plenty of other things. Merkel dislikes the idea of the nation state and its symbols, is not much of a cultural Christian, is very pro-mass migration, and is not a great believer in national sovereignty. That's totally at odds with much of Eastern and Central Europe, and is a very big problem given she's trying to impose her beliefs on the rest of the EU.
Just saw black mirror's "Waldo" episode made me think a whole lot about Trump.Never seen it, in what way does it remind you of him?
Satire candidate that just take the piss on it's opponents and the system.
Just saw black mirror's "Waldo" episode made me think a whole lot about Trump.Great episode!
Satire candidate that just take the piss on it's opponents and the system.
You're thinking of bernie
Meaning you'll be running far behind by the time fossil fuel runs out.“Muh peak oil” chill. Fossil fuels are not running out anytime soon
But they will.Not in both of our lifetimes
Fossil fuel is great.
http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/bp-oil-spill-disaster-by-numbers-2078396.html
Neither is global warming.Tell that to the cavemen! Or the people who lived in medieval times during that warming period. They'd agree tbh, altho the ice age humans wouldn't agree
Theodin the whole not in our lifetimes argument is stupid. If everyone thought like that we’d be fucked. Better to deal with an issue before it becomes an issue.That’s an excellent pint, but why trade economic and energy prosperity for something that may be a problem or not. Actually, you didn’t make a good point. Why’s it fucked?
There have already been research posted before that you've rejected so I don't see the point.So, instead of a) telling me when and where I have you make a fallicious statement and b) justify your fallacy with a fallacy.
Then China should do something about it. The EPA’s yearly reports show that US air quality is better than its ever been - only in like three cities in the Midwest is pollution a problem.And burning more fossil fuels is going to make that rise. Eventually if pollution levels aren’t dealt with they will begin to affect our lives negatively. That’s why it’s better to prevent that from happening before it’s too late to deal with it.
There have already been research posted before that you've rejected so I don't see the point.So, instead of a) telling me when and where I have you make a fallicious statement and b) justify your fallacy with a fallacy.
Idk if it’s because your first language isn’t English or you’re just incredibly poor at discussion but you’re really not doing well here
Then China should do something about it. The EPA’s yearly reports show that US air quality is better than its ever been - only in like three cities in the Midwest is pollution a problem.
There have already been research posted before that you've rejected so I don't see the point.So, instead of a) telling me when and where I have you make a fallicious statement and b) justify your fallacy with a fallacy.
Idk if it’s because your first language isn’t English or you’re just incredibly poor at discussion but you’re really not doing well here
Theodin is Canadian, it's biologically impossible for him to be rude.
Theodin is Canadian, it's biologically impossible for him to be rude.Canadians in this community are however a special breed
'Europe's constant push for globalization' 'plagued by neo-fascists movements' oh man you're killing me here.You're moderating kills me and the whole forum but there's nothing we can do.
Not sure what's wrong with William's comment, albeit the term 'neo-fascist' is too strong a word when looking at M5S/AfD/UKIP/PiS/etc. It's eurosceptic populism rather than neo-fascism that's the EU's biggest problem.Yeah, that's what we pointed out in class but it was the author's terms. We just agreed that right-wing populism and that it seems to be a recurring trend in Western countries, despite how open Western countries try to be. It was mostly just a political discussion on whether state sovereignty would survive globalization but we got into a lot of bigger discussion on immigration and the role of NGO's and MNC's in international politics.
1.Status quo
2.Status quo is challenged
3. Some people don't like it because they perceive the status quo as beneficial and oppose challenge.
Yeah, really sounds like something unique to the EU of the last decade.
Not sure what's wrong with William's comment, albeit the term 'neo-fascist' is too strong a word when looking at M5S/AfD/UKIP/PiS/etc. It's eurosceptic populism rather than neo-fascism that's the EU's biggest problem.Yeah, that's what we pointed out in class but it was the author's terms. We just agreed that right-wing populism and that it seems to be a recurring trend in Western countries, despite how open Western countries try to be. It was mostly just a political discussion on whether state sovereignty would survive globalization but we got into a lot of bigger discussion on immigration and the role of NGO's and MNC's in international politics.
Some political scientists don't even consider populism an ideology like the left-right divide, but a style or strategy. I don't necessarily agree with that, but yes, there's left-wing populism, but no, it's not a copy-paste of right-wing populism with leftist ideas.I would agree that it is more of a way of doing things rather than an ideology
Some political scientists don't even consider populism an ideology like the left-right divide, but a style or strategy. I don't necessarily agree with that, but yes, there's left-wing populism, but no, it's not a copy-paste of right-wing populism with leftist ideas.
Can you link an article that isn’t a subscription?
I doubt Corbyn will feel any consequences in the polls, considering his voting demographic.What do you mean?
Who's the most likely successor to May?
Nah they won't choose him because they know he'll never be elected. He's not well liked.Who's the most likely successor to May?
From the Conservatives? Probably Rees-Mogg.
Nah they won't choose him because they know he'll never be elected. He's not well liked.Who's the most likely successor to May?
From the Conservatives? Probably Rees-Mogg.
It's hard to say because none of them seem great but I have a hunch Johnson will make a move for itNah they won't choose him because they know he'll never be elected. He's not well liked.Who's the most likely successor to May?
From the Conservatives? Probably Rees-Mogg.
Who do you think then? He seems to be a favourite among tories.
I hate it when local elections are used as some sort of a referendum on the national government. You see the same thing here (we have local elections in March).
I am more worried about the growing support that Labour is gaining and at this rate they will win the next general election. I would rather have May over Corbyn, even though I don't particulary like May.
People don’t want a conservative government anymore. They fucked things even worse than Labour.
I was talking about the party Steven, don’t try and be a smart arse
Brexit growth forecasts looking bad
Having said that Brexit was never going to be a good thing in the short-term
In what way is there a 'deep cultural split' or 'massive economic divergence' in the Netherlands? Has there ever been?
And if there was then no, you wouldn't have dissolved two centuries ago because this only applies in the democratic era. Non-homogeneous unions are possible if you keep people in line with bullets (e.g. Austria-Hungary, USSR, etc).
The current state of Great Britain is the breeding ground for a hard line conservative party to gain power and to then use mass hysteria to create an authoritarian government that will simply have nothing to oversee it, with the only they could truly be undone is through some sort of revolution, perhaps with the destruction of the Palace of Westminster on the 5th of November, symbolizing the end of the old, and the beginning of the new.
The current state of Great Britain is the breeding ground for a hard line conservative party to gain power and to then use mass hysteria to create an authoritarian government that will simply have nothing to overseDespite the current centre-conservative party being increasingly unpoluar and the only notable right-wing party getting 1.8% of the electorate in contrast to 12.8% two years prior. The BNP garnered about 3000 more votes nationwide than two year prior.
In what way is there a 'deep cultural split' or 'massive economic divergence' in the Netherlands? Has there ever been?
And if there was then no, you wouldn't have dissolved two centuries ago because this only applies in the democratic era. Non-homogeneous unions are possible if you keep people in line with bullets (e.g. Austria-Hungary, USSR, etc).
The Catholic-Protestant split as well as the difference of wealth between the west and east that's still very much felt today.
Looking back, I wonder how well or bad the world would be if colonialism still prevailed. I feel like the world would be much more stable in the fact that many of these new states would not be having constant ethnic wars but at the same time colonialism stripes native people of pretty much everything but at the same time gives a common language and religion to unite people. However, neocolonialism and the inability to enforce peace among areas, leaving room for genocide, is far worse in my opinion which is why I bring this up.
I'm not talking of the situation today, obviously. I'm talking in historic perspective. The catholic/protestant split is nowhere as strong as it used to be, but strong it was, until even after world war two. For more then a century, there were pretty much parallel societies that lived next to, not with, eachother. The split certainly was a lot stronger felt then cultural differences with a country a thousand kilometres away.
Maybe so, but obviously a Catholic and a Protestant will have more in common on social and cultural issues than a secular atheistic/soft religious West (France and Germany) vs the hardcore Catholicism of places like Poland.
QuoteMaybe so, but obviously a Catholic and a Protestant will have more in common on social and cultural issues than a secular atheistic/soft religious West (France and Germany) vs the hardcore Catholicism of places like Poland.
But countries aren't singular entities. You talk of those in the same way people talk of 'blue states' or 'red states' in the USA - political fairytales people pretend are real to avoid admitting that the reality is a ridiciously complex shitfest. Hardcore Protestants in my country and hardcore Catholics in Poland have a lot in common, which is why the religious Dutch parties are in the same European faction as PiS and love working together. It's the same as people who say 'Scotland voted to Remain!' while 38% voted to leave to pretend it's some pro-European bullwark, or that 'Britain voted to leave!' while 48.11% voted to remain, to pretend it's somehow united in that mission.
(https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/395183071919603722/413477071977971722/3ef191cd54f2c79f5a0ae48fd451ed78.png) (https://twitter.com/YouTube/status/963900837570469888)because they been through a lotta shit as a race dawg
A rather rascist tweet from YouTube, if you ask me. Imagine the uproar we'd get from the SJW's if it said "Subscribe to white creators."
What are your guys' thoughts on this so-called "Black History Month"? In my opinion, it's a ridiculous concept that shouldn't be "marked" in any way. We don't have "White History Month", nor do we have "Yellow History Month" or "Red History Month" so why the hell should we have a "Black History Month"? Besides, why should we have a month celebrating the history of a certain skin colour? What's the point of it?
Ironic that black history is basically Jim Crow segregation of history because we get 11 months lol
On a more realistic note, it sickens me how partisan YouTube/Google is. It went from my favorite website to a shit hole where trending is hand picked, worthy creators don’t get shit, and talk show hosts spew leftist shit with no demonitization. It’s sad to see what it’s become. I honestly thought their twitter was hacked but nope, just retarded
(https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/395183071919603722/413477071977971722/3ef191cd54f2c79f5a0ae48fd451ed78.png) (https://twitter.com/YouTube/status/963900837570469888)because they been through a lotta shit as a race dawg
A rather rascist tweet from YouTube, if you ask me. Imagine the uproar we'd get from the SJW's if it said "Subscribe to white creators."
What are your guys' thoughts on this so-called "Black History Month"? In my opinion, it's a ridiculous concept that shouldn't be "marked" in any way. We don't have "White History Month", nor do we have "Yellow History Month" or "Red History Month" so why the hell should we have a "Black History Month"? Besides, why should we have a month celebrating the history of a certain skin colour? What's the point of it?
(https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/395183071919603722/413477071977971722/3ef191cd54f2c79f5a0ae48fd451ed78.png) (https://twitter.com/YouTube/status/963900837570469888)
A rather rascist tweet from YouTube, if you ask me. Imagine the uproar we'd get from the SJW's if it said "Subscribe to white creators."
What are your guys' thoughts on this so-called "Black History Month"? In my opinion, it's a ridiculous concept that shouldn't be "marked" in any way. We don't have "White History Month", nor do we have "Yellow History Month" or "Red History Month" so why the hell should we have a "Black History Month"? Besides, why should we have a month celebrating the history of a certain skin colour? What's the point of it?
blacks probably had it the worst throughout history(https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/395183071919603722/413477071977971722/3ef191cd54f2c79f5a0ae48fd451ed78.png) (https://twitter.com/YouTube/status/963900837570469888)because they been through a lotta shit as a race dawg
A rather rascist tweet from YouTube, if you ask me. Imagine the uproar we'd get from the SJW's if it said "Subscribe to white creators."
What are your guys' thoughts on this so-called "Black History Month"? In my opinion, it's a ridiculous concept that shouldn't be "marked" in any way. We don't have "White History Month", nor do we have "Yellow History Month" or "Red History Month" so why the hell should we have a "Black History Month"? Besides, why should we have a month celebrating the history of a certain skin colour? What's the point of it?
So has every race.
Because they had shit societies, leaders and organization / complicity to whites such as selling slaves to traders. They did it all to themselves and deserve no remorseblacks probably had it the worst throughout history(https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/395183071919603722/413477071977971722/3ef191cd54f2c79f5a0ae48fd451ed78.png) (https://twitter.com/YouTube/status/963900837570469888)because they been through a lotta shit as a race dawg
A rather rascist tweet from YouTube, if you ask me. Imagine the uproar we'd get from the SJW's if it said "Subscribe to white creators."
What are your guys' thoughts on this so-called "Black History Month"? In my opinion, it's a ridiculous concept that shouldn't be "marked" in any way. We don't have "White History Month", nor do we have "Yellow History Month" or "Red History Month" so why the hell should we have a "Black History Month"? Besides, why should we have a month celebrating the history of a certain skin colour? What's the point of it?
So has every race.
blacks probably had it the worst throughout history-because they been through a lotta shit as a race dawg
So has every race.
blacks probably had it the worst throughout history-because they been through a lotta shit as a race dawg
So has every race.
Still doesn't mean that they deserve to have an entire month dedicated to their 'history' as well as have sites like YouTube licking their feet.
Leftist companies ruin the peace of black history month imo, its whats popular and accepted so thats what they're going for I guess trying to have a clever marketing campaign. :-\Spoilerblacks probably had it the worst throughout history-because they been through a lotta shit as a race dawg
So has every race.
Still doesn't mean that they deserve to have an entire month dedicated to their 'history' as well as have sites like YouTube licking their feet.[close]
In fairness, Black History Month is a predominantly American thing, and the blacks have had it the worst in U.S history, maybe the natives could compete but its not like their abuse was was completely intentional.
In fairness, Black History Month is a predominantly American thing, and the blacks have had it the worst in U.S history, maybe the natives could compete but its not like their abuse was was completely intentional.
I'm think you're using the word "worst" a little too lightlyIn fairness, Black History Month is a predominantly American thing, and the blacks have had it the worst in U.S history, maybe the natives could compete but its not like their abuse was was completely intentional.
The Irish had it worse, they were slaves too.
I'm think you're using the word "worst" a little too lightlyIn fairness, Black History Month is a predominantly American thing, and the blacks have had it the worst in U.S history, maybe the natives could compete but its not like their abuse was was completely intentional.
The Irish had it worse, they were slaves too.
Cheeky little shit.I'm think you're using the word "worst" a little too lightlyIn fairness, Black History Month is a predominantly American thing, and the blacks have had it the worst in U.S history, maybe the natives could compete but its not like their abuse was was completely intentional.
The Irish had it worse, they were slaves too.
Exactly. that's why I used worse.
Cheeky little shit.I'm think you're using the word "worst" a little too lightlyIn fairness, Black History Month is a predominantly American thing, and the blacks have had it the worst in U.S history, maybe the natives could compete but its not like their abuse was was completely intentional.
The Irish had it worse, they were slaves too.
Exactly. that's why I used worse.
Does the American government have the jurisdiction to prosecute Russian citizens?I believe they can if they’re on American soil but apparently it’s against the Russian constitution to extradite people.
Does the American government have the jurisdiction to prosecute Russian citizens?I believe they can if they’re on American soil but apparently it’s against the Russian constitution to extradite people.
Yes they wouldn't but I'm just saying that even if they wanted to it's legally against their constitution, treaty or not.Does the American government have the jurisdiction to prosecute Russian citizens?I believe they can if they’re on American soil but apparently it’s against the Russian constitution to extradite people.
Why would the Russian government extradite their own citizens to another country? (especially when the country in question has sour relations with Russia)
There needs to be a extradition treaty in place in order for Russia to extradite their citizens as well.
You don't need to have someone in the courtroom to prosecute him. They'll trial them In Abstentia. But yeah, Russia is exactly never going to extradite anyone. Same goes for the guys who shot down MH17 or are responsible for it. It annoys me to no end that the Dutch government still pretends they will be prosecuted and punished.
I guess that's why Russia where the ones that vetoed against holding a trial for the suspects in the UN security council.
The faster the UK is out of the EU the better. I'll move to the UK when that happens. Been there, nice place.
I guess that's why Russia where the ones that vetoed against holding a trial for the suspects in the UN security council.
Russia vetoed it because it would have ended up in being a very one-sided court. I'll quote what Lavrov said about the proposal.
“The proposal itself was very peculiar. It was proposed in the draft statute to establish the tribunal based mostly on Ukrainian law and for the judges and prosecutors in the tribunal to be appointed by the Secretary-General without consulting the Security Council and that the judges should have experience in exercising Ukrainian and Malaysian law.”
You could read this article to get a full view on why the Russians didn't want to accept the intl. tribunal.
https://www.rt.com/news/311691-lavrov-mh17-malaysia-asean/
Responding to your edit about Russian weaponry, it was in fact Soviet weaponry, that is also in posession of the Ukrainian army. There's no valid proof that shows it was separatist forces that shot down the plane. There's a working theory in Russia that the Ukrainians were in fact wishing to shoot down the Russian presidential plane which was going to fly a similar route, but instead ended up shooting down the wrong plane.
I wish Belgium had that already. Immigrants think they are the boss here. Not all of them, but a lot.The faster the UK is out of the EU the better. I'll move to the UK when that happens. Been there, nice place.
The only unfortunate thing with a potential dissolution of the European Union/Schengen is that we'll have closed borders again and will require visas in order to visit other European countries. But it's a small price to pay for increased security really.
-
-
rt nice meme.
No valid proof hmm I guess all of the world are just against Russia, Russia is clearly the only country to act objectively in all situation a perfect country with a perfect people.
RT is as relevant as Fox News or CNN.
One sided? The evidence is overwhelmingly against Russia of course it would be one sided.
Again you link RT as a source, I can't take you seriously when you do that.
You’re defending Russia even though it was them who supplied the equipment and are constantly being the aggressor in the Ukraine?
Again you link RT as a source, I can't take you seriously when you do that.
And I can't take you serious when you use claims from your liberal, Russophobic media. I can use the same argument against you. There's nothing wrong with using RT as a source btw. It's actually a great source of news, and I'd recommend you read it but I know you won't. (hurr durr Russian propaganda) It's funny that for you it's apperantly enough to "invalidate" all my evidence because apperantly hurr durr RT is Russian propaganda.
One sided? The evidence is overwhelmingly against Russia of course it would be one sided.
RT is funded by the Russian government, do I trust the Russian government? No so do I trust RT? Hell no.
RT is a good source so long as the news involves anything that is not involved with Russia. The whole Russian media apparatus is literally built to make people support the Russian government and its views.
Responding to your edit about Russian weaponry, it was in fact Soviet weaponry, that is also in posession of the Ukrainian army. There's no valid proof that shows it was separatist forces that shot down the plane. There's a working theory in Russia that the Ukrainians were in fact wishing to shoot down the Russian presidential plane which was going to fly a similar route, but instead ended up shooting down the wrong plane.
One sided? The evidence is overwhelmingly against Russia of course it would be one sided.
What overwhelming evidence? Have you read Dutch and Russian reports? Are you an aircrash investigator (you picked it up on National geographic?)?
The Dutch report stated that the MH17 was shot down by an air-to-air guided missile, made in Russia, used in about 50 other countries in the world, including Ukrainian air force. Let's say you read that, it definitely proves the Russians shot down the MH17? Where's the motive? Why would Russian air force send a plane into Ukrainian airspace to shoot down a civilian plane?
RT is a good source so long as the news involves anything that is not involved with Russia. The whole Russian media apparatus is literally built to make people support the Russian government and its views.
Ok, but something like the BBC is a far better news source to sight than RT concerning the events in Ukraine. Given the fact that Russia wants Crimea and Ukraine in its sphere its not hard to see why RT is not a good source.RT is a good source so long as the news involves anything that is not involved with Russia. The whole Russian media apparatus is literally built to make people support the Russian government and its views.
I can understand that it can be perceived by biased as some, but RT simply delivers the Russian viewpoint very efficiently, same as all other media do. Of course, I can't claim that RT is a unbiased, non-sided news source. At the same time, neither can any of you, considering all media have their side that they're on and their point that they wish to propagate. There's no truly independent news source, there never has been, and there never will be. One must simply pick a side.
Norwegian are you trolling because this is silly. You sound like Putin's PR department. If Russia is such an innocent country then why have Russian soldiers been in the Ukraine?
No, the Dutch report said MH17 was shot down by a BUK, made in Russia. Never, ever, was there any suggestion or claim it was done by an air-to-air guided missile. Where did you get that information?
https://www.rtlnieuws.nl/nieuws/binnenland/mh17-rapport-dit-zijn-de-belangrijkste-conclusies
Responding to your edit about Russian weaponry, it was in fact Soviet weaponry, that is also in posession of the Ukrainian army. There's no valid proof that shows it was separatist forces that shot down the plane. There's a working theory in Russia that the Ukrainians were in fact wishing to shoot down the Russian presidential plane which was going to fly a similar route, but instead ended up shooting down the wrong plane.
'A working theory'. Didn't know that was a new name for a 'totally retarded piece of fiction'.
Seperatists (including the leadership) were rejoicing on social media they shot down an airplane. They took pictures. Russian Media reported on it - and then it turned out a civilian airliner was missing, and they suddenly denied everything. They had actually shot down Antonov's before, supplying the border posts enclaves, and they were aiming for one of those again when they hit MH17 by accident.
To pretend none of that happens and suggest Ukraine would be retarded enough to shoot down Putin means you either just don't want to believe the truth or you're just an idiot. What would Ukraine gain? Giving Russians the perfect excuse to actually officially invade? Losing all support from allies by such an aggressive act, a warcrime even? Expanding a war they were winning? How, in your head, does this theory seem even remotely plausible?
Norwegian are you trolling because this is silly. You sound like Putin's PR department. If Russia is such an innocent country then why have Russian soldiers been in the Ukraine?
Norwegian are you trolling because this is silly. You sound like Putin's PR department. If Russia is such an innocent country then why have Russian soldiers been in the Ukraine?
Norwegian are you trolling because this is silly. You sound like Putin's PR department. If Russia is such an innocent country then why have Russian soldiers been in the Ukraine?
In be4 'muh nazi coup', 'muh Russiaphobia', 'muh American imperialism is worse', 'muh Putin is just defending Russia' and 'muh NATO aggression'.
Norwegian, Putin is the strongest leader for Russia because he keeps having all the others killed
Norwegian, Putin is the strongest leader for Russia because he keeps having all the others killed
lmao the BBC is not owned by the British government
Just because they were pricks that doesn't make Putin goodNorwegian, Putin is the strongest leader for Russia because he keeps having all the others killed
You really miss having Stalin and KGB around, don't you? :P
Yes, we wouldn't want any of those weak, capitalist, democrats running Russia would we?
An assassination of Putin would be ideal for Ukraine and the west, as at the moment there's nobody as strong as Putin to lead the Russian government.
Yes, we wouldn't want any of those weak, capitalist, democrats running Russia would me?
An assassination of Putin would be ideal for Ukraine and the west, as at the moment there's nobody as strong as Putin to lead the Russian government.
Der Führer Vladmir keep Russia stronk backbone of cripple world.
Just because they were pricks that doesn't make Putin goodNorwegian, Putin is the strongest leader for Russia because he keeps having all the others killed
You really miss having Stalin and KGB around, don't you? :P
Just because they were pricks that doesn't make Putin good
Yes, we wouldn't want any of those weak, capitalist, democrats running Russia would me?
Der Führer Vladmir keep Russia stronk backbone of cripple world.
Honestly not worth arguing with somebody so brainwashed
Can't read the link you provided, I don't speak Dutch.
Even if it was shot down by a BUK missle system, still doesn't answer why would the russian shoot down a civilian plane? They didn't gain anything from it...
What is a totally retarded piece of fiction is your theory that it was the Russians or the separatists who shot down the Malaysian jetliner. What the bloody hell do they gain from that?
That's exactly how it is though.
Stalin wasn't a prick? You heard it here first guysJust because they were pricks that doesn't make Putin good
Pricks, nicely put, would really like to know more of what you know about Stalin and USSR. No, that doesn't make Putin good nor bad.Yes, we wouldn't want any of those weak, capitalist, democrats running Russia would me?
Der Führer Vladmir keep Russia stronk backbone of cripple world.
Yet, Putin was and most probably will be chosen again by the citizens of Russian Federation. And as long as the citizens of RF elect him, he'll be their president. In case you didn't notice, Russia is a capitalist, democratic state, how do you think they got so many millionaires?
Honestly not worth arguing with somebody so brainwashed
That's mainly because Western leaders don't control their media and can't have their opposition "dealt with". Not saying democracy in Russia has been a great thing thus far, but I can't remember the last time a Western country killed 20 million of its own people.Yes, we wouldn't want any of those weak, capitalist, democrats running Russia would me?
An assassination of Putin would be ideal for Ukraine and the west, as at the moment there's nobody as strong as Putin to lead the Russian government.
Der Führer Vladmir keep Russia stronk backbone of cripple world.
Believe it or not, Russians actually elect him and he enjoys an approval rating western leaders only can dream of.
Like I said before, they mistook it for an Antonov transport plane (which they had shot down before). I'm convinced they never meant to shoot it down, but they did. I'd love to add a 'and justice will be served' to that, but we all know that's not going to happen. Russia will to the end of times deny it ever had anything to do with it, and as long as it has idiots like you, it can get away with it.
Like I said before, they mistook it for an Antonov transport plane (which they had shot down before). I'm convinced they never meant to shoot it down, but they did. I'd love to add a 'and justice will be served' to that, but we all know that's not going to happen. Russia will to the end of times deny it ever had anything to do with it, and as long as it has idiots like you, it can get away with it.
Mistaking an Antonov radar signature for a Boing 777 is literally impossible (unless it was Ray Charles or Steve Wonder operating them), especially with BUK m3 systems Russians are using.
Can't read the link you provided, I don't speak Dutch.
Even if it was shot down by a BUK missle system, still doesn't answer why would the russian shoot down a civilian plane? They didn't gain anything from it...QuoteWhat is a totally retarded piece of fiction is your theory that it was the Russians or the separatists who shot down the Malaysian jetliner. What the bloody hell do they gain from that?
Like I said before, they mistook it for an Antonov transport plane (which they had shot down before). I'm convinced they never meant to shoot it down, but they did. I'd love to add a 'and justice will be served' to that, but we all know that's not going to happen. Russia will to the end of times deny it ever had anything to do with it, and as long as it has idiots like you, it can get away with it.
A few posts ago you were still claiming the Dutch OVV report said it was an air-to-air missile. Yeah, I just don't trust what you're saying at this point.
The BBC is constantly having arguments with the British government regardless of which party is in power. The relationship between them really isn't that cosy. When was the last time RT said anything even mildly embarrassing or critical of Putin?
For foreign events I think the BBC is as good as it gets. Has its natural biases when covering domestic UK politics and is as bad as CNN in that respect, but RT was clearly conceived as a propaganda outfit.
That's mainly because Western leaders don't control their media and can't have their opposition "dealt with". Not saying democracy in Russia has been a great thing thus far, but I can't remember the last time a Western country killed 20 million of its own people.Yes, we wouldn't want any of those weak, capitalist, democrats running Russia would me?
An assassination of Putin would be ideal for Ukraine and the west, as at the moment there's nobody as strong as Putin to lead the Russian government.
Der Führer Vladmir keep Russia stronk backbone of cripple world.
Believe it or not, Russians actually elect him and he enjoys an approval rating western leaders only can dream of.
Russia wants peace and friendship? Tell that to the people living in the Donbas.
Russia wants peace and friendship? Tell that to the people living in the Donbas.
Russia wants peace and friendship? Tell that to the people living in the Donbas region.I hear they got very friendly with the people of Crimea, when they invaded.
Russia wants peace and friendship? Tell that to the people living in the Donbas.
Thanks to Russia, there are people in Donbas region.
The BBC is constantly having arguments with the British government regardless of which party is in power. The relationship between them really isn't that cosy. When was the last time RT said anything even mildly embarrassing or critical of Putin?
For foreign events I think the BBC is as good as it gets. Has its natural biases when covering domestic UK politics and is as bad as CNN in that respect, but RT was clearly conceived as a propaganda outfit.
So now it's criteria that a news source HAS to criticize the country it's from in order to be perceived as unbiased? What if there aren't reasons for them to criticize Putin? Have you ever thought about that? Because he's never really done anything against the Russian interest. Oh and trust me, those who wish to criticize Putin do so freely. I know a lot of Russians were unhappy with the government's handling of the olympic scandal, and nobody's been killing or arresting them yet.That's mainly because Western leaders don't control their media and can't have their opposition "dealt with". Not saying democracy in Russia has been a great thing thus far, but I can't remember the last time a Western country killed 20 million of its own people.Yes, we wouldn't want any of those weak, capitalist, democrats running Russia would me?
An assassination of Putin would be ideal for Ukraine and the west, as at the moment there's nobody as strong as Putin to lead the Russian government.
Der Führer Vladmir keep Russia stronk backbone of cripple world.
Believe it or not, Russians actually elect him and he enjoys an approval rating western leaders only can dream of.
Huh, Putin doesn't control the media though, nor can he have his opposition "dealt with". (There's no need to anyways, they're all braindead.) There's no laws against independent newspapers or channels. If there was, anti-Russian papers such as The Moscow Times wouldn't be published. And where do you have those numbers from? Did you pull them out of your ass? When did Russia kill 20 million of it's own people?Russia wants peace and friendship? Tell that to the people living in the Donbas.
Funnily enough those are the ones that wish to rejoin Russia and escape from these new western liberal democratic 'values' that the junta has come with.
Russia wants peace and friendship? Tell that to the people living in the Donbas region.I hear they got very friendly with the people of Crimea, when they invaded.
And to the people of Georgia, when they invaded.
And to the people of Chechnya, when they invaded.
So do they just not educate you about Stalin in Russia? As far as your concerned hes "Glorious leader who we must strive to be like"SpoilerThe BBC is constantly having arguments with the British government regardless of which party is in power. The relationship between them really isn't that cosy. When was the last time RT said anything even mildly embarrassing or critical of Putin?
For foreign events I think the BBC is as good as it gets. Has its natural biases when covering domestic UK politics and is as bad as CNN in that respect, but RT was clearly conceived as a propaganda outfit.
So now it's criteria that a news source HAS to criticize the country it's from in order to be perceived as unbiased? What if there aren't reasons for them to criticize Putin? Have you ever thought about that? Because he's never really done anything against the Russian interest. Oh and trust me, those who wish to criticize Putin do so freely. I know a lot of Russians were unhappy with the government's handling of the olympic scandal, and nobody's been killing or arresting them yet.That's mainly because Western leaders don't control their media and can't have their opposition "dealt with". Not saying democracy in Russia has been a great thing thus far, but I can't remember the last time a Western country killed 20 million of its own people.Yes, we wouldn't want any of those weak, capitalist, democrats running Russia would me?
An assassination of Putin would be ideal for Ukraine and the west, as at the moment there's nobody as strong as Putin to lead the Russian government.
Der Führer Vladmir keep Russia stronk backbone of cripple world.
Believe it or not, Russians actually elect him and he enjoys an approval rating western leaders only can dream of.
Huh, Putin doesn't control the media though, nor can he have his opposition "dealt with". (There's no need to anyways, they're all braindead.) There's no laws against independent newspapers or channels. If there was, anti-Russian papers such as The Moscow Times wouldn't be published. And where do you have those numbers from? Did you pull them out of your ass? When did Russia kill 20 million of it's own people?Russia wants peace and friendship? Tell that to the people living in the Donbas.
Funnily enough those are the ones that wish to rejoin Russia and escape from these new western liberal democratic 'values' that the junta has come with.[close]
I hear they got very friendly with the people of Crimea, when they invaded.
And to the people of Georgia, when they invaded.
And to the people of Chechnya, when they invaded.
RT is funded by the Russian government, do I trust the Russian government? No so do I trust RT? Hell no.
Vice versa. I'm certain you trust things like Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (which is funded by the American government and spreads the most hilarious propaganda I've ever seen), but even if you come to me with some other privately owned newspaper or whatever, I still won't trust them because no matter how "independent" they claim to be, there's always someone with the money behind them. *cough* Soros *cough*
In the first fucking paragraph of the wiki it mentions how Russian Separatists where shelling Georgians before they sent in the troops.I hear they got very friendly with the people of Crimea, when they invaded.
And to the people of Georgia, when they invaded.
And to the people of Chechnya, when they invaded.
If you don't want to read books about it, at least read wiki on those wars in Chechnya, South Osetia and Crimea.
In the first fucking paragraph of the wiki it mentions how Russian Separatists where shelling Georgians before they sent in the troops.I hear they got very friendly with the people of Crimea, when they invaded.
And to the people of Georgia, when they invaded.
And to the people of Chechnya, when they invaded.
If you don't want to read books about it, at least read wiki on those wars in Chechnya, South Osetia and Crimea.
The first Chechen war was just them trying to obtain independence, which is fair given how shit the communists had been to them.
Chechnya was then a de facto state, then a rouge militia invades part of Russian and so Putin decides to level the country, then they resorted to terrorism.
And that referendum you're mentioned about Crimea, took part during the Russia occupation lol, so it wasn't even used to justify, they just fucking did it. Its also a likely rigged vote, seeing less than 70% of the population is Russian yet 95% voted to join Russia.
In the first fucking paragraph of the wiki it mentions how Russian Separatists where shelling Georgians before they sent in the troops.
The first Chechen war was just them trying to obtain independence, which is fair given how shit the communists had been to them.
Chechnya was then a de facto state, then a rouge militia invades part of Russian and so Putin decides to level the country, then they resorted to terrorism.
And that referendum you're mentioned about Crimea, took part during the Russia occupation lol, so it wasn't even used to justify, they just fucking did it. Its also a likely rigged vote, seeing less than 70% of the population is Russian yet 95% voted to join Russia.
the Russians came to ensure the Ukrainians wouldn't interfere? This might be the most eye-opening I've ever read on this thread.
"We invaded a country to make sure they did the right thing"the Russians came to ensure the Ukrainians wouldn't interfere? This might be the most eye-opening I've ever read on this thread.
You're welcome! ;)
More like "We sent troops to a country to ensure that radicals wouldn't interfere and disrupt a referendum""We invaded a country to make sure they did the right thing"the Russians came to ensure the Ukrainians wouldn't interfere? This might be the most eye-opening I've ever read on this thread.
You're welcome! ;)
A referendum that happened after you sent the troops you mean? You invaded a country because you wanted it's territory. You have no right to enter a country without permission i.e invadeHonestly by the logic given, the EU should have invaded Britain to ensure there was no "disruption" in the Brexit vote. I wonder if he really believes Russian troops would have left had the "referendum" turned out against Russia.
You invaded a country because you wanted it's territory. You have no right to enter a country without permission i.e invade
You have no right to enter a country without permission i.e invade
Honestly by the logic given, the EU should have invaded Britain to ensure there was no "disruption" in the Brexit vote. I wonder if he really believes Russian troops would have left had the "referendum" turned out against Russia.
Jesus Christ this is hilarious. You actually would go anywhere to justify Putin’s actions. You made the point that Crimea was a part of the Russian empire, so I showed why that was a bullshit line of argument. Just because you’re not there to exploit the population that doesn’t mean you didn’t take over. The referendum was declared invalid by the UN and the fact that Russian troops were there (and they weren’t just there because of the naval base so stop chatting shit) makes the results questionable anyhow. I’m not waiting for my daily dose of whataboutism
A referendum that happened after you sent the troops you mean? You invaded a country because you wanted it's territory. You have no right to enter a country without permission i.e invade
Whataboutism again Norwegian. The Russian troops had no legal right to be in the Crimea (except for the naval base). You’ve spoken to many people is such a vague term without much evidence to back it up or a good reflector of overall opinion. The vote was declared invalid by the UN, but of course Russia doesn’t care about that. The media is pretty tightly controlled in Russia so I’d be surprised to find a documentary that was against the takeover tbh.
I know many people in Russia who are opposed to Putin, people who support Navalny etc. and nothing bad has happened to them. They're all living freely, nobody's harrassing them or oppressing them
Quite frankly, I don't care about the UN declaring the vote invalid because I know how the people in Crimea voted and that's all that matters.
Media is not tightly controlled at all, and people are free to do as they please. I know many people in Russia who are opposed to Putin, people who support Navalny etc. and nothing bad has happened to them. They're all living freely, nobody's harrassing them or oppressing them.
Russia is no longer the Soviet Union and is now a free democracy.
you're so blinded by the anti-Russian propaganda,
you're so blinded by propaganda,
so blinded by propaganda,
I'm not going to claim that the west is moral
According to our benchmark estimates, top income shares are now similar to (or higher than) the levels observed in the United States. We also find that inequality has increased substantially more in Russia than in China and other ex-communist countries in Eastern Europe. We relate this finding to the specific transition strategy followed in Russia. According to our benchmark estimates, the wealth held offshore by rich Russians is about three times larger than official net foreign reserves, and is comparable in magnitude to total household financial assets held in Russia.
But it's like spying right? Everyone does it but the point is to not get caught. It's perfectly within a country's right to object to it happening, call them out on it and prosecute those offending, as it breaks the law. I'm pissed off enough at companies meddling in politics, let alone other countries.I'm not going to claim that the west is moral
The thing is you dont have to.
If anyone believes election meddling doesnt exist and isnt reciprocal (for decades now), I have a bridge to sell you in scenic Iqaluit
But it's like spying right? Everyone does it but the point is to not get caught. It's perfectly within a country's right to object to it happening, call them out on it and prosecute those offending, as it breaks the law. I'm pissed off enough at companies meddling in politics, let alone other countries.I'm not going to claim that the west is moral
The thing is you dont have to.
If anyone believes election meddling doesnt exist and isnt reciprocal (for decades now), I have a bridge to sell you in scenic Iqaluit
Героям славаmans been hacked
Героям славаmans been hacked
When they eventually invade?Героям славаmans been hacked
man is trying to be learn Russian
They’re not invading they’re preventing radicals from destroying a democratic voteWhen they eventually invade?Героям славаmans been hacked
man is trying to be learn Russian
Germany doing well for themselves. A 36 billion euro surplus. Makes you wonder what’s actually good about living in the UK anymore
Like the North and South of England thenGermany doing well for themselves. A 36 billion euro surplus. Makes you wonder what’s actually good about living in the UK anymore
*Western Germany, in the former East they're still pretty poor. Most Western German states have a GDP per capita double that of the East. Also Germany as a whole is about to hit a demographic time-bomb as they don't want to have babies but still expect to have extensive welfare in retirement...
Like the North and South of England thenGermany doing well for themselves. A 36 billion euro surplus. Makes you wonder what’s actually good about living in the UK anymore
*Western Germany, in the former East they're still pretty poor. Most Western German states have a GDP per capita double that of the East. Also Germany as a whole is about to hit a demographic time-bomb as they don't want to have babies but still expect to have extensive welfare in retirement...
Its getting better though...atleast they have great roads in the east!Like the North and South of England thenGermany doing well for themselves. A 36 billion euro surplus. Makes you wonder what’s actually good about living in the UK anymore
*Western Germany, in the former East they're still pretty poor. Most Western German states have a GDP per capita double that of the East. Also Germany as a whole is about to hit a demographic time-bomb as they don't want to have babies but still expect to have extensive welfare in retirement...
Yep, it's basically the UK North/South divide on steroids.
Germany doing well for themselves. A 36 billion euro surplus. Makes you wonder what’s actually good about living in the UK anymoreThis in itself actually makes me and a lot of other Germans pretty angry, considering how far our social state has fallen
but hey lets support all of these refugees first!Its getting better though...atleast they have great roads in the east!Like the North and South of England thenGermany doing well for themselves. A 36 billion euro surplus. Makes you wonder what’s actually good about living in the UK anymore
*Western Germany, in the former East they're still pretty poor. Most Western German states have a GDP per capita double that of the East. Also Germany as a whole is about to hit a demographic time-bomb as they don't want to have babies but still expect to have extensive welfare in retirement...
Yep, it's basically the UK North/South divide on steroids.Germany doing well for themselves. A 36 billion euro surplus. Makes you wonder what’s actually good about living in the UK anymoreThis in itself actually makes me and a lot of other Germans pretty angry, considering how far our social state has fallen
Germany doing well for themselves. A 36 billion euro surplus. Makes you wonder what’s actually good about living in the UK anymoreThis in itself actually makes me and a lot of other Germans pretty angry, considering how far our social state has fallen
Where's the "EU collapses before Brexit can take place" option?
can someone remind me why they're doing this again?From what I’ve heard from leave voters it’s a bit of both
Is it more economical or just not wanting to deal with the EU's bs?
can someone remind me why they're doing this again?
Is it more economical or just not wanting to deal with the EU's bs?
As rotten and unreformable as the UK, or worst?
Let’s be honest we do live in a right shithole tbfAs rotten and unreformable as the UK, or worst?
In what way is the UK rotten and unreformable?
Let’s be honest we do live in a right shithole tbfAs rotten and unreformable as the UK, or worst?
In what way is the UK rotten and unreformable?
For me it's mainly [...]
That’s TheodinFor me it's mainly [...]
I honestly thought you were Canadian
That’s Theodin
Let’s be honest we do live in a right shithole tbf
For me it's mainly [...]
I honestly thought you were Canadian
helloThat’s TheodinFor me it's mainly [...]
I honestly thought you were Canadian
If I'm not mistaken Steven also lives in Australia and so doesn't have to actually deal with the bullshit that the rest of us poor sods do.
Steven, what happens if NATO goes to war? Will you bet drafted into all 3 armies?It’s acruslly four since he’s also a KGB agent
Plenty of BS in 'stralia lol, and my wife is keeping me here against my will
Steven, what happens if NATO goes to war? Will you bet drafted into all 3 armies?
Did you celebrate Australia Day?
It must really suck when the problem isn't money but manpower. FeelsGermanyMancutting the mandatory service fucked us properly
It must really suck when the problem isn't money but manpower. FeelsGermanyManinstituting the mandatory service fucked poland and france properly
We should all just bow down to Russia so they can stop radicals from interfering in our referendums. Then there would be no issues.Also allow more Russians into our countries so they can invade to protect the minorities.
Russian immigrants (anecdotally) seem to be of decent quality. Tbh the same is true of the entire Iron CurtainWe should all just bow down to Russia so they can stop radicals from interfering in our referendums. Then there would be no issues.Also allow more Russians into our countries so they can invade to protect the minorities.
Russian immigrants (anecdotally) seem to be of decent quality. Tbh the same is true of the entire Iron CurtainWe should all just bow down to Russia so they can stop radicals from interfering in our referendums. Then there would be no issues.Also allow more Russians into our countries so they can invade to protect the minorities.
mmhm?Russian immigrants (anecdotally) seem to be of decent quality. Tbh the same is true of the entire Iron CurtainWe should all just bow down to Russia so they can stop radicals from interfering in our referendums. Then there would be no issues.Also allow more Russians into our countries so they can invade to protect the minorities.
Eh, I'd say Romania is the exception to the rule.
Romanians and Sinti are not the same. Romanians are great. Sinti and Roma can go awayreminds me of this gem ;D
Are you trying to tell me that im a Nazi? lolRomanians and Sinti are not the same. Romanians are great. Sinti and Roma can go awayreminds of this gem ;DSpoiler(https://www.fsegames.eu/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.npd-hessen.de%2Finhalte%2Fimage%2FNPD_Wahlplakat_Geld_fuer_die_Oma_statt_fuer_Sinti_und_Roma.jpg&hash=ee88e416a47fba5844c58e585792542923163a93)[close]
So what do you guys think that will happen with the Ireland to Northern Ireland border?I think they will kinda do some kind like "super visa" agreement, where companys can trade theire goods without border checks, but soft checks for people
The EU is really making it a requirement for any agreement that that border stays open...
I mean, come on, the EU really doesn't give a shit about British or Irish people any more than they cared about the Greeks. This is just playing politics to achieve a desired outcome.Well obviously; they won't be in the EU so why should they care (assuming you mean NI)? They have their own interests to look after. I don't know why anyone would be surprised about this, I mean it was clear from before the vote that the EU was going to force concessions. The UK has always had the poorer footing with regards to the deal, precisely because they hadn't bothered thinking about any of the details of it before going to a referendum. It was a blind leap forward with no structure and we're reaping the consequences. Who'dve thunk?
Another question is what do you guys think the future will be with Brexit, for the 2+milion Polish and other EU citizens living in the UK, and other way around the 1.5+ milion UK citizens living in the EU?
Another pressing question: now that the UK is leaving the European Union, will the British curriculum specification start teaching that the equation of a straight line is y = mx + b instead of the great British equation y = mx + c ?This needs to be taken to the UN security council immediately
Interested to see what people think about South Africa on this forum? Especially European's opinions but in general.
Interested to see what people think about South Africa on this forum? Especially European's opinions but in general.If you change whites to Jews and Africans to Germans you start to get some serious parallels, especially in the 'confiscating their land and wealth' to give to native Africans.
Interested to see what people think about South Africa on this forum? Especially European's opinions but in general.If you change whites to Jews and Africans to Germans you start to get some serious parallels, especially in the 'confiscating their land and wealth' to give to native Africans.
It's just disappointing to see.
Shkreli broke the law by concealing his funds' losses early on, yes, but those funds eventually turned profitable (with some of his investors even admitting on the witness stand of his trial that partnering with Shkreli was a great investment).Crime is never about the outcome. The ends don't justify the means, otherwise totalitarian systems would be legal. Western society takes issue in how the gains are gotten, not if they're gotten.
This sentence was made in the name of politics, not justice. Seven years for a crime that didn't even cost his investors any money in the long run? Seems legit.
As long as he's sentenced into the type of prison he belongs to be in, I think that's fair enough. He'll be fine, and I bet you when he gets released for good behaviour he'll be better
He is a bit of a prick, hiked up the price of a life saving drugWhich is sadly not uncommon in the pharma industry, and unlike other companies he invested in R & D with that profit. moral memes are worthless
He may have put the money into more research but that doesn’t help the people who needed that drug there and thenHe is a bit of a prick, hiked up the price of a life saving drugWhich is sadly not uncommon in the pharma industry, and unlike other companies he invested in R & D with that profit. moral memes are worthless
It may just be me, but he doesn't seem like the kind of guy to reinvest that money in research, considering his fraud conviction. I'd imagine he was using it to line his pockets and invest in other companies. It's not like his company developed the drug in the first place, they just bought the rights to it then marked it up massively.
I assume since you're using it to say it's okay that he hiked the price 5000% that it was available to every single person who took the pill immediately after the price was hiked?
So is the drug in full commercial sale then?
And what are the eligibility requirements because I couldn't find the specifics
Although eligibility differs from program to program, they all have three specific criteria in common.
Income: To qualify for any patient assistance program, your total household income must be less than 200% of the Federal Poverty Level.
Prescription Coverage: Prescription assistance programs require that you do not currently subscribe to private or public sources of prescription coverage.
Residence: You must be a United States resident or citizen to be eligible for any of these programs.
The thing is. Going off those requirements. Let's say I'm a single man living by myself who earns $30,000 dollars per year. I also am uninsured. $750 dollars per tablet is not something I'm going to be able to pay. So what can I do?
And if insurance companies have to pay more for the drug, then surely that cost then falls back more onto the consumer.
https://globalnews.ca/news/4058984/justin-trudeau-india-trip-ipsos-poll/Hopefully not. Who's ready for a fourth straight PC loss?? Doug Ford cannot win Ontario
Also Doug Ford supposedly won the Ontario PC race looooooooooooool
https://globalnews.ca/news/4058984/justin-trudeau-india-trip-ipsos-poll/Hopefully not. Who's ready for a fourth straight PC loss?? Doug Ford cannot win Ontario
Also Doug Ford supposedly won the Ontario PC race looooooooooooool
I’m calling a Wynne minorityhttps://globalnews.ca/news/4058984/justin-trudeau-india-trip-ipsos-poll/Hopefully not. Who's ready for a fourth straight PC loss?? Doug Ford cannot win Ontario
Also Doug Ford supposedly won the Ontario PC race looooooooooooool
And i like thousands of others never received my PIN to vote. Party is a shitshow.
On the bright side the last polls still have the PC at an absurd 50% and even with Doug ford at leader maintained a huge margin (wynne vs ford, wynne vs elliott, etc.)
I’m calling a Wynne minorityhttps://globalnews.ca/news/4058984/justin-trudeau-india-trip-ipsos-poll/Hopefully not. Who's ready for a fourth straight PC loss?? Doug Ford cannot win Ontario
Also Doug Ford supposedly won the Ontario PC race looooooooooooool
And i like thousands of others never received my PIN to vote. Party is a shitshow.
On the bright side the last polls still have the PC at an absurd 50% and even with Doug ford at leader maintained a huge margin (wynne vs ford, wynne vs elliott, etc.)
I just don’t see a world where Toronto suburbs vote for Rob Ford’s brotherI’m calling a Wynne minorityhttps://globalnews.ca/news/4058984/justin-trudeau-india-trip-ipsos-poll/Hopefully not. Who's ready for a fourth straight PC loss?? Doug Ford cannot win Ontario
Also Doug Ford supposedly won the Ontario PC race looooooooooooool
And i like thousands of others never received my PIN to vote. Party is a shitshow.
On the bright side the last polls still have the PC at an absurd 50% and even with Doug ford at leader maintained a huge margin (wynne vs ford, wynne vs elliott, etc.)
Ontario is probably the most postmodern province of the world's most postmodern country. God help you if Wynne stays in power.
Someone explain Ontario politics to me?Liberals have been in for over a decade. Two Liberal premiers have had their times in office mired by extremely poor financial decisions, terrible political partisanship, they've had party members charged with corruption, they singlehandedly ruined both the energy and industrial sectors, and had prominent members of parliament call different parts of non-Toronto Ontario "a wasteland".
Someone explain Ontario politics to me?They have a garbage, liberal premier like the rest of the country.
Here's the thing, there's no point getting rid of Wynne and replacing her with someone who's not much different. Conservatives need to be conservative. Doug Ford probably ain't the best messenger but if the message itself is good...Tried that last time tho. My party sources expected Brown to abandon his Liberal agenda after election
Because if Theresa May doesn’t condemn Russian for it then it makes her look weakDont you think the Russians just ignoring her ultimatum makes her look weaker? Now she will have to put in sanctions that hurt the economy of all countrys connected to the topic
Im going a bit off topic but I just wanted to give you some updates.. election was held here in Italy 10 days ago. Right wing coalition got 37%, 5-Stars-Movemnet got 32%, center-left party collapsed. Lowest tornout ever for Italy (about 73%).
In the last 2 years M-5s and Lega (which is the leader party in the right wing coalition) changed a bit their opinion about EU and euro. They used to be very euroscepit (they wanted a Italexit referendum), nowadays, especially for M-5s, leaving EU is not a priority anymore.
Despite the fact that both those parties are partially eurospectic and are extremely populist, its really difficoult that they will be able to form a government (yeah classic Italy), so we will either have a caretaker government or we'll go back to vote in some months (hopefully with a different electoral law).Election result(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c8/Italian_2018_elections_Chamber_of_Deputies_constituencies.svg/654px-Italian_2018_elections_Chamber_of_Deputies_constituencies.svg.png)[close]
Ikr none gives a shit about Italy but yeah I think is quite important for the future of EU
But what is the next step?
Even after a reelection the country will probably color the same as this result.. the population is devided..
What new election law would you think work?
There wasn’t any economic sanctions tho afaikBecause if Theresa May doesn’t condemn Russian for it then it makes her look weakDont you think the Russians just ignoring her ultimatum makes her look weaker? Now she will have to put in sanctions that hurt the economy of all countrys connected to the topic
'Russia said his comments demonstrated his "intellectual impotence"."He doesnt seem confident at all. As threatening as my pre school teachers
lol
Lol conservatives and liberals, both sides of the same coinExplain yourself
You all are going at each other while the man outside the box laughsWho’s the man outside the box and how are you so gloriously enlightened
Canada's parliment has been voting for 24 hours now. Here's a background.
1. Trudeau's trip to India was a disaster for many reasons, but one thing he did was use a national security official to blame the government of India for there being a convicted attempted murderer at a dinner party the Trudeau's hosted.
2. The opposition parties called that bluff and proposed a motion to have the NSO brief parliamentarians on the issue. Since there's a minimal chance that's indeed what happened, the government defeated the motion.
3. Because of this, the Conservatives and NDP are forcing a vote on every single amendment on the 2018 budget - over 260 individual votes. Also, the way our parliament works is that budget motions are confidence motions, meaning if the budget fails, the government falls.
Major embarrassment for the Liberals, as if they would agree to let the NSO testify, the voting would stop - the budget would pass, but they're protecting Trudeau at significant political cost.
Filibuster, anyone? :D
gloriousCanada's parliment has been voting for 24 hours now. Here's a background.
1. Trudeau's trip to India was a disaster for many reasons, but one thing he did was use a national security official to blame the government of India for there being a convicted attempted murderer at a dinner party the Trudeau's hosted.
2. The opposition parties called that bluff and proposed a motion to have the NSO brief parliamentarians on the issue. Since there's a minimal chance that's indeed what happened, the government defeated the motion.
3. Because of this, the Conservatives and NDP are forcing a vote on every single amendment on the 2018 budget - over 260 individual votes. Also, the way our parliament works is that budget motions are confidence motions, meaning if the budget fails, the government falls.
Major embarrassment for the Liberals, as if they would agree to let the NSO testify, the voting would stop - the budget would pass, but they're protecting Trudeau at significant political cost.
Filibuster, anyone? :D
They lasted 20 hours, just finished. That India trip is the gift that keeps on giving.
Should have kept going honestly, I don't think the Tories realize how much they're going to have to demonize Trudeau in order to make Scheer seem more appealing.gloriousCanada's parliment has been voting for 24 hours now. Here's a background.
1. Trudeau's trip to India was a disaster for many reasons, but one thing he did was use a national security official to blame the government of India for there being a convicted attempted murderer at a dinner party the Trudeau's hosted.
2. The opposition parties called that bluff and proposed a motion to have the NSO brief parliamentarians on the issue. Since there's a minimal chance that's indeed what happened, the government defeated the motion.
3. Because of this, the Conservatives and NDP are forcing a vote on every single amendment on the 2018 budget - over 260 individual votes. Also, the way our parliament works is that budget motions are confidence motions, meaning if the budget fails, the government falls.
Major embarrassment for the Liberals, as if they would agree to let the NSO testify, the voting would stop - the budget would pass, but they're protecting Trudeau at significant political cost.
Filibuster, anyone? :D
They lasted 20 hours, just finished. That India trip is the gift that keeps on giving.
Someone’s been reading Marx
Should have kept going honestly, I don't think the Tories realize how much they're going to have to demonize Trudeau in order to make Scheer seem more appealing.
Real shit.Someone’s been reading Marx
I only read the great anarcho-communist author Nipplestockings
Everyone else is an inferior intellectual and that's a fact.
I miss Nipplestockings.
I'm just pointing out the real problem to your naive brains/r/iamverysmart
Yes I am very 'smart' when it comes to critical thinking and logicYou should check out that subreddit
I love this subredditI'm just pointing out the real problem to your naive brains/r/iamverysmart
It’s honestly one of the best things on redditI love this subredditI'm just pointing out the real problem to your naive brains/r/iamverysmart
Cute. You must be so sophisticated and intelligent from college. How silly of me to try and converse with you.You’re digging the hole still mate
I miss Nipplestockings.
If people legitimately think that jokingly calling an admin a [redacted -by me, still there in link - slur for gay people] is homophobia, and that it warrants an instant perma ban, then I don't know what to say. It makes to me cringe to think that anyone could be this blindingly zealous on their quest to see all "bad boy words" (As is it's coming to) eliminated. Sorry, but this isn't preschool. I know that swearing and using bigoted language is immature, but being legimitely offended when someone swears at you jokingly is absolutely ridiculous. Is Flying squirrel on a PR campaign or something? I'm pretty sure people enjoy joking around with their friends while letting out some harsh langauge more than having to watch their mouths living in a facist police state while playing a video game.
Christ. And yes, I have brought this issue up with the admins, and they brushed me off. And no, I'm not the only one to have these thoughts about the administration. I believe people who kiss up to the admins are a minority at this point.
your biggest concern should be why 5/7 Of your life is devoted to working for another man and why you have to work until you die.
your biggest concern should be why 5/7 Of your life is devoted to working for another man and why you have to work until you die.
Yeah, you're right. Let's all live out the rest of our lives in our mother's basements! Take that corporations, I won't be your slave!
I don't follow Alex Jones, he's controlled opposition.
Not saying everything he says is wrong, some of the things he says is right.
And LOL at Joe, this is what happens when you start questioning the system, the brainwashed try to put you down
Edit: that video of Alex Jones is from 2001, back when he was legit, everything he said in that video is true.
It also modernizes the bail system, giving police the authority to impose a broader scope of conditions on accused persons without seeking court approval — something which could reduce the strain on limited court resources.
I mean, good.How is that good?
Meanwhile in canada Trudeau just put forward unbelievably stupid reforms to the Criminal Justice system
People (see: men) accused of domestic violence or with a vaguely defined "history" of domestic violence will effectively be held guilty until proven innocent for the purpose of bail. How the son of the man who implemented the Charter of Rights and Freedoms doesnt realize a reverse onus clause will never survive a Charter challenge (via right to be presumed innocent) is fucking incredible.
They are seeking to eliminate preliminary inquiries, bafflingly indicating they are doing it to save time and resources when by all accounts removing them will do just the opposite.
They still have their feathers ruffled virtue signalling over the Stanley case and have thus UNBELIEVABLY BAFFLINGLY decided they want to eliminate peremptory challenges for jury selection. What. the. actual. fuck? The only way for prosecution or defence to have a juror excluded will be to prove to the judge that the potential juror is overtly biased. This is fucking insanity...
Then we have this gem:QuoteIt also modernizes the bail system, giving police the authority to impose a broader scope of conditions on accused persons without seeking court approval — something which could reduce the strain on limited court resources.
What the fuck this is even worse than what Harper's conservatives did...
They claim they are trying to reduce strain on justice system resources but these changes will only result in MORE pretrial detention, MORE lengthy trials, and more convictions. And most ironically to their virtue signalling, the hardest hit will be aboriginals and poor who cant afford to fight a lengthy/difficult battle just for bail.
This is unbelievably absurd.
Turkey won’t risk war with France, and the west owes the Kurds some protectionI mean, good.How is that good?
Maybe. Maybe not. But that’s a big bluff for France to callTurkey won’t risk war with France, and the west owes the Kurds some protectionI mean, good.How is that good?
It’s a good one to call. I’m a realist but I’m an idealist for the KurdsMaybe. Maybe not. But that’s a big bluff for France to callTurkey won’t risk war with France, and the west owes the Kurds some protectionI mean, good.How is that good?
France is a pretty active militairy player anyway, much more then people tend to give it credit. It's no stranger to unilateral action.True. It's always a mess in Syria. Still think it's worth it tho
I guess it's also worth to remember that the Syrian Democratic Forces=/=the Kurds. Whole bunch of etnicities in there, even if the YPG/YJG dominates it.
The Kurds in Syria don't want an independent Kurdistan. Their goal always has been autonomy in a decentralized Syria.
The Kurds in Syria don't want an independent Kurdistan. Their goal always has been autonomy in a decentralized Syria.
If the latter gets it
I'm not sure the Syrian Kurds will settle merely for enhanced autonomy.
QuoteIf the latter gets it
Which it clearly will not.
But the only way the US would get it's way would be to put boots on the ground, which they won't.
No, because they are fully aware that is a imposibble scenario. They can't hope to defeat Assad in the long run and even if they would, Turkey would never accept their existance. They barely respect Syrian soevereignity as it is; a break-away region would just get invaded straight away.
The YPG, later the SDF, and Assad never actually really fought eachother, and they have nothing to gain by starting. Assad is more likely to accept autonomy over a few regions not important to anyone in strategic or economic terms. Especially as he can just take away that autonomy in a few years anyway.
USA's policy is already overtly pro-kurd. Which is why they are opposed to its independence, which will lead to only more instability in the region. They didn't do shit when Iraq took back control over the border regions, and just because Trump got a new advisor doesn't actually mean he's going to listen to him.
A 9mm handgun I believe. The vast majority of gun crime within the US is committed with handguns though, so no surprises here.And do the gun laws in the her state prohibit certain assault rifles ?
And do the gun laws in the her state prohibit certain assault rifles ?
A 9mm handgun I believe. The vast majority of gun crime within the US is committed with handguns though, so no surprises here.And do the gun laws in the her state prohibit certain assault rifles ?
Thanks suns for clarifying since I assume Gordo didn’t know. Could we then argue that the damage could have been worse had the shooter had access to a rifle? I think that’s a fair argument.
Thanks suns for clarifying since I assume Gordo didn’t know. Could we then argue that the damage could have been worse had the shooter had access to a rifle? I think that’s a fair argument.
Not without also assuming they tried their damnedest to get a rifle and couldnt and that it was because of the ban that they couldnt. Also in this case if she couldnt do any real damage with a handgun in close quarters I have a hard time imagining she would fair much better with a rifle.
Also its a meme at this point but AR 15's are not assault rifles. No selective fire/full auto = not an assault rifle
It’s just very dismissive for Gordo to try and take pot shots at a state with gun restrictions when there’s no real evidence that she got around them.
what happened to those that owned ars before the ban?A 9mm handgun I believe. The vast majority of gun crime within the US is committed with handguns though, so no surprises here.And do the gun laws in the her state prohibit certain assault rifles ?
Yes, California made it illegal to purchase assault rifles such as the AR-15 since January 1st of 2018.
what happened to those that owned ars before the ban?
My argument isn’t that all firearms should be banned. It would be impossible in the US. But I’m saying that maybe she had a handgun because the assault rifles were banned, lessening the potential damage she could cause.I think here damage was "lessened" by her incompetence
My argument isn’t that all firearms should be banned. It would be impossible in the US. But I’m saying that maybe she had a handgun because the assault rifles were banned, lessening the potential damage she could cause.
Handguns have a slower rate of fire, usually a smaller calibre, less effective range and accuracy, and smaller magazines. I think Toffee has a fair argument when he says that handgun, on average, do less damage then a assault rifle when we put them in the same scenario.
usually a smaller calibre
usually a smaller calibre
I'm an American, so I'm not very good with the metric system. I could have sworn 9mm is larger than 5.56mm or even 7.62mm
Caliber is only the diameter of the cartridge - not the length.
Thanks suns for clarifying since I assume Gordo didn’t know. Could we then argue that the damage could have been worse had the shooter had access to a rifle? I think that’s a fair argument.
My argument isn’t that all firearms should be banned. It would be impossible in the US. But I’m saying that maybe she had a handgun because the assault rifles were banned, lessening the potential damage she could cause.
If I'm not mistaken, rifle rounds are more deadly due to their increased velocity and the speed they're fired at. They do more damage to the human body.
1. A victim hit by a rifle shot will have more damage done to his or her body then if the victim were hit by a 'smaller' pistol round. I think we can all agree on that.
3. Bigger cartridges, faster rate of fire.
Maybe not. But it makes it harder than selling them freely.
well considering we're the global policeman no
Just give every civilian nukes alreadyIf the second amendment gives you rights to it, why not?
I'll make sure to use it the next time some poor black chap gets killed so his fellow compatriots can't rob my local Nike store.Just give every civilian nukes alreadyIf the second amendment gives you rights to it, why not?
What do you think on the latest events in Syria? Would it grow into the new confrontaion in the region? Or status-quo remains?It’s happened before. Insults will be thrown, threats will be made but nothing will change.
It’s happened before. Insults will be thrown, threats will be made but nothing will change.Had a feeling that this could rise to a point of boiling. Syria turns out to be a place of showing strength to eachother by big countries and nothing more.
What do you think on the latest events in Syria? Would it grow into the new confrontaion in the region? Or status-quo remains?It’s happened before. Insults will be thrown, threats will be made but nothing will change.
(https://www.fsegames.eu/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fs2.quickmeme.com%2Fimg%2F8d%2F8db02790ad2cfb19ad0df922935beb3c264869634adefe8f0586fc645a1970e2.jpg&hash=2c3f855200da90c5dd4bf77f881c844f50548ae6)
Anything that does not involve militairy action will be meaningless.
That’s basically every countries foreign policy at the minute. Russia and Assad are allowed to do as they please.
Very much agreed. The only thing I can see is outside players influencing Trump as he ran on a cornerstone of avoiding Middle Eastern conflict.That’s basically every countries foreign policy at the minute. Russia and Assad are allowed to do as they please.Oh and Assad's almost won the war already. Why would he suddenly now resort to chemical weapons, attacking an area where his own troops are stationed? So naive. Shame on you.
Relax, it's just going to be a series of air/missile strikes against Assad targets. Nobody wants Russian dead bodies as a result of this, the Americans always tell Moscow what's going to be targeted so they can pull their people out.
If May isn't seeking a parliamentary vote then that probably means the UK will be in a support role. It'll be some fat American pushing the button or whatever, though Macron's a bit 'Tony Blair' so will want to kill a few Syrians to make himself feel important.
Ooooh. Theresa May trying to pull a 'rally around the flag' to distract from her terrible stint as PM
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-43719284 (http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-43719284)
https://www.wsj.com/articles/lawmakers-to-hear-from-pompeo-mattis-in-midst-of-syria-crisis-1523525400 (https://www.wsj.com/articles/lawmakers-to-hear-from-pompeo-mattis-in-midst-of-syria-crisis-1523525400)
I love how the new state-meta is to send mercenaries/private contractors/no-insignia soldiers to do your work because then you don't have to start a world war over it. Yum.
What are some examples of stateless agents in the cold war? I've always known on proxy wars but didn't realize nonuniform men went during the cold war. I thought they were a post cold war phenomena.https://www.wsj.com/articles/lawmakers-to-hear-from-pompeo-mattis-in-midst-of-syria-crisis-1523525400 (https://www.wsj.com/articles/lawmakers-to-hear-from-pompeo-mattis-in-midst-of-syria-crisis-1523525400)
I love how the new state-meta is to send mercenaries/private contractors/no-insignia soldiers to do your work because then you don't have to start a world war over it. Yum.
Proxy wars and stateless agents arent really that new tbh. Been the go-to since the Cold War
Anything that does not involve militairy action will be meaningless.Yes because military action will help conclude the war. Please take refugees you are responsible for.
Anything that does not involve militairy action will be meaningless.Yes because military action will help conclude the war. Please take refugees you are responsible for.
Assad has no motive to use chemical weapons. If gas attack even happened it was done by USA founded rebels. City in which supposed attack happened was held by one of the most extreme fanatical rebels who would have no problem gasing civilians. This rebel group also kidnapped people from other towns and use them as meatshield say they will kill them if syria bombs the town. Video they sent is so laughable bunch of fake medics showering kidnapped children who show no sign of being hurt. If chlorine was actually used people would be coughing a lot, written claims and reports say some people just collapsed, chlorine is cruel poision and you cough a lot before you die. They also posted picture of dead people in a bunker, easily they could just kill them with CO from intentional gasleak. All you need to make chlorine is electricity salt and water. They could even make Sarin with some heating capability. Now stop supporting your country in destroying other countries wasnt 3 milion people enough?
Well threats will do nothing, while military action will be counter productive. Who shoots missiles at chemical weapon center? Someone who knows there is no chemical weapons there and doesn't care if there was any. Just opportunity for UK to be the beta dog of USA and French goverment to show they have a big dick.Anything that does not involve militairy action will be meaningless.Yes because military action will help conclude the war. Please take refugees you are responsible for.
Assad has no motive to use chemical weapons. If gas attack even happened it was done by USA founded rebels. City in which supposed attack happened was held by one of the most extreme fanatical rebels who would have no problem gasing civilians. This rebel group also kidnapped people from other towns and use them as meatshield say they will kill them if syria bombs the town. Video they sent is so laughable bunch of fake medics showering kidnapped children who show no sign of being hurt. If chlorine was actually used people would be coughing a lot, written claims and reports say some people just collapsed, chlorine is cruel poision and you cough a lot before you die. They also posted picture of dead people in a bunker, easily they could just kill them with CO from intentional gasleak. All you need to make chlorine is electricity salt and water. They could even make Sarin with some heating capability. Now stop supporting your country in destroying other countries wasnt 3 milion people enough?
I think you misinterpreted him. Point is simply saying more mean words or putting some more toothless sanctions on them would be meaningless at this point (just like with Obama's "red line" that he failed to back up when crossed). Regardless of the veracity of gas attack allegations, this is 100% correct.
I see we have again no shortage of gas experts, just like there was no shortage of anti-air experts after the Russians shot down MH17.Yes of course 50 civilians is worth getting bombed by USA, it is obvious Assad is not so stupid to use gas and give USA a reason to attack him and yes he is much stronger than rebels it is just question of time before he defeats rebels but it will still take some times since war is slow fighting for every street. If he actually wanted to use gas he would use something much more effective than chlorine which is ww1 gas and believe me he has better stuff. But you will of course keep claiming Assad used chemical weaponons even though there is no proof of it, just like last years gas attack was never proven. And it is obvious that video is just some poorly acted sceen. Rebels used the gas on people they kidnapped from nearby city because they are desprate to get help from their liege lord USA.
All these Assad fanboys pretending he's on some smooth path towards ultimate victory need to become slightly more aware on the absolutely abismal state of the Syrian Army and Assad complete dependency on all sorts of barely loyal militias and foreign groups. Yeah, the pro-Assad side is probably the strongest faction, but that doesn't mean they're anywhere near able to completly defeat the opposition, let alone win the war in any short period of time.
Oh and Im not Assad fanboi I am just not braindead.
Keep believing everything you hear of CCN and that USA is protector of the world while Russia is evil.QuoteOh and Im not Assad fanboi I am just not braindead.
Right.
I'm Dutch. I can't even receive CNN.That makes everything just much worse.
I'm Dutch. I can't even receive CNN.That makes everything just much worse.
Well saying that we are not short of gas experts seemed like you didn't agree.I'm Dutch. I can't even receive CNN.That makes everything just much worse.
Notice that I actually never said anything in opposition to your claims. You're incredibly trigger-happy to attack anyone who you perceive as denying the apparantly undeniable truth. Why?
Ur moms ass is a gass expert! ah ah ha ahah ah !!!
I’m a Duuring expert.
fake newsI’m a Duuring expert.
Undeniably the truth.
I only expect more refugees from Syria into EU coming in short time.Probably but it's not like the tide ebbed away at all. People want to get away from war and we have to look at ourselves for a lot of the destruction caused.
Why even brother talking about politics. You cant trust all that the media says and everything that is said here wont help any situation or any problem that occur in the world. It seems this thread is kinda a game. "I am right! Fuck your opinion." Not wanting to offend anyone, but it's just useless from my point of view.If nobody talked about politics then no decisions would ever be made and nothing would ever get better.
Why even brother talking about politics. You cant trust all that the media says and everything that is said here wont help any situation or any problem that occur in the world. It seems this thread is kinda a game. "I am right! Fuck your opinion." Not wanting to offend anyone, but it's just useless from my point of view.You don't have to talk about politics if you dont want to.
Why even brother talking about politics. You cant trust all that the media says and everything that is said here wont help any situation or any problem that occur in the world. It seems this thread is kinda a game. "I am right! Fuck your opinion." Not wanting to offend anyone, but it's just useless from my point of view.
Lol! Russians all talk no action!!!
Lol! Russians all talk no action!!!
When you try to paint Russia and Assad as people who care about human rights
Two dictators who care about human rights.When you try to paint Russia and Assad as people who care about human rights
But they do.
Two dictators who care about human rights.When you try to paint Russia and Assad as people who care about human rights
But they do.
Okay.
If you define caring as using gas on their people, they both deeply care for their own civilians.When you try to paint Russia and Assad as people who care about human rights
But they do.
Lol! Russians all talk no action!!!
A bigger response might be given in due time, but most likely it will not a military response, unless any further strikes will cause damage to Russian troops. Russia will stick to their diplomatic responses for now I believe. Congratulations to the coalition forces (USA, UK and France) for demonstrating their incompetence in destroying anything of importance. 71 out of the 103 missiles fired at Syria were intercepted by the Syrian army, using old Soviet-era surface-to-air missiles. This is a total humiliation for them, especially since Trump was bragging about his 'new' and 'smart' missiles.
I can only applaud Russia for their smart diplomatic play, it is quite impressive. The coalition forces managed to violate both fundamental human rights and the UNSC charter in their attack yesterday, but it's not like anyone will care or punish them for it anyways.
If Russian troops get hit in another attack though, I can guarantee you that there will be a quick and harsh military response.
When you try to paint Russia and Assad as people who care about human rightsThey don't but west is much worse. USA killed more than 3 million people in Iraq, agent orange was a humanitary juice as well. Not to mention that USA election mean nothing since President or congress have no power, look at Trump he was saying he will stop supporting rebels in Syria now that he is elected does what illuminati tell him to do. US presidents are just puppets while Putin and Assad are at least actual rulers of their country. Look a country that has a dictator that kills a few political opponents lets start a war and kill at least a milion people and refugees will go to Europe anyways.
Never happened.If you define caring as using gas on their people, they both deeply care for their own civilians.When you try to paint Russia and Assad as people who care about human rights
But they do.
My 5 cents.Fact is NATO is agressor that is bullying Russia and USA broke many agreements with Russia about staying out of middle east, not building antinuke systems...
Russian economics is taking another hard dive, so they need to keep their diplomatic face by pretending they influencing global politics. Though, they're going more and more for a militarism in country, so they must keep the population in constant readiness for conflicts. There will be no unrest inside country if leaders talk about constant threats outside the Russia.
About missles - no evidence or proofs about intrecepted ones were given by the way. Russian media were caught on lie so many times here in Ukraine, so why not they can make the same in Syria, lies lies.
What we have in Syria is another little local war without high chance of getting global, the sides will keep challenging each other on both diplomatic and military fields. Remember the episode, where US troops destroyed russian troops moving to the oil fields? What action Russia took? Nothing.
Mcpero must be trolling. He actually used the Illuminati coupled with the old Soviet whataboutismNice argument
Yes it is. It’s the age old argument of deflecting onto somebody else to avoid criticism for something you can’t defend.Mcpero must be trolling. He actually used the Illuminati coupled with the old Soviet whataboutismNice argument
NiceYes it is. It’s the age old argument of deflecting onto somebody else to avoid criticism for something you can’t defend.Mcpero must be trolling. He actually used the Illuminati coupled with the old Soviet whataboutismNice argument
Lol! Russians all talk no action!!!hey i'm still alive due to that ok
See you can’t deny itNiceYes it is. It’s the age old argument of deflecting onto somebody else to avoid criticism for something you can’t defend.Mcpero must be trolling. He actually used the Illuminati coupled with the old Soviet whataboutismNice argument
thinking this threadwould be going off on one after the bombing in syria.....
thinking this threadwould be going off on one after the bombing in syria.....Well believe it or not but the politics thread is where we discuss politics
Deny what? That your argument is used to avoid critcism for something you can't defend?See you can’t deny itNiceYes it is. It’s the age old argument of deflecting onto somebody else to avoid criticism for something you can’t defend.Mcpero must be trolling. He actually used the Illuminati coupled with the old Soviet whataboutismNice argument
LOL. Didn't know McPero was such a russiaphile.LOL. Didn't know Animeman was such a muricaphile.
You might as well move to mother Russia, eh?
You know, to feel "safe from the west".
What are you talking about Mcpero? You’re the one using whataboutism. Sure the West has done bad things, but that doesn’t excuse Russia and Assad.Idk what are you talking about? Don't know whataboutism. Of course Putin and Assad are not nice and kill political opponents. But USA caused far more destruction in the world than Russia has and it is far more hypocritical. Russia used diplomacy to befriend Syria while USA comes and starts buying mercenaries to fight against stable dictator regimes resulting in destructive war and after the war state is ruled by a diffrent dictator. I don't know how am I defending Assad and Russia they didn't use gas there is nothing to defend them for.
Google whataboutism and then read back your posts. Your position is indefensible and your logic is flawed. Why are you defending dictators when yesterday you were denying that they were dictators at all? Consistently changing the goalposts to suit your argument. Sounds like something Putin does to be honest.When was denying they are not dictators and when was I defending them you are just making stuff up by now.
Nevermind that was Norweegian. But the point remains the same. You’re defending evil men who have done terrible things just because you hate somebody else who has done terrible things. It’s quite ironic, don’t you think?I am defending innocent Syrian and Iraq people that West keeps bombing. I was never defending Putin and Assad for killing political apponents. So idk how am I defending them?
LOL. Didn't know McPero was such a russiaphile.LOL. Didn't know Animeman was such a muricaphile.
You might as well move to mother Russia, eh?
You know, to feel "safe from the west".
You might as well get a job in McDonald's, eh?
You know to feel "safe from Soviet communist invasion".
You mean the same Syrian and Iraqi people who are also being killed by Putin and Assad? The west has done terrible things, but wake up and see that Putin and Assad are just as bad.So if one day there would be military uprising caused by a foreign country in UK you would judge UK army for fighting against them? But that is really irrelevant. There would be no war in first place if USA wouldn't be supporting rebel groups and ISIS. Syrian goverment just wants to end the war it is quote natural what they are doing. USA caused this destruction and Syria and Russia are doing the most rational thing to end it.
Which point is that exactly?LOL. Didn't know McPero was such a russiaphile.LOL. Didn't know Animeman was such a muricaphile.
You might as well move to mother Russia, eh?
You know, to feel "safe from the west".
You might as well get a job in McDonald's, eh?
You know to feel "safe from Soviet communist invasion".
Proves mine and Toffee's point.
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/world/2017/feb/07/up-to-13000-secretly-hanged-in-syrian-jail-says-amnestyYou mean the same Syrian and Iraqi people who are also being killed by Putin and Assad? The west has done terrible things, but wake up and see that Putin and Assad are just as bad.So if one day there would be military uprising caused by a foreign country in UK you would judge UK army for fighting against them? But that is really irrelevant. There would be no war in first place if USA wouldn't be supporting rebel groups and ISIS. Syrian goverment just wants to end the war it is quote natural what they are doing. USA caused this destruction and Syria and Russia are doing the most rational thing to end it.
Things like this wouldn't happen if USA wouldn't start a war. Not to mention we don't know to what extend these reports are true.https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/world/2017/feb/07/up-to-13000-secretly-hanged-in-syrian-jail-says-amnestyYou mean the same Syrian and Iraqi people who are also being killed by Putin and Assad? The west has done terrible things, but wake up and see that Putin and Assad are just as bad.So if one day there would be military uprising caused by a foreign country in UK you would judge UK army for fighting against them? But that is really irrelevant. There would be no war in first place if USA wouldn't be supporting rebel groups and ISIS. Syrian goverment just wants to end the war it is quote natural what they are doing. USA caused this destruction and Syria and Russia are doing the most rational thing to end it.
If he was really just defending his country then things like this wouldn’t happen.
That defending accusations by accusing the accusers is not an adequete defenseAgain I am not defending anybody just saying Assad didn't do the gas attack but USA supported rebels did and that Western bombing was counter productive. If I say somebody didn't do something doesn't mean that I am defending them for everything else they did.
Blaming the US for Assad killing thousands of innocent people. Do you have no shame? Besides, certain people within the UN have said they have enough evidence for Assad to be convicted of war crimes. There’s no excuse for that.If USA didn't interfere this most likely wouldn't happen at least not in such great extend so they are partialy guilty. What are you trying to prove? I already say on every post that Assad is bad. I am claiming Assad didnt do the gas attack and that this western intervention was counter productive. Now post something if you disagree with that but don't post another 'Assad is bad' post.
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKCN1AT0AY
Except you try and take the blame away from Assad and Putin every single time. You seem to have a thing for old Vlad and I would say you loved him except being gay is illegal in Russia...I try to take blame away from Assad and Putin from this gas attack yes. No being gay in Russia is not illegal, how Russian society accepts homosexuals is another thing.
No being gay in Russia is not illegal, how Russian society accepts homosexuals is another thing.
If USA didn't interfere this most likely wouldn't happen at least not in such great extend so they are partialy guilty.
So if one day there would be military uprising caused by a foreign country in UK you would judge UK army for fighting against them?
There would be no war in first place if USA wouldn't be supporting rebel groups and ISIS.
QuoteNo being gay in Russia is not illegal, how Russian society accepts homosexuals is another thing.
I cringed.QuoteIf USA didn't interfere this most likely wouldn't happen at least not in such great extend so they are partialy guilty.
The phrasing in this sentence is worthy of a Nobel price for literature.QuoteSo if one day there would be military uprising caused by a foreign country in UK you would judge UK army for fighting against them?
No. We would, however, judge the UK army for warcrimes, such as targeting civilians and using non-discriminatory and therefor illegal weaponry.QuoteThere would be no war in first place if USA wouldn't be supporting rebel groups and ISIS.
Yeah, how could anyone suggest the Assad regime has anything to do with the start of the Syrian Civil war? Imperialists, I say!
If his regime was so strong, why was he losing badly before the Russian’s intervened? And to say that the West’s meagre support for the rebel’s cause them to weaken the regime is very much wishful thinking.Rebels were winning because of Western support idk what makes you think it was meagre support, they wanted regime change but Russian intervention ruined their plans. And no they can't change regime in mere days. Oh and I can say it is wishful thinking that Assad regime is weak what kind of argument is that lol?
If the USA had really wanted regime change, they would have changed the regime in mere days
McPero are you Russian?No. I live in a NATO country.
Is it Turkey i.e. the worst of the NATO countries?No.
So the U.S at the current height of its global strength, given no other interventionist superpower left, is failing after 7 years to topple the already disliked Assad, when in the past they've taken out more stable countries like Chile in a day. The U.S is really giving its all isn't it?
Yes but Assad most likely didn't use gas if that is what you are applying here.
Yes there would be no war because his regime was to strong if you believe rebels could achive anything without support of west you are delusional
So the U.S at the current height of its global strength, given no other interventionist superpower left, is failing after 7 years to topple the already disliked Assad, when in the past they've taken out more stable countries like Chile in a day. The U.S is really giving its all isn't it?Was Russian army in Chile? Was Chile really more stable? Not to mention in Chile Chilean army took over. Why would USA support rebels to overthrow regime and then suddenly say oh nevermind let him stay. Just because USA is the strongest global military power that doesn't makes it allmighty. USA also lost in Vietnam where it actually had own military force and lost in Iran.
McPero are you Russian?No. I live in a NATO country.
Yes I agree there would be no war if UK kept Syria as colony and treated people well. But if there would be no Assad there would be some other dictator maybe even worse or do you propose it would somehow turn to a Scandinavian model of democracy state? Or perhaps anarchy?So the U.S at the current height of its global strength, given no other interventionist superpower left, is failing after 7 years to topple the already disliked Assad, when in the past they've taken out more stable countries like Chile in a day. The U.S is really giving its all isn't it?
Different situation, obviously. Also, the religious factor is a little more present.QuoteYes but Assad most likely didn't use gas if that is what you are applying here.
Even if he didn't, his entire regime is basically a long list of warcrimes. Or are you saying Assad or his forces are innocent of any (war)crimes or crimes against humanity? Is that what you truly believe? And please don't answer this question with 'But the USA/west'.QuoteYes there would be no war because his regime was to strong if you believe rebels could achive anything without support of west you are delusional
There would be no war if there hadn't been an Assad regime.
You failed to answer the question without mentioning the USA'you failed to answer without using words' what kind of arguments are this?
At this point I'd almost want Assad to win this war so this whole people are dying thing could be done with.
Hopefully he would give Northern Syria/The Kurds some autonomy that would be a small victory at least.
At this point I'd almost want Assad to win this war so this whole people are dying thing could be done with.North West Syria held by kurds is doomed since Turkish military is taking their land. North East I think he will be forced to give up maybe.
Hopefully he would give Northern Syria/The Kurds some autonomy that would be a small victory at least.
You point fingers away from Assad, use hypothetical arguments to accuse other countries and quite frankly chat shiteYou failed to answer the question without mentioning the USA'you failed to answer without using words' what kind of arguments are this?
You point fingers away from Assad, use hypothetical arguments to accuse other countries and quite frankly chat shiteYou failed to answer the question without mentioning the USA'you failed to answer without using words' what kind of arguments are this?
Yes I agree there would be no war if UK kept Syria as colony and treated people well.
But if there would be no Assad there would be some other dictator maybe even worse or do you propose it would somehow turn to a Scandinavian model of democracy state? Or perhaps anarchy?
Of course he commited crimes almost every army in every war comits warcrimes, of there was serious civil war in UK, UK goverment would commit them as well.
Yeah I knew it was only mandate after WW1 for some reason thought it was British. Doesn't really matters. I know you weren't saying that. But keeping colonies after WW2 would be the best thing it could happen. Europe should keep colonies untill they would develop them to level of Europe, they would become educated and wouldn't have 10 kids and democracy might work after they would be released. Now you have these poor countries opened to neocolonialism which is far worse than colonialism would be.
Yes I agree there would be no war if UK kept Syria as colony and treated people well.
That's some retarded logic right there and I'd like to be clear that I never meant or support this believe in any way. The answer to colonialism isn't more colonialism. Not to mention that Syria was never a colony of the UK, merely a mandate of the French for just under two decades. Why don't you read the wikipedia page on the country first, before you make such broad statements as 'it should never have had self-determination'?QuoteBut if there would be no Assad there would be some other dictator maybe even worse or do you propose it would somehow turn to a Scandinavian model of democracy state? Or perhaps anarchy?
Or perhaps a slightly less dictator-ish country with respect to fair claims to political and human rights.QuoteOf course he commited crimes almost every army in every war comits warcrimes, of there was serious civil war in UK, UK goverment would commit them as well.
If human rights and international law are that meaningless according to you, then why do you care about the USA bombing Assad?
As I mentioned earlier, Assad is very likely to cut a deal with the Kurds. Protection in return for subordination and probably the return of some regions to direct government control. The SDF cannot hope to win a war against Assad, especially not with Turkey breathing down its neck. Dunno how the lefties will spin that shit, but my money is definitaly on it.
Tu Quoque is not an argument.Yeah it is sad how they keep using it. It is a discussion about USA airstrikes and somehow they keep pointing finger to Assad 'he did this he does this' even though I said multiple times that he is bad. Idk why would you even want to have discussion about Assad being bad or good it is obvious he is not good. I am simply criticising USA support of rebels against his regime, their airstrikes that only managed to injure 3 civilians and that Assad has no motive for gas attack and that it was executed by rebels supported by USA. It is far more important to discuss USA's action than Assads since USA is far greater danger to world peace than any other state. It is crucial to keep awareness that USA is spreading lies and is leading agressive foreign policy which is not according to international law or rather USA controls international law to their benefit. This is dangerous since your country could easily be next I don't think you would be concered with your state military killing americal mercenaries when there are lies spead about your country.
But keeping colonies after WW2 would be the best thing it could happen. Europe should keep colonies untill they would develop them to level of Europe, they would become educated and wouldn't have 10 kids and democracy might work after they would be released. Now you have these poor countries opened to neocolonialism which is far worse than colonialism would be.
Assad's regime is no different to half of middle east/africa it has just been exautrated by fake news to seem like it is almost like North Korea. Syria was a good country and most people were happy to live there. So you might have more democratic states in area we are talking about but few had such a good life standard.
It's really not up to you (or any of us) to decide if Syrian people had a fair reason to protest and later resist the government. There have been the most horrible regimes in the world in which 'most people were happy to live'. Which, by the way, is kinda hard to measure in dictatorships as the people who aren't happy to live there usually get a visit by the police, dissappear, flee the country, get jailed or end up dead.
A Syrian refugee writes a column for a local newspaper in my city. During the last election, he wrote about how he found it so funny peopl were so secretive about who they voted for. He explained that in Syria, you showed everybody you voted for Assad's party, all but screaming from the rooftops how much you loved voting for the party and how Assad was such an awesome leader, just to make sure the police wouldn't come after them. People would leave the curtains open and draw a much bigger cross then necessary, just to make sure anyone who wished to check could see they were being good citizens.
So you are claiming pre ww2 Europe is same as post ww2 Europe? And that colonial lords were trying to develop their colonies? No they didn't so it would be possible for colonies to catch up to their overlord countries, since global community would have eyes on colonies that they are treated well and actually developing. And of course I am aware they were claiming they are civilising colonies but they weren't really, but they would be force to do so now.QuoteBut keeping colonies after WW2 would be the best thing it could happen. Europe should keep colonies untill they would develop them to level of Europe, they would become educated and wouldn't have 10 kids and democracy might work after they would be released. Now you have these poor countries opened to neocolonialism which is far worse than colonialism would be.
Do you even realize you're citing the exact defence people had for colonialism for centuries? And your argument is, correct me if I'm wrong, 'another few decades would surely have solved all its problems!'? No, it would not. That's like saying the best way to avoid all the nasty consequencies of having a war is having a little more war.QuoteAssad's regime is no different to half of middle east/africa it has just been exautrated by fake news to seem like it is almost like North Korea. Syria was a good country and most people were happy to live there. So you might have more democratic states in area we are talking about but few had such a good life standard.
It's really not up to you (or any of us) to decide if Syrian people had a fair reason to protest and later resist the government. There have been the most horrible regimes in the world in which 'most people were happy to live'. Which, by the way, is kinda hard to measure in dictatorships as the people who aren't happy to live there usually get a visit by the police, dissappear, flee the country, get jailed or end up dead.
A Syrian refugee writes a column for a local newspaper in my city. During the last election, he wrote about how he found it so funny peopl were so secretive about who they voted for. He explained that in Syria, you showed everybody you voted for Assad's party, all but screaming from the rooftops how much you loved voting for the party and how Assad was such an awesome leader, just to make sure the police wouldn't come after them. People would leave the curtains open and draw a much bigger cross then necessary, just to make sure anyone who wished to check could see they were being good citizens.
No they didn't so it would be possible for colonies to catch up to their overlord countries, since global community would have eyes on colonies that they are treated well and actually developing.
They have right to protest against Assad no doubt but I am not sure what exactly is your point here? .
If his regime was so strong, why was he losing badly before the Russian’s intervened? And to say that the West’s meagre support for the rebel’s cause them to weaken the regime is very much wishful thinking.
If the USA had really wanted regime change, they would have changed the regime in mere days
Doesn't seems like you are reading what I am writing how is that exactly the same? I said colonise should stay under colonial overlord countries untill equally developed. Is Afrika equally developed? Was it when it was 'ready' to be released? No it is still not. Seems like you only read the sentence you quoted because otherways what you wrote makes no sense. Read again. And Syria was mandate and before that it was Otoman province so not really western country, Turkey managed to westernize while Syria didn't so Syria should be kept as a colony by France.QuoteNo they didn't so it would be possible for colonies to catch up to their overlord countries, since global community would have eyes on colonies that they are treated well and actually developing.
Jesus Christ. This is EXACTLY what the plan was for all ex-colonies: Receive self-determination, gain independence from the colonial overlord when 'ready' (which for some countries took even decades after WW2, while their independence movements usually existed long before that), and all under the watchful eye of the United Nations. But hey, it turns out that if you create a country from a weirdly drawn region you just used to get natural resources from for a century, without paying attention to its local factors like power structure, cultures, ethnic diversity, languages, all in the middle of a ideological cold world war, somehow, that tends to lead to friction. I wonder why.
You're suggesting the exact course of history as an alternative course. It's almost funny.
Not to mention that Syria never was a colony, so I actually don't know why you're even arguing this.QuoteThey have right to protest against Assad no doubt but I am not sure what exactly is your point here? .
My point is that they have the right to protest, amongst a whole set of other rights, and that no western apologist has or should have the right to argue they don't really deserve, want or need that right because that apologist isn't comfortable with that. Civilians are not to be harmed, let alone specifically targetted. Warcriminals deserve a fair trial and due punishment, not apologies or praise.
Doesn't seems like you are reading what I am writing how is that exactly the same? I said colonise should stay under colonial overlord countries untill equally developed. Is Afrika equally developed? Was it when it was 'ready' to be released? No it is still not
So when exactly stopped the anti-Assad protests (later, fighting) and did the American invasion start?Well it is quite obvious protests were started by USA from the beginning.QuoteDoesn't seems like you are reading what I am writing how is that exactly the same? I said colonise should stay under colonial overlord countries untill equally developed. Is Afrika equally developed? Was it when it was 'ready' to be released? No it is still not
See, the problem is that you, nor anyone besides people themselves, has right to determine this. Self-determination is not something you grant, it is something that is claimed.
Well it is quite obvious protests were started by USA from the beginning.
QuoteDoesn't seems like you are reading what I am writing how is that exactly the same? I said colonise should stay under colonial overlord countries untill equally developed. Is Afrika equally developed? Was it when it was 'ready' to be released? No it is still not
See, the problem is that you, nor anyone besides people themselves, has right to determine this. Self-determination is not something you grant, it is something that is claimed.
QuoteWell it is quite obvious protests were started by USA from the beginning.
(https://m.popkey.co/88908e/87wQl.gif)
That looks like a great film. I'll be watching it later; Thank you :DQuoteDoesn't seems like you are reading what I am writing how is that exactly the same? I said colonise should stay under colonial overlord countries untill equally developed. Is Afrika equally developed? Was it when it was 'ready' to be released? No it is still not
See, the problem is that you, nor anyone besides people themselves, has right to determine this. Self-determination is not something you grant, it is something that is claimed.Spoilerhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mzyaa2tfwBk?t=21s[close]
how could I possibly resist
Ну что, политики на диване, о чем кумекаете?Is that Rusky?
I hope it is not too high would be a shame if you caught a braincell.QuoteWell it is quite obvious protests were started by USA from the beginning.
(https://m.popkey.co/88908e/87wQl.gif)
Well they do have best capabilities to destroy meteor and minimise the damage but meteor could be to big.QuoteWell it is quite obvious protests were started by USA from the beginning.
(https://m.popkey.co/88908e/87wQl.gif)
hey it will obviously be USA's fault if a meteor kills half the planet
Ну что, политики на диване, о чем кумекаете?Is that Rusky?
Отличная шутка. И да, перевод существует - политическая дискуссия, mon ami.Ну что, политики на диване, о чем кумекаете?Is that Rusky?
Of course not. There is no Russian translation for 'political discussion'.
Lies, obviously. Next you'll be telling me Russians have a word for 'Free and fair election', or for 'constitutional rights', or hell, even for 'independent media'. I wasn't born yesterday, you know.Hehe xd I live in democratic state where people can go unemployed for entire life so it must mean I am better than Russians hehe.
Lies, obviously. Next you'll be telling me Russians have a word for 'Free and fair election', or for 'constitutional rights', or hell, even for 'independent media'. I wasn't born yesterday, you know.Sophisticated demagogy
So Russian’s aren’t unemployed? ???Lies, obviously. Next you'll be telling me Russians have a word for 'Free and fair election', or for 'constitutional rights', or hell, even for 'independent media'. I wasn't born yesterday, you know.Hehe xd I live in democratic state where people can go unemployed for entire life so it must mean I am better than Russians hehe.
Russian unemployment is actually higher than both the US and the UKSo Russian’s aren’t unemployed? ???Lies, obviously. Next you'll be telling me Russians have a word for 'Free and fair election', or for 'constitutional rights', or hell, even for 'independent media'. I wasn't born yesterday, you know.Hehe xd I live in democratic state where people can go unemployed for entire life so it must mean I am better than Russians hehe.
Lies, obviously. Next you'll be telling me Russians have a word for 'Free and fair election', or for 'constitutional rights', or hell, even for 'independent media'. I wasn't born yesterday, you know.
The illusion of choice during elections is spread among CIS widely. Just in every country it presents in different form.
Democracy is just a better form of hidden absolutism compared to dictatorship.Are you Putin’s press officer or something?
Democracy is just a better form of hidden absolutism compared to dictatorship.Hmm, in what world is that the case
This makes no sense since Putin claims he has perfect democracy.Democracy is just a better form of hidden absolutism compared to dictatorship.Are you Putin’s press officer or something?
In world where political parties can be bought, usually politicians main goal is reelection/personal gain. State can easily frame their citizens and eliminate them like dictatorship regimes do only difference being more people will believe the frame. Why did Kennedy die? He did something big bois didn't like.Democracy is just a better form of hidden absolutism compared to dictatorship.Hmm, in what world is that the case
Do the most cruel thing imaginable to his kind of people by just ignoring him.Go ahead I don't really fancy talking with people of your kind that support USA imperialism, terrorism, bombing innocents and general caos/destruction for supposed spreading of democracy. You generally lack in common sense and critical thinking capabilities.
Yet you’re a conspiracy theorist 🧐 I’m guessing Bush did 9/11, too, right?Idk it is possible. It definitely was quite convenient.
Those things are illegal and rare. In the UK the most scandalous thing that happens is usually scrutinised by the opposition, something which doesn’t happen in a dictatorship.How do you know what illegal things were there that we will never know about.
You generally lack in common sense and critical thinking capabilities.
Andrew MacFokenDonald is that you m8?You generally lack in common sense and critical thinking capabilities.
You cannot fool me, MATT 8) Reveal yourself
Do the most cruel thing imaginable to his kind of people by just ignoring him.Go ahead I don't really fancy talking with people of your kind that support USA imperialism, terrorism, bombing innocents and general caos/destruction for supposed spreading of democracy. You generally lack in common sense and critical thinking capabilities.
Russian imperialism? They have no imperialism they are weak but if they had it it wouldn't be any better probably.Do the most cruel thing imaginable to his kind of people by just ignoring him.Go ahead I don't really fancy talking with people of your kind that support USA imperialism, terrorism, bombing innocents and general caos/destruction for supposed spreading of democracy. You generally lack in common sense and critical thinking capabilities.
Because Russian imperialism is so much better *chuckle*.
Meh. People like to claim that those World Bank loans were meant to get Yeltsin re-elected but it's not like Russia didn't already receive a ton of financial support anyway. They would have received those loans regardless, because they badly needed them (We should just have let it gone to shit, I guess). It's hardly 'stitching up' the election. Not to say that that election was really free and fair, because it wasn't, but that's on the Russians themselves. I know, I know, Russians like blaming the general 'West' for everything that's shit in their country (So basically, for everything), and that's exactly the mindset Putin and his cronies love. Russian citizens don't need to start thinking it's their right and responsibility to make political change or demand fair elections. Oh no.The elections were totally not democratic. People voted to save the Soviet Union from disbanding(around 80% from the USSR, google if needed “referendum for the indivisibility of the USSR”).
The funniest thing is that the three major Russian parties actually ran the same three guys for president in 1996 as they did in 2018.
^ remember guys big pharma controls the world and lizards have taken over the governmentYou generally lack in common sense and critical thinking capabilities.
You cannot fool me, MATT 8) Reveal yourself
Where are the commie edgelords we once had when you need them?dw capitalism is a transitional form of communism
Where are the commie edgelords we once had when you need them?
No it isn’t lolWhere are the commie edgelords we once had when you need them?dw capitalism is a transitional form of communism
Please contact Karl Marx for further informationNo it isn’t lolWhere are the commie edgelords we once had when you need them?dw capitalism is a transitional form of communism
You’re thinking of Marxist socialism. Capitalism is the complete opposite.Please contact Karl Marx for further informationNo it isn’t lolWhere are the commie edgelords we once had when you need them?dw capitalism is a transitional form of communism
Read the manifest of the communistic party, I copied the words from thereYou’re thinking of Marxist socialism. Capitalism is the complete opposite.Please contact Karl Marx for further informationNo it isn’t lolWhere are the commie edgelords we once had when you need them?dw capitalism is a transitional form of communism
Read the manifest of the communistic party, I copied the words from thereYou’re thinking of Marxist socialism. Capitalism is the complete opposite.Please contact Karl Marx for further informationNo it isn’t lolWhere are the commie edgelords we once had when you need them?dw capitalism is a transitional form of communism
Capitalism is a completely different ideology. If they’re writing that, then they’re wrong.Read the manifest of the communistic party, I copied the words from thereYou’re thinking of Marxist socialism. Capitalism is the complete opposite.Please contact Karl Marx for further informationNo it isn’t lolWhere are the commie edgelords we once had when you need them?dw capitalism is a transitional form of communism
Pardon, communist party*Yes they are.
Ok, they are wrong ;D
Read the manifest of the communistic party, I copied the words from thereYou’re thinking of Marxist socialism. Capitalism is the complete opposite.Please contact Karl Marx for further informationNo it isn’t lolWhere are the commie edgelords we once had when you need them?dw capitalism is a transitional form of communism
I miss gluk
Times change man, none of us trigger each other anymore :'(not even Duuring takes my bait anymoreSpoilerRead the manifest of the communistic party, I copied the words from thereYou’re thinking of Marxist socialism. Capitalism is the complete opposite.Please contact Karl Marx for further informationNo it isn’t lolWhere are the commie edgelords we once had when you need them?dw capitalism is a transitional form of communism
I miss gluk[close]
With all these old names coming up, it's strange realizing that somehow this forum used to be even worse.
EU is pretty chill now except for when NWL happens a lot of people get salty, but that is to be expected tbh.
NA though.. I hear about doxing every now and then it's pretty fucked up.
EU is pretty chill now except for when NWL happens a lot of people get salty, but that is to be expected tbh.
NA though.. I hear about doxing every now and then it's pretty fucked up.
I spent a lot of time with a very liberal regiment but then I spent time with the PLG and went through a transitional neo-nazi period and now I'm just a baseline conservative. I'd say that most NA regiments are conservative now.Its usually and observable half and half I find, leaders are ranging from centrist to neo nazi while rankers are usually centrist to socialist.
All crazy except Karth. Karth was amazing.I spent a lot of time with a very liberal regiment but then I spent time with the PLG and went through a transitional neo-nazi period and now I'm just a baseline conservative. I'd say that most NA regiments are conservative now.Its usually and observable half and half I find, leaders are ranging from centrist to neo nazi while rankers are usually centrist to socialist.
Did he pass away?All crazy except Karth. Karth was amazing.I spent a lot of time with a very liberal regiment but then I spent time with the PLG and went through a transitional neo-nazi period and now I'm just a baseline conservative. I'd say that most NA regiments are conservative now.Its usually and observable half and half I find, leaders are ranging from centrist to neo nazi while rankers are usually centrist to socialist.
Every self-respecting political member of this community has gone through a Neo-Nazi period in the PLGI spent a lot of time with a very liberal regiment but then I spent time with the PLG and went through a transitional neo-nazi period and now I'm just a baseline conservative. I'd say that most NA regiments are conservative now.Its usually and observable half and half I find, leaders are ranging from centrist to neo nazi while rankers are usually centrist to socialist.
Spartans never die; They just go missing in actionDid he pass away?All crazy except Karth. Karth was amazing.I spent a lot of time with a very liberal regiment but then I spent time with the PLG and went through a transitional neo-nazi period and now I'm just a baseline conservative. I'd say that most NA regiments are conservative now.Its usually and observable half and half I find, leaders are ranging from centrist to neo nazi while rankers are usually centrist to socialist.
Everytime you came in the 63e TS your IP was logged and traced. When the day of Karth's reckoning comes enjoy the airstrikes on your houses kidd0s.Bushpirates will rue the day they tked Karth every Friday.
Everytime you came in the 63e TS your IP was logged and traced. When the day of Karth's reckoning comes enjoy the airstrikes on your houses kidd0s.Fun fact about this: our Enjin website has the IP addresses of anyone who has ever sent in an application to join the regiment (or at least their IP address at the time they applied.) We sometimes used this to identify people we didn't know in the ts by cross-referencing the IP addresses from the website and the ts. This was pretty rare, however, as you can't actually look up a person by their IP address on Enjin AFAIK.
I spent a lot of time with a very liberal regiment but then I spent time with the PLG and went through a transitional neo-nazi period and now I'm just a baseline conservative. I'd say that most NA regiments are conservative now.Its usually and observable half and half I find, leaders are ranging from centrist to neo nazi while rankers are usually centrist to socialist.
Turkey always used to be very independent in the NATO. And the current confrontation between Greece and Tukrey proves that a lot. I guess, Ankara will follow their interest on Syria instead of supporting NATO in kurdish question.Why am I not surprised?Spoiler(https://i.gyazo.com/fc558d1610e878795e10240bf19e6889.png)[close]
US troops are patrolling close to the border between these two, NATO infighting inc?
Yey more NATO terrorists against an actually healthy community.Turkey always used to be very independent in the NATO. And the current confrontation between Greece and Tukrey proves that a lot. I guess, Ankara will follow their interest on Syria instead of supporting NATO in kurdish question.Why am I not surprised?Spoiler(https://i.gyazo.com/fc558d1610e878795e10240bf19e6889.png)[close]
US troops are patrolling close to the border between these two, NATO infighting inc?
What are you blabbering about?Yey more NATO terrorists against an actually healthy community.Turkey always used to be very independent in the NATO. And the current confrontation between Greece and Tukrey proves that a lot. I guess, Ankara will follow their interest on Syria instead of supporting NATO in kurdish question.Why am I not surprised?Spoiler(https://i.gyazo.com/fc558d1610e878795e10240bf19e6889.png)[close]
US troops are patrolling close to the border between these two, NATO infighting inc?
Turkey should be kicked from NATO and targeted as well.Remove kebab or something.
REMOVE KEBABTurkey was fine before Erdogan.
REMOVE KEBABTurkey was fine before Erdogan.
REMOVE KEBAB
FSA is terrorist group.What are you blabbering about?Yey more NATO terrorists against an actually healthy community.Turkey always used to be very independent in the NATO. And the current confrontation between Greece and Tukrey proves that a lot. I guess, Ankara will follow their interest on Syria instead of supporting NATO in kurdish question.Why am I not surprised?Spoiler(https://i.gyazo.com/fc558d1610e878795e10240bf19e6889.png)[close]
US troops are patrolling close to the border between these two, NATO infighting inc?Turkey should be kicked from NATO and targeted as well.Remove kebab or something.
Kebab is good food.REMOVE KEBABTurkey was fine before Erdogan.REMOVE KEBAB
Kebab is good food.REMOVE KEBABTurkey was fine before Erdogan.REMOVE KEBAB
Turkey should be kicked from NATO and targeted as well.
Turkey should be kicked from NATO and targeted as well.
Kick NATO's gateway to the middle east and target a holder of shared nuclear weapons?
sounds pretty risky to me
If you kick Turkey from NATO then you risk Russian influence increasing.Turkey should be kicked from NATO and targeted as well.
Kick NATO's gateway to the middle east and target a holder of shared nuclear weapons?
sounds pretty risky to me
not really
holy shit all these expertsJust a discussion. Nobody here claims to be an expert.
holy shit all these experts
More then on a forum dedicated to stand-alones released in the last year.Oh shit
Everytime you came in the 63e TS your IP was logged and traced. When the day of Karth's reckoning comes enjoy the airstrikes on your houses kidd0s.Bushpirates will rue the day they tked Karth every Friday.
lmaooooooooooooooooooooooo
English people can't even speak English.
More then on a forum dedicated to stand-alones released in the last year.
you've been waiting since November to use that eh
duuring plebEnglish people can't even speak English.More then on a forum dedicated to stand-alones released in the last year.
8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8)
duuring pleb
Please stop. Please I beg you.
If there is one thing I would not look forward to is becoming a platoon commander of a JROTC instruction platoon.
EDIT: or a conscription platoon, that is.
Yeah sounds awesome... a company commander who doesn't even know what his own lieutenants do.
My weapon will be the cleanest of all.
It is mostly my fault that the guns Duuring is using are dirty as shit.
The Finns have shown that leading conscripts is the best experience ever.this is glorious.Spoiler(https://i.imgur.com/fGyO2h4.jpg)[close]
Not for the Federal Government. They've got enough bodies to throw into other people's wars.
It's legally impossible to create a state armed forces that cannot be called up by the federal government in certain circumstances. Even the State Defence Forces are state militias which the president can technically 'federalize'. Not that he will, because they're useless.
Whenever there is an insurrection in any State against its government, the President may, upon the request of its legislature or of its governor if the legislature cannot be convened, call into Federal service such of the militia of the other States, in the number requested by that State, and use such of the armed forces, as he considers necessary to suppress the insurrection.
Whenever the President considers that unlawful obstructions, combinations, or assemblages, or rebellion against the authority of the United States, make it impracticable to enforce the laws of the United States in any State by the ordinary course of judicial proceedings, he may call into Federal service such of the militia of any State, and use such of the armed forces, as he considers necessary to enforce those laws or to suppress the rebellion.
So if it came to it, literally who knows which "side" would prevail in the argument
That being said, he won't federalize any state militias because, once again, they're basically useless for anything but support, so it would be much easier just to form new federal units.
I don't get the European disdain for militias, personally. (Militias in this case referring to SDFs, or proper organizations that have actual entry requirements; not Bob and his buddies running around backwoods Tennessee pretending to be operators and calling themselves a militia)
Now we get into the fun realm of whether or not the constitution or more recent federal law apply. That said, if we're at the point that a President is even considering trying to mobilize state forces, they've either probably already been mobilized by their respective states, or their ranks have been so decimated by conscription that they'd be a shell of what they once were.
I don't get the European disdain for militias, personally. (Militias in this case referring to SDFs, or proper organizations that have actual entry requirements; not Bob and his buddies running around backwoods Tennessee pretending to be operators and calling themselves a militia)
For a start, most European countries do not have a strong tradition of a federalized form of government. Germany is perhaps the most decentralized and federal of all western European nations and even they are considered pretty centralized compared to the US. As such, there is no local authority to set up militia units. The only authority that could are national governments and they have no reason at all to raise a militia. They'll just raise another professional military unit if they need more men.
Remember the last time a state declared itself 'neutral' during a rebellion? Didn't last very long, did it?
Welcome to the wonderful world of contradictory legislation.
A defense force established under this section may be used within the jurisdiction concerned, as its chief executive (or commanding general in the case of the District of Columbia) considers necessary, but it may not be called, ordered, or drafted into the armed forces.
[The president] may call into Federal service such of the militia of any State
Even Lincoln acknowledged Kentucky being in the right to remain neutral
In other news Kim Jong-un and Moon Jae-in met today on South Korean soil, (this being the first time a member of the Kim family sets foot on South Korean soil since the Korea War) to discuss denuclearization and a peace agreement.
Stalin mudered lol?In other news Kim Jong-un and Moon Jae-in met today on South Korean soil, (this being the first time a member of the Kim family sets foot on South Korean soil since the Korea War) to discuss denuclearization and a peace agreement.
Well, apart from his sister of course (and potentially also members of his murdered half-brother's family).
He's playing games, this is propaganda nothing more at a time when the regime is weak. He only recently survived a plot against him after the Chinese refused to back it and tipped him off. He's still going to end up like Mussolini (hung by a mob) or Stalin (murdered by his rivals). I hope it's the former.
Remember folks, terrorbombing your people is okay as long as you don't gas them.Remember folks, drone striking Syrian children is okay if NATO does it.
I very much doubt the people have the courage or motive to kill him.
Do you have any source for this coup attempt?
Stalin mudered lol?
I cant find it link would be nice. He was 74 and had weak heart since 1945 he was stressed, depressed and paranoid, could have easily been a natural death.I very much doubt the people have the courage or motive to kill him.
Do you have any source for this coup attempt?
https://news.sky.com/story/north-korea-leader-kim-jong-un-killed-relatives-over-china-coup-plot-11002869Stalin mudered lol?
He was almost certainly poisoned via a blood thinner. Google it-medical evidence and witness testimony makes for a strong case.
I cant find it link would be nice. He was 74 and had weak heart since 1945 he was stressed, depressed and paranoid, could have easily been a natural death.I very much doubt the people have the courage or motive to kill him.
Do you have any source for this coup attempt?
https://news.sky.com/story/north-korea-leader-kim-jong-un-killed-relatives-over-china-coup-plot-11002869Stalin mudered lol?
He was almost certainly poisoned via a blood thinner. Google it-medical evidence and witness testimony makes for a strong case.
that's exactly right ;)Remember folks, terrorbombing your people is okay as long as you don't gas them.Remember folks, drone striking Syrian children is okay if NATO does it.
Does the USA use drones in anti-Assad strikes?Don't have to be anti-Assad strikes to hit Syrian children.
I'd even believe the denuclearization and peace talks. I don't think Kim is braindead, he knows that if he tries something the entire world will delete NK from the globe.Yet on the other hand he can use biological weapon to wipe a few milion people.
Can't believe the majority voted for conscription....There was no feudal army option...
Does the USA use drones in anti-Assad strikes?Don't have to be anti-Assad strikes to hit Syrian children.
Can't believe the majority voted for conscription....
Is there a reason you can't just make a single post?I use phone it is hard to get all the quotes inside.Does the USA use drones in anti-Assad strikes?Don't have to be anti-Assad strikes to hit Syrian children.
Oh, I don't deny that US or allied strikes have hit civilians. That's a sad reality of war. The difference is that those are accidents. At worst, it's negligence. Though that's of course doesn't really matter for the person getting a bomb on his or her head.
Is there a reason you can't just make a single post?I use phone it is hard to get all the quotes inside.Does the USA use drones in anti-Assad strikes?Don't have to be anti-Assad strikes to hit Syrian children.
Oh, I don't deny that US or allied strikes have hit civilians. That's a sad reality of war. The difference is that those are accidents. At worst, it's negligence. Though that's of course doesn't really matter for the person getting a bomb on his or her head.
And Assad is hitting civilians intentionally right? Both sides hit them and are rather careless about it, US backed rebels also use civilians as meat shields and hostages.
And Assad is hitting civilians intentionally right? Both sides hit them and are rather careless about it, US backed rebels also use civilians as meat shields and hostages.
To what porpuse would he be doing that?Is there a reason you can't just make a single post?I use phone it is hard to get all the quotes inside.Does the USA use drones in anti-Assad strikes?Don't have to be anti-Assad strikes to hit Syrian children.
Oh, I don't deny that US or allied strikes have hit civilians. That's a sad reality of war. The difference is that those are accidents. At worst, it's negligence. Though that's of course doesn't really matter for the person getting a bomb on his or her head.
And Assad is hitting civilians intentionally right? Both sides hit them and are rather careless about it, US backed rebels also use civilians as meat shields and hostages.
yeah, he is
? Can you read?
And Assad is hitting civilians intentionally right? Both sides hit them and are rather careless about it, US backed rebels also use civilians as meat shields and hostages.
T U Q U O Q U E
The Syrian army shell cities with civilians inside. It’s pretty common knowledge if you know anything about the Syrian war.Because rebels keep civilians as hostages inside. What is Syrian army supposed to do, oh okay I guess we will just let this city be? You just don't seem to look at this realistically, you look at Syrian war with some humanitarian democratic idealism not practial logic.
"The SOHR attributed 83,500 civilian deaths to the regime of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and its allies, including Russia; 7,000 to Syrian rebels and allied forces; 3,700 to Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL); 920 to the U.S.-led coalition; and 500 to Turkey."UK based organisation, also doesn't really include the fact that rebels use hostages that Syria than kills with air strikes.
War has its own rules, ToffeeExactly I don't think you find many people that would complain about allies bombing Nazi German civilians in cities.
It happens from either side and they always cry that the other side kills civis.
Whatever, sometimes people die in war y'know.
No, that was defiantly awful & people should've been punished for it.War has its own rules, ToffeeExactly I don't think you find many people that would complain about allies bombing Nazi German civilians in cities.
It happens from either side and they always cry that the other side kills civis.
Whatever, sometimes people die in war y'know.
War has its own rules, ToffeeExactly I don't think you find many people that would complain about allies bombing Nazi German civilians in cities.
It happens from either side and they always cry that the other side kills civis.
Whatever, sometimes people die in war y'know.
"The SOHR attributed 83,500 civilian deaths to the regime of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and its allies, including Russia; 7,000 to Syrian rebels and allied forces; 3,700 to Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL); 920 to the U.S.-led coalition; and 500 to Turkey."UK based organisation, also doesn't really include the fact that rebels use hostages that Syria than kills with air strikes.
One second it was “why would he do that” and the next it’s “civilian casualties are unavoidable”. Sometimes they happen, but it can be avoided better if you don’t shell a city with hundreds of thousands of people in.It was why would he kill civilians with purpose of killing civilians.
And Germany did fully intend for civilian casualties. They dropped more than a million bombs on the city.
Allies intended to kill civilians as well.Boy, politics isn’t for you.
Also, no, USA+NATO should stay. We can't let Russia build another strongpoint in the Middle East.
No one here don’t understand a thing.One second it was “why would he do that” and the next it’s “civilian casualties are unavoidable”. Sometimes they happen, but it can be avoided better if you don’t shell a city with hundreds of thousands of people in.It was why would he kill civilians with purpose of killing civilians.
And Germany did fully intend for civilian casualties. They dropped more than a million bombs on the city.
Like I said like 10 times already Assad is not an angel but truth is war would never happen if USA wouldn't back the 'freedom fighters'. Pretty sure USA knew what will happen (a bloody war) so they are responsible for all the casulties of Syrian war. And the realistic fair thing NATO should do is fuck off from Syria and let Russia and Assad end the war. What USA should have done to make things right is help Assad destroy the rebels and send him aid to rebuild Syria.
I know but I was referring to Allies bombing German cities.
Quit trying to shift all the blame away from Assad. Maybe the war wouldn’t have started if Syria hadn’t been a dictatorshipWhataboutism is a valid strategy to win arguments in todays "modern" world.
Unfortunately Russia and co are specialists in whataboutism. America have done a lot wrong in the Middle East as have Britain. But that doesn’t excuse Assad from the atrocities that he has committed. He should be out on trial for war crimes.What a cuck. Assad is the closest the Middle East has had to an enlightened monarch who stands up to the West and preserves secularism.
OkayUnfortunately Russia and co are specialists in whataboutism. America have done a lot wrong in the Middle East as have Britain. But that doesn’t excuse Assad from the atrocities that he has committed. He should be out on trial for war crimes.What a cuck. Assad is the closest the Middle East has had to an enlightened monarch who stands up to the West and preserves secularism.
Allies intended to kill civilians as well.
Also, no, USA+NATO should stay. We can't let Russia build another strongpoint in the Middle East.
That fact didnt prevent the syrians from helping Iraqi during war with coalition in 2000's, although many of suiciders are syrians by nationality.Unfortunately Russia and co are specialists in whataboutism. America have done a lot wrong in the Middle East as have Britain. But that doesn’t excuse Assad from the atrocities that he has committed. He should be out on trial for war crimes.What a cuck. Assad is the closest the Middle East has had to an enlightened monarch who stands up to the West and preserves secularism.
Unfortunately Russia and co are specialists in whataboutism. America have done a lot wrong in the Middle East as have Britain. But that doesn’t excuse Assad from the atrocities that he has committed. He should be out on trial for war crimes.What a cuck. Assad is the closest the Middle East has had to an enlightened monarch who stands up to the West and preserves secularism.
While the Assad's may have actually invented suicide bombings I still think that overall Syria stands out to other Middle Eastern countries and in a good way.That fact didnt prevent the syrians from helping Iraqi during war with coalition in 2000's, although many of suiciders are syrians by nationality.Unfortunately Russia and co are specialists in whataboutism. America have done a lot wrong in the Middle East as have Britain. But that doesn’t excuse Assad from the atrocities that he has committed. He should be out on trial for war crimes.What a cuck. Assad is the closest the Middle East has had to an enlightened monarch who stands up to the West and preserves secularism.
Rebels should be given no quarter. Any of them allowed to live only causes the anti-government sentiment to continue. Have you never played a strategy game in your life? Evidently not.Unfortunately Russia and co are specialists in whataboutism. America have done a lot wrong in the Middle East as have Britain. But that doesn’t excuse Assad from the atrocities that he has committed. He should be out on trial for war crimes.What a cuck. Assad is the closest the Middle East has had to an enlightened monarch who stands up to the West and preserves secularism.
I'm sure the people getting barrelbombed will be happy to hear that at least they're being bombed by secular people.
Not sure why people are still trying to debate McPero. He's a walking Assad-boi-meme.
Allies intended to kill civilians as well.'another' umm which one is their strongpoint in Middle East apart from Syria? Russia came to Syria and made a fair deal while USA proxy wars anyone that doesn't wants USA neocolonial bullshit deals and places their puppets as dictators. Since when is making allies and trade partners imperialism?
Also, no, USA+NATO should stay. We can't let Russia build another strongpoint in the Middle East.
Unfortunately Russia and co are specialists in whataboutism. America have done a lot wrong in the Middle East as have Britain. But that doesn’t excuse Assad from the atrocities that he has committed. He should be out on trial for war crimes.
Quit trying to shift all the blame away from Assad. Maybe the war wouldn’t have started if Syria hadn’t been a dictatorshipAssad is guilty of killing his political apponents and being ruthless in Syrian war, but he is not the main cause of the war. Assad is comparable figure to dictator of South Korea Park Chunghee, they both made a lot for people in their countries by making countries economically strong but they were both killing opposition and repressing their population.
Unfortunately Russia and co are specialists in whataboutism. America have done a lot wrong in the Middle East as have Britain. But that doesn’t excuse Assad from the atrocities that he has committed. He should be out on trial for war crimes.What a cuck. Assad is the closest the Middle East has had to an enlightened monarch who stands up to the West and preserves secularism.
I'm sure the people getting barrelbombed will be happy to hear that at least they're being bombed by secular people.
Not sure why people are still trying to debate McPero. He's a walking Assad-boi-meme.
I’m not excusing nato crimes. Anybody guilty should be tried as a war criminal. Shelling citizens is avoidable. End of.NATO strikes hit 3 civilians, so Macron, Trump, May should go to Hague for war crimes?
If it breaks international law then whoever made the order should go.I’m not excusing nato crimes. Anybody guilty should be tried as a war criminal. Shelling citizens is avoidable. End of.NATO strikes hit 3 civilians, so Macron, Trump, May should go to Hague for war crimes?
International law is controlled by NATO so even if they break it which they do nothing will happen to them.If it breaks international law then whoever made the order should go.I’m not excusing nato crimes. Anybody guilty should be tried as a war criminal. Shelling citizens is avoidable. End of.NATO strikes hit 3 civilians, so Macron, Trump, May should go to Hague for war crimes?
Reading this, I wish we were back in ancient times when killing civilians, enslaving them, destroying entire cities, killing all the livestock and destroying all crops was legit and considered a totally normal thing to do.Make me.
Just to stop this retarded discussion that is just going in circles.
International law is controlled by the UNInternational law is controlled by NATO so even if they break it which they do nothing will happen to them.If it breaks international law then whoever made the order should go.I’m not excusing nato crimes. Anybody guilty should be tried as a war criminal. Shelling citizens is avoidable. End of.NATO strikes hit 3 civilians, so Macron, Trump, May should go to Hague for war crimes?
International law is controlled by the UNInternational law is controlled by NATO so even if they break it which they do nothing will happen to them.If it breaks international law then whoever made the order should go.I’m not excusing nato crimes. Anybody guilty should be tried as a war criminal. Shelling citizens is avoidable. End of.NATO strikes hit 3 civilians, so Macron, Trump, May should go to Hague for war crimes?
my bad thenInternational law is controlled by the UNInternational law is controlled by NATO so even if they break it which they do nothing will happen to them.If it breaks international law then whoever made the order should go.I’m not excusing nato crimes. Anybody guilty should be tried as a war criminal. Shelling citizens is avoidable. End of.NATO strikes hit 3 civilians, so Macron, Trump, May should go to Hague for war crimes?
No it isn't. For example the international law that most affects you probably relates to the WTO, which is not part of the UN.
This thread is a circle jerk for a select few with their engraved political opinions anyways, once a person has read too far into his own ideology without reading the opposition he'll be stuck listening to himself lecture for hours.You shouldn't really believe in any ideology
yawn, this is why political threads don't work.
This thread is a circle jerk for a select few with their engraved political opinions anyways, once a person has read too far into his own ideology without reading the opposition he'll be stuck listening to himself lecture for hours.
yawn, this is why political threads don't work.
Why would Sweden need conscription? Strategically one of the least important countries, apart from steel no natural resources, nobody is going to invade them.
So countries like Lithuania, Finland and (to a lesser degree) Sweden? Yeah, conscription serves a purpose. The Netherlands or Canada? Not so much.
Context-dependent. For the purpose of national defence against a numerically superior force, conscription greatly expands defensive capabilities and makes it easier to set up a capable resistance force after a succesful invasion. This increases the costs for an invader, and makes invasion less likely to happen at all.
However, for our greatly specialized and essentially small-scaled warfare, yeah, conscription serves little militairy purpose. The money is better spend in something else.
So countries like Lithuania, Finland and (to a lesser degree) Sweden? Yeah, conscription serves a purpose. The Netherlands or Canada? Not so much.
Context-dependent. For the purpose of national defence against a numerically superior force, conscription greatly expands defensive capabilities and makes it easier to set up a capable resistance force after a succesful invasion. This increases the costs for an invader, and makes invasion less likely to happen at all.
However, for our greatly specialized and essentially small-scaled warfare, yeah, conscription serves little militairy purpose. The money is better spend in something else.
So countries like Lithuania, Finland and (to a lesser degree) Sweden? Yeah, conscription serves a purpose. The Netherlands or Canada? Not so much.
That's the military angle and I agree with it, but the arguments for conscription are also to do with civil integration and skills training. European countries with massive inward migration and large numbers of NEETs could perhaps benefit.
We already have an invention for fighting a numerically superior force. It's called manoeuvre warfare and has been proven to work in a number of wars.
but, and correct me if I'm wrong, the actual fighting is still mostly done by guys with rifles.
While this is technically true there is much more to be said about combat than "fighting with rifles". The complexity of combat operations is incredible... The individual specialisations out there in modern armies are getting more and more complex in increasingly demanding environments... You cannot simply assume you give someone a rifle, some ammo and a little but of training and expect them to perform in modern combat.... it just doesnt work that way anymore....
This shows in the way basic soldiers get trained now... BCT in thw '70 was done within half a year... usually a 3 to four momths. After that they were immediately pressed into service for half a year. The comabt trainings are still jhust as long but the current standard is to such an extent now that as soon as you come straight out of training, you basically know how to hold and shoot your rifle. At least another year of training is required until one is a fully functional member of the unit and able to be an individual and independantly operating soldier. Not to mention they have no actual specialisation when they come out of basic, that still needs to be trained.
Then there's the matter of officers. If you have a conscription army, you need conscripted officers. The minimum amount of training you undergo as an officer in the Netherlands is 1.5 years... and that is for combat service support unit. Go to manoeuvre and you're stuck to at least 2 years.... and that is for people who already have a bachelor. These days you need officers with a high intellectual capacity... The americans thought they didnt and are currently facing the problems with subaltern officer.... well.... basically being too stupid.
There is a reason the US cannot seem to fucking properly conduct stab ops.... a significant part of it is because its personnel is too stupid... combat isn't any less complicated... especially if you're fighting a numerically superior foe, you need to be the quicker, more smarter army... you cannot just beat a numerically superior foe by somewhat increasing your numbers.....
REEEEEEEEEEEE.it triggers me almost as much as Holdfasts rivers do.
Mcpero you just said that there was no natural resources produced there and then gave a valuable resource.I said apart from steel and steel is mostly just iron which is not hard to come by. Their biggest threat Russia has enough of it.
I don’t agree with conscription since it violates citizen rights unless it’s in extraordinary circumstances.
I can only speak for myself but I do oppose conscription because not only is it semi ineffective but it also more importantly violates my personal freedoms which I'd only accept being overwritten if we were in some kind of extreme crisis.
Which news flash Sweden isn't. I'd still support increased military spending though especially since Russia can't leave our airspace and waters alone REEEEE.
But conscription also offers non-combat or non-militairy paths.It may for some. But for those who are conscripted into combat roles, they’re essentially being forced into a kill or be killed situation in the event of invasion.
But conscription also offers non-combat or non-militairy paths.
No, because you still voluntarily choose the military path.Under some circumstances maybe but could you guarantee that for everybody?
But conscription also offers non-combat or non-militairy paths.
True, but there's the risk of those positions already being filled & I'd be bound by the military for however long the mandatory military service is.
No, because you still voluntarily choose the military path.Under some circumstances maybe but could you guarantee that for everybody?
In that case, yes, it is against civil liberties.
Lol, Britain is leaving the EU and the Dutch are going to pay for it.
I look forward to Merkel, with Macron just behind her, walking over Amsterdam and making them pay up. It's quite clever how the Germans have managed to get other people to finance their empire.
EU is a joke at this point.
It is only right.Lol, Britain is leaving the EU and the Dutch are going to pay for it.
I look forward to Merkel, with Macron just behind her, walking over Amsterdam and making them pay up. It's quite clever how the Germans have managed to get other people to finance their empire.
Called it!
https://www.dutchnews.nl/news/2018/05/dutch-dig-in-heels-rise-in-eu-budget-is-not-acceptable-says-prime-minister/
When are we going to expand Europol? :/Yeah like trade blockade on UK.EU is a joke at this point.
Kinda I'm hoping for some reforms once the UK actually leaves.
Why does something being old make it okay?In that case, yes, it is against civil liberties.
Although putting yourself in harms way for the benefit of society is legally pretty old and established.
Not in every country. In the US draft once you’re inducted you can’t choose where they put you
Lol, Britain is leaving the EU and the Dutch are going to pay for it.
I look forward to Merkel, with Macron just behind her, walking over Amsterdam and making them pay up. It's quite clever how the Germans have managed to get other people to finance their empire.
Called it!
https://www.dutchnews.nl/news/2018/05/dutch-dig-in-heels-rise-in-eu-budget-is-not-acceptable-says-prime-minister/
‘Brexit is already set to hit the Netherlands’ economy hard. This proposal imposes a disproportionately high bill on top of that,’ Rutte said. In addition, the compensation for major net payers is being phased out, and this is something the Netherlands therefore ‘rejects,’ the prime minister said.
The Netherlands currently pays some €7bn a year into the Brussels coffers, but that could rise to approaching €10m if the plans go through. In particular, the commission wants to phase out the Dutch rebate of around €1bn and cut the amount of customs tax the Netherlands can keep from 20% to 10%. Rebates and discounts granted to other countries, including Austria and Germany, are also up for the chop. The commission says the benefits need to be scrapped in order to simplify the complex EU financial systems.
Do you have to make about 30 posts?Good point my friend.
Dutch need to keep quiet and pay up. Anyone who disagrees with France and Germany re: the future of the EU is a nasty evil eurosceptic baddie.He won't win because he is not far left buth he also doesn't deserves to win it. One good deed doesn't erase bad ones, but he is better than Obama or Hillary would be. Also I think sucess of peace talks is due to mr Kim not Trump.
Anyway, what do people think about Trump getting the Nobel Peace Prize? I think he's a buffoon and that political leaders should almost never get the award, but his Korea policy has thus far proven to be a massive success. He's far more deserving than Obama, who it seems to me won because he had a nice smile. He won't win because he's not left-wing but poll worthy question maybe?
Stop double posting or I will ban you.Terrorist
No it’s not I’m using a phone right nowIt is and forum wont crash from double posts.
Dutch need to keep quiet and pay up. Anyone who disagrees with France and Germany re: the future of the EU is a nasty evil eurosceptic baddie.Obama got it for his drone warfare in Afghanistan, Trump has been a bit underwhelming in that department so far
Anyway, what do people think about Trump getting the Nobel Peace Prize? I think he's a buffoon and that political leaders should almost never get the award, but his Korea policy has thus far proven to be a massive success. He's far more deserving than Obama, who it seems to me won because he had a nice smile. He won't win because he's not left-wing but poll worthy question maybe?
Dutch need to keep quiet and pay up. Anyone who disagrees with France and Germany re: the future of the EU is a nasty evil eurosceptic baddie.
Anyway, what do people think about Trump getting the Nobel Peace Prize? I think he's a buffoon and that political leaders should almost never get the award, but his Korea policy has thus far proven to be a massive success. He's far more deserving than Obama, who it seems to me won because he had a nice smile. He won't win because he's not left-wing but poll worthy question maybe?
Dutch need to keep quiet and pay up. Anyone who disagrees with France and Germany re: the future of the EU is a nasty evil eurosceptic baddie.Obama got it for his drone warfare in Afghanistan, Trump has been a bit underwhelming in that department so far
Anyway, what do people think about Trump getting the Nobel Peace Prize? I think he's a buffoon and that political leaders should almost never get the award, but his Korea policy has thus far proven to be a massive success. He's far more deserving than Obama, who it seems to me won because he had a nice smile. He won't win because he's not left-wing but poll worthy question maybe?
Dutch need to keep quiet and pay up. Anyone who disagrees with France and Germany re: the future of the EU is a nasty evil eurosceptic baddie.
Anyway, what do people think about Trump getting the Nobel Peace Prize? I think he's a buffoon and that political leaders should almost never get the award, but his Korea policy has thus far proven to be a massive success. He's far more deserving than Obama, who it seems to me won because he had a nice smile. He won't win because he's not left-wing but poll worthy question maybe?
I don't think the Norwegian Nobel committee thinks threatening someone into submission is worthy of the prize, besides his actual contribution is questionable there was from my understanding many different factors that lead North Korea to want to negotiate like their dead/dying economy. If anything it should go to Moon Jae-in who did the actual negotiations.Dutch need to keep quiet and pay up. Anyone who disagrees with France and Germany re: the future of the EU is a nasty evil eurosceptic baddie.Obama got it for his drone warfare in Afghanistan, Trump has been a bit underwhelming in that department so far
Anyway, what do people think about Trump getting the Nobel Peace Prize? I think he's a buffoon and that political leaders should almost never get the award, but his Korea policy has thus far proven to be a massive success. He's far more deserving than Obama, who it seems to me won because he had a nice smile. He won't win because he's not left-wing but poll worthy question maybe?
Pretty sure one of their main reasons for giving it to Obama was the Iran deal.
Pretty sure one of their main reasons for giving it to Obama was the Iran deal.
When are we going to expand Europol? :/Yeah like trade blockade on UK.EU is a joke at this point.
Kinda I'm hoping for some reforms once the UK actually leaves.
Pretty sure one of their main reasons for giving it to Obama was the Iran deal.
I doubt that since the Iran deal was reached six years later. They actually gave no specific reason for Obama's award, which isn't surprising given he'd only been in office 9 months.
Not in every country. In the US draft once you’re inducted you can’t choose where they put you
Yes as soon as you're drafted into the military. What Duuring means is that you can object to yourself being called to the military. You can refuse service in the armed forces on ethical grounds.
After that you get two choices: instead of doing 1.5 years of service, or two years of alternative service, like in nursing homes, cleaning, hospitals, garbage services. You can choose what kind of alternative service you'd do yourself. It is either that, or 6 months incarceration.
At least, this was the Dutch system.
I dont really think the leader of the most warfighting state in the world should any kind of peace price....
They left EU, they wont contribute anything to the budget and wil expect to have free trade like they did before. Not how it works.When are we going to expand Europol? :/Yeah like trade blockade on UK.EU is a joke at this point.
Kinda I'm hoping for some reforms once the UK actually leaves.
reason?
They left EU, they wont contribute anything to the budget and wil expect to have free trade like they did before. Not how it works.When are we going to expand Europol? :/Yeah like trade blockade on UK.EU is a joke at this point.
Kinda I'm hoping for some reforms once the UK actually leaves.
reason?
Who is next Romania?They left EU, they wont contribute anything to the budget and wil expect to have free trade like they did before. Not how it works.When are we going to expand Europol? :/Yeah like trade blockade on UK.EU is a joke at this point.
Kinda I'm hoping for some reforms once the UK actually leaves.
reason?
Oh yeah, forgot Brussel is that stupid to actually do it. Anyway, I hope the UK is not the last country to leave the Union.
YikesWho needs army when you have economy and banks
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/05/02/luftwaffe-four-combat-ready-eurofighters-pressure-builds-weak/ (https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/05/02/luftwaffe-four-combat-ready-eurofighters-pressure-builds-weak/)
YikesWho needs army when you have economy and banks
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/05/02/luftwaffe-four-combat-ready-eurofighters-pressure-builds-weak/ (https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/05/02/luftwaffe-four-combat-ready-eurofighters-pressure-builds-weak/)
Power resides where men believe it resides, and that is in the military. In order for Germany to be taken seriously it also has to project force. It's the reason we listen to the U.S. and not to Switzerland when it comes to foreign policy.Our military being shit does matter why exactly? What do we need it for?
Just my two cents
The Germans are pushing for an EU military to do the fighting for them.
For terrorists inside the Germany army is of little use, and terrorist states that army could be useful against arw far away. What eastern invasion? Russia?YikesWho needs army when you have economy and banks
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/05/02/luftwaffe-four-combat-ready-eurofighters-pressure-builds-weak/ (https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/05/02/luftwaffe-four-combat-ready-eurofighters-pressure-builds-weak/)
So the Deutsche Bank is going to ward off terrorists and eastern aggression now?
Power resides where men believe it resides, and that is in the military. In order for Germany to be taken seriously it also has to project force. It's the reason we listen to the U.S. and not to Switzerland when it comes to foreign policy.Power doesn't resides in military.
Just my two cents
For terrorists inside the Germany army is of little use, and terrorist states that army could be useful against arw far away. What eastern invasion? Russia?
Germany doesn't needs own military, if Russia strikes them USA will save them. If European union is Holy Roman Empire than Germany is Habsburgs.
What the fuck is this.QuoteFor terrorists inside the Germany army is of little use, and terrorist states that army could be useful against arw far away. What eastern invasion? Russia?
Yes, Russia, the country to our east that has been invading people
No, Russia is not invading anyone, right?What the fuck is this.QuoteFor terrorists inside the Germany army is of little use, and terrorist states that army could be useful against arw far away. What eastern invasion? Russia?
Yes, Russia, the country to our east that has been invading people
Expecting a comment about the United States with absolutely no reference to Russia's actions in three, two, one...Hey they’re there to stop extremists from taking over!!!1!1!!!
Remember kids, promoting seperatism within the Russian Federation means three years prison time, promoting seperatism towards it means a premiership, a medal and a meet-and-greet with Putin.Providing free one-way tickets for separatism lovers and promoters. The meeting with the former DPR/LPR adepts is guaranteered. Bring friends = more fun.
I <3 Donald Trump
The Germans are pushing for an EU military to do the fighting for them.
I giggled.
But under the bland label of the Framework Nations Concept, Germany has been at work on something far more ambitious — the creation of what is essentially a Bundeswehr-led network of European miniarmies. “The initiative came out of the weakness of the Bundeswehr,” said Justyna Gotkowska, a Northern Europe security analyst at Poland’s Centre for Eastern Studies think tank. “The Germans realized that the Bundeswehr needed to fill gaps in its land forces … in order to gain political and military influence within NATO.” An assist from junior partners may be Germany’s best shot at bulking out its military quickly — and German-led miniarmies may be Europe’s most realistic option if it’s to get serious about joint security. “It’s an attempt to prevent joint European security from completely failing,” Masala said.
...
Romania’s entire military won’t join the Bundeswehr, nor will the Czech armed forces become a mere German subdivision. But in the next several months each country will integrate one brigade into the German armed forces: Romania’s 81st Mechanized Brigade will join the Bundeswehr’s Rapid Response Forces Division, while the Czech 4th Rapid Deployment Brigade, which has served in Afghanistan and Kosovo and is considered the Czech Army’s spearhead force, will become part of the Germans’ 10th Armored Division. In doing so, they’ll follow in the footsteps of two Dutch brigades, one of which has already joined the Bundeswehr’s Rapid Response Forces Division and another that has been integrated into the Bundeswehr’s 1st Armored Division.
Remember kids, promoting seperatism within the Russian Federation means three years prison time, promoting seperatism towards it means a premiership, a medal and a meet-and-greet with Putin.Well, the conquering of the Crimea was a strategic move, since the pro-american ukrainian president Piotr Poroshenko was planning to let the NATO’s build a base there. You don’t need to be into the politics to understand the simple fact - No one needs destabilization in that region. Please don’r forget the Crimea Autonomy had and has a right to choose their own way of the development. They made a choice, under ~90% voted for the reunification with Russia.
It might sound radical but I support the idea of joint security if it’s properly controlled by all of the contributors instead of a single one. There will come a time when Europe won’t be able to rely on the US and we need to look to ourselves to defend each other. Closer bonds and connections only serve to maintain the longest relative peace the continent has ever seen.
I’m not trying to be funny but I can’t really understand what you just typed due to the poor grammar so I’ll just make this point; Russia intervened in the Ukraine without UN backing, sending in troops wearing no insignia and denying their involvement. If they thought that they were in the right then why would they not take their issues to the peacekeeping council of the world? Russia sent troops to the Ukraine because they knew that the democratically elected government were becoming more pro-NATO and EU.Can you prove the intervention? Before the Crimea conflicts started, there was a Russian Naval Base with 5 000 soldiers in it. Democratically elected? Mate, the government was occupied by bandits and freaks during the West&Co sponsored revolution , to understand this you need to see their speeches.
Ah I see, Russia started a war to prevent the region from becoming destabilised.
Makes sense
Steven you will note the use of the word ‘relative’. Europe is quite peaceful if you look at the previous centuries.Can you prove the intervention? Before the Crimea conflicts started, there was a Russian Naval Base with 5 000 soldiers in it. Democratically elected? Mate, the government was occupied by bandits and freaks during the West&Co sponsored revolution , to understand this you need to see their speeches.
Council you said that Russia intervened because nobody needs destabilisation. Yet participating in wars tend to increase instability. You said that crimea had a choice even though Russia moved troops into the region before the vote took place. If you think that is democracy then you probably think Anschluss was perfectly reasonable. You also slipped up with your rhetoric by using the word “conquering”.
You also say that the revolution was western-sponsored but provide no evidence for that accusation and seem to just pander to the entire anti west, Russia can do no wrong propaganda train that Putin has rolling.
(https://www.fsegames.eu/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fukrainianpolicy.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2015%2F03%2Fanti-fascist-ukrainianssarah2.jpg&hash=8995472e92e6273f0fbbc84d6a2a643a1816d9f6)I’ve heard something same
(https://www.mintpressnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/Russia-Ukraine-Phone-_Mill.jpg)
better to be a national socialist than to be red commie scum, better dead than red even.
8)
I can prove the intervention because it’s a readily admitted fact if you read these two sourcesBoth links doesn’t work.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_green_men_(Ukrainian_crisis)
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_military_intervention_in_Ukraine_(2014–present)
In the first link it even says that Putin admitted that special forces had been involved.
Russian troops were also in the Ukraine before the referendum was held.
The fact that you refuse to give evidence for the revolution being western controlled means that you don’t have any. Just because the west sponsor the current Ukrainian government that doesn’t mean that there is evidence of foul play previously. Of course he US would want to arm their allies which have had their sovereignty threatened.
You really do fall for everything that Putin tells you. Must be hard to admit that the government you devote yourself to is a charade.
Longest period of relative peace in Europe was the 19th century if you're looking at the continent as a whole, not just its North-Western portion.Technicalities. Europe has been very peaceful in contrast to the majority of the past, agree? We haven’t had a war between two major European powers for 70+ years. The 19th century saw the Napoleonic Wars which raged for more than a decade and a half as well as the Crimean war and the Franco-Prussian war. Sure there has been conflict in certain regions but considering the destruction that previous wars have brought such as WW2, we’re not doing so bad
Russia sucks and should burn in hell.
Remember kids, promoting seperatism within the Russian Federation means three years prison time, promoting seperatism towards it means a premiership, a medal and a meet-and-greet with Putin.Well, the conquering of the Crimea was a strategic move, since the pro-american ukrainian president Piotr Poroshenko was planning to let the NATO’s build a base there. You don’t need to be into the politics to understand the simple fact - No one needs destabilization in that region. Please don’r forget the Crimea Autonomy had and has a right to choose their own way of the development. They made a choice, under ~90% voted for the reunification with Russia.
Pre-history of the Ukrainian local conflict:
Everything was good until Piotr issued a law about “restriction of the russian language”. After the idiotic law was half-accepted few regions which were ~80% russian-talking resisted it and defended a right to speak the language of their ancestors.
Mate, the government was occupied by bandits and freaks during the West&Co sponsored revolution , to understand this you need to see their speeches.
My father was in Kiev few days ago. The situation is really awful.
QuoteFor terrorists inside the Germany army is of little use, and terrorist states that army could be useful against arw far away. What eastern invasion? Russia?
Yes, Russia, the country to our east that has been invading people.QuoteGermany doesn't needs own military, if Russia strikes them USA will save them. If European union is Holy Roman Empire than Germany is Habsburgs.
Are you nine years old?
Europe has never been so peaceful as it is since 1945 until now. Only time period Europe might have been more peaceful was inside Roman Empire for some time. Middle ages were basically constant wars among nobles, religions, hordes. New age from 1492-1815 was also constant wars. After Napoleon you got bunch of revolutions, formation of Italy and Germany, Crimean war, Balkan Wars, Bismarck's march on Paris in 1871. Even if there wasn't as much war in Europe, European countries were involved in wars around the Globe which effect's European population. It is true though these few wars since 1945 were pretty brutal compared to wars in middle ages and new age.Longest period of relative peace in Europe was the 19th century if you're looking at the continent as a whole, not just its North-Western portion.Technicalities. Europe has been very peaceful in contrast to the majority of the past, agree? We haven’t had a war between two major European powers for 70+ years. The 19th century saw the Napoleonic Wars which raged for more than a decade and a half as well as the Crimean war and the Franco-Prussian war. Sure there has been conflict in certain regions but considering the destruction that previous wars have brought such as WW2, we’re not doing so bad
Russia took control of the Crimea illegally and took advantage of a country in crisis. Yes that’s been done by the west many a team and they’ve received their due criticism, as should Russia.West received criticism by some people, but that was basically all it happened. On the other hand you have media that defends western illegal actions and is heavily biased with information (not saying Russian media is any better). While Russia is criticized by most of the media and get sanctions and actual punishment. So yes let's criticize Russia a bit more and keep ignoring fact west get's away with most of illegal stuff, that makes a lot of sense.
Russia sucks and should burn in hell.Welcome to the suicide club.
When did Russia beat Yuan Emperor of China a.k.a. Gengis Khan?Russia sucks and should burn in hell.Welcome to the suicide club.Spoiler(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/35/YuanEmperorAlbumGenghisPortrait.jpg/267px-YuanEmperorAlbumGenghisPortrait.jpg)
(https://historytime.ru/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/%D0%BD%D0%B0%D0%BF%D0%BE%D0%BB%D0%B5%D0%BE%D0%BD.jpg)
(https://24smi.org/public/media/2017/8/8/01_wvA6hQ7.jpg)[close]
Mate, i feel really bad about you not knowing the basis facts about the Russian-Ukrainian conflict but trying to argue. I see right to a tea bullshit from the BBC, you better ask the ukrainians about it.Remember kids, promoting seperatism within the Russian Federation means three years prison time, promoting seperatism towards it means a premiership, a medal and a meet-and-greet with Putin.Well, the conquering of the Crimea was a strategic move, since the pro-american ukrainian president Piotr Poroshenko was planning to let the NATO’s build a base there. You don’t need to be into the politics to understand the simple fact - No one needs destabilization in that region. Please don’r forget the Crimea Autonomy had and has a right to choose their own way of the development. They made a choice, under ~90% voted for the reunification with Russia.
Pre-history of the Ukrainian local conflict:
Everything was good until Piotr issued a law about “restriction of the russian language”. After the idiotic law was half-accepted few regions which were ~80% russian-talking resisted it and defended a right to speak the language of their ancestors.
Like, absolutely none of this is correct and you get names, facts and even timeline wrong. There has never been a law about restricting the Russian language.Mate, the government was occupied by bandits and freaks during the West&Co sponsored revolution , to understand this you need to see their speeches.
Also not true. The previous cabinet resigned and the parliament elected a new one which had majority support. Even if you disagree with the way the presidency was handled, the fall of the cabinet was perfectly democratic and constitutional.QuoteMy father was in Kiev few days ago. The situation is really awful.
Let me guess. Nazi militia's roaming the streets to slit the throat of anyone who dares to utter a word of Russian?
Literally no one here were killed by russians.When did Russia beat Yuan Emperor of China a.k.a. Gengis Khan?Russia sucks and should burn in hell.Welcome to the suicide club.Spoiler(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/35/YuanEmperorAlbumGenghisPortrait.jpg/267px-YuanEmperorAlbumGenghisPortrait.jpg)
(https://historytime.ru/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/%D0%BD%D0%B0%D0%BF%D0%BE%D0%BB%D0%B5%D0%BE%D0%BD.jpg)
(https://24smi.org/public/media/2017/8/8/01_wvA6hQ7.jpg)[close]As far as I know they allied him.
Holy fuck, McPero, I agree with you in all fronts. Thanks for the explanation.QuoteFor terrorists inside the Germany army is of little use, and terrorist states that army could be useful against arw far away. What eastern invasion? Russia?
Yes, Russia, the country to our east that has been invading people.QuoteGermany doesn't needs own military, if Russia strikes them USA will save them. If European union is Holy Roman Empire than Germany is Habsburgs.
Are you nine years old?
Last time 'Russia' was threat to Europe it was in WWII. After that Soviet Union would be able to invade Europe and take if it wasn't for USA having nukes. But as the time went on Soviet Union became weaker and weaker compared to USA and USA military was exaggerating Soviet power so they would get more and more funds, but in reality there was never balance of power, USA always had big advantage. In case of nuclear war Soviet union would have done a lot less damage to USA even USA has nicely packed mega cities while Russia is more decentralized from that point of view. Only advantage Russia/Soviets always had was more cost efficient equipment, devices, ect. ... because they were forced into that, US military isn't. The reason new technologies are usually first used in military is not because military would be most important but because military usually has the army and builds devices no matter the cost of production, because you will never make profit from a bomb exploding so you can't evaluate it's 'selling price' (unless you get some resource from winning some war, which usually is not the case).
Only 'invasion' Russia did since WW2 into Europe was Ukraine because they were trying to join NATO (at least half of the country did). Imagine today Mexico decides to join into alliance with Russia and let's Russia build military bases there I bet we would see no violence there ...
So no Europe is in no danger from the Russia. Only threat is USA which basically has Europe occupied since 1945.
(https://www.fsegames.eu/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FiCz6NpR.jpg&hash=c16104e3cac7b925a4afff296f48624e21ba5896)
And before you start saying 'whataboutism', we are talking about why Germany (doesn't) need military not about Russia invading Ukraine, so I can talk about USA all i want.
No I'm 10.Europe has never been so peaceful as it is since 1945 until now. Only time period Europe might have been more peaceful was inside Roman Empire for some time. Middle ages were basically constant wars among nobles, religions, hordes. New age from 1492-1815 was also constant wars. After Napoleon you got bunch of revolutions, formation of Italy and Germany, Crimean war, Balkan Wars, Bismarck's march on Paris in 1871. Even if there wasn't as much war in Europe, European countries were involved in wars around the Globe which effect's European population. It is true though these few wars since 1945 were pretty brutal compared to wars in middle ages and new age.Longest period of relative peace in Europe was the 19th century if you're looking at the continent as a whole, not just its North-Western portion.Technicalities. Europe has been very peaceful in contrast to the majority of the past, agree? We haven’t had a war between two major European powers for 70+ years. The 19th century saw the Napoleonic Wars which raged for more than a decade and a half as well as the Crimean war and the Franco-Prussian war. Sure there has been conflict in certain regions but considering the destruction that previous wars have brought such as WW2, we’re not doing so badRussia took control of the Crimea illegally and took advantage of a country in crisis. Yes that’s been done by the west many a team and they’ve received their due criticism, as should Russia.West received criticism by some people, but that was basically all it happened. On the other hand you have media that defends western illegal actions and is heavily biased with information (not saying Russian media is any better). While Russia is criticized by most of the media and get sanctions and actual punishment. So yes let's criticize Russia a bit more and keep ignoring fact west get's away with most of illegal stuff, that makes a lot of sense.Spoilerhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nz20lu2AM2k[close]
I am not suggesting to invade Russia. All I am saying is that Russia is garbage.You said “Russia sucks and should burn in hell.”
I mean Genghis was also emperor of China. And 0.5% of world's population has his genes.Literally no one here were killed by russians.When did Russia beat Yuan Emperor of China a.k.a. Gengis Khan?Russia sucks and should burn in hell.Welcome to the suicide club.Spoiler(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/35/YuanEmperorAlbumGenghisPortrait.jpg/267px-YuanEmperorAlbumGenghisPortrait.jpg)
(https://historytime.ru/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/%D0%BD%D0%B0%D0%BF%D0%BE%D0%BB%D0%B5%D0%BE%D0%BD.jpg)
(https://24smi.org/public/media/2017/8/8/01_wvA6hQ7.jpg)[close]As far as I know they allied him.
Gengis Khan(Temuchzhin) was a Khan of the Great Mongolian Empire. You are talking about his grandson HoobilaiThey were drawn the same way.Spoiler(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/1b/YuanEmperorAlbumKhubilaiPortrait.jpg/1200px-YuanEmperorAlbumKhubilaiPortrait.jpg)[close]
I am not suggesting to invade Russia. All I am saying is that Russia is garbage.Why is it garbage?
1)West received criticism by some people, but that was basically all it happened. On the other hand you have media that defends western illegal actions and is heavily biased with information (not saying Russian media is any better). While Russia is criticized by most of the media and get sanctions and actual punishment. So yes let's criticize Russia a bit more and keep ignoring fact west get's away with most of illegal stuff, that makes a lot of sense.
2)Only 'invasion' Russia did since WW2 into Europe was Ukraine because they were trying to join NATO (at least half of the country did). Imagine today Mexico decides to join into alliance with Russia and let's Russia build military bases there I bet we would see no violence there ...
So no Europe is in no danger from the Russia. Only threat is USA which basically has Europe occupied since 1945.
Was he?I mean Genghis was also emperor of China. And 1% of world's population has his genes.Literally no one here were killed by russians.When did Russia beat Yuan Emperor of China a.k.a. Gengis Khan?Russia sucks and should burn in hell.Welcome to the suicide club.Spoiler(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/35/YuanEmperorAlbumGenghisPortrait.jpg/267px-YuanEmperorAlbumGenghisPortrait.jpg)
(https://historytime.ru/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/%D0%BD%D0%B0%D0%BF%D0%BE%D0%BB%D0%B5%D0%BE%D0%BD.jpg)
(https://24smi.org/public/media/2017/8/8/01_wvA6hQ7.jpg)[close]As far as I know they allied him.
Gengis Khan(Temuchzhin) was a Khan of the Great Mongolian Empire. You are talking about his grandson HoobilaiThey were drawn the same way.Spoiler(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/1b/YuanEmperorAlbumKhubilaiPortrait.jpg/1200px-YuanEmperorAlbumKhubilaiPortrait.jpg)[close]I am not suggesting to invade Russia. All I am saying is that Russia is garbage.Why is it garbage?
Mate, i feel really bad about you not knowing the basis facts about the Russian-Ukrainian conflict but trying to argue. I see right to a tea bullshit from the BBC, you better ask the ukrainians about it.
If you want so, PM me, I will send you the teamspeak.
1)West received criticism by some people, but that was basically all it happened. On the other hand you have media that defends western illegal actions and is heavily biased with information (not saying Russian media is any better). While Russia is criticized by most of the media and get sanctions and actual punishment. So yes let's criticize Russia a bit more and keep ignoring fact west get's away with most of illegal stuff, that makes a lot of sense.
Imagine today Mexico decides to join into alliance with Russia and let's Russia build military bases there I bet we would see no violence there ...
Longest period of relative peace in Europe was the 19th century if you're looking at the continent as a whole, not just its North-Western portion.Technicalities. Europe has been very peaceful in contrast to the majority of the past, agree? We haven’t had a war between two major European powers for 70+ years. The 19th century saw the Napoleonic Wars which raged for more than a decade and a half as well as the Crimean war and the Franco-Prussian war. Sure there has been conflict in certain regions but considering the destruction that previous wars have brought such as WW2, we’re not doing so bad
A whataboutism person’s talking about the whataboutism, haha.Mate, i feel really bad about you not knowing the basis facts about the Russian-Ukrainian conflict but trying to argue. I see right to a tea bullshit from the BBC, you better ask the ukrainians about it.
If you want so, PM me, I will send you the teamspeak.
I visited Ukraine two times, I have dozens of Ukrainian friends, I did volunteer work with Ukrainian children from Donetsk and Luhansk Regions and I have a (Russian-speaking) Ukrainian boyfriend. But don't you worry, I'll ask them.Quote1)West received criticism by some people, but that was basically all it happened. On the other hand you have media that defends western illegal actions and is heavily biased with information (not saying Russian media is any better). While Russia is criticized by most of the media and get sanctions and actual punishment. So yes let's criticize Russia a bit more and keep ignoring fact west get's away with most of illegal stuff, that makes a lot of sense.
Whataboutism.QuoteImagine today Mexico decides to join into alliance with Russia and let's Russia build military bases there I bet we would see no violence there ...
But Mexico doesn't want to join an alliance with Russia because Russia is a shit country with the economy per capita of Greece. Russia (and apparantly Russians) are utterly incapable of seeing other post-soviet states as independent, soevereign nations. They seem to think Russia, and Russia alone, has some solid right to interfere. And worst, they seem to think that everybody thinks that way. That the world is some pie you can divide, and that Russia somehow is equal to the United States in power and influence.
The only thing Russia has to offer is war, instability and threats. That's why it invades countries; there is no other way it can control its minion states other then wreck them as they try assert their independence. It's no use debating this with Russians, because they always think the same way: First they deny, and then, when evidence becomes too overwhelming, they just say (and honestly believe) it's their right. Russia could literally nuke Kyiv tomorrow, killing millions of its Russian-speaking inhabitans, and still you would somehow think this is acceptable behavior because 'that's just how the world works'. Seriously, how many people need to die before you people will learn?
It's Russia. Obviously it is garbage. It is a "ex"-soviet country... There is no way it could not be garbage.No one cares about communism, it’s dead.
I am sorry (not), but I am biased towards hating communism.
Is it for real that you have a ukrainian boyfriend?
What’s about the volunteer’s work? Which organization?
It's Russia. Obviously it is garbage. It is a "ex"-soviet country... There is no way it could not be garbage.No one cares about communism, it’s dead.
I am sorry (not), but I am biased towards hating communism.
You’ve said shit about Russia, that we should burn in hell.
Mate, as I told you before - you are a disgusting prick.
Russia is not only the politics, it’s the Motherland for the people living in it. You said Russia without any refinement. Don’t try to excuse yourself. And you are the FSE developer, what a shame.It's Russia. Obviously it is garbage. It is a "ex"-soviet country... There is no way it could not be garbage.No one cares about communism, it’s dead.
I am sorry (not), but I am biased towards hating communism.
You’ve said shit about Russia, that we should burn in hell.
Mate, as I told you before - you are a disgusting prick.
Kinda dead, but not really. Doesn't change the fact that unless Russia sees a ginormous change in their politics, it is going to remain a shithole.
And no, I did not say that Russians should burn in hell, I said, Russia. The political construct.
It is not the fault of the average Russian citizen that his country is garbage. It is the fault of the select few and their supporters.
I also can not really blame anyone living in Russia on defending Russia, since that is to be expected. It is not like they got any other choice. (At least not, if they want to survive unharmed)
I love how council could do nothing to refute the fact that his sources even disagreed with himWill back to you later
You’ll get back to me later? So you don’t have any evidence readily available? Most people make statements that they can already back up.I love how council could do nothing to refute the fact that his sources even disagreed with himWill back to you later
I don’t want to spend energy telling to nonames from the internet pure facts anymore.You’ll get back to me later? So you don’t have any evidence readily available? Most people make statements that they can already back up.I love how council could do nothing to refute the fact that his sources even disagreed with himWill back to you later
Whataboutism.Yeah could you stop using it Mr Duuring?
But Mexico doesn't want to join an alliance with Russia because Russia is a shit country with the economy per capita of Greece. Russia (and apparAntly Russians) are utterly incapable of seeing other post-soviet states as independent, soEvereign nations. They seem to think Russia, and Russia alone, has some solid right to interfere. And worst, they seem to think that everybody thinks that way. That the world is some pie you can divide, and that Russia somehow is equal to the United States in power and influence.Exactly Russia is weak and in no position to be rivaling USA dominance. Yet somehow you claim it is threat to European union, a state with Greek economy per capita? As far as I can see Russia is interfering and invading neighboring countries that USA want's to build military bases in, because Russia is scared of NATO. Russia feels so threatened that they invade countries at cost of making own economy Greece 2.0, so Putin is retarded or something? No he has a reason to be scared when you look at what USA is doing. It seems like you don't believe in sovereignty of countries/nations but rather in global USA empire.
Russia is not only the politics, it’s the Motherland for the people living in it. You said Russia without any refinement. Don’t try to excuse yourself. And you are the FSE developer, what a shame.It's Russia. Obviously it is garbage. It is a "ex"-soviet country... There is no way it could not be garbage.No one cares about communism, it’s dead.
I am sorry (not), but I am biased towards hating communism.
You’ve said shit about Russia, that we should burn in hell.
Mate, as I told you before - you are a disgusting prick.
Kinda dead, but not really. Doesn't change the fact that unless Russia sees a ginormous change in their politics, it is going to remain a shithole.
And no, I did not say that Russians should burn in hell, I said, Russia. The political construct.
It is not the fault of the average Russian citizen that his country is garbage. It is the fault of the select few and their supporters.
I also can not really blame anyone living in Russia on defending Russia, since that is to be expected. It is not like they got any other choice. (At least not, if they want to survive unharmed)
Whataboutism.Yeah could you stop using it Mr Duuring?But Mexico doesn't want to join an alliance with Russia because Russia is a shit country with the economy per capita of Greece. Russia (and apparAntly Russians) are utterly incapable of seeing other post-soviet states as independent, soEvereign nations. They seem to think Russia, and Russia alone, has some solid right to interfere. And worst, they seem to think that everybody thinks that way. That the world is some pie you can divide, and that Russia somehow is equal to the United States in power and influence.Exactly Russia is weak and in no position to be rivaling USA dominance. Yet somehow you claim it is threat to European union, a state with Greek economy per capita? As far as I can see Russia is interfering and invading neighboring countries that USA want's to build military bases in, because Russia is scared of NATO. Russia feels so threatened that they invade countries at cost of making own economy Greece 2.0, so Putin is retarded or something? No he has a reason to be scared when you look at what USA is doing. It seems like you don't believe in sovereignty of countries/nations but rather in global USA empire.
You are confusing communism which is type of economic policy with dictatorship which is form of government. Today's Russia is looking more towards former glory of Russian Tsardom rather than USSR. Russians living in Muscovy are just like Americans in New York, addicted to shopping and hardcore capitalists.Kinda dead, but not really. Doesn't change the fact that unless Russia sees a ginormous change in their politics, it is going to remain a shithole.It's Russia. Obviously it is garbage. It is a "ex"-soviet country... There is no way it could not be garbage.No one cares about communism, it’s dead.
I am sorry (not), but I am biased towards hating communism.
You’ve said shit about Russia, that we should burn in hell.
Mate, as I told you before - you are a disgusting prick.
And no, I did not say that Russians should burn in hell, I said, Russia. The political construct.
It is not the fault of the average Russian citizen that his country is garbage. It is the fault of the select few and their supporters.
I also can not really blame anyone living in Russia on defending Russia, since that is to be expected. It is not like they got any other choice. (At least not, if they want to survive unharmed)
I believe in a global USA Empire. The USA are great.'I believe in drone strikes on civilians. Agent Orange was great.'
Out of arguments let's mention the Vietnam War that ended because of free speech and demonstrations something Russia doesn't have heh.'whataboutism'
Sure, fair enough, but they go hand in hand.Yeah but so do capitalism and dictatorship sometimes, so it is really inconvenient to call dictatorship communism.
No but srsly drone strikes were used in Vietnam right? And war ending because of free speech makes everything okay apparently, not to mention war also ended because USA got rekt. And USA got punished really hard by the international community.
No he has a reason to be scared when you look at what USA is doing. It seems like you don't believe in sovereignty of countries/nations but rather in global USA empire.
How can you interpret someone's argument this wrong?It wasn't even an argument.QuoteNo he has a reason to be scared when you look at what USA is doing. It seems like you don't believe in sovereignty of countries/nations but rather in global USA empire.
Do you really think NATO wants to invade Russia?
Yeah but so do capitalism and dictatorship sometimes, so it is really inconvenient to call dictatorship communism.
So we would if Russia had no nukes?Yes probably wouldn't be open invasion but rather proxy war where NATO would instal own puppet goverment and add Russia to the NATO.
Why?Huge amounts of natural resources (gas, platinum, rhodium...), envelopment of China which would be last opposing country.
All of which Russia is already selling to NATO because it's basicaly its entire economy?It would be owned by USA companies.
I think you are slightly underestimating the costs of war and the democratic control in the USA.USA needs war to keep military industry running. Cost of war doesn't matter in that case. There might not even be a war if USA would set up sucessful coup.
Can we all just agree that Mcpero and Council base their arguments on fantasy and Russian propaganda and don’t understand the basics of everything they argue for and against. They ignore facts and proof and make statements that only exist in their own realities and therefore can’t be proven.
USA needs war to keep military industry running. Cost of war doesn't matter in that case. There might not even be a war if USA would set up sucessful coup.
I know, but Hoi3 keeps crashing. Need something to waste time on.That just made 0 sense.QuoteUSA needs war to keep military industry running. Cost of war doesn't matter in that case. There might not even be a war if USA would set up sucessful coup.
Wait, your whole argument is that NATO wants to coup/proxy-war Putin out but doesn't because of nukes. So NATO doesn't want Putin to nuke Russia?
You seriously can’t see it, can you? It’s the general consensus here that you have to prove what you’re saying. You both struggle to get the timelines of events right, let alone the actual facts. You can’t provide any sources and make statements that cannot be supported in any reality. It’s almost laughableGive me one example
Do you really think NATO wants to invade Russia?If they could they would. But currently they don't want to because it would mean nuclear war.
So we would if Russia had no nukes?
Yes probably wouldn't be open invasion but rather proxy war where NATO would instal own puppet goverment and add Russia to the NATO.
the way you both try and defend Russia in the Ukraine as though you can’t see that you’ve invaded a country undemocratocally and illegallyYou seriously can’t see it, can you? It’s the general consensus here that you have to prove what you’re saying. You both struggle to get the timelines of events right, let alone the actual facts. You can’t provide any sources and make statements that cannot be supported in any reality. It’s almost laughableGive me one example
Yes Putin would nuke NATO.Do you really think NATO wants to invade Russia?If they could they would. But currently they don't want to because it would mean nuclear war.
So you state NATO does not invade because of Nukes. So, I ask.So we would if Russia had no nukes?
To which you reply:Yes probably wouldn't be open invasion but rather proxy war where NATO would instal own puppet goverment and add Russia to the NATO.
How does having nukes stop NATO from starting a proxy war right now?
I am not defending Russia for invading Ukraine. And what the fuck is undemocratic invasion lol? Perhaps May bombing Syria without approval of Parliament? Every invasion is illegal so here your argument proven wrong. Oh and me or Council since we are apparently one person now didn't invade anyone, im not even Russian.the way you both try and defend Russia in the Ukraine as though you can’t see that you’ve invaded a country undemocratocally and illegallyYou seriously can’t see it, can you? It’s the general consensus here that you have to prove what you’re saying. You both struggle to get the timelines of events right, let alone the actual facts. You can’t provide any sources and make statements that cannot be supported in any reality. It’s almost laughableGive me one example
Putin would nuke NATO while it is not actually at war with them?I dont know for sure
There is your whataboutism again. I didn’t agree with the bombing of Syria either but you defend Russia all the time, avoiding levying any actual criticism against a dictatorship.I am not defending Russia for invading Ukraine. And what the fuck is undemocratic invasion lol? Perhaps May bombing Syria without approval of Parliament? Every invasion is illegal so here your argument proven wrong. Oh and me or Council since we are apparently one person now didn't invade anyone, im not even Russian.the way you both try and defend Russia in the Ukraine as though you can’t see that you’ve invaded a country undemocratocally and illegallyYou seriously can’t see it, can you? It’s the general consensus here that you have to prove what you’re saying. You both struggle to get the timelines of events right, let alone the actual facts. You can’t provide any sources and make statements that cannot be supported in any reality. It’s almost laughableGive me one example
Putin would nuke NATO while it is not actually at war with them?I dont know for sure
Thinking again even if Russia didnt have nukes NATO couldnt defeat it at low enough cost.
What whataboutism wtf? I just wasnt sure what undemocratic invasion is,point of that wasnt saying hey UK is actually undemocratically invading people. I dont defend Russia all the time you are delusional.There is your whataboutism again. I didn’t agree with the bombing of Syria either but you defend Russia all the time, avoiding levying any actual criticism against a dictatorship.I am not defending Russia for invading Ukraine. And what the fuck is undemocratic invasion lol? Perhaps May bombing Syria without approval of Parliament? Every invasion is illegal so here your argument proven wrong. Oh and me or Council since we are apparently one person now didn't invade anyone, im not even Russian.the way you both try and defend Russia in the Ukraine as though you can’t see that you’ve invaded a country undemocratocally and illegallyYou seriously can’t see it, can you? It’s the general consensus here that you have to prove what you’re saying. You both struggle to get the timelines of events right, let alone the actual facts. You can’t provide any sources and make statements that cannot be supported in any reality. It’s almost laughableGive me one example
Yes I did on purpose because Im not so stubborn to not admit I was wrong, my world wont collapse if something I believe in turns out to be wrong.Putin would nuke NATO while it is not actually at war with them?I dont know for sure
Thinking again even if Russia didnt have nukes NATO couldnt defeat it at low enough cost.
Which is why we don't want to invade. Did you just counter your own argument?
Yes I did on purpose because Im not so stubborn to not admit I was wrong, my world wont collapse if something I believe in turns out to be wrong.
No it doesnt but they don't want to give up influence over Ukraine. And they still feel safer if there is no NATO in Ukraine.Yes I did on purpose because Im not so stubborn to not admit I was wrong, my world wont collapse if something I believe in turns out to be wrong.
So NATO does not want to invade Russia. So does Putin need to invade Ukraine in order to defend Russia from NATO?
They didn't want to lose influence so they started a war causing public opinion of Russia to take a steep dive and public support for joining NATO going up? And what influence to begin with? Russia has no soft power, like I said.Well not really influence but rather Ukraine not joining NATO. Your claim is Russian goverment is just evil and wants to hurt Ukraine for no reason just because Russia is a meany or what? Russia wants to play the same game USA is but they are much weaker. Ukraine used to be buying most of Russian gas. Half of Ukraine likes Russia the other side hates it. But yes now more and more people are leaning toward NATO.
Your claim is Russian goverment is just evil and wants to hurt Ukraine for no reason just because Russia is a meany or what?
Half of Ukraine likes Russia the other side hates it
You were literally trying your best to defend them against NATO whilst talking to Duuring before you managed to unravel your own argument...What whataboutism wtf? I just wasnt sure what undemocratic invasion is,point of that wasnt saying hey UK is actually undemocratically invading people. I dont defend Russia all the time you are delusional.There is your whataboutism again. I didn’t agree with the bombing of Syria either but you defend Russia all the time, avoiding levying any actual criticism against a dictatorship.I am not defending Russia for invading Ukraine. And what the fuck is undemocratic invasion lol? Perhaps May bombing Syria without approval of Parliament? Every invasion is illegal so here your argument proven wrong. Oh and me or Council since we are apparently one person now didn't invade anyone, im not even Russian.the way you both try and defend Russia in the Ukraine as though you can’t see that you’ve invaded a country undemocratocally and illegallyYou seriously can’t see it, can you? It’s the general consensus here that you have to prove what you’re saying. You both struggle to get the timelines of events right, let alone the actual facts. You can’t provide any sources and make statements that cannot be supported in any reality. It’s almost laughableGive me one example
What are yoi than?QuoteYour claim is Russian goverment is just evil and wants to hurt Ukraine for no reason just because Russia is a meany or what?
No?QuoteHalf of Ukraine likes Russia the other side hates it
Wrong.
No I was not.You were literally trying your best to defend them against NATO whilst talking to Duuring before you managed to unravel your own argument...What whataboutism wtf? I just wasnt sure what undemocratic invasion is,point of that wasnt saying hey UK is actually undemocratically invading people. I dont defend Russia all the time you are delusional.There is your whataboutism again. I didn’t agree with the bombing of Syria either but you defend Russia all the time, avoiding levying any actual criticism against a dictatorship.I am not defending Russia for invading Ukraine. And what the fuck is undemocratic invasion lol? Perhaps May bombing Syria without approval of Parliament? Every invasion is illegal so here your argument proven wrong. Oh and me or Council since we are apparently one person now didn't invade anyone, im not even Russian.the way you both try and defend Russia in the Ukraine as though you can’t see that you’ve invaded a country undemocratocally and illegallyYou seriously can’t see it, can you? It’s the general consensus here that you have to prove what you’re saying. You both struggle to get the timelines of events right, let alone the actual facts. You can’t provide any sources and make statements that cannot be supported in any reality. It’s almost laughableGive me one example
You’ve been trying to justify their actions for this entire discussion, saying that they only want to play be same game as the US and they only fear for their own security. Any excuseYeah those two reasons dont justfy their invasion of Ukraine?
No they don’tYou’ve been trying to justify their actions for this entire discussion, saying that they only want to play be same game as the US and they only fear for their own security. Any excuseYeah those two reasons dont justfy their invasion of Ukraine?
You first said it was because they felt threatened by NATO, then you said they didn't but wanted to keep their influence and then you admitted Russia had no influence in Ukraine to start with, but rather was trying to make sure Ukraine didn't join NATO - although you just said NATO wasn't a threat to Russia. We've gone full circle.Hope it didn't cause short circuit in your brain.
I'm somewhat amused.
Exactly.No they don’tYou’ve been trying to justify their actions for this entire discussion, saying that they only want to play be same game as the US and they only fear for their own security. Any excuseYeah those two reasons dont justfy their invasion of Ukraine?
So you agree with us Russia should return Crimea and cease supporting its vassal states in eastern Ukraine? Now we're getting somewhere.I agree Russia should fuck off from Ukraine and do another referendum in Crimea about being in Russia or Ukraine. Maybe referendum even in other parts (those in east). Referendums being watched by Russia, Ukraine, USA, Switzerland/Austria.
So what is the point in you arguing in against me and duuringSo you agree with us Russia should return Crimea and cease supporting its vassal states in eastern Ukraine? Now we're getting somewhere.I agree Russia should fuck off from Ukraine and do another referendum in Crimea about being in Russia or Ukraine. Maybe referendum even in other parts (those in east). Referendums being watched by Russia, Ukraine, USA, Switzerland/Austria.
I don't know Duuring said Russia is threat to Germany. And you just started accusing me of things Council was saying. Plus Duuring's HOI was crashing so he was bored.So what is the point in you arguing in against me and duuringSo you agree with us Russia should return Crimea and cease supporting its vassal states in eastern Ukraine? Now we're getting somewhere.I agree Russia should fuck off from Ukraine and do another referendum in Crimea about being in Russia or Ukraine. Maybe referendum even in other parts (those in east). Referendums being watched by Russia, Ukraine, USA, Switzerland/Austria.
Hmm, this ain't gonna be good for relations with Eastern Europe (which are already terrible)
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/karl-marx-jean-claude-juncker-defends-legacy-a8337176.html
Hmm, this ain't gonna be good for relations with Eastern Europe (which are already terrible)
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/karl-marx-jean-claude-juncker-defends-legacy-a8337176.html
#MarxDidNothingWrong
Nobody seems to blame philosophers (for example Johann Gottfried Herder) that invented nationalism for what Hitler, Mussolini, Japan did, all national heros.
#MarxDidNothingWrong
Nobody seems to blame philosophers (for example Johann Gottfried Herder) that invented nationalism for what Hitler, Mussolini, Japan did, all national heros.
I am saying nor Marx nor nationalism philispohers are guilty, not whataboutism okay 니가 privilaged white male?#MarxDidNothingWrong
Nobody seems to blame philosophers (for example Johann Gottfried Herder) that invented nationalism for what Hitler, Mussolini, Japan did, all national heros.
w h a t a b o u t i s m
Labour winning in urban (pro-stay) areas, Tories in rural and northern England (pro-leave) areas. We might be looking at a serious re-alignment happening.Most of the gains were from no overall control. If you compare the colour map to the 2014 one it’s not majorly different. Nobody gained that much tbh.
So we've been bashing on Russia for a while now what's next? Turkey maybe? ;)
Maybe but Turkey is on Russia level of shit atm.How about UAE taking Socotra from Yemen? Oh wait UAE is USA ally thus their actions must be legal.
It might sound radical but I support the idea of joint security if it’s properly controlled by all of the contributors instead of a single one. There will come a time when Europe won’t be able to rely on the US and we need to look to ourselves to defend each other. Closer bonds and connections only serve to maintain the longest relative peace the continent has ever seen.
You know the intervention is lead by Saudi Arabia right?Intervention into Yemen? Saudi and UAE aee close allies what is your point here?
Controlled by a council which has elected individuals from each countryIt might sound radical but I support the idea of joint security if it’s properly controlled by all of the contributors instead of a single one. There will come a time when Europe won’t be able to rely on the US and we need to look to ourselves to defend each other. Closer bonds and connections only serve to maintain the longest relative peace the continent has ever seen.
Defend each other, sure, but not as one army controlled by some illiterate idiots in Brussel.
Controlled by a council which has elected individuals from each countryIt might sound radical but I support the idea of joint security if it’s properly controlled by all of the contributors instead of a single one. There will come a time when Europe won’t be able to rely on the US and we need to look to ourselves to defend each other. Closer bonds and connections only serve to maintain the longest relative peace the continent has ever seen.
Defend each other, sure, but not as one army controlled by some illiterate idiots in Brussel.
Except NATO isn’t just EuropeControlled by a council which has elected individuals from each countryIt might sound radical but I support the idea of joint security if it’s properly controlled by all of the contributors instead of a single one. There will come a time when Europe won’t be able to rely on the US and we need to look to ourselves to defend each other. Closer bonds and connections only serve to maintain the longest relative peace the continent has ever seen.
Defend each other, sure, but not as one army controlled by some illiterate idiots in Brussel.
Yeah that's what NATO is for
Except NATO isn’t just EuropeControlled by a council which has elected individuals from each countryIt might sound radical but I support the idea of joint security if it’s properly controlled by all of the contributors instead of a single one. There will come a time when Europe won’t be able to rely on the US and we need to look to ourselves to defend each other. Closer bonds and connections only serve to maintain the longest relative peace the continent has ever seen.
Defend each other, sure, but not as one army controlled by some illiterate idiots in Brussel.
Yeah that's what NATO is for
Says who? Why can't Europe protect itself? The Americans are talking about withdrawing funding from Nato so the natural place for us to turn is to eachotherExcept NATO isn’t just EuropeControlled by a council which has elected individuals from each countryIt might sound radical but I support the idea of joint security if it’s properly controlled by all of the contributors instead of a single one. There will come a time when Europe won’t be able to rely on the US and we need to look to ourselves to defend each other. Closer bonds and connections only serve to maintain the longest relative peace the continent has ever seen.
Defend each other, sure, but not as one army controlled by some illiterate idiots in Brussel.
Yeah that's what NATO is for
Which is a good thing. Only a 'little European' would want NATO to shrink. Any European defensive structure has to keep the Americans in, the Germans down and the Russians out.
The Americans don't fund NATO. And Trump is only spending more on the armed forces, not less.They send a lot of military aid to NATO members, Trump has threatened to cut that funding
Like what? Is he closing down basis in Europe? Bringing back ships to the continental US?I guess I was wrong about the funding being specific for nato as it’s actually for countries that don’t vote with the us in the UN, which could include some nato countries but he said that nato members couldn’t be sure of US support if they don’t pay their 2%
Well by the same logic, is there any point in any country having a military in the EU? A strong EU army can deter future threats and decrease our dependency on other powers like the US
I might be dreaming but if somebody in Europe were to come forward with a proposal of a joint force, where each country maybe only contributed a small number of troops at first. Each country that contributed would have a place on a board which decides on action.
My point is that if the US wants to withdraw support, then let them. We should defend ourselves. I would support a federalised country in Europe, but that’s just me. I don’t understand the entire sovereignty argument. Seems like people just put pride ahead of anything else.Europe needs to become federation and give more power to European parliament and also make a new system of electing MPs for it. But it is very important to keep cultural diversity across the states in federation. But I don't think that is happening so I hope my country just declares neutrality like Austria and Switzerland.
My point is that if the US wants to withdraw support, then let them. We should defend ourselves. I would support a federalised country in Europe, but that’s just me. I don’t understand the entire sovereignty argument. Seems like people just put pride ahead of anything else.
And then the most simple part: not enough troops. Recent missions in an already poorly manned military europe have left the infantry weak.
Might be wrong, but it's still the case that the Bundeswehr probably couldn't fight a modern war in its current state.
The entire NATO force in Europe has maybe 3 AWACS planes VITAL for division-sized and up units. In a considerable theatre you'd need dozens for a sustained campaign.
It is most definitely true.
Yeah, that is probably true.
I think a combined EU military would be better at allocating resources then 27 independant ones.
So I don't think spending or manpower would be an issue I think the most major issue would be culture, langauge and obviously all the issues with merging militaries (like different systems etc).
Better, but most definitely not good enough.Mot good enough for what?
Better, but most definitely not good enough.Mot good enough for what?
It doesn't matter if or who the current threat it. It matters that a rich Europe will always need the means to defend itself- and right now it can't.Wait Netherlands have 15k soldiers?
The only military that could remotely be considered to join into would have been Great Britain, but even that is too far-fetched to be anything but be a bad joke.
As I said... you need integrated systems to think about it even in rudamentary form.
Look at the Dutch-German cooperation. This system they currently have is barely working as is, and the Dutch and German military are possibly the closes of two cultures you can get (and militarily vastly different, then again the Dutch military is vastly different from any military culture except maybe the Danish, but with 15.000 activ military personnel they're hardly putting a dent in anything) and even on this level they feel like they're just a political experiment with no real combat value.
But the idea I’m proposing isn’t to integrate everything into the budeswehr. Also Russia could be seen as a threat to EU countries depending on who signed up. Enemies are never constant, the army would be there to defend in case we needed it.
the Bundeswehr, a military with only four working Eurofighters, 0 working submarines or A400M transport planes, 95 operational tanks (out of c.300) and god knows what else. It has never once been deployed in serious strength abroad.
Oh, and then there's language barriers which make it difficult in practical terms unless they ironically make them all communicate in English (good luck persuading the French to do that).Well Austro-Hungarian/Habsurg army used to be multi-lingual, there were some issues but definitely good example that you can form strong military with Germans, Hungarians (not even Indo-European), Romanians, Slavs. I believe Hungarian part had Hungarian officers and rest had German.
>wants to give example of strong multicultural, multi-lingual army
>gives Austrian-Hungarian army as example
If we're being honest the Canadian military is basically comprised into two parts, a french speaking part and a bilingual part. The french get their owns units and bases, and everyone else still needs french for promotions.>wants to give example of strong multicultural, multi-lingual army
>gives Austrian-Hungarian army as example
This.
Most obvious modern example is Canada, and it's difficult enough with only two languages and you have stark divisions between French and English speaking units. Officers have to be bilingual too, which is just about possible. Just not feasible in an EU context unless you have an English speaking command structure all the way down to at least company level, plus highly regionalised recruitment.
For all the effort that'd require, and all the nationalist sentiment it'd cause, you're better off just using NATO interoperability and individual national contributions to an EU expeditionary force as and when required.
This is where I step in. Join my personal army. Together we make Europes military great again!Poshel nahuj
My first order will be to construct 13 brand new aircraft-carriers and put tanks on it. Additionally I propose to develop a new technology that will allow us to launch airplanes from diving submarines. I also want to develop a helicopter that can drive on roads, so that it can use Germanys non existing speedlimit to quickly transport troops through central Europe.
I would also like to introduce you to my new military doctrine. I call it "burgerdonutsandwich" it revolves around the idea that exporting beer cans filled with C4 and remote detonators to foreign countries that we are not at war with, will make them more likely to join our side.
I think a combined EU military would be better at allocating resources then 27 independant ones.
So I don't think spending or manpower would be an issue I think the most major issue would be culture, langauge and obviously all the issues with merging militaries (like different systems etc).
This is where I step in. Join my personal army. Together we make Europes military great again!I mean you already got the money from BCoF donation scam so quite a nice idea. I would like to add you should make an elite unit called Space Marines.
My first order will be to construct 13 brand new aircraft-carriers and put tanks on it. Additionally I propose to develop a new technology that will allow us to launch airplanes from diving submarines. I also want to develop a helicopter that can drive on roads, so that it can use Germanys non existing speedlimit to quickly transport troops through central Europe.
I would also like to introduce you to my new military doctrine. I call it "burgerdonutsandwich" it revolves around the idea that exporting beer cans filled with C4 and remote detonators to foreign countries that we are not at war with, will make them more likely to join our side.
It won't be FSE developing it, so it will come out!
Wow, Trump just pulled the US out of the Iran deal which is pretty major...WH has been briefing all day he'd stop short of doing that!Oh yes, we certainly should not have left an agreement with the leading state sponsor of global terrorism. I mean the terms were SO fantastic for us. We give them pallets of money, and they lie about their nuclear program proceeding along. Except now without international sanctions, it will be even easier for them.
Looks to me like another nail in the coffin of America's informal empire (and I say that not as a leftie critic of imperialism but rather as an apt description). From TPP to Iran the US looks totally unreliable and untrustworthy.
Wait are you from Iran and did Iran left the deal, because it seems like you are describing USA the leading state sponsor of global terrorism.Wow, Trump just pulled the US out of the Iran deal which is pretty major...WH has been briefing all day he'd stop short of doing that!Oh yes, we certainly should not have left an agreement with the leading state sponsor of global terrorism.
Looks to me like another nail in the coffin of America's informal empire (and I say that not as a leftie critic of imperialism but rather as an apt description). From TPP to Iran the US looks totally unreliable and untrustworthy.
There were in depth checks which proved that Iran were complying with the deal.
That report literally says that the deal didn’t place any restrictions on Iran’s ballistic missiles.There were in depth checks which proved that Iran were complying with the deal.
http://www.defenddemocracy.org/content/uploads/documents/IranBallisticMissileResearchMemo.pdf
You sure about that lol
Trophy?Spoiler(https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-FXZvktB5BuM/V4r9YwAO9VI/AAAAAAAAKk8/PtlGz94QGXYtA_KpphdeS0aQGzts8vurgCLcB/s1600/The%2BSoviet%2Bflag%2Bover%2Bthe%2BReichstag%252C%2B1945.jpg)[close]
no it's a primitive dabTrophy?Spoiler(https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-FXZvktB5BuM/V4r9YwAO9VI/AAAAAAAAKk8/PtlGz94QGXYtA_KpphdeS0aQGzts8vurgCLcB/s1600/The%2BSoviet%2Bflag%2Bover%2Bthe%2BReichstag%252C%2B1945.jpg)[close]
https://www.dailywire.com/news/30403/barack-obamas-presidential-legacy-comprehensive-michael-j-knowlesHe forgot a few but it is a solid list nonetheless
https://youtu.be/VyjMt4tPDHQ
'we want to live in nation states not false artificial creations'
Nice one Farage it is not like nation is exatly that, false artificial creation. And not to mention Britain is not a nation as well lul crub your brexit.
Even though I disagree with what Farage said and with leaving the EU as a whole, the idea that the nations within the UK are being oppressed is stupid. Scotland voted to join the UK, Northern Ireland chose the UK over the Republic of Ireland and Wales has been within our country longer than it was ever a unified country of its own. They each have National Assemblies and certain levels of autonomy. The United Kingdom is what it says on the tin, a nation of nations, not an oppressive English state. Any suggestion that it is otherwise is idiotic. We voted as a whole otherwise it’s like saying “Tony from France didn’t vote for Macron and is therefore being oppressed”.
France doesn't have a divided nation to the same degree as the UK, so it's a poor example and as far as I know there is a lot of Scots who don't consider themselves British.
In many ways the situation there is currently worse than in NI
QuoteIn many ways the situation there is currently worse than in NI
What ways?
Right. How many people were killed because of the Northern Ireland conflict, and how much damage was done in, say, US dollars, and how do those numbers compare to the Corsican Nationalist conflict? I assume much worse?
Northern Ireland isn’t in a political crisis in relation to them being in the YK, it’s their inability to agree on local governance.
Also Scotland might not consider themselves to be British, but they are part of the nation and when the vote happened it was as the country of he United Kingdom, not as England, Scotland etc. Let’s just put it this way, if We had all remained because Scotland wanted to remain then wouldn’t England be being kept against their will? But that would be okay? Scotland might be a separate cultural identity , but the political identity is still that of the UK.
But the majority of people DID want it. It's irrelevant where in the country those people are because that's not how a referendum works. A lot of London wanted to stay too but that doesn't mean they're being oppressed. That's just how democracy works.Northern Ireland isn’t in a political crisis in relation to them being in the YK, it’s their inability to agree on local governance.
Also Scotland might not consider themselves to be British, but they are part of the nation and when the vote happened it was as the country of he United Kingdom, not as England, Scotland etc. Let’s just put it this way, if We had all remained because Scotland wanted to remain then wouldn’t England be being kept against their will? But that would be okay? Scotland might be a separate cultural identity , but the political identity is still that of the UK.
The UK & EU are both unions (sure the UK union is a much stronger union compared to the EU). Anyways my point was that Farage uses self determination and argues that the Brittish don't want the EU even though half the states in his union did want it, I just find it funny. I wasn't trying to imply anything else really.
Northern Ireland isn’t in a political crisis in relation to them being in the YK, it’s their inability to agree on local governance.
Also Scotland might not consider themselves to be British, but they are part of the nation and when the vote happened it was as the country of he United Kingdom, not as England, Scotland etc. Let’s just put it this way, if We had all remained because Scotland wanted to remain then wouldn’t England be being kept against their will? But that would be okay? Scotland might be a separate cultural identity , but the political identity is still that of the UK.
The UK & EU are both unions (sure the UK union is a much stronger union compared to the EU). Anyways my point was that Farage uses self determination and argues that the Brittish don't want the EU even though half the states in his union did want it, I just find it funny. I wasn't trying to imply anything else really.
It's so painful to see the Belgian prime minister get so worked up about Farage's comments about Belgium not being a nation... btw with an earpiece in, the sod doesn't even speak English well enough... Something I think is unacceptable at such a level of European politics... even though his own people doesn't even think there is something called 'Belgium'.
National identities have not replaced regional or local identities and identities do not have to replace another to exist.You are right of course but I meant replaced as the main identity/strongest, and I think for most people national identity is stronger than regional. But there are stronger identities like family, friends.... I dont think National and regional or national and European can be on the same level one will strongly dominate the other.
You can't have one of the worst fertility rates in Europe but still expect to have one of the most generous welfare systems.
Whether it's allowing women to serve in combat, or people to change their gender, Sweden usually gets there first. Though to be fair they're also often the last to abandon insane ideas since they were practising state-sponsored eugenics programmes and sterilising people well into the 1970s. It's a little known fact that Sweden, per head of population, sterilised more people than Nazi Germany.Poor Swedistan, you will be remembered for your vikings that went through entire Russia to get to Constantinople to get a job there.
OH NOES women in the military. HOW AWFUL.
OH NOES women in the military. HOW AWFUL.
And yet many women serve with distinction. It’s a stupid comparison to make.OH NOES women in the military. HOW AWFUL.
Enjoy 36% less muscle mass. Why don't we just have children and disabled serve in army? Such discrimination.
So do children.And yet many women serve with distinction. It’s a stupid comparison to make.OH NOES women in the military. HOW AWFUL.
Enjoy 36% less muscle mass. Why don't we just have children and disabled serve in army? Such discrimination.
What a silly argument. You’re trying to compare women in combat to children being forced to commit atrocities.So do children.And yet many women serve with distinction. It’s a stupid comparison to make.OH NOES women in the military. HOW AWFUL.
Enjoy 36% less muscle mass. Why don't we just have children and disabled serve in army? Such discrimination.
http://www.macleans.ca/culture/why-children-are-good-soldiers/
What a silly argument. You’re trying to compare women in combat to children being forced to commit atrocities.So do children.And yet many women serve with distinction. It’s a stupid comparison to make.OH NOES women in the military. HOW AWFUL.
Enjoy 36% less muscle mass. Why don't we just have children and disabled serve in army? Such discrimination.
http://www.macleans.ca/culture/why-children-are-good-soldiers/
Modern infantry equipment is heavier than medieval full plate armor, with difference that plate armor weight is much more evenly spread. Of course women can fight and serve in army but biologically they have an disadvantage so it is not as effective, but yes you get women who are better soldiers than men, but when you look at sports you see they are no match for them (watch some men vs female tennis). Also if country loses a lot of men in war, few man can impregnate big amount of females, while this cant be done other way around. So it is much more effective to have men military and much less riskier. Female military was mostly made when there was no men left or as a reserve force (sparta). Also muscular military woman is not something most men desire so by joining the army they are as good as dead in terms of reproduction. So yes muscle is still very much needed but there are positions that you don't need them, but I would call those positions real military.
Women forced into military, meaning forced to commit atrocities.
Yeah 75% of 'military' is not military.
There’s a level required to pass training courses. Many women have passed them, end of discussion. You speak as though the biology thing is so black and white, but there are many women who have above average fitness and muscle mass and vice versa for men.
There’s a level required to pass training courses. Many women have passed them, end of discussion. You speak as though the biology thing is so black and white, but there are many women who have above average fitness and muscle mass and vice versa for men.
If you assume that if I say 'warrior-diplomat' you think I mean soldiers being deployed as diplomats no, thats not what I meant. Look up tje term it's interesting.No modern military has used women in a real war (apart from Kurdistan but we dont really know what is happening there) we don't know if having woman is beneficial for psychological effects, maybe men could turn on own women to rape them?
Proneness to injury doesnt really apply to the military since it's not a sports-injury sensitive type of physical thing. Injury more like breaking bones and completely tearing off joints, but usually only when falling.
That 100km march in the falklands. Yes women would definitely have it harder there bjt it is marching, it is easily trained and when jt does happen its more mental than physocal anyway.
You're dismissing the social benefits of having women in a sqiad far too easily Steven, humint and human relations is a key aspect of modern warfare and dont forget muslim women arent allowed to talk to foreign men. So in your entire intel scheme you already lose 50% of the population.
And yes, unlike a lot of stereotypes, agression is not by a long shot what the military looks for in most cases of applying violence. ESPECIALLY in COIN
maybe men could turn on own women to rape them?
Sexual assault in the U.S. military is rampant.maybe men could turn on own women to rape them?
What?
If you assume that if I say 'warrior-diplomat' you think I mean soldiers being deployed as diplomats no, thats not what I meant. Look up tje term it's interesting.
Proneness to injury doesnt really apply to the military since it's not a sports-injury sensitive type of physical thing. Injury more like breaking bones and completely tearing off joints, but usually only when falling.
That 100km march in the falklands. Yes women would definitely have it harder there bjt it is marching, it is easily trained and when jt does happen its more mental than physocal anyway.
You're dismissing the social benefits of having women in a sqiad far too easily Steven, humint and human relations is a key aspect of modern warfare and dont forget muslim women arent allowed to talk to foreign men. So in your entire intel scheme you already lose 50% of the population.
And yes, unlike a lot of stereotypes, agression is not by a long shot what the military looks for in most cases of applying violence. ESPECIALLY in COIN
BUT WHAT ABOUT THIS TRIBE IN THE AMAZON WHERE THE WOMEN DO THE FIGHTING AND THE MEN DO THE COOKING?!?!? SHOULDN'T THAT PROVE THAT WOMEN ARE SUPERIORIf you assume that if I say 'warrior-diplomat' you think I mean soldiers being deployed as diplomats no, thats not what I meant. Look up tje term it's interesting.
Proneness to injury doesnt really apply to the military since it's not a sports-injury sensitive type of physical thing. Injury more like breaking bones and completely tearing off joints, but usually only when falling.
That 100km march in the falklands. Yes women would definitely have it harder there bjt it is marching, it is easily trained and when jt does happen its more mental than physocal anyway.
You're dismissing the social benefits of having women in a sqiad far too easily Steven, humint and human relations is a key aspect of modern warfare and dont forget muslim women arent allowed to talk to foreign men. So in your entire intel scheme you already lose 50% of the population.
And yes, unlike a lot of stereotypes, agression is not by a long shot what the military looks for in most cases of applying violence. ESPECIALLY in COIN
Not what grunts do, people who liaise with locals are usually officers via interpreters or more likely work for military intelligence. We're discussing a role that involves taking ground and/or holding it. Women lack the physical characteristics to do that as well as men, and a case can be made that they lack mental aggression too though I'm not as familiar with that side of the argument so I'm not using it here.
I mean come on, this is the product of natural selection, identifiable across most species and shouldn't be that controversial. Generally speaking can women fight? Yes. Can they do so as well as men? No. Perfectly fine to use them if you're desperate for manpower but as a modern, professional fighting force there's absolutely no need and they reduce combat effectiveness.
Muslim women aren't allowed to talk to anyone lol unless their husbands say so. Even in societies where you don't have that, the benefit of having a 'female perspective' is far outweighed by the drawbacks.
Or maybe it is due to the fact that these guys are constantly being reminded that they are the coolest dudes on the planet, protecting the most awesome country in the universe and that they have they are undefeatable, that killing is a normal thing and that guns are cool. It probably also does not help that they are almost no women around them.
Quality kek out of thatOr maybe it is due to the fact that these guys are constantly being reminded that they are the coolest dudes on the planet, protecting the most awesome country in the universe and that they have they are undefeatable, that killing is a normal thing and that guns are cool. It probably also does not help that they are almost no women around them.
The Virgin Bundeswehr vs the Chad U.S Army
Quality kek out of thatOr maybe it is due to the fact that these guys are constantly being reminded that they are the coolest dudes on the planet, protecting the most awesome country in the universe and that they have they are undefeatable, that killing is a normal thing and that guns are cool. It probably also does not help that they are almost no women around them.
The Virgin Bundeswehr vs the Chad U.S Army
Or maybe it is due to the fact that these guys are constantly being reminded that they are the coolest dudes on the planet, protecting the most awesome country in the universe and that they have they are undefeatable, that killing is a normal thing and that guns are cool. It probably also does not help that they are almost no women around them.There's no way you typed this with a straight face
Or maybe it is due to the fact that these guys are constantly being reminded that they are the coolest dudes on the planet, protecting the most awesome country in the universe and that they have they are undefeatable, that killing is a normal thing and that guns are cool. It probably also does not help that they are almost no women around them.There's no way you typed this with a straight face
No modern military has used women in a real war (apart from Kurdistan but we dont really know what is happening there) we don't know if having woman is beneficial for psychological effects, maybe men could turn on own women to rape them?
You mean apart from both Britain and the US?Haven't been in a real war since 1945/vietnam. If you think driving in a plane and dropping bombs is same as being down there shooting people in the face thats pretty weird.
What war was that Norwegian conquest of Jan Mayen? And Dutch reconquista of Ceylon?No modern military has used women in a real war (apart from Kurdistan but we dont really know what is happening there) we don't know if having woman is beneficial for psychological effects, maybe men could turn on own women to rape them?
Yes, they have. AS I said, the IDF, Norway, The Netherlands, mostly not in combat roles but definitely have seen combat a lot. The Serbs had a 50/50 male/female tank crew in general, the US has had a shitton of women in combat when they were in Marine supply, these guys got it worse than a lot of infantry platoons, plenty of women CAS pilots.
I’m sure the soldiers who have died would call them real warsYou mean apart from both Britain and the US?Haven't been in a real war since 1945/vietnam. If you think driving in a plane and dropping bombs is same as being down there shooting people in the face thats pretty weird.
Oh yeah those heavy loses so many US, UK troops died.I’m sure the soldiers who have died would call them real warsYou mean apart from both Britain and the US?Haven't been in a real war since 1945/vietnam. If you think driving in a plane and dropping bombs is same as being down there shooting people in the face thats pretty weird.
Yeah they did. Besides, losses don’t determine if something is a war.Oh yeah those heavy loses so many US, UK troops died.I’m sure the soldiers who have died would call them real warsYou mean apart from both Britain and the US?Haven't been in a real war since 1945/vietnam. If you think driving in a plane and dropping bombs is same as being down there shooting people in the face thats pretty weird.
UK lost 7,415 soldiers since ww2.Yeah they did. Besides, losses don’t determine if something is a war.Oh yeah those heavy loses so many US, UK troops died.I’m sure the soldiers who have died would call them real warsYou mean apart from both Britain and the US?Haven't been in a real war since 1945/vietnam. If you think driving in a plane and dropping bombs is same as being down there shooting people in the face thats pretty weird.
I’m sure the soldiers who have died would call them real wars
Yeah they did. Besides, losses don’t determine if something is a war.
Not really. I meant that the number of losses don’t determine wars, not that losses don’t matter at all. It was fairly obvious that’s what I was saying.
I’ll try my best but I may have gone crazyNot really. I meant that the number of losses don’t determine wars, not that losses don’t matter at all. It was fairly obvious that’s what I was saying.
Alright next time just don't debate yourself, ok?
Haven't been in a real war since 1945/vietnam. If you think driving in a plane and dropping bombs is same as being down there shooting people in the face thats pretty weird.
What war was that Norwegian conquest of Jan Mayen? And Dutch reconquista of Ceylon?
I meant since 1945 for UK and Vietnam for USA. Oh yeah the mighty golfu war where 300 coalition soldiers died (not including kuwait) compared to 50k Iraqi on the other side.Haven't been in a real war since 1945/vietnam. If you think driving in a plane and dropping bombs is same as being down there shooting people in the face thats pretty weird.
Have they not gotten to that part in history class yet Pero?
You literally missed the biggest tank battle the U.S. has ever fought, in the same war that also hadthe largest air assault operation in the world's history. Yes I am talking about Desert Sabre.
There was also the conventional part of Operation Iraqi Freedom.
And between '45 and Vietnam there have been a couple invasions amongst the the Korean War.
Please you're entitled to your opinion but you are kind of making a fool out of yourself now.
What war was that Norwegian conquest of Jan Mayen? And Dutch reconquista of Ceylon?
Oh please even if you're attempting to troll this is getting a bit ridiculous. Norway and the Netherlands both fought in Iraqi Freedom and Afghanistan. Just because its intrastate warfare doesn't mean there weren't any big engagements. Actually a lot of engagement fought by coalition forces in Iraq and Afghanistan during the insurgencies were more intense than During the Second Gulf War.
bro what even is mcpero i cant tell if hes killed my high or intensified it tf you talking about bud
im convinced i just witnessed either the best trolling ive seen in years or the human embodiment of edge
You speak as if western media is any better. I mean really, did you see the coverage of what's happening in Jerusalem?You mean that bit where Israel shot a bunch of kids
You mean that bit where Israel shot a bunch of kids
Weren’t they just moving up to a fence? Hardly justification to shoot them.You mean that bit where Israel shot a bunch of kids
Palestinian kids that were used as human shields by the same innocent and sweet Palestinian "protesters", yes.
Looks like you're giving McPero some real competition when it comes to moronic, uninformed one-liners
It looks like there were some instigators but was there any immediate danger to Israeli lives? Because if so that's not justification to shoot those children, human shields or not. The fact that you can't discuss a topic without resorting to insults says a lot about you, not me.Looks like you're giving McPero some real competition when it comes to moronic, uninformed one-liners
Palestinian kids that were used as human shields by the same innocent and sweet Palestinian "protesters", yes.
they did not grab their own children, lift them up to cover their bodies, and advance on the israelis with intent to do them harm and with suspect that they would be shot at, and were thus suspecting to be in need of the child-sized human shields, my fucking god dude, are you sane?
are you REALLY saying the palestinians are the bad guys in this issue? the israelis have been destroying palestinian families for decades, and are a major wedge against the well-being and future restabilization and recovery of the entire middle east, and dont you dare call me an anti-semite for even proposing that
was faris odeh really going to do damage to any israeli (***soldier!!!***, they were armed and equipped soldiers with helmets and body armor and tanks advancing in gaza during the al-aqsa intifada, not helpless victim civilians or something) by throwing little rocks at a fucking tank? was he truly a threat to the israeli people, or even those armed soldiers? can you truly say his death by gunfire was justifiable on the israeli soldiers' parts, and is the killing of any palestinian child, protester or not, peaceful or aggravated or upset, at the hands of israelis since then any different or more/less justifiable?
Yes and according to humanitarian and war laws it is alwasy the soldier's fault if they use disproportional violence. Any order to commit such atrocities are in nature illegal and therefore punishable when obeyed. As a soldier, you cannot be pressured into using disproportionate violence.
You gave to be able to prove intent to kill when you have shot a civilian =P even people walking towards you with a knife in their hand do not allow for you to shoot them. So using lethal weapon rounds against people throwing rocks at you doesn't really compute. The worst thing you'd be able to do to them is shooting rubber bullets (but even that is questionable) and beating them with a stick...
Each individual soldier is punishable, as well as the institution who warrented this attack.
Spoilerhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=unMuQbVdINQ[close]
Trump the God Emperor have spoken.
Yes and according to humanitarian and war laws it is alwasy the soldier's fault if they use disproportional violence. Any order to commit such atrocities are in nature illegal and therefore punishable when obeyed. As a soldier, you cannot be pressured into using disproportionate violence.
You gave to be able to prove intent to kill when you have shot a civilian =P even people walking towards you with a knife in their hand do not allow for you to shoot them. So using lethal weapon rounds against people throwing rocks at you doesn't really compute. The worst thing you'd be able to do to them is shooting rubber bullets (but even that is questionable) and beating them with a stick...
Each individual soldier is punishable, as well as the institution who warrented this attack.
Terrorism does not equate to evil to me. There's people who are terrorists for terrible causes, but there are people who fight as rebels for their beliefs and their homes and are labeled as terrorists by those who they are against and I don't equate them to the terribleness of known terror organizations. I'm not on the right side, there is no "correct" side, you're a moron for thinking it works like that. I stand for what I believe is right in the world, and I believe that the Palestinian people are not the oppressors here, not the aggressors here, and are certainly not the ones in the wrong. The most terrible part of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is that so few of either side are familiar with what pre-Israel Palestine was like. All they know is the conflict between the two, and its now become a generational, escalating conflict, and with the recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, Palestinians feel that their lives are at an end. It's not a surprise many would die to see their people live.
Looks like you're giving McPero some real competition when it comes to moronic, uninformed one-liners
Border laws don’t involve shooting children. You’re really going far out on that one.
bro what even is mcpero i cant tell if hes killed my high or intensified it tf you talking about budYeah easiest thing to do is just call someone retarded, troll and a 14 years old not giving a single argument?
im convinced i just witnessed either the best trolling ive seen in years or the human embodiment of edge
That doesn’t justify shooting them. Just listen to yourselves. You’re actually trying to defend the killing of children. Did those children pose a threat to life? I doubt it.Border laws don’t involve shooting children. You’re really going far out on that one.
Border laws involve everyone. Kinda stupid to send your kids to a border with your long-time enemy, isn't it?
Gordo:
X1=-4
X2=-1/2
Y1=-4
Y2=3
I was at least expecting complex numbers.
Attacking/attempting to breach the border of most countries will get you shot. CBP don't use their tasers that often.
[/quote
Maybe I am generalising, but the police forces of the U.S. don't really have such a great track record with using proportional violence.
Proportionality of violence and escalating up the violence chain is still something that EVERYONE carrying whatever type of weapon is required to observe. Approaching a border fence does NOT constitute lethal force. It is literally that simple. There are no vital interests of the state at stake when someone approaches a border fence.... at least not an interest that has to be solved with violence. And this is not even a matter of political perspective or orientation to be discussed... this is signed into law internationally.Border laws involve everyone. Kinda stupid to send your kids to a border with your long-time enemy, isn't it?
Yes astronomically stupid. Still does not constitute lethal force...
Literally as a soldier guarding a military compound in Afghanistan you're not allowed to immediately shoot someone who walks towards the gate with a large coat on screaming "I HAVE A BOMB". You have to first instruct him to lie on the floor and stfu. Only if he doesn't comply after being threatened with lethal force and a warning shot was fired... THEN you are allowed to shoot him/her.
Is this a comperable situation to borders? Not even because violence escalation is even more strict concerning police matters.
bro what even is mcpero i cant tell if hes killed my high or intensified it tf you talking about budYeah easiest thing to do is just call someone retarded, troll and a 14 years old not giving a single argument?
im convinced i just witnessed either the best trolling ive seen in years or the human embodiment of edge
Are you saying you saw a single person cough?
Does chlorine have rotten smell?
Gordo:
X1=-4
X2=-1/2
Y1=-4
Y2=3
I was at least expecting complex numbers.
No but I think a few thousand have in ww1 and people that work in labs smell it sometimes. And they will tell you it's not rotting smell.bro what even is mcpero i cant tell if hes killed my high or intensified it tf you talking about budYeah easiest thing to do is just call someone retarded, troll and a 14 years old not giving a single argument?
im convinced i just witnessed either the best trolling ive seen in years or the human embodiment of edge
Are you saying you saw a single person cough?
Does chlorine have rotten smell?
Gordo:
X1=-4
X2=-1/2
Y1=-4
Y2=3
I was at least expecting complex numbers.
have you ever smelled a chlorine
I mean it is okay from international law point of view to shoot kids because of border law. That just shows that international laws are a meme and that Israeli government is 100% monsters. And Israeli people are one of the most brainwashed people ever.That doesn’t justify shooting them. Just listen to yourselves. You’re actually trying to defend the killing of children. Did those children pose a threat to life? I doubt it.Border laws don’t involve shooting children. You’re really going far out on that one.
Border laws involve everyone. Kinda stupid to send your kids to a border with your long-time enemy, isn't it?
it is okay from international law point of view to shoot kids because of border law.
Law that is not enforced is not a law.it is okay from international law point of view to shoot kids because of border law.
Uhm.... no it isn't....
Yes it isLaw that is not enforced is not a law.it is okay from international law point of view to shoot kids because of border law.
Uhm.... no it isn't....
It is just as much as I am king of France.Yes it isLaw that is not enforced is not a law.it is okay from international law point of view to shoot kids because of border law.
Uhm.... no it isn't....
You're talking shit. If something is written into law then it's law. Its fact, not debate.It is just as much as I am king of France.Yes it isLaw that is not enforced is not a law.it is okay from international law point of view to shoot kids because of border law.
Uhm.... no it isn't....
Step 1) Don't attempt to cross the fence of the Israeli border illegallyOther countries manage to not shoot kids. But I’m sure those children posed a great threat to heavily armed soldiers. I guess that’s what they tell themselves so they can sleep at night.
Step 2) Avoid getting shot
We have to get this groundbreaking revelation to the Palestinians as soon as possible
You literally just said 'if something is written it is a fact, not debate'. A law being written and signed by most of the countries that is not enforced is just letters on paper, it is not de facto law.You're talking shit. If something is written into law then it's law. Its fact, not debate.It is just as much as I am king of France.Yes it isLaw that is not enforced is not a law.it is okay from international law point of view to shoot kids because of border law.
Uhm.... no it isn't....
Step 1) Don't attempt to cross the fence of the Israeli border illegallyI mean it is not like Palestinians knew what is going to happen, they did it to gain international favor and attention. You have to have a pretty good reason to send your kids to be shot just to get attention, hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm what could the the reason?
Step 2) Avoid getting shot
We have to get this groundbreaking revelation to the Palestinians as soon as possible
Israel = Jews. Jews are God's people. Jews killing Palestinians can thus be interpreted as..Step 1) Don't attempt to cross the fence of the Israeli border illegallyOther countries manage to not shoot kids. But I’m sure those children posed a great threat to heavily armed soldiers. I guess that’s what they tell themselves so they can sleep at night.
Step 2) Avoid getting shot
We have to get this groundbreaking revelation to the Palestinians as soon as possible
bro what even is mcpero i cant tell if hes killed my high or intensified it tf you talking about budYeah easiest thing to do is just call someone retarded, troll and a 14 years old not giving a single argument?
im convinced i just witnessed either the best trolling ive seen in years or the human embodiment of edge
Are you well?
I posted that in general as other people do/did that. By that I mean call people stuff and instead of bringing arguments. Telling them why they think they are wrong, I don't mind getting talked shit I would just rather have a constructive reply.bro what even is mcpero i cant tell if hes killed my high or intensified it tf you talking about budYeah easiest thing to do is just call someone retarded, troll and a 14 years old not giving a single argument?
im convinced i just witnessed either the best trolling ive seen in years or the human embodiment of edge
Where in my post was any of that? Are you well?
Is it illegal to j-walk in some regions and areas? Yes. Is it heavily enforced? Not always. Is it no longer a law because of that? Obviously no, it's still the law. Does the enforcement of the law being often unenforced because there aren't always officers around to make anything out of it when it happens mean it's any less of a law? Obviously no, it is still the law. Does it often going unenforced mean officers wont enforce it when they are around and can enforce it, because so many people get away with it when they're not there? No.
Israel is committing international crimes but isn't being held accountable for them--the law is being broken, no action is being taken. All that aside I can't believe you view Israel as in the right here, and Palestinians being the bad guys. That is fucking mind blowing. THAT'S why I thought you had to be trolling (again, I mentioned nothing about your mental capability or your age). But now it's clear that you're just relentless in your trolling efforts to an unhealthy degree, or you're actually just a terrible human being.
2. If you're referring to the United States in terms of international law, the U.S. hasn't signed most of the treaties in regards to weapons usage and such.
Hold on there McPero...They are close ally of USA but okay NATO and Israel den. I was talking about Israeli ideology not their security policies.
1. Israel isn't a NATO member...
2. If you're referring to the United States in terms of international law, the U.S. hasn't signed most of the treaties in regards to weapons usage and such.
3. Israel's security politics do not, in any way whatsoever, closely resemble those of Hitler....
There is a major drive for Israel's security politics that is also the cause for their tendency to not really care about international law and humanitarian rights, but it's a bit complex. If people are really interested I can tell, otherwise you guys'll just have to take my word for it.
lol look at all these people claiming to be experts here
https://www.wired.com/story/europes-new-privacy-law-will-change-the-web-and-more/
For Eurosceptics!
lol look at all these people claiming to be experts here
https://www.wired.com/story/europes-new-privacy-law-will-change-the-web-and-more/
For Eurosceptics!
Crap idea, if they can't get your data then expect more pay walls, less services or both. Only winner from this is the Asian tech industry which now has a major competitive advantage.
Oh and I know everyone likes an 'EU good' story but as is so often the case it looks like GDPR is actually based off of international standards made in Geneva, not Brussels (ISO 27001 to be exact). Congrats to EU bureaucrats for lifting the work of others and passing it off as their own.
https://www.wired.com/story/europes-new-privacy-law-will-change-the-web-and-more/
For Eurosceptics!
Ofc, but why should I care about massive restrictions on private companies using my data when the government can access it *extremely* easily and will undoubtedly abuse it?Exactly. Private companies have less movtives to abuse personal that than state does.
Ofc, but why should I care about massive restrictions on private companies using my data when the government can access it *extremely* easily and will undoubtedly abuse it?Because it's better than nothing? But yeah the UK is in a sad state when it comes to privacy.
And you support Russia?Ofc, but why should I care about massive restrictions on private companies using my data when the government can access it *extremely* easily and will undoubtedly abuse it?Exactly. Private companies have less movtives to abuse personal that than state does.
I support Russia in some things, but I don't generally support it.Ofc, but why should I care about massive restrictions on private companies using my data when the government can access it *extremely* easily and will undoubtedly abuse it?Because it's better than nothing? But yeah the UK is in a sad state when it comes to privacy.And you support Russia?Ofc, but why should I care about massive restrictions on private companies using my data when the government can access it *extremely* easily and will undoubtedly abuse it?Exactly. Private companies have less movtives to abuse personal that than state does.
GDPR or not, EU sucks anyway!
I support Russia in some things, but I don't generally support it.Ofc, but why should I care about massive restrictions on private companies using my data when the government can access it *extremely* easily and will undoubtedly abuse it?Because it's better than nothing? But yeah the UK is in a sad state when it comes to privacy.And you support Russia?Ofc, but why should I care about massive restrictions on private companies using my data when the government can access it *extremely* easily and will undoubtedly abuse it?Exactly. Private companies have less movtives to abuse personal that than state does.
Ofc, but why should I care about massive restrictions on private companies using my data when the government can access it *extremely* easily and will undoubtedly abuse it?Because it's better than nothing? But yeah the UK is in a sad state when it comes to privacy.
British get out reeeeee
You're mixing EU policy with UK policy. Why?
Besides is corperations not being allowed to spy on you better than they being allowed?
Either way you're leaving the EU soon so you probably don't have to worry about keeping the law.
Only thing I generally support is Red Velvet.GDPR or not, EU sucks anyway!
There's pros and cons with the EU but overall I support it.I support Russia in some things, but I don't generally support it.Ofc, but why should I care about massive restrictions on private companies using my data when the government can access it *extremely* easily and will undoubtedly abuse it?Because it's better than nothing? But yeah the UK is in a sad state when it comes to privacy.And you support Russia?Ofc, but why should I care about massive restrictions on private companies using my data when the government can access it *extremely* easily and will undoubtedly abuse it?Exactly. Private companies have less movtives to abuse personal that than state does.
Right...
Hey look, the Russian army shot down MH17. Shocking.
Hey look, the Russian army shot down MH17. Shocking.
Hey look, the Russian army shot down MH17. Shocking.And I was so sure it was Uganda.
As predicted, EU consumers have taken a hit. Most of it's temporary disruption but some firms have pulled out permanently.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-44239126
Interesting developments today, regarding a grooming trial & Tommy Robinson.I’ve heard about that but it’s hard to judge what he’s done before any evidence is put forward. I assume he’s been going on his usual anti-Muslim tirade again.
Interesting developments today, regarding a grooming trial & Tommy Robinson.I’ve heard about that but it’s hard to judge what he’s done before any evidence is put forward. I assume he’s been going on his usual anti-Muslim tirade again.
Damn, bad news coming out of Ireland re: legalising abortion.Yeah because it’s bad that a foetus with a fatal abnormality can be terminated /s
Damn, bad news coming out of Ireland re: legalising abortion.Yeah because it’s bad that a foetus with a fatal abnormality can be terminated /s
It’s really not at all. Many Irish women travel to the UK every year to terminate their pregnancies due to things like fatal abnormalities or pregnancies caused via rape or incest. Under the previous amendment all of those reasons were disregarded despite the obvious health impacts of both the feutus and potentially the mother.Damn, bad news coming out of Ireland re: legalising abortion.Yeah because it’s bad that a foetus with a fatal abnormality can be terminated /s
That's an incredibly minor aspect of it.
Well abortion can cause infertility, that's about it.It’s really not at all. Many Irish women travel to the UK every year to terminate their pregnancies due to things like fatal abnormalities or pregnancies caused via rape or incest. Under the previous amendment all of those reasons were disregarded despite the obvious health impacts of both the feutus and potentially the mother.Damn, bad news coming out of Ireland re: legalising abortion.Yeah because it’s bad that a foetus with a fatal abnormality can be terminated /s
That's an incredibly minor aspect of it.
Abortions aren't just going to stop because you make it illegal it will just make it more dangerous for the women who seek them. The US is an example of this.
Abortions aren't just going to stop because you make it illegal it will just make it more dangerous for the women who seek them. The US is an example of this.And Argentina
Abortions aren't just going to stop because you make it illegal it will just make it more dangerous for the women who seek them. The US is an example of this.
Much the same as people in a vegetative state hooked up to life-support then?The life support case is a bad comparison considering people on life-support are taken off it often. As has already been mentioned, if regular abortion was made illegal, it would still occur but in more dangerous ways. By having it the way it is now, at least women aren't putting themselves at risk with life threatening procedures with shady doctors.
To an extent I agree with your other point. Seems to me when a mother's life is at risk, even though that's incredibly rare, abortion should be possible. I'm not a fan of aborting a disabled baby however (that's eugenics) and I think you have to have strict punishments for medical professionals who cheat the system. I think the UK's pre-1967 abortion laws (yes, it was legal before 1967) are preferable to what we have now.
Much the same as people in a vegetative state hooked up to life-support then?The life support case is a bad comparison considering people on life-support are taken off it often. As has already been mentioned, if regular abortion was made illegal, it would still occur but in more dangerous ways. By having it the way it is now, at least women aren't putting themselves at risk with life threatening procedures with shady doctors.
To an extent I agree with your other point. Seems to me when a mother's life is at risk, even though that's incredibly rare, abortion should be possible. I'm not a fan of aborting a disabled baby however (that's eugenics) and I think you have to have strict punishments for medical professionals who cheat the system. I think the UK's pre-1967 abortion laws (yes, it was legal before 1967) are preferable to what we have now.
70,000 a year?But you’re not including other complications besides death. The world health organisation supports the legalisation of abortion and says that around 4-13% of maternal deaths can be attributed to unsafe abortions. They also say that most of these can be prevented with legal and safe abortion methods.
In the UK pre-1967 it was 30 deaths a year from illegal abortions. At the same time, on average, 20 women were dying annually from *legal* abortion procedures gone wrong.
70,000 a year?
In the UK pre-1967 it was 30 deaths a year from illegal abortions. At the same time, on average, 20 women were dying annually from *legal* abortion procedures gone wrong.
70,000 a year?
In the UK pre-1967 it was 30 deaths a year from illegal abortions. At the same time, on average, 20 women were dying annually from *legal* abortion procedures gone wrong.
They kept accurate numbers on illegal abortions?
So if you had a child you would be absolutely fine with somebody smoking around them?
Don’t ever become a father.
And I'm sure your wife is learning about how the second hand smoke contains chemicals. Would you want them inhaling those chemicals? If so then you're quite clearly failing to protect them.Don’t ever become a father.
Too late, I have twins and my wife is a trainee doctor.
Let's get some perspective. If you live in an urban area, especially a major city like London/New York/Paris/etc, then second hand tobacco smoke is the least of your concerns regarding what your children are inhaling. Most towns and cities around the globe, including in the West, have pollution levels far above international standards that are considered safe. Me and my wife are well aware of this. It's safer for my children to be around smokers 24/7 and live in the countryside than it is for them to live in a city with non-smoking parents.Yes and it would be even safer if you kept them away from smokers as well.
Let's get some perspective. If you live in an urban area, especially a major city like London/New York/Paris/etc, then second hand tobacco smoke is the least of your concerns regarding what your children are inhaling. Most towns and cities around the globe, including in the West, have pollution levels far above international standards that are considered safe. Me and my wife are well aware of this. It's safer for my children to be around smokers 24/7 and live in the countryside than it is for them to live in a city with non-smoking parents.Yes and it would be even safer if you kept them away from smokers as well.
It’s not irrational at all. I’m more likely to die in a car crash than a shark attack but it doesn’t mean I’m gonna go and sucker punch a great white.Let's get some perspective. If you live in an urban area, especially a major city like London/New York/Paris/etc, then second hand tobacco smoke is the least of your concerns regarding what your children are inhaling. Most towns and cities around the globe, including in the West, have pollution levels far above international standards that are considered safe. Me and my wife are well aware of this. It's safer for my children to be around smokers 24/7 and live in the countryside than it is for them to live in a city with non-smoking parents.Yes and it would be even safer if you kept them away from smokers as well.
They are kept away 99% of the time, but it is irrational to be especially concerned about it given other environmental dangers.
It’s not irrational at all. I’m more likely to die in a car crash than a shark attack but it doesn’t mean I’m gonna go and sucker punch a great white.
When you use an incredibly outdated meme to defend smoking around children. I'm sure you wouldn't want your kiddo being in a car filled with cigarette smoke would you? Ya know, since it causes cancer.when some sperg posting on a forum for a terrible, dead game tells you not to further your genealogical line because you wouldn't mollycoddle your child every waking moment of their existence(https://thumbs.gfycat.com/FortunateTinyAardwolf-max-1mb.gif)[close]
When you use an incredibly outdated meme to defend smoking around children. I'm sure you wouldn't want your kiddo being in a car filled with cigarette smoke would you? Ya know, since it causes cancer.when some sperg posting on a forum for a terrible, dead game tells you not to further your genealogical line because you wouldn't mollycoddle your child every waking moment of their existence(https://thumbs.gfycat.com/FortunateTinyAardwolf-max-1mb.gif)[close]
What an emphatic revelation.Well if it’s so clear to you then why are you getting involved? If he’s okay with people smoking around his kids then it obviously isn’t good for them.
Well I’m sorry to break it to you, but allowing your kids to be in the same room as somebody smoking increases their risk of cancer.
And as I said to you, there are many studies and prominent institutions that disagree with you. Also, of course it’s not short term. You don’t just get cancer with a click of the fingers. Same with actual smokers. But that doesn’t make it healthy, does it?Well I’m sorry to break it to you, but allowing your kids to be in the same room as somebody smoking increases their risk of cancer.
As I've pointed out to you, using scientific evidence, it probably doesn't. Even studies that suggest it does increase the risk mostly state that a) it's only in the case of long-term exposure, and b) it's in their view a slight risk factor anyway that's far outweighed by urban pollution
Well I’m sorry to break it to you, but allowing your kids to be in the same room as somebody smoking increases their risk of cancer.Do you have even the slightest Idea how many fucking things cause Cancer?
You need to drop it down a notch.What are you talking about?
I actually smoked my kids.You just admited to incest paedophilia. Nice.
Speaking german does there is a study that was made since 1250 untill now.Well I’m sorry to break it to you, but allowing your kids to be in the same room as somebody smoking increases their risk of cancer.Do you have even the slightest Idea how many fucking things cause Cancer?
You need to drop it down a notch.What are you talking about?
Fse might be one of the few places where saying second hand smoke causes cancer is a controversial opinion...
Lmao no it’s not. It’s a view supported by the NHS, WHO and CRUK but apparently they’re all wrong and you’re right.That's because in the field of medicine it is a controversial opinion.You need to drop it down a notch.What are you talking about?
Fse might be one of the few places where saying second hand smoke causes cancer is a controversial opinion...
Appealing to authority is a debating fallacy (particularly when said authority has been caught lying on this very issue).. It is really impossible to claim that, when you have so many factors that might be increasing heart attacks (more fat people), lung cancers (more air pollution) over the last ten years.
The medical evidence suggests passive smoking is probably not bad for you. Smoking bans in public and commercial areas have been in place in most Western countries for over a decade; if passive smoking were as bad as claimed then you'd expect significant reductions in heart attacks, lung cancers and so on among the general population over the last ten years. And yet that's not what has happened. Most studies have not identified statistically significant reductions in any of those diseases and I can cite them if you so wish.
Let's get some perspective. If you live in an urban area, especially a major city like London/New York/Paris/etc, then second hand tobacco smoke is the least of your concerns regarding what your children are inhaling. Most towns and cities around the globe, including in the West, have pollution levels far above international standards that are considered safe. Me and my wife are well aware of this. It's safer for my children to be around smokers 24/7 and live in the countryside than it is for them to live in a city with non-smoking parents.Citation please
Citation please
at least in North America, air pollution in cities are way below international and national standards (some exceptions, but usually in remote regions, for a variety of reasons), per the EPA and Environment Canada.
Moreover, those pollutants are *usually* the fault of dust from unpaved roads, heat-induced ozone concentration, or forest fire smoke.
Air quality, at least in in North America (but probably in the rest of the Western world, with exceptions) has been steadily improving for the past 20 years
That's why I cry everytime I jerk off.
More of this please (and less of this: https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/oct/18/theresa-may-plans-to-let-people-change-gender-without-medical-checks)Can't wait to visit gynecologist, to check my vagina, because my clitoris is really huge it is like a cellular organ and my lips are like two giant balls.
(https://i.pinimg.com/736x/6c/cf/19/6ccf1923718ccaa363fae6b0ea8208fd.jpg)
More of this please (and less of this: https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/oct/18/theresa-may-plans-to-let-people-change-gender-without-medical-checks)
Has the EU ever been closer to death? Lol
In what universe do you people live?-Carl Sagan, probably
In what universe do you people live?
Safe Space.
What universe are you living in Duuring?
In what universe do you people live?
The universe where one of the EU 'big four' are leaving, another is on a collision course with Brussels, and the other two have weak and unpopular leaders. Eastern Europe is in revolt, the White House is no longer a friend to Brussels but in fact an opponent (there's even a good chance of a trade war), while terrorism and economic instability still wreck the Continent. Euroscepticism has never been a more powerful force.
What universe are you living in Duuring?
Any particular reason as to why Denmark is banning burqas and niqabs?Women's rights?
I sure hate using the same currency everywhere, being able to travel around freely, cheap flights, being able to expect the same laws and food standards anywhere in Europe. It really sucks.
I wish it would take me 4hours just to cross the Dutch border, like when I was young. Man, it was so much fun going to France, being checked at every border, taking hours just to spend a day at the sea in Holland, then having to convert my money with a crappy exchange rate, just to buy some icecream. SO MUCH FUN.
I also really hate going to countries like Malta and seeing all those EU projects popping up. All those restored Forts and Castles are just so ugly... It is also retarded that I can easily use my credit card anywhere in Europe. Or that I do not have to pay VAT when buying stuff from other European countries with my company account. It just sucks. Not being taxated twice also fucking sucks, like seriously. I would love to pay income tax twice and pay additional VAT on it. I hate doing buisness in other countries, it is just to easy.
Personally, I would be so much better off without the EU, I do not profit from the EU at all!
The problem with all those benefits you listed is that it's perfectly possible to have them without the need for a technocratic supranational union that wants its own army. Much of this is already happening as a result of globalisation (particularly flights, credit cards, telecommunications etc), and it's on an intergovernmental basis. Of course the EU has gone furthest and fastest than anywhere else. The only other place that you can compare it to is New Zealand and Australia (which also have free movement, residency and employment rights; mutual recognition of regulation and standards for goods, services, professional qualifications etc; harmonisation of social policy regarding pensions, welfare payments; military and intelligence co-operation and integration; etc). You can do all this stuff without 28 unelected Commissioners led by a drunkard, a useless parliament, a silly flag and anthem, grandiose plans for an army, and so on. The question you need to ask yourself is why EU citizens have so little democratic control over EU integration vs your average Australian/New Zealand citizen has over the trans-Tasman equivalent.Technocracy and deep state are the only reason democratic countries still function.
i support tommy robinson
i support tommy robinson
This is a big reason as to why the West is so f*cked. Trying to mess with human nature doesn't tend to end well, and the nuclear family is the default unit across cultures. If it weren't the ideal family structure then that wouldn't be the case.I think that's absolutely absurd to welcome the end of the nuclear family.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5801847/Fury-family-court-judge-said-applaud-end-nuclear-family.html
I was raised by a single mother and I’ve turned out fine
Pretty much.But gay parents are better then no parents.
I was very pro-gay marriage, it's a valuable institution, but I'm not so keen on gay adoption. It's highly desirable for children to have both a male and female role model.
And where is your evidence?I was raised by a single mother and I’ve turned out fine
Congratulations, but I don't accept anecdotal evidence.
And where is your evidence?I was raised by a single mother and I’ve turned out fine
Congratulations, but I don't accept anecdotal evidence.
That’s hardly evidence, is it? Give me some numbers and proof please instead of making generalised statements.And where is your evidence?I was raised by a single mother and I’ve turned out fine
Congratulations, but I don't accept anecdotal evidence.
The entire course of human evolution. Yours?
That’s hardly evidence, is it? Give me some numbers and proof please instead of making generalised statements.And where is your evidence?I was raised by a single mother and I’ve turned out fine
Congratulations, but I don't accept anecdotal evidence.
The entire course of human evolution. Yours?
I didn't say it's superior, I'm just saying that it's possible for a child to be raised outside of the traditional family and still have a good life. My life is proof of that fact.That’s hardly evidence, is it? Give me some numbers and proof please instead of making generalised statements.And where is your evidence?I was raised by a single mother and I’ve turned out fine
Congratulations, but I don't accept anecdotal evidence.
The entire course of human evolution. Yours?
How about you offer proof that the alternatives to the nuclear family are superior? I'm arguing for the status quo so the onus is on you to justify the change.
So you accept that the nuclear family is preferable and we shouldn't celebrate its decline?I don’t believe either one is preferable and I don’t celebrate the downfall of the nuclear family.
That’s the best argument for gay adoption, tbhPretty much.But gay parents are better then no parents.
I was very pro-gay marriage, it's a valuable institution, but I'm not so keen on gay adoption. It's highly desirable for children to have both a male and female role model.
Tbf orphans should just be adopted by the military at age 7 and go through experimental procedures to augment their physical abilities. After this they get their own exosuits and become the most lethal killing machines on the planet.That’s the best argument for gay adoption, tbhPretty much.But gay parents are better then no parents.
I was very pro-gay marriage, it's a valuable institution, but I'm not so keen on gay adoption. It's highly desirable for children to have both a male and female role model.
Tbf orphans should just be adopted by the military at age 7 and go through experimental procedures to augment their physical abilities. After this they get their own exosuits and become the most lethal killing machines on the planet.That’s the best argument for gay adoption, tbhPretty much.But gay parents are better then no parents.
I was very pro-gay marriage, it's a valuable institution, but I'm not so keen on gay adoption. It's highly desirable for children to have both a male and female role model.
Tbf orphans should just be adopted by the military at age 7 and go through experimental procedures to augment their physical abilities. After this they get their own exosuits and become the most lethal killing machines on the planet.That’s the best argument for gay adoption, tbhPretty much.But gay parents are better then no parents.
I was very pro-gay marriage, it's a valuable institution, but I'm not so keen on gay adoption. It's highly desirable for children to have both a male and female role model.
Tbf orphans should just be adopted by the military at age 7 and go through experimental procedures to augment their physical abilities. After this they get their own exosuits and become the most lethal killing machines on the planet.That’s the best argument for gay adoption, tbhPretty much.But gay parents are better then no parents.
I was very pro-gay marriage, it's a valuable institution, but I'm not so keen on gay adoption. It's highly desirable for children to have both a male and female role model.
wish i was an orphan
That is a dramatic increase... seems weird suddenly hundreds of people get the idea to start this...? what caused it? Did they get registered more?
And so far it seems more like a police problem than a political one.
Well I doubt it helps that Britain has thousands fewer police officers
You mean if they have time to do things that part of their duties? Other than the car painting thing those are standard police roles. It’s no coincidence that crime has gone up since police numbers have been cut. Even many of the higher ups in the police service have said that cuts are putting people at risk.Well I doubt it helps that Britain has thousands fewer police officers
If they have time to monitor Twitter, paint their cars pink and turn up to pride etc then they're clearly not understaffed.
You mean if they have time to do things that part of their duties? Other than the car painting thing those are standard police roles. It’s no coincidence that crime has gone up since police numbers have been cut. Even many of the higher ups in the police service have said that cuts are putting people at risk.Well I doubt it helps that Britain has thousands fewer police officers
If they have time to monitor Twitter, paint their cars pink and turn up to pride etc then they're clearly not understaffed.
Getting prison time for something said on twitter is insane to me.I suppose it depends on the context of what was said.
To provide protection and security at demonstrations is a pretty common thing. There are 20,000 fewer police officers in the UK than in 2010. Knife crime rose 20% in England and Wales this year.
You make it sound so easy to abandon parts of their role but I’m pretty sure if it was as simple as that then they would have already done it
Getting prison time for something said on twitter is insane to me.I suppose it depends on the context of what was said.
Getting prison time for something said on twitter is insane to me.
Millions of people use Cannabis every year. Very few users suffer from psychosis that it’s a strenuous link at best to say that Cannabis outright causes it.
Obviously there are safety concerns that are mostly associated with younger people using it. And smoking obviously causes lung issues. But Cannabis hasn’t actually directly killed anyone.
Maybe it does, maybe it doesn’t. That isn’t the point of what we’re talking about. The police have had cuts and are saying they need more money. I doubt anybody knows more about the topic than them. Their numbers are down, crime is up and they’re struggling to cope.Obviously there are safety concerns that are mostly associated with younger people using it. And smoking obviously causes lung issues. But Cannabis hasn’t actually directly killed anyone.
There fates worse than death, go visit a locked ward in a psychiatric hospital.
Maybe it does, maybe it doesn’t. That isn’t the point of what we’re talking about. The police have had cuts and are saying they need more money. I doubt anybody knows more about the topic than them. Their numbers are down, crime is up and they’re struggling to cope.Obviously there are safety concerns that are mostly associated with younger people using it. And smoking obviously causes lung issues. But Cannabis hasn’t actually directly killed anyone.
There fates worse than death, go visit a locked ward in a psychiatric hospital.
Circus
What government are you talking about?Circus
Well, at least our government isn't assassinating people for speaking out against them yet. Thanks for reminding us it could always be worse.
Democracy* can be just as flawed as an autocracy and often times is. It's why the world needs enlightened monarchs again with unlimited reform powerI, for one, couldn’t trust Prince Charles with unlimited power
Democracy* can be just as flawed as an autocracy and often times is. It's why the world needs enlightened monarchs again with unlimited reform powerYes, with democracy you have a mob of people of which 90% don't know shit about parties they vote for (basically people are not good rulers over themselves). But it is not like you even have any options since all the parties are trash. Then you have politicians who are elected and 95% of them primary goal is to be elected again and not to do sth good for the state. They also can break all their promises and nothing will happen. These politicians are easily corrupt since they need money for their campaign or just personal greed so rich people can influence them. Not to mention all the interregnums you get.
Turns out male uber-feminist Justin Trudeau groped a female reporter in 2000 and issued a f*cked up excuse/apology when confronted about it. Sad and funny at the same time given his recent #MeToo lecturing. Why is it so many of the men involved with the feminist movement turn out to be creeps?I guess he should be burned alive then.Spoiler(https://i.redd.it/6c1se3rhzh211.jpg)[close]
He wasn't raised to be a ruler.Democracy* can be just as flawed as an autocracy and often times is. It's why the world needs enlightened monarchs again with unlimited reform powerI, for one, couldn’t trust Prince Charles with unlimited power
you are confusing platon and Sokrates my dudeDemocracy* can be just as flawed as an autocracy and often times is. It's why the world needs enlightened monarchs again with unlimited reform powerYes, with democracy you have a mob of people of which 90% don't know shit about parties they vote for (basically people are not good rulers over themselves). But it is not like you even have any options since all the parties are trash. Then you have politicians who are elected and 95% of them primary goal is to be elected again and not to do sth good for the state. They also can break all their promises and nothing will happen. These politicians are easily corrupt since they need money for their campaign or just personal greed so rich people can influence them. Not to mention all the interregnums you get.
With absolutist you get a person who is raised to be a good ruler, his motive is to make his country great again. And he and his administration doesn't get fucked every 4 years by new political agenda but can work very effectively. It has been clear democracy can't work alone since early stages so we have mix of democracy and technocracy anyways.
Socrates said it well: If you were heading on a journey by the sea, who would you ideally want to decide who was in charge of the vessel just anyone or people educated in rules and demands of seafaring? The later of course. So why do we keep thinking that any person would be fit to judge who should be the ruler of a country? Here his point isn't necessarily that democracy is bad but that most people are not qualified for it. And I personally don't believe ever will be, and there is no real way of deciding who is fit to vote and who isn't, so there goes democracy.
It is in Plato's book but it is Socrates saying it, but those conversations are mostly fiction so yes it was Plato's idea probably. So in a way Socrates said nothing we know of.you are confusing platon and Sokrates my dudeDemocracy* can be just as flawed as an autocracy and often times is. It's why the world needs enlightened monarchs again with unlimited reform powerYes, with democracy you have a mob of people of which 90% don't know shit about parties they vote for (basically people are not good rulers over themselves). But it is not like you even have any options since all the parties are trash. Then you have politicians who are elected and 95% of them primary goal is to be elected again and not to do sth good for the state. They also can break all their promises and nothing will happen. These politicians are easily corrupt since they need money for their campaign or just personal greed so rich people can influence them. Not to mention all the interregnums you get.
With absolutist you get a person who is raised to be a good ruler, his motive is to make his country great again. And he and his administration doesn't get fucked every 4 years by new political agenda but can work very effectively. It has been clear democracy can't work alone since early stages so we have mix of democracy and technocracy anyways.
Socrates said it well: If you were heading on a journey by the sea, who would you ideally want to decide who was in charge of the vessel just anyone or people educated in rules and demands of seafaring? The later of course. So why do we keep thinking that any person would be fit to judge who should be the ruler of a country? Here his point isn't necessarily that democracy is bad but that most people are not qualified for it. And I personally don't believe ever will be, and there is no real way of deciding who is fit to vote and who isn't, so there goes democracy.
Just out of curiosity, how much theoretical statecraft classics did you read? Did you read Aristotle? Cause you cant just take on text and say "Yeah Platon said that!". Carl Popper argues that Platon would have been fine with Hitler. Read Aristotle, he argues against Platon.It is in Plato's book but it is Socrates saying it, but those conversations are mostly fiction so yes it was Plato's idea probably. So in a way Socrates said nothing we know of.you are confusing platon and Sokrates my dudeDemocracy* can be just as flawed as an autocracy and often times is. It's why the world needs enlightened monarchs again with unlimited reform powerYes, with democracy you have a mob of people of which 90% don't know shit about parties they vote for (basically people are not good rulers over themselves). But it is not like you even have any options since all the parties are trash. Then you have politicians who are elected and 95% of them primary goal is to be elected again and not to do sth good for the state. They also can break all their promises and nothing will happen. These politicians are easily corrupt since they need money for their campaign or just personal greed so rich people can influence them. Not to mention all the interregnums you get.
With absolutist you get a person who is raised to be a good ruler, his motive is to make his country great again. And he and his administration doesn't get fucked every 4 years by new political agenda but can work very effectively. It has been clear democracy can't work alone since early stages so we have mix of democracy and technocracy anyways.
Socrates said it well: If you were heading on a journey by the sea, who would you ideally want to decide who was in charge of the vessel just anyone or people educated in rules and demands of seafaring? The later of course. So why do we keep thinking that any person would be fit to judge who should be the ruler of a country? Here his point isn't necessarily that democracy is bad but that most people are not qualified for it. And I personally don't believe ever will be, and there is no real way of deciding who is fit to vote and who isn't, so there goes democracy.
None, I was just taught base idea of Plato's Republic and heard this quote somewhere and context in which it was used.Just out of curiosity, how much theoretical statecraft classics did you read? Did you read Aristotle? Cause you cant just take on text and say "Yeah Platon said that!". Carl Popper argues that Platon would have been fine with Hitler. Read Aristotle, he argues against Platon.It is in Plato's book but it is Socrates saying it, but those conversations are mostly fiction so yes it was Plato's idea probably. So in a way Socrates said nothing we know of.you are confusing platon and Sokrates my dudeDemocracy* can be just as flawed as an autocracy and often times is. It's why the world needs enlightened monarchs again with unlimited reform powerYes, with democracy you have a mob of people of which 90% don't know shit about parties they vote for (basically people are not good rulers over themselves). But it is not like you even have any options since all the parties are trash. Then you have politicians who are elected and 95% of them primary goal is to be elected again and not to do sth good for the state. They also can break all their promises and nothing will happen. These politicians are easily corrupt since they need money for their campaign or just personal greed so rich people can influence them. Not to mention all the interregnums you get.
With absolutist you get a person who is raised to be a good ruler, his motive is to make his country great again. And he and his administration doesn't get fucked every 4 years by new political agenda but can work very effectively. It has been clear democracy can't work alone since early stages so we have mix of democracy and technocracy anyways.
Socrates said it well: If you were heading on a journey by the sea, who would you ideally want to decide who was in charge of the vessel just anyone or people educated in rules and demands of seafaring? The later of course. So why do we keep thinking that any person would be fit to judge who should be the ruler of a country? Here his point isn't necessarily that democracy is bad but that most people are not qualified for it. And I personally don't believe ever will be, and there is no real way of deciding who is fit to vote and who isn't, so there goes democracy.
Well thats obviously an issue. Would be a bit like just reading Nazi Historians for you education. Again, read Aristotle, he makes great points against PlatonWat. I don't think democracy is shit because i heard that quote so it is not an issue. Don't have the time currently sorry.
Holy fuck boys, Doug Ford just got elected Premier of Ontario :/It’s ya boi
Holy fuck boys, Doug Ford just got elected Premier of Ontario :/It’s ya boi
>When the Muller investigations approval ratings are nearing 50% wtf America at least let it run it's course.That's exactly what a witch-hunter would say.
5 people have already pleaded guilty on several accounts it's not a witch hunt!
>When the Mueller investigations approval ratings are nearing 50% wtf America at least let it run it's course.And yet, we're still waiting for charges to be laid on anyone remotely close to Trump (apart from Manafort, which was financial crimes - unrelated to Mueller's scope) and there seems to be little evidence that anything the investigation has produced in relation to the possibility of collusion isn't based off of the Steele dossier, which may not even stand in court.
5 people have already pleaded guilty on several accounts it's not a witch hunt!
5 people have already pleaded guilty on several accounts it's not a witch hunt!is technically correct, but only correct in the sense that it's a mildly productive investigation. Since Trump has been assured privately that he isn't under investigation, and no evidence or charges brought towards him or his family, it seems like the focus on him as the epicenter of collusion reeks of political motives. Republicans grow weary of the investigation not because they believe he's close to a breakthrough, but because most likely it's going to drag on for years more with no important charges laid to the Trump family.
Is it that hard to believe Republicans want Trump gone?
The only reason he isn't out yet is because at the moment it causes more damage than it creates oppertunities if Trump would be put aside.
Tommy Robinson has been transferred to a maximum security prison where 73% of the inmates is Muslim, this man is bound to die in there.He broke the law and went to prison. Big deal ::)
UK Court LUL
Politically motivated? Again he was appointed by a Republican, several Republicans even applauded the choice of Mueller.If it’s so clear that close Trump surrogates colluded, Mueller would have brought or recommended charges against them already. He hasn’t, so either
Also ousting Trump isn't in Muellers job descprition his job descrption includes rooting out Russian interferance in the US election which he have been doing how long it takes is irrelevant & if there's been any links between Russia and the Trump campaign which there clearly has been since Trumps son even confirmed having met Russians in Trump tower.
Tommy Robinson has been transferred to a maximum security prison where 73% of the inmates is Muslim, this man is bound to die in there.
UK Court LUL
Jesus Christ the man was sent to prison because he broke the law. It’s not that hard to figure out. Stop acting as if some great injustice has been done against him.That's what I say about everyone that went to gulag in Soviet Russia.
You clearly don’t know what’s gone on. He was on a suspended sentence for contempt of court and proceeded to commit the same crime again. Hence the prison sentence.Jesus Christ the man was sent to prison because he broke the law. It’s not that hard to figure out. Stop acting as if some great injustice has been done against him.That's what I say about everyone that went to gulag in Soviet Russia.
@Council: Looks as if I spoke a little soon. My bad.He should burn himself alive on court, perfect martyr.Tommy Robinson has been transferred to a maximum security prison where 73% of the inmates is Muslim, this man is bound to die in there.
UK Court LUL
Yeah, Tommy's death is pretty much a certainty at this point (according to a contact of his lawyer, he's already been attacked pre-transfer after being left in a room unsupervised with several Muslim inmates).
However, unlike Kevin Crehan (the man who was murdered in his cell after being convicted for throwing bacon at a mosque), Tommy most likely cannot simply be quietly "snuffed out" by our elite leftist judges. Tommy's impending death will make him a sort of martyr in the eyes of many I suspect, offering some much needed rejuvenation to his movement.
Yeah you're right that sort of scum is right in line with all the rapists, murderers and god knows whats in there!You clearly don’t know what’s gone on. He was on a suspended sentence for contempt of court and proceeded to commit the same crime again. Hence the prison sentence.Jesus Christ the man was sent to prison because he broke the law. It’s not that hard to figure out. Stop acting as if some great injustice has been done against him.That's what I say about everyone that went to gulag in Soviet Russia.
Yes, he deserves a sentence, no doubt.It doesn’t matter if he’s encouraging them or not, those are the kind of people who support his organisation. Hooligans and bigots who’ll take any opportunity to cause trouble.
I don't really know much on the guy but I highly doubt he's encouraging them to assault police officers and do Hitler salutes. Especially considering he's pro-israel.
No. I doesn't matter what kind of people support him, it matters what he does.Yes, he deserves a sentence, no doubt.It doesn’t matter if he’s encouraging them or not, those are the kind of people who support his organisation. Hooligans and bigots who’ll take any opportunity to cause trouble.
I don't really know much on the guy but I highly doubt he's encouraging them to assault police officers and do Hitler salutes. Especially considering he's pro-israel.
Jesus Christ the man was sent to prison because he broke the law. It’s not that hard to figure out. Stop acting as if some great injustice has been done against him.
There’s pictures circulating of Tommy Robinson supporters attacking police officers and doing Nazi salutes. That shows the kind of people that he represents. I don’t know about you but I’d rather my Great Grandad didn’t fight all those years ago only for big Dave from London to prance about being a bigot.
You mean like when he breaks the law?So he broke a law and now he is guilty of nazi salutes and hooliganism. Good one.
Didn’t say that. But those are the kind of people that he associates with.You mean like when he breaks the law?So he broke a law and now he is guilty of nazi salutes and hooliganism. Good one.
So if I go to Vatican with facist symbols and scream support for Pope, Pope is now associated with facism. Good logic.Didn’t say that. But those are the kind of people that he associates with.You mean like when he breaks the law?So he broke a law and now he is guilty of nazi salutes and hooliganism. Good one.
No because the pope isn’t the same organisation. The EDL were marching in London which is Tommy Robinson’s. The point that I’m making is that it’s ironic for islamaphobes to claim that a smallWhich he isnt member of since 2014 because the group was full of extremists.
Minority of extremist Muslims represent over a billion people but claim that these few don’t represent them. It’s hypocritical and shows just how bigoted they are.
He was still the founder and his views haven’t changed since then. My point still stands.No because the pope isn’t the same organisation. The EDL were marching in London which is Tommy Robinson’s. The point that I’m making is that it’s ironic for islamaphobes to claim that a smallWhich he isnt member of since 2014 because the group was full of extremists.
Minority of extremist Muslims represent over a billion people but claim that these few don’t represent them. It’s hypocritical and shows just how bigoted they are.
we are having a disscussion about this right now. come to my teamspeak. if you dont know it poke me on 15thyr for the ip adress. Im not having u think he deserves to be in prison and deserves to be in this situation so man the fuck up and talk to me.He was still the founder and his views haven’t changed since then. My point still stands.No because the pope isn’t the same organisation. The EDL were marching in London which is Tommy Robinson’s. The point that I’m making is that it’s ironic for islamaphobes to claim that a smallWhich he isnt member of since 2014 because the group was full of extremists.
Minority of extremist Muslims represent over a billion people but claim that these few don’t represent them. It’s hypocritical and shows just how bigoted they are.
No it doesn't. He literally left the organisation because he didn't share views with most of the members. And those members were joined in when he was imprison so he has nothing to do with them.He was still the founder and his views haven’t changed since then. My point still stands.No because the pope isn’t the same organisation. The EDL were marching in London which is Tommy Robinson’s. The point that I’m making is that it’s ironic for islamaphobes to claim that a smallWhich he isnt member of since 2014 because the group was full of extremists.
Minority of extremist Muslims represent over a billion people but claim that these few don’t represent them. It’s hypocritical and shows just how bigoted they are.
No because the pope isn’t the same organisation. The EDL were marching in London which is Tommy Robinson’s. The point that I’m making is that it’s ironic for islamaphobes to claim that a small
Minority of extremist Muslims represent over a billion people but claim that these few don’t represent them. It’s hypocritical and shows just how bigoted they are.
After a 1hr 15minute conversation with Toffee i can confirm he has not watched the liverstream tommy robinson did to see if he released any new information, i can also confirm he was not aware of several news outlets reporting on the charges, names and faces of the alleged and i can also confirm he based his general understanding on what had happened on whaqt someone else has said in something they had written. He is now going off to watch videos himself to make a clarified informed opinion and he will also no longer be spouting absolute bullshit without looking at all the information available. We resume our debate tonight or tommorow when he decides to take his time and look and think for himself instead of being a leftist puppet. k thxs baeYou clearly don’t know what’s gone on. He was on a suspended sentence for contempt of court and proceeded to commit the same crime again. Hence the prison sentence.Jesus Christ the man was sent to prison because he broke the law. It’s not that hard to figure out. Stop acting as if some great injustice has been done against him.That's what I say about everyone that went to gulag in Soviet Russia.
What a biased post. The only thing I didn't know was the time in which the journalism ban was put in place. You actually agreed with me that Tommy Robinson had broken the law and should be in prison for it. If the ban was appropriate or not is irrelevant because Tommy Robinson still chose to disregard the authority of a court which is in breach of his suspended sentence. It may or may not have been new information but that doesn't matter when he still wilfully defied a court order.After a 1hr 15minute conversation with Toffee i can confirm he has not watched the liverstream tommy robinson did to see if he released any new information, i can also confirm he was not aware of several news outlets reporting on the charges, names and faces of the alleged and i can also confirm he based his general understanding on what had happened on whaqt someone else has said in something they had written. He is now going off to watch videos himself to make a clarified informed opinion and he will also no longer be spouting absolute bullshit without looking at all the information available. We resume our debate tonight or tommorow when he decides to take his time and look and think for himself instead of being a leftist puppet. k thxs baeYou clearly don’t know what’s gone on. He was on a suspended sentence for contempt of court and proceeded to commit the same crime again. Hence the prison sentence.Jesus Christ the man was sent to prison because he broke the law. It’s not that hard to figure out. Stop acting as if some great injustice has been done against him.That's what I say about everyone that went to gulag in Soviet Russia.
"You actually agreed with me that Tommy Robinson had broken the law and should be in prison for it" I agreed he breached the Reporting ban on the case but we both agreed that such a thing should not be in place and even if it was it should be to hide specific details, not the names charges and faces which was already released on the links i showed u.What a biased post. The only thing I didn't know was the time in which the journalism ban was put in place. You actually agreed with me that Tommy Robinson had broken the law and should be in prison for it. If the ban was appropriate or not is irrelevant because Tommy Robinson still chose to disregard the authority of a court which is in breach of his suspended sentence. It may or may not have been new information but that doesn't matter when he still wilfully defied a court order.After a 1hr 15minute conversation with Toffee i can confirm he has not watched the liverstream tommy robinson did to see if he released any new information, i can also confirm he was not aware of several news outlets reporting on the charges, names and faces of the alleged and i can also confirm he based his general understanding on what had happened on whaqt someone else has said in something they had written. He is now going off to watch videos himself to make a clarified informed opinion and he will also no longer be spouting absolute bullshit without looking at all the information available. We resume our debate tonight or tommorow when he decides to take his time and look and think for himself instead of being a leftist puppet. k thxs baeYou clearly don’t know what’s gone on. He was on a suspended sentence for contempt of court and proceeded to commit the same crime again. Hence the prison sentence.Jesus Christ the man was sent to prison because he broke the law. It’s not that hard to figure out. Stop acting as if some great injustice has been done against him.That's what I say about everyone that went to gulag in Soviet Russia.
Also I've watched that Ben Shapiro video before. I've never denied that Islam needs reform with regards to certain areas such as it's treatment of women. However, labelling them all as evil is a bit far. Christianity also needs reform with it's treatment of the gay population etc. The telling thing about that video is that when he begins talking about Western populations the statistics are either much lower or he changed the question which was asked to traditionally Islamic countries. 78% of people wanting cartoonists prosecuted doesn't mean they support terrorists or want the collapse of Western culture, does it? The fact that these percentages are lower could suggest that the issue isn't inherently imbedded into Islam but in the societies of certain countries themselves. These lower numbers also imply that it is possible and common for Muslims to become perfectly suited to Western society.
It's way too easy to tarnish people with the same brush. For example it would be wrong to call all right wing followers facists or all left wingers communists. It would be wrong to say that all Christians hate gay people and it's wrong to suggest that Islam is an issue in it's entirety rather than a naturally peaceful religion in which some people exploit, as many do with a number of relgions and have done for thousands of years.
Fucking hell use some paragraphs for the love of god. I agreed that a complete reporting ban should not be in place but that details should be withheld for the sake of a fair trial without outside influence."You say that you believe Islam is peaceful here but on the you said Islam is “barbaric”." Sorry ill specify for you, it is generally peaceful but it has parts which are barbaric and yes you can say that for every other religion but do the other religion go round bombing eachother and killing gays in the 21st Century.
You say that you believe Islam is peaceful here but on the you said Islam is “barbaric”.
You clearly don’t understand what you’re on about because the reporting ban breach IS contempt of court because he defied a court order.
And they do “mingle” I’ve spoken to many peaceful Muslims.
Crimes have been committed by Christians against gay people, and some have reformed and some haven’t. You love to ignore this fact though because it doesn’t fit the idea that Islam is harbouring all the evil that you seem to have.
The reason I stuttered in our conversation was because you can’t discuss anything without interrupting every five seconds causing me to lose my train of thought constantly.
I don’t know about you Voluble but I’ve left my hometown before.
I’m not going to continue to go back and forth with you over the same points since you clearly have little to no understanding of why the law was broken and the reporting ban which did not violate free speech. I cannot continue to explain this to you as I already have a number of times. I agreed with you that Tommy Robinson should not have been placed in a high security prison in a wing that puts him at serious physical risk, but that’s irrelevant to my original point - he was guilty and has been punished accordingly. Suck it up.
This is the last time I’m going to be posting on the topic or speaking to you voluble. You can’t grasp the basic facts about how law works. I don’t claim to be an expert but this is some basic shit that you can find on google. You even said that the media should be able to broadcast the verdict during the trial(?). I can’t believe I’ve wasted half my day for that.
So you agree with me, the reporting ban was there as is the judges right. No free speech was taken, the integrity of the trial was maintained. I don’t understand what football teams have to do with this but if you really want to bring that up, I used to have a season ticket before I ran out of money. And you support a championship club.Im already in England mongo, also to clarify I agree the reporting ban was something decided by the judge but i disagree about the free spech aspect because they should have the freedom to report on what is going on in communities around our country and the affect of muslim grooming gangs. They should be able to report whenever they want and at whatever point during the proceedings along as they release no new information. Journalists should not be limited on when and what they can report on. Then directly after when tommy was arrested, the judge put a reporting ban on tommys court case which to me, sounds like abusing his powers. P.S. Ill do a fund.me for you, £1 a week so you can buy a discounted water bottle and noodles at your local aldi.
Although I suppose if you go and ask Hercules for another go at the playoff final then he’ll let you.
The reporting ban was to prevent the trial being affected in any way. Tommy Robinson was live streaming to hundreds of thousands of people, getting in the faces of the defendents and goading them about "prison bags" and that was just the first 3 minutes. If somebody on a high profile criminal case (which these kind of bans are applied to) saw that it could affect the decision making process and create a bias amongst either a jury or a judge. That's why it's there, not to try and block out the free speech of anyone. Once the trial is over the ban would be lifted and Tommy would have been free to discuss the entire case in it's entirety and say whatever he wanted.So you agree with me, the reporting ban was there as is the judges right. No free speech was taken, the integrity of the trial was maintained. I don’t understand what football teams have to do with this but if you really want to bring that up, I used to have a season ticket before I ran out of money. And you support a championship club.Im already in England mongo, also to clarify I agree the reporting ban was something decided by the judge but i disagree about the free spech aspect because they should have the freedom to report on what is going on in communities around our country and the affect of muslim grooming gangs. They should be able to report whenever they want and at whatever point during the proceedings along as they release no new information. Journalists should not be limited on when and what they can report on. Then directly after when tommy was arrested, the judge put a reporting ban on tommys court case which to me, sounds like abusing his powers. P.S. Ill do a fund.me for you, £1 a week so you can buy a discounted water bottle and noodles at your local aldi.
Although I suppose if you go and ask Hercules for another go at the playoff final then he’ll let you.
Correction, he was streaming to a few thousand people at best, but due to his arrest millions have seen it now to see what has happened to him. Also seeming you are confident that these bans are put onto high profile criminal cases, i need you to instantly tell me your sources and where you have seen this previously to use it in your response to me to jusitfy the judge using the reporting ban. Also in high profile criminal cases, i can say the opposite xD https://gyazo.com/0415e23bcb307cca8f0f338e0da3a6c1 https://gyazo.com/2048e5daef00911af1d4f0314aacbbd6 Here is one new and old example of high profile criminal cases not having reporting bans. So stop your bullshit about it being legit and it doesnt affect free speech and that having reporting causes biased amongst the jury or for the judge. So please enlighten me and show me these other high profile criminal cases the ban has been applied to which you are refering to when you said " (which these kind of bans are applied to)".The reporting ban was to prevent the trial being affected in any way. Tommy Robinson was live streaming to hundreds of thousands of people, getting in the faces of the defendents and goading them about "prison bags" and that was just the first 3 minutes. If somebody on a high profile criminal case (which these kind of bans are applied to) saw that it could affect the decision making process and create a bias amongst either a jury or a judge. That's why it's there, not to try and block out the free speech of anyone. Once the trial is over the ban would be lifted and Tommy would have been free to discuss the entire case in it's entirety and say whatever he wanted.So you agree with me, the reporting ban was there as is the judges right. No free speech was taken, the integrity of the trial was maintained. I don’t understand what football teams have to do with this but if you really want to bring that up, I used to have a season ticket before I ran out of money. And you support a championship club.Im already in England mongo, also to clarify I agree the reporting ban was something decided by the judge but i disagree about the free spech aspect because they should have the freedom to report on what is going on in communities around our country and the affect of muslim grooming gangs. They should be able to report whenever they want and at whatever point during the proceedings along as they release no new information. Journalists should not be limited on when and what they can report on. Then directly after when tommy was arrested, the judge put a reporting ban on tommys court case which to me, sounds like abusing his powers. P.S. Ill do a fund.me for you, £1 a week so you can buy a discounted water bottle and noodles at your local aldi.
Although I suppose if you go and ask Hercules for another go at the playoff final then he’ll let you.
A go fund me would help considering you must have a lot of disposable income. I heard ticket prices are a lot cheaper in the lower leagues.
Actually I was taking a long time because I have other things to do than sit here refreshing 24/7 like you. The judiciary says this "The court may hear trials in private in exceptional circumstances where doing so is necessary to prevent the administration of justice from being frustrated or rendered impractical".Correction, he was streaming to a few thousand people at best, but due to his arrest millions have seen it now to see what has happened to him. Also seeming you are confident that these bans are put onto high profile criminal cases, i need you to instantly tell me your sources and where you have seen this previously to use it in your response to me to jusitfy the judge using the reporting ban. Also in high profile criminal cases, i can say the opposite xD https://gyazo.com/0415e23bcb307cca8f0f338e0da3a6c1 https://gyazo.com/2048e5daef00911af1d4f0314aacbbd6 Here is one new and old example of high profile criminal cases not having reporting bans. So stop your bullshit about it being legit and it doesnt affect free speech and that having reporting causes biased amongst the jury or for the judge. So please enlighten me and show me these other high profile criminal cases the ban has been applied to which you are refering to when you said " (which these kind of bans are applied to)".The reporting ban was to prevent the trial being affected in any way. Tommy Robinson was live streaming to hundreds of thousands of people, getting in the faces of the defendents and goading them about "prison bags" and that was just the first 3 minutes. If somebody on a high profile criminal case (which these kind of bans are applied to) saw that it could affect the decision making process and create a bias amongst either a jury or a judge. That's why it's there, not to try and block out the free speech of anyone. Once the trial is over the ban would be lifted and Tommy would have been free to discuss the entire case in it's entirety and say whatever he wanted.So you agree with me, the reporting ban was there as is the judges right. No free speech was taken, the integrity of the trial was maintained. I don’t understand what football teams have to do with this but if you really want to bring that up, I used to have a season ticket before I ran out of money. And you support a championship club.Im already in England mongo, also to clarify I agree the reporting ban was something decided by the judge but i disagree about the free spech aspect because they should have the freedom to report on what is going on in communities around our country and the affect of muslim grooming gangs. They should be able to report whenever they want and at whatever point during the proceedings along as they release no new information. Journalists should not be limited on when and what they can report on. Then directly after when tommy was arrested, the judge put a reporting ban on tommys court case which to me, sounds like abusing his powers. P.S. Ill do a fund.me for you, £1 a week so you can buy a discounted water bottle and noodles at your local aldi.
Although I suppose if you go and ask Hercules for another go at the playoff final then he’ll let you.
A go fund me would help considering you must have a lot of disposable income. I heard ticket prices are a lot cheaper in the lower leagues.
Yea you defo spent that whole time looking for a source xD Also it says trials in private in exceptional circumstances? This doesnt class as a exceptional circumstance in the sense of the outcome being affected by reporters reporting on common knowledge? Technically it is applicable but to me atleast, it doesn't qualify for a reporting ban as loads of people get done for grooming kids all the time, this is one of many scandals and this is the only one with a reporting ban as far as im aware. Now i am calling it quits here as we have progressed no where all day as you have a lack of understanding of common sense and the meaning of free speech and i find it highly annoying when you cant formulate any other point but the fact "he broke the law". Ye duh he did but its the stupidity of the law and how and why it was applied and under what conditions it was applied for that has pissed ppl off. So yeah you can sit there thinking the law is perfect, not like laws change all the time or anything. Ok goodnight and you wont get another response of me so dont bother typing xoxoxo Good night Leftist puppet xoxoxActually I was taking a long time because I have other things to do than sit here refreshing 24/7 like you. The judiciary says this "The court may hear trials in private in exceptional circumstances where doing so is necessary to prevent the administration of justice from being frustrated or rendered impractical".Correction, he was streaming to a few thousand people at best, but due to his arrest millions have seen it now to see what has happened to him. Also seeming you are confident that these bans are put onto high profile criminal cases, i need you to instantly tell me your sources and where you have seen this previously to use it in your response to me to jusitfy the judge using the reporting ban. Also in high profile criminal cases, i can say the opposite xD https://gyazo.com/0415e23bcb307cca8f0f338e0da3a6c1 https://gyazo.com/2048e5daef00911af1d4f0314aacbbd6 Here is one new and old example of high profile criminal cases not having reporting bans. So stop your bullshit about it being legit and it doesnt affect free speech and that having reporting causes biased amongst the jury or for the judge. So please enlighten me and show me these other high profile criminal cases the ban has been applied to which you are refering to when you said " (which these kind of bans are applied to)".The reporting ban was to prevent the trial being affected in any way. Tommy Robinson was live streaming to hundreds of thousands of people, getting in the faces of the defendents and goading them about "prison bags" and that was just the first 3 minutes. If somebody on a high profile criminal case (which these kind of bans are applied to) saw that it could affect the decision making process and create a bias amongst either a jury or a judge. That's why it's there, not to try and block out the free speech of anyone. Once the trial is over the ban would be lifted and Tommy would have been free to discuss the entire case in it's entirety and say whatever he wanted.So you agree with me, the reporting ban was there as is the judges right. No free speech was taken, the integrity of the trial was maintained. I don’t understand what football teams have to do with this but if you really want to bring that up, I used to have a season ticket before I ran out of money. And you support a championship club.Im already in England mongo, also to clarify I agree the reporting ban was something decided by the judge but i disagree about the free spech aspect because they should have the freedom to report on what is going on in communities around our country and the affect of muslim grooming gangs. They should be able to report whenever they want and at whatever point during the proceedings along as they release no new information. Journalists should not be limited on when and what they can report on. Then directly after when tommy was arrested, the judge put a reporting ban on tommys court case which to me, sounds like abusing his powers. P.S. Ill do a fund.me for you, £1 a week so you can buy a discounted water bottle and noodles at your local aldi.
Although I suppose if you go and ask Hercules for another go at the playoff final then he’ll let you.
A go fund me would help considering you must have a lot of disposable income. I heard ticket prices are a lot cheaper in the lower leagues.
https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/reporting-restrictions-guide-may-2016-2.pdf
There is your quote, source and reasoning. And Aston Villa are still fucking shite.
South Africa seems to be doing good1. Colonise South Africa.
South Africa seems to be doing good1. Colonise South Africa.
2. Live there for few houndred years.
3. Get expelled from South Africa by 'native' population.
4. Convert to Judaism.
5. Claim land in Palestine.
6. Get land in Palestine.
That pretty much 17th century mentality to think someone has to right to just take your land because he won a war. I don't think you would consider France taking half of England because French ruled it for ages a good deal.South Africa seems to be doing good1. Colonise South Africa.
2. Live there for few houndred years.
3. Get expelled from South Africa by 'native' population.
4. Convert to Judaism.
5. Claim land in Palestine.
6. Get land in Palestine.
When you lose a war, you usually also lose some of your land. Looks like the Arabs should have accepted the 1948 Partition Plan!
That pretty much 17th century mentality to think someone has to right to just take your land because he won a war. I don't think you would consider France taking half of England because French ruled it for ages a good deal.
True, they had a reasonable offer on the table and walked away. Israel is clearly behaving badly though and the defeat in 1948 doesn't justify the continuing encroachment of Arab (not Palestinian, there's no such thing) land 70 years later.
I think it's a very complicated situation with bad things happening on both sides. The victims are innocent people who get caught in the middle.or get used as meatshields
I think it's a very complicated situation with bad things happening on both sides. The victims are innocent people who get caught in the middle.or get used as meatshields
or get paid to stand in the line of fire while being filmed
I am not saying Israelis should leave Im just saying it should happen in the first place. Before 20th century Arabs had nothing to do with jews (they had some but thats about it), after Israel was given land they started to try and exterminate them, just like Israeli Arabs, only they are better at it. I dont know what France and England being at war has to do with anything.That pretty much 17th century mentality to think someone has to right to just take your land because he won a war. I don't think you would consider France taking half of England because French ruled it for ages a good deal.
I wouldn't consider it because there isn't an ongoing war between England and France as far as I'm aware of. The Arabs lost their land in a conflict they willingly took part in; just how delusional are you to think the Israelis should now withdraw from said land and gift it to a populace that has attempted to exterminate them on numerous occasions.True, they had a reasonable offer on the table and walked away. Israel is clearly behaving badly though and the defeat in 1948 doesn't justify the continuing encroachment of Arab (not Palestinian, there's no such thing) land 70 years later.
Absolutely, the IDF are far from saints. I'm simply opposed to the all too common accusation that the Jews are the sole instigators of this never-ending conflict.
True, they had a reasonable offer on the table and walked away. Israel is clearly behaving badly though and the defeat in 1948 doesn't justify the continuing encroachment of Arab (not Palestinian, there's no such thing) land 70 years later.
Absolutely, the IDF are far from saints. I'm simply opposed to the all too common accusation that the Jews are the sole instigators of this never-ending conflict.
True, they had a reasonable offer on the table and walked away. Israel is clearly behaving badly though and the defeat in 1948 doesn't justify the continuing encroachment of Arab (not Palestinian, there's no such thing) land 70 years later.
Before 20th century Arabs had nothing to do with jews (they had some but thats about it)
What do you mean? The region their in was called Palestine since before the State of Palestine was founded.
Not before it was Judea, Samaria and Galilee
Before 20th century Arabs had nothing to do with jews (they had some but thats about it)What do you mean? The region their in was called Palestine since before the State of Palestine was founded.
This thread makes me lose the will to live sometimes
True, they had a reasonable offer on the table and walked away. Israel is clearly behaving badly though and the defeat in 1948 doesn't justify the continuing encroachment of Arab (not Palestinian, there's no such thing) land 70 years later.
What do you mean? The region their in was called Palestine since before the State of Palestine was founded.
True, they had a reasonable offer on the table and walked away. Israel is clearly behaving badly though and the defeat in 1948 doesn't justify the continuing encroachment of Arab (not Palestinian, there's no such thing) land 70 years later.
What do you mean? The region their in was called Palestine since before the State of Palestine was founded.
I know, it's not a comment on that. Some people try and claim Palestinians are a distinct group, whether it be along cultural or ethnic lines. They're not. They're simply Arabs who were on the "wrong" side of an artificial border in the post-Ottoman Middle East.
Actually Jews had been in the Middle East for a long time. Even Jesus was born in the Middle East.You realise there was this thing called second Jewish rebellion after which Romans demolished Jerusalem, enslaved all jews and sold them all over their empire, and created pagan cities in Judea? Since then they have been spread all over the world. They were in Europe, Arabic world, Ethiopia... I don't know how much the arabs have been oppressing them, my guess would be much less than Europe. But that was because they were heatens and it was pretty normal for middle ages to not accept other religions.
You can refere to them as Palestinian as they live in Palestine lands. But I dont know how different are they from Jordanian, Egyptian arabs...True, they had a reasonable offer on the table and walked away. Israel is clearly behaving badly though and the defeat in 1948 doesn't justify the continuing encroachment of Arab (not Palestinian, there's no such thing) land 70 years later.
What do you mean? The region their in was called Palestine since before the State of Palestine was founded.
I know, it's not a comment on that. Some people try and claim Palestinians are a distinct group, whether it be along cultural or ethnic lines. They're not. They're simply Arabs who were on the "wrong" side of an artificial border in the post-Ottoman Middle East.
Thanks for that little history lesson but you said Jews had nothing to do with the Arabs before the 20th century. You’ve literally countered your own point.Actually Jews had been in the Middle East for a long time. Even Jesus was born in the Middle East.You realise there was this thing called second Jewish rebellion after which Romans demolished Jerusalem, enslaved all jews and sold them all over their empire, and created pagan cities in Judea? Since then they have been spread all over the world. They were in Europe, Arabic world, Ethiopia... I don't know how much the arabs have been oppressing them, my guess would be much less than Europe. But that was because they were heatens and it was pretty normal for middle ages to not accept other religions.
(they had some but thats about it)'Jews under Islamic rule were given the status of dhimmi, along with certain other pre-Islamic religious groups.[1] Though second-class citizens, these non-Muslim groups were nevertheless accorded certain rights and protections as "people of the book". During waves of persecution in Medieval Europe, many Jews found refuge in Muslim lands.[2] For instance, Jews expelled from the Iberian Peninsula were invited to settle in various parts of the Ottoman Empire, where they would often form a prosperous model minority of merchants acting as intermediaries for their Muslim rulers'
I wouldn’t describe thousands of years of history as “some”Islam is not even 2000 years old so you cant even use a plural, if we are having nitpicking contest. They are 'some' compared to entire population of arabic world. And even if they weren't just 'some' jews there it doesn't matters for my point which is they were treated quite well and that arabs hating jews started in 20th century.
Arabs and Islam aren’t synonymousThey are in context we are talking about as most of Arabs follow islam. Not that it matters since arabs didn't live in middle east for 2000 years as well.
In context Arabs are Arabs and have always been Arabs. They’ve been around for thousands of years.Arabs and Islam aren’t synonymousThey are in context we are talking about as most of Arabs follow islam. Not that it matters since arabs didn't live in middle east for 2000 years as well.
Now stop being a baby and bring me some real arguments.
But they were not present elsewhere than in Arabia untill 7th century. And they changed since they embraced islam. It is like considering anceint greeks being same as modern greeks or Italians being same as Romans.In context Arabs are Arabs and have always been Arabs. They’ve been around for thousands of years.Arabs and Islam aren’t synonymousThey are in context we are talking about as most of Arabs follow islam. Not that it matters since arabs didn't live in middle east for 2000 years as well.
Now stop being a baby and bring me some real arguments.
Arabs have less claim to the land of Israel than the Jews, that's just a fact.Now yes. Not in 1948.
It just baffles me how they didn’t just accept the partition agreement with the UNJust accept that half of England is ceded to Italy. After all Roman Empire had that land and Romans lived there. Or maybe to give Yorkshire to Danes, their ancestors lived there. Or maybe France they ruled England for centuries all fancy words in your language are basically French. Perhaps entire England should be given back to Celts living in Scotland and Ireland?
Ethnically ancient Greeks and modern Greeks are the same....they’re all still Greek.No they are not. Ethnicity, from the Greek word εθνος, is "a social group that shares a common and distinctive culture, religion, language". They don't speak the same language, dont have same religion... Ethnicity is not genetics. They have been mixing with other peoples so they cant be same. But even if we say they are genetically same what does that have to do with anything, is this middle ages that we give such importance to blood? It is like im 10% black by DNA I can say niㄱㄱa now.
Does everyone on the internet have degrees and masters in history and politics or what?Didn’t realise you needed a degree to talk about something
Yes. That's why it's called Arabia... I mean the Jewish are really 0-1 behind on the Arabs because of that, but I guess it sounded stupid to call it Jewopia.
Yeah that is true. But that doesn't change the fact that arab-israeli hate started with 20th century. And was caused by UK thinking they can just give land to whoever they want and not some arab intolerance.Does everyone on the internet have degrees and masters in history and politics or what?Didn’t realise you needed a degree to talk about something
And Mcpero, I don’t want to sidetrack what I was saying, but the point I’m trying to make is that the Jews and Arabs have been around each other for a long time. The Jews have obviously lived in the Middle East for thousands of years and the Arabs have too.
So kicking out people from their homeland and then bringing in foreigners and renaming the land they were settled to makes the claim of the people originally displaced from their land irrelevant? Ok.
So kicking out people from their homeland and then bringing in foreigners and renaming the land they were settled to makes the claim of the people originally displaced from their land irrelevant? Ok.You are talking about Palestinian Arabs getting kicked out here? Because description fits perfectly.
>Using the bible as a history bookBible is used source for claims that Hewbrews originate from Israel, which is higly unlikely their civilisation might start there but they were nomads like everyone else. And yes Bible is not the best history source but I am pretty sure Hewbrews did defeat and take land from other peoples living around them.
<insert military coup d'etat where 1 helicoptor and 10 enlisted men attack allowing Erdogan to suspend the entire constitution>>Using the bible as a history bookBible is used source for claims that Hewbrews originate from Israel, which is higly unlikely their civilisation might start there but they were nomads like everyone else. And yes Bible is not the best history source but I am pretty sure Hewbrews did defeat and take land from other peoples living around them.
Pretty disappointed that this is all you had to say about my post, expected more from you.
Anyways what happens if Erdogan doesn't win the elections?
"Paris had also sought to ease Berlin’s fears about any fiscal “transfers” from economically strong countries to weaker ones, advocating a system whereby countries could suspend their national contributions if they needed to use the fund."Unfortunately Germany is still as evil in 2018 as she was in 1914 and 1939...why do small European countries constantly have to suffer for the German national interest?
Imagine comparing Germany in 2018 to literal Nazis.
It might be wrong but comparing them to literally murdering tens of millions of people is insane
I can't go anywhere on social media without seeing a video of the kids in cages at the southern border of the U.S.They’re in cages and you think that’s okay?
TRUMP IS LITERALLY HITLER AND THESE CAMPS ARE LITERALLY JUST LIKE AUSCHWITZ, LIKE LOOK AT THIS AERIAL PHOTO TO PROVE MY POINT AND IGNORE THAT THESE KIDS HAVE FOOD, WATER, A/C AND SCHOOL.
I don't like them being in cages but their parents set them up for failure by coming here illegally. Breaking the law and then having a child doesn't mean you should just be exempt from breaking the law. A country without laws or borders is no country at all.I can't go anywhere on social media without seeing a video of the kids in cages at the southern border of the U.S.They’re in cages and you think that’s okay?
TRUMP IS LITERALLY HITLER AND THESE CAMPS ARE LITERALLY JUST LIKE AUSCHWITZ, LIKE LOOK AT THIS AERIAL PHOTO TO PROVE MY POINT AND IGNORE THAT THESE KIDS HAVE FOOD, WATER, A/C AND SCHOOL.
Nobody says it should but that doesn’t mean you should be allowed to take the child and lock them up. You can deal with illegal immigrants without violating their human rights. The UN even says that the US should stop.I don't like them being in cages but their parents set them up for failure by coming here illegally. Breaking the law and then having a child doesn't mean you should just be exempt from breaking the law. A country without laws or borders is no country at all.I can't go anywhere on social media without seeing a video of the kids in cages at the southern border of the U.S.They’re in cages and you think that’s okay?
TRUMP IS LITERALLY HITLER AND THESE CAMPS ARE LITERALLY JUST LIKE AUSCHWITZ, LIKE LOOK AT THIS AERIAL PHOTO TO PROVE MY POINT AND IGNORE THAT THESE KIDS HAVE FOOD, WATER, A/C AND SCHOOL.
You've been Toffee'd, Steven. Best give up while you still have some brain cells left
Obviously I agree that it’s poor for Germany to prioritise themselves over other European states, but to compare that to Nazism is far fetched at best and stupid at worst. Being a dick isn’t the same as invading countries and slaughtering millions.
You've been Toffee'd, Steven. Best give up while you still have some brain cells leftFunny how you say that but have nothing against my point. You actually think this is comparable to Nazism is insane. You could say that he’s talking about Imperialism but Germany isn’t trying to create an empire. The mentality in Germany in 1939 was one of racism and global domination. It’s a poor comparison which was the only point I was making (I actually agree that they’re kind of being arseholes based on the point you’ve made) but Being selfish is a different beast than starting a god damn world war. Some Brits love to criticise Germany for continually taking with contribution but that’s what the UK has been moaning about for a while.
You've been Toffee'd, Steven. Best give up while you still have some brain cells leftYou could say that he’s talking about Imperialism but Germany isn’t trying to create an empire
Of course the EU will be dominated by the larger nations. That’s just the nature of the organisation. In principle each member has their own vote but bigger countries have more sway. That doesn’t mean Germany is intending to turn the Europe into the fourth reich or something. Each member state is going to prioritise their own interests above others. France does it, Germany does it, the UK does it. It may be wrong but that’s just how it is. Politicians all talk about cooperation but they’re all out for personal gain no matter which country they’re from.You've been Toffee'd, Steven. Best give up while you still have some brain cells leftYou could say that he’s talking about Imperialism but Germany isn’t trying to create an empire
The major feature of an empire is the ability to extract resources from the periphery to the metropole.
The EU is of course German dominated; it has been for some time and will be for the foreseeable future. As to whether the EU has become a kind of German imperial project that's a whole different subject. What I would say is that the 'Mitteleuropa' and 'limited sovereignty' plans adopted by the German High Command during WWI are interesting reading. I'm not alleging some kind of grand conspiracy, it's basically just pure luck that Germany has got to where it is.
Because it's the only way the incompetent, bloated, and corrupt union steel jobs can hope to compete globally. You do it to get those votes. Democracy isn't enacting sound policy, it's enacting whatever placates the mob to where they reelect you.I mean I know its for the votes, but economically speaking it just a loss.
I personally favour CANZUK over the EU and would like to see a union of Anglopshere states (minus the USA, which wouldn't want to join anyway) in my lifetime. There's real momentum for it too which is quite exciting and the NZ-AUS relationship provides a good template.But natural geography means the EU will always be a large trading partner. In the absence of a deal the tariffs could hit the economy real hard.
At the very least CANZUK should work towards completing defence integration which is already at quite an advanced stage.
Because it's the only way the incompetent, bloated, and corrupt union steel jobs can hope to compete globally. You do it to get those votes. Democracy isn't enacting sound policy, it's enacting whatever placates the mob to where they reelect you.I mean I know its for the votes, but economically speaking it just a loss.
British people accusing a country of imperialist policies. Ha.That was part of the point I was trying to make but sadly everyone here has a habit of over reaction.
British people accusing a country of imperialist policies. Ha.Brtish imperialism in the past has nothing to do with german imperialism in present times. UK seems to be going more for old USA seclusion with brexit. So a nice 'humorous' remark but pretty invalid.
Not like the council cares about human rights anywaysBecause it's the only way the incompetent, bloated, and corrupt union steel jobs can hope to compete globally. You do it to get those votes. Democracy isn't enacting sound policy, it's enacting whatever placates the mob to where they reelect you.I mean I know its for the votes, but economically speaking it just a loss.
USA leaving UN hooman rights council. Nice. At least we wont have to watch that disgusting creature Nikki Haley.
If you’re referencing German imperialism in the 20th century then you can’t disregard someone talking about British imperialism.
British people accusing a country of imperialist policies. Ha.Brtish imperialism in the past has nothing to do with german imperialism in PRESENT times. UK seems to be going more for old USA seclusion with brexit. So a nice 'humorous' remark but pretty invalid.
Yeah and Steven, the person who was bringing up that mentioned 1914 and 1939....He was comparing Germany in 1871-1945 to present Germany and I never saw him claiming UK at the time wasn't imperialist, which it was just had different methods, UK had smaller army than Belgium prior to 1914, they achived domination through diplomacy mostly. So saying: 'stop complaining about german imperialism when your country (UK) was imperialist in 20th century' is pretty pointless.
Why are you bringing up random facts? Because they had a smaller army and achieved some parts of their empire through diplomacy it doesn’t make them imperialist? All duuring was doing was pointing out the irony.
Facts were pretty random though. But please pay more attention when you are reading.Yeah and Steven, the person who was bringing up that mentioned 1914 and 1939....He was comparing Germany in 1871-1945 to present Germany and I never saw him claiming UK at the time wasn't imperialist, which IT WAS just had different methods, UK had smaller army than Belgium prior to 1914, they achived domination through diplomacy mostly. So saying: 'stop complaining about german imperialism when your country (UK) was imperialist in 20th century' is pretty pointless.
You literally edited it.5 minutes before you replied yes. I think I added the last part. Or corrected a typo don't remember.
No you changed the bit which I was replying to, after I began typing myYou literally edited it.5 minutes before you replied yes. I think I added the last part. Or corrected a typo don't remember.
Funny how you say that but have nothing against my point. You actually think this is comparable to Nazism is insane. You could say that he’s talking about Imperialism but Germany isn’t trying to create an empire. The mentality in Germany in 1939 was one of racism and global domination. It’s a poor comparison which was the only point I was making (I actually agree that they’re kind of being arseholes based on the point you’ve made) but Being selfish is a different beast than starting a god damn world war. Some Brits love to criticise Germany for continually taking with contribution but that’s what the UK has been moaning about for a while.
And William you quoted that but didn’t say anything back to my point against you since you enjoy locking kids in cages and watching your country fall apart a little bit more every day.
Gordo and William struggle to have conversations outside of circle jerking so they resort chatting shite instead.
"You actually think this is comparable to Nazism is insane."
You could say that he’s talking about Imperialism but Germany isn’t trying to create an empire.
lol no.No you changed the bit which I was replying to, after I began typing myYou literally edited it.5 minutes before you replied yes. I think I added the last part. Or corrected a typo don't remember.
Reply...
The EU is very much controlled by Germany, which was always inevitable after the fall of the Berlin Wall. There's a reason why Cameron spent more time negotiating with Berlin than Brussels in the build up to the referendum, and why the Obama-Merkel relationship was so close. Brussels used to be run via the 'Franco-German motor', with Germany as the senior partner. For the best part of two decades however France has been in relative decline vs Germany and the latter now dictates EU policy.French goverment is pretty retarded, they are policing Africa and getting almost nothing out of it. Idk what they are doing with their country.
There are few countries on Earth that extract wealth from foreign populations via some form of political control. Germany is one of them.
Obviously I agree that it’s poor for Germany to prioritise themselves over other European states, but to compare that to Nazism is far fetched at best and stupid at worst. Being a dick isn’t the same as invading countries and slaughtering millions.
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/the-jihadi-training-camp-right-in-the-heart-of-london-a3249941.htmlCan't wait for EU internet law thing, when there will be no such news left on interent, disgusting fake news. Protecc me EU censorship.
Nothing to see here
Can't wait for EU internet law thing, when there will be no such news left on interent, disgusting fake news. Protecc me EU censorship.
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/the-jihadi-training-camp-right-in-the-heart-of-london-a3249941.html
Nothing to see here
And how will those jobs be replaced?Gender studies. Can employ anyone as professor there.
Because according to Toffee it's OK for the EU to ruin people financially, but not Brexit!What a stupid comment. Without a deal with the EU the economy is going to take a massive hit and people are going to lose jobs. Can you honestly say with the way things are going at the minute jay we’re all going to be better off after Brexit? There’s no deal on the table with the EU and no major trading partners have signed new trade deals with us.
Because according to Toffee it's OK for the EU to ruin people financially, but not Brexit!What a stupid comment. Without a deal with the EU the economy is going to take a massive hit and people are going to lose jobs. Can you honestly say with the way things are going at the minute jay we’re all going to be better off after Brexit? There’s no deal on the table with the EU and no major trading partners have signed new trade deals with us.
3 million jobs are directly linked to exports with the EU. They’re not all reliant on membership of course but the lives of a lot of people are going to be affected with more potential job losses. Even leaked government papers predict lower economic growth outside of the EEA.
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.uk.businessinsider.com/how-government-leaked-brexit-economics-paper-compares-to-other-forecasts-2018-1
I can't go anywhere on social media without seeing a video of the kids in cages at the southern border of the U.S.
TRUMP IS LITERALLY HITLER AND THESE CAMPS ARE LITERALLY JUST LIKE AUSCHWITZ, LIKE LOOK AT THIS AERIAL PHOTO TO PROVE MY POINT AND IGNORE THAT THESE KIDS HAVE FOOD, WATER, A/C AND SCHOOL.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1h7VGCnEh3YStill better turn of events than US occupation since 1945.
So Erdogan won...A shocker.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1h7VGCnEh3YStill better turn of events than US occupation since 1945.
What bait? I don't see any EU soldiers in Europe only US ones.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1h7VGCnEh3YStill better turn of events than US occupation since 1945.
Nice bait.
I'm always for militarism
https://edition.cnn.com/2018/06/28/europe/france-national-service-trnd/index.html (https://edition.cnn.com/2018/06/28/europe/france-national-service-trnd/index.html)
Don’t think anybody really thought he was actually liberal. It’s just he wasn’t as right leaning as Trump.I'm always for militarism
https://edition.cnn.com/2018/06/28/europe/france-national-service-trnd/index.html (https://edition.cnn.com/2018/06/28/europe/france-national-service-trnd/index.html)
Macron is bringing back national service? But I thought CNN, BBC et al said he was the anti-Trump liberal hero.
I'm always for militarism
https://edition.cnn.com/2018/06/28/europe/france-national-service-trnd/index.html (https://edition.cnn.com/2018/06/28/europe/france-national-service-trnd/index.html)
Macron is bringing back national service? But I thought CNN, BBC et al said he was the anti-Trump liberal hero.
Don’t think anybody really thought he was actually liberal. It’s just he wasn’t as right leaning as Trump.I'm always for militarism
https://edition.cnn.com/2018/06/28/europe/france-national-service-trnd/index.html (https://edition.cnn.com/2018/06/28/europe/france-national-service-trnd/index.html)
Macron is bringing back national service? But I thought CNN, BBC et al said he was the anti-Trump liberal hero.
Community service might be a more accurate description, and there's nothing anti-liberal in such a service, even if it is mandatory. That's just overly simplistic. By the same logic, the laws enforcing school education (what these kids would otherwise be doing) would also be anti-liberal.
In a way education is anti-anarcho-liberal, which is extreme liberalism but liberalism and conservativism are not necessarily about what their names apply. So I strongly agree militarism is not connected to conservativism or liberalism. But comparing education and military is pretty dumb. Since military is counter productive activity while education is very productive.I'm always for militarism
https://edition.cnn.com/2018/06/28/europe/france-national-service-trnd/index.html (https://edition.cnn.com/2018/06/28/europe/france-national-service-trnd/index.html)
Macron is bringing back national service? But I thought CNN, BBC et al said he was the anti-Trump liberal hero.
Community service might be a more accurate description, and there's nothing anti-liberal in such a service, even if it is mandatory. That's just overly simplistic. By the same logic, the laws enforcing school education (what these kids would otherwise be doing) would also be anti-liberal.
Military service can be useful for other things other than defence. Teaches discipline and hard work, although I personally feel forced service takes away persons freedoms.Like school doesn't do that? Military is waste of time for young people who are in best position to learn things and after that their IQ starts decreasing. It is expensive and makes for a shit army.
Social media will be the downfall of Western Civilization because it only allows radical beliefs to grow and fester into mainstream ideas. Rather then having a middle it's just pushing people to both fringes
Except it's not really community service so no that's not a more accurate description. They have to do one month in 'civic culture' (whatever that means) then 3-12 months in the military (albeit with opt-outs). It's watered down to be a bit less militaristic from what he initially wanted but the vast bulk of the programme is focused on military service. Sure people can opt out of that to volunteer for other stuff but it's still an 'opt out' rather than 'opt in' military programme.
Military service can be useful for other things other than defence. Teaches discipline and hard work, although I personally feel forced service takes away persons freedoms.Like school doesn't do that? Military is waste of time for young people who are in best position to learn things and after that their IQ starts decreasing. It is expensive and makes for a shit army.
Social Media certainly generates quite a unique issue in that it puts you into echo chambers of your own political views, essentially killing public political debate. I know a lot of people who are not used to being exposed to views different of their own.
Well what do you define as new? Since you mainly meet new people over the internet nowadays it certainly make the effect stronger then in prior years (I think).Social Media certainly generates quite a unique issue in that it puts you into echo chambers of your own political views, essentially killing public political debate. I know a lot of people who are not used to being exposed to views different of their own.
And you think that's a new situation? Or that we only now become aware of this?
Or that we only now become aware of this??
People have always gravitated towards those with similar views, that’s just human nature. You say social media kills public debate but if anything it enhances it.Enhances it? People just block you if they dont agree with you. You cant block someone in RL. How exactly does it enhance public debate?!
People who block you won’t debate you in real life because they don’t want the disagreement. There are thousands of discussions about politics on social media every day. Way more than in public because it’s much easier to talk to someone online from all around the world.People have always gravitated towards those with similar views, that’s just human nature. You say social media kills public debate but if anything it enhances it.Enhances it? People just block you if they dont agree with you. You cant block someone in RL. How exactly does it enhance public debate?!
Where? Im pretty active on Twitter, following people from pretty much EVERY political spectrum. I dont read discussions. I just read people telling people they agree with that they are right.People who block you won’t debate you in real life because they don’t want the disagreement. There are thousands of discussions about politics on social media every day. Way more than in public because it’s much easier to talk to someone online from all around the world.People have always gravitated towards those with similar views, that’s just human nature. You say social media kills public debate but if anything it enhances it.Enhances it? People just block you if they dont agree with you. You cant block someone in RL. How exactly does it enhance public debate?!
That was the American election of 2016 summed up. Groupthink on a massive scale left people stunned at the idea of a Trump victory and even today I find stuff saying '2018 vibes, block all Trump supporters because we don't need that racist energy'People have always gravitated towards those with similar views, that’s just human nature. You say social media kills public debate but if anything it enhances it.Enhances it? People just block you if they dont agree with you. You cant block someone in RL. How exactly does it enhance public debate?!
Uniformed mobs of idiots roaming the streets trying to hurt or kill people based on political or racial status worries me because that is exactly how genocides start: going after a group for being different or having something you don't have.QuoteSocial media will be the downfall of Western Civilization because it only allows radical beliefs to grow and fester into mainstream ideas. Rather then having a middle it's just pushing people to both fringes
We were literally commiting genocides less then 80 years ago but dear God Twitter will be the end of us!!!!1
What about what we’re doing right now? We’ve all been discussing politics for years from the comfort of our homes. This happens all over the internet. And if someone walks away from a conversation with you please don’t continue to follow them. That’s slightly weirdWhere? Im pretty active on Twitter, following people from pretty much EVERY political spectrum. I dont read discussions. I just read people telling people they agree with that they are right.People who block you won’t debate you in real life because they don’t want the disagreement. There are thousands of discussions about politics on social media every day. Way more than in public because it’s much easier to talk to someone online from all around the world.People have always gravitated towards those with similar views, that’s just human nature. You say social media kills public debate but if anything it enhances it.Enhances it? People just block you if they dont agree with you. You cant block someone in RL. How exactly does it enhance public debate?!
Blocking is a LOT easier then walking away from a discussion Toffee wouldnt you agree? :)
And before that, who did people talk to? Their neighbours, their colleagues, their fellow church-goers; the people in the same social class as they, from the same region (or even street) as they.I do believe that there was a tiny timeframe from the 80s to ~2010 where it was different.
The Dutch concept of columnization is a perfect example of a divided society living in their little echo-boxes. There were Catholic schools, Catholic hospitals, Catholic unions, Catholic societies, Catholic sport organizations, Catholic newspaper and later even Catholic radio and TV. Same for the protestants, same for the socialists, and in lesser degree the same for Liberals (who were a tiny upper-middle class group) and Jews (who most people just ignored as much as they could). My history Teacher told us about how he was not allowed to even talk with kids in his own street because they were of the different religion, and how he had to cycle all the way through town for the Catholic school even though there was a perfectly fine (Protestant) school very close.
People always think the times they live in are definitely worse then those in the past. Please. The people who only listen to those who agree with them on twitter are the same people shouting you would go to hell for reading a Protestant newspaper 50 years ago. Nothing has changed, just the way we experience it.
I was talking about major Social Media, not FSE. And I never said that im following people who walk away from me? Its harder to run from an actual discussion because you have to face defeat, you are essentially publicly shamed because you couldnt take part in the debate anymore. On Twitter you press a buttonWhat about what we’re doing right now? We’ve all been discussing politics for years from the comfort of our homes. This happens all over the internet. And if someone walks away from a conversation with you please don’t continue to follow them. That’s slightly weirdWhere? Im pretty active on Twitter, following people from pretty much EVERY political spectrum. I dont read discussions. I just read people telling people they agree with that they are right.People who block you won’t debate you in real life because they don’t want the disagreement. There are thousands of discussions about politics on social media every day. Way more than in public because it’s much easier to talk to someone online from all around the world.People have always gravitated towards those with similar views, that’s just human nature. You say social media kills public debate but if anything it enhances it.Enhances it? People just block you if they dont agree with you. You cant block someone in RL. How exactly does it enhance public debate?!
Blocking is a LOT easier then walking away from a discussion Toffee wouldnt you agree? :)
I agree schools should do more to teach kids discipline and hard work which they don't really in Europe and North America. Physical punishment is not needed to teach discipline and can be harmful for development of young. Though that doesn't mean force shouldn't be allowed to use in school when it is necessary (protecting other students...)
Schools in the west haven't taught discipline for a very long time, specifically dating back to when physical punishment was ruled out (pun intended).
Not too mention it helps organizing and mobilizing voters, especially hard to reach groups like first-time-voters and minorities. That's the real impact of social media on politics.Another point that is adressed extremely well by Hypernormalisation. Again, can only recomment watching.
Caz, twitter literally allows anybody to tweet at the President of the USA, the most powerful man in the world. Could you say that before social media? It allows people to voice their opinion better than ever before.How often does he respond? I agree on the opinion bit, but voicing your opinion and debating are 2 kinds of things.
Caz, twitter literally allows anybody to tweet at the President of the USA, the most powerful man in the world. Could you say that before social media? It allows people to voice their opinion better than ever before.Only it is usually (in case of celebrities - lets be honest here most people wont see or care what Bill Dill wrote) not their opinion. They are saying things that benefit them and won't say thing that will hurt their reputation. Or even worse just push ideas of other people for something in return. It is like supposed free media, where in USA you have this big news companies that just bombarded with anti Trump propaganda while smaller news companies aren't really noticed.
Not too mention it helps organizing and mobilizing voters, especially hard to reach groups like first-time-voters and minorities. That's the real impact of social media on politics.Voters should find a party/politocal ideas they would support themselves, otherways they are not fit to vote.
QuoteSocial media will be the downfall of Western Civilization because it only allows radical beliefs to grow and fester into mainstream ideas. Rather then having a middle it's just pushing people to both fringes
We were literally commiting genocides less then 80 years ago but dear God Twitter will be the end of us!!!!1
Okay, I understand you probably think you weren't succesfully targeted by a political organisation, because people tend to think those effects only work on other people, but I can assure you, you were.Oh yeah you know better than me of course. I was only influenced by a few teachers who were not part of any political organisations.
Teachers who vote. Who have been influenced and then influence you in turn.Okay, I understand you probably think you weren't succesfully targeted by a political organisation, because people tend to think those effects only work on other people, but I can assure you, you were.Oh yeah you know better than me of course. I was only influenced by a few teachers who were not part of any political organisations.
Okay, I understand you probably think you weren't succesfully targeted by a political organisation, because people tend to think those effects only work on other people, but I can assure you, you were.Oh yeah you know better than me of course. I was only influenced by a few teachers who were not part of any political organisations.
Okay, I understand you probably think you weren't succesfully targeted by a political organisation, because people tend to think those effects only work on other people, but I can assure you, you were.Oh yeah you know better than me of course. I was only influenced by a few teachers who were not part of any political organisations.
Okay, I understand you probably think you weren't succesfully targeted by a political organisation, because people tend to think those effects only work on other people, but I can assure you, you were.Oh yeah you know better than me of course. I was only influenced by a few teachers who were not part of any political organisations.
Teachers are often extremely politically active. I wish I could be in this mystical realm of non-partisan teachers.
The EU's very own 'Fall of Saigon' moment.
https://www.politico.eu/article/brussels-eu-staff-workload-european-parliament-elections-brexit-legislation/
Meh, when Italy leaves the Eurozone (only a matter of time) others will follow and it'll collapse.
Dutch elections in a little over a week, what are the predictions? I reckon Wilders will lead the largest party but will get nowhere near government. Also Rutte won't stay on as PM either-you can't lose almost half your support verses last time and still carry on.
The EU has never looked weaker and I should think all it would take would be another economic or political crisis to drive it over the cliff edge.
Duuring calling out someone for making inaccurate predictions?
Oh boy, you'd be in trouble had you not deleted the 2016 politics thread.
Actually, the phrase is “the die is cast”. If you’re going to lecture someone on English, at least get it right yourself.
So you fucked it up. My point stands. Also please don’t censor yourself.Duuring calling out someone for making inaccurate predictions?
Oh boy, you'd be in trouble had you not deleted the 2016 politics thread.
Yes, which is ironic.Actually, the phrase is “the die is cast”. If you’re going to lecture someone on English, at least get it right yourself.
Common misconception. The original Latin states 'alea', which means 'a game of dice'. It is not meant to be taken as a singular die. I originally put 'Let the dice be thrown', which according to Mary Beard is the most exact translation, but then changed it back and f*cked it up.
So you fucked it up. My point stands. Also please don’t censor yourself.Duuring calling out someone for making inaccurate predictions?
Oh boy, you'd be in trouble had you not deleted the 2016 politics thread.
Yes, which is ironic.Actually, the phrase is “the die is cast”. If you’re going to lecture someone on English, at least get it right yourself.
Common misconception. The original Latin states 'alea', which means 'a game of dice'. It is not meant to be taken as a singular die. I originally put 'Let the dice be thrown', which according to Mary Beard is the most exact translation, but then changed it back and f*cked it up.
Duuring calling out someone for making inaccurate predictions?
Oh boy, you'd be in trouble had you not deleted the 2016 politics thread.
I don't really much news and if I do I usually look up different newspapers, so I can see 2 different fake news. So you are saying every thing on internet and every human interaction is product of some political organisation/campaign nice one.Okay, I understand you probably think you weren't succesfully targeted by a political organisation, because people tend to think those effects only work on other people, but I can assure you, you were.Oh yeah you know better than me of course. I was only influenced by a few teachers who were not part of any political organisations.
Unless you live in a shed with no internet (apart from FSE of course) and have succesfully avoided all human interaction (except those teachers I guess?) since the day of your birth, you have been the target of a political campaign at some point in your life. If you open a newspaper with political news, you already are.
Yeah I had only like 2 partisan teachers.Okay, I understand you probably think you weren't succesfully targeted by a political organisation, because people tend to think those effects only work on other people, but I can assure you, you were.Oh yeah you know better than me of course. I was only influenced by a few teachers who were not part of any political organisations.
Teachers are often extremely politically active. I wish I could be in this mystical realm of non-partisan teachers.
not only will the EU Parliament have an even bigger eurosceptic bloc
There will be big gains in Eastern Europe, Italy, Austria, Sweden and Germany for eurosceptics.
Looking at groupings is misleading imo since a lot tag along with EPP/PES anyway.
Have you nerds discussed the skyrocketing amount of farm murders (and white discrimination in general) in South Africa? The world might witness another civil war, this time racial based, very soon.Can't wait for the certain nutbags to say that the whites deserve it for the apartheid
Have you nerds discussed the skyrocketing amount of farm murders (and white discrimination in general) in South Africa? The world might witness another civil war, this time racial based, very soon.Can't wait for the certain nutbags to say that the whites deserve it for the apartheid
Have you nerds discussed the skyrocketing amount of farm murders (and white discrimination in general) in South Africa? The world might witness another civil war, this time racial based, very soon.But but evil white man took land from them and expelled them (like 500 years ago)! It is their land that their gods gave them you bigggot!!! Just like God gave land to Hewbrews and now they have permanent claim on it!
I thought we were including soft euroscepticism? You can believe in a community of European countries whilst still being anti-EU. Orban's vision of such a community is just radically different from that of Merkel's.
I'm not sure En Marche are actually going to win big...latest projections have them at c22 MEPs. Largest party sure, but Le Pen's group are projected to get c18, Republicans c14 so it's not *that* big a win compared to who comes 2nd/3rd. Plus if current trends continue then Macron's popularity will potentially fall even further by the time the vote actually happens...next French Presidential election is 2022, Macron will still be pushing through unpopular things in 2019 as it's the middle of the electoral cycle.
Not sure this is a good idea...Why?
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/01/world/europe/denmark-immigrant-ghettos.html
Not sure this is a good idea...
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/01/world/europe/denmark-immigrant-ghettos.html
we did thatbet you can’t do it again
So how is that brexit going? Cos really, I don't even know anymore. Can someone (seriously) please just enlighten me?All the politicians that 'wanted' it retired.
So how is that brexit going? Cos really, I don't even know anymore. Can someone (seriously) please just enlighten me?
Juncker has a history of getting drunk at these kinds of summits and embarrassing himself. Last year his aides had to babysit him in his room after he got pissed during UN peace talks over Cyprus. He may well have been both drunk and suffering from sciatica. My wife isn't here (Junior Doctor) so I'll take your word for it. But his claim to have not been drunk isn't helped by his fucking about in Trump's chair at the summit.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tbVI_ecxZqs
Lol Trump massively helped the EU's standpoint and bargaining position against the UK... but still it came as a huge surprise to me he involved himself.
Surely the most natural course is for Britain to remain closer with the EU since it’s our closest and largest trading partner? It would be massive shift for all of that trade to go to the USA.
What’s the likelihood that trade to the US increases to the extent that it replaces the majority of our EU trade? Because right now we trade more with them than with the rest of the world combined (exports and imports). I’m no trade expert but what are the odds of a seismic shift in where we export our goods to? Genuinely curious btw not trying to disagree
I think it will be very dependent on if we end up with tariff free trade with the EUWhat’s the likelihood that trade to the US increases to the extent that it replaces the majority of our EU trade? Because right now we trade more with them than with the rest of the world combined (exports and imports). I’m no trade expert but what are the odds of a seismic shift in where we export our goods to? Genuinely curious btw not trying to disagree
Hard to do... I mean... following the logic of the free market, if a drastic increase of trade with the US would be possible and would mean vastly more income, wouldn't it have happened?
What’s the likelihood that trade to the US increases to the extent that it replaces the majority of our EU trade? Because right now we trade more with them than with the rest of the world combined (exports and imports). I’m no trade expert but what are the odds of a seismic shift in where we export our goods to? Genuinely curious btw not trying to disagree
I think it will be very dependent on if we end up with tariff free trade with the EU
Must have added my numbers up wrong.So do you think the USA will eventually become our largest trade partner?
Turks lol?Must have added my numbers up wrong.So do you think the USA will eventually become our largest trade partner?
If you count the EU as individual countries rather than as one entity then it is already, but it's more accurate not to do that since the EU is a distinct economic area. I honestly have no idea but it could easily turn out that way, even had we voted 'Remain'. EU demographics are awful, especially in Germany which is by far our largest EU trade partner. By 2060 there will be roughly 10 million fewer Germans than in 2015-who's going to buy our stuff? Who's going to make the stuff that we buy from them?
I do hope you aren't a frequent reader of the The Intercept ;)
Roughly 150 pro-homosexual counter-demonstrators, many of them masked,
That's actually in my city, just in front of the train station. Even see a few guys I actually know personally, and the guy I voted for last two elections.Protesting the gay advertisement was a bit much but masked half-men attacking you is probably worse in a country built on DEMOCRACY. I think it sets a bad model for Antifa to be a worldwide thing considering what they do and the values they are walking all over.
'Gezin in gevaar' is such a meme. "I'm confronted with people being different every day!!11 :'( :'( :'( ". The whole protest was against Suitsupply because they made an advertisment with a gay couple. So what do they want? Gay people to become invisible? It's retarded, and truly nobody cares. I wouldn't call 30 people on a saturdayafternoon a 'stir'.
I actually found their written reportQuoteRoughly 150 pro-homosexual counter-demonstrators, many of them masked,
Hahaha 150. Never. Never ever. Even if you count all the press, police, protesters and counterprotesters, there weren't more then aprox. 50.
in a country built on DEMOCRACY
Quotein a country built on DEMOCRACY
Our country was built on tax avoidance and the freedom to force everyone to believe in a very specific branch of Protestantism.
where did it come?Quotein a country built on DEMOCRACY
Our country was built on tax avoidance and the freedom to force everyone to believe in a very specific branch of Protestantism. The whole democracy thing didn't come in until...well, never.
I have trouble feeling any form of pity for people whose goal in life is to strip me of my rights so that they can feel better about themselves. I have this argument with Christians a lot.
~10 Catholic blokes seem to cause quite the stir in the Netherlands with their presence. I love to see civil discussion where one side wears masks and attack the others. Was a good meme
http://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/news/16375599.blackburn-teen-dubbed-uks-youngest-terrorist-in-lifetime-anonymity-bid/?ref=mc&lp=10What is wrong with current Pope? Is he following words of Jesus to much instead of made up shit priests came up in middle ages?
Someone call the boys over at Guinness, we've got another one for the book.~10 Catholic blokes seem to cause quite the stir in the Netherlands with their presence. I love to see civil discussion where one side wears masks and attack the others. Was a good meme
I'd think our current pope is more of a danger to Catholic values than a group of masked Dutch queers. I understand your argument in regards to civil discourse, though.
I thought those were the same thinghttp://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/news/16375599.blackburn-teen-dubbed-uks-youngest-terrorist-in-lifetime-anonymity-bid/?ref=mc&lp=10What is wrong with current Pope? Is he following words of Jesus to much instead of made up shit priests came up in middle ages?
Someone call the boys over at Guinness, we've got another one for the book.~10 Catholic blokes seem to cause quite the stir in the Netherlands with their presence. I love to see civil discussion where one side wears masks and attack the others. Was a good meme
I'd think our current pope is more of a danger to Catholic values than a group of masked Dutch queers. I understand your argument in regards to civil discourse, though.
I mean yeah if you want to shoot up a school or theatre it's much easier to go through legal channels than build your own shitty plastic gun at home.
But for an airport? Oh boy.
Also plastic guns could become a problem in other countries but it all dependent on how it develops obviously.
But yeah the big news as of now is it's legal in the US again.
With Trump and Republicans in power? Nice meme dude.I mean I was talking about in the UK but it's the same kind of deal here tbh
Have there been any closures of tax loopholes like Trump promised or no?
I'd assume no.
With Trump and Republicans in power? Nice meme dude.I mean I was talking about in the UK but it's the same kind of deal here tbh
Have there been any closures of tax loopholes like Trump promised or no?
I'd assume no.
It is not. Jesus never said anything against homosexuals rather you could argue he said it is equally respectful way of living. Or anything against contraception really. And many other things.I thought those were the same thinghttp://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/news/16375599.blackburn-teen-dubbed-uks-youngest-terrorist-in-lifetime-anonymity-bid/?ref=mc&lp=10What is wrong with current Pope? Is he following words of Jesus to much instead of made up shit priests came up in middle ages?
Someone call the boys over at Guinness, we've got another one for the book.~10 Catholic blokes seem to cause quite the stir in the Netherlands with their presence. I love to see civil discussion where one side wears masks and attack the others. Was a good meme
I'd think our current pope is more of a danger to Catholic values than a group of masked Dutch queers. I understand your argument in regards to civil discourse, though.
A joke mcpero. A joke.No memes allowed okay?
sozzlesA joke mcpero. A joke.No memes allowed okay?
Also come on Gordo, they all agreed to publish the same front page to protest Corbyn's antisemitism.
The whole Corbyn anti-semitism case would be stronger if they didn't also use his or Labour's criticism of Israel as being anti-semitic.
The whole Corbyn anti-semitism case would be stronger if they didn't also use his or Labour's criticism of Israel as being anti-semitic.
I don't think that Corbyn himself is anti-Semitic but I do think that he hasn't done enough to purge discrimination from within the party. That's the main criticism I have of his time as leader.
So is it time to talk about the extreme heat wave this year yet and how fucked we are?
Global warming isnt human caused right?So is it time to talk about the extreme heat wave this year yet and how fucked we are?
how does this mean we're fucked
Global warming isnt human caused right?So is it time to talk about the extreme heat wave this year yet and how fucked we are?
how does this mean we're fucked
No its just random u knoGlobal warming isnt human caused right?So is it time to talk about the extreme heat wave this year yet and how fucked we are?
how does this mean we're fucked
Alien caused
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/business/wp/2018/07/11/approved-by-donald-trump-asbestos-sold-by-russian-company-is-branded-with-the-presidents-face/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.e4d668f4a767
"But Trump has long expressed skepticism about its potential health effects after it is applied. In his 1997 book, “The Art of the Comeback,” he wrote that he believed that anti-asbestos efforts were “led by the mob."
"Asbest, named for its chief product, was once known as “the dying city” because of elevated rates of lung cancer and other diseases."
Nice.
Sure. That still does not make it a safe.
Sure. That still does not make it a safe.
Depends what type of asbestos you're talking about (asbestos is a general term) and in what form it's in (e.g. asbestos cement, asbestos spray, asbestos wool etc). White asbestos cement for example is quite safe.
Trump's point was less to do with safety and more to do with the US asbestos compensation scandal of the 1990s.
How hard is it to get a US citizenship so I can join the US Space Force ODST?Easy if you're in Trump''s extended family
How hard is it to get a US citizenship so I can join the US Space Force ODST?Easy if you're in Trump''s extended family
Which is something Trump has spoken against. Doesn't stop him from helping his own family out though does it.How hard is it to get a US citizenship so I can join the US Space Force ODST?Easy if you're in Trump''s extended family
Or be the family member of any other US citizen...?
Global warming isnt human caused right?So is it time to talk about the extreme heat wave this year yet and how fucked we are?
how does this mean we're fucked
Tell me that when you die of stroke because of heat.Global warming isnt human caused right?So is it time to talk about the extreme heat wave this year yet and how fucked we are?
how does this mean we're fucked
you gon be dead af before it does anythin to you
Tell me that when you die of stroke because of heat.Global warming isnt human caused right?So is it time to talk about the extreme heat wave this year yet and how fucked we are?
how does this mean we're fucked
you gon be dead af before it does anythin to you
That's the short-term mind-set that got humanity into this issue in the first place.Tell me that when you die of stroke because of heat.Global warming isnt human caused right?So is it time to talk about the extreme heat wave this year yet and how fucked we are?
how does this mean we're fucked
you gon be dead af before it does anythin to you
i'm not white i don't die from above average heat amigo
only thing that gonna happen is arctic animals gonna die and i literally couldn't give two shits about polar bears and seals
That's the short-term mind-set that got humanity into this issue in the first place.SpoilerTell me that when you die of stroke because of heat.Global warming isnt human caused right?So is it time to talk about the extreme heat wave this year yet and how fucked we are?
how does this mean we're fucked
you gon be dead af before it does anythin to you
i'm not white i don't die from above average heat amigo
only thing that gonna happen is arctic animals gonna die and i literally couldn't give two shits about polar bears and seals[close]
Doesn't make you right. I'm sure your future family will thank you for ruining their planet.That's the short-term mind-set that got humanity into this issue in the first place.SpoilerTell me that when you die of stroke because of heat.Global warming isnt human caused right?So is it time to talk about the extreme heat wave this year yet and how fucked we are?
how does this mean we're fucked
you gon be dead af before it does anythin to you
i'm not white i don't die from above average heat amigo
only thing that gonna happen is arctic animals gonna die and i literally couldn't give two shits about polar bears and seals[close]
yup aint that a bitch too bad most people give as little of a shit huh
If ice melts a lot of cities will ne flooded. A lot of fertile land will be destroyed.That's the short-term mind-set that got humanity into this issue in the first place.SpoilerTell me that when you die of stroke because of heat.Global warming isnt human caused right?So is it time to talk about the extreme heat wave this year yet and how fucked we are?
how does this mean we're fucked
you gon be dead af before it does anythin to you
i'm not white i don't die from above average heat amigo
only thing that gonna happen is arctic animals gonna die and i literally couldn't give two shits about polar bears and seals[close]
yup aint that a bitch too bad most people give as little of a shit huh
(https://scontent-frt3-2.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/38894238_1210191105790073_3481423648877707264_n.jpg?_nc_cat=1&oh=53ccfe3ae5707e33ec613bff0f7b1d3b&oe=5C0F8313)
So how much time is left until a deal must have been signed in time for the parliaments to approve it?I don't know much about parliament schedule but you would think that, due to the importance of Brexit negotiations, the house would be ready to vote pretty quickly after the deal is placed before them. With that in mind, it may go to the wire.
So how much time is left until a deal must have been signed in time for the parliaments to approve it?
It's nothing to do with free movement, it's about the EU deciding to charge tourists. The US does not have free movement with the UK yet Americans can come here for tourism purposes Visa free for up to 6 months.£6 is nothing for entry to a country. It's another example of people getting fussed over something which is their own making. You lose privileges such as free entry when you voted to leave the EU. Besides, if we're all going to be better off after Brexit as you lot say then surely £6 is worth that cost, right?
If Brussels wants to charge UK tourists then that's up to them. The real question is how this will work re: the Common Travel Area between the UK and Ireland. If Brits travelling from NI to Dublin have to pay £6 then Sinn Fein will throw a tantrum and EU politicians can probably expect a visit from the IRA. Make sure you check under your cars lads..So how much time is left until a deal must have been signed in time for the parliaments to approve it?
Do you mean the withdrawal agreement or the trade deal?
I sure hate using the same currency everywhere, being able to travel around freely, cheap flights, being able to expect the same laws and food standards anywhere in Europe. It really sucks.
I wish it would take me 4hours just to cross the Dutch border, like when I was young. Man, it was so much fun going to France, being checked at every border, taking hours just to spend a day at the sea in Holland, then having to convert my money with a crappy exchange rate, just to buy some icecream. SO MUCH FUN.
I also really hate going to countries like Malta and seeing all those EU projects popping up. All those restored Forts and Castles are just so ugly... It is also retarded that I can easily use my credit card anywhere in Europe. Or that I do not have to pay VAT when buying stuff from other European countries with my company account. It just sucks. Not being taxated twice also fucking sucks, like seriously. I would love to pay income tax twice and pay additional VAT on it. I hate doing buisness in other countries, it is just to easy.
Personally, I would be so much better off without the EU, I do not profit from the EU at all!
It's nothing to do with free movement, it's about the EU deciding to charge tourists. The US does not have free movement with the UK yet Americans can come here for tourism purposes Visa free for up to 6 months.£6 is nothing for entry to a country. It's another example of people getting fussed over something which is their own making. You lose privileges such as free entry when you voted to leave the EU. Besides, if we're all going to be better off after Brexit as you lot say then surely £6 is worth that cost, right?
If Brussels wants to charge UK tourists then that's up to them. The real question is how this will work re: the Common Travel Area between the UK and Ireland. If Brits travelling from NI to Dublin have to pay £6 then Sinn Fein will throw a tantrum and EU politicians can probably expect a visit from the IRA. Make sure you check under your cars lads..So how much time is left until a deal must have been signed in time for the parliaments to approve it?
Do you mean the withdrawal agreement or the trade deal?
Well that's the difficulty of negotiating to leave when the UK is so heavily tied into the EU. How do you respect past agreements like good friday whilst getting what you want?
No but it has been signed by Ireland, an EU member state.Well that's the difficulty of negotiating to leave when the UK is so heavily tied into the EU. How do you respect past agreements like good friday whilst getting what you want?
Fun fact: the EU is not and never has been a signatory to the Good Friday Agreement. It's not even an observer to it.
Unlike other forms of asbestos the UK Govt advises white asbestos cement can be left alone, including on public buildings like schools, and there is no obligation to remove it. Unlike other asbestos products you also don't need to be a licensed contractor to remove it.
It was the last asbestos product to be banned in the UK (1999), and even then it was on the basis of bad publicity rather than scientific advice (the general public was scared shitless by the word 'asbestos').
As I said, it's quite safe. The release of fibres from it is extremely low (even when broken) and within safety limits.
When France acts in its own interests it's greedy but when Britain does the same it's fine ???
When France acts in its own interests it's greedy but when Britain does the same it's fine ???
Is there anywhere where the points are expanded upon or have they only just outlined them atm? Would be interesting to read.
Now *this* is interesting. CANZUK is actively being discussed by the Canadian Conservatives at their big pre-election convention. If it passes it'll be official party policy and form part of the 2019 manifesto.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DkanaKZXoAAzFnM.jpg:large)
Should pass given it's backed by the leadership...
https://edition.cnn.com/2018/08/08/politics/donald-trump-primaries/index.htmlNot my president
Are we tired yet, folks?
Good time to be a Republican I guess.
There's also a few old Democrat judges on the Supreme Court that Trump will replace so I wouldn't be surprised if Roe vs Wade gets overturned.
By killing yourself trying to do it yourself, of course. Like the good old days. Life's sacred people.
Your rights oppress my freedom of religion reeeee
Not to mention the conservative judges he's planting down on all courts. The USA is going to feel this one for a long time.
But we're not talking about the UK.
Did anyone keep track of the number of illegal abortions and the number of deaths related to those anyway?
A bunch of cells is not a baby.
A bunch of cells is not a baby.
A bunch of cells is not a baby.
Okay, well please tell us at exactly what week into the pregnancy you think those 'bunch of cells' become human. Also you're falling into the classic trap of dehumanising in order to justify killing, which has been done frequently throughout history (Australian Aboriginals, Jews, Yazidis, etc).
Read my post about the WHO study.
That countries with anti-abortion laws tend to have more unsafe abortions. It also states that these laws do nothing to lower the number of abortions.Read my post about the WHO study.
What specifically about it?
That countries with anti-abortion laws tend to have more unsafe abortions.Read my post about the WHO study.
What specifically about it?
It also states that these laws do nothing to lower the number of abortions.
Do you have all your sources ready by the way? I would love to read them.
The WHO may or may not have had some issues in the past but you're always very quick to dismiss their work because it goes against your own political views. It seems to fit as a very safe fallback when statistics go against you. "Oh but they're untrustworthy" even if their figures add up and argument makes sense.
Have you ever considered that the reason they have the IPPF as a permanent partner is because what they do is best for the health of people around the globe? They work with these people because they agree in regards to the topic. That's not a sign of corruption in the slightest. If I donate to a political party, it's because I agree with what they are saying, and the same thing is happening here. You don't have any evidence that WHO is being bribed to change their viewpoint so don't go talking as if you do.
Except, as I just said, it's entirely probable that the reason the IPPF is allowed to operate closely with WHO is because they agree that extending abortion rights is the correct thing to do in regards to ensuring the wellbeing of women around the globe. You are simply speculating about things which you have no real evidence that they are happening.Have you ever considered that the reason they have the IPPF as a permanent partner is because what they do is best for the health of people around the globe? They work with these people because they agree in regards to the topic. That's not a sign of corruption in the slightest. If I donate to a political party, it's because I agree with what they are saying, and the same thing is happening here. You don't have any evidence that WHO is being bribed to change their viewpoint so don't go talking as if you do.
WHO is not being bribed, it's simply been taken over institutionally by pressure groups and NGOs. Google 'Long march through the institutions', it's a tried and tested technique. IPPF is a group primarily concerned with extending abortion rights, it has no business being one of six 'permanent partners' (the other 5 being UN agencies plus the World Bank).
Except, as I just said, it's entirely probable that the reason the IPPF is allowed to operate closely with WHO is because they agree that extending abortion rights is the correct thing to do in regards to ensuring the wellbeing of women around the globe. You are simply speculating about things which you have no real evidence that they are happening.Have you ever considered that the reason they have the IPPF as a permanent partner is because what they do is best for the health of people around the globe? They work with these people because they agree in regards to the topic. That's not a sign of corruption in the slightest. If I donate to a political party, it's because I agree with what they are saying, and the same thing is happening here. You don't have any evidence that WHO is being bribed to change their viewpoint so don't go talking as if you do.
WHO is not being bribed, it's simply been taken over institutionally by pressure groups and NGOs. Google 'Long march through the institutions', it's a tried and tested technique. IPPF is a group primarily concerned with extending abortion rights, it has no business being one of six 'permanent partners' (the other 5 being UN agencies plus the World Bank).
Because it's the right thing to do, because abortion allows for the safeguarding of women's health, regardless of if you agree with it or not.
Abortions will happen either way so you may as well facilitate them happening in a safe environment.
It's quite funny how you'll do anything to protect cells that some people don't even consider to be alive yet, but you won't do anything to help women who are in need.
I mistyped when I put alive, I meant actually being a baby. If you really believe those cells are human life and shouldn't be touched then maybe you also should avoid stepping on any grass so as to not become a murderer. The difference between a cluster of cells and a human life is quite large
Illegal abortions were happening regardless of the law, as we both know. So either way they happen. That's fact. Maybe not as many but still a significant amount....Just because deaths are low that doesn't mean that risk of complications arent high. A large reason for the low number of deaths will have been the NHS helping women who have been through unsafe abortions.
It's silly to limit yourself to just the UK if you want to properly have a discussion on illegal abortion risks since we're not the only country that matters....You clearly give a shit about cells, but not about women who are victims of rape, or incest or cannot afford to raise their children. Then conservatives move on to complaining when these women move onto benefits or have to put their kids into care.
My viewpoint is that abortions should be legal up until the point where the foetus becomes sentient.
And the vast majority of illegal abortions will be carried out by doctors in hospitals anyway.Yeah you clearly have no idea what is happening in South America. Most illegal abortions are performed by amateurs looking to make money of young whamen that were so smart.
Are you a woman that is pregnant? no? then you should not have an opinion on abortion, it's their business.
Whatever you do in this discussion, don't take religion into the argument, forcing anyones believe on someone else is insane.
For instance in the country where I live (Poland) abortion is absolutely forbidden, so hundreds of thousands of woman travel to other countries germany or czech republic to get one, if they have the money, if they don't have the money, especially in bad places then they have to resort to medieval methods, that more often then not are absolutely killing or more often mutilating for life..
If you are against abortion in first few weeks u should stop mastrubating. You kill billions of potential babies that way.
Nice conjecture everyone, once again my expectations have been met in full.Holy shit stop acting like you think you're better than everyone elseIf you are against abortion in first few weeks u should stop mastrubating. You kill billions of potential babies that way.
You say that as if masturbation isn't also repugnant.
Yes I believe a human fetus is human life (what could it be otherwise?)
That means that if I were to shoot a woman carrying a baby (again, even if it's a single cell), I'd have to be convicted of a double, not a single murder. But that also means that a mother who endangers her baby by, for example, smoking or drinking alcohol, should be charged with child abuse. None of these things we do. A human being is not a human being in the eyes of the law until it is born.
Yes I believe a human fetus is human life (what could it be otherwise?)
So is it entitled to human legal rights as if it were a born person, yes or no?
Nice conjecture everyone, once again my expectations have been met in full.Holy shit stop acting like you think you're better than everyone elseIf you are against abortion in first few weeks u should stop mastrubating. You kill billions of potential babies that way.
You say that as if masturbation isn't also repugnant.
But that also means that a mother who endangers her baby by, for example, smoking or drinking alcohol, should be charged with child abuse.
I was talking about "Nice conjecture everyone, once again my expectations have been met in full." not your line about people wankingNice conjecture everyone, once again my expectations have been met in full.Holy shit stop acting like you think you're better than everyone elseIf you are against abortion in first few weeks u should stop mastrubating. You kill billions of potential babies that way.
You say that as if masturbation isn't also repugnant.
I'm not trying to appear better than anyone else. I'm just pointing out that it's something people do for momentary pleasure and I am sure most people would rather have an intimate partner than have to "make do" with... themselves.But that also means that a mother who endangers her baby by, for example, smoking or drinking alcohol, should be charged with child abuse.
I mean... yeah. The information is pretty available, most everyone should know neither of those things lead to good results when the child is born.
South Africa ain't lookin so good :-[Let the Chinese deal with Africa they are doing far better than Europeans and USA did so far.
Nice conjecture everyone, once again my expectations have been met in full.Yeah better tell your child that his dick will fall off is he mastrubates. That will help his mental development.If you are against abortion in first few weeks u should stop mastrubating. You kill billions of potential babies that way.
You say that as if masturbation isn't also repugnant.
Also to expand on my comment to Duuring, you can actually be charged additional crimes which involve a fetus in the United States, so both of your examples aren't really outlandish to a lot of us, as no doubt they were meant to be.
I mean... yeah. The information is pretty available, most everyone should know neither of those things lead to good results when the child is born.
I personally would ban smoking while pregnant given the serious dangers involved.
Feticide laws are not in place in all US states and the very fact they exist strenghten the idea that fetuses are not human beings in the eyes of the law. If they are, there is no need to write specific laws on the legal position of fetuses. Likewise, there are specific laws to protect animals because the rights granted to humans are not automatically in place for them.
The consequence of which is that the woman's body becomes in service of the fetus, removing her autonomy to make decisions. Women are not baby-making-machines.
The consequence of which is that the woman's body becomes in service of the fetus, removing her autonomy to make decisions.
Is a day after pill murder?
I really hope you're joking. Because that's the dumbest argument I've seen on this discussion so far.He's trying to troll
Women are not baby-making-machines.
I'm unfamiliar with what kind of changes they've made besides outlawing abortion please enlighten me.They introduced 500+ program.
Poland's national debt will be even higher if it doesn't have a big enough workforce in the future to service it. If you're going to borrow money then you'll want to see a return bigger than the cost of interest on it. Polish babies will become adult workers and taxpayers, which is a fantastic investment and worth borrowing to pay for.That is way too simple to actually happen in real life. Surely the recouping of the investment will be dependent on many other variables such as economic growth which influences the number of jobs available for a dramatically increased population (something which won't be helped by a weak economy), social programs such as higher education (which affects the suitability of the workforce to the jobs available in various industries) as well as the number of people from this new generation that will actually find work.
I was only really talking specifically about Poland. Given it's had a fertility rate of below 2.1 per woman for decades they're going to have to sprint simply to stand still. However generally speaking if you have a dynamic, Western-style economy with high individual purchasing power then population growth is a good thing.Obviously population growth can be good but I was talking about the idea of excessive growth to the point that economic growth can't keep up. But I see what you mean.
(https://i.imgur.com/KvWyQId.jpg)oh no he didn't
#NewZimbabweRest in peace, Rhodesia. :'(
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ddzf9Mm4hdYPeterson is not that good of a philosopher, pretty overrated and his obsession with Christianity is weird.
Like a physicist trying to explain quantum physics to 5 year olds.
Like a physicist trying to explain quantum physics to 5 year olds.
xdLike a physicist trying to explain quantum physics to 5 year olds.
Nothing to see here but fair and neutral journalism from our tax-payer funded BBC. Move along, bucko.
Also, don't forget to pay your TV licence lest you want to be raided by the CID.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ddzf9Mm4hdYPeterson is not that good of a philosopher, pretty overrated and his obsession with Christianity is weird.
Like a physicist trying to explain quantum physics to 5 year olds.
He is definitely on the good side, but many people view him as some Jesus, which isn't healthy and he himself wouldn't want them to see him that way.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ddzf9Mm4hdYPeterson is not that good of a philosopher, pretty overrated and his obsession with Christianity is weird.
Like a physicist trying to explain quantum physics to 5 year olds.
If he dismantled feminism in front of feminists he's automatically a good person!
Just read that John McCain is discontinuing his brain cancer treatment.
https://www.facebook.com/6179724269/posts/10156152358034270/
Uff cancer treatment seemed to be very effective in this case (probably not, probably he just knew his time has come). What happens now is he replaced?Just read that John McCain is discontinuing his brain cancer treatment.
https://www.facebook.com/6179724269/posts/10156152358034270/
He's passed now.
The governor of Arizona appoints a (Republican) replacement who serves either until a special election in 2018 or until McCain's term is up, in 2020. It's rather late in the season for a special election + primaries, and the Arizona seat is not very safe at the moment, so the replacement will probably serve until 2020. There's a good chance his wife will be appointed.Medieval country xd
He doesn't call himself a philosopher? I wouldn't necessarily say he's obsessed with Christianity either, it's more so that he's interested in the archetypes within the bible itself, thus, he speaks from a psychological stance. If you watched any of his Biblical Lectures you would know that the Bible is more than just religious rambling, it provides psychological significance and an understanding of Western culture.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ddzf9Mm4hdYPeterson is not that good of a philosopher, pretty overrated and his obsession with Christianity is weird.
Like a physicist trying to explain quantum physics to 5 year olds.
He doesn't but he criticizes post modernist philosophers as if he was one. I've seen people that study philosophy say that he actually doesn't understands post modernist philosophy. Bible itself is mostly just a religious rules. It is actually mostly ancient Greek (Aristotles) and medieval (Thomas Aquinas) philosophers that influenced Western culture. For example Thomas Aquinas read Aristotles works and used its philosophy to apply it into Bible. He took plain words from Bible and explained them with help of Aristotles. Every time you take a book you can find some deep meanings if you look hard enough and want to find them. For example there is debate whether Jesus claimed that homosexuals need help or is their way of life equally normal to life of heterosexuals. Theologians of course took something that Jesus supposedly said and explained it as if here he meant that homosexuals need help, even though those words could also mean the opposite, they explained it as it fit them the most or what they believed it meant.He doesn't call himself a philosopher? I wouldn't necessarily say he's obsessed with Christianity either, it's more so that he's interested in the archetypes within the bible itself, thus, he speaks from a psychological stance. If you watched any of his Biblical Lectures you would know that the Bible is more than just religious rambling, it provides psychological significance and an understanding of Western culture.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ddzf9Mm4hdYPeterson is not that good of a philosopher, pretty overrated and his obsession with Christianity is weird.
Like a physicist trying to explain quantum physics to 5 year olds.
You could take a garbage book like Harry Potter and find archetypes that define Western culture if you really wanted to see them.
He doesn't but he criticizes post modernist philosophers as if he was one. I've seen people that study philosophy say that he actually doesn't understands post modernist philosophy. Bible itself is mostly just a religious rules. It is actually mostly ancient Greek (Aristotles) and medieval (Thomas Aquinas) philosophers that influenced Western culture. For example Thomas Aquinas read Aristotles works and used its philosophy to apply it into Bible. He took plain words from Bible and explained them with help of Aristotles. Every time you take a book you can find some deep meanings if you look hard enough and want to find them. For example there is debate whether Jesus claimed that homosexuals need help or is their way of life equally normal to life of heterosexuals. Theologians of course took something that Jesus supposedly said and explained it as if here he meant that homosexuals need help, even though those words could also mean the opposite, they explained it as it fit them the most or what they believed it meant.He doesn't call himself a philosopher? I wouldn't necessarily say he's obsessed with Christianity either, it's more so that he's interested in the archetypes within the bible itself, thus, he speaks from a psychological stance. If you watched any of his Biblical Lectures you would know that the Bible is more than just religious rambling, it provides psychological significance and an understanding of Western culture.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ddzf9Mm4hdYPeterson is not that good of a philosopher, pretty overrated and his obsession with Christianity is weird.
Like a physicist trying to explain quantum physics to 5 year olds.
You could take a garbage book like Harry Potter and find archetypes that define Western culture if you really wanted to see them.
I mean it is nice book for children I guess.You could take a garbage book like Harry Potter and find archetypes that define Western culture if you really wanted to see them.
Underlined: if you define Harry Potter as garbage you either don't understand what it was written for or you're just a salty alt type trying to be part of a sub-culture by denying things.
Italic: That's because, tadaa, Harry Potter was written by someone raised by Western culture and thus stuck in the Western thinking. You bet you're going to find Western Archetypes in there.
I'd also disagree that the Bible is just 'religious rules'. It offers a perspective that allows one to find wisdom in how one shall face the world. I also didn't say that the Bible influenced Western culture, I said it helps us understand it. By that I mean it's probably a good idea to know the story of Christ's Passion in order to listen to St Matthew Passion by J.S Bach. Or that it's also probably a good idea to know that the within the context of art, believers in the early Christian church would use certain signs like the anchor to show that they are Christians. There is a difference between influence and understand.Well exactly purpose of religious rules is to help one find wisdom in how one shall face the world. Life rules is maybe better expression.
I can agree with you in regards to his stance on post-modernism. I think most people view post-modernism as an ideology when in reality it's a description on what people are doing, (people losing faith with western modernity and beginning to reject it to replace it with values they have made up themselves) would be an example. However, I guess what he is eluding to is the people that start to believe in post-modernism (post-modernists) which therefore transforms it into an ideology of sorts. In essence, post-modernism is a form of uber skepticism deriving from modernism. More and more there is no longer a trust in institutionalized science and instead, structure is replaced by choice. People are starting to create their own form of logic and their own philosophies, an example of which would be transgenderism, the idea that an identity is now a commodity (you can choose what gender you are etc) and how the introduction of Bill C-16 is a threat to freedom of speech and therefore a threat to how we think. So that's sort of how I would interpret what Jordan refer's to when he talks about 'post-modernism/ists' and why he believes they are a threat. However, another way of interpreting people as being 'post-modernists' is not because they believe in post-modernism. post-modernism basically gives a prediction of the future, (people losing faith in western institutions and replacing conventional values with ones they've made up themselves), this is what is happening in Western civilization and therefore the people that are doing this are technically a creation of post-modernism if that makes sense. They are, therefore 'post-modernists', as they have become what post-modernism predicted. So that could also be what he means when referring to post-modernists.Yes people ignoring scientific facts and most basic human tools like math is pretty problematic. I find (trans)genderism very interesting occurrence. People that support genderism are mostly people that are against gender roles and stereotypes (men play football, woman cook for example). I don't understand why they feel the need for social construct of gender since it has no purpose but to label people with gender roles, stereotypes and pronouns (since gender won't help a doctor healing his patient) which is what they are against. It makes far more sense to only have sex which is defined by science and let people live like they want to live, if a born man wants to dress as a girl let him but that won't change his y chromosome to x.
Well exactly purpose of religious rules is to help one find wisdom in how one shall face the world. Life rules is maybe better expression.
I kind of don't understand what is the purpose of him helping people understand Western culture, I feel like people in Europe that are well rounded already understand it and those who do not mostly are not interested and never will. I don't know how he could bring this knowledge to those people. Could you explain that?
I think Western individual is far more about believing that he has his future in his hands that he can advance in society to higher status which is also main tool for capitalism to run. Life being suffering was mostly medieval thing which kinda started to die out with Renaissance. Out of "Christians" right now only orthodox still follow this. While for example puritans made up USA mentality with predestination.QuoteWell exactly purpose of religious rules is to help one find wisdom in how one shall face the world. Life rules is maybe better expression.
I kind of don't understand what is the purpose of him helping people understand Western culture, I feel like people in Europe that are well rounded already understand it and those who do not mostly are not interested and never will. I don't know how he could bring this knowledge to those people. Could you explain that?
Mmm one that I can think of off of the top of my head would be when he talks about the Western individual. He states how it's not an accident that the axiomatic western individual (Jesus) was someone who was unfairly nailed to a cross and tortured as this is symbolises the idea that life is suffering and it's what the religious people have always been saying. I sort of agree with this, we all go through hardships in life and not everything is fair - people you know are going to eventually die, you're going to die at some point. So there are many reasons for us to be resentful. But what Peterson proposes is that although life is suffering, there are ways to reduce it. First, you accept it. Then you start with yourself, get yourself together so that when something bad happens you're not whining away and instead you can stand up solidly. Be a better person is basically the point, and that's a start in overcoming the suffering of life. On a side note, I just realized it's somewhat similar to the Stoic philosophy as well. So that's sort of one way how he meshes religion and the understanding of western culture together, but that was very brief also. The reason I think he's so successful is because in fact there are a lot of people who are whining away in the corner and are incompetent, and Peterson knocks sense into them, tells them to stand up with their shoulders back and take responsibility for their lives. He emphasizes the importance of the individual and pushes for self-improvement. So by him helping one understand why the axiomatic western individual is nailed to a cross, he can then help people understand how to better themselves if that makes sense.
You could take a garbage book like Harry Potter and find archetypes that define Western culture if you really wanted to see them.
Underlined: if you define Harry Potter as garbage you either don't understand what it was written for or you're just a salty alt type trying to be part of a sub-culture by denying things.
Italic: That's because, tadaa, Harry Potter was written by someone raised by Western culture and thus stuck in the Western thinking. You bet you're going to find Western Archetypes in there.
Does anyone else feel nothing but secondhand embarrassment for those who were wearing outfits from "The Handmaid's Tale"? Good God.
Harry Potter is a fine work of literature.
“I don’t know why they don’t take care of a situation like that. I think it’s embarrassing for the country to allow protesters. You don’t even know what side the protesters are on.”
There you have it. Donald Trump doesn't like free speech when it goes against him.
Exactly. Dangerous to such a volatile individual in power.“I don’t know why they don’t take care of a situation like that. I think it’s embarrassing for the country to allow protesters. You don’t even know what side the protesters are on.”
There you have it. Donald Trump doesn't like free speech when it goes against him.
I don't think Trump actually thinks that deeply about anything. His positions depend on his mood, who the last person to speak to him was, etc.
I've so for only had 1 of my 5 profs not mention Donald Trump in a negative light and its day 2, the fuck is that.
“I don’t know why they don’t take care of a situation like that. I think it’s embarrassing for the country to allow protesters. You don’t even know what side the protesters are on.”
There you have it. Donald Trump doesn't like free speech when it goes against him.
If he meant that then it’s his responsibility to clarify. His statements should be taken at face value rather than you trying to defend him by claiming he actually just wrote it wrong. It’s a really shitty, flimsy and frankly embarrassing defence of what he said.
It’s not the first time he’s been against free speech. When American footballers knelt during the anthem (thereby exercising their constitutional right to free speech) he suggested that they should lose their jobs. If that had happened their rights would have been infringed upon. If it happened once then you might be able to put it down to grammar but this is clearly a consistent pattern within his statements.
Trump would have to be after career suicide? Or maybe he’s just fucking stupid. He should know that his statements are going to be taken how he says them. People shouldn’t have to infer and wade through his bullshit.
If you read into the explanations given by those who knelt then you would know that’s it’s a protest against racism. A juvenile flaunt of privilege? They used their position to try and do some good and raise awareness for a topic that they think is a real issue.
Maybe you should be the one to read the definition of free speech, as expressive conduct is viewed as a form of it and is therefore protected by the first amendment. http://law.jrank.org/pages/7019/Freedom-Speech-Expressive-Conduct.html
It’s irrelevant if the protest achieved anything or not, it’s still protected by the first amendment, meaning Trump has advocated for taking away the rights of these players. I wouldn’t expect you to understand all of this though since we’ve already established that you don’t like social sciences.
I wouldn’t expect you to understand all of this though since we’ve already established that you don’t like social sciences.
The act got them on the front of CNN which got people talking about the issue - which is exactly what they wanted. The fact that you can’t see that is funny. The entire point of a protest is to shed light and gain publicity for an issue. Their protests have become an international talking point which is exactly what they intended.
The NFL does reserve the right to fire and might technically be within their rights to ban or fine players, but for the president of the USA to try and interfere by advocating for their firing when he is supposed to be a guardian of people’s rights to express themselves, sets a dangerous precedent of a member of government overstepping the mark. Trump does actually come close to breaking the law, as its illegal for a government official to attempt to influence a private entity’s employment decisions. The only thing that stops this code from applying is the partisan political motive, considering criticism received from within his own party for his comments. I’ll include he link to the code for reference.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/227
For example, saying that social science has no use to society when it underpins the very rights you enjoy today.
I don't care for the rhetoric made behind the scenes, I'm speaking of the act itself. What did the protest achieve other than get the footballers themselves on the front of CNN?
It's sadly not within their contract to make political statements, that is not what they are paid millions for. I'm glad the NFL gave them the boot, pun intended.
Because my argument is right and you’re not doing anything to disprove it. I just gave you enough reason to prove that Trump shouldn’t be tweeting about this stuff but you can’t accept the fact that you’re wrong as usual.The act got them on the front of CNN which got people talking about the issue - which is exactly what they wanted. The fact that you can’t see that is funny. The entire point of a protest is to shed light and gain publicity for an issue. Their protests have become an international talking point which is exactly what they intended.
The NFL does reserve the right to fire and might technically be within their rights to ban or fine players, but for the president of the USA to try and interfere by advocating for their firing when he is supposed to be a guardian of people’s rights to express themselves, sets a dangerous precedent of a member of government overstepping the mark. Trump does actually come close to breaking the law, as its illegal for a government official to attempt to influence a private entity’s employment decisions. The only thing that stops this code from applying is the partisan political motive, considering criticism received from within his own party for his comments. I’ll include he link to the code for reference.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/227
You just repeat the same argument over and over again with added hyperbole. 5000 posts, no fucking wonder.For example, saying that social science has no use to society when it underpins the very rights you enjoy today.
I did not say that Toffee, I alluded to people studying for degrees that have no use to society.
But...that's the whole point of a protest? Raise awareness for the issue. When I organise a protest and the only person who hears about it is my neighbour, I'm doing something wrong.
If you only consider a protest a protest when it actually triggers a change, then that's not a very good definition. We would have hardly any events that we could call 'protest' by that definition
I mean, it's in the very name. 'Protest' the issue, not 'Fix' the issue. If they were in a position to fix it on their own, they wouldn't have to protest in the first place, would they.
You put it like it was never clear what the issue was about, that the only thing that was reported was 'Breaking news: Footballers kneel'.
I'd argue they were pretty clear about what the issue was.
Trump is a shit president and history will record him as such.
Toffee Gordo and I don't often agree with each other but this time we can agree that your arguments are literally confusingly pulled out of your ass.
It’s not my fault that you all want to live in a society where some men making a stand for something that they believe in is a despicable act. But none of you get outraged when a black man is shot dead in the street. It’s a fucking embarrassment and you should all be ashamed.
It’s not my fault that you all want to live in a society where some men making a stand for something that they believe in is a despicable act. But none of you get outraged when a black man is shot dead in the street. It’s a fucking embarrassment and you should all be ashamed.
Gordo loves to rant on about how Trump is the greatest thing since sliced bread but doesn’t realise that his approval ranting is tanked and he even lost the popular vote to begin with. I know my posts include a lot of emotion, but that’s not a bad thing when I believe something to be right. At least I can stand up for something that is good.
Okay Gordo, whatever you say mate. I'm just not gonna interact with you anymore. It's clear we both disagree.It’s not my fault that you all want to live in a society where some men making a stand for something that they believe in is a despicable act. But none of you get outraged when a black man is shot dead in the street. It’s a fucking embarrassment and you should all be ashamed.
Gordo loves to rant on about how Trump is the greatest thing since sliced bread but doesn’t realise that his approval ranting is tanked and he even lost the popular vote to begin with. I know my posts include a lot of emotion, but that’s not a bad thing when I believe something to be right. At least I can stand up for something that is good.
I haven't seen a meltdown this embarrassing since the days of Gluk and Nipplestockings.
You are legitimately a social justice warrior.
What does irritate me is that he is using sports as a means to propagate political views... which is EXACTLY what sports is not about
It is a sad reality but that reality is that everything is political, as Duuring has pointed out. We cannot hope to escape it anymore, as sad as that possibility is.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L9YzC67yijo
Kap is a simple example of 'securing the bag' even if he was a black man raised by a benevolent white family since his black family abandoned him. But hey, all cops are pigs amiright?
Its not surprising the subjects in which they dislike him. English and Philosophy hate him, History isn't fond, Polisci talked about why his administration is going tits up and pgov didn't mention him.I've so for only had 1 of my 5 profs not mention Donald Trump in a negative light and its day 2, the fuck is that.
What subject do you study?
Obviously he's talking about family breakdown (divorce, single-parent families, abortion, low fertility rates, etc) and social disintegration (multiculturalism, Islamic extremism, mass immigration, etc). You could also add a breakdown in law and order to that too.
Obviously he's talking about family breakdown (divorce, single-parent families, abortion, low fertility rates, etc) and social disintegration (multiculturalism, Islamic extremism, mass immigration, etc). You could also add a breakdown in law and order to that too.
Obviously he's talking about gay marriage and rights for women. See, he's talking so unspecified you can spin this either way.
Also watching the Swedish election. 18% is pretty good and SD dragged most parties to the right on social issues. Could have done better tho...
Also watching the Swedish election. 18% is pretty good and SD dragged most parties to the right on social issues. Could have done better tho...
Yeeeah... I think Sweden's pretty far gone at this point. On the bright side these new Swedish contracts enabling sex between partners will mean more work for you though right, eh Steven?
I really don't see how an attack on the Syrian regime could be constitutional. The Bundeswehr is only meant to defend, there's no way of explaining how it would be defending Germany by bombing Assad.There is in Fact a way in the Parlamentsbeteiligungs-Gesetz (ParlBG ("Participation of the parliament in the decision of military strikes law" ), which is legitimized by the constitution, but that way is not given here.
There will never be a yes to a military strike in our parliament atm, and without that no strike because constitution. The Option without the parliament mentoined is not given as it is held back for emergencys, not for Situations that need quick actions for the sake of efficencyI agree, it's a very different premise compared to our involvement in Afghanistan, especially considering all the parties already involved, even on opposing sides.
Also Afghanistan was a NATO Mission, dont think this will happen with any syrian involvementThere will never be a yes to a military strike in our parliament atm, and without that no strike because constitution. The Option without the parliament mentoined is not given as it is held back for emergencys, not for Situations that need quick actions for the sake of efficencyI agree, it's a very different premise compared to our involvement in Afghanistan, especially considering all the parties already involved, even on opposing sides.
I really don't see how an attack on the Syrian regime could be constitutional. The Bundeswehr is only meant to defend, there's no way of explaining how it would be defending Germany by bombing Assad.
I really hope you're kiddingSteven throwing bait out there, as per usual ::)
In Germany the parliament would stop Merkel with help of the high court so...I really don't see how an attack on the Syrian regime could be constitutional. The Bundeswehr is only meant to defend, there's no way of explaining how it would be defending Germany by bombing Assad.
There was no way of explaining how invading Iraq would protect Americans from terrorists trained in afghanistan, hidden in Pakistan, and funded by Saudis but did Bush let that stop him? No!
Whats your excuse Germans smdh
Germany is a psychopathic country so I guess it's a good thing they don't currently have an army.You must know a Lot about Germany ::)
Makes no sense for them to think about bombing Syria given they don't even have the ability to do it. Unless of course Merkel isn't intending to send in the German Air Force, but is instead going to unilaterally volunteer other European countries to do it on her behalf. She already opened up their borders unilaterally so it wouldn't surprise me.
I really hope you're kidding
I really hope you're kidding
How can one be so presumptuous that he is calling a whole country psychopathic...I really hope you're kidding
About which bit? Because it's absolutely true that Germany is a psychopathic country.
How can one be so presumptuous that he is calling a whole country psychopathic...I really hope you're kidding
About which bit? Because it's absolutely true that Germany is a psychopathic country.
Steve i have read a lot of your Posts here in the last months, and therefore i know that you know shit about germany. In my Opinion you know shit about politics at all. You are just posting random articles to trigger a discussion and afterwards pushing populist opinions.
Oh i did in fact got you right there. To this post i could just repost my first one, but i think you know what i want to say.How can one be so presumptuous that he is calling a whole country psychopathic...I really hope you're kidding
About which bit? Because it's absolutely true that Germany is a psychopathic country.
You misunderstand, I'm not saying all German people are psychopaths, I'm saying Germany as a country behaves psychopathically on the world stage and always has done.Steve i have read a lot of your Posts here in the last months, and therefore i know that you know shit about germany. In my Opinion you know shit about politics at all. You are just posting random articles to trigger a discussion and afterwards pushing populist opinions.
I clearly know more about German foreign and economic policy than you do. If it's populist to despise what Germany is doing to Southern Europe then so be it. Your country is a disgrace and you should be deeply embarrassed about that.
Luckily the UK is the very essence of rule by logic and respect for fellow nations and states.Duuring! You brexit watch your language!
You are just posting random articles to trigger a discussion and afterwards pushing populist opinions.
Oh i did in fact got you right there.
To keep things simple, this thread will be the one for all discussion related to politics.
Oh Steve i am not here to tell you what you are doing is wrong in general, i am just saying you are doing it wrong.You are just posting random articles to trigger a discussion and afterwards pushing populist opinions.Oh i did in fact got you right there.To keep things simple, this thread will be the one for all discussion related to politics.
No further questions m'lud.
Dont bother Steven, its pointless to discuss with Bergen.today i walked through the city and suddenly i knew you are going to say something like that. If its pointless for you to discuss with me Caz, only because i dont agree with you in certain topics, then i cant help you. I am saying what Steve does and says is wrong, nevertheless i wouldnt stop to talk to him because of that. There is no reason to stop the discussion only because of different oppinions, that is what any discussion is about.
What exactly is the point of discussion when one refuses to change his own viewsConsensus or Compromise, or (at least) acceptance.
What exactly is the point of discussion when one refuses to change his own viewsConsensus or Compromise, or (at least) acceptance.
You are just posting random articles to trigger a discussion and afterwards pushing populist opinions.
https://www.theverge.com/2018/9/12/17849868/eu-internet-copyright-reform-article-11-13-approved
https://www.theverge.com/2018/9/12/17849868/eu-internet-copyright-reform-article-11-13-approved
I heard. I actually emailed a couple of MEPs from the Netherlands... not that it mattered, the Netherlands ovewhelmingly voted against, along with Sweden and another country...
The lobby is strong in this... the EP has no idea how much they're gonna break with this.
https://www.theverge.com/2018/9/12/17849868/eu-internet-copyright-reform-article-11-13-approved
I heard. I actually emailed a couple of MEPs from the Netherlands... not that it mattered, the Netherlands ovewhelmingly voted against, along with Sweden and another country...
The lobby is strong in this... the EP has no idea how much they're gonna break with this.
So stupid, and why does the EU hate big tech so much anyway? The EU seriously under performs in the technology sector but you don't turns things around by being vindictive.
Mad Max is back on the scene
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/bernier-peoples-party-canada-1.4823647
100% True although he is the most interesting party leading right now imo. I'd say Trudeau was getting a second term any way you slice it but now its almost a guarantee.Mad Max is back on the scene
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/bernier-peoples-party-canada-1.4823647
Total insanity. The only thing Bernier will achieve will be to split the anti-Trudeau vote, thereby keeping the Liberals in power after the next election. Bernier just comes across as a sore loser on an ego trip.
Not sure Trudeau was guaranteed to win, especially after the India trip which changed everything imo. It probably would have ended up in Hung Parliament territory (or close to it) had Bernier's ego not got in the way. Still got another 13 months to go but yeah he's probably gonna win a second term. Really frustrating as a man who's as equally thick and vain as Trump really doesn't deserve to win again.I only say he was guaranteed a second term mainly because no one knows who Andrew Scheer is and Trudeau remains fairly popular although not much as he once was. I'd agree though that he'd come back in with far less seats in any case. Had the Conservatives initially picked Bernier I feel that a Conservative government may have been plausible but most Canadians don't even know who Scheer is rn. Scheer, although seemingly well intentioned has got no fire in him. His main appeal to voters right now is that hes not Trudeau. It kinda feels like a terminal status quo in Canadian politics right now. Trudeau and Scheer just feel like lukewarm options, the NDP is never coming back into opposition, the Blocs falling apart. Provincial politics are currently more interesting than Federal by a long shot.
Kap only started this shit cause he was about to get benched. A backup QB that was jerked off to infinity by the franchise because he had one good game and led them to Super Bowl which they lost anyways. Fast forward a few years and he has had two losing seasons, abysmal yards thrown, and a frustrated, shrinking fanbase. "What ever shall I do to regain my relevancy oh lord?" cried the oversized afro. The rest is history from there. He used his standing in the NFL to stir some controversy and regain his audience, promptly splitting the country's opinion of him. Also, only getting a fourth out of his contract probably sent him into a hissy fit. The kid was shoved into the spotlight and he didn't know what to do without it.freezing cold take tbh
Though, who cares about American sports outside of the states anyways, the rest of the world is living in bliss! While this "shithole" bulldozes itself a grave.
I let my hot cocoa get cold, now im madKap only started this shit cause he was about to get benched. A backup QB that was jerked off to infinity by the franchise because he had one good game and led them to Super Bowl which they lost anyways. Fast forward a few years and he has had two losing seasons, abysmal yards thrown, and a frustrated, shrinking fanbase. "What ever shall I do to regain my relevancy oh lord?" cried the oversized afro. The rest is history from there. He used his standing in the NFL to stir some controversy and regain his audience, promptly splitting the country's opinion of him. Also, only getting a fourth out of his contract probably sent him into a hissy fit. The kid was shoved into the spotlight and he didn't know what to do without it.freezing cold take tbh
Though, who cares about American sports outside of the states anyways, the rest of the world is living in bliss! While this "shithole" bulldozes itself a grave.
Except for the fact we know the health risks (and benefits) of cannabis to a much better degree than the 40/50s generation did about tabacco.
Anyway, how's the Brexit going? I haven't been following it except for the occasional article in the mainstream Dutch news.
Why not both the Tory party tearing itself apart from inside and the EU having what is in essence a march against Berlin. That should make 2019 very fun.Except for the fact we know the health risks (and benefits) of cannabis to a much better degree than the 40/50s generation did about tabacco.
We really don't. For a start cannabis is a psychotropic drug and our understanding of the human brain is still fairly primitive. We're also at a point where the links between cannabis use and mental illness are starting to pile up.Anyway, how's the Brexit going? I haven't been following it except for the occasional article in the mainstream Dutch news.
Withdrawal agreement has been finalised (at least between the technical teams) and agreed to in principle behind the scenes. May and Merkel sidelined Barnier and thrashed out a deal between London and Berlin.
Won't be made fully public for a while, a few politicians need to get their pictures taken and Barnier will want to eat a few more cakes at taxpayer's expense, but it's a done deal. May is trying to sell it to the Brits, Merkel is trying to sell it to Brussels. Only thing that can wreck it is either a) internal Tory party plotting (can't be ruled out) or b) some idiot in the EU Commission (probably Selmayr) trying to take on Berlin.
Next hurdle is that future trade arrangements need to be negotiated but that'll be post-March 2019.
It's fun to think how we have not even left the EU yet and yet the housing market is already on a verge of a crash.But you will have the freedom to post memes.
By housing market crash do you mean a deflation of prices, or something else? I don't really follow Britbong or Euro politics.Oh hi mr president
Withdrawal agreement has been finalised (at least between the technical teams) and agreed to in principle behind the scenes. May and Merkel sidelined Barnier and thrashed out a deal between London and Berlin.
Won't be made fully public for a while, a few politicians need to get their pictures taken and Barnier will want to eat a few more cakes at taxpayer's expense, but it's a done deal. May is trying to sell it to the Brits, Merkel is trying to sell it to Brussels. Only thing that can wreck it is either a) internal Tory party plotting (can't be ruled out) or b) some idiot in the EU Commission (probably Selmayr) trying to take on Berlin.
But that would mean EVERYBODY is on board and NOBODY is dropping ANYTHING. For one, that's impossible and borderline conspiracy theory, and for another, how do you know? An educated guess?
Ah okay. So you're guessing.
So I just got ID'd in Tesco trying to buy an energy drink. I think we have bigger problems than Brexit on our hands.
Hell I'm not going to fight. Fuck off with conscription. They can shoot a bullet through my head I don't care.
Energy drinks are as bad as smoking.
Calm yourself keyboard warrior. We both know you'd shit your pants just before they'd pull the trigger.Why should I be afraid of dying? Everyone dies. It's just a matter of time. If you get a bullet in your head, you won't feel any pain. It's a split-second and you are no more.
Energy drinks are as bad as smoking.
Relax Mr Hitchens, it was only a one-off.
However, will age restrictions really prove effective at combating obesity in this manner, given that in 2017, 1 in 4 British adults and 3/10 minors (aged 2-15) were considered obese? IDs won't deter consenting adults or bad parents.
Freedom doesn't come for free my friend.Calm yourself keyboard warrior. We both know you'd shit your pants just before they'd pull the trigger.Why should I be afraid of dying? Everyone dies. It's just a matter of time. If you get a bullet in your head, you won't feel any pain. It's a split-second and you are no more.
If you want to take up arms if they bring conscription in again and shoot people who leave family behind, well you do that then. I can't get it over my heart killing people.
If you want to take up arms if they bring conscription in again and shoot people who leave family behind,
Simple, if you don't go to war you can't get shot.
Uh... what? Whats the point in getting conscripted and not go to war...Simple, if you don't go to war you can't get shot.
Uh...
Simple, if you don't go to war you can't get shot. Life isn't a movie where you can be a hero and save, shoot everyone you want.
Simple, if you don't go to war you can't get shot.
as a brit you are probably getting stabbed true.Simple, if you don't go to war you can't get shot.
That's probably true if you're a Brit or living in NA/Oceania. If you're a continental European on the other hand...
Simple, if you don't go to war you can't get shot. Life isn't a movie where you can be a hero and save, shoot everyone you want.
With just my two years in the academy I cannot say to be a walking oracle, but you just ate the fucking cake on not knowing how an actual army works and what it means to be a soldier...
That's probably true if you're a Brit or living in NA/Oceania. If you're a continental European on the other hand...Including the US in that might be a bit of a stretch :D
Are you 12?Simple, if you don't go to war you can't get shot. Life isn't a movie where you can be a hero and save, shoot everyone you want.
With just my two years in the academy I cannot say to be a walking oracle, but you just ate the fucking cake on not knowing how an actual army works and what it means to be a soldier...
What it means to be a soldier? Do you know what the americans besides shooting terrorists did? Pissing on innocent dead bodies, probably also raped a few. But oh yes media doesnt show this. And not only the Americans btw. There is no honor in being a freakin soldier friend. Its all about killing. And yeah you can come with, but what if your army doesnt protect you? I dont need someone to protect me so he has to kill others.
What it means to be a soldier? Do you know what the americans besides shooting terrorists did? Pissing on innocent dead bodies, probably also raped a few. But oh yes media doesnt show this. And not only the Americans btw. There is no honor in being a freakin soldier friend. Its all about killing. And yeah you can come with, but what if your army doesnt protect you? I dont need someone to protect me so he has to kill others.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conscientious_objectorSimple, if you don't go to war you can't get shot. Life isn't a movie where you can be a hero and save, shoot everyone you want.
With just my two years in the academy I cannot say to be a walking oracle, but you just ate the fucking cake on not knowing how an actual army works and what it means to be a soldier...
What it means to be a soldier? Do you know what the americans besides shooting terrorists did? Pissing on innocent dead bodies, probably also raped a few. But oh yes media doesnt show this. And not only the Americans btw. There is no honor in being a freakin soldier friend. Its all about killing. And yeah you can come with, but what if your army doesnt protect you? I dont need someone to protect me so he has to kill others.
In similiar news: The entire General Assembly of the UN laughed in Trump's face.I'm surprised no one laughed at the claim that the U.S has been committed to stopping interference with small countries since 1823. It kind of glazes over the whole cold war policy of the U.S.
We are a band of brothers and native to the soil, Fighting for the property we gained by honest toil, And when our rights were threatened, the cry rose near and far, Hurrah! for the Bonnie Blue Flag that bears a single starI love the Republic of West-Florida
Anybody actually buy this Kavanaugh shit?
America is broken.gib solution pls
Get a monarch and parliament like all the cool countries.America is broken.gib solution pls
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LV6mVmAVQU4
Dunno about you, but I'm with #NobodyCares2020America will pull through. I believe! :D
RUTTE GOATFrom what I gather he's alright, are you a VVD voter?
I love how they divide it into three sections, Conservative, Socialist, and Liberal. Am I the only one who feels it dumbs down these candidates into these niche boxes and presents them in a biased way to the average reader?
I thought they were divided into the "Commission" and the Opposition not like Conservative, Liberal, and Socialist.I love how they divide it into three sections, Conservative, Socialist, and Liberal. Am I the only one who feels it dumbs down these candidates into these niche boxes and presents them in a biased way to the average reader?
It corresponds to the EU Parliament groupings so it's not really dumbed down. Basically each group nominates a candidate, and after the elections the group with the most MEPs *should* get to install their candidate as head of the EU Commission.
I thought they were divided into the "Commission" and the Opposition not like Conservative, Liberal, and Socialist.I love how they divide it into three sections, Conservative, Socialist, and Liberal. Am I the only one who feels it dumbs down these candidates into these niche boxes and presents them in a biased way to the average reader?
It corresponds to the EU Parliament groupings so it's not really dumbed down. Basically each group nominates a candidate, and after the elections the group with the most MEPs *should* get to install their candidate as head of the EU Commission.
Which candidate are people planning on voting for? ;)
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-eu-election-names-factbox/a-successor-to-juncker-names-in-frame-for-top-eu-job-idUSKCN1MC259
Which candidate are people planning on voting for? ;)
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-eu-election-names-factbox/a-successor-to-juncker-names-in-frame-for-top-eu-job-idUSKCN1MC259
Well you do indirecly vote for the candidate of the coalition that your party belongs to.
But the head of the European Comission is such an important role it should have an election of it's own.
The EU is honestly such a bureaucratic nightmare it's hilarious. Like why are there seperate elections for the EU parliament instead of just staffing it according to the proportions of national elections? Fucking hell it triggers me.Which candidate are people planning on voting for? ;)
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-eu-election-names-factbox/a-successor-to-juncker-names-in-frame-for-top-eu-job-idUSKCN1MC259
Well you do indirecly vote for the candidate of the coalition that your party belongs to.
But the head of the European Comission is such an important role it should have an election of it's own.
Precisely, it's too far removed from voters. Of course if you did have direct elections then you're essentially creating the post of 'President of the European Union', and certain member states that are used to being in control *cough* Germany *cough* might not like that. You'd also put rocket boosters up the eurosceptic cause.
But the biggest problem is that Europe isn't politically, culturally or economically homogeneous enough to have such a position. What happens if someone, say from Eastern Europe, wins by running on a traditionalist platform? I'd quite like that but I sense most Western Europeans wouldn't. What if it's a Southern European who run's on an anti-austerity platform which Germany would de facto end up paying for? Well, now they have a mandate to meddle....
Like why are there seperate elections for the EU parliament instead of just staffing it according to the proportions of national elections?
So you think the system is bad but you give arguments why it should not be changed? Okay.Having one election instead of two sounds like a lot less bureaucracy.QuoteLike why are there seperate elections for the EU parliament instead of just staffing it according to the proportions of national elections?
Is that a serious question? Because you literally say the EU is a bureaucratic nightmare and then argue for more bureaucracy.
Organizing an election is really not that hard once the structure is already in place. Letting parties pick people to take seats in the European Parliament is a technocratic wet dream and is precisely what will make it even more of a bureaucratic fortress.I'm struggling to see your point, are you saying two elections is less of a bureaucratic nightmare than one?
So you think the system is bad but you give arguments why it should not be changed? Okay.
I really hope Brazil ends up electing Haddad.. I get that there is severe dismay in the country but Bolsonaro have been speaking out as pro dictatorship pro torture and very anti LGBTQ rights.Haddad would stand a better chance if half his party wasn't behind bars.
"the error of the dictatorship was that it tortured, but did not kill." - Bolsonaro regarding the military dictatorship Brazil had from the 1960's to 1980's.
Hey, so, we have a brexit agreement. How are we all feeling about it?
I really hope Brazil ends up electing Haddad.. I get that there is severe dismay in the country but Bolsonaro have been speaking out as pro dictatorship pro torture and very anti LGBTQ rights.Haddad would stand a better chance if half his party wasn't behind bars.
"the error of the dictatorship was that it tortured, but did not kill." - Bolsonaro regarding the military dictatorship Brazil had from the 1960's to 1980's.
Bolsonaro is a crazed motherfucker but the PT is despised all across the board, no thanks to Lula of course. Oh and that knife incident really didn't help.
Elizabeth Warren revealed to be 1/1000 Native American. Imagine my shock
“The right man in the wrong place can make all the difference in the world.” -A Mysterious ManI really hope Brazil ends up electing Haddad.. I get that there is severe dismay in the country but Bolsonaro have been speaking out as pro dictatorship pro torture and very anti LGBTQ rights.Haddad would stand a better chance if half his party wasn't behind bars.
"the error of the dictatorship was that it tortured, but did not kill." - Bolsonaro regarding the military dictatorship Brazil had from the 1960's to 1980's.
Bolsonaro is a crazed motherfucker but the PT is despised all across the board, no thanks to Lula of course. Oh and that knife incident really didn't help.
I'd rather have a corrupt fucker than a lunatic that could destroy muh democracy.
Favelas and a good fourth of the Brazilian population gonna go pop.I think giving the police more power to kill will probably help but then again Brazil is already the leader in terms of police kill ratio.
Oh god, Bolsonaro won..Yeah, let Brazil reelect the party that totally fucking destroyed the country. Good one m8
Merkel quitting as CDU leader in December, thank god, but says she wants to remain as Chancellor until 2021...unlikely they'd allow that surely?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VRxue5PLaTUTook me way too long to realize this wasn't in London Ontario
Remember, remember the 14th of June.
So the Republican nominee for governor of Georgia is not only running but also oversees the election? Nice meme.
538 now has republicans at 40-60% chance to hold the house (up from 12% pre voting)Indeed, they had Dems a few hours ago at 90%. Now its shrunk to barely 50%. While I won't doubt that they will make gains, the polls are once again showing ineptitude.
Yawn. Democrats will make big gains. Senior Republicans will talk smack about Trump. We'll then be subjected to months of obsessive analysis about how it's the end for Trump etc. He'll then win again in 2020.Cortez? She is going to win easily, which is pretty predictable considering the attention she's getting. I expect interesting statements from her when it comes to revenue bills and whatnot.
I don't really care what happens, though I do hope that Hispanic socialist woman gets given a position of responsibility that involves some kind of budget. Will be funny to see a media darling flounder.
Florida does its typical stupid shit and Gillum gets screwed by a solid inch
Gerrymandering at its finest. both sides do it. though the reps had the advantage of winning their landslide victory in the same year that the census was taken in 2010.(which means districts are redrawn not too long later to be more in their favor)
All in all, most definitely a win for the Democrats, but still lackluster considering the mass-mobilization of young voters and the ridiculous amount of cash raised. Probably the only think I'm not looking forward to is Pelosi's brain freezes every few seconds (and as the speaker no less).
Well at least I can rest easy knowing that literally nothing will be done by the government for the next two years.You certain the DNC nominee will be Beto? He has a good chance but is most likely going to contend with the likes of Biden and Harris, so Bloomberg isn't out of the question.
I'm extremely impressed Ted Cruz won but at the same time I think this means Bloomberg won't be the 2020 candidate which makes me sad. I respect his financial responsibility and wouldn't mind him winning as the Democratic candidate.
If anything it would have the same effect as Teddy Roosevelt's ill-fated Bull-Moose (Progressive) Party which only weakened the Republicans allowing for a Democrat to win for the first time in decades. I think Beto resonates with young people and it seems like the D's are changing their appeal as less of that of the working/union class and more of that of young voters. It's a bold move and perhaps shows that Unions/traditional energy jobs will lean Republican from now on, which they have lately.Well at least I can rest easy knowing that literally nothing will be done by the government for the next two years.You certain the DNC nominee will be Beto? He has a good chance but is most likely going to contend with the likes of Biden and Harris, so Bloomberg isn't out of the question.
I'm extremely impressed Ted Cruz won but at the same time I think this means Bloomberg won't be the 2020 candidate which makes me sad. I respect his financial responsibility and wouldn't mind him winning as the Democratic candidate.
Now what would be entertaining is Mike using his massive financial assets to form a centrist/classical liberal party that gains steam. But thats so far fetched that Jill Stein has a better chance of getting 3% of the vote in another presidential bid.
Yeah impeachment is only half the picture. Bill got impeached but was acquitted by the entirety of Democratic senate.
Considering that Mr. NoSexualRelations was a far more agreeable president, I suspect it wouldn't take much at this point for Trump to tick off some of the Republicans and see him out of 1600 Penn.
I am mostly referring to Clinton not having a sizable portion of his own party either feuding with him or being uncooperative, including some bipartisan support here and there. Granted he was playing off the whole "New Democrats" thing and whatnot but still. Trump can probably keep the majority of the party on his side since they really don't want to hand the power over to the Dems, that isn't to say though that Trump lacks a solid base. As for Billy Boy, I wouldn't go as far as saying he is a psychopath, but he was shady for sure.Yeah impeachment is only half the picture. Bill got impeached but was acquitted by the entirety of Democratic senate.
Considering that Mr. NoSexualRelations was a far more agreeable president, I suspect it wouldn't take much at this point for Trump to tick off some of the Republicans and see him out of 1600 Penn.
Hmmm, define 'agreeable'.....with Clinton there was a scandal every few months on everything from sex to money. Not to mention some suspicious deaths thrown into the mix too.
Clinton is a psychopath, Trump's a narcissist. Out of the two it's the former that's the greater danger.
Yeah impeachment is only half the picture. Bill got impeached but was acquitted by the entirety of Democratic senate.
Considering that Mr. NoSexualRelations was a far more agreeable president, I suspect it wouldn't take much at this point for Trump to tick off some of the Republicans and see him out of 1600 Penn.
Hmmm, define 'agreeable'.....with Clinton there was a scandal every few months on everything from sex to money. Not to mention some suspicious deaths thrown into the mix too.
Clinton is a psychopath, Trump's a narcissist. Out of the two it's the former that's the greater danger.
So how's that wall doing?McConnell is pushing for funding but it's probably never going to happen :p
President Macron of France has just suggested that Europe build its own military in order to protect itself from the U.S., China and Russia. Very insulting, but perhaps Europe should first pay its fair share of NATO, which the U.S. subsidizes greatly!
Yeah impeachment is only half the picture. Bill got impeached but was acquitted by the entirety of Democratic senate.
Considering that Mr. NoSexualRelations was a far more agreeable president, I suspect it wouldn't take much at this point for Trump to tick off some of the Republicans and see him out of 1600 Penn.
tl;dr the Republicans in the Senate are probably not going to defect to vote against him in that instance because their base constituents would be certain to vote them out
And Trump is right, Europe has been subsidised by the US for decades when it comes to defence. The US stationed c.300,000 men in Germany alone at the height of the Cold War. Even in 2018 US forces still form the backbone of NATO deployments in Europe.
Germans are, as we all know, natural psychopaths
QuoteAnd Trump is right, Europe has been subsidised by the US for decades when it comes to defence. The US stationed c.300,000 men in Germany alone at the height of the Cold War. Even in 2018 US forces still form the backbone of NATO deployments in Europe.
So pull them back.QuoteGermans are, as we all know, natural psychopaths
Only now you tell me this? Do you know how much I interact with Germans on a daily basis? I'm lucky to be alive.
And Trump is right, Europe has been subsidised by the US for decades when it comes to defence. The US stationed c.300,000 men in Germany alone at the height of the Cold War. Even in 2018 US forces still form the backbone of NATO deployments in Europe.
We have an ocean to keep the Russians away, it was literally for you all so Stalin didn't pubstomp you all because he got bored.And Trump is right, Europe has been subsidised by the US for decades when it comes to defence. The US stationed c.300,000 men in Germany alone at the height of the Cold War. Even in 2018 US forces still form the backbone of NATO deployments in Europe.
Stationing 300.000 troops in Germany is definitely not equal to subsidizing the European Defense budget (which is something the U.S. haven't done in the cold war).
By stationing 300.000 troops in Germany, the US were looking out for itself. Not for Europe, for themselves.
Macron wants an EU army because he's an EU nationalist
We have an ocean to keep the Russians away, it was literally for you all so Stalin didn't pubstomp you all because he got bored.
Russia isn't a threat because of the size of their military power, but because of their willingness to use it.
QuoteMacron wants an EU army because he's an EU nationalist
Or maybe because France's quite ridiculously large army would be one of the most powerful parts of such an army, much larger than the role it plays within NATO. I dunno.
And besides.... Russia can't afford a war.
And besides.... Russia can't afford a war.
Ukraine, Syria, Caucasus, Africa.
And besides.... Russia can't afford a war.
And besides.... Russia can't afford a war.
Ukraine, Syria, Caucasus, Africa.
That's not war... those are small conflicts... I meant a real war. Steel on steel kind of war.
If you change the definition of war to something that's not happening, yeah, they're not fighting wars. Nor is any state.
Change my mind:urrr dat wasnt real communism!111!111ojenoenenoe1!11 :o :o :o :o
Communism is bs.
If you change the definition of war to something that's not happening, yeah, they're not fighting wars. Nor is any state.
Okay i should have said warfighting. Doesn't change the point.
they will definitely not anger NATO with Finland or the Baltics
https://www.facebook.com/nigelfarageofficial/videos/446480095880198/UzpfSTEwMDAwMjA1NTA0ODU0ODoxOTQwMzc3OTg2MDE2MDE4/
Do you guys remember when the government actually did something for the people? I don't.Which is why the state should only use tax money for military and police, public roads and judicial matters. Because those are the only things they are able to govern efficiently.
Watch out with that hate speech, your progressive government might put you on some watchlist.Do you guys remember when the government actually did something for the people? I don't.Which is why the state should only use tax money for military and police, public roads and judicial matters. Because those are the only things they are able to govern efficiently.
Do you guys remember when the government actually did something for the people? I don't.
Do you guys remember when the government actually did something for the people? I don't.
Let us see
1. Military
2. Police(the people who keep you from getting robbed)
3. Fire Department(keep your house from burning down)
4. Clean water
5. Electricity
6. Roads
7. Education
8. Air travel
9. Cheaper food(subsidized the agricultural, meat, and dairy industries)
10. Affirmative Action (College/University educations for minorities)
11. FAFSA (Federal Student Aid for incoming college students)
12. Healthcare
I could keep going on and on but if you hate the government so much why don't you go live in somalia :)
10. Affirmative Action (College/University educations for minorities)
10. Affirmative Action (College/University educations for minorities)
Uh oh
9. Cheaper food(subsidized the agricultural, meat, and dairy industries)
I sure do love my frozen chick burrito bowl for that extra protein!9. Cheaper food(subsidized the agricultural, meat, and dairy industries)
I suppose if you're purely a consumer it's easier to just see the cheaper products and not to see the socioeconomic devastation whole regions of the country have experienced thanks to the USDA's selective subsidization.
Change my mind:urrr dat wasnt real communism!111!111ojenoenenoe1!11 :o :o :o :o
Communism is bs.
A timeless masterpiece? What is this the 1980's?
Copy that, we now have full meme clearance:
(https://cuckedsweden.files.wordpress.com/2016/05/swedennnn.jpg)
What a joke of a liberal cuck Trudeau truly isPosted this last year m8, old news.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NLdEYw3ginA
Ukraine, Russia what's the difference?By Motherland I meant the US but yeah sure same thing.
But what about le weed revenue???
So is StevenChilton still around to tell us why the Brexit deal is actually a great British victory?
You could have avoided almost all of this by having a grown-up negotiation that kept the UK close to the EU bloc.
Instead you fucked Theresa May about much the same way as you did to Yanis Varoufakis.
We could literally force a deal on you that makes Gibraltar part of Papua New Guinea and puts Northern Ireland on sale on Ebay if we feel that's in our interest.
I can imagine him sitting at home in Holland,
I'm not cheering on predictions of economic doom. I have accepted that there is no positive end to this story. We're all gonna suffer, and nobody will benefit. Unless Brexit is of course reversed.
And yes, it is Britains fault. We didn't force them to become a member and we did not force them out.
Good luck eating that cake.
losing co-operation in defence, intelligence sharing,
Eu countries do share intelligence with one another,
Really intel is too closed in the EU. They're trying, and rightfully so, to break it open a little but it's very, very slow going.
Unlike what you seem to think, it's really quite uncommon for higher government circles to be penetrated these days
Anyone in France able to give a view about what the 'gilets jaunes' protests are all about? Also how come it's spreading to Belgium and the Netherlands?
They're not European, they're not army, they're not crushing and yellow vests are not dissidents. Grow up.
They're not European, they're not army, they're not crushing and yellow vests are not dissidents. Grow up.
Well, I agree they're not European but they are technically EU ('European Gendarmerie Force' has been a thing for years, hence the yellow stars on the vehicles). Also Macron ordered the French army onto the streets, so actually an EU military will quite likely be used for these kinds of purposes. It's PJW, so it's presented in a sensationalist way, but the gist of what he's saying is true.
Odds on a Corbyn premiership?
Anyone else watch Macron's public humiliation live on French TV?
Anyone else watch Macron's public humiliation live on French TV?
So... you uh, you gonna link it?
If you feel that adapting your policies to have broader public support is a humilation
New poll.
I have to say, boy, a leadership challenge? What a birthdaygift!
https://www.politico.eu/article/brexit-britain-small-boring-and-stupid-theresa-may-eu-withdrawal-deal/
How is that related to the article?
Deciding that you *do* want to be part of these things but demanding special status at the same time.
It's the personal observation of a close observer of the whole process and something I recognize quite a lot from my personal interaction with British (but especially English) people in the re-enactment scene. You're free to disagree with it as much as you want.
It's quite hard to argue that given "Brexit is the story of a proud former imperial power undergoing a mid-life crisis." is included the opening establishing paragraphs of the article - at the very least it's heavily implied.
in order to sway the opinions of true 'neutrals'.
All the smart ones already knew he was a shill already anyways.
Isn't there some Democrats and some Libertarians who are willing to reduce military spending?While libertarians want to cut spending, there are literally 0 in the House of Representatives or U.S. Senate. http://prntscr.com/lw75vu (http://prntscr.com/lw75vu)
If anything financial collapses the U.S. it will be the looming Social Security (and various other pensions) insolvency. Additionally, just raising taxes won't fix anything; if spending isn't cut we'll just keep digging the hole, there's only so much you can milk out of Americans. Therein lies the problem, one side refuses to cut defense spending and the other refuses to touch entitlement spending, and then they blame one another for not being bipartisan.Yeah, it's pretty much a death wish to run a campaign with the idea that you're going to touch entitlements such as medicaid/SS/medicare. Considering voter patterns, it just can't be done seeing as how important the old voters are. The irony though is that the U.S. borrows money from the SS trust fund and owes money to that as well. It's really just a mess when you actually look at it and highlights why America needs a Peter the Great style leader to reform it.
Isn't there some Democrats and some Libertarians who are willing to reduce military spending?
Cutting back on Defense would go a long way.Almost all of central and southern US can be considered third world, so there is no brink but simply a slow fall to the ground. Like you said, the infrastructure is complete shit as deemed by the ASCE, and it would take a lot of effort to convince the populace to seriously consider its condition. Slapping socialism on like a bandaid won't do anything. It's divided between two simple reasons: Americans are scared of the word alone, and the fact that socialists in this country never agree on its fundamentals. If I'm going to be honest bro, as much as we would like social change, I can't see it happening in the next 30 years for this country. I think we can agree that a US collapse is NOT in the best interests of the world, or else have fun with the massive power vacuum and global recession that follows.
I never thought I'd ever say it. But Defense is really one of the very few areas where money is better spent elsewhere. The U.S. is on the brink of becoming a third-world coutnry. Maternity deaths are too high, children deaths are too high.
Within the next 10-20 years the entire country's infrastructure will decline immensely because of lack of proper replacement and maintenance of bridges and railroads.
Basic access to healthcare is still shit, especially if you consider other Western countries.
Something with taxes, as in raising them, may go a long way. Sorry guys the issues in your country are mounting so fast y'all need some socialism.
Almost all of central and southern US can be considered third world
Racial problems are going to take another generation or two to finally wither (assuming they don't take up their forefathers' mantle, which is entirely plausible). Healthcare is shitty, no denying that, but it's good that people are able to point out that cost is the problem, not care. Thats why I believe that in the current state of Medicare, making it universally free would not remedy our problems. Whether it be the patient, government programs, or insurance, the cost is unacceptable on any scale. The costs are constantly raked higher than they need to be. If you don't have insurance here and end up in the hospital, 90% of the time you are fucked, plain and simple. The only exception I can come find is the ER, which is subsidized by the government with billions, and doesn't affect the rising costs of insurance, medicine, etc...Almost all of central and southern US can be considered third world
Many central US states actually rank very highly on the Human Development Index, it's the South and Rust Belt that rank quite poorly. Every country has regional economic disparity and there's not really much you can do about it. I think most of America's problems stem from a bloated military budget, racial tensions and poor healthcare provision.
I think we can agree that a US collapse is NOT in the best interests of the world, or else have fun with the massive power vacuum and global recession that follows.
As much as I'd like another European-dominated world solely because of self-interest
It is very well possible for once in history the powers that be will not be centered around the West/Europe. I am not sure if I will like the political fallout of that one if I am still around by then.
you gotta be shittin me...Spoiler
(https://scontent.fams1-2.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/48375608_599824593805050_6796333133676412928_n.jpg?_nc_cat=100&_nc_ht=scontent.fams1-2.fna&oh=4b21963d6d3a8415d0744085bdf63908&oe=5CAAAF95)
(https://scontent.fams1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/48416107_599825443804965_5518001474539356160_n.jpg?_nc_cat=106&_nc_ht=scontent.fams1-1.fna&oh=0e86e3e1c58e0f864e7db58bbf4ea69e&oe=5CA058C3)[close]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LNaf5XqVTmk
Try clicking the 'dislike' button on this video.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JZveA-NAIDI
They should have just cancelled it. Claire was definitely manipulative but I never thought she would make a good lead, even if Spacey had dodged the accusations and the plot wasn't rewritten.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JZveA-NAIDI
You know what? Regardless of the accusations against him and whether or not he is guilty of those, those three minutes had me paying more attention then all the episodes of the new season of House of Cards I actually watched before realizing I didn't give two shits about Claire.
I think he should have died like he did in the BBC series, assassinated by his wife in order to protect his legacy. Season 5 wasn't even that good, the whole thing was just Frank surviving one threat to the next, never going on the offensive like he used to.They should have just cancelled it. Claire was definitely manipulative but I never thought she would make a good lead, even if Spacey had dodged the accusations and the plot wasn't rewritten.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JZveA-NAIDI
You know what? Regardless of the accusations against him and whether or not he is guilty of those, those three minutes had me paying more attention then all the episodes of the new season of House of Cards I actually watched before realizing I didn't give two shits about Claire.
RIP Germany https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/13444/germany-child-marriage-lawwell...
RIP Germany https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/13444/germany-child-marriage-law
The case involves a Syrian couple — a 14-year-old Syrian girl married to her 21-year-old cousin — who arrived in Germany at the height of the migrant crisis in August 2015.
Man who lives in a palace surrounded by priceless artworks urges people to 'shun materialism' and 'lead simpler lives':Like he has a choice. You think he can just say demolish Vatican City and make a simpler one? Not like he is trying to be less materialistic since the beginning of his reign.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/pope-francis-urges-people-to-forgo-materialism-for-simpler-life/
https://youtu.be/ah9he0NZkhYComments are the best part.
I didn't even bother watching the video, the title and comments alone were worth clicking on it.https://youtu.be/ah9he0NZkhYComments are the best part.
I watched some random part in the middle and it says Antichrist have supernatural powers and that Macron's supernatural power is that he never sweats.I didn't even bother watching the video, the title and comments alone were worth clicking on it.https://youtu.be/ah9he0NZkhYComments are the best part.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EuEDuye-JmELitterally the most stupid video I've ever seen. It looks like any normal major city subway station, literally nothing to write home about.
Looks like a genuine dystopian nightmare.
You should see the San Fran stations, needles line every entrance.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EuEDuye-JmELitterally the most stupid video I've ever seen. It looks like any normal major city subway station, literally nothing to write home about.
Looks like a genuine dystopian nightmare.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EuEDuye-JmELitterally the most stupid video I've ever seen. It looks like any normal major city subway station, literally nothing to write home about.
Looks like a genuine dystopian nightmare.
Paris Metro just looks like a slightly more rundown and dirtier version of the London Underground, it's pretty average (I've been on both). Nothing hideous but nor is there anything particularly beautiful about it either.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EuEDuye-JmELitterally the most stupid video I've ever seen. It looks like any normal major city subway station, literally nothing to write home about.
Looks like a genuine dystopian nightmare.
Really? Compare
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IzYucGccy2c
Well tbf we have a lot of issues in Sweden but we're still pretty much the best country in the world to live in.
Unfortunately we've been going downhill for the last 10 years thanks to shitty politicians.
Obviously biased opinion.
The Moscow subway looks good because the Russian government pomps a shitload of money into the city. Far more than other cities or especially the more rural regions of Russia, which co-incidentally are usually the regions where the natural wealth comes from. Wouldn't want a revolution to break out in your capital city, of course. ::)
In combination with the recent non-stop terrorist attacks and rioting, it's not hard to see why Paris' tourism has taken a nose-dive.
Paris has had non-stop protests for a long time now. Not just recent years. France is a protesting country and Paris the protesting capital.
It's literally impossible to cross France and not be at some point victim of a strike or protest. Basic fact that anyone living next to France knows.
And yet the French government does not consider declaring a state of emergency for each of those protests
Well, that's nice. I personally couldn't give less of a shit about France, I just take delight in observing the many failures of sinking ''mainland'' European countries. :)
But to be fair, I am not sure you can expect Trump to back away from this ridiculous idea.
A border "wall" has been done before with relatively high effectiveness.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inner_German_border
I think minefields work pretty well to stop people from crossing the border.
Sure, the Mexico US border is twice as long, but the US also has like 2012038120380 billion more citizens, soldiers and money than the GDR ever had.
So I wouldn't say its impossible.
312.000 news jobs in December in the US. Trump is on a roll. 8)Can confirm, somehow me and my friends got jobs. Economy is on a roll, although I'd like it if we invested into fixing the infrastructure, for even shit that gets done in that section can take years, if not decades.
Where are the end of the world prophets now?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k8cKAEurGC8
Sonic weaponry to temporarily decapacitate people...
Sonic weaponry to temporarily decapacitate people...
I swear I read that as 'temporarily decapitate'. I thought it was pretty amusing.
Sonic weaponry to temporarily decapacitate people...
I swear I read that as 'temporarily decapitate'. I thought it was pretty amusing.
=P PArt of the reason I use it. It's one of these 'fancy slang words' you hear every now and again used by LEOs and military.
If I got a nickle for every time someone working for the militairy uses slang, I'd buy the Dutch army a Leopard tank.
Apparantly we're getting the tanks back. Because you know, they're so useful and cost-effective.
If I got a nickle for every time someone working for the militairy uses slang, I'd buy the Dutch army a Leopard tank.
Apparantly we're getting the tanks back. Because you know, they're so useful and cost-effective.If you want to see if it's a good idea to get rid of military equipment, look around you to other countries.
So, did the NL actually sell their tanks or did they just decommission them and store them somewhere? I never quite understood why a country would sell perfectly fine military equipment. Wouldn't it make more sense to just store it somewhere, in case you might need it later? It costs more than selling your tanks, but it will still be cheaper and faster than buying it all new.
If the Dutch can't afford tanks then they can't fight a modern war,
Why bother buying loads of F-35s etc?
I get you usually go in with other partners, but it makes a lot more sense to hide behind German/EU re-armament.
So, did the NL actually sell their tanks or did they just decommission them and store them somewhere? I never quite understood why a country would sell perfectly fine military equipment. Wouldn't it make more sense to just store it somewhere, in case you might need it later? It costs more than selling your tanks, but it will still be cheaper and faster than buying it all new.
Sold most of them to Norway I believe. And to some shithole coutries.
It is not cheaper to store them. They still need regular maintenance and the location where they're stored needs to be under constant guard.
Getting rid of tanks doesn't mean you're going to get rid of just vehicles. You are getting rid of maintenance infrastructure, spare parts and storage, ammunition and the whole infrastructure behind that, personnel to operate tanks, training facilities plus staff and logistics, staff capacity.
Just storing tanks wouldn't solve the problem of it being expensive to bring them back. The thing that makes it more expensive than just buying new stuff is that it takes a couple of years to get tanks operational in a unit again. The costs are there.
Also, the time tanks are in storage not being used, they're also not being kept current. If you're storing tanks for 8 years, after you've been using them for ten years already, the second they're going to get out of storage, they will require a midlife-cycle upgrade. That is going to cost a couple of million per tank. No the current construction is much cheaper. We steal everything from the German motorpool and only pay for it if the tanks are deployed.
Don't compare politics and democracy to sports.
QuoteIf the Dutch can't afford tanks then they can't fight a modern war,
Because tanks play such a incredible big role in all the conflicts we're fighting today, right? No, they don't. We send scouts to Mali, infantry to the Baltic states, F-16s to Jordan and ships all over the place. Tanks would do absolutely nothing and serve purely as a PR-tool. That money can be spend way more effectively. Don't get me wrong, if we would place those tanks in Latvia or Lithuania I'd be all for it. But we won't.QuoteWhy bother buying loads of F-35s etc?
I'm just gonna assume that question is not meant serious and you can tell the difference between the political and militairy reasons to buy a jet and not a tank. Especially considering the sort of missions we actually perform with our military.QuoteI get you usually go in with other partners, but it makes a lot more sense to hide behind German/EU re-armament.
Even if we get more tanks (because we do have them, a whopping twelve), they're 99% sure going to be part of the Mechanized Brigade, and thus part of the 1st German Panzerdivision. So whether we get tanks or not really doesn't make any political difference.
SpoilerQuoteIf the Dutch can't afford tanks then they can't fight a modern war,
Because tanks play such a incredible big role in all the conflicts we're fighting today, right? No, they don't. We send scouts to Mali, infantry to the Baltic states, F-16s to Jordan and ships all over the place. Tanks would do absolutely nothing and serve purely as a PR-tool. That money can be spend way more effectively. Don't get me wrong, if we would place those tanks in Latvia or Lithuania I'd be all for it. But we won't.QuoteWhy bother buying loads of F-35s etc?
I'm just gonna assume that question is not meant serious and you can tell the difference between the political and militairy reasons to buy a jet and not a tank. Especially considering the sort of missions we actually perform with our military.QuoteI get you usually go in with other partners, but it makes a lot more sense to hide behind German/EU re-armament.
Even if we get more tanks (because we do have them, a whopping twelve), they're 99% sure going to be part of the Mechanized Brigade, and thus part of the 1st German Panzerdivision. So whether we get tanks or not really doesn't make any political difference.[close]
The point I'm making is that the Dutch might be better off giving up any pretence of being a military power and simply spend the money on other projects. If others have agreed to die on your behalf then it's viable from a security perspective. And even so, what's the point in spending good money on it simply to hand it over to German control as part of an EU military union?
The point I'm making is that the Dutch might be better off giving up any pretence of being a military power and simply spend the money on other projects. If others have agreed to die on your behalf then it's viable from a security perspective.
SpoilerQuoteIf the Dutch can't afford tanks then they can't fight a modern war,
Because tanks play such a incredible big role in all the conflicts we're fighting today, right? No, they don't. We send scouts to Mali, infantry to the Baltic states, F-16s to Jordan and ships all over the place. Tanks would do absolutely nothing and serve purely as a PR-tool. That money can be spend way more effectively. Don't get me wrong, if we would place those tanks in Latvia or Lithuania I'd be all for it. But we won't.QuoteWhy bother buying loads of F-35s etc?
I'm just gonna assume that question is not meant serious and you can tell the difference between the political and militairy reasons to buy a jet and not a tank. Especially considering the sort of missions we actually perform with our military.QuoteI get you usually go in with other partners, but it makes a lot more sense to hide behind German/EU re-armament.
Even if we get more tanks (because we do have them, a whopping twelve), they're 99% sure going to be part of the Mechanized Brigade, and thus part of the 1st German Panzerdivision. So whether we get tanks or not really doesn't make any political difference.[close]
The point I'm making is that the Dutch might be better off giving up any pretence of being a military power and simply spend the money on other projects. If others have agreed to die on your behalf then it's viable from a security perspective. And even so, what's the point in spending good money on it simply to hand it over to German control as part of an EU military union?
Not really how an alliance works. That's like saying Belgium might as well have abolished its army in 1914 because Britain would guard its neutrality.
The point I'm making is that the Dutch might be better off giving up any pretence of being a military power and simply spend the money on other projects. If others have agreed to die on your behalf then it's viable from a security perspective.
That's what most within NATO think! I think from memory only a few Nations meet their budget requirements for defence......
Because we're not fighting an interstate conflict right now, hello.
Because tanks play such a incredible big role in all the conflicts we're fighting today, right? No, they don't.
We send scouts to Mali,Because we wanted a seat at the Security Council and there was a requirement for an ISR component that fit exactly what the Dutch are good at. it failed, but come on, it's a UN mission, what did we expect.
infantry to the Baltic states,
F-16s to Jordan and ships all over the place.First one because it was asked for and it was the only low-risk operation we could lay our hands on. Second one because it is literally the most Duitch thing to do.
Tanks would do absolutely nothing and serve purely as a PR-tool. That money can be spend way more effectively. Don't get me wrong, if we would place those tanks in Latvia or Lithuania I'd be all for it. But we won't.Because of aforementioned reasons. the Dutch CHOSE to not deploy tanks to Afghanistan, in spite of the Norwegians (I think) and the Canadians choosing so anyway.
I'll grace it with an answer:QuoteWhy bother buying loads of F-35s etc?I'm just gonna assume that question is not meant serious and you can tell the difference between the political and militairy reasons to buy a jet and not a tank. Especially considering the sort of missions we actually perform with our military.
The point I'm making is that the Dutch might be better off giving up any pretence of being a military power and simply spend the money on other projects. If others have agreed to die on your behalf then it's viable from a security perspective.
Because we're not fighting an interstate conflict right now, hello.
Also the eFP is not there to actually fight. It's an insurance to ther Baltics NATO will fight if the Baltics egt attacked.
I'll grace it with an answer:
Intel
The reasoning you're offering is as if we'd never get a regular war again on the European continent. This is simply too uncertain to tell, and considering other countries aren't selling theirs, we shouldn;t either.
Serbia is stirring shit again
The point I'm making is that the Dutch might be better off giving up any pretence of being a military power and simply spend the money on other projects. If others have agreed to die on your behalf then it's viable from a security perspective.
The Dutch is more of a military power than you think... Just not in the absolute numbers kind of way.
But they're not. The Brigade doesn't go anywhere or doesn't do anything without approval from the Dutch government. They're not part of the German army and it would literally take the stroke of a pen to abolish the cooperation. Berlin is not controlling anything, just like we're not controlling the German elements within the brigade or the British marines with which we work together a shitton. It's not different from a unified command.
It would have to be? Says who?
QuoteBecause we're not fighting an interstate conflict right now, hello.
And when we do, our twelve tanks will surely tip the balance.
QuoteI'll grace it with an answer:
Intel
I have to disagree with you there. Like you said yourselves, airplanes allow you to run low-risk operations. The benefits of showing your involvement in the world with the minimum amount of risk. If you don't have tanks, you can't be asked to send them to some UN mission and get them put out of action by a African childsoldier with a RPG. We don't need our Armed Forces for national defence, just for national interests. Like bombing people in Syria. The decisions to invest in the airforce (and in the military in general) is for political reasons, not for actual military reasons.
The unannounced move by the US State Department, which has not previously been reported, downgraded the EU delegation's diplomatic status in Washington from member state to international organization.
"We don't exactly know when they did it, because they conveniently forgot to notify us," an EU official who is familiar with the matter told DW in an interview.
He is actually starting to do harm now... He's literally making this up as he goes. Just like when that journalist asked him if he was going to declare state of emergency over the border wall, he literally got the idea there and then and just throws it out there.
Was it written in China?Psychologist from England and Finnish political 'scientists' (big science lads) wrote it. And in what world would China allow Japan to have such high IQ.
Did you know that if you use 100% of your brain, you get godlike powers? true story.Some Dr. Manhattan level shit, except without getting zapped and all that stuff.
Was it written in China?And in what world would China allow Japan to have such high IQ.
Did you know that if you use 100% of your brain, you get godlike powers? true story.Did you know that if you use 10% of received donations, you can release BCoF by now. true story
Brexit vote tomorrow. Got to say, most people expect a no-vote and tend to agree, but it would be quite the meme if the British parliament just gives in and supports the deal.
Can they even do that at this point?Yep, that would probably lead to years of political unrest in the UK (especially in England).
Regarding to the ECJ they can in Fact:Can they even do that at this point?Yep, that would probably lead to years of political unrest in the UK (especially in England).
But it doesn't look like May is staying much longer. ^^
Can they even do that at this point?
?Can they even do that at this point?
Is it legally possible? Yes, but even if it wasn't that doesn't matter. Plenty of illegal things happen in the EU so long as the political will is there.
Now in other news, as Germany heads into recession whilst Britain has the highest GDP growth of any major EU member state, I'd like to take this opportunity to gloat about how wrong Duuring's predictions of economic doom have turned out. ;)
?Can they even do that at this point?
Is it legally possible? Yes, but even if it wasn't that doesn't matter. Plenty of illegal things happen in the EU so long as the political will is there.
Now in other news, as Germany heads into recession whilst Britain has the highest GDP growth of any major EU member state, I'd like to take this opportunity to gloat about how wrong Duuring's predictions of economic doom have turned out. ;)
UK had lower gdp growth than Germany and France in 2018. You were probably looking at inflation rate. Plus UK is still a member of EU.
Yep clearly says:?Can they even do that at this point?
Is it legally possible? Yes, but even if it wasn't that doesn't matter. Plenty of illegal things happen in the EU so long as the political will is there.
Now in other news, as Germany heads into recession whilst Britain has the highest GDP growth of any major EU member state, I'd like to take this opportunity to gloat about how wrong Duuring's predictions of economic doom have turned out. ;)
UK had lower gdp growth than Germany and France in 2018. You were probably looking at inflation rate. Plus UK is still a member of EU.
I understand the difference between GDP, inflation, PMI etc. I read investor briefings on a weekly (if not daily) basis for work. Go back and look at the figures again.
Pete, Q4 figures for 2018 haven't even been released yet. Where are you getting your information from?Goldman Sachs Global Investment Research
How the fuck are we heading into recession? And that the gross domestic product of a nation that is just about to isolate themself from the biggest (once again) domestic market is not any sign for a developing economy but just a sign that the british have reason enough to prepare their economy to be more self sustainable as they will lack ton of shit from markets they had access to before.Can they even do that at this point?
Is it legally possible? Yes, but even if it wasn't that doesn't matter. Plenty of illegal things happen in the EU so long as the political will is there.
Now in other news, as Germany heads into recession whilst Britain has the highest GDP growth of any major EU member state, I'd like to take this opportunity to gloat about how wrong Duuring's predictions of economic doom have turned out. ;)
I really think you should read the briefings more carefully
At -0.2%qoq, Q3 GDP growth was significantly weaker than we expected (before Euro area Q3 GDP had been published)...While growth has decelerated from last year’s 2.5%yoy pace, these two factors exaggerate the weakness in Q3 and point to a Q4 rebound
I'm curious what happens to those numbers after no-deal Brexit.
I'd be amused if it wouldn't hurt the Dutch economy so much. That's kinda my whole feel with this thing. It would be fun to watch a country wreck itself, it's just that it will drag us down with it.
Is there any reliable economic model that predicts the British economy would grow after brexit?
Joke, I only own beautiful guns.AR-15 is sexy, but then again I think the G36 and C7 are beauties as well. :P
So is Corbyn going to make a move?
Joke, I only own beautiful guns.
Joke, I only own beautiful guns.
I guess Germans only like weird-looking fish guns that melt after extended use.
It does get hot relatively quickly (usually after the first 30 rounds), but you have to really push the limit for it to become a serious issue, at least from what I’ve seen.Joke, I only own beautiful guns.
I guess Germans only like weird-looking fish guns that melt after extended use.
Wasn't overheating one of the issues with the AR-15?
and C7 are beauties as well. :P
Joke, I only own beautiful guns.
I guess Germans only like weird-looking fish guns that melt after extended use.
Wasn't overheating one of the issues with the AR-15?
Wait, that shit is used outside of Canada and Norway?and C7 are beauties as well. :P
Can you please.... PLEASE not say anything positive about the C7?
Standard issue Dutch Military rifle.Wait, that shit is used outside of Canada and Norway?and C7 are beauties as well. :P
Can you please.... PLEASE not say anything positive about the C7?
He works for May, he calls these no confidence votes so that May wins them, while she still can. Ez clap.So is Corbyn going to make a move?
He'll call a no confidence vote, May will win it (already has confirmed DUP backing) and that'll enable her to stay on for a bit longer. Corbyn is a bit thick and this is the kind of dumb move he'd make.
(https://images.hellogiggles.com/uploads/2019/01/02131905/Trump2.jpg)
I can appreciate a god-tier troll when I see one
Also we swedes finally got a prime minister 130ish days after the election.
Also we swedes finally got a prime minister 130ish days after the election.
[Laughs in Belgian]
https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/former-navy-seal-jocko-willink-toxic-masculinity-the-dichotomy-of-being-a-man?fbclid=IwAR3L_7i-E499ESeZY22S5aJ8ox05nzqjE5zWgZUn8jgEHYqu2adO7UptmQ0Puts up a good point, and then you read the comments and lose hope.
https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/former-navy-seal-jocko-willink-toxic-masculinity-the-dichotomy-of-being-a-man?fbclid=IwAR3L_7i-E499ESeZY22S5aJ8ox05nzqjE5zWgZUn8jgEHYqu2adO7UptmQ0Puts up a good point, and then you read the comments and lose hope.
Gotta make that recruiting number somehow.I bet they accept males who fail fitness test as well.
Well this was obviously going to happen.Spoiler(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DxOYhDJWsAEfglq.jpg:large)[close]
Well this was obviously going to happen.Spoiler(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DxOYhDJWsAEfglq.jpg:large)[close]
Even says "those who failed". U.S. Military, amongst many others, are failing to meet recruitment numbers. This is how they make do.
Because they desperately need people.
Recruits are hard to come by because the folks coming of prime military age now have lived their whole lives in a never-ending war in other people's countries and the delusion of 'protecting your country' by means of bombing others half a world away has crumbled.
Recruits are hard to come by because the folks coming of prime military age now have lived their whole lives in a never-ending war in other people's countries and the delusion of 'protecting your country' by means of bombing others half a world away has crumbled.
No that's really not why recruiment is down.
Most regular force soldiers now days never even see active combat or even fulfill combat roles. A lot of it nowadays is NATO deployments in allied countries, peacekeeping and border security.Also during peace time recruitment numbers tend to go down anyway. Few people want to train for years on weapon systems they might never get to use in real combat and they want the glory of going to war.Recruits are hard to come by because the folks coming of prime military age now have lived their whole lives in a never-ending war in other people's countries and the delusion of 'protecting your country' by means of bombing others half a world away has crumbled.
No that's really not why recruiment is down.
You think people join the army because they want to use weapon systems in real combat and for 'the glory of going to war'?
For example there is about 15,000 personal in the RCAF but only 100 or so aircraft used in combat.That's not weird at all.... the rate between combat personnel and support personnel in a combat theatre are about 1:8 to 1:12 nowadays and that's considering most of personnel in-theatre is land component. The air forces usually have a much higher rating so that's really not surprising...
Venezuela is getting spicy. I don't really see a way this is going to go down peacefully, as Maduro has the army's backing, and Guadio is either going to get whacked or arrested if no other major developments occur.Yeah we're getting worried, too =P (no sarcasm intended)
You think people join the army because they want to use weapon systems in real combat and for 'the glory of going to war'?
Most regular force soldiers now days never even see active combat or even fulfill combat roles. A lot of it nowadays is NATO deployments in allied countries, peacekeeping and border security.Also during peace time recruitment numbers tend to go down anyway. Few people want to train for years on weapon systems they might never get to use in real combat and they want the glory of going to war.Recruits are hard to come by because the folks coming of prime military age now have lived their whole lives in a never-ending war in other people's countries and the delusion of 'protecting your country' by means of bombing others half a world away has crumbled.
No that's really not why recruiment is down.
For example there is about 15,000 personal in the RCAF but only 100 or so aircraft used in combat.
More has happened on NATO missions the past 15 years though. UN missions are shit.I liked it quite a bit, but I think they have to get creative since recruitment numbers and overall military enthusiasm have been lackluster for the past few years.
EDIT: Holy shit that ad is embarassing.
Less professional soldiers that join for glories of war = less psychopaths
Conscription?
We all know how military works. You have a mass of people of which majority is there to get shot and die and small percentage of psychopaths that don't mind or enjoy killing and those do most of the killing. That is why conscription is stupid, you just get more people that are ready to get killed but not kill.Less professional soldiers that join for glories of war = less psychopaths
No those two really aren't correlated.
We all know how military works. You have a mass of people of which majority is there to get shot and die and small percentage of psychopaths that don't mind or enjoy killing and those do most of the killing. That is why conscription is stupid, you just get more people that are ready to get killed but not kill.
Non of you 'glories of war' seeking boys that are on this forum have killed anyone or even attempted to. If you did though you are either a psychopath or you are enjoying your PTSD.
But yes I agree coloration is not strong. Conscription army is expensive and shit, only thing it might be positive for is that you might learn some discipline and improve physique but than again it is wasting time when you coupd be learning or meeting a potential partner.
I don't believe any progressive government in Europe (all of the west) would ever DREAM about implementing conscription.
As I said, the majority is there to support a majority who do the fighting, of which most do not die.?
I believe he meant a majority are there to support the minority who do the fighting (logistics and such).
So you are saying that if there was a total war between let's say Germany and France those 8 out of 9 still wouldn't do the fighting?I believe he meant a majority are there to support the minority who do the fighting (logistics and such).
Yes, exactly this.
As I mentioned before, the ratio is about 1:8 nowadays I think.
So you are saying that if there was a total war between let's say Germany and France those 8 out of 9 still wouldn't do the fighting?I believe he meant a majority are there to support the minority who do the fighting (logistics and such).
Yes, exactly this.
As I mentioned before, the ratio is about 1:8 nowadays I think.
So Netherlands with 25k military would have 2,8k people fighting.So you are saying that if there was a total war between let's say Germany and France those 8 out of 9 still wouldn't do the fighting?I believe he meant a majority are there to support the minority who do the fighting (logistics and such).
Yes, exactly this.
As I mentioned before, the ratio is about 1:8 nowadays I think.
Not exactly, there still would be some logistics units that'd come under fire. But yes, in general there's 8 out of 9 people who generally wouldn't be fighting.
So Netherlands with 25k military would have 2,8k people fighting.Not 25k in military. Our ministry of defence is 52.000 ith 42.000 military. I really don't know where your numbers are coming from mate.
Lmao, video footage has emerged of a shirtless Bernie Sanders singing Soviet propaganda songs with a group of Russians.
https://twitter.com/TopRopeTravis/status/1089909214213038081?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw
Just because your task is not to fight, does not mean that you are not part of the military.JOther soldiers would do it that are equally cappable of fighting on a front line? And they would probably have to fight since supply routes would be attacked and military bases as well?
If there were only frontline troops, where would they get their food, water, ammo, information etc. ? Who would guard the military bases at home?
Lmao, video footage has emerged of a shirtless Bernie Sanders singing Soviet propaganda songs with a group of Russians.Ah clear proof he is a evil Soviet Communist that would prepare the ground for the undead Red Army under the command of undead Stalin to invade USA and eventually whole world.
https://twitter.com/TopRopeTravis/status/1089909214213038081?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw
I'm struggling to understand what Big Pete's ideal military would be. Other than apparently full of psychopaths and no logistics support.Sounds like the perfect model for a division of Forlorn hope, but even then they have to eat.
Communist = Bad
I'm struggling to understand what Big Pete's ideal military would be. Other than apparently full of psychopaths and no logistics support.Yeah because I said military doesn't needs logistics right?
Yeah because I said military doesn't needs logistics right?
And yes best military is full of psychopaths that love killing, nothing more effective on the battlefield than that.
It depends on what you define as combat, though. You can use an incredibly broad definition ('Anyone who is in an active combat zone', or even 'Anyone carrying or managing a weapon') or a very narrow one ('Anyone who can be expected under normal circumstances to come under direct fire'). But even that leaves a large grey area.
If (I'm just talking layman terms here) you're an engineer, your job is not to fight people but to support those who do. But a combat engineer is still quite likely to come indirect or even direct fire, despite fighting not being their primary job. But imagine being in a large-caliber artillery unit. The changes of you coming under direct fire are small, but you are, unlike the engineer, actively trying to kill people. When does your supporting become fighting, and when does your fighting become supporting?
'Anyone who can be expected under normal circumstances to come under direct fire'This is the usual military definition of combat. Artillerymen wouldn't argue they have seen combat, but nobody would deny their role inside the part of combat.
Other soldiers would do it that are equally cappable of fighting on a front line? And they would probably have to fight since supply routes would be attacked and military bases as well?The thing you are horribly missing is that military =/= combat troops.
Your social science studies are showing
You don't understand what a psychopath is.
Hey how is Brexit going?
Spoke with @JunckerEU. #Brexit now in final fase. The EU is united; the Withdrawal Agreement is the best and only deal on the table. Awaiting proposal from UK that is acceptable to EU and will enable ratfication in the UK.
'No Deal' is going to happen if the backstop isn't removed, and for the UK it probably won't be that bad.
Factor in the weakness of the Eurozone economy and it's pretty clear that you guys can't win a game of chicken with us. We will win this small victory at least.
There is no such thing as the president of Holland.
Hahahahahahaha - oh god, you're serious?
There is no such thing as the president of Holland.
Firstly, because we don't have a president.
Secondly, because we're not Holland.
What you're looking for is Prime Minister of the Netherlands.
You will have alienated a major economy on your doorstep
If the populist/nationalist parties pooled their MEPs then they'd currently be the the 3rd biggest in the EU "Parliament".
What a shame it would be if a literal neo-Nazi from Eastern Europe became President of the EU Commission in 2024
QuoteYou will have alienated a major economy on your doorstep
Yeah, and it will definitly hurt us. But I fail to see how, logically, the UK will be hurt comparatively less. You're not just gonna WTO trade with us, but also with the rest of the world. How will it be bad for us, but not for you?
ITT:I don't think keeping Europeans from endlessly killing each other through famine and war and the freedom of movement would necessarily classify it as a total failure broseph.
Corporate lawyer baits unemployed social science students into having an absolute meltdown attempting to defend the hilarious and total failure that is the European integration project.
social 'science' hmmm
Existing deals with countries outside the EU are already being what's called 'grandfathered', i.e arrangements rolled over as far as possible. It'll also be very easy for the UK to trade access to its markets for agricultural products in return for services (etc), which is something the EU struggles to do due to French objections.
It will hurt the UK, but the damage will mostly be sector specific. In the medium to long term EU exports to the UK (your largest market) will become increasingly uncompetitive assuming the UK goes down the path of trade liberalisation. The flip-side of that is prices in the UK, both for consumer goods and inputs for industry, will on average decrease. You'll also see onshoring as UK firms pull back operations from EU27 to Britain. UK tech industry, the biggest in Europe, will also benefit from escaping particularly burdensome EU regulation (for some reason Brussels has a death wish when it comes to digital technology).
ITT:I don't think keeping Europeans from endlessly killing each other through famine and war and the freedom of movement would necessarily classify it as a total failure broseph.
Corporate lawyer baits unemployed social science students into having an absolute meltdown attempting to defend the hilarious and total failure that is the European integration project.
Actually a lot of the grandfathered deals will still be messed up and need renegotiating, as for example things which are made "in the EU" no longer includes the UK, so various products will no longer be under FTA as I understand it. There's also lots of altering of very minor text, but when you consider that the EU-ROK deal is over 1400 pages on it's own, it adds up. Not to mention ROK now see the UK as an equal in size, compared to negotiating with the EU, US etc and want more concessions.
I'm sure it'll all get sorted out, but many trade deals are not actually ready for B-Day yet.
Idk where you're getting this whole thing about onshoring from, as the trend so far seems very firmly the other way around. I'm curious as to what length of time you believe medium to long term to mean, roughly speaking.
Paul Kelly, Ibec’s director for the food and drink industry, warned that the imposition of tariff barriers could force some Irish businesses to transfer their activities to the UK market, resulting in job losses here. He also pointed out that 80 per cent of agri-food jobs were in the regions, meaning that “already economically disadvantaged areas will become more disadvantaged”.https://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/unions-say-eu-must-protect-rural-areas-and-food-sector-from-brexit-1.3048901
The only thing that shows is that it's more difficult for EU based companies to trade in post-Brexit Britain, which was already obvious. Companies are leaving the UK as it's less attractive. That's not really onshoring so much as filling a gap in the market created by companies leaving.
All that means is less competition and a more isolationist market, which most people agree is not a good thing for consumers. Brits will lose their jobs with EU companies and move to work at British companies, which just equals loss of earnings and uncertainty for them, also not great. And that's assuming best case smooth transition and picking up the slack in production left behind.
Personally I don't give a shit where a given company I buy from is based, I want the best quality goods provided at the lowest cost.
To be clear, I just enjoy coming on here to debate political stuff while we all wait for BCoF.
BCoF is a HoaxMildly put.
Well this is the funniest, weirdest story of 2019 thus far.whos that
https://medium.com/@jeffreypbezos/no-thank-you-mr-pecker-146e3922310f
TL;DR: Jeff Bezos had his dick pics leaked to a US tabloid and they allegedly tried to blackmail him with them.
Unamed 'senior EU diplomat': "In a no-deal scenario, Ireland would have to choose between setting up a physical Border with Northern Ireland and de facto leaving the single market. If there is no physical Border, the customs checks would have to take place on all goods coming from Ireland."https://www.independent.ie/opinion/editorial/editorial-eu-cannot-allow-us-to-burn-as-may-fiddles-over-brexit-37818812.html
That is the point of pressure with whichEuropeGermany will whip the Brits back in submission.
It's what happens when you trust G*rmanics in the first place.
So Trump's gone full dictator. Not hugely surprising considering his idols but anyway.
Sets an interesting precedent for future Democratic presidents. One could very easily argue national emergencies on school shootings (even if they wait until the next one that won't be far off) or those lacking health insurance.
Oh boy...So Trump's gone full dictator. Not hugely surprising considering his idols but anyway.
Sets an interesting precedent for future Democratic presidents. One could very easily argue national emergencies on school shootings (even if they wait until the next one that won't be far off) or those lacking health insurance.
Presidential power has expanded rapidly in the last 25 years, every incumbent has abused the office in one way or another. For example Obama did so via the prolific use of executive orders. I don't blame Trump-he has a clear mandate to build the wall.
Sets an interesting precedent for future Democratic presidents.I feel like using it to be able to appropriate funds for a project on the border is in a different league than presumably pushing de-facto legislation upon the whole of the interior. Nevertheless, given the insanity that ilk have adopted it wouldn't surprise me. They're welcome to; it would be the final nail in the coffin of this accursed union.
it would be the final nail in the coffin of this accursed union.
it would be the final nail in the coffin of this accursed union.
Let's hope the Supreme Court stops it, lest we see the American Dream itself shatter, launching us into an interesting era with more than enough job oppertunities for a person as myself.Shatter? It was never real to begin with.
Why would it? What would it gain? The logic 'we pay more than we get' is barely valid as you could literally continueing seceding richer parts away from poorer parts right down to the micro-level. Looking at you, Catalonia.
Fun fact: Texas was a lot bigger than our current size, but we also made Santa Anna sign the treaty of independence with guns all around him, so that's probably why.Why would it? What would it gain? The logic 'we pay more than we get' is barely valid as you could literally continueing seceding richer parts away from poorer parts right down to the micro-level. Looking at you, Catalonia.
I think it's more about arguments of nationhood. Texas was an independent republic that won its own war against Mexico before it joined the USA.
Why would it? What would it gain? The logic 'we pay more than we get' is barely valid as you could literally continueing seceding richer parts away from poorer parts right down to the micro-level. Looking at you, Catalonia.It's time for the
Why would it? What would it gain?
If you come over as a 'peacekeeper' you'll be lucky to leave in a body bag.r/iamverybadass
I am not making any claims about my own actions, merely pointing out that 'those hillbillies in the woods' aren't going to be as easy to 'persuade' as people will undoubtedly lead on.Contrary to popular belief, they are proficient shooters and well versed in guerrilla warfare.
Why would it? What would it gain?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereignty
To classify Texas as a nation that is different from the US is somewhat laughable considering pretty much its entire Republican government, including all its presidents and fifty-seven of the sixty signers of its declaration of independence were Americans.
The United States is easily made up of several nations, both culturally and ethnically. The only thing we share collectively is a language, and barely at that.And political citizenship. At least most of us...
While we're at it we could make the same argument about many countries, especially ones with very polarised politics and high income inequality, including the UK.
So, just for the sake of the argument, then what was the Texas nation when it was founded in 1836? Because its founders had no common chararistics except being white, English-speaking and American. And slaveholders for the most part, I guess.
Thank the media industry's lobby for this. This will become a fucking joke. I really hope this will turn into some internet insurgency
I, for one, hope that India bloodies Pakistan once again
Muslims of my generation, growing up in the 70s and 80s, were inspired by radical ideas derived from secular humanism.
Even if there's a delay we're still leaving. Good luck without us.
(https://www.trading-treff.de/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/plattform_o%CC%88konomie.png)
once Britain leaves
I genuinely don't understand your point with the graph. Do you think that those companies only operate in the country/continent they originate from? Besides that, the graph just shows growth in Asia at the cost of the US market.
Not that any of that will change post-Brexit anyway, they'll still need to comply with EU regulations and there are still cheaper places to operate from than the UK.
But obviously muh oppressive EU overlords stop me accessing Google, I'll be so grateful to leave the EU and have more personal data stripped.
You honestly think the UK is going to out-race the US and Asia to the bottom of the barrel?
The EU’s internet-killing new Copyright Directive has become mired in a fresh layer of controversy after it emerged that multiple MEPs were “tricked” into voting the wrong way on it. Guido understands that an extra vote was inserted into the voting list at the last minute which threw most MEPs’ voting lists out of sync. Unlike the Commons where MPs have to physically make the decision to walk through lobbies, MEPs just robotically press buttons according to a long voting list handed out to them.https://order-order.com/2019/03/28/meps-tricked-voting-wrong-way-article-13/
At least 13 MEPs have told the European Parliament they accidentally voted the wrong way. Now the EU has modified their individual voting records but has refused to revisit the result of the vote, despite the fact there was a majority of just 5 MEPs. The EU also rejected a direct request from MEPs to stage the entire vote again.
From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs
We must secure the existence of our people and a future for white children
:thinking:
From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs
We must secure the existence of our people and a future for white children
:thinking:
Comparing that to communism has become a joke in itself, as you can see.
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/03/14/court-rules-gun-maker-remington-can-be-sued-over-newtown-shooting.html
why
Can't wait for EU to deny brexit extension ;D
yanggang 2020Where is my universal 1000 dollars
God British politics is so cringy.Which isn't?
May is gone.Can't wait for a new idiot.Spoilerhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-50NdPawLVY[close]
Brexit means nothing.BREXIT... MEANS... BREXIT
Nigel will eventually die bois we'll just wait him out..Brexit means nothing.BREXIT... MEANS... BREXIT
oh btw, brexit is dumb and isn't going to happen. They're going to sit on their hands until people forget.
RE: EU "parliamentary" elections...
I predict the EU Council will ignore the Spitzenkandidat process and Manfred Weber will not become President of the EU Commission despite the EPP being the largest party. Why? Because he's a terrible candidate (they actually managed to find someone worse than Juncker), and the fact that France & Germany aren't keen on him means they'll probably block it (and we all know France and Germany decide everything). Plus there's the danger that the nationalists could be the biggest party next time round...
Of course. Johnson's ridicious hardline position is the only thing that will bring back voters to the Conservatives and MP's would like to keep their seats.
But hey someone please tell me how first-past-the-post single-member districts are such a good system for electing legislative bodies.
Spoilerhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iRN62IebC04[close]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uNKdwtd0tigSpoilerhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iRN62IebC04[close]Spoiler(https://www.innovationiseverywhere.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/Iran-map-languages-3.png)[close]
Where we dropping boys?
This better be a full blown ground war, none of this pussy "tactical" shit they pulled in Nam and 04. 80 million Hajis aren't just gonna let Khamenei walk with a few skirmishes and some oil fields burning. They are going to want BLOOD, and we will be forced to level their entire geographic position with artillery ordnance. This is precisely what the warhawks Pompeo, Bolton, and Commander in Chief Pumpkin want. Thousands of Americans and millions of Iranians will die over some shitty sand dune, and a mass humanitarian/geopolitical crisis will emerge from its ruin.In my world politics we learned about there is always a war that happens between the falling world power and the second place, rapidly rising other power (so U.S.A. vs China). I predict the Russians and Chinese providing mass assistance to Iran and it will be one of the most economically damaging wars in addition to mass loss of life, if China/Russia decide to not get involved directly. It will cement China as the number one power and the fall of the United States as the global hegemonic power.
I'm sure Khamenei and Trump are fully willing to let a few hundred thousand perish for their goals. The former for God, and the latter for Economy. Either way, this could potentially be the opening to some of the worst atrocities in recent memory if left unchecked.This better be a full blown ground war, none of this pussy "tactical" shit they pulled in Nam and 04. 80 million Hajis aren't just gonna let Khamenei walk with a few skirmishes and some oil fields burning. They are going to want BLOOD, and we will be forced to level their entire geographic position with artillery ordnance. This is precisely what the warhawks Pompeo, Bolton, and Commander in Chief Pumpkin want. Thousands of Americans and millions of Iranians will die over some shitty sand dune, and a mass humanitarian/geopolitical crisis will emerge from its ruin.In my world politics we learned about there is always a war that happens between the falling world power and the second place, rapidly rising other power (so U.S.A. vs China). I predict the Russians and Chinese providing mass assistance to Iran and it will be one of the most economically damaging wars in addition to mass loss of life, if China/Russia decide to not get involved directly. It will cement China as the number one power and the fall of the United States as the global hegemonic power.
This is the invasion of Japan the U.S. never got if it happens (in terms of dedicated populace willing to kill themselves).i'm generally pretty terrified of a nation that sends children to perform mineclearing with their bodies or frontal assaults on regular troops(https://66.media.tumblr.com/afe42fecc870f5d05ad842655cba0f58/tumblr_mfbagpMM611rcoy9ro1_1280.jpg)[close]
But hey someone please tell me how first-past-the-post single-member districts are such a good system for electing legislative bodies.
FPTP is great so long as you have primary elections that ensures there's a two-party system. For instance there's no need to vote Liberal Democrat if you can instead vote for a centrist to be the official Tory or Labour candidate come the general election.
In my world politics we learned about there is always a war that happens between the falling world power and the second place, rapidly rising other power (so U.S.A. vs China). I predict the Russians and Chinese providing mass assistance to Iran and it will be one of the most economically damaging wars in addition to mass loss of life, if China/Russia decide to not get involved directly. It will cement China as the number one power and the fall of the United States as the global hegemonic power.In addition to that, Iran is basically impossible to defeat in a defensive ground war if you look at the geography and size of the nation. Iran is basically Afghanistan on some massive steroids.
This is the invasion of Japan the U.S. never got if it happens (in terms of dedicated populace willing to kill themselves).i'm generally pretty terrified of a nation that sends children to perform mineclearing with their bodies or frontal assaults on regular troops(https://66.media.tumblr.com/afe42fecc870f5d05ad842655cba0f58/tumblr_mfbagpMM611rcoy9ro1_1280.jpg)[close]
Surprised that none of the Eurosceptics on this forum have been yelling about the next EU commisioner probably being a German from Merkel's party.
What happened to wanting us to leave ASAP... Scared, Duuring?
Imagine having the parliament sent into recess to avoid laws from being passed, that would look like someone being scared of a democratic institu..... oh
(https://i.gyazo.com/14edadae2523b5b14f5317a283b7afa5.png) (https://gyazo.com/14edadae2523b5b14f5317a283b7afa5)I really don't understand how people think Bernie is going to pull this off. He gets lambasted by the media 24/7, and says a whole lot of shit that sounds completely unfeasible. As per usual, I anticipate he will pull the money he needs out of his own ass while being already $21 trillion in debt.
found this interesting
Please explain HOW not spending as much as the USA on military puts YOU at risk of an invasionI was speaking hypothetically, as in getting rid of the ENTIRE military (and not a portion of it) budget wouldn't fulfill Bernie's plan by even 25%. Also, contrary to popular American-Nationalistic belief, this country is full of gun-toting morons who would run away before the first shot is even fired. Sure, the logistics of an invasion would be the biggest issue, and some would put up a fight, but not nearly enough to win. A big juicy country with plenty of resources and no standing military is easy pickings. We wouldn't stand a chance. Many, many people want this country reduced to nothing but a fleeting memory of a bygone era.
I believe there would be a lot more tax policies to attempt to cover that sum, winters.I understand that, but it is assuming that the Democrats actually hold on to power for longer than 4 terms. If they lose any of the major branches decisively for even a single term, they are going to get set back. The Republicans aren't going to raise shit.
The deficit we’re taking in atm is putting us closer to that dreaded ww2 national debt
I believe there would be a lot more tax policies to attempt to cover that sum, winters.I understand that, but it is assuming that the Democrats actually hold on to power for longer than 4 terms. If they lose any of the major branches decisively for even a single term, they are going to get set back. The Republicans aren't going to raise shit.
The deficit we’re taking in atm is putting us closer to that dreaded ww2 national debt
Bernie with serious health problems. I wonder what this means for his campaign or if he'll recoverIt's going to seriously damage the voter optics on his campaign. Think about it, an 80 year old man recovering from fucking heart surgery wanting to lead the country. Bless Bernie but this seriously might have just screwed him over. Establishment Democrats and Warren/Biden astroturfers will relentlessly push this story until Super Tuesday, all the while Republicans shove it in their faces come election day and beyond.
Carter is still around and active even at his of 95? so who knows what will happen to bernies campaign.To be fair, Carter is someone who lives a nice life and actually helps people himself unlike most politicians.
It's evident that the Senate wouldn't do shit even if he was guilty. Positive change is impossible, and it's time the American people accepted that.Congress really wasn't designed to make sweeping policy changes for the whole of the population of the country except in cases of massive unanimity. This polarizing gridlock is a consequence of centralizing power in institutions that were never meant to have those powers. If a more central authority is desired, either by the peoples here or the government, then a new system is required. People seem content to try and fit a square peg through a round hole, and then get upset when it doesn't go through - shouldn't be surprising, the voting public has always only cared for its own largess and aggrandizement.
Bernie's health concerns doesn't really matter that much when he's already stagnated in the polls. As it's looking right now it will be between Biden & Warren.Bernie with serious health problems. I wonder what this means for his campaign or if he'll recoverIt's going to seriously damage the voter optics on his campaign. Think about it, an 80 year old man recovering from fucking heart surgery wanting to lead the country. Bless Bernie but this seriously might have just screwed him over. Establishment Democrats and Warren/Biden astroturfers will relentlessly push this story until Super Tuesday, all the while Republicans shove it in their faces come election day and beyond.
Can't wait for the Bernie Bros to lose their minds again.Bernie's health concerns doesn't really matter that much when he's already stagnated in the polls. As it's looking right now it will be between Biden & Warren.Bernie with serious health problems. I wonder what this means for his campaign or if he'll recoverIt's going to seriously damage the voter optics on his campaign. Think about it, an 80 year old man recovering from fucking heart surgery wanting to lead the country. Bless Bernie but this seriously might have just screwed him over. Establishment Democrats and Warren/Biden astroturfers will relentlessly push this story until Super Tuesday, all the while Republicans shove it in their faces come election day and beyond.
Can't wait for the Bernie Bros to lose their minds again.Bernie's health concerns doesn't really matter that much when he's already stagnated in the polls. As it's looking right now it will be between Biden & Warren.Bernie with serious health problems. I wonder what this means for his campaign or if he'll recoverIt's going to seriously damage the voter optics on his campaign. Think about it, an 80 year old man recovering from fucking heart surgery wanting to lead the country. Bless Bernie but this seriously might have just screwed him over. Establishment Democrats and Warren/Biden astroturfers will relentlessly push this story until Super Tuesday, all the while Republicans shove it in their faces come election day and beyond.
I’m still haven’t met anyone who supports biden
RIP's in the chat for my boys, the Kurds. You all don't deserve this.They need another Saladin.
Assad = Saladin.RIP's in the chat for my boys, the Kurds. You all don't deserve this.They need another Saladin.
Bye bye labour
All political parties are wank, might aswell just kill ourselves and get out of this shitty world anyway
All political parties are wank, might aswell just kill ourselves and get out of this shitty world anyway
dont be that person, and definitly don't be that person on a 'political thread'.
If you like welfare you vote labour d00d also Corbyn said he won't be taking labour into the next election so they will probably go for someone more moderate next.All of our parties are in varying levels in favour of the welfare state, as it would be political suicide not to be. And in regards to the next leader being moderate, considering the party has been highjacked by momentum, that's a doubt.
gear up boys were going to war
You think WW3 will take its place soon? With all the tension now growing between the US and Iran.. Because if they go to war, Russia might join in as well. And when Russia joins in the war, the NATO will follow most likely too. As well as all the nations allies. I am not much of a politics person, so forgive me if I talk bullshit. It is just that this subject worries me.No
i hate the "we're going to war"will you call us civilians next or show us your camaro
snip you're 35% body fat and cant do a push up, I dont think there's a "we" here
No because I’m not an arrogant boot that thinks he’s better than someone just because he thinks he has a hard job. And there are a lot of military people here it’s not like it’s that hard to get in. Also it’s a Dodge Challenger. Got a good 30% APR deal on iti hate the "we're going to war"will you call us civilians next or show us your camaro
snip you're 35% body fat and cant do a push up, I dont think there's a "we" here
good shitNo because I’m not an arrogant boot that thinks he’s better than someone just because he thinks he has a hard job. And there are a lot of military people here it’s not like it’s that hard to get in. Also it’s a Dodge Challenger. Got a good 30% APR deal on iti hate the "we're going to war"will you call us civilians next or show us your camaro
snip you're 35% body fat and cant do a push up, I dont think there's a "we" here
I don't know who is dumber here. The US killing a top military general, or Iran blowing up a Ukrainian commercial plane filled with fucking Canadians.
I don't know who is dumber here. The US killing a top military general, or Iran blowing up a Ukrainian commercial plane filled with fucking Canadians.
Definitely the latter. I don't really know what's dumb about eliminating a dangerous terrorist.
I don't know who is dumber here. The US killing a top military general, or Iran blowing up a Ukrainian commercial plane filled with fucking Canadians.
Definitely the latter. I don't really know what's dumb about eliminating a dangerous terrorist.
Because it creates tension between the US & Iran? Because it creates a possible proxy esque war in Iraq? I'm not say killing him was good or bad but it will have repercussions for the US and allies. If you can't see that you're really naive.
Also it's quite obvious they shot down the commercial plane by accident it had like 80 Iranian citizens onboard and Iran had absolutely nothing to gain from shooting it down.
Alot of Swedish passports died in that Irani shootdown :'(
I don't know who is dumber here. The US killing a top military general, or Iran blowing up a Ukrainian commercial plane filled with fucking Canadians.
Definitely the latter. I don't really know what's dumb about eliminating a dangerous terrorist.
Because it creates tension between the US & Iran? Because it creates a possible proxy esque war in Iraq? I'm not say killing him was good or bad but it will have repercussions for the US and allies. If you can't see that you're really naive.
Also it's quite obvious they shot down the commercial plane by accident it had like 80 Iranian citizens onboard and Iran had absolutely nothing to gain from shooting it down.
There would always be tension in the region though?
I'd like to see more severe sanctions on the Iranian pro-terrorist government.
And it'd be hilarious to see the canucks beating the shit out of Iran anyway. :p
if your brother died vs if some kid from china got ran over, which would you care about more about. Its human nature homieAlot of Swedish passports died in that Irani shootdown :'(
Jeez 176 civilians just died dude.
I don't see how their ethnicity matters.
if your brother died vs if some kid from china got ran over, which would you care about more about. Its human nature homieAlot of Swedish passports died in that Irani shootdown :'(
Jeez 176 civilians just died dude.
I don't see how their ethnicity matters.
if your brother died vs if some kid from china got ran over, which would you care about more about. Its human nature homieAlot of Swedish passports died in that Irani shootdown :'(
Jeez 176 civilians just died dude.
I don't see how their ethnicity matters.
Yes, so? I still find it highly inconsiderate to make race ”jokes” about civilians who just died.
Once again, the youth vote turns out be virtually nonexistent. Boomers will rule elections till they enter hospice care. This is both sad and hilarious. Millennials are arguably the most pathetic generation in history. They bemoan their state and yet do nada when it's their time to shine.Really odd decision, thought she would endorse sanders to give progressives a shot.
Warren was dumb not to have dropped and endorsed Bernie. She might have screwed him over in several states he sweeped last cycle. Bloomberg is a corporate shill but that is to be expected. At least he has the unwavering support of American Samoa and it's 350 voters! Anyways, Texas will ignore closing down voting booths in areas that are heavily populated by minorities. Very nice indeed.Spoiler(https://i.imgur.com/BufGkev.png)[close]
“I don’t vote in primaries just elections”Once again, the youth vote turns out be virtually nonexistent. Boomers will rule elections till they enter hospice care. This is both sad and hilarious. Millennials are arguably the most pathetic generation in history. They bemoan their state and yet do nada when it's their time to shine.Really odd decision, thought she would endorse sanders to give progressives a shot.
Warren was dumb not to have dropped and endorsed Bernie. She might have screwed him over in several states he sweeped last cycle. Bloomberg is a corporate shill but that is to be expected. At least he has the unwavering support of American Samoa and it's 350 voters! Anyways, Texas will ignore closing down voting booths in areas that are heavily populated by minorities. Very nice indeed.Spoiler(https://i.imgur.com/BufGkev.png)[close]
Stands her ground and gets third in her own state LOL
It’s pure ego. She stayed in to spite Bernie and got wiped in the process. The Left is superb at self-destruction.Once again, the youth vote turns out be virtually nonexistent. Boomers will rule elections till they enter hospice care. This is both sad and hilarious. Millennials are arguably the most pathetic generation in history. They bemoan their state and yet do nada when it's their time to shine.Really odd decision, thought she would endorse sanders to give progressives a shot.
Warren was dumb not to have dropped and endorsed Bernie. She might have screwed him over in several states he sweeped last cycle. Bloomberg is a corporate shill but that is to be expected. At least he has the unwavering support of American Samoa and it's 350 voters! Anyways, Texas will ignore closing down voting booths in areas that are heavily populated by minorities. Very nice indeed.Spoiler(https://i.imgur.com/BufGkev.png)[close]
Stands her ground and gets third in her own state LOL
It is not surprising that the youth/younger vote is lower than older people. Has been for a very long time. It is far easier for older people to go out and vote than younger people.Being an idealogical purist didn't help Bernie either. He doesn't make compromises on anything and makes the DNC out to be evil. It might have worked with the GOP, since they fall in line, but the more picky Democrats wouldn't have it. Bernie overshot his expectations and is now risking getting his entire campaign sunk over it.
I once heard a saying along the lines of "Democrats fall in love, Republicans fall in line." Over the years, i find that to be fairly accurate. Whoever does a better job uniting their party, and swaying independents will win.Most of the populace wants a return to "normalcy". What they don't want is a full fledged revolution that tries to tear down long-standing institutions. Americans don't want to hear about how the government is screwing everything up; that is why the loved Obama. He gave a few nice speeches and everybody went back to their own thing (except the neocons with their birthing conspiracy).
Bernie has a lot of very loyal followers but that love doesnt go far beyond them.
As i am posting this, there are reports Warren is backing out of the race. If so, its basically a 2 person race. When it comes to the moderates vs the progressives, moderates have the advantage imo. How many states coming up will bernie win, and win by a large enough margin to build a large delegate count compared to Biden? I can see a lot of states coming up, including large states where if i had to guess, bernie will lose hard.
With all that said, biden hasn't run a good campaign. The debates, fundraising, and the other campaign activities haven't been great. It amuses me how many people forgot this after he won SC and did very well on super tuesday. It is much easier to blame the people in the first 3 states as being out of touch than admit it. Why would/should people vote for you if you dont put any effort in and performed so poorly up to that point? It wasn't until it was do or die for him that he finally showed up. TBH it feels like he just assumed he would win and hasnt put much effort in. Brand and being Obamas guy is what saved him. If he does poorly going forward, i can see sanders winning.
waiting on cancel culture to catch up to old uncle joe. This is gonna be fun to seeThe disinformation spread during this election season is going to be horrible. Bloomberg might decide to buy as many ad spots as he can to help the Democrats, while Trump will focus on Joe's senility and pedophilic tendencies. Two old codgers duking it out for the most powerful position on the planet; it's going to be beautiful.
Ah well, at least Bernie tried. It's a pity too, maybe he will inspire someone more charismatic to head the progressive movement. Now, who to pick from. A rambling, senile dinosaur, or a raging, wannabe authoritarian narcissist?no bullshit joe should be in a nursing home right now, wtf is going on? Who voted for this??Spoiler(https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/001/771/794/369.jpg)[close]
ed milliband is tough enoughIf you like welfare you vote labour d00d also Corbyn said he won't be taking labour into the next election so they will probably go for someone more moderate next.All of our parties are in varying levels in favour of the welfare state, as it would be political suicide not to be. And in regards to the next leader being moderate, considering the party has been highjacked by momentum, that's a doubt.
Can't tell if Biden is lying through his teeth about Tara Reade or his dementia has kicked into overdrive.He's lying right through his teeth and the media is right behind him trying to cover up any accusation she has.
any 1 antifascist here or just cunts?Elias what do you consider as antifascist? Cause I hate Fascists. But I do believe you wouldnt call antifascist
Is Le Pen actually winning in France?Sure lol
any 1 antifascist here or just cunts?
Tragic how the public responds to the tragedy at Minneapolis. Unacceptable. Prayers for all the normal and peaceful citizens <3What's currently happening is unfortunate but entirely unpreventable. Whether or not race relations are as bad as claimed by the media, it's clear that they have won the war on information in this category. The message is set and there is no going back now. Much like the deaths of Trayvon Martin and Michael Brown, George Floyd's death will once again bring to attention the injustices and prejudices African-Americans face on a daily basis. It's obvious that looting and burning won't do much to help the cause, and they will use Floyd's death as justification for their actions. Collateral damage is never taken out of definition quite like it is when there is a martyr involved. There's this section in "The Anarchist's Cookbook" I believe that focuses on a similar issue to the one in question. It extrapolates from historic examples that humans, no matter their class, color, or sex, will exploit a crisis for their own benefit (and potentially amusement). The scapegoat here is the police. In terms of scale, the situation and perspective has gotten so bad that there isn't anything (barring maybe hanging the guilty officers publicly) that will appease the public. They are the perfect scapegoat, and will be used as such to substantiate any acts of civil disobedience that may occur.
Tragic how the public responds to the tragedy at Minneapolis. Unacceptable. Prayers for all the normal and peaceful citizens <3yes it is tragic that the police officer can run off to his vacation home in florida after murdering someone
The US police force is interesting in the fact that it rarely, if ever, calls out it's own members for illegal acts. They are very tight knit, and close ranks when the situation calls for it.Tragic how the public responds to the tragedy at Minneapolis. Unacceptable. Prayers for all the normal and peaceful citizens <3yes it is tragic that the police officer can run off to his vacation home in florida after murdering someone
pretty sure the guy from the "I can't breathe" from NYC is still employed by NYPD too.The US police force is interesting in the fact that it rarely, if ever, calls out it's own members for illegal acts. They are very tight knit, and close ranks when the situation calls for it.Tragic how the public responds to the tragedy at Minneapolis. Unacceptable. Prayers for all the normal and peaceful citizens <3yes it is tragic that the police officer can run off to his vacation home in florida after murdering someone
Half of the cops who partook in Rodney King's beating got 30 months (eventually reversed), the other half got off scot-free. Even after the video footage and one of the worst riots in American history, they STILL defend their actions.
Tragic how the public responds to the tragedy at Minneapolis. Unacceptable. Prayers for all the normal and peaceful citizens <3the burnings g00chee
Tragic how the public responds to the tragedy at Minneapolis. Unacceptable. Prayers for all the normal and peaceful citizens <3yes it is tragic that the police officer can run off to his vacation home in florida after murdering someone
Figures that it would be Protestants involved. Where are my fellow minimalist Fraticelli practitioners at?Tragic how the public responds to the tragedy at Minneapolis. Unacceptable. Prayers for all the normal and peaceful citizens <3yes it is tragic that the police officer can run off to his vacation home in florida after murdering someone
Yes, I'm in no way defending the police officer. I'm just calling out the uncalled for and pathetic actions of all the protestants involved in the vandalism.
Looting and destroying properties will sure help their case lul @cazKore how would you try and change a corrupt system?
Well, the problem with their riots is that it essentially serves a self-defeating purpose. The American Justice system absolutely is beyond fucked, but what's happening now isn't going to accomplish anything. Nothing short of marching Capitol Hill in the millions will make Washington change their minds. They directly profit off of this system, so it makes sense that they only offer empty platitudes instead of meaningful legislation. Their anger is justified, now they just need to direct it at the people who actually dictate this shit.Looting and destroying properties will sure help their case lul @cazKore how would you try and change a corrupt system?
Simple! I’m abandoning this shit hole of a country and moving to Belgium soonLooting and destroying properties will sure help their case lul @cazKore how would you try and change a corrupt system?
Probably the smartest moveSimple! I’m abandoning this shit hole of a country and moving to Belgium soonLooting and destroying properties will sure help their case lul @cazKore how would you try and change a corrupt system?
has it really gotten that bad that belgium is better?Probably the smartest moveSimple! I’m abandoning this shit hole of a country and moving to Belgium soonLooting and destroying properties will sure help their case lul @cazKore how would you try and change a corrupt system?
Simple! I’m abandoning this shit hole of a country and moving to Belgium soonLooting and destroying properties will sure help their case lul @cazKore how would you try and change a corrupt system?
Yeshas it really gotten that bad that belgium is better?Probably the smartest moveSimple! I’m abandoning this shit hole of a country and moving to Belgium soonLooting and destroying properties will sure help their case lul @cazKore how would you try and change a corrupt system?
I am currently on the way to become a Police Officer in Germany. You have to study for 3 Years to become a Police Officer and you are required to pass multiple Psychological Screenings.The problem isn't just the training american police officers receives but it's also the GUNS. It's unfair to compare Europe to America in regards to policing because american police officers have to face the fact that any civilian could be carrying a gun on them at any time. The entire police force is built around using the most force and control possible because their living in a country where civilians can carry and own lethal weapons of death wherever they please.
We learnt to take care of People in our custody in our first week, and how fast people can choke.
The Fact that American Cops are trained for 2 MONTHS is absolutely insane. That Cop murdered that Man and I think it is completely legit that the People there are currently rioting.
Violence leads to more violence. People of colour shouldn't be surprised if what they are doing now in Minneapolis leads to more cases of police brutality and what not.what are people of colour?
Pertaining to specifically American demographics, they are anyone who isn't white. It's a controversial term to say the least, and usually isn't used outside of discussions that involve racism.Violence leads to more violence. People of colour shouldn't be surprised if what they are doing now in Minneapolis leads to more cases of police brutality and what not.what are people of colour?
guessing those that produce different concentrations of melanin than himViolence leads to more violence. People of colour shouldn't be surprised if what they are doing now in Minneapolis leads to more cases of police brutality and what not.what are people of colour?
I think one of the biggest problems with American police training is the sheer number of different agencies and difference in training between those agencies; the FBI and other federal law enforcement agencies are very well trained, some of the best in the world, but since there isn't consistency between the different city, state and county forces, you get incredibly well-trained forces like Tulsa but then you got a manual that says putting pressure on someone's neck for a few minutes is a great idea like MinneapolisIsnt Police in America mostly funded by the City it protects itself?
In Ontario (not sure about the other provinces) we have a civilian oversight agency called the SIU which investigates use-of-force incidents like this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_Investigations_Unit but if I'm not mistaken its either the city prosecutor or the FBI investigating use of force situations? which is questionable
Well, for insurances and welfare Belgium is a good country. But we got the most difficult political structure you could ever imagine. We have multiple governments and language communities that never get along with each other. Also taxes are high here. 21%. Might go up as well maybe in the future. As for the cops, we have good ones but also some pretty annoying ones. I guess in every country it's like this. But, police brutality is almost nonexistent.Simple! I’m abandoning this shit hole of a country and moving to Belgium soonLooting and destroying properties will sure help their case lul @cazKore how would you try and change a corrupt system?
Well, there’s the city funded city police, transport police, state police (usually for highways and rural areas) and then federal law enforcement agenciesI think one of the biggest problems with American police training is the sheer number of different agencies and difference in training between those agencies; the FBI and other federal law enforcement agencies are very well trained, some of the best in the world, but since there isn't consistency between the different city, state and county forces, you get incredibly well-trained forces like Tulsa but then you got a manual that says putting pressure on someone's neck for a few minutes is a great idea like MinneapolisIsnt Police in America mostly funded by the City it protects itself?
In Ontario (not sure about the other provinces) we have a civilian oversight agency called the SIU which investigates use-of-force incidents like this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_Investigations_Unit but if I'm not mistaken its either the city prosecutor or the FBI investigating use of force situations? which is questionable
Not gonna lie everytime I hear Details about the American State it just sounds like they never updated any of their Legislatures or Laws since the 18th Century.Well, there’s the city funded city police, transport police, state police (usually for highways and rural areas) and then federal law enforcement agenciesI think one of the biggest problems with American police training is the sheer number of different agencies and difference in training between those agencies; the FBI and other federal law enforcement agencies are very well trained, some of the best in the world, but since there isn't consistency between the different city, state and county forces, you get incredibly well-trained forces like Tulsa but then you got a manual that says putting pressure on someone's neck for a few minutes is a great idea like MinneapolisIsnt Police in America mostly funded by the City it protects itself?
In Ontario (not sure about the other provinces) we have a civilian oversight agency called the SIU which investigates use-of-force incidents like this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_Investigations_Unit but if I'm not mistaken its either the city prosecutor or the FBI investigating use of force situations? which is questionable
I think one of the biggest problems with American police training is the sheer number of different agencies and difference in training between those agencies; the FBI and other federal law enforcement agencies are very well trained, some of the best in the world, but since there isn't consistency between the different city, state and county forces, you get incredibly well-trained forces like Tulsa but then you got a manual that says putting pressure on someone's neck for a few minutes is a great idea like Minneapolis
In Ontario (not sure about the other provinces) we have a civilian oversight agency called the SIU which investigates use-of-force incidents like this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_Investigations_Unit but if I'm not mistaken its either the city prosecutor or the FBI investigating use of force situations? which is questionable
yeh, altho it's not necessarily a bad thing to have a layered police structure. the rcmp in Canada is both a federal and in most provinces provincial police force, and they also function as part of the foreign intelligence service. which is kinda strangeI think one of the biggest problems with American police training is the sheer number of different agencies and difference in training between those agencies; the FBI and other federal law enforcement agencies are very well trained, some of the best in the world, but since there isn't consistency between the different city, state and county forces, you get incredibly well-trained forces like Tulsa but then you got a manual that says putting pressure on someone's neck for a few minutes is a great idea like MinneapolisYou are right, the agencies is kind of ridiculous I did a report on the different departments and agencies in american politics once back when I studied politics, ended up with pages upon pages of different agencies for law enforcement and its subsidiaries. It's mainly caused by the states which is unique to the US compared to Europe in that each state is it's own governing body and has its own departments and agencies that stem from it, 50 states = a lot of fucking agencies. + Federal level. Then you have cities, military and paramilitary departments. Presidential only bodies such as the secret service, it just keeps going. The secret service alone is a small army...
In Ontario (not sure about the other provinces) we have a civilian oversight agency called the SIU which investigates use-of-force incidents like this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_Investigations_Unit but if I'm not mistaken its either the city prosecutor or the FBI investigating use of force situations? which is questionable
Anonymous possibly exposing the fuck outta Trump. Would suck if this was true cause then we'd have to deal with Biden as president potentially.That demented old fuck would at least have a cabinet that would help keep a decent public image. Trump is too egotistical to allow anyone to steal the spotlight, even if it is detrimental to his reelection chances.
American presidential candidates always full of old senile men tough choices wherever you look.
https://www.insider.com/george-floyd-non-responsive-before-officer-took-knee-off-neck-2020-5This Video shows nothing relevant. like at all.
watch the video, floyd was fucked off his mind on drugs and had a heart attack
https://youtu.be/EUhatOhtnPI
career criminal and drug addict, the world is better off without him
(https://i.imgur.com/WV5rkjS.png)
This Video shows nothing relevant. like at all.Thats why the article is there for context
Dont you ever think theres a time to stop being edgy?
Media last week: If you don't stay at home, you are an awful human being. You are killing people by doing so.There are people who preached social distancing and mask wearing two weeks ago that are now ustifying mass gatherings in order to protest police brutality. They follow whatever the narrative is.
Media today: Trump is a dictator for sending in the National Guard after governors and mayors failed to protect their cities from rioting and looting.
Girls are posting black screens on social media - sums up european responseProbably the most annoying part of it
Ireland looking real nice right nowVery low tax rate for companies, but if you’re looking for the last vestiges of in-Christian religious warfare it’s your island
I dont blame euro's all women are sheep. Thinking they're going against the system when all of their friends and the media are constantly telling them what to doGirls are posting black screens on social media - sums up european responseProbably the most annoying part of it
Honestly BLM should be declared a terrorist organisation at this point.
Trump got the military going inSanders America is one of the least racist countries on the planet. One moment of racial tension doesnt define the whole damn country. Move to Belgium if you want, youll find its not some post racial paradise like youre expecting.
I got my 1 way ticket to Brussels ready to go
Fuck you America
Still hasn't voluntarily been waterboarded like he said he would!Honestly BLM should be declared a terrorist organisation at this point.
thank you sean hannity
Honestly BLM should be declared a terrorist organisation at this point.
Then they post black screens, stating that these black screens aren't enough to fight injustice and that we should be doing more. We should all be doing more. ::)I dont blame euro's all women are sheep. Thinking they're going against the system when all of their friends and the media are constantly telling them what to doGirls are posting black screens on social media - sums up european responseProbably the most annoying part of it
Ireland looking real nice right nowVery low tax rate for companies, but if you’re looking for the last vestiges of in-Christian religious warfare it’s your island
https://youtu.be/iUhdc1GAddk
Honestly this is a very good perspective on how things should be handled, instead of screaming defund the police and creating a mad max world
my late prediction
let's see how it fares
it's really gonna come down to Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio and PASpoiler(https://i.gyazo.com/27975c511c4aa8613c4e8668f4913f29.png)[close]
Let’s go Trump!!
which lizard person did you guys vote for
which lizard person did you guys vote forkanye west
Trump doesnt look like he will win Michigan, and the votes from the cities appear to be swinging it as the rural areas from what i was looking at, have already voted so i do not see where the votes for Trump to come back would come from. Same as Nevada with Reno and Las Vegas.Trump could win Nevada on mail ins tho possibly then it'd be over, even if Trump loses Michigan
Trump doesnt look like he will win Michigan, and the votes from the cities appear to be swinging it as the rural areas from what i was looking at, have already voted so i do not see where the votes for Trump to come back would come from. Same as Nevada with Reno and Las Vegas.Trump could win Nevada on mail ins tho possibly then it'd be over, even if Trump loses Michigan
looks like he could win PA, GA, and NC atm
imagine Trump losing on that 1 electoral vote in Nebraska tho lmao
fraud :)
I went to bed expecting to wake up to a Trump blowout wtf guys
This election cycle came very close to being a 269 to 269 tie. That would've been fun to gone through.Biden winning that 1 vote in Nebraska turns out to be a game changer
This election cycle came very close to being a 269 to 269 tie. That would've been fun to gone through.Biden winning that 1 vote in Nebraska turns out to be a game changer
This election cycle came very close to being a 269 to 269 tie. That would've been fun to gone through.Biden winning that 1 vote in Nebraska turns out to be a game changer
I still think Trump is gonna pull through. Idk just my gut feeling
(https://i.imgflip.com/4h8d1x.png)fraud :)
Trump train got derailed. I doubt a recount changes much
It’s gonna be a lot harder for Republicans to win in the future unless they move more to the left imo
All the democrats from NY, NJ, and California moving to states like Texas, North Carolina, Georgia, and Florida has impacted and will further impact elections in the future. Republicans won’t win unless they have a polarizing figure like Trump or a young charismatic candidate that is moderate and not very conservative.yeah Gary Johnson the pothead with his brain fried is a great example of third party candidates
I personally think the party system is trash and we need to do something about it. These two candidates are garbage and the other parties could’ve had a huge opportunity here to win votes (Almost like Gary Johnson in 2016). The media doesn’t give any other parties attention and I feel like third party candidates do a shit job of marketing and using the internet to influence votes.
Now we are stuck with Joe Biden for a couple years and then a Marxist in Kamala Harris for the rest of the term.
Yang 2024
I'm just stating that he actually got a decent chunk of votes. I believe a third party candidate has the ability to actually compete for votes especially if they run a good campaign. There was no better time than now for someone to step up outside of the Republican or Democratic parties, and nobody took advantage. All it takes nowadays is an internet movement.All the democrats from NY, NJ, and California moving to states like Texas, North Carolina, Georgia, and Florida has impacted and will further impact elections in the future. Republicans won’t win unless they have a polarizing figure like Trump or a young charismatic candidate that is moderate and not very conservative.yeah Gary Johnson the pothead with his brain fried is a great example of third party candidates
I personally think the party system is trash and we need to do something about it. These two candidates are garbage and the other parties could’ve had a huge opportunity here to win votes (Almost like Gary Johnson in 2016). The media doesn’t give any other parties attention and I feel like third party candidates do a shit job of marketing and using the internet to influence votes.
Now we are stuck with Joe Biden for a couple years and then a Marxist in Kamala Harris for the rest of the term.
Yang 2024
I'm just stating that he actually got a decent chunk of votes. I believe a third party candidate has the ability to actually compete for votes especially if they run a good campaign. There was no better time than now for someone to step up outside of the Republican or Democratic parties, and nobody took advantage. All it takes nowadays is an internet movement.All the democrats from NY, NJ, and California moving to states like Texas, North Carolina, Georgia, and Florida has impacted and will further impact elections in the future. Republicans won’t win unless they have a polarizing figure like Trump or a young charismatic candidate that is moderate and not very conservative.yeah Gary Johnson the pothead with his brain fried is a great example of third party candidates
I personally think the party system is trash and we need to do something about it. These two candidates are garbage and the other parties could’ve had a huge opportunity here to win votes (Almost like Gary Johnson in 2016). The media doesn’t give any other parties attention and I feel like third party candidates do a shit job of marketing and using the internet to influence votes.
Now we are stuck with Joe Biden for a couple years and then a Marxist in Kamala Harris for the rest of the term.
Yang 2024
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=96-BQaIVOpc
See, Trump has ruined the Republican Party. Now majority of the youth and the country in general thinks Republicans are just a bunch of racist rednecks. When that really isn't the case. So Democrats are going to dominate for the foreseeable future, as most of these die hard trump supporters are going to literally die off. The Republican Party needs a candidate like Marco Rubio. Someone to try and be more moderate and reconnect with more youthful voters that lean towards the middle.this has been the lefts view of the right for decades. I know you're probably too young to know that but this is a brainlet take. a right winger trying to use a moderate candidate just moves the party farther to the left which is kind of their strategy. that's how you get someone like Mitt Romney who is incredibly out of touch with blue collar right wingers
See, Trump has ruined the Republican Party. Now majority of the youth and the country in general thinks Republicans are just a bunch of racist rednecks. When that really isn't the case. So Democrats are going to dominate for the foreseeable future, as most of these die hard trump supporters are going to literally die off. The Republican Party needs a candidate like Marco Rubio. Someone to try and be more moderate and reconnect with more youthful voters that lean towards the middle.this has been the lefts view of the right for decades. I know you're probably too young to know that but this is a brainlet take. a right winger trying to use a moderate candidate just moves the party farther to the left which is kind of their strategy. that's how you get someone like Mitt Romney who is incredibly out of touch with blue collar right wingers
playing on their terms is still playing their game :)
See, Trump has ruined the Republican Party. Now majority of the youth and the country in general thinks Republicans are just a bunch of racist rednecks. When that really isn't the case. So Democrats are going to dominate for the foreseeable future, as most of these die hard trump supporters are going to literally die off. The Republican Party needs a candidate like Marco Rubio. Someone to try and be more moderate and reconnect with more youthful voters that lean towards the middle.this has been the lefts view of the right for decades. I know you're probably too young to know that but this is a brainlet take. a right winger trying to use a moderate candidate just moves the party farther to the left which is kind of their strategy. that's how you get someone like Mitt Romney who is incredibly out of touch with blue collar right wingers
playing on their terms is still playing their game :)
1. Okay first of all I’m way better at games than you. 2. I have a girlfriend right now and she’s really sexy and said you’re ugly. 3. I’m waaaaay better at memes than you.See, Trump has ruined the Republican Party. Now majority of the youth and the country in general thinks Republicans are just a bunch of racist rednecks. When that really isn't the case. So Democrats are going to dominate for the foreseeable future, as most of these die hard trump supporters are going to literally die off. The Republican Party needs a candidate like Marco Rubio. Someone to try and be more moderate and reconnect with more youthful voters that lean towards the middle.this has been the lefts view of the right for decades. I know you're probably too young to know that but this is a brainlet take. a right winger trying to use a moderate candidate just moves the party farther to the left which is kind of their strategy. that's how you get someone like Mitt Romney who is incredibly out of touch with blue collar right wingers
playing on their terms is still playing their game :)
1- I am older then you.
2- I am a Republican and have been since I was a junior in high school.
3- It isn't playing their game. Both parties need to be more centered. You have to be able to see both sides. And leaning far-right or far-left is wrong in a modern world. Both parties need moderate candidates. Because majority of the country is full of moderate people in reality. Which is why Trump lost. Because he pushed away to many of the moderate center leaning Republicans. Also Trump isn't even a true Republican. He has been flip flopping parties his whole life. Also, Mitt Romney would of been a great Republican leader.
1. Okay first of all I’m way better at games than you. 2. I have a girlfriend right now and she’s really sexy and said you’re ugly. 3. I’m waaaaay better at memes than you.See, Trump has ruined the Republican Party. Now majority of the youth and the country in general thinks Republicans are just a bunch of racist rednecks. When that really isn't the case. So Democrats are going to dominate for the foreseeable future, as most of these die hard trump supporters are going to literally die off. The Republican Party needs a candidate like Marco Rubio. Someone to try and be more moderate and reconnect with more youthful voters that lean towards the middle.this has been the lefts view of the right for decades. I know you're probably too young to know that but this is a brainlet take. a right winger trying to use a moderate candidate just moves the party farther to the left which is kind of their strategy. that's how you get someone like Mitt Romney who is incredibly out of touch with blue collar right wingers
playing on their terms is still playing their game :)
1- I am older then you.
2- I am a Republican and have been since I was a junior in high school.
3- It isn't playing their game. Both parties need to be more centered. You have to be able to see both sides. And leaning far-right or far-left is wrong in a modern world. Both parties need moderate candidates. Because majority of the country is full of moderate people in reality. Which is why Trump lost. Because he pushed away to many of the moderate center leaning Republicans. Also Trump isn't even a true Republican. He has been flip flopping parties his whole life. Also, Mitt Romney would of been a great Republican leader.
blue collar right wingersracists*
To summarize, Americans simply want to grill.oh not just americans
You really expect Democrats and Republicans to ever work together again??See, Trump has ruined the Republican Party. Now majority of the youth and the country in general thinks Republicans are just a bunch of racist rednecks. When that really isn't the case. So Democrats are going to dominate for the foreseeable future, as most of these die hard trump supporters are going to literally die off. The Republican Party needs a candidate like Marco Rubio. Someone to try and be more moderate and reconnect with more youthful voters that lean towards the middle.this has been the lefts view of the right for decades. I know you're probably too young to know that but this is a brainlet take. a right winger trying to use a moderate candidate just moves the party farther to the left which is kind of their strategy. that's how you get someone like Mitt Romney who is incredibly out of touch with blue collar right wingers
playing on their terms is still playing their game :)
1- I am older then you.
2- I am a Republican and have been since I was a junior in high school.
3- It isn't playing their game. Both parties need to be more centered. You have to be able to see both sides. And leaning far-right or far-left is wrong in a modern world. Both parties need moderate candidates. Because majority of the country is full of moderate people in reality. Which is why Trump lost. Because he pushed away to many of the moderate center leaning Republicans. Also Trump isn't even a true Republican. He has been flip flopping parties his whole life.
4- Mitt Romney would of been a great Republican leader.
Bruh he chose Kamela Harris as his running mateSee, Trump has ruined the Republican Party. Now majority of the youth and the country in general thinks Republicans are just a bunch of racist rednecks. When that really isn't the case. So Democrats are going to dominate for the foreseeable future, as most of these die hard trump supporters are going to literally die off. The Republican Party needs a candidate like Marco Rubio. Someone to try and be more moderate and reconnect with more youthful voters that lean towards the middle.this has been the lefts view of the right for decades. I know you're probably too young to know that but this is a brainlet take. a right winger trying to use a moderate candidate just moves the party farther to the left which is kind of their strategy. that's how you get someone like Mitt Romney who is incredibly out of touch with blue collar right wingers
playing on their terms is still playing their game :)
Joe Biden was easily the most moderate centrist pick the Democrats could've gone with and it looked early like Bernie Sanders would be the nominee. The Democrats are being moved further to the right to appease independents because this is an election to beat Trump not to "play any games". ABC news also said that 7% of Mail in ballots were not delivered by the USPS. People being suspicious of "sudden mail in ballot dumps" are not realizing this was supposed to happen and they said this would happen for weeks. The opposite happened in Florida and Texas where Biden was up big early with mail in ballots but as election day votes came in the states swung back to trump. The midwestern states simply did the opposite and counted mail in ballots after election day ones.
He had to get the more left leaning dems somehowBruh he chose Kamela Harris as his running mateSee, Trump has ruined the Republican Party. Now majority of the youth and the country in general thinks Republicans are just a bunch of racist rednecks. When that really isn't the case. So Democrats are going to dominate for the foreseeable future, as most of these die hard trump supporters are going to literally die off. The Republican Party needs a candidate like Marco Rubio. Someone to try and be more moderate and reconnect with more youthful voters that lean towards the middle.this has been the lefts view of the right for decades. I know you're probably too young to know that but this is a brainlet take. a right winger trying to use a moderate candidate just moves the party farther to the left which is kind of their strategy. that's how you get someone like Mitt Romney who is incredibly out of touch with blue collar right wingers
playing on their terms is still playing their game :)
Joe Biden was easily the most moderate centrist pick the Democrats could've gone with and it looked early like Bernie Sanders would be the nominee. The Democrats are being moved further to the right to appease independents because this is an election to beat Trump not to "play any games". ABC news also said that 7% of Mail in ballots were not delivered by the USPS. People being suspicious of "sudden mail in ballot dumps" are not realizing this was supposed to happen and they said this would happen for weeks. The opposite happened in Florida and Texas where Biden was up big early with mail in ballots but as election day votes came in the states swung back to trump. The midwestern states simply did the opposite and counted mail in ballots after election day ones.
this post smells of Israel First neoconSee, Trump has ruined the Republican Party. Now majority of the youth and the country in general thinks Republicans are just a bunch of racist rednecks. When that really isn't the case. So Democrats are going to dominate for the foreseeable future, as most of these die hard trump supporters are going to literally die off. The Republican Party needs a candidate like Marco Rubio. Someone to try and be more moderate and reconnect with more youthful voters that lean towards the middle.this has been the lefts view of the right for decades. I know you're probably too young to know that but this is a brainlet take. a right winger trying to use a moderate candidate just moves the party farther to the left which is kind of their strategy. that's how you get someone like Mitt Romney who is incredibly out of touch with blue collar right wingers
playing on their terms is still playing their game :)
1- I am older then you.
2- I am a Republican and have been since I was a junior in high school.
3- It isn't playing their game. Both parties need to be more centered. You have to be able to see both sides. And leaning far-right or far-left is wrong in a modern world. Both parties need moderate candidates. Because majority of the country is full of moderate people in reality. Which is why Trump lost. Because he pushed away to many of the moderate center leaning Republicans. Also Trump isn't even a true Republican. He has been flip flopping parties his whole life.
4- Mitt Romney would of been a great Republican leader.
I'm just stating that he actually got a decent chunk of votes. I believe a third party candidate has the ability to actually compete for votes especially if they run a good campaign. There was no better time than now for someone to step up outside of the Republican or Democratic parties, and nobody took advantage. All it takes nowadays is an internet movement.All the democrats from NY, NJ, and California moving to states like Texas, North Carolina, Georgia, and Florida has impacted and will further impact elections in the future. Republicans won’t win unless they have a polarizing figure like Trump or a young charismatic candidate that is moderate and not very conservative.yeah Gary Johnson the pothead with his brain fried is a great example of third party candidates
I personally think the party system is trash and we need to do something about it. These two candidates are garbage and the other parties could’ve had a huge opportunity here to win votes (Almost like Gary Johnson in 2016). The media doesn’t give any other parties attention and I feel like third party candidates do a shit job of marketing and using the internet to influence votes.
Now we are stuck with Joe Biden for a couple years and then a Marxist in Kamala Harris for the rest of the term.
Yang 2024
If a third party candidate ever gets big in this current climate, it will simply be a repeat of Ross Perot. The political tribalism runs too deep for any other party to make wiggle room. All you can hope for is that demographics shift just enough for the DNC and GOP to actually listen
I'm just stating that he actually got a decent chunk of votes. I believe a third party candidate has the ability to actually compete for votes especially if they run a good campaign. There was no better time than now for someone to step up outside of the Republican or Democratic parties, and nobody took advantage. All it takes nowadays is an internet movement.All the democrats from NY, NJ, and California moving to states like Texas, North Carolina, Georgia, and Florida has impacted and will further impact elections in the future. Republicans won’t win unless they have a polarizing figure like Trump or a young charismatic candidate that is moderate and not very conservative.yeah Gary Johnson the pothead with his brain fried is a great example of third party candidates
I personally think the party system is trash and we need to do something about it. These two candidates are garbage and the other parties could’ve had a huge opportunity here to win votes (Almost like Gary Johnson in 2016). The media doesn’t give any other parties attention and I feel like third party candidates do a shit job of marketing and using the internet to influence votes.
Now we are stuck with Joe Biden for a couple years and then a Marxist in Kamala Harris for the rest of the term.
Yang 2024
If a third party candidate ever gets big in this current climate, it will simply be a repeat of Ross Perot. The political tribalism runs too deep for any other party to make wiggle room. All you can hope for is that demographics shift just enough for the DNC and GOP to actually listen
A Ross Perot is exactly what we need. If Yang ran as an independent in this election and took part in the debates I honestly think he’d have gotten at least 20,000,000 votes. Someone similar can make a push in the next election I believe. (But IMO this election was the best time for a third party candidate to make a statement and they failed miserably)
I'm just stating that he actually got a decent chunk of votes. I believe a third party candidate has the ability to actually compete for votes especially if they run a good campaign. There was no better time than now for someone to step up outside of the Republican or Democratic parties, and nobody took advantage. All it takes nowadays is an internet movement.All the democrats from NY, NJ, and California moving to states like Texas, North Carolina, Georgia, and Florida has impacted and will further impact elections in the future. Republicans won’t win unless they have a polarizing figure like Trump or a young charismatic candidate that is moderate and not very conservative.yeah Gary Johnson the pothead with his brain fried is a great example of third party candidates
I personally think the party system is trash and we need to do something about it. These two candidates are garbage and the other parties could’ve had a huge opportunity here to win votes (Almost like Gary Johnson in 2016). The media doesn’t give any other parties attention and I feel like third party candidates do a shit job of marketing and using the internet to influence votes.
Now we are stuck with Joe Biden for a couple years and then a Marxist in Kamala Harris for the rest of the term.
Yang 2024
If a third party candidate ever gets big in this current climate, it will simply be a repeat of Ross Perot. The political tribalism runs too deep for any other party to make wiggle room. All you can hope for is that demographics shift just enough for the DNC and GOP to actually listen
A Ross Perot is exactly what we need. If Yang ran as an independent in this election and took part in the debates I honestly think he’d have gotten at least 20,000,000 votes. Someone similar can make a push in the next election I believe. (But IMO this election was the best time for a third party candidate to make a statement and they failed miserably)
Notice how even though Biden has a 100k vote lead in Arizona he's not suing to stop counting the ballots. You can't want to count the ballots in Arizona and then want to stop the counting in Pennsylvania.
"According to three Insider polls of voters who hadn't decided whether they're voting Republican or Democrat, 46% said they would be satisfied with him as the nominee, the highest level of support among any Democratic candidate. Former Vice President Joe Biden held the next-highest percentage of undecided voters, with 42%."I'm just stating that he actually got a decent chunk of votes. I believe a third party candidate has the ability to actually compete for votes especially if they run a good campaign. There was no better time than now for someone to step up outside of the Republican or Democratic parties, and nobody took advantage. All it takes nowadays is an internet movement.All the democrats from NY, NJ, and California moving to states like Texas, North Carolina, Georgia, and Florida has impacted and will further impact elections in the future. Republicans won’t win unless they have a polarizing figure like Trump or a young charismatic candidate that is moderate and not very conservative.yeah Gary Johnson the pothead with his brain fried is a great example of third party candidates
I personally think the party system is trash and we need to do something about it. These two candidates are garbage and the other parties could’ve had a huge opportunity here to win votes (Almost like Gary Johnson in 2016). The media doesn’t give any other parties attention and I feel like third party candidates do a shit job of marketing and using the internet to influence votes.
Now we are stuck with Joe Biden for a couple years and then a Marxist in Kamala Harris for the rest of the term.
Yang 2024
If a third party candidate ever gets big in this current climate, it will simply be a repeat of Ross Perot. The political tribalism runs too deep for any other party to make wiggle room. All you can hope for is that demographics shift just enough for the DNC and GOP to actually listen
A Ross Perot is exactly what we need. If Yang ran as an independent in this election and took part in the debates I honestly think he’d have gotten at least 20,000,000 votes. Someone similar can make a push in the next election I believe. (But IMO this election was the best time for a third party candidate to make a statement and they failed miserably)
Wtf none of this logic ever makes sense to me. How can you guys truly believe that Andrew Yang is the best candidate for America and then somehow make the jump all the way to Trump. Biden will be a lot closer to Andrew Yang on like every issue ever and was even endorsed by him. You say you want Andrew Yang yet you pull for Trump? This is just like 2016 where all the progressive democrats said Clinton wasn't good enough. You guys say you want this stuff but then vote completely opposite of it because it's not exactly what you wanted. If you were a true Yang supporter you would realize like he did, that Biden would be a lot closer of a candidate to him then Trump would be.
"According to three Insider polls of voters who hadn't decided whether they're voting Republican or Democrat, 46% said they would be satisfied with him as the nominee, the highest level of support among any Democratic candidate. Former Vice President Joe Biden held the next-highest percentage of undecided voters, with 42%."I'm just stating that he actually got a decent chunk of votes. I believe a third party candidate has the ability to actually compete for votes especially if they run a good campaign. There was no better time than now for someone to step up outside of the Republican or Democratic parties, and nobody took advantage. All it takes nowadays is an internet movement.All the democrats from NY, NJ, and California moving to states like Texas, North Carolina, Georgia, and Florida has impacted and will further impact elections in the future. Republicans won’t win unless they have a polarizing figure like Trump or a young charismatic candidate that is moderate and not very conservative.yeah Gary Johnson the pothead with his brain fried is a great example of third party candidates
I personally think the party system is trash and we need to do something about it. These two candidates are garbage and the other parties could’ve had a huge opportunity here to win votes (Almost like Gary Johnson in 2016). The media doesn’t give any other parties attention and I feel like third party candidates do a shit job of marketing and using the internet to influence votes.
Now we are stuck with Joe Biden for a couple years and then a Marxist in Kamala Harris for the rest of the term.
Yang 2024
If a third party candidate ever gets big in this current climate, it will simply be a repeat of Ross Perot. The political tribalism runs too deep for any other party to make wiggle room. All you can hope for is that demographics shift just enough for the DNC and GOP to actually listen
A Ross Perot is exactly what we need. If Yang ran as an independent in this election and took part in the debates I honestly think he’d have gotten at least 20,000,000 votes. Someone similar can make a push in the next election I believe. (But IMO this election was the best time for a third party candidate to make a statement and they failed miserably)
Wtf none of this logic ever makes sense to me. How can you guys truly believe that Andrew Yang is the best candidate for America and then somehow make the jump all the way to Trump. Biden will be a lot closer to Andrew Yang on like every issue ever and was even endorsed by him. You say you want Andrew Yang yet you pull for Trump? This is just like 2016 where all the progressive democrats said Clinton wasn't good enough. You guys say you want this stuff but then vote completely opposite of it because it's not exactly what you wanted. If you were a true Yang supporter you would realize like he did, that Biden would be a lot closer of a candidate to him then Trump would be.
https://www.businessinsider.com/right-leaning-voters-support-andrew-yang-2020-1 (good article that might explain why Yang swayed 2016 Trump voters)
Yang appeals to me a lot more than two 70+ year old men (one an internet troll, the other deteriorating mentally). Yang is more relatable and is a young fresh face. He speaks well and his motto "not left, not right, forward" is something I also believe in. Took a while to learn and get used to his UBI plan but I can get over it. Stimulus checks worked out during the pandemic. I can see it happening more often in the future. I agree with his outlook that automation will one day replace many jobs and we have to prepare and not avoid it. Some of the things I disagree with him on are the taxes he'd propose on Wall Street trades, and his VAT taxes.
(Also Yang, and most democratic leaders/candidates, are expected to endorse the leader of their party)
Also Hawk man I think the point you’re missing on why Trump supporters would support Yang is that Yang talked about how he understood why people who don’t necessarily like Trump voted him anyways (disengagement from society and the economy, dissatisfaction with mainstream politicians) and Yang treated Trump supporters as legitimate voters with legitimate reasons for voting for him, which is not really popular among Democratic circles. Both of these things resonated with Trump supporters, even if they had policy differences with Yang. A lot of people vote for a persons character and political identity rather than strictly policy, and Yang’s character was much more appealing than any other Dem candidateI voted for trump so I can watch the chimp out happen again which would in turn radicalize the working class white man towards right wing extremism. which would be wholesome 100 big chungus
Why does having universal healthcare have any effect on the viability of UBI? The federal government is already very good at mailing cheques, it would be fairly simple to implement a nationwide UBI
Also Hawk man I think the point you’re missing on why Trump supporters would support Yang is that Yang talked about how he understood why people who don’t necessarily like Trump voted him anyways (disengagement from society and the economy, dissatisfaction with mainstream politicians) and Yang treated Trump supporters as legitimate voters with legitimate reasons for voting for him, which is not really popular among Democratic circles. Both of these things resonated with Trump supporters, even if they had policy differences with Yang. A lot of people vote for a persons character and political identity rather than strictly policy, and Yang’s character was much more appealing than any other Dem candidate
Why does having universal healthcare have any effect on the viability of UBI? The federal government is already very good at mailing cheques, it would be fairly simple to implement a nationwide UBIYou totally misunderstood what Hawkince was saying about UBI and universal health care go back and reread his post. Also if you honestly think that UBI is as simple as government mailing checks then you have a child-like understanding of politics in the United States.
Also Hawk man I think the point you’re missing on why Trump supporters would support Yang is that Yang talked about how he understood why people who don’t necessarily like Trump voted him anyways (disengagement from society and the economy, dissatisfaction with mainstream politicians) and Yang treated Trump supporters as legitimate voters with legitimate reasons for voting for him, which is not really popular among Democratic circles. Both of these things resonated with Trump supporters, even if they had policy differences with Yang. A lot of people vote for a persons character and political identity rather than strictly policy, and Yang’s character was much more appealing than any other Dem candidate
Why does having universal healthcare have any effect on the viability of UBI? The federal government is already very good at mailing cheques, it would be fairly simple to implement a nationwide UBI
Also Hawk man I think the point you’re missing on why Trump supporters would support Yang is that Yang talked about how he understood why people who don’t necessarily like Trump voted him anyways (disengagement from society and the economy, dissatisfaction with mainstream politicians) and Yang treated Trump supporters as legitimate voters with legitimate reasons for voting for him, which is not really popular among Democratic circles. Both of these things resonated with Trump supporters, even if they had policy differences with Yang. A lot of people vote for a persons character and political identity rather than strictly policy, and Yang’s character was much more appealing than any other Dem candidate
I don't know if the DNC would even allow a candidate like Yang to ever become the frontrunner. They run boring, milquetoast neoliberals because that's precisely what most of the center-left want: a boring president that you don't have to worry about.
On the other hand, the imminent recession caused by COVID could be its best shot for years to come. The moratoriums for millions are about to end and food banks are getting longer lines every day. Something drastic needs to happen in order to avoid an even bigger disaster than it already is. It'll get shit on by some of the right for being "socialism" while the establishment continues to ignore every problem in the country in it while continuing to suck up to its donors, but I don't really see a better opportunity.
Why does having universal healthcare have any effect on the viability of UBI? The federal government is already very good at mailing cheques, it would be fairly simple to implement a nationwide UBIYou totally misunderstood what Hawkince was saying about UBI and universal health care go back and reread his post. Also if you honestly think that UBI is as simple as government mailing checks then you have a child-like understanding of politics in the United States.
Also Hawk man I think the point you’re missing on why Trump supporters would support Yang is that Yang talked about how he understood why people who don’t necessarily like Trump voted him anyways (disengagement from society and the economy, dissatisfaction with mainstream politicians) and Yang treated Trump supporters as legitimate voters with legitimate reasons for voting for him, which is not really popular among Democratic circles. Both of these things resonated with Trump supporters, even if they had policy differences with Yang. A lot of people vote for a persons character and political identity rather than strictly policy, and Yang’s character was much more appealing than any other Dem candidate
It's the implication that a nation without universal healthcare is a long ways away from implenting UBI. Federal Minimum wage hasn't been increased since 2007 and if increasing with inflation should be just over 9$ now.Yes, I agree, that is a strong implication - however, many dichotomies exist within the US government political system, so it wouldn't be that much of a surprise to see UBI with a private healthcare system
The idea that Biden is a candidate with little widespread appeal is also inherently false. The reason the DNC got behind him was because he was seen as a moderate and could appeal to broad sides of the spectrum.I never said Biden didn't have widespread appeal among broad sections of society, this is obviously true, he just had a lot less appeal from Trump supporters comparatively
I agree.I don't know if the DNC would even allow a candidate like Yang to ever become the frontrunner. They run boring, milquetoast neoliberals because that's precisely what most of the center-left want: a boring president that you don't have to worry about.
On the other hand, the imminent recession caused by COVID could be its best shot for years to come. The moratoriums for millions are about to end and food banks are getting longer lines every day. Something drastic needs to happen in order to avoid an even bigger disaster than it already is. It'll get shit on by some of the right for being "socialism" while the establishment continues to ignore every problem in the country in it while continuing to suck up to its donors, but I don't really see a better opportunity.
This is not true. Obama was a remarkably unknown state senator and came in at a time when he was given almost no shot. Hillary Clinton was a enormous favorite and Obama won people over with his message of hope and great change. Obama invigorated many people and ran 2 very successful campaigns. Regardless of what you think Obama did or didn't do for America you have to agree that he was by no means a "boring, milquetoast neoliberal" candidate because he was the complete opposite.
I agree.I don't know if the DNC would even allow a candidate like Yang to ever become the frontrunner. They run boring, milquetoast neoliberals because that's precisely what most of the center-left want: a boring president that you don't have to worry about.
On the other hand, the imminent recession caused by COVID could be its best shot for years to come. The moratoriums for millions are about to end and food banks are getting longer lines every day. Something drastic needs to happen in order to avoid an even bigger disaster than it already is. It'll get shit on by some of the right for being "socialism" while the establishment continues to ignore every problem in the country in it while continuing to suck up to its donors, but I don't really see a better opportunity.
This is not true. Obama was a remarkably unknown state senator and came in at a time when he was given almost no shot. Hillary Clinton was a enormous favorite and Obama won people over with his message of hope and great change. Obama invigorated many people and ran 2 very successful campaigns. Regardless of what you think Obama did or didn't do for America you have to agree that he was by no means a "boring, milquetoast neoliberal" candidate because he was the complete opposite.
Obama was a great "leader". As in, the man was very charismatic, funny, relatable, nice, well spoken, and was different than the norm. I like the guy a lot even though I disagree with some of his policies on healthcare and the economy. He will probably be the coolest president of our lifetimes tbh. And it is easy for me to see someone like that winning again.
I don't know if the DNC would even allow a candidate like Yang to ever become the frontrunner. They run boring, milquetoast neoliberals because that's precisely what most of the center-left want: a boring president that you don't have to worry about.
On the other hand, the imminent recession caused by COVID could be its best shot for years to come. The moratoriums for millions are about to end and food banks are getting longer lines every day. Something drastic needs to happen in order to avoid an even bigger disaster than it already is. It'll get shit on by some of the right for being "socialism" while the establishment continues to ignore every problem in the country in it while continuing to suck up to its donors, but I don't really see a better opportunity.
This is not true. Obama was a remarkably unknown state senator and came in at a time when he was given almost no shot. Hillary Clinton was a enormous favorite and Obama won people over with his message of hope and great change. Obama invigorated many people and ran 2 very successful campaigns. Regardless of what you think Obama did or didn't do for America you have to agree that he was by no means a "boring, milquetoast neoliberal" candidate because he was the complete opposite.
I don't know if the DNC would even allow a candidate like Yang to ever become the frontrunner. They run boring, milquetoast neoliberals because that's precisely what most of the center-left want: a boring president that you don't have to worry about.
On the other hand, the imminent recession caused by COVID could be its best shot for years to come. The moratoriums for millions are about to end and food banks are getting longer lines every day. Something drastic needs to happen in order to avoid an even bigger disaster than it already is. It'll get shit on by some of the right for being "socialism" while the establishment continues to ignore every problem in the country in it while continuing to suck up to its donors, but I don't really see a better opportunity.
This is not true. Obama was a remarkably unknown state senator and came in at a time when he was given almost no shot. Hillary Clinton was a enormous favorite and Obama won people over with his message of hope and great change. Obama invigorated many people and ran 2 very successful campaigns. Regardless of what you think Obama did or didn't do for America you have to agree that he was by no means a "boring, milquetoast neoliberal" candidate because he was the complete opposite.
I'll admit Obama was a breath of fresh air. He is an exceptional orator and his everyman image certainly helped, but the outside figures certainly boosted him in 08. The recession was in full swing and opinions were turning sour towards the Iraq War, something both Clinton and McCain were adamant about continuing. Much like with Trump, voters were convinced that they could challenge the status-quo with the "outsider" candidate that was Obama. I think he really tried at the start but slowly got worn down as Republicans and even his own party simply couldn't get anything done without butting heads.
The thing is about his run is that he was a one-in-a-million candidate. The exception to a pattern that had remained unbroken since Humphrey. Just look at the previous Democratic candidates from the past 35 years: Kerry, Clinton (Bill), Gore, Dukakis. The common denominator here is that they all ran boring campaigns with meh levels of charisma. These people were definitely milquetoast but still got the nominations. That is the normal, and will likely remain so until you get someone similar to Obama, which I don't expect will happen for awhile.
You are right about 2012 Obama though, he ran a perfect ground campaign and Romney just couldn't turn out the more grassroot Republicans.
I think people are starting to realize that running an exciting campaign built on hope does not translate well into actual legislation. While he didn't get the nomination either of the two time he tried, Bernie would most certainly turned out the same way had he won, ran a campaign promising change only to be battered down by opposition from the GOP and more centrist Democrats. The outcome of this is ultimately cynicism. We can't expect people to put faith into a system that constantly lies to them and doesn't produce anything but gridlocks. Sooner or later that hopeful campaign shtick is going to run out of gas.
I don't know if the DNC would even allow a candidate like Yang to ever become the frontrunner. They run boring, milquetoast neoliberals because that's precisely what most of the center-left want: a boring president that you don't have to worry about.
On the other hand, the imminent recession caused by COVID could be its best shot for years to come. The moratoriums for millions are about to end and food banks are getting longer lines every day. Something drastic needs to happen in order to avoid an even bigger disaster than it already is. It'll get shit on by some of the right for being "socialism" while the establishment continues to ignore every problem in the country in it while continuing to suck up to its donors, but I don't really see a better opportunity.
This is not true. Obama was a remarkably unknown state senator and came in at a time when he was given almost no shot. Hillary Clinton was a enormous favorite and Obama won people over with his message of hope and great change. Obama invigorated many people and ran 2 very successful campaigns. Regardless of what you think Obama did or didn't do for America you have to agree that he was by no means a "boring, milquetoast neoliberal" candidate because he was the complete opposite.
I'll admit Obama was a breath of fresh air. He is an exceptional orator and his everyman image certainly helped, but the outside figures certainly boosted him in 08. The recession was in full swing and opinions were turning sour towards the Iraq War, something both Clinton and McCain were adamant about continuing. Much like with Trump, voters were convinced that they could challenge the status-quo with the "outsider" candidate that was Obama. I think he really tried at the start but slowly got worn down as Republicans and even his own party simply couldn't get anything done without butting heads.
The thing is about his run is that he was a one-in-a-million candidate. The exception to a pattern that had remained unbroken since Humphrey. Just look at the previous Democratic candidates from the past 35 years: Kerry, Clinton (Bill), Gore, Dukakis. The common denominator here is that they all ran boring campaigns with meh levels of charisma. These people were definitely milquetoast but still got the nominations. That is the normal, and will likely remain so until you get someone similar to Obama, which I don't expect will happen for awhile.
You are right about 2012 Obama though, he ran a perfect ground campaign and Romney just couldn't turn out the more grassroot Republicans.
I think people are starting to realize that running an exciting campaign built on hope does not translate well into actual legislation. While he didn't get the nomination either of the two time he tried, Bernie would most certainly turned out the same way had he won, ran a campaign promising change only to be battered down by opposition from the GOP and more centrist Democrats. The outcome of this is ultimately cynicism. We can't expect people to put faith into a system that constantly lies to them and doesn't produce anything but gridlocks. Sooner or later that hopeful campaign shtick is going to run out of gas.
Again you are wrong, as Bill Clinton was ironically plagued by a extramarital affair in his 1992 campaign and had finished 3rd in the Iowa and 2nd in the New Hampshire primaries. He came into the primaries as a southern state governor and wasn't until super tuesday did he establish himself as a legitimate candidate. In the actual election he capitalized similarly to Barack Obama on a weak economy and I would argue was a pretty good candidate. Turnout increased by 5 percent from 1998 to 1992 and he found much success across much of America including his native south, despite Ross Perot's early polling leads. His 2nd campaign in the 1996 election saw turnout go down 5 percent again although that's not something I would fault Bill for as much as his opposition. Bob Dole was not the greatest candidate and Ross Perot no longer had much of a base at all.
I clicked through all of it you bastard
I clicked through all of it you bastardtrolled in epic gamer fashion
UBI is stupid and I will never support someone who wants it
Damn. Looks like a Pyrrhic victory at best for the Dems. Republicans may have lost their best meatshield in history, but they gained in the house and held the senate (unless the GA runoff goes favorably for the Dems). They will certainly come back with a vengeance in '22 and given historical trends, it could be a complete blowout barring any major revelations.Imagine if Republicans could scrounge up a half decent candidate? Would probably go very poorly for Biden. But historically he will probably win his second term as long as he Doesn’t massively fuck up or die.
Damn. Looks like a Pyrrhic victory at best for the Dems. Republicans may have lost their best meatshield in history, but they gained in the house and held the senate (unless the GA runoff goes favorably for the Dems). They will certainly come back with a vengeance in '22 and given historical trends, it could be a complete blowout barring any major revelations.Imagine if Republicans could scrounge up a half decent candidate? Would probably go very poorly for Biden. But historically he will probably win his second term as long as he Doesn’t massively fuck up or die.
God bless the USA and Joe BidenI guess.
Damn. Looks like a Pyrrhic victory at best for the Dems. Republicans may have lost their best meatshield in history, but they gained in the house and held the senate (unless the GA runoff goes favorably for the Dems). They will certainly come back with a vengeance in '22 and given historical trends, it could be a complete blowout barring any major revelations.Imagine if Republicans could scrounge up a half decent candidate? Would probably go very poorly for Biden. But historically he will probably win his second term as long as he Doesn’t massively fuck up or die.
They don't even need a half decent candidate. Trump would have annihilated Biden if he just shut his mouth and came up with a somewhat effective COVID response.
Damn. Looks like a Pyrrhic victory at best for the Dems. Republicans may have lost their best meatshield in history, but they gained in the house and held the senate (unless the GA runoff goes favorably for the Dems). They will certainly come back with a vengeance in '22 and given historical trends, it could be a complete blowout barring any major revelations.Imagine if Republicans could scrounge up a half decent candidate? Would probably go very poorly for Biden. But historically he will probably win his second term as long as he Doesn’t massively fuck up or die.
They don't even need a half decent candidate. Trump would have annihilated Biden if he just shut his mouth and came up with a somewhat effective COVID response.
Trump has a diehard fan base. The next guy won’t
I want tucker carlson to be the next fuhrerid rather vote for Hillary
https://youtu.be/l4Gni803ArQ
Isnt it proven that something like a UBI would massively boost the economy?UBI is stupid and I will never support someone who wants it
Ahh you're one of those that likes paying taxes to get next to nothing in return for it.
I find it astonishing that America didnt reform its voting system fucking ONCE since it got created. Its so incredibly backwards.
Thank you for reminding us that today, 82 years ago, Germans committed one of the worst crimes against fellow Germans leading up to World War 2 and the holocaust - although your picture is from 2018, marking the 80th anniversary. Never forget, always remember. Stand together as Germans against those who attempt to bring us down by terror and segregation. Besides that, let's remember that today 31 years ago the Wall came down, leading to a strong, unified, and historically grounded Germany which we can be proud of, just as stated by Cazasar and depicted by yourself. Cheers!I find it astonishing that America didnt reform its voting system fucking ONCE since it got created. Its so incredibly backwards.the dude who got 15 years of this(https://static.independent.co.uk/s3fs-public/thumbnails/image/2018/11/09/12/Angela-Merkel.jpg)[close]
USA gave Germany freedom and democracy, pretty sure they know how to handle themselves ;pthey sure did, they even aided in making the best constitution known the world. But they still live with an age old system wich has its roots in a time were slavery was the norm and people were mostly farmers.
Isnt it proven that something like a UBI would massively boost the economy?where?
Isnt it proven that something like a UBI would massively boost the economy?where?
so if you raise taxes on the mega corporations wouldn’t they raise the prices of their products to cover it? That seems like the common sense thing to me. Although I guess people would just use that money to buy stuff from the mega corporations to. Either way I just think it creates a unneeded reliance on the government who usually sucks at their jobIsnt it proven that something like a UBI would massively boost the economy?where?
Well big brains have done some big math and many think it would boost the economy. And it seems like common sense honestly. Take some of the tax money that mega corporations are paying and give some of it back to the middle and lower class. Then they spend that money on whatever, so it then sends that money right back into the economy by using money that is already there. Instead of them pretending that they use it on infrastructure and military etc. When they actually are just hoarding it and wasting it on dumb fuck programs that do nothing for majority of people. And the idea that it encourages laziness could be partly true, but the amount would barely be enough to live on. So people would have to work if they wanted anything extra or better. And even if some people do get lazy with it. They are still going to be spending that money so it still goes back into the economy.
The most cost effective UBI would be a UBI that replaces many existing welfare programsso if you raise taxes on the mega corporations wouldn’t they raise the prices of their products to cover it? That seems like the common sense thing to me. Although I guess people would just use that money to buy stuff from the mega corporations to. Either way I just think it creates a unneeded reliance on the government who usually sucks at their jobIsnt it proven that something like a UBI would massively boost the economy?where?
Well big brains have done some big math and many think it would boost the economy. And it seems like common sense honestly. Take some of the tax money that mega corporations are paying and give some of it back to the middle and lower class. Then they spend that money on whatever, so it then sends that money right back into the economy by using money that is already there. Instead of them pretending that they use it on infrastructure and military etc. When they actually are just hoarding it and wasting it on dumb fuck programs that do nothing for majority of people. And the idea that it encourages laziness could be partly true, but the amount would barely be enough to live on. So people would have to work if they wanted anything extra or better. And even if some people do get lazy with it. They are still going to be spending that money so it still goes back into the economy.
Didn’t you say you were a republican?
so if you raise taxes on the mega corporations wouldn’t they raise the prices of their products to cover it? That seems like the common sense thing to me. Although I guess people would just use that money to buy stuff from the mega corporations to. Either way I just think it creates a unneeded reliance on the government who usually sucks at their jobIsnt it proven that something like a UBI would massively boost the economy?where?
Well big brains have done some big math and many think it would boost the economy. And it seems like common sense honestly. Take some of the tax money that mega corporations are paying and give some of it back to the middle and lower class. Then they spend that money on whatever, so it then sends that money right back into the economy by using money that is already there. Instead of them pretending that they use it on infrastructure and military etc. When they actually are just hoarding it and wasting it on dumb fuck programs that do nothing for majority of people. And the idea that it encourages laziness could be partly true, but the amount would barely be enough to live on. So people would have to work if they wanted anything extra or better. And even if some people do get lazy with it. They are still going to be spending that money so it still goes back into the economy.
Didn’t you say you were a republican?
what jobs actually pay minimum wage?so if you raise taxes on the mega corporations wouldn’t they raise the prices of their products to cover it? That seems like the common sense thing to me. Although I guess people would just use that money to buy stuff from the mega corporations to. Either way I just think it creates a unneeded reliance on the government who usually sucks at their jobIsnt it proven that something like a UBI would massively boost the economy?where?
Well big brains have done some big math and many think it would boost the economy. And it seems like common sense honestly. Take some of the tax money that mega corporations are paying and give some of it back to the middle and lower class. Then they spend that money on whatever, so it then sends that money right back into the economy by using money that is already there. Instead of them pretending that they use it on infrastructure and military etc. When they actually are just hoarding it and wasting it on dumb fuck programs that do nothing for majority of people. And the idea that it encourages laziness could be partly true, but the amount would barely be enough to live on. So people would have to work if they wanted anything extra or better. And even if some people do get lazy with it. They are still going to be spending that money so it still goes back into the economy.
Didn’t you say you were a republican?
Companies nowadays have grown much faster and outpaced wage growth especially on the lower end of the spectrum. Federal minimum wage hasn't been increased since may 2007 where it became 7.25 which should be a little over 9$ if it kept just pace with inflation and not economic growth.Spoiler(https://files.epi.org/charts/img/172791-21692.png)[close]
what jobs actually pay minimum wage?so if you raise taxes on the mega corporations wouldn’t they raise the prices of their products to cover it? That seems like the common sense thing to me. Although I guess people would just use that money to buy stuff from the mega corporations to. Either way I just think it creates a unneeded reliance on the government who usually sucks at their jobIsnt it proven that something like a UBI would massively boost the economy?where?
Well big brains have done some big math and many think it would boost the economy. And it seems like common sense honestly. Take some of the tax money that mega corporations are paying and give some of it back to the middle and lower class. Then they spend that money on whatever, so it then sends that money right back into the economy by using money that is already there. Instead of them pretending that they use it on infrastructure and military etc. When they actually are just hoarding it and wasting it on dumb fuck programs that do nothing for majority of people. And the idea that it encourages laziness could be partly true, but the amount would barely be enough to live on. So people would have to work if they wanted anything extra or better. And even if some people do get lazy with it. They are still going to be spending that money so it still goes back into the economy.
Didn’t you say you were a republican?
Companies nowadays have grown much faster and outpaced wage growth especially on the lower end of the spectrum. Federal minimum wage hasn't been increased since may 2007 where it became 7.25 which should be a little over 9$ if it kept just pace with inflation and not economic growth.Spoiler(https://files.epi.org/charts/img/172791-21692.png)[close]
cucked and krautpilled my dude 8)Thank you for reminding us that today, 82 years ago, Germans committed one of the worst crimes against fellow Germans leading up to World War 2 and the holocaust - although your picture is from 2018, marking the 80th anniversary. Never forget, always remember. Stand together as Germans against those who attempt to bring us down by terror and segregation. Besides that, let's remember that today 31 years ago the Wall came down, leading to a strong, unified, and historically grounded Germany which we can be proud of, just as stated by Cazasar and depicted by yourself. Cheers!I find it astonishing that America didnt reform its voting system fucking ONCE since it got created. Its so incredibly backwards.the dude who got 15 years of this(https://static.independent.co.uk/s3fs-public/thumbnails/image/2018/11/09/12/Angela-Merkel.jpg)[close]Spoiler(https://www.stuttgarter-zeitung.de/media.media.d4a36c4a-3149-4d89-b6a3-c14719edec4b.original1024.jpg)
One year later
(https://www.hdg.de/lemo/img_hd/bestand/objekte/deutscheeinheit/deutschlandfahne-vor-reichstag_foto_LEMO-F-6-182_uls.jpg)[close]
#ProudToBeAGerman
hahahaha get out of you echo chamber dudecucked and krautpilled my dude 8)Thank you for reminding us that today, 82 years ago, Germans committed one of the worst crimes against fellow Germans leading up to World War 2 and the holocaust - although your picture is from 2018, marking the 80th anniversary. Never forget, always remember. Stand together as Germans against those who attempt to bring us down by terror and segregation. Besides that, let's remember that today 31 years ago the Wall came down, leading to a strong, unified, and historically grounded Germany which we can be proud of, just as stated by Cazasar and depicted by yourself. Cheers!I find it astonishing that America didnt reform its voting system fucking ONCE since it got created. Its so incredibly backwards.the dude who got 15 years of this(https://static.independent.co.uk/s3fs-public/thumbnails/image/2018/11/09/12/Angela-Merkel.jpg)[close]Spoiler(https://www.stuttgarter-zeitung.de/media.media.d4a36c4a-3149-4d89-b6a3-c14719edec4b.original1024.jpg)
One year later
(https://www.hdg.de/lemo/img_hd/bestand/objekte/deutscheeinheit/deutschlandfahne-vor-reichstag_foto_LEMO-F-6-182_uls.jpg)[close]
#ProudToBeAGermanSpoiler(https://i.imgur.com/x0I5TlT.png)(https://i.imgur.com/x8Fvgum.png)[close]
copehahahaha get out of you echo chamber dudecucked and krautpilled my dude 8)Thank you for reminding us that today, 82 years ago, Germans committed one of the worst crimes against fellow Germans leading up to World War 2 and the holocaust - although your picture is from 2018, marking the 80th anniversary. Never forget, always remember. Stand together as Germans against those who attempt to bring us down by terror and segregation. Besides that, let's remember that today 31 years ago the Wall came down, leading to a strong, unified, and historically grounded Germany which we can be proud of, just as stated by Cazasar and depicted by yourself. Cheers!I find it astonishing that America didnt reform its voting system fucking ONCE since it got created. Its so incredibly backwards.the dude who got 15 years of this(https://static.independent.co.uk/s3fs-public/thumbnails/image/2018/11/09/12/Angela-Merkel.jpg)[close]Spoiler(https://www.stuttgarter-zeitung.de/media.media.d4a36c4a-3149-4d89-b6a3-c14719edec4b.original1024.jpg)
One year later
(https://www.hdg.de/lemo/img_hd/bestand/objekte/deutscheeinheit/deutschlandfahne-vor-reichstag_foto_LEMO-F-6-182_uls.jpg)[close]
#ProudToBeAGermanSpoiler(https://i.imgur.com/x0I5TlT.png)(https://i.imgur.com/x8Fvgum.png)[close]
Trump is going to win
they will find things about the fraud dwTrump is going to win
He lost weeks ago lul.
they will find things about the fraud dwTrump is going to win
He lost weeks ago lul.
Who is Casazar?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x1FW36keZJw&t=
(https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fmemepedia.ru%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2018%2F10%2F19-2.jpg&f=1&nofb=1)Spoilerhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x1FW36keZJw&t=[close]
had to puke a little when Nigel Farage and Trump were on the same stage
(https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fmemepedia.ru%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2018%2F10%2F19-2.jpg&f=1&nofb=1)Spoilerhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x1FW36keZJw&t=[close]
had to puke a little when Nigel Farage and Trump were on the same stage
Its not worth arguing with that guy. There is no convincing someone who is this deep into Republican Bullshit(https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fmemepedia.ru%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2018%2F10%2F19-2.jpg&f=1&nofb=1)Spoilerhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x1FW36keZJw&t=[close]
had to puke a little when Nigel Farage and Trump were on the same stage
Nice meme except this is exactly the same if not worse among Trump cultists who believe in alternate facts.
Let's go inject som sanitizer bois! POG
I swear the election was rigged but I don't have any evidence and I've lost 40 ish lawsuits and won 1.
Prime example of American media brainwashing not only Americans, but the entire West.(https://i.ibb.co/N6HmfJP/459487-C6-9-FF2-45-CB-91-D4-B6540312551-A.jpg)
true gamers only listen to Alex Jones
true gamers only listen to Alex Jones
people really act like he isn't spitting fax sometimestrue gamers only listen to Alex Jones
He really is a fascinating figure. His beliefs may be wack and are upheld by a cult, but the way he twists them into complex conspiracies is genuinely hilarious. Even if it's just a character, the money he has made provides him with the incentive to keep going.
2021 is off to a great start. Coup on day 6! The writers really managed to up the stakes, I really thought they couldn't match last season!this season gonna be fire
2021 is off to a great start. Coup on day 6! The writers really managed to up the stakes, I really thought they couldn't match last season!this season gonna be fire
2021 is off to a great start. Coup on day 6! The writers really managed to up the stakes, I really thought they couldn't match last season!this season gonna be fire
I don't know if I think the election was stolen or not, personally I think I may be leaning towards the fact that it wasn't but there hasn't been a real wide-spread investigation yet for me to go off of.
To me though, I understand why this is happening and it takes me back to when the George Floyd riots were happening. Circumstances are different but the mission is the same, to fight against a (as deemed) corrupt system. No amount of peaceful protesting will ever get rid of people who shouldn't be in power. This doesn't always have to negate to violence though. In my humble opinion civil disobedience is actually a fundamental part of any society - if justified.
Probably a hot take but I feel like the incorrect thing to do in a situation where you think the most powerful man in the world got his position illegally, or if you think that your ethnic group is being wrongfully persecuted, is to sit back and do nothing.
2021 is off to a great start. Coup on day 6! The writers really managed to up the stakes, I really thought they couldn't match last season!this season gonna be fire
I don't know if I think the election was stolen or not, personally I think I may be leaning towards the fact that it wasn't but there hasn't been a real wide-spread investigation yet for me to go off of.
To me though, I understand why this is happening and it takes me back to when the George Floyd riots were happening. Circumstances are different but the mission is the same, to fight against a (as deemed) corrupt system. No amount of peaceful protesting will ever get rid of people who shouldn't be in power. This doesn't always have to negate to violence though. In my humble opinion civil disobedience is actually a fundamental part of any society - if justified.
Probably a hot take but I feel like the incorrect thing to do in a situation where you think the most powerful man in the world got his position illegally, or if you think that your ethnic group is being wrongfully persecuted, is to sit back and do nothing.
This is happening because our beloved commander-in-chief has been revving his base up into a frenzy that can't be reasoned with. Spending the last four years legitimizing batshit insane conspiracy theories in order promote a post-truth society takes it toll.
Trump didn't do it because he actually thinks he lost. He is doing it because he realizes that his political Ponzi scheme is about to collapse right on top of him. His supporters, the GOP, and half of America would suffer an identity crisis if he conceded now. Why give up when your base is naïve enough to be this invested and willing to donate millions towards a lost cause? This is the death-knell of conservative identity politics.
imagine thinking your vote matters lmao
look at his programming going completely haywire, the modern Nordic man. SAD!imagine thinking your vote matters lmao
Imagine being this fucking stupid.
whatDont worry, he is merely pretending to be retarded!
can trump still win?bah gawd that's biden's music
can trump still win?
can trump still win?
SAD!can trump still win?
rip dreams
rip USA
rip democracy
I haven't seen any pages anymore before this one, so I am sorry if this is already talked about. But what do you guys about these "Great Reset"? The new world order that is trying to build its place. I feel it's actually believable that the governments of this world try to keep people indoors and that this Pandemic is the perfect moment to do so. Because if you go outside, you'll get to pay 250 EUR to the Police if it's for unnecessary business, atleast here in Belgium. Do you guys think this new world order will actually take place, if it's propoganda, if it is good or bad for us? Because ofcourse when you look at their website they speak of great things, but I don't know if it will be great for every other citizen as well.
Would be appreciated if you won't act like a clown for once.I haven't seen any pages anymore before this one, so I am sorry if this is already talked about. But what do you guys about these "Great Reset"? The new world order that is trying to build its place. I feel it's actually believable that the governments of this world try to keep people indoors and that this Pandemic is the perfect moment to do so. Because if you go outside, you'll get to pay 250 EUR to the Police if it's for unnecessary business, atleast here in Belgium. Do you guys think this new world order will actually take place, if it's propoganda, if it is good or bad for us? Because ofcourse when you look at their website they speak of great things, but I don't know if it will be great for every other citizen as well.
https://www.infowars.com/
here you go mate, the proper website for people like you
I haven't seen any pages anymore before this one, so I am sorry if this is already talked about. But what do you guys about these "Great Reset"? The new world order that is trying to build its place. I feel it's actually believable that the governments of this world try to keep people indoors and that this Pandemic is the perfect moment to do so. Because if you go outside, you'll get to pay 250 EUR to the Police if it's for unnecessary business, atleast here in Belgium. Do you guys think this new world order will actually take place, if it's propoganda, if it is good or bad for us? Because ofcourse when you look at their website they speak of great things, but I don't know if it will be great for every other citizen as well.You are actually lost
There are two separate issues here Skaenn.yes
One is the notion that the nations of the world, including international scientific and medical fields want to keep people locked inside, causing trillions of dollars of economic damage, somehow manufacturing both a plausible threat and killing off vast numbers of people through a mechanism which spreads much like a virus. If you believe that you're more paranoid than many psychiatric patients I see on the regular.
If you believe that rich people and those in power are profiteering off of an international catastrophe and are allowing people to die on vast scales for financial and political profit then I think you're pretty sensible.
Anything is possible after Biden's win
I'm just glad that I don't live in California right now. 8)What is happening?
Anything is possible after Biden's win
Wtf do you mean? Biden was leading in virtually every poll he was expected to win.
I'm just glad that I don't live in California right now. 8)What is happening?
I'm just glad that I don't live in California right now. 8)What is happening?
Our governor is a moron that contradicts himself at every turn.
Virus cases keep fluctuating since the state has no actual plan.
Wildfires are getting worse and no one is doing anything to address it.
Smelt, a species of fish that is commonly used to indicate overall environmental health in the Delta (and California as a whole), continue to spiral towards functional extinction.
Homeless people. Everywhere.
OOFI'm just glad that I don't live in California right now. 8)What is happening?
Our governor is a moron that contradicts himself at every turn.
Virus cases keep fluctuating since the state has no actual plan.
Wildfires are getting worse and no one is doing anything to address it.
Smelt, a species of fish that is commonly used to indicate overall environmental health in the Delta (and California as a whole), continue to spiral towards functional extinction.
Homeless people. Everywhere.
yeah pretty much
OOFI'm just glad that I don't live in California right now. 8)What is happening?
Our governor is a moron that contradicts himself at every turn.
Virus cases keep fluctuating since the state has no actual plan.
Wildfires are getting worse and no one is doing anything to address it.
Smelt, a species of fish that is commonly used to indicate overall environmental health in the Delta (and California as a whole), continue to spiral towards functional extinction.
Homeless people. Everywhere.
yeah pretty much
Wait I remember I watched a Youtube Vid from a German living in California talking about how shit the state has become.
Is there a particular Reason why your politicians dont do shit against those issues?
Environmentally speaking, it simply isn’t profitable and/or practical enough yet for the switch to more sustainable energy. You have bastards like Exxon who funnel millions into worldwide disinformation campaigns meant to discredit wind, air, and solar so that their competition remains non-existent.California has an incredible amount of solar power generation. unfortunately the technology doesn't exist to make it a) worth the cost and b) consistent enough to power the grid. there are a lot of examples of jurisdictions that spend a lot of money and time trying to make their grids run on renewables but it doesn't work because renewables can't provide baseline supply to match demand changes
QuoteEnvironmentally speaking, it simply isn’t profitable and/or practical enough yet for the switch to more sustainable energy. You have bastards like Exxon who funnel millions into worldwide disinformation campaigns meant to discredit wind, air, and solar so that their competition remains non-existent.California has an incredible amount of solar power generation. unfortunately the technology doesn't exist to make it a) worth the cost and b) consistent enough to power the grid. there are a lot of examples of jurisdictions that spend a lot of money and time trying to make their grids run on renewables but it doesn't work because renewables can't provide baseline supply to match demand changes
the "exxon spends all this money in environmental disinformation" is a position straight out of 2005. at this point, the anti-fossil fuel movement is a multi billion dollar industry with influence and reach 10x the scale of anything pro fossil fuel. especially in a state like California, the influence pro-renewables groups have is wayyy bigger than Exxon or any group
the most effective way to reduce fossil fuel emissions from power generation is invest in nuclear generation. this is not disputed, but the anti-nuclear lobby is very powerful. i mean, they could also invest in clean tech and encourage innovation while admitting that electricity is only effectively generated by fossil fuel sources, but since that's not ideologically helpful enough they won'tQuoteEnvironmentally speaking, it simply isn’t profitable and/or practical enough yet for the switch to more sustainable energy. You have bastards like Exxon who funnel millions into worldwide disinformation campaigns meant to discredit wind, air, and solar so that their competition remains non-existent.California has an incredible amount of solar power generation. unfortunately the technology doesn't exist to make it a) worth the cost and b) consistent enough to power the grid. there are a lot of examples of jurisdictions that spend a lot of money and time trying to make their grids run on renewables but it doesn't work because renewables can't provide baseline supply to match demand changes
the "exxon spends all this money in environmental disinformation" is a position straight out of 2005. at this point, the anti-fossil fuel movement is a multi billion dollar industry with influence and reach 10x the scale of anything pro fossil fuel. especially in a state like California, the influence pro-renewables groups have is wayyy bigger than Exxon or any group
You’re right in that the state has a lot of renewable sources (almost 40% last I checked) but I simply do not buy the government’s statements that they are taking the issues that fossil fuels present seriously. The time to act was 20 years ago. I hope you’re right in the sense of their influence, but it better pick up its pace in a world that is still run largely by fossil.
Even if the Exxon point is a bit outdated, the relevance still holds. They knew in the 80s that emissions needed to drop and still kept going. I try to avoid going down the deep ecology route, but if the reports are right and planet turns into a hellhole, then justified or not they are going to be as equally reviled as some of the biggest mass murderers in history.
or you could justthe most effective way to reduce fossil fuel emissions from power generation is invest in nuclear generation. this is not disputed, but the anti-nuclear lobby is very powerful. i mean, they could also invest in clean tech and encourage innovation while admitting that electricity is only effectively generated by fossil fuel sources, but since that's not ideologically helpful enough they won'tQuoteEnvironmentally speaking, it simply isn’t profitable and/or practical enough yet for the switch to more sustainable energy. You have bastards like Exxon who funnel millions into worldwide disinformation campaigns meant to discredit wind, air, and solar so that their competition remains non-existent.California has an incredible amount of solar power generation. unfortunately the technology doesn't exist to make it a) worth the cost and b) consistent enough to power the grid. there are a lot of examples of jurisdictions that spend a lot of money and time trying to make their grids run on renewables but it doesn't work because renewables can't provide baseline supply to match demand changes
the "exxon spends all this money in environmental disinformation" is a position straight out of 2005. at this point, the anti-fossil fuel movement is a multi billion dollar industry with influence and reach 10x the scale of anything pro fossil fuel. especially in a state like California, the influence pro-renewables groups have is wayyy bigger than Exxon or any group
You’re right in that the state has a lot of renewable sources (almost 40% last I checked) but I simply do not buy the government’s statements that they are taking the issues that fossil fuels present seriously. The time to act was 20 years ago. I hope you’re right in the sense of their influence, but it better pick up its pace in a world that is still run largely by fossil.
Even if the Exxon point is a bit outdated, the relevance still holds. They knew in the 80s that emissions needed to drop and still kept going. I try to avoid going down the deep ecology route, but if the reports are right and planet turns into a hellhole, then justified or not they are going to be as equally reviled as some of the biggest mass murderers in history.
at this point emissions are less of a problem than loud voices make them out to be. models regularly run warm and the lower rcp's are the most likely. instead of spending millions on misguided climate actions or donating to already wealthy groups the gov could, just maybe, invest in getting better at forest fire management or something like that
One of the biggest raisins fossil fuels consistently outpace renewables is due to the sheer amount of funding they receive compared to renewables (almost double in R&D from the US gov). The US provides about 20 billion dollars annually to fossil fuel companies for extraction, exploration, development, etc. Renewables receive only a FRACTION of the amount of money the fossil fuel industry gets. In addition, the tax breaks given are only temporary. If we remove the temporary tax breaks, the fossil fuel companies receive 7 times as many incentives as renewables do. Of course, this is likely to change as more libtards get elected, and has changed greatly over the last decade or so. I just hope it isn't too little too late.it's not too late, anyone who tells you that is misinformed
As for nuclear energy, I agree it is currently probably our best bet. However, we do need to be really really careful with it. We do not have a way to properly dispose of nuclear waste, contrary to what many nuclear energy enthusiasts say. Throwing it on a mountain and calling it a day or putting the barrels in the ocean isn't exactly the best idea. Then again, fracking for the Marcellus and Utica shales also produce a shitton of radioactive material that the companies deny (I wonder why literally every single landfill in Ohio is far more radioactive than other states and why WV and PA ship their shale waste there ??? ???).
also climate change is real xd
fuck i feel like a libtard
Ideal would be Nuclear and hydro with natural gas for peak/load following until battery tech catches up but we don't have a lot more rivers we can dam and there have been a number of developments in nuclear technology(more efficient reactors/using more reprocessed fuel and fusion may actually be a thing in 10 years maybe) but of course storage of spent fuel and radioactive materials has been torpedoed by two administrations so dry cask and spent fuel pools are as good as we're going to get until we become sensible and actually fund a solution. Literally instead of half assing one solution full ass one please thank you! Actually fuck coal though no capOne of the biggest raisins fossil fuels consistently outpace renewables is due to the sheer amount of funding they receive compared to renewables (almost double in R&D from the US gov). The US provides about 20 billion dollars annually to fossil fuel companies for extraction, exploration, development, etc. Renewables receive only a FRACTION of the amount of money the fossil fuel industry gets. In addition, the tax breaks given are only temporary. If we remove the temporary tax breaks, the fossil fuel companies receive 7 times as many incentives as renewables do. Of course, this is likely to change as more libtards get elected, and has changed greatly over the last decade or so. I just hope it isn't too little too late.it's not too late, anyone who tells you that is misinformed
As for nuclear energy, I agree it is currently probably our best bet. However, we do need to be really really careful with it. We do not have a way to properly dispose of nuclear waste, contrary to what many nuclear energy enthusiasts say. Throwing it on a mountain and calling it a day or putting the barrels in the ocean isn't exactly the best idea. Then again, fracking for the Marcellus and Utica shales also produce a shitton of radioactive material that the companies deny (I wonder why literally every single landfill in Ohio is far more radioactive than other states and why WV and PA ship their shale waste there ??? ???).
also climate change is real xd
fuck i feel like a libtard
that is the downside of nuclear. however if you want consistent baseload power you're going to get it either from nuclear or renewables. good luck getting that from other sources
thorium reactors would be most efficient instead of uranium. its literally overall better but getting to thorium is more difficult than uranium and the mining will still result in pollution, altho not nearly as much as fossil fuels. it produces way less nuclear waste(e) but still produces it and its so annoying we dont have a way to properly dispose of it yet. hopefully renewables can catch up soon even though wind power is kinda gay due to the amount of land neededIdeal would be Nuclear and hydro with natural gas for peak/load following until battery tech catches up but we don't have a lot more rivers we can dam and there have been a number of developments in nuclear technology(more efficient reactors/using more reprocessed fuel and fusion may actually be a thing in 10 years maybe) but of course storage of spent fuel and radioactive materials has been torpedoed by two administrations so dry cask and spent fuel pools are as good as we're going to get until we become sensible and actually fund a solution. Literally instead of half assing one solution full ass one please thank you! Actually fuck coal though no capOne of the biggest raisins fossil fuels consistently outpace renewables is due to the sheer amount of funding they receive compared to renewables (almost double in R&D from the US gov). The US provides about 20 billion dollars annually to fossil fuel companies for extraction, exploration, development, etc. Renewables receive only a FRACTION of the amount of money the fossil fuel industry gets. In addition, the tax breaks given are only temporary. If we remove the temporary tax breaks, the fossil fuel companies receive 7 times as many incentives as renewables do. Of course, this is likely to change as more libtards get elected, and has changed greatly over the last decade or so. I just hope it isn't too little too late.it's not too late, anyone who tells you that is misinformed
As for nuclear energy, I agree it is currently probably our best bet. However, we do need to be really really careful with it. We do not have a way to properly dispose of nuclear waste, contrary to what many nuclear energy enthusiasts say. Throwing it on a mountain and calling it a day or putting the barrels in the ocean isn't exactly the best idea. Then again, fracking for the Marcellus and Utica shales also produce a shitton of radioactive material that the companies deny (I wonder why literally every single landfill in Ohio is far more radioactive than other states and why WV and PA ship their shale waste there ??? ???).
also climate change is real xd
fuck i feel like a libtard
that is the downside of nuclear. however if you want consistent baseload power you're going to get it either from nuclear or renewables. good luck getting that from other sources
thorium reactors would be most efficient instead of uranium. its literally overall better but getting to thorium is more difficult than uranium and the mining will still result in pollution, altho not nearly as much as fossil fuels. it produces way less nuclear waste(e) but still produces it and its so annoying we dont have a way to properly dispose of it yet. hopefully renewables can catch up soon even though wind power is kinda gay due to the amount of land neededIdeal would be Nuclear and hydro with natural gas for peak/load following until battery tech catches up but we don't have a lot more rivers we can dam and there have been a number of developments in nuclear technology(more efficient reactors/using more reprocessed fuel and fusion may actually be a thing in 10 years maybe) but of course storage of spent fuel and radioactive materials has been torpedoed by two administrations so dry cask and spent fuel pools are as good as we're going to get until we become sensible and actually fund a solution. Literally instead of half assing one solution full ass one please thank you! Actually fuck coal though no capOne of the biggest raisins fossil fuels consistently outpace renewables is due to the sheer amount of funding they receive compared to renewables (almost double in R&D from the US gov). The US provides about 20 billion dollars annually to fossil fuel companies for extraction, exploration, development, etc. Renewables receive only a FRACTION of the amount of money the fossil fuel industry gets. In addition, the tax breaks given are only temporary. If we remove the temporary tax breaks, the fossil fuel companies receive 7 times as many incentives as renewables do. Of course, this is likely to change as more libtards get elected, and has changed greatly over the last decade or so. I just hope it isn't too little too late.it's not too late, anyone who tells you that is misinformed
As for nuclear energy, I agree it is currently probably our best bet. However, we do need to be really really careful with it. We do not have a way to properly dispose of nuclear waste, contrary to what many nuclear energy enthusiasts say. Throwing it on a mountain and calling it a day or putting the barrels in the ocean isn't exactly the best idea. Then again, fracking for the Marcellus and Utica shales also produce a shitton of radioactive material that the companies deny (I wonder why literally every single landfill in Ohio is far more radioactive than other states and why WV and PA ship their shale waste there ??? ???).
also climate change is real xd
fuck i feel like a libtard
that is the downside of nuclear. however if you want consistent baseload power you're going to get it either from nuclear or renewables. good luck getting that from other sources
why is energy so difficult
Homelessness? I don’t know the answer to that one. We’ve thrown billions at the issue and most of it goes unspent or towards pork barrel projects that do nothing but provide positive PR for its respective figurehead. I suppose a good first step would be to stop treating them like parasites and props for gubernatorial ads.OOFI'm just glad that I don't live in California right now. 8)What is happening?
Our governor is a moron that contradicts himself at every turn.
Virus cases keep fluctuating since the state has no actual plan.
Wildfires are getting worse and no one is doing anything to address it.
Smelt, a species of fish that is commonly used to indicate overall environmental health in the Delta (and California as a whole), continue to spiral towards functional extinction.
Homeless people. Everywhere.
yeah pretty much
Wait I remember I watched a Youtube Vid from a German living in California talking about how shit the state has become.
Is there a particular Reason why your politicians dont do shit against those issues?
Hello my fellow National Socialist I can spot you from a mile away with those Hitler ideasHomelessness? I don’t know the answer to that one. We’ve thrown billions at the issue and most of it goes unspent or towards pork barrel projects that do nothing but provide positive PR for its respective figurehead. I suppose a good first step would be to stop treating them like parasites and props for gubernatorial ads.OOFI'm just glad that I don't live in California right now. 8)What is happening?
Our governor is a moron that contradicts himself at every turn.
Virus cases keep fluctuating since the state has no actual plan.
Wildfires are getting worse and no one is doing anything to address it.
Smelt, a species of fish that is commonly used to indicate overall environmental health in the Delta (and California as a whole), continue to spiral towards functional extinction.
Homeless people. Everywhere.
yeah pretty much
Wait I remember I watched a Youtube Vid from a German living in California talking about how shit the state has become.
Is there a particular Reason why your politicians dont do shit against those issues?
I've been thinking about this issue quite often considering the fact that I live in an area with a high amount of homelessness. I think that one of the main problems we have when trying to tackle this issue is how the general public views homeless people. Rather than trying to elevate the financial status of our fellow Americans, we, as a nation, would rather look at these people with contempt. I think I noticed this the most when driving through a "poorish" neighborhood and my wife expressed some negative feelings. I know other people are like this as well. Based on what I've seen personally, I believe that there is a serious class issue within the U.S. I understand that a lot of homeless people are not good people, or are homeless because of reasons within their control. However, I do believe that the majority of these people can be useful for something, and should at least, have the opportunity to fix or change their life.
Anyways, I'm not a socialist necessarily, but I believe this issue stems from the fact that our country is obsessed with profits and consumerism, rather than comradery and community. This is a late stage capitalism issue and imo, is solved by a cultural change, rather than some sort of change by legislature initially. However, when the time comes, I would personally implement some sort of large-scale "homeless employment" that would consist of small or large scale public projects. Of course, this has been done pretty often. So I would try to implement measures to make this semi-permanent. Providing employees a place to eat and sleep, in range within their work site. I've toyed around with the idea of tiny house villages (lol) or perhaps reclaiming abandoned buildings and repurposing them into housing for homeless employees. However, this could only be achieved if freed up some of our budget from other agencies. The first one that comes to mind is the military, but I would be weary of removing too much from the defense budget. As a good 60% of it is actually useful and not beaurucratic junk.
I'm drunk while writing this so I'm not too sure if my post made sense but i'll post the main point down here.
I believe that Americans have a serious cultural problem that can only be solved by becoming more collectivist. More beneficial and semi-permanent social programs need to be implemented to to give the economically disadvantaged a serious chance to reclaim their role in society. However, measures also need to be implemented to make sure that this system isn't abused/used by people that do not deserve it.
ok thanks
Pollution is caused by cowsI mean red meat farming is a large chunk of the overall so you’re right
No. All pollution is caused by cowsPollution is caused by cowsI mean red meat farming is a large chunk of the overall so you’re right
Hello my fellow National Socialist I can spot you from a mile away with those Hitler ideasHomelessness? I don’t know the answer to that one. We’ve thrown billions at the issue and most of it goes unspent or towards pork barrel projects that do nothing but provide positive PR for its respective figurehead. I suppose a good first step would be to stop treating them like parasites and props for gubernatorial ads.OOFI'm just glad that I don't live in California right now. 8)What is happening?
Our governor is a moron that contradicts himself at every turn.
Virus cases keep fluctuating since the state has no actual plan.
Wildfires are getting worse and no one is doing anything to address it.
Smelt, a species of fish that is commonly used to indicate overall environmental health in the Delta (and California as a whole), continue to spiral towards functional extinction.
Homeless people. Everywhere.
yeah pretty much
Wait I remember I watched a Youtube Vid from a German living in California talking about how shit the state has become.
Is there a particular Reason why your politicians dont do shit against those issues?
I've been thinking about this issue quite often considering the fact that I live in an area with a high amount of homelessness. I think that one of the main problems we have when trying to tackle this issue is how the general public views homeless people. Rather than trying to elevate the financial status of our fellow Americans, we, as a nation, would rather look at these people with contempt. I think I noticed this the most when driving through a "poorish" neighborhood and my wife expressed some negative feelings. I know other people are like this as well. Based on what I've seen personally, I believe that there is a serious class issue within the U.S. I understand that a lot of homeless people are not good people, or are homeless because of reasons within their control. However, I do believe that the majority of these people can be useful for something, and should at least, have the opportunity to fix or change their life.
Anyways, I'm not a socialist necessarily, but I believe this issue stems from the fact that our country is obsessed with profits and consumerism, rather than comradery and community. This is a late stage capitalism issue and imo, is solved by a cultural change, rather than some sort of change by legislature initially. However, when the time comes, I would personally implement some sort of large-scale "homeless employment" that would consist of small or large scale public projects. Of course, this has been done pretty often. So I would try to implement measures to make this semi-permanent. Providing employees a place to eat and sleep, in range within their work site. I've toyed around with the idea of tiny house villages (lol) or perhaps reclaiming abandoned buildings and repurposing them into housing for homeless employees. However, this could only be achieved if freed up some of our budget from other agencies. The first one that comes to mind is the military, but I would be weary of removing too much from the defense budget. As a good 60% of it is actually useful and not beaurucratic junk.
I'm drunk while writing this so I'm not too sure if my post made sense but i'll post the main point down here.
I believe that Americans have a serious cultural problem that can only be solved by becoming more collectivist. More beneficial and semi-permanent social programs need to be implemented to to give the economically disadvantaged a serious chance to reclaim their role in society. However, measures also need to be implemented to make sure that this system isn't abused/used by people that do not deserve it.
ok thanks
"The Third Position is a set of neo-fascist political ideologies that developed in Western Europe following the Second World War. Developed in the context of the Cold War, it developed its name through the claim that it represented a third position between the capitalism of the Western Bloc and the communism of the Eastern Bloc." - Wikipedia
Nice.
"The Third Position is a set of neo-fascist political ideologies that developed in Western Europe following the Second World War. Developed in the context of the Cold War, it developed its name through the claim that it represented a third position between the capitalism of the Western Bloc and the communism of the Eastern Bloc." - WikipediaAurum is a based fren :)
Nice.
"The Third Position is a set of neo-fascist political ideologies that developed in Western Europe following the Second World War. Developed in the context of the Cold War, it developed its name through the claim that it represented a third position between the capitalism of the Western Bloc and the communism of the Eastern Bloc." - WikipediaAurum is a based fren :)
Nice.
https://youtu.be/VeNjMwCZETgSpoilerSpoilerSpoilerSpoilerSpoilerSpoilerSpoilerSpoilerSpoilerDOUBLE ROMANS![close][close][close][close][close][close][close][close][close]
"The Third Position is a set of neo-fascist political ideologies that developed in Western Europe following the Second World War. Developed in the context of the Cold War, it developed its name through the claim that it represented a third position between the capitalism of the Western Bloc and the communism of the Eastern Bloc." - Wikipedia
Nice.
I just agree with it economically, don't really see what the issue is with that
I would do the same, not tryna lose my career over saying you liked a guy who criticized the people you aren't allowed to criticizeJust to clarify he said it's not true."The Third Position is a set of neo-fascist political ideologies that developed in Western Europe following the Second World War. Developed in the context of the Cold War, it developed its name through the claim that it represented a third position between the capitalism of the Western Bloc and the communism of the Eastern Bloc." - WikipediaAurum is a based fren :)
Nice.Spoilerhttps://youtu.be/VeNjMwCZETgSpoilerSpoilerSpoilerSpoilerSpoilerSpoilerSpoilerSpoilerSpoilerDOUBLE ROMANS![close][close][close][close][close][close][close][close][close][close]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T4kPn5hEFB4"The Third Position is a set of neo-fascist political ideologies that developed in Western Europe following the Second World War. Developed in the context of the Cold War, it developed its name through the claim that it represented a third position between the capitalism of the Western Bloc and the communism of the Eastern Bloc." - Wikipedia
Nice.
I just agree with it economically, don't really see what the issue is with that
I dunno fam a mix of fascism and communism seems like shit x2 to me.
But I'd have to read up on the ideology to give you a real take. But I can't be fucked reading up on some dead ideology nobody gives two shits about.
I dunno fam a mix of fascism and communism seems like shit x2 to me.based
But I'd have to read up on the ideology to give you a real take. But I can't be fucked reading up on some dead ideology nobody gives two shits about.
"The Third Position is a set of neo-fascist political ideologies that developed in Western Europe following the Second World War. Developed in the context of the Cold War, it developed its name through the claim that it represented a third position between the capitalism of the Western Bloc and the communism of the Eastern Bloc." - WikipediaAurum is a based fren :)
Nice.
https://youtu.be/VeNjMwCZETgSpoilerSpoilerSpoilerSpoilerSpoilerSpoilerSpoilerSpoilerSpoilerDOUBLE ROMANS![close][close][close][close][close][close][close][close][close]
Just to clarify he said it's not true.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T4kPn5hEFB4"The Third Position is a set of neo-fascist political ideologies that developed in Western Europe following the Second World War. Developed in the context of the Cold War, it developed its name through the claim that it represented a third position between the capitalism of the Western Bloc and the communism of the Eastern Bloc." - Wikipedia
Nice.
I just agree with it economically, don't really see what the issue is with that
I dunno fam a mix of fascism and communism seems like shit x2 to me.
But I'd have to read up on the ideology to give you a real take. But I can't be fucked reading up on some dead ideology nobody gives two shits about.
A multiple Party system would be very good for the US. You have Sanders, Biden, Obama, AOC and Warren in the same party? In a normal system, they would be in different parties but could form a majority in the parlament. Same goes for the GOP. Imagine voting for a party that stands for 80-90% of your opinion and not just 40%.yep, as someone from a working democracy watching the american political system is very frustrating
A multiple Party system would be very good for the US. You have Sanders, Biden, Obama, AOC and Warren in the same party? In a normal system, they would be in different parties but could form a majority in the parlament. Same goes for the GOP. Imagine voting for a party that stands for 80-90% of your opinion and not just 40%.^^
the parties will probably just form alliances similar to how the political climate is now anyway so more than likely wont be a big difference and will probably just make you think youre more important than you are and will still have to bow down to our true glorious leadersA multiple Party system would be very good for the US. You have Sanders, Biden, Obama, AOC and Warren in the same party? In a normal system, they would be in different parties but could form a majority in the parlament. Same goes for the GOP. Imagine voting for a party that stands for 80-90% of your opinion and not just 40%.^^
Could happen, but more likely the parties will built a social, a liberal, a conservative, an enivorment, a populist and a socialist party. Probably a christian party for the evangelists. Maybe a socialist one.the parties will probably just form alliances similar to how the political climate is now anyway so more than likely wont be a big difference and will probably just make you think youre more important than you are and will still have to bow down to our true glorious leadersA multiple Party system would be very good for the US. You have Sanders, Biden, Obama, AOC and Warren in the same party? In a normal system, they would be in different parties but could form a majority in the parlament. Same goes for the GOP. Imagine voting for a party that stands for 80-90% of your opinion and not just 40%.^^
"let me show you stupid ameritards what a real democracy looks like"A multiple Party system would be very good for the US. You have Sanders, Biden, Obama, AOC and Warren in the same party? In a normal system, they would be in different parties but could form a majority in the parlament. Same goes for the GOP. Imagine voting for a party that stands for 80-90% of your opinion and not just 40%.yep, as someone from a working democracy watching the american political system is very frustrating
you'd be surprisedthe parties will probably just form alliances similar to how the political climate is now anyway so more than likely wont be a big difference and will probably just make you think youre more important than you are and will still have to bow down to our true glorious leadersA multiple Party system would be very good for the US. You have Sanders, Biden, Obama, AOC and Warren in the same party? In a normal system, they would be in different parties but could form a majority in the parlament. Same goes for the GOP. Imagine voting for a party that stands for 80-90% of your opinion and not just 40%.^^
I do hope you are merely pretending to be retarded"let me show you stupid ameritards what a real democracy looks like"A multiple Party system would be very good for the US. You have Sanders, Biden, Obama, AOC and Warren in the same party? In a normal system, they would be in different parties but could form a majority in the parlament. Same goes for the GOP. Imagine voting for a party that stands for 80-90% of your opinion and not just 40%.yep, as someone from a working democracy watching the american political system is very frustrating
(https://i.imgur.com/GMkjsST.png)
I mean even if, these alliances are coalitions and are still LEAPS better then your shit 2 Party System.you'd be surprisedthe parties will probably just form alliances similar to how the political climate is now anyway so more than likely wont be a big difference and will probably just make you think youre more important than you are and will still have to bow down to our true glorious leadersA multiple Party system would be very good for the US. You have Sanders, Biden, Obama, AOC and Warren in the same party? In a normal system, they would be in different parties but could form a majority in the parlament. Same goes for the GOP. Imagine voting for a party that stands for 80-90% of your opinion and not just 40%.^^
canada has 3 major political parties and factions aren't too common. been a true minority government here since the last election
Theo is Canadian... so its not his system. Just his weird neighbours system.I mean even if, these alliances are coalitions and are still LEAPS better then your shit 2 Party System.you'd be surprisedthe parties will probably just form alliances similar to how the political climate is now anyway so more than likely wont be a big difference and will probably just make you think youre more important than you are and will still have to bow down to our true glorious leadersA multiple Party system would be very good for the US. You have Sanders, Biden, Obama, AOC and Warren in the same party? In a normal system, they would be in different parties but could form a majority in the parlament. Same goes for the GOP. Imagine voting for a party that stands for 80-90% of your opinion and not just 40%.^^
canada has 3 major political parties and factions aren't too common. been a true minority government here since the last election
Imagine having to Register to voteImagine closing voting stations in cities so the libtards have to wait for hours.
Imagine having to Register to voteWe do
Could happen, but more likely the parties will built a social, a liberal, a conservative, an enivorment, a populist and a socialist party. Probably a christian party for the evangelists. Maybe a socialist one.the parties will probably just form alliances similar to how the political climate is now anyway so more than likely wont be a big difference and will probably just make you think youre more important than you are and will still have to bow down to our true glorious leadersA multiple Party system would be very good for the US. You have Sanders, Biden, Obama, AOC and Warren in the same party? In a normal system, they would be in different parties but could form a majority in the parlament. Same goes for the GOP. Imagine voting for a party that stands for 80-90% of your opinion and not just 40%.^^
There are people in both parties in the us that can be sorted in the liberal party. Some in the social party from both Dems and Reps.
In the end it could only help the people to find a party that fits them better.
Yes, and still the tories need the DUP to have 50%. And its not just about the government. If the party makes it into the parliament, they have a voice. Thats more worth than having a party that stand for 40% or your opinion having the majority in a Parlament.Could happen, but more likely the parties will built a social, a liberal, a conservative, an enivorment, a populist and a socialist party. Probably a christian party for the evangelists. Maybe a socialist one.the parties will probably just form alliances similar to how the political climate is now anyway so more than likely wont be a big difference and will probably just make you think youre more important than you are and will still have to bow down to our true glorious leadersA multiple Party system would be very good for the US. You have Sanders, Biden, Obama, AOC and Warren in the same party? In a normal system, they would be in different parties but could form a majority in the parlament. Same goes for the GOP. Imagine voting for a party that stands for 80-90% of your opinion and not just 40%.^^
There are people in both parties in the us that can be sorted in the liberal party. Some in the social party from both Dems and Reps.
In the end it could only help the people to find a party that fits them better.
I mean the primaries are basicly like deciding between different parties on the right to far right (Republicans) and centre-right to centre to left (Democrats).
I think more parties would make it harder if anything for more voices to get through in a first past the post system.
Just look at the UK, Labour and Conservatives are basicly winning all district elections even though the Liberals tend to get between 7-20% each election.
No they don't the tories have 365 seats out of 326 needed for a majority, the tories have formed a government alone. DUP was from 2017-2019.even if third parties don't get into government or coalitions they at least compete for voters
Also like I said that's what primaries are for I doubt more parties would make any difference in congress.
Maybe if it was introduced with some sort of proportioinal representation system but that would probably be called an infringement on state rights so I doubt that would ever happen.
shut up retardNo they don't the tories have 365 seats out of 326 needed for a majority, the tories have formed a government alone. DUP was from 2017-2019.even if third parties don't get into government or coalitions they at least compete for voters
Also like I said that's what primaries are for I doubt more parties would make any difference in congress.
Maybe if it was introduced with some sort of proportioinal representation system but that would probably be called an infringement on state rights so I doubt that would ever happen.
Svenynoobshut up retardNo they don't the tories have 365 seats out of 326 needed for a majority, the tories have formed a government alone. DUP was from 2017-2019.even if third parties don't get into government or coalitions they at least compete for voters
Also like I said that's what primaries are for I doubt more parties would make any difference in congress.
Maybe if it was introduced with some sort of proportioinal representation system but that would probably be called an infringement on state rights so I doubt that would ever happen.
Svenynoobshut up retardNo they don't the tories have 365 seats out of 326 needed for a majority, the tories have formed a government alone. DUP was from 2017-2019.even if third parties don't get into government or coalitions they at least compete for voters
Also like I said that's what primaries are for I doubt more parties would make any difference in congress.
Maybe if it was introduced with some sort of proportioinal representation system but that would probably be called an infringement on state rights so I doubt that would ever happen.
(https://i.gyazo.com/bd914a72c9f2a3dad007da3b9bc10f07.png)Svenynoobshut up retardNo they don't the tories have 365 seats out of 326 needed for a majority, the tories have formed a government alone. DUP was from 2017-2019.even if third parties don't get into government or coalitions they at least compete for voters
Also like I said that's what primaries are for I doubt more parties would make any difference in congress.
Maybe if it was introduced with some sort of proportioinal representation system but that would probably be called an infringement on state rights so I doubt that would ever happen.
(https://i.gyazo.com/98f6efddbc29f392946bad5bb0a67268.png)
So the snowflakes are in Texas now right?
The only snowflakes I see are the Americans that refuse to admit that Trump lost.there's a difference between noting that masks inside private stores are not an issue and then the people i see out running with masks on. like everything somewhat political, issues create crazies on every side
Or the ones who say "but mah rights" when they're forced to wear a mask inside a privately owned store.
”People I see out running with masks on.” Maybe I’m being slow but I really don’t understand what you’re trying to say with this.That there are times where wearing masks is ineffective and pointless and that some people really overestimate their usefulness
This is not entierly true. If you’re in a crowded area where you can’t keep 2 meters away from others then a lot of health experts recommend wearing a mask.
Either way I don’t see how this is even close to how right-wingers and anti-vaxxers are behaving.
Yes he agreed with you on masks should be a thing in buildings and private businesses. He is talking about masks like your just outside and you wear a mask.”People I see out running with masks on.” Maybe I’m being slow but I really don’t understand what you’re trying to say with this.That there are times where wearing masks is ineffective and pointless and that some people really overestimate their usefulness
There really isn’t a situation outside where a mask has any real use
How am I supposed to answer that? Lol, if you live in the inner city maybe you have to sometimes, markets could also be an example.If you look at the context he is talking about stuff like taking a outside run. You usally don't run through crowded areas
How am I supposed to answer that? Lol, if you live in the inner city maybe you have to sometimes, markets could also be an example.If you look at the context he is talking about stuff like taking a outside run. You usally don't run through crowded areas
How am I supposed to answer that? Lol, if you live in the inner city maybe you have to sometimes, markets could also be an example.If you look at the context he is talking about stuff like taking a outside run. You usally don't run through crowded areas
”People I see out running with masks on.” Maybe I’m being slow but I really don’t understand what you’re trying to say with this.That there are times where wearing masks is ineffective and pointless and that some people really overestimate their usefulness
There really isn’t a situation outside where a mask has any real use
Well why wouldn't you not put your mask on infront of others.How am I supposed to answer that? Lol, if you live in the inner city maybe you have to sometimes, markets could also be an example.If you look at the context he is talking about stuff like taking a outside run. You usally don't run through crowded areas
No one is stopping you from taking off your mask when jogging, but obviously, if you take a stop somewhere where there are others present there isn't an excuse for not putting the mask on imo
Maybe we just live in a different areas. But if I want outside and went on a walk. Odds are of me walking into anyone are super slim like next to none. If you go to a market your going to a place you know will have alot of people you know your going somewhere where you need a mask. You don't just happen to walk into a market without knowing where it is.How am I supposed to answer that? Lol, if you live in the inner city maybe you have to sometimes, markets could also be an example.If you look at the context he is talking about stuff like taking a outside run. You usally don't run through crowded areas”People I see out running with masks on.” Maybe I’m being slow but I really don’t understand what you’re trying to say with this.That there are times where wearing masks is ineffective and pointless and that some people really overestimate their usefulness
There really isn’t a situation outside where a mask has any real use
There isn’t, unless you’re at a crowded concert or something. The chances of getting COVID from outdoor circulation is crazy lowHow am I supposed to answer that? Lol, if you live in the inner city maybe you have to sometimes, markets could also be an example.If you look at the context he is talking about stuff like taking a outside run. You usally don't run through crowded areas”People I see out running with masks on.” Maybe I’m being slow but I really don’t understand what you’re trying to say with this.That there are times where wearing masks is ineffective and pointless and that some people really overestimate their usefulness
There really isn’t a situation outside where a mask has any real use
Are you high? Your personal lived experience is not in question here.Maybe we just live in a different areas. But if I want outside and went on a walk. Odds are of me walking into anyone are super slim like next to none. If you go to a market your going to a place you know will have alot of people you know your going somewhere where you need a mask. You don't just happen to walk into a market without knowing where it is.How am I supposed to answer that? Lol, if you live in the inner city maybe you have to sometimes, markets could also be an example.If you look at the context he is talking about stuff like taking a outside run. You usally don't run through crowded areas”People I see out running with masks on.” Maybe I’m being slow but I really don’t understand what you’re trying to say with this.That there are times where wearing masks is ineffective and pointless and that some people really overestimate their usefulness
There really isn’t a situation outside where a mask has any real use
There are other examples (some of which I've given) and this is a bit of a pivot?There isn’t, unless you’re at a crowded concert or something. The chances of getting COVID from outdoor circulation is crazy lowHow am I supposed to answer that? Lol, if you live in the inner city maybe you have to sometimes, markets could also be an example.If you look at the context he is talking about stuff like taking a outside run. You usally don't run through crowded areas”People I see out running with masks on.” Maybe I’m being slow but I really don’t understand what you’re trying to say with this.That there are times where wearing masks is ineffective and pointless and that some people really overestimate their usefulness
There really isn’t a situation outside where a mask has any real use
Masks are generally not necessary
I am generally a retard
I am generally a retard
Well done west. Apparently now accusing somebody of "racism" without ANY proof whatsoever (guilty until proven innocent) is more serious than a murder attempt and an assault.
Good job, let the terrorists from BLM get in control of everything. Common sense is no more!
I know I usally just troll but what drugs are you guys on I want some.Well done west. Apparently now accusing somebody of "racism" without ANY proof whatsoever (guilty until proven innocent) is more serious than a murder attempt and an assault.
Good job, let the terrorists from BLM get in control of everything. Common sense is no more!
Again, Americans disgust me
Well done west. Apparently now accusing somebody of "racism" without ANY proof whatsoever (guilty until proven innocent) is more serious than a murder attempt and an assault.If you're referring to the recent death of Daunte Wright conflating an armed robbery and assault charge with murder attempt seems a bit much. The officer who shot him hasn't been charged with a hate nor crime, nor has she been assumed guilty until proven innocent.
Good job, let the terrorists from BLM get in control of everything. Common sense is no more!
1 less one to worry about eh boys?we get it bro you hate black people
I was obviously talking about c*ps out on the street sweetie 💅💅1 less one to worry about eh boys?we get it bro you hate black people
She resigned and is being charged with second-degree manslaughterI was inclined to give her some slag, but I read somewhere she was on the force for 17 Years. So she either is grossly incompetent and should only work in incredibly low skill jobs, or she actually wanted to shoot someone.
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/14/us/kim-potter-charged-daunte-wright.html
Supposedly it's very unlikely that she will be convicted though due to how narrowly worded the law is.
Personally I don't understand how you as a trained professional could possibly mistake a gun for a taser.Spoiler(https://i.gyazo.com/005452e17f684ce4b3ba9951245830cf.png)[close]
imagine being unironically racist lmao HAHA XDDDDDDDDDDDDDD funny frog am I right guysShe resigned and is being charged with second-degree manslaughterI was inclined to give her some slag, but I read somewhere she was on the force for 17 Years. So she either is grossly incompetent and should only work in incredibly low skill jobs, or she actually wanted to shoot someone.
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/14/us/kim-potter-charged-daunte-wright.html
Supposedly it's very unlikely that she will be convicted though due to how narrowly worded the law is.
Personally I don't understand how you as a trained professional could possibly mistake a gun for a taser.Spoiler(https://i.gyazo.com/005452e17f684ce4b3ba9951245830cf.png)[close]
Well done west. Apparently now accusing somebody of "racism" without ANY proof whatsoever (guilty until proven innocent) is more serious than a murder attempt and an assault.If you're referring to the recent death of Daunte Wright conflating an armed robbery and assault charge with murder attempt seems a bit much. The officer who shot him hasn't been charged with a hate nor crime, nor has she been assumed guilty until proven innocent.
Good job, let the terrorists from BLM get in control of everything. Common sense is no more!
Civil society seems to think otherwise, but it seem more of a reaction to the general situation faced by black people with regards to police violence in the U.S, than an explicit hate crime in the instance of Wrights death. And while civil society may think the officer guilty until proven innocent, they don't enforce legal penalties, the judicial system does.
Aight I'm back to the shadows...
Well done west. Apparently now accusing somebody of "racism" without ANY proof whatsoever (guilty until proven innocent) is more serious than a murder attempt and an assault.A few of the BLM leaders also take advantage of the donations they get and spend it on houses!!!
Good job, let the terrorists from BLM get in control of everything. Common sense is no more!
Well done west. Apparently now accusing somebody of "racism" without ANY proof whatsoever (guilty until proven innocent) is more serious than a murder attempt and an assault.A few of the BLM leaders also take advantage of the donations they get and spend it on houses!!!
Good job, let the terrorists from BLM get in control of everything. Common sense is no more!
Why are you dropping cryptic messages like this?Well done west. Apparently now accusing somebody of "racism" without ANY proof whatsoever (guilty until proven innocent) is more serious than a murder attempt and an assault.If you're referring to the recent death of Daunte Wright conflating an armed robbery and assault charge with murder attempt seems a bit much. The officer who shot him hasn't been charged with a hate nor crime, nor has she been assumed guilty until proven innocent.
Good job, let the terrorists from BLM get in control of everything. Common sense is no more!
Civil society seems to think otherwise, but it seem more of a reaction to the general situation faced by black people with regards to police violence in the U.S, than an explicit hate crime in the instance of Wrights death. And while civil society may think the officer guilty until proven innocent, they don't enforce legal penalties, the judicial system does.
Aight I'm back to the shadows...
I'm not referring to the Daunte Wright case.
Well done west. Apparently now accusing somebody of "racism" without ANY proof whatsoever (guilty until proven innocent) is more serious than a murder attempt and an assault.A few of the BLM leaders also take advantage of the donations they get and spend it on houses!!!
Good job, let the terrorists from BLM get in control of everything. Common sense is no more!
Kore most likely murdered a minorityWhy are you dropping cryptic messages like this?Well done west. Apparently now accusing somebody of "racism" without ANY proof whatsoever (guilty until proven innocent) is more serious than a murder attempt and an assault.If you're referring to the recent death of Daunte Wright conflating an armed robbery and assault charge with murder attempt seems a bit much. The officer who shot him hasn't been charged with a hate nor crime, nor has she been assumed guilty until proven innocent.
Good job, let the terrorists from BLM get in control of everything. Common sense is no more!
Civil society seems to think otherwise, but it seem more of a reaction to the general situation faced by black people with regards to police violence in the U.S, than an explicit hate crime in the instance of Wrights death. And while civil society may think the officer guilty until proven innocent, they don't enforce legal penalties, the judicial system does.
Aight I'm back to the shadows...
I'm not referring to the Daunte Wright case.Well done west. Apparently now accusing somebody of "racism" without ANY proof whatsoever (guilty until proven innocent) is more serious than a murder attempt and an assault.A few of the BLM leaders also take advantage of the donations they get and spend it on houses!!!
Good job, let the terrorists from BLM get in control of everything. Common sense is no more!
I assume you're reffering to Patrisse Cullors?
Sure, she did make her money by riding on BLM with her memories and being offered director roles for WB and youtube but so far I haven't seen evidence of any wrong doing.
Why are you dropping cryptic messages like this?Well done west. Apparently now accusing somebody of "racism" without ANY proof whatsoever (guilty until proven innocent) is more serious than a murder attempt and an assault.If you're referring to the recent death of Daunte Wright conflating an armed robbery and assault charge with murder attempt seems a bit much. The officer who shot him hasn't been charged with a hate nor crime, nor has she been assumed guilty until proven innocent.
Good job, let the terrorists from BLM get in control of everything. Common sense is no more!
Civil society seems to think otherwise, but it seem more of a reaction to the general situation faced by black people with regards to police violence in the U.S, than an explicit hate crime in the instance of Wrights death. And while civil society may think the officer guilty until proven innocent, they don't enforce legal penalties, the judicial system does.
Aight I'm back to the shadows...
I'm not referring to the Daunte Wright case.Well done west. Apparently now accusing somebody of "racism" without ANY proof whatsoever (guilty until proven innocent) is more serious than a murder attempt and an assault.A few of the BLM leaders also take advantage of the donations they get and spend it on houses!!!
Good job, let the terrorists from BLM get in control of everything. Common sense is no more!
I assume you're reffering to Patrisse Cullors?
Sure, she did make her money by riding on BLM with her memories and being offered director roles for WB and youtube but so far I haven't seen evidence of any wrong doing.
Kore most likely murdered a minorityWhy are you dropping cryptic messages like this?Well done west. Apparently now accusing somebody of "racism" without ANY proof whatsoever (guilty until proven innocent) is more serious than a murder attempt and an assault.If you're referring to the recent death of Daunte Wright conflating an armed robbery and assault charge with murder attempt seems a bit much. The officer who shot him hasn't been charged with a hate nor crime, nor has she been assumed guilty until proven innocent.
Good job, let the terrorists from BLM get in control of everything. Common sense is no more!
Civil society seems to think otherwise, but it seem more of a reaction to the general situation faced by black people with regards to police violence in the U.S, than an explicit hate crime in the instance of Wrights death. And while civil society may think the officer guilty until proven innocent, they don't enforce legal penalties, the judicial system does.
Aight I'm back to the shadows...
I'm not referring to the Daunte Wright case.Well done west. Apparently now accusing somebody of "racism" without ANY proof whatsoever (guilty until proven innocent) is more serious than a murder attempt and an assault.A few of the BLM leaders also take advantage of the donations they get and spend it on houses!!!
Good job, let the terrorists from BLM get in control of everything. Common sense is no more!
I assume you're reffering to Patrisse Cullors?
Sure, she did make her money by riding on BLM with her memories and being offered director roles for WB and youtube but so far I haven't seen evidence of any wrong doing.
No I called you a murderer because you killed someone in cold bloodKore most likely murdered a minorityWhy are you dropping cryptic messages like this?Well done west. Apparently now accusing somebody of "racism" without ANY proof whatsoever (guilty until proven innocent) is more serious than a murder attempt and an assault.If you're referring to the recent death of Daunte Wright conflating an armed robbery and assault charge with murder attempt seems a bit much. The officer who shot him hasn't been charged with a hate nor crime, nor has she been assumed guilty until proven innocent.
Good job, let the terrorists from BLM get in control of everything. Common sense is no more!
Civil society seems to think otherwise, but it seem more of a reaction to the general situation faced by black people with regards to police violence in the U.S, than an explicit hate crime in the instance of Wrights death. And while civil society may think the officer guilty until proven innocent, they don't enforce legal penalties, the judicial system does.
Aight I'm back to the shadows...
I'm not referring to the Daunte Wright case.Well done west. Apparently now accusing somebody of "racism" without ANY proof whatsoever (guilty until proven innocent) is more serious than a murder attempt and an assault.A few of the BLM leaders also take advantage of the donations they get and spend it on houses!!!
Good job, let the terrorists from BLM get in control of everything. Common sense is no more!
I assume you're reffering to Patrisse Cullors?
Sure, she did make her money by riding on BLM with her memories and being offered director roles for WB and youtube but so far I haven't seen evidence of any wrong doing.
Yes, call me a racist because I'm pointing out major flaws in today's society
Kore's talking about the slavia prague player who called a Rangers Player a slur.Pretty sad that the child got shot but he shouldn't be holding a gun in the first place. I do believe we some sort of new police reform and technology to keep citizens and cops safe.
Killing anyone is bad but maybe the police should stop killing black people especially young children. Idk just a wild thought.
Im about to finish the german police academy, and man your police system is horrendous to me.Kore's talking about the slavia prague player who called a Rangers Player a slur.Pretty sad that the child got shot but he shouldn't be holding a gun in the first place. I do believe we some sort of new police reform and technology to keep citizens and cops safe.
Killing anyone is bad but maybe the police should stop killing black people especially young children. Idk just a wild thought.
Im about to finish the german police academy, and man your police system is horrendous to me.Kore's talking about the slavia prague player who called a Rangers Player a slur.Pretty sad that the child got shot but he shouldn't be holding a gun in the first place. I do believe we some sort of new police reform and technology to keep citizens and cops safe.
Killing anyone is bad but maybe the police should stop killing black people especially young children. Idk just a wild thought.
1. Why does every single city pay for its own police force?! the drawbacks from this are obvious: most departments have no money, lackluster training and most people police the area they are from. totally unnecessary
2. Your Police Training is like a few months. In Germany we train for 3 years and you need to finish a bachelors degree to become a basic policeman. We study sociology, psychology etc. to deescalate situations and train high stress situations. What can you even learn in a few weeks?
3. Your police is getting more and more militarised. The equipment, the training is more in the spirit of invading vietnam then policing. You cant compare policing and military work. In policing you need to be compassionate, empathetic, communicative but also firm if you need to. In the military you need to kill the enemy. Even the fucking public communication: "War on Crime" what fucking war. Crime exists because of sociology issues. Who do you wage fucking "War" against??
also the lack of a federally mandated training standard is a serious detrimentIm about to finish the german police academy, and man your police system is horrendous to me.Kore's talking about the slavia prague player who called a Rangers Player a slur.Pretty sad that the child got shot but he shouldn't be holding a gun in the first place. I do believe we some sort of new police reform and technology to keep citizens and cops safe.
Killing anyone is bad but maybe the police should stop killing black people especially young children. Idk just a wild thought.
1. Why does every single city pay for its own police force?! the drawbacks from this are obvious: most departments have no money, lackluster training and most people police the area they are from. totally unnecessary
2. Your Police Training is like a few months. In Germany we train for 3 years and you need to finish a bachelors degree to become a basic policeman. We study sociology, psychology etc. to deescalate situations and train high stress situations. What can you even learn in a few weeks?
3. Your police is getting more and more militarised. The equipment, the training is more in the spirit of invading vietnam then policing. You cant compare policing and military work. In policing you need to be compassionate, empathetic, communicative but also firm if you need to. In the military you need to kill the enemy. Even the fucking public communication: "War on Crime" what fucking war. Crime exists because of sociology issues. Who do you wage fucking "War" against??
Kore's talking about the slavia prague player who called a Rangers Player a slur.some say cops are more likely to shoot african-americans because they're the most criminally active ethnic minority in the country, but lets be real they only shoot them because they're WHITE NEONAZI TRASH
Killing anyone is bad but maybe the police should stop killing black people especially young children. Idk just a wild thought.
Im about to finish the german police academy, and man your police system is horrendous to me.Kore's talking about the slavia prague player who called a Rangers Player a slur.Pretty sad that the child got shot but he shouldn't be holding a gun in the first place. I do believe we some sort of new police reform and technology to keep citizens and cops safe.
Killing anyone is bad but maybe the police should stop killing black people especially young children. Idk just a wild thought.
1. Why does every single city pay for its own police force?! the drawbacks from this are obvious: most departments have no money, lackluster training and most people police the area they are from. totally unnecessary
2. Your Police Training is like a few months. In Germany we train for 3 years and you need to finish a bachelors degree to become a basic policeman. We study sociology, psychology etc. to deescalate situations and train high stress situations. What can you even learn in a few weeks?
3. Your police is getting more and more militarised. The equipment, the training is more in the spirit of invading vietnam then policing. You cant compare policing and military work. In policing you need to be compassionate, empathetic, communicative but also firm if you need to. In the military you need to kill the enemy. Even the fucking public communication: "War on Crime" what fucking war. Crime exists because of sociology issues. Who do you wage fucking "War" against??
in kore's case black people
Kore's talking about the slavia prague player who called a Rangers Player a slur.some say cops are more likely to shoot african-americans because they're the most criminally active ethnic minority in the country, but lets be real they only shoot them because they're WHITE NEONAZI TRASH
Killing anyone is bad but maybe the police should stop killing black people especially young children. Idk just a wild thought.
das rhyte whiteboiIm about to finish the german police academy, and man your police system is horrendous to me.Kore's talking about the slavia prague player who called a Rangers Player a slur.Pretty sad that the child got shot but he shouldn't be holding a gun in the first place. I do believe we some sort of new police reform and technology to keep citizens and cops safe.
Killing anyone is bad but maybe the police should stop killing black people especially young children. Idk just a wild thought.
1. Why does every single city pay for its own police force?! the drawbacks from this are obvious: most departments have no money, lackluster training and most people police the area they are from. totally unnecessary
2. Your Police Training is like a few months. In Germany we train for 3 years and you need to finish a bachelors degree to become a basic policeman. We study sociology, psychology etc. to deescalate situations and train high stress situations. What can you even learn in a few weeks?
3. Your police is getting more and more militarised. The equipment, the training is more in the spirit of invading vietnam then policing. You cant compare policing and military work. In policing you need to be compassionate, empathetic, communicative but also firm if you need to. In the military you need to kill the enemy. Even the fucking public communication: "War on Crime" what fucking war. Crime exists because of sociology issues. Who do you wage fucking "War" against??
in kore's case black people
bruhKore's talking about the slavia prague player who called a Rangers Player a slur.some say cops are more likely to shoot african-americans because they're the most criminally active ethnic minority in the country, but lets be real they only shoot them because they're WHITE NEONAZI TRASH
Killing anyone is bad but maybe the police should stop killing black people especially young children. Idk just a wild thought.
bet they will force whites into slavery now that biden is a president so they know what was it like 150+ years ago
Surely that's bait?But he is the devil on earth! He invented the jewish space laser together with Bill gates and BLM.
Biden was VP to meet republican in the middle. Look at his voting record and you'll see he's a republican in all but name. He's not the radical leftist you pretend he is.
yes, he dances for the *snip* puppetmaster that has his hand up his assSurely that's bait?But he is the devil on earth! He invented the jewish space laser together with Bill gates and BLM.
Biden was VP to meet republican in the middle. Look at his voting record and you'll see he's a republican in all but name. He's not the radical leftist you pretend he is.
Do your research!
I am going to start to wear PPE when I browse the forums because I don’t want to breathe the same air as you retards
I am going to start to wear PPE when I browse the forums because I don’t want to breathe the same air as you retards
"murder", RIP US legal systemNot shocked tbh.
A guilty verdict is the only positive outcome from this case. Won't bring George Floyd back but its justice and it sends the right message.100% agree, I cant wait for the next crackhead to OD on fentanyl so I can cop some new jordans
A guilty verdict is the only positive outcome from this case. Won't bring George Floyd back but its justice and it sends the right message.
A guilty verdict is the only positive outcome from this case. Won't bring George Floyd back but its justice and it sends the right message.
Guilty? I agree. Murder? Probably not.
What I find disturbing the most is the brutal reality that if they switched their skin colour there would be zero media coverage and probably way milder punishment.
The so called fight against inequality and supposed oppression of black community has turned into a witch hunt of every white officer.
There are millions of police-civilian interactions each year and how many end up with an unarmed black person getting shot? Literally a needle in a haystack. Same applies for the gun rights issue - banning guns or taking away guns won't solve anything, it will most likely have the opposite effect.
Americans should aim to solve the issues at their roots and search for actual solutions. And no, the institution is not the issue.
Its 2nd Degree Murder, in Germany we would call it "Totschlag" and I think the verdict is fair.A guilty verdict is the only positive outcome from this case. Won't bring George Floyd back but its justice and it sends the right message.
Guilty? I agree. Murder? Probably not.
What I find disturbing the most is the brutal reality that if they switched their skin colour there would be zero media coverage and probably way milder punishment.
The so called fight against inequality and supposed oppression of black community has turned into a witch hunt of every white officer.
There are millions of police-civilian interactions each year and how many end up with an unarmed black person getting shot? Literally a needle in a haystack. Same applies for the gun rights issue - banning guns or taking away guns won't solve anything, it will most likely have the opposite effect.
Americans should aim to solve the issues at their roots and search for actual solutions. And no, the institution is not the issue.
Same applies for the gun rights issue - banning guns or taking away guns won't solve anything, it will most likely have the opposite effect.I mean that's a seperate issue though I am interested in why restricting laws regarding firearms will have the opposite effect in your opinion?
A man was in cuffs, on the ground with no possible way of being a threat. A police officer held his knee against his neck for 9 and a half minutes. Its not like he fell and accidentally killed him. He chose to put his knee on this guy and then held it there for over 9 minutes whilst the victim said he can't breathe. Idk seems kinda deliberate to me. Oh and by the way , we've known for years that kneeling on someone like that cuts off their air supply :3I'm going to be honest with you. You know if you can talk your breathing because breath going through is how we talk. He was being choked but because he was talking that means at the moment he still breathing. You know before he lost consciousness and shit went bad.
Same applies for the gun rights issue - banning guns or taking away guns won't solve anything, it will most likely have the opposite effect.I mean that's a seperate issue though I am interested in why restricting laws regarding firearms will have the opposite effect in your opinion?
(By opposite effect I suppose you mean more deaths etc.?)
A man was in cuffs, on the ground with no possible way of being a threat. A police officer held his knee against his neck for 9 and a half minutes. Its not like he fell and accidentally killed him. He chose to put his knee on this guy and then held it there for over 9 minutes whilst the victim said he can't breathe. Idk seems kinda deliberate to me. Oh and by the way , we've known for years that kneeling on someone like that cuts off their air supply :3I'm going to be honest with you. You know if you can talk your breathing because breath going through is how we talk. He was being choked but because he was talking that means at the moment he still breathing. You know before he lost consciousness and shit went bad.
The Police are really violent in the US. To put this in perceptive my Dad and Two Uncles all got beaten by the cops. My Dad had hand cuffs on while they beat him.(Not sure the details on the other twl)Only one of my Uncles actually got arrested and charged with a crime and that was drug procession. So yeah the institution is definitely the issue.A guilty verdict is the only positive outcome from this case. Won't bring George Floyd back but its justice and it sends the right message.
Guilty? I agree. Murder? Probably not.
What I find disturbing the most is the brutal reality that if they switched their skin colour there would be zero media coverage and probably way milder punishment.
The so called fight against inequality and supposed oppression of black community has turned into a witch hunt of every white officer.
There are millions of police-civilian interactions each year and how many end up with an unarmed black person getting shot? Literally a needle in a haystack. Same applies for the gun rights issue - banning guns or taking away guns won't solve anything, it will most likely have the opposite effect.
Americans should aim to solve the issues at their roots and search for actual solutions. And no, the institution is not the issue.
The Police are really violent in the US. To put this in perceptive my Dad and Two Uncles all got beaten by the cops. My Dad had hand cuffs on while they beat him.(Not sure the details on the other twl)Only one of my Uncles actually got arrested and charged with a crime and that was drug procession. So yeah the institution is definitely the issue.A guilty verdict is the only positive outcome from this case. Won't bring George Floyd back but its justice and it sends the right message.
Guilty? I agree. Murder? Probably not.
What I find disturbing the most is the brutal reality that if they switched their skin colour there would be zero media coverage and probably way milder punishment.
The so called fight against inequality and supposed oppression of black community has turned into a witch hunt of every white officer.
There are millions of police-civilian interactions each year and how many end up with an unarmed black person getting shot? Literally a needle in a haystack. Same applies for the gun rights issue - banning guns or taking away guns won't solve anything, it will most likely have the opposite effect.
Americans should aim to solve the issues at their roots and search for actual solutions. And no, the institution is not the issue.
Maybe if he didn't have a dudes knee on his neck he could breathe easier. Also yeah he wasn't perfect and had a past but that's not relevant.A man was in cuffs, on the ground with no possible way of being a threat. A police officer held his knee against his neck for 9 and a half minutes. Its not like he fell and accidentally killed him. He chose to put his knee on this guy and then held it there for over 9 minutes whilst the victim said he can't breathe. Idk seems kinda deliberate to me. Oh and by the way , we've known for years that kneeling on someone like that cuts off their air supply :3I'm going to be honest with you. You know if you can talk your breathing because breath going through is how we talk. He was being choked but because he was talking that means at the moment he still breathing. You know before he lost consciousness and shit went bad.
Maybe if he wasn't on drugs he could breathe easier as well, who knows. It's just sad that his criminal history and drug abuse has been just sweeped under the "hurr durr racism" carpet.
Same applies for the gun rights issue - banning guns or taking away guns won't solve anything, it will most likely have the opposite effect.I mean that's a seperate issue though I am interested in why restricting laws regarding firearms will have the opposite effect in your opinion?
(By opposite effect I suppose you mean more deaths etc.?)
It could be a stretch but still my opinion is that the more guns you take away from normal, law abiding and mentally healthy citizens the likelihood of armed robberies, assaults and what not resulting in death or serious wounds of the victim will rise. Crime rate and mass shootings won't magically disappear nor drop down.
It could be a stretch but still my opinion is that the more guns you take away from normal, law abiding and mentally healthy citizens the likelihood of armed robberies, assaults and what not resulting in death or serious wounds of the victim will rise. Crime rate and mass shootings won't magically disappear nor drop down.Don't you think that is a bit far-fetched? Why are there no similar problems in western-European countries then? The death rates (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/2e/2010_homicide_suicide_rates_high-income_countries.png/325px-2010_homicide_suicide_rates_high-income_countries.png) in these countries are extremely low in comparison to the US.
A man was in cuffs, on the ground with no possible way of being a threat. A police officer held his knee against his neck for 9 and a half minutes. Its not like he fell and accidentally killed him. He chose to put his knee on this guy and then held it there for over 9 minutes whilst the victim said he can't breathe. Idk seems kinda deliberate to me. Oh and by the way , we've known for years that kneeling on someone like that cuts off their air supply :3I'm going to be honest with you. You know if you can talk your breathing because breath going through is how we talk. He was being choked but because he was talking that means at the moment he still breathing. You know before he lost consciousness and shit went bad.
I'm going to be honest with you. You know if you can talk your breathing because breath going through is how we talk. He was being choked but because he was talking that means at the moment he still breathing.I'll just briefly mention that you're completely and utterly wrong in that regard. There's a huge difference between inhalation (generating a small amount of negative pressure to suck air into your lungs) and speaking (creating positive pressure and forcing air out). It's the same reason that an Iron Lung is (technically) a much better way of ventilating patients than intubation, at least from the perspective of your lungs. Huge inconvenience for everything else though.
A man was in cuffs, on the ground with no possible way of being a threat. A police officer held his knee against his neck for 9 and a half minutes. Its not like he fell and accidentally killed him. He chose to put his knee on this guy and then held it there for over 9 minutes whilst the victim said he can't breathe. Idk seems kinda deliberate to me. Oh and by the way , we've known for years that kneeling on someone like that cuts off their air supply :3I'm going to be honest with you. You know if you can talk your breathing because breath going through is how we talk. He was being choked but because he was talking that means at the moment he still breathing. You know before he lost consciousness and shit went bad.
WTF are you talking about?
https://www.mprnews.org/story/2020/07/09/medical-experts-floyds-speech-didnt-mean-he-could-breathe
I have no idea what you're trying to convey but you sound fucking retarded. :)
What my point is, is that systemic racism does not exist, not in the US.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institutional_racism#United_States
What my point is, is that systemic racism does not exist, not in the US.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institutional_racism#United_States
If I hear one more retard say this (especially an EU that has never actually seen a black person) I'm going to fucking kill myself. We get it bro. You don't like brown people. You don't have to hide it. Just own it. I swear, every time I see a post from you, you're always there puking up some shit take that shows your lack of knowledge/bias on a subject. From your shitty hockey takes to your braindead takes on US domestic issues. All your posts are pure unadulterated brain rot, please stop posting.
What my point is, is that systemic racism does not exist, not in the US.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institutional_racism#United_States
If I hear one more retard say this (especially an EU that has never actually seen a black person) I'm going to fucking kill myself. We get it bro. You don't like brown people. You don't have to hide it. Just own it. I swear, every time I see a post from you, you're always there puking up some shit take that shows your lack of knowledge/bias on a subject. From your shitty hockey takes to your braindead takes on US domestic issues. All your posts are pure unadulterated brain rot, please stop posting.
Nah, you don't get it and you will never get it seeing you being one of the illiterate libtard specimens that do nothing but assume and that can't comprehend simple facts.
And thanks for the wikipedia page, ain't reading it.
Now go ahead and kill yourself as you promised, thanks.
All you can do is throw insults at anyone with different opinions?
What my point is, is that systemic racism does not exist, not in the US.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institutional_racism#United_States
If I hear one more retard say this (especially an EU that has never actually seen a black person) I'm going to fucking kill myself. We get it bro. You don't like brown people. You don't have to hide it. Just own it. I swear, every time I see a post from you, you're always there puking up some shit take that shows your lack of knowledge/bias on a subject. From your shitty hockey takes to your braindead takes on US domestic issues. All your posts are pure unadulterated brain rot, please stop posting.
Nah, you don't get it and you will never get it seeing you being one of the illiterate libtard specimens that do nothing but assume and that can't comprehend simple facts.
And thanks for the wikipedia page, ain't reading it.
Now go ahead and kill yourself as you promised, thanks.All you can do is throw insults at anyone with different opinions?
truly poetic
What my point is, is that systemic racism does not exist, not in the US.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institutional_racism#United_States
If I hear one more retard say this (especially an EU that has never actually seen a black person) I'm going to fucking kill myself. We get it bro. You don't like brown people. You don't have to hide it. Just own it. I swear, every time I see a post from you, you're always there puking up some shit take that shows your lack of knowledge/bias on a subject. From your shitty hockey takes to your braindead takes on US domestic issues. All your posts are pure unadulterated brain rot, please stop posting.
What my point is, is that systemic racism does not exist, not in the US.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institutional_racism#United_States
If I hear one more retard say this (especially an EU that has never actually seen a black person) I'm going to fucking kill myself. We get it bro. You don't like brown people. You don't have to hide it. Just own it. I swear, every time I see a post from you, you're always there puking up some shit take that shows your lack of knowledge/bias on a subject. From your shitty hockey takes to your braindead takes on US domestic issues. All your posts are pure unadulterated brain rot, please stop posting.
Nah, you don't get it and you will never get it seeing you being one of the illiterate libtard specimens that do nothing but assume and that can't comprehend simple facts.
And thanks for the wikipedia page, ain't reading it.
Now go ahead and kill yourself as you promised, thanks.All you can do is throw insults at anyone with different opinions?
truly poetic
hey, I simply replied in the same manner as you replied to me ;)
What my point is, is that systemic racism does not exist, not in the US.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institutional_racism#United_States
If I hear one more retard say this (especially an EU that has never actually seen a black person) I'm going to fucking kill myself. We get it bro. You don't like brown people. You don't have to hide it. Just own it. I swear, every time I see a post from you, you're always there puking up some shit take that shows your lack of knowledge/bias on a subject. From your shitty hockey takes to your braindead takes on US domestic issues. All your posts are pure unadulterated brain rot, please stop posting.
Nah, you don't get it and you will never get it seeing you being one of the illiterate libtard specimens that do nothing but assume and that can't comprehend simple facts.
And thanks for the wikipedia page, ain't reading it.
Now go ahead and kill yourself as you promised, thanks.All you can do is throw insults at anyone with different opinions?
truly poetic
hey, I simply replied in the same manner as you replied to me ;)
Yeah, I'm okay with shit talking but don't act like you're better than it in one post, then do it the next. Also, I would love to hear some of these "simple facts" about how systemic racism doesn't exist.
Goomba are you one of those savages that go and loot and destroy others' property? Wouldn't be surprised.
Goomba are you one of those savages that go and loot and destroy others' property? Wouldn't be surprised.No, actually, I think that people shouldn't destroy others' private property, and owners should be allowed to defend it. Pretty funny how you've already made assumptions about me because you're incapable of thinking in a nuanced manner. Also, nice pivot, so I'll ask again: what are these "simple facts" that disprove systemic racism?
Goomba are you one of those savages that go and loot and destroy others' property? Wouldn't be surprised.No, actually, I think that people shouldn't destroy others' private property, and owners should be allowed to defend it. Pretty funny how you've already made assumptions about me because you're incapable of thinking in a nuanced manner. Also, nice pivot, so I'll ask again: what are these "simple facts" that disprove systemic racism?
oh great another EU that has never actually seen a black person not on TV also your last post was mad funny bro my sides were truly in orbitGoomba are you one of those savages that go and loot and destroy others' property? Wouldn't be surprised.
He's a soy geek, that's why. He's never worked with blacks before 100%.
oh great another EU that has never actually seen a black person not on TV also your last post was mad funny bro my sides were truly in orbitGoomba are you one of those savages that go and loot and destroy others' property? Wouldn't be surprised.
He's a soy geek, that's why. He's never worked with blacks before 100%.
Goomba are you one of those savages that go and loot and destroy others' property? Wouldn't be surprised.No, actually, I think that people shouldn't destroy others' private property, and owners should be allowed to defend it. Pretty funny how you've already made assumptions about me because you're incapable of thinking in a nuanced manner. Also, nice pivot, so I'll ask again: what are these "simple facts" that disprove systemic racism?
You don't even know what systemic racism is you fucking dumbass. Systemic racism doesn't mean that black people can't be successful, obviously, they can be. It means that there are still black people being affected by forms of racism that are embedded within laws and society. The reality is that in the United States black people were and still are in some cases affected by things such as redlining, harsher prison sentencing, and voter disenfranchisement (see Wikipedia I linked and https://www.acluofnorthcarolina.org/en/news/block-vote-voter-suppression-2020 and https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/07/north-carolina-voting-rights-law/493649/) These targeted attacks on black people combined with the US government looking the other way created downstream effects where many black families/communities have been left impoverished for generations, and obviously impoverished populations are more prone to drugs, violence, prostitution, gangs, etc. I don't know why people act like things such as Jim Crow, segregation, and other forms of state-sponsored racism were so long ago, they weren't.Goomba are you one of those savages that go and loot and destroy others' property? Wouldn't be surprised.No, actually, I think that people shouldn't destroy others' private property, and owners should be allowed to defend it. Pretty funny how you've already made assumptions about me because you're incapable of thinking in a nuanced manner. Also, nice pivot, so I'll ask again: what are these "simple facts" that disprove systemic racism?
Blacks have literally the same opportunities as anyone else and even more (affirmative action), lol. The fact you have had a black president, that there are blacks in the congress etc. literally proves my point.
If you can't even present any form of identification then you shouldn't be allowed to vote. It's not difficult to get an ID even if you don't have a driver's license.You don't even know what systemic racism is you fucking dumbass. Systemic racism doesn't mean that black people can't be successful, obviously, they can be. It means that there are still black people being affected by forms of racism that are embedded within laws and society. The reality is that in the United States black people were and still are in some cases affected by things such as redlining, harsher prison sentencing, and voter disenfranchisement (see Wikipedia I linked and https://www.acluofnorthcarolina.org/en/news/block-vote-voter-suppression-2020 and https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/07/north-carolina-voting-rights-law/493649/) These targeted attacks on black people combined with the US government looking the other way created downstream effects where many black families/communities have been left impoverished for generations, and obviously impoverished populations are more prone to drugs, violence, prostitution, gangs, etc. I don't know why people act like things such as Jim Crow, segregation, and other forms of state-sponsored racism were so long ago, they weren't.Goomba are you one of those savages that go and loot and destroy others' property? Wouldn't be surprised.No, actually, I think that people shouldn't destroy others' private property, and owners should be allowed to defend it. Pretty funny how you've already made assumptions about me because you're incapable of thinking in a nuanced manner. Also, nice pivot, so I'll ask again: what are these "simple facts" that disprove systemic racism?
Blacks have literally the same opportunities as anyone else and even more (affirmative action), lol. The fact you have had a black president, that there are blacks in the congress etc. literally proves my point.
]If you can't even present any form of identification then you shouldn't be allowed to vote. It's not difficult to get an ID even if you don't have a driver's license.
I never really understood how voter ID laws are considered racist. You should be able to prove who you are. I dont think Ive ever met someone without an IDIgnoring your dumbass anecdote, the reason they are considered racist is that sometimes there is action taken to actively prevent minorities from receiving ids. Case and point in 2016 the North Carolina state legislature was taken to court for the following: "In this one statute, the North Carolina legislature imposed a number of voting restrictions. The law required in-person voters to show certain photo IDs, beginning in 2016, which African Americans disproportionately lacked, and eliminated or reduced registration and voting access tools that African Americans disproportionately used. Id. at *9-10, *37, *123,*127, *131. Moreover, as the district court found, prior to enactment of SL 2013-381, the legislature requested and received racial data as to usage of the practices changed by the proposed law. "Later on the court document says this "In response to claims that intentional racial discrimination animated its action, the State offered only meager justifications. Although the new provisions target African Americans with almost surgical precision, they constitute inapt remedies for the problems assertedly justifying them and, in fact, impose cures for problems that did not exist." Pretty fucked up to attempt to suppress one of the most fundamental constitutional rights if you ask me.
Hello person on the internet, I said a wrong piece of infomation as even the article point out a common piece of misinformation in the US. In my previous experiences of being choked out I could not talk while I had a arm around my neck chocking me so I just used assumed the information was true. Have a nice day retardA man was in cuffs, on the ground with no possible way of being a threat. A police officer held his knee against his neck for 9 and a half minutes. Its not like he fell and accidentally killed him. He chose to put his knee on this guy and then held it there for over 9 minutes whilst the victim said he can't breathe. Idk seems kinda deliberate to me. Oh and by the way , we've known for years that kneeling on someone like that cuts off their air supply :3I'm going to be honest with you. You know if you can talk your breathing because breath going through is how we talk. He was being choked but because he was talking that means at the moment he still breathing. You know before he lost consciousness and shit went bad.
WTF are you talking about?
https://www.mprnews.org/story/2020/07/09/medical-experts-floyds-speech-didnt-mean-he-could-breathe
I have no idea what you're trying to convey but you sound fucking retarded. :)
Ok so if their gonna do stuff like that (Make voting id required and then close all the places to get an ID in certain areas) then i understand why it might be considered suppression. But i still think requiring a voter id is perfectly valid as long as people have access to it]If you can't even present any form of identification then you shouldn't be allowed to vote. It's not difficult to get an ID even if you don't have a driver's license.
Voting should be made as easy as possible for as many people as possible, considering that large-scale voter fraud has never been proved all barriers should be lowered where possible.I never really understood how voter ID laws are considered racist. You should be able to prove who you are. I dont think Ive ever met someone without an IDIgnoring your dumbass anecdote, the reason they are considered racist is that sometimes there is action taken to actively prevent minorities from receiving ids. Case and point in 2016 the North Carolina state legislature was taken to court for the following: "In this one statute, the North Carolina legislature imposed a number of voting restrictions. The law required in-person voters to show certain photo IDs, beginning in 2016, which African Americans disproportionately lacked, and eliminated or reduced registration and voting access tools that African Americans disproportionately used. Id. at *9-10, *37, *123,*127, *131. Moreover, as the district court found, prior to enactment of SL 2013-381, the legislature requested and received racial data as to usage of the practices changed by the proposed law. "Later on the court document says this "In response to claims that intentional racial discrimination animated its action, the State offered only meager justifications. Although the new provisions target African Americans with almost surgical precision, they constitute inapt remedies for the problems assertedly justifying them and, in fact, impose cures for problems that did not exist." Pretty fucked up to attempt to suppress one of the most fundamental constitutional rights if you ask me.
Sources: https://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/nc-4th.pdf and https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/court-north-carolina-voter-id-law-targeted-black-voters/
Similarly, in 2015, Alabama closed down a bunch of DMVs that also targeted black people. I'm too lazy to quote again so you can read more here if you care. https://www.al.com/opinion/2017/01/as_it_turns_out_bentleys_drive.html
I dont get why eastern europeans, who have a notorious low count of migrants are so fucking racist all the time>German
Insightful ArgumentI dont get why eastern europeans, who have a notorious low count of migrants are so fucking racist all the time>German
and now think about what you saidInsightful ArgumentI dont get why eastern europeans, who have a notorious low count of migrants are so fucking racist all the time>German
I dont get why eastern europeans, who have a notorious low count of migrants are so fucking racist all the time
You don't think black people exist in Europe?!?oh great another EU that has never actually seen a black person not on TV also your last post was mad funny bro my sides were truly in orbitGoomba are you one of those savages that go and loot and destroy others' property? Wouldn't be surprised.
He's a soy geek, that's why. He's never worked with blacks before 100%.
Statistically eastern europe has a very low percentage of migrants, but are dominantly rightwing and anti immigrant. I dont get that. You said im German. Please explain this to me like im 5and now think about what you saidInsightful ArgumentI dont get why eastern europeans, who have a notorious low count of migrants are so fucking racist all the time>German
I was simply flinging back at you the (racist) assumption that you made about a group of people based on where they are geographically from. As for the argument you are making about migrants, I fail to see the connection or relevance?Statistically eastern europe has a very low percentage of migrants, but are dominantly rightwing and anti immigrant. I dont get that. You said im German. Please explain this to me like im 5and now think about what you saidInsightful ArgumentI dont get why eastern europeans, who have a notorious low count of migrants are so fucking racist all the time>German
I am going to start to wear PPE when I browse the forums because I don’t want to breathe the same air as you retards
Imagine thinking the US is systemically racist lmao.History aint on your side BRUTHER
Just cause blacks are poor and dumb doesn't mean the system is fucked. There's a reason behind their high incarceration rates and poverty. The vast majority of that stems from their own actions. Single mothers deciding to get dicked by losers, losers not taking ownership and doing dumb shit that gets them locked up or killed by a cop.
Call out losers for what they are. Losers. The "Systemic" racism myth is rooted in victimhood and excuses.
I am going to start to wear PPE when I browse the forums because I don’t want to breathe the same air as you retardsImagine thinking the US is systemically racist lmao.History aint on your side BRUTHER
Just cause blacks are poor and dumb doesn't mean the system is fucked. There's a reason behind their high incarceration rates and poverty. The vast majority of that stems from their own actions. Single mothers deciding to get dicked by losers, losers not taking ownership and doing dumb shit that gets them locked up or killed by a cop.
Call out losers for what they are. Losers. The "Systemic" racism myth is rooted in victimhood and excuses.
Negro had it coming
Imagine thinking the US is systemically racist lmao.just a reminder that there are still people alive that lived under jim crow laws. instead of thinking all black people are just inherently low iq, you should understand that the conditions black people in the us are right now is due to a long history of slavery and oppressions. the impact of these policies just doesn't magically disappear when you finally start getting the same legal rights as white people. poverty breeds poverty, which is true for white people as well.
Just cause blacks are poor and dumb doesn't mean the system is fucked. There's a reason behind their high incarceration rates and poverty. The vast majority of that stems from their own actions. Single mothers deciding to get dicked by losers, losers not taking ownership and doing dumb shit that gets them locked up or killed by a cop.
Call out losers for what they are. Losers. The "Systemic" racism myth is rooted in victimhood and excuses.
Imagine thinking the US is systemically racist lmao.just a reminder that there are still people alive that lived under jim crow laws. instead of thinking all black people are just inherently low iq, you should understand that the conditions black people in the us are right now is due to a long history of slavery and oppressions. the impact of these policies just doesn't magically disappear when you finally start getting the same legal rights as white people. poverty breeds poverty, which is true for white people as well.
Just cause blacks are poor and dumb doesn't mean the system is fucked. There's a reason behind their high incarceration rates and poverty. The vast majority of that stems from their own actions. Single mothers deciding to get dicked by losers, losers not taking ownership and doing dumb shit that gets them locked up or killed by a cop.
Call out losers for what they are. Losers. The "Systemic" racism myth is rooted in victimhood and excuses.
Imagine thinking the US is systemically racist lmao.just a reminder that there are still people alive that lived under jim crow laws. instead of thinking all black people are just inherently low iq, you should understand that the conditions black people in the us are right now is due to a long history of slavery and oppressions. the impact of these policies just doesn't magically disappear when you finally start getting the same legal rights as white people. poverty breeds poverty, which is true for white people as well.
Just cause blacks are poor and dumb doesn't mean the system is fucked. There's a reason behind their high incarceration rates and poverty. The vast majority of that stems from their own actions. Single mothers deciding to get dicked by losers, losers not taking ownership and doing dumb shit that gets them locked up or killed by a cop.
Call out losers for what they are. Losers. The "Systemic" racism myth is rooted in victimhood and excuses.
le epic bootstraps memes. do you think all white people born in poverty make their way out?Imagine thinking the US is systemically racist lmao.just a reminder that there are still people alive that lived under jim crow laws. instead of thinking all black people are just inherently low iq, you should understand that the conditions black people in the us are right now is due to a long history of slavery and oppressions. the impact of these policies just doesn't magically disappear when you finally start getting the same legal rights as white people. poverty breeds poverty, which is true for white people as well.
Just cause blacks are poor and dumb doesn't mean the system is fucked. There's a reason behind their high incarceration rates and poverty. The vast majority of that stems from their own actions. Single mothers deciding to get dicked by losers, losers not taking ownership and doing dumb shit that gets them locked up or killed by a cop.
Call out losers for what they are. Losers. The "Systemic" racism myth is rooted in victimhood and excuses.
I'm pretty sure rioting, crying about "systemic racism", destroying small businesses that could employ them helps them out a lot. They have the power to fix their own lives but they choose not to. Victim mindset is far more appealing than getting after it, working hard and finding a way to get out of poverty.
le epic bootstraps memes. do you think all white people born in poverty make their way out?Imagine thinking the US is systemically racist lmao.just a reminder that there are still people alive that lived under jim crow laws. instead of thinking all black people are just inherently low iq, you should understand that the conditions black people in the us are right now is due to a long history of slavery and oppressions. the impact of these policies just doesn't magically disappear when you finally start getting the same legal rights as white people. poverty breeds poverty, which is true for white people as well.
Just cause blacks are poor and dumb doesn't mean the system is fucked. There's a reason behind their high incarceration rates and poverty. The vast majority of that stems from their own actions. Single mothers deciding to get dicked by losers, losers not taking ownership and doing dumb shit that gets them locked up or killed by a cop.
Call out losers for what they are. Losers. The "Systemic" racism myth is rooted in victimhood and excuses.
I'm pretty sure rioting, crying about "systemic racism", destroying small businesses that could employ them helps them out a lot. They have the power to fix their own lives but they choose not to. Victim mindset is far more appealing than getting after it, working hard and finding a way to get out of poverty.
also why arent you studying to become a doctor and rather be lazy and shit on black people on the internet, maybe you're the low iq one?
le epic bootstraps memes. do you think all white people born in poverty make their way out?Imagine thinking the US is systemically racist lmao.just a reminder that there are still people alive that lived under jim crow laws. instead of thinking all black people are just inherently low iq, you should understand that the conditions black people in the us are right now is due to a long history of slavery and oppressions. the impact of these policies just doesn't magically disappear when you finally start getting the same legal rights as white people. poverty breeds poverty, which is true for white people as well.
Just cause blacks are poor and dumb doesn't mean the system is fucked. There's a reason behind their high incarceration rates and poverty. The vast majority of that stems from their own actions. Single mothers deciding to get dicked by losers, losers not taking ownership and doing dumb shit that gets them locked up or killed by a cop.
Call out losers for what they are. Losers. The "Systemic" racism myth is rooted in victimhood and excuses.
I'm pretty sure rioting, crying about "systemic racism", destroying small businesses that could employ them helps them out a lot. They have the power to fix their own lives but they choose not to. Victim mindset is far more appealing than getting after it, working hard and finding a way to get out of poverty.
also why arent you studying to become a doctor and rather be lazy and shit on black people on the internet, maybe you're the low iq one?
Imagine thinking the US is systemically racist lmao.just a reminder that there are still people alive that lived under jim crow laws. instead of thinking all black people are just inherently low iq, you should understand that the conditions black people in the us are right now is due to a long history of slavery and oppressions. the impact of these policies just doesn't magically disappear when you finally start getting the same legal rights as white people. poverty breeds poverty, which is true for white people as well.
Just cause blacks are poor and dumb doesn't mean the system is fucked. There's a reason behind their high incarceration rates and poverty. The vast majority of that stems from their own actions. Single mothers deciding to get dicked by losers, losers not taking ownership and doing dumb shit that gets them locked up or killed by a cop.
Call out losers for what they are. Losers. The "Systemic" racism myth is rooted in victimhood and excuses.
why haven't you made the decision to get higher education and move to study in harvard? instead you spend your time spouting racist shit on the forums. it's that simple.le epic bootstraps memes. do you think all white people born in poverty make their way out?Imagine thinking the US is systemically racist lmao.just a reminder that there are still people alive that lived under jim crow laws. instead of thinking all black people are just inherently low iq, you should understand that the conditions black people in the us are right now is due to a long history of slavery and oppressions. the impact of these policies just doesn't magically disappear when you finally start getting the same legal rights as white people. poverty breeds poverty, which is true for white people as well.
Just cause blacks are poor and dumb doesn't mean the system is fucked. There's a reason behind their high incarceration rates and poverty. The vast majority of that stems from their own actions. Single mothers deciding to get dicked by losers, losers not taking ownership and doing dumb shit that gets them locked up or killed by a cop.
Call out losers for what they are. Losers. The "Systemic" racism myth is rooted in victimhood and excuses.
I'm pretty sure rioting, crying about "systemic racism", destroying small businesses that could employ them helps them out a lot. They have the power to fix their own lives but they choose not to. Victim mindset is far more appealing than getting after it, working hard and finding a way to get out of poverty.
also why arent you studying to become a doctor and rather be lazy and shit on black people on the internet, maybe you're the low iq one?
If you live in the US, being born poor is circumstance but dying poor is a choice.
Will not explain
please read the Wikipedia articles linked previously, because you still don't even know what institutional racism meansImagine thinking the US is systemically racist lmao.just a reminder that there are still people alive that lived under jim crow laws. instead of thinking all black people are just inherently low iq, you should understand that the conditions black people in the us are right now is due to a long history of slavery and oppressions. the impact of these policies just doesn't magically disappear when you finally start getting the same legal rights as white people. poverty breeds poverty, which is true for white people as well.
Just cause blacks are poor and dumb doesn't mean the system is fucked. There's a reason behind their high incarceration rates and poverty. The vast majority of that stems from their own actions. Single mothers deciding to get dicked by losers, losers not taking ownership and doing dumb shit that gets them locked up or killed by a cop.
Call out losers for what they are. Losers. The "Systemic" racism myth is rooted in victimhood and excuses.
yes, they have the same legal rights as white people, thanks for proving us that racism from the institutional standpoint does not exist ;D
Imagine thinking the US is systemically racist lmao.just a reminder that there are still people alive that lived under jim crow laws. instead of thinking all black people are just inherently low iq, you should understand that the conditions black people in the us are right now is due to a long history of slavery and oppressions. the impact of these policies just doesn't magically disappear when you finally start getting the same legal rights as white people. poverty breeds poverty, which is true for white people as well.
Just cause blacks are poor and dumb doesn't mean the system is fucked. There's a reason behind their high incarceration rates and poverty. The vast majority of that stems from their own actions. Single mothers deciding to get dicked by losers, losers not taking ownership and doing dumb shit that gets them locked up or killed by a cop.
Call out losers for what they are. Losers. The "Systemic" racism myth is rooted in victimhood and excuses.
yes, they have the same legal rights as white people, thanks for proving us that racism from the institutional standpoint does not exist ;D
Imagine thinking the US is systemically racist lmao.just a reminder that there are still people alive that lived under jim crow laws. instead of thinking all black people are just inherently low iq, you should understand that the conditions black people in the us are right now is due to a long history of slavery and oppressions. the impact of these policies just doesn't magically disappear when you finally start getting the same legal rights as white people. poverty breeds poverty, which is true for white people as well.
Just cause blacks are poor and dumb doesn't mean the system is fucked. There's a reason behind their high incarceration rates and poverty. The vast majority of that stems from their own actions. Single mothers deciding to get dicked by losers, losers not taking ownership and doing dumb shit that gets them locked up or killed by a cop.
Call out losers for what they are. Losers. The "Systemic" racism myth is rooted in victimhood and excuses.
yes, they have the same legal rights as white people, thanks for proving us that racism from the institutional standpoint does not exist ;D
The law might be fair at this point in time but the system aint.
You ever heard about Brailsford? For every Derek Chauvin there are others who arent found guilty.Imagine thinking the US is systemically racist lmao.just a reminder that there are still people alive that lived under jim crow laws. instead of thinking all black people are just inherently low iq, you should understand that the conditions black people in the us are right now is due to a long history of slavery and oppressions. the impact of these policies just doesn't magically disappear when you finally start getting the same legal rights as white people. poverty breeds poverty, which is true for white people as well.
Just cause blacks are poor and dumb doesn't mean the system is fucked. There's a reason behind their high incarceration rates and poverty. The vast majority of that stems from their own actions. Single mothers deciding to get dicked by losers, losers not taking ownership and doing dumb shit that gets them locked up or killed by a cop.
Call out losers for what they are. Losers. The "Systemic" racism myth is rooted in victimhood and excuses.
yes, they have the same legal rights as white people, thanks for proving us that racism from the institutional standpoint does not exist ;D
The law might be fair at this point in time but the system aint.
good thing derek chauvin was found not guilty oh wait
You're really narrow minded.Imagine thinking the US is systemically racist lmao.just a reminder that there are still people alive that lived under jim crow laws. instead of thinking all black people are just inherently low iq, you should understand that the conditions black people in the us are right now is due to a long history of slavery and oppressions. the impact of these policies just doesn't magically disappear when you finally start getting the same legal rights as white people. poverty breeds poverty, which is true for white people as well.
Just cause blacks are poor and dumb doesn't mean the system is fucked. There's a reason behind their high incarceration rates and poverty. The vast majority of that stems from their own actions. Single mothers deciding to get dicked by losers, losers not taking ownership and doing dumb shit that gets them locked up or killed by a cop.
Call out losers for what they are. Losers. The "Systemic" racism myth is rooted in victimhood and excuses.
yes, they have the same legal rights as white people, thanks for proving us that racism from the institutional standpoint does not exist ;D
The law might be fair at this point in time but the system aint.
good thing derek chauvin was found not guilty oh wait
please read the Wikipedia articles linked previously, because you still don't even know what institutional racism meansImagine thinking the US is systemically racist lmao.just a reminder that there are still people alive that lived under jim crow laws. instead of thinking all black people are just inherently low iq, you should understand that the conditions black people in the us are right now is due to a long history of slavery and oppressions. the impact of these policies just doesn't magically disappear when you finally start getting the same legal rights as white people. poverty breeds poverty, which is true for white people as well.
Just cause blacks are poor and dumb doesn't mean the system is fucked. There's a reason behind their high incarceration rates and poverty. The vast majority of that stems from their own actions. Single mothers deciding to get dicked by losers, losers not taking ownership and doing dumb shit that gets them locked up or killed by a cop.
Call out losers for what they are. Losers. The "Systemic" racism myth is rooted in victimhood and excuses.
yes, they have the same legal rights as white people, thanks for proving us that racism from the institutional standpoint does not exist ;D
yes, they have the same legal rights as white people, thanks for proving us that racism from the institutional standpoint does not exist ;D
Most of you left-wingers are losers that want to blame people's shortfalls on external factors. Excuse making machines.What makes you the expert? You feeling like it? Do you lived in every country this discussion was about? Do you wrote scientific articles about these problems?
"But... But... But... Systemic racism.... muh political science degree.... but... but... but..." ABSOLUTE DORKS
Most of you left-wingers are losers that want to blame people's shortfalls on external factors. Excuse making machines.What makes you the expert? You feeling like it? Do you lived in every country this discussion was about? Do you wrote scientific articles about these problems?
"But... But... But... Systemic racism.... muh political science degree.... but... but... but..." ABSOLUTE DORKS
You act like you have the ultimate proof that your point is wrong, but from my perspective it looks like
" But but the immigrants have such good life, everybody cares for them but nobody cares for me. My problem bigger than theirs!"
Yeah, the black people in the US arent slaves anymore and yes they have rights. But everywhere in the world its the same. To become rich and successfull its a good start to have parents who are rich and successfull. And with a population which was suppressed at least till the late 60s or early 70s, there cant be that many rich and successfull black people.
So yeah, you could say the poor people are suppressed in the US, but with a majority of the black and latino people you could connect the dots. Just look at the University costs in the US or the non-employment quota.
Then there is the problem with white supremacy in the US society. Its not like they are a majority or something, but they exist, they have weapons and some of them are in the police force.
So we have poor people who have it hard to fight their way out.
We have a many poor black people.
We have white supremacists in important positions.
Call it whatever you want, but there is a problem.
We call it institutional racism.
Drugged up and resisted arrest. The left loves to make losers their saints.you are a sick man and I truly hope you never have Power over someone
Imagine doing 10min of research before you start uttering stupid opinions in public.Ha this is a privately owned website, so in reality we're not in public space.
holy fucking shitImagine doing 10min of research before you start uttering stupid opinions in public.Ha this is a privately owned website, so in reality we're not in public space.
Drugged up and resisted arrest. The left loves to make losers their saints.you are a sick man and I truly hope you never have Power over someone
There is a little difference you may notice between force used and fucking killedDrugged up and resisted arrest. The left loves to make losers their saints.you are a sick man and I truly hope you never have Power over someone
I'm an all around nice guy. Fat people should be shamed and people resisting arrest should have force used upon them.
There is a little difference you may notice between force used and fucking killedDrugged up and resisted arrest. The left loves to make losers their saints.you are a sick man and I truly hope you never have Power over someone
I'm an all around nice guy. Fat people should be shamed and people resisting arrest should have force used upon them.
also reminder that he actually died because he had a police offer kneeling on his neck for 7 minutesAssuming all drugs addicts are men named George Floyd
literally what the fuck are you on about? i dont think ive ever met anyone so incapable of making any sense.also reminder that he actually died because he had a police offer kneeling on his neck for 7 minutesAssuming all drugs addicts are men named George Floyd
If there is a land where everyone who is on drugs and resists the police should be killed on open street I dont want to live there.
There is no reason to kill someone who isnt activly trying to kill you and even then you should choose any other option as long as it also saves your life. He was sourrounded by like 6 cops and they had plenty of time to check his pockets to find any weapon. Why was it important to kill him? It doesnt matter if he was a lawyer with a harvard Degree or a homeless drug user who lives under a bridge. He deserved to live. So someone who took his life should be punished, especially if it was a racist reason.
He is not a saint or a hero, he is just a helpless victim.
Most of you left-wingers are losers that want to blame people's shortfalls on external factors. Excuse making machines.What makes you the expert? You feeling like it? Do you lived in every country this discussion was about? Do you wrote scientific articles about these problems?
"But... But... But... Systemic racism.... muh political science degree.... but... but... but..." ABSOLUTE DORKS
You act like you have the ultimate proof that your point is wrong, but from my perspective it looks like
" But but the immigrants have such good life, everybody cares for them but nobody cares for me. My problem bigger than theirs!"
Yeah, the black people in the US arent slaves anymore and yes they have rights. But everywhere in the world its the same. To become rich and successfull its a good start to have parents who are rich and successfull. And with a population which was suppressed at least till the late 60s or early 70s, there cant be that many rich and successfull black people.
So yeah, you could say the poor people are suppressed in the US, but with a majority of the black and latino people you could connect the dots. Just look at the University costs in the US or the non-employment quota.
Then there is the problem with white supremacy in the US society. Its not like they are a majority or something, but they exist, they have weapons and some of them are in the police force.
So we have poor people who have it hard to fight their way out.
We have a many poor black people.
We have white supremacists in important positions.
Call it whatever you want, but there is a problem.
We call it institutional racism.
Well you've met meliterally what the fuck are you on about? i dont think ive ever met anyone so incapable of making any sense.also reminder that he actually died because he had a police offer kneeling on his neck for 7 minutesAssuming all drugs addicts are men named George Floyd
Meanwhile the EU is turning itself into a USSR 2.0laughed
he probably meant racial diversity, not immigrants per say which is just a legal status. In that case he'd be correct, germany does have larger ethnic minority groups, while czechia for instance is sitting at like 0.5% non-whites - as far as we know -, most of which are vietnamese, so not even a problematic oneI was simply flinging back at you the (racist) assumption that you made about a group of people based on where they are geographically from. As for the argument you are making about migrants, I fail to see the connection or relevance?Statistically eastern europe has a very low percentage of migrants, but are dominantly rightwing and anti immigrant. I dont get that. You said im German. Please explain this to me like im 5and now think about what you saidInsightful ArgumentI dont get why eastern europeans, who have a notorious low count of migrants are so fucking racist all the time>German
As per the official OECD numbers: Permanent inflows as a share of population (%) 2019
Poland 0.5
Czechia 0.6
Hungary 0.6
Germany 0.7
So using your logic am I correct in saying that Germans are "so fucking racist all the time" due to having approximately the same migration numbers as these racist Eastern European countries?
i'm cringing at the fact that you think you did something here lolplease read the Wikipedia articles linked previously, because you still don't even know what institutional racism meansImagine thinking the US is systemically racist lmao.just a reminder that there are still people alive that lived under jim crow laws. instead of thinking all black people are just inherently low iq, you should understand that the conditions black people in the us are right now is due to a long history of slavery and oppressions. the impact of these policies just doesn't magically disappear when you finally start getting the same legal rights as white people. poverty breeds poverty, which is true for white people as well.
Just cause blacks are poor and dumb doesn't mean the system is fucked. There's a reason behind their high incarceration rates and poverty. The vast majority of that stems from their own actions. Single mothers deciding to get dicked by losers, losers not taking ownership and doing dumb shit that gets them locked up or killed by a cop.
Call out losers for what they are. Losers. The "Systemic" racism myth is rooted in victimhood and excuses.
yes, they have the same legal rights as white people, thanks for proving us that racism from the institutional standpoint does not exist ;D
"Institutional racism, also known as systemic racism, is a form of racism that is embedded through laws within society or an organization."Quoteyes, they have the same legal rights as white people, thanks for proving us that racism from the institutional standpoint does not exist ;D
I do wonder if you guys ever read sources that dont peddle to your conformation biasYou think we use sources lmao
I do wonder if you guys ever read sources that dont peddle to your conformation bias
I really hope you are trollingI do wonder if you guys ever read sources that dont peddle to your conformation bias
(https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/001/645/935/f6c.png)
Will not explain.
I do wonder if you guys ever read sources that dont peddle to your conformation bias
(https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/001/645/935/f6c.png)
Will not explain.
Spoiler(https://i.imgur.com/6kGliTj.jpg)[close]
Fucking racist cops killed a harmless Black guy again! Stop white racism! #BLM
https://twitter.com/CaldronPool/status/1385472671303958529
Fucking racist cops killed a harmless Black guy again! Stop white racism! #BLM
https://twitter.com/CaldronPool/status/1385472671303958529
Honestly the cop who shot the kid who tried to kill the other kid should get a life sentence! Stop overpolicing in problematic black neighbourhoods! Defund the police! Preventing the blacks from killing each other is racist!
>YOU'RE SERIOUSLY NOT GONNA PROVIDE A SOURCE?!??!?!
(https://i.imgur.com/MHmGjTb.png)
Fucking racist cops killed a harmless Black guy again! Stop white racism! #BLM
https://twitter.com/CaldronPool/status/1385472671303958529
Honestly the cop who shot the kid who tried to kill the other kid should get a life sentence! Stop overpolicing in problematic black neighbourhoods! Defund the police! Preventing the blacks from killing each other is racist!
You two are talking about two different instances one of which I don't know jack shit about, so I won't comment.
When it comes to the recent shooting of the 16 year old girl in Colombus, Ohio it would seem the cop is in the right from the bodycam footage, but all shootings that lead to death deserve to be investigated.
So Î'll wait for the investigation to finish before I make any real comment, cause I'm not retarded like you. :)>YOU'RE SERIOUSLY NOT GONNA PROVIDE A SOURCE?!??!?!
(https://i.imgur.com/MHmGjTb.png)
I remember when the far-right claimed to be from rational and logic, they were wrong and retarded. So it's refreshing that you have dropped the act and embraced that you are retarded.
https://youtu.be/74gx0v5ZJzwSpeaking of fat people.
You're calling me retarded based on things I haven't done? lol
I bet none of you fucking "chads" ever attended any kind of fighting gym or fired a gun or did any of the other "manly" things you guys talk about. Its kinda sad honestly. You guys literally discuss with strawman exclusively
you doing combat sports?I bet none of you fucking "chads" ever attended any kind of fighting gym or fired a gun or did any of the other "manly" things you guys talk about. Its kinda sad honestly. You guys literally discuss with strawman exclusively
ight how much are you betting?
you doing combat sports?I bet none of you fucking "chads" ever attended any kind of fighting gym or fired a gun or did any of the other "manly" things you guys talk about. Its kinda sad honestly. You guys literally discuss with strawman exclusively
ight how much are you betting?
you doing combat sports?I bet none of you fucking "chads" ever attended any kind of fighting gym or fired a gun or did any of the other "manly" things you guys talk about. Its kinda sad honestly. You guys literally discuss with strawman exclusively
ight how much are you betting?
you doing combat sports?I bet none of you fucking "chads" ever attended any kind of fighting gym or fired a gun or did any of the other "manly" things you guys talk about. Its kinda sad honestly. You guys literally discuss with strawman exclusively
ight how much are you betting?
Some of you really need to put on some muscle mass and get laid.
I can guarantee you that one of you here studied a useless major like "political science" and thinks they're experts on topics from their lefty point of view. Should have spent that time at the gym getting jacked. Would have done you more good and sorted out your value system.
Some of you really need to put on some muscle mass and get laid.
I bet you're a pussyI can guarantee you that one of you here studied a useless major like "political science" and thinks they're experts on topics from their lefty point of view. Should have spent that time at the gym getting jacked. Would have done you more good and sorted out your value system.
I bet you're a pussy
Some of you really need to put on some muscle mass and get laid.
I bet you're a pussyI can guarantee you that one of you here studied a useless major like "political science" and thinks they're experts on topics from their lefty point of view. Should have spent that time at the gym getting jacked. Would have done you more good and sorted out your value system.
I bet you're a pussy
Some of you really need to put on some muscle mass and get laid.
I bet you're a pussyI can guarantee you that one of you here studied a useless major like "political science" and thinks they're experts on topics from their lefty point of view. Should have spent that time at the gym getting jacked. Would have done you more good and sorted out your value system.
I bet you're a pussy
Hawkince talking shit from the comfort of his turbo-powered wheelchair
Some of you really need to put on some muscle mass and get laid.
I bet you're a pussyI can guarantee you that one of you here studied a useless major like "political science" and thinks they're experts on topics from their lefty point of view. Should have spent that time at the gym getting jacked. Would have done you more good and sorted out your value system.
I bet you're a pussy
Hawkince talking shit from the comfort of his turbo-powered wheelchair
Are you just here to shit talk or are you gonna actually try to add to the dumb-fuck arguments that right-wing retards have put forth?
Some of you really need to put on some muscle mass and get laid.
I bet you're a pussyI can guarantee you that one of you here studied a useless major like "political science" and thinks they're experts on topics from their lefty point of view. Should have spent that time at the gym getting jacked. Would have done you more good and sorted out your value system.
I bet you're a pussy
Hawkince talking shit from the comfort of his turbo-powered wheelchair
Are you just here to shit talk or are you gonna actually try to add to the dumb-fuck arguments that right-wing retards have put forth?
I apologize for not adding to this great intellectual debate, I didn't come with any Wikipedia links to post :-[, next time I'll just write "I bet you're a pussy" and leave the thread.
(https://cdn.discordapp.com/emojis/566099042984001536.png?v=1)
Some of you really need to put on some muscle mass and get laid.
I bet you're a pussyI can guarantee you that one of you here studied a useless major like "political science" and thinks they're experts on topics from their lefty point of view. Should have spent that time at the gym getting jacked. Would have done you more good and sorted out your value system.
I bet you're a pussy
Hawkince talking shit from the comfort of his turbo-powered wheelchair
Are you just here to shit talk or are you gonna actually try to add to the dumb-fuck arguments that right-wing retards have put forth?
I apologize for not adding to this great intellectual debate, I didn't come with any Wikipedia links to post :-[, next time I'll just write "I bet you're a pussy" and leave the thread.
Well there weren't many great points brought up by "Some of you really need to put on some muscle mass and get laid." and "Should have spent that time at the gym getting jacked. Would have done you more good and sorted out your value system." but your pseudo-intelligence is really showing.
Some of you really need to put on some muscle mass and get laid.
I bet you're a pussyI can guarantee you that one of you here studied a useless major like "political science" and thinks they're experts on topics from their lefty point of view. Should have spent that time at the gym getting jacked. Would have done you more good and sorted out your value system.
I bet you're a pussy
Hawkince talking shit from the comfort of his turbo-powered wheelchair
Are you just here to shit talk or are you gonna actually try to add to the dumb-fuck arguments that right-wing retards have put forth?
I apologize for not adding to this great intellectual debate, I didn't come with any Wikipedia links to post :-[, next time I'll just write "I bet you're a pussy" and leave the thread.
Well there weren't many great points brought up by "Some of you really need to put on some muscle mass and get laid." and "Should have spent that time at the gym getting jacked. Would have done you more good and sorted out your value system." but your pseudo-intelligence is really showing.
Ohohoho, you got me and my pseudo-intelligence. All I did was the same thing you did, but Goomba only cared about me doing it because he thinks we're not on the same side of this issue but knows you and him are, hence why he called me out for shit-talking but had nothing to say to you.
And so what if there are no great points brought up? Just like myself, you could've easily just said nothing, but instead, you decided to hurl shit like a monkey.
Muh pseudo-intelligence.
Some of you really need to put on some muscle mass and get laid.
I bet you're a pussyI can guarantee you that one of you here studied a useless major like "political science" and thinks they're experts on topics from their lefty point of view. Should have spent that time at the gym getting jacked. Would have done you more good and sorted out your value system.
I bet you're a pussy
Hawkince talking shit from the comfort of his turbo-powered wheelchair
Are you just here to shit talk or are you gonna actually try to add to the dumb-fuck arguments that right-wing retards have put forth?
I apologize for not adding to this great intellectual debate, I didn't come with any Wikipedia links to post :-[, next time I'll just write "I bet you're a pussy" and leave the thread.
Well there weren't many great points brought up by "Some of you really need to put on some muscle mass and get laid." and "Should have spent that time at the gym getting jacked. Would have done you more good and sorted out your value system." but your pseudo-intelligence is really showing.
Ohohoho, you got me and my pseudo-intelligence. All I did was the same thing you did, but Goomba only cared about me doing it because he thinks we're not on the same side of this issue but knows you and him are, hence why he called me out for shit-talking but had nothing to say to you.
And so what if there are no great points brought up? Just like myself, you could've easily just said nothing, but instead, you decided to hurl shit like a monkey.
Muh pseudo-intelligence.
I just want you to stop hiding your power level and actually attempt to engage with the arguments, unlike the EUs and Fancypants. I guess I expected better from an avid paragraph poster such as yourself.
Some of you really need to put on some muscle mass and get laid.
I bet you're a pussyI can guarantee you that one of you here studied a useless major like "political science" and thinks they're experts on topics from their lefty point of view. Should have spent that time at the gym getting jacked. Would have done you more good and sorted out your value system.
I bet you're a pussy
Hawkince talking shit from the comfort of his turbo-powered wheelchair
Are you just here to shit talk or are you gonna actually try to add to the dumb-fuck arguments that right-wing retards have put forth?
I apologize for not adding to this great intellectual debate, I didn't come with any Wikipedia links to post :-[, next time I'll just write "I bet you're a pussy" and leave the thread.
Well there weren't many great points brought up by "Some of you really need to put on some muscle mass and get laid." and "Should have spent that time at the gym getting jacked. Would have done you more good and sorted out your value system." but your pseudo-intelligence is really showing.
Some of you really need to put on some muscle mass and get laid.
I bet you're a pussyI can guarantee you that one of you here studied a useless major like "political science" and thinks they're experts on topics from their lefty point of view. Should have spent that time at the gym getting jacked. Would have done you more good and sorted out your value system.
I bet you're a pussy
Hawkince talking shit from the comfort of his turbo-powered wheelchair
Are you just here to shit talk or are you gonna actually try to add to the dumb-fuck arguments that right-wing retards have put forth?
I apologize for not adding to this great intellectual debate, I didn't come with any Wikipedia links to post :-[, next time I'll just write "I bet you're a pussy" and leave the thread.
Well there weren't many great points brought up by "Some of you really need to put on some muscle mass and get laid." and "Should have spent that time at the gym getting jacked. Would have done you more good and sorted out your value system." but your pseudo-intelligence is really showing.
Some of you really need to put on some muscle mass and get laid.
I bet you're a pussyI can guarantee you that one of you here studied a useless major like "political science" and thinks they're experts on topics from their lefty point of view. Should have spent that time at the gym getting jacked. Would have done you more good and sorted out your value system.
I bet you're a pussy
Hawkince talking shit from the comfort of his turbo-powered wheelchair
Are you just here to shit talk or are you gonna actually try to add to the dumb-fuck arguments that right-wing retards have put forth?
I apologize for not adding to this great intellectual debate, I didn't come with any Wikipedia links to post :-[, next time I'll just write "I bet you're a pussy" and leave the thread.
Well there weren't many great points brought up by "Some of you really need to put on some muscle mass and get laid." and "Should have spent that time at the gym getting jacked. Would have done you more good and sorted out your value system." but your pseudo-intelligence is really showing.
You and your friend look like you're on an emotional rollercoaster buddy. Must've been something I said? I'd watch out and try to keep my cool, after all you are a respected member of this community. Quite the effeminate trait you are publicly displaying, albeit fully expected.
Imagine seriously discussing politics with people out of touch with reality who sit at home all day. Yikes. Get a grip.
No further arguments needed, fix your own life before trying to fix the world.
Negro had it coming
Hot take - If you're scared of the virus, stay at home isolated, vaccinate yourself and let people live their lives instead of forcing masks and vaccines down our throats.
You are responsible for your own health.
Pussies.
Sure, you don't have to get involved, but you're the one who came in the thread and clearly saw there were lines already drawn in the sand and still decided shit talk. Why did you post in the first place if you didn't want to get involved?Some of you really need to put on some muscle mass and get laid.
I bet you're a pussyI can guarantee you that one of you here studied a useless major like "political science" and thinks they're experts on topics from their lefty point of view. Should have spent that time at the gym getting jacked. Would have done you more good and sorted out your value system.
I bet you're a pussy
Hawkince talking shit from the comfort of his turbo-powered wheelchair
Are you just here to shit talk or are you gonna actually try to add to the dumb-fuck arguments that right-wing retards have put forth?
I apologize for not adding to this great intellectual debate, I didn't come with any Wikipedia links to post :-[, next time I'll just write "I bet you're a pussy" and leave the thread.
Well there weren't many great points brought up by "Some of you really need to put on some muscle mass and get laid." and "Should have spent that time at the gym getting jacked. Would have done you more good and sorted out your value system." but your pseudo-intelligence is really showing.
Ohohoho, you got me and my pseudo-intelligence. All I did was the same thing you did, but Goomba only cared about me doing it because he thinks we're not on the same side of this issue but knows you and him are, hence why he called me out for shit-talking but had nothing to say to you.
And so what if there are no great points brought up? Just like myself, you could've easily just said nothing, but instead, you decided to hurl shit like a monkey.
Muh pseudo-intelligence.
I just want you to stop hiding your power level and actually attempt to engage with the arguments, unlike the EUs and Fancypants. I guess I expected better from an avid paragraph poster such as yourself.
Damn, the old "I expected better" well now I HAVE to get involved.
is there systemic racismYES
are all humans equal?NO
Hey Dumba stop fat shaming Anthonyonce you stop hating black people I will change it
Can you elaborate? Genuinely interestedare all humans equal?NO
do you really think around the world ppl are equal lmaoCan you elaborate? Genuinely interestedare all humans equal?NO
In terms of potential? I dont think they differ that much no. In terms of life oppurtunities, certainly not.do you really think around the world ppl are equal lmaoCan you elaborate? Genuinely interestedare all humans equal?NO
Hey Dumba stop fat shaming Anthonyonce you stop hating black people I will change it
poor phrasing then, a lot of incredible people snuffed out by repressive regimes and ideologies around the globe and its actually tragic don't know where to beginIn terms of potential? I dont think they differ that much no. In terms of life oppurtunities, certainly not.do you really think around the world ppl are equal lmaoCan you elaborate? Genuinely interestedare all humans equal?NO
none of us are born equal, be it only by genetics. Some people have natural born talent others lack and converselyIn terms of potential? I dont think they differ that much no. In terms of life oppurtunities, certainly not.do you really think around the world ppl are equal lmaoCan you elaborate? Genuinely interestedare all humans equal?NO
People are not equal. Some are better than others. Want a "sOuRcE". Look at women and how they view most men.So you are Racist AND an Incel, got it.
Edit: And no, some people are dumb and will always be dumb. IQ is 90% genetics. There's your "are we all equal in potential" question answered.
Edit: And no, some people are dumb and will always be dumb. IQ is 90% genetics. There's your "are we all equal in potential" question answered.And this is simply wrong. IQ is heavily influenced by your education, + IQ is a very controversial measurement of intelligence
The standard deviation of intelligence seems to be the same pattern between all socioeconomic groups - education raises the levels, but not the standard deviation. Also IQ is only controversial if you make it so - it’s a perfectly scientific field of study with a lot of predictive power!People are not equal. Some are better than others. Want a "sOuRcE". Look at women and how they view most men.So you are Racist AND an Incel, got it.
Edit: And no, some people are dumb and will always be dumb. IQ is 90% genetics. There's your "are we all equal in potential" question answered.Edit: And no, some people are dumb and will always be dumb. IQ is 90% genetics. There's your "are we all equal in potential" question answered.And this is simply wrong. IQ is heavily influenced by your education, + IQ is a very controversial measurement of intelligence
Caz, your stupidity genuinely surprised meThe "conservative" worldview of you and your circle really doesnt surprise me.
I personally think IQ is pretty good for what it is: Measuring your Intelligence in certain fields. It doesnt do to well in terms of social intelligence and the likes, but it is pretty alright if you ask me.The standard deviation of intelligence seems to be the same pattern between all socioeconomic groups - education raises the levels, but not the standard deviation. Also IQ is only controversial if you make it so - it’s a perfectly scientific field of study with a lot of predictive power!People are not equal. Some are better than others. Want a "sOuRcE". Look at women and how they view most men.So you are Racist AND an Incel, got it.
Edit: And no, some people are dumb and will always be dumb. IQ is 90% genetics. There's your "are we all equal in potential" question answered.Edit: And no, some people are dumb and will always be dumb. IQ is 90% genetics. There's your "are we all equal in potential" question answered.And this is simply wrong. IQ is heavily influenced by your education, + IQ is a very controversial measurement of intelligence
People are not equal. Some are better than others. Want a "sOuRcE". Look at women and how they view most men.how would you explain the increase of the average iq in almost every region of the world (https://ourworldindata.org/uploads/2015/07/Flynn-%E2%80%93-World-Regions-750x477.png), which heavily correlates with the steady increase in the standard of living?
Edit: And no, some people are dumb and will always be dumb. IQ is 90% genetics. There's your "are we all equal in potential" question answered.
SpoilerPeople are not equal. Some are better than others. Want a "sOuRcE". Look at women and how they view most men.how would you explain the increase of the average iq in almost every region of the world (https://ourworldindata.org/uploads/2015/07/Flynn-%E2%80%93-World-Regions-750x477.png), which heavily correlates with the steady increase in the standard of living?
Edit: And no, some people are dumb and will always be dumb. IQ is 90% genetics. There's your "are we all equal in potential" question answered.[close]
Also, I do not see the point of this conversation: are all humans identical? No. Are some humans more valuable than others? Of course not. Should all humans have the same rights and be treated equally on the basis of these rights? Yes.
I sincerely hope nobody would disagree with this.
"the left" what do you even mean Kore what are you talking aboutSpoilerPeople are not equal. Some are better than others. Want a "sOuRcE". Look at women and how they view most men.how would you explain the increase of the average iq in almost every region of the world (https://ourworldindata.org/uploads/2015/07/Flynn-%E2%80%93-World-Regions-750x477.png), which heavily correlates with the steady increase in the standard of living?
Edit: And no, some people are dumb and will always be dumb. IQ is 90% genetics. There's your "are we all equal in potential" question answered.[close]
Also, I do not see the point of this conversation: are all humans identical? No. Are some humans more valuable than others? Of course not. Should all humans have the same rights and be treated equally on the basis of these rights? Yes.
I sincerely hope nobody would disagree with this.
The left disagrees ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
There is an argument to be made tho that higher levels of diligence correlate with a high degree of successCaz, your stupidity genuinely surprised meThe "conservative" worldview of you and your circle really doesnt surprise me.I personally think IQ is pretty good for what it is: Measuring your Intelligence in certain fields. It doesnt do to well in terms of social intelligence and the likes, but it is pretty alright if you ask me.The standard deviation of intelligence seems to be the same pattern between all socioeconomic groups - education raises the levels, but not the standard deviation. Also IQ is only controversial if you make it so - it’s a perfectly scientific field of study with a lot of predictive power!People are not equal. Some are better than others. Want a "sOuRcE". Look at women and how they view most men.So you are Racist AND an Incel, got it.
Edit: And no, some people are dumb and will always be dumb. IQ is 90% genetics. There's your "are we all equal in potential" question answered.Edit: And no, some people are dumb and will always be dumb. IQ is 90% genetics. There's your "are we all equal in potential" question answered.And this is simply wrong. IQ is heavily influenced by your education, + IQ is a very controversial measurement of intelligence
For the other part: You are right. I think a lot of people misunderstood me, because I was speaking in very general terms: I am aware there are certain genetic differences between people that simply cant be discussed away. I do generally believe that most people have pretty similar "genetic oppurtunities", and that for example the black population in america isnt generally poor because they are "black" (like SOME PEOPLE dogwhistled on here) but because of poverty induced by racism.
Oh, and the good ol "just pull yourself up by those bootstrps" argument is stupid as fuck
literally incorrect? dont know where you got that from but afaik the gap between lowest and highest socioeconomic groups are an average of 6 IQ points at age 2 - aka when the education factor hasn't kicked in yet - and the deviation only gets bigger through time as it reaches 18 IQ points at age 16 - aka post-education factor. If i had to take a wild guess, those starting 6 points would proly be due to genetics and the 18 points due to the higher quality educationThe standard deviation of intelligence seems to be the same pattern between all socioeconomic groups - education raises the levels, but not the standard deviation. Also IQ is only controversial if you make it so - it’s a perfectly scientific field of study with a lot of predictive power!People are not equal. Some are better than others. Want a "sOuRcE". Look at women and how they view most men.So you are Racist AND an Incel, got it.
Edit: And no, some people are dumb and will always be dumb. IQ is 90% genetics. There's your "are we all equal in potential" question answered.Edit: And no, some people are dumb and will always be dumb. IQ is 90% genetics. There's your "are we all equal in potential" question answered.And this is simply wrong. IQ is heavily influenced by your education, + IQ is a very controversial measurement of intelligence
Yes it is obviously true that people aren't perfectly equal in terms of cognitive or physical prowess. As you said, some people are genetically better at many things than other people. And even if people are better at differing skills, it probably wouldn't come down to a perfect balance.
However, I think most people are born equal in terms of their potential to be successful in life. Of course the term "successful in life" is a very ambiguous term, but I'd say everyone in the world has the potential to master a skill and to be successful within a certain field. Aside from the extreme outliers, for example people born with severe physical or mental disabilities, the average human will fall within a spectrum of cognitive and physical abilities that allows them to potentially excel in something in life. It may require substantially more effort and dedication for one person to achieve a mastery of a particular skill than it does for another person, but potentially speaking they can both achieve mastery in the skill. Yes, the person that has a cognitive or physical advantage has the potential to be even better than the other person, but that does not mean the other person is not successful.
I was just explaining what I thought Cazasar might've meant with what he said about people having equal potential. But sure go be a little bitch about it.WOW WHAT A NICE CONTRIBUTION TO THIS DISCUSSION RIKKERT HOLMES, TY VERY MUCHSpoilerYes it is obviously true that people aren't perfectly equal in terms of cognitive or physical prowess. As you said, some people are genetically better at many things than other people. And even if people are better at differing skills, it probably wouldn't come down to a perfect balance.
However, I think most people are born equal in terms of their potential to be successful in life. Of course the term "successful in life" is a very ambiguous term, but I'd say everyone in the world has the potential to master a skill and to be successful within a certain field. Aside from the extreme outliers, for example people born with severe physical or mental disabilities, the average human will fall within a spectrum of cognitive and physical abilities that allows them to potentially excel in something in life. It may require substantially more effort and dedication for one person to achieve a mastery of a particular skill than it does for another person, but potentially speaking they can both achieve mastery in the skill. Yes, the person that has a cognitive or physical advantage has the potential to be even better than the other person, but that does not mean the other person is not successful.[close]
(https://d2u3dcdbebyaiu.cloudfront.net/uploads/atch_img/406/5b4f4f25ed362c8f764d6661f8a2b6d4.jpeg)Är det du bror?
6'4
220lb
Jacked
White with a touch of caramel
Sexy as fuck
High IQ
Millionaire genetics
Risk averse
Emotionally stable
Packing heat
Me > you
Keep your equality.
If you all really care so much about IQ, the best thing we could do is genocide eastern European countries like Macedonia, Montenegro, and the Czech Republic because somehow Neandertals have managed to survive there and have given birth to knuckle-dragging bastard spawn like Kore, Ledger, and Fredovic. All of whom collectively tank the IQs of their given nations by at least 25 points.:)
If you all really care so much about IQ, the best thing we could do is genocide eastern European countries like Macedonia, Montenegro, and the Czech Republic because somehow Neandertals have managed to survive there and have given birth to knuckle-dragging bastard spawn like Kore, Ledger, and Fredovic. All of whom collectively tank the IQs of their given nations by at least 25 points.
When Duuring was reigning you were legit banned for driving posts off topic all the time good timesDuuring was both a tyrant and a pretty reasonable guy
Aside from my post clearly being a joke to insult your lack of intelligence even if I was a racist I would at least own that fact instead of hiding behind dog whistles and dog shit arguments like "poor people are just lazy hur dur." Also, it's fascinating to me that you're from Europe but somehow have the worldview of an inbred red-neck from West Virginia I guess this is what 4chan does to the brain. "Soy" "Communism" "Low testosterone" you've literally hit every single boogieman buzzword possible, its so fucking pathetic to watch people like you have the same political opinions I had when I was 15.
Whoa cowboy, that's some racist shit you've just spewed. Revealing your true colors post by post. Bet this one won't get deleted by the soy mods.
Anyway, let me reveal some facts and opinions about you:
5'6
Morbidly obese
"But bro I'm smart, only insecure people go to the gym"
Whines about free healthcare but won't shape himself up
Low IQ
Loser and self-defeatist mentality
Gets emotionally rekt by an fse post from a stranger on the Internet
Depressed
Low testosterone, lacks competitive drive to strive in a capitalist environment
Pushes communist policies over self-improvement
"But drug addicts deserve a good life!"
Lives a privileged life in a 1st world country and still whines
Thinks he's a hero for wearing a mask
Simplifies his world view in group identities
Compensates his inferiority by supporting communist equality policies
Looks like a geek
4th post magically deleted.
No warning, no mute, no ban - only pure salt.
Ain't stopping this young gun boys.
When Duuring was reigning you were legit banned for driving posts off topic all the time good times
Aside from my post clearly being a joke to insult your lack of intelligence even if I was a racist I would at least own that fact instead of hiding behind dog whistles and dog shit arguments like "poor people are just lazy hur dur." Also, it's fascinating to me that you're from Europe but somehow have the worldview of an inbred red-neck from West Virginia I guess this is what 4chan does to the brain. "Soy" "Communism" "Low testosterone" you've literally hit every single boogieman buzzword possible, its so fucking pathetic to watch people like you have the same political opinions I had when I was 15.
Whoa cowboy, that's some racist shit you've just spewed. Revealing your true colors post by post. Bet this one won't get deleted by the soy mods.
Anyway, let me reveal some facts and opinions about you:
5'6
Morbidly obese
"But bro I'm smart, only insecure people go to the gym"
Whines about free healthcare but won't shape himself up
Low IQ
Loser and self-defeatist mentality
Gets emotionally rekt by an fse post from a stranger on the Internet
Depressed
Low testosterone, lacks competitive drive to strive in a capitalist environment
Pushes communist policies over self-improvement
"But drug addicts deserve a good life!"
Lives a privileged life in a 1st world country and still whines
Thinks he's a hero for wearing a mask
Simplifies his world view in group identities
Compensates his inferiority by supporting communist equality policies
Looks like a geek
lmao this is still going on?Fralla shhhhh
Fair Enough, but the "pull yourself up with those bootstraps" argument is still dumbThere is an argument to be made tho that higher levels of diligence correlate with a high degree of successCaz, your stupidity genuinely surprised meThe "conservative" worldview of you and your circle really doesnt surprise me.I personally think IQ is pretty good for what it is: Measuring your Intelligence in certain fields. It doesnt do to well in terms of social intelligence and the likes, but it is pretty alright if you ask me.The standard deviation of intelligence seems to be the same pattern between all socioeconomic groups - education raises the levels, but not the standard deviation. Also IQ is only controversial if you make it so - it’s a perfectly scientific field of study with a lot of predictive power!People are not equal. Some are better than others. Want a "sOuRcE". Look at women and how they view most men.So you are Racist AND an Incel, got it.
Edit: And no, some people are dumb and will always be dumb. IQ is 90% genetics. There's your "are we all equal in potential" question answered.Edit: And no, some people are dumb and will always be dumb. IQ is 90% genetics. There's your "are we all equal in potential" question answered.And this is simply wrong. IQ is heavily influenced by your education, + IQ is a very controversial measurement of intelligence
For the other part: You are right. I think a lot of people misunderstood me, because I was speaking in very general terms: I am aware there are certain genetic differences between people that simply cant be discussed away. I do generally believe that most people have pretty similar "genetic oppurtunities", and that for example the black population in america isnt generally poor because they are "black" (like SOME PEOPLE dogwhistled on here) but because of poverty induced by racism.
Oh, and the good ol "just pull yourself up by those bootstrps" argument is stupid as fuck
Doesn’t mean you should discount external factors but no reason to ignore diligence as an important aspect of performance
Fair Enough, but the "pull yourself up with those bootstraps" argument is still dumbThere is an argument to be made tho that higher levels of diligence correlate with a high degree of successCaz, your stupidity genuinely surprised meThe "conservative" worldview of you and your circle really doesnt surprise me.I personally think IQ is pretty good for what it is: Measuring your Intelligence in certain fields. It doesnt do to well in terms of social intelligence and the likes, but it is pretty alright if you ask me.The standard deviation of intelligence seems to be the same pattern between all socioeconomic groups - education raises the levels, but not the standard deviation. Also IQ is only controversial if you make it so - it’s a perfectly scientific field of study with a lot of predictive power!People are not equal. Some are better than others. Want a "sOuRcE". Look at women and how they view most men.So you are Racist AND an Incel, got it.
Edit: And no, some people are dumb and will always be dumb. IQ is 90% genetics. There's your "are we all equal in potential" question answered.Edit: And no, some people are dumb and will always be dumb. IQ is 90% genetics. There's your "are we all equal in potential" question answered.And this is simply wrong. IQ is heavily influenced by your education, + IQ is a very controversial measurement of intelligence
For the other part: You are right. I think a lot of people misunderstood me, because I was speaking in very general terms: I am aware there are certain genetic differences between people that simply cant be discussed away. I do generally believe that most people have pretty similar "genetic oppurtunities", and that for example the black population in america isnt generally poor because they are "black" (like SOME PEOPLE dogwhistled on here) but because of poverty induced by racism.
Oh, and the good ol "just pull yourself up by those bootstrps" argument is stupid as fuck
Doesn’t mean you should discount external factors but no reason to ignore diligence as an important aspect of performance
Wipes out half the jewish population.
"Yeah we are all equal!"
"I'm a nice guy now, in fact YOU are the racist one"
Bet you feel really guilty bro, I know I would :D
Can't make this shit up.
He thinks its funny to pretend to be retarded. Just ignore him. Pathetic.Wipes out half the jewish population.
"Yeah we are all equal!"
"I'm a nice guy now, in fact YOU are the racist one"
Bet you feel really guilty bro, I know I would :D
Can't make this shit up.
Are your last two brain cells having trouble reproducing right now or are you just being that dumb? Either way, I feel sorry for you ::)
But anyway, I'd just be interested to know how you're going to blame Caz for the crimes the Nazis committed. ??? I hope this is not too difficult for you. Arguing has not been your strong point so far.
Aside from my post clearly being a joke to insult your lack of intelligence even if I was a racist I would at least own that fact instead of hiding behind dog whistles and dog shit arguments like "poor people are just lazy hur dur."
Whoa cowboy, that's some racist shit you've just spewed. Revealing your true colors post by post. Bet this one won't get deleted by the soy mods.
Anyway, let me reveal some facts and opinions about you:
5'6
Morbidly obese
"But bro I'm smart, only insecure people go to the gym"
Whines about free healthcare but won't shape himself up
Low IQ
Loser and self-defeatist mentality
Gets emotionally rekt by an fse post from a stranger on the Internet
Depressed
Low testosterone, lacks competitive drive to strive in a capitalist environment
Pushes communist policies over self-improvement
"But drug addicts deserve a good life!"
Lives a privileged life in a 1st world country and still whines
Thinks he's a hero for wearing a mask
Simplifies his world view in group identities
Compensates his inferiority by supporting communist equality policies
Looks like a geek
Please elaborate!Aside from my post clearly being a joke to insult your lack of intelligence even if I was a racist I would at least own that fact instead of hiding behind dog whistles and dog shit arguments like "poor people are just lazy hur dur."
Whoa cowboy, that's some racist shit you've just spewed. Revealing your true colors post by post. Bet this one won't get deleted by the soy mods.
Anyway, let me reveal some facts and opinions about you:
5'6
Morbidly obese
"But bro I'm smart, only insecure people go to the gym"
Whines about free healthcare but won't shape himself up
Low IQ
Loser and self-defeatist mentality
Gets emotionally rekt by an fse post from a stranger on the Internet
Depressed
Low testosterone, lacks competitive drive to strive in a capitalist environment
Pushes communist policies over self-improvement
"But drug addicts deserve a good life!"
Lives a privileged life in a 1st world country and still whines
Thinks he's a hero for wearing a mask
Simplifies his world view in group identities
Compensates his inferiority by supporting communist equality policies
Looks like a geek
Stop with the "if I was a racist" shit. Own it then. The only real and disgustingr racists here are you and your friends (hawkince, caz, furnox).
Literally.
you german and against my opinion. you communist hurr!Please elaborate!Aside from my post clearly being a joke to insult your lack of intelligence even if I was a racist I would at least own that fact instead of hiding behind dog whistles and dog shit arguments like "poor people are just lazy hur dur."
Whoa cowboy, that's some racist shit you've just spewed. Revealing your true colors post by post. Bet this one won't get deleted by the soy mods.
Anyway, let me reveal some facts and opinions about you:
5'6
Morbidly obese
"But bro I'm smart, only insecure people go to the gym"
Whines about free healthcare but won't shape himself up
Low IQ
Loser and self-defeatist mentality
Gets emotionally rekt by an fse post from a stranger on the Internet
Depressed
Low testosterone, lacks competitive drive to strive in a capitalist environment
Pushes communist policies over self-improvement
"But drug addicts deserve a good life!"
Lives a privileged life in a 1st world country and still whines
Thinks he's a hero for wearing a mask
Simplifies his world view in group identities
Compensates his inferiority by supporting communist equality policies
Looks like a geek
Stop with the "if I was a racist" shit. Own it then. The only real and disgustingr racists here are you and your friends (hawkince, caz, furnox).
Literally.
SpoilerPlease elaborate!Aside from my post clearly being a joke to insult your lack of intelligence even if I was a racist I would at least own that fact instead of hiding behind dog whistles and dog shit arguments like "poor people are just lazy hur dur."
Whoa cowboy, that's some racist shit you've just spewed. Revealing your true colors post by post. Bet this one won't get deleted by the soy mods.
Anyway, let me reveal some facts and opinions about you:
5'6
Morbidly obese
"But bro I'm smart, only insecure people go to the gym"
Whines about free healthcare but won't shape himself up
Low IQ
Loser and self-defeatist mentality
Gets emotionally rekt by an fse post from a stranger on the Internet
Depressed
Low testosterone, lacks competitive drive to strive in a capitalist environment
Pushes communist policies over self-improvement
"But drug addicts deserve a good life!"
Lives a privileged life in a 1st world country and still whines
Thinks he's a hero for wearing a mask
Simplifies his world view in group identities
Compensates his inferiority by supporting communist equality policies
Looks like a geek
Stop with the "if I was a racist" shit. Own it then. The only real and disgustingr racists here are you and your friends (hawkince, caz, furnox).
Literally.[close]
Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II
Got you covered Kore.
Please explain to me further how you feel so we can get over this immense guilt that you carry so deeply in your soul.
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/36/Sigmund_Freud%2C_by_Max_Halberstadt_%28cropped%29.jpg)SpoilerYes I did pick a jew as my therapist on purpose in case you were daft enough to realize.SpoilerYou were[close][close]
When Duuring was reigning you were legit banned for driving posts off topic all the time good timesyea but Duuring would just ban you if you had a different opinion
you german and against my opinion. you communist hurr!Please elaborate!Aside from my post clearly being a joke to insult your lack of intelligence even if I was a racist I would at least own that fact instead of hiding behind dog whistles and dog shit arguments like "poor people are just lazy hur dur."
Whoa cowboy, that's some racist shit you've just spewed. Revealing your true colors post by post. Bet this one won't get deleted by the soy mods.
Anyway, let me reveal some facts and opinions about you:
5'6
Morbidly obese
"But bro I'm smart, only insecure people go to the gym"
Whines about free healthcare but won't shape himself up
Low IQ
Loser and self-defeatist mentality
Gets emotionally rekt by an fse post from a stranger on the Internet
Depressed
Low testosterone, lacks competitive drive to strive in a capitalist environment
Pushes communist policies over self-improvement
"But drug addicts deserve a good life!"
Lives a privileged life in a 1st world country and still whines
Thinks he's a hero for wearing a mask
Simplifies his world view in group identities
Compensates his inferiority by supporting communist equality policies
Looks like a geek
Stop with the "if I was a racist" shit. Own it then. The only real and disgustingr racists here are you and your friends (hawkince, caz, furnox).
Literally.
Aside from my post clearly being a joke to insult your lack of intelligence even if I was a racist I would at least own that fact instead of hiding behind dog whistles and dog shit arguments like "poor people are just lazy hur dur."
Whoa cowboy, that's some racist shit you've just spewed. Revealing your true colors post by post. Bet this one won't get deleted by the soy mods.
Anyway, let me reveal some facts and opinions about you:
5'6
Morbidly obese
"But bro I'm smart, only insecure people go to the gym"
Whines about free healthcare but won't shape himself up
Low IQ
Loser and self-defeatist mentality
Gets emotionally rekt by an fse post from a stranger on the Internet
Depressed
Low testosterone, lacks competitive drive to strive in a capitalist environment
Pushes communist policies over self-improvement
"But drug addicts deserve a good life!"
Lives a privileged life in a 1st world country and still whines
Thinks he's a hero for wearing a mask
Simplifies his world view in group identities
Compensates his inferiority by supporting communist equality policies
Looks like a geek
Stop with the "if I was a racist" shit. Own it then. The only real and disgustingr racists here are you and your friends (hawkince, caz, furnox).
Literally.
Aside from my post clearly being a joke to insult your lack of intelligence even if I was a racist I would at least own that fact instead of hiding behind dog whistles and dog shit arguments like "poor people are just lazy hur dur."
Whoa cowboy, that's some racist shit you've just spewed. Revealing your true colors post by post. Bet this one won't get deleted by the soy mods.
Anyway, let me reveal some facts and opinions about you:
5'6
Morbidly obese
"But bro I'm smart, only insecure people go to the gym"
Whines about free healthcare but won't shape himself up
Low IQ
Loser and self-defeatist mentality
Gets emotionally rekt by an fse post from a stranger on the Internet
Depressed
Low testosterone, lacks competitive drive to strive in a capitalist environment
Pushes communist policies over self-improvement
"But drug addicts deserve a good life!"
Lives a privileged life in a 1st world country and still whines
Thinks he's a hero for wearing a mask
Simplifies his world view in group identities
Compensates his inferiority by supporting communist equality policies
Looks like a geek
Stop with the "if I was a racist" shit. Own it then. The only real and disgustingr racists here are you and your friends (hawkince, caz, furnox).
Literally.
All you left-wingers are losers that are just looking for excuses. Pathetic soy losers. Get jacked and get after it. Your future self will thank you. So many people are less fortunate than you and you're there crying and sulking.
What to do for the unfortunate blacks, the poor fags, the kikes and the inbreeders? Tell them to get over it and stop being pussies.
Negro had it coming
Negro had it coming
Should have given him 5 warning shots to the chest tbh
6'4
220lb
Jacked
White with a touch of caramel
Sexy as fuck
High IQ
Millionaire genetics
Risk averse
Emotionally stable
Packing heat
Me > you
Keep your equality.
Xdddd le epic troll moment
Xdddd le epic troll moment
don't get me wrong, everything i said i stand for as well as genuinely thinking you guys are racist
simply based of an assumption
Xdddd le epic troll moment
don't get me wrong, everything i said i stand for as well as genuinely thinking you guys are racist
simply based of an assumption
Ah yes I’m racist based on an ”assumption” while people who use racial slurs or he had it coming cause he’s black arguments ain’t?
can you pls for once in this thread actually explain anything of what you just saidXdddd le epic troll moment
don't get me wrong, everything i said i stand for as well as genuinely thinking you guys are racist
simply based of an assumption
Ah yes I’m racist based on an ”assumption” while people who use racial slurs or he had it coming cause he’s black arguments ain’t?
I don't give a shit about slurs or other jokes, what matters are your values, which indicate that you and others are racist.
tbh using racial slurs doesn't make someone a racist
Just walk away slowlytbh using racial slurs doesn't make someone a racist
I have so many questions, but at this point, I'm afraid to ask.
tbh using racial slurs doesn't make someone a racistphew I'm in the clear
tbh using racial slurs doesn't make someone a racistBREAKING NEWS
incredible reading comprehension there, somebody a few posts up said it's racist to use a racial slur whereas I naively thought stating racist viewpoints makes someone a racisttbh using racial slurs doesn't make someone a racistBREAKING NEWS
White Person says N Word isnt that bad!
incredible reading comprehension there, somebody a few posts up said it's racist to use a racial slur whereas I naively thought stating racist viewpoints makes someone a racisttbh using racial slurs doesn't make someone a racistBREAKING NEWS
White Person says N Word isnt that bad!
Wtf midnight why kill the long-running discussion we were having >:(
i certainly don't remember phoning youWtf midnight why kill the long-running discussion we were having >:(
It was my calling. I had to derail it all for the greater good :'(
8. Do not drive a thread Off-Topicas I recall the derailing started with you, furrnox and goomba calling on-topic political stances racist
"Off-Topic" posts in a thread are constituted as posts that are irrelevant to the thread's intended purpose or discussion. If users consistently attempt to derail the thread’s subject, then moderators will take action against the user(s). It is the thread owner’s responsibility to make moderation aware when user(s) attempt to derail the thread.
If only this Forum had somekind of moderator.
No, the derailing started right after that actually8. Do not drive a thread Off-Topicas I recall the derailing started with you, furrnox and goomba calling on-topic political stances racist
"Off-Topic" posts in a thread are constituted as posts that are irrelevant to the thread's intended purpose or discussion. If users consistently attempt to derail the thread’s subject, then moderators will take action against the user(s). It is the thread owner’s responsibility to make moderation aware when user(s) attempt to derail the thread.
If only this Forum had somekind of moderator.
yes there were some real hot and relevant political debates until then for sureNo, the derailing started right after that actually8. Do not drive a thread Off-Topicas I recall the derailing started with you, furrnox and goomba calling on-topic political stances racist
"Off-Topic" posts in a thread are constituted as posts that are irrelevant to the thread's intended purpose or discussion. If users consistently attempt to derail the thread’s subject, then moderators will take action against the user(s). It is the thread owner’s responsibility to make moderation aware when user(s) attempt to derail the thread.
If only this Forum had somekind of moderator.
*snip*
Let's be honest here, everyone's a little bit racist.I really cant wrap my head around how we could EVER say you guys were racist
If you disagree, have a walk alone in downtown Detroit at 2am. London works too. You'd be PETRIFIED.
But let me know how that works out for ya.
*snip*Let's be honest here, everyone's a little bit racist.I really cant wrap my head around how we could EVER say you guys were racist
If you disagree, have a walk alone in downtown Detroit at 2am. London works too. You'd be PETRIFIED.
But let me know how that works out for ya.
*snip*btw this take simply proves you atleast have no idea about german crime statistics.
I don't need statistics when I have the capabilities to assess any man and act accordingly. You'll virtue signal and die. I'll fight, out-manoeuvre and thrive. You and I are not the same.that made me chuckle kudos ledgi
8. Do not drive a thread Off-Topicas I recall the derailing started with you, furrnox and goomba calling on-topic political stances racist
"Off-Topic" posts in a thread are constituted as posts that are irrelevant to the thread's intended purpose or discussion. If users consistently attempt to derail the thread’s subject, then moderators will take action against the user(s). It is the thread owner’s responsibility to make moderation aware when user(s) attempt to derail the thread.
If only this Forum had somekind of moderator.
as I recall the derailing started with you, furrnox and goomba calling on-topic political stances racist8. Do not drive a thread Off-Topicas I recall the derailing started with you, furrnox and goomba calling on-topic political stances racist
"Off-Topic" posts in a thread are constituted as posts that are irrelevant to the thread's intended purpose or discussion. If users consistently attempt to derail the thread%u2019s subject, then moderators will take action against the user(s). It is the thread owner%u2019s responsibility to make moderation aware when user(s) attempt to derail the thread.
If only this Forum had somekind of moderator.
???
Spoiler(https://i.imgur.com/6kGliTj.jpg)[close]
as I recall the derailing started with you, furrnox and goomba calling on-topic political stances racistI didn't just "call them racist" I offered my stance and information that was relevant to the conversation. Were there a few jabs in there calling them racist? Absolutely, but since we were talking about race issues I don't really see how that is "derailing."
as I recall the derailing started with you, furrnox and goomba calling on-topic political stances racistI didn't just "call them racist" I offered my stance and information that was relevant to the conversation. Were there a few jabs in there calling them racist? Absolutely, but since we were talking about race issues I don't really see how that is "derailing."
Also, Ledger, unprompted, just used a slur for Jewish people so are we really gonna sit here and act like he isn't a blatant racist when pretty much everything here has displayed evidence to support that argument?
can you pls for once in this thread actually explain anything of what you just saidXdddd le epic troll moment
don't get me wrong, everything i said i stand for as well as genuinely thinking you guys are racist
simply based of an assumption
Ah yes I’m racist based on an ”assumption” while people who use racial slurs or he had it coming cause he’s black arguments ain’t?
I don't give a shit about slurs or other jokes, what matters are your values, which indicate that you and others are racist.
Can't wait for goomba and co to come and call senator Tim Scott a racist for speaking the truth. Oh wait, he's black, that doesn't fit your narrative, does it?Yeah man, you caught me, I am totally pushing a narrative and virtue signaling on the FSE forums. Please continue to tell me how race relations are in my country while you sit in your 90% white country that is smaller than my state.
America is not racist.
Just imagine 10% non white in czech republic.Can't wait for goomba and co to come and call senator Tim Scott a racist for speaking the truth. Oh wait, he's black, that doesn't fit your narrative, does it?Yeah man, you caught me, I am totally pushing a narrative and virtue signaling on the FSE forums. Please continue to tell me how race relations are in my country while you sit in your 90% white country that is smaller than my state.
America is not racist.
Can't wait for goomba and co to come and call senator Tim Scott a racist for speaking the truth. Oh wait, he's black, that doesn't fit your narrative, does it?Yeah man, you caught me, I am totally pushing a narrative and virtue signaling on the FSE forums. Please continue to tell me how race relations are in my country while you sit in your 90% white country that is smaller than my state.
America is not racist.
Just imagine 10% non white in czech republic.Can't wait for goomba and co to come and call senator Tim Scott a racist for speaking the truth. Oh wait, he's black, that doesn't fit your narrative, does it?Yeah man, you caught me, I am totally pushing a narrative and virtue signaling on the FSE forums. Please continue to tell me how race relations are in my country while you sit in your 90% white country that is smaller than my state.
America is not racist.
can you pls for once in this thread actually explain anything of what you just saidXdddd le epic troll moment
don't get me wrong, everything i said i stand for as well as genuinely thinking you guys are racist
simply based of an assumption
Ah yes I’m racist based on an ”assumption” while people who use racial slurs or he had it coming cause he’s black arguments ain’t?
I don't give a shit about slurs or other jokes, what matters are your values, which indicate that you and others are racist.
I'm just using the logic you have been using to claim that I hate blacks and to call me a racist. Glad you're not getting it. A little bit of self reflection from y'alls part would be great.
I don't need statistics when I have the capabilities to assess any man and act accordingly. You'll virtue signal and die. I'll fight, out-manoeuvre and thrive. You and I are not the same.
I don't need statistics when I have the capabilities to assess any man and act accordingly. You'll virtue signal and die. I'll fight, out-manoeuvre and thrive. You and I are not the same.
my man thinks he's batman lmao
Ok, institutional racism and inequality is a real and big problem in the US. Please give us 5 bulletpoints on how would YOU solve these issues. You can be creative.
Ok, institutional racism and inequality is a real and big problem in the US. Please give us 5 bulletpoints on how would YOU solve these issues. You can be creative.I've put this off for a while cause I haven't had the time to put down the effort to respond. First of all I'm not an academic in any sense but from the arguments I've heard here are 4 "bulletpoints" in no particular order, that would make sense to me. (I know you asked for 5)
10% too muchJust imagine 10% non white in czech republic.Can't wait for goomba and co to come and call senator Tim Scott a racist for speaking the truth. Oh wait, he's black, that doesn't fit your narrative, does it?Yeah man, you caught me, I am totally pushing a narrative and virtue signaling on the FSE forums. Please continue to tell me how race relations are in my country while you sit in your 90% white country that is smaller than my state.
America is not racist.
when the swede cuck says something vs when the chad Czech man says somethingCan't wait for goomba and co to come and call senator Tim Scott a racist for speaking the truth. Oh wait, he's black, that doesn't fit your narrative, does it?Yeah man, you caught me, I am totally pushing a narrative and virtue signaling on the FSE forums. Please continue to tell me how race relations are in my country while you sit in your 90% white country that is smaller than my state.
America is not racist.
1.Racist
2.Racist
3.Banks don't give a shit.
4.Only losers get addicted
5. Blacks don't get accepted cos they score lower. #Cope
they don't have arguments they just wanna circlejerk their 4chan talking points1.Racist
2.Racist
3.Banks don't give a shit.
4.Only losers get addicted
5. Blacks don't get accepted cos they score lower. #Cope
Your posts so far have been completely pointless and have only made you look stupid.
How about you use your two remaining braincells and give me a real argument to respond to.
Debating is gay. Real men do trial by combat to see who’s opinion is right
Debating is gay. Real men do trial by combat to see who’s opinion is right
Any animal can use violence to resolve their conflicts, only humans can use their words to do the same.
I'm not a fan of riots but you can argue that they were rioting against a system they find/found to be tyrannical which in my book could be justifiable reason to commit acts of violence in some circumstances.
I'm not a fan of riots but you can argue that they were rioting against a system they find/found to be tyrannical which in my book could be justifiable reason to commit acts of violence in some circumstances.political violence in free countries bad
I'm not a fan of riots but you can argue that they were rioting against a system they find/found to be tyrannical which in my book could be justifiable reason to commit acts of violence in some circumstances.
I find your mind fucked up, I'm going to beat you up. Dumbass logic to burn down businesses.
You're a professional victim, that's it.
tbh using racial slurs doesn't make someone a racistphew I'm in the clear
Wow I guess the Macedonian education system really is as bad as it’s ranking says it isnot only that, makedonia as a whole is dogshit
https://english.republika.mk/news/macedonia/macedonian-students-ranked-among-the-worst-in-europe/
I'm not a fan of riots but you can argue that they were rioting against a system they find/found to be tyrannical which in my book could be justifiable reason to commit acts of violence in some circumstances.
I find your mind fucked up, I'm going to beat you up. Dumbass logic to burn down businesses.
You're a professional victim, that's it.
I literally said I'm not a fan of rioting "dumbass" all I said is that there can be justification for violence if you live in a tyrranical society. What people believe to be a tyrranical society is subjective nazis and commies believe we live in a tyrranical society right now for example. I think they're entierly wrong and I don't support their violent acts. However the Hong Kong demonstrations had violence tied to it but is still something I supported cause I support political freedom and think their cause was just. Also the fighting as far as I'm aware was between authorities and demonstrators. No local bussniesses were targeted.
Just to be clear so your brain will get it right I do not support rioting.
political violence in free countries bad
political violence in free countries bad
i wish i lived in usa so i could just buy a gun and shoot myself
I'm right here. You don't have to vague post.i wish i lived in usa so i could just buy a gun and shoot myself
I wish certain Americans did this too :D
i wish i lived in usa so i could just buy a gun and shoot myself
i wish i lived in usa so i could just buy a gun and shoot myself
Wow I guess the Macedonian education system really is as bad as it’s ranking says it is
https://english.republika.mk/news/macedonia/macedonian-students-ranked-among-the-worst-in-europe/
If you do suicide by cop you are a HUGE dickheadi wish i lived in usa so i could just buy a gun and shoot myself
Why buy a gun?
Let the police shoot you :)
If you do suicide by cop you are a HUGE dickheadi wish i lived in usa so i could just buy a gun and shoot myself
Why buy a gun?
Let the police shoot you :)
Ah yes, America Bad, very niceAmerican Police Bad is a good take theodin
If you do suicide by cop you are a HUGE dickheadi wish i lived in usa so i could just buy a gun and shoot myself
Why buy a gun?
Let the police shoot you :)
Was refering to the trigger-happy police force in the us
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VWAybDJS7ng
If you do suicide by cop you are a HUGE dickheadi wish i lived in usa so i could just buy a gun and shoot myself
Why buy a gun?
Let the police shoot you :)
Was refering to the trigger-happy police force in the us
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VWAybDJS7ng
Trigger-happy? Nobody shot a gun in this video. Low IQ take and so is this woman, let me deconstruct why.
1. Huffpost conveniently cuts the video where the first thing the police officer gets portrayed in a negative light with "you're gonna get fucking shot". They also conveniently mute the video with their shitty explanation when shit's starting to hit the fan. Classic media-manipulation.
2. They are clearly suspects for theft, no police officer goes around random people pointing a gun at them. They didn't want to comply so the officer pulls out a gun so they don't run away and potentially harm someone in the chase.
3. "I can't put my hands up, I'm holding a baby and I'm pregnant!!", proceeding to act emotional and aggressive instead of putting the baby in the car complying with authority. Can't put her hands up because she's pregnant?She is guilty so she doesn't want to leave her kids behind alone.
4. Video conveniently cuts again to the officer trying to impose authority and do his job. But he's violent and mean to the poor little helpless woman with kids right? She isn't at all screaming because they are using force to arrest the MAN right? Maybe because he could be carrying a firearm?They were clearly beating up the woman causing her to yell!
5. Video conveniently cuts again right before she's yelling because she and her husband/boyfriend didn't comply to the law. The officers let the woman walk freely because she has children.
6. They pick a black cop woman to do damage control because the video looks bad. And they put the cops that just did their job on desk duty lmao, pathetic.
7. They sue for 10MIL so they can get rich quick taking the money from law-abiding american citizens. Typical loser thieves.
This is why there's so much crime in the US. Officers are becoming spineless due to left-wing political pressure. Failed society.
i wish i lived in usa so i could just buy a gun and shoot myself
Why buy a gun?
Let the police shoot you :)
i wish i lived in usa so i could just buy a gun and shoot myself
Why buy a gun?
Let the police shoot you :)
it wouldnt work because i am not black
SpoilerIf you do suicide by cop you are a HUGE dickheadi wish i lived in usa so i could just buy a gun and shoot myself
Why buy a gun?
Let the police shoot you :)
Was refering to the trigger-happy police force in the us
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VWAybDJS7ng
Trigger-happy? Nobody shot a gun in this video. Low IQ take and so is this woman, let me deconstruct why.
1. Huffpost conveniently cuts the video where the first thing the police officer gets portrayed in a negative light with "you're gonna get fucking shot". They also conveniently mute the video with their shitty explanation when shit's starting to hit the fan. Classic media-manipulation.
2. They are clearly suspects for theft, no police officer goes around random people pointing a gun at them. They didn't want to comply so the officer pulls out a gun so they don't run away and potentially harm someone in the chase.
3. "I can't put my hands up, I'm holding a baby and I'm pregnant!!", proceeding to act emotional and aggressive instead of putting the baby in the car complying with authority. Can't put her hands up because she's pregnant?She is guilty so she doesn't want to leave her kids behind alone.
4. Video conveniently cuts again to the officer trying to impose authority and do his job. But he's violent and mean to the poor little helpless woman with kids right? She isn't at all screaming because they are using force to arrest the MAN right? Maybe because he could be carrying a firearm?They were clearly beating up the woman causing her to yell!
5. Video conveniently cuts again right before she's yelling because she and her husband/boyfriend didn't comply to the law. The officers let the woman walk freely because she has children.
6. They pick a black cop woman to do damage control because the video looks bad. And they put the cops that just did their job on desk duty lmao, pathetic.
7. They sue for 10MIL so they can get rich quick taking the money from law-abiding american citizens. Typical loser thieves.
This is why there's so much crime in the US. Officers are becoming spineless due to left-wing political pressure. Failed society.[close]
You're funny :)
So beeing triger-happy is when someone is shooting.
Explain to me this then.
https://www.prisonpolicy.org/blog/2020/06/05/policekillings/
SpoilerIf you do suicide by cop you are a HUGE dickheadi wish i lived in usa so i could just buy a gun and shoot myself
Why buy a gun?
Let the police shoot you :)
Was refering to the trigger-happy police force in the us
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VWAybDJS7ng
Trigger-happy? Nobody shot a gun in this video. Low IQ take and so is this woman, let me deconstruct why.
1. Huffpost conveniently cuts the video where the first thing the police officer gets portrayed in a negative light with "you're gonna get fucking shot". They also conveniently mute the video with their shitty explanation when shit's starting to hit the fan. Classic media-manipulation.
2. They are clearly suspects for theft, no police officer goes around random people pointing a gun at them. They didn't want to comply so the officer pulls out a gun so they don't run away and potentially harm someone in the chase.
3. "I can't put my hands up, I'm holding a baby and I'm pregnant!!", proceeding to act emotional and aggressive instead of putting the baby in the car complying with authority. Can't put her hands up because she's pregnant?She is guilty so she doesn't want to leave her kids behind alone.
4. Video conveniently cuts again to the officer trying to impose authority and do his job. But he's violent and mean to the poor little helpless woman with kids right? She isn't at all screaming because they are using force to arrest the MAN right? Maybe because he could be carrying a firearm?They were clearly beating up the woman causing her to yell!
5. Video conveniently cuts again right before she's yelling because she and her husband/boyfriend didn't comply to the law. The officers let the woman walk freely because she has children.
6. They pick a black cop woman to do damage control because the video looks bad. And they put the cops that just did their job on desk duty lmao, pathetic.
7. They sue for 10MIL so they can get rich quick taking the money from law-abiding american citizens. Typical loser thieves.
This is why there's so much crime in the US. Officers are becoming spineless due to left-wing political pressure. Failed society.[close]
You're funny :)
So beeing triger-happy is when someone is shooting.
Explain to me this then.
https://www.prisonpolicy.org/blog/2020/06/05/policekillings/
I'm sure cops go around killing innocent blacks and it has nothing to do with high crime rates they commit. In what world do you live in lmao. Oh yeah, the world where you believe anything the mainstream media feeds you. Clown.
6'4
220lb
Jacked
White with a touch of caramel
Sexy as fuck
High IQ
Millionaire genetics
Risk averse
Emotionally stable
Packing heat
Me > you
Keep your equality.
(https://i.gyazo.com/34980c72d4af305974a0da1d769419bc.png)People doing DNA tests and get political about it smh. Just accept that your grand grand grand grand grand father moved somewhere else and fucked a girl, this does not change anything
(https://i.gyazo.com/34980c72d4af305974a0da1d769419bc.png)there is a great paper about this, but I sadly dont have a link atm
if i were in his place id be pretty thankful to have greek ancestry over turkish ancestry, no offense turks
Doubt, if you grew up in Turkey with Turkish culture I doubt you wouldnt feel like a fucking dirty cockroach 24/7if i were in his place id be pretty thankful to have greek ancestry over turkish ancestry, no offense turks
Doubt, if you grew up in Turkey with Turkish culture I doubt you'd prefer having Greek ancestry.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/hate-speech-bill-c36-1.6077606We place our hopes in the senate
Canada is fucked lmao I need out.
C-10 gave the government the power to regulate internet content including social media end users under the old Broadcasting Act (intended for old radio and TV broadcasts). now bill c-36 will give them the power to define what they consider to be hate speech on a whim and punish it with fines of up to $20,000 for first offense and $50,000 for subsequent offenses; using information pulled from ISP's, social media companies, etc. to faciliate.
people kept repeating that the Liberals aren't stupid enough to try to censor the internet even after they removed the provision exempting end users from Bill c-10, but now it's clear that that's exactly what they're doing - and of course they are citing the incident in London as proof that this is required even though the perpetrator had little to no online presence as far as police have determined
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/hate-speech-bill-c36-1.6077606We place our hopes in the senate
Canada is fucked lmao I need out.
C-10 gave the government the power to regulate internet content including social media end users under the old Broadcasting Act (intended for old radio and TV broadcasts). now bill c-36 will give them the power to define what they consider to be hate speech on a whim and punish it with fines of up to $20,000 for first offense and $50,000 for subsequent offenses; using information pulled from ISP's, social media companies, etc. to faciliate.
people kept repeating that the Liberals aren't stupid enough to try to censor the internet even after they removed the provision exempting end users from Bill c-10, but now it's clear that that's exactly what they're doing - and of course they are citing the incident in London as proof that this is required even though the perpetrator had little to no online presence as far as police have determined
https://www.firstpost.com/world/i-can-see-the-greatness-jackie-chan-wants-to-join-chinas-communist-party-9800131.html?fbclid=IwAR1mWPa4QGSjVL6Xo4p2p5JqrmtQFnv859GL0bD0Ff2L4U1_r-haOsQWHGc rip Hong Kong https://www.reddit.com/r/pics/comments/gwanwg/jackie_chan_at_the_benefit_concert_held_in_may/I dont think thats a surprise really, is it? Jackie is only as big as he is because he doesn't speak out against the party, it only makes sense that he endorses/joins it
Im happy of John Bercow https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FTX1OCXj_tg&t=330snot a surprise, he was always a closet leftie
Afghanistan is a shitshowIt was always going to end this way. Coulda stayed another 20 years for the same thing. Should've never went in there in the first place.
Afghanistan is a shitshowIt was always going to end this way. Coulda stayed another 20 years for the same thing. Should've never went in there in the first place.
Sharia law kinda basedAfghanistan is a shitshowIt was always going to end this way. Coulda stayed another 20 years for the same thing. Should've never went in there in the first place.
Once we killed Osama we should've bailed. These Afghanis would rather have Sharia law anyways. They don't want democracy. They'll have tribal wars for the next 25 years until the next superpower wants to try and tame them. We gave them everything necessary to fight these dudes and they just didn't care lol.
Most of the population does not want sharia. As I understand it there are some organizations within the country focusing on getting women out of the country due to the increased risk. Never the less Bush #2 caused this and now everyone is blaming trump or biden :DAfghanistan is a shitshowIt was always going to end this way. Coulda stayed another 20 years for the same thing. Should've never went in there in the first place.
Once we killed Osama we should've bailed. These Afghanis would rather have Sharia law anyways. They don't want democracy. They'll have tribal wars for the next 25 years until the next superpower wants to try and tame them. We gave them everything necessary to fight these dudes and they just didn't care lol.
Most of the population does not want sharia. As I understand it there are some organizations within the country focusing on getting women out of the country due to the increased risk. Never the less Bush #2 caused this and now everyone is blaming trump or biden :DAfghanistan is a shitshowIt was always going to end this way. Coulda stayed another 20 years for the same thing. Should've never went in there in the first place.
Once we killed Osama we should've bailed. These Afghanis would rather have Sharia law anyways. They don't want democracy. They'll have tribal wars for the next 25 years until the next superpower wants to try and tame them. We gave them everything necessary to fight these dudes and they just didn't care lol.
The whole region has always been a shit show for centuries anyway :-\Most of the population does not want sharia. As I understand it there are some organizations within the country focusing on getting women out of the country due to the increased risk. Never the less Bush #2 caused this and now everyone is blaming trump or biden :DAfghanistan is a shitshowIt was always going to end this way. Coulda stayed another 20 years for the same thing. Should've never went in there in the first place.
Once we killed Osama we should've bailed. These Afghanis would rather have Sharia law anyways. They don't want democracy. They'll have tribal wars for the next 25 years until the next superpower wants to try and tame them. We gave them everything necessary to fight these dudes and they just didn't care lol.
I saw a report that 99% of Muslims in Afghanistan would support Sharia law.
Here’s a tweet with a picture of the data
https://twitter.com/swati_gs/status/1427265492868235273?s=21
These people like living that way. Most of the country is tribes run by warlords essentially. Backwards civilization.
The fact that we didn’t just send in C-130s last week and just pull our allies and interpreters out and then sorted out the legal process later is a testimony to the absolute decay of Western government
Not the worst thing ever, the ANA has always been a corrupt shell organization essentially laundering US aidThe fact that we didn’t just send in C-130s last week and just pull our allies and interpreters out and then sorted out the legal process later is a testimony to the absolute decay of Western government
yeah the terps are cool, they can come but anyone in charge of the ANA is a pedo and is gonna be executed by the Taliban :)
How do we fix the middle east? may god help my afghan brothers
How do we fix the middle east? may god help my afghan brothers
nuke it
how to fix the middle east part 2 of xyou will make great fuel for the eternal flames heathen
>remove religion
how to fix the middle east part 2 of xyou will make great fuel for the eternal flames heathen
>remove religion
How do we fix the middle east? may god help my afghan brothers
nuke it
Yeah just hit it with a reset button.
Most of the population does not want sharia. As I understand it there are some organizations within the country focusing on getting women out of the country due to the increased risk. Never the less Bush #2 caused this and now everyone is blaming trump or biden :DAfghanistan is a shitshowIt was always going to end this way. Coulda stayed another 20 years for the same thing. Should've never went in there in the first place.
Once we killed Osama we should've bailed. These Afghanis would rather have Sharia law anyways. They don't want democracy. They'll have tribal wars for the next 25 years until the next superpower wants to try and tame them. We gave them everything necessary to fight these dudes and they just didn't care lol.
I saw a report that 99% of Muslims in Afghanistan would support Sharia law.
Here’s a tweet with a picture of the data
https://twitter.com/swati_gs/status/1427265492868235273?s=21
These people like living that way. Most of the country is tribes run by warlords essentially. Backwards civilization.
Most of the population does not want sharia. As I understand it there are some organizations within the country focusing on getting women out of the country due to the increased risk. Never the less Bush #2 caused this and now everyone is blaming trump or biden :DAfghanistan is a shitshowIt was always going to end this way. Coulda stayed another 20 years for the same thing. Should've never went in there in the first place.
Once we killed Osama we should've bailed. These Afghanis would rather have Sharia law anyways. They don't want democracy. They'll have tribal wars for the next 25 years until the next superpower wants to try and tame them. We gave them everything necessary to fight these dudes and they just didn't care lol.
I saw a report that 99% of Muslims in Afghanistan would support Sharia law.
Here’s a tweet with a picture of the data
https://twitter.com/swati_gs/status/1427265492868235273?s=21
These people like living that way. Most of the country is tribes run by warlords essentially. Backwards civilization.
I don't think mobs of people would be trying to escape the country, and basically killing themselves clinging onto planes if they "liked" living that way, and I don't think a nearly decade-old poll of 1,000 people is enough to support that stance.
Canadian election szn!voting bloc 8) f*** trudeau
LPC started out with a decent chance of a majority but a week into the campaign they've not run a good one so far, while the CPC has rolled out some popular policy proposals
Latest projections have the Liberals winning another minority but with less seats - due in large part to a more competitive CPC than last time and a more stable NDP
Popular vote has tightened in the past few days with the CPC and LPC running at basically a dead heat
Bloc facing some serious questions in whether they can repeat last election's success in Quebec
Green party imploding and the PPC not a serious threat
Gonna be an interesting one! You can check out the polls and projections at 338canada.com
Canadian election szn!
LPC started out with a decent chance of a majority but a week into the campaign they've not run a good one so far, while the CPC has rolled out some popular policy proposals
Latest projections have the Liberals winning another minority but with less seats - due in large part to a more competitive CPC than last time and a more stable NDP
Popular vote has tightened in the past few days with the CPC and LPC running at basically a dead heat
Bloc facing some serious questions in whether they can repeat last election's success in Quebec
Green party imploding and the PPC not a serious threat
Gonna be an interesting one! You can check out the polls and projections at 338canada.com
Canadian election szn!voting bloc 8) f*** trudeau
LPC started out with a decent chance of a majority but a week into the campaign they've not run a good one so far, while the CPC has rolled out some popular policy proposals
Latest projections have the Liberals winning another minority but with less seats - due in large part to a more competitive CPC than last time and a more stable NDP
Popular vote has tightened in the past few days with the CPC and LPC running at basically a dead heat
Bloc facing some serious questions in whether they can repeat last election's success in Quebec
Green party imploding and the PPC not a serious threat
Gonna be an interesting one! You can check out the polls and projections at 338canada.com
I'd be weary of tracking polls using just 338, they absolutely botched the NS election, PC-NS had a 13% chance of a minority and wound up with a firm majority. They also had NL Libs winning a sweeping majority back in March, when in reality they gained a single seat (although the election being fucked up by the third wave of COVID may have factored in).SpoilerCanadian election szn!
LPC started out with a decent chance of a majority but a week into the campaign they've not run a good one so far, while the CPC has rolled out some popular policy proposals
Latest projections have the Liberals winning another minority but with less seats - due in large part to a more competitive CPC than last time and a more stable NDP
Popular vote has tightened in the past few days with the CPC and LPC running at basically a dead heat
Bloc facing some serious questions in whether they can repeat last election's success in Quebec
Green party imploding and the PPC not a serious threat
Gonna be an interesting one! You can check out the polls and projections at 338canada.com[close]
Tories have been doing a good job at marketing O'Toole for name recognition and he isn't as controversial as Scheer, if they can turn that into more BC, ATL, and GTA seats they may have a shot a a minority gov't. Had my man MacKay been leader I'd say that win would be a guarantee.
Only Liberal shot at a majority imo is if they can win Quebec and maybe a few urban seats out west.
The death of the Greens since May stepped down might return enough seats back to the NDP to keep Jagmeet around.
My overall prediction is a Lib min, Trudeau pulls a Mulroney and hands a shitfest to Freeland come next election. All other parties vapourize their leadership (Except for Bernier, who is gunned down by the dairy cartel).
Good man!SpoilerCanadian election szn!voting bloc 8) f*** trudeau
LPC started out with a decent chance of a majority but a week into the campaign they've not run a good one so far, while the CPC has rolled out some popular policy proposals
Latest projections have the Liberals winning another minority but with less seats - due in large part to a more competitive CPC than last time and a more stable NDP
Popular vote has tightened in the past few days with the CPC and LPC running at basically a dead heat
Bloc facing some serious questions in whether they can repeat last election's success in Quebec
Green party imploding and the PPC not a serious threat
Gonna be an interesting one! You can check out the polls and projections at 338canada.com[close]Provincial elections are a shitshow to poll anyways. 338 got the last election almost perfectly and the polls he sources from are usually reliable so idk!SpoilerI'd be weary of tracking polls using just 338, they absolutely botched the NS election, PC-NS had a 13% chance of a minority and wound up with a firm majority. They also had NL Libs winning a sweeping majority back in March, when in reality they gained a single seat (although the election being fucked up by the third wave of COVID may have factored in).SpoilerCanadian election szn!
LPC started out with a decent chance of a majority but a week into the campaign they've not run a good one so far, while the CPC has rolled out some popular policy proposals
Latest projections have the Liberals winning another minority but with less seats - due in large part to a more competitive CPC than last time and a more stable NDP
Popular vote has tightened in the past few days with the CPC and LPC running at basically a dead heat
Bloc facing some serious questions in whether they can repeat last election's success in Quebec
Green party imploding and the PPC not a serious threat
Gonna be an interesting one! You can check out the polls and projections at 338canada.com[close]
Tories have been doing a good job at marketing O'Toole for name recognition and he isn't as controversial as Scheer, if they can turn that into more BC, ATL, and GTA seats they may have a shot a a minority gov't. Had my man MacKay been leader I'd say that win would be a guarantee.
Only Liberal shot at a majority imo is if they can win Quebec and maybe a few urban seats out west.
The death of the Greens since May stepped down might return enough seats back to the NDP to keep Jagmeet around.
My overall prediction is a Lib min, Trudeau pulls a Mulroney and hands a shitfest to Freeland come next election. All other parties vapourize their leadership (Except for Bernier, who is gunned down by the dairy cartel).[close]
Speaking as someone who voted in the CPC leadership race, O'Toole was everyone's second or third choice - and I think that applies to Canadians in general as well. But he (and the party) are doing a fine job at both marketting him and running a sound campaign. CPC's always had ground game but policy and war rooming was always questionable, but this time they're leaving the ground game to the locals and focussing exclusively on marketting and war rooming and it's working. O'Toole has barely left Ottawa, which means he's fresh as hell, sees the trends before Trudeau, and isn't getting hammered on the road by op media. It's a strategy that will work best in courting suburban Ontario seats, I think.
Green collapse is funny. National media basically begged for them to be relevant for a decade, and after Lizzie couldn't get anything more than 2-3 seats, they're basically as effective as the PPC. Paul isn't even going to win her riding, by a lot!
If the CPC cut into the Liberal seat count in Ontario by like 5-10 and flip a couple seats in BC/ATL then O'Toole gets another shot tbh. Unless he does something stupid he's proven to be a better leader than Scheer, which will help his cause
Finally a good take hereMost of the population does not want sharia. As I understand it there are some organizations within the country focusing on getting women out of the country due to the increased risk. Never the less Bush #2 caused this and now everyone is blaming trump or biden :DAfghanistan is a shitshowIt was always going to end this way. Coulda stayed another 20 years for the same thing. Should've never went in there in the first place.
Once we killed Osama we should've bailed. These Afghanis would rather have Sharia law anyways. They don't want democracy. They'll have tribal wars for the next 25 years until the next superpower wants to try and tame them. We gave them everything necessary to fight these dudes and they just didn't care lol.
I saw a report that 99% of Muslims in Afghanistan would support Sharia law.
Here’s a tweet with a picture of the data
https://twitter.com/swati_gs/status/1427265492868235273?s=21
These people like living that way. Most of the country is tribes run by warlords essentially. Backwards civilization.
I don't think mobs of people would be trying to escape the country, and basically killing themselves clinging onto planes if they "liked" living that way, and I don't think a nearly decade-old poll of 1,000 people is enough to support that stance.
Obviously the people in the “modernized” city of Kabul are gonna want to flee. They are some of the few people living in what we’d call generally normal conditions with basic human rights. The rest of the country lives in a way we can’t really comprehend because it’s so backwards. If a majority of people there supported the way of life we expect, surely they would have put up some form of resistance after we left them with all the necessary means of doing so. I just hope all the people that want to leave are able to get home.
The sharia itself isn‘t defined but just a compilation of statements and instructions always left to be interpret. The Taliban do it in the most conservative way possible, something the majority does not agree with.It's not difficult to call Afghanistan NATO's greatest defeat when the three other wars were all victories. The U.S managed to remain fit for leadership after the categorically bigger defeat it faced in Vietnam. It doesn't follow that despite having a larger and more advanced military than ever, 22,000 casualties in a counter-insurgency over a 20 year period voids it's ability to protect it's allies.
Anyway, the whole thing is totally lost and probably NATO‘s greatest defeat to this day. Plus - and this might be the only good thing we can possibly take from this debacle - after the last four turbulent years in the transatlantic alliance, we see once again that the United States simply aren’t fit for leadership anymore. Europe should finally take it‘s matters (and especially it‘s defense) into it‘s own hands and stop being so dependent.
It's not difficult to call Afghanistan NATO's greatest defeat when the three other wars were all victories. The U.S managed to remain fit for leadership after the categorically bigger defeat it faced in Vietnam. It doesn't follow that despite having a larger and more advanced military than ever, 22,000 casualties in a counter-insurgency over a 20 year period voids it's ability to protect it's allies.Should have said 'the West' instead of NATO, my bad.
Not certain what you mean by "turbulent last four years" in NATO. If by that you mean the Trump presidency, then your final recommendation for Europe to look to it's own defence basically aligns itself with his policy towards NATO.
Can we discuss inflation / if American is immune to it and they can just let the machine go brrrr because the banks own the money and not the people?
As this is a game forum let's keep it on topic, if the dollar does go nuclear the entire games industry will be wiped out.
Can we discuss inflation / if American is immune to it and they can just let the machine go brrrr because the banks own the money and not the people?
As this is a game forum let's keep it on topic, if the dollar does go nuclear the entire games industry will be wiped out.
People will game regardless if the dollar is worth zero.
Is it a bad thing that I think Democracy is a joke and I wish the world still welcomed authoritarian style leadership and governments?
Is it a bad thing that I think Democracy is a joke and I wish the world still welcomed authoritarian style leadership and governments?weak bait
Can we discuss inflation / if American is immune to it and they can just let the machine go brrrr because the banks own the money and not the people?
As this is a game forum let's keep it on topic, if the dollar does go nuclear the entire games industry will be wiped out.
People will game regardless if the dollar is worth zero.
Majority of large western development companies use dollars to pay developers / fund their own development staff. Customers aren't the issue.
You'll see the rise of Eastern influence in video game media just like we're seeing with social media.
Is it a bad thing that I think Democracy is a joke and I wish the world still welcomed authoritarian style leadership and governments?weak bait
Is it a bad thing that I think Democracy is a joke and I wish the world still welcomed authoritarian style leadership and governments?weak bait
No, I am serious. Democracy is slow, weak and inefficient. We need a new form of government that combines the good morals of democracy with the efficiency and strength of an authoritarian government.
Slow isnt bad if you ask me. Also history isnt really backing your argument palIs it a bad thing that I think Democracy is a joke and I wish the world still welcomed authoritarian style leadership and governments?weak bait
No, I am serious. Democracy is slow, weak and inefficient. We need a new form of government that combines the good morals of democracy with the efficiency and strength of an authoritarian government.
let him be its been 5 years that he has been trying to be a pro csgo playerSlow isnt bad if you ask me. Also history isnt really backing your argument palIs it a bad thing that I think Democracy is a joke and I wish the world still welcomed authoritarian style leadership and governments?weak bait
No, I am serious. Democracy is slow, weak and inefficient. We need a new form of government that combines the good morals of democracy with the efficiency and strength of an authoritarian government.
Slow isnt bad if you ask me. Also history isnt really backing your argument palIs it a bad thing that I think Democracy is a joke and I wish the world still welcomed authoritarian style leadership and governments?weak bait
No, I am serious. Democracy is slow, weak and inefficient. We need a new form of government that combines the good morals of democracy with the efficiency and strength of an authoritarian government.
Slow isnt bad if you ask me. Also history isnt really backing your argument palIs it a bad thing that I think Democracy is a joke and I wish the world still welcomed authoritarian style leadership and governments?weak bait
No, I am serious. Democracy is slow, weak and inefficient. We need a new form of government that combines the good morals of democracy with the efficiency and strength of an authoritarian government.
Slow is bad when you live in a massive country like the US. Where our democracy is an absolute shit show and is filled with corruption on both sides and a pile of shit so big and deep that there is no real fix at this point.
Also explain to me how history isn't backing my argument? Look at Napoleon and Hitler (countless others), both used their authority to quickly turn their nations into global superpowers. And are you implying that the democracy's we have today are the pinnacle of government? Do you honestly believe there is not a better system? If you don't think it can be better then I pity you. Do you really think that mankind's peak is a bunch of disjointed countries spread across our planet with massive differences between us and systems that take lifetimes to see change and progress? I sincerely hope not.
Is it a bad thing that I think Democracy is a joke and I wish the world still welcomed authoritarian style leadership and governments?
Bring back feudalism
Is it a bad thing that I think Democracy is a joke and I wish the world still welcomed authoritarian style leadership and governments?
Yes.
Bring back feudalism
Canadian election update:we need the rhino do this again this time around
Projections show it to be MAD closeSpoiler(https://i.gyazo.com/5b29fbe90ae1cedc260bc7de2c7bc213.png)[close]
Liberals stopped the bleeding but they lost some ground, English debates will make things clearer - but also people don't really watch the debates so idk
NDP still projected for a seat increase, they've done well
Bloc set to maintain their hold on rural QC, altho CPC looking to flip a few
Like all CDN elections, it'll come down to GTA toss-ups, key Atlantic seats, and BC suburbs
also I must say, Canada is frighteningly regional in its politics. Americans and Europeans complain about this as well generally but in CA it's kinda insane. CPC swept two whole provinces last election and managed merely opposition. Quebec, BC and the Maritimes are not too politically regionalized but in the rest of Canada geography essentially dictates voting intentions and that's frankly concerning.
Canadian election update:
Projections show it to be MAD closeSpoiler(https://i.gyazo.com/5b29fbe90ae1cedc260bc7de2c7bc213.png)[close]
Liberals stopped the bleeding but they lost some ground, English debates will make things clearer - but also people don't really watch the debates so idk
NDP still projected for a seat increase, they've done well
Bloc set to maintain their hold on rural QC, altho CPC looking to flip a few
Like all CDN elections, it'll come down to GTA toss-ups, key Atlantic seats, and BC suburbs
also I must say, Canada is frighteningly regional in its politics. Americans and Europeans complain about this as well generally but in CA it's kinda insane. CPC swept two whole provinces last election and managed merely opposition. Quebec, BC and the Maritimes are not too politically regionalized but in the rest of Canada geography essentially dictates voting intentions and that's frankly concerning.
The moderator wasn't the best tbhMeh, I'd say modern Western alienation is still a far cry away from the days of Reform and the CA.SpoilerCanadian election update:
Projections show it to be MAD closeSpoiler(https://i.gyazo.com/5b29fbe90ae1cedc260bc7de2c7bc213.png)[close]
Liberals stopped the bleeding but they lost some ground, English debates will make things clearer - but also people don't really watch the debates so idk
NDP still projected for a seat increase, they've done well
Bloc set to maintain their hold on rural QC, altho CPC looking to flip a few
Like all CDN elections, it'll come down to GTA toss-ups, key Atlantic seats, and BC suburbs
also I must say, Canada is frighteningly regional in its politics. Americans and Europeans complain about this as well generally but in CA it's kinda insane. CPC swept two whole provinces last election and managed merely opposition. Quebec, BC and the Maritimes are not too politically regionalized but in the rest of Canada geography essentially dictates voting intentions and that's frankly concerning.[close]
Our lack of a functional upper chamber to promote regional interests is a driving factor there (it's why Reform used to have a hard on for a triple-E senate), in addition to insane party discipline that means provinces need to really swing for one party or another if they're going to influence federal policy.
Take on the English debate: Trudeau gave of an aura of mild panic the entire time, not a great night for him overall. O'Toole kinda just existed, definitely did a good job on hitting home the "moderate man" image. Singh made his rehearsed talking points seem natural enough, but beyond a few sound bites for the Toronto Star his arguments seemed mostly unsubstantive. Paul, likewise with O'Toole existed. Her jab at Trudeau being a "fake feminist" felt flat af. I'm not entirely confident Blanchet caught on to the "English" part of the debate.
Overall: anytime Trudeau opened his mouth shouting ensued, moderator asked unethically leading questions (especially the one on the QC secularism bill). Might hurt Trudeau a little, but no one gave a Mulroney or Layton worthy performance so it's probably inconsequential.
harper used the "i just exist please dont hurt me" for like 6 election wins in a row and the cpc somehow forgot that that's how you win as a conservative in canadaMeh, I'd say modern Western alienation is still a far cry away from the days of Reform and the CA.SpoilerCanadian election update:
Projections show it to be MAD closeSpoiler(https://i.gyazo.com/5b29fbe90ae1cedc260bc7de2c7bc213.png)[close]
Liberals stopped the bleeding but they lost some ground, English debates will make things clearer - but also people don't really watch the debates so idk
NDP still projected for a seat increase, they've done well
Bloc set to maintain their hold on rural QC, altho CPC looking to flip a few
Like all CDN elections, it'll come down to GTA toss-ups, key Atlantic seats, and BC suburbs
also I must say, Canada is frighteningly regional in its politics. Americans and Europeans complain about this as well generally but in CA it's kinda insane. CPC swept two whole provinces last election and managed merely opposition. Quebec, BC and the Maritimes are not too politically regionalized but in the rest of Canada geography essentially dictates voting intentions and that's frankly concerning.[close]
Our lack of a functional upper chamber to promote regional interests is a driving factor there (it's why Reform used to have a hard on for a triple-E senate), in addition to insane party discipline that means provinces need to really swing for one party or another if they're going to influence federal policy.
Take on the English debate: Trudeau gave of an aura of mild panic the entire time, not a great night for him overall. O'Toole kinda just existed, definitely did a good job on hitting home the "moderate man" image. Singh made his rehearsed talking points seem natural enough, but beyond a few sound bites for the Toronto Star his arguments seemed mostly unsubstantive. Paul, likewise with O'Toole existed. Her jab at Trudeau being a "fake feminist" felt flat af. I'm not entirely confident Blanchet caught on to the "English" part of the debate.
Overall: anytime Trudeau opened his mouth shouting ensued, moderator asked unethically leading questions (especially the one on the QC secularism bill). Might hurt Trudeau a little, but no one gave a Mulroney or Layton worthy performance so it's probably inconsequential.
(https://i.gyazo.com/2488b5aa4beb9ac9fc8388c453605980.png)bruh.
The results so far. As widely predicted the Liberals take another minority. It'll be interesting to see how many seats the government will be though.
This further underscores the pointlessness of this election lol. it's 2019 basically on repeat. please stop calling them justin im tired
*rings little bell*i mean except fish n ship what are you guys really missing? not much tbh
Can we talk about inflation please helloooo UK got no food
*rings little bell*i mean except fish n ship what are you guys really missing? not much tbh
Can we talk about inflation please helloooo UK got no food
Tory Syndrome here we come, the CPC is going back hard right.My overall prediction is a Lib min, Trudeau pulls a Mulroney and hands a shitfest to Freeland come next election. All other parties vapourize their leadership (Except for Bernier, who is gunned down by the dairy cartel).SpoilerCanadian election szn!
LPC started out with a decent chance of a majority but a week into the campaign they've not run a good one so far, while the CPC has rolled out some popular policy proposals
Latest projections have the Liberals winning another minority but with less seats - due in large part to a more competitive CPC than last time and a more stable NDP
Popular vote has tightened in the past few days with the CPC and LPC running at basically a dead heat
Bloc facing some serious questions in whether they can repeat last election's success in Quebec
Green party imploding and the PPC not a serious threat
Gonna be an interesting one! You can check out the polls and projections at 338canada.com[close]
But Mr Scholz says it is time for a new coalition with the Greens and liberals.
Sounds scary xd
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hNDgcjVGHIw
This is actually a video I wouldn't expect NYT to make.
This is actually a video I wouldn't expect NYT to make.It's a fucking op-ed news sites publish dozens of them every day. It's honestly so depressing to read this forum post along with the comments of that video and see all the people who have obviously never read a single article past the headline. Despite what conservative outlets would have you believe the "left-wing" media isn't one giant circle jerk that is too afraid to criticize it's own base.
ratioThis is actually a video I wouldn't expect NYT to make.It's a fucking op-ed news sites publish dozens of them every day. It's honestly so depressing to read this forum post along with the comments of that video and see all the people who have obviously never read a single article past the headline. Despite what conservative outlets would have you believe the "left-wing" media isn't one giant circle jerk that is too afraid to criticize it's own base.
As for the video itself, I found it to be pretty boring. Yeah, the major cities on the west coast are overcrowded poorly zoned/designed shitholes that nobody wants to move from because property values continue to rise and the weather is nice. It's baby's liberal criticism that conservatives will always eat up. The framing of the video is terrible too, everyone seems to forget that we live in a democracy and that just because a certain party is currently in power in a certain area doesn't mean they can just push through legislation on a whim, they are still beholden to their constituents who will not always vote in predictably left-wing or right-wing ways. You can try to paint it as hypocrisy all you want in the broader picture but it turns out to be a little more complicated than that when you actually dig into the details.
ratio
(https://i.imgur.com/eqKTE7Xh.jpg)This is actually a video I wouldn't expect NYT to make.It's a fucking op-ed news sites publish dozens of them every day. It's honestly so depressing to read this forum post along with the comments of that video and see all the people who have obviously never read a single article past the headline. Despite what conservative outlets would have you believe the "left-wing" media isn't one giant circle jerk that is too afraid to criticize it's own base.
As for the video itself, I found it to be pretty boring. Yeah, the major cities on the west coast are overcrowded poorly zoned/designed shitholes that nobody wants to move from because property values continue to rise and the weather is nice. It's baby's liberal criticism that conservatives will always eat up. The framing of the video is terrible too, everyone seems to forget that we live in a democracy and that just because a certain party is currently in power in a certain area doesn't mean they can just push through legislation on a whim, they are still beholden to their constituents who will not always vote in predictably left-wing or right-wing ways. You can try to paint it as hypocrisy all you want in the broader picture but it turns out to be a little more complicated than that when you actually dig into the details.
You act like I give a shit about politics. I was just posting it because I wasn’t expecting NYT to make something like this. Tbh I never see either side criticize their own side very often when I do watch the news (which is rare). The media does lie quite a bit so you never know what’s true from either side. :)If you come into the politics thread and post about it you're kind of giving the impression that you at least somewhat care about it and are opening yourself up for people to respond to it as I did.
If it’s so depressing delete your accountThat would be no fun tho :(
I'm sad the jury got it wrong and said not guilty to all charges in the Kyle Rittenhouse case.
I'm glad the jury got it right and said not guilty to all charges in the Kyle Rittenhouse case.
I'm sad the jury got it wrong and said not guilty to all charges in the Kyle Rittenhouse case.
(https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/facebook/001/330/809/d90.png)I'm glad the jury got it right and said not guilty to all charges in the Kyle Rittenhouse case.
So happy for him, justice has been served ;DI'm sad the jury got it wrong and said not guilty to all charges in the Kyle Rittenhouse case.
Racist ;D
(https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/facebook/001/330/809/d90.png)I'm glad the jury got it right and said not guilty to all charges in the Kyle Rittenhouse case.
So happy for him, justice has been served ;DI'm sad the jury got it wrong and said not guilty to all charges in the Kyle Rittenhouse case.
Racist ;D
Is that you
Is that you
(https://c.tenor.com/HDXIhTFsQDEAAAAM/kayne-west-selfie.gif)
Is that you
(https://c.tenor.com/HDXIhTFsQDEAAAAM/kayne-west-selfie.gif)
Can we discuss inflation / if American is immune to it and they can just let the machine go brrrr because the banks own the money and not the people?
As this is a game forum let's keep it on topic, if the dollar does go nuclear the entire games industry will be wiped out.
Is team UA still gonna happen ? since....Dw its about to happen IRL
Is team UA still gonna happen ? since....Dw its about to happen IRL
ready for this thread to pop off
ready for this thread to pop off
Can we discuss inflation / if American is immune to it and they can just let the machine go brrrr because the banks own the money and not the people?
As this is a game forum let's keep it on topic, if the dollar does go nuclear the entire games industry will be wiped out.
Politics thread that doesn't talk about finances is like a cake without any cream I'll eat it sure but where's my cream.
*Rubs fingernails on jacket* well well well I see your purse is looking mighty light there partner. Oh what's this? Covid? Banks manipulation of the markets? Federal reserve IS going to raise interest rates? CHINA? NFT scams and crypto bubble ? Recession that'll make 2008 look like a fart?
Post brought to you by chocolate milky on a cold night.jpeg
Hoping our ukrainians nw homies stay safe
Hoping our ukrainians nw homies stay safe
Stay safe
Stay safe
Stay safe
I’m glad people here are being genuine about it no matter what side your on.
I keep seeing shit like “Ukraine is 1 shot” etc or jokes about either side dying which I understand is just joking around and they are naive children. When I was young I thought going to war would be badass and super fun.
I don’t have any Ukrainian or Russian friends but It will become very real when your friends are the ones getting blown up
No more brother wars <3
I’m glad people here are being genuine about it no matter what side your on.
I keep seeing shit like “Ukraine is 1 shot” etc or jokes about either side dying which I understand is just joking around and they are naive children. When I was young I thought going to war would be badass and super fun.
I don’t have any Ukrainian or Russian friends but It will become very real when your friends are the ones getting blown up
No more brother wars <3
Good thing we got those manpads and javelins to the Ukrainians before this all popped off. Already videos of planes and helicopters getting shot down.
1941?Good thing we got those manpads and javelins to the Ukrainians before this all popped off. Already videos of planes and helicopters getting shot down.
we gave them helments so when the helicopters fall on their heads they dont get hurt 8) :-\
Stay safe
Good thing we got those manpads and javelins to the Ukrainians before this all popped off. Already videos of planes and helicopters getting shot down.reports are that those javelins are kicking ass! same with the british NLAWs. even tho russia has the armor advantage by far ukraine is doing a good job inflicting damage
1941?Good thing we got those manpads and javelins to the Ukrainians before this all popped off. Already videos of planes and helicopters getting shot down.
we gave them helments so when the helicopters fall on their heads they dont get hurt 8) :-\
1941?Good thing we got those manpads and javelins to the Ukrainians before this all popped off. Already videos of planes and helicopters getting shot down.
we gave them helments so when the helicopters fall on their heads they dont get hurt 8) :-\
Go attack a nato member so USA can delete Russia in 1 minute
1941?Good thing we got those manpads and javelins to the Ukrainians before this all popped off. Already videos of planes and helicopters getting shot down.
we gave them helments so when the helicopters fall on their heads they dont get hurt 8) :-\
Go attack a nato member so USA can delete Russia in 1 minute
Thanks God i was born in Latam.
What a great morning to be alive
❤️What a great morning to be alive
We appreciate all the kind words guys, thank youledabil
We appreciate all the kind words guys, thank youledabil
yes please, reset humanity get the nukes ready1941?Good thing we got those manpads and javelins to the Ukrainians before this all popped off. Already videos of planes and helicopters getting shot down.
we gave them helments so when the helicopters fall on their heads they dont get hurt 8) :-\
Go attack a nato member so USA can delete Russia in 1 minute
What a great morning to be aliveHope you're okay David ❤️🇺🇦
What a great morning to be alive
Okay yet ❤️What a great morning to be aliveHope you're okay David ❤️🇺🇦
I hope twister and ext_kill survive this
"Never let a good opportunity go to waste" #GypsyGrindset #Gyptrillionaireweakest romanian immigrant to ukraine mashallah
https://twitter.com/miaulodetz/status/1498021378221645825
Remember when I used to post in here... ah... good times.Yes, yes. Good times. Let's get back to your room sir.
Yes, yes. But let's get you back to your room as well sir.Remember when I used to post in here... ah... good times.Yes, yes. Good times. Let's get back to your room sir.Spoiler(https://moneyinc.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/shutterstock_717307528-750x500.jpg)[close]
Yes, yes. But let's get you back to your room as well sir.Remember when I used to post in here... ah... good times.Yes, yes. Good times. Let's get back to your room sir.Spoiler(https://moneyinc.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/shutterstock_717307528-750x500.jpg)[close]
Can you truely ”win” a war though? You can surrvive a war, and I truely hope Ukraine does, and that they manage to rebuild their country.
at this point if there is no major changes in the war, the ''looser'' will be the one that flinch first but by the looks of it we will have a summer of intense combatCan you truely ”win” a war though? You can surrvive a war, and I truely hope Ukraine does, and that they manage to rebuild their country.
yeah, in ukraine's case i'd argue surviving = winning
Can you truely ”win” a war though? You can surrvive a war, and I truely hope Ukraine does, and that they manage to rebuild their country.
yeah, in ukraine's case i'd argue surviving = winning
No, just like in every war everCan you truely ”win” a war though? You can surrvive a war, and I truely hope Ukraine does, and that they manage to rebuild their country.
yeah, in ukraine's case i'd argue surviving = winning
In some sense I suppose but do you really think the people who’ve lost their homes, their livelyhoods, their parents, their children, their husbands, their wives or their limbs will feel like they’ve won anything?
Hawk once aren’t you literally inbred?don't bully him, he cant stand up to defend himself
:oHawk once aren’t you literally inbred?don't bully him, he cant stand up to defend himself
Hawk once aren’t you literally inbred?
Hawk once aren’t you literally inbred?don't bully him, he cant stand up to defend himself
Hawk once aren’t you literally inbred?can you succeed at suicide
Hawk once aren’t you literally inbred?can you succeed at suicide
Rare gluk post about to drop...
you're all fucking wrong.
I feel unusually happy today
I feel unusually happy todayLiterally no one asked or cares
+ rep good postI feel unusually happy today
Maybe you were an abortion in a past life?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-61968607
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8aLtGwHqX8M
I feel unusually happy todayI'll bait.
Dear Unicorn,I feel unusually happy todayI'll bait.
Why?
Roe v Wade overturnedI feel unusually happy todayI'll bait.
Why?
Roe v Wade overturnedI feel unusually happy todayI'll bait.
Why?
Roe v Wade overturnedI feel unusually happy todayI'll bait.
Why?
mexicant is reaching levels of retardation I didn't know he could this is actually amazing
I love it when the government tells me what medical procedures I can and cannot have!Roe v Wade overturnedI feel unusually happy todayI'll bait.
Why?
Roe v Wade overturnedI feel unusually happy todayI'll bait.
Why?
mexicant is reaching levels of retardation I didn't know he could this is actually amazing
In your head rent free
https://ballotpedia.org/Moore_v._Harperthat case seems to be more focused on gerrymandering and maps, or am i reading it wrong? whats the vote portion
This is it friendlies. The second those lovely folks from the Federalist Society decide that the state legislatures can ignore voter tallies regardless of the majority, then you can kiss the corpse of this democracy goodbye.
Then again, it is "deeply rooted in tradition and history" for this country to go full blown fascistic.
I love it when the government tells me what medical procedures I can and cannot have!Roe v Wade overturnedI feel unusually happy todayI'll bait.
Why?
The why was more why are you happy at it getting overturned?
https://ballotpedia.org/Moore_v._Harperthat case seems to be more focused on gerrymandering and maps, or am i reading it wrong? whats the vote portion
This is it friendlies. The second those lovely folks from the Federalist Society decide that the state legislatures can ignore voter tallies regardless of the majority, then you can kiss the corpse of this democracy goodbye.
Then again, it is "deeply rooted in tradition and history" for this country to go full blown fascistic.
I love it when the government tells me what medical procedures I can and cannot have!Roe v Wade overturnedI feel unusually happy todayI'll bait.
Why?
The why was more why are you happy at it getting overturned?
I'm in favour of euthanasia. I think it should be legal for someone to have the right to choose to end their life.UNI SPEAKING FAX
Also, overturning Roe Vs Wade won't lower the number of abortions, it'll lower the number of safe abortions.
I'm in favour of euthanasia. I think it should be legal for someone to have the right to choose to end their life.
Also, overturning Roe Vs Wade won't lower the number of abortions, it'll lower the number of safe abortions.
what is your issue with abortion mr opinionsI'm in favour of euthanasia. I think it should be legal for someone to have the right to choose to end their life.
Also, overturning Roe Vs Wade won't lower the number of abortions, it'll lower the number of safe abortions.
You’re ignoring the group that would no longer see abortion as an option due to less access.
dishonest questionwhat is your issue with abortion mr opinionsI'm in favour of euthanasia. I think it should be legal for someone to have the right to choose to end their life.
Also, overturning Roe Vs Wade won't lower the number of abortions, it'll lower the number of safe abortions.
You’re ignoring the group that would no longer see abortion as an option due to less access.
dishonest questionwhat is your issue with abortion mr opinionsI'm in favour of euthanasia. I think it should be legal for someone to have the right to choose to end their life.
Also, overturning Roe Vs Wade won't lower the number of abortions, it'll lower the number of safe abortions.
You’re ignoring the group that would no longer see abortion as an option due to less access.
(https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/facebook/001/465/185/56b.jpg)
(https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/facebook/001/465/185/56b.jpg)
(https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/facebook/001/465/185/56b.jpg)
(https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/facebook/001/465/185/56b.jpg)
Fat insecure manchildren unite?
You can always doxx me again if that helps, I could use some more tears during my workout
Low IQ zone(https://i.imgur.com/Zuklbot.jpg)
Me to unicornMy dms are open
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hbzPEgROac4
Btw I'm not sure if that photo is doxxing someone else or if its a meme template... if its doxxing action will be taken.it was an NA politics meme template…. this thread was meant to be the bastion of free speech please stop censoring us
Low IQ zone
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2023_Czech_presidential_election coming soon
Me to unicornMy dms are open
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hbzPEgROac4
Private forums do not need to abide by free speech but I'm sure you already knew that :)Btw I'm not sure if that photo is doxxing someone else or if its a meme template... if its doxxing action will be taken.it was an NA politics meme template…. this thread was meant to be the bastion of free speech please stop censoring us
Low IQ zonehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2023_Czech_presidential_election coming soonMe to unicornMy dms are open
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hbzPEgROac4
hey guys we discuss american politics here either discuss that or leave
king shitLow IQ zonehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2023_Czech_presidential_election coming soonMe to unicornMy dms are open
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hbzPEgROac4
hey guys we discuss american politics here either discuss that or leave