Comments by "William Davis" (@williamdavis9562) on "20 VS 1" video.

@DarthFhenix55 It tends to boil down to a matter of translation and nuance. Different cultures had completely different methods to enact what we call "slavery" to a point it is even difficult to use the same name for the practice. So no I don't agree that slavery is slavery no matter the context, especially not to anyone who has done any reading on the topic. In some places slavery was practiced exactly the same was as indentured servant was in the west. In some cases it wasn't. There is far too much nuance and historical fact for me to agree with your statement.
9
@bilbobaggins3464 Reminds me of that story about Napoleon who in his hayday attacked a small garrison town governed by a 85 year old Ottoman Pasha. The old man proceeded to hold the city and handed Napoleon and his huge army a crippling defeat. The French<--- lol They're usually really good at defeating nations which have no military and fight back with rocks. When they have to fight a real army, it usually doesn't go too well for them.
8
@DarthFhenix55 Life was much different back then. People would prefer their kids to be "trafficked" if it gave them a path to power and influence instead of staying home and starving to death. You have to look at things in context. It isn't like taking kids today and putting them in the military. If you tried to extrapolate today's morality on a much different world 500 years ago, you wouldn't find anything that wouldn't trigger you.
8
@lahire4943 I'm sure even their allies were shocked the French didn't run away as soon as the arrow started flying. The modern French are better though (but only when they're fighting Africans with no weapons)
8
@FF-ct5dr No one is trying to be witty. Just trying to figure out why you're having an emotional meltdown over this. If you are French, I would have thought you would have surrendered by now lol
6
@debasishgoswami9896 That guy who couldn't walk is quite possible in the top 4 military commanders of all time.
5
@nolancer5974. It does make sense, during the first half of the Ottoman's reign the Serbians probably fought harder for the Ottomans than the Ottomans themselves. The Serbians were essentially their "secret weapon" for hundreds of years. Today they pawn themselves off as some sort of bulwark against the Ottomans lol
5
@thedonkey6704 You don't have to deny something to have to cope with the emotional pain it causes you.
5
@FF-ct5dr I'm not sure how holding things down 150 years ago has anything to do with the modern era. In the last 100 years France hasn't beaten a half way decent standing army. Even their own retired generations doubt their ability to do so. Their military is a paper tiger. You literally sound like an Egyptian guy for example citing some battle they won 1500 years ago to claim they have a competent military today. It is a ridiculous argument.
5
@lahire4943 How about after the Nepoleon era? Fact is the modern French military since the early 1900s is really only able to defeat African nations which throw stones. Educate yourself. You sound like Egyptians who claim to have a world beating military because of the accomplishments of the ancient Egyptians.
5
@Crisyx91 You seem triggered lol
4
This comment legit made me laugh.
4
@Zetact_ I'm not sure they'd say that because their army had just has many groups speaking different languages. That was the norm back then. Great comment either way.
3
@thedonkey6704 Yea that is what the Serbs always did. Bayezid knew they'd come through.
3
@lahire4943 The Ottomans and Brits carried the French in Crimea, what are you smoking? Bro you're literally clutching at straws, you might as well try to convince me the world is flat.
3
@lahire4943 You laughing hysterically and delving into cognitive dissonance isn't going to change two things. 1. The reality of my original post and how demonstrably true it is. 2. The fact you were emotionally triggered by those facts.
3
@n5304 you're literally referring to two dying and decaying groups of people about their glory in fighting each other 100s of years ago. I'm not English, I'm also aware that like France they're a dying civilization as well, with an army today almost as inept as France's. Two nations who are weak and irrelevant on the world stage. But have leaders who still think it is the 1800s and anyone gives a sh!t what either of these nations think. Both are simply vassal states of Washington. France today is what Algeria was in the 1800s. A colony.
3
@kevgasper3934 No one said America doesn't have a lot to account for. I fail to see how that excuses France's behavior though. That would be like you calling me out for murdering 10 people and my defense being "well the other guy killed 50 people" That doesn't excuse the 10 I killed does it? Find a better defense of France.
3
@n5304 It seems you were triggered when I pointed out simple facts. I also found it interesting in trying to prove the French arent' cowards, you blamed the English for the French being occupied by the Germans so easily. Or the fact that half of the French decide to work for the Germans. Hell if you're French, I'm shocked you didn't wave the white flag the moment this debate started lol
2
@SeptemberManHey I think the reason the French military is completely and utterly inept has a lot more to do with what transpired over the past 50 years than it does what happened during the Napoleonic era. A bit of evidence is that most of your formerly powerful neighbors also have the same exact problems. England is facing the same exact problem. Germany is on 100x worse shape militarily than France is. But on a grand scale, none of those three nations I mentioned have the ability, logistics, ammunition or manpower to wage a large scale war. Full stop.
2
@kevgasper3934 Is that your typical response when painted into a corner with nowhere to go?
2
@lahire4943 Was this one of the few times French soldiers performed well?
1
@FF-ct5dr Considering we're talking about the modern French army and their inability to wage war. It would make sense to keep the time frame short no? Or do you actually think the accomplishments of an army from 300 years make any difference to their military prowess today? This really isn't a complicated concept. Why are you so emotionally invested in this? So the French army sucks, who cares? Are you an officer in the French army or something and feel offended?
1
@SeptemberManHey I agree with basically everything you're saying. Yes the Russians did the bulk of the fighting in WW2, this is something which here in the west is ignored in history text books. Yes we Americans got our arses handed to us in Vietnam. You also forgot to mention the Taliban outlasted us in Afghanistan and the resistance pretty much pushed us out of Iraq. But none of that changes the fact the French would be speaking German right now if it wasn't for America opening up a huge front for the Germans in the west. If not German, then you'd be speaking Russian perhaps if the Russians kept coming from the east after destroying Germany. But it isn't too late, if we pull back. It is still possible the Russians will come for you lol Especially now that your completely inept and insane midget regime leader Macron keeps talking about sending troops to Ukraine. Picking a fight he can't possibly win or even come close to competing in. If France wants military adventures, it should stick to shooting Africans wielding rockets and AK47s. Something they can barely handle anyway.
1
@SeptemberManHey It is hard for me to wrap my head around as to how France would have evolved if it didn't fall right after the Napoleonic era. So I'll take your word for it I guess. There is something to be said about nations functioning base on the whims of globalist banker's terms. A lot of true there.
1
The biggest nemesis to the French are simply men with weapons.
1
@kevgasper3934 You can’t counter it, claim it isn’t even worth commenting on. Yet you commented on it. This can’t be serious lol
1