Youtube comments of Mar (@swunt10).

  1. 493
  2. 455
  3. 295
  4. 238
  5. 169
  6. 164
  7. 156
  8. 117
  9. 103
  10. 96
  11. 92
  12. 85
  13. 83
  14. 77
  15. 73
  16. 71
  17. 67
  18. 65
  19. 63
  20. 62
  21. 60
  22. 59
  23. 59
  24. 55
  25. 54
  26. 50
  27. 48
  28. 48
  29. 48
  30. 46
  31. 46
  32. 46
  33. 45
  34. 45
  35. 44
  36. 43
  37. 42
  38. 42
  39. 40
  40. 39
  41. 38
  42. 37
  43. 37
  44. 37
  45. 37
  46. 36
  47. 35
  48. 34
  49. 34
  50. 33
  51. 32
  52. 32
  53. 30
  54. 29
  55. 28
  56. 28
  57. 28
  58. 28
  59. 26
  60. 26
  61. 26
  62. 25
  63. 25
  64. 25
  65. 24
  66. 24
  67. 24
  68. 24
  69. 23
  70. 23
  71. 23
  72. 23
  73. 23
  74. 23
  75. 22
  76. 22
  77. 22
  78. 22
  79. 21
  80. 21
  81. 21
  82. 21
  83. 20
  84. 20
  85. 20
  86. 20
  87. 20
  88. 19
  89. 19
  90. 19
  91. 19
  92. 19
  93. 19
  94. 18
  95. 18
  96. 18
  97. 18
  98. 18
  99. 18
  100. 18
  101. 18
  102. 17
  103. 17
  104. 17
  105. 17
  106. 17
  107. 16
  108. 16
  109. 16
  110. 16
  111. 16
  112. 16
  113. 15
  114. 15
  115. 15
  116. 15
  117. 14
  118. 14
  119. 14
  120. 14
  121. 14
  122. 14
  123. 14
  124. 14
  125. 14
  126. 13
  127. 13
  128. 13
  129. 13
  130. 13
  131. 13
  132. 13
  133. 12
  134. 12
  135. 12
  136. 12
  137. 12
  138. 12
  139. 12
  140. 12
  141. 12
  142. 12
  143. 12
  144. 12
  145. 12
  146. 12
  147. 12
  148. 12
  149. 12
  150. 12
  151. 11
  152. 11
  153. 11
  154. 11
  155. 11
  156. 11
  157. 11
  158. 11
  159. 11
  160. 11
  161. 11
  162. 11
  163. 11
  164. 11
  165. 11
  166. 11
  167. 11
  168. 11
  169. 11
  170. 10
  171. 10
  172. 10
  173. 10
  174. 10
  175. 10
  176. 10
  177. 10
  178. 10
  179. 10
  180. 10
  181. 10
  182. 10
  183. 10
  184. 10
  185. 10
  186. 10
  187. 9
  188. 9
  189. 9
  190. 9
  191. 9
  192. 9
  193. 9
  194. 9
  195. 9
  196. 9
  197. 9
  198. 9
  199. 9
  200. 9
  201. 9
  202. 9
  203. 9
  204. 9
  205. 9
  206. 9
  207. 9
  208. 9
  209. 9
  210. 9
  211. 9
  212. 9
  213. 9
  214. 9
  215. 9
  216. 9
  217. 8
  218. 8
  219. 8
  220. 8
  221. 8
  222. 8
  223. Eli Kupesok you haven't proven anything. the euro fighter typhoon has an RCS of 0.32m2 while the f35 has an RCS of 0.19m2. see? numbers.. ^^ and yes the f-35 is 20 year old tech and concepts. as an aerospace engineer I can tell you that's how it works. concepts and tech from the 90's are now going into production. eg. they have to reactivate old chip production machinery that museums can only dream about but that's how the industry works. radar, unlike planes, get new iterations ever 5 years or so. that's why radar always works and apart from some small optical back ups that the german and dutch navy use, no one even bothers with it. everything shows up on radar. planes play catch up. it's slower than a f-16^^ lol. slower than the budget national guard cessna^^ and yes it can't turn. simple aerodynamics. small wings, less lift, slower turns/low sustained turn speed. very simple stuff. not to mention the weight of that little fat plane. if you only need bvr then why bother with a fighter? any old stealth plane could do it. you see? in contrast to stealth bombers they need a fighter because stealth doesn't work as advertised. you need to be mobile and fast because stealth isn't going to help you outside of the bombing 3rd world countries comfort zone. btw if you need a useful plane to get into defended air space to bomb some enemy AA, the tornado ground hugger has you covered. 30-40 years old and still called in to be first to bomb enemy AA. because you don't defeat radar with stealth but by flying low and actually carrying loads of ammunition at the same time. can you understand that? can you get it throw your thick skull into your tiny brain?
    8
  224. 8
  225. 8
  226. 8
  227. 8
  228. 8
  229. 8
  230. 8
  231. 8
  232. 8
  233. 8
  234. 8
  235. 8
  236. 8
  237. 8
  238. 8
  239. 8
  240. 8
  241. 8
  242. 8
  243. 8
  244. 7
  245. 7
  246. 7
  247. 7
  248. 7
  249. 7
  250. 7
  251. 7
  252. 7
  253. 7
  254. 7
  255. 7
  256. 7
  257. 7
  258. 7
  259. 7
  260. 7
  261. 7
  262. 7
  263. 7
  264. 7
  265. 7
  266. 7
  267. 7
  268. 7
  269. 7
  270. 7
  271. 7
  272. 7
  273. 7
  274. 7
  275. 7
  276. 7
  277. 7
  278. 7
  279. 7
  280. 7
  281. 7
  282. 7
  283. 7
  284. 6
  285. 6
  286. 6
  287. 6
  288. 6
  289. 6
  290. 6
  291. 6
  292. 6
  293. 6
  294. 6
  295. 6
  296. 6
  297. 6
  298. 6
  299. 6
  300. 6
  301. 6
  302. 6
  303. 6
  304. 6
  305. 6
  306. 6
  307. 6
  308. 6
  309. 6
  310.  @STKS1991  Nice diversion from your previous lie and your lack of a response. I can also do diversions. From defensenews "British Army admits more delays in fielding enough combat forces By Andrew Chuter LONDON — The limitations of the British Army’s ability to field modernized armored fighting forces in the 2020s have been laid bare in evidence submitted by the military to the parliamentary Defence Committee. The Army admitted that by 2025 it would only be able to field a combat division consisting of just a single maneuver brigade and an interim maneuver support brigade. One analyst here wondered what impact the admission would have on Britain’s allies. "If you are the chief of staff of the U.S. Army, which still retains considerable heavy forces, you are going to really wonder how much the British Army is a warfighting army, " said Ben Barry, senior fellow for land warfare at the International Institute for Strategic Studies think tank in London. “It’s quite jaw-dropping. One of the key takeaways from this evidence is the Army can’t field two armored infantry brigades,” said Barry. “The Army was mandated [in the 2015 review] to deliver two armored infantry brigades, whereas they are now saying they can only generate one. They have enough vehicles for three infantry armored brigades, but my very strong suspicion is they haven’t been spending money on spares. If they haven’t got sufficient spare parts they will only risk sending one brigade on operations,” said Barry." Quite the joke compared to germany's 2 full tank divisions. But I'm sure after Rheinmetall helped the helpless british to rebuild their useless tanks into something that is somewhat modern and then donate them some proper Boxer to help with mobility the british might be able to field at least some small force by 2030 or so. Until then they are not even worth of consideration in the european theater, just a loud mouthed side show.
    6
  311. 6
  312. 6
  313. 6
  314. 6
  315. 6
  316. 6
  317. 6
  318. 6
  319. 6
  320. 6
  321. 6
  322. 6
  323. 6
  324. 6
  325. 6
  326. 6
  327. most of them are russian trolls pretending to be americans, some are useful idiots (either russian expats living in the west or our own conspiracy nuts or normal patriotic russians) turned by russian propaganda. they are only a couple of hundred in total, making a lot of noise. As europeans we have some experience with that. there are great articles and docus out there about how soviet- and putin russian propaganda works and who are the people behind this holistic propaganda warfare approach. it's all about drowning out normal conversation by flooding forums and comment section with really stupid and obnoxious spam posts so that you lose interest to even read through them because for every real post there are 10 spam posts. that way they effectively block communication. their conspiracy theories and stories and explanations are numerous and change all the time and don't even fit together but they don't need to since it's all about drowning out the truth and reason. if there are 10 different explanations nobody has the time or resources to filter out the one true story. that way they effectively block the truth. they try to infiltrate or even start all sorts of movements and groups and stories and agendas even opposing ones, doesn't matter if it's pro or against something or if it's from here or there to the point where you can never be sure if you are doing your own thing or something infiltrated by the kremlin that's how putin used to make sure everyone in russia falls in line because even opposition groups and anti putin internet sites can be under the kremlins control, you just never know only 1 out of 10 might be run and not influenced by real people. that way they effectively divide the population. in the end they killed communication, truth and divided everyone. it's called salami tactics by most people. slice by slice they wiggle everyone down. it's never to obvious. there is no smoking gun. it's just little by little.
    6
  328. 6
  329. 6
  330. 6
  331.  @gazpachopolice7211  I always had a different take on who started a world war. To me the logical start of a world war is the moment, the decision, that turned a "normal" conflict in a world war. WW1 was therefore started by germany or russia because their actions turned a local conflict into a world war WW2 was started by france/UK because their actions turned a local conflict into a world war. Before these actions there was no world war, just some local war or conflict that would have ended in no time, but after these actions (declarations of war really) a world war existed. I never liked the idea of declaring a country the starter of a world war based on them being the first in a more or less causal chain of events that turned into world wars eventually. Because technically when germany invaded poland in 1939 (as did the soviet union, people conveniently forget that all of the time) or if you prefer japan invaded china, that didn't start a world war, just a local regular sized war. Only when other countries joined these wars, did that then create a world war. It's a bit like the US invasion of Iraq, just a regular war, but what if china would have decided to get involved by declaring war on the US, that would certainly then be a world war. But would we honestly say the US started that hypothetical world war just because they started the first local war? No. We would say china started ww3 because they got involved and their involvement turned it into a world war. So why do we not say the same about ww1 and ww2? That would only be logical. But I seem to be alone in thinking that way.
    6
  332. 6
  333. 6
  334. 6
  335. 6
  336. 6
  337. 6
  338. 6
  339. 5
  340. 5
  341. 5
  342. 5
  343. 5
  344. 5
  345. 5
  346. 5
  347. 5
  348. 5
  349. 5
  350. 5
  351. 5
  352. 5
  353. 5
  354. 5
  355. 5
  356. 5
  357. 5
  358. 5
  359. 5
  360. 5
  361. 5
  362. 5
  363. 5
  364. 5
  365. 5
  366. 5
  367. 5
  368. 5
  369. 5
  370. 5
  371. 5
  372. 5
  373. 5
  374. 5
  375. 5
  376. 5
  377. 5
  378. 5
  379. 5
  380. 5
  381. 5
  382. 5
  383. 5
  384. 5
  385. 5
  386. 5
  387. 5
  388. 5
  389. 5
  390. 5
  391. 5
  392. 5
  393. 5
  394. 5
  395. 5
  396. 5
  397. 5
  398. 5
  399. 5
  400. 5
  401. 5
  402. 5
  403. 5
  404. 5
  405. 5
  406. 5
  407. 4
  408. 4
  409. 4
  410. 4
  411. 4
  412. 4
  413. 4
  414. 4
  415. 4
  416. 4
  417. 4
  418. 4
  419. 4
  420. 4
  421. 4
  422. 4
  423. 4
  424. 4
  425. 4
  426. 4
  427. 4
  428. 4
  429. 4
  430. 4
  431. 4
  432. 4
  433. 4
  434. 4
  435. 4
  436. 4
  437. 4
  438. 4
  439. 4
  440. 4
  441. 4
  442. 4
  443. 4
  444. 4
  445. 4
  446. 4
  447. Stop the boats and you stop the killing. Leftist are to blame for this just like they are to blame for the outrageous migrant crime and Islamisation in the UK. You don't invite these people, you send them back immediately and this all stops within no time. If you let them in illegally and give them free money for live, then more will come. Crime increases and boat drowning increases. Leftists are murderers. Strong border defenses, no free money for illegals and a fast acting remigration policy is the only thing that can stop the 3rd world colonization of our European countries. We are the natives here, it's out land and we don't need these people coming here colonizing us. They are a burden on our society and dangerous, cause a housing crisis and outbreed us. It's a genocide on us white people and it needs to stop before it's too late. Fuck leftism and their hatred for their own kind and stop the illegal money coming out of countries like Russia, China and Israel that pays for most of this illegal migration of brown people into white countries. They want our destruction, they want to see our geocide. It's on us to be stronger and resilient. Stop migration and you solve nearly all problems the west has today. Migration only weakens us, from crime, low wages, billions on social security spending, high taxes to cover the social security spending on migrants , housing crisis, knife crime, rape epidemic, Islamic terrorism, unsafe schools and the resulting low birth rate of white people (high taxes, no housing, crime ridden streets and unsafe schools cause low birth rates). We have to stand together and Re-migrate on a large scale.
    4
  448. 4
  449. 4
  450. 4
  451. 4
  452. 4
  453. 4
  454. 4
  455. 4
  456. 4
  457. 4
  458. 4
  459. 4
  460. 4
  461. 4
  462. 4
  463. 4
  464. 4
  465. 4
  466. 4
  467. 4
  468. 4
  469. 4
  470. 4
  471. 4
  472. 4
  473. 4
  474. 4
  475. 4
  476. 4
  477. 4
  478. 4
  479. 4
  480. 4
  481. 4
  482. 4
  483. 4
  484. 4
  485. 4
  486. 4
  487. 4
  488. 4
  489. 4
  490. 4
  491. 4
  492. 4
  493. 4
  494. 4
  495. 4
  496. 4
  497. 4
  498. 4
  499. 4
  500. 4
  501. 4
  502. 4
  503. 4
  504. 4
  505. 4
  506. 4
  507. 4
  508. 4
  509. 4
  510. 4
  511. 4
  512. 4
  513. 4
  514. 4
  515. 4
  516. 4
  517. 4
  518. 4
  519. 4
  520. 3
  521. 3
  522. 3
  523. 3
  524. 3
  525. wars can be won against bigger countries. nobody said anything about wars of attrition. that's something you made up. at the time nobody had any interest in a war of attrition. everyone was working to avoid that and they nearly succeeded.  as he explains at great length. if the japanese had attacked in the east, moscow had fallen and germany would have easily won on the eastern front, then not even the US and UK could have successfully invaded europe even if they had all the time in the world. that would have been impossible if the wehrmacht could concentrate entirely on defending the coast in western europe. also at 25:10 he said germany produced 40.000 warplanes and the UK 28.000 so I don't know where you get the idea from that the UK produce more planes than germany but I might be wrong here. other mistakes you made include the idea that neville chamberlain was wrong. well he wasn't. the idea that formed europe after the 1ww was called ethnic self determination. sudeten germany joining germany was exactly that, so the UK had no reason to protest and they didn't. maybe we should start the 3rd wolrd war right now since russia annexed the crimea??  thank god you are a nobody, if you had something to say it would be worse than what happened when the nazis where in power. at least the nazis where prepared to attack russia. we are clearly not ready at the moment and thanks to nuclear bombs probably never will. the next point is, attacking civilian german cities as a threat if germany stopped to honor the versailles treaty, it's not only ludicrous and a crime against humanity it would also make the UK the aggressor and the reason for ww2. the next obvious mistake you made is to confuse the rheinland with the ruhr area. the rheinland has almost no industry worth mentioning. besides that france invaded and annexed the ruhr area in the 1920's which caused the german hyperinflation and thereby paved the way for the nazis in the first place. it was also a war of aggression and against international law but since it was france and not germany who did it nobody talks about it. take those points and think about them and don't just reply with any stupid comment of your own. if you are not advice resistant and if you know a bit about history and if you can think logically, then I'm sure you will learn something. no need to get defensive. there is nothing wrong with being wrong as long as one learns from mistakes.
    3
  526. 3
  527. 3
  528. 3
  529. 3
  530. 3
  531. 3
  532. 3
  533. 3
  534. 3
  535. 3
  536. 3
  537. 3
  538. 3
  539. 3
  540. 3
  541. 3
  542. 3
  543. 3
  544. 3
  545. 3
  546. 3
  547. 3
  548. 3
  549. 3
  550. 3
  551. 3
  552. 3
  553. 3
  554. 3
  555. 3
  556. 3
  557. 3
  558. 3
  559. 3
  560. 3
  561. 3
  562. 3
  563. 3
  564. 3
  565. 3
  566. ohmybrowncow germany is sending them weapons free of charge. Full list of the german equipment (I'll try give a translation, link is below): General equipment (1st and 2nd deliveries in 2014): 700 radio devices, 4000 helmets, 20 metal detectors, 30 mine probes, 40 munitions defusal kits, 680 Night vision goggles, 4000 vests, 25 field kitchens, 125 tents, 1500 binoculars, 4000 ballistic glasses, 270 Medkits additional 3rd delivery (2015): 6000 helmets, 1500 binoculars, 4000 gas masks (+ replacement filters), 30 mine probes + unspecified amounts (it says "large amounts") of winter clothing and medical material weapons (1st and second in 2014): 8000 G3 (+ 2 million rounds) 40 MG3 (+ 1 million rounds) 8000 G36 (+ 4 million rounds) 30 MILAN ATGM (+ 500 missiles) 200 Panzerfaust 3 (+2500 rockets) 40 Carl-Gustav-launchers (+1000 muniotion, flares only) 100 Flare guns (+4000 flares) 10000 hand grenades additional 3rd delivery (2015): 30 MILAN ATGM (+ 500 missiles) 200 Panzerfaust 3 (+2400 rockets) 4000 G3 (+2 million rounds) 10 MG3 (508,000 rounds) another 4 mio rounds for the G36 10000 hand grenades vehicles (1st and 2nd delivery in 2014): 40 Wolf unarmored (basically Mercedes G wagon military version) 20 Wolf partially armored 40 Unimog trucks 1 Fuel truck 5 Dingo 1 additional 3rd delivery (2015) 10 Unimog trucks (Ambulance version) 10 Dingo http://www.bundeswehr.de/portal/a/bwde/!ut/p/c4/DcoxDoAwCADAt_gB2N38hbpRJQ1pRVPAJr7e5tbDHQelVzK53EoVV9wOmVOH1E8GFjVi_xguMRuDFaRRAQprweahGZ-yTD8tichm/
    3
  567. 3
  568. 3
  569. 3
  570. 3
  571. 3
  572. 3
  573. 3
  574. 3
  575. 3
  576. 3
  577. 3
  578. 3
  579. 3
  580. +alaa llayan I don't know whats funny here sex-slaves, which are called in the Qur’an by the name milk al-yamin, “that which your right hands possess” [Koran 4:24] The mufti said, “With the law of sex slaves, there must be a Muslim nation at war with a Christian nation, or a nation which is not of the religion, not of the religion of Islam. And there must be prisoners of war.” “Is this forbidden by Islam?” I asked. “Absolutely not. “Allah allows Muslims to rape non-Muslim women in order to humiliate them, claims Islamic professor,” Zee News, January 17, 2016: Washington: A female Islamic professor has claimed that Allah has allowed Muslim men to rape non-Muslim women in order to ‘humiliate’ them, report stated. Suad Saleh, who is a professor from the renowned Al-Azhar University in Cairo, Egypt, made the claims during an interview to a TV channel. According to The Inquisitr News report, in the video posted by LiveLeak, Saleh says that Allah has given the Muslim men a way to have sexual relations with slave women that is ‘legitimate’. and directly from the koran Abu Sirma said to Abu Sa’id al Khadri (Allah he pleased with him): 0 Abu Sa’id, did you hear Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) mentioning al-’azl? He said: Yes, and added: We went out with Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) on the expedition to the Bi’l-Mustaliq and took captive some excellent Arab women; and we desired them, for we were suffering from the absence of our wives, (but at the same time) we also desired ransom for them. So we decided to have sexual intercourse with them but by observing ‘azl (Withdrawing the male sexual organ before emission of semen to avoid conception). But we said: We are doing an act whereas Allah’s Messenger is amongst us; why not ask him? So we asked Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him), and he said: It does not matter if you do not do it, for every soul that is to be born up to the Day of Resurrection will be born. (Sahih Muslim 3371)
    3
  581. 3
  582. 3
  583. ewt415 I'm not even a BMW fan. btw the LFA is 4 times more expensive than the i8. so again you are comparing apples with oranges. you do realize that a ultimate driving machine doesn't need to be the one with the biggest engine right? or are you american? luxury for you guys is making something bigger. almost all bmw's are ultimate driving machines(especially the M5 and M3/4). none of them is the fastest car in the world but nobody ever said that that's the definition. and revolutionary? well which one of the cars you mentioned has carbon, hybrid and german luxury/design? all that for the price of a normal sports car. what would you call revolutionary? if it could fly. get real kid. you lost the argument the moment you decided to rant without knowing the facts. btw you might have noticed how the guy before me and I myself pointed out that it's a sportscar. the guy in the video clearly compares the i8 several times with the 911 and R8. a supercar is nothing more than the name for a sportscar that is more exotic then the rest. the reason is, there is a gap in the english language for small sports cars like the cayman, audi TT and alfa romeo C4, (all around 50k) and the bigger sports cars like the 911 and R8 (around 100k). because of that and because exotic sports cars can be named super cars you could label the i8 as a super car simply because it is superior to it's sports car competitors in terms of exoticness. nobody would would by a car because of i's label. don't you worry that some poor old millionaire walks into a car dealer and ends up with an i8 instead of the 4 times more expensive car that he actually wanted.
    3
  584. 3
  585. 3
  586. 3
  587. 3
  588. 3
  589. 3
  590. 3
  591. 3
  592. 3
  593. 3
  594. 3
  595. 3
  596. 3
  597. 3
  598. 3
  599. 3
  600. 3
  601. 3
  602. 3
  603. 3
  604. 3
  605. 3
  606. 3
  607. 3
  608. 3
  609. 3
  610. 3
  611. This is really nonsense from a scientific standpoint. Cows are, like all other animals, co2 neutral and other gases animals produce, like methane, always break down into co2 (which again is co2 neutral, co2->plants->cows->ch4->co2->plants). There is no long term effect, nothing accumulates, nothing gets added, it's a circle. It is really a pointless debate. This is really a big facepalm moment for humanity. People have fallen for this narrative that cow's methan is somehow heating up the planet. It clearly isn't. No methane accumulates. we already have as much methan in the atmospehere as we will ever have even in 1 million years in the future when we keep all our cows. No methane can accumulate, it all breaks down into co2 and the balance is already reaced for the number of cows we have. The only way to get more methane into the athmosphere would be to have more cows because than a new balance would be reached (again with no long term effect) I hate that people have fallen for this fallacy. As an engineer it worries me that people lack simple logic and math skills and our society is then doomed to fall for these obviously nonsensical neratives. Yes cows produce methane, as do all other animals, but it's not methane from fossile fuel, it's methane from gras and bacteria, it's short term and part of natrues cycle. Nothing gets added, nothing accumulates. It's always at ballance for the current set up. We could have less cows but it would make next to no difference. Flying in a fossile fueled aircraft to make this "documentary" has done more long term, actually accumulating damage to the atmosphere than any number of cows could ever do.
    3
  612. 3
  613. 3
  614. 3
  615. 3
  616. 3
  617. 3
  618. 3
  619. 3
  620. @Arfur Fuxxakes the virus is known to be a chimera and it most probably was a standard gain of function experiment done in china most probably by the chinese military. in china civil and military science are not clearly separated. the fact that some very loud (and only a few) virologist very early on said categorically that this virus just can't be man made is like barking dogs (some western scientists worked happily with chinese scientists for money and lack of standards in china and it's better to be a virologist hero during a pandemic than to be part of the group who created this virus so of course most virologists say the virus is natural even though all evidence points in a different directon). there is no scientific proof this virus is not man made (this can't be proven since about 2001 viruses can be gene manipulated at will without leaving any sort of traces in the genome) and the fact it's a chimera (a combination of 3 viruses), the fact it has a working furin cleavage site, the fact the viruses mutations started in October 2019, the fact in october 2019 there was an accident at a wuhan lab and mobile phone data shows the entire area around the lab was closed for a week, the fact this new virus can jump to all sorts of species where natural viruses need decades to jump to just one new species, the fact one of the viruses used to create this one, the pangulin corona virus was discovered in 2013 but the chinese only told the world about this new corona virus in 2020 (the only reason for that is military security and working on their new virus without telling the world about it) the fact the virus came from wuhan the very city where the chinese do their gain of function experiments on corona viruses it's just very obvious this virus not only came from a lab but was also created in that lab. but I know, this is just a conspiracy theory and I'm being silly. just wait a few years and it will all come out. it's so obvious this can't be covered up by a single nature article by a small group of scientists with dirt on their hands. the media really should ask more questions and not just swallow every bait.
    3
  621. 3
  622. 3
  623. 3
  624. 3
  625. 3
  626. 3
  627. 3
  628. 3
  629. 3
  630. 3
  631. 3
  632. 3
  633. 3
  634. 3
  635.  @finnmorton6510  ja geltendes Recht ist schon klar aber die "politischen Vergehen" wie Hitlerwitze machen oder was heute schon alles unter 'Rassismus' fällt z.b. "racial profiling" (früher hieß das "die Polizei kennt ihre Pappenheimer", deswegen werden vergleichsweise weniger alte Omas kontrolliert als schwarze Drogendealer im Park) oder aber auch nur die "falsche Meinung haben" z.b. Million junger muslimischer Männer hier rein zu lassen, sind nicht geltendes Recht sonder tagesaktuelle politische Ideologie. Wer darf da entscheiden was "besser" ist, was die "falsche Meinung" ist? Ein Links-Grünes Gutmenschengremium von Gleichstellungsbeauftragten und 'Anti Rassismus Experten', das dann entscheidet ob dein Leben und Karriere jetzt zerstört werden weil dein Whatsapp Hitlerwitz nicht ankam? oder weil du die falschen Leute einmal zu oft kontrolliert hast? oder du einmal zu oft mit unliebsamen Menschen Kontakt hattest? oder du eine andere Meinung zu Migration hast? Was vor 10 Jahren noch gesunder Menschenverstand war ist heute schon "Rechtsextrem" z.b. Merkel Aussage über Zuwanderung von vor ein Paar Jahren. Nach heutigem stand sind auch 5/6 aller Menschen in einem Kegel/Fußball/Dackelverein Rechtsextremisten wegen Aussagen die vor 20 Jahren noch CDU und SPD Usus waren. Wie weit will man noch in die Links-Grüne Ecke um "besser" zu werden? Wir formen einen neuen 'besseren' Menschen der keine Meinung mehr haben darf außer die aktuelle Parole? Wer anders Denkt und nicht "gut" ist wird dann 'zersetzt' von der 'besseren Staatssicherheit' oder wie genau darf man sich das vorstellen was hier "besser" ist?
    3
  636. 3
  637. 3
  638. 3
  639. 3
  640. 3
  641. 3
  642. 3
  643. 3
  644. 3
  645. 3
  646. 3
  647. 3
  648. 3
  649. I would rather have half the population but live among germans than this migrant shitstorm which will destroy us and half of europe forever. Leftists fucked us over, it's a genocide of us germans and many germans only now start to realize that. The leftist politics, media and NGOs hate white people, especially germans (basically themselves) and many prominent figures even said that out loud. We are so stupid to not have stopped these traitors before it's was too late. The Islamisation of germany (and france and the UK) is the worst thing that will happen to us ever. No plague, no war could do that much lasting damage. We need to ban the totalitarian islam, it's not a religion, it's an ideology that is invading us, attacking us. We also need to deport islamists and their supporters (that's probably more than half of all muslims or more) There is no other way. Everyone I know agrees and we all hate this migrant politics. I don't personally know anyone who is in favor of this fake "asylum" nonsense of letting everyone in, even the migrants I know are warning against the people that are coming in. The next elections will be interesting but I'm afraid it's too late. The propaganda from politicians, the government media and all the leftists, keeps most people out of touch with the grim reality of our genocide happening right now. Most people are simply too old, not interested, brainwashed by leftism or just too busy with their lives to inform themselves about this issue outside the government- and leftist media. If more people would realize that this is our death sentence, that we are destroying ourselves and our country, they would stand up or at least vote differently.
    3
  650. 3
  651. 3
  652. 3
  653. 3
  654. 3
  655. 3
  656. 3
  657. 3
  658. 3
  659. 3
  660. 3
  661. 3
  662. 3
  663. 3
  664. 3
  665. 3
  666. 3
  667. 3
  668. 3
  669. 3
  670. 3
  671. 3
  672. 3
  673. 3
  674. 3
  675. 3
  676. 3
  677. 3
  678. 3
  679. 3
  680. 3
  681. 3
  682. 3
  683. 3
  684. 3
  685. if you believe these manual field guns, that are basically static, have any kind of chance against something like a PzH2000, then you are just wrong. all the hate against "robots" vs men is so populistic. these field guns are full of technology as well. they require trucks to get them around, they need sensors and computers for targeting and calculation trajectories and most if not all of them use power assisted systems to move all that metal around and what do they get for maybe using 30% less technology compared to a PzH2000? nothing. they are vulnerable against counter battery fire which makes them absolutely useless or even suicidal in a peer to peer conflict, they require more personnel, which is the bane of modern western militaries, they can't keep up with mobile infantry and especially armoured divisions/brigades, they can't be used for direct fire like old 88 mm could or the PzH2000 can so in a pinch they can't protect themselves or be used as a last line of defence when the enemy breaks through and even in a counter insurgency type of scenario they are not all that great. who wants to set up a field gun when you fight taliban/ISIS? there is no front line you can hide behind so you basically need another unit as protection. even the taliban use mortars and the crews of field guns have no protection against that either. so what are field guns actually useful for? nothing really. also don't be cocky about 'humans always being able to load faster than machines'. a PzH2000 can fire 3 rounds in 10 seconds. tell yourself whatever you will about 'when' and 'if' some sort of mythical super duper proficient crew .. no 3 rounds in 10 seconds is just on another level.
    3
  686. 3
  687. 3
  688. 3
  689. 3
  690. 3
  691. 3
  692. 3
  693. 3
  694. 3
  695. 3
  696. 3
  697. 3
  698. 3
  699. 3
  700. 3
  701. 3
  702. 3
  703. 3
  704. 3
  705. 3
  706. 3
  707. 3
  708. 3
  709. 3
  710. none of that contradicts any of what I said. in fact it proves what I said. thanks. also don't get fooled by constant calls for more research. that's how scientists get founded. I work at a research institute and one thing you will never hear from us is that we are done and there is no need for more research. another thing you will never hear is that there is one perfect and simple solution for most all problems. that's what you need to know when you talk about science. but let me tell you. quite often there is a simple solution for most problems and when it comes to zero gravity the simple and only solution is weight training. lifting increasingly heavy weights until you reach a point where you are ok with yourself. you only need ca 10 different exercises split over two days (legs, upper body) and 2x10 reps for each exercise. even if you spend the rest of the day sleeping/zero G you will gain/retain you muscle mass and with that bone density and even most cardiovascular health. that's just a fact of life. given that you get enough food you will get used to lifting a certain weight after proper training, meaning you can lift slightly more the next time or at least the same weight. that's how nature works. yes you don't need space doctors and fancy research to get to that conclusion that's why you will never hear that from fancy space doctors. but it's true and I could prove it if I would get funding and clearance to experiment with an astronaut for 6 months on board the ISS^^ like that's going to happen.
    3
  711. 3
  712. 3
  713. 3
  714. 3
  715. 3
  716. 3
  717. 3
  718. 3
  719. 3
  720. 3
  721. 3
  722. 3
  723. 3
  724. 3
  725. 3
  726. 3
  727. 3
  728. 3
  729. 3
  730. 3
  731. 3
  732. 3
  733. 3
  734. 3
  735. 3
  736. 3
  737. 3
  738. 3
  739. 3
  740. 3
  741. 3
  742. 3
  743. 3
  744. 3
  745. 3
  746. 3
  747. 3
  748. 3
  749. 3
  750. 3
  751. 3
  752. 3
  753. 3
  754. 3
  755. 3
  756. 3
  757. 3
  758. 3
  759. 2
  760. 2
  761. 2
  762. 2
  763. 2
  764. 2
  765. 2
  766. 2
  767. 2
  768. 2
  769. 2
  770. 2
  771. 2
  772. 2
  773. 2
  774. 2
  775. James The "Верховная Рада Украины приняла Закон «О внесении изменений в некоторые законодательные акты Украины об усилении ответственности военнослужащих, предоставлении командирам дополнительных прав и возложении обязанностей в особый период» Законодательный акт возлагает на командиров обязанность принимать решительные меры по прекращению совершения уголовного правонарушения подчиненными и восстановлению правопорядка. Закон также вводит административную ответственность за совершение военных административных правонарушений. В частности, введена ответственность за отказ от выполнения законных требований командира (начальника), небрежное отношение к военной службе, нарушение правил несения боевого дежурства, нарушение правил несения пограничной службы, распитие алкогольных, слабоалкогольных напитков военнослужащими. Командирам предоставлено право составлять административные протоколы. Закон решает вопрос отбывания наказания в дисциплинарном батальоне военнослужащими военной службы по контракту и призванными во время мобилизации. Соответствующие изменения внесены в Уголовный кодекс, Кодекс Украины об административных правонарушениях, Уголовно-исполнительный кодекс, Дисциплинарный устав, Устав внутренней службы, Устав гарнизонной и часовой служб Вооруженных Сил Украины и Закон «О социальной и правовой защите военнослужащих и членов их семей». Закон принят с учетом предложений. Соответствующий законопроект зарегистрирован под №1762."
    2
  776. 2
  777. 2
  778. 2
  779. 2
  780. 2
  781. 2
  782. 2
  783. 2
  784. 2
  785. 2
  786. 2
  787. 2
  788. 2
  789. 2
  790. 2
  791. 2
  792. 2
  793. 2
  794. 2
  795. 2
  796. 2
  797. 2
  798. 2
  799. 2
  800. 2
  801. 2
  802. 2
  803. 2
  804. 2
  805. 2
  806. 2
  807. 2
  808. 2
  809. 2
  810. 2
  811. 2
  812. 2
  813. 2
  814. 2
  815. 2
  816. 2
  817. 2
  818. 2
  819. 2
  820. 2
  821. 2
  822. 2
  823. 2
  824. 2
  825. 2
  826. 2
  827. 2
  828. 2
  829. 2
  830. 2
  831. 2
  832. 2
  833. 2
  834. 2
  835. 2
  836. 2
  837. 2
  838. 2
  839. 2
  840. 2
  841. 2
  842. 2
  843. 2
  844. 2
  845. 2
  846. 2
  847. 2
  848. 2
  849. 2
  850. 2
  851. 2
  852. 2
  853. 2
  854. 2
  855. 2
  856. 2
  857. 2
  858. 2
  859. 2
  860. 2
  861. 2
  862. 2
  863. 2
  864. 2
  865. 2
  866. 2
  867. 2
  868. 2
  869. 2
  870. 2
  871. 2
  872. 2
  873. 2
  874. 2
  875. 2
  876. 2
  877. 2
  878. 2
  879. 2
  880. 2
  881. 2
  882. 2
  883. 2
  884. 2
  885. 2
  886. 2
  887. 2
  888. 2
  889. 2
  890. 2
  891. 2
  892. 2
  893. 2
  894. 2
  895. 2
  896. 2
  897. 2
  898. 2
  899. 2
  900. 2
  901. 2
  902. 2
  903. 2
  904. 2
  905. 2
  906. 2
  907. 2
  908. 2
  909. 2
  910. 2
  911. 2
  912. 2
  913. 2
  914. 2
  915. 2
  916. 2
  917. 2
  918. 2
  919. 2
  920. 2
  921. 2
  922. 2
  923. 2
  924. 2
  925. 2
  926. 2
  927. 2
  928. 2
  929. 2
  930. 2
  931. 2
  932. 2
  933. 2
  934. it's just wrong to make this so anglo centric. the british never came up with their own money nor did anyone use their money on a large scale. 1. the L, s, d systems is from the frankish empire as are the weights 2. some of the frankish systems is based on roman coins specifically the denarius which the carolingians called 'Pfennig' (engl. pennies) hence the appropriation d for pennies 3. the large silver coins come from the Thaler and groschen system and not the crown, that's just the english copy of the Taler (as is the Spanish dollar, spain and the HRE both being ruled by the same emperor) 3. the idea of creating these large silver coins of equal value to the small gold coins comes from the fact that venice traded with the eastern roman empires gold coins but in northern europe there are no gold mines so for trade purposes germans needed large silver coins of equal value to the venician gold coins (florin, ducat). these where the standard coins of the day. the english coins where used basically nowhere and they are all based on continental coins anyway. so talking about money in america, sure you can mention english coins but they are almost irrelevant for the understanding of where that money came from. it basically started in ancient times with small silver coins, especially the later roman dinarius, then the carolingian reformation set the monetary system into stone for the next millenia with the l/s/d system then some italians and germans fiddle around with gold and large silver coins and boom, the dollar.
    2
  935. 2
  936. 2
  937. 2
  938. 2
  939. 2
  940. 2
  941. 2
  942. 2
  943. 2
  944. 2
  945. 2
  946. 2
  947. 2
  948. 2
  949. 2
  950. 2
  951. 2
  952. 2
  953. 2
  954. 2
  955. 2
  956. 2
  957. 2
  958.  @BallisticSollution  does the KF-41 have MUSS? or 20 times magnification? or 2 independent 360 degree optics +the normal camera 360 degree round view along with the normal gunner optics as well as a automatic washer and armor plate for each optic? can it depress it's 30 mm gun to -17 degree or up 60 degrees? No, so... also read this to learn something "In the advertised configurations, it contains as many Rheinmetall-made parts as possible, even if these might not always be class-leading. One example are the optics, which are based on Rheinmetall's own SEOSS (stabilized electro-optical sighting system). This is a purely electronic sight, meaning the SEOSS features no optical connection for the daysight unlike some other optics. It also includes the Rheinmetall-made SAPHIR thermal imager, which performed worse than the ATTICA thermal imager during Bundeswehr testing and hence was not adopted on Bundeswehr combat vehicles." now please don't write a come back just to have the last word, we are not in kindergarden here. only write something if it's actually worth while otherwise let it be. PS also I wrote the puma got it's latest update in february, that's 1/2 a year ago so why do you write nonsense like "After they are upgraded, sure, the Puma might be technically the same, but it's not yet. " just to infuriate me or what? stop talking nonsense. the lynx is a nice afforadable export version from the germans, it's made for countries who don't have the capability to build their own tanks. it's build of proven parts (meaning nothing new), fewer system and less complex/redundancy. the lynx is a run of the mill standard volkswagen and the puma is a custom build mercedes infantry fighting vehicle specifically made for the german style of tank/infantry war fighting and just like the marder it will not be exported (until the germans sell off their old pumas in about 20 years) since other countries don't have a proper armor docrine and don't need a capable vehicle like the puma with a price to match, for most other countries a normal ifv does the trick. the british even decided to dump their warrior ifv and replace it with the boxer because they just don't have a armor war fighting doctrine.
    2
  959. 2
  960. 2
  961. 2
  962. 2
  963. 2
  964. 2
  965. 2
  966. 2
  967. 2
  968. 2
  969. 2
  970. 2
  971. 2
  972. 2
  973. 2
  974. 2
  975. 2
  976. 2
  977. 2
  978. 2
  979. 2
  980. 2
  981. 2
  982. 2
  983. 2
  984. 2
  985. 2
  986. 2
  987. 2
  988. 2
  989. 2
  990. 2
  991. 2
  992. 2
  993. 2
  994. 2
  995. 2
  996. 2
  997.  @thalorenz  warum soll es hier um mich gehen? Es geht darum was hier mit Menschen gemacht wird, was hier einige mit Applaus herbeiwünschen (was schon mal da war Stichwort Stasi). Es geht darum das gesunder Menschenverstand und politische Meinungen die noch vor 10 Jahren Usus waren heute schon "Rechtsextrem" genannt werden. Wie Links-Grüne Spinner hier den Ton angeben und Menschen nach belieben und ohne Gerichtsverfahren zu "Feinden" und "anti demokraten" und "Rechtsextremen" erklären mit denen man dann alles machen kann. Das wenn jemand einen Witz macht oder er eine abweichende politische Meinung hat ihm die Karriere, der Arbeitsplatz und sonnst noch was zerstört wird. Schon alleine deine Forderung das das so richtig ist, verstößt gegen unsere Rechtsstaatlichen Prinzipien denn es gilt immer noch "Grundsätzlich darf ein Arbeitnehmer nicht wegen seiner politischen Gesinnung gekündigt werden. Die Kündigung ist nur gerechtfertigt, wenn durch die politische Betätigung die Arbeitstätigkeit beeinflusst wird, also eine Verletzung der arbeitsvertraglichen Pflichten vorliegt." so und nicht anders auch wenn einige Links-Grüne Ideologen schon heute ihre falschen Moralischen Ideen über das Gesetzt stellen oder sie zu Gesetz machen. Einfach nur 1984 was hier abgeht. PS wer also gegen den Einmarsch von 1 Million junger Muslimischer Männer ist, ist ein "Menschenfeind" und "Rechtsextrem". wowsa. Dann wäre es doch auch legitim diese 'Menschenfeinde', nicht nur zu zersetzen in dem man ihnen alles nimmt, sondern sie auch aus dem Verkehr zu ziehen nicht war? Also ab ins KZ? mit jedem der nicht möchte das Millionen von Muslimischen Männer ihr Unwesen treiben ('Unwesen' laut BKA Report, mehrere hunderttausende begehen Jedes Jahr Straftaten, ausländerrechtliche Verstoße schon nicht mitgerechnet) oder Hitlerwitze per Whatsapp verschickt? In Afrika gibt es übrigens einige Hundert Millionen Menschen die lieber in Europa leben würden (auch so eine Statistik). Ich hoffe in deiner schönen neuen Welt ist genug Platz für die? Oder ist der ganze quatsch doch etwas Realitätsfern und nichts weiter wie eine weitere deutsche extreme Ideologie an der die Welt genesen soll? Haben wir nicht eigentlich Gesetze in unserem Rechtsstaat die eindeutig sagen wer hier Asyl bekommt und wer nicht und das Asyl nur für Persönlich verfolgte gilt und zwar nur so lange wie sie verfolgt erden.. wie Merkel noch am anfangt erklärt hat die Menschen die kommen gehen ja auch wieder und jetzt heißt es alle bleiben und wer noch nicht da ist kann auch noch kommen. Wie schnell sich alles verändert, wer da was gegen sagt ist also "anti demokrat" und "rechtsextrem"? So kann man auch Bürger verleumden und mit Totschlagargumenten eine Debatte verhindern. Denn mit Rechtsextremisten und demokratiefeinden kann man schließlich nicht debattieren... Man braucht also gar keine Diktatur, man muss einfach nur alle Abweichler zu Feinden erklären, gewürzt mit ein paar bösen Unterstellungen damit man sie Gesellschaftlich unmöglich macht, geltende Gesetzte werden nur angewandt wenn sie nach Gutdünken "Moralisch" gerechtfertigt sind und bestrafen kann man die "Feinde" durch Zersetzung wenn es eben kein Gesetz gibt gegen das sie verstoßen haben. Wer jetzt sagt das das alles gegen das Rechtsstaatlichkeitsprinzip verstoßt wird kurzerhand auch zum Rechtsextremisten und Demokratiefeind erklärt. Ganz einfach. Echt toll was hier abgeht.
    2
  998. 2
  999. 2
  1000. 2
  1001. ​ @finnmorton6510  Genau darum gehts. Wer entscheidet was OK und plötzlich nicht mehr OK ist? Ab wann werden Existenzen vernichtet aus neuster Interpretierung von political correctness? Wie konnte es soweit kommen das geltende Gesetzte plötzlich nur noch angewendet werden wenn sie durch falsche Moral genehmigt werden und anderseits Menschen außergerichtlich Verurteilt werden selbst wenn sie gegen kein Gesetz verstoßen haben. Linke Spinner haben damit den Rechtsstaat ausgehebelt und werden jeden Tag radikaler in ihren Ansichten. Vor ca 15 Jahren sagte Merkel noch das Massenmigration nicht geht, vor genau 10 Jahren das Multikulti gescheitert ist und vor 5 Jahren das alle Migranten wieder gegangen werden. Wer das heute sagt wird dann gerne schnell noch als "Rechtsextremist" betitelt und somit als Unmensch den man ignorieren kann und mit dem man dann alles machen kann, ja sogar muss. Egal was Gesetze sagen oder nicht. Das man jetzt schon wieder so weit ist in Deutschland dass man für einen Witz seinen Arbeitsplatz und Karriere verliert und zusätzlich noch an den öffentlichen Pranger gestellt wird lässt nichts gutes vermuten. Wir sind also am Anfang, wenn nicht sogar mitten drin in der neusten deutschen Ideologie an der die Welt genesen soll, die mal wieder für sich reklamiert der einzige wahre Heilbringer für eine Ideale Zukunft zu sein und das gefälligst alle sich eingliedern und Abweichler als Unmenschen ihr Recht verwirkt haben zu Leben. Wer damit einverstanden ist macht Karriere (sieht man z.b. an unserem neuen Verfassungsschutzpräsidenten der artig Räächts den Feind vermutet, sein Vorgänger hatte wohl noch die falschen Daten vorliegen und hat sich öffentlich zu laut gewundert was hier gerade abgeht) und Mitläufer werden belohnt (je Spinnerter man ist um so besser dotiert sind die Posten als Gleichstellungsbeauftragter*innen/e und um so mehr Geld gibt es für Interkulturelle oder antifaschistische Projekte die ja so super beliebt sind das viele dieser Veranstaltungen mehr Akteure haben als Besucher/Zuschauer) das die Medien artig auf Linie gebracht sind z.b nicht mehr berichten wer der Täter in einem Verbrechen ist (außer wenn er deutscher ist) und mittlerweile gar nicht mehr berichten wenn mal wieder ein vergewaltigtes Mädchen tot im Graben gefunden wurde oder von ihrem Afghanischen Freund abgestochen wurde usw führt dann auch dazu das ein guter Teil der Bevölkerung nicht weiß was hier gerade los ist. Kaum einer wundert sich warum seit ein Paar Jahren kaum einer dieser Fälle mehr zur Bundesweite Empörung führt so wie noch die ersten Dutzend fälle 2015 bis 2017 bevor dann die neue Medienrichtlinie in kraft trat. Wir haben also einen defakto Medienblackout, außergerichtliche Verurteilungen, einen neuen Sprachduktus gibt es auch passend zur neuen Ideologie, jede Ideologie braucht als Legitimation auch einen Feind vor dem sie Schutz verspricht und das sind halt Rechtsextremisten reale und imaginäre, Mitläufer der neuen Ideologie werden brav belohnt und an entsprechende Positionen befördert und wer nicht auf Linie ist wird Zersetzt. Ganz klassisch. Mit etwas gut gemachter Propaganda kommt das ganze dann auch beim Wahlvolk an, muss nur etwas witzig (wie hier) oder Unterhaltsam verpackt sein (wie die ganzen heimelig grusligen aufgebauschten Dokus über Rechtsextremisten und wie sie DER Feind sind und super duper Gefährlich, die seit Monaten auf den öffentlich Rechtlichen laufen).
    2
  1002. 2
  1003. 2
  1004. 2
  1005. 2
  1006. 2
  1007. 2
  1008. 2
  1009. 2
  1010. 2
  1011. 2
  1012. 2
  1013. 2
  1014. 2
  1015. 2
  1016. 2
  1017. 2
  1018. 2
  1019. 2
  1020. 2
  1021. 2
  1022. 2
  1023.  @cqpp  White european Caucasians, don't play stupid with me.. But I have to thank you. Leftists like you are the reason people start to wake up and see whats happening here. Your passive aggressive playing stupid "what is white" "what is gender" and other obvious bullshits gets people angry and makes them see past the thin veil of "we leftists are the good guys, promise" (despite leftism having killed hundreds of millions of people in camps and on the streets and destroyed entire nations and people [and now europe] from Stalin, Mao, Pot and co, even the nazis said about themselves they are left wing socialists). So keep up the good work! fight the good fight until you wake up in an Islamist Kalifat of Europe with Sharia law. The leftist in Iran who supportet the muslims to get into power then also had to flee the country once they saw the outcome. Like rats from a sinking boat they ran away from their own creation because the muslims could not be controlled and hated them just as much as the shah. That is the leftist reality of unlimited european migration. When you realize that you destroyed a perfect european paradise because of a leftist ideology of "diversity good because it's diversity", it will be too late. Leftists are always full of ideology and they always fuck it up on a missive scale. Thousands of europeans where already killed by these savage migrants, 100.000s of european woman have been raped, many of which children by grooming gangs in the UK (in other countries they still haven't even realized that muslim grooming gangs exist). Muslims start to take over power in London and scotland, soon german cities will be majority muslim. Fun times ahead. Get ready for sharia.
    2
  1024. 2
  1025. 2
  1026. 2
  1027. 2
  1028. 2
  1029. 2
  1030.  @callsigndd9ls897  But they didn't come up with it together. BAE had several designs in the works but all of them looked like a F/A18 so the british government rightly decided that if they can't do better than the F/A18 they shouldn't spend a ton of money on the development of this new jet. Meanwhile MBB responded to the german TKF-90 design request with what was later called the Eurofighter. Lots of politics was involved but basically france joined and then left again (basically copied everything the could and then left to build the Rafel clone) and britain joined the project. BTW no MBB TKF-90 where build because it was a design and not a prototype. It went strait from design to jet. There where prototypes planned but because these prototype didn't really serve a purpose it was decided to not waste money and resources on them. After all the technical problems like post stall aerodynamics, avionics, fly by wire and instability where all solved by the Rockwell-MBB X-31 (The only X Plane where the US worked with another country because the germans came up with the idea) and F-104G CCV experimental aircraft. Despite this the UK sneaked in some money outside of the program to build a prototype that was in reality only a tornado with different wings even though this aircraft was not really needed for the Eurofighter program and by the time it took flight the Eurofighter development was completely finalized anyway. But to this day the british claim the Eurofighter is their jet because of this prototype not realizing that the prototype was based on the MBB TKF-90, X-31, basically just a Tornado underneath, once part of the multi national program where every country should build some of these prototypes but then it was realized that these prototypes where not needed for the Eurofighter program. In the end BAE failed to come up with their own design, joined the german program.
    2
  1031. 2
  1032. 2
  1033. 2
  1034. 2
  1035. 2
  1036. 2
  1037. 2
  1038. 2
  1039. 2
  1040. 2
  1041. 2
  1042. 2
  1043. 2
  1044. 2
  1045. 2
  1046. 2
  1047. 2
  1048. 2
  1049. 2
  1050. 2
  1051. 2
  1052. 2
  1053. 2
  1054. 2
  1055. 2
  1056. 2
  1057. 2
  1058. 2
  1059. This is really nonsense from a scientific standpoint. Cows are, like all other animals, co2 neutral and other gases animals produce, like methane, always break down into co2 (which again is co2 neutral, co2->plants->cows->ch4->co2->plants). There is no long term effect, nothing accumulates, nothing gets added, it's a circle. The same is true for the nitrate given that the cows only eat local food. It is really a pointless debate. This is really a big facepalm moment for humanity. People have fallen for this narrative that cow's methan is somehow heating up the planet. It clearly isn't. No methane accumulates. we already have as much methan in the atmospehere as we will ever have even in 1 million years in the future when we keep all our cows. No methane can accumulate, it all breaks down into co2 and the balance is already reaced for the number of cows we have. The only way to get more methane into the athmosphere would be to have more cows because than a new balance would be reached (again with no long term effect) I hate that people have fallen for this fallacy. As an engineer it worries me that people lack simple logic and math skills and our society is then doomed to fall for these obviously nonsensical neratives. Yes cows produce methane, as do all other animals, but it's not methane from fossile fuel, it's methane from gras and bacteria, it's short term and part of natrues cycle. Nothing gets added, nothing accumulates. It's always at ballance for the current set up. We could have less cows but it would make next to no difference. Flying in a fossile fueled aircraft to make this "documentary" has done more long term, actually accumulating damage to the atmosphere than any number of cows could ever do.
    2
  1060. 2
  1061. 2
  1062. 2
  1063. 2
  1064. 2
  1065. 2
  1066. 2
  1067. 2
  1068. 2
  1069. 2
  1070. 2
  1071. 2
  1072. 2
  1073. 2
  1074. 2
  1075. 2
  1076. 2
  1077. 2
  1078. 2
  1079. 2
  1080. 2
  1081. 2
  1082. 2
  1083. 2
  1084. 2
  1085. 2
  1086. 2
  1087. 2
  1088. 2
  1089. 2
  1090. 2
  1091. 2
  1092. 2
  1093. 2
  1094. 2
  1095. 2
  1096. 2
  1097. 2
  1098. 2
  1099. 2
  1100. 2
  1101. 2
  1102. 2
  1103. 2
  1104. 2
  1105. 2
  1106. 2
  1107. 2
  1108. 2
  1109. 2
  1110. 2
  1111. 2
  1112. 2
  1113. Das wäre aber schade denn Obgleich ich die Inhalte der Sendung und ihre Aufbereitung üblicherweise schätze, ist diese Sendung nur bedingt gelungen, da sie zu wenig differenziert. "Geschlecht" (sex) ist zuvorderst ein biologisches Merkmal; daneben wurde der Begriff des "sozialen Geschlechts", der ein soziales, identitätsstiftendes Konstrukt (gender) beschreibt, in das viele Aspekte (des Individuums wie der Gesellschaft) einfließen, eingeführt. Biologisch betrachtet definiert nicht das Individuum, sondern die Art seiner Keimzellen (!) die (biologische) Geschlechtszugehörigkeit. Was folgt daraus? 1. Die meisten Menschen - inklusive transidentitärer Menschen (!) - haben ein eindeutiges (!) biologisches Geschlecht: XX für weibliche Merkmalsausprägungen, XY für männliche Merkmalsausprägungen. 2. Probleme mit dieser simplen Einteilung ergeben sich dort, wo chromosomale Abweichungen (wie bspw. beim Turner-Syndrom, Betroffene haben nur ein funktionstüchtiges X-Chromosom, der Phänoytpus ist dennoch weiblich) bestehen oder die äußerlichen Geschlechtsmerkmale uneindeutig sind bzw. der chromosomalen Geschlechtszugehörigkeit nicht (gänzlich) entsprechen. Dies wird mit dem Begriff Intersexualität beschrieben. Es handelt sich hier um ein biologisches Phänomen, dass folgerichtig auch im Tierreich zu beobachten ist. Geschlechtsdysphorie (d.h. Trans"sexualität" bzw. -identität) ist bei Intersexuellen möglich, wenn sie sich mit dem (ihnen einst zugewiesenen) Geschlecht oder dem Phänotypus nicht identifizieren, ist jedoch nicht universal vorhanden. 3. Transidentität existiert im Tierreich nicht, da es ein soziales Konstrukt ist, das nur besteht, weil wir Menschen auch ein soziales Geschlecht und ein Bewusstsein haben, das Geschlechterrollen aufnimmt und im Verlauf der kindlichen Entwicklung eine individuelle Identität ausbildet. 4. Nichtsdestotrotz hat z.B. ein biologischer Mann das Recht, sich entsprechend seiner andersgeschlechtlichen Identität als Frau zu definieren und sein Leben derart zu gestalten (... und das gleiche gilt für eine Frau, die sich dem männlichen Geschlecht zugehörig fühlt, oder für einen Menschen, der sich als divers begreift). Die Anerkennung der biologischen Fakten ist darum keine Hetze gegen transidentitäre Menschen. 5. Inzwischen mehren sich Stimmen von jungen Menschen, die ihre Geschlechtsangleichung bereuen und sie nachträglich als dysfunktionalen Versuch, mit ihren eigentlichen psychischen Problemen und den Entwicklungsherausforderungen während der pubertären (Geschlechts-)Identitätsfindung (wie der weiterhin vorhandene Druck, sich den Geschlechterstereotypen anzupassen, die paradoxerweise auch tlw. durch die Trans-Community befeuert werden) umzugehen, werten. Auch diese Menschen verdienen Gehör, nicht selten werden sie von den einstigen "Leidensgenossen" nicht gehört, mitunter gar mundtot gemacht. Der Umstand, dass diese Gruppe existiert, invalidiert die Erfahrungen von transidentitären Menschen nicht. Eine kritische Haltung gegenüber dem Hype, der sich um psychische Erkrankungen im Allgemeinen und auch Transidentität im Speziellen auf social media entsponnen hat, ist kein Hate gegen Trans-Menschen. Viele junge Menschen sind gerade heutzutage sehr beeinflussbar und werden mit diesen Dingen konfrontiert. Gerade für psychisch labile Jugendliche kann eine vermeintliche Transidentität, die ein Zugehörigkeitsgefühl ermöglichen und weitere emotionale Bedürfnisse befriedigen kann, vorerst ein (indes dysfunktionaler) Ausweg sein. Da die Stigmatisierung von Menschen mit Transidentität im Vergleich abgenommen hat, Transidentität in bestimmten Kontexten sogar positiv konnotiert ist, steigt auch die Attraktivität dieses Störungsbilder. Im Übrigen ein Phänomen, das auch bei anderen psychischen Erkrankungen wie bspw. Borderline oder Autismus zu beobachten ist. 6. Bedenken zu äußern, dass eine mit wenigen Schritten zu erreichende Geschlechtsänderung auf dem Papier Schutzräume für Frauen unsicherer machen könnte, sind für nicht wenige Betroffene, die Gewalt erfahren haben, durchaus real. Diese abzutun, nur weil rechte Strömungen diese für ihre Zwecke aufgreifen, ist nicht im Sinne einer differenzierten, entemotionalisierten Darstellung, die auch dieses Thema braucht. 7. Die Thematik könnte wesentlich vereinfacht werden, würde man neben der Angabe eines biologischen Geschlechts eine weitere Angabe über die soziale Geschlechtszugehörigkeit einführen. 8. Ebenso ist das Aufgreifen von Begriffen wie TERF dem Diskurs nicht zuträglich; die begrenzte und dosierte Anwendung von Begriffen wie "cis" mag in bestimmten Kontexten (wie wissenschaftliche oder öffentlichkeitswirksame Diskurse) durchaus sinnig bzw. teils unvermeidlich sein, um über bestehende Diskriminierungen sprechen zu können. Darüber hinaus jedoch dürfte die sich auch in der Allgemeinbevölkerung abzeichnende Entwicklung, alles und jeden in Kategorisierungen zu pressen, nachteilig auswirken; davon abgesehen widerspricht sie dem Credo der Individualität und der häufig verwendeten Formulierung, dass letztlich nur das Menschsein zähle, nicht die Sexualpräferenz, das biologische Geschlecht oder die Geschlechtsidentität. Für meine Meinungsäußerung (und deren Qualität) spielt es zunächst keinerlei Rolle, als was ich mich definiere. Ich empfinde es als befremdlich, ein "ich bin xy" voranstellen zu müssen, um die nachfolgende Aussage zu kontextualisieren.
    2
  1114. 2
  1115. 2
  1116. 2
  1117. 2
  1118. 2
  1119. 2
  1120. 2
  1121. 2
  1122. 2
  1123. 2
  1124. 2
  1125. 2
  1126. 2
  1127. 2
  1128. 2
  1129. 2
  1130. 2
  1131. 2
  1132. 2
  1133. 2
  1134. 2
  1135. 2
  1136. 2
  1137. 2
  1138. 2
  1139. 2
  1140. 2
  1141. 2
  1142. 2
  1143. 2
  1144. 2
  1145. 2
  1146. 2
  1147. 2
  1148. 2
  1149. 2
  1150. 2
  1151. 2
  1152.  @CasualAmin  1. because the stealth of the F35 is almost useless against modern ground based air defense systems. Modern highly efficient radars, longer wave radar, the new kind of passive radars from Hensoldt or simply more than one radar connected together defeat the stealth of the F35 according to all I heard so much so that it doesn't even make a small difference. That's why flying low, below the radars, is still the best option even for stealthy F35 just like for none stealth aircraft 2. because bvr is still mostly unrealistic except in very limited circumstances. The fog of war and other limiting factors such as rules of engagement, civilian aviation and allied nations milling around make i nearly impossible to know what is going on before you actually check. That's why visual confirmation is still the default setting for all fighter jets. You simply can't shot at every radar blip on your screen, you have to check it out. Once you do that you are so close that any stealth feature becomes meaningless. But even at bvr you still have modern IRST systems like on the Eurofighter so a stealth aircraft is very much detectable even bvr 3. the third limiting factor that can easily defeat stealth is long range AA missiles with two link communication such as Meteor. Meteor can be launched in a general direction by any sort of aircraft and then the missile using it's own sensors and other aircraft/ground stations or even other Meteor missiles feed it with additional information. Basically like a suicide drone. That's why flying low is still the best option in most cases and stealth or not if you stay below the radar horizon you are good Of course if you do artificial exercises in controlled airspace, two groups of jets coming in high from known directions, everyone just out for a computer simulated missile kill and you basically play who can shoot first then stealth is probably a lot of fun but in the real world how often does that happen?
    2
  1153. 2
  1154. 2
  1155. 2
  1156. 2
  1157. 2
  1158. 2
  1159. 2
  1160. 2
  1161. 2
  1162. 2
  1163. 2
  1164. 2
  1165. 2
  1166. 2
  1167. 2
  1168. 2
  1169. 2
  1170. 2
  1171. 2
  1172. 2
  1173. 2
  1174. 2
  1175. 2
  1176. 2
  1177. 2
  1178. 2
  1179. 2
  1180. 2
  1181. 2
  1182. 2
  1183. 2
  1184. 2
  1185. 2
  1186. 2
  1187. 2
  1188. 2
  1189. 2
  1190. 2
  1191. 2
  1192. 2
  1193. 2
  1194. 2
  1195. 2
  1196. 2
  1197. 2
  1198. 2
  1199. 2
  1200. 2
  1201. 2
  1202. 2
  1203. 2
  1204. 2
  1205. 2
  1206. 2
  1207. 2
  1208. 2
  1209. 2
  1210. 2
  1211. 2
  1212. 2
  1213. 2
  1214. 2
  1215. 2
  1216. 2
  1217. 2
  1218. 2
  1219. 2
  1220. 2
  1221. 2
  1222. 2
  1223. 2
  1224. 2
  1225. 2
  1226. 2
  1227. 2
  1228. 2
  1229. 2
  1230. 2
  1231. 2
  1232. 2
  1233. 2
  1234. 2
  1235. 2
  1236. 2
  1237. 2
  1238. 2
  1239. 2
  1240. 2
  1241. 2
  1242. 2
  1243. 2
  1244. 2
  1245. 2
  1246. 2
  1247. 2
  1248. 2
  1249. 2
  1250. 2
  1251. 2
  1252. 2
  1253. 2
  1254. 2
  1255. 2
  1256. 2
  1257. 2
  1258. 2
  1259. 2
  1260. 2
  1261. 2
  1262. 2
  1263. 2
  1264. yes, if only you wouldn't start every other comment with "LOL" I would forgive you that you think googling for the wikipedia page of the stuff I just told you made you an instantaneous expert. in fact german scientists stayed on to at least 1955 "by the assistance of captured scientists from the advanced German rocket program,[1][2] was performed mainly by Soviet engineers and scientists after 1955," not to mention those that where never allowed to leave since that would compromise security. even korolev was not known to anyone until after his death, imagine what they did to german engineers that they found where useful? send them back to west germany right into the hands the US for questioning how the secrete soviet ballistic missile program is doing? yeah fat chance, we will never hear from them. but even 1955 is good enough for my point. also this quote I found puts everything into perspective. "After his release from prison, Korolev began by building a replica of the German A4 rocket that Stalin requested. Following the replication of the A4, he went on to develop the R-7 booster, which had five clustered engines each with four thrust chambers.[5] It was the first rocket to pioneer the booster rocket concept." from copying A4's to R-7, just like that. from working on the A4 with 2000+ german engineers and scientists brought to the soviet union, many of whom did not work with von Braun directly but either in production or with other nazi rocket projects, usually detachable rocket boosters for aircrafts and nazi rocket planes. what an odd coincident. but Korolev was a rocket scientist genius that could easily do all of that on his own, right? except for this quote "Although Korolev trained as an aircraft designer, his greatest strengths proved to be in design integration, organization and strategic planning." so he was more the soviet manager type and not the engineer/scientist type of guy. good thing he came up with the glorious R-7 thingy all on his own for the always perfect glorious soviet motherland, completely unrelated to evil german nazis who might or might not have worked on some uninteresting old stuff there at the same time. they just spend their time with polishing their shoes or something, nothing interesting to see here, move on. yeah right. we all know how russia works. I guess they still pretend they developed the atom bomb on their own, completely forgetting the german scientist that gave them the blue prints and data. russian propaganda and self deception at it's finest because mother russia is pure nationalistic glory and everything else is evil counter revolutionism or western propaganda. just like that Kalashnikov farmer boy who just happened to "design" a sturmgewehr on a napkin one day. please everyone lets ignore Hugo Schmeisser and countless other german weapons engineers working in the soviet union at the same time in the same place, all experts in the fields of weapons engineering, die cast parts, metal stamping, and a complete machine-assembly they developed for the Stg 44. just a coincidence. they just polished their shoes as well all day long and didn't work on anything interesting at all. naturally the Ak 47 just fell into the lap of a peasant boy turned tank commander. the ideal soviet propaganda type. isn't that convenient? PS don't get me started on russian cargo rockets. every time I read up on something that was scheduled to be put into space by russian cargo rockets they just happen to blow up or not work properly every time they carry western satellites or supply missions. if they where so great why not use them for manned missions that where planed to use them or newer types? right..
    2
  1265. I'm not german but I'm 100% certain you are russian. if you ever wanted to know what 100 years of state propaganda does to an impoverished people look no further than russians, wherever they live. all tell the same story, the same way with the same conclusions, always. if the soviets or putin would deny the sun exists then the sun wouldn't exist and there would be no prove in the world to change that opinion, all western (nazi german, US CIA, british colonialists aso.) propaganda as per usual, right? soviets where secret about their weapons programs at the best of times and would've never acknowledged any german contribution to it even if it's a proven fact that thousands of them where milling around the place and somehow what they produced also looked the part and so if something worked it was done by soviet farmers and workers turned soviet heroes just like it was the raison d'etat the state proclaimed. so of course a farmer turned tank driver invented the kalashnikov, I mean, who else could have invented the freedom gun of the soviet empire? nazi engineers, the recent enemies of the soviet people? just because they knew how to do that and did it before and after and some information about it even leaked? no no, and who designed the soviet rocket program that guaranteed a nuclear deterrent? more nazis? just like the nazis in the evil capitalist american rocket program who did the same thing only with more resources and therefore better results? no no. that is completely unreasonable to even think out loud. just because the rocket engineers the soviets abducted where working on boosters doesn't mean that the first rocket they build after the A4, which also had boosters had anything to do with any of the other things. everyone who says that is "racist" and a "russophobe" and an "actual fascist" and all those words. what a great argument. I'm racist, you are racist, everyone is racist. you don't agree with someone, racist. someone challenges your world view, racist. making good points talking about a subject, racist.
    2
  1266. 2
  1267. 2
  1268.  @anonygent  Aluminium is cheap because of cheap energy and not because of technology. Aluminium is one of the most common metals in the earth crust but the refining uses up huge amounts of electricity, the technology to refine it hasn't changes for 100 years, only the cost of energy got cheaper. Exploiting oil and gas has lead us into a dependence of cheap fossile energy which is exactly what he talked about, we build stupid suburbs and other wasteful ugly nonsense that depend on cheap energy. But oil and gas are limited and there is no magic technology to get around that fact. fracking is a short lived endeavour and climate change will take it's toll. there are no freebies in this universe, everything has a cost and all the wasteful, inefficient infrastructure and consumerism that lives and dies with cheap energy will come to haunt us. 100-200 years ago people has skills and the infrastructure to survive but today civilization would end if just the electricity went out not to mention the end of cheap oil. The ugliness and social isolation car dependency created is another problem for society and mental health which is already taking a toll. As is consumerism, buying cheap chinese products just to through them away 2-3 years later is not exactly a cleaver investment for the future wealth of our kids. All of this is clearly not sustainable but we humans always get fooled by the presence, we can't imagine things will ever change, but oh boy will they change wheatear we want to or not. Suburbs are already not able to pay for themselves and financially ruin entire cities and car dependency has created an entire generation that lives on credit. Even the houses we build are short lives and need to be rebuild every couple of decades. None of that is sustainable and 'technology' doesn't even factor into this.
    2
  1269. 2
  1270. 2
  1271. 2
  1272. 2
  1273. 2
  1274. 2
  1275. 2
  1276. 2
  1277. 2
  1278. 1: challenger has the old armour with the 1980's Technology and no way to fully upgrade it. the Leo 2 A7+ has modern armour because it's upgradable so thanks to modern technology the tank armour can keep up with modern anti-tank amunition. the Challenger just can't compete. not even close to having the best armour. not to mention the lack of APS. you must be a blind fool if you think the challenger armour is the best. 2: its gun and ammo is shit, that's why they hirred the guys who made the Abrams, leo2 gun and try to upgrade it. but that won't work because of the storage for the ammo. it just doesn't fit inside the turret of the Challenger. so even with the planned upgrade this video mentions the challenger will be stuck with this ineffective gun. (and the Leo 2 a6 carries it's ammo in a seperate compartment outside the turret, the Challenger carries it inside the hull which killed 2 soldiers just this year) 3 the Challenger has nowhere near the best cross Country agility. with 19hp/t compared to the leo2 which has 24hp/t it just can't keep up. also have you ever seen a Challenger cold start? the funniest shit ever. smokes like a coal plant and takes forever to start up. not very agile. https://youtu.be/2mufnDGUMm4?t=12m11s ps. don't make up shit unconfirmed storries about the combat record of the Challenger. it's childish. the Leo has been in many conflicts as well. btw if you say the Abrams was knocked out by whatever, guess what. Challenger and Abrams both use chobham armour. so all in all the Challenger 2 is less mobile, old armour and a useless gun with weak ammo (british trials found out the Leo's Tungsten DM53 ammo is better than the depleted uranium ammo the Challenger uses)
    2
  1279. 2
  1280. 2
  1281. 2
  1282. 2
  1283. 2
  1284. 2
  1285. 2
  1286. 2
  1287. 2
  1288. 2
  1289. 2
  1290. 2
  1291. 2
  1292. 2
  1293. 2
  1294. 2
  1295. 2
  1296. 2
  1297. 2
  1298. 2
  1299. 2
  1300. 1
  1301. 1
  1302. 1
  1303. 1
  1304. 1
  1305. 1
  1306. 1
  1307. 1
  1308. 1
  1309. 1
  1310. 1
  1311. 1
  1312. 1
  1313. 1
  1314. 1
  1315. ACS607 the altea is the first car at nothing. nothing at all. it didn't do anything new or first and you are the only person on the planet who makes this strange claim. there is no category of cars called sporty mpv. is this a spanish nationalist thing or something? I don't get it. why would anyone fight over such nonsense? a car as big as a golf but with more headroom for people who like to sit in their cars wearing hats. what on earth makes you believe that this is something different from all the rest? the golf plus and every other mpv is basically exactly that. "sporty mpv" in contrast to unsporty mpv's? how is it more sporty? if you are the sole person on the planet who just invented this category could you explain that a little bit. is the altea faster on the track than other mpv's? no, right. so what did seat invent? a new marketing name for something that really isn't anything new? yes, it's probably that and you have fallen for it (or invented it, I can't find anything about sporty mpvs so I'm not sure where you get this from). btw I can tell you that nothing has ever happened at seat that didn't happen at VW first. even the engineers are mostly from VW. the entire tech in and around the car is VW. nothing happens at seat that isn't signed by VW. they use the VW supply companies for basically most parts of the car. and to call you up on your little lies. the prototype of the altea is from 2003 and the car came out 2004 just like the golf plus. so not 2005. what do you think you win by lying about such dates that are really easy to find anyway? the ibiza doesn't use the PQ35 platform so why would you bring this up. I never said anything about PQ25. you try to put words in my mouth and call me a liar? what sort of idiot are you? and what's the LED nonsense all about. I lost the context? do you think it's something worth mentioning or where was I wrong about the LED's that I never mentioned? you are a strange troll, I have to say.
    1
  1316. 1
  1317. 1
  1318. 1
  1319. 1
  1320. 1
  1321. 1
  1322. 1
  1323. 1
  1324. gitana082 Page 1 Name Year of Birth Place of Residence  Source Fate based on this source Grelling,Margaret 1898 Berlin, Germany‎ List of murdered Jews ... Murdered  Berkowicz,Khava Pruzany, Poland‎ Page of Testimony Murdered  Gipfel,Rebekka 1905 Kassel, Germany‎ List of murdered Jews ... Murdered  Gusyk,Lydia 1909 Berlin, Germany‎ List of murdered Jews ... Murdered  Biermann,Magda 1915 Nove Mesto nad Vahom, Czechoslovakia‎ Page of Testimony Murdered  Bergher,Reizl Reizel 1892 Turobin, Poland‎ Page of Testimony Murdered  Fischer,Regina 1895 Mandok, Hungary‎ Page of Testimony Murdered  Bergher,Ada Heda Vrsac, Yugoslavia‎ Page of Testimony Murdered  Buerger,Ernest 1891 Oradea, Romania‎ Page of Testimony Murdered  Beer,Lina 1910 Vranov, Czechoslovakia‎ Page of Testimony Murdered  Fischer,Hela 1916 Miskolc, Hungary‎ Page of Testimony Murdered  Bergher,Olga 1926 Romania‎ Page of Testimony Murdered  Bergher,Shmuel Smuel Versec, Yugoslavia‎ Page of Testimony Murdered  Bergher,Elza   1903 Romania‎ Page of Testimony Murdered  Balassa,Julina Yolanda Mali Idjos, Yugoslavia‎ Page of Testimony Murdered  Bergher,Yitzkhak Avraam 1868 Romania‎ Page of Testimony Murdered  Goldsztajn,Rizel Rajzel 1918 Kwasylow, Poland‎ Page of Testimony Murdered  Bergher,Mor 1884 Budapest, Hungary‎ Page of Testimony Murdered  Bregher,Lea Leia Arad, Romania‎ Page of Testimony Murdered  Bergher,Rakhel 1890 Tatarbunary, Romania‎ Page of Testimony Murdered  Gross,Sara Sarika 1906 Michalovce, Czechoslovakia‎ Page of Testimony Murdered  Bergher,Dov 1924 Kilija, Romania‎ Page of Testimony Murdered  Bergher,Shlomo Slomo 1870 Astyla, Poland‎ Page of Testimony Murdered  Bergher,Josef Yosef 1908 Budapest, Hungary‎ Page of Testimony Murdered  Bergher,Shlomo 1896 Artziz, Romania‎ Page of Testimony Murdered  Bregher,Leib Stefanesti, Romania‎ Page of Testimony Murdered  Grodka,Franziska 1879 Berlin, Germany‎ List of murdered Jews ... Murdered  Bragar,Heinich Heinikh 1885 Kishinev, Romania‎ Page of Testimony Murdered  Herschendoerfer,Selda 1860 Berlin, Germany‎ List of murdered Jews ... Murdered  Goldschmidt,Erna 1900 Berlin, Germany‎ List of murdered Jews ... Murdered  Hahn,Emilie 1880 Frankfurt am Main, Germany‎ List of murdered Jews ... Murdered  Bencz,Feiga Fejga 1911 Ludmir, Poland‎ Page of Testimony Murdered  Bergher,Nakhman Nahman 1897 Romania‎ Page of Testimony Murdered  Bergher,Haim Khaim 1919 Rawa Ruska, Poland‎ Page of Testimony Murdered  Byr,Dyna Dina 1877 Landshut, Germany‎ Page of Testimony Murdered  Bergier,Yitzkhak Jcchak 1920 Kunow, Poland‎ Page of Testimony Murdered  Berkovits,Roza Rosa 1900 Berehovo, Czechoslovakia‎ Page of Testimony Murdered  Bendek,Karolina Kreina 1899 Nagyvarad, Romania‎ Page of Testimony Murdered  Butzinski,Chaike Khaika 1898 Grodno, Poland‎ Page of Testimony Murdered  Bergher,Pesia 1885 Beresteczko, Poland‎ Page of Testimony Murdered  Bragar,Tzvi Beniamin 1871 Kishinev, Romania‎ Page of Testimony Murdered  Berger,Roza Rosalie 1870 Csenger, Hungary‎ Page of Testimony Murdered  Bergher,Rivka Viso, Romania‎ Page of Testimony Murdered  Benjamowicz,Khasia Naliboki, Poland‎ Page of Testimony Murdered  Feuerman,Chana Khana Nagysomkut, Romania‎ Page of Testimony Murdered  Tzikert,Sara 1922 Warsaw, Poland‎ Page of Testimony Murdered  Hannemann,Margarete 1886 Berlin, Germany‎ List of murdered Jews ... Murdered  Tzikert,Sara 1914 Warszawa, Poland‎ Page of Testimony Murdered  Birgher,Haia Khaia 1868 Coma, Czechoslovakia‎ Page of Testimony Murdered  Birgher,Zigfrid  apparently your soviet propaganda arguments and word twisting isn't that effective if you come across a person who can think for themselves (I know, not many of them left in russia). but the fact that we can name millions of victims including where they came from and where they died pretty much is enough to conclude that ww2 happened. it's not necessary to name 100% although when people died other people searched for them at some point so technically it's 100% even if not all of them are on the internet. the girl that didn't die (just like almost all "victims" that putins propaganda invent) didn't exist and the russian journalists even said that themselves. do you call russian journalists who talk off record and in private lairs? how brain dead and stupid do you have to be to believe stupid russian propaganda, it's so badly made and falls apart whenever someone looks into it that only  a stupid person would fall for that. are people in russia really that stupid?
    1
  1325. 1
  1326. 1
  1327. 1
  1328. 1
  1329. 1
  1330. 1
  1331. 1
  1332. 1
  1333. 1
  1334. 1
  1335. 1
  1336. 1
  1337. 1
  1338. 1
  1339. 1
  1340. 1
  1341. 1
  1342. James The of course this is not true. everyone outside of russia knows that. https://www.bellingcat.com/news/uk-and-europe/2015/01/28/a-reconstruction-of-clashes-in-mariupol-ukraine-9-may-2014/ http://www.osce.org/ukraine-smm/136061 http://en.radiovaticana.va/news/2015/01/25/pro-russian_rebels_blamed_for_massacre_in_mariupol/1119941 http://www.news.com.au/world/us-and-europe-ratcheting-up-pressure-after-phone-call-reveals-russia-behind-mariupol-massacre/story-fndir2ev-1227196640527 same for other cities. http://www.forbes.com/sites/paulroderickgregory/2014/05/11/inside-putins-campaign-of-social-media-trolling-and-faked-ukrainian-crimes/ http://www.forbes.com/sites/paulroderickgregory/2014/05/11/inside-putins-campaign-of-social-media-trolling-and-faked-ukrainian-crimes/2/ all you do is blah blah. I proofed to you that all the russian government propaganda are lies. the pictures, the stories. everything is made up. the pictures are from conflicts in syria, chechenia and egypt, the stories never happened which was proofen by journalists and locals. russian government propaganda even used a russian actress for it's lies. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2574131/How-Russian-television-used-actress-pretend-five-different-people-opposed-revolution-reported-normal-Ukrainians-backed-Kremlin.html don't you see that the government lies to the russian people to use them? the russian government is the enemy of the russian people and not anyone else. http://www.forbes.com/sites/paulroderickgregory/2014/04/12/russian-tv-caught-red-handed-same-guy-same-demonstration-but-three-different-people-spy-bystander-heroic-surgeon/ https://www.bellingcat.com/news/uk-and-europe/2015/01/18/unpicking-the-donetsk-peoples-republics-tangled-volnovakha-bus-massacre-narrative/
    1
  1343. 1
  1344. 1
  1345. 1
  1346. 1
  1347. 1
  1348. 1
  1349. 1
  1350. 1
  1351. 1
  1352. 1
  1353. 1
  1354. 1
  1355. 1
  1356. 1
  1357. 1
  1358. 1
  1359. 1
  1360. 1
  1361. 1
  1362. 1
  1363. 1
  1364. 1
  1365. 1
  1366. 1
  1367. 1
  1368. 1
  1369. 1
  1370. 1
  1371. 1
  1372. 1
  1373. 1
  1374. 1
  1375. 1
  1376. 1
  1377. 1
  1378. 1
  1379. 1
  1380. 1
  1381. 1
  1382. 1
  1383. 1
  1384. 1
  1385. 1
  1386. 1
  1387. 1
  1388. 1
  1389. 1
  1390. 1
  1391. 1
  1392. 1
  1393. 1
  1394. 1
  1395. 1
  1396. 1
  1397. 1
  1398. 1
  1399. 1
  1400. 1
  1401. 1
  1402. Delta40 you are completely mixing up 1918 and 1919. germany only agreed to an armistice but one year later the allies humiliated germany with the versailles treaty. germany on the other hand agreed to an armistice with russia and later imposed only mild sanctions on russia. so there is no difference except that germany didn't act like a bitch and changed it's mind. germany won against russia in the exact same way as the allies won against germany. If you like it or not. you can't point out any difference because there is non. just because you don't like it or you are to stupid to get it doesn't change the facts. also you mixed up 1918 and 1919 against. you clearly accused me for saying republic instead of weimar republic but that's your mistake since there is a difference between the revolution and the declaration of the republic and the weimar republic which came one year later. your quote: "Germany became known as the Weimar Republic. If you designated and presented such things with a bit more clarity perhaps we wouldn't still be talking." you haven't got anything right the entire time, you lack common knowledge (who doesn't know about the revolution?) and you are advice resistant when I tell you something (you don't even have to believe me, just look it up). stupid people who are wrong the entire time but are still smug and insist on teaching others really bother me. instead of writing me senseless comments back, trying to get the last word why don't you try not to make it worse for you. isn't it humiliating at some point?
    1
  1403. 1
  1404. Delta40 you are wrong again in everything you said and I knew you just wanted to have the last word. and boy was that another one of your surprisingly thoughtless comments. the versailles treaty nor the armistice was not singed by the german empire just like the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk was not singed by the russian empire. oh and there never was a communist government in germany, you got that wrong too but since you haven't got anything right it's not surprising. so you talked nonsense again. there is no difference even in that department. you don't have a point and grasping a straws like telling me there is a difference in the empires and military?? so what the hell does that have to do with anything?? (oh please don't try to answer that question it's rhetorical and I don't need any more of your illogic nonsense) what the hell is going on in your head? you seriously can't be that thick. who the hell cares about troops outnumbering other troops. that's what the war was for. is that the only difference you can find? because it's not only not relevant in any conceivable way you are seriously getting on my nerves. maybe I'm just not used to talk to advice resistant idiots. I'm just not trained to work with "spacial needs" kids.  here I write it down for you one more time. war>starting to lose the war>social unrest>revolutionary change in government>armistice and>peace treaty signed by new governments. god I hope you are not that stupid in real live. I really hope you are not. that would be tragic.
    1
  1405. 1
  1406. 1
  1407. 1
  1408. GeneralMacArthur1945 oh so we are back to the different street names. well yes that is a huge difference. so clearly germany didn't win against russia because... the revolutionary new government that signed the armistice and the peace treaty was not exactly the same in germany as it was in russia. what a surprise. I also think (but I'm not sure) that the treaty was signed at a different day and perhaps even in a different city. also the weather was different. so clearly the parallels are not exact and I'm just silly. I shouldn't  use the word exactly. but then nobody should ever use the word exactly if you are going to be anal about it without understanding how language works and what context means. according to you it was not "exactly" the same because the guys who signed the treaty had different names and different uniforms. you clearly won that argument.^^ and what other differences do you mean? please name one. just one, don't be cryptic.  but none of those that I already answered because they where lies or wrong. I'm really good at memorizing and I don't like to repeat myself. what is not to understand about the simple facts so that people start to grasp at straws like their lives depended on made up lies and anal nonsense? both russia and germany had a war on their western front. the cost of war was so high that social unrests resulted from it. in germany the navy (november revolution) and in russia the anti-monarchists (february revolution), then both began to lose the war, the new revolutionary (not long lasting) governments took over (in germany the republicans and in russia the social liberals together with the soviets) and the monarchy was gone, so the new revolutionary governments signed an armistice in both cases. later both governments were replaced. in germany by the weimar republic and in russia by the bolsheviks. they then signed the peace treaty which forced them to pay reparations, give up land and other sovereignty. that is what "exact" means. it is precisely the same. which is extraordinary. even if it would not have been so identical it would still not mean that germany didn't won against russia. but it makes my argumentation so much easier.^^ any objections? 
    1
  1409. 1
  1410. 1
  1411. 1
  1412. 1
  1413. 1
  1414. 1
  1415. 1
  1416. 1
  1417. 1
  1418. 1
  1419. 1
  1420. 1
  1421. 1
  1422. 1
  1423. 1
  1424. 1
  1425. 1
  1426. 1
  1427. 1
  1428. 1
  1429. 1
  1430. 1
  1431. 1
  1432. 1
  1433. 1
  1434. 1
  1435. 1
  1436. 1
  1437. XATHORA I just visited the att web site. 1 GB data per month and texting and calling as flat rates. 2 years contract. iphone 5s. monthly 65$ (40$ for the phone and 25$ for service). 40$ activation fee and 99$ as "due today". =1699$ over 2 years. so tell me again where they "take less money in exchange for having me as a customer". you pay them in that scenario 1060$ over 2 years for the phone alone and 640$ for service.  "att takes less money in exchange for having me as a customer" doesn't work. on any level. that's not how any of this works. they are not that happy to have you as an customer to basically give you money (by paying up apple). you give them money. use your brain man. that platitude a la "to have me as a customer" makes no sense and explains nothing. you have fallen for the trap of paying up what essentially is a credit. you think you pay only 65$ and everyone who buys their phone without contract pays to much but you are mistaken. I can almost understand what you probably think, because you haven't properly thought it through. you think that having you as a costumer is what att wants so they sponsor or bribe you by getting you a cheap phone. but that doesn't work when you have to pay them monthly for service anyway. as an accountant you would be a massive fail. logical argumentation would help you out here. follow the money and don't use platitudes as explanations because platitudes don't explain or prove anything. simply add up what you pay them over 2 years. that's the money they get from you. take that and subtract what an iphone costs the rest is profit for att. if that works out to be in the region of what their service would cost you anyway (without the phone), you haven't saved anything.
    1
  1438. 1
  1439. 1
  1440. 1
  1441. 1
  1442. 1
  1443. 1
  1444. 1
  1445. 1
  1446. 1
  1447. 1
  1448. 1
  1449. 1
  1450. 1
  1451. 1
  1452. 1
  1453. 1
  1454. 1
  1455. 1
  1456. 1
  1457. 1
  1458. 1
  1459. Steve Kusaba it was intended as a rhetorical question but that didn't stop you from answering it.^^ you didn't need to show me that you are stupid in that way, that was perfectly clear from the beginning. I just tried to be nice and hoped for the best. but you just couldn't hide your small intellect and started to insult me. ok, everything step by step. someone who is suspicious of authority to the point of smart arse internet rambling and being suspicious for the sake of being suspicious is indistinguishable from a conspiracy theorists. that's one part of being anti-social in case you didn't notice.  if you can't see a connection between a working society where authority does exist, is respected and is not constantly undermined by idiots who think they understood everything, and a clearly not working society, where authority doesn't even exist like in somalia, then you are not capable of logical thought. that's not a "concept", that's you being stupid. don't you see where anti-social behavior and negative basic attitude against authority leads? you should read up on the definition of 'society' if you still don't get it. btw everything that is against this definition is by definition anti-social. well but at least you do like to insult people right away, like every advise resistant idiot. that saves time and you use that time well to accuse people of ridicules things that are completely pulled from the air like "you are a real original thinker, using a several years old focus group meme as if it came from your inspirational musings." (I never said that did I? and a good example is a good example. you are the one who tried to change the definition of being anti-social, so it's your job of defending your bullshit and not mine) or "A troll that will not identify himself" (wow such an original non-argument you must be a real original thinker, using a several years old focus group meme as if it came from your inspirational musings. see what I did there?) or "breaks down to conduct a grade school quarrel over concepts he can not understand" (it seems as if you don't even understand your own concept, I understand concepts quite well, thank you)  or "hear your rambling directed at music". (wow straw-men argument insight)   some people are just born as arseholes, but you could at least try to hide it. but there is nothing you can do about your stupidness, you clearly can't hide that. now go and be some more suspicious of authority and see how smart that is and how well it will play out socially. you better be a world class musician or have other talents to get away with it.. but please don't lecture to many other people on your twisted logic, I don't want the revolution of the stupid, undereducated people and mediocrity to happen in my lifetime.  mhh maybe you shouldn't have answered the rhetorical question in the first place.
    1
  1460. 1
  1461. 1
  1462. 1
  1463. 1
  1464. 1
  1465. 1
  1466. 1
  1467. 1
  1468. 1
  1469. Fek The First there was nothing in my comment that can even remotely be described as emotional. maybe you should check your brain at the nearest mental hospital if you hear voices that are clearly not there. also I read your comment, I also read all the ducktales. but none of that gave me any deeper inside on what we are talking about. what I said stands true. if you think the harrier is a bomber or even a benchmark for bombers then you got something terribly wrong. on the other hand if you compare the f35b to the harrier and came to the conclusion that the "f35b is a superb bomber". well then that's just stupid which would bring me back to the idea of checking your sanity at the nearest hospital. so I don't really know where you think you are going with any of that but don't mind me. I didn't buy a plane that is not designed as a bomber, with hardly enough range to make it from the carrier to the shore and back again (never mind flying actual bombing sorties), with a bomb capacity for sorties (actually vertical landing with full bomb load instead of ditching it before landing) that couldn't rival the capacity of a 80yr old ladies shopping bag during a blizzard, the safe fail capability (one engine) of a one legged ice skater with brittle-bone disease (how handy is that as a close support, low flying war plane?) and no actual bomber. because they have run out of seats after installing the first one. that's a novel concept for a bomber. oh no wait. I can think of one other. the glorious Me262 bomber. great success. rule britania.
    1
  1470. 1
  1471. 1
  1472. 1
  1473. 1
  1474. 1
  1475. 1
  1476. 1
  1477. 1
  1478. 1
  1479. 1
  1480. 1
  1481. 1
  1482. 1
  1483. 1
  1484. 1
  1485. 1
  1486. 1
  1487. 1
  1488. 1
  1489. 1
  1490. James The yes. if you can read. here for you again.  http://www.examiner.com/list/russia-s-top-100-lies-about-ukraine http://nypost.com/2014/07/21/why-russia-buys-putins-lies/ http://www.stopfake.org/top-fakty-rossijskoj-lzhi-ob-ukraine-chast-2/ there is tones more out there. every russian lie is dismantled. the fact that russian propaganda is inconsistent and contraditics it self is also obvious. for putins media it doesn't matter that a lie is poorly constructed. they produce 10 new ones in the time it takes to examine the first one. also that they sometimes contradict each other by giving different explanations for the same thing is normal. putin did the same with russian opposition groups. Vladislav Surkov is behind that strategy. putin and Vladislav Surkov create or support a party or a movement in russian, nazis, liberals, democrats, communists, rights activists everything. they have there hand on the lid. nothing happens in russia without approval of the kremlin. and then they did a masterful thing. they said publicly that they do exactly these things and from that moment on no opposition or supporter group or party could be certain of anything anymore. everything is trivialized and the concept of truth completely destroyed. " The brilliance of this new type of authoritarianism is that instead of simply oppressing opposition, as had been the case with 20th-century strains, it climbs inside all ideologies and movements, exploiting and rendering them absurd... Its Moscow can feel like an oligarchy in the morning and a democracy in the afternoon, a monarchy for dinner and a totalitarian state by bedtime." "One moment Surkov would fund civic forums and human-rights NGOs, the next he would quietly support nationalist movements that accuse the NGOs of being tools of the West. With a flourish he sponsored lavish arts festivals for the most provocative modern artists in Moscow, then supported Orthodox fundamentalists, dressed all in black and carrying crosses, who in turn attacked the modern-art exhibitions. The Kremlin’s idea is to own all forms of political discourse, to not let any independent movements develop outside of its walls." http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2014/11/hidden-author-putinism-russia-vladislav-surkov/382489/#disqus_thread
    1
  1491. 1
  1492. 1
  1493. 1
  1494. 1
  1495. 1
  1496. 1
  1497. 1
  1498. 1
  1499. 1
  1500. 1
  1501. 1
  1502. 1
  1503. 1
  1504. 1
  1505. 1
  1506. 1
  1507. 1
  1508. 1
  1509. 1
  1510. 1
  1511. 1
  1512. 1
  1513. 1
  1514. 1
  1515. 1
  1516. 1
  1517. 1
  1518. 1
  1519. you are wrong. britain not only implemented/invented strategic bombing as a concept (Stanley Baldwin, Hugh Trenchard among others) but they also used it first. in ww2 then they broke the roosevelt appeal and the hague convention that prohibits the bombing of undefended cities outside the area of battle. it's funny that you use rotterdam and warsaw as examples of your view. they are the prime allied propaganda myths, that just shows how little britain moved on from war time propaganda. both rotterdam and warsaw where tactical bombings in support of ground troops not unlike modern tactical bombing in support of ground troops. in rotterdam half of the city was already german occupied, with battles taking place inside the city. it couldn't possibly be more "inside the battle area" than that. not only that but also the dutch city commander had half a dozen chances to surrender that day but he delayed in order give his troops time to demolish abridge. he basically played a game. when the air force was called in he eventually surrendered but the germans tried but failed to call the air strike off. eventually a couple dozen bombs fell on the city doing not much damage. but they hid the nearby harbour which spilled burning oil all over the streets and houses caught fire and the inner part of the city near the harbour burned down. all in all 800 civilians died but british propaganda reported that 30.000 died. because of that lie the british policy changed and they decided to bomb germany. in warsaw it was similar. the polish positioned artillery and tanks inside the city so the germans gave them the chance to surrender the city. when that didn't happen they called in the air force. not much damage was done but the polish surrendered. most of the destruction you might think about when looking at warsaw happened much later during the warsaw uprising and soviet attack. what you mean with coventry is not quite clear to me. coventry happened as a retaliation of british bombings of german cities. maybe get your causality in order mate.
    1
  1520. you really should look up the bombing of rotterdam and warsaw first before calling out others for bullshitting. it makes you look like an advice resistant idiot. "At the last minute, the Netherlands decided to submit and sent a plenipotentiary and other negotiators across to German lines. There was an attempt to call off the assault, but the bombing mission had already begun.[86] In legal terms, the attack was performed against a defended part of a city vital for the military objectives and in the front-line, and the bombing respected Article 25 to 27 of the Hague Conventions on Land Warfare.[87] Whilst German historian Horst Boog says British propaganda inflated the number of civilian casualties by a factor of 30,[91] contemporary newspaper reports show the Dutch legation in Paris initially estimated 100,000 people were killed,[92] the Dutch legation in New York later issued a revised figure of 30,000.[93] International news agencies widely reported these figures, portraying Rotterdam as a city mercilessly destroyed by terror bombing without regard for civilian life, with 30,000 dead lying under the ruins.[82] Neither claim was true. Furthermore, the bombing was against well-defined targets, albeit in the middle of the city, and would have assisted the advancing German Army.[82]" "Following the attack on Rotterdam, RAF Bomber Command was authorized to attack German targets east of the Rhine on 15 May 1940; the Air Ministry authorized Air Marshal Charles Portal to attack targets in the Ruhr, including oil plants and other civilian industrial targets which aided the German war effort, such as blast furnaces.[97][41] The underlying motive for the attacks was to divert German air forces away from the land front.[98] Churchill explained the rationale of his decision to his French counterparts in a letter dated the 16th: "I have examined today with the War Cabinet and all the experts the request which you made to me last night and this morning for further fighter squadrons. We are all agreed that it is better to draw the enemy on to this Island by striking at his vitals, and thus to aid the common cause."[99] Due to the inadequate British bomb-sights the strikes that followed "had the effect of terror raids on towns and villages."[98] On the night of 15/16 May, 96 bombers crossed the Rhine and attacked targets in Gelsenkirchen. 78 had been assigned oil targets, but only 24 claimed to have accomplished their objective.[100][101][102] On the night of 17/18 May, RAF Bomber Command bombed oil installations in Hamburg and Bremen; the H.E. and 400 incendiaries dropped caused six large, one moderately large and 29 small fires. As a result of the attack, 47 people were killed and 127 were wounded.[103][104] Railway yards at Cologne were attacked on the same night.[104] During May, Essen, Duisburg, Düsseldorf and Hanover were attacked in a similar fashion by Bomber Command. In June, attacks were made on Dortmund, Mannheim, Frankfurt and Bochum.[100] At the time, Bomber Command lacked the necessary navigational and bombing technical background and the accuracy of the bombings during the night attacks was abysmal. Consequently, the bombs were usually scattered over a large area, causing an uproar in Germany." "Despite the British attacks on German cities, the Luftwaffe did not begin to attack military and economic targets in the UK until six weeks after the campaign in France was concluded.[98]" when the battle of britain begun " Hermann Göring's general order, issued on 30 June 1940, stated: The war against England is to be restricted to destructive attacks against industry and air force targets which have weak defensive forces. ... The most thorough study of the target concerned, that is vital points of the target, is a pre-requisite for success. It is also stressed that every effort should be made to avoid unnecessary loss of life amongst the civilian population. — Hermann Göring[111]" "Hitler's No. 17 Directive, issued 1 August 1940, established the conduct of war against Britain and specifically forbade the Luftwaffe from conducting terror raids. The Führer declared that terror attacks could only be a means of reprisal, as ordered by him.[116]"
    1
  1521. 1
  1522. 1
  1523. 1
  1524. 1
  1525. 1
  1526. 1
  1527. 1
  1528. 1
  1529. 1
  1530. 1
  1531. 1
  1532. 1
  1533. 1
  1534. 1
  1535. 1
  1536. 1
  1537. 1
  1538. 1
  1539. 1
  1540. 1
  1541. 1
  1542. 1
  1543. 1
  1544. Brandon Austria syriza is pro EU membership and pro euro. Recently, the Vice President of the European Parliament and Syriza MEP Dimitrios Papadimoulis stated that Greece should "be a respectable member of the European Union and the euro zone"[30] and that "there is absolutely no case for a Grexit".[31] http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/feb/06/greece-syriza-government-vows-fight-pressure-stick-bailout-terms-debt 1. syria and libia are dictatorships and violence broke out before the US picked a side and supported them. russia supported assad long before violence broke out and he still send weapons into the conflict zone even though the rest of the world said that's not a good idea. 2. military bases can only be established under international law. you will find that most bases are welcome by the host nations as they are a guarentee for stability and peace. 3. that makes no sense. the US only leads interventions in other countries when they invade them. everything else wouldn't make sense. 4. when you don't like that, it's fine with me. I don't like it either. but mostly it's for the right reason. libya is one example. the US has turned more countries into democracies than any other country. I can be for democracy and against idiots. no problem. I'm also for democracy and against people who think pedophilia should be legal. I'm pro democracy and don't like nazis. criticizing stupid people and democracy are not mutually exclusive. everyone who supports putin and as fallen for russian propaganda, is not right in the head and hasn't understood anything. besides that. the russian propaganda war is so badly made. apart from the sheer volume and noise there is no substance. all the lies have been debunked. it takes a special kind of stupid person to fall for that and it's highly dangerous when people fall for undemocratic government propaganda.
    1
  1545. 1
  1546. KahnProStudios an engineering program is not what I was talking about. I mean study engineering at a university. your "school" doesn't really hack it in that department. I know that, in the US, everyone with a hard hat on likes to call himself an engineer. some even insist on it because they went on a program, to a school or because they had to read engineering for beginners for one semester at their local collage so that their meaningless liberal art or business study degree has some justification. but those are not engineers. I study engineering at a university and 5% woman quota might be a lie since when I started we where ca. 150 men and 3-4 woman in our faculty, about the same in general engineering next door. it's the same everywhere. if japanese corporations haven't been bullied yet into taking quota-woman in fear of feminazis coming down on them with all the bad PR and wild accusations then I'm sure that will happen very soon, don't worry. this propaganda video and your comments are just the first wave and sooner or later a qualified men will lose out on an open job position to a woman who is qualified as a woman because the company is bullied into fulfilling arbitrary quotas on how many woman have to work where (always the best payed positions of course, I haven't seen feminists complaining about street sweepers or constructions workers not fulfilling any quotas even though they are almost 100% male jobs). sooner or later the government is telling companies which individuals to hire for what positions directly. while we are at it we could just decide what those companies do anyway, so we create a planed economy since companies apparently have to fulfill government policy instead of doing what they do best to make a profit. making a profit and having not enough woman in the best payed positions is such a crime. big wohuh
    1
  1547. 1
  1548. 1
  1549. 1
  1550. 1
  1551. 1
  1552. 1
  1553. 1
  1554. 1
  1555. 1
  1556. 1
  1557. 1
  1558. 1
  1559. 1
  1560. 1
  1561. 1
  1562. 1
  1563. 1
  1564. 1
  1565. 1
  1566. 1
  1567. 1
  1568. 1
  1569. 1
  1570. 1
  1571. 1
  1572. 1
  1573. 1
  1574. 1
  1575. 1
  1576. 1
  1577. 1
  1578. 1
  1579. 1
  1580. 1
  1581. 1
  1582. 1
  1583. 1
  1584. 1
  1585. 1
  1586. 1
  1587. 1
  1588. 1
  1589. 1
  1590. 1
  1591. 1
  1592. 1
  1593. 1
  1594. 1
  1595. 1
  1596. 1
  1597. 1
  1598. 1
  1599. 1
  1600. 1
  1601. 1
  1602. 1
  1603. 1
  1604. John Carter instead you think that indiscriminate targeting and killing of civilians on a massive scale by bombing every city of a country is moral. your ethic is fucked up. maybe you should go to a psychiatrist and talk to him about killing civilians and feeling superior.  btw that "german" idea of legality did prevail, it was international law back then and it still is international law today. tactical bombing just like artillery, is still legal, strategic area bombing to kill as many woman and children as possible is not. I hope you don't moan about germany blockading the UK in ww1 next. the UK started to blockade germany in 1914 to starve out the civilian population. they didn't let civilians ships (full of food) through because they said that food and civilians help the german war effort. 1915 germany blockaded the UK as retaliation. 2 million german civilians died because of this artificial famine. but german ships let civilians ships through to the UK if they didn't carry war supplies. the same tactic was used by the british in india. so I guess the "german idea of legality" prevailed there too. the british idea of legality is quite self serving,  killing millions of civilians, annexing countries all over the world, strategic bombing of ancient cities against the hague treaty and roosevelts appeal, but still maintaining a disgusting sense of superiority and no sense of guilt. if germany would act like that about the holocaust people would be disgusted. but british people don't like to ask questions or think for themselves. 
    1
  1605. 1
  1606. 1
  1607. 1
  1608. 1
  1609. 1
  1610. 1
  1611. 1
  1612. 1
  1613. 1
  1614. 1
  1615. 1
  1616. 1
  1617. 1
  1618. 1
  1619. 1
  1620. 1
  1621. 1
  1622. 1
  1623. 1
  1624. 1
  1625. 1
  1626. 1
  1627. 1
  1628. 1
  1629. 1
  1630. 1
  1631. 1
  1632. 1
  1633. 1
  1634. 1
  1635. 1
  1636. 1
  1637. 1
  1638. 1
  1639. 1
  1640. 1
  1641. 1
  1642. 1
  1643. 1
  1644. 1
  1645. 1
  1646. 1
  1647. 1
  1648. 1
  1649. 1
  1650. 1
  1651. 1
  1652. 1
  1653. 1
  1654. 1
  1655. 1
  1656. 1
  1657. 1
  1658. 1
  1659. 1
  1660. 1
  1661. 1
  1662. 1
  1663. 1
  1664. 1
  1665. 1
  1666. 1
  1667. 1
  1668. 1
  1669. 1
  1670. 1
  1671. 1
  1672. 1
  1673. 1
  1674. 1
  1675. 1
  1676. 1
  1677. 1
  1678. 1
  1679. 1
  1680. 1
  1681. 1
  1682. 1
  1683. 1
  1684. 1
  1685. 1
  1686. 1
  1687. 1
  1688. 1
  1689. 1
  1690. 1
  1691. 1
  1692. 1
  1693. 1
  1694. 1
  1695. 1
  1696. 1
  1697. 1
  1698. 1
  1699. 1
  1700. 1
  1701. 1
  1702. betatalk357 "IRS estimates that about 6 million unauthorized immigrants file individual income tax returns each year." http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/12-6-immigration.pdf Professor of Law Francine Lipman writes that the belief that illegal migrants are exploiting the US economy and that they cost more in services than they contribute to the economy is "undeniably false". Lipman asserts that "illegal immigrants actually contribute more to public coffers in taxes than they cost in social services" and "contribute to the U.S. economy through their investments and consumption of goods and services; filling of millions of essential worker positions resulting in subsidiary job creation, increased productivity and lower costs of goods and services; and unrequited contributions to Social Security, Medicare and unemployment insurance programs." Aviva Chomsky, a professor at Salem State College, states that "Early studies in California and in the Southwest and in the Southeast...have come to the same conclusions. Immigrants, legal and illegal, are more likely to pay taxes than they are to use public services. illegal immigrants aren't eligible for most public services and live in fear of revealing themselves to government authorities. Households headed by illegal immigrants use less than half the amount of federal services that households headed by documented immigrants or citizens make use of." http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=881584 "The Internal Revenue Service issues an Individual Taxpayer Identification Number (ITIN) regardless of immigration status because both resident and nonresident aliens may have Federal tax return and payment responsibilities under the Internal Revenue Code." http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=7718604 haha. loser. I won.
    1
  1703. 1
  1704. 1
  1705. 1
  1706. 1
  1707. 1
  1708. 1
  1709. 1
  1710. 1
  1711. 1
  1712. 1
  1713. 1
  1714. 1
  1715. 1
  1716. 1
  1717. 1
  1718. 1
  1719. 1
  1720. 1
  1721. 1
  1722. 1
  1723. 1
  1724. 1
  1725. 1
  1726. 1
  1727. 1
  1728. 1
  1729. 1
  1730. 1
  1731. 1
  1732. 1
  1733. 1
  1734. 1
  1735. 1
  1736. 1
  1737. 1
  1738. 1
  1739. 1
  1740. 1
  1741. 1
  1742. 1
  1743. 1
  1744. 1
  1745. 1
  1746. 1
  1747. 1
  1748. 1
  1749. 1
  1750. 1
  1751. 1
  1752. 1
  1753. 1
  1754. This is really nonsense from a scientific standpoint. Cows are, like all other animals, co2 neutral and other gases animals produce, like methane, always break down into co2 (which again is co2 neutral, co2->plants->cows->ch4->co2->plants). There is no long term effect, nothing accumulates, nothing gets added, it's a circle. It is really a pointless debate. This is really a big facepalm moment for humanity. People have fallen for this narrative that cow's methan is somehow heating up the planet. It clearly isn't. No methane accumulates. we already have as much methan in the atmospehere as we will ever have even in 1 million years in the future when we keep all our cows. No methane can accumulate, it all breaks down into co2 and the balance is already reaced for the number of cows we have. The only way to get more methane into the athmosphere would be to have more cows because than a new balance would be reached (again with no long term effect) I hate that people have fallen for this fallacy. As an engineer it worries me that people lack simple logic and math skills and our society is then doomed to fall for these obviously nonsensical neratives. Yes cows produce methane, as do all other animals, but it's not methane from fossile fuel, it's methane from gras and bacteria, it's short term and part of natrues cycle. Nothing gets added, nothing accumulates. It's always at ballance for the current set up. We could have less cows but it would make next to no difference. Flying in a fossile fueled aircraft to make this "documentary" has done more long term, actually accumulating damage to the atmosphere than any number of cows could ever do. Unfortunately most people are scientific illiterate and so they fall for this methane nonsense. It's really sad for humanity how easily lead on we are.
    1
  1755. 1
  1756. 1
  1757. 1
  1758. 1
  1759. 1
  1760. 1
  1761. 1
  1762. 1
  1763. 1
  1764. 1
  1765. 1
  1766. 1
  1767. 1
  1768. 1
  1769. 1
  1770.  @joshuaparker9185  well everything you just wrote is wrong or nonsense."we don't live in the past" might as well say nothing right there.. "Who cares if VW produces 10 million cars?" VW and their 10 million new customers probably.. "They cheated the govt. with emissions scandal." which is neither here nor there and surely not the topic here but ok. "Go to Cali today and see, 3-4 out of 10 cars are Teslas." that is demonstrably wrong and also california isn't the world, it isn't even all that important and if "we don't life in the past" is an "argument" then 'we don't live in california' is one too. "wait for" we are always waiting for something... "You’ll see more cybertrucks than f150s" considering that Ford builds and sells about 1 Million F150s a year (as many cars as tesla did build in total in their 20 year history) very unlikely especially with this piece of info in mind "In June 2020, Ford announced the unnamed fully-electric F-150 was to begin production within two years of the introduction of the 2021 F-150; i.e., by 2022." next "Thirdly, people never asked for an electric vehicle." they sure did, they even build them themselves, there was an entire movement before tesla was even invented, it's just that it's niche, which it still technically is but thanks to lithium batteries and other spillover from modern tech industry EVs are more viable now with or without tesla."Tesla has a huge lead on its competitors" considering that Porsche already showed them up by beating tesla in acceleration, braking, cornering, fast charging, design and luxury and matching the teslas in range I really don't see that. tesla is better positioned than most during this improved battery technology, climate change regulations and cities fighting air pollution driven EV ramp up but that will only last so long until the EV market is big enough that every manufacturer will caters to to that market a movement already going on. But right now the EV market is still small, I think they are at 5% EV right now so still niche. "VW have a lot of catching up to do" if you ignore that Porsche belongs to VW just as audi who also build a car on the taycan platform then that might be true... but VW was never the first at anything but they are still the biggest. so there is that. maybe think about it.
    1
  1771.  @joshuaparker9185  " Porsche showing up in performance is the same as another random car beating Porsche like Rimac or some startup." that makes no sense on any level. Porsche is not "another random start up" if anything tesla is. so you made a point against tesla building some fast 0-60 times cars for a couple of years like other one trick ponies and "Who makes the fast buck is what matters." well that can't be tesla then since they only produce loses. other car manufactures would long have been bankrupt but tesla has an endless supply of willing donors and investors because there never is a shortage of shady dollars needing a place to hide. any other non american company producing loses for 2 decades straight would be bankrupt but I guess different rules apply if you are the chosen one in the land of the free. free and fair competition is a rule that only applies to others right? if you are an american company with a cult following you can just skip that and outspend every other car maker in the world without even producing meaningful numbers of cars. tesla sold 1 million cars in their entire history, that's the annual output of an average VW, toyota factory building but don't mind that, you don't need to sell cars if you are tesla, just sell promises instead and you can outspend everyone of your competitors. world wide supercharging network with free electricity? sure why not. it's not like it costs money or anything. money is no object if you are a car manufacturer that hardly sells any cars.. as long as you are called tesla.
    1
  1772. 1
  1773. 1
  1774. 1
  1775. 1
  1776. 1
  1777. 1
  1778. 1
  1779. 1
  1780. 1
  1781. 1
  1782. 1
  1783. 1
  1784. 1
  1785. 1
  1786. 1
  1787. 1
  1788. 1
  1789. 1
  1790. 1
  1791. 1
  1792. 1
  1793. 1
  1794. 1
  1795. 1
  1796. 1
  1797. 1
  1798. 1
  1799. 1
  1800. 1
  1801. 1
  1802. 1
  1803. 1
  1804. 1
  1805. 1
  1806. 1
  1807. 1
  1808. 1
  1809. 1
  1810. 1
  1811. 1
  1812. 1
  1813. 1
  1814. 1
  1815. 1
  1816. 1
  1817. 1
  1818. 1
  1819. 1
  1820. 1
  1821. 1
  1822. 1
  1823. 1
  1824. 1
  1825. 1
  1826. 1
  1827. 1
  1828. 1
  1829. 1
  1830. 1
  1831. 1
  1832. 1
  1833. 1
  1834. 1
  1835. 1
  1836. 1
  1837. 1
  1838. 1
  1839. 1
  1840. 1
  1841. 1
  1842. 1
  1843. 1
  1844. 1
  1845. 1
  1846. 1
  1847. 1
  1848. 1
  1849. 1
  1850. 1
  1851. 1
  1852. 1
  1853. 1
  1854. 1
  1855. 1
  1856. 1
  1857. 1
  1858. 1
  1859. 1
  1860. 1
  1861. 1
  1862. 1
  1863. 1
  1864. 1
  1865. 1
  1866. 1
  1867. 1
  1868. 1
  1869. 1
  1870. 1
  1871. 1
  1872. 1
  1873. 1
  1874. 1
  1875. 1
  1876. 1
  1877. 1
  1878. 1
  1879. 1
  1880. 1
  1881. 1
  1882. 1
  1883. 1
  1884. 1
  1885. 1
  1886. 1
  1887. 1
  1888. 1
  1889. 1
  1890. 1
  1891. 1
  1892. 1
  1893. 1
  1894. 1
  1895. 1
  1896. 1
  1897. 1
  1898. 1
  1899. 1
  1900. 1
  1901. 1
  1902. 1
  1903. 1
  1904. Evidence? lets take a look. There is an institute in Wuhan that deals with novel coronaviruses and most of their work involves gain of function experiments meaning for example inserting furin cleavage sites into viruses, creating chimeras and passing them through cell cultures/humanized mice to make these viruses more adapted and infectious to human lung cells (all this is published data from a 2015 scientific paper). The track record of chinese and frankly most of the worlds laboratories when it comes to incidental or not so incidental leaks and outbreaks of viruses and bacteria is rather appalling (e.g. Sars 1 got away from chinese labs in Beijing 4 times in a row) and that's why the US under Obama banned this dangerous gain of function experiments. Now what has happened in the real world. A novel coronavirus outbreak in Wuhan caused a world wide pandemic, this virus has the human adapted version of a furin cleavage site (the only one in it's virus family) that still cant be explained with evolutionary theory. It is the only novel virus to cause an outbreak/pandemic ever that was perfectly adopted to humans instead of it's host animal from day one, which is very strange to say the least. It all started just down the tram line of the institute in Wuhan and as far as we know the earliest reports came from sick lab workers and since then the CCP in china worked not to help find out what happened, like one would do in a global crisis, but rather they disappear chinese scientists and produce one after the other propaganda story to deflect from the virus lab in Wuhan. The chinese propaganda is aided in no small part by western virologists who, as it turns out, continued their gain of function experiments by financing the Wuhan lab to do some work for them. At the front of the conspiracy is the Wellcome Trust with Peter Daszak who funneled US money to Wuhan to do gain of function research. So lots of western virologists have clear conflict of interests (which they never confessed to in their papers and letters) culminating in some public letters (not scientific papers) to nature and the lancet magazines suspiciously early on in the pandemic calling this virus definitely natural in origin without presenting scientific evidence for that claim (and contradicting their private opinions about the virus looking engineered in private emails sent just days earlier) and calling the lab leak idea a conspiracy theory. The authors of these letters are all gain of function researches who would lose tremendously if gain of function experiments where to be banned again (the Obama ban was lifted under Trump). There are lots of additional circumstantial evidences but that's good enough for starters. Also a big thanks to the media for calling us conspiracy nutters and racists for pointing out dozen's of data points that clearly point to a lab leak. If journalists had done their job and investigated instead of being the echo chamber of chinese propaganda and religious believers of obviously corrupted virologists, we might have had an answer already. Now it's one year later and all the evidence and stories have been cleaned up and it's going to be very difficult to proof anything no matter how obvious. PS Other interesting facts that are worth looking into is -the fact that this sars-cov2 virus doesn't seem to infect bats very well which would be strange for a virus said to come from bats while it readily infects everything else from humans, cats to wild animals. -the Fauci emails that show that half a dozen Wellcome trust employees somehow have command over the worlds leading virologists when it comes to making appointments and meetings to discuss subjects (that are unfortunately censored in the emails with the b5 notice next to the censored parts of the emails, but the b5 exemption is only for US government litigation and not for private Trust employees. mhh) -and the very interesting case of the pangolin RaTG13 Virus the chinese produced in 2020 after the outbreak started and is said to be the closest link to sars-cov2, it was found in 2013 but the chinese didn't tell the world about it which is very unusual since a new coronavirus is big news in the scientific world and always a potential danger. So what did the chinese do with this virus for 7 years? oh yeah the chinese military also does bio research in the same Wuhan labs.. no relations^^ also the chinese say the RaTG13 virus only exists in a data base and that they don't have the virus anymore. I would say this is not a lie they probably really don't have the RaTG13 anymore.. at least not in it's original form so they rather not show it to anyone because what they have done to it over the last 7 years would be the smoking gun. That's probably why nobody gets access to the Wuhan lab, neither the WHO nor researches to the Wuhan database. But that's just my speculation. now lets hope that there are at least some journalists around with integrity and hunger for investigative journalism because this subject is rife for some investigation.
    1
  1905. Weil es zu Verstümmelungen, unbehandelten psychischen Störungen und vielen Selbstmorden führt dieser ganze woke Blödsinn. Quote von einem anderen Kommentar. Obgleich ich die Inhalte der Sendung und ihre Aufbereitung üblicherweise schätze, ist diese Sendung nur bedingt gelungen, da sie zu wenig differenziert. "Geschlecht" (sex) ist zuvorderst ein biologisches Merkmal; daneben wurde der Begriff des "sozialen Geschlechts", der ein soziales, identitätsstiftendes Konstrukt (gender) beschreibt, in das viele Aspekte (des Individuums wie der Gesellschaft) einfließen, eingeführt. Biologisch betrachtet definiert nicht das Individuum, sondern die Art seiner Keimzellen (!) die (biologische) Geschlechtszugehörigkeit. Was folgt daraus? 1. Die meisten Menschen - inklusive transidentitärer Menschen (!) - haben ein eindeutiges (!) biologisches Geschlecht: XX für weibliche Merkmalsausprägungen, XY für männliche Merkmalsausprägungen. 2. Probleme mit dieser simplen Einteilung ergeben sich dort, wo chromosomale Abweichungen (wie bspw. beim Turner-Syndrom, Betroffene haben nur ein funktionstüchtiges X-Chromosom, der Phänoytpus ist dennoch weiblich) bestehen oder die äußerlichen Geschlechtsmerkmale uneindeutig sind bzw. der chromosomalen Geschlechtszugehörigkeit nicht (gänzlich) entsprechen. Dies wird mit dem Begriff Intersexualität beschrieben. Es handelt sich hier um ein biologisches Phänomen, dass folgerichtig auch im Tierreich zu beobachten ist. Geschlechtsdysphorie (d.h. Trans"sexualität" bzw. -identität) ist bei Intersexuellen möglich, wenn sie sich mit dem (ihnen einst zugewiesenen) Geschlecht oder dem Phänotypus nicht identifizieren, ist jedoch nicht universal vorhanden. 3. Transidentität existiert im Tierreich nicht, da es ein soziales Konstrukt ist, das nur besteht, weil wir Menschen auch ein soziales Geschlecht und ein Bewusstsein haben, das Geschlechterrollen aufnimmt und im Verlauf der kindlichen Entwicklung eine individuelle Identität ausbildet. 4. Nichtsdestotrotz hat z.B. ein biologischer Mann das Recht, sich entsprechend seiner andersgeschlechtlichen Identität als Frau zu definieren und sein Leben derart zu gestalten (... und das gleiche gilt für eine Frau, die sich dem männlichen Geschlecht zugehörig fühlt, oder für einen Menschen, der sich als divers begreift). Die Anerkennung der biologischen Fakten ist darum keine Hetze gegen transidentitäre Menschen. 5. Inzwischen mehren sich Stimmen von jungen Menschen, die ihre Geschlechtsangleichung bereuen und sie nachträglich als dysfunktionalen Versuch, mit ihren eigentlichen psychischen Problemen und den Entwicklungsherausforderungen während der pubertären (Geschlechts-)Identitätsfindung (wie der weiterhin vorhandene Druck, sich den Geschlechterstereotypen anzupassen, die paradoxerweise auch tlw. durch die Trans-Community befeuert werden) umzugehen, werten. Auch diese Menschen verdienen Gehör, nicht selten werden sie von den einstigen "Leidensgenossen" nicht gehört, mitunter gar mundtot gemacht. Der Umstand, dass diese Gruppe existiert, invalidiert die Erfahrungen von transidentitären Menschen nicht. Eine kritische Haltung gegenüber dem Hype, der sich um psychische Erkrankungen im Allgemeinen und auch Transidentität im Speziellen auf social media entsponnen hat, ist kein Hate gegen Trans-Menschen. Viele junge Menschen sind gerade heutzutage sehr beeinflussbar und werden mit diesen Dingen konfrontiert. Gerade für psychisch labile Jugendliche kann eine vermeintliche Transidentität, die ein Zugehörigkeitsgefühl ermöglichen und weitere emotionale Bedürfnisse befriedigen kann, vorerst ein (indes dysfunktionaler) Ausweg sein. Da die Stigmatisierung von Menschen mit Transidentität im Vergleich abgenommen hat, Transidentität in bestimmten Kontexten sogar positiv konnotiert ist, steigt auch die Attraktivität dieses Störungsbilder. Im Übrigen ein Phänomen, das auch bei anderen psychischen Erkrankungen wie bspw. Borderline oder Autismus zu beobachten ist. 6. Bedenken zu äußern, dass eine mit wenigen Schritten zu erreichende Geschlechtsänderung auf dem Papier Schutzräume für Frauen unsicherer machen könnte, sind für nicht wenige Betroffene, die Gewalt erfahren haben, durchaus real. Diese abzutun, nur weil rechte Strömungen diese für ihre Zwecke aufgreifen, ist nicht im Sinne einer differenzierten, entemotionalisierten Darstellung, die auch dieses Thema braucht. 7. Die Thematik könnte wesentlich vereinfacht werden, würde man neben der Angabe eines biologischen Geschlechts eine weitere Angabe über die soziale Geschlechtszugehörigkeit einführen. 8. Ebenso ist das Aufgreifen von Begriffen wie TERF dem Diskurs nicht zuträglich; die begrenzte und dosierte Anwendung von Begriffen wie "cis" mag in bestimmten Kontexten (wie wissenschaftliche oder öffentlichkeitswirksame Diskurse) durchaus sinnig bzw. teils unvermeidlich sein, um über bestehende Diskriminierungen sprechen zu können. Darüber hinaus jedoch dürfte die sich auch in der Allgemeinbevölkerung abzeichnende Entwicklung, alles und jeden in Kategorisierungen zu pressen, nachteilig auswirken; davon abgesehen widerspricht sie dem Credo der Individualität und der häufig verwendeten Formulierung, dass letztlich nur das Menschsein zähle, nicht die Sexualpräferenz, das biologische Geschlecht oder die Geschlechtsidentität. Für meine Meinungsäußerung (und deren Qualität) spielt es zunächst keinerlei Rolle, als was ich mich definiere. Ich empfinde es als befremdlich, ein "ich bin xy" voranstellen zu müssen, um die nachfolgende Aussage zu kontextualisieren.
    1
  1906. 1
  1907. 1
  1908. 1
  1909. 1
  1910. 1
  1911. 1
  1912. 1
  1913. 1
  1914. 1
  1915. 1
  1916. 1
  1917. 1
  1918. 1
  1919.  @spikespa5208  you see, you make the same flawed argument. I'm not saying dreadnought was not better than most ships before her. I and luckily a small handful of naval historians who don't fall for simplistic narratives like most do, am saying that ship was not revolutionary, it was very well in line with the constant evolution at the time. so why is the dreadnought seen as the turning point, a revolution, a genus idea? and not for example, and no I'm not american, Indiana (BB1), the first true large caliber battleship. many other ships could be named to cause a stir. every generation produced ships with better everything. but First Sea Lord, Admiral Sir John Fisher, his ego and his self made propaganda make all the difference here. to answer your question which ships at the time of the dreadnought where comparable. the japanese Satsuma was a 12 gun all 12 inch battleship (alto supply issues forced them to fit some 10 inch guns), the US South Carolina also a all 12 inch gun battleship in development well before the dreadnought. to quote Matthew Wright "As we have seen, the all-big-gun armament was entirely in line with existing trend. Furthermore, battleship size, speeds and broadside weights had been rising since the 1880s, and Dreadnought was very much on the curve." "In short, Fisher did not wholly get his way: and if we consider Fisher’s armoured cruiser ideas as the ‘revolution’, then in many ways Dreadnought was more ‘evolution’." "Thanks in part to cost constraints – but also docking limits, which constrained size – she was not radically larger than the Lord Nelson class – 17,900 tons normal load versus the Lord Nelson’s 15,925 tons. This was a lesser jump than between the 12,590 ton battleship Nile of 1888 and the 15,580 ton displacement of her successor Royal Sovereign class of 1889. Further, Dreadnought’s broadside at around 6,600 lb was not radically heavier at intended battle range than Lord Nelson’s 5,200 lb." and "The point that Dreadnought was an evolution that embodied current trends – not a total re-think – was generally recognised within the Admiralty. There were even calls to build more Lord Nelsons, which were liked in service for their handling, and also regarded as effective combatants for some years. Even during the First World War, the pair were stationed off the Dardanelles where they were thought sufficient" in short it can be argued that the step from pre-battleships to battleships or the step to "super dreadnoughts" where far more significant and truly made older ships obsolete. the dreadnoughts where just evolution. well on the curve of the day in line with other ships and the general thinking at the time. but people like simple and decisive explanations and Fishers egoistic propaganda delivered on point.
    1
  1920. 1
  1921. 1
  1922. 1
  1923. 1
  1924. 1
  1925. 1
  1926. 1
  1927. 1
  1928.  @TheDrummingWarrior  "Also there’s nothing about the f35b that makes it crippled" except that's wrong.. the F35B weights more than the other variants, is limited to 7G's instead of 9G's, has a bring back capability of almost nothing, it's also the slowest variant and has less range than the other variants. it also has the lowest take of weight meaning to be able to launch the thing it can neither carry enough fuel nor enough weapons which makes the lack of air to air refueling capability of the british carriers even more depressing. what the UK politicians who over ruled the navy opted for is saving some money on an angled deck with catapults and arresting gear in exchange for having almost no capabilities. yet they still have the costs of operating 2 carriers and lots of very expensive F35 jets. some old freighter converted to carry a number of helicopters with some rockets strapped to the sides would have saved even more money... PS if you think they will ever convert the 2 ships to proper carriers think again. they just build the 2 ships and opted not to install the catapults and arresting wires AND they bough many billions worth of F35Bs. no one will retrofit catapults to these ships, not within the next 30 years where the F35Bs will be used nor after 30 years when retrofitting expensive catapults and arresting gear in a 1 year long retrofit dock exercise to some then quite old ships will make even less sense. no, the QE carriers will be stuck with F35Bs and that's it. the only solution here would be to at least develop, as has been proposed in the US, an air refueling variant of the tilt rotor osprey and ideally also an AWACS variant of the osprey. then at least the F35Bs could launch with a relevant number of weapons on board and then laboriously refuel air to air before going on a mission while a long range AWACS commands the battle space. that wont make the F35Bs any better at dodging rockets or going very far but at least it would give them a chance to even get somewhere while carrying some weapons.
    1
  1929. 1
  1930. 1
  1931. 1
  1932. 1
  1933. 1
  1934. 1
  1935. 1
  1936. 1
  1937. 1
  1938. 1
  1939. 1
  1940. 1
  1941. 1
  1942. 1
  1943. 1
  1944. 1
  1945. 1
  1946. 1
  1947. 1
  1948. 1
  1949. 1
  1950. 1
  1951. 1
  1952. 1
  1953. 1
  1954. 1
  1955. 1
  1956. 1
  1957. 1
  1958. 1
  1959. 1
  1960. 1
  1961. 1
  1962. 1
  1963. 1
  1964. 1
  1965. 1
  1966. 1
  1967. 1
  1968. 1
  1969. 1
  1970. 1
  1971. 1
  1972. 1
  1973. 1
  1974. 1
  1975. 1
  1976. 1
  1977. 1
  1978. 1
  1979. 1
  1980. 1
  1981. 1
  1982. 1
  1983. 1
  1984. 1
  1985. 1
  1986. 1
  1987. 1
  1988. 1
  1989. 1
  1990. 1
  1991. 1
  1992. 1
  1993. 1
  1994. 1
  1995. @Arfur Fuxxakes there are already scientists out there who connect the dots. sky news australia and daily mail quote some scientists "A growing number of scientists say it is possible COVID-19 was created in a laboratory. "Israeli geneticist, Dr Ronen Shemesh, who is working on treatment for COVID-19, said in his opinion the virus was more likely created in a laboratory than evolved naturally in nature. “There are many reasons to believe that the COVID-19 generating SARS-CoV-2 was generated in a lab. Most probably by methods of genetic engineering,” he said. “I believe that this is the only way an insertion like the FURIN protease cleavage site could have been introduced directly at the right place and become effective.” Dr Shemesh points to the insertion of a Furin site as the most unusual aspect of COVID-19. “I believe that the most important issue about the differences between ALL coronavirus types is the insertion of a Fufin protease cleavage site at the Spike protein of SARS-CoV-2,” he said. “Such an insertion is very rare in evolution, the addition of such 4 Amino acids alone in the course of only 20 years is very unlikely.” "“What makes it even more suspicious is that fact that this insertion not only occurred on the right place and in the right time, but also turned the cleavage site from an Serine protease cleavage site to a FURIN cleavage site,” he said." "La Trobe University Chemistry and Physics Professor David Winkler says there are several possibilities for the source of COVID-19 and you cannot rule out the laboratory as one option. “On the basis of the calculations we’ve done, you can’t exclude that it’s been processed through human cells in a biosecurity lab - but it’s certainly not the only explanation,” he said. Flinders University Professor Nikolai Petrovsky says COVID-19 is “exquisitely adapted to infect humans”." the daily mail and sky new australia reported on it. so the media is not completely silenced even though the consensus is that there is only one truth and everything that doesn't match the chinese official story (and some western virologists who where suspiciously loud very early on without any facts at hand) is a conspiracy and right wing and what not. PS google coronavirus gain of function experiment 2015 study. the chinese inserted a furin cleavage site in coronaviruses in 2015 yet some backwater virologist say this sars-cov-2 CAN'T be man made..
    1
  1996. 1
  1997. 1
  1998. 1
  1999. 1
  2000. 1
  2001. 1
  2002. 1
  2003. 1
  2004. 1
  2005. 1
  2006. 1
  2007. 1
  2008. 1
  2009. 1
  2010. 1
  2011. 1
  2012. 1
  2013. 1
  2014. 1
  2015. 1
  2016. 1
  2017. 1
  2018. 1
  2019. 1
  2020. 1
  2021. 1
  2022. 1
  2023. 1
  2024. 1
  2025.  Frank C. Miller  when germany and the soviet union attacked poland. poland only existed as a nation for 2 decades. also I didn't see the UK and france declare war on the soviet union. they only declared war on germany. funny right? almost as if they really wanted war with germany and didn't actually care about poland. also stop that bullshit of 'conquer the world', 'starve and kill entire populations'. do you morion even know what time we are talking about? did 1945 somehow happen before 1940 in your mind? I'm talking about 1939 when germany and the soviet union attacked poland to get back to their pre versailles treaty borders. people say that's the start of ww2 therefore hitler started ww2. but it's a simple fact of reasoning that a border conflict in eastern europe is in fact not a world war. it only turned into a world war when france and the UK decided they wanted war with germany and declared it. then it became a world war. strangely enough neither france nor the UK had the balls to declare war against the soviet union for attacking poland. why is that? if the reason for declaring war against germany was that poland needed to be protected then why did nobody declare war on the soviets? because it's bullshit. just like the UK declaring war against germany in ww1 was not because germany used some belgian roads to get to france. nobody in the UK gives two shits about belgium being used as a short cut and nobody in the UK gave a shit about poland (as demonstrated when the soviets occupied poland during the cold war and nobody cared).
    1
  2026. 1
  2027. 1
  2028. 1
  2029. 1
  2030. 1
  2031. 1
  2032. 1
  2033. 1
  2034. 1
  2035. 1
  2036. 1
  2037. 1
  2038. 1
  2039. 1
  2040. 1
  2041. 1
  2042. 1
  2043. 1
  2044. 1
  2045. 1
  2046. 1
  2047. 1
  2048. 1
  2049. 1
  2050. 1
  2051. 1
  2052. 1
  2053. 1
  2054. 1
  2055. 1
  2056. 1
  2057. 1
  2058. 1
  2059. 1
  2060. 1
  2061. 1
  2062. 1
  2063. 1
  2064. 1
  2065. 1
  2066. 1
  2067. 1
  2068. 1
  2069. 1
  2070. 1
  2071. 1
  2072. 1
  2073. 1
  2074. 1
  2075. 1
  2076. 1
  2077. 1
  2078. 1
  2079. 1
  2080. 1
  2081. 1
  2082. 1
  2083. 1
  2084. 1
  2085. 1
  2086. 1
  2087. 1
  2088. 1
  2089. 1
  2090. 1
  2091. 1
  2092. 1
  2093. 1
  2094. 1
  2095. 1
  2096. 1
  2097. 1
  2098. 1
  2099. 1
  2100. 1
  2101. 1
  2102. 1
  2103. 1
  2104. 1
  2105. 1
  2106. 1
  2107. 1
  2108. 1
  2109. 1
  2110. 1
  2111. 1
  2112. 1
  2113. 1
  2114. 1
  2115. 1
  2116. 1
  2117. 1
  2118. 1
  2119. 1
  2120. 1
  2121. 1
  2122. 1
  2123. 1
  2124. 1
  2125. 1
  2126. 1
  2127. 1
  2128. 1
  2129. 1
  2130. 1
  2131. 1
  2132. 1
  2133. 1
  2134. 1
  2135. 1
  2136. 1
  2137. 1
  2138. 1
  2139. 1
  2140. 1
  2141. 1
  2142. 1
  2143. 1
  2144. 1
  2145. 1
  2146. 1
  2147. 1
  2148. 1
  2149. 1
  2150. 1
  2151. 1
  2152. 1
  2153. 1
  2154. 1
  2155. 1
  2156. 1
  2157. 1
  2158. 1
  2159. 1
  2160. 1
  2161. 1
  2162. 1
  2163. 1
  2164. 1
  2165. 1
  2166. 1
  2167. 1
  2168. 1
  2169. 1
  2170. 1
  2171. 1
  2172. 1
  2173. 1
  2174. 1
  2175. 1
  2176. 1
  2177. 1
  2178. 1
  2179. 1
  2180. 1
  2181. 1
  2182. 1
  2183. 1
  2184. 1
  2185.  @mrkokolore6187  es gibt nicht genug Uran 235 auf der Erde um auch nur einen Bruchteil der weltweiten Energieproduktion auch nur für ein paar Jahre zu betreiben. Atomkraft kann also gar nicht zum Klimaschutz beitragen und schon gar nicht nachhaltig also Regenerativ. Selbst wenn wir jetzt anfangen überall auf der Welt konventionelle Atomreaktoren zu bauen (das sind die einzigen für die es Pläne gibt) um Kohle, Gas und Öl Kraftwerke zu 1 zu 1 zu ersetzten und dann in 20 Jahren alle neu gebauten Meiler einschalten (so lange dauert der Bau von Reaktoren nun mal) dann können wir die vielleicht ein Paar Jahre laufen lassen bis es einfach kein Brennstoff mehr gibt, denn Uranmienen sind Weltweit auf dem Absteigenden Ast und es gibt einfach nicht mehr. In den selben 20 Jahren (und für weniger Geld) können wir aber genauso gut auf Sonne, Wind und Power-to-Gas umsteigen und das dann bin in alle Ewigkeit so weiter machen. Mal ganz zu schweigen davon das die Atomindustrie damals völlig falsche Berechnung zur Sicherheit von Atomenergie als Grundlage ihrer Existenz vorgelegt hat und es nun mal Realität ist das aller Paar Jahre, selbst bei den wenigen Atomreaktoren die es weltweit gibt, einige davon in die Luft fliegen aus den Unterschiedslisten Gründen. Darum wurde Weltweit in den letzten 3 Jahrzehnten kaum ein Atomkraftwerk gebaut (und weil die viel zu teuer sind als das es sich lohnen würde). So ist die Faktenlage und so ist die Realität. Wer das nicht akzeptieren kann ist vielleicht dümmer als er glaubt.
    1
  2186. 1
  2187. 1
  2188. 1
  2189. 1
  2190. 1
  2191. 1
  2192. 1
  2193. 1
  2194. 1
  2195. 1
  2196. 1
  2197. 1
  2198. 1
  2199. 1
  2200. 1
  2201. 1
  2202. 1
  2203. 1
  2204. 1
  2205. 1
  2206. 1
  2207. 1
  2208. 1
  2209. 1
  2210. 1
  2211. 1
  2212. 1
  2213. 1
  2214. 1
  2215. 1
  2216. 1
  2217. 1
  2218. 1
  2219. 1
  2220. 1
  2221. 1
  2222. 1
  2223. 1
  2224. 1
  2225. 1
  2226. 1
  2227. 1
  2228. 1
  2229. 1
  2230. 1
  2231. 1
  2232. 1
  2233. 1
  2234. 1
  2235. 1
  2236. 1
  2237. 1
  2238. 1
  2239. 1
  2240. 1
  2241. 1
  2242. 1
  2243. 1
  2244. 1
  2245. 1
  2246. 1
  2247. 1
  2248. 1
  2249. 1
  2250. 1
  2251. 1
  2252. 1
  2253. 1
  2254. 1
  2255. 1
  2256. 1
  2257. 1
  2258. 1
  2259. 1
  2260. 1
  2261. 1
  2262. 1
  2263. 1
  2264. 1
  2265. 1
  2266. 1
  2267. 1
  2268. 1
  2269. 1
  2270. 1
  2271. 1
  2272. 1
  2273. 1
  2274. 1
  2275. 1
  2276. 1
  2277. 1
  2278. 1
  2279. 1
  2280. 1
  2281. 1
  2282. 1
  2283. 1
  2284. 1
  2285. 1
  2286. 1
  2287. 1
  2288. This is really nonsense from a scientific standpoint. Cows are, like all other animals, co2 neutral and other gases animals produce, like methane, always break down into co2 (which again is co2 neutral, co2->plants->cows->ch4->co2->plants). There is no long term effect, nothing accumulates, nothing gets added, it's a circle. It is really a pointless debate. This is really a big facepalm moment for humanity. People have fallen for this narrative that cow's methane is somehow heating up the planet. It clearly isn't. No methane accumulates. we already have as much methane in the atmosphere as we will ever have even in 1 million years in the future when we keep all our cows. No methane can accumulate, it all breaks down into co2 and the balance is already reached for the number of cows we have. The only way to get more methane into the atmosphere would be to have more cows because than a new balance would be reached (again with no long term effect) I hate that people have fallen for this fallacy. As an engineer it worries me that people lack simple logic and math skills and our society is then doomed to fall for these obviously nonsensical narratives. Yes cows produce methane, as do all other animals, but it's not methane from fossile fuel, it's methane from gras and bacteria, it's short term and part of natures cycle. Nothing gets added, nothing accumulates. It's always at balance for the current set up. We could have less cows but it would make next to no difference. What we actually need to do is get to organic farming. meaning not using fossile fuel products like fertilizers. One Hectare of permanent grassland can sustain 1 cow indefinitely. That's the perfect type of agriculture. Don't worry about methane, that's a nonsense argument and the nitrogen runoff is a symptom of non organic farming practices. Flying in a fossile fueled aircraft to make this "documentary" has done more long term, actually accumulating damage to the atmosphere than any number of cows could ever do.
    1
  2289. 1
  2290.  @Lemonzify  The fasted way for me to get to uni is by bike. It's 3km away through half city half country side traffic. Bike parking is right in front of the door, car parking is either a car park 3 minutes walk away or if that's full searching for street parking. Taking the bus is the slowest but also the most relaxed basically accelerated walking. Taking the car is also an option but I don't really use it since biking is faster and taking the bus means I'm free to walk to other places without worrying about getting back to the car. If you build a city right people will make use of everything. Saying cars are faster and that's why all people will use it is just stupid since we all know that if everyone would drive our cities would have to be razed to the ground to build these horrid american highways through "downtown", then razing downtown to build parking for all the cars. in the end you have no city left only highways with soul crushing traffic and ugly parking lots while the people have to live in suburbian outskirts being trapped there basically isolated and fully dependent on their cars to get them out of these dystopian single family house oceans. You would have to be stupid to advocate for that option. It's already proven to be a failed experiment and traditional, proper city planning is much better for everything and everyone including health, aesthetics, efficiency, social contacts, child development, financially for the individual and for the district (high costs from spread out infrastructure and low density resulting in low tax income).
    1
  2291. 1
  2292. 1
  2293. 1
  2294. 1
  2295. 1
  2296. 1
  2297. 1
  2298. 1
  2299. 1
  2300. 1
  2301. 1
  2302. 1
  2303. 1
  2304. 1
  2305. 1
  2306. 1
  2307. 1
  2308. 1
  2309. 1
  2310. 1
  2311. 1
  2312. 1
  2313. 1
  2314. 1
  2315. 1
  2316. 1
  2317. 1
  2318. 1
  2319. 1
  2320. 1
  2321. 1
  2322. 1
  2323. 1
  2324. 1
  2325. 1
  2326. 1
  2327. 1
  2328. 1
  2329. 1
  2330. 1
  2331. 1
  2332. 1
  2333. 1
  2334. 1
  2335. 1
  2336. 1
  2337. 1
  2338. 1
  2339. 1
  2340. 1
  2341. 1
  2342. 1
  2343. 1
  2344. 1
  2345. 1
  2346. 1
  2347. 1
  2348. 1
  2349. 1
  2350. 1
  2351. 1
  2352. 1
  2353. 1
  2354. 1
  2355. 1
  2356. 1
  2357. 1
  2358. 1
  2359. 1
  2360. 1
  2361. 1
  2362. 1
  2363. 1
  2364. 1
  2365. 1
  2366. 1
  2367. 1
  2368. 1
  2369. 1
  2370. 1
  2371. 1
  2372. 1
  2373. 1
  2374. 1
  2375. 1
  2376. 1
  2377. 1
  2378. 1
  2379. 1
  2380. 1
  2381. 1
  2382. 1
  2383. 1
  2384. 1
  2385. 1
  2386. 1
  2387. 1
  2388. 1
  2389. 1
  2390. 1
  2391. 1
  2392. 1
  2393. 1
  2394. 1
  2395. 1
  2396. 1
  2397. 1
  2398. 1
  2399. 1
  2400. 1
  2401. 1
  2402. 1
  2403. 1
  2404. 1
  2405. 1
  2406. 1
  2407. 1
  2408. 1
  2409. 1
  2410. 1
  2411. 1
  2412. 1
  2413. 1
  2414. 1
  2415. 1
  2416. 1
  2417. 1
  2418. 1
  2419. 1
  2420. 1
  2421. 1
  2422. 1
  2423. 1
  2424. 1
  2425. 1
  2426. 1
  2427. 1
  2428. 1
  2429. 1
  2430. 1
  2431. 1
  2432. let's face it the challenger is garbage. you need a new gun, everyone realizes that, but because the turret it too small you also need a new turret to mount the new gun (plus new sights and sensors). the hull is compromised by it's weak and old powerpack and it probably couldn't support a larger turret. so you need a new hull as well or at least a new powerpack and major modifications to the hull to support the powerpack and new turret. then you need to add all the modern equipment of sights, sensors and what not. in the end you would "upgrade" the challenger by replacing every single part of it costing just as much as buying a new tank and it would probably end up looking like a leopard 2 and use mainly leopard 2 parts from guns to sights and sensors, but it would be full of bugs since all new developments have problems initially, especially this sort of frankensteins monster upgrade. easy solution, build some leopard 2s and use them for 20 years before switching to the leopard 3. the only other option would be to develop a modern tank from scratch and that would mean billions of pounds in development costs that nobody can afford not to mention the inevitable cost overruns, buying mostly german parts from guns and powerpacks to sensors and sights since nobody in their right mind could justify the costs and time it would take to develop high tech world class equipment like that from scratch while you could just buy it off the shelf from rheinmetall or kmw, at least 10-15 years development time and then a short production run followed by closing everything down again and having to deal with all the teething problems of the new tank before it can be declared operational in about 20 years from now. makes no sense too me. sentimental nonsense will not make the UK military better or prepared for the future. if it was down to sentimental thinking of the lower ranks then everyone would still use ww2 tanks. that's not the way to the future. the argument of the Iraq war just shows how stupid that thinking is. the Iraq war was almost 20 years ago and even then it was a war against an unprepared 3rd world nation with old soviet tanks and badly trained and led crews with no support (satellites, air cover, artillery aso). it has no relevance for anything really.
    1
  2433. 1
  2434. 1
  2435. 1
  2436. 1
  2437. 1
  2438. 1
  2439. 1
  2440. 1
  2441. 1
  2442. 1
  2443. 1
  2444. 1
  2445. 1
  2446. 1
  2447. 1
  2448. 1
  2449. 1
  2450. 1
  2451. 1
  2452. 1
  2453. 1
  2454. 1
  2455. 1
  2456. 1
  2457. 1
  2458. 1
  2459. 1
  2460. 1
  2461. 1
  2462. 1
  2463. 1
  2464. 1
  2465. 1
  2466. 1
  2467. 1
  2468. 1
  2469. 1
  2470. 1
  2471. 1
  2472. 1
  2473. 1
  2474. 1
  2475. 1
  2476. 1
  2477. 1
  2478. 1
  2479. 1
  2480. 1
  2481. 1
  2482. 1
  2483. 1
  2484. 1
  2485. 1
  2486. 1
  2487. 1
  2488. 1
  2489. 1
  2490. 1
  2491. 1
  2492. 1
  2493. 1
  2494. 1
  2495. 1
  2496. 1
  2497. 1
  2498. 1
  2499. 1
  2500. 1
  2501. 1
  2502. 1
  2503. 1
  2504. 1
  2505. 1
  2506. 1
  2507. 1
  2508. 1
  2509. 1
  2510. 1
  2511. 1
  2512. 1
  2513. 1
  2514. 1
  2515. 1
  2516. 1
  2517. 1
  2518. 1
  2519. 1
  2520. 1
  2521. 1
  2522. 1
  2523. 1
  2524. 1
  2525. 1
  2526. 1
  2527. 1
  2528. 1
  2529. 1
  2530. 1
  2531. 1
  2532. 1
  2533. 1
  2534. 1
  2535. 1
  2536. 1
  2537. 1
  2538. 1
  2539. 1
  2540. 1
  2541. 1
  2542. 1
  2543. 1
  2544. 1
  2545. 1
  2546. 1
  2547. 1
  2548. 1
  2549. 1
  2550. 1
  2551. 1
  2552. 1
  2553. 1
  2554. 1
  2555. 1
  2556. 1
  2557. 1
  2558. 1
  2559. 1
  2560. 1
  2561. 1
  2562. 1
  2563. 1
  2564. 1
  2565. 1
  2566. 1
  2567. 1
  2568. 1
  2569. 1
  2570. 1
  2571. 1
  2572. 1
  2573. 1
  2574. 1
  2575. 1
  2576. 1
  2577. 1
  2578. 1
  2579. 1
  2580. 1
  2581. 1
  2582. 1
  2583. 1
  2584. 1
  2585. 1
  2586. 1
  2587. 1
  2588. 1
  2589. 1
  2590. 1
  2591. 1
  2592. 1
  2593. 1
  2594. 1
  2595. 1
  2596. 1
  2597. 1
  2598. 1
  2599. 1
  2600. 1
  2601. 1
  2602. 1
  2603. 1
  2604. 1
  2605. 1
  2606. 1
  2607. 1
  2608. 1
  2609. 1
  2610. 1
  2611. 1
  2612. 1
  2613. 1
  2614. 1
  2615. 1
  2616. 1
  2617. 1
  2618. 1
  2619. 1
  2620. 1
  2621. 1
  2622. 1
  2623. 1
  2624. 1
  2625. 1
  2626. 1
  2627. 1
  2628. 1
  2629. 1
  2630. 1
  2631. 1
  2632. 1
  2633. 1
  2634. 1
  2635. 1
  2636. 1
  2637. 1
  2638. 1
  2639. 1
  2640. 1
  2641. 1
  2642. 1
  2643. 1
  2644. 1
  2645. 1
  2646. 1
  2647. 1
  2648. 1
  2649. 1
  2650. 1
  2651. 1
  2652. 1
  2653. 1
  2654. 1
  2655. 1
  2656. 1
  2657. 1
  2658. 1
  2659. 1
  2660. 1
  2661. 1
  2662. 1
  2663. 1
  2664. 1
  2665. 1
  2666. 1
  2667. 1
  2668. 1
  2669. 1
  2670. 1
  2671. 1
  2672. 1
  2673. 1
  2674. 1
  2675. 1
  2676. 1
  2677. 1
  2678. 1
  2679. 1
  2680. 1
  2681. 1
  2682. 1
  2683. 1
  2684. 1
  2685. 1
  2686. 1
  2687. 1
  2688. 1
  2689. german Fallschirmjäger use mortars instead of artillery because german paras are going for the mobile warfare type of engagement. the thinking is, para troops and airborne elements are usually ill equipped with not much logistics so they can't sustain a fight for a long period against regular enemy troops anyways. airborne troops world wide have the same problem of just not having the staying power of regular ground forces and therefore they are not used anymore. most people don't want to admit it but para units are nowadays mostly prestige units with a good morale and training but no use in modern warfare as airborne elements. nobody wants to risk airborne operation in a peer to peer scenario because altho it's easy to drop off airborne elements, how do you resupply them once the enemy starts to fight back (helicopters are easy targets) and how do you get them out again? well usually you can't so that limits what airborne troops can be used for. so the solution is mobility. if all airborne elements are mobile then they don't need to sit there (or walk which is not much better) and take the punishment from the enemy. instead they can be dropped off at a safe distance from wherever the mission is. get into their little Wiesel 1 or 2 tracked and air portable weapons carriers and just scoot and shot and then retreat again to e.g. an airport they can secure or at least an exfiltration point that is reasonably far away from enemy forces and can be defended until all airborne elements are evacuated or linked up with the relieve ground units. for that type of airborne operations artillery is not strictly needed, mortars that can keep up with mobile forces on the other hand are perfect for the job. a mortar shell has about the same impact on target as a regular artillery shell but with a reduced range of about 1/4 the range of artillery. for a mobile unit that is plenty enough since the mortar units are always right with them, so they don't need the range.
    1
  2690. 1
  2691. 1
  2692. 1
  2693. 1
  2694. 1
  2695. 1
  2696. 1
  2697. 1
  2698. 1
  2699. 1
  2700. 1
  2701. 1
  2702. 1
  2703. 1
  2704. 1
  2705. 1
  2706. 1
  2707. 1
  2708. 1
  2709. 1
  2710. 1
  2711. 1
  2712. 1
  2713. 1
  2714. 1
  2715. 1
  2716. 1
  2717. 1
  2718. 1
  2719. 1
  2720. 1
  2721. 1
  2722. 1
  2723. 1
  2724. 1
  2725.  @rmr5184  most electric cars from VW and many others are sold out almost a year in advance too. still tesla is worth more than VW, bmw, mercedes combined (according to teslas stock price). that's just nonsense all around. also tesla is not a few years ahead. porsche with the taycan showed that luxury sports cars with equal range and faster charging and faster driving can be had for only a little more moneys (to make up for the higher porsche quality) so where is tesla years ahead exactly? other brands managed to build proper E city cars that just work and are affordable like the peugeot zoe, e-up, e mini and many more, tesla has none of that. most cars in most parts of the world are around golf class in size peugeot, vw, honda, bmw all have EVs in that range and they are perfect little cars for around the same price as regular ICE versions of these cars (including government grands) so are they ahead of tesla or what? the only thing tesla is good at is building really simple E cars in the upper price segment (without having the same upper price segment quality) so basically charging people a lot of money for simple cars with good electric drives. that's nice and all but doesn't make up for all the foul plays they did with their restrictions, law suits and cult following not to mention the financial fair play. I do wonder what sort of dark money is floating around in the US where it's possible to have a company that mainly produces debt and very few cars go and outspend all other companies world wide for a decade or more without going bankrupt. all german brands together put a lot of their money into ionity charging network and it's still more expensive to charge there compared to tesla but tesla build a massive charging network as a really small company with no income and they charge less for the electricity coming out of these chargers. completely unfair financial competition. even if tesla wasn't so restrictive with their car parts and what not, this alone raises my eyebrows. someday a bomb will explode and interesting details will come forth and I wouldn't want to be on the wrong side of that shit storm... or the US is really good at protectionism who knows
    1
  2726. 1
  2727. 1
  2728. 1
  2729. 1
  2730. 1
  2731. 1
  2732. 1
  2733. 1
  2734. 1
  2735. 1
  2736. 1
  2737. 1
  2738. 1
  2739. 1
  2740. 1
  2741. 1
  2742. 1
  2743. 1
  2744. 1
  2745. 1
  2746. 1
  2747. 1
  2748. 1
  2749. 1
  2750. 1
  2751. 1
  2752. 1
  2753. 1
  2754. 1
  2755. 1
  2756. 1
  2757. 1
  2758. 1
  2759. 1
  2760. 1
  2761. 1
  2762.  @Albertkallal  ... modern F16s can go Mach 2 and are therefore faster than the F35 who max out at Mach 1.6... maybe you skipped physics class but just like the powerful jet engine is no indication for max speed (because the F35 is heavier and less aerodynamic.. fat really than other jets so the more power doesn't translate to more speed) the same is true for fuel capacity. The F35 is a fat brick and needs a large engine which needs more fuel. So the more fuel doesn't translate into more range because the powerful engine and the shit aerodynamics negate it. That's exactly the problem of aerospace engineering (which is what I studied at uni) if you make it slightly heavier or inefficient it bites you on the arse everywhere. Also conformal fuel tanks exist in case you don't know.. PS the old F16 versions that where used by norway and as red team in the US is not only an older version (modern version of the F16 can go Mach 2+ while the F35 maxes out at Mach 1.6) but it's also a much smaller aircraft. The larger the aircraft the easier it can outrun other aircraft. That's why fighter jets could not keep up with Concorde. Didn't make Concorde a great fighter jet though. Also these military quotes simpletons like to use are always political. you will never get any negative quotes out of active military personal simply because they like their career and everything they say is closely monitored also most of these positive quotes come from basically lobbyists who already work for or will work for the industry after they leave the military (or they are at least part of the "team" for this program). If you want to know what they really think you need to look where the money and power is flowing. Here for example from a few weeks ago "WASHINGTON — The Pentagon and industry agree the F-35 engine needs improvements. But despite years of development and debate, the path forward isn’t yet clear. With the fifth-generation fighter’s missile capacity, electronic warfare, and targeting systems advancing beyond what was originally conceived, and the U.S. Air Force concerned about the potential for war against China, the service is planning to put more power and cooling ability on the F-35." "But there remain multiple options for how to get there. One approach is making a series of upgrades to the existing Pratt & Whitney-made F135 engine currently powering the F-35 through the Enhanced Engine Program. Another potential path is an entirely new replacement engine using cutting-edge technology such as a third stream of air to improve fuel efficiency and thrust. Pratt & Whitney and General Electric Aviation have each developed competing versions as part of the Adaptive Engine Transition Program, known as AETP." So the fat brick needs a new more powerful engine.. well.. it's not like everyone in the know already pointed that out. Doesn't take a math genius to figure that one out. Maybe they should also fix the 7G limit for the F35C and F35B version while they are at it because that's embarrassing all around. They also tried to solve the too small internal weapons bay at some point.. It's a good modern aircraft but as an air superiority fighter it's almost useless, too slow, can't turn. As a multi role jack of all trades it's ok alto too expensive for this secondary role. In the end everyone will buy it simply because it's modern, has stealth capability, is available and widely used by others. But it's not difficult to imagine a better jet fighter.
    1
  2763. 1
  2764. 1
  2765. 1
  2766. 1
  2767. 1
  2768. 1
  2769. 1
  2770. 1
  2771. 1
  2772. 1
  2773. 1
  2774. 1
  2775. 1
  2776. 1
  2777. 1
  2778. 1
  2779. 1
  2780. 1
  2781. 1
  2782. 1
  2783. 1
  2784. 1
  2785. 1
  2786. 1
  2787.  @McKenzy1971  Inhalten Konsumiert? Zum Beispiel die Regierungspropaganda die du gefressen hast wenn du den Schwachsinn mit "AfD nicht demokratisch" wiederkäust ,den du vor 5 Monaten das erste mal gehört hast, als plötzlich alle Politiker und Medien damit angefangen haben? Ohne Grund, ohne Anlass und ohne Beweis. Als ich das gleichzeitig von mehreren Politikern zum ersten mal gehört hab hatte ich mir schon gedacht die haben wieder eine neue Propagandaoffensive gestartet. Noch dazu das Wort Demokratie zu missbrauchen, wie es schon die Linken in der DDR (Deute DEMOKRATISCHE Republik) gemacht haben um "ihre Demokratie" zu "schützen". Oh ha, armes Westvolk, dumm und vollgefressen, die merken es nicht mal wenn sie gesteuert werden. So wie ich das sehe hat die anti-AfD hetze der letzten Monate auf allen Kanälen echt Wirkung gezeigt. Dem Dummvolk wurde mal wieder richtig das Gehirn gewaschen, in dem man die schlechten Umfragewerte der Regierung damit bekämpft hat in dem man die Opposition mal eben als anti-demokratisch und sich selbst als Demokratieretter verkauft hat. Grüne und Linke sind dafür sogar zu 10.000en Demonstrieren gegangen. Wie der Manchurian Kandidate.. Derweilen wird Deutschland vom Abschaum dieser Welt überrannt, Millionenfach. Alle Statistiken zeigen das die Morde, Messerstechereien, Körperverletzungen, Gruppenvergewaltigungen und Sozialkosten für unser Land verherend sind aber an der Umvolkung wird weiter eisern Festgehalten. Die Linken haben ihre Ideologie an der die Welt genesen soll und dann wird Europa jetzt wieder in den Abgrund gestürzt. Wem das nicht gefällt oder wer es versucht zu stoppen muss nieder gemacht werden, denn Linksextremisten dulden kein Widerspruch. Mao, Stalin, Khmer und Stasi haben das schon vorgemacht.
    1
  2788. Inhalten Konsumiert? Zum Beispiel die Regierungspropaganda die du gefressen hast wenn du den Schwachsinn mit "AfD nicht demokratisch" wiederkäust ,den du vor 5 Monaten das erste mal gehört hast, als plötzlich alle Politiker und Medien damit angefangen haben? Ohne Grund, ohne Anlass und ohne Beweis. Als ich das gleichzeitig von mehreren Politikern zum ersten mal gehört hab hatte ich mir schon gedacht die haben wieder eine neue Propagandaoffensive gestartet. Noch dazu das Wort Demokratie zu missbrauchen, wie es schon die Linken in der DDR (Deute DEMOKRATISCHE Republik) gemacht haben um "ihre Demokratie" zu "schützen". Oh ha, armes Westvolk, dumm und vollgefressen, die merken es nicht mal wenn sie gesteuert werden. So wie ich das sehe hat die anti-AfD hetze der letzten Monate auf allen Kanälen echt Wirkung gezeigt. Dem Dummvolk wurde mal wieder richtig das Gehirn gewaschen, in dem man die schlechten Umfragewerte der Regierung damit bekämpft hat in dem man die Opposition mal eben als anti-demokratisch und sich selbst als Demokratieretter verkauft hat. Grüne und Linke sind dafür sogar zu 10.000en Demonstrieren gegangen. Wie der Manchurian Kandidate.. Derweilen wird Deutschland vom Abschaum dieser Welt überrannt, Millionenfach. Alle Statistiken zeigen das die Morde, Messerstechereien, Körperverletzungen, Gruppenvergewaltigungen und Sozialkosten für unser Land verherend sind aber an der Umvolkung wird weiter eisern Festgehalten. Die Linken haben ihre Ideologie an der die Welt genesen soll und dann wird Europa jetzt wieder in den Abgrund gestürzt. Wem das nicht gefällt oder wer es versucht zu stoppen muss nieder gemacht werden, denn Linksextremisten dulden kein Widerspruch. Mao, Stalin, Khmer und Stasi haben das schon vorgemacht.
    1
  2789.  @McKenzy1971  Inhalten Konsumiert? Zum Beispiel die Regierungspr*paganda die du gefressen hast, wenn du den Schwachsinn mit "AfD nicht demokratisch" wiederkäust ,den du vor 5 Monaten das erste mal gehört hast, als plötzlich alle Politiker und Medien gleichzeitig damit angefangen haben? Ohne Grund, ohne Anlass und ohne Beweis. Als ich das gleichzeitig von mehreren Politikern zum ersten mal gehört habe, hatte ich mir schon gedacht die haben wieder eine neue Pr*pagandaoffensive gestartet. Noch dazu das Wort Demokratie zu missbrauchen, wie es schon die Linken in der DDR (Deute DEMOKRATISCHE Republik) gemacht haben um "ihre Demokratie" zu "schützen". Oh ha, armes Westvolk, d*mm und vollgefressen, die merken es nicht mal wenn sie gesteuert werden. So wie ich das sehe hat die anti-AfD hetze der letzten Monate auf allen Kanälen echt Wirkung gezeigt. Dem Dummvolk wurde mal wieder richtig das Gehirn gewaschen, in dem man die schlechten Umfragewerte der Regierung damit bekämpft hat in dem man die Opposition mal eben aus dem nichts heraus als anti-demokratisch gestempelt hat und sich selbst als Demokratieretter verkauft. Grüne und Linke sind dafür sogar zu 10.000en Demonstrieren gegangen. Wie der Manchurian Kandidat.. Derweilen wird Deutschland vom Abschaum dieser Welt überrannt, Millionenfach. Alle Statistiken zeigen das die Morde, Messerstechereien, Körperverletzungen, Gruppenvergewaltigungen und duzende Milliarden pro Jahr in Sozialkosten für unser Land verheerend sind, aber an der Umv*lkung wird weiter eisern Festgehalten. Die Linken haben ihre Ideologie, an der die Welt genesen soll und dann wird Europa jetzt wieder in den Abgrund gestürzt. Wem das nicht gefällt oder wer es versucht zu stoppen, muss nieder gemacht werden, denn Linksextremisten dulden kein Widerspruch. Mao, Stalin, Khmer und Stasi haben das schon vorgemacht. PS wegen YT Gh*stblocking Kommentar zensiert, hier der zweite Versuch Meinungsfreiheit irgendwie aufrecht zu erhalten gegen den Linkstotalitarismus
    1
  2790. 1
  2791. 1
  2792. 1
  2793.  @noahpauly8766  ja schön aber Klimawandel ist jetzt und mal eben so ein komplett neuen Atomreaktortyp zu konstruieren (gegen eine Atomindustrie die das nicht will) und genehmigt zu bekommen und dann 1-2 Testreaktoren bauen (gegen den ausdrücklichen Wunsch der Mehrheit der Bevölkerung) und nachdem der Testreaktor erfunden-konstruiert-genemigt-gebaut und ein paar Jahre wenigstens getestet wurde könnte man dann, falls das alles Gut lief bis dahin, dann einige Thorium Reaktoren Bauen. Bauzeit üblicherweise 10-20 Jahre. Also mal grob gerechnet würde es von jetzt bis die erste Generation von ein paar wenigen kommerziellen Reaktoren ans Netz gehen min 30-40 Jahre dauern. Damit könnten wir dann bestimmt 10-20% des Strombedarfs decken... im Jahr 2060. Das bringt also nichts in Sachen Klimawandel denn der ist jetzt und wartet nicht auf uns. Auch produziert Thorium weiterhin Atommüll, denn der meiste Atommüll sind ja nicht die paar Brennstäbe, so tödlich die auch sind, sonder Millionen Tonnen anderer verseuchter Müll der nun mal in einem Kernkraftwerk im Betrieb so anfällt und selbst das Kernkraftwerk selber ist am Ende seines Lebenszyklus hoch kontaminierter Atommüll und wohin damit wenn wir Tausende von solchen Reaktoren auf der Welt bräuchten? Aber für die Bundeswehr könnten wir so vielleicht mal Nuklear U-Boote bekommen und auch Schiffe könnten vielleicht so ein Thoriumreaktor gekommen. Dafür wurden die ja Ursprünglich erfunden (ich glaub Thorium war mal eine Idee des US Militärs für ein einfacheren Reaktortyp der ein Flugzeug und Uboot betreiben kann). Wenn uns unsere Sicherheit und Freiheit lieb ist (hust* China hust*) müssten wir eh mal anfangen Langstrecken U-Boote und Flugzeugträger zu bauen. Dafür wär das gut. Für Strom ist Solar, Wind, Power-to-Gas und Wärmepumpen und mit Holz heizen wo immer möglich die einzig praktikable Variante weil sie jetzt funktioniert und auch bis in alle Ewigkeit und noch dazu Dezentral bis hin zu Selbstversorger.
    1
  2794. 1
  2795. 1
  2796. 1
  2797. 1
  2798. 1
  2799. 1
  2800. 1
  2801. 1
  2802. 1
  2803. 1
  2804. 1
  2805. 1
  2806. 1
  2807. 1
  2808. 1
  2809. 1
  2810. 1
  2811. 1
  2812. 1
  2813. 1
  2814. 1
  2815. 1
  2816. 1
  2817. 1
  2818. 1
  2819. 1
  2820. 1
  2821. 1
  2822. 1
  2823. 1
  2824. 1
  2825. 1
  2826. 1
  2827. 1
  2828. 1
  2829. 1
  2830. 1
  2831. 1
  2832. 1
  2833. 1
  2834. 1
  2835. 1
  2836. 1
  2837. 1
  2838. 1
  2839. 1
  2840. 1
  2841. 1
  2842. 1
  2843. 1
  2844. 1
  2845. 1
  2846. 1
  2847. 1
  2848. 1
  2849. 1
  2850. 1
  2851. 1
  2852. 1
  2853. 1
  2854. 1
  2855. 1
  2856. 1
  2857. 1
  2858. 1
  2859. 1
  2860. 1
  2861. 1
  2862. 1
  2863. 1
  2864. 1
  2865. 1
  2866. 1
  2867. 1
  2868. 1
  2869. 1
  2870. 1
  2871. 1
  2872. 1
  2873. 1
  2874. 1
  2875. 1
  2876. 1
  2877. 1
  2878. 1
  2879. 1
  2880. 1
  2881. 1
  2882. 1
  2883. 1
  2884. 1
  2885. 1
  2886. 1
  2887. 1
  2888. 1
  2889. 1
  2890. 1
  2891. 1
  2892. 1
  2893. 1
  2894. 1
  2895. 1
  2896. 1
  2897. 1
  2898. 1
  2899. 1
  2900. 1
  2901. 1
  2902. 1
  2903. 1
  2904. 1
  2905. 1
  2906. 1
  2907. 1
  2908. 1
  2909. 1
  2910. 1
  2911. 1
  2912. 1
  2913. 1
  2914. 1
  2915. 1
  2916. 1
  2917. 1
  2918. 1
  2919. 1
  2920. 1
  2921. 1
  2922. 1
  2923. 1
  2924. 1
  2925. 1
  2926. 1
  2927. 1
  2928. 1
  2929. 1
  2930. 1
  2931. 1
  2932. 1
  2933. 1
  2934. 1
  2935. 1
  2936. 1
  2937. 1
  2938. 1
  2939. 1
  2940. 1
  2941. 1
  2942. 1
  2943. 1
  2944. 1
  2945. 1
  2946. 1
  2947. 1
  2948. 1
  2949. 1
  2950. 1
  2951. 1
  2952. 1
  2953. 1
  2954. 1
  2955. 1
  2956. 1
  2957. 1
  2958. 1
  2959. 1
  2960. 1
  2961. 1
  2962. 1
  2963. 1
  2964. 1
  2965. 1
  2966. 1
  2967. 1
  2968. 1
  2969. 1
  2970. 1
  2971. 1
  2972. 1
  2973. 1
  2974. 1
  2975. 1
  2976. 1
  2977. 1
  2978. 1
  2979. 1
  2980. 1
  2981. 1
  2982. 1
  2983. 1
  2984. 1
  2985. 1
  2986. 1
  2987. 1
  2988. 1
  2989. 1
  2990. 1
  2991. 1
  2992. 1
  2993. 1
  2994. 1
  2995. 1
  2996. 1
  2997. 1
  2998. 1
  2999. 1
  3000. 1
  3001. 1
  3002. 1
  3003. 1
  3004. 1
  3005. 1
  3006. 1
  3007. 1
  3008. 1
  3009. 1
  3010. 1
  3011. 1
  3012. 1
  3013. 1
  3014. 1
  3015. 1
  3016. 1
  3017. 1
  3018. 1
  3019. 1
  3020. 1
  3021. 1
  3022. 1
  3023. 1
  3024. 1
  3025. 1
  3026. 1
  3027. 1
  3028. 1
  3029. 1
  3030. 1
  3031. 1
  3032. 1
  3033. 1
  3034. 1
  3035. 1
  3036. 1
  3037. 1
  3038. 1
  3039. 1
  3040. 1
  3041. 1
  3042. 1
  3043. 1
  3044. 1
  3045. 1
  3046. the virus is known to be a chimera and it most probably was a standard gain of function experiment done in china most probably by the chinese military. in china civil and military science are not clearly separated. the fact that some very loud (and only a few) virologist very early on said categorically that this virus just can't be man made is like barking dogs (some western scientists worked happily with chinese scientists for money and lack of standards in china and it's better to be a virologist hero during a pandemic than to be part of the group who created this virus so of course most virologists say the virus is natural even though all evidence points in a different directon). there is no scientific proof this virus is not man made (this can't be proven since about 2001 viruses can be gene manipulated at will without leaving any sort of traces in the genome) and the fact it's a chimera (a combination of 3 viruses), the fact is has a working furin cleavage site as a 100% copy a past job, the fact the virus shows no signs of mutations before October 2019, the fact this new virus can jump to all sorts of species where natural viruses need decades to jump to just one new species, the fact one of the viruses used to creat this one the pangulin corona virus was discovered in 2013 but the chinese only told the world about this new corona virus in 2020 (the only reason for that is military security and working on their new virus without telling the world about it) the fact the virus came from wuhan the very city where the chinese do their gain of function experiments on corona viruses it's just very obvious this virus not only came from a lab but was also created in that lab. but I know, this is just a conspiracy theory and I'm being silly. just wait a few years and it will all come out. it's so obvious this can't be covered up by a single nature article by a small group of scientists with dirt on their hands. the media really should ask more questions and not just swallow every bait.
    1
  3047. 1
  3048. 1
  3049. 1
  3050. 1
  3051. 1
  3052. 1
  3053. 1
  3054. 1
  3055.  @louiswalker5080  maybe you should have read some of the 2017GE manifestos before writing any of this or did someone tell you this and you actually believe it? just look at the 2017 labour manifesto: 1. point. "Accept the EU referendum result and build a close new relationship with the EU". I accept the result of the non binding referendum as well and they also made clear in the same sentence what the terms are. no deal brexit certainly doesn't fit the bill. maybe the norway option, just a trade deal would or a new EU deal and another referendum on that deal, but not the suspension of parliament and a hard brexit. so who exactly thought the referendum was about staying or leaving every single european agreement and program including a hard boarder in ireland, no european freedoms like free movement of people and money? maybe they should have said that instead of promising 350 quadrillion for the NHS PS you still vote for MPs and not a political party. the people voted for their local MP based on his persona/opinions and not on party manifestos that apparently nobody except me even reads anymore. PPS the other labour manifesto points from the 2017GE are : Guarantee the rights of EU nationals living in the UK and work to "secure reciprocal rights" for UK citizens elsewhere in the EU A "meaningful" role for Parliament throughout Brexit negotiations Scrap Conservatives' Brexit White Paper and replace with "fresh negotiating priorities" with strong emphasis on retaining the benefits of the single market and customs union Reject no deal as a viable option and if needs be negotiate transitional arrangements "to avoid a cliff-edge for the UK economy" are you still sure you are pro democracy?
    1
  3056. 1
  3057. 1
  3058. 1
  3059. 1
  3060. 1
  3061. 1
  3062. 1
  3063. 1
  3064. 1
  3065. 1
  3066. 1
  3067. 1
  3068. 1
  3069. 1
  3070. 1
  3071. 1
  3072. 1
  3073. 1
  3074. 1
  3075. 1
  3076. 1
  3077. 1
  3078. 1
  3079. 1
  3080. 1
  3081. 1
  3082. 1
  3083. 1
  3084. 1
  3085. 1
  3086. 1
  3087. 1
  3088. 1
  3089. 1
  3090. 1
  3091. 1
  3092. 1
  3093. 1
  3094. 1
  3095. 1
  3096. 1
  3097. 1
  3098. 1
  3099. 1
  3100. 1
  3101. 1
  3102. 1
  3103. 1
  3104. 1
  3105. 1
  3106. 1
  3107. 1
  3108. 1
  3109. 1
  3110. 1
  3111. 1
  3112. 1
  3113. 1
  3114. 1
  3115. 1
  3116. 1
  3117. 1
  3118. 1
  3119. 1
  3120. 1
  3121. 1
  3122. 1
  3123. 1
  3124. 1
  3125. 1
  3126. 1
  3127. 1
  3128. 1
  3129. 1
  3130. 1
  3131. 1
  3132. 1
  3133. 1
  3134.  @Thomas_P_aus_M  deutsche sind bis spätestens 2050 eine minderheit im eigenem land. wer die 3. welt nach deutschland holt wird deutschland zur 3. welt machen. schon jetzt brauchen wir plötzlich mehr polizisten, richter, staatsanwälte und gefängnisse sind plötzlich überfüllt obwohl sie noch vor ein paar jahren angeblich leer standen und das obwohl selbst vergewaltiger von unser unfähigen kuscheljustiz auf freien fuß getestzt werden nur weil sie muslimische migranten sind, wie jetzt der fall in dresden mal wieder deutlich machte. natürlich beteuten 2-3 millionen migranten seit 2015 ("flüchtlinge" die ihre papiere "verloren" haben) auch das die mieten steigen. ist halt angebot und nachfrage wenn plötzlich 1 million wohnungen fehlen und der staat (steuergeld) finanziert die migranten und ihre wohnungen in bester lage durch. hunderttausende von denen sind verbrecher laut öffiziellen staatlichen statistiken und das ohne verstöße gegen das aufhentaltsgesetzt und natürlich mit riesiger dunkelziffer. hauptsache wir bezahlen für unseren eigenen untergang in 2 bis 3 stelliger milliardenhöhe. das dann kein geld mehr da ist um das klima zu retten ist klar. also wird die deutsche restbevölkerung noch etwas weiter gegängelt, es wander zwar schon jetzt jedes jahr 200.000 gut ausgebildete deutsche aus und kommen nie wieder aber den rest der hier bleibt will man jetzt auch noch vergraulen. fahrverbote, tempolimit, keine wohnungen für junge deutsche familien und alte menschen, steigende kriminalität und frauen werden am fließband ermordet und vergewaltigt, die medien zensieren sich selber und schreiben nicht mehr darüber bzw nur unter regionales und verschweigen wer die täter sind das es ja rasistisch ist. schöne neue welt, aber wenn das jemand laut ausspricht kann man ihn ja wegen hassrede ins gefängniss stecken, denn leider musste man schon die rede- und meinungsfreiheit auf dem altar der migration opfern. schöne neue welt. das passiert halt wenn man eine ganze generation von weicheiern erzieht die kein selbsterhaltungstrieb mehr haben und denen man 24h am tag nazi verbrechen zur last legt. die gehirnwäsche halt wohl gewirkt. noch nie hat sich ein volk so selbstbereit aufgegeben und jeden der noch vernünftig denken kann als depp oder bot verunglimpft. mit wehenden fahnen in den untergang. das können deutsche gut, einer ideologie verfallen und dann bis zum untergang daran festhalten. schade nur das wir jedes mal auch resteurope mit in den untergrund ziehen müssen. aber im gegensatz zu kriegen ist der bevölkerungsaustausch final. da gibt es kein zurück. irgendwann mal wird man sagen, hier haben mal deutsche gelebt, bis zu ihren untergang, allahu akbar.
    1
  3135.  @Thomas_P_aus_M  von pispers kenn ich alles. das er 30 minuten über den kapitalismus schimpft finde ich jetzt nicht entkräftend, ist halt schön einfach, es gibt keine probleme... migration, griechenland, gewalt gegen frauen, justizversagen usw gibt es für ihn nicht, für pispers gibt es nur probleme mit kapitalismus, ist klar. mein kommentar kannst du sowieso nicht zerlegen da ich die quellen der statistiken alle habe, OECD, statistisches bundesamt usw stimmung brauch ich auch nicht machen. sind halt alles fakten. das unsere medien sich selbst zensieren ist ja zb keine verschwörung sondern ganz öffentlich im neuen pressekodex. wenn man mal wieder liest das irgendein "mann" oder "männer" jemanden vor die bahn "geschubst" haben oder irgend eine frau getötet wurde weiß man es waren migranten, denn bei deutschen steht es immer dabei das sie deutsch sind. man muss heute wieder zwischen den zeilen lesen können, drum sind ostdeutsche wahrscheinlich auch etwas kritischer, denn die können das noch. zuletzt auch wieder schön in nürnberg oder wo das war, 2 jugendliche auf die gleise geschmissen und tot. da hieß es in den medien die täter waren deutsche. danach wurde nichts mehr berichtet. seltsam. jetzt kam im polizeibericht raus es waren ein türke und ein grieche. sind halt auch irgendwie deutsche. wollen wir mal hoffen das die opfer nicht auch migrationshintergrund hatten sonst wird das wie bei antisemitischen taten pauschal als rechte gewalt eingeordnet in der statistik. so läuft das eben heute. wenn in chemnitz weitgehend friedlich demonstriert wird sind das menschenjagten, in amberg machen 4 asylanten willkürlich jagt auf passanten und niemand nennt es beim namen. man kann gar nicht mehr die augen davor verschließen was hier los ist. es ist viel zu offensichtlich. aber die linksgrünrot verseuchten medien und politiker schaffen das doch irgendwie. wenn hier mehr leute mitbekommen würden was hier los ist, dann wär was los.
    1
  3136. 1
  3137. 1
  3138. 1
  3139. 1
  3140. 1
  3141. 1
  3142. 1
  3143. 1
  3144. 1
  3145. 1
  3146. 1
  3147. 1
  3148.  @passionenergy2203  I don't know if you are stupid or have problems reading but next time try to argue without resorting to straw men arguments. only arseholes do that. so don't put words in my mouth that I never said just so you can continue arguing (with yourself basically). everything I said is correct. everything you say is neither historically correct nor does it make sense. many younger kids have that problem of not knowing what words mean. the only thing you probably learned at school, if even that, is that a federal republic of germany exists now and hence the word german is somehow mixed up in your head with meaning exclusively 'citizen of the federal republic of germany'. you are also quite clearly incapable of thinking in any other terms than modern nationalism. well I'm sorry if it's impossible for you to imagine things out of your horizon but all I can say is that people just a few decades ago had very different experiences and a better and more immediate understanding of history. to them words had meaning and definition and to them modern nationalism was either new or didn't even exist depending on where you are and at what time. so thing about kid and then read my comments again but this time without inserting your own moronic ideas. just take it as gospel until you can find primary sources that disagree with me and don't make the mistake again of trying to mix your limited way of thinking (or lack thereof) as historical facts just because it feels right to you.
    1
  3149. 1
  3150. 1
  3151. 1
  3152. 1
  3153. 1
  3154. 1
  3155. 1
  3156. 1
  3157. 1
  3158. 1
  3159. 1
  3160. 1
  3161. 1
  3162. 1
  3163. 1
  3164. 1
  3165. 1
  3166. 1
  3167. 1
  3168. 1
  3169. 1
  3170. 1
  3171. 1
  3172. 1
  3173. 1
  3174. 1
  3175. 1
  3176. 1
  3177. 1
  3178. 1
  3179. 1
  3180. 1
  3181. 1
  3182. 1
  3183. 1
  3184. 1
  3185. 1
  3186. 1
  3187. 1
  3188. 1
  3189. 1
  3190. 1
  3191. 1
  3192. 1
  3193. 1
  3194. 1
  3195. 1
  3196. 1
  3197. 1
  3198. 1
  3199. 1
  3200. 1
  3201. 1
  3202. 1
  3203. 1
  3204. 1
  3205. 1
  3206. 1
  3207. 1
  3208. 1
  3209. 1
  3210. 1
  3211. 1
  3212. 1
  3213. 1
  3214. 1
  3215. 1
  3216.  @elliotbland6203  1) that's why I wrote " UK government cheaped out of a catapult and arresting wire configuration because of budget and development concerns". maybe learn to read? how about that? 2) a real fighter? no it can't as many have already pointed out, not to mention that the F35B still lugs around it's vertical lift devise and as anyone with any knowledge knows a real fighter is not burdened with unnecessary weight. quote "..Whereas the F-35A is stressed to 9 g, the F-35B's stress goal is 7 g" another quote "the F-35C carrier variant features larger wings" which we all know is important to fighter to maneuver. so it's not comparable to a proper fighter. not to mention that even the normal F35A and C is not a fighter, it's more a stealth bomber or at best a fighter-bomber. 3) a helicopter is not an awacs, it has neither the range to go anywhere nor the capability. quote "..is supposed to offer an affordable, low-risk solution compared with the other more radical and advanced options that were considered" 4) well it just can't so don't lie about it. quote "Similar in size to the A variant, the B sacrifices about a third of the A variant's fuel volume to accommodate the vertical flight system" 5) there is no difference between this carrier and a catbar carrier with not working catapults also I'm pretty sure it would have cost a few more millions. what do you know? who are you even? want to show me your incredible accounting skills? then maybe stop talking nonsense and show me where it says that a catapult and some arresting wires cost billions and not millions. moron. 6) didn't you just say having more less capable carriers is better than having less more capable carriers at point (1)? that flies right in your face in your own comment and you didn't even notice? the USS america class can carry 20 F35s and two MH-60's making them small aircraft carriers. the americans plan to build 11 of them and they already got 11 Wasp class LHDs. the only point in your entire comment that is actually true is that the USS america class does not have a ramp. I guess this is such a difficult and advanced technology that only the british can build it. I mean a ramp.. can you even imagine putting a ramp on a ship. all the science involved in that. this really makes this british helicopter carrier a special piece of very capable hardware. amazing.
    1
  3217.  @elliotbland6203  1) "because of budget and development concerns". with other words, not enough money and afraid. it's strange that I have to put this here the third time. maybe you get around to learning to read so that you might get it the first time next time you read something. but at least the MOD said that if they ever find enough money they could still build a proper aircraft carrier in the future which is good thinking. 2) yea. nice that you came around. it's not a fighter jet just like I said. you are literally wasting my time here. maybe don't start to argue in the first place, then I don't have to repeat myself until you get it. 3) never heard that all arresting wires failed at the same time. but sure. make shit up if it makes you happy. who cares for facts if you can just feel better about yourself. 5) steal yourself out of that argument as well. fact is the new carrier doesn't have catapults and arresting wired, just as much as any helicopter carrier doesn't. your strange argument was that if they had build it with catbar then it might not be fully operational right now. I said the way they did build them means they will never have operational catbar capabilities. I hope that makes sense to you since I couldn't put it more logical. 6) you seem so proud to be the bitch of the americans. you really build those carriers for them and you are proud of it. the little lapdog of the americans just happy to be allowed to play along. so sweet. but makes sense. without real US carriers this thing could not operate amphibiously like the USMC needs too. but sure. when I look at the pictures I see that they are not even on the same level. the QE has out builds and doesn't fit through the panama canal. the USS america does. also since the USS america and wasp class are a smaller and cheaper to operate they have many more of them which makes strategic sense and they got well decks which is needed for most amphibious operations. all in all what is your point again?
    1
  3218. 1
  3219. 1
  3220. 1
  3221. 1
  3222. 1
  3223. 1
  3224. 1
  3225. 1
  3226. 1
  3227. 1
  3228. 1
  3229. 1
  3230. 1
  3231. 1
  3232. 1
  3233. 1
  3234. 1
  3235. 1
  3236. 1
  3237. 1
  3238. 1
  3239. 1
  3240. 1
  3241. 1
  3242. 1
  3243. 1
  3244. 1
  3245. 1
  3246. 1
  3247. 1
  3248. 1
  3249. 1
  3250. 1
  3251. 1
  3252. 1
  3253. 1
  3254. 1
  3255. 1
  3256. 1
  3257. 1
  3258. 1
  3259. 1
  3260. 1
  3261. 1
  3262. 1
  3263. 1
  3264. 1
  3265. 1
  3266. 1
  3267. 1
  3268. 1
  3269. 1
  3270. 1
  3271. 1
  3272. 1
  3273. 1
  3274. 1
  3275. 1
  3276. 1
  3277. 1
  3278. 1
  3279. the catholic church is not chrstinity. wars have been fought over this, so that Point should be clear. what good deeds did she do? let Kids die instead of feeding them with Food she could buy from the millions of charity she got but insted channeled the Money to the vatican? let People under her protection suffer from incredible pain because she was a nutjob and belived pain were kissed from Jesus? is it a good deed to Keep woman down just because it Plays in the Hand of the catholic church? the only good deed she did was making Money and new followers for the catholic church. like all cults that's the only purpose. if you don't belive that is true and you want "evidence" then let me ask you the same Thing every idiot with an Agenda should be asked at that Point. +what would you accept as evidence and Change your mind accordingly?+ obviously written account and personal experience doesnt count for you. so I guess we never know. right? with that advice resistant attitude you can dismiss everything and nothing ever is accepted because it's not "evidence" in your eyes. btw the hitler comment was because you said we should not talk against mother teresa because she is dead and can't defend herself. so guess what. we can. hitler is dead and we can talk shit about him too even though he cant defend himself and you know why? because it's not a fucking game with rules. free speech mutherfucker. I know my comment with all it's logic will pass right by you just like the hitler reference did (isn't your stupidity and lack of logic bothering you) and will make no Impact. I don't know why I bother arguing with advice resistant morons. no amount of logic nd arguments will ever mean anything and all I get back is a stupid comment like yours where you even boast about not defending hiter and then ask me to "use the garbage between my ears"?! embarrassing
    1
  3280. 1
  3281. 1
  3282. 1
  3283. 1
  3284. 1
  3285. 1
  3286. 1
  3287. 1
  3288. 1
  3289. 1
  3290. 1
  3291. 1
  3292. 1
  3293. 1
  3294. 1
  3295. 1
  3296. 1
  3297. 1
  3298. 1
  3299. 1
  3300. 1
  3301. 1
  3302. 1
  3303. 1
  3304. 1
  3305. 1
  3306. 1
  3307. 1
  3308. 1
  3309. 1
  3310. 1
  3311. 1
  3312. 1
  3313. 1
  3314. 1
  3315. 1
  3316. 1
  3317. 1
  3318. 1
  3319. 1
  3320. 1
  3321. 1
  3322. 1
  3323. 1
  3324. 1
  3325. 1
  3326. 1
  3327. 1
  3328. 1
  3329. 1
  3330. 1
  3331. 1
  3332. 1
  3333. 1
  3334. 1
  3335. 1
  3336. 1
  3337. 1
  3338. 1
  3339. 1
  3340. 1
  3341. 1
  3342. 1
  3343. 1
  3344. 1
  3345. 1
  3346. 1
  3347. 1
  3348. 1
  3349. 1
  3350. 1
  3351. 1
  3352. 1
  3353. 1
  3354. 1
  3355. it's called Operation Osoaviakhim. 2200 german rocket scientists where transported to the soviet union and started their rocket program by rebuilding the V2 called the R-1 in the soviet union. altho the soviets couldn't hide it, they said that the germans were sent back in the 50's but some (ca 200) never came back because they still worked on the soviet missile program in the late 50's during the development of the R-7 in "german infested"(according to the KGB) OKB-1 design bureau and it was not desired that when the germans go back to germany that they will tell the americans all the latest news about the russian nuclear deterrence, as you might imagine. unlike the americans the soviets were secretive about all of that so there are very little public sources since the soviets didn't exactly publish anything, but it's still true. also next time don't talk back at me, instead try to look it up first and don't just repeat everything soviet propaganda wants you to believe. I know their storyline too. I don't need a parrot to repeat it back at me. we all know that from rockets, nuclear weapons, concord, space shuttle and first jet airplanes, soviets copied or stole most of their tech before incorporating it in their industry. but they would never acknowledge that even if all the evidence is very clear. russian leaders just like to lie to everyone including their own people (look at the attack on Skripal and all the clear evidence but russians still lie about it or look at the shot down airplane Malaysia Airlines Flight 17, they still deny it though if it's so obvious, or look at all the russian soldiers just happening to be on holiday in the ukrain when they get captured still in their uniform and all the dead russian soldiers being secretly buried in russia and their families send notes that they where killed outside of russia and needed transporting back home and that they are not allowed to talk about it, russian lies are so obvious and they still deny everything) PS von 'Braun got his knowledge of rocket building from building rockets and not from Tsiolkovsky. also if anything it's worth mentioning that Hermann Oberth was very influential on von Braun according to von Braun.
    1
  3356. 1
  3357. 1
  3358. you seem to be terribly misinformed. NASA doesn't use the RD-180. the only ones that use the RD-180 is the privat company ULA for their Atlas V rocket and like most companies they use the cheapest option available. also the RD-180 was first build in 2000 the same year it was first used by ULA in the Atlas lll rocket. "high-level agreements between the US government and the Russian government, the engines were imported to the US" so that's exactly the same year and a political agreement at a time where international cooperation was on the agenda, see ISS). nothing to brag about. if Bangladesh would build a cheaper engine they would buy that instead. most countries import cheap items from asia to save money to make a profit. btw the Mig-15 used german swept back wing design and is a derivate of the Mig-9 which "was the first turbojet fighter developed by Mikoyan-Gurevich in the years immediately after World War II. It used reverse-engineered German BMW 003 engines." and the engines the Mig-15 used where famously british. "The Soviet aviation minister Mikhail Khrunichev and aircraft designer A. S. Yakovlev suggested to Premier Joseph Stalin that the USSR buy the conservative but fully developed Nene engines from Rolls-Royce for the purpose of copying them in a minimum of time. Stalin is said to have replied, "What fool will sell us his secrets?"[4] "British Labour government and its Minister of Trade, Sir Stafford Cripps, were perfectly willing to provide technical information and a license to manufacture the Rolls-Royce Nene. Sample engines were purchased and delivered with blueprints. Following evaluation and adaptation to Russian conditions, the windfall technology was tooled for mass-production as the Klimov RD-45 to be incorporated into the MiG-15." do you have any other examples we can go through?
    1
  3359. 1
  3360. 1
  3361. 1
  3362. 1
  3363. 1
  3364. 1
  3365. 1
  3366. 1
  3367. 1
  3368. 1
  3369. 1
  3370. 1
  3371. 1
  3372. 1
  3373. 1
  3374. 1
  3375. 1
  3376. 1
  3377. 1
  3378. 1
  3379. 1
  3380. 1
  3381. 1
  3382. 1
  3383. 1
  3384. 1
  3385. 1
  3386. 1
  3387. 1
  3388. 1
  3389. 1
  3390. 1
  3391. 1
  3392. 1
  3393. 1
  3394. 1
  3395. 1
  3396. 1
  3397. 1
  3398. 1
  3399. 1
  3400. 1
  3401. 1
  3402. 1
  3403. 1
  3404. 1
  3405. 1
  3406. 1
  3407. 1
  3408. 1
  3409. 1
  3410. 1
  3411. 1
  3412. 1
  3413. 1
  3414. 1
  3415. 1
  3416. 1
  3417. 1
  3418. 1
  3419. 1
  3420. 1
  3421. 1
  3422. 1
  3423. 1
  3424. 1
  3425. 1
  3426. 1
  3427. 1
  3428. 1
  3429. 1
  3430. 1
  3431. 1
  3432. 1
  3433. 1
  3434. 1
  3435. 1
  3436. 1
  3437. 1
  3438. 1
  3439. 1
  3440. 1
  3441. 1
  3442. 1
  3443. 1
  3444. 1
  3445. 1
  3446. 1
  3447. 1
  3448. 1
  3449. 1
  3450. 1
  3451. 1
  3452. 1
  3453. 1
  3454. 1
  3455. 1
  3456. 1
  3457. 1
  3458. 1
  3459. 1
  3460. 1
  3461. 1
  3462. 1
  3463. 1
  3464. 1
  3465. 1
  3466. 1
  3467.  @jhunt5578  This is really nonsense from a scientific standpoint. Cows are, like all other animals, co2 neutral and other gases animals produce, like methane, always break down into co2 (which again is co2 neutral, co2->plants->cows->ch4->co2->plants). There is no long term effect, nothing accumulates, nothing gets added, it's a circle. It is really a pointless debate. This is really a big facepalm moment for humanity. People have fallen for this narrative that cow's methane is somehow heating up the planet. It clearly isn't. No methane accumulates. we already have as much methane in the atmosphere as we will ever have even in 1 million years in the future when we keep all our cows. No methane can accumulate, it all breaks down into co2 and the balance is already reached for the number of cows we have. The only way to get more methane into the atmosphere would be to have more cows because than a new balance would be reached (again with no long term effect) I hate that people have fallen for this fallacy. As an engineer it worries me that people lack simple logic and math skills and our society is then doomed to fall for these obviously nonsensical narratives. Yes cows produce methane, as do all other animals, but it's not methane from fossile fuel, it's methane from gras and bacteria, it's short term and part of natures cycle. Nothing gets added, nothing accumulates. It's always at balance for the current set up. We could have less cows but it would make next to no difference. What we actually need to do is get to organic farming. meaning not using fossile fuel products like fertilizers. One Hectare of permanent grassland can sustain 1 cow indefinitely. That's the perfect type of agriculture. Don't worry about methane, that's a nonsense argument and the nitrogen runoff is a symptom of non organic farming practices. Flying in a fossile fueled aircraft to make this "documentary" has done more long term, actually accumulating damage to the atmosphere than any number of cows could ever do.
    1
  3468. 1
  3469. 1
  3470. 1
  3471. 1
  3472. 1
  3473. 1
  3474. 1
  3475. 1
  3476. well you are wrong. no idea why you are so stupid to think the EU started out as some form of capitalistic efficiency project. it just didn't and never was. the european coal and steel community (first iteration of the EU) was a purely political project to make war on the continent impossible by tying german and french coal and steel industry together in a bureaucratic political organization. without coal and steel there couldn't be a new franco-german war. with this new found european political cooperation, as opposed to european military/economic antagony, came the slow process of integration, set out from the start as a political project of deeper integration. from the ecsc, to the eec to the eu. just to quote wiki. "The ECSC was run by four institutions: a High Authority composed of independent appointees, a Common Assembly composed of national parliamentarians, a Special Council composed of nation ministers, and a Court of Justice. These would ultimately form the blueprint for today's European Commission, European Parliament, the Council of the European Union and the European Court of Justice." ps I actually believe you and your story of having doctor titles (and then bragging with it on the internet) as an engineer I work with 'doctors' all the time. lets just say you fit right in there. I'm surprised you actually know enough to use a computer to write a comment on youtube. well done you. here I give you another doctor title. +++Doctor of Internet Studies from the University of Mar+++ it's as good and real as all your other "doctor titles" verstehst schon, au revoir stronzo.
    1
  3477. germany never imposed austerity on anyone. they all had a choice, austerity, 'not austerity' or bankruptcy. all good options that have been used by many countries in similar situations before and since. but for 'not austerity' you need money. they wouldn't or couldn't get that money on the market because of what they did to themselves by knowingly overspending for years and loosing all trust. so they begged other countries to give them money. but like with all loans, when you want them you have to play by the rules. no bank will give you a loan if you end every month on a loss and already have 100% of your annual income in debt. the bank will tell you that will not work and you will go bankrupt. so you need to learn to spend within your means first. btw that 'german' (really norther european) approach has worked perfectly in ireland, portugal and now spain and it is begging to work in reluctant greece. their economy grows, unemployment is sinking and the government ends every year on a surplus. yes the EU is a supra national institution/state. that's the idea. the EU is something in between the UN and national states just as national states are something in between the EU and regional government just as regional governments are something in between national states and local representatives. if you live in a village you can say I am part of that village, the local constituency, the regional government, the nation, the eu and the UN and in the future probably earth and then inhabited mars will form a political entity as well. who knows. btw what macron wants and what macron gets are two different things and I'm against merkels migrant politics just as much as most people and things are already changing. nothing humans do is ever perfect. that's why there is a politic process. you can vote or get voted in. no reason to throw the baby out with the bathwater. I much rather have the EU and everything that comes with it than not having it. there is no common market without a politic institution. there is no common market without things like environment protection and labour rights. if you want an economic block you need people who run it. the EU is just that- there is no conceivable option to have an economic block but not an political entity. you talk about the euro being impossible without a government controlling it, well the same is true for a common market. have your cake and eat it, right? if we would scrap the EU and started over with the intention of having an economic block we would end up with something very similar to the EU again. the only other option would be an undemocratic institution without a parliament, without a council and without a political process. that's not better, that's worse.
    1
  3478. 1
  3479. 1
  3480. 1
  3481. 1
  3482. 1
  3483. 1
  3484. 1
  3485. 1
  3486. 1
  3487. 1
  3488. 1
  3489. 1
  3490. 1
  3491. 1
  3492. 1
  3493. 1
  3494. 1
  3495. 1
  3496. 1
  3497. 1
  3498. 1
  3499. 1
  3500. 1
  3501. 1
  3502. 1
  3503. 1
  3504. 1
  3505. 1
  3506. 1
  3507. 1
  3508. 1
  3509. 1
  3510. 1
  3511. 1
  3512. 1
  3513. 1
  3514. 1
  3515. 1
  3516. 1
  3517. 1
  3518. 1
  3519. 1
  3520. 1
  3521. 1
  3522. 1
  3523. 1
  3524. 1
  3525. 1
  3526. 1
  3527. 1
  3528. 1
  3529. 1
  3530. 1
  3531. 1
  3532. 1
  3533. 1
  3534. 1
  3535. 1
  3536. 1
  3537. 1
  3538. 1
  3539. 1
  3540. 1
  3541. 1
  3542. 1
  3543. 1
  3544. 1
  3545. 1
  3546. 1
  3547. 1
  3548. 1
  3549. 1
  3550. 1
  3551. 1
  3552. 1
  3553. 1
  3554. 1
  3555. 1
  3556. 1
  3557. 1
  3558. 1
  3559. 1
  3560. 1
  3561. 1
  3562. 1
  3563. 1
  3564. 1
  3565. 1
  3566. 1
  3567. 1
  3568. 1
  3569. 1
  3570. 1
  3571. 1
  3572. 1
  3573. 1
  3574. 1
  3575. 1
  3576. 1
  3577. 1
  3578. 1
  3579. 1
  3580. 1
  3581. 1
  3582. 1
  3583. 1
  3584. 1
  3585.  @DJWeiWei  yes that article. (a article, not a paper and not peer reviewed). they even mention the inserted furin cleavage site as strange but that it has not been "proven" to do anything so it's not evidence for anything. guess what. it has been proven that exactly this furin cleavage site is what makes this virus so well adjusted to humans, as any virologists surly should know if they are not imposters since even biologists know this, none of this is news and everyone knows this. so why did they play dumb in this article? (rhetorical question, most authors of this article are involved with gain of function experiments as are most virologists, for most it's their only grand 'revenue') and why is this article still the main source for the "natural origin" narrative even though it's already outdated? why did they say with certainty this virus is not man made when there is no scientific proof that it is not man made/natural? it's a disgrace of an article that dragged science into the gutters and it was picked up by everyone including scientific papers and media. it's reverenced as source in many papers and the media jumped on it so that the narrative now is settled and everyone who questions or looks into the origin of this virus risks their grant moneys and their reputation. only a few speak out freely but most have been silenced. my best guess is time will tell. there is no way the chinese didn't fuck around with this, the lab shut down in wuhan that was discovered thanks to public phone data, the gene mutations, the gain of function insertion of the furin cleavage site, the fact this virus can jump into dozens of very different species right from the get go which no natural virus can just as if this virus was passed through cell cultures and lab animals (takes about a decade for a virus to jump to one new species in nature), the fact the chinese lied about the origin, the place it first appeared is nowhere near where the 'bats' live but right next to the labs the chinese (civil and military) do their research, the fact many chinese scientists have been disappeared. man if this was a court case it would be clear cut but thanks to a small group of western scientists (with 'special interests') and their nature article that is flawed beyond repair in it's facts and unscientific conclusions we got to the point where pointing out the evidence and the obvious gets you framed as conspiracy idiot and most media doesn't even report on the origin of the virus that fucked our lives.
    1
  3586. 1
  3587.  @DJWeiWei  there is no evidence that sars-cov-2 has a natural origin, none, yet thanks to one nature article that everyone is referencing (that is deeply flawed, not peer reviewed, not a paper, yet claims in absolute therms 'which is deeply unscientific in itself' and without evidence that this just can't be an escaped lab experiment and the authors are all biased and with financial interests in gain of function experiments some of them with links to the wuhan labs, not to mention is already outdated with their claim that the furin cleavage site, that looks very suspicious, having no affect on how the virus works, basically that entire article is garbage from start to end and needs to be dismissed), a laboratory origin has been decried as conspiracy theory even though there is plenty of evidence. considering everyone who says this is a chinese military experiment gone wrong risks loosing his job and reputation this is as good as it gets. as long as no one can proof this is a natural virus I stand by the facts and they don't look good for the chinese. PS "There seems to be a starting assumption that there must be a conspiracy. " well there seems to be a starting assumption that the wuhan lab and the chinese lying to us about the wuhan virus makes it magically natural, where does that come from? no evidence for a zoonotic origin of this virus even though everyone looked. not even a theory exists how this virus could have evolved. yet the virus broke out in wuhan where the labs are for these viruses, labs which have been found to be unprofessionally run, the very labs that published papers about gain of function experiments by inserting furin cleavage sites into coronaviruses in 2015, the lab where they keep it secret for many years that they have found a new coronavirus Ratg13 which is unheard of but in line with the chinese military research at the wuhan wuhan labs, the labs which had an apparent accident in the very month the virus seems to have jumped to the population based on peer reviewd papers that calculated the time line, the chinese knowingly lying about some fish market bullshit, the virus has been called out by a number scientists (the few who don't seem to rely on grant money and peer pressure including nobel prize winner) to look like a gain of function experiments with insertion of a furin cleavage site and apparently being run through cell cultures and lab animals making it so infectious to surprisingly many animals from the get go, no natural virus has been found that can explain this one, not to mention the strange random mutations patterns that can't be explained by even the most convoluted natural origin theory. by god people, who at this point is stupid enough to believe this is a bat soup accident... PS of course virologists world wide are now seen as heroes and are showered in research money, it's human nature that they like to be the heroes of the hour and have all the resources they ever wished for, nobody has any incentive to rock the boat and make virologists into the villains of the piece by arguing that it's an escaped lab experiment. that is human nature and I can understand that. hardly a conspiracy, just human nature. but there are scientist who risk their name and reputation and thereby their jobs and financially situation and they have spoken out about this virus looking very much like a chinese lab experiment that escaped. but thanks to a media and peer pressure agenda we don't hear much about that. but the tide is slowly turning. papers are published that go against the dogma that this virus 'can't be' made in lab. some australian news papers put out articles where scientists get to say what they really think. I give another year. right now the media has already decided that this is a conspiracy so they have no incentive to prove themselves wrong, the virologists don't want to be villains of this disaster without a job (gain of function experiments employs most virologists a ban would put them out of jobs) and politicians have no reason to antagonize china or rather trump stopped the ban of gain of function experiments in the US so he will hardly point fingers in his own direction. the truth is out there. we will see in about a year.
    1
  3588. 1
  3589. 1
  3590. 1
  3591. 1
  3592. 1
  3593. 1
  3594. 1
  3595. 1
  3596. 1
  3597. 1
  3598. 1
  3599. 1