Comments by "0IIIIII" (@0IIIIII) on "ABC News"
channel.
-
288
-
158
-
29
-
29
-
17
-
14
-
13
-
10
-
10
-
9
-
9
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@danielviets4427 firstly, it was Trump who set the timeline of the withdrawal, Biden extended it. And I don’t think your opinions on Bagram or the pullout mean anything. Are you suggesting that the US occupy Bagram Air Base indefinitely? Or for a longer period? How is that possible? That wouldn’t be a withdrawal, that would be pointless as it wouldn’t change anything.
Also, comparing this to the Vietnam War is folly, it took South Vietnam 2 years to fall since the US withdrew, here in Afghanistan, the government collapsed in only a couple weeks, no comparison. You also can’t call Biden a liar because he was mistaken. This was unplanned and none of the experts were expecting the government to collapse so rapidly. Unforeseen events happening doesn’t make Biden a liar, it makes him mistaken, and he can’t be blamed for this, his policy and military expert/advisors were all equally mistaken, and shocked at the speed with which the Afghan government collapsed
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Aqua Man Assad is a dictator, dictators create extremism. Saddam Hussein, Assad, they're all the same. Why hasn't ISIS cropped up in Israel for instance? The answer is because Israel is peaceful, democratic, and takes care of its citizens. Assad, Hussein, and Putin, they all don't. They all contribute to terrorism and extremism. During the Arab Spring, this all boiled over, and it was their fault. So by supporting Putin, you are supporting Assad and supporting terrorism.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Biden said US will defend Taiwan. He did not answer what role the US will militarily will play. Lloyd has echoed Biden’s answers, that the long-standing policy has not changed. To come out and say “yes or no” to troop deployment is risky for multiple reasons.
If the US gives a statement affirming US troops will deploy to Taiwan and fight a Chinese invasion, then China may call the bluff and attack, which hurts Taiwan and means the US will either loose credibility if it does not respond, or will be forced to fight a bloody war if it does respond.
Alternatively, if the US says “no American troops in Taiwan”, this may embolden Chinese claims and rattle Taiwanese, leading to an invasion of Taiwan or Taiwan trading its sovereignty to China to avert an invasion. US interests aren’t helped here either.
The solution therefore, is to to speak as Biden and Lloyd have done, which is to reassure Taiwan and deter China with ambiguous messaging. This way China is discouraged from war, and Taiwan averts an invasion. US interests are served.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
PrintProfessor LOL Canadians think they’re the only country that has a parade once a year. Get real! That is not Canadian culture. That’s a day trip, and PS, everyone has pride parades.
Good for Canada that lots of rich Chinese are buying second homes in Vancouver, but that’s not multiculturalism, it’s tycoons jacking up your rents. No wonder Vancouver is so expensive despite being so boring.
I have been to Canada by the way, I went to Quebec City. I was bored. Nothing to do but walk around and eat food. Street performers were a nice distraction though.
Dude, Canada has smarter politics and better healthcare than the US, but you have to admit that the country has no soul. The geography of the nation means everyone lives inside their smartphones and never mingles with other people. Canada is perhaps a tolerant country, where races live together, but it’s not a diverse country, where many cultures share ideas.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@JohnFelinn the occupation of the West Bank and blockade of Gaza Strip occurs precisely as a matter of self defense and pacifying the enemy. Israel used to occupy and even have settlements in the Gaza Strip until 2005, when Israel pulled out entirely with an offer of peace, this was intended to preclude the larger and more decisive pullout of the West Bank, and give the Palestinians a nation that was theirs, though likely with some concessions, namely Israel would keep East Jerusalem and the smaller cities surrounding it that Palestine claims. But anyways, after Israel pulled out from the Gaza Strip, the Palestinians elected Hamas, threw out PA, and began committing terrorism, only then was the Gaza Strip blockaded. Now Israel fears that if it pulls out from the West Bank, it too will be like the Gaza Strip. So the occupation will not end until the Palestinians prove they will be peaceful and good governing. Besides, Israelis have suffered many wars and terror attacks from Palestinians, building settlements and annexing land is justice
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Steiner von Wolfkin Kreave you being antivax or anti-Covid-19 vaccine, or anti-lockdown, anti mask, etc, all hurts me as a young vaccinated man. Because you are prolonging this pandemic, this lockdown, the deaths and injuries of vulnerable Americans (plus people in other nations), you and the other unvaccinated are breeding grounds for new variants which may be vaccine resistant, or which may be more deadly, more transmissible, etc.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I like chees Cake Murder rate in Britain, 2011-2012: 10.43 per 1,000,000. Firearms accounted for 6% of homicides, so .72 gun-homicides for 1,000,000. Through basic math, that's 1.043 murders, and .072 gun-murders, per 100,000 respectively.
http://www.citizensreportuk.org/reports/murders-fatal-violence-uk.html
(In this other article, the gun homicide rate in 2012 was listed for Whales and England as .07 per 100,000, so you can tell how closely the data lines up, which proves that my evidence is consistent. Scotland had no ratio posted but we can infer that it is insignificant. Northern Ireland is not included because that place is unusually violent and unstable. Here's that article, it too was written in and for 2012).
http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2012/jul/22/gun-homicides-ownership-world-list
Murder and nonnegligent manslaughter rate in the US, 2012: 4.7 per 100,000
As we know from the Guardian article, the US gun homicide rate is 2.97 per 100,000. 2.97/4.7 is about 63%. So of all the murders committed in the US in 2012, 63% involved guns.
http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2012/crime-in-the-u.s.-2012/tables/1tabledatadecoverviewpdf/table_1_crime_in_the_united_states_by_volume_and_rate_per_100000_inhabitants_1993-2012.xls
Conclusion: Accounting for population differences;
1) The UK has about 4 times less murders in general compared to the US.
2) Only 6% of UK murders involved guns, compared to 63% in the US.
3) The gun homicide rate out of 100,000 in the US is about 2.97, compared to the UK's rate of .07, that's about 40 times lower.
4) There is an obvious positive-correlation between restrictive gun laws and fewer murders in general, gun-only and otherwise.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@jeffrice4713 firstly, where’s the proof Biden’s evacuation was unplanned? Biden extended the evacuation deadline that Trump set, saying Trump’s deadline was far too short. So Biden made the pullout less disorderly, than if Trump had his way.
Secondly, the withdrawal of US troops, which was started by Trump, not Biden, is what permitted the Taliban to take Afghanistan. How orderly or lot the evacuation was wouldn’t change the fact that the US was absent and the Taliban stood unopposed.
The fact that Biden was mistaken about the outcomes is not related to anything. The same logic would apply to Trump, and Trump is the one who started the pullout, not Biden
You seem to either say that the pullout was bad, but are blaming Biden, despite the fact that Trump pushed for the evacuation initially, and on a more rushed timetable than Biden did. Do you have evidence that if Trump were President Afghanistan would’ve been better?
For
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Biden said US will defend Taiwan. He did not answer what role the US will militarily will play. Lloyd has echoed Biden’s answers, that the long-standing policy has not changed. To come out and say “yes or no” to troop deployment is risky for multiple reasons.
If the US gives a statement affirming US troops will deploy to Taiwan and fight a Chinese invasion, then China may call the bluff and attack, which hurts Taiwan and means the US will either loose credibility if it does not respond, or will be forced to fight a bloody war if it does respond.
Alternatively, if the US says “no American troops in Taiwan”, this may embolden Chinese claims and rattle Taiwanese, leading to an invasion of Taiwan or Taiwan trading its sovereignty to China to avert an invasion. US interests aren’t helped here either.
The solution therefore, is to to speak as Biden and Lloyd have done, which is to reassure Taiwan and deter China with ambiguous messaging. This way China is discouraged from war, and Taiwan averts an invasion. US interests are served.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1