Comments by "0IIIIII" (@0IIIIII) on "TomoNews US"
channel.
-
252
-
99
-
94
-
89
-
81
-
51
-
45
-
43
-
43
-
37
-
33
-
32
-
31
-
31
-
31
-
29
-
25
-
23
-
21
-
19
-
18
-
17
-
16
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
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
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
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
-
Cerberus984 Here's the thing, the US bureaucrats will probably anticipate that, and then think, "hey, I have a good idea. Let's help out the homeless and get them up on their feet, so that they neither want to enroll in prison, or turn to crime to get by. That way we can keep our citizens happy and out of prison, we can keep crime down, and since they will be making more money in the future, we can then collect more revenue in taxes to fund these social services. As it is we already spend so much money incarcerating people as it is, so this is a financially smart and morally sound investment. Everyone wins!'
That is what will happen.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
I grow tired of your oversimplifications Crappy Nappy. I understand that the Iraq War is controversial, but you are ignoring the other perspectives. Iraq was worse off under Saddam Hussein than it was under US Occupation. Saddam Hussein was murdering 25,000 Iraqis every year, especially the Kurds in the north. It was genocide. That all ended when the US invaded and overthrew Saddam Hussein. Now Iraq has a democracy, though it is flawed and corrupt, Iraqis now have more freedom and rights than they did under Saddam Hussein. Forces from the Fallout, like ISIS, are being contained in pockets out west. Most of the country is safe relative to other developing countries. WMDs and the lack thereof are not relevant or important. (Although Iraq did actually have stores of old biological weapons, which the Baathists denied having. These weapons may not have been particularly dangerous, but they did in fact exist, so Bush may have been vindicated after all.)
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
-
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
-
2
-
Eric Fisher US armed the Mujaheddin to oppose the Soviets, then the Muj split into the Northern Alliance and the Taliban, US funded the Northern Alliance to fight the Taliban, and after 9/11 US invaded and overthrew the Taliban, which now operates in remote rural areas of Afghanistan as a shadow of its former self, and the situation has since improved. What is your point? How is any of this bad or unique? They have old US weapons from the Cold War, but who cares? That's a minor detail and doesn't matter in the grand scheme. If you think that the Soviet War in Afghanistan should never have happened in the first place, well Cold War policies demanded US involvement.
Russia can be deterred with economic means, without the US military being in the picture? What proof do you have of this? The sanctions are working (and even they are not working perfectly by the way) now because the US military is in the picture, poised to strike, ensuring that any full on war would be suicide for Russia. Removing the US military, NATO, and such changes everything, which means its unknown and you cannot make claims that Russia can be contained without the US military policing it.
Germany is NOT fully capable of defending itself. That's the point of alliances like NATO. Your taxes go to fund the US military, NATO's cornerstone and the World's Policeman, to stop wars from breaking out. Even if it isn't obvious foreign wars are dangerous and disruptive, without your tax dollars funding the US military, the US would have more wars to deal with, each more violent and disruptive than the current conflicts in Ukraine, Georgia, Israel, Taiwan, etc. But despite the US's great power, it is still dependent on its network of allies. That is why they get a say in NATO and other alliances.
US nationbuilding is crucial to keep the country on its feet, and to keep the Afghan people content, all in an effort to curb unrest and extremism and keep the country peaceful. I'm not sure what proof you have that the US is strapped for cash, or that rebuilding American infrastructure is at the expense the War in Afghanistan as if there is one without the other.
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
-
Crappy Nappy You are making moral equivalences where known exist. And you are assuming that Russians themselves have something to gain from Russia's regime. Neither are true. I sympathize with the Russians, they are being conned by their undemocratic leaders, and they deserve better, but if they're too dumb to see Putin as the corrupt, warmongering tyrant that he is, well that's their problem in my book. Look at the evidence, Russia is a corrupt regime, it doesn't even care for its own people, it does not compare to the US. Tyrannies like Russia and China are the only two remaining bulwarks against global interdependence and world peace. The world as lead by the US is the most prosperous and peaceful, there is a reason that the US is allied with every single democracy, and that there have seldom been any wars between two democratic countries. Russia deserves to be stopped. We didn't look at Hitler and sing/ask "Why can't we be friends", so why should we do the same with Putin? I'm not saying there should be a world war to stop him, but he does deserve to be stopped somehow.
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
-
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
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
BMasterToronto78 Yes but that's only two examples of bias, for only two examples of Western media. CNN and Fox may be biased towards certain political issues, but they rarely, if ever, flat out lie. They are vetted, and private, media companies. They are compelled to tell the truth, or else their reputations are trashed and a scandal is created. Your sources are state media, and have been accused of bias multiple times from multiple watchdogs. It's not even that hard to tell that RT is biased, because it is run and funded by the Kremlin, for instance. So while Western, private media is flawed, they are still reliable and the sources you listed are completely biased and full of outright lies, especially RT.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Eric Fisher You are cherrypicking examples. I wonder where you go off jumping to conclusions without proof? There are plenty of examples throughout history where US nationbuilding has been a smashing success, some of which coincide with your examples. Taiwan, Japan, South Korea, pretty much all of Western Europe, Latin America especially since the end of the Cold War have all benefited from US Interventionism. Even in Iraq, more people have been helped by Saddam Hussein's toppling than have been hurt by ISIS and other forces in the fallout of the Iraq War. Iraqi Kurdistan in the north has especially been prosperous. So unlike you, I have reasons that my beliefs are based on instead of imagination. And I believe that if NATO works with moderate forces like the Kurds and FSA, Assad and ISIS can be killed or removed, and Syria can liberalize, and this will only happen if Assad is removed. If he remains, Syria will be back at square one, even if Assad wins the Syrian Civil War. Syria will go back to being an unstable regime in the Middle East, which we have enough of, and have existed regardless of current events which involve America.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Lord Gaben Wow really? You honestly believe that Afghanistan was better off before the US invaded? You think it was better under the Taliban? You are oversimplifying. And you neglect to consider that Iraq was in the shitter before the Iraq War. Remember the Gulf War when Iraq invaded Kuwait? Remember how Saddam Hussein was murdering 25,000 Iraqis every year? Remember how his secret police arrested dissidents? US nationbuilding in Iraq has helped more people than it hurt, and now Iraqis are safer and more free than they ever were. As for ISIS, it is being contained in pockets out west, and steadily being routed. All in all looks like the Iraq War was a success. Iraq, contrary to your claim, is better off and not "fucked". Most of the country is relatively peaceful. Similar things can be said about Afghanistan.
Libya is another matter, and if you actually did some research you would know that it was European NATO members such as France and the UK that undertook the mission in Libya, not the US. But they were having trouble running the show, so they repeatedly petitioned the US to come and help. Eventually the US did, Gadaffi was killed by allied local forces, but ironically, unlike Iraq and Afghanistan, nobody stayed behind to stabilize the fallout, and that is why there were problems. I don't what the situation is now though.
US did not start the Syrian Civil War, it is not America's fault that it happened, in fact I think it was a good thing. Assad was killing his own people in the Arab Spring, which prompted Syrian military officials to defect and form the FSA, triggering the war. Assad is a bastard who deserves to be shot, the war is his fault. And if there are liberal factions in Syria that can take Assad down and combat ISIS, then the US should and does support them.
Any proof that FSA and Kurds are as Jihadist as ISIS, or is that just your amateurish opinion? Kurdish women fight alongside the men, without even wearing headscarves. Clearly the Kurds and the FSA likewise are not Jihadists, though it seems you wish they were. Stop being a 2nd World shill, making false equivalences.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
***** Bias is not in play here, we are not talking advanced and controversial theories, we're talking basic facts. US has ways of determining whether or not Iran is building nuclear weapons instead of nuclear power plants, I listed a few that my professor knew about. In short, it is impossible for Iran to cheat, the Iran Nuclear Deal is sound, and political affilitian, even if my professor was naive enough to succumb to it, is not in play here because what he told me is not subject to political biases. US gathers intelligence, that is not a politicized statement, it is a truthful one.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
ZMowlcher First of all, I don't think that they are incorrectly labeling anyone, if they are labeling at all. I think you're missing the point of a compilation too. These stories may have been covered by Tomonews before, but now in this video, they are all brought together in once place, thus increasing the exposure, reaching out to more people like me who haven't seen all of the individual videos, and is also a way to frame them all and put them into context. Also, make no mistake, US gun and general murder homicide rates (which are not related to population), are several times higher than all Western countries. It's a problem, therefore it's newsorthy.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Garfunkel Shekelstien You know nothing about the Vietnam War. It is entirely different from sending in US troops to bolster Ukrainian forces. Firstly, Ukraine is unlike South Vietnam, it is stronger and less corrupt. Secondly, in Vietnam there was a guerilla force that hid among the populace in remote, impassible, and isolated villages. That stuff doesn't exist in Ukraine, the country is well developed, well mapped, and modern. Thirdly, US did quite well militarily in Vietnam. US and allied forces never lost a single battle to the NVA or VC, even with some exceptions, it can be said that they won most of the battles, only losing a few. The Vietnam War was lost due to political reasons, not military ones. US military was not beaten by the NVA or VC as you claim. There is no reason to suggest that Russia will, and there is no advantage that Russia has.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
BMasterToronto78 The vote to secede, even if it was legitimate and I don't think it was, was done after unmarked Russian troops invaded Crimea. The vote itself was illegitimate. It was not based on honesty and reason, it was based on petty nationalism, Putinism, and anti-Western sentiment. Examples of Russia invading other countries and seizing territory are the incursions into Moldova and Georgia. Putin exports tyranny by supporting Assad in Syria, and also by sending arms, money, advisers, and soldiers to Eastern Ukraine to aid the rebels there. And by arguing with the US, EU, and NATO they are halting the expansion of democracy. The proof that Putin is a dictator who oppresses everyone is the NGO reports like the Democracy Index and the Corruptions Perceptions Index.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
NuclearGrizzly And yet countries which are for more left-leaning, and have much stricter gun laws, have fewer gun-homicides and homicides in general. If it was just one country, it would maybe be a coincidence, but it's in most stable democracies. If gun control works in Japan, Australia, Canada, the UK, France, etc, it's probably effective and it can work in the US.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
NuclearGrizzly Your claim is false, America has a strong rule of law, low corruption, and few citizens live in poverty, and those that do have it easier than the impoverished in failed states and regimes. Let me be clear about my definitions here, so that we don't argue over definitions. I mean 3rd world poverty and corruption. In the US the police will respond to every crime they are called to, and the courts prevent fraud. In any case, even if it's true by whatever criteria/definition that the US has "high poverty and corruption", I don't see any proof that lax gun laws are the solution. In fact we have have had lax gun laws since this country's start, without any interruption. So how then can you say that guns are able to stop corruption if they couldn't prevent it in the first place?
Switzerland is a unique case in the world, and it is not comparable to America. Switzerland has conscription and most people are trained to use guns and exposed to military discipline, Switzerland is also a progressive country with safety nets for the poor, to prevent them turning to crime. And so even though there are guns in Switzerland, people are less likely to commit crimes with them. In short, it's a bad comparison to the US, because the countries are substantially different.
If you have proof that the low levels of violence in Switzerland are because of cultural homogeneity, by all means, prove it to me.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
NuclearGrizzly A blog post is bogus fact. And if you care to read my essay, which includes both primary and secondary sources, you will see that despite your claim, developed countries with gun control, in this case the UK, have gun murder and murder rates that are several times lower than the US's. Also, while developed countries may or may not be compared to the US, that does not mean that they get priority or are more comparable to the US than developed countries. In fact developed countries like the UK are more comparable to the US, because the similarities are stronger. UK and US both have strong police, legal systems, and low corruption, Mexico does not.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Ken M NOAA explicitly states that manmade Global Warming is causing rising sea levels, and that islands and coasts are flooding. Articles from reputable sites like the New York Times also feature quotes from the leaders of these countries saying the same thing. http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/12/02/world/The-Marshall-Islands-Are-Disappearing.html?_r=0
My point is not that the US should go to war, my point is that reframing the issue can make arbitrarily make the same issues seem more or less dire, and that if people care about insignificant threats like ISIS or something they should care much more about Climate Change, because unlike ISIS, Climate Change can destroy cities and displace millions of people, which in a way, violate a country's sovereignty. Experts at NOAA and the Pentagon agree.
Those countries need to do or die, like I said the US should help them out if it's too burdensome, but you can't just pollute the Earth because you're too lazy or corrupt a country to do the right thing.
Low blow man, I'm in college btw.
1
-
1
-
Ken M Why do you assume it's a dilemma? In real life it's not a dilemma, and in real life China wouldn't do this. I understand you want to get to the bottom of my opinion, and see how far I'd be willing to go, but I want to stress that this just a hypothetical with unrealistic parameters and therefore should not be taken too seriously. Also this is just my opinion.
If China refused to cut greenhouse gases and the rest of the world moved on, and if other options like sanctions wouldn't work, and of espionage didn't work, and if sabotage didn't work, then yes I guess war is the only option.
And if poor countries literally have no other options than to burn coal or starve, then they should burn some coal and make all due haste towards renewables, with or without aid from the US and other countries, and if they don't, then they should be punished.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Ken M Climate Change as you define that term is real, and it is natural. However, Climate Change as I define that term, is also real, it is man-made, it is dangerous, and it is preventable. That article you cited linked to no sources, and not all the points are about discrediting the scientific consensus, they are about, how hopeless it is to even try, which is irrelevant and seems more about casting doubt on efforts.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1