Youtube comments of Emanon (@Emanon...).
-
3100
-
1200
-
784
-
773
-
666
-
459
-
419
-
406
-
383
-
371
-
336
-
306
-
287
-
268
-
267
-
250
-
248
-
241
-
215
-
211
-
207
-
193
-
192
-
162
-
162
-
161
-
157
-
156
-
155
-
151
-
147
-
145
-
144
-
142
-
137
-
137
-
133
-
132
-
130
-
127
-
125
-
120
-
117
-
116
-
114
-
110
-
109
-
107
-
107
-
107
-
107
-
104
-
103
-
103
-
97
-
90
-
86
-
85
-
80
-
80
-
79
-
76
-
75
-
75
-
74
-
72
-
70
-
70
-
69
-
69
-
67
-
66
-
65
-
62
-
62
-
61
-
58
-
58
-
56
-
56
-
55
-
55
-
54
-
53
-
53
-
53
-
52
-
52
-
52
-
51
-
50
-
50
-
49
-
48
-
47
-
46
-
46
-
45
-
43
-
43
-
43
-
43
-
43
-
42
-
42
-
42
-
42
-
Yeah, that's a shit argument.
First of all, you can use the correct name. Persia is the Greek name for your lands.
If Persian empires were so stable, why the fuck did you have so many of them? And dynastic stuggles within at almost every turn? With regards to the diaspora - how much of their Fars heritage have been kept? Not much, brother...
I honestly don't care about Islam in Iran. But to solely blame a foreign invader 1400 years ago is a bit much, no? Just like Christians blaming Jews for Christ or Muslims blaming the Crusades....
And what about the Mongols? The Timurids? The Mughals then?
I've met a lot of Iranians who, first of all, say they are "Persian" and secondly, simply don't know their own history. Be critical, thats fine.
But stop inciting religious or racial bigotry by claiming that your culture was "oh so superior back then" and solely putting the blame on others.
Why the fuck did you lose in only a couple of years, if you were so magnificent and stable and bla bla bla ? Huh? Why were your people converted so easily in a few generations?
Btw: I say the same to the Arabs who blame their decline on the Crusades, the Mongol invasions, and the Turks. And to the Jews about the destruction of their temple and their enslavement in Babylon.
Get. Over. It.
42
-
41
-
41
-
41
-
40
-
40
-
40
-
39
-
39
-
39
-
39
-
39
-
38
-
38
-
38
-
37
-
37
-
37
-
37
-
36
-
36
-
Know your history, my brother.
The Arab empires 700-1100 (the decline coinciding with the rise of Al Ghazali), and in some case until the 12-1300's were beacons of learning, tolerance, debate and knowledge - From Andalusia to Sicily to Delhi.
They certainly weren't perfect, but compared to middle age Europe life was not bad...
If Islam was so "barbaric" how did it spread through trade and diplomacy to East Africa and Indonesia?
From a historic stand point I'm sorry that there isn't more left of the great Persian civilizations. But to put them on a piedestal and assume everything was fantastic is simply factually wrong.
The huge problem with Islam today, IMHO, is not the religion itself. Religion is malleable to the culture and will of its people. Just like ideology and technology.
It's the general exploitation and lack of education during and after the colonial and ottoman eras that really put a hurt on these vastly different regions - which they are yet to recover from.
Conservative Islam ie. Saudi Arabia and Iran are largely a nationalistic response in the aftermath of the colonial era. Where Europe used Fascism and Communism, the larger middle east chose to revive a conservative view of their religions - and replace it or their culture in some instances.
I see your points, but your views are sorely lacking the nuance of the factual historic events.
I'm guessing you are the sort that thinks "Religion is the root to all evil", am I right?
Again, that's an easy one-liner statement, that shows a blatant ignorance of history, culture and societies in general. Lastly: Arabs are not only Islam, Islam is not only Arabs, though they each play a major part in each others history.
And please refrain from openly racist language in the future. It's plainly hurtful and no way conducive to a proper discussion
35
-
34
-
34
-
34
-
34
-
34
-
33
-
33
-
33
-
32
-
32
-
32
-
31
-
30
-
30
-
30
-
30
-
30
-
29
-
29
-
29
-
29
-
28
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
The Russians, line the Chinese, are a proud people. Maybe if we in the West had been more benevolent right after the fall of the USSR, we would have gained an ally such as Germany, Italy and Japan after WW II. Instead, people resort to this language of humiliation and offense.
As a Scandinavian, I too could suggest that Slovakia has contributed absolutely nothing to the EU (which is a fact, as Slovakia is a net negative contributor to the EU budget) except, made us more beholden to authoritarianism, corrupt corporate interests and racially motivated migration policies.
Hurtful language that doesn't exactly motivate friendship and cooperation, no?
15
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
8
-
Point 6: African exploitation.
I see your point if you look at it from a purely "state investment" perspective.
That is, however, a misleading argument to make.
Every aspect of life, from race, to culture, to religion, to language was impacted by European colonization.
It persists to this day where powerful corporations and/or states exploit the division and corruption of actors to exploit a region, often at a wholesale detriment to the local population. Oil, minerals, rubber, coffee, cocoa, gems are being extracted in an exploitative manner to this day.
Heck, Elon Musk inherited his wealth from African slave labor in the mines in South Africa.
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
Inheritance tax is extremely important, actually, if you want to a slightly more equal society.
First of all, it's used as a tax loophole by the wealthy, secondly, you didn't work for any of the money you inherited. Your parents did, sure, but did they also work for the skyrocketing housing prices and the value of their stocks?
It's only fair to take a small share of that and redistribute it to the poorest, schools, hospitals and buckling infrastructure.
Fact is that the UK has had massive economic growth the last 30 years, but very little improvement in purchasing power or opportunity for the lowest 30-40% of the population.
25% of British children live in poverty (until the Tories by law got rid of that stat).
Sure, things can be done better, but the fact is that the current government needs to cover for the fiscal black hole the last 14 years and after Brexit.
It's a fucking joke when you have Tories and Nigel Garbage protesting with the farmers, mate.
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
2 minutes in and you're already absolutely, unequivocally, misrepresenting the context of the conflict:
This never started with Hamas. This started with a brutal Israeli occupation and absolutely no accountability from the international community, the US in particular.
Before Hamas was founded in the 80's, around 40.000 Palestinians had already been killed by Israel, many thousands more maimed by their "broken bones" policy. A million more displaced from their homes.
Hamas is a symptom, not the underlying disease. And the disease is Israeli war crimes, occupation, settlements, apartheid and lack of accountability. It IS as simple as that.
The brutal massacre we're seeing now is another case of allowing Israel to commit atrocities that any other nation would have been sanctioned and isolated for. Case in point: Russia. Which in a year has killed far fewer civilians than Israel has done in a month. "Human Shields" is only applicable if you believe the other side would refrain from bombing civilians. As the Israelis have never had a problem with 95-99% civilian casualties, the entire concept of Hamas using "Human Shields" is laughable. And how is it that Israeli intelligence never saw the attacks coming, but somehow know whenever a Hamas fighter is riding in an ambulance or hiding under a school, hospital or church?
OR is the simple, rational answer this:
The Israeli government seeks to maximise death and destruction to provoke, once again, a mass exodus of Palestinians. And they are very comfortable with using lies and propaganda to further their goals as they are never questioned or looked into.
7
-
7
-
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
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
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
-
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
-
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
-
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
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
@SirAmnesia YouTube doesn't allow for links, but I assumed you'd done your due diligence.
Source: SNP webpage "Scottish voters were told they could protect their EU citizenship by voting remain"
Admittedly not an objective source, but neither are any media outlet in Britain when it comes to IndyRef or indeed Brexit.
The majority of Europe would go to bat for Scotland to join the EU. NATO is a given since Scotland's strategic location is paramount for security in the North Sea. So yeah, there will be a lot of quid pro quo's behind the scene, but in the end, countries like Spain and especially Hungary will comply or suffer severe consequences.
Britain rejoining, if ever, won't happen until the current generation of Tories responsible are out.
So yes "technically". And yes, independence is still a better bet given Tory policies which are dismantling every social service, quite contrary to the wishes of Scotland.
Take the rhetorical win, mate. I'll have to do with the substantive one.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
You're a coward when you have to resort to clear Israeli talking points and "both sides" of the conflict.
There are more Israeli lies about October 7th verified to be untrue, than statements that have been proved correct - and they have all been repeated as nauseam by media outlets, just as you yourself have repeated them.
Here's where it all falls apart with regard to any and all moral legitimacy Israel might claim:
Cutting off food and water, targeting journalists, hospitals and schools provide a clear and systematic motive of the Israeli plan. Civilians, even surrendering hostages, waving white flags have been killed. What does that tell you of the Israeli army and their methods? And then there's the clear statements from Israeli military and gov't officials themselves.
This is a deliberate act of destroying a population and their means of sustaining life, probably in the hope that Egypt or others relent and allow Israel to ethnically cleanse the entire area. Which is seemingly the main reason for the US pier, as there are far easier, cheaper methods to bring in aid by making weapons deliveries contingent on aid deliveries.
Peter Zeihan tried to portray himself as objective, but he's in fact squarely in the demographic that refuses to raise any basic questions about Israeli conduct and the American support that makes it possible.
The whole thing is an atrocity and this is the moment in history where the West have allowed themselves to be utterly morally corrupted by a brutal occupation and apartheid regime that deserves no sympathy or support.
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
-
@daftwod What selection?
In what way are Indian and Chinese "selected". They simply put a larger emphasis on education as group in the US. In their home country, the possibilities are more limited with regards to overall socio-economic status.
Comparing intelligence to height is utterly fallacious. It's a single parameter. If anything the analogy would be physical prowess.
Some are fast, some are strong, some are resilient etc. The ones who excel in one category,does not necessarily excel in every category.
The are differences, sure, but you can't say that any single culture or race is "superior", and if so, in which way? It utterly depends on resources and environment. The genetic variance is miniscule.
IQ compared to GDP is bullshit. Racial IQ is bullshit. IQ as a single measure of intelligence is bullshit.
It's at best, dishonest science. At worst, it's used for a malevolent racist political agenda. Please read up on the actual studies made and not what some cherrypicking youtuber with no scientific background is using as an argument.
I simply have nothing further to add to this subject.
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
-
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
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
From an American perspective, I don't see how you can view large areas of mainland Europe as being "Rightist". Most conservatives in Europe would be considered social democrats in the USA.
Almost all core "Western" liberal democracies have established, and uncontroversial, expansive "leftist" policies when it comes to public services ie transportation, education, health, pension, labour rights etc...
Sure, when it comes to ethnonationalism and migration, there's been a swing of the pendulum to the right, but all the basic policies are still very much "leftist" and gaining further traction when it comes to climate, energy, corporations and tax havens.
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
-
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
-
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
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@WolfOfIberia I think we can both agree that no one can say for sure what could have happened.
And yes, The Greek cities were allowed autonomy. I'd counter that the exact same case can be made had they been made Persian Satrapies, though.
As you so eloquently framed it, it was the Romans and their later adoption of Christianity that had, by far, the largest impact on Greek society.
The reason I bring it up is because of the inherent (but as we both agree on, wrongful) "East Vs West" narrative that permeates popular culture.
You seem to have a good grasp of the subject, and Kudos for that.
Sadly, I see many battles/events misused by people that seek to aggrandize themselves through the actions of their ancestors, without seemingly having understood the actual events and the reason for them.
The presenters themselves, although a bit tongue in cheek, misrepresented the very same topic that we're discussing.
Casual fans of historic battles wouldn't have caught up on that and assumed that it indeed was about "freedom and democracy" (shush, don't mention the helots or Sparta!) And not, as you say, a matter of retaliation for fomenting rebellion.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
neo11:
Let's make it simple, my brother:
1) Am I a racist and a bigot? Im Palestinian, living in Denmark, denied access to Israel because of my opinion pieces in newspapers. I did volunteer work in Greece, before I worked as an MD for MSF in Greece for almost a year. And I have gay muslim persons in my family who are fully loved and accepted.
So tell me: Towards whom have I been bigotted and racist ? Please enlighten me....
2) Didn't I agree with you that the EU sorely needs reform? Yes
It's fucked, yeah. And Greece got the worst of the worst deals.
3) Am I a fan of Israel, Egypt, UAE, Turkey and Saudi Arabia ie. "our friends"?
Fuck no. I just wrote an opinion piece (in danish) about that very subject (probably banning me from Egypt and Saudi Arabia now). Pointing out problems doesn't mean that I'm okay with other problems. You DO understand that, right?
Next I'll be taking on Poland, Hungary and Turkey. What the fuck have you done lately?
4) You have not in a single sentence adressed that Greek politics and finance policies fucked the country over before we even had a crisis... Not a single word where you say that Greece is even partly to blame for the clusterfuck that is greek financial policies the last 30 years.
5) By your own logic: You wan't out of the EU. You have said nothing about refugees' rights. And you don't take any blame. No compromise or nuance in anything you say.
Would it be fair to say you are pro-Golden Dawn or an authoritarian communist? You certainly check the boxes.
You my friend, might just be part of the problem.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@jessvagnar4957
It might be disagreeable to you, but that doesn't make it inherently wrong.
Yes, there are voters of all shapes and sizes, but when people specifically say they have voted for tariffs and cannot explain to an interviewer what that is, it tells me that these voters have no clue and are simply following "the group" (family, race, religion, favourite podcaster etc).
Other examples are people with illegal migrant friends and family that believe that it's only the criminal illegal migrants that will be forcibly deported. Really? According to whom exactly?
People dependent on ACA voting for the party that have actively said abolishing it is the first thing on their agenda. Mainly because they don't fucking know that Obamacare and the ACA are one and the same (!).
I mean, come on...
This is a horribly dangerous state of affairs for a democracy as politicians, corporations and the media now have a vested interest in keeping people misinformed and undereducated to maintain their power base.
It's the recipe for a propagandistic dystopian kleptocracy, but still fully convincing the average citizen that they have power and that it's the best country on Earth. It really fucking isn't on like 37 out of 40 parameters.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Not only can you, but in fact you have been doing so, since the inception of the international system, Bernie.
Imagine if Western nations were made to answer for their war crimes?:
Vietnam, Cambodia, Algeria, Indonesia, Rhodesia (Zimbabwe), Kenya, Angola, Tanzania, Iraq, Palestine, Afghanistan...
That's just from the top of my head. Indictments of every major "civilised" nation since the 1960s.
We're not even counting the gross "violations" during WW2 committed by the allies against civilians.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
"Think" whatever I want? The sheer arrogance of your ill-veiled aversion, dude... Get a laxative, stat...
Have you heard of that small thing called Europe? Well, there, in many countries, we have building codes and protection laws that start in parliament based on fucked up companies thinking they can get away with loss of lives and property.
That works very well too. Environment protection, health codes, safety and working conditions, proper wages.
Apple, Walmart and Amazon are a bit behind on that, brother. Except in Europe where their ass gets sued to high heaven if they don't follow the rules.
Corporate interest + money in politics + lack of oversight = Epic clusterfuck of the average citizen.
Greed and Growth > Lives and Livelyhood. Always.
How do you "experience" these realities? Let me know what you "think". Please.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@arthurtorin8776 Thank you for a well thought out reply.
My point is not that of "Slavery bad. White people slavery worst."
It can be summed up in 2 different points
1) Modern concepts of Eugenics, Racial Supremacy and Social Darwinism, Apartheid, Segregation used as recently as in our parents' lives.
Yes. We can hold them to a different standard because it wasn't ancient history.
Have you ever apologized for Hitler, Stalin or Pol Pot because "it was a different time with different standards". No? My point exactly. "Dark acts" are abhorrent and recognized as such by contemporaries. That includes slavery in the 1800's.
2) The very real day to day impact of said policies from Baltimore, Atlanta, Detroit to Dar Es Salaam, Capetown, Dhaka or Pnom Penh. At least the recognition of damages done in human lives would be appropriate.
Damages and restitution aside, would it hurt the prestige of modern "humane" democracies to acknowledge and apologize for these actions? No. Not slavery per se, but that is a good place to start.Then maybe apologize for Vietnam? Iraq? The French in Algeria? Brits in Rhodesia?
The "Whites" are the worst by sheer scale because of their hegemonic dominance for 300-400 years and the emergence of libertarian ideals contrary to that, and yet continuing with the views on racial inequality.
Also, scale matters, buddy.
Just as the Holocaust and the Holodomor are held up as the worst events in history - not the concentration camps in South Africa by the British in the 1890's or the Irish Famine. Scale matters.
Ps: The Neanderthals were a different species, not race. They went extinct not from conflict, but because we bred with them and sapiens had much higher birth rates.
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
-
avatarofcloud
While I completely agree, that the Turkish people should own it, I don't see how this is relevant...
And that political personalities can have somewhat dual opinions on the same subject is not a new thing...
Russia: Freedom for East Ukraine, yet not for Chechens
France: Freedom for East Timor, yet no apology for Algeria.
USA: Invading tyrants to impose democracy, allied with tyrants, fighting terrorism, yet conducting and supporting state terrorism (by definition).
As I said, I don't see the relevance of your comment. But as far as I know, he doesn't deny it, just that he did earlier.
Meh...Better than nothing I guess
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Patrick Briggs
OK.
First question:
What other thing was happening in 2014?
Did everyone have a chance to vote during a civil war, or only primarily Pro-Assad areas?
When was the last presidential election in Syria before that?
Secondly:
Which sources called the elections fair? Journalists? Well, they weren't allowed in the country unless they were smuggled in or had "permission" i.e. iranian, russian, chinese media and only in controlled areas.
Thirdly:
Don't you find it odd that people like Assad, Hussein, Ghaddafi, Mugabe always won in +85% landslides?
When has a democratically elected leader in true free and fair elections ever had a victory like this?
If you systematically dismantle the opposition through terror and suppression, you can easily put up a weak candidate against you to give the illusion of free elections. Out of 35 people that wanted to run, only 2 were allowed. And everyone - arab or non-arab - considers them sham candidates.
It's all a game, friend.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
First of all. Thanks for your reply.
Just read the article:
1) A child being "still" during birth is not an indicator for anything.
Lots of children are born still, and with the correct medical intervention, the large amount of these children do very well. Heck, I was still born.
It's perfectly fine to assume that the child would have lived, until we have the autopsy reports
2) A third trimester woman close to her due date, with a known mental illness, is a very serious condition.
What was she doing in a prison to begin with if she is pregnant and with known paranoid schizophrenia?
The reasonable thing would have been to admit her to a psychiatric hospital with easy access to an OB ward until she has given birth.
3) Three other people have died there since April, including a bi-polar man that died of dehydration.
This pattern suggests, at best, negligence due to incompetence, and at worst, malevolent lack of empathy
4) The private health company states that the child was still born. Okay. Why was the woman not rushed to a hospital? A birth does not happen over 5-10 minutes.
Although most births, with the right professional assistance (midwifes, nurses etc.), occur without incidents, this woman is not considered an uncomplicated case by any measure. Especially is she is medicated.
This suggests a cover-up by the medical personal, or at the very least, professonal incompetence which in any other civilized place would cost you your license
But hey, what do I know. I'm just a pediatric doctor working in a neonatal department of a university hospital
Again, I have seen nothing that can excuse the actions of the prison. And their track record does not afford them the benefit of the doubt.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@MimOzanTamamogullar
I'll try to answer succinctly:
1) Who were the main terror groups during the British mandate and what were the death tolls?
Irgun, Haganah, Stern. Stern even cooperating with fascists during WW2 to arm themselves and commit further atrocities.
During the mandate 1917-1948 450 Jews were killed and around 4500 Palestinians.
And bombing British officers and civilians.
2) The only attack that Israel faced was in 1948 after the Arab nations repeatedly and profusely warned about the consequences of handing over land to a people that have no legal rights to it. The Western powers were fully aware of this and the risk of Jews being killed, yet took the decision anyway.
And the result was atrocities, ethnic cleansing of Palestinians and seizure of 26% of Palestine, which is illegal under international law.
Let's take the other wars:
1956 - A plot by Israel, France and the UK to seize the Suez. Go figure.
1967 - A "pre-emptive" strike as told by Israel. The fact that the Arabs were so unprepared tells you that they had no intentions of an attack.
Israel occupies the Golan, Sinai and the Palestinian territories.
1973 - An attack by Egypt, but fully within international law as Israel held rightful Egyptian territory.
3) "What would I do?"
Plenty of things I wouldn't do
Not lie about the horrible events.
For example:
-There were no beheaded babies.
-No pregnant women disembowelled (Israelis did that in Lebanon 1982).
-No babies in ovens (Israelis did that in Deir Yassin in 1948).
-Not a single photo evidence of mass rape at a festival with thousands of people.
-No "HQ" under the Al Shifa Hospital. (Not that it matters because they bombed them all now and still found nothing)
*NOT CUT FOOD, WATER AND MEDICINE TO CIVILIANS!
NOT BOMB SCHOOLS, HOSPITALS, MOSQUES, HOMES!*
How about that?
Why didn't Israel evacuate civilians to camps in the Negev desert?
Instead they've killed 30.000+, further 20.000+ presumed dead (Israeli figures) and hundreds of thousands about to die from famine and disease.
In conclusion:
The fact that you present this as an attack on Israel and not a direct result of 75 years of occupation, land theft, apartheid and killings shows me that you haven't paid attention, or have willingly followed the Israeli narrative.
Israel has almost yearly bombed Gaza and killed hundreds or thousands. More than 400 Palestinians have been murdered in the West Bank. Are they Hamas "Human Shields" too?
Secondly, do you in any way try to defend the illegality of the above? How about the clear war crimes that Israel have committed? The fact that the ICJ has deemed it justified to continue with a case of genocide?
There is so much overwhelming evidence to everything I've written here, that I'm not going to bother with sources. Look it up yourself. Take responsibility if you want to tell yourself that you're on the right side of history. Or perhaps try switching the channel and hearing the news from someone other than people feeding you Hasbara crap with a shovel.
"If it's from the Israeli/UK/US government or Israeli military, it's a lie."
That's my advice to you.
PS: Sorry. It wasn't as short a post as I had hoped.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@TheGaymo And yet you, in your comment, placed the entire responsibility for any dead civilian on the hands of the 9/11 terrorists.
Sure, it's part of the equation, but by that logic it started with America funding and arming the very same people 20 years earlier, did it not?
I have a postulate. Haven't looked it up, so I might be wrong:
The number of proven innocent civilians killed directly through American military operations, as intentional collateral or otherwise, is a far higher number than a list of servicemen that fell in Afghanistan.
And another postulate worth exploring:
How many servicemen have ended up homeless, mentally damaged or committed suicide as a direct result of the horrors they faced?
I'm betting it's a much higher number.
Nothing wrong with honouring the sacrifice they made, but when we 20 years later still haven't had a genuine discussion and dissection of the true cost of human lives, it smacks of hollow jingoism and a frankly narrow view of who has actually "paid the ultimate price".
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Trump lies. NOT NEWS.
Just do a 2 minute update at the end of the week. Until then, you're perpetuating the "media circus" and division of us vs. them.
Nothing is going to happen before the Mueller probe is done - and even then maybe nothing will change at all.
Perhaps use that time to cover the worrying developments in :
Israel, Palestine, Syria, Poland, Hungary, Myanmar, CAR, Qatar, Egypt? Climate change and record forest fires? Rapes in India? Transgender rights in the Caribbean?
I know you're Americans, but maybe, just maybe , focus on news elsewhere? Until then, this is simply uninteresting reporting. Just my humble opinion.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Nyet-Zdyes
Here's the counterargument:
Children are expensive and time-consuming (I know, because Im a parent myself)
If you're only looking out for yourself, which is encouraged by the neo-liberals, you'd be far better off with working a bit more, investing in your career and simply buying all the help you'll need in your old age.
All things being equal, you'd be far better off than a family where the children are working, supporting their own household with kids and expected to be able to take care of their ageing parents...
If you don't provide people a proper incentive and in our society even somewhat punish them for having children in terms of career, wealth, benefits etc I'd fully and utterly understand why people would say "fuck y'all, I'm not giving an ounce more" when there is more than enough wealth and resources to accommodate the needs of every person in the developed countries.
Children, schools, healthcare, general education: All these things are investments in society, not purely expenses.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Ah the classic anti-semite argument for criticizing Israel. Except I have jewish friends, and we both hate Israel. It's about human dignity and ultimately what is right.
"Fair and square", okay, if you say so. So you're arguing "right by conquest"?
That means, I guess, if another powerful nation invaded Israel and deported every single Israeli, that it would be perfectly fine, right?
You've just legitimized the destruction of Israel to all it's enemies. Just your own logic.
That's why we have agreed on international rules. They are not always followed, I grant you that, but Israel is among the top contenders for international violations. And no, you're not a democracy if you have a privileged class based on ethnicity, a 2nd class minority and 3rd class citizens with no rights whatsoever in illegally occupied land.
I think the only dumb thing is your lack of historical knowledge. The Philistines were there back then too, buddy. Who do you think the Israelites were fighting back then?
But if you want to open the "historic" can of worms, that means that 2/3 of you should return to Europe and Russia. You're not semites. You're not Israelites. You're "just" Jews. Big difference. If you don't believe me, do a 23 & Me if you're a "European" Israeli. I fucking dare you.
PS: I before you get your yamukkah and curls all spinning, I have no love for Egypt, Syria, Saudis, Iran and UAE too. I'm not biased in my criticism of injustice and human rights abuse. I hope one day you can see that it's not because you're jewish or from Israel. I'm calling you out because your policies are the policies of racism and supremacy.
1
-
You really don't grasp the idea of discussion, do you? I'm showing you examples of how ridiculous your points are. Guess that military training really washes away your imagination and critical thinking, ehh SteinBergBaumGoldRubin?
Funny you should bring up the Geneva Convention - which is about protecting civilians in engagements - not rules of diplomacy.
How many times just this week has Israel broken the Geneva convention? "Butterfly" rounds, Journalists, Medical personnel, Protesting families getting killed... Annexation is illegal by international law. eg. Crimea. Period.
Palestinians (Why do you keep calling them Arabs?) are discriminated against and receive way less public funding in their areas in Israel. Look up what neutral observers and NGO's have said.
I wouldn't trust a single word from Bibi if I were you... And, yes I have been to Israel, Gaza and the West Bank, seen it for myself, and spoken to numerous people.
The Germany thing was an example of your ridiculous reasoning. If jewish is not about blood, how come then, that african jews are treated so poorly in Israel? Can I get Israeli citizenship if I convert then? If so how can you prove that I actually believe in Judaism?
My point is not that you would win a war. You would 100%, especially if Daddy US is coming to your help everytime.
But how long do you think that a country of 10 million will remain a regional superpower against larger neighbours? Wouldn't it be better to seek a compromise peace now and start living, toelrating and trading? I'm saying this because the current policies are sacrificing the future of Israel for political and territorial gains today.
Good luck. As of right now you're showing the world what you are: An arrogant and supremacist people that views other lives as worth less than your own.
One more thing: You people are the most obnoxious travellers in the world. Tell your friends, talk to them. But I guess it's difficult to change if you believe you're better than everyone else and at the same time every one is out to get you... As I said, good luck.
PS: "Eurofags" hahaha... So are you part of Europe or not? Calling me a Fag while having the gay capital of Tel Aviv seems a bit much, no? Again, ease up on the "soap in the shower" military thinking, bro...
1
-
1
-
Golan: (from Wiki)
Israeli settlement activity began in the 1970s. The area was governed by military administration until 1981 when Israel passed the Golan Heights Law, which extended Israeli law and administration throughout the territory.[11] This move was condemned by the United Nations Security Council in UN Resolution 497,[2][12] although Israel states it has a right to retain the area, citing the text of UN Resolution 242, adopted after the Six-Day War, which calls for "safe and recognised boundaries free from threats or acts of force".[13] The continued Israeli control of the Golan Heights remains highly contested and is still regarded as belligerent occupation by most countries . The international community rejects the validity of the Golan Heights Law as an attempted annexation by force, illegal under the UN Charter and the Geneva Conventions .[165] Israeli settlements and human rights policy in the occupied territory have also drawn criticism from the UN.[166][167]
You were saying? And that's just from the top of my head, not even quoting international law directly.
And if you "don't want" Gaza and the West Bank - get the fuck out, let them be, and take all the settlers with you...
No? Why not?
And here we go again with the "jew-hater". Might I then imply that you hate Arabs and Muslims? And Christians? And black people? And Arabic jews?
I criticize Israel, not Jews or Judaism. Not even the same thing. I couldn't care less about Judaism...
Final point: If 95% of the world population hates you, might it be, _just maybe_, that it's because you're a bunch of arrogant and racist assholes?
I'll be waiting with the "I told you so" in about 30 years. Unfortunately.
Until then, enjoy your apartheid society.
1
-
1
-
1
-
Resolution 242:
(i) Withdrawal of Israeli armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict;
(ii) Termination of all claims or states of belligerency and respect for and acknowledgment of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every State in the area and their right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force."[4]
This was back when the US didn't blindly support Israeli actions.
Oslo Accords 1993: Full recognition of Israel and a road map to establishing a Palestinian state - Which have been denied the Palestinians on every turn.
Yes, they shouldn't accept a peace when the terms with regards to borders and Jerusalem are constantly changed by Israel.
The withdrawal from Gaza? Yeah, 20.000 settlers pulled out. And 100.000 settlers moved in to East Jerusalem. Seems legit, right?
Hamas are terrorists. And they are a problem. But so is the Israeli blockade denying people medication, fuel and ability to rebuild and access pure water. It's collective punishment of a civilian population, which is a direct violation of the Geneva convention that you hold so dear.
Killing journalists, medical personnel, civilians that were "a threat" from 300-600 meters distance? Arrests with no rights or legal protections? Using illegal rounds to cause maximum damage? White phosporous and cluster munitions used over civilian areas?
My friend, I've read the NGO reports. You should do the same.
As I said, you seem somewhat reasonable, but the language in Israel about Palestinians (which you don't even recognize as a people and nation) is directly opposite to what you say and think. It is a war of racial supremacy for Israel. Why else would you insitute a bill with this wording:
- "The right to exercise national self-determination in the State of Israel is unique to the Jewish people."
- "The capital of the state: Jerusalem, complete and united, is the capital of Israel."
- "Jewish settlement: The state views the development of Jewish settlement as a national value and will act to encourage and promote its establishment and consolidation."
This law contradicts everything you just said with regards to an intent of peace.
I have said my part.
PS: Fuck Koh Phan Ngan, indeed...
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@mariaf.6601 None whatsoever.
But neither is there for Russia being the culprit. All investigations have been halted, not ended naturally, they've been halted.
APN did a great video based on gaming theory of why it could and should be Russia. But remember that he's a NATO intelligence officer from Denmark, my country. We're not exactly objective in this matter, and a military person is directly prohibited from sharing all of his research, intel and knowledge.
Now to the "Qui Bono" aspect:
1) You wean Europe off Russian gas.
2) You hurt the Russian economy by preventing them from exporting the gas (no sizeable alternative routes for the gas to go).
3) Europe instead relies on US imported LNG at about three times the rate.
4) The US energy sector finds a stable, huge market for their gas exports.
5) By painting it as a Russian False Flag, you increase fear of further Russian sabotage and bring Europe closer under the US umbrella: More money for NATO = More money for US weapons manufacturers.
And possibly
6) You tank European economic development with the vastly increased energy and military expenditures, especially Germany's, thus making Europe as a whole more reliant on the US in the future.
There are literally no reasons why this should be Russian sabotage and not an American operation. But again, it's only based on "Qui Bono" and the history of the US to use lies to galvanise their allies into action (Iraq 2003).
I want Europe to be able to stand on its own. Not for us to be naive lapdogs for whatever crazy person they should choose to elect next.
But it's probably too late for that this time around...
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@SqueakScolari69
Oh, it's an atrocity. That and Tibet too. Taiwan however is something different. Did you know that Taiwan also claims the entirety of China just as the PRC does (including Tibet as well)?
China has never claimed to be a defender of human rights and freedom. The US on the other hand uses every opportunity to tell me how great they are.
Meanwhile they're funding and arming an actual genocide, not "just" a cultural genocide that is happening to the Uighurs.
The British in Kenya and Rhodesia. The French in Algeria and Indochina. The US in Vietnam, Cambodia, Afghanistan and Iraq.
I think it's ridiculous to compare genocides, but it's funny how people only talk about Uighurs and Armenians, not the ones Western powers have been responsible for in our life times.
My point still stands however: China hasn't gone to war, interfered or intervened in any country for decades.
They're not good guys, sure, but they're objectively far less bloody butchers than the Americans and their buddies the Israelis, which are the worst of them all.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Zionism as an ideology has become intrinsically linked to the dogmas of Nazism:
1) "Master" race -> Chosen people.
Inherently Jews by being "chosen" are above and other people's are considered lesser. The Talmud directly justifies subjugation, oppression and outright murder of these "untermensch".
2) Lebensraum -> Eretz Israel
Which at the very least includes parts of Lebanon, Jordan, Syria and the Sinai for most, and is from the Nile to the Euphrates for the most radical Zionists.
3) "Volksdeutsche Blut" -> Jewish blood heritage.
Jews that marry Palestinians in Israel will have children that are "nationals", not citizens, thus not afforded the same protections. Their union is not legally recognised by marriage in Israel, merely tolerated as them living together.
This is a lighter version of the Nurnberg laws of Germany from 1935.
Jews that have had no familial or historic connection to Israel/Palestine, are not practising Judaism and have never even been to Israel, have a "right of return" that affords them an easy path to citizenship, this isnt afforded to any person of non-jewish descent, especially if they're Arabic and of Christian/Muslim faith.
And then there's the obvious actions of the Israeli state which speak for themselves.
Zionism is simply a version of Nazism for Jews.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@dimitriosvlissides5781 I'll extend you an olive branch.
I was in Greece in 2016 for almost a year working with a medical NGO. I did it to try and alleviate the suffering of the refugees, and at the same time because of my outrage of how Greece was abandoned by the rest of Europe, while it was still struggling after an economic crisis.
I can't think of a kinder and more hospitable people. Certainly more open and friendly than we are up here.
It has been established historigraphy for a century that "original sources" such as Herodotus and later sources embellished and propagandized the events. It's a great insight into the culture and mindset of classical Greece, but not a tool for teaching history.
With regards to slavery, rights and democracy: If only a group of people have absolute rights, the rest have none, then what is the difference between 1 absolute monarch a thousand leagues away or a 1000 absolute legislators a league away?
Sure, many Countries/Empires had systematic slavery. Some still do today.
Almost all Countries/ Empires have blood on their hands.
The difference is how Greeks percieve themselves and the pride they take in the traditions of "liberty" and "democracy". Not a single person in Denmark is defending slavery from Viking raids. Even though Vikings had a much more egalitarian society compared to contemporary Christian Europe.
Greek Democracy was a solid foundation, but was deeply flawed. No shame in admitting that.
With regards to Marathon itself, as I said earlier, Athens was burned to a crisp and the larger part of Greece was conquered 20 years later. This didn't affect the culture, science or story of the region in the long run. 400 years of Turkish rule, apart from the whole Gyros/Kebab controversy, didn't either.
So yes, I actually have proof that it was insignificant because the thing they wanted to prevent happeed 20 years later anyway. The Ionians were producing great works of math, science and art before, under and after Persian rule.
This East vs West narrative is tiring, especially since you yourself admit that we can't ascribe modern values such as "clash of civilizations" to ancient events.
Lastly, why do you consider Byzantium to be Greek? Apart from the language, what does it have in common with the proud traditions of "classical" Greece?
Religion? No. They destroyed or converted your temples and later persecuted polytheists. Hence the word "demon" having the meaning it has today...
Democracy? No. Absolute dynasties with more civil wars than most of us do laundry...
Great works of philosophy, science and art? Not in the same extent or spirit. Unless you enjoyed the smell of your burning skin in a pyre.
A very long diatribe and I apologize for that. Ancient Greece was awesome. No doubt of that. But it was a deeply flawed society. Women were treated poorly and the great warriors and philosophers could only do their craft because of the numberless slaves that were toiling every day. A great society in some ways too.
Depends very much on the eye of the beholder.
It doesn't make you any less justified in taking pride in your great heritage to be able to admit that.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@NettiYahoo Oh wow the entire league of nations , huh!?
Like India? Nigeria? Indonesia?
Give me a break. Half the world was still colonised and under western domination at the time. It's not a legitimate decision, especially when the very people living there were never asked.
Secondly, why was the league of Nations dismantled, if you seem to think it was such a great institution?
Thirdly, Even the UN in 1947 didn't represent the majority of nations or people at the time.
But let's say it did.
Why does Israel not listen and follow any of the resolutions laid out by the UN? You know, your almighty creator?
Fact is, Israel has never been legitimate.
It's a colonial state bent on genocide and displacement, with the full support of the West because of the tragedy of WW2. If the West truly believed that Jews should be safe, they wouldn't have given them a plot of land among 13 nations that refused the partition plan.
Eg. Russian and American Jews whose descendants haven't lived in the Middle East for at least centuries, if not millenia, simply have no association or heritage that ties them to the region except history. And that's not a basis for nationhood.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@kristiskinner8542 I have read the Hamas charter of 2017. Have you?
Or did someone in the media just outline it for you with their interpretation?
I'm not defending Hamas or their actions, but simply referring to something as "Islamic" is not good enough. Even though you might clutch your pearls by the thought.
Their charter has not much to do with Islam, really, except the sanctity of the Al Aqsa mosque. Its foremost a Palestinian nationalist charter.
They are even willing to abide by the 1967 borders as outlined in UN resolutions, but on the condition that all settlers be expelled from West Bank and East Jerusalem. Since they are illegal, I don't see a problem with that. At all.
If you can have Christian Democrats in Europe, Republican religious right in the US, I don't see why you can't have "Islamic" Conservative parties and groups in the Middle East. I don't agree with them at all, but then again, I'm probably considered a socialist in the US. It's a set of misinformed double standards peddled by media that are interested in keeping you afraid and suspicious.
Because it generates clicks, which generates money, which generates votes, which generates power.
Get off the "fear and loathing" crack, lady.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Critical G:
Yet another repeated cliche that the zionists and conservatives in the US want you to swallow whole. And "Israel have the right to defend itself", right?
And every one who criticizes them "are antisemites", right? Oh please, just read up on the history of the region the last 28 years. You'll quickly see who have dealt in bad faith and reneged on every treaty (hint: It's Israel...)
Israel does exist. Palestine doesn't. Israel is an occupying country and trampling on a daily basis on Palestinian rights to property, liberty and yes, life.
Read a couple of UN reports and corroborated witness accounts from NGO's. Heck, just watch news that isn't American or British.
According to Israels actions, the Palestinians have no right to exist. There is nothing pointing to the contrary. Especially after the announcement that the "jewishness of the state" is to be preserved and that the West Bank apparently is manifest destiny from God himself. Who cares about the natives, right?
Remind you of anyone, my brother?
Lastly, you're confusing Judaism with the zionist policies of Israel. A lot of people do that. These two things are not mutually inclusive. They often do the same with Islam and Palestinians (even though 20% are christian).
Just like not all Palestinians support Hamas or support terror, not all Jews support Israel or support Israeli terrorism.
But yes, when it comes to international law, international conventions, human rights, broken treaties, UN resolutions, and just a goddamn poll in almost every single country - Israeli policy the last 30 years have turned Israel into a criminal state and a rogue element with regards to stability in the ME.
We'll see how you feel when AIPAC pushes for an invasion of Iran and thousands of American lives are lost...
You're on the wrong side of history. South Africa. Jim Crow. Nurnberg laws. Israel.
1
-
1
-
1) Lets entirely forget the Irgun and Haganah terror before the state of Israel. Conquest does not legitimize your claim.
By your own argument, if Israel starts a war its then perfectly fine to deport and/or ethnically cleanse all Israelis? I think you just made the argument for everyone who actually wants to wipe out Israel. Own goal, brother. Own goal.
2) They didn't then, true. Because by a stroke of a pen their land was taken from them, and they were never represented or included in the process.
I would do the same if someone told me that a family was moving into my home without my consent. Everyone would do that.
3-4) Hamas are not in any way popular in Gaza. They lost the peoples support. Good.
People are denied medicine, fuel and building materials. Toys, wheelchairs, medical equipment, power cables... It's a concentration camp. Period.
Children and elderly are dying from curable diseases because the medicine is not allowed. How "humane" of Israel...
If Hamas weren't actively targeting civilians ie. terrorists, I would support their policies too. Don't give an inch to Israel, because they never uphold their deals.
Furthermore Netanyahu uses Gaza for political gains. Every single time there is a case of corruption or a scandal in his cabinet, guess what? Gaza gets bombed. Seems legit, right?
5) Again, you're confusing Muslims, Arabs and Palestinians.
Israeli uses the last 70 years of conflict to justify the last 30 years of atrocities.
Lastly, If you use the Holocaust as an argument while defending Israeli policies, I'm sorry dude, you lost the moral argument. Also ask the few Holocaust survivors about how you're treating other human beings. Ask them.
Israel is an oppressive occupying country. The blockade of Gaza is a crime against humanity. These are not controversies. Facts.
No one believes your propaganda anymore, dude.
1
-
mor19:
I've been to the West Bank and Gaza. I've worked there as a med. student and later as a an MD for MSF. And I've been to Israel too. And met Israeli travellers in Asia (which are btw the most obnoxious people you will ever meet...)
So kindly, I know what I am talking about, and contrary to you I haven't been brainwashed by state media, nationalism, zionism and military service.
With the regards to "the Arab" (still won't recognize them as a people, I see), what the fuck has that to do with anything? I can on the top of my head mention 10 cases of killings, abuse and forceful evictions, just the last week - if thats the game you want to play.
You have to ask yourself:
Will Israel always be strong enough to not be destroyed by it's neighbours? The answer is no.
Wouldn't it be better then, to have a fair and compromise peace and start trading and living next to each other?
If France and Germany can do it, Denmark and Sweden can do it, Bosnia and Serbia can do it, then surely Israel and its neighbours can do it.
Having said that:
Until you stop building settlements, seize land, limit access to water, deny civil rights and commit killings with no accountability, then I'm afraid Israel has no legitimacy in my book. And yes, Egypt, Saudis and Syria is also hugely fucked up. It doesn't make your country less criminal.
Democracy by a privileged group and by law 2nd class citizens, is not a legitimate democracy.
You have yet to answer any of the questions with the regards to the illegality of Israeli actions in international law.
Blah blah poor poor Israelis... Cry me a river. You have nukes and a strong military. You can have a peace with Palestine if you want to. Easily.
See you in about 30 years when Israel is isolated, reviled and every jew elsewhere pays the price for it. I'm afraid that your children will also pay the price for the crimes of your country today
1
-
1
-
1
-
@tomr200199 In terms of sheer losses, no, not comparable. We can agree on that.
But in terms of achieving set military and political goals and the resulting human suffering, civilian casualties and, quite frankly, humilitiation by a technologically, economically and logistically inferior force, then it's quite comparable.
Oh, and the fucking manufactured casus belli, nationalist jingo and media spin 24/07 comes to mind too
It's the same MO, mate. The difference is that the US & friends had vastly more resources at their disposal.
Again, a bit of perspective and humility would not be out of place.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Guys, it's seriously an exercise in semantics.
Look up the definition of socialism, especially democratic socialism:
"a political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole."
The key word here being owned OR regulated by the community as a whole.
It's an umbrella term open for interpretation.
By that definition, yes, the Scandinavian countries, Netherlands and France are socialist countries.
Getting back to New Zealand "stagflation" economics in the 70's.
* Name me a single time in history where solely austere measures have had a positive impact on growth, employment and purchase power
* Name me a single instance of severe tax cuts bringing measurable equal growth in a market system
This is not a zero sum game, fellas. Unfortunately that's how it is presented to a lot of people who have no idea of underlying economic mechanisms and political theories. But it's easy to understand. Really.
If you're interested in this, check out lectures and books by Mark Blyth and Yanis Varoufakis.
Final thought:
When has economists as groups ever been right about anything? Exactly. It's not science based on evidence. It's religious dogma.
Thanks for a respectful tone guys :)
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Well, there we disagree strongly.
Firt of all, your views on "honor killing, female genital mutilation, polygamy etc." is uninformed about how people actually live their lives around the globe.
You see people as "barbarians" who are from other areas. I see them as human beings who've had a shit draw in life. On a perfect planet Earth, yes, we would have no borders. That's not the case, however.
While having strong immigration laws is fine, denying refugees of war, no matter the cost, is for me "barbaric and medieval".
And no, London is still pretty white. You are factually wrong. Look it up.
It's not a zero sum game. But I digress.
My point is that there is a short way from nationalism to policies that limit civil liberties even in Eastern Europe, and that is due to the lack of information & general education in the populace.
Respectfully, even you have demonstrated on severel occasions a lacking knowledge in areas yet a very strong belief in your views despite of that. That's part of the problem imo.
While I dont' disagree that culture and nationality plays a major part, the greatest hindrance to democratization is abject poverty, lack of education and lack of opportunity.
1
-
Stnl N2:
1) London:
You are correct about the statistical data. What it doesn't say in the first 4-5 lines however are number of "new" immigrants ie. 1st or 2nd generation. That number is 23%, Which is still a large number, yes, but the majority are British of British (UK and Commonwealth), African and Indian descent.
To consider Caribbeans, Africans and Indians that came to England 100-200 years ago as foreigners is a gross misrepresentation of what is defined as British.
Secondly are the 2 mio. (recent) Polish migrants in the EU also to be considered "diluting" the national culture?
2) Islam:
Of course I concede to that. I'm not here to "win" arguments, dude.
A youtube video is nice, just be careful with the source and the underlying agenda. Haven't seen the video, I'll just take your word for it. But honestly I'm tired of loose quotes and discussions out of context on Islam.
Yes. Sex Slavery was a part of Islam in wartime 12-1300 years ago. To some (ISIS, Boko Haram, Al Shabab) it still is. That doesn't mean that the large part of muslims tolerate this - especially their wife ;)
Islam (and christianity, judaism, buddhism etc..) like technology, is a tool in your daily life. You can use it to advocate slavery and murder of infidels. And you can use it to advocate charity, peace and tolerance.
Right now, it seems the fucked up guys down there are using it for oppression of women, trampling the rights of the poor and for advocating wars. *Sigh*
I'm gonna have a drink...
Just keep an open mind and take care.
Cheers
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
This is a BS talking point. Of course its possible, but it's unlikely. Politicians love this because it means distracting from domestic issues. APN probably likes this too because it means increased military funding and research budgets.
Objectively speaking, the US has increasingly been provoking and maligning Russia, China and Iran the last decade. These countries are by no means "innocent", but they haven't conducted destabilising wars and used increasingly belligerent language as the US have the past decades (!).
Diplomacy, as we say in Denmark, "is a town in Russia" - meaning they don't even consider it as an option in the US anymore.
Ukraine is what it is sadly, but likely wouldn't have happened if NATO didn't announce their plans of expansion for Georgia and Ukraine.
NATO expansion that was absolutely unnecessary solely from the viewpoint of a westerner.
Not that it excuses Russian aggression in any way, but we were warned by Russia, more than once, that this would be the consequence.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@wolfmaster7746 I'm not trying to make a political statement in any way with my comment, but the Ulster flag isn't anything to be emulated either. It's England with a "stop" sign ;)
I just think that a blue harp flag would be spectacularly unique to Ireland, whereas the tricolour is an anachronistic remnant - and quite unoriginal from a vexological standpoint...
Just from the top of my head: Ireland, France, Italy, Russia, Estonia, Lithuania, Benelux, Germany, Slovakia, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, Slovenia, Croatia, Serbia, Moldavia... Thats a lot of countries with essentially the same three or four colour themes.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Not quite on topic, but important nonetheless:
Why spend 2% of GDP yearly on defence, when 1,5% is more than enough to ensure the safety of Europe?
Unless you're a weapon manufactoring country, defence spending is a effectively a money sink.
Aside from personnel jobs, it doesn't produce value, quickly devaluates and the opportunity cost of military vs. civilian spending (health, education, infrastrucure... hell, even tax breaks if that's your fancy) are never accounted for.
NATO spends 1,2 trillion $ as of 2021, increasing dramatically in 2022.
If the US chooses to spend 4% of GDP on defence, that's on them.
I really don't see the point of throwing away billions of Dollars/Euros for a plus-extra-max defence, when a strong integrated defence will suffice. Russian Nukes being what they are, 1,5% of GDP is more than enough to deal with conventional conflicts - even against Russia.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
"Gold from the Spanish Empire ended in Spain and Italy and their economies stalled, whilst England and The Netherlands went through massive development"
Exactly. The vast wealth was used to buy goods from France and Northern Europe which spurred the development of industry, innovation and banking in those regions. Incidentally, the largest and wealthiest empires of the time were England, France and the Netherlands...
It's very hard to explain these points in a couple of minutes, and kudos for trying, but you're making exceptions when it's convenient and cherrypicking facts to support your statements.
"Exploitation" is not only measured in state finances, but the detrimental social and economic impact it had on the affected regions and the political instability instituted indirectly after decolonization.
South Africa, Zimbabwe, India/Pakistan, Congo, Nigeria, Haiti, Central America etc.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Kool-aid
Before that, what was the trigger to the war?
Legitimate demands for civil, constitutional and economic reforms through peaceful protests.
The protests were met with utter butchery. The civil war started.
So yes, It's a perfect comparison to the civil rights movement. And has certain similarities to the Spanish civil war.
Then, a few years on we can start talking about a proxywar by the West, Israel, Iran and Russia.
You guys shit your pants every single time someone is called a terrorist.
Well guess what, my occidental buddy. You're supporting Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Israel who are by every definition commiting acts of terrorism in Yemen, Sinai and Palestine.
By proxy, you're the terrorists too .
Saying that the war is lost and we should seek a solution, even with Assad, is one thing.
Saying "long live Assad" and that everyone that fought against him "are all terrorists" is an abject surrender of any common sense or moral values you might hold.
In terms of drinkning the Kool-Aid, who watches the watchers, eh "Kool-Aid Watchdog"?
1
-
1
-
Another world:
While you are absolutely right about the inherent bias, you are simply wrong about everything else.
Al Jazeera is in Qatar.
While it's not the whole reason, it IS a major part of the reason for the blockade on Qatar BY Saudi Arabia and the UAE, who have called for them to shut it down. So get your facts straight before insulting people.
Even the US and Israel ("lovers" of free speech) have sought to shut it down for reporting from Syria, Gaza, Iraq and Afghanistan.
*Let me put it this way:
If you're a news organisation and your journalists are imprisoned and beaten and Egypt, Iran, Russia, USA, UAE, Saudis AND Israel want you shut down - you're absolutely doing something right.*
During the uprising I followed news from Arabian, Russian and Western sources. I don't give a shit what you think. I don't care about chemical weapons either. Killing civilians is wrong no matter the method.
What is the first and foremost purpose of a government? Protecting its citizens.
Assad's forces started the shellings into civilian areas - that's fact. Snipers were targeting peaceful demonstrators - fact. Hundreds of corroborated refugee accounts of rape and killings - fact.
Are ISIS a bunch of fucks? Absolutely
But Assad is in no way, shape or form any better. And if the "insurgents" were puppets of the West and Saudis, wouldn't it be relevant to ask if Assad is also a puppet of Iran and Russia?
One thing is clear:
There is no legitimate government that protects and respresents the will of the Syrian people.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Kittykatg2023 Israel is an occupying country and a brutal one at that. Hamas didn't exist 40 years ago. The Israeli occupation and settlements did. Israel is not the victim, they're the oppressor.
Regarding any peace treaties from Oslo until now, how is that going? Since Peres, every new government has continued settlements and reneged on their agreements. The US are not a trustworthy arbiter.
...And then in general there's the violence, killing, beating, imprisonment, torture, expulsions, apartheid in occupied territories etc etc etc.
Or do you believe UN observers, Amnesty, HRC, Doctors without Borders and every goddamn human rights NGO on the planet to be "biased" too?
Wake up, lady. Just because white people are guilty of killing and persecuting Jews for centuries, doesn't mean that Israel has a carte blanche to do the same to the Palestinians... Because you feel sorry for them for what your ancestors did...
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Jake12220 "The EU isn't even democratic, it's primarily run by bureaucrats"
You DO know that there are elections and even the "undemocratic" parts ie the commission and council are composed of representatives appointed and/or elected in their home country, right?
Tell me, in what way is the UK itself more democratic? Does Scotland and NI effectively have a veto in Westminster? Is the UK ruled by (slow) consensus, compromise and negotiation?
The UK left because... Well, who the fuck knows, really. Populism, migration, Ignorance, fucking Queen Victoria?
Not even the Brits know why they left if you ask them. As in 60% would rejoin today if there was a referendum.
The EU is by no means perfect, and I'm not an EU federalist. Many reforms are needed and indeed, it's a slow and heavy bureaucratic machine.
I will however defend that the EU is a singular succes in history in promoting peace, stability, democracy and prosperity across national borders.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@D1NKERR One year into Bidens presidency and he's already "the worst president ever" ?
Man, you Americans sure have a short memory...
But back to the point:
What you feel about the homelessness in California (or elsewhere) isn't really relevant. How and why people become homeless is the real question.
There are many sectors that need an overhaul in the US, starting with money and corporate interests in politics. Before that, nothing has a chance of true systemic reform.
With regards to increasing defence spending and the threat to America.
No. Simply no. The US is not under serious threat by any country, not even China or Russia as it is currently.
And looking at demographics and economic projections for the next 20 years, the air will quickly fizzle out of the Russian and Chinese balloons.
China "miscounted" 100 million of their own citizens in the 2022 census. As in they assumed their population was 100 million larger than it actually is.
Which means they have even less men andd women capable of producing children, working in the economy and serving in the armed forces.
That's your main adversary today, right there. I doubt the Chinese armed forces will perform any better than the pitiful show we got from the Russians so far.
Spending these obscene amounts on defence might seem like a prudent measure, but if there is ever a conventional conflict between the US and Russia and/or China, having such an overwhelmingly superior force actually increases the risk of nuclear weapons by the other side, as they will have no other alternative to counter the sheer conventional military strength of the US.
1
-
@lukelandwalker2920 No one said giving up on defence spending or not developing missile defence systems.
I'd appreciate if you challenged my comments without putting words in my mouth.
The notion that the US itself is under any legitimate threat of invasion is the real "pretty silly" reasoning here.
My rationale, for the US at least, is to not spend almost 800 billion dollars a year on anything and everything, but be more selective and ultimately show greater restraint with tax dollars that could vastly improve the lives of their own citizens.
800+ military bases and tens of thousands of troops in Japan, Korea, Saudi, Kuwait, freakin Germany etc. can easily be reduced without any major effect on US security. Cutting nukes from 5000 to, say, 3000 is still more than adequate to annihilate everything. At the very least, the US should prioritize spending more on the servicemen that have returned and are left with nothing after sacrificing for their country. That's reasonable, no?
Economic warfare Vs Iran, Iraq, North Korea and now Russia, has shown us that US soft power can achieve vastly more than pure military intervention. What do you think prevents China from invading Taiwan? Is it the 7th fleet? Or do you think it's the threat of complete economic isolation that will ruin the CCP and control over its people?
But as I said earlier, at least the US has an incentive to maintain its bloated defence spending as every cent is essentially public spending straight back into the economy and keeping millions of jobs going. For the rest of NATO, the 2% annual spending benchmark is mostly nothing but a very expensive yearly paycheck to the US.
1,5% for NATO is more than enough to counter and greatly surpass Russian or Chinese defence spending. Combined.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@MrTaxiRob I can emphatise (not sure if that's correctly spelled) with your sentiment. However being a "historic bulwark" is as much an empty rhetoric as the current Russian point of Ukraine being "the cradle of Russian civilization". Or a 1900 year old claim by Israel for annexing the rest of Palestine based on the writings in a old book and the sayings of lunatics with curly sideburns.
The Hungarians and Poles have suffered far more, and recently, under the yoke of fellow Europeans and especially fellow Slavs ie the Soviets.
It speaks to mentality, sure, but that mentality is nonetheless indefensible compared to our modern liberal values and, I dare say, sheer decency toward our fellow human beings . It's somewhat idealistic and naive, I know, but to be so boldly confronted with outright hypocrisy, that they're not even trying to disguise it is offensive.
And as I asked the other dude, how much do we know about the average Ukrainian? Are they less prone to homo-phobia, misogyny and xenophobia as their Russian brethren?
I hope so.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@wilhelmu "Shitholemenistan" pretty much sums up your world view, mate.
Just a few remarks, and then I'll leave you to it:
1) Poland and Hungary are the greatest beneficiaries of the EU. They are the largest net negative contributors to the EU. In other words, if other Europeans, who had nothing in common with you, hadn't come along and aided you when you yourselves were "shitholegrads", you'd be God knows where by now...
2) The countries that received 0 refugees during the crisis, and could have helped their European neighbours in Greece, Spain and Italy, CHOSE to contribute absolutely nothing. No funds, no resources and definitely no tolerance or hospitality. Never mind refugees, you've made that clear, but where the fuck was your solidarity for fellow Europeans back then?
3) Ironically, these same countries, especially Poland, have among the highest rates of migrant nationals living and working in other countries ie Germany, France, UK and Scandinavia.
Hmmm. Interesting.
4) The Visegrad clique in recent years have been among the most vocal critics of the EU, and in certain cases have themselves try to implement Erdogan/Putin style autocratic measures to consolidate power in direct contradiction with EU settled law.
5) This is the most important part. I'm all for aid to the Ukraine, and it's not feasible for any country to simply open their borders. We can agree on that, I assume. However, when general laws and charters that should apply equally only apply for a certain ethnicity, religion, culture or skin colour... Yeah, there's a very accurate word for that.
6) Some of the largest group of refugees recent years were directly caused by US + allies, including Poland.
To put it in simple terms: If you're part of the problem, you should strive to be part of the solution.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1