Comments by "dixon pinfold" (@dixonpinfold2582) on "VisualPolitik EN"
channel.
-
50
-
21
-
13
-
13
-
10
-
9
-
9
-
7
-
Ok, so because of China's aggression, South Korea and Japan think they should have nuclear weapons. But they are extremely hesitant, for fear that if they did have them, China would react aggressively.
Well, it looks to me as though they'd better act. When you're that afraid of your bully, it's time to get stronger.
Maybe all four Western-allied democracies should move simultaneously. Maybe South Korea, Japan, Taiwan and Australia should all arm themselves with nuclear weapons, and do it now. Perhaps they should also sign a nuclear defence pact, even one that includes the US.
A cute and cuddly panda-bear China seemed a possibility 20 to 25 years ago. But it was never going to happen. That's been clear for over a decade now.
7
-
6
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
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
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Thanks for your reply. Yes, the federal debt is indeed a massive problem. But I stop short of crediting the president with any intention of addressing it. There's only one way to go about it, and that's to shrink the size of the debt relative to that of the economy.
As far as I can tell, he intends to cut spending and taxes at the same time, which may not reduce the deficit at all. Unless he takes it down to zero, he'll increase debt, and nearly everyone expects the latter to happen. (So do I. In fact I bet the deficit won't shrink much, and debt-to-GDP will barely budge or indeed rise. In theory, rapid GDP growth could come to the rescue, but I doubt it will. Private capital doesn't like what it sees right now and I think it's good at judging these matters.)
And speaking of things the average person doesn't know, Europe is already outspending the US on Ukraine aid, and has been doing so for the past year and a half. On military equipment and ammo alone, the US is still covering well more than half, but there's a lot of other aid besides that.
The average person also doesn't know that a great deal of the materiel delivered by the US to Ukraine has been costed as though it were paid for in cash rather than paid off decades ago. Much of it was mothballed or marked for disposal due to obsolescence or sheer age. So it had to either be used up or tossed out anyway.
As he normally does, the president has exaggerated on all these matters to a degree I can't excuse, and it's gotten far worse since November 5. He sounded reasonable during the campaign and had my support (whatever that's worth) for that reason. Not anymore.
Finally, regarding your first assertion in this thread, I always felt the same way until lately. Now I no longer believe he's merely playing chicken with allies on military spending, which seemed like a good course of action. If he really does hand eastern Ukraine to Russia on a silver platter as he appears set to do, then he's not trying to strengthen NATO after all; he means to marginalize or even end it.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
PoliticsAndCoffee_1865 That is highly misleading, buddy, and flirts with outright falsehood, buddy. It is misleading because it implies that people of non-French background will no longer be allowed to live in France. In fact that would be true in a tiny minority of cases. In normal cases the usual pathway to French citizenship would remain open; it would simply not be automatic.
Nor is not to grant automatic citizenship to those born to foreigners at all extreme, for such an automatic grant is given in only 22 out of 190+ countries in the world. Japan, for instance, would like to have a word with you.
I don't have all day to improve upon the truth value of your crude assertion, so to help speed things up, here is Perplexity's response to the query Does the Rassemblement National say that people born in France who are not of French background should be deported? :
"Based on the search results provided, there is no indication that the Rassemblement National (RN) explicitly states that French-born people who are not of French background should be deported. However, the party does propose significant changes to French citizenship and immigration policies that would affect people born in France to foreign parents:
* The RN wants to abolish France's "droit de sol" (jus soli), which currently grants French nationality at 18 to people born on French soil to foreign parents, provided they have lived in France for at least five years since the age of 11.
* Instead, the RN proposes restricting automatic French nationality by blood, granting it only to people born to at least one French parent.
* The party aims to impose "very strict conditions" for naturalization, based on guarantees of assimilation, mastery of the French language, and respect for French laws and customs.
* The RN suggests that naturalized French citizenship could be withdrawn in cases where naturalized citizens commit acts "incompatible with French nationality or prejudicial to the nation's interests".
* Jordan Bardella, the RN president, has made comments about "French people of foreign origin locked into in repentance and hatred of France," suggesting a distinction between different categories of French citizens based on their origins.
While these proposals do not explicitly call for the deportation of French-born people who are not of French background, they do indicate a desire to restrict access to French citizenship and create distinctions between different categories of French citizens based on their origins. The party's overall stance appears to be focused on significantly reducing immigration and tightening citizenship requirements, rather than explicitly calling for the deportation of French-born individuals without French background."
—Sources listed: Le Monde, Reuters, France24, Radio France Internationale
[And note that these sources are known more for hostility to conservative points of view than for freedom from political bias. Two are owned and funded by the French state, buddy.]
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1