ATP

Well-known member
For how many pages can the same handful of people go back and forth before just admitting they don't see eye to eye, never will, and moving on?
You have a point.
Is it really? Shady dudes with such a big scheme of course can pay off some politicians to give them a word of support, but is Israel as a country really doing anything regarding it?

Again i ask, what did they do to be our enemy? Do, as in actions, not "some dude said something".

Politics. Both would hurt the poll bars of the people who would have to order it and they really need their poll bars, so they don't. You can't complain Israel's politicians are not as stupid as some of the western ones, you can complain about those being stupid.
So,i do not agree,but stop answering to you after that.

@LordsFire we all live in world where Izrael try rob Poland under pretext that some polish jews murdered by germans should gave their property to Izrael if they lived.
And,where jews are spitting on christians,attacking their churches and shops,and notching is done about that.

Not mention,illegal jewish settlers are attacking palestinians on their own land in WB.

Only difference between us is,that you do not care about that.
 

King Arts

Well-known member
True, and that's because, for obvious reasons, more conservative Jews were more likely to go to Israel, while leftist Jews, well, why would they give a damn about being in one country or another, PROGRESS! has to happen everywhere anyway, but let's not project the fault of those on the Israeli Jews.
Umm there are people who believe in rules for thee but not for me. For example I remember hearing that George Soros tried to stop funding for Femen when they were going to Israel.

Do they? A lot of that is very nasty slapfights where some neocon wants to slap down leftist/islamic BDS movement (that's what the pledge is about, it's a movement of hardcore leftists with ME migrant support, so like Israel or not, it's a right wing politicians job to shit on them all day) and someone makes it a soundbite about being a traitor or caring about Israel too much.
Again either the citizens of a nation are free to support or criticise or be indifferent to foreign nations or they are not. Neo cons trying to carve out a specific exception where people MUST support Israel is shameful, and people like Dan Crenshaw should be spit on for betraying their oaths to the constitution. It's not that different from Warsaw pact powers requring their people to support the Soviets.

CCP is obviously a different situation because it's almost universally agreed that it's a rival power. Israel is in far more controversial territory leaning towards ally, closer to Turkey, Pakistan or France. Should we except the left's effort in attacking such even if... provisional and controversial allies from our right wing political opposition? I would say obviously not.
Why should i defend far left activism if it wants to infiltrate foreign policy? Screw the reds, i say. Is there some massive right wing or libertarian movement to boycott Israel over matters of US national interest that i'm not aware of?
Should citizens of your nations be free to criticize Saudi Arabia? That is also an ally.
And that's why they made mistake regarding SA. If they got wiser with that mistake, great, we shouldn't complain about people getting wiser.
I don't think they wised up and said "Oh we were totally wrong about South Africa and we should not repeat the mistake with Israel." No instead they say "No it's completely different when we do it."
Do you realize that the truly "laws above might" solution would be for UK to give it back, and then, upon China violating its obligations of respecting HK self-governance and such for agreed upon time, invade, take it back, and add additional punitive measures against China?
To be fair the British added that at the last second. The original treaty with the China in the Qing dynasty did not require the Chinese to make it a democracy when they got it back 100 years later. Also the British did not allow Hong Kong to have democracy until they were about to give it back to China, one can definitely think that it was a poisoned challice.

Also you said you would answer another question if "king of the hill" does not determine legitimacy then what does? Who was there first? So hypothetical scenario let's say some aliens kidnapped Native Americans in the 1600's or so. The Natives eventually rebel or are freed and have their own space empire. They eventually find earth again and are pissed at what the U.S. and Canada did to their ethnic brothers so they invade and destroy those nations and force many Americans and Canadians into reservations/bantustans like how Israel treats the Palestinians or force them to go back to England. In the war with the Western powers former colonists like England and France also have to pay reparations. Do you think the space Indians are justified? If you became president of Poland what sort of policy would you take would stick with Western civilization and be space Iran, or would you abandon them and deal with the space Indians without giving a shit about other Western nations that got fucked?


In this hypo to clarify Americans are Palestinians, Space Indians are Israelis, England and France are like Syria, Lebanon, and Egypt who fight Israel and are neighbors. Poland is like Iran where Iran/Polands strategic interests would logically mean that they should not be enemies and instead maybe even allies. But because of ideology either Islamism, or Western civilization/culture they feel affinity with the people fighting Israel/space Indians.

Great, so, why are people insisting on criticizing Israel for wanting to treat Muslims as second class citizens (and not just on account of ancient texts, but after they have put a lot of effort into earning that over recent decades), aka apartheid state?
Why should people not criticize what is going on in foreign nations if they think it is immoral? You realize for Americans that is part of the reason we are actually caring about ww2 with Germany, or the Cold war with Russia, or Ukraine and Russia now? Logically if you don't consider morality, and don't give a shit about "empire" why should Americans care about Russian or Nazi invasion of Europe?

Where are you going with this "they could have killed them, but they kept them around and just treated them like crap because they were useful" argument?
You said they were going to wipe them out. I said they did not.

Not genocided technically (killed a lot of them, just not all), just culled and treated as a servants. What's your point in that?
That's the same grade of argument as Turks saying Armenian genocide wasn't a genocide because obviously there were Armenians left.
That's a terrible argument and insulting towards Armenians. Jews were treated well by Muslims in the middle ages, the Armenians were treated by the Turks the same way the Germans did the Jews. I guess the Nazis did not do a genocide because there are still Jews.

As a westerner why would i give a damn about what territory Arabs think is theirs?
In the grand scheme of things, it's not an equal opportunistic comparison. Zionist Jews want just a state in ME, the argument being about whether its borders should go tens of kilometers this or that way. Not much room for conflict with westernerers there.
The Arab world meanwhile, can get quite... creative and ambitions in its demands on the West, and did many times in the past.
You shouldn't give a shit about that, I don't care too much. I also don't care what territory Jews think is theirs.

Yup. And i brought up that most people don't share yours. This shit is why since the industrial age and later fall of significance of religion in western countries, nationalism and national culture is what unites states, not religions, about which people are more expected to "agree to disagree".
But you are trying to find common ground with something as nebulous as "western culture" This is not a conflict between Poles and Palestinians. It's between Jews and Arabs, both groups equally diffrent to Catholic Poles. At least religion would ensure that there is commonality of belief you agree with other coreligionists on what is right and wrong, who is good and bad. As opposed to "Western civilization" which can have almost anyone in a suit. Hell even trannies, and people arguing for both sides in the Israel Palestine war.

My standard is that i support partially westernized nationalists against islamists, simple as that.
And there is an important comparison here to notice, in many of such cases "you lost the war, suck it up" is expected to be the ultimate argument. Germans accepted it. UK would also accept it if it had to. The whole reason why the Palestinian conflict persists rather than disappearing in the 50's, 60's or 70's is that they have lost a few wars and yet still insist on not making concessions.
Funny you mention that. No the British would not, they would break the treaty the second they could.

stable
Syria...
Libya...
Egypt...
Refugee crisis started truly when Merkel went full retard and started advertising the asylum exploit in western legal systems, and leftists helped.
I know you want to put the blame on "western meddling", but a look at the major sources of them demonstrates how irrelevant that is.
Height of migrant crisis:
Angela Merkel was in charge from 2005 to 2021. The Arab nations were freed from colonialism in the 50's and 60's. Are you saying the mass immigration happened in between 1960 to 1990's and 2000? Also there is history before the 1800's. The Turks in the 1600's were one of the richest and most powerful nations. They were evil but not a shithole.

So you want to reduce the most right wing voting subsection of US Christians... And you think they are the cucks... because they agree with orthodox Jews on the matter of Israel... who are voting as right wing as the evangelicals?

What would be our interest? Instead of shilling for the Arabs of Palestine with their islamic bent (they aren't nice to Christians either, if you think spit and rocks are that bad, how about molotovs and ak's), you could be proposing some more cheeky ideas... Like pressuring Israel to let some Western government provide the security for Christian pilgrims. But we all know that no sane government would want to stick their dick into a meatgrinder like this as security in that region is not a simple or easy thing
Evangelicals are shit they are partly responsible for making the left so strong their ideas of individualism and hyper Protestantism is the 2nd worst part of Christianity. The only ones who are worse are the hyper wokeists, those are a different breed of protestant.
 

Marduk

Well-known member
Moderator
Staff Member
Umm there are people who believe in rules for thee but not for me. For example I remember hearing that George Soros tried to stop funding for Femen when they were going to Israel.
Guess Mossad knows where his skeleton rich closet is.
Again either the citizens of a nation are free to support or criticise or be indifferent to foreign nations or they are not. Neo cons trying to carve out a specific exception where people MUST support Israel is shameful, and people like Dan Crenshaw should be spit on for betraying their oaths to the constitution. It's not that different from Warsaw pact powers requring their people to support the Soviets.
No, it is not a carve out where people must support Israel, it's a carve out that businesses who want to get government deals and public organizations aka taxpayer funded ones don't get to play leftie activist and announce a boycott of Israel, either read up on the events you are trying to comment or stop talking about shit you are clueless about because it looks like you are trying to manipulate me with journo grade word twists, and i do not appreciate that, you are insulting either my or your intelligence by doing that in such an obvious way.
Should citizens of your nations be free to criticize Saudi Arabia? That is also an ally.
Yes, they should be free to do that. But, say, if the director of a public hospital decides that he wants to boycott Saudi Arabia so he will buy more expensive fuel for the hospital, fuck this guy, he is supposed to pursue the public's interests in business decisions, not use the institution as his personal platform for political activism or virtue signalling. And just because he is free to doesn't mean i can't say he's retarded and sacrificing national interests for leftie bullshit in doing so.
I don't think they wised up and said "Oh we were totally wrong about South Africa and we should not repeat the mistake with Israel." No instead they say "No it's completely different when we do it."
But with those qualifiers we probably leave the area of "many people".
The facts are that Israel had good relations with apartheid era South Africa, and i don't think US neocons of all people were particular fans of the SA marxists either.
To be fair the British added that at the last second. The original treaty with the China in the Qing dynasty did not require the Chinese to make it a democracy when they got it back 100 years later. Also the British did not allow Hong Kong to have democracy until they were about to give it back to China, one can definitely think that it was a poisoned challice.
Lemme get the world's smallest violin for the chicoms...
Sticking with original treaty so hard they could also decide that chicoms should not get it at all because they aren't Qing dynasty so the deal wasn't made with them, it could also be made independent (and nuclear armed!) or handed over to Taiwan.
Also you said you would answer another question if "king of the hill" does not determine legitimacy then what does? Who was there first? So hypothetical scenario let's say some aliens kidnapped Native Americans in the 1600's or so. The Natives eventually rebel or are freed and have their own space empire. They eventually find earth again and are pissed at what the U.S. and Canada did to their ethnic brothers so they invade and destroy those nations and force many Americans and Canadians into reservations/bantustans like how Israel treats the Palestinians or force them to go back to England. In the war with the Western powers former colonists like England and France also have to pay reparations. Do you think the space Indians are justified? If you became president of Poland what sort of policy would you take would stick with Western civilization and be space Iran, or would you abandon them and deal with the space Indians without giving a shit about other Western nations that got fucked?
I would purge the xenos, their lackeys, and found the Imperium of Polish Mankind.
Can we not introduce ridiculous what-ifs into the discussion that is plenty complicated enough without adding the hypothetical interstellar politics and land sovereignty questions into it?
In this hypo to clarify Americans are Palestinians, Space Indians are Israelis, England and France are like Syria, Lebanon, and Egypt who fight Israel and are neighbors. Poland is like Iran where Iran/Polands strategic interests would logically mean that they should not be enemies and instead maybe even allies. But because of ideology either Islamism, or Western civilization/culture they feel affinity with the people fighting Israel/space Indians.
Except Arabs weren't assured Jews outside ME disappeared or totally forgot about their homeland, there was a complicated and constant political controversy over this topic over centuries that sometimes got more intense, sometimes less, but it was always there, and even the Jews still in Israel, i think Arabs weren't dumb enough to think they love being second class citizens to Muslim rulers.
Why should people not criticize what is going on in foreign nations if they think it is immoral? You realize for Americans that is part of the reason we are actually caring about ww2 with Germany, or the Cold war with Russia, or Ukraine and Russia now? Logically if you don't consider morality, and don't give a shit about "empire" why should Americans care about Russian or Nazi invasion of Europe?
The Americans who make the decisions in question care definitely more about the material and military interests than merely on account of personal moral imperialist fancies. Some less important citizens may paper over that state of affairs with whatever stories about morality/immorality of that support, whatever fits their preferred agenda better, but that's just unimportant details.
You said they were going to wipe them out. I said they did not.
I didn't state anything, i asked you a question about where are you going with that statement and what are you trying to imply with it. Am i supposed to make my own guesses? You may not like them...
That's a terrible argument and insulting towards Armenians. Jews were treated well by Muslims in the middle ages, the Armenians were treated by the Turks the same way the Germans did the Jews. I guess the Nazis did not do a genocide because there are still Jews.
I think you are using the term "well" rather relatively here.
If tomorrow all western countries started treating Muslims like Muslims treat Dhimmis by islamic law, they would blow their gaskets, and so would the left and UN.
You shouldn't give a shit about that, I don't care too much. I also don't care what territory Jews think is theirs.
I'll give a shit about what i want regardless of your opinion, and Arab world is till a pain in the ass to Europe as it always was, so it's tactically useful to give a shit.
But you are trying to find common ground with something as nebulous as "western culture" This is not a conflict between Poles and Palestinians. It's between Jews and Arabs, both groups equally diffrent to Catholic Poles.
Said equality being a total asspull from your side.
At least religion would ensure that there is commonality of belief you agree with other coreligionists on what is right and wrong, who is good and bad. As opposed to "Western civilization" which can have almost anyone in a suit. Hell even trannies, and people arguing for both sides in the Israel Palestine war.
Only to a point, then you get a 30 year war or something, i'm not your fellow theocracy fan and i have dramatically opposing views regarding these things.
Funny you mention that. No the British would not, they would break the treaty the second they could.
Again, your alt-hist is not an argument for anything.
Angela Merkel was in charge from 2005 to 2021. The Arab nations were freed from colonialism in the 50's and 60's. Are you saying the mass immigration happened in between 1960 to 1990's and 2000? Also there is history before the 1800's. The Turks in the 1600's were one of the richest and most powerful nations. They were evil but not a shithole.
Does being known as "the sick man of Europe" sound like universal praise of their stability to you?
Yup, that's exactly what everyone would call the most stable country in Europe... :cool:

Of course in the 60's colonial powers were far more willing and able to slap down silly shit on part of their former colonies, and also plenty of population growth, political loosening of borders and reinforcing of "muh human rights" in Europe had to happen before this kind of crisis could get so bad. Imagine doing all the border jumping shit the migrants during the Cold War, chances are quite a few would get fucking shot...
Plenty of wars in ME before 2014, yet there was no crisis, suddenly it happened in 2014 when Merkel was virtue signalling, coincidence?
And even then, somehow the migrants know to head to Germany, UK, Sweden, and other notably generous and humane welfare states, somehow informed to not head towards countries less tolerant of bullshit. Hence the conclusion, it's not about mythical destabilisation, it's about tolerance of bullshit. And that's besides the argument i made with the chart that you conveniently skipped - the fuck did West do to "destabilize" Eritrea or Pakistan that they are generating more "refugees" than Syria, Iraq or Afghanistan? That should be a finishing blow to the leftist "muh western destabilization" myth and your clumsy effort to throw it at me.
Evangelicals are shit they are partly responsible for making the left so strong their ideas of individualism and hyper Protestantism is the 2nd worst part of Christianity. The only ones who are worse are the hyper wokeists, those are a different breed of protestant.
The influence is definitely there, but it's not a necessary component, the virus of marxism is very adaptable - see: liberation theology. No protestantism there....
 
Last edited:

49ersfootball

Well-known member
Guess Mossad knows where his skeleton rich closet is.

No, it is not a carve out where people must support Israel, it's a carve out that businesses who want to get government deals and public organizations aka taxpayer funded ones don't get to play leftie activist and announce a boycott of Israel, either read up on the events you are trying to comment or stop talking about shit you are clueless about because it looks like you are trying to manipulate me with journo grade word twists, and i do not appreciate that, you are insulting either my or your intelligence by doing that in such an obvious way.

Yes, they should be free to do that. But, say, if the director of a public hospital decides that he wants to boycott Saudi Arabia so he will buy more expensive fuel for the hospital, fuck this guy, he is supposed to pursue the public's interests in business decisions, not use the institution as his personal platform for political activism or virtue signalling. And just because he is free to doesn't mean i can't say he's retarded and sacrificing national interests for leftie bullshit in doing so.

But with those qualifiers we probably leave the area of "many people".
The facts are that Israel had good relations with apartheid era South Africa, and i don't think US neocons of all people were particular fans of the SA marxists either.

Lemme get the world's smallest violin for the chicoms...
Sticking with original treaty so hard they could also decide that chicoms should not get it at all because they aren't Qing dynasty so the deal wasn't made with them, it could also be made independent (and nuclear armed!) or handed over to Taiwan.

I would purge the xenos, their lackeys, and found the Imperium of Polish Mankind.
Can we not introduce ridiculous what-ifs into the discussion that is plenty complicated enough without adding the hypothetical interstellar politics and land sovereignty questions into it?

Except Arabs weren't assured Jews outside ME disappeared or totally forgot about their homeland, there was a complicated and constant political controversy over this topic over centuries that sometimes got more intense, sometimes less, but it was always there, and even the Jews still in Israel, i think Arabs weren't dumb enough to think they love being second class citizens to Muslim rulers.

The Americans who make the decisions in question care definitely more about the material and military interests than merely on account of personal moral imperialist fancies. Some less important citizens may paper over that state of affairs with whatever stories about morality/immorality of that support, whatever fits their preferred agenda better, but that's just unimportant details.

I didn't state anything, i asked you a question about where are you going with that statement and what are you trying to imply with it. Am i supposed to make my own guesses? You may not like them...

I think you are using the term "well" rather relatively here.
If tomorrow all western countries started treating Muslims like Muslims treat Dhimmis by islamic law, they would blow their gaskets, and so would the left and UN.

I'll give a shit about what i want regardless of your opinion, and Arab world is till a pain in the ass to Europe as it always was, so it's tactically useful to give a shit.

Said equality being a total asspull from your side.

Only to a point, then you get a 30 year war or something, i'm not your fellow theocracy fan and i have dramatically opposing views regarding these things.

Again, your alt-hist is not an argument for anything.

Does being known as "the sick man of Europe" sound like universal praise of their stability to you?
Yup, that's exactly what everyone would call the most stable country in Europe... :cool:

Of course in the 60's colonial powers were far more willing and able to slap down silly shit on part of their former colonies, and also plenty of population growth, political loosening of borders and reinforcing of "muh human rights" in Europe had to happen before this kind of crisis could get so bad. Imagine doing all the border jumping shit the migrants during the Cold War, chances are quite a few would get fucking shot...
Plenty of wars in ME before 2014, yet there was no crisis, suddenly it happened in 2014 when Merkel was virtue signalling, coincidence?
And even then, somehow the migrants know to head to Germany, UK, Sweden, and other notably generous and humane welfare states, somehow informed to not head towards countries less tolerant of bullshit. Hence the conclusion, it's not about mythical destabilisation, it's about tolerance of bullshit. And that's besides the argument i made with the chart that you conveniently skipped - the fuck did West do to "destabilize" Eritrea or Pakistan that they are generating more "refugees" than Syria, Iraq or Afghanistan? That should be a finishing blow to the leftist "muh western destabilization" myth and your clumsy effort to throw it at me.

The influence is definitely there, but it's not a necessary component, the virus of marxism is very adaptable - see: liberation theology. No protestantism there....
Hmm 🤔
 

King Arts

Well-known member
Yes, they should be free to do that. But, say, if the director of a public hospital decides that he wants to boycott Saudi Arabia so he will buy more expensive fuel for the hospital, fuck this guy, he is supposed to pursue the public's interests in business decisions, not use the institution as his personal platform for political activism or virtue signalling. And just because he is free to doesn't mean i can't say he's retarded and sacrificing national interests for leftie bullshit in doing so.
Yes but they should be punished for wasting government funds at that point. Low level government officials don't have the authority to sanction other nations. They go for what is best for the people they are responsible for. The hospital administrator has a duty to get the best deal for the hospital. But he should still be free in his personal life to be publicly against Israel.

Lemme get the world's smallest violin for the chicoms...
Sticking with original treaty so hard they could also decide that chicoms should not get it at all because they aren't Qing dynasty so the deal wasn't made with them, it could also be made independent (and nuclear armed!) or handed over to Taiwan.
Yes the Chicoms suck. But this has nothing to do with the Chicoms.
The British would have acted the same even if the Chinese were not communists. If it was a new Chinese emprie with a new dynasty, or a Republic. They would still be assholes. Stop changing the topic and just deal with the issue presented.

I would purge the xenos, their lackeys, and found the Imperium of Polish Mankind.
Can we not introduce ridiculous what-ifs into the discussion that is plenty complicated enough without adding the hypothetical interstellar politics and land sovereignty questions into it?
So you are going to be space Iran? I hope this means you won't be bitching about Iran in the future. Also FYI there are no xenos in the fight here the Indians are humans. Also no answer the what if. The what if shows if you actually believe what you are arguing, or if you are just in support of what is good for "western interests" at the moment.

Except Arabs weren't assured Jews outside ME disappeared or totally forgot about their homeland, there was a complicated and constant political controversy over this topic over centuries that sometimes got more intense, sometimes less, but it was always there, and even the Jews still in Israel, i think Arabs weren't dumb enough to think they love being second class citizens to Muslim rulers.
The same applies to Native Americans, they aren't completely disappeared and did not forget their homeland. Realistically the Jews for hundreds of years were a tiny minority it is extremely unlikely they would get their nation back.

I think you are using the term "well" rather relatively here.
Yes, but only because your accusation was rock bottom. You said that Muslims would genocide all the Jews. I don't need to show Jews being treated like kings and given blowjobs by supermodels to prove you wrong. Simply show that Jews were not exterminated.

I'll give a shit about what i want regardless of your opinion, and Arab world is till a pain in the ass to Europe as it always was, so it's tactically useful to give a shit.
Israel has also been a pain in the ass to Europe.

Said equality being a total asspull from your side.
I don't think you know anything about Judaism or Islam. Because yes at best they are equally different. But you could argue that Muslims are at least closer since they respect Jesus.

Only to a point, then you get a 30 year war or something, i'm not your fellow theocracy fan and i have dramatically opposing views regarding these things.
Yes to a point, because diffrent religions give diffrent values. Religion is what tells you that rape, murder, and theft are wrong and should not be done even if you can get away with it. When you have no religion you have LGBT groomers, why oppose that, why should the groomers not do what feels good to them if they can get away with it?

Again, your alt-hist is not an argument for anything.
Not alt hist. It's real history. Kinda embarrasing you don't know about English history.

Does being known as "the sick man of Europe" sound like universal praise of their stability to you?
Yup, that's exactly what everyone would call the most stable country in Europe... :cool:
The Ottomans were the sick man starting in the 1700's From the 1400's to 1600's they were powerful. Thats at least 200 years before they degraded.
The influence is definitely there, but it's not a necessary component, the virus of marxism is very adaptable - see: liberation theology. No protestantism there
You harp on about liberation theology alot but I'm not convinced it's common. And you keep it very vague so that any kind of help towards the poor you can just say is muh liberation theology. Like I can point to protestants having heresy by denying scripture and tradition, and accepting gays, and women pastors, and denying miracles like Christ's ressurection.

All you have is some nebulous communist plot to infilitrate the Church. I'm not saying it's not true as you can see with the current pope but can you define it or show that there is a large group that is actively communists, and not merely supporting the poor and oppressed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ATP

TheRejectionist

TheRejectionist
To a degree one's opinion shouldn't get something canned in an entire organization. But even I have to do follow the (kinda obvious) unwritten rules as an educator. Not discussing too much (publicly with people I barely know) stuff like Israel/Palestine, Ukraine and feminism and more. So I am very glad I found out about the Sietch.

Honestly I wouldn't be surprised if I dig enough I find more proof about how (likely) Israel's existance has been detrimental not only to Europe and its neighbors. When I have time I will do some research, right now after finishing my thesis and one month in Prague has left me without energy.
 

King Arts

Well-known member
To a degree one's opinion shouldn't get something canned in an entire organization.

But even I have to do follow the (kinda obvious) unwritten rules as an educator.

Not discussing too much (publicly with people I barely know) stuff like Israel/Palestine, Ukraine and feminism and more.

So I am very glad I found out about the Sietch.
You should not be allowed to discuss that with children, as your personal political beliefs should not be taught to impressionable kids. Now if they are older like high schoolers then maybe there can be more freedom. Also you shouldn't be going off topic in your class and not teaching the subject, but just talking your politics.
 

TheRejectionist

TheRejectionist
You should not be allowed to discuss that with children, as your personal political beliefs should not be taught to impressionable kids. Now if they are older like high schoolers then maybe there can be more freedom. Also you shouldn't be going off topic in your class and not teaching the subject, but just talking your politics.

I was...speaking more about the adults (their parents, my boss and my potential colleagues and outside of work friends and acquaintances) not the kids themselves.
I want to have their own opinions and I rather...keep them in the dark as long as it is reasonably possible about the fact than there are worse things than the Bermuda triangle and spooky stuff.

The only time I might have gotten "political" was replying to a kid's question and I was : "If they" (those with power) "tell you something its good ... it likely is not" and she/he was "Why people" (adults) "believe them?", I replied : "I honestly do not have the faintest idea or clue why people older or younger than you or me believe thàt chàrade".
 

Marduk

Well-known member
Moderator
Staff Member
Yes but they should be punished for wasting government funds at that point. Low level government officials don't have the authority to sanction other nations. They go for what is best for the people they are responsible for. The hospital administrator has a duty to get the best deal for the hospital. But he should still be free in his personal life to be publicly against Israel.
And who is stopping people from being against Israel in private life? There is a reason why the law we are discussing is called "Anti BDS laws" and are relevant to certain kinds of organizations, not private persons.
So you are just badly informed about a point you brought up, or alternatively are trying to misinform me about it, while i did my research and know the situation in question properly.
The "banning criticism of Israel" laws you mentioned are aimed at organizations, like, say, publicly owned/funded colleges, who were most notably targeted by those laws.
Yes the Chicoms suck. But this has nothing to do with the Chicoms.
The British would have acted the same even if the Chinese were not communists. If it was a new Chinese emprie with a new dynasty, or a Republic. They would still be assholes. Stop changing the topic and just deal with the issue presented.
Sorry, i do not trust your alt-history third eye. I trust mine, and it says you are wrong.
So you are going to be space Iran? I hope this means you won't be bitching about Iran in the future.
Lemme add to my notes that your sarcasm detector is as broken as your alt-history third eye.
I don't think what you call space Iran would be the same thing i would call that.
Also FYI there are no xenos in the fight here the Indians are humans. Also no answer the what if. The what if shows if you actually believe what you are arguing, or if you are just in support of what is good for "western interests" at the moment.
Circumstances can change perspectives, and this is a truly grand change of perspective, with fucking alien empires interfering in the affairs of us humans, even if through proxies.
Your what-if is shit because it adds twists and surprises that do not apply to real life situations, definitely not this one, where the defeated group gets split in half, one half disappears for hundreds of years, unheard of by their kin back home or their enemies alike, gets ridiculously OP in the process, and returns. In real life, such breaks of contact continuity are practically unheard of, and if they were, it would be damn material to any consideration of land sovereignty.

It's not like Arabs forgot that all the Jews outside of Middle East exist or could possibly want their homeland back. It was just that they though they were hot shit (and back then they had some of a point) and were too strong for this to happen, then shit happened, then they got their asses kicked massively by western empires, who then ruled them and the Jews, and then on account of own internal politics more or less granted them independence, which they then used to pick fights with Israel that was also granted independence by the above. Of course the customs of handling such disputes do not apply well to your what-if.
As i said, we do not have customs designed to handle interstellar foreign policy and its implications, for obvious reasons.
Fuck, we even have special law of the sea to deal with some issues very differently than any "law of the land" would, and parts of ethno-tribal groups disappearing off-planet for centuries is way more of an out of context problem for law and customs than anything going on the sea.
The same applies to Native Americans, they aren't completely disappeared and did not forget their homeland. Realistically the Jews for hundreds of years were a tiny minority it is extremely unlikely they would get their nation back.
But they were still there, with their own relations with Arabs and with other powers.
With Native Americans, they still are in their homelands, and have their own arrangements with the rest of Americans (importantly, on tribe by tribe basis, rather than as general group, which is just a leftist construct), which goes into another aspect of this, foreign relations between civilizations and stone age hunter gatherers in my opinion can't be expected to work exactly the same as between near-peer civilizations, never did, and only ridiculous people suggest they should.
Yes, but only because your accusation was rock bottom. You said that Muslims would genocide all the Jews. I don't need to show Jews being treated like kings and given blowjobs by supermodels to prove you wrong. Simply show that Jews were not exterminated.
Sorry but no one cares about your personal insistence on using the most strict theoretical (rather than the legal) definition of genocide. By that logic Hitler didn't want to genocide Slavs, because he just wanted to get rid of most of them and keep some as slaves. Such minor differences are not really that important to this discussion.
Israel has also been a pain in the ass to Europe.
With what? Minor first world problem scandals? Arab butthurt?
How many invasions of Europe did Israel do, how many territories it occupied for how many centuries. Have some fucking sense of scale.
I don't think you know anything about Judaism or Islam. Because yes at best they are equally different. But you could argue that Muslims are at least closer since they respect Jesus.
You are right that i care little about the theological differences between them, and care far more about the presented cultural and political differences between them.
Yes to a point, because diffrent religions give diffrent values. Religion is what tells you that rape, murder, and theft are wrong and should not be done even if you can get away with it. When you have no religion you have LGBT groomers, why oppose that, why should the groomers not do what feels good to them if they can get away with it?
No, religion is a part of culture (bigger in some cultures, proportionally lesser in others, like currently ours), which is what tells you what is right and wrong, so i have to disagree here vehemently, you are wrong and letting your personal preference for how things should be (which btw i have as low opinion of as you probably have of my worldview) blind you to how things are as-is.
Otherwise you would not get lesbian bishops blessing gay marriages in a parody of both Christianity and leftism.
Religion is not some magic wall to keep leftism away, for it has proven many times that if the price of getting its way is to infiltrate and subvert religious organizations, it is very willing and able to do exactly that.
Not alt hist. It's real history. Kinda embarrasing you don't know about English history.
I know you are not a fan of English geopolitics, and i see that here.
The Ottomans were the sick man starting in the 1700's From the 1400's to 1600's they were powerful. Thats at least 200 years before they degraded.
Yup. And how does that counter my point at all? They were "the sick man of Europe" since 1700's, which directly contributed to their downfall and falling under control of the western colonial powers in the first place (stable and powerful states generally don't do that), rather than from modern era "western meddling", utterly crushing this stupid leftist theory you were parroting here.
Or are you trying to say that western colonial powers did a terrible thing to all Arabs by granting them independence without making the Ottoman Empire great and stable again first, as hilariously stupid thing for them to do it would be?
You harp on about liberation theology alot but I'm not convinced it's common.
It's irrelevant to my argument whether 5 million or 200 million of people subscribe to it. It exists, and on a major scale enough to be considered a political ideology.

And you keep it very vague so that any kind of help towards the poor you can just say is muh liberation theology. Like I can point to protestants having heresy by denying scripture and tradition, and accepting gays, and women pastors, and denying miracles like Christ's ressurection.
I'm not trying to simp for protestants here either, they are more compartmentalized than the major more united branches of Christianity, some protestant branches got it worse, some less, and due to smaller institutional momentum parts can be taken over much faster, but the reaction to it can also be faster.
All you have is some nebulous communist plot to infilitrate the Church. I'm not saying it's not true as you can see with the current pope but can you define it or show that there is a large group that is actively communists, and not merely supporting the poor and oppressed.
Bingo, it is an old and time honored tactic of communists to hide their quest for power, overt or, especially when they are weak enough that it needs to be covert, behind "supporting the poor and oppressed", only slowly shifting the definitions of "oppression" and "supporting" and "poor" as tactically suitable at the moment, in the final stage arriving at sending money and weapons to communist militants oppressed by having a non-communist government. If you are willing to take this cover at face value, oh well, i think Lenin had a term for people like you.

Is the number of infiltrators large? Well, you can see their influence, so it's large enough to matter, besides that, it of course depends on your definition of large group.
 
Last edited:

filipina84

Well-known member
You do not read my post,yet stil citate it.Orthodox jews belive,that we are cattle.Good for them,i had notching against it.
I only do not undarstandt,why they do not eat us.

Becouse,if i belive that somebody is cattle,i would eat him.Becouse cattle exist to be eaten.
If you do not undarstandt that....

P.S I do not hate jews,i do not care about them.As long as they do not try steal from me,or attack in other way,i hoinestly do not care what they do,and do not care they orthodox jews think that we are cattle.
Their problem,not mine.As long as they do not try kill and eat me or somebody in my country.


Entire Izrael state is our enemy at least from 2009.I do not care about palestinians,but as long as Izrael2.0 keep attacking us,palestinian are allies.
If they stop,i would stop caring about both nations.



Not hostility. @Marduk belive,that Poland should support Izrael when they keep attacking us.
I think,that in this situation we should support palestinians,even when i do not care about them.That is all.






Thanks. Now,i undarstandt why Felix Koneczny do not belived that orthodox jews killed chistian children.
Ok.
 

LTR

Don't Look Back In Anger
Administrator
Staff Member
Founder
BREAKING: Newsmax reporting Israel haz declared State of War after Hamas launched 5,000 rockets into Israel. Israeli Defense Forces mobilizing soldiers & reservists.

Let's not forget about the stupidity of the Biden administration kissing up to Iran.

Recent Gazan-Israeli hostilities and other topics that directly branch out from that can be discussed in this thread.

 

TheRejectionist

TheRejectionist
Recent Gazan-Israeli hostilities and other topics that directly branch out from that can be discussed in this thread.

Wàs it reàlly necesseàry à sepàràte threàd?
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top