Could be airsoft, but polymer magazines are pretty standard.The gun looks fake, doesn't show rounds and the sound is....I'm pretty sure that's an airsoft gun. It sounds like fucning plastic.
Could be airsoft, but polymer magazines are pretty standard.The gun looks fake, doesn't show rounds and the sound is....I'm pretty sure that's an airsoft gun. It sounds like fucning plastic.
Not for AKs, but that isn't why I say it's plastic. The gun itself sounds plastic.Could be airsoft, but polymer magazines are pretty standard.
I can find tons of polymer mags for AKs online right now lolNot for AKs, but that isn't why I say it's plastic. The gun itself sounds plastic.
and boltCould be 3D printed, these days you can just about replace everything with plastic except for the barrel.
Fair enough, although even those are only necessary if you intend to use it more than once. You can also make single use firearms entirely out of plastic.and bolt
I mean more along it isn't the main mag for AKs. They exist yes.I can find tons of polymer mags for AKs online right now lol
But again not disagreeing that it could be fake
Could be 3D printed, these days you can just about replace everything with plastic except for the barrel.
While possible...the stock looks to have a fake wood grain...and is WAY to shiny to be more then plastic. Even AK 74s don't have that fucking shiny a stock.and bolt
You can get them for like $10, no need to even 3d print lolCould be 3D printed, these days you can just about replace everything with plastic except for the barrel.
Sorry for responding so late. I lost track of this. Anyway the differance is if there is one central leader that would hopefully cut down on internal infighting. Diverse decentralized states are usually much more prone to infighting than centralized states all things being equal.So stop trying to bullshit that centralized ones don't have them when they are the biggest examples of that problem.
Are you delusional? Yes every capitalist will tell you that we are getting wealthier, this applies to all groups whites blacks etc. The only thing is that some groups had a head start and the growth has slowed down. People are richer now than 20 years ago.Ask the local Americans, LMAO, get back to fucking planet Earth.
Fair this was immature of me, but so were your insults.Spare me the childishness, obviously i meant the centralizers.
And you do? You are very knowledgeable about Imperial German laws and economic and social policies?Exactly, that's the problem with you, you usually don't know the shit you are talking about.
Why is it that states that were centralized were more likely to implement industrialization or modernize? I mean we can look to Meiji era Japan vs China. Japan was smaller so was able to centralize and get control of the nation under the national government easier to implement reforms while large China could not do the same as effectively.It was because it was one of the leaders of industrialization, not because it was centralized. Plenty of other very centralized countries that were and are absolute shitholes.
Stop stealing the credit of technological primacy for socialism.
No you Poles were not "bleeding hearts" who went to Russia to help them out of the "kindness of your hearts" your leaders saw a weak rival/neighbor and saw oppurtunity to gain riches, land, and power so you took it.As above, stop talking about shit you know nothing about, it's tiring.
Yes, it was.
Ok everyone has social security and everyone likes it. Any American politician that tried to get rid of it would get kicked out of office. If that is your standard of of socialism then everything is socialism and we should not trust you.russians had plenty of pathologies of their own.
Let's not forget that Bismarck was the first to implement the form of social security system every socialist loves for a start.
You call everything socialism conquest is not socialism.I do have a problem with being lectured by socialists and their useful idiots about what is imperialism and what actions constitute it. It is not a kind of respect i'm willing to let socialists have. It's like being lectured by thieves about property rights.
Britain is pretty centralized. You do understand that London and what Parliament and the monarch decides what will happen in Scotland, or Ireland, or other parts of the Empire?Yet it was Russia and Germany that in the end took the centralization to the ultimate conclusion of totalitarianism, while not so centralized Britain didn't.
Dude yes maybe a centralized Poland would still be too weak to fight both Russia and Prussia, but it would be stronger than OTL Poland. Ok I'm going to give very simple arguments and hypotheticals for you. Let's stop looking at Poland let's look at what you want for Germany and Russia your enemies.Well no amount of centralization would teleport Poland into another part of the world, so there you have it, you know the answer, but you still bullshit.
There are very few countries that wouldn't turn out "weak" in such a neighborhood.
This is the attitude of all empries and aspiring empires the Americans and British and French were not any different in their arrogance and hunger for more territory, markets, and resources.An attitude which was the very reason why it found itself at war with so many at the same time.
sameNGL I stopped reading this argument when each post in it became multiple pages long
About Poland -Sorry for responding so late. I lost track of this. Anyway the differance is if there is one central leader that would hopefully cut down on internal infighting. Diverse decentralized states are usually much more prone to infighting than centralized states all things being equal.
Are you delusional? Yes every capitalist will tell you that we are getting wealthier, this applies to all groups whites blacks etc. The only thing is that some groups had a head start and the growth has slowed down. People are richer now than 20 years ago.
You are the one spreading BLM propaganda nonsense.
Fair this was immature of me, but so were your insults.
And you do? You are very knowledgeable about Imperial German laws and economic and social policies?
Why is it that states that were centralized were more likely to implement industrialization or modernize? I mean we can look to Meiji era Japan vs China. Japan was smaller so was able to centralize and get control of the nation under the national government easier to implement reforms while large China could not do the same as effectively.
No you Poles were not "bleeding hearts" who went to Russia to help them out of the "kindness of your hearts" your leaders saw a weak rival/neighbor and saw oppurtunity to gain riches, land, and power so you took it.
![]()
Time of Troubles - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
Seriously Poland invaded Russia, occupied towns, did not pay the mercenary armies it hired and those armies rioted in Russia, and took land. Again it's nothing special historically but don't act like you were innocent little doves.![]()
Polish–Russian War (1609–1618) - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
Ok everyone has social security and everyone likes it. Any American politician that tried to get rid of it would get kicked out of office. If that is your standard of of socialism then everything is socialism and we should not trust you.
You call everything socialism conquest is not socialism.
Also centralism is not socialism. Hell you are outright acting delusional by claiming that me saying that the Polish Commonwealth being decentralized made it weak is a commie talking point.
![]()
Golden Liberty - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
"In its extreme, the Golden Liberty has been criticized as being responsible for "civil wars and invasions, national weakness, irresolution, and poverty of spirit".[19] Failing to evolve into the "modern" system of an absolutist and national monarchy, the Commonwealth suffered a gradual decline down to the brink of anarchy because of liberum veto[17] and other abuses of the system. With the majority of the szlachta believing that they lived in the perfect state, too few questioned the Golden Liberty and the Sarmatism philosophy until it was too late.[20] With the szlachta refusing to pay taxes for a larger and modern army and magnates bribed by foreign powers paralyzing the Commonwealth political system,[21][22] the Commonwealth was unable to keep up with its increasingly militarized and efficient (through bureaucratization) neighbors,[23] becoming a tempting target for foreign aggression. It was eventually partitioned and annexed by stronger absolutist neighboring countries in the late-18th-century partitions of Poland.[10][24]"
Dude what I said is not some commie hot take. Historians have made that assessment.
You can argue that liberty and freedom is worth the loss of efficiency and power and that it does not matter if you are ruled by a foreign or local tyrant. Basically argue a libertarian talking point where freedom is worth sacrafice, something I think @Abhorsen would say. But you taking this "liberty has no downsides" thing makes you look like a cultist worshiping a religion.
Britain is pretty centralized. You do understand that London and what Parliament and the monarch decides what will happen in Scotland, or Ireland, or other parts of the Empire?
Dude yes maybe a centralized Poland would still be too weak to fight both Russia and Prussia, but it would be stronger than OTL Poland. Ok I'm going to give very simple arguments and hypotheticals for you. Let's stop looking at Poland let's look at what you want for Germany and Russia your enemies.
If you could choose would you rather your enemies be weak or strong?
I'm going to assume weak. Therefore if centralization made states weaker you'd want Russia and Germany to be centralized since a centralized Germany is already a threat so best too not make it stronger by having it be decentralized.
But if centralization made states strong then you'd want Germany and Russia to be decentralized to have it so the national government is weak and the states or oblasts are almost independent.
Now for Poland you want the opposite of what you want for the enemy you want Poland strong.
Now here is my question do you think Germany was stronger and more dangerous as Imperial Germany after Prussia took over, OR as the Holy Roman Empire where each state can do what it wants?
@ATP you can also respond to these posts.
This is the attitude of all empries and aspiring empires the Americans and British and French were not any different in their arrogance and hunger for more territory, markets, and resources.
The EU is trying to censor the US. Specifically, Elon Musk's interview with Trump. It's attacking our fundamental freedoms more than Russia at this point. Fuck them. Threaten to leave NATO if they continue, but remain allies with those who exit. They are no allies of ours if they hate what America stands for.
The EU is trying to censor the US. Specifically, Elon Musk's interview with Trump. It's attacking our fundamental freedoms more than Russia at this point. Fuck them. Threaten to leave NATO if they continue, but remain allies with those who exit. They are no allies of ours if they hate what America stands for.
First, he's not even a French politician anymore. He's an EU politician who is French. So him speaking this way is him speaking on the behalf of the EU government, the similar to how a US Cabinet member speaking would be on behalf of the US government.Even the french politician in question didn't go "I AM THE EU!" no matter how much would he love to so don't overdramatize.
Second, no. Musk is a US citizen. So is Trump. Their speech being restricted or even threatened while they are in the US is an attack on the US and what it stands for. It's a direct attack on the guarantees in the Constitution, the founding document of our government.Meanwhile Musk is not "The USA" but the owner of an international business with all the liabilities of that international status.
Musk is technically able to not keep infrastructure and money in the EU, and if the EU wants to ban EU companies from doing business with X or even have ISPs ban access to it, like China and such, they can do it, but it's gonna hurt their politics more than it will hurt Musk.