Forums / Discussion / General

235,455 total conversations in 7,818 threads

+ New Thread


Featured Featured
Politics General

Last posted Nov 19, 2024 at 05:02PM EST. Added Jan 01, 2017 at 06:26PM EST
18034 posts from 293 users

Chewybunny wrote:

I've always been a fan of bringing back the Guillotine.
Many politicians. Probably 90% of them deserve it.
The people demand blood, and blood is what the people shall receive.

Here here
and it’s reusable too

Team Arkos wrote:

That is amusing coming from an NPC like your self. Seeing that Today that the CIA swamp dweller just blew up their reputation by showing that President Trump was right back when he said that he is being spied on. The deep state attempted another Coup and failed.

I do my own research when I need to. Why should I give you any more? You refuse to read any of it.

Everything you link is from your youtube account
also
>npc

Chewybunny wrote:

Hypothetical, if Civil War breaks out. Who would win?

Probably the Left if i'm completely honest. It'd be a battle of attrition and since a majority of young people don't like the Right, they'd actually probably outlive or be able to physically overpower Trump's supporting base. And by that I mean, literally young people will preform Home Invasions for supplies/weapons of residential areas/gun hoarder areas and the elderly will not be able to physically defend themselves effectively. Statistics show gun owners are mostly woefully unprepared to actually and effectively use their firearms in a real life or death scenario, many simply collecting guns to have the largest surplus, rather then rigorously training for accuracy or the concentration needed to not panic.

Additionally, things are not as they were in the 1800's. A civil war in the modern context is radically different then a civil war back then. There are no more 2 armies squaring off with generals giving orders, while clear territorial divides are drawn. Lone Wolves can commit massive strikes against enemy forces in their territory without ever needing to illegally enter it. It is a war that the Right is woefully in-equipped to fight.

To put it in another context, the Right is prepared for a Red Dawn scenario. A foreign army claiming physical territory and having easy to hit convoys and clearly marked men in uniforms. They are not prepared for the true face of modern civil war, which is people dressed as Civilians, shooting other civilians, and using improvised explosives against the Infrastructure of a country, in a long and drawn out Siege. It is the same mentality of why we lost Vietnam, or the Korean War, or why we continue to flounder in the Middle East.

A civil war no longer requires a Robert E. Lee. A Jefferson Davis is now a quaint relic of a bygone era. The party who, if I may be so bold, enjoys clinging to the past and reveres traditional values, is not one that can easily adapt to new tactics in a rapidly changing landscape.

Though it is a moot point regardless. It would be at most a Pyrrhic Victory. The stock market would tank twice over and crash the global trade market. And the damage that a war in the modern Us would inflict is 1000 times more devastating then the Burning of Georgia ever had been. Power Plants would be destroyed, Reservoirs contaminated, factories decimated, and roadways left inoperable. Food Distribution would be in shambles and thus, lead to mass starvation or malnutrition in many areas. Even if the Right won, the country they fought for would be a shell of its former self, and not worth a dime in the context of Late-Stage Capitalism.

This post has been hidden due to low karma.
Click here to show this post.

Kenetic Kups wrote:

Everything you link is from your youtube account
also
>npc

I don't even have a youtube account, nice try though.

Oh and try a better picture meme than that.

Chewybunny wrote:

Hypothetical, if Civil War breaks out. Who would win?

Foreign powers funding fringe groups to prolong the fighting, reduce America's global presence, and taking a piece of the American pie should their faction win.

More realistically I think the "civil war-like fracture" would likely be more of a political one, rather than a guerilla war. The effects of the impeachment, whether successful or not, would become a populist talking point that politicians would use to rally their people. It can splinter our parties and demographics into further sub-groups, dividing their effectiveness; it can galvanize certain, possibly radical groups into organizing more effectively; and it will ultimately stymie America's progress as we deal with the fallout of the impeachment with the infighting it brings.

A/an successful/unsuccessful impeachment is going to be the beginning of further political turmoil, not the end.

wisehowl_the_2nd wrote:

Foreign powers funding fringe groups to prolong the fighting, reduce America's global presence, and taking a piece of the American pie should their faction win.

More realistically I think the "civil war-like fracture" would likely be more of a political one, rather than a guerilla war. The effects of the impeachment, whether successful or not, would become a populist talking point that politicians would use to rally their people. It can splinter our parties and demographics into further sub-groups, dividing their effectiveness; it can galvanize certain, possibly radical groups into organizing more effectively; and it will ultimately stymie America's progress as we deal with the fallout of the impeachment with the infighting it brings.

A/an successful/unsuccessful impeachment is going to be the beginning of further political turmoil, not the end.

When you have 1/3 of the population in a conservative hugbox of AM Radio, Fox News, extremist religious figures, etc. it's gonna be hard to bridge the gap.

William Barr and Mike Pompeo are asking the UK, Australian, and Italian governments to help debunk the Russia investigations and the Ukraine fiasco in any way they can.

With special guest, the Dragon of Budapest, Sebastian Gorka.

PatrickBateman96 wrote:

Was he not doing that before

Considering he fired Steve Bannon, who runs brietbart, and that Brietbart ran negative pieces on trump afterwards, it's a bit surprising.

But it's a poll that shows him in a big favour, so I'm not that surprised.

Last edited Oct 01, 2019 at 01:12PM EDT

Black Graphic T wrote:

Probably the Left if i'm completely honest. It'd be a battle of attrition and since a majority of young people don't like the Right, they'd actually probably outlive or be able to physically overpower Trump's supporting base. And by that I mean, literally young people will preform Home Invasions for supplies/weapons of residential areas/gun hoarder areas and the elderly will not be able to physically defend themselves effectively. Statistics show gun owners are mostly woefully unprepared to actually and effectively use their firearms in a real life or death scenario, many simply collecting guns to have the largest surplus, rather then rigorously training for accuracy or the concentration needed to not panic.

Additionally, things are not as they were in the 1800's. A civil war in the modern context is radically different then a civil war back then. There are no more 2 armies squaring off with generals giving orders, while clear territorial divides are drawn. Lone Wolves can commit massive strikes against enemy forces in their territory without ever needing to illegally enter it. It is a war that the Right is woefully in-equipped to fight.

To put it in another context, the Right is prepared for a Red Dawn scenario. A foreign army claiming physical territory and having easy to hit convoys and clearly marked men in uniforms. They are not prepared for the true face of modern civil war, which is people dressed as Civilians, shooting other civilians, and using improvised explosives against the Infrastructure of a country, in a long and drawn out Siege. It is the same mentality of why we lost Vietnam, or the Korean War, or why we continue to flounder in the Middle East.

A civil war no longer requires a Robert E. Lee. A Jefferson Davis is now a quaint relic of a bygone era. The party who, if I may be so bold, enjoys clinging to the past and reveres traditional values, is not one that can easily adapt to new tactics in a rapidly changing landscape.

Though it is a moot point regardless. It would be at most a Pyrrhic Victory. The stock market would tank twice over and crash the global trade market. And the damage that a war in the modern Us would inflict is 1000 times more devastating then the Burning of Georgia ever had been. Power Plants would be destroyed, Reservoirs contaminated, factories decimated, and roadways left inoperable. Food Distribution would be in shambles and thus, lead to mass starvation or malnutrition in many areas. Even if the Right won, the country they fought for would be a shell of its former self, and not worth a dime in the context of Late-Stage Capitalism.

But if it's a battle of attrition, the vast majority of natural resources, and food-stuffs are directly controlled by people on the right. Not to mention, the very same people, on the right, have a far larger hoard of guns and ammunition. And land. Frankly, most of the left's conclaves are in major coastal cities which would be effectively cut off from a lot of the resources. Seems to me, the right doesn't have to capture any realistic territory – while the left would have to make consistent attacks and raids on rural areas which would be defended by armed conservative farmers.

This post has been hidden due to low karma.
Click here to show this post.

Chewybunny wrote:

But if it's a battle of attrition, the vast majority of natural resources, and food-stuffs are directly controlled by people on the right. Not to mention, the very same people, on the right, have a far larger hoard of guns and ammunition. And land. Frankly, most of the left's conclaves are in major coastal cities which would be effectively cut off from a lot of the resources. Seems to me, the right doesn't have to capture any realistic territory – while the left would have to make consistent attacks and raids on rural areas which would be defended by armed conservative farmers.

Combine that most of the Police and military forces would side with Conservative faction, the general lack of gun skill, training and out right aversion to fire arms the left has, and blinding over confidence the left has will leave a lethal mix for the left once the bullets start flying. Even an old woman with a gun can do tremendous amounts of damage to a gang of ateifa thugs.

About the territory, all the conservative needs to do is wall the left up into their pockets and just starve them into submission.

do….do you think every red county is made up 100% of trump supporters? Not to mention the fact his support has gone down from 2016. I can't imagine more than 15% of americans willing to die protecting trump.

poochyena wrote:

do….do you think every red county is made up 100% of trump supporters? Not to mention the fact his support has gone down from 2016. I can't imagine more than 15% of americans willing to die protecting trump.

Similarly with blue counties. But what is generally true, is that more rural areas, tend to be more conservative.

Chewybunny wrote:

But if it's a battle of attrition, the vast majority of natural resources, and food-stuffs are directly controlled by people on the right. Not to mention, the very same people, on the right, have a far larger hoard of guns and ammunition. And land. Frankly, most of the left's conclaves are in major coastal cities which would be effectively cut off from a lot of the resources. Seems to me, the right doesn't have to capture any realistic territory – while the left would have to make consistent attacks and raids on rural areas which would be defended by armed conservative farmers.

You really didn't seem to read my post. The right may hold those resources, uncontested in a situation where laws need be abided and no real threats occur. That isn't the same as being able to hold those resources against a small band of 5 youths with basic handguns preforming a Home Invasion. Most of the gun owners who, let's face it, are in their 50's and over and far past the prime of their lives, aren't equipped to hold off a fast attack like that.

Conservatives want an Army vs Army situation. But it's going to be an Insurgency, in which the people fighting are plain clothed and indistinguishable from anyone else walking the street.

Also I have to call this out for how stupid it is. Arkos, do you really think you'll be able to build a wall that's Triple the length of the Mexican border, on both sides of the United States, without straining your own resources financially? And how is this wall magically gonna manifest in time to actually make a difference? Additionally, you are talking about walling off port-side towns and giving them essentially free-ability to take control of the Navy…like did you actually think any of this through? Or did you just pop a boner at the thought of sending leftists to the concentration camp, and had all the blood go to your other head?

Last edited Oct 01, 2019 at 07:58PM EDT

Team Arkos wrote:

Combine that most of the Police and military forces would side with Conservative faction, the general lack of gun skill, training and out right aversion to fire arms the left has, and blinding over confidence the left has will leave a lethal mix for the left once the bullets start flying. Even an old woman with a gun can do tremendous amounts of damage to a gang of ateifa thugs.

About the territory, all the conservative needs to do is wall the left up into their pockets and just starve them into submission.

Wait a second… notice anything weird about your map vs the map Trump posted?


Are you ok with Trump posting fake news? Its literally a fake map.

This post has been hidden due to low karma.
Click here to show this post.

Black Graphic T wrote:

You really didn't seem to read my post. The right may hold those resources, uncontested in a situation where laws need be abided and no real threats occur. That isn't the same as being able to hold those resources against a small band of 5 youths with basic handguns preforming a Home Invasion. Most of the gun owners who, let's face it, are in their 50's and over and far past the prime of their lives, aren't equipped to hold off a fast attack like that.

Conservatives want an Army vs Army situation. But it's going to be an Insurgency, in which the people fighting are plain clothed and indistinguishable from anyone else walking the street.

Also I have to call this out for how stupid it is. Arkos, do you really think you'll be able to build a wall that's Triple the length of the Mexican border, on both sides of the United States, without straining your own resources financially? And how is this wall magically gonna manifest in time to actually make a difference? Additionally, you are talking about walling off port-side towns and giving them essentially free-ability to take control of the Navy…like did you actually think any of this through? Or did you just pop a boner at the thought of sending leftists to the concentration camp, and had all the blood go to your other head?

After reading your posts just proves to me neither of your heads functions at all. You really think that 5 punks with bats will stick around in a home invasion when the first thug get dropped by the homeowner with a gun? The biggest deterrent to a home invasion is a resident with a gun they are willing to use!

Honestly you come across as someone who learned all you know about guns and fighting from TV and video games. I'm sure you never even fired a real gun in your life, much less held one. A gun is a force multiplier that will make an old person into a very dangerous to take on.

A plain clothed insurgency? The left likes to wear black and bad camo patterns, which are easy to pick out. Even still, they also are rather vocal and move in groups so they don't hide at all who they are any more.

Build walls around the leftist enclaves? Don't need to, have GPS get turned off, blockade the roads out of the enclaves and have drones and/or armed patrols looking for stragglers elsewhere. And when I said the Military will side with the conservatives, that means the Navy too. they have weapons they will turn on the left just the same. Sailing the warships themselves out of the lefts reach is easy as well.

I have put more thought into this than you have. You have clearly forgot that history has proven that the left has and still is putting people they don't like into death camps. Just go look at what China is doing to the Muslims right now. The blue check markers of twitter been calling for the complete destruction of us deplorables for years in every way and nothing is happening to them.

All of this civil war talk is coming out of the left for one main reason. They are so unable to accept they lost 2016 fair and square they can not take that fact. It's so bad to the point it worse than a infantile tempter tantrum, it's a mental illness that is pushing them burn down everything in their mindless hate and spitefulness.

I don't want a war. I don't want to hurt others. But by God, if the left starts it, I will fight back.

Team Arkos wrote:

After reading your posts just proves to me neither of your heads functions at all. You really think that 5 punks with bats will stick around in a home invasion when the first thug get dropped by the homeowner with a gun? The biggest deterrent to a home invasion is a resident with a gun they are willing to use!

Honestly you come across as someone who learned all you know about guns and fighting from TV and video games. I'm sure you never even fired a real gun in your life, much less held one. A gun is a force multiplier that will make an old person into a very dangerous to take on.

A plain clothed insurgency? The left likes to wear black and bad camo patterns, which are easy to pick out. Even still, they also are rather vocal and move in groups so they don't hide at all who they are any more.

Build walls around the leftist enclaves? Don't need to, have GPS get turned off, blockade the roads out of the enclaves and have drones and/or armed patrols looking for stragglers elsewhere. And when I said the Military will side with the conservatives, that means the Navy too. they have weapons they will turn on the left just the same. Sailing the warships themselves out of the lefts reach is easy as well.

I have put more thought into this than you have. You have clearly forgot that history has proven that the left has and still is putting people they don't like into death camps. Just go look at what China is doing to the Muslims right now. The blue check markers of twitter been calling for the complete destruction of us deplorables for years in every way and nothing is happening to them.

All of this civil war talk is coming out of the left for one main reason. They are so unable to accept they lost 2016 fair and square they can not take that fact. It's so bad to the point it worse than a infantile tempter tantrum, it's a mental illness that is pushing them burn down everything in their mindless hate and spitefulness.

I don't want a war. I don't want to hurt others. But by God, if the left starts it, I will fight back.

May I remind you that Trump has never ruled with the majority's permission?

Last edited Oct 02, 2019 at 09:44AM EDT

Team Arkos wrote:

After reading your posts just proves to me neither of your heads functions at all. You really think that 5 punks with bats will stick around in a home invasion when the first thug get dropped by the homeowner with a gun? The biggest deterrent to a home invasion is a resident with a gun they are willing to use!

Honestly you come across as someone who learned all you know about guns and fighting from TV and video games. I'm sure you never even fired a real gun in your life, much less held one. A gun is a force multiplier that will make an old person into a very dangerous to take on.

A plain clothed insurgency? The left likes to wear black and bad camo patterns, which are easy to pick out. Even still, they also are rather vocal and move in groups so they don't hide at all who they are any more.

Build walls around the leftist enclaves? Don't need to, have GPS get turned off, blockade the roads out of the enclaves and have drones and/or armed patrols looking for stragglers elsewhere. And when I said the Military will side with the conservatives, that means the Navy too. they have weapons they will turn on the left just the same. Sailing the warships themselves out of the lefts reach is easy as well.

I have put more thought into this than you have. You have clearly forgot that history has proven that the left has and still is putting people they don't like into death camps. Just go look at what China is doing to the Muslims right now. The blue check markers of twitter been calling for the complete destruction of us deplorables for years in every way and nothing is happening to them.

All of this civil war talk is coming out of the left for one main reason. They are so unable to accept they lost 2016 fair and square they can not take that fact. It's so bad to the point it worse than a infantile tempter tantrum, it's a mental illness that is pushing them burn down everything in their mindless hate and spitefulness.

I don't want a war. I don't want to hurt others. But by God, if the left starts it, I will fight back.

Your president started this conversation by retweeting a quote all about if he gets impeached, a civil war will break out. What's wrong boomer? Your memory getting not as good as it used to be?

@arkos
>All of this civil war talk is coming out of the left for one main reason. They are so unable to accept they lost 2016 fair and square they can not take that fact. It's so bad to the point it worse than a infantile tempter tantrum, it's a mental illness that is pushing them burn down everything in their mindless hate and spitefulness.

I can't wait for you to completely reverse your position on this once you learn it was Trump who started the civil war talks, not "the left"

Boomer Republicans. "The Left Started All This Civil War Talk!!!"

Also Boomer Republicans,

I also love that the context of the quote is "Let us win or our religion will carry out acts of violence against you!"

I thought the entire reason republicans put out that "Islam Bad" is because of how violent it is. Evangelicals over here threatening civil war if they get out-voted in a democratic republic.

BrentD15 wrote:

Ukraine appears to be capitulating to Russia's demands of permanent ownership of Crimea and influence over Donbas.
Next on Putin's wishlist: Sanctions relief.

More info in this;

One of Zelensky's many campaign promises was peace in the Donbass region. Within the last 48 hours, it's been revealed that his government has signed a deal with other participants in the negotiations that states that Ukraine will implement the Steinmeier formula, which is a compromise proposed in 2016 that will see the Donbass vote for whether or not they want special status, something that Zelensky is apparently on record saying he would not allow.

It looks like Ukraine and Russia are sort of in a complicated dance for compromise that requires a lot of steps to complete. Ukraine wants the Donbass back but all of the quickest options will require Zelensky going back on his promises. And, apparently, Russia considers the war in the region to be a lost cause but is trying to pull out of it in a way that won't hurt Putin's image but Russian separatists will see Russia as having abandoned them to "ethno fascists."

But the deal having been made, Ukrainian nationalists are angry and are protesting in Kiev to back out of the deal, claiming that the government is surrendering, admitting defeat, appeasing Putin, you name it.

Sources / Read More
Deutsche Welle
BBC
Euronews
Global Comment
TASS
UNIAN

What is going on, is Putin winning? Why would anyone think it's a good idea to compromise with Putin? Macron says he wants to cooperate with Russia or something. What the fuck. 4D chess?

Could Russia just invade any country now and in a few years everyone will be like "but we need to cooperate with Russia and respect her right to invade and occupy neighboring countries".

Thank God for NATO.

Yo, recently BlazeTV released this video (I skipped the intro, straight to the timeline of events) about the genesis to this whole Ukrainian scandal – things not many people are talking about in the News today:

What do you think about this? Because I think it's a little strange, that MSM are focused entirely either on the Trump's phonecall or Biden's Son and not on the things that happend in between… Is there a chance that ALL of this will be investigated, parallel with the Trump's case? I'm pressing X for doubt, but what do you think?

Abandoning the Kurds is going to severely bite the US in the ass for many decades to come. Not just the US but the ME.
It sends signals to the rest of the world that our dedication to being an ally changes every 4 to 8 years.
This shouldn't be the case. But it is And yes, Obama did something similar with the Iran deal. But this isn't about Obama. This is about a horrendous foreign policy move by the Trump administration.

I sincerely hope that there is at least a damn good reason for doing this.

Luckily, a lot of the Republicans that otherwise support the President, such as Lindsay Graham, have criticized him heavily for this. This isn't a good move, especially with the need for Republican support during the impeachment proceedings.

Last edited Oct 07, 2019 at 05:26PM EDT

Chewybunny wrote:

Abandoning the Kurds is going to severely bite the US in the ass for many decades to come. Not just the US but the ME.
It sends signals to the rest of the world that our dedication to being an ally changes every 4 to 8 years.
This shouldn't be the case. But it is And yes, Obama did something similar with the Iran deal. But this isn't about Obama. This is about a horrendous foreign policy move by the Trump administration.

I sincerely hope that there is at least a damn good reason for doing this.

Luckily, a lot of the Republicans that otherwise support the President, such as Lindsay Graham, have criticized him heavily for this. This isn't a good move, especially with the need for Republican support during the impeachment proceedings.

I guess this really goes to show how true the "no eternal allies, only eternal interests" quote is.

And unless we repair our relationship with the Kurds, I have a bad feeling they'll become the next terrorist group we funded to get rid of a terrorist group we funded to get rid of a terrorist group we funded to get rid of a terrorist group we funded to get rid of a terrorist group we funded…

The difference I think is that Kurdish forces are actually fighting to realize a national homeland of Kurdistan. Previous iterations of jihadi-terrorism had little to do with ethno national claims, and more to do with a globalized jihad. Even the Afghans were fighting for an existing nation, a nation that was under invasion, but a nation nontheless.

Chewybunny wrote:

Abandoning the Kurds is going to severely bite the US in the ass for many decades to come. Not just the US but the ME.
It sends signals to the rest of the world that our dedication to being an ally changes every 4 to 8 years.
This shouldn't be the case. But it is And yes, Obama did something similar with the Iran deal. But this isn't about Obama. This is about a horrendous foreign policy move by the Trump administration.

I sincerely hope that there is at least a damn good reason for doing this.

Luckily, a lot of the Republicans that otherwise support the President, such as Lindsay Graham, have criticized him heavily for this. This isn't a good move, especially with the need for Republican support during the impeachment proceedings.

This move, along with a desire to withdraw from the Open Skies Treaty yesterday, shows that the President is unraveling and is rapidly rushing through a wish-list for someone.

Chewybunny wrote:

The difference I think is that Kurdish forces are actually fighting to realize a national homeland of Kurdistan. Previous iterations of jihadi-terrorism had little to do with ethno national claims, and more to do with a globalized jihad. Even the Afghans were fighting for an existing nation, a nation that was under invasion, but a nation nontheless.

I feel I need to help clarify about the Kurdish situation. President Trump is just pulling our troops out of the way, all 50 of them. We haven't cut off ties to them. In fact we are still sending them guns, ammo and other stuff they need to fight. Know this, the Kurds are experienced fighters on their own. They don't need us to guide them in how to fight well.

>But Russia…

With us out of the way, Russia has to deal with Turkey and those two can go at each other for awhile. Better we are not caught between them getting ground up.

I am tired of the U.S. getting caught up in every conflict in the world that never ends. Having my own family served and bleed in that part of the world for little reason. I am tired of being the world's police. We will have enough problems coming out of Iran and China soon enough.

Team Arkos wrote:

I feel I need to help clarify about the Kurdish situation. President Trump is just pulling our troops out of the way, all 50 of them. We haven't cut off ties to them. In fact we are still sending them guns, ammo and other stuff they need to fight. Know this, the Kurds are experienced fighters on their own. They don't need us to guide them in how to fight well.

>But Russia…

With us out of the way, Russia has to deal with Turkey and those two can go at each other for awhile. Better we are not caught between them getting ground up.

I am tired of the U.S. getting caught up in every conflict in the world that never ends. Having my own family served and bleed in that part of the world for little reason. I am tired of being the world's police. We will have enough problems coming out of Iran and China soon enough.

From what I've heard, Turkey pretty much said "We're going to go kill Kurds, get out of our way." and president trump said, "Please don't" and then when they said they were going to do it anyway, completely folded and went along with it. The tweets seem to be completely empty threats, as Trump tends to just launch the sanctions first, and then tweets about it.

Hi! You must login or signup first!