- Joined
- Feb 25, 2022
- Messages
- 2,349
- Reaction score
- 1,643
- Location
- Anti-Populism, Pro-NATO
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Centrist
Hardly fraud, the system allowed multiple choices.Alright, there is some voter fraud happening.
Suspects: @tacomancer & @Nomad4Ever
View attachment 67388818
There is no fraud -> incompetence in logistics -> the person that created the poll. @CentristHardly fraud, the system allowed multiple choices.
We need an audit!Alright, there is some voter fraud happening.
Suspects: @tacomancer & @Nomad4Ever
View attachment 67388818
Cyber Ninjas - out of Florida , have been doing excellent work with a sterling reputation in this field since 2013. You are going to have to contact Mr. Jack Wilenchik, their attorney. The former CEO Doug Logan is otherwise engaged, as is their media representative Rod Thomson and the rest of the staff. https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/po...ona-gop-election-audit-shutting-down-n1287145We need an audit!
Cyber Ninjas - out of Florida , have been doing excellent work with a sterling reputation in this field since 2013. You are going to have to contact Mr. Jack Wilenchik, their attorney. The former CEO Doug Logan is otherwise engaged, as is their media representative Rod Thomson and the rest of the staff. https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/po...ona-gop-election-audit-shutting-down-n1287145
Russia defeated the Nazis. Churchill did not.I just read some heated exchanges in regards to controversial statutes.
I am a firm believer that in order to measure the progress in a particular area -> you need a reference point.
A vocal group on the left says to remove that reference point and start fresh. An opposite group from the right wants them up as on day 1, there is no touching them, even though some are highly controversial.
Churchill is the latest example to be asked in some areas to be taken down.
As originally from Europe I find this outrageous, we would all be speaking German now if it wasn't for great men like Churchill. However, nobody can deny Churchill's flaws and there are many, from his imperialism which came with bigotry at the time.
So what is wrong with keeping the statues and marking them with the good and the bad?
A) "He helped defeat Nazi Germany"
B) "He expressed bigotry towards people from India".
We should stop making statues.I just read some heated exchanges in regards to controversial statutes.
I am a firm believer that in order to measure the progress in a particular area -> you need a reference point.
A vocal group on the left says to remove that reference point and start fresh. An opposite group from the right wants them up as on day 1, there is no touching them, even though some are highly controversial.
Churchill is the latest example to be asked in some areas to be taken down.
As originally from Europe I find this outrageous, we would all be speaking German now if it wasn't for great men like Churchill. However, nobody can deny Churchill's flaws and there are many, from his imperialism which came with bigotry at the time.
So what is wrong with keeping the statues and marking them with the good and the bad?
A) "He helped defeat Nazi Germany"
B) "He expressed bigotry towards people from India".
Without the allies, Russia would have been defeated.Russia defeated the Nazis. Churchill did not.
I think tear them down. The views of those who are being mistreated count for the most
Without the allies, Russia would have been defeated.
But people see those statues every day and get the message, this is what we admire in socieyI have a now-deceased grandmother who in her youth was jailed in colonial India for marching to demand freedom from Churchill's occupation of that nation, so I am perfectly OK with Churchill statues being destroyed, but I am also OK with them being marked with contextualizing information. That said, I will not lose sleep over some random person wanting to believe that he was some great dude. In the grand scheme of things, anyone who derives their personal value or net worth from their connection to or relationship with some public figure is pretty much damned to fail at life anyway, so let them find fulfillment in worshiping statues of relics while the rest of us write our own modern stories.
Nothing? FFS that's the most ignorant trolling bullshit that I have heard in a while.HAHAHAHAA!! The allies did nothing to help russia. Russia got to Berlin first b/c they defeated Hitler alone
Nothing? FFS that's the most ignorant trolling bullshit that I have heard in a while.
History just does not agree with your take that Russia single-handedly defeated Hitler. We sent Russia arms, without them no Russia. etc etc etc. Damn you are really ignorant about WW2.
Give it up dude that has nothing to do with statues. Unless you want a Stalin statue or some other idiotic shit.We sent some aid. The russians did the fighting. Without russia, HItler wins WWII
In my opinion -> The Allied forces should have gone one block east after "stabilizing" Germany. One more pit spot to Stalin and it would have saved us the troubles of today where similar forces of authoritarianism are upon us from the same area.The russians
You've been reading too much Yankee revisionist history. Slavery aside, the South had sufficient Causus Belli to secede, due to Yankee tariffs and other actions of obnoxious little feds, which continue to this day. When the Union was first formed, regardless of your 21st Century sensibilities, a compromise was reached between those who wanted a powerful central government (Hamilton et al) and those who wanted a decentralized government where states were considered better at meeting the needs of their distinct populations (Jefferson et al). Yankee big government types immediately began the process of subverting that compromise. It would have been particularly galling to the South that the Yankees who were most gung ho to abolish slavery were the rich heirs of the slave trading fortunes of Connecticutt sea captains. I have never seen any mention of any of them proposing to buy back any of the slaves they sold and free them, only expropriate them.Meh, the idea that “we’d all be speaking German now” is rather silly. Germany had no ability to successfully invade England, much less the US.
Churchill certainly stepped up and gave the UK good leadership when it was needed the most, but acknowledging he was human and therefore subject to the same bigotries and faults of the time is important.
There’s a difference between that and celebrating a regime like the Confederacy which was explicitly fighting to save slavery and was seen as a a pariah even in its day
You've been reading too much Yankee revisionist history. Slavery aside, the South had sufficient Causus Belli to secede, due to Yankee tariffs and other actions of obnoxious little feds, which continue to this day. When the Union was first formed, regardless of your 21st Century sensibilities, a compromise was reached between those who wanted a powerful central government (Hamilton et al) and those who wanted a decentralized government where states were considered better at meeting the needs of their distinct populations (Jefferson et al). Yankee big government types immediately began the process of subverting that compromise. It would have been particularly galling to the South that the Yankees who were most gung ho to abolish slavery were the rich heirs of the slave trading fortunes of Connecticutt sea captains. I have never seen any mention of any of them proposing to buy back any of the slaves they sold and free them, only expropriate them.
The insistence of Yankees that slavery was the only issue has been used to demonize the South ever since. It is probably also a reason for Southerners to scapegoat Blacks as being the cause of the destruction of the South.
In my opinion -> The Allied forces should have gone one block east after "stabilizing" Germany. One more pit spot to Stalin and it would have saved us the troubles of today where similar forces of authoritarianism are upon us from the same area.
Churchill called him "Uncle Joe" though, I can add that to the list of the flaws or I can reason that it was the reality of the time. I think I will go with the reality of the time, I will not want to join the crowd that judges historical events based on the standards of 2022 on this one aspect.
Excellent. A realist. I think you are on your way to the center.The idea was a complete and utter nonstarter.
First off, the Red Army by 1945 numbered over eleven MILLION men. That’s about as large as the ENTIRE US military put together at that point. Furthermore, those troops have a qualitatively superior tank, the T-34, in large numbers and were battle hardened by going up against the elite of the Wehrmacht.
The Western Allies not only still had to deal with Imperial Japan, but they’d been fighting for the past several years. People were done. They had no interest in fighting what would have been a colossally long and brutal war right after the Nazis were beaten, especially since they’d just seen what a disaster an invasion of the USSR turned out to be. Oh, AND the USSR knew the plan was being discussed, so there was no element of surprise.
Invading the USSR would not have “stopped authoritarianism”; it would have killed millions of Americans and victory was far from being assured. There’s a reason it was dubbed “Operation Unthinkable”.
HAHAHAHAA!! The allies did nothing to help russia. Russia got to Berlin first b/c they defeated Hitler alone
Excellent. A realist. I think you are on your way to the center.
Without the allies, Russia would have been defeated.
You seem lost this is not stormfront or some KKK site.You've been reading too much Yankee revisionist history. Slavery aside, the South had sufficient Causus Belli to secede, due to Yankee tariffs and other actions of obnoxious little feds, which continue to this day. When the Union was first formed, regardless of your 21st Century sensibilities, a compromise was reached between those who wanted a powerful central government (Hamilton et al) and those who wanted a decentralized government where states were considered better at meeting the needs of their distinct populations (Jefferson et al). Yankee big government types immediately began the process of subverting that compromise. It would have been particularly galling to the South that the Yankees who were most gung ho to abolish slavery were the rich heirs of the slave trading fortunes of Connecticutt sea captains. I have never seen any mention of any of them proposing to buy back any of the slaves they sold and free them, only expropriate them.
The insistence of Yankees that slavery was the only issue has been used to demonize the South ever since. It is probably also a reason for Southerners to scapegoat Blacks as being the cause of the destruction of the South.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?