This thread reminds me the one time I tried to look like I knew what I was talking about, but really I didn't.
I could imagine it being the proxy war to end all proxy wars.Yea, that's what they said about cold war as well.
for people who want to talk about serious big-brains political topics.Saudi and Iran need to stop being baka meanies.
John is super right here btwjohnmedina999 wrote:
Here's the lesson of the day: stop paying attention to political campaign ads lol
They're all the same. An informed fella does research and maybe donates to the best campaign, if you want to. There's no reason to have people email you.
What a funny reaction. Sharing a humourous excerpt from the Newspaper is "propoganda"? You know I am allowed to have my own perspective on things and deviate from a dry academic discussion, even if the way I frame things is offensive to you. Having a racewar isn't likely but it's an interesting idea. And it's exactly situations like this where the Second Amendment and the relation of power of the state to the citizen is important.DaddyCoolVipper wrote:
This thread is hilarious
I love how you "wanting to discuss the political topic" is just a camouflage for spreading propaganda. I see no evidence that you're informed on the situation, considering your go-to subject of discussion is the fucking Second Amendment of all things...
Also that line at the end about the implied race war what the fuck lol, ridiculous
Do you realise that White farmers are already being gunned down left and right? How is i disadvantageous to the White farmers to have guns to defend themselves? I mean sure, they have limited access to some weapons, but these are the scenarios where AR-15s would come in handy.roshan117 wrote:
also how would guns help in south africa
people would just use them to further oppress the white people, you really dont think before u write essays on here do you
When you start pushing political ideology like this, I don't think propaganda is a particularly inaccurate term. Also tbf you started with a (deliberate?) misinterpretation of the quote:B1rd wrote:
This is why it's essential that citizens retain the power of violence, instead of all the power of violence being concentrated in the hands of the state and controlled by Democracy and corrupt politicians.
It was politicians that have caused all the problems in the middle east, not average people. And it's average people who suffer the consequences of this mass immigration, while the politicians are comfortable in their upper-class suburbs. So no it's definitely not up to us to take responsibility for the actions of politicians today and hundreds of years ago. Countries aren't people.Comfy Slippers wrote:
As a conservative I agree with some of your arguments, but only partially. You're neglecting one thing b1rd. Far right tends to generalize and use extreme scenarios to further their white ethnostate beliefs. Germany, France, UK have all had their fair share of muslim and black population prior to the whole Syrian fiasco. It is only after the onset of daesh that we've seen western europe struggling with 'nasty immigrants'. In hindsight, it isn't the islamic population that's being problematic, it's the social pressure that they're enduring and the manipulative nature of far-right parties that are continually beating a dead horse. And, by no means am I an advocate of sharia law in western countries as I still find traditional values to be a key point in a culturally enriching society.
Then again, western powers kinda deserve this. Starting from Brits way back in the days of europes colonial period, all the way to the recent history with CIA and it's violations of international laws that is (allegedly) in the name of battling terrorism. It's only reasonable to think that west has done their fair share of dirty work. I mean, just take a look at pre-extremist middle eastern cities of 1950s. You all accomplished your goals of creating this now proclaimed shithole just for the sake of fucking oil. You reap what you sow