x
Click to expand
Latest users (4): akkere, klowserpok, marinepenguin, undeadwill, anonymous(25).
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
#78416 - dehumanizer (02/21/2015) [-]
Le foq Canada, wtf....

i did that politics test and i got gommi 85% libtards 84% am i beeing trolled here?
User avatar #78418 to #78416 - lulzformalaysiaair (02/21/2015) [-]
It's hard to side with any of these Good Goyim parties since they are all so similar.

We need an overhaul of the Canadian political landscape. Big time, but until that happens we need to vote conservative.
#78420 to #78418 - dehumanizer (02/21/2015) [-]
no, omar is right, we need islamic gommunism x-DDD
www.youtube.com/watch?v=46XoD6RjkjY
User avatar #78417 to #78416 - lulzformalaysiaair (02/21/2015) [-]
HAHAHAHAAHAHAAHAHAAHAH
haha
ha
#78419 to #78417 - dehumanizer (02/21/2015) [-]
I just dont get how it could happen, are the canadian parties this fucked up that the gommies and libtards are the good guys?
User avatar #78421 to #78419 - lulzformalaysiaair (02/21/2015) [-]
>gets commies and libs
>assumes they are best

Dumb logic there.
#78422 to #78421 - dehumanizer (02/21/2015) [-]
you guys need a nat soc party preferably one not led by the Iroquois
#78424 to #78423 - dehumanizer (02/21/2015) [-]
they're coming for you
#78414 - levvy (02/21/2015) [-]
komorowski, poroshenko, and grybauskaite will cause only more problems in ukraine

with the new alliance they form, one polish or lithuanian solider will get killed and the eu will explode with butthurt

just wait
#78555 to #78414 - duudegladiator (02/24/2015) [-]
Meanwhile as the false flag of Neverussia is flown in FJ.
Meanwhile as the false flag of Neverussia is flown in FJ.
#78408 - anonymous (02/21/2015) [-]
US Border Patrol Break In Driver Window Cam, Pine Valley, California, 31 May 2013, Lawless DHS

Anyone else support our brave men and women of the border guard harrasment leauge?

Showing those neo-nazi getapo guards who is boss.
#78406 - Shiny (02/21/2015) [-]
Syzria is rustling a lot of German and EU (i.e. german) jimmies, which is really funny. Tsipras also seems to be doing a great job of fostering political stability in Greece by compromising with the right wing parties.

User avatar #78461 to #78406 - lulzformalaysiaair (02/22/2015) [-]
Never answered my question, are you pro-syriza?
User avatar #78434 to #78406 - kanadetenshi (02/21/2015) [-]
Austerity or not a default is inevitable.
#78411 to #78406 - lulzformalaysiaair (02/21/2015) [-]
Are you... are you pro syriza?

Honestly greece and the rest of the EU owns so much money to Germany. So much that based on the cycle they have now they will never pay it back. It's complete bullshit that Greece is trying to get it's debt cut in half. Personally Greece should either keep paying on time no matter how much it suffers (they have a very relaxed culture in Greece compared to the hard working ethic of Germany anyways. Not even trying to be racist, it's just the truth) or they should be repossessed and given to Germany. I don't know how, I don't care how, Greece has proved to be a very inexperienced country that can't handle itself. If Germany even invades so be it.
User avatar #78496 to #78411 - jewishcommunazi (02/22/2015) [-]
Before Syriza and Tsipras, they were doing whatever the EU and the IMF told them to. I'm all for paying the debt, but it should be paid by those who really created it.
User avatar #78498 to #78496 - lulzformalaysiaair (02/22/2015) [-]
>Before Syriza and Tsipras, they were doing whatever the EU and the IMF told them to.
They fucking better do what Germany says, Germany owns their fucking ass. I could not give a flying shit of what happens to Greece, all I know is that filthy socialist shithole needs to pay the debt it made for itself.

"I'm all for paying the debt, but it should be paid by those who really created it."
Greece.
User avatar #78499 to #78498 - jewishcommunazi (02/22/2015) [-]
They did that and it didn't work out. Germany doesn't seem willing to have its debt paid and now they missed their chance to rule Greece. They should've really helped Greece so that it could afford to pay back rather than implementing policies that made a downward spiral into failure for Greece.

Countries are not conscious being, they don't ask for money, people do. Let the greeks who received the money pay the debt.
User avatar #78503 to #78499 - lulzformalaysiaair (02/23/2015) [-]
>They should've really helped Greece so that it could afford to pay back
By giving them even more leeway with money? Isn't that just the common day excuse of every entity that can't pay its debt?

"Let the greeks who received the money pay the debt."
You mean the Greek people? The money goes to the government, I have no clue wtf you're referring too.
User avatar #78504 to #78503 - jewishcommunazi (02/23/2015) [-]
"By giving them even more leeway with money? Isn't that just the common day excuse of every entity that can't pay its debt?"
By not implementing the typical shit policies that have been shown not to work.

"You mean the Greek people? The money goes to the government, I have no clue wtf you're referring too."
The money went to the government, the government gave it away to itself and its friends, Greece had not improved or benefitted with that money.
User avatar #78505 to #78504 - lulzformalaysiaair (02/23/2015) [-]
>The money went to the government, the government gave it away to itself and its friends, Greece had not improved or benefitted with that money.
If so, sucks for Greece then. Not Germany's problem. What you get with such a socialist government.

>By not implementing the typical shit policies that have been shown not to work.
Which R?
User avatar #78507 to #78505 - jewishcommunazi (02/23/2015) [-]
What? Syriza got elected just a few days ago...

Austerity measures.
User avatar #78508 to #78507 - lulzformalaysiaair (02/23/2015) [-]
They still had a pretty socialist government I'm sure

>Austerity measures.
So what exactly is wrong with that?
User avatar #78510 to #78508 - jewishcommunazi (02/23/2015) [-]
The former prime minister was a liberal conservative. The other two before that one were independent, one of them was also vice-president of the European Central Bank so at least one of them was probably not a leftist. A socialist-ish president came before those.

Cuts might seem like saving money but it can in reality stagnate the economy besides creating worse living conditions, which is what we're seeing. It only works in very short term.
User avatar #78513 to #78510 - lulzformalaysiaair (02/23/2015) [-]
>The former prime minister was a liberal conservative. The other two before that one were independent, one of them was also vice-president of the European Central Bank so at least one of them was probably not a leftist. A socialist-ish president came before those.

Well they didn't change the government enough so I consider them that.

>Cuts might seem like saving money but it can in reality stagnate the economy besides creating worse living conditions, which is what we're seeing. It only works in very short term.
Can't pay because don't have enough money, can't add money because bad. Well a solution must exist. Paying is the priority.
User avatar #78520 to #78513 - jewishcommunazi (02/23/2015) [-]
I say they're totally cappies, but fine.

Create policies that generate money. Then you can start paying. Austerity stifles the possibility of creating such a policy, leaving Greece with a debt having ever higher interest rates. Greece would be economically raped into the third world and the debt never paid back completely.
User avatar #78501 to #78499 - jewishcommunazi (02/22/2015) [-]
No debt was created for the benefit of the greek people.
0
#78500 to #78499 - jewishcommunazi has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #78412 to #78411 - compared (02/21/2015) [-]
Thanks for using a comparison, hope you are well.
#78407 to #78406 - anonymous (02/21/2015) [-]
and here we have a pathetic attempt to make a retarded leftist party internet cool.

"le rustle le jimbobs"

kill yourself you degenerate waste nobody here wants your opinions

inb4 circlejerk, you're just cancer
#78413 to #78407 - lulzformalaysiaair (02/21/2015) [-]
Eyy come on man that's harsh.
#78425 to #78410 - anonymous (02/21/2015) [-]
>"inb4 circlejerk"
>whines about circlejerk

oh you predictable retard you
#78409 to #78407 - anonymous (02/21/2015) [-]
Just let it out young man, just let it out.


*pats the young anon on the shoulder*
#78403 - ribocoon (02/21/2015) [-]
The government is putting preservatives in tin foil, that when exposed to hair follicles can alter our brain chemistry

Are we living in a new world order?
#78398 - anonymous (02/20/2015) [-]
Whatever happened to Rockefeller Republicans?

Are they a dead breed? Did they all just become Democrats? Are they still there, but just covered up by the much louder Conservative Republicans?
#78400 to #78398 - cabbagemayhem (02/20/2015) [-]
They became libertarians.
User avatar #78392 - schnizel (02/20/2015) [-]
Pebar, how will the free market fix crime?
User avatar #78399 to #78392 - pebar ONLINE (02/20/2015) [-]
Milton Friedman Interview Drug Policy in America 1/2 r u srs?
User avatar #78432 to #78399 - schnizel (02/21/2015) [-]
>dat intro
#78397 to #78392 - cabbagemayhem (02/20/2015) [-]
How much petty crime do you think is directly caused by the war on the drugs?
User avatar #78431 to #78397 - schnizel (02/21/2015) [-]
Over 2%.
#78441 to #78431 - cabbagemayhem (02/21/2015) [-]
Yes...well over 2%.
User avatar #78396 to #78392 - Shiny (02/20/2015) [-]
The same way racial homogyny will :^)
#78429 to #78396 - schnizel (02/21/2015) [-]
Look at that, a leftist trying to use his brain. You are cute, it's proven that humans work better, feel better and that crime is a lot lower among racial homogeneous societies.
0
#78380 to #78377 - lulzformalaysiaair has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #78381 to #78380 - lulzformalaysiaair (02/20/2015) [-]
shit i thought this was /fitness/
User avatar #78383 to #78382 - lulzformalaysiaair (02/20/2015) [-]
So I am responsible?
User avatar #78370 - AreyouSerious ONLINE (02/20/2015) [-]
uproxx.com/webculture/2015/02/10-miserable-sates/

I've noticed the shittiest states are usually the most conservative areas of the country and the better states are the most liberal. Of course they're major exceptions, Texas is a very prominent conservative state and Connecticut is a not so great liberal state.

Also if these states are shit, why doesn't the local government try new laws, change the tax code to help change the state
User avatar #78379 to #78370 - marinepenguin ONLINE (02/20/2015) [-]
Illinois has been democrat for as long as I can remember, and it's shit.
#78378 to #78370 - cabbagemayhem (02/20/2015) [-]
Because then they'd be even worse off. By "shitty" and "better", I assume you mean "poorer" and "richer". Coastal cities are naturally richer because of their trade benefits, not because of their policies. They're only liberal because they can afford the loss. "Shittier" interior states can't afford the hit to their economy. Hence, "better" states aren't rich because they're liberal and shrewd, they're liberal because they're rich wasteful.
User avatar #78375 to #78374 - AreyouSerious ONLINE (02/20/2015) [-]
I see it's more then just liberal and conservative. But seriously, do they not see that there's a problem? that they need to change their state's priorities in order to help the state.
#78373 to #78370 - pebar ONLINE (02/20/2015) [-]
Except liberal states, especially california, are practically bankrupt and unemployment is higher   
   
www.bls.gov/web/laus/laumstrk.htm
Except liberal states, especially california, are practically bankrupt and unemployment is higher

www.bls.gov/web/laus/laumstrk.htm
#78345 - anonymous (02/19/2015) [-]
Is it wrong for a person to take advantage of something they say they disagree with?

Some examples being.
A libertarian living in a rent-controlled apartment.
A left winger using private education or health services.
Or a nationalist using immigrant labor in their business.
User avatar #78388 to #78345 - schnizel (02/20/2015) [-]
As long as they get what they want, they can use the enemies force against itself.
User avatar #78361 to #78345 - pebar ONLINE (02/19/2015) [-]
I'm very anti communist but I'm considering buying a mosin
#78360 to #78345 - cabbagemayhem (02/19/2015) [-]
Well, technically, the libertarian is paying for the rent-controlled apartment, even if he doesn't want to. The other two don't even make sense. No, it's not wrong.
User avatar #78349 to #78345 - lulzformalaysiaair (02/19/2015) [-]
Well people have to get by, as long as you realize that what you're doing is against your belief and therefore you feels some guilt for it, then I guess it's fine. You are somewhat of a hypocrite though, this doesn't mean that your opinion holds no weight.
#78324 - kanadetenshi (02/19/2015) [-]
Sorry lulzformalaysiaair
#78514 to #78324 - theluppijackal ONLINE (02/23/2015) [-]
Guess I'm just a commie fuck
#78351 to #78324 - lulzformalaysiaair (02/19/2015) [-]
www.selectsmart.com/FREE/select.php?client=netherlands I did this test to see which Netherlands political party I would belong to and I got 100% Party of Freedom. How about you?
User avatar #78415 to #78404 - lulzformalaysiaair (02/21/2015) [-]
Got Cons 100% obviously.
User avatar #78366 to #78351 - jewishcommunazi (02/20/2015) [-]
1st- Socialist;
2nd- Labour;
3rd- Democrats 66;
4th- National Alliance;
5th- People's Party for Freedom and Democracy.
User avatar #78389 to #78366 - kanadetenshi (02/20/2015) [-]
2 liberals and 1 nazi party in your top 5. You're making Lenin roll in his grave. :^(
User avatar #78368 to #78366 - lulzformalaysiaair (02/20/2015) [-]
Why don't you like the market? Why be a big brother government lover?
User avatar #78369 to #78368 - jewishcommunazi (02/20/2015) [-]
I don't like the market because, it's not as half as great as liberals think it is. For example, car parts get shittier and less durable as time goes by because "it's more profitable" that way.
I don't like the government either, but at least it can think beyond profit sometimes and cares more about the well-being of the population, even if it may sometimes be just because it wants to get re-elected.
User avatar #78371 to #78369 - lulzformalaysiaair (02/20/2015) [-]
But losers and winners is the natural order. Some are better then others, some will be alpha (rich, successful) and others won't in that sense. To try and make big government force nature to clump both together just makes losers and losers only except for the one socialist dictator ruling it all

And at least you have the opportunity to be alpha, it is possible to succeed if enough effort is put.
User avatar #78394 to #78371 - jewishcommunazi (02/20/2015) [-]
So are the vietnamese 10-year olds just not as smart and hard-working as the Kardashians? Capitalism and the free market is by no means "natural" either, they were imposed. Socialists don't clump "losers and winners" together either. Former socialist states during Stalin had their rich people, but those people became rich by themselves, not like in some instances under capitalism. Not to mention that under free market societies, the government almost inevitably sides with the richest so that they can help each other off.
User avatar #78353 to #78351 - lulzformalaysiaair (02/19/2015) [-]
It's a anti-immigration, anti-Islam, Eurosceptic and right-wing populist very weird term, I tried looking it up and I got pro laissez-faire liberalism and anti-elitism as well as pro Welfare chauvinism.
User avatar #78367 to #78353 - jewishcommunazi (02/20/2015) [-]
Populism is stupid, right or left-wing.
#78356 to #78353 - kanadetenshi (02/19/2015) [-]
They're pretty much all over the place on the political spectrum but they mainly got popular for their really anti-islamic and anti-immigration stance.

They even want to put a tax on hijab's which they called Kopvoddentaks (Dutch for head rag tax)

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Party_for_Freedom#Party_platform
User avatar #78358 to #78356 - lulzformalaysiaair (02/19/2015) [-]
Yeah but they are more free market then other parties right?
User avatar #78362 to #78358 - kanadetenshi (02/19/2015) [-]
They do have some liberal elements (real liberalism that is) but they've recently been supporting a lot of welfare state idea's similar to the Socialist Party.
User avatar #78364 to #78363 - kanadetenshi (02/19/2015) [-]
Yeah like i said they are all over the place so they pretty much take whatever is popular among the common people. Party of Freedom and Democracy is the most liberal big party in The Netherlands.
#78352 to #78351 - kanadetenshi (02/19/2015) [-]
Questions are a little unspecific and simplistic for Dutch politics but i'm not surprised you got Party for Freedom.
User avatar #78354 to #78352 - lulzformalaysiaair (02/19/2015) [-]
The test must be shitty if you got it too since your a subhuman "pro immigration" person who doesn't care that Islam will be raping his country in the future. no hard feelings :^ )
User avatar #78357 to #78354 - kanadetenshi (02/19/2015) [-]
A more accurate quiz is Stemwijzer but it's only in Dutch.
User avatar #78355 to #78354 - kanadetenshi (02/19/2015) [-]
Well i did answer yes on whether Islam poses a problem to The Netherlands.
User avatar #78333 to #78324 - lulzformalaysiaair (02/19/2015) [-]
NDP on "immigration, and foreign policy issues"
I don't think I'll ever be able to think of you the same way again.
#78344 to #78333 - anonymous (02/19/2015) [-]
Aren't you an immigrant?
User avatar #78348 to #78344 - lulzformalaysiaair (02/19/2015) [-]
I prefer the term Canadian citizen for 11 years (and for life).
User avatar #78336 to #78333 - kanadetenshi (02/19/2015) [-]
It's pretty common knowledge that Libertarians oppose strict immigration laws...
User avatar #78331 to #78324 - lulzformalaysiaair (02/19/2015) [-]
ARE YOU FUCKING KIDDING ME???? How did you get liberal and NDP before Conservative even though your first choice is Libertarian.
User avatar #78330 to #78324 - schnizel (02/19/2015) [-]
>inb4 FAT BEN'S POOP PARTY
User avatar #78359 to #78330 - lulzformalaysiaair (02/19/2015) [-]
canada.isidewith.com/political-quiz You should do it, I'm interested to see which party you get and by how much.
User avatar #78402 to #78386 - lulzformalaysiaair (02/20/2015) [-]
Jesus christ that's fucking horrible man. Horrible, horrible. You got NDP first, you would fucking hate NDP. They are very left.
User avatar #78426 to #78402 - schnizel (02/21/2015) [-]
Damn.
#78286 to #78285 - schnizel (02/19/2015) [-]
tl;dw    
 JK, it's a good presentation, but if money if the prime goal in your life you can call yourself a jew.[spoiler]   [/spoiler]
tl;dw
JK, it's a good presentation, but if money if the prime goal in your life you can call yourself a jew.[spoiler] [/spoiler]
User avatar #78268 - lulzformalaysiaair (02/19/2015) [-]
I think I'm going to stop calling leftists liberals, they don't deserve that title. I'll just call them leftists, if they get upset. Well they can eat my dick up till they hick up.
#78322 to #78268 - anonymous (02/19/2015) [-]
I very rarely see them refer to themselves as Liberals. It's more of a snarl world used by Conservatives.

Just like how very few people actually identified as Neo-Conservatives. Yet people used "Neo-Con" derogatorily towards Bush, his administration, and supporters.
User avatar #78284 to #78268 - radiserne (02/19/2015) [-]
They call themselves liberals, humanists and whatnot, when in contrary they're quite the opposite.
User avatar #78274 to #78268 - kanadetenshi (02/19/2015) [-]
I just call them progressivists.
User avatar #78296 to #78274 - lulzformalaysiaair (02/19/2015) [-]
I don't like that title too, it also implies that they are better then you and you don't like to progress.
User avatar #78298 to #78296 - kanadetenshi (02/19/2015) [-]
Well that's kind of the thing with politics, they always try to make their movement sound amazing with good sounding words. Like "Social Justice" or "pro-life"
User avatar #78299 to #78298 - lulzformalaysiaair (02/19/2015) [-]
Yeah though I am pro abortion, but not government payed for abortions
User avatar #78262 - lulzformalaysiaair (02/19/2015) [-]
YOUR SECOND AMENDMENT

"If the second amendment only applies to muskets does that mean the first amendment only applies to what you write on parchment and quill/ink or as far as your voice can carry in a town square?"
#78241 - schnizel (02/18/2015) [-]
>mfw there are people in this world who aren't reactionaries
User avatar #78401 to #78241 - drastronomy (02/20/2015) [-]
wait, you are from serbia or some shit right?

Does that not make you a communist?
User avatar #78427 to #78401 - schnizel (02/21/2015) [-]
Bosnia.
User avatar #78287 to #78241 - theshadowed (02/19/2015) [-]
Oh yes, lets drag ourselves back into the dark ages of a corrupt church controlling everything, countless wars because inbred fools of monarchs believe they have claims, complete lack of logic, common sense, equality. Lovely.
User avatar #78288 to #78287 - schnizel (02/19/2015) [-]
> dark ages
>Analyzing Abu Dhabi’s excellent assessment of Polish Kings, I get 250 out of 835 years of bad monarchs, or a 30% failure ratio by time. 18 individual monarchs out of 48, or a 37.5% failure rate by person.
>Previously, in Monarchy FAQ, I estimated a 12% failure rate by time for Austrian monarchs, a 10% failure rate by time for Prussian monarchs, and a 9% failure rate by time for French Bourbon monarchs.
User avatar #78289 to #78288 - theshadowed (02/19/2015) [-]
Ah, Poland is an accurate representation.
But look how well Polands King's did for them! I see the Commonwealth is still going strong! Oh wait.
And yet all of them fell due to corruption and decadence.

What caused the fall of Rome? Its Emperors.
#78290 to #78289 - schnizel (02/19/2015) [-]
>But look how well Polands King's did for them! I see the Commonwealth is still going strong! Oh wait.
You know the reason they fell we for military reasons, not economical.
>And yet all of them fell due to corruption and decadence.
That's a big assumptions.
>What caused the fall of Rome? Its Emperors.
Really? The Emperors were the ones trying to save Rome, not destroy it. And when you say Emperors, name them.
>inb4 Caligula
User avatar #78291 to #78290 - theshadowed (02/19/2015) [-]
Poland's incompetent monarchs allowed them to be overrun. Yeh they were besest by Sweden and Russia, but if England, Jerusalem, the Spaniards all held off their enemies when they outnumbered
The German monarchs fell because of a long list of incompetent monarchs that culminated in WW1. Same for Austria, Russia. Oh and lets not even get started on the Bourbons. Even Louis the Sun King, arguably the only semi-competent Bourbon was corrupt and decadent beyond belief

Let me work out the failure rate of Rome. And working it out at around 50%. And when 1 in 2 of your Emperors is corrupt, stupid/insane, or just fucking useless, then there's an issue
User avatar #78292 to #78291 - schnizel (02/19/2015) [-]
>Poland's incompetent monarchs allowed them to be overrun.
Even if they were the best, good logic son.
>but if England
An island fortress.
>Jerusalem
Held of the muslims at one breached section of the wall with knights, no wonder they won.
> Spaniards
The muslims won more than 90% of the Iberian peninsula until the Asturians defeated them.
>The German monarchs fell because of a long list of incompetent monarchs that culminated in WW1.
>Same for Austria, Russia.
They were capable shadow, you try waging a war and see how easy it is.
>Oh and lets not even get started on the Bourbons. Even Louis the Sun King, arguably the only semi-competent Bourbon was corrupt and decadent beyond belief
Got any proof of that?
>Let me work out the failure rate of Rome. And working it out at around 50%. And when 1 in 2 of your Emperors is corrupt, stupid/insane, or just fucking useless, then there's an issue
What, a corrupt parliament works better? I will repeat this for the final time:
A monarchy in whatever form provides the stability to a country that democracy in many situations is unable to provide. In a monarchy the successor is bred from birth to fulfill his or her position rather than with an elected head of state who may have considerably less experience. In a republic (a country without a monarch) the head of state owes his power to the private interests that got him elected, and thus becomes indebted to them once he or she assumes power. In this way the president must satisfy those special interest groups first before he can act for what would be best for his or her country. In a monarchy however the monarch is king or queen simply because he or she was born into the role, and thus doesn't owe anyone or group for where he or she is, thus allowing the monarch to reign more freely and make decisions that are best for the country rather than the group of rich and powerful people that would have gotten him/her there as in a republic. Because the monarch reigns for life there becomes a greater amount of pressure on the monarch to rule as best as he/she can and so that things wont be messed up for the next generation.
cont.
In a republic however the presidents term is often short, and whatever long term problems or screw-ups that occurred in one presidents term become carried over to the next man in office who may or may not deal with them, potentially creating a snowball effect of presidents deferring difficult decisions to later presidents (such as the immense debt problem in the US). A monarchy is ultimately cost saving because the personal fortunes of the personal fortunes of the royal family can usually cover the costs that incur for the institutions support. In the UK for example the monarchy is paid for by a tax (which is like one cent per person per year) for the monarchies upkeep. In turn however the private income from the Queens estates is turned over to the treasury which in total becomes a net gain for the national treasury (see the link about the civil list). In addition the amount of money gained from tourism brings added revenue for the state. In a republic the salary of the president is paid for by the state, and the private income of the president is kept by the president. After the president leaves office, his support is still born by the state in the form of pensions which are paid until his or her death. This can be very costly when combined with the dozens of other ex presidents living off of pensions from the state. Because a monarch is not apart of any one political party he or she is able to be above the factions of politics and make decisions based on his or her conscious not based on what his or her party policy is. The monarch would also be able to mediate between the different levels of government should any emergency arise.
User avatar #78293 to #78292 - theshadowed (02/19/2015) [-]
I actually agree, I prefer autocracy. Just I think that combining autocracy with modern values is the way forward

Jerusalem helf their lands (not just the city) for decades.
Those monarchs weren't. Austria, maybe. But Russia? Allowed their country to become poor, basically collapsed it. The Bolsheviks didn't help tho. The Bourbons were idiots. Their constant wars and bullshit led to the Revolution. The Sun King almost ruined the country building Versailles.
User avatar #78304 to #78293 - schnizel (02/19/2015) [-]
>Those monarchs weren't. Austria, maybe. But Russia? Allowed their country to become poor, basically collapsed it. The Bolsheviks didn't help tho. The Bourbons were idiots. Their constant wars and bullshit led to the Revolution. The Sun King almost ruined the country building Versailles.
Wait, what, did the jews get rekt almost every time?
Pretty much, did you read on how Mongols conquered Baghdad.

>I actually agree, I prefer autocracy. Just I think that combining autocracy with modern values is the way forward
I'm only afraid whats needed to make men worthy of becoming noble in an autocracy. The quest for money hoarding must be destroyed in each one, and service to the nation must be the first goal.
User avatar #78306 to #78304 - theshadowed (02/19/2015) [-]
Jews have literally nothing to do with this argument don't drag your antisemitism in
But its stupid to assume that because a man had a great ancestor, that he will be great in turn. Autocracy on a noble family doesn't really work. Elected autocracy I can go with.
User avatar #78307 to #78306 - schnizel (02/19/2015) [-]
You talked about Jerusalem.
>But its stupid to assume that because a man had a great ancestor, that he will be great in turn.
An apple does not fall far from the tree. Almost everyone in my family was in a war, almost every generation and I currently feel that I should enlist, but I don't want to fight a meaningless war.
User avatar #78308 to #78307 - theshadowed (02/19/2015) [-]
I meant the Christian Crusader State
But sometimes the apple does fall, quite a long way. Dsitressingly often
And then you have all the civil wars, petty family squabbles from selfish fools that drag their countries for their own personal bidding
You really think many monarchs have had their countries interests at heart? Men like Alfred the Great maybe, but mostly its personal interest
User avatar #78309 to #78308 - schnizel (02/19/2015) [-]
>I meant the Christian Crusader State
You know they got rekt by Saladin.
>And then you have all the civil wars, petty family squabbles from selfish fools that drag their countries for their own personal bidding
True, but nowdays, you are dragged into wars by bankers and the countries suck their dick.
>You really think many monarchs have had their countries interests at heart? Men like Alfred the Great maybe, but mostly its personal interest
But it's in every fathers best interest to raise his children perfectly.
>not mentioning Phillip II
User avatar #78310 to #78309 - theshadowed (02/19/2015) [-]
Yeh but they rekt for about a century
So bankers or kings?
But is that always the case?
Hmm, great invasion of England he had there
User avatar #78311 to #78310 - schnizel (02/19/2015) [-]
True.
You can kill a king.
It should be...
No, no, I'm talking about the Macedonian.
User avatar #78312 to #78311 - theshadowed (02/19/2015) [-]
Its just as hard to kill a dynasty as it it to scourge a bank
Well look at Philip the Macedonian. His son, while great, overextended and led his empire to collapse. He didn't think. Alexander, while a good military commander, was a bad ruler
User avatar #78314 to #78312 - schnizel (02/19/2015) [-]
But what if the you have a dynasty of bankers?
>Rothchilds
>was a bad ruler
He was, at first, but the more he conquered the more he became a bad person. The mofo killed his best friend because he was drunk and died because he shit himself.
User avatar #78316 to #78314 - theshadowed (02/19/2015) [-]
Or poisoned, don't know for sure
User avatar #78317 to #78316 - schnizel (02/19/2015) [-]
Malaria.
User avatar #78319 to #78317 - theshadowed (02/19/2015) [-]
I did not know that. Still, my point stands. A great ruler does not necessarily beget a great ruler
User avatar #78321 to #78319 - schnizel (02/19/2015) [-]
True.
User avatar #78276 to #78241 - kanadetenshi (02/19/2015) [-]
It's logically impossible to have only reactionary since it would means there would be no modern system of politics because as soon as your political system is the modern political system you're no longer a reactionary.
#78277 to #78276 - schnizel (02/19/2015) [-]
These modern political systems are the reason we are shitty kana. Quite funny how we were among the fastest growing and the strongest states during the middle ages but nowdays we are nothing.
These modern political systems are the reason we are shitty kana. Quite funny how we were among the fastest growing and the strongest states during the middle ages but nowdays we are nothing.
User avatar #78278 to #78277 - kanadetenshi (02/19/2015) [-]
What i mean is that reactionary can only work if there is a dominant political system to oppose. Let's say that in 500 years monarchism or fascism becomes the dominant political systems, then progressives would be the reactionaries.
User avatar #78279 to #78278 - schnizel (02/19/2015) [-]
You can leave that part to me.
#78261 to #78241 - anonymous (02/19/2015) [-]
how can you call yourself a reactionary when you want a system of government that has never existed?
User avatar #78272 to #78261 - schnizel (02/19/2015) [-]
That's like telling a communist in 1917 that he isn't a communists because he wants a system of government that has never existed.
#78280 to #78272 - anonymous (02/19/2015) [-]
revolutionary =/= reactionary
#78282 to #78281 - anonymous (02/19/2015) [-]
that guy sounds like an idiot
User avatar #78283 to #78282 - schnizel (02/19/2015) [-]
>Julius Evola
User avatar #78327 to #78283 - jewishcommunazi (02/19/2015) [-]
Did he influence Mussolini or was it the other way around?
User avatar #78329 to #78327 - schnizel (02/19/2015) [-]
>Evola never joined Mussolini's National Fascist Party, he considered himself an anti-fascist, and catalogued fascist squadristi as peasants.[3] Mussolini considered Evola of the "hysterical fanatics" who could serve the fascist interests.[3] According to Daniel McCarthy:

“ At one point, il Duce or one of his underlings asked Evola why he hadn’t joined the Fascist Party proper. Evola replied that the continued existence of the party proved the failure of fascism. After all, if the state had become all and absorbed all lesser allegiances, how could there be such a thing as a “party,” which, as the word indicates, represents a partial or special interest?[7]
User avatar #78260 to #78241 - Shiny (02/19/2015) [-]
Reactionary thought is just the naturalistic fallacy taken to its logical conclusion.
User avatar #78273 to #78260 - schnizel (02/19/2015) [-]
That makes no sense.
#78270 to #78260 - anonymous (02/19/2015) [-]
Shiny thought is just the spamming of as many big words as possible hoping that it makes sense in an attempt to sound smart
User avatar #78253 to #78241 - marinepenguin ONLINE (02/19/2015) [-]
Because society evolves and so doesnt the responsibilities of a state. I am not saying we should throw away all old traditions and ways of thinking to make way for new ideas, but eventually all systems and ideas become obsolete with time. Our ideas of nationhood and ways of governing will be tested sometime in the future, as we continue to expand beyond our planet. Within a thousand years, the Roman empire will be largely forgotten by the average people, as will most civilizations, the further they fade into history.
#78275 to #78253 - schnizel (02/19/2015) [-]
Livy would be ashamed of what you have just said.
User avatar #78295 to #78275 - marinepenguin ONLINE (02/19/2015) [-]
And why is that?
User avatar #78305 to #78295 - schnizel (02/19/2015) [-]
He was a Roman writer, long story short, he wanted to keep Romans traditional, honorable, brave, etc. but Rome still collapsed.
His works were well sold in Rome, and I think you could get it on amazon.
User avatar #78313 to #78305 - marinepenguin ONLINE (02/19/2015) [-]
I agree that certain traditional traits in a society like integrity and honor should be preserved, because those concepts usually make for a more disciplined and efficient nation. But general speaking, society, our technical knowledge, and our forms of governing should evolve with time.
User avatar #78315 to #78313 - schnizel (02/19/2015) [-]
Adapted towards tradition, not fashion.
User avatar #78318 to #78315 - marinepenguin ONLINE (02/19/2015) [-]
Maybe. All I know is that American society especially is deteriorating in many ways.
User avatar #78320 to #78318 - schnizel (02/19/2015) [-]
Thanks Obama.
#78229 - marinepenguin ONLINE (02/18/2015) [-]
I wonder if these quotes are real.
User avatar #78259 to #78229 - akkere ONLINE (02/19/2015) [-]
All are legit save for Alberto E-Stein.
Albert Einstein was actually a Labor Zionism supporter, though he did write a letter criticizing another political party within Israel called the "Freedom Party" , comparing them to the Nazi party. That's probably what "inspired" the fictional quote, kind of like Miyazaki's commentary on anime being run by weeaboo lead to fictional quotes of him saying "Anime is worse than Hiroshima" or something like that.
archive.org/details/AlbertEinsteinLetterToTheNewYorkTimes.December41948
It's more of a criticism of some actions being taken to the formation of Israel than a blanket criticism of Israel as a whole.

In the letter/essay Gandhi made to which the quote derives from, it's more or less the same vein as Einstein's, with being critical of the violent approach to setting up the home, but also noting the Arab violent responses even against non-combatant personnel. The main point of his statement is he believes people should make a home from where they're born or "make their livestock", rather than just selecting a spot on the map and setting up shop because of some designation.
www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/JewsGandhi.html
User avatar #78244 to #78229 - lulzformalaysiaair (02/19/2015) [-]
If it's true: implying alberto

But it's not.
User avatar #78251 to #78244 - marinepenguin ONLINE (02/19/2015) [-]
After looking into it a bit longer only Ghandi and Malcom X seemed to be true. Einstein was my main concern, as he didn't voice his political griefs often.
#78256 to #78251 - anonymous (02/19/2015) [-]
I believe he was particularly anti-war, his opposition to World War I caused some friction with other German scientists.
User avatar #78257 to #78256 - marinepenguin ONLINE (02/19/2015) [-]
Interesting, considering his work on the atomic bomb, maybe he forsaw the massive energy potentials from nuclear based power?
User avatar #78263 to #78257 - lulzformalaysiaair (02/19/2015) [-]
Or maybe he didn't actually believe we would annihilate each other.
User avatar #78266 to #78263 - marinepenguin ONLINE (02/19/2015) [-]
No, there's no way he wouldn't have known that. Anyone with half a brain knows that if given the chance, we'd use nukes to get what we wanted. The only thing holding us back is MAD, if the Japs had nukes we never would have nuked them in fear of retaliation.
User avatar #78267 to #78266 - lulzformalaysiaair (02/19/2015) [-]
ehh whatever, nukes were inevitable. Technology must always progress no matter what, if it leads to our destruction then it is a sign from the universe that we are rapped in chains that we can not leave no matter how long and hard we try. If not then we will be gods and masters of the universe.
User avatar #78269 to #78267 - marinepenguin ONLINE (02/19/2015) [-]
I wouldn't say nukes were inevitable. The progression of science and knowledge is inevitable, it just so happens that our path of knowledge took us to where we invented nukes instead some other form of weaponry. Imagine if the Chinese had somehow discovered electricity as a viable weapon to be used in battle, we may have energy and plasma based weaponry instead of projectile based weapons.

And I agree, as long as we don't destroy ourselves in the process, there is quite literally no limit as to what humanity could accomplish. I believe that knowledge, is so vast that there is a near infinite ceiling that we can attempt to reach.

I read a HFY where eventually we became so advanced we learned how to transcend dimensions. Leaving our physical bodies and becoming immortal through energy. In the super far future, that may well be possible.
User avatar #78297 to #78269 - lulzformalaysiaair (02/19/2015) [-]
But at what price? When do we get to the point where we aren't human? i.e genetic changes from birth
User avatar #78301 to #78297 - marinepenguin ONLINE (02/19/2015) [-]
I don't know. There may very well be a point where we are no longer human.
User avatar #78302 to #78301 - lulzformalaysiaair (02/19/2015) [-]
911/galaxy

worth it
#78240 to #78229 - anonymous (02/18/2015) [-]
As far as I've hard the Albert Einstein one is fake.
User avatar #78233 to #78229 - jewishcommunazi (02/18/2015) [-]
Malcolm X was muslim, it's no surprise he'd say something like that.
User avatar #78235 to #78233 - marinepenguin ONLINE (02/18/2015) [-]
Yeah I didn't even think about that.
User avatar #78232 to #78229 - marinepenguin ONLINE (02/18/2015) [-]
I just looked them up and apparently they're true. I've never really took a solid stance on Zionism or a free Palestine, interesting seeing these more revered individuals stances.
User avatar #78230 to #78229 - marinepenguin ONLINE (02/18/2015) [-]
Although I don't care much for Nelson Mandela.
User avatar #78209 - lulzformalaysiaair (02/18/2015) [-]
BILL WHITTLE: THE CASE FOR ISRAEL Great video. I'm just gonna repost it even though it's been here.

For the people on here that hate jews, I find that understandable but when you argue anti-israel because you hate jews at least have an appreciation for the level that Israel is on even when faced with such environmental hostility. Especially if you wish for your country to be on that level of progress, nationality, ect. I respect you schnizel for doing that There is an obvious bias when you are anti-israel and hate jews, one could say that you could flip the coin and find different arguments that are pro-israel but you choose to ignore them because you have a deep seeded hatred for jews. My personal opinion.
inb4 muh holocaust or something like that
User avatar #78227 to #78209 - Shiny (02/18/2015) [-]
The "antisemite" card is the main reason Israel gets away with the shit they do on a regular basis. They're as much of a terrorist organization as Hamas, and both think they have "divine right" to land significant to Abrahamic religion. There's no good reason they can't peacefully share the land.
User avatar #78245 to #78227 - lulzformalaysiaair (02/19/2015) [-]
huh Shiny you make me laugh.
User avatar #78218 to #78209 - radiserne (02/18/2015) [-]
People are always going to bash on Israel, cause they either hate jews or love muslims. They totally disregard that:
1) Israel is the most developed and civilized state in the Middle east
2) Almost every muslim country in the Middle east wants to destroy it and kill its population. Gaza and the Golan heights are a result of other nations aggression against Israel.
3) Throughout the 20th century, Israel has only defended itself
4) Hamas shoot rockets at Israeli settlements and then go hide in schools and hospitals, and generally in areas where they can get as much collateral as possible.

For gods sake, it has a population of 8 million, while their neighbors, who several times have declared war on them, have populations exceeding over several hundred millions. If people really think Israel is the aggressor, they're either extremely naive, or they've fallen for the palestinian propaganda.
#78226 to #78218 - Shiny (02/18/2015) [-]
"Throughout the 20th century, Israel has only defended itself"

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Liberty_incident
User avatar #78228 to #78226 - radiserne (02/18/2015) [-]
... Is that seriously what you can come up with? A mistake, during the Six-Day war? Holy shit that's borderline retarded.
User avatar #78323 to #78228 - schnizel (02/19/2015) [-]
I don't like Shiny and I would choke the little bitch with a belt but that stuff can't be a mistake. Noone is that dumb, and we are talking about jews, they aren't stupid.
#78332 to #78323 - Shiny (02/19/2015) [-]
"I would choke the little bitch with a belt"
"I would choke the little bitch with a belt"
#78334 to #78332 - schnizel (02/19/2015) [-]
Shitskin, I eat goyim like you for dinner.
Shitskin, I eat goyim like you for dinner.
User avatar #78335 to #78334 - Shiny (02/19/2015) [-]
I'm Caucasian.
#78338 to #78335 - schnizel (02/19/2015) [-]
As much as I'm liberal.
User avatar #78342 to #78338 - Shiny (02/19/2015) [-]
The fact that I'm white doesn't change for your narrative.
User avatar #78343 to #78342 - schnizel (02/19/2015) [-]
>white
User avatar #78385 to #78350 - schnizel (02/20/2015) [-]
White like Argentina.
#78391 to #78385 - anonymous (02/20/2015) [-]
Oh goodness the memes.
User avatar #78325 to #78323 - radiserne (02/19/2015) [-]
I just find it strange that Israel would deliberately attack their biggest ally, even though they're sneaky bastards.
User avatar #78328 to #78325 - schnizel (02/19/2015) [-]
To enrage the yanks more so that they would keep killing sandniggers.
User avatar #78337 to #78328 - radiserne (02/19/2015) [-]
How would that enrage them though? They didn't disguise it as a mudslime attack.
#78393 to #78337 - mudslime (02/20/2015) [-]
WAHT DA FUCKIN FUK?
#78395 to #78393 - radiserne (02/20/2015) [-]
I know what your schemes lil nigga
User avatar #78339 to #78337 - schnizel (02/19/2015) [-]
They goyim found out about it.
User avatar #78247 to #78236 - lulzformalaysiaair (02/19/2015) [-]
Son... you didn't actually prove anything though. The incident was Israel defending itself by going on the offensive because it thought the ship was Egyptian. You like to leave out the part that this was occurring during the Six Day War.
User avatar #78237 to #78236 - radiserne (02/18/2015) [-]
Both sides agreed it was not an aggression, but a mistake. Holy shit you're arrogant as fuck.
User avatar #78243 to #78237 - akkere ONLINE (02/18/2015) [-]
When you say both sides, do you also include the survivors of the USS Liberty?
User avatar #78246 to #78243 - lulzformalaysiaair (02/19/2015) [-]
I'm sorry to burst your bubble but who cares about their opinion? It was a tragedy and all but you don't value the opinion of a person who thinks 911 was a conspiracy more then a nation because his father was on the plane.

It really doesn't matter since they agreed to it, now whether America did that because it's ties to Israel were very important is a different question. Surely one can't think Israel would just kill Americans for fun and on purpose though.
User avatar #78250 to #78246 - akkere ONLINE (02/19/2015) [-]
I agree that it honestly doesn't make any sense why they'd deliberately attack an American vessel. There's no value in it, tactical or otherwise in doing so, and no one but children would believe anyone would just shoot a vessel "JUST TO SEE MY POWER".

However, it also doesn't make any sense to censor and abuse the survivors for making the claims they were deliberate rather than addressing them directly. This isn't just a matter of being related to a victim of the incident, these were the people that were actually in the incident and saw the event contrary to the reports.

Personally, I don't think the Israeli ship shot the Liberty thinking "HAHA, TAKE THAT AMERICAN, WE'LL JUST COVER IT UP LATER". There's no value in it, tactically or otherwise, as I've mentioned before. I'd be more likely to believe the Israeli military vessel was infiltrated by a time traveling, mind controlling Nazi who took control of the vessel and performed the strike to stir up a controversy like this, then think the Captain deemed it a tactical necessity to take down a ship he could see was of no threat to either his crew or his nation.
But I also don't like the amount of disrespect given to these survivors with not meeting their requests to validating claims made by a federal judge regarding supposed "congressional investigations" regarding the incident. All they would have to do is address these veterans and walk them through all the necessary files and records regarding the incident and satisfy them (at least, the ones that haven't snapped to the point of irrationality), and poof, the issue would be gone.
User avatar #78254 to #78250 - lulzformalaysiaair (02/19/2015) [-]
I don't know what your referring to when you mean "not meeting their requests".
User avatar #78238 to #78237 - Shiny (02/18/2015) [-]
Translation: neocons suck each others dicks because bible, fuck the lives of the crewmen.
User avatar #78239 to #78238 - radiserne (02/18/2015) [-]
Cause in your opinion, America should have attacked Israel, resulting in more deaths? Sorry, I was unaware that mistakes don't happen in wars, my fault.
User avatar #78215 to #78209 - kanadetenshi (02/18/2015) [-]
Israel should've never happened, or at least definitely not be put in the middle east no matter if it's their supposed holy land. Now they're in a stalemate position where even if they wanted to get rid of their borders the Israeli civilians would be open to massive assaults from their neighbor countries. The fact that Israels warmongering has created such deep hatred for Israel makes it very difficult to negotiate on either part.
User avatar #78249 to #78215 - lulzformalaysiaair (02/19/2015) [-]
Thanks for the history lesson I guess but Israel is now here and you can't really do anything about it. Same for the europeans that came here, took the savage's land and crafted it into two of the most advanced countries in the world CAD>US in living standard dough
User avatar #78271 to #78249 - kanadetenshi (02/19/2015) [-]
Lol Israel has his living standards to thank purely because they have been leeching from western countries.
#78214 to #78209 - akkere ONLINE (02/18/2015) [-]
My problem with this video is it serves to fight the anti-Israel stance with a pro-Israel one, and in doing so overlooks Israel's fair share of offenses that are more than just retaliatory strikes.  Everything from people being held as political prisoners, to torture, to assassinations with a high civilian casualty ratio. Not to mention the shady details with the formation of Israel itself. Israel is committing more than just their fair share of atrocities, and while one may suppose they'd  have that right as a nation at war, do they have the right to do so with the unknowable taxpayer's dime from another nation like the US? Or have such an admittedly strong influence in the media to suppress the emphasis of these crimes, even if it perhaps isn't as be-all end-all as /pol/ might suggest?    
   
The fact is, if we're ever going to properly address the issues surrounding Israel, we need to drop one-sided videos like these as well as /pol/ circlejerking and look at the big picture of what's really at stake; power hungry groups looking to grab more power, and some on a larger scale than others. This whole "From my point of view, [x] is evil" thing is only wasting viewers' time and clogging up the distribution of information.   
And personally, I don't find it acceptable to hate Jews or take an anti-Israel stance and translate that to hating anyone with a Jewish ethnic background as a whole. I can "understand" the frustration that might come psychologically with mentally associating an issue with a particular race, especially with the way the liberal and conservative media have successfully stitched race into every conceivable issue, but I think the first step to undoing the damage caused by these forces in the media is to take more objective views and purging such biases.
My problem with this video is it serves to fight the anti-Israel stance with a pro-Israel one, and in doing so overlooks Israel's fair share of offenses that are more than just retaliatory strikes. Everything from people being held as political prisoners, to torture, to assassinations with a high civilian casualty ratio. Not to mention the shady details with the formation of Israel itself. Israel is committing more than just their fair share of atrocities, and while one may suppose they'd have that right as a nation at war, do they have the right to do so with the unknowable taxpayer's dime from another nation like the US? Or have such an admittedly strong influence in the media to suppress the emphasis of these crimes, even if it perhaps isn't as be-all end-all as /pol/ might suggest?

The fact is, if we're ever going to properly address the issues surrounding Israel, we need to drop one-sided videos like these as well as /pol/ circlejerking and look at the big picture of what's really at stake; power hungry groups looking to grab more power, and some on a larger scale than others. This whole "From my point of view, [x] is evil" thing is only wasting viewers' time and clogging up the distribution of information.
And personally, I don't find it acceptable to hate Jews or take an anti-Israel stance and translate that to hating anyone with a Jewish ethnic background as a whole. I can "understand" the frustration that might come psychologically with mentally associating an issue with a particular race, especially with the way the liberal and conservative media have successfully stitched race into every conceivable issue, but I think the first step to undoing the damage caused by these forces in the media is to take more objective views and purging such biases.
User avatar #78252 to #78214 - lulzformalaysiaair (02/19/2015) [-]
I see where you're coming from maybe you wanna link me to the so called atrocities Israel has done though, I've heard about some of them but never cared to research but there is no unbiased perspective. It's not possible, it can't exist.

You wanna be a filthy, mudslime loving lib or someone that's more right and takes a more pro-Israeli stance? :^ )
User avatar #78258 to #78252 - akkere ONLINE (02/19/2015) [-]
Regarding the “shady details” of the formation of Israel and the resulting Civil War, there was the massacres of numerous Arab villages during the expulsion of casualties. Major examples being Saliha, Lydda, Abu Shusha, Deir Yassin, and Al-Dawaiyima.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deir_Yassin_massacre
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1948_Palestinian_exodus_from_Lydda_and_Ramle#Massacre_in_Lydda
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Dawayima_massacre
I would like to point out that Palestinian forces aren’t in the high and mighty route; they’ve got atrocities to answer for as well with massacres on non-combat personnel and civillians
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hadassah_medical_convoy_massacre
(more in the next link)

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killings_and_massacres_during_the_1948_Palestine_war
This is kind of a key link that drives the “neutral” perspective home for me. Blood spilled carelessly with weapons from both flags, and it's easy to see how.
I'll just make this comment here to section off this time period so it's easier to dispute any of these events as well as add anything further.
I hope this doesn't end up in one of those one-sided /pol/ posts about da ebil jews
User avatar #78264 to #78258 - lulzformalaysiaair (02/19/2015) [-]
Ohh... i thought you would show me evidence of Israel massacring people after it's creation not during.

I really couldn't care about these massacres that happened during the time that Israel was being founded and mass immigration was occurring simply because both sides were dishing it out, if anything Arabs were extremely hateful of the idea and the first to start such discrimination and not wanting to move out of the land/

I hate having to repeat this but remember, Israel was founded legally by being handed over from the British, not the Arabs but from the British. Life isn't fair but nothing about the creation was illegal, of course violence would have to occur because so many arabs refused to move and you know what? So be it. Being forcefully pushed out had to happen. You don't hate the U.S because it pushed out the natives and they didn't even do it on any legal terms unlike Israel.

Bottom line is this is a stupid argument and I really don't see how it should play any role on whether someone should be pro/anti/neutral on Israel. Show me Israel doing horrible shit after it's creation, not during war. Doing shit it has no explanation for and then I can take a close examination and possibly agree but before that I'm just going to have to assume your a little biased and clouded in your thought. Israel is always judged on different standards for some reason.
User avatar #78365 to #78264 - akkere ONLINE (02/19/2015) [-]
I figured I'd expedite this one
This is the main atrocity I had in mind when I wrote about Israel definitely not being in the innocent side.
Using Palestinian civilians as "human shields"
www.btselem.org/human_shields/20060720_human_shields_in_beit_hanun
www.cbsnews.com/news/israel-probes-human-shield-allegations/
www.un.org/press/en/2002/SG2077.doc.htm
Turns out, the term actually has two meanings; using people as shields in the literal sense of having them act as barriers, or forcing them to perform tasks such as searching a building or scouting under gun point. These instances are mostly the latter, but the ones described in the CBS article start out as the latter and become the former.
It's nothing the Palestinian militants haven't done either, but it's still a shocking act especially with the attempted justification from the Israeli Brass themselves. This is one of those "absolutely unacceptable" atrocities I had in mind when I first wrote about it.
There's a series of political cartoons that show the "difference between Hamas militants and the IDF", and a couple of them show the popular example of a Hamas infantry man using a baby carriage (with an infant inside) as a direct human shield, while an IDF infantry man stands in front of an identical baby carriage, giving the implication one intends to use it as a human shield and the other intends to defend it with their life.
This specific issue shows the contrary.
User avatar #78294 to #78264 - akkere ONLINE (02/19/2015) [-]
I'm working on a list for evidence (i.e. legitimate reports and testimonies and not just poor sources seen on /pol/ collaborations) to show a full length span from creation to today.
The massacres were more or less to open and show that Israel hasn't been the peace walker even from the very beginning.

As for why Israel's held under different standards, I really have no idea why that is either. I wouldn't want anyone to look at these links and assume that Israel's some monstrocity since birth; every nation will have skeletons in its closet no matter the details of it's birth. My whole reasoning to arranging for this is to point out that ideas like the one Bill Whittle suggests that the leadership of Israel's "done nothing wrong" outright isn't true.
If you'd like, I could also counter-balance this with a post regarding achievements committed by Israel to show promise the nation has, as I in no way want to have it underlined this as a black 'n' white issue, but my main point was addressing the attitude people like Bill Whittle have towards the subject.
User avatar #78212 to #78209 - schnizel (02/18/2015) [-]
<3
Keep fighting the good fight.
User avatar #78210 to #78209 - pebar ONLINE (02/18/2015) [-]
I don't really care about Israel either way, but not using nukes doesn't necessarily make a country moral and civilized
User avatar #78222 to #78210 - lulzformalaysiaair (02/18/2015) [-]
Obviously not everything the guy says is a great argument.
#78204 - anonymous (02/18/2015) [-]
Liberals will actually defend this.
User avatar #78219 to #78204 - radiserne (02/18/2015) [-]
What the fuck is the difference between femme and female? Also all this gender mumbo jumbo is utter bullshit.
User avatar #78216 to #78204 - kanadetenshi (02/18/2015) [-]
Didn't know Tinky-Winky was third gender.
User avatar #78205 to #78204 - lulzformalaysiaair (02/18/2015) [-]
Some of them look like fucking spaceships. Also gender is a stupid concept.
#78211 to #78205 - cabbagemayhem (02/18/2015) [-]
Why? Gender is the first and most obvious way to classify human beings. It has the largest effect on our social interaction, and if aliens saw us, they'd wonder why half of us have dicks before anything else.
User avatar #78221 to #78211 - lulzformalaysiaair (02/18/2015) [-]
Sex =/= Gender. Come on man.
#78224 to #78221 - cabbagemayhem (02/18/2015) [-]
Oh, well in that case gender is a stupid concept.
User avatar #78199 - marinepenguin ONLINE (02/18/2015) [-]
Just finished reading "Back to the Front, and accidental historian walks the trenches of world war 1", and started rereading Jeff Shaara's "The Steel Wave". I don't know why, but I've been binge reading stuff about the world wars. I just wish there were more good stuff about World War 1, as it's arguably the most influential war of modern times.
User avatar #78208 to #78199 - akkere ONLINE (02/18/2015) [-]
Both wars were probably one of the few historical events you can talk about consistently to no end and still have new information to put into the conversation, hence why there's just an endless amount of reading in just the non-fiction department. Then you've got all kinds of phenomenal literature just from veterans themselves, some of which touch less on the wars and more the aftermath and resulting events.
User avatar #78231 to #78208 - marinepenguin ONLINE (02/18/2015) [-]
Every time I reread about, or rewatch a documentary, I always find a new connection or something new to take from it. I love that period of history.
 Friends (0)