On November 09 2016 22:05 LikeASet wrote:
I believe most people's reasons for voting either are probably shallow.
...The election results are making me feel warm inside because I live in California and I'm surrounded by retarded social justice warrior millennials, many of them coming from schools like Berkely, Davis, etc. ...
...Anyways I feel like Trump getting elected is a big FU to social justice warrior culture and an "everyone stop being such pussies" kind of statement...
Idk bud, you might be the shallow one based on this post.
Millennials complaining about other SJW millennials reminds me of how people used to bash "emo kids" back in the day. Great for you man, I hope you found the validation you needed. Meanwhile there are people legitimately concerned for the environment, national surveillance, the supreme court justice seats, and a billion other things. Just people being shallow, I guess.
(For what it's worth I voted for neither HRC or Trump)
I really hoped Trump wouldn't win, but he did and we must respect the office. The election results are a real lesson in empathy. The writing was on the wall during the primaries, Trump had a snowballing, diehard fanbase and the rational left believed people would actually care about stuff like blatant sexual harassment. Fact of the matter is people are willing to look past it when their jobs, livelihood, and identity are on the line.
How the left feels now is exactly how racist nutjobs felt when we elected Obama in 08 - talk about secession, emigration, murder, etc. None of that happened, instead they came out in droves on election day. In 4 years, the left can respond similarly.
So by your logic, everyone who voted for trump is not concerned with the environment, national defence, etc. GJ oversimplifying the whole situation. Not like Hillary is a proven war monger or anything.
What the fuck are you talking about? You voted for a climate change denier. You're concerned with the environment how, exactly? I'm sure you're also concerned with women's rights as you also voted to take away their right to have an abortion. The list of stupid shit goes on, as we all know. Why? Because you felt "annoyed with some SJW people"? That's the equivalent of hiring a psychopath to shoot up a school because you were bullied by a small group of people and then patting yourself on the back for "winning".
The most disturbing part is how satisfied you are with yourself. No one with a functioning brain and a little compassion should be satisfied about [the results of] this election.
obviously Trumps stance on climate change is awful, on the other hand Hillary called fracking protesters cry babies and she was clearly bough by the industry so the alternative is better on the enviroment it wasnt a black and white difference and she was only going to pursue lobbying interests as usual.
These SJW arent just annoying the regressive left can be very dangerous, look at all the problems with Sweden and migration, and the shitstorm that will go in a few years in Germany, in Canada you are quickly losing free speech as its about to be legislated the use of non-binary gender pronounces mandatory and refusing to do so would be considered hate speech and punishable by law.
And yeah Trump is certainly an overkill but that is what happens when the left doesnt check itself and runs amok, as I said before this election, they are the ones empowering these ultra right demagoges
I agree with your points and I certainly don't believe it's black and white. Like I said, it's that smug attitude that really disturbs me; he literally said he got a "warm feeling inside" from Trump being elected just to stick it to the SJWs. You're talking big picture but he's not in immediate danger from them, it's just a petty subjective thing.
As for free speech, we already don't have it. Society always arbitrary draws a line somewhere to decide what is hate speech and what is not. I'm not yet convinced Bill C-16 is some major issue. It seems to me like an expansion of those already existing anti-discrimination laws to now be more inclusive of the entire LGBT spectrum. I know Jordan Peterson has been fighting hard on the pronouns issue and I have yet to catch up on the details, but reading the bill it doesn't look like it's going to be mandatory. If intent is ignored and it became a crime not to use all those silly pronouns then yes it would be incredibly foolish. But between some issue like that and having to live under a pro-life regime, I think you know how easy of a choice that is.
fuck I should just sell some of my Pokemon cards, if no one stakes that is what I will have to do - lostaccount
Truth now seems to be whatever side you're on lol
The internet really fucked the world's ass, is this just some process or is it just going to head towards people just hating and killing each other?
On November 11 2016 08:09 Baalim wrote:
Except that the only country actually bombing the rebels is Russia, the US doesnt like the rebels but also wants to topple Assad... so basically they bomb rebels when it doesnt help Assad directly and they "accidently" bomb Assads troops from time to time, all this while the US ally, Saudi Arabia funds the rebels.
So the no fly zone is spitting in Russias face and helping the rebels (Isis and the rest of the Jihadist groups)
Russia is bombing everything, using cheap dumb bombs and just carpeting entire sections of cities like Aleppo. Russia is broke and wants to help Assad on the cheap, which creates a ton of human suffering and death because they and Assad simply don't give a flying fuck about innocent civilian deaths. They are willing to sacrifice hundreds of thousands of innocent lives to achieve their goals.
Yes, the rebels aren't all good people, there are MANY different groups of rebels and the US isn't helping all of them. The Saudis are supplying certain Sunni rebel groups with arms and money. It's a very complicated situation because Syria is majority Sunni but they've been ruled by the allegedly secular Ba'ath party (Assad's party) but that party stays in power partly due to the Shia minority, specifically the Alawites, and they ruthlessly kill and imprison Sunni dissidents.
Furthermore, despite whatever Putin is saying about fighting ISIS, they simply are not. Their bombing/fighting has been mostly in northern Syria, near Aleppo. ISIS is not operating close to there, they are heavily concentrated in central/eastern Syria up to the border with Iraq. A no-fly zone would obviously be after negotiation with Russia. Russia itself would welcome a relaxing of economic sanctions imposed after its annexation of Crimea, so they would likely be willing to negotiate terms with the US on Syria. Russia's overall goal isn't necessarily to help Assad, it's to gain economic advantage in securing a pipeline for their oil, keeping their military bases in Syria and displaying their arms for export. Russia is broke and currently nobody really wants to buy their outdated shit.
Thanks for the detailed info I didnt know some details like Russia bombing the north, and of course Russia isnt attacking the rebels because they are the good guys, they arent even targets of Jihadis, its all personal gain but still, the US currently is against Assad and against rebels.
You cannot do that, you cant topple assad and avoid sunnis to take power, I assume they are planning for the long-game, meaning eventually Assad dies, the rebels are also unorganized so the US can put a friendly puppet government, this plan sounds more disastrous than killing civilians as collateral damage.
Assad is the best option, as brutal and bad he is he is far better than the muslim brotherhood controlling a country as big and unstable as Syria, so hopefully Trump and Putin can negotiate and end this madness, something the previous administration seemed unable or unwilling to do.
On November 12 2016 05:38 Loco wrote:
If intent is ignored and it became a crime not to use all those silly pronouns then yes it would be incredibly foolish. But between some issue like that and having to live under a pro-life regime, I think you know how easy of a choice that is.
And that is a huge problem, we have to chose between the Trudeaus and Merkels or the Trumps and Faranges.... either regressive left or bigoted right, where are the sensible moderate candidates?
On November 11 2016 08:09 Baalim wrote:
Except that the only country actually bombing the rebels is Russia, the US doesnt like the rebels but also wants to topple Assad... so basically they bomb rebels when it doesnt help Assad directly and they "accidently" bomb Assads troops from time to time, all this while the US ally, Saudi Arabia funds the rebels.
So the no fly zone is spitting in Russias face and helping the rebels (Isis and the rest of the Jihadist groups)
Russia is bombing everything, using cheap dumb bombs and just carpeting entire sections of cities like Aleppo. Russia is broke and wants to help Assad on the cheap, which creates a ton of human suffering and death because they and Assad simply don't give a flying fuck about innocent civilian deaths. They are willing to sacrifice hundreds of thousands of innocent lives to achieve their goals.
Yes, the rebels aren't all good people, there are MANY different groups of rebels and the US isn't helping all of them. The Saudis are supplying certain Sunni rebel groups with arms and money. It's a very complicated situation because Syria is majority Sunni but they've been ruled by the allegedly secular Ba'ath party (Assad's party) but that party stays in power partly due to the Shia minority, specifically the Alawites, and they ruthlessly kill and imprison Sunni dissidents.
Furthermore, despite whatever Putin is saying about fighting ISIS, they simply are not. Their bombing/fighting has been mostly in northern Syria, near Aleppo. ISIS is not operating close to there, they are heavily concentrated in central/eastern Syria up to the border with Iraq. A no-fly zone would obviously be after negotiation with Russia. Russia itself would welcome a relaxing of economic sanctions imposed after its annexation of Crimea, so they would likely be willing to negotiate terms with the US on Syria. Russia's overall goal isn't necessarily to help Assad, it's to gain economic advantage in securing a pipeline for their oil, keeping their military bases in Syria and displaying their arms for export. Russia is broke and currently nobody really wants to buy their outdated shit.
Thanks for the detailed info I didnt know some details like Russia bombing the north, and of course Russia isnt attacking the rebels because they are the good guys, they arent even targets of Jihadis, its all personal gain but still, the US currently is against Assad and against rebels.
that guys post was 90% bullshit, he sounds like a guy that googled abunch of BBC articles and misunderstood most of them.
there is not a 'russian pipeline in syria', it doesn't even make logical sense, Russia has massive pipeline access to most of Europe as is and couldn't make a profit selling in MENA anyways. he probably read about Russian involvement in order to deny Qatar's pipeline and confused himself but even that theory is borderline retarded.
Russia waited a solid 3 years before even getting involved in Syria, despite Assad's requests for help. They pretty much didn't jump in until it became dangerously close to Al-Qaeda/Saudi taking over Syria.
in regard to Russia 'only bombing North Syria' but somehow magically missing ISIS, North-Central Syria was 100% ISIS until just under two years ago... when Russia bombed the shit out of them. Once the Kurds came in on the ground and took over the area they focused on the Jihadis in Aleppo. here's a map from late 2014
and here's the map from a month ago, outside of Al-Bab, Deir-ez-Zor and Raqqa almost all of the territory ISIS owns in Syria is empty desert with no strategic utility.
The only place left in Syria with significant ISIS near Syrian army to bother bombing is Deir-ez-Zor.
This propaganda is so laughably retarded... "now that Russia bombed ISIS out of Syria, they don't bomb them anymore, so bad Russians!"
On November 12 2016 04:52 nolan wrote:
for all the people talking about Syria I strongly recommend watching this interview with Jack Murphy, U.S. special forces in Iraq who actually knows some things about the conflict.
tl;dw:
- FSA and 'moderate rebels' are a front to fence arms to Al-Nusra, JaF, Jihadis for $
- U.S. troop morale is at an all time low, they tend to sympathize with minority groups that support Assad (certain Kurd factions, Assyrians, Syrian Armenians, Yezidi etc). They tend to feel that they are training jihadis, esp the special forces guy who speak Arabic and actually have a clue. There's been numerous incidents like this where retarded 'U.S. backed moderate rebels' refer to the very soldiers training them as pigs and crusaders.
- Most think it's a result of bureaucratic incompetence and optimism to a fault on part of the CIA rather than some evil long-con plan to arm Nusra/ISIS
- Calls out a few journalists by name for putting out lobby group propaganda pushing for war
Syrian Civil War is such an exemplary display of American narcissism and myopia, and guys defending US actions in this thread, blaming 'murderous Russia' etc. is just pathetic. You just decided (again) that some guy in the middle east is a dictator and needs to be toppled (no monetary or geopolitical reasons included at all right ?)
So you start supporting 'moderate rebel factions' (child beheaders included) which are basically Al-Qaeda or their sympathisers. Assad is not a good man but at least he is trying to run a secular state - what would be the solution US is proposing ? To unite syria by islamist radicals often times ideologically closer to ISIS rather than Assad?
I am not a Russian sympathiser on their foreign or domestic policies, quite contrary, but in case of Syria, they are there on invitation of the government (however much anyone wants to make it illegitimate).
If you question their strategy of bombing civilians, firstly try to understand what is going on for example in Aleppo. The moderate rebels you are supporting, are demanding ransom for letting any civilian leave the premises when there is one sided ceasfire announced by government forces etc. They are not focusing on civilians but the rebels prefer to have human shields so the international community can have an outcry about this, while there is almost no coverage of atrocities that are going on in Yemen, where there are tens of thousands of civilian casualties, where Saudis decided to topple the government with the support of US. The hypocrisy is real.
On November 12 2016 09:59 Spitfiree wrote:
Is it true Trump voters are starting waves of racism and sexism in the USA? Or is the media still all over Trump?
as a prominent liveleak scientist, i would say that incidences of violence appear to be at about a 10:1 ratio in favor of anti-trump people
On September 08 2008 10:07 Baal wrote: my head is a gyroscope, your argument is invalid
1
Santafairy Korea (South). Nov 12 2016 20:05. Posts 2233
The problem with that quote is he's obviously constructing a strawman. Liberals as a whole aren't saying those things (don't find me a tweet because when you're talking about a group of people as large as 55m+, there's bound to be morons, obviously). The real fear is that he ran a campaign where he attributed negative characteristics to whole groups of people, and even if he didn't mean to cast aspersions on the entire group, words are powerful and I'll give Trump credit here in that he speaks them very convincingly and his worst supporters will take his dog whistles and interpret them to suit their own hateful ideas.
People of color, Muslim-Americans, immigrants and even people who look like immigrants (because, how the hell can you tell the difference between a Mexican and a Mexican-American?) are being harassed at a higher rate than before this election season. Sure, Trump did not create the hate, but he stoked the flames and normalized it. Bigots, who previously would only say horrible shit among themselves are now emboldened to harass people openly in public because they believe the president-elect agrees with their hate, even if he truly doesn't. He played to his supporters darkest fears that immigrants are here to take jobs, commit rape, commit terrorism, and leech off society when none of those things are true, supported by lots of data. Immigrants tend to commit the least amount of crime because they're overjoyed to have a job and make some money and they don't want to risk the opportunity.
okay your personal impression, with no data, is people of color harassment is rising, now what about the "die whites die" and assaults on white people and trump supporters? everyone has a color. surely assaults on trump supporters is up from when there were no trump supporters. but this stuff doesn't matter, because it's either justified or the victims don't matter as much as muh minorities. and you know who's still killing the most blacks? blacks. oppression is a smoke screen to keep retards voting Democrat. now, there are other reasons to vote Democrat, but you can't base a national coalition on regressive hogwash.
also, if immigrants didn't take jobs, that would mean you were bringing unemployed people into the country
It seems to be not very profitable in the long run to play those kind of hands. - Gus Hansen
This video is PERFECT I agree with it 100% every single word:
it shouldn't detract from the message and content of the video, but it is weird that if you look at his channel, all of his videos are scripted "real reactions"
On November 12 2016 09:27 Baalim wrote:
This video is PERFECT I agree with it 100% every single word:
I'd already posted it on this very page though . Another good one:
sam harris is so abnormally (not a bad thing) calm, collected and rational. i wish i had the control over my message/voice/tone (both online/live) when speaking to other people.
Last edit: 13/11/2016 04:00
1
K40Cheddar United States. Nov 13 2016 18:10. Posts 2202
On November 12 2016 09:27 Baalim wrote:
This video is PERFECT I agree with it 100% every single word:
Yeah good video that sums up my entire thoughts basically.
On November 12 2016 05:38 Loco wrote:
If intent is ignored and it became a crime not to use all those silly pronouns then yes it would be incredibly foolish. But between some issue like that and having to live under a pro-life regime, I think you know how easy of a choice that is.
And that is a huge problem, we have to chose between the Trudeaus and Merkels or the Trumps and Faranges.... either regressive left or bigoted right, where are the sensible moderate candidates?
There is a high probability that Trudeau will be one of the best 'leaders' from the last decades. Not because he is amazing but because everyone else have been horrible people. Trudeau is as close to a regular person you can get with morals and understanding of politics without the bought and paid for agendas. It is extreme to think canada will become a locked down country from political correctness.
I have learned from poker that being at the table is not a grind, the grind is living and poker is how I pass the time
1
shootair United States. Nov 14 2016 01:04. Posts 430
On November 09 2016 05:43 traxamillion wrote:
Crazyyyy. Thought hilary was 100
Didnt vote just loving the drama. (I live in california tho. If i was in a swing state i prob vote. Never voting is kinda my own dumb protest of the whole system tho)
I think personally a rich casino hustler should not be president but hillary obv sucked too. Maybe bernie coulda won actually. Prolly would have.
Must be nice to be white and rich in america right now
On November 12 2016 05:38 Loco wrote:
If intent is ignored and it became a crime not to use all those silly pronouns then yes it would be incredibly foolish. But between some issue like that and having to live under a pro-life regime, I think you know how easy of a choice that is.
And that is a huge problem, we have to chose between the Trudeaus and Merkels or the Trumps and Faranges.... either regressive left or bigoted right, where are the sensible moderate candidates?
There is a high probability that Trudeau will be one of the best 'leaders' from the last decades. Not because he is amazing but because everyone else have been horrible people. Trudeau is as close to a regular person you can get with morals and understanding of politics without the bought and paid for agendas. It is extreme to think canada will become a locked down country from political correctness.
Canada is on its way to legislate that the refusal of non-binary gender pronounces would be a crime.
So you better learn the pronounces to refer to the 28 genders or you will face the legal consequences.
On November 14 2016 08:10 Spitfiree wrote:
This is fucking absurd. At which point do they stop the liberal approach and actually label these people as psychologically ill ?
I dont care about labeling them ill or insane, they can dress and do with their bodies whatever they want, they can ask to be called however they want too, but it should never be legislated in the state or any other organization, for the same reasons they are free to do whatever the fuck they want.
On November 12 2016 09:27 Baalim wrote:
This video is PERFECT I agree with it 100% every single word:
I'd already posted it on this very page though . Another good one:
sam harris is so abnormally (not a bad thing) calm, collected and rational. i wish i had the control over my message/voice/tone (both online/live) when speaking to other people.
Yep, I thought it was just a front when I first came across him many years ago. I think I interpreted it as patronizing, especially when he clumsily tried to "awaken" the "atheist community" to secular spirituality. But honestly he's won me over with time; he's been tested many times and I think he's authentic. Dude has done a lot of work on himself and certainly has a talent when it comes to communication. He's also one of the few contemporary moralists who didn't hesitate to call himself an hypocrite because he wasn't a vegan and he's openly said he struggled with it but has made progress. It's hard to hate on a guy like that, though it amazes me --and saddens me-- how ill-informed he is on nutrition to have struggled for so long.
fuck I should just sell some of my Pokemon cards, if no one stakes that is what I will have to do - lostaccount
Contact Users: 445 Active, 0 Logged in - Time: 12:54
. Another good one:
