So not only are you a petulant pedant, you're one who doesn't bother to read or comprehend the obvious. You must be a charmer at parties.
Your post is nonsense and completely off topic from the parent.
The topic was rebellions against empires. What was off topic was your pointless pedantry on the fall of the (western) Roman Empire as the parent poster didn't say anything about it.
all of you examples got their independence on the graces of their colonial masters aside from Vietnam. Maybe stick to non-history subjects...
So you're a wannabe history pedant who hasn't heard of the Philippine Revolution, Churchills torture camps in Kenya, or that the Indian independence movement carried the threat of force as well as peaceful protest. Why don't you pick up some history books on your way to get some medication for all your uptight, retentive, pointless wankery.
Because the only thing more annoying than a pedant, is a pedant who gets everything wrong.
What part of the word "evidence" are you having a hard time with? You guys are as full of shit now as you were in 2003, when you ran around smearing anyone who questioned the Iraq war as Saddam supporters.
An email recently released by the whistleblowing organization WikiLeaks shows how the Clinton campaign and Democratic Party bear direct responsibility for propelling the bigoted billionaire to the White House. In its self-described "pied piper" strategy, the Clinton campaign proposed intentionally cultivating extreme right-wing presidential candidates, hoping to turn them into the new "mainstream of the Republican Party" in order to try to increase Clinton's chances of winning. The Clinton campaign and Democratic National Committee called for using far-right candidates "as a cudgel to move the more established candidates further to the right." Clinton's camp insisted that Trump and other extremists should be "elevated" to "leaders of the pack" and media outlets should be told to "take them seriously." The strategy backfired â" royally.
So, it was Hillary, a right-wing incompetent Democrat (like I said the first time) who worked to get Trump nominated.
JFK slashed taxes, sent thousands of "advisors" to continue France's colonialist occupation of Vietnam, and lied his ass off about a "missile gap", that dramatically escalated the cold war. He also forgot to mention in his televised speech on Cuba that the entire reason the USSR wanted to place missiles there was to counter the nuclear-armed Jupiter missiles the United States had just installed in Turkey. He was also happy to play the racist card in a primary debate: "You say you are going to take ten thousand black people and move them into Orange County? It is just going to be catastrophic."
All right-wing actions, not left wing.
Every Democrat today is a hundred miles to the left of JFK.
Certifiable. Democratic leadership, starting with Clinton has been to the right of Reagan. Bill signed a laundry list of massive deregulatory and corporate trade bills that Ronnie could have only dreamed of. He also passed draconian crime bills that tripped the prison population, militarized the police and threw gays under the bus for 15 years with DOMA. Hell, he even tried privatizing Social Security long before Bush did. And then Hillbots had the gall to attack Sanders as being weak on minorities.
Speaking of Ronnie, Reaganism didn't begin with him. It began with Carter. Deregulating the trucking and airline industries, appealing to right-wing Christians and attacked Ford for being soft on the USSR. Oh, and he was also happy to play the racist card: "I see nothing wrong with ethnic purity being maintained. I would not force a racial integration of a neighborhood by government action."
Right. Wing.
Modern Democrats are totally bonkers, and blah blah blah blah blah
Repeal the 22nd Amendment, resurrect Reagan and he'd be the liberal in a three way race between himself, Obama and Hillary in 2020. Reagan insisted Social Security had nothing to do with the deficit; Obama wanted to cut benefits as part of deficit "reduction". Obama took Romneycare national, started a war with Libya without authorization from Congress (something his own VP threatened Bush with impeachment for if he did the same thing to Iran), fought his own party to pass the TPP, went to the right of the GOP with his "sequester" austerity. Obama also tripled the Afghanistan occupation, tried extending the Iraq occupation past the deal Bush made with Iraq, bombed three times as many countries as Bush, overthrew the democracies of Honduras and Ukraine, and repeated the Iraq "mistake" in both Syria and Libya. And Hillary is even more right wing than he is.
So please, at long last, stop with this silliness. We are doing nothing. Nothing, nothing, nothing.
Is this sarcasm? So hard to tell these days. The Russiagate nonsense is nothing more than Democrats having their turn at bullshit partisan witch hunts. They have just as much evidence as the Birther nutjobs who spent the late nineties insisting that Bill Clinton had Vince Foster shot, because reasons.
Since the Truman Doctrine was instituted (you know, Democratic President Harry Truman), Democratic and Republican Administrations
Yes, bipartisan, right-wing imperialistic warmongers. What about them?
have both made containment a cornerstone of their dealings with the Kremlin
Yes, containment. On one side you have a country that overthrew dozens of democracies during the Cold War and got six million people killed just between the Korean and Vietnam invasions....and over there was the USSR.
Even in the post-Soviet era, while cooperation increased, the US still sought to maintain and even enlarge NATO.
And them some people scratch their heads when the US overthrows another democracy, this one right on Russia's doorstep.
That is, up until the current *Republican* Administration.
Yes, because if you don't support starting World War 3 over issues entirely of your own making, you must be a Putin fanboy. Because reasons.
The Left has a firm chokehold on EVERY button of the "societal machine"
You mean Democrats. Democrats are not left wing. Democrats are right wing. Democrats despise people who work for a living just as much as Republicans do, they're just less honest about it.
which is the reason Trump was elected
Trump was elected because Hillary was nominated. Hillary, who was a right-wing trainwreck of incompetence, warmongering and corruption.
right wing lunatics were not regularly killing police, smashing stores, burning things... Antifa and BLM are meanwhile happily doing all those things
Antifa and BLM are regularly killing police? On what planet?
...who have used race baiting against working whites in the same way white supremacists attack black and latinos. It's an inversion of LBJ's famous observation about poor southern whites:
"If you can convince the lowest white man he's better than the best colored man, he won't notice you're picking his pocket. Hell, give him somebody to look down on, and he'll empty his pockets for you."
Only instead of getting poor whites to resent minorities who have never done a thing to them, it's getting poor minorities to resent white people who have never done anything to them. And all the while, the fine folks at COINTELPRO are laughing their asses off as people ignore the deep state crony capitalists hiding behind the curtain.
If you think it's a bullshit argument, why was the "yes" side blatantly overrepresented in the 2014 attempt? Nobody seriously believes 80% of Catalonians are pro-independence.
I'm not the AC, but maybe because there isn't an argument so far other than that the result was lopsided and not liked by some people. Where was the election tampering? Were there credible accusations of ballot stuffing or manipulating electronic votes? Shenanigans like we see in the United States, where poll hours and locations are limited where people are more likely to vote for a certain side? Drawing up a voter purge list a la Florida in 2000 where almost all of the people on the list weren't actually felons?
If it was a case of the union side boycotting the vote out of petulance - like the right wing in Venezuela that deliberately sat out the elections for the constituent assembly and is now whining about its make up - then maybe they should have gotten their asses to the polls.
Not as impressive as your level of pedantry. What makes you think he's only talking about a small time period? And it's not as if many other occupied countries haven't gained their independence from foreign empires. Kenya, India, Vietnam, Philippines....
Spitting them out at the nearest mirror? For the third time: workers and consumers aren't benefiting from these corporate trade laws, only corporations are. Wal-Mart importing cheap crap from China isn't benefitting consumers, it's benefitting Wal-Mart's profits. The only exports that are up are from weapons manufacturers and agriculture dumping subsidized products into markets like Mexico. That has bankrupted millions of Mexican farmers, fueling both immigrants trying to cross the border as well as the drug trade.
Some part of "not benefiting workers or consumers" that you're having a hard time getting? Still, nothing a few years of honest labor wont fix for you.
Police can legally compel you to disclose the correct finger to use, by way of destruction of evidence charges against you by using a self-destruct option by way of an incorrect print. You will be charged with the original crime, destruction of evidence, and interference of the investigation.
Uh huh. Sure it's not a case of "the police can legally lie to you about all this shit they claim is the law"?
Wait, I agree with a '+5 Insightful' post, even thank him when we usually disagree on many if not most topics, and I get modded 'Troll'?
Well, I would say it was a butthurt Hillbot with modpoints, but I'm still sitting at a +2, so who knows. But it sounds like we can agree on her being a loathsome person, so I will raise a glass and toast to her sharing Kristian Saucier's fine accommodations, and for the same reasons he did.
You fuckheads said the same thing about anyone who questioned the Iraq war, smearing them as Saddam supporters. You were full of shit then, and you are full of shit now.
Uh, you first, Slick. Hillary Clinton was a complete and utter trainwreck of corrupt warmongering incompetence. Anyone with two neurons to rub together would want her as faaaaar from any position of power as possible. Now you take that, plus an alleged crack about getting someone murdered - it wouldn't be the first time - and you think said person wouldn't have a perfectly valid self-interest in seeing that person lose an election?
And that's assuming his decision was in any way influenced by threatened by a drone. Most of the commentary on Assange's character and motivations is mindless, drooling character assassination. This is not an exception.
Sorry, but a guy who injected himself in the election specifically because he personally didn't like a candidate deserves that title.
A corrupt, incompetent candidate who allegedly said "can't we just drone this guy"? Golly Gee, I wonder why Assange might not like her. Were you whining, though, that Assange "just didn't like Bush" when he was publishing information about that president's war crimes?
Nah, it's your fault for coming up with a list of "absolute retards" after the PP said "no absolute retards". Quotes used because I know a couple of disabled people, so I prefer the term "fuckwits", myself.
Slashdot Mirror
So not only are you a petulant pedant, you're one who doesn't bother to read or comprehend the obvious. You must be a charmer at parties.
The topic was rebellions against empires. What was off topic was your pointless pedantry on the fall of the (western) Roman Empire as the parent poster didn't say anything about it.
So you're a wannabe history pedant who hasn't heard of the Philippine Revolution, Churchills torture camps in Kenya, or that the Indian independence movement carried the threat of force as well as peaceful protest. Why don't you pick up some history books on your way to get some medication for all your uptight, retentive, pointless wankery.
Because the only thing more annoying than a pedant, is a pedant who gets everything wrong.
What part of the word "evidence" are you having a hard time with? You guys are as full of shit now as you were in 2003, when you ran around smearing anyone who questioned the Iraq war as Saddam supporters.
FTFY:
So, it was Hillary, a right-wing incompetent Democrat (like I said the first time) who worked to get Trump nominated.
JFK slashed taxes, sent thousands of "advisors" to continue France's colonialist occupation of Vietnam, and lied his ass off about a "missile gap", that dramatically escalated the cold war. He also forgot to mention in his televised speech on Cuba that the entire reason the USSR wanted to place missiles there was to counter the nuclear-armed Jupiter missiles the United States had just installed in Turkey. He was also happy to play the racist card in a primary debate: "You say you are going to take ten thousand black people and move them into Orange County? It is just going to be catastrophic."
All right-wing actions, not left wing.
Certifiable. Democratic leadership, starting with Clinton has been to the right of Reagan. Bill signed a laundry list of massive deregulatory and corporate trade bills that Ronnie could have only dreamed of. He also passed draconian crime bills that tripped the prison population, militarized the police and threw gays under the bus for 15 years with DOMA. Hell, he even tried privatizing Social Security long before Bush did. And then Hillbots had the gall to attack Sanders as being weak on minorities.
Speaking of Ronnie, Reaganism didn't begin with him. It began with Carter. Deregulating the trucking and airline industries, appealing to right-wing Christians and attacked Ford for being soft on the USSR. Oh, and he was also happy to play the racist card: "I see nothing wrong with ethnic purity being maintained. I would not force a racial integration of a neighborhood by government action."
Right. Wing.
Repeal the 22nd Amendment, resurrect Reagan and he'd be the liberal in a three way race between himself, Obama and Hillary in 2020. Reagan insisted Social Security had nothing to do with the deficit; Obama wanted to cut benefits as part of deficit "reduction". Obama took Romneycare national, started a war with Libya without authorization from Congress (something his own VP threatened Bush with impeachment for if he did the same thing to Iran), fought his own party to pass the TPP, went to the right of the GOP with his "sequester" austerity. Obama also tripled the Afghanistan occupation, tried extending the Iraq occupation past the deal Bush made with Iraq, bombed three times as many countries as Bush, overthrew the democracies of Honduras and Ukraine, and repeated the Iraq "mistake" in both Syria and Libya. And Hillary is even more right wing than he is.
Right. Wing.
Is this sarcasm? So hard to tell these days. The Russiagate nonsense is nothing more than Democrats having their turn at bullshit partisan witch hunts. They have just as much evidence as the Birther nutjobs who spent the late nineties insisting that Bill Clinton had Vince Foster shot, because reasons.
Yes, bipartisan, right-wing imperialistic warmongers. What about them?
Yes, containment. On one side you have a country that overthrew dozens of democracies during the Cold War and got six million people killed just between the Korean and Vietnam invasions....and over there was the USSR.
And them some people scratch their heads when the US overthrows another democracy, this one right on Russia's doorstep.
Yes, because if you don't support starting World War 3 over issues entirely of your own making, you must be a Putin fanboy. Because reasons.
You mean Democrats. Democrats are not left wing. Democrats are right wing. Democrats despise people who work for a living just as much as Republicans do, they're just less honest about it.
Trump was elected because Hillary was nominated. Hillary, who was a right-wing trainwreck of incompetence, warmongering and corruption.
Antifa and BLM are regularly killing police? On what planet?
Keep fucking the Franco chicken, AC.
...who have used race baiting against working whites in the same way white supremacists attack black and latinos. It's an inversion of LBJ's famous observation about poor southern whites:
Only instead of getting poor whites to resent minorities who have never done a thing to them, it's getting poor minorities to resent white people who have never done anything to them. And all the while, the fine folks at COINTELPRO are laughing their asses off as people ignore the deep state crony capitalists hiding behind the curtain.
I'm not the AC, but maybe because there isn't an argument so far other than that the result was lopsided and not liked by some people. Where was the election tampering? Were there credible accusations of ballot stuffing or manipulating electronic votes? Shenanigans like we see in the United States, where poll hours and locations are limited where people are more likely to vote for a certain side? Drawing up a voter purge list a la Florida in 2000 where almost all of the people on the list weren't actually felons?
If it was a case of the union side boycotting the vote out of petulance - like the right wing in Venezuela that deliberately sat out the elections for the constituent assembly and is now whining about its make up - then maybe they should have gotten their asses to the polls.
Doesn't change the fact the South started the war to keep slaves, either.
Not as impressive as your level of pedantry. What makes you think he's only talking about a small time period? And it's not as if many other occupied countries haven't gained their independence from foreign empires. Kenya, India, Vietnam, Philippines....
Spitting them out at the nearest mirror? For the third time: workers and consumers aren't benefiting from these corporate trade laws, only corporations are. Wal-Mart importing cheap crap from China isn't benefitting consumers, it's benefitting Wal-Mart's profits. The only exports that are up are from weapons manufacturers and agriculture dumping subsidized products into markets like Mexico. That has bankrupted millions of Mexican farmers, fueling both immigrants trying to cross the border as well as the drug trade.
Some part of "not benefiting workers or consumers" that you're having a hard time getting? Still, nothing a few years of honest labor wont fix for you.
How.
FTFY. Nafta bankrupted not only American factory workers, but millions of Mexican farmers, just as one example of the "wonders" of free trade.
So your "both sides" consists of importers and exporters. Not workers or consumers. Another capitalist in need of a gulag...
Uh huh. Sure it's not a case of "the police can legally lie to you about all this shit they claim is the law"?
Well, I would say it was a butthurt Hillbot with modpoints, but I'm still sitting at a +2, so who knows. But it sounds like we can agree on her being a loathsome person, so I will raise a glass and toast to her sharing Kristian Saucier's fine accommodations, and for the same reasons he did.
You fuckheads said the same thing about anyone who questioned the Iraq war, smearing them as Saddam supporters. You were full of shit then, and you are full of shit now.
Uh, you first, Slick. Hillary Clinton was a complete and utter trainwreck of corrupt warmongering incompetence. Anyone with two neurons to rub together would want her as faaaaar from any position of power as possible. Now you take that, plus an alleged crack about getting someone murdered - it wouldn't be the first time - and you think said person wouldn't have a perfectly valid self-interest in seeing that person lose an election?
And that's assuming his decision was in any way influenced by threatened by a drone. Most of the commentary on Assange's character and motivations is mindless, drooling character assassination. This is not an exception.
A corrupt, incompetent candidate who allegedly said "can't we just drone this guy"? Golly Gee, I wonder why Assange might not like her. Were you whining, though, that Assange "just didn't like Bush" when he was publishing information about that president's war crimes?
Nah, it's your fault for coming up with a list of "absolute retards" after the PP said "no absolute retards". Quotes used because I know a couple of disabled people, so I prefer the term "fuckwits", myself.
Moronic ones, that's who. Or Swiftoating ratfuckers. Messing with other countries is what you do.
Handpicked spooks chosen by a professional liar who committed perjury does not mean "widely believed".