# Outside the Box > Philosophy and Debate >  >  Random Political Thoughts

## Lunaire

This thread is for posting thoughts you have about any political events around the globe.

_Ground Rules:
Civil discussion and debate is welcome.Personal attacks, insults, or sweeping generalizations will not be tolerated.Moderators are community volunteers and their opinions do not necessarily reflect the views of Anxiety Space as a whole.
_

----------


## Cage

Australian's video game censorship is outrageous and UK's porn restriction list of BDSM is outrageous. Thanks politics for infringing on the rights of citizens to choose to do things as consenting adults.

----------


## Otherside

I might need a lot of alchohol Thursday night. I fear we're doomed however this election turns out. They're all going to doom us. All of them. We're just doomed.

----------


## Cuchculan

> I might need a lot of alchohol Thursday night. I fear we're doomed however this election turns out. They're all going to doom us. All of them. We're just doomed.



The EU are not going to make it any easier on the UK. They have made that very clear. Make an example of the first country to jump ship. If May does get back in it will be more of the same. She has said exactly what she has planned for the future. Now with all these attacks it might just help her get elected. Other parties want to remain in the EU with the open borders. All this latest stuff is playing right into her hands. Case of how tough she reacts over the coming week to what has happened over the past two weeks. The public want a swift tough reaction. I am sure she is fully aware of this. Her team will be telling her how she can cost this election. Based on the horrible events that we have seen over there. I am sure other parties will use them too. But how can you spin it if you want to remain in the EU? Look forward to watching that one. The public are on high alert and have this major fear at the moment. Sit back and watch May use that fear. She wants to be seen as another Thatcher like Iron Lady. But we all saw the celebrations when Thatcher died. When she was in power she took no crap. May is trying to do the exact same thing.

----------


## Otherside

> The EU are not going to make it any easier on the UK. They have made that very clear. Make an example of the first country to jump ship. If May does get back in it will be more of the same. She has said exactly what she has planned for the future. Now with all these attacks it might just help her get elected. Other parties want to remain in the EU with the open borders. All this latest stuff is playing right into her hands. Case of how tough she reacts over the coming week to what has happened over the past two weeks. The public want a swift tough reaction. I am sure she is fully aware of this. Her team will be telling her how she can cost this election. Based on the horrible events that we have seen over there. I am sure other parties will use them too. But how can you spin it if you want to remain in the EU? Look forward to watching that one. The public are on high alert and have this major fear at the moment. Sit back and watch May use that fear. She wants to be seen as another Thatcher like Iron Lady. But we all saw the celebrations when Thatcher died. When she was in power she took no crap. May is trying to do the exact same thing.



Oh May will get elected. She would have done without Manchester and London. 

After all, who's the other option? Corbyn? Sure, he's got his heart in the right place, but the problem is, he's just not liked, and people worry that he'll be bankrupt the country.

Any other person in the opposition and the with the shitshow of a campaign that May has done, and Labour would have won. All her campaign has been is slogans such as "Brexit means Brexit", "Strong and Stable", "Forward Together." She's also screwed up a lot during her time in power. She backtracked on a tax rise for the self-employed, having to apologize when people angrilly pointed out that it went against a manifesto pledge in 2015. She's...not quite backtracked on a policy whereby people will have to pay large amounts for there care when they're older, taken from the sale of there house after there death. A lot of people are angry about that, and rightly so. I'm angry. That will affect my parents if she gets in. They've worked there entire lives, they're reaching retirement. They're put in years of taxation payments, told that they'd get this when they came to retire, they'd get the help they needed. Now they're being told that this isn't the case. 

May may be trying to be Thatcher, but she doesn't have it in her. She can't stand up to Trump. She can't even face a debate and defend her own policies. She can't answer difficult questions such as "Why are nurses unable to afford to buy food on there monthly salaries and having to rely on food banks?".

----------


## CloudMaker

Starting to get tired of the wins!

"It is time to put Youngstown, Ohio, Detroit, Michigan, and Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, along with many, many other locations within our great country before Paris, France," Trump said. "It is time to make America great again."

I believe global warming is real, but the cause of it is still under debate. That agreement was horrible IMO and a step further towards Agenda 21 and the destruction of the United States so I'm glad Trump pulled out....Likewise with NATO. Why have we continued to help Europe so they can have better medical care........education........etc?

The cold war was declared over......time for them to provide their own defense.

----------


## Cuchculan

> Starting to get tired of the wins!
> 
> "It is time to put Youngstown, Ohio, Detroit, Michigan, and Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, along with many, many other locations within our great country before Paris, France," Trump said. "It is time to make America great again."
> 
> I believe global warming is real, but the cause of it is still under debate. That agreement was horrible IMO and a step further towards Agenda 21 and the destruction of the United States so I'm glad Trump pulled out....Likewise with NATO. Why have we continued to help Europe so they can have better medical care........education........etc?
> 
> The cold war was declared over......time for them to provide their own defense.



So if the British and other Nations pulled out of Iraq tomorrow and Afghanistan and left just the US, you would also be happy with that? Considering you seem to want to be left alone and to do your own thing. Good luck with that one.

----------


## CloudMaker

> So if the British and other Nations pulled out of Iraq tomorrow and Afghanistan and left just the US, you would also be happy with that? Considering you seem to want to be left alone and to do your own thing. Good luck with that one.



IDK America doesn't need the British in Iraq. America spends $650 billion a year in military... british spend $58 billion.... we will be just fine without them.

----------


## CloudMaker

I'm angry about Trump kicking Bannon out.
Steve Bannon is the real deal.
It may have been a smart move towards North Korea and China aggression and also silences Democrats saying he's in bed with Putin.

I don't want America interfering with the Middle East.  It's a huge mistake IMO.

Our idiot senile old Governor pushed through a 12 cent gas tax!!!!  JEBUS i hate it.
Only 2% of the collected (already higher than any state) tax will go to road improvement the rest the crooks in Sacramento can spend as they want!!!!
I was at Winco today and a Asian dude in front of me went on a rant about the grocery bag tax and the gas tax..........so I joined in.   I said I can hardly wait to retire and move out of this shitty state..........an leave the non taxpayer illegals......he said yeah! I'm so sick of this [BEEP]!!

Good God they are killing us!

----------


## Cuchculan

> IDK America doesn't need the British in Iraq. America spends $650 billion a year in military... british spend $58 billion.... we will be just fine without them.



America would be stretched to breaking point without the help of other Countries in the many Countries they have decided to invade. It was meant to be a quick war. What are we at now? 12 or 13 years? If America is so good by itself, why has it gone on this long? With all their might you think they would have won, whatever they are trying to win by now. 

As for healthcare systems in Europe? I live in Ireland, not part of the UK, but the UK healthcare system sucks. One of the worst out there. Just as bad as the one in Ireland. 

Dare I mention Guantanamo Bay? Another US invention. Interment without trial and release date. You know the founder of ISIS was a prisoner there for 4 years. Tortured on a regular basis. I am sure when set free he didn't think ' bless them, they have set me free '. That place only served into the hands of the likes of ISIS. That gave them support and a large number of new members. 

I do believe you will get your wish, with the US been on its own. More because all the world leaders hate Trump. If he wants to go it alone they won't try and stop him. Europe is suffering more at the hands of ISIS over the actions of your great country. The same people you want away from, the British, over the past few weeks. Good to see how much you really care about them.

----------


## CloudMaker

> America would be stretched to breaking point without the help of other Countries in the many Countries they have decided to invade. It was meant to be a quick war. What are we at now? 12 or 13 years? If America is so good by itself, why has it gone on this long? With all their might you think they would have won, whatever they are trying to win by now. 
> 
> As for healthcare systems in Europe? I live in Ireland, not part of the UK, but the UK healthcare system sucks. One of the worst out there. Just as bad as the one in Ireland. 
> 
> Dare I mention Guantanamo Bay? Another US invention. Interment without trial and release date. You know the founder of ISIS was a prisoner there for 4 years. Tortured on a regular basis. I am sure when set free he didn't think ' bless them, they have set me free '. That place only served into the hands of the likes of ISIS. That gave them support and a large number of new members. 
> 
> I do believe you will get your wish, with the US been on its own. More because all the world leaders hate Trump. If he wants to go it alone they won't try and stop him. Europe is suffering more at the hands of ISIS over the actions of your great country. The same people you want away from, the British, over the past few weeks. Good to see how much you really care about them.



We wouldnt be stretched to breaking point if we stayed out of other countries. We should be defending ourselves not europe.

IDK about the middle east. we shouldn't be there.... it only has gone on so long because we care about civillian casualties. we could level the whole middle east if we needed to.

I dont like guantanomo either... We shouldnt be letting terrorists go after getting information. I believe in capital punishment. Some people deserve it.

----------


## CloudMaker

I hope trump reduces the federal government by 90% at least.
I hate the "Education" department......that has never "educated" anything or anyone...in fact.....people are dumber and softer than any time in history!

I hate the EPA when they constantly decide you and your children and grandchildren should pay for being successful, and they can't tell you what causes global warming, but they want you to pay for it anyway!

----------


## Cuchculan

We wouldn't be stretched to breaking point if we stayed out of other countries. We should be defending ourselves not europe?

I don't see the US army in Europe defending it at all? If anything they only use Europe for their air force bases. Without the use of such bases they would be stuck. Invading other countries was their own idea. Nobody put them up to it. Trust me many an innocent civilian life has been lost in these countries. Heck even have friendly fire. Killing your own troops. Problem in Iraq was simple. Pick a leader. Leave him there until you don't want him in power any more. Then move in to get rid of him. Put somebody new in power. Is more about greed. Natural resources. Oil to be precise. You started the whole mess off. So you are not defending Europe, you are only making things worse for Europe when they run to help you out.

----------


## Otherside

From someone who actually lives in Britain/Europe. 

"Defending Europe". Against what, exactly? What are you defending us against? There is not a war on our doorstep.

As for Iraq, ironically, you asked us to come along. It was not the US asking you to come join. 

As for the "less money spent on defense" issue - of course there is less money spent. The UK is significantly smaller than the US. There is less people. Less people therefore means less tax money goes into the governments coffer to pay for this defense, and there are less people in said country who are recruited as solders. You want something comparable? Yes, you spend more of your GDP on defense than we do. But the UK has met (and is paying more than) the NATO requirement of 2% (We pay 2.21 :: . 


As for better education and healthcare...both of them are lacking at the moment. Our healthcare service is in crisis. You need an op? Get put on a 12 month waiting list, good luck getting one sooner. Call 999 for an ambulance? You may find yourself listening to hold music. If you're lucky, an ambulance will be free when you finally do get through. Gotta see a consultant? Waiting list. Ever need to go to A&E? You've probably got a 6 hour wait ahead of you. Get taken into the hospital in an ambulance? Well, this winter was problematic for that. There wasn't enough beds for the people that got taken in. People were lying in the corridors, on the chairs in the waiting rooms, and on the floors. We've got hospitals shutting left right and centre as a "cost shutting initiative" meaning that the nearest one for some people is a three hour journey. We've got nurses leaving there jobs because the pay no longer is enough to feed themselves for a month on, and moving to stacking shelves in Tesco. Trainee Doctors are moving abroad because they're not happy with the conditions they've got to deal with when they go to work. I could go on and on. 

Education? Constant rising fees, universities offering staff voluntary redundancies and asking if they'll take a paycut. Class sizes in schools are on the rise decreasing the quality of education, some schools have been found to be being radicalized by the parents on the governing board, and schools can't pay for the essentials at times, and have turned to asking parents/ex students to make a monthly contribution by direct debit (I actually get calls from my old secondary school asking if I'd like to donate.) 

I must be living in some alternative Britain if "Education and Health" has been improved by the American military that is apparently here. If anything, education and health has gotten worse over the last two decades or so.

----------


## CloudMaker

> From someone who actually lives in Britain/Europe. 
> 
> "Defending Europe". Against what, exactly? What are you defending us against? There is not a war on our doorstep.
> 
> As for Iraq, ironically, you asked us to come along. It was not the US asking you to come join. 
> 
> As for the "less money spent on defense" issue - of course there is less money spent. The UK is significantly smaller than the US. There is less people. Less people therefore means less tax money goes into the governments coffer to pay for this defense, and there are less people in said country who are recruited as solders. You want something comparable? Yes, you spend more of your GDP on defense than we do. But the UK has met (and is paying more than) the NATO requirement of 2% (We pay 2.21. 
> 
> 
> ...



Thats my point. Lots of bases in europe are from the cold war era.....cold war is over. America should focus on itself, not on NATO. Your graph shows most of europe doesnt even meet their agreed to 2%.....but we have to pay for them. SAD!

I dont have health insurance. I work two jobs 30 hours each both part time.... no benefits because each is part time. Last time I went to a hospital was a 14 hour wait just to see a nurse....it costs over $2000 just to call an ambulance..i work so hard but cant afford that. THATS NOT EVEN COST OF TREATMENT....JUST THE AMBULANCE RIDE! If I ever get badly hurt i will just die....never be able to afford any kind of major treatment.

----------


## Otherside

> Thats my point. Lots of bases in europe are from the cold war era.....cold war is over. America should focus on itself, not on NATO. Your graph shows most of europe doesnt even meet their agreed to 2%.....but we have to pay for them. SAD!
> 
> I dont have health insurance. I work two jobs 30 hours each both part time.... no benefits because each is part time. Last time I went to a hospital was a 14 hour wait just to see a nurse....it costs over $2000 just to call an ambulance..i work so hard but cant afford that. THATS NOT EVEN COST OF TREATMENT....JUST THE AMBULANCE RIDE! If I ever get badly hurt i will just die....never be able to afford any kind of major treatment.



You're making no sense here. On one hand, you're complaining about the lack of defense in Europe. On the other hand, you're going on about the cold war and how the  cold war era is over, and so the defenses are no longer needed. 

Yes, the graph shows that only five countries - including the US - are paying there fair share. I don't dispute that. 

Countries have military bases abroad. That has little to with what the  Soviet Union did a couple of decades ago. America is not the only  country to have military bases abroad. It's hardly unique in that respect, and hardly gets the title of "Defender of the World" or even "Defender of Europe" simply for sticking a few military bases on the continent. 

Personally, I'm fine with America deciding it wants to focus on itself. I'm not alone in that opinion right now. As Cuchcullan said, nobody will stop Trump if he decides to isolate himself. The majority of world leaders do not think much of him, and will not stop him. They are already not interested in renegotiating Paris with him, as he seems to want. They will not beg America to stick around. 

You've made it quite clear who you support politically, and that's fine. But it's been quite clear for a long time - even pre-election - what his intentions were regarding healthcare, and they were not involving benevolent, cheap (or even free), universal healthcare coverage. If that's what you wanted, then it's not Trump that you should be supporting. Regardless, I'm not sure what this has to do with this anyway, or why you're even trying to start a "who has it worse". 

And no, money that the US could be using is not funding state-sponsored healthcare in Europe.

----------


## Lunaire

> We wouldn't be stretched to breaking point if we stayed out of other countries. We should be defending ourselves not europe?
> 
> I don't see the US army in Europe defending it at all? If anything they only use Europe for their air force bases. Without the use of such bases they would be stuck. Invading other countries was their own idea. Nobody put them up to it. Trust me many an innocent civilian life has been lost in these countries. Heck even have friendly fire. Killing your own troops. *Problem in Iraq was simple. Pick a leader. Leave him there until you don't want him in power any more. Then move in to get rid of him. Put somebody new in power.* Is more about greed. Natural resources. Oil to be precise. You started the whole mess off. So you are not defending Europe, you are only making things worse for Europe when they run to help you out.



To clarify your position which I've put in bold -- are you proposing that the United States should place a non-democratically-elected government in charge of Iraq?

If so, what would this kind of government setup look like? And how would the United States remove them from power without maintaining a presence there and disrupting local stability?

----------


## Cuchculan

> To clarify your position which I've put in bold -- are you proposing that the United States should place a non-democratically-elected government in charge of Iraq?
> 
> If so, what would this kind of government setup look like? And how would the United States remove them from power without maintaining a presence there and disrupting local stability?



Have they not done that in the past? Supported groups to overthrow a certain leader. Then arm the newer group. Then have the same weapons used against them years later. When they want a change of leader yet again. Afghanistan is one example of this. Lot of the weapons used against the US were US weapons. Plus old soviet weapons. Same with Iraq. They are fractions to take on the person in power. Why? They simply want that person out of power. Hence we have dictators in these countries most of the time. Not elected people. Elections never worked in those countries. People simply didn't vote. Because they were told not to. By warlords and the likes. Democratic governments never worked in these countries. Person in power picks who they want in their government. If you happen to get in and they don't want you in, you would simply vanish. Choices, choices. Put somebody in power or let someone take over power who might be a real monster?

----------


## Lunaire

> Have they not done that in the past? Supported groups to overthrow a certain leader. Then arm the newer group. Then have the same weapons used against them years later. When they want a change of leader yet again. Afghanistan is one example of this. Lot of the weapons used against the US were US weapons. Plus old soviet weapons. Same with Iraq. They are fractions to take on the person in power. Why? They simply want that person out of power. Hence we have dictators in these countries most of the time. Not elected people. Elections never worked in those countries. People simply didn't vote. Because they were told not to. By warlords and the likes. Democratic governments never worked in these countries. Person in power picks who they want in their government. If you happen to get in and they don't want you in, you would simply vanish. Choices, choices. Put somebody in power or let someone take over power who might be a real monster?



Thanks for clarifying your position. I'm not going to state an opinion on the matter and will try to remain as a neutral participant in this thread, though I will be chiming in if I feel that something needs to be clarified or to present material that I feel may be be beneficial to the discussion. 

An example of material you may find useful is this list of United States supported authoritarian regimes from Wikipedia:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List..._United_States

----------


## Cuchculan

My whole thing is what goes on is not official. In Syria you have those against Assad. They have been armed and trained. By who? On paper you will read maybe Turkey as an answer. You won't read Israel. Who were given the weapons by the US. If Assad had not got the backing of Putin he would be long since gone. So the US can't been seen to be taken any official action. There is always a way around this. We go back to Afghanistan again for a second. Russia invaded their country. Who armed those fighting against Russia? The US. It was never on the books. These are the many weapons that were used against them many years later. You will never have a working government in Afghanistan. Too many different ethnic groups. Same with Iraq. One group might hate the other group. Case of who is better than the other? They all might be bad. Might have one that has the backing of the US of other Countries too. They get him into power and he tries to form a government that never works. Then you have ISIS blowing the place up to disrupt everything the West is trying to do. I am talking about in Iraq here. Killing innocent locals. They see them as having sold out to the West. 

Let us exchange links. Go to 1981 on this page. Regan was in power back then. This is what I am on about. Only this was out in the open. Back one leader and then change your mind and what that leader out of power. So back another group to overthrow the original one you helped take power. Because he refused to play ball. This still happens. I am not making this up. Just stating fact. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIA_ac...s_in_Nicaragua

Not picking on the US either. I simply felt the poster who wanted the US left alone for reasons that made no sense was posting pure nonsense. If you have not read the earlier posts they are worth reading. Like the rest of the world is doing wrong. Except the US. Worry not. Is just an exchange of views. Nothing else. We can agree to disagree.

----------


## CloudMaker

So my boss was literally crying when Trump won.
She said Trump  sexually assaulted women...............and I said Clinton did the same, and has actually been convicted and paid for his assaults. Paula Jones. etc.................for the record.

And Hitlery helped  Saudi Arabia where they routinely throw homosexuals off of buildings and treat women as animals and she has taken bribes as Secretary of State! 
She didn't want to hear it.

Pay for play ................that's a cute word for TREASON..... Orwell would be proud!

I don't know how to get through to these idiots.
I really don't.  NAFTA and the TPP has been literal genocide on working class American Citizens.

I pray "lock her up" is a mandate and not a campaign slogan.

----------


## Cuchculan

There is a great documentary on you tube about the Clintons. In it we hear of the people who went against them. Of those people so many have died. Now I can't say they have anything to do with all these deaths. Let us just say it is a higher death rate than normal for people who tried to block the most powerful couple in the US. Most powerful at that time. The deaths happened in different ways. Some were ruled as suicide. Others as accidents. Others have question marks hanging over them. Might all just be conspiracy theory heaven. That a film crew went out of their way to track a lot of dead people back to the Clintons. They certainly all connections in a negative way. I am sure if you visit you tube the video will be easy to find. Makes for interesting viewing if nothing else.

Here is a quick 10 minute video about all the murders. And other deaths. This is the quick version.

----------


## InvisibleGuy

I watched the documentary. I remember the Clinton administration very well, I remember hearing about all these people dying from plane crashes and suicides. Personally, I don't even have a political party anymore, I'm embarrassed by both. I couldn't even bring myself to vote in the 2016 election. Trump both disgusts and embarrasses me. I think some of those deaths in the video were probably accidental but not all. There are just way too many in number and there are too many ironies for them to have all been accidental. There are people who believe this country isn't capable or would never engage in the kind of corrupt, illegal activities other countries engage in, and while I don't get into conspiracy theories, I think if you believe this country doesn't do those kinds of things then you're incredibly naive.

----------


## Cuchculan

One or two deaths you can say ' [BEEP] happens '. Might be nothing at all. Once it begins to reach double figures it begins to make you wonder. Can all these deaths just be accidents and suicides? As I said, it makes for good viewing. Kind of reminds me of the TV show ' The House of Cards '. In that show the President was willing to have people killed who got in his way. Make it look like they done it to themselves or it was just an accident. i am nearly sure the Underwoods are based around the Clintons. In a loose sort of way. Do what you have to do to make things go away.

----------


## Otherside

Do you know, I think we're more doomed than I thought we would be on Thursday after voting. 

- No party has a majority. The previous ruling conservative party lost a large number of seats, plus a majority.

- The Conservative party wants to ally with a Northern Irish party - the DUP - to get a majority and form a government. Ignoring the honestly awful views of the DUP, allying with them may just be illegal, and undermine the entire Irish peace process/Good Friday Agreement (in which the UK gov are guarantors. So why the hell do they think allying with unionists is a grand idea?!) 

- It is also now incredibly hypocritical that the dear PM decided to call her biggest opposition - Corbyn - a "terrorist. sympathiser" - given that she's considering allying with DUP. And who are the DUP associated with? A terrorist group called Ulster Resistance. 

- Also, this is not "Strong and Stable"  We haven't had Stable since Brexit. We have had u-turn after u-turn, and now a general election that has kicked any stability into the gutter. Your campaign was a shambles, and it was as though you decided you'd see if you could win by announcing every single policy that would anger the public (reallow fox hunting when only 5% support that? Really? Or that dementia tax? Or that whole debacle with "let's scrap human rights?"). As you said, "The people have spoken". 

Sent from my D5803 using Tapatalk

----------


## Cuchculan

Just add in the names UDA, UVF, and a few other splinter groups along with that. They hate the Irish. We don't exactly like them either. The worst bombing ever carried out happened in Dublin and was done by those terrorists. They always say they have nothing got to do with them. But that is who votes for them. It will be a disaster for peace in the North of Ireland. The DUP will use it a major victory. In order to power share they will want something in return. That something will favour them in the North over the Catholics.


19030519_1728101670539838_3978259380861315570_n.jpg

----------


## sunrise

Trump's cabinet meeting. Whisky Tango Foxtrot.

----------


## Cuchculan

19059898_1661402427204643_7545628400898479516_n.jpg

----------


## CloudMaker

Maga ftw

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2017...ooked-hillary/

----------


## CloudMaker

I love President Trump, I'm not going to lie.  I would have Loved President Bernie Sanders. But the DNC decided that all of us were to  stupid to vote and put the Clintons up again.
Trump; is the best hope we have.
I hate the Democrats..
I Love Trump.  I hope he stays in office and pisses off everyone.
He's the  [BEEP] in the  punchbowl.

MAGA

----------


## InvisibleGuy

^ Honestly, you are of course entitled to your opinion, I'm entitled to mine. I can't stand him. I work with people, and have family members that voted for him, and the overwhelming majority of them think he's an embarrassment and a fool and a complete fucking moron. I really don't know where to begin. The things he says get him into a lot of trouble of course, but it's more disconcerting to me that he means what he says, he opens his mouth and says what he's actually thinking (not out of sarcasm or trying to be funny or anything like that) and that's pretty scary.

I don't agree with a lot of his policies either. Just as an example...why in the [BEEP] would you try to end a school lunch program for children? The rationale behind the changes is that healthy lunches are just ending up in the trash. So. Using that logic, we should feed our kids candy bars and ice cream for lunch every day. It doesn't make sense, even a five year old could point out the faulty logic there lmao.

He wants to of course undo ObamaCare....and I agree it's a very broken system, but why not come up with an alternative, ffs?

He withdrew the United States from the Paris Agreement. It is literally Donald Trump vs the rest of the world on that issue, I don't know of anyone who thinks that's a very smart idea, and I'm including my Republican friends.

He's a fucking idiot, and imo he doesn't even qualify to be a Congressman, much less POTUS.

----------


## CloudMaker

So I worked with this total anti-Trump woman Saturday and she started to bombard me with how the Russians were involved in our elections, and I said "you know we  the US has been involved in so many elections.........and even installed people that the citizens never wanted.  and then I said I'm more worried about our own Government than anything Putin could do.
She was pissed off for awhile, and then thought about it...........and told me I'm right!  LOL

I'm known as the Trump person at the library. They all sort of come to me and spew hateful stuff...........and then I ask them why the DNC didn't pick Saunders...........If the DNC would have picked anyone except the Clintons they would have won the election.......but they didn't and now everyone knows how evil and corrupt  they are!
Trump hates Bezo and Amazon BTW.
He tried to make a deal with the China version of Amazon.
Amazon has major DOD funding.

----------


## fetisha

I don't mean to be negative but America is hopeless, no president is ever going to make this country better.

----------


## CloudMaker

Today while I was driving home I saw a house with MAGA and American flags and TRUMP written on the garage.
There are a lot of us here.
The library was sort of half and half.  The half that wanted Hillary and the higher gas taxes are still living at home with their parents at the age of 40!
Of course California is a paradise to them!  If I didn't have to pay my own way I would love it here too.
Trump is a idiot, but still an open question in my mind.
Clinton is a proven idiot criminal rapist and thief.
The choice was very easy for me.
I have no regrets.

----------


## Cuchculan

So who exactly did Hilary rape again?

----------


## CloudMaker

> So who exactly did Hilary rape again?



http://pizzagate.wiki/Hillary_Clinton

----------


## Cuchculan

Lot of connections allegedly to a lot of shady people. Investigated it said, but no convictions? We could all easily say this person done that and that person done this. In never convicted they are not what people claim they are. I am no fan of hers in any way, shape or form. Just a lot of things we have heard and nothing ever proven. Same with a lot of other people out there. Makes for good reading. Until they are ever convicted of anything they are innocent in my eyes.

----------


## sunrise

Polish government working hard to make Trump feel welcomed:  "Government leaders have even promised to bus in throngs of people from rural Poland ? the heart of the ruling party?s support ? to cheer the American president as he delivers a speech Thursday in the less-supportive capital city of Warsaw." 

 Pathetic. 

 "Since Law and Justice took power in 2015, the party has been accused of pushing anti-democratic changes, engaging in press restrictions, moving to constrict women?s reproductive rights and stifling the teaching of evolution and climate change in schools."     Sounds like their government is moving in the same direction as ours.

----------


## Otherside

> Polish government working hard to make Trump feel welcomed:  "Government leaders have even promised to bus in throngs of people from rural Poland ? the heart of the ruling party?s support ? to cheer the American president as he delivers a speech Thursday in the less-supportive capital city of Warsaw." 
> 
>  Pathetic. 
> 
>  "Since Law and Justice took power in 2015, the party has been accused of pushing anti-democratic changes, engaging in press restrictions, moving to constrict women?s reproductive rights and stifling the teaching of evolution and climate change in schools."     Sounds like their government is moving in the same direction as ours.



Yeah a lot of Europe doesn't like Trump much at the moment. He's apparently delayed a state visit to the UK until "we like him more" in fear of being photographed alongside large protests in London or something. I suppose the photos would be embarrassing for him or something.

Must want some nice photos saying "Look I'm likeable in Europe!". Can't imagine two of the big players in the EU (Germany/France), who've already made it clear that they really don't like Trump, will be pleased with Poland after this. 

Sent from my D5803 using Tapatalk

----------


## kevinjoseph

Lol I just read this thread and the one that spawned it.  Pretty good stuff

----------


## JamieWAgain

I'm so, so, so, so tired of the media on both sides.
I WANT OUR COUNTRY TO GET BACK TO WORK. LET OUR LEADER LEAD.
Stepping off my pedestal, but really, we are in a horrible place right now, politically.

----------


## CloudMaker

So I worked today with 2 people......one who is over 40 and still lives at home with her "mama" and one who is my age, but has a husband that's a scientist at the lab.

They were both LOL'ing about Sean Spicer....and then I said to them................:isn't he in the National Guard?  Isn't he doing his duty?  and then then had to stop at look at me ashamed.
I so hate these entitled idiots.
Even if Trump gets nothing accomplished , I'm still happier than if that idiot Hillary got in there.

----------


## kevinjoseph

What makes these people 'entitled' cloudmaker?

----------


## InvisibleGuy

:popcorn:

----------


## CloudMaker

> What makes these people 'entitled' cloudmaker?



one is over 40 and lives with her mother and think the world owes her everything. Sad.

----------


## kevinjoseph

I'm 32 and live with my mother.  Otherwise she would have to live in a care facility or hire in-home health care.  I don't feel entitled.

----------


## CloudMaker

> I'm 32 and live with my mother.  Otherwise she would have to live in a care facility or hire in-home health care.  I don't feel entitled.



It sounds like you are caring for your mother not the other way around. Good for you!

----------


## InvisibleGuy

Does living with your parents make you less of a human being though?

There was a time, not long after my gf committed suicide, when I had to move in with my parents. I was not capable of taking care of myself, in any way. I was a complete, and total wreck of a person.

What would you think of me? At that time? In that condition?

----------


## Cuchculan

She should come to Ireland. She would be in for a culture shock. It is not uncommon for kids to live at home. As long as they want to. They pay their own way. Unlike the US, we don't see a rush to move out of the family home. Parents will never say ' Time to move out '. They are happy to have family members living at home. Only myself and my mother here. Nothing wrong with that at all. Lord only knows how many times things have broken in this house and I fixed them. My mother, alone, would have been stuck. I am not saying I look after her. She can still look after herself. But it is not a free ride either. Bills are split. That helps her too. Plus we have a very big garden. She would not be able for that kind of work. The Irish door is always open to family members to come back and live at home. No big deal at all.

----------


## CloudMaker

2 months after my son turned 18 I kicked him out. No warning. Told him to leave suddenly at 11 o clock at night. He found his way.

----------


## Cuchculan

That would never happen in Ireland. When you are ready to go, you go. Simple as that. Why the big hurry? Have lived away from home for a period of time. But home was always there to come back to. Parents are not in any mad rush to kick their kids out of the family home here.

----------


## InvisibleGuy

> Does living with your parents make you less of a human being though?
> 
> There was a time, not long after my gf committed suicide, when I had to move in with my parents. I was not capable of taking care of myself, in any way. I was a complete, and total wreck of a person.
> 
> What would you think of me? At that time? In that condition?



I would really, really be surprised if anyone went through the suicide of a loved one and didn't need help, in some way. If you witnessed their suicide. And were able to carry on with your life as if nothing had happened. And didn't need the help from family or friends.

That would just be fuqing amazing. Not sure I know of anyone that could do that.

What is so wrong with needing or wanting the help from your parents, or family? I don't get it.

I understand wanting to and needing to be independent. But what is so wrong with that, with needing help or giving help to a family member?

----------


## Otherside

> I would really, really be surprised if anyone went through the suicide of a loved one and didn't need help, in some way. If you witnessed their suicide. And were able to carry on with your life as if nothing had happened. And didn't need the help from family or friends.
> 
> That would just be fuqing amazing. Not sure I know of anyone that could do that.
> 
> What is so wrong with needing or wanting the help from your parents, or family? I don't get it.
> 
> I understand wanting to and needing to be independent. But what is so wrong with that, with needing help or giving help to a family member?



Ultimately, nothing. My parents took care of me when I was unwell. It was that, or be in hospital. Neither of us particularly wanted the later option. 

Here, a lot of people couldn't even begin to afford rent, let alone the deposit for a mortgage at 18. London is one of the most expensive cities in the world. It's fairly common for people to be stuck at home, whilst doing a full time job. They have no other option.

----------


## InvisibleGuy

> Ultimately, nothing. My parents took care of me when I was unwell. It was that, or be in hospital. Neither of us particularly wanted the later option. 
> 
> Here, a lot of people couldn't even begin to afford rent, let alone the deposit for a mortgage at 18. London is one of the most expensive cities in the world. It's fairly common for people to be stuck at home, whilst doing a full time job. They have no other option.



I've heard. London is a pretty expensive place to live. Kind of like New York City. Just to rent an efficiency apartment there is ridiculously expensive.

Houston, Texas is relatively cheap. I have a one bedroom but it's more space than I need. Ffs, I don't even go into my living room. There's furniture in there. A pretty nice leather sofa. A nice glass dining room table. Pictures on the wall. Lamps. That no one ever sees lol.

I could honestly live in my bedroom. Seriously.

----------


## kevinjoseph

In the US, it was common for multiple generations to live under the same roof until the Baby Boomer generation, when everyone enjoyed a greater amount of economic freedom.  It's not entitlement

----------


## Cuchculan

I did state it was a culture difference. I know it is. I couldn't imagine my mother living alone, here in this house. In the past 3 months alone I have fixed the boiler, the washing machine, the tap in the kitchen and a few other bits and pieces. Can be handy to have someone in the house who knows how to fix things. If alone she would rush to call out people to have them fixed. That would cost a small fortune. So we both win. Half the bills are mine. Even pick up food when I am out. In other words I don't expect her to pay for everything. Otherside did mention the cost of rent. Is the same here in Ireland. They have been forced to put a rent cap on what landlords can charge people. That is how high the prices got. Plus a lot of landlords don't want people on welfare. Even though welfare is paying the rent. So you are sure of it. That is leading to a lot of homeless families. Few hotels have been turned into places to house them for now. But a family of 5 in one room in a hotel? All because landlords don't want welfare people.

----------


## CloudMaker

Obamacare didn't get repealed....SAD!  

I'm tired of paying for other people's healthcare!

----------


## sunrise

> I think that's a culture difference. In America, my mom was making me pay her 'cab fee' to go to a simple doctor appt, by the age of 15, and by 17 she was making me pay rent.... She'd spout off that she couldn't wait until I turned 18 so she wasn't legally obligated to take me to doctor appts (even tho I was paying her). I moved out before 18.



I think it depends on the culture specific to the family.  I know parents who made their kids pay rent at 18 y.o. but making you pay a 'cab fee' at 15 is ridiculous! But I know people in their 40's who still live with their parents and pay nothing.  I think 18 is too young to make children pay rent money to parents in this day and age. Everything is too expensive, and being able to pay your own college fees, books, etc. is a feat in itself. 

My own random political thought: A lot of the political train wreck happening right now is because of the Magnitsky Act and the concerted efforts being made to scuttle it.

----------


## CloudMaker

I hope trump cuts NASA why do we need to spend money on space when there are people dying in the streets in our own country

----------


## kevinjoseph

> I hope trump cuts NASA why do we need to spend money on space when there are people dying in the streets in our own country



Exactly how you can justify cutting NASA funding using a concern for "people dying in the streets of our own country" when just previously you stated you wanted Obamacare funding cut as well is astounding.

----------


## CloudMaker

> Exactly how you can justify cutting NASA funding using a concern for "people dying in the streets of our own country" when just previously you stated you wanted Obamacare funding cut as well is astounding.



Obamacare is a failure. According to the government I make too much to get a subsidized plan but I still can't afford health insurance. It is cheaper for me to pay the tax penalty every year than pay for health insurance ... all it has done for me is make me pay more taxes. I shouldn't have to pay for someone else's healthcare. 

NASA funding is an absolute waste. That is money that could be used for infrastructure or even better to support our military.

----------


## CloudMaker

When I read all kinds of stuff about how bad Trump is,,,, I stop and think about where we would be now with that evil [BEEP] Hillary Clinton.  and I say a silent MAGA prayer.
Praise  KEK and  Donald Trump;!

----------


## kevinjoseph

> When I read all kinds of stuff about how bad Trump is,,,, I stop and think about where we would be now with that evil [BEEP] Hillary Clinton.  and I say a silent MAGA prayer.
> Praise  KEK and  Donald Trump;!



KEK?

----------


## Cuchculan

Probably meant KKK.  :XD:

----------


## CloudMaker

> KEK?

----------


## Cuchculan

World of Warcraft Alien race or something like that?

----------


## CloudMaker

> World of Warcraft Alien race or something like that?



No Kek is the /pol/ god MAGA

----------


## Sagan

:O_O:  what on earth?


*NASA Technologies Benefit Our Lives*


https://spinoff.nasa.gov/Spinoff2008/tech_benefits.html

Ok. Why not bring up military budget? Its 600 billion! More than 54% of a  total budget. Why do we spend more money on killing people than  science?﻿

----------


## Sagan

> NASA funding is an absolute waste. That is money that could be used for infrastructure or even better to support our military.



The MILITARY? Are you serious? 









The military has enough of my damned tax money!

----------


## CloudMaker

> The MILITARY? Are you serious? 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Yes I support our troops and they should get even more IMO. 

Our military is all around the globe protecting Europe and east Asia from Russia. The military finds all kinds of scientific discoveries. Without the military there would be no science.

----------


## Sagan

> Without the military there would be no science.



I support our troops also. ONLY when they are in direct defense of the country. I do NOT support our military policing the world and it's arrogance around the globe. However that quoted statement from you makes me cringe. Einstein was not in the military, assisted them, yes. Neither were Hawking, Wilson, Planck, Sagan, Heisenberg, Maxwell, Schr?dinger, Tesla, Eddington, green, Krauss, Tyson. I could go on for ever. ALL made GREAT advances in science and technology!

I don't have the energy to have this debate. But anyone with any sense knows what I am trying to say here. We need to CUT military spending and put that money to good use here at home! Not NASA. I'm talking about the sick and the hungry, and the homeless. Even a small cut to our military spending could feed every starving American for years. Think about it. The poor veterans that did fight for us are left on the streets to be [BEEP] on. No one gives a rats [BEEP] about them. They should be given first class top of the line treatment for the rest of their lives. So many of them are sleeping under benches and in parks, homeless with mental illness. The Republicans are just fucking fine with this bullshit.


Pennies are spend on science and education in this country, while BILLIONS are spend on the military industrial complex. the F-35 and the V-22 Osprey just to name 2 examples. Both of which are dismal failures yet they have their reps and senators backing these wasteful, worthless programs!

The US has 800 military bases placed around the globe. Like an empire. I say we shut more than half of these down and focus on the blight here at home!

----------


## sunrise

The military is boated.  There's little oversight on how money is spent and there's a ton of waste and profiteering happening.  But politicians seem to be afraid of promoting defense cuts.

----------


## Ironman

> Yeah a lot of Europe doesn't like Trump much at the moment. He's apparently delayed a state visit to the UK until "we like him more" in fear of being photographed alongside large protests in London or something. I suppose the photos would be embarrassing for him or something.
> 
> Must want some nice photos saying "Look I'm likeable in Europe!". Can't imagine two of the big players in the EU (Germany/France), who've already made it clear that they really don't like Trump, will be pleased with Poland after this. 
> 
> Sent from my D5803 using Tapatalk



These days, this is actually a good thing.  A lot of America doesn't like what is going on in Europe either so the feeling is mutual.  We are glad Brexit happened and are starting to heed your warnings about immigration.
Trump is hated so much because he is able to buck trends that aren't good in the long run.  Our health care system brought on by the last President is quickly becoming unhinged - yet another state announced they can't handle Obamacare policies  (Nevada - yes, liberal Nevada where prostitution is legal - they can't handle the 2010 health care system!)

----------


## Ironman

> Yes I support our troops and they should get even more IMO. 
> 
> Our military is all around the globe protecting Europe and east Asia from Russia. The military finds all kinds of scientific discoveries. Without the military there would be no science.



I think Obama cut a lot of that off - to the point where there are planes getting old and falling apart - that's not good.

----------


## Ironman

> I support our troops also. ONLY when they are in direct defense of the country. I do NOT support our military policing the world and it's arrogance around the globe. However that quoted statement from you makes me cringe. Einstein was not in the military, assisted them, yes. Neither were Hawking, Wilson, Planck, Sagan, Heisenberg, Maxwell, Schr?dinger, Tesla, Eddington, green, Krauss, Tyson. I could go on for ever. ALL made GREAT advances in science and technology!
> 
> I don't have the energy to have this debate. But anyone with any sense knows what I am trying to say here. We need to CUT military spending and put that money to good use here at home! Not NASA. I'm talking about the sick and the hungry, and the homeless. Even a small cut to our military spending could feed every starving American for years. Think about it. The poor veterans that did fight for us are left on the streets to be [BEEP] on. No one gives a rats [BEEP] about them. They should be given first class top of the line treatment for the rest of their lives. So many of them are sleeping under benches and in parks, homeless with mental illness. The Republicans are just fucking fine with this bullshit.
> 
> 
> Pennies are spend on science and education in this country, while BILLIONS are spend on the military industrial complex. the F-35 and the V-22 Osprey just to name 2 examples. Both of which are dismal failures yet they have their reps and senators backing these wasteful, worthless programs!
> 
> The US has 800 military bases placed around the globe. Like an empire. I say we shut more than half of these down and focus on the blight here at home!



But in a way, they are defending us.  For instance, if Obama had done something about Ukraine alone, Putin would have gotten the message not to mess with us.  Syria should have been dealt with - Assad should have been removed.  Putin made us look bad.  That is the very thing we are trying to prevent and he messed it up. 

Keep your friends close....and your enemies closer.

----------


## Otherside

> These days, this is actually a good thing.  A lot of America doesn't like what is going on in Europe either so the feeling is mutual.  We are glad Brexit happened and are starting to heed your warnings about immigration.
> Trump is hated so much because he is able to buck trends that aren't good in the long run.  Our health care system brought on by the last President is quickly becoming unhinged - yet another state announced they can't handle Obamacare policies  (Nevada - yes, liberal Nevada where prostitution is legal - they can't handle the 2010 health care system!)



And that's fine. I'm not an American and I don't live there. So I don't like Trump much and think he's an arrogant plonker with to much money. I don't have to deal with his politics. As the kids say, he literally is "not my president" lol. Americans can not like European politics, we can not like yours. That's fine. 

Not going to comment on Obamacare, I don't know enough about it really. Or American healthcare. Having lived with state funded healthcare for all my life (which I'm aware that Obamacare isn't, it seems to be more regulations on health insurance policies although correct me if I'm wrong), private healthcare is a weird and bizarre world to me. And it seems that the US and UK (can't speak for the rest of Europe) has different views on healthcare. America argues "why should we pay for someone else's healthcare?" We'd just rather pay a few extra pence in National Insurance payments each month and keep our healthcare coverage. 

Honestly though, Trump is probably more of a joke over here than hated. Everyone finds the whole wall thing amusing, and wants to know if his hair is real. I also currently have a bet on construction of the wall not having begun by 2020. But we shall see. 

Sent from my G3121 using Tapatalk

----------


## Cuchculan

Irish view on Trump? Over the past while he has been firing those around him that he feels don't fit in. Where else do we see this? North Korea. Only in North Korea they are fired and then killed. Or simply vanish. I will be interested to see, after 1 year in office, how many people Trump gets rid of. I think only last week after he hired one person, another person didn't like who he hired, so he fired the person who didn't like her. Had him replaced. It is like you are watching at sitcom. Wonder who will be fired next? If I look back through history all the dictators around the world began not to trust those around them. They became paranoid. Got rid of everybody. Brought new people in. Trump it not that bad as of yet. That is why I am waiting to see how many he fires in his first year in power. It will give us a better picture of the man. Then we will have to ask why he keeps firing people? I know some don't want to work for him any more. They don't like his ideas and his methods of doing things. Others are just in his way. Quick answer? Fire them. Get somebody new in. It is all about how much power he imagine he has. Some traits are there to liken him to a mild dictator. He can never really go too far over board. Not in America. This whole building of a wall. Kicking out illegal immigrants. Stopping people entering the country. Next he will want to perfect race of people in the US. Might even grow a small moustache to follow.

----------


## fetisha

> Irish view on Trump? Over the past while he has been firing those around him that he feels don't fit in. Where else do we see this? North Korea. Only in North Korea they are fired and then killed. Or simply vanish. I will be interested to see, after 1 year in office, how many people Trump gets rid of. I think only last week after he hired one person, another person didn't like who he hired, so he fired the person who didn't like her. Had him replaced. It is like you are watching at sitcom. Wonder who will be fired next? If I look back through history all the dictators around the world began not to trust those around them. They became paranoid. Got rid of everybody. Brought new people in. Trump it not that bad as of yet. That is why I am waiting to see how many he fires in his first year in power. It will give us a better picture of the man. Then we will have to ask why he keeps firing people? I know some don't want to work for him any more. They don't like his ideas and his methods of doing things. Others are just in his way. Quick answer? Fire them. Get somebody new in. It is all about how much power he imagine he has. Some traits are there to liken him to a mild dictator. He can never really go too far over board. Not in America. This whole building of a wall. Kicking out illegal immigrants. Stopping people entering the country. Next he will want to perfect race of people in the US. Might even grow a small moustache to follow.



SO many people are panicking over him in office and I don't blame them but I'm just going to let him keep digging his own grave enough to make him hit rock bottom because he is doing more harm then good to the country. I don't understand trump supporters at all but everyone is different. I even think Obama didn't change too much but atleast he has a heart.

----------


## Cuchculan

Thank God there is the Atlantic ocean between us and him. But seriously the candidates over the last number of Presidential elections has been poor. Back to when Bush jnr got into office. There has been no other real challengers. Nobody stands out as a true leader. So no matter what way people voted you were always going to have a bad choice of President. Now we have Trump threatening to unleash hell on earth on North Korea. Like the world has never seen before. Somehow I believe him too. He wants to play with his new box of toys.

----------


## Otherside

> Thank God there is the Atlantic ocean between us and him. But seriously the candidates over the last number of Presidential elections has been poor. Back to when Bush jnr got into office. There has been no other real challengers. Nobody stands out as a true leader. So no matter what way people voted you were always going to have a bad choice of President. Now we have Trump threatening to unleash hell on earth on North Korea. Like the world has never seen before. Somehow I believe him too. He wants to play with his new box of toys.



To be fair to Trump, North Korea have threatened to fire missiles Guam today, a US territory in the pacific. 

I'm not sure I blame him for turning round and saying, "You do that, we'll turn round and unleash our military power against you." Essentially, North Korea would have declared war against them if they do that. And North Korea have hardly been kind to America lately. They killed one of there citizens. By the looks of it, Otto Warmbier was falsely accused and died in custody. 

Kim Jong Un is unhinged. At this point, the world has given him plenty of warnings. Disarm. Stop firing missiles into the air. Even it's one ally has told them to do so. America would not be alone in attacking North Korea if they were to fire missiles at Guam, I think. 


Sent from my G3121 using Tapatalk

----------


## Cuchculan

Kim Jong is a head case. He wouldn't mind having his own people killed. It would be no big deal to him. That is the frightening thing about the man. But China and Russia would both get involved. As a rule it is about flexing your muscles. They say a lot. Maybe attempt a test launch. But to hear they may be nuclear now. That is worrying. Though the question would have to be asked of exactly where did they get the materials from? To suddenly become nuclear. That was the report last night on the radio here. China keeps an eye on them as a rule. Sort of their best mates. Trump did say that China was not doing enough. plus we have the diplomatic stuff with Russia. North Korea needs a good kick up the rear end. But if that was to happen, what would be the knock on effects with other countries? At the moment it is like a game of chess. Neither side actually making a move. Just verbals. That is all it has been for a few decades now. Will be interesting to see if anybody makes an actual move.

----------


## Otherside

> Kim Jong is a head case. He wouldn't mind having his own people killed. It would be no big deal to him. That is the frightening thing about the man. But China and Russia would both get involved. As a rule it is about flexing your muscles. They say a lot. Maybe attempt a test launch. But to hear they may be nuclear now. That is worrying. Though the question would have to be asked of exactly where did they get the materials from? To suddenly become nuclear. That was the report last night on the radio here. China keeps an eye on them as a rule. Sort of their best mates. Trump did say that China was not doing enough. plus we have the diplomatic stuff with Russia. North Korea needs a good kick up the rear end. But if that was to happen, what would be the knock on effects with other countries? At the moment it is like a game of chess. Neither side actually making a move. Just verbals. That is all it has been for a few decades now. Will be interesting to see if anybody makes an actual move.



I don't trust Kim Jong Un to not fire a missile. He's unstable, paranoid, unpredictable and the sole source of power in North Korea. That's a dangerous combination. 

What happens if there is war? North Korea would not win. China wouldn't risk siding with them, I don't think so. They have to much to loose. Undoubtedly the area would be unstable. Perhaps it would be absorbed into South Korea. If Kim Jong Un was alive no doubt he'd be tried at the Hague as a war criminal. 

Of course they may not even have nuclear missiles. This is a country that can't afford to keep the lights on. And as you should, who is trading with them? There are so sanctions and embargoes against them at the moment. So who would be stupid enough to risk pissing off the world to sell nuclear material to North Korea? 

And then there's the worrying question. Is it a country, or are they buying on the black market? And if they can get it, the next question is who else could? ISIS? Anyone with enough money and an agenda? 

Sent from my G3121 using Tapatalk

----------


## Cuchculan

I do like to keep on eye on global conflicts because I have a web site that deals with that same topic. Mostly they are old conflicts that have already happened. Not an up to the minute account of what might happen. With North Korea, to-date, it is a bit like a peacock. Spreading the tail to show off. Would you fire a missile with the knowledge that to do so might mean the end of your life and your country? That is what Kim is faced with. Plus if you look at the range of missile interceptors out there these days. If you were to fire a missile it could be blown out of the sky in seconds over your own country. Would you risk it? All this talk of North Korea having a missile that could reach the US. It would never get even close to the US. Be blown out of the sky well in advance. Sanctions have just been placed on North Korea. Thus they are blaming the US for the newest sanctions. Going back a few months ago only North Korea failed three times to even launch a long range missile. They kept blowing up before they ever left the ground. Just my curious mind wondering how they fixed this problem in such a short space of time. Suddenly they could launch a missile. Then they went long range. Then they went nuclear. Something just doesn't add up. For things to move that quickly. People used to joke about them trying to light the fuse on their missile with wet matches. They simply couldn't get one off the ground. I do kind of doubt the big claims been made about them. It took a lot of countries years to build a nuclear programme. These go and do it in the space of a few months? The reason they are mentioning that small island is because it is closer to them. They think ' we can get a missile that far before it is blown out of the sky '. Why not just fire one into South Korea? It would have the exact same after effects. 

untitled.png

I can't see China jumping into any war. Or Russia for that matter. But they will kick up a stink. Kind of like they are backing North Korea. Don't dare go near them. Again flexing of muscles. This has been on since the cold war years. All the talking. All the threats. But people saw what a nuclear bomb could do in Japan. Nobody ever wants to see that again. Hence they have always shouted insults at each other and that was as far as it ever got. I am sure if Kim found out he was dying tomorrow, he is the kind of lunatic who might start a war on his death bed. Because he won't be around after it all. Up until then I think we will simply see more words shouted at each other. Just like has been going on for a long time now.

----------


## Ironman

> SO many people are panicking over him in office and I don't blame them but I'm just going to let him keep digging his own grave enough to make him hit rock bottom because he is doing more harm then good to the country. I don't understand trump supporters at all but everyone is different. I even think Obama didn't change too much but atleast he has a heart.



That's the problem - Obama didn't change anything except try to get all of us to fit his radical leftness.  He was hellbent on destroying the Republican Party and instead annihilated his own.  It got to the point where the DNC had to secretly blacklist Bernie Sanders in favor of a candidate who tried to get into the Presidency with her name only.  She wanted the Presidency handed to her on a platter.  

We are finding out very quickly that Obama did NOT have anything but himself in mind the further we get away from him.

Trump got stuck with North Korea and a nuclear Iran - Obama helped build that!

----------


## Otherside

> I do like to keep on eye on global conflicts because I have a web site that deals with that same topic. Mostly they are old conflicts that have already happened. Not an up to the minute account of what might happen. With North Korea, to-date, it is a bit like a peacock. Spreading the tail to show off. Would you fire a missile with the knowledge that to do so might mean the end of your life and your country? That is what Kim is faced with. Plus if you look at the range of missile interceptors out there these days. If you were to fire a missile it could be blown out of the sky in seconds over your own country. Would you risk it? All this talk of North Korea having a missile that could reach the US. It would never get even close to the US. Be blown out of the sky well in advance. Sanctions have just been placed on North Korea. Thus they are blaming the US for the newest sanctions. Going back a few months ago only North Korea failed three times to even launch a long range missile. They kept blowing up before they ever left the ground. Just my curious mind wondering how they fixed this problem in such a short space of time. Suddenly they could launch a missile. Then they went long range. Then they went nuclear. Something just doesn't add up. For things to move that quickly. People used to joke about them trying to light the fuse on their missile with wet matches. They simply couldn't get one off the ground. I do kind of doubt the big claims been made about them. It took a lot of countries years to build a nuclear programme. These go and do it in the space of a few months? The reason they are mentioning that small island is because it is closer to them. They think ' we can get a missile that far before it is blown out of the sky '. Why not just fire one into South Korea? It would have the exact same after effects. 
> 
> untitled.png
> 
> I can't see China jumping into any way. Or Russia for that matter. But they will kick up a stink. Kind of like they are backing North Korea. Don't dare go near them. Again flexing of muscles. This has been on since the cold war years. All the talking. All the threats. But people saw what a nuclear bomb could do in Japan. Nobody ever wants to see that again. Hence they have always shouted insults at each other and that was as far as it ever got. I am sure if Kim found out he was dying tomorrow, he is the kind of lunatic who might start a war on his death bed. Because he won't be around after it all. Up until then I think we will simply see more words shouted at each other. Just like has been going on for a long time now.



Two things could be going on here as to why NK have nukes so fast. 

1 - Someone's trading technology. Someone who knows how missiles are made, is selling that information. Idiotic and unlikely. But could be what's happening. 

2 - NK is bluffing. Like I said, NK can't afford to keep the streetlights on at night. How would they afford the materials for nuclear weaponry? Of course the nukes could come at the cost of infrastructure. 

China won't act, I agree. Too much is as stake. They have trade with the US, Europe. They're trying to build there reputation with the world, and siding with NK would be a stupid move. They'd probably cry "American Agression" and "Sovereign nation". But when push comes to shove? They will not not have NKs back. 

Someone in his inner circle who defected to the south said he was that if North Korea were ever to fall, Kim Jong Un would certainly take down as much of America with him as he could. 

Sent from my G3121 using Tapatalk

----------


## Ironman

> Two things could be going on here as to why NK have nukes so fast. 
> 
> 1 - Someone's trading technology. Someone who knows how missiles are made, is selling that information. Idiotic and unlikely. But could be what's happening. 
> 
> 2 - NK is bluffing. Like I said, NK can't afford to keep the streetlights on at night. How would they afford the materials for nuclear weaponry? Of course the nukes could come at the cost of infrastructure. 
> 
> China won't act, I agree. Too much is as stake. They have trade with the US, Europe. They're trying to build there reputation with the world, and siding with NK would be a stupid move. They'd probably cry "American Agression" and "Sovereign nation". But when push comes to shove? They will not not have NKs back. 
> 
> Someone in his inner circle who defected to the south said he was that if North Korea were ever to fall, Kim Jong Un would certainly take down as much of America with him as he could. 
> ...



Or China traded technology with them.
...or Russia - thanks to Hillary Clinton, they bought 20% of our uranium.  Sickening to think that could end up in a weapon.

Kim Jong Un has officially threatened to hit Guam - so, they do anything and it's on.  We won't hold back until he's out.

I noticed that any film we ever see of him - he's either waddling (due to size), waving, or clapping.

----------


## Otherside

> Or China traded technology with them.
> ...or Russia - thanks to Hillary Clinton, they bought 20% of our uranium.  Sickening to think that could end up in a weapon.
> 
> Kim Jong Un has officially threatened to hit Guam - so, they do anything and it's on.  We won't hold back until he's out.
> 
> I noticed that any film we ever see of him - he's either waddling (due to size), waving, or clapping.



Yeah it wouldn't surprise me if Russia or China did it. 

Kim hits Guam and the world would be angry. Of course America would retaliate, and they'd be right to do so. I doubt they'd be the only country willing to make a move. I can't see Kim surrendering to be honest. The war with either end with America invading Pyongyang and desposing of Kim, America invading Pyongyang and Kim running off to Venezuela to live the rest of his days hiding from, well, pretty much everyone, or a load of generals seeing that the war is going to end badly if Kim doesn't go, and throwing a coup d'etat and begging America for a ceasefire. 

All films made of him are propaganda. The North Korean people are told that the Kims may as well be benevolent God's. They're all but worshipped. It simply wouldn't do for an awkward image to get out. 

Sent from my G3121 using Tapatalk

----------


## sunrise

> SO many people are panicking over him in office and I don't blame them but I'm just going to let him keep digging his own grave enough to make him hit rock bottom because he is doing more harm then good to the country. I don't understand trump supporters at all but everyone is different. I even think Obama didn't change too much but atleast he has a heart.



Yup, he keeps sticking his foot in it.  It's kind of amazing that his own words may be his own downfall. I sorely miss Obama.

----------


## Cuchculan

I read a book once about what happened after the old Soviet Union broke up. I am talking about the army here and the weapons. The army had not been paid for a few years. So some got together and decided to make their own money. Selling off weapons of all sorts. It was estimated that over a million various types of weapons meant missing. These did vary. Let us just say that some in the wrong hands could start a war. If it was there it was up for sale. The list of what was up for sale was frightening. Not talking small guns here. Though they were sold in bulk as well. The army bases had nobody in control of them. Simple as that. You put an order in and you would get what you wanted. Not saying this went as far as nuclear goods. though the blueprints for the Soviet nuclear programme was there somewhere. You could buy it for the right price. Remember we had a load of smaller countries come out of the old Soviet Union. Simple fact was that the main people in charge of the new Russian State had no idea where most things now were. So they wrote them off as vanished. Who knows who ended up with what back then. Highest bidder got the best weapons available. The writer of the book got a tour around an old Soviet army base. Everything was for sale in the base. They felt they were owned money and this was their way of getting what was owed to them.

----------


## CloudMaker

North Korea will never beat the United States MAGA!!!

----------


## Cuchculan

> North Korea will never beat the United States MAGA!!!



Come on Miss Brains tell us why the war in Iraq is not over as of yet? That was meant to be in and out. Quick war. Look at all the deaths over the past decade. Talking US soldiers here. They are still been killed in Iraq. War is not as simple as you make it out to be. The US has a big army. It is well armed. But war actually does have rules. Only in Iraq it turned from a normal war into urban warfare. In and out was the dream. But it is still going on today. you never bargained on those who you would be fighting against. They knew the land better than other foreign powers coming into their country. They didn't play by the rules either. It is still one big mess in Iraq. Even your big US army couldn't and can't fight its way through that mess. Similar happened in Vietnam. Was more the land that got them. Locals know the land. They use it well. The Afghan conflict is similar. So many mountain ranges. Been used in a smart way by rebel fighters. When you think that even Russia tried and failed to invade Afghanistan too. You get more than you expect when you simply run into some countries. Somalia was the exact same. Turned into a nightmare for the US. At times you are best off simply firing from the sky. But with that tactic you have to try and avoid killing innocent civilians. That is not easy at all in some countries. You can take out the military bases with drones alone. But each country is different. The lay of the land is different.

----------


## Otherside

> Come on Miss Brains tell us why the war in Iraq is not over as of yet? That was meant to be in and out. Quick war. Look at all the deaths over the past decade. Talking US soldiers here. They are still been killed in Iraq. War is not as simple as you make it out to be. The US has a big army. It is well armed. But war actually does have rules. Only in Iraq it turned from a normal war into urban warfare. In and out was the dream. But it is still going on today. you never bargained on those who you would be fighting against. They knew the land better than other foreign powers coming into their country. They didn't play by the rules either. It is still one big mess in Iraq. Even your big US army couldn't and can't fight its way through that mess. Similar happened in Vietnam. Was more the land that got them. Locals know the land. They use it well. The Afghan conflict is similar. So many mountain ranges. Been used in a smart way by rebel fighters. When you think that even Russia tried and failed to invade Afghanistan too. You get more than you expect when you simply run into some countries. Somalia was the exact same. Turned into a nightmare for the US. At times you are best off simply firing from the sky. But with that tactic you have to try and avoid killing innocent civilians. That is not easy at all in some countries. You can take out the military bases with drones alone. But each country is different. The lay of the land is different.



Lots of people forget this. 

Vietnam -> the locals just resorted to guerilla warfare. They did not have the numbers but they knew Vietnam. And those in charge of the war didn't quite count on the media. There was very little public support in the US after images such as the one of that kid running naked as his skin burnt, thanks to a chemical the US dropped. 

Iraq -> Went fabulously. Sure, you got Saddam out. And he was a charming character for sure. Even if he never did have WMDs (see the similarity here?). But since then:

- Iraqi government is fairly weak, as is its armed forces. The US had to hang around the ensure that nobody worse got into power. 
- Its essentially a power vacuum. IS took advantage of that. They swept in and claimed territory. 
- The US's actions in Iraq, Afghanistan and the middle east contributed to rise of Al Qaeda, IS and other savoury groups. As far as they're concerned, you were foreign invaders who came in, caused chaos and made there lives hell. Not great liberators who gave them better lives with democracy and freedom. 

Don't be so eager for a war with North Korea. It won't be quick. It will be fairly nasty, bloody and rife with instability. Several groups will take advantage of that and try to stake claim to the North. And at the end of it all, you'll be lucky of there isn't another KJU character in charge. 

Sent from my G3121 using Tapatalk

----------


## kevinjoseph

I smell a troll

----------


## CloudMaker

Iraq/Nam were not conventional wars.... US is great at fighting a conventional war with another country. See the gulf war. 

Like you said we are in quagmire because we try to avoid civilian casualties. If we didn't then it would be over quickly. I don't think we should TBH.

----------


## InvisibleGuy

I think the only thing I can add is that arrogance can be a pretty dangerous thing esp with international incidents like this. Trump's arrogance is just....off the charts. It's like watching two kindergartner's talk smack at each other in the playground at recess, it seriously is. I'd rather see action rather than empty words back and forth. Making threats like Trump has made in the last few days actually makes him look weak in my eyes. It makes him look scared, and like he's out of options and doesn't know how else to respond except to lash out with empty words and threats. His promises to NK during the last week haven't changed anything. NK isn't even taking his words seriously, and they've said as much.

----------


## CloudMaker

@Cuchculan
 the US has two Ohio class submarines in the area at all times. Each sub can fire 8 missiles, and each missile can hold up to 36 nuclear warheads. That is 576 nuclear warheads we can launch in under an hour. 

We have 18 Ohio class submarines in total. That's 5,184 nuclear warheads. 

Still think NK can win? MAGA!!!

----------


## Cuchculan

> @Cuchculan
>  the US has two Ohio class submarines in the area at all times. Each sub can fire 8 missiles, and each missile can hold up to 36 nuclear warheads. That is 576 nuclear warheads we can launch in under an hour. 
> 
> We have 18 Ohio class submarines in total. That's 5,184 nuclear warheads. 
> 
> Still think NK can win? MAGA!!!



I never said North Korea could win. I said it won't be as simple as it sounds. The biggest mistakes the US made in the past was jumping into countries thinking it would be an easy victory. That always proved wrong. The US already broke every rule of war with Guantanamo Bay. Your answer is just to kill all off the innocent civilians? That says all we need to know about you as a person.

----------


## Chantellabella

> I think the only thing I can add is that arrogance can be a pretty dangerous thing esp with international incidents like this. Trump's arrogance is just....off the charts. It's like watching two kindergartner's talk smack at each other in the playground at recess, it seriously is. I'd rather see action rather than empty words back and forth. Making threats like Trump has made in the last few days actually makes him look weak in my eyes. It makes him look scared, and like he's out of options and doesn't know how else to respond except to lash out with empty words and threats. His promises to NK during the last week haven't changed anything. NK isn't even taking his words seriously, and they've said as much.



I agree. Great post!

----------


## Otherside

Who said North Korea would be a conventional war? You can bet it won't be. For starters, KJU is not sane. He will not care about civilian casualties, war crimes, the Geneva convention. 

One of KJUs inner circle defected to the south. Since then he's come out and said that you can bet your [BEEP] that he'll push the red button and destroy as much of America as he can before he falls. Do those missiles have the capabilities of hitting America? We don't know, but there's a good chance they'll be able to at least hit the west coast. 

America may have more missiles than NK, but it only takes only for there to be a large amount of devastation. Why do you think none were fired in the cold War? We could have been destroyed. We almost were when Russia dumped nukes on Cuba. 

The US world win, sure. They have allies around the world who are promising to honour the defensive treaties made with the US in the event of an attack. They would not be alone. 

I actually don't view Trump as weak for doing what he's doing. What is he meant to do? He's got the lives of every single person living in the US to worry about. NK has said they'll shoot missiles at Guam. He has to respond. So, what exactly are his options? 

- Diplomacy? That'll be happening behind the scenes I imagine, but the US and NK are not on diplomatic terms. They do not have an embassy in Pyongyang or an ambassador in NK. Heck, US citizens were recently banned from entering NK. Relations have soured considerably. 
-Begin a war? If NK does have nukes, you risk them being fired instantly. 
- Issue a warning? Has been the chosen option. Not only does it tell NK not to try anything, it also attempts to reassure a panicked US people's. Granted most of it may be in colourful Trump-speak and on twitter, but the message got across. 

As for NK not taking it seriously - they have never taken anything from the US particularly seriously. 

Sent from my G3121 using Tapatalk

----------


## Cuchculan

17862657_1577228258955394_1926462770924900622_n.png

----------


## Cuchculan

Just watched a rather frightening video. They had a map of the World and were asking Americans were North Korea was. If you only saw where they were pointing at. Some even pointed at parts of Canada. Just watch and try and not be alarmed. I doubt all Americans are like this.

----------


## Chantellabella

@cuchcuIan  said I doubt all Americans are like this. 



[/QUOTE]


There is no such thing as "all Americans." The diversity of thought, of political views, life circumstances, and knowledge are unique to each one of us, just as they are to you and your country.

I believe the struggles in our world are directly related to the use of "all." 

Rather than deal with reality, people want to put entire groups of people into a box and assign an entire set of values to that group. Hence prejudice thinking.

So doubt no more. No. This isn't an all American thing. This is a "some uninformed people" thing.

Also, how many people got it right and didn't get into the video that day? Any skewed idea can be formed if you only publish one out of a hundred people every hour and then post just the clueless answers. 

Comedy is funny, but it's not fact unless all Americans we given that question.

----------


## Otherside

> @cuchcuIan  said I doubt all Americans are like this. 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ...



[/QUOTE]

Plenty of uninformed Brits, not just an American thing. I can think of quite a few actually. There are unbelievably some people that still believe that the British Empire still exists, oh rule Britannia and all that jazz. Of course the Empire as it was has been gone for a long time, and thank the lord for that. It's hardly something we should be proud of.

That said, "stupidity and ignorance" seems to be a trait that is often stereo-typically applied to Americans. And the rest of the world seems to like laughing about it. Sure, you get the odd American prick who seems incapable of working out that a world exists beyond the borders of the US and that maybe, it might be a little bit different to America. You get the odd moron everywhere. The majority though don't seem to be clueless and ignorant though, from my experience.

----------


## InvisibleGuy

> @cuchcuIan  said I doubt all Americans are like this. 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There is no such thing as "all Americans." The diversity of thought, of political views, life circumstances, and knowledge are unique to each one of us, just as they are to you and your country.
> 
> ...



Could not agree more. Very well said.

----------


## kevinjoseph

Have you all heard of the riots caused by white supremacist nationalist Trump supporters in Virginia?  I can't believe we have neo-Nazis in America still to this extent, and I don't even want to call them that, but that's what they are...Trump couldn't even place responsibility on them for the death and destruction, but said it was everyone's fault...

----------


## CloudMaker

@kevinjoseph
 They are white NATIONALISTS not white supremacists... there is a difference

----------


## Otherside

Really? Does it really matter what they call themselves? Give me one reason why the exact name they call themselves matters here.  

Those white-nationalists/white-supremists/whatever the hell you want to call them drove a car into a crowd full of people. Sound familiar to any recently-occurred, incidents that had happened recently? I'll give you a clue - London? Paris? Berlin? Stockholm?

Those white-nationalists/white-supremists stood making nazi salutes. My ancestors did not sacrifice there lives and my country did not give up so much during those years so that a bunch of overly-entitled Americans who could stand around hero-worshipping a guy who almost wiped out an entire continent, and who almost destroyed our way of life. And don't give me the free-speech crap. Sure, free speech is great. They're only worshiping a guy who happily censored any differing opinions and famously burned books. 

I don't see these "white-nationalists" as any better than "white-supremacists".

----------


## Cuchculan

There is a difference? All I saw was hated. I have watched many a documentary on these idiots. Fact is the should be an illegal group and should be arrested on sight. Or anybody seen to support them should be under racial laws.

----------


## Chantellabella

Polarizing hatred of any kind and any name saddens me. 

This is not one country or one political side problem. It is a humanity problem.

----------


## Cuchculan

Just watched the real time footage of the car been driven into the crowd. Sure was something else. Other than that, one thing I noticed were people ready for a riot. If you watch any footage at all have a look at what they are wearing on their heads. Hundreds had hard hats on. Like you would see a builder wearing on a site. Protect the head. Others had on body protection. Do you wear that kind of stuff to a so called peaceful rally? The answer is a clear NO. But the police done nothing at all. Had whites using racist terms towards blacks and the police just standing there. Calling them all sorts of names. Over here you would get arrested for that. Have no idea why it is not a hate crime in the US? Please explain it to me. Is that considered freedom of speech? Using the N word and doing ape noises. Get yourself jail time in this country for that shit.

----------


## Chantellabella

> Plenty of uninformed Brits, not just an American thing. I can think of quite a few actually. There are unbelievably some people that still believe that the British Empire still exists, oh rule Britannia and all that jazz. Of course the Empire as it was has been gone for a long time, and thank the lord for that. It's hardly something we should be proud of.
> 
> That said, "stupidity and ignorance" seems to be a trait that is often stereo-typically applied to Americans. And the rest of the world seems to like laughing about it. Sure, you get the odd American prick who seems incapable of working out that a world exists beyond the borders of the US and that maybe, it might be a little bit different to America. You get the odd moron everywhere. The majority though don't seem to be clueless and ignorant though, from my experience.



The thing about prejudice is that it doesn't become true because a few people believe it. Nor a hundred or a thousand. 

Yet, we as humans seem to take a small bit of information from a few people and because it's been said by more than one, they turn it into fact. Then they believe they have a right to expound on the virtues of that imagined fact. 

Isn't that what hate groups do? One person had an experience with a few people and reacted with them. Then they judged that person. Then they projected those traits onto other people who reminded them of that person. Then they taught their children to also believe that people similar to this person will be the same. 

None of us on the planet know every single other human being. Only then can we make an opinion but even then the opinion is still skewed. Relationships are 2 sided and if I had a particular experience with someone it's because my personality is interacting with their personality. Other people will have a different response to them. 

It's basically humans clashing with humans because they're different? The same? There's no right. No truth about it. 

Prejudice means judging before knowing facts. We can't know everyone on the planet and therefore, there are no true facts about everyone.

----------


## Cuchculan

For the record I did use the words ' I doubt all Americans are like this '. Which seemed to be jumped upon. I did know it was only a few people been asked. Hence I wrote those words. That it was not all Americans. I just found it funny on one hand. Frightening on another hand. Especially when the one woman pointed to Canada. You would assume she would have some idea which country is above the one she lives in. If I had of been judging all Americans my wording would have been a lot stronger. The whole point I was making, based on the video, was how can people really be that dumb? To think North Korea is in Canada. But that was just one woman. 

I did see another video once. This one was of more interest to me. People stopped and shown images. Political figures and serial killers. The could seriously name all the serial killers. Hadn't a clue of the political leaders. This sort of thing interests me. I do have a site on serial killers. Once said that people would be more aware of serial killers than any other famous people. The media is to blame for that one. For turning them into something much bigger than they really are.

----------


## Chantellabella

> They're often perpetrated by the media, and the sharing of videos such as the one that Cuchculan posted above. 
> 
> 
> Sent from my G3121 using Tapatalk



For the record, the media is only as broad as the people who share its content. Seems like there's a responsibility on both parties.

----------


## kevinjoseph

All I wanted to say by the post I wrote was that there are still white nationalists AND white supremacists in the US and they don't seem ashamed to be public about their beliefs.  As far as the terms "white nationalist" and "white supremacist" I could have been more specific.  I belief they aren't exactly interchangeable; a white nationalist is a white person who believes his or her country or leader etc. can do no wrong (as opposed to a patriot, who has respect and pride for his or her country) above all other nations.  A white supremacist is a white person who believes his or her "race" is supreme above all others.   These are just my working definitions.

I would say that supremacists of all stripes and nationalists from every country are ignorant, and as others have mentioned in this thread above me, a little education can help them.  I'm not using "ignorant" as an insult; I am ignorant in some ways myself of course, and I would expect others to educate me when I propose a statement that is at odds with the facts.  

I do take exception to anyone who is a nationalist or a racial supremacist as I believe they're not just ignorant by accident, but choosing to ignore certain facts to make their grasp of facts and their worldview more aligned and so as not to experience uncomfortable cognitive dissonance as much as possible.  Not sure if this makes sense to everyone, but hope it helps.

----------


## Cuchculan

The pen is mightier than the sword. I am sorry if you were offended. Here in Ireland we are used to people telling Irish jokes. We don't moan about it. We laugh along. The dumb Irishman, drunk, potato jokes. No big deal to us at all. So no more comments that may offend anybody. I guess things are just a bit different over this side of the world. We tend to joke around a lot. Even make fun of ourselves. Shows others it is pointless them doing it. Because all we will do is laugh. Sorry if the funny video offended you.

----------


## Lunaire

Hi All,

You are free to have civil debate with each other here but please do not resort to ad hominem arguments. Disagreeing with someone's opinion is not a justifiable excuse for personal attacks or insults.

We would like to keep this thread open because we feel it can be a helpful avenue to share opinions on real world events that may otherwise be controversial in nature. It is up to all of us to maintain a friendly environment that fosters genuine discussion. 

Like   
@Total Eclipse
 and  
@Otherside
 mentioned, if you see anything that you believe is working against that environment then please submit a report and a moderator will review it. 

Thanks! (⌒‿⌒)

----------


## Koalafan

> Hi All,
> 
> You are free to have civil debate with each other here but please do not resort to ad hominem arguments. Disagreeing with someone's opinion is not a justifiable excuse for personal attacks or insults.
> 
> We would like to keep this thread open because we feel it can be a helpful avenue to share opinions on real world events that may otherwise be controversial in nature. It is up to all of us to maintain a friendly environment that fosters genuine discussion. 
> 
> Like   
> @Total Eclipse
>  and  
> ...



Agreed. Sending a koala hug out to everyone  :Hug:

----------


## Ironman

> All I wanted to say by the post I wrote was that there are still white nationalists AND white supremacists in the US and they don't seem ashamed to be public about their beliefs.  As far as the terms "white nationalist" and "white supremacist" I could have been more specific.  I belief they aren't exactly interchangeable; a white nationalist is a white person who believes his or her country or leader etc. can do no wrong (as opposed to a patriot, who has respect and pride for his or her country) above all other nations.  A white supremacist is a white person who believes his or her "race" is supreme above all others.   These are just my working definitions.
> 
> I would say that supremacists of all stripes and nationalists from every country are ignorant, and as others have mentioned in this thread above me, a little education can help them.  I'm not using "ignorant" as an insult; I am ignorant in some ways myself of course, and I would expect others to educate me when I propose a statement that is at odds with the facts.  
> 
> I do take exception to anyone who is a nationalist or a racial supremacist as I believe they're not just ignorant by accident, but choosing to ignore certain facts to make their grasp of facts and their worldview more aligned and so as not to experience uncomfortable cognitive dissonance as much as possible.  Not sure if this makes sense to everyone, but hope it helps.



But, they have the First Amendment as anyone else.  The issue is when it turns violent.  We are all responsible for our actions. 
If we have heard nothing but "Black Lives Matter" for the last few years, what would people expect to happen?  The pendulum swings.  ALL lives matter, black, white, policemen, black policemen, white policemen, any colored policemen, any color.

What we saw was ugliness.  Both extremes.  It's shameful.  We are all supposed to be working toward the greater good, not putting one over the other.

----------


## kevinjoseph

Black Lives Matter.  This is hard for some to comprehend.  Why would a movement have to proclaim such a thing, that seems obvious to some?  When black lives don't matter to those in power, like law enforcement officers.  There is institutional racism against ethnic minorities in the US.  It exists.  Racism exists.   Black Lives Matter wouldn't exist if there wasn't a need for it.  It isn't saying that white lives don't matter, at all, and BLM has explicitly and repeatedly denounced violence in its name.  

What we saw was ugliness, yes, but one side came prepared to incite riots, one came to protest that.

EDIT:  You cannot say the counter-protestors are morally equivalent to the Neo-Nazis.  They simply aren't.  One side wants those who are different from them dead.  These are the Neo-Nazis.  This is their clearly stated goal, among others.  The counter-protestors do not want 'the other' dead.

----------


## Cuchculan

One thing I mentioned in an earlier post was the way people were dressed. Hard hats on. Why? Obvious really. To protect their heads. So they go to a march dressed for an expected riot. Fully geared up so they won't get hurt if hit on the head. I ever saw some with bullet proof vests on. Who wears such things to a march? It shows, again, they were expecting much more to happen. The one thing that really stood out was the abuse towards the blacks. The use of the N word. Ape impressions. The police were right there just watching it all. Doing nothing at all. It should be a crime in itself as it is in other countries. To be racist in such an open way. Wasn't like they were even trying to hide it. Was sad to see. But the image of the day was the woman in her 60's or around that age. A throw back to Woodstock. Just standing in the middle of all the haters with a peace sign on her flowery blouse and her two fingers raised for peace. Just spinning round and round on the spot were she was standing. It was sweet to see amongst so much hated.

----------


## Ironman

> Black Lives Matter.  This is hard for some to comprehend.  Why would a movement have to proclaim such a thing, that seems obvious to some?  When black lives don't matter to those in power, like law enforcement officers.  There is institutional racism against ethnic minorities in the US.  It exists.  Racism exists.   Black Lives Matter wouldn't exist if there wasn't a need for it.  It isn't saying that white lives don't matter, at all, and BLM has explicitly and repeatedly denounced violence in its name.  
> 
> What we saw was ugliness, yes, but one side came prepared to incite riots, one came to protest that.
> 
> EDIT:  You cannot say the counter-protestors are morally equivalent to the Neo-Nazis.  They simply aren't.  One side wants those who are different from them dead.  These are the Neo-Nazis.  This is their clearly stated goal, among others.  The counter-protestors do not want 'the other' dead.



This is what President Trump was trying to explain - ANYONE getting into violence should pay consequences.  If any movement is resorting to violence, they should be held accountable.  

Secondly, with all of this "Confederacy statue" stuff going on, there is an old adage......"Those who don't remember history are doomed to repeat it".  You can't erase the ugly past; you can only prevent an ugly future.  Tearing down things now makes the present ugly and that makes the future ugly and past uglier.

----------


## kevinjoseph

If Trump meant that, he should probably have said that. I would have agreed with him then, but he didn't say that.  

The Confederacy statues are there to honor traitors to the US who tried to destroy it.  You cannot justify statues honoring Confederates by saying they are there so we don't forget the past.

----------


## Cuchculan

I can just say I had said from day one that making the confederate flag illegal in some States just handed people another weapon to use as a sign of hatred. If you class that flag as a sign of racism, now people will use it as just that. On the other hand you might have those who simply want to save their flag. Not want to see it been banned. I can respect those who love their flag. But they have to stop that element of people from using it as a flag of hated now. I am Irish. I am not fully up to speed on the flag. I know it banned from memorials. Couldn't be flow any more. So maybe somebody can tell me if it is actually banned in any States? I do know that different groups view the flag in different ways. Some see it with pride. Others see it a racist. To make it a racist tool is only serving into the hands of those groups who are racist already. They will use it to cause trouble. Do know a bit of the back history. Fact was it was not always flown. Might have seen it in a few early films. Gone with the wind and the likes. Correct me if I am wrong, but it wasn't until the 1960's that people began to take interest the flag again. They began to recognise it as meaning something to them. It held historical value and meaning. I can respect that. We do the same with our flags here in Ireland and the capital city, Dublin. We all have our flags. Hence if it is a pride thing and it holds meaning that is great. Is only when people begin to use for the wrong purposes that it can get out of hand. Those who want the flag for pride and historical meaning should distance themselves from those who want to use as a hate symbol. They should not mix together. Because then people will begin to imagine they are one in the same group.

----------


## InvisibleGuy

I'm about as far south in the US as you can get, and I have absolutely no problem with the Confederacy statues coming down. Every single one of them should come down, as far as I'm concerned. There's a pretty large high school here in Houston that was formerly named Robert E Lee High School, but as of last year was renamed Margaret Long Wisdom High School (after a former teacher there). There are other school in the Houston area that have been renamed. All of this started in the last couple of years....so it's been going on for a while now.

I see no reason why men who fought for the confederacy, who fought to make slavery legal, should be remembered or honored or memorialized in any way. I never have understood why anyone would want to do that, unless your obviously a racist. We have history books to teach history, we don't need statues honoring those men.

----------


## Ironman

> I'm about as far south in the US as you can get, and I have absolutely no problem with the Confederacy statues coming down. Every single one of them should come down, as far as I'm concerned. There's a pretty large high school here in Houston that was formerly named Robert E Lee High School, but as of last year was renamed Margaret Long Wisdom High School (after a former teacher there). There are other school in the Houston area that have been renamed. All of this started in the last couple of years....so it's been going on for a while now.
> 
> I see no reason why men who fought for the confederacy, who fought to make slavery legal, should be remembered or honored or memorialized in any way. I never have understood why anyone would want to do that, unless your obviously a racist. We have history books to teach history, we don't need statues honoring those men.



That doesn't make all people who want them left alone racist either - that's another point.
It's "safe space" run amok.  The Civil War was ugly, yes, and removing the Confederate stuff can be seen as denying that ugly part of history.  This kind of division has led to country's downfalls.  We have certainly been at each other's throats enough in the last nine years to lead us right into another one........as if we are doomed to repeat it.

----------


## InvisibleGuy

In my opinion, taking down the statues that honored these men, changing the names of schools that once honored these men, does not deny that ugly part of history. It's removing the name, the statue, whatever it may be, that honored their memory. That's all it does. Removing the statue does not change history, the idea that it does makes no sense to me.

If you are not racist, I don't see why you'd not want them removed.

If we were to take the names out of all the history books, erase the Wikipedia and whatever other sites on the internet...erase all mention of their names and pretend as though it never happened, that would be like trying to deny or erase history. No one is suggesting that.

It's really not a hard concept to grasp, imo. Unless the people who don't want the statues removed really are racist.....

----------


## Otherside

Germany's not removed stuff from the Third Reich. 

Hitler's bunker, concentration camps, the Olympic Stadium (which is filled with statues of "the supreme aryan race"). Checkpoint Charlie - the checkpoint between east and west Berlin - still stands. It's a similar story with Hitler's Birth House in Austria. Some Eastern European states have not removed statues of Soviet heroes, despite being oppressed under them, because it is important to remember what happened. 

I went as a child to view these things on a school trip. Why? Because it important that you stand there, and see these things, and understand exactly why this can never happen again. Why we can never forget what happened, ever deny the uncomfortable truth and history, however much we want to.

----------


## InvisibleGuy

Well....a lot of statues are coming down. A lot of schools in the Houston area have changed their names. I welcome it all. Can't wait until it's all done, every one.

----------


## sunrise

The display of the Confederate flag to me is a symbol of continued resistance to acceptance of diversity and civil rights, going way back to desegregation, Jim Crow, etc.  In fact, there is ongoing efforts in some states to implement legislation that amount to voter suppression.  I don't think those symbols are there as a cautionary reminder of a difficult past, but rather an act of defiance, and they are an affront, I would imagine, to blacks who live in areas where they are on display.  The Confederate flag for example is used by the KKK.  The idea of people wanting to celebrate their "heritage" by waving that flag or putting Confederate statues on a pedestal is just a euphemism for what it really means.  



I live in an area where such symbols are very rarely displayed, but when I did encounter one, a large flag on private property waving in the wind, it was a huge jolt.  I'll never forget it.  I wanted to get out of that area.  It's a symbol of hate to me.  Why fly it when we have a USA flag?  Display your pride with that flag.  It may be more difficult for non-Americans to understand, but there is an dark undercurrent there.

----------


## Otherside

I understand exactly what it's like thank you very much. The US is not the only place with a dodgy history. Or the only place where that dodgy history is celebrated by some people in the present. 

Waving a flag is one thing. Sure that's what symbol of pride. But tearing down all reminders because you wince when you pass them? Wiping away all traces of an uncomfortable past? 

The Fact that you wince is good. Why? Because then we understand and remember. Because future generations will. The fact that they are there is proof that these things happen edge. There's enough people in the world denying them without leaving no evidence of the past in place. 

Sent from my G3121 using Tapatalk

----------


## InvisibleGuy

Erecting a statue to someone is more than a reminder of the past. Not just anyone has a statue of them, a replica of them in a park or in front of city hall or whatever. It's more than just a reminder of the person, it's placed usually in a prominent place to honor what that person stood for, or the good they brought to others, for their bravery and courage, for their integrity, for doing the right thing even when it wasn't popular....or maybe all of those things. It's an honor bestowed on someone usually after they've passed on. It's much, much more than a simple reminder of the past.

We have reminders of the past in countless history books, on the internet, everywhere....to educate people about the past. Not to celebrate their lives and what they stood for, as in the case of confederate soldiers, but to educate people. If the goal was to celebrate someone's life or accomplishments then a statue would be very appropriate.

People did not erect statues so that people could wince as they went by. Google "Robert E Lee statue". Nothing about that statue makes you want to "wince" as you walk or drive by. If that were the goal, perhaps they would have made a statue showing him whipping or torturing slaves. Strange how I've never seen a statue that depicts anything like that. So. Is making people "wince" really the goal here? I don't think so. I'm not naive enough to believe that, not for a second.

----------


## sunrise

> As historians and journalists have amply documented, the first wave of statues and monuments were erected decades after North had won the Civil War. As the South in the 1890s and 1900s began to codify segregationist Jim Crow laws and deployed mob and state-sanctioned violence to keep African-Americans subjugated, states erected dozens of public tributes to the cause of the Confederacy. Confederate statues and monuments served as cultural expressions of white supremacy, painful reminders that the nation?s racial hierarchy survived the emancipation of African-Americans from slavery.
> A second wave of monument construction coincided with massive white resistance to the nonviolent civil rights movement. From 1955 to 1965, Southern (and some non-Southern) states put up dozens of Confederate-glorifying monuments. In reality, then, the Civil Rights Act (1964), the Voting Rights Act (1965) and affirmative action, among other policies aimed at fostering racial equality, never adequately addressed the stubborn persistence of racism in the society and the subtle appeals to white supremacy in the political culture, long after the civil rights revolution had run its course.  https://www.yahoo.com/news/confederate-monuments-testify-unions-unfinished-victory-195513450.html



  I don't see taking down the statues as erasing evidence, it's the unclenching of a fist.

----------


## Ironman

> The display of the Confederate flag to me is a symbol of continued resistance to acceptance of diversity and civil rights, going way back to desegregation, Jim Crow, etc.  In fact, there is ongoing efforts in some states to implement legislation that amount to voter suppression.  I don't think those symbols are there as a cautionary reminder of a difficult past, but rather an act of defiance, and they are an affront, I would imagine, to blacks who live in areas where they are on display.  The Confederate flag for example is used by the KKK.  The idea of people wanting to celebrate their "heritage" by waving that flag or putting Confederate statues on a pedestal is just a euphemism for what it really means.  
> 
> 
> 
> I live in an area where such symbols are very rarely displayed, but when I did encounter one, a large flag on private property waving in the wind, it was a huge jolt.  I'll never forget it.  I wanted to get out of that area.  It's a symbol of hate to me.  Why fly it when we have a USA flag?  Display your pride with that flag.  It may be more difficult for non-Americans to understand, but there is an dark undercurrent there.



Removing the flag isn't going to change it.  There will always be people with those viewpoints.  It would empower them to use it even more.
Some have completely gotten away from that rhetoric and warn impressionable people that being in those kinds of groups is not the thing to do.

----------


## Ironman

> I don't see taking down the statues as erasing evidence, it's the unclenching of a fist.



It's an attempt to erase it.  The next thing will be removing it from history books, then destroying the Constitution.    Things can snowball into things we can't handle.

The most important thing to do is be able to answer the question.  "Who was Robert E. Lee?"  "Who was Ulysses S. Grant?"  "What did Abraham Lincoln do?" "What was the Civil War about?" - especially if they are young.
We have the opportunity to show our wisdom.  That's one thing about reaching age 40 that I noticed was different.

----------


## Otherside

> Erecting a statue to someone is more than a reminder of the past. Not just anyone has a statue of them, a replica of them in a park or in front of city hall or whatever. It's more than just a reminder of the person, it's placed usually in a prominent place to honor what that person stood for, or the good they brought to others, for their bravery and courage, for their integrity, for doing the right thing even when it wasn't popular....or maybe all of those things. It's an honor bestowed on someone usually after they've passed on. It's much, much more than a simple reminder of the past.
> 
> We have reminders of the past in countless history books, on the internet, everywhere....to educate people about the past. Not to celebrate their lives and what they stood for, as in the case of confederate soldiers, but to educate people. If the goal was to celebrate someone's life or accomplishments then a statue would be very appropriate.
> 
> People did not erect statues so that people could wince as they went by. Google "Robert E Lee statue". Nothing about that statue makes you want to "wince" as you walk or drive by. If that were the goal, perhaps they would have made a statue showing him whipping or torturing slaves. Strange how I've never seen a statue that depicts anything like that. So. Is making people "wince" really the goal here? I don't think so. I'm not naive enough to believe that, not for a second.



I didn't say erecting a statue was built as a reminder. I never said that. I made that comment because someone spoke of that when driving past a flag. Let's be honest here - you want to wipe every trace of an uncomfortable past so that you have feel better when you pass them on the street. 

History books and the Internet are all well and good but what proof will have that any of this happened in several years time? All you have is your word. You've torn down the proof that these things happened and people celebrated that. You've left the future with a text book and your word. You think you have problems now with racism? Ohh, you'll have problems in several generations time. You just made sure there was nothing left that proved anything happened. 

How many people already deny the past? It's harder to deby it when the proof is right there. Look these people were celebrated. And this is why it was wrong. You want me to a Google? How about a google on holocaust denial, and you'll see how many deny something when there isn't proof. Or the people who fully support the actions of North Korea, the majority of which we know from peoples words. There will be a greater number of people who refuse to believe when we rely only on someone else's word - particularly when that word is second hand. Q

Sent from my G3121 using Tapatalk

----------


## Cuchculan

Why not pretend it never happened. That is exactly what the Irish were once told by a member of the British Royal family. To simply move on and forget about it. That the British killed so many Irish in their 800 years of rule here in Ireland. It is our history. The fact that we began to fight back, We have lots of dead war heroes. People we don't want to forget. As for flags? You should see the North of Ireland. It is divided. Catholic and Protestant. Each have their own groups. Republicans and Loyalists. Catholics wants to be part of the Republic. Protestants want to be part of the UK. One flag was removed once and it caused many nights of rioting. Lot of hard line Republicans ( They would be the Catholics ) and hard line Loyalists / Unionists ( They would be the Protestants ) just look for any excuse to riot. You hand them one and they will gladly take it. Turn it back against you. If visiting the North of Ireland you have got to know your flags and football tops. Or else you could end up in the wrong area wearing the wrong top. The band Megadeth found this out the hard way. They were playing in a Loyalist / Protestant area and didn't have a clue. Said ' this next song is for the Republican cause '. Broke out in the song ' Holy Wars '. That caused a full scale riots. Lead singer had his head split open with bottles thrown at him. Later he said he was dumb. He thought he knew what he was doing. But knows now that he hadn't got a clue of the whole political situation in the North of Ireland. You could be walking down a normal looking road. Suddenly you come across a ten foot wall in the middle of that road. Simple really. One side is Catholic and the other Protestant. Protestant male once took a shortcut through a Catholic housing estate. He was kicked to death. Not by Catholics. By Protestants who were hunting Catholics out. They killed one of their own. That can the North of Ireland for you. Wrong place / wrong time. Dead. Although the peace process is in place, it is still a tip toe situation. Protestants have their marching season. Why march? To celebrate battles won against Catholics. Only they like to march through Catholic areas. Which has been stopped over the past few years. The riots it used to cause. But flags play a major role in all that goes on in the North of Ireland. Many different flags meaning many different things. It would be silly to remove any of these flags. Even the ones, as an Irishman, I don't like. Why? Because it would cause a lot of trouble. Could result in deaths. Both sides have worked hard over the past decade or so. Things are not as bad as they once were. Bombs and shootings and the likes. Some groups from each area meet together and talk about their common problems. They see they both suffer in the exact same way. Whilst others like to continue on fighting and will never stop no matter what. Because they are simply full of nothing but hatred. It is what they are thought at a young age. To hate the other side. Break that cycle and we could have an answer.

----------


## InvisibleGuy

> History books and the Internet are all well and good but what proof will have that any of this happened in several years time? All you have is your word. You've torn down the proof that these things happened and people celebrated that. You've left the future with a text book and your word. You think you have problems now with racism? Ohh, you'll have problems in several generations time. You just made sure there was nothing left that proved anything happened. 
> 
> How many people already deny the past? It's harder to deby it when the proof is right there. Look these people were celebrated. And this is why it was wrong. You want me to a Google? How about a google on holocaust denial, and you'll see how many deny something when there isn't proof. Or the people who fully support the actions of North Korea, the majority of which we know from peoples words. There will be a greater number of people who refuse to believe when we rely only on someone else's word - particularly when that word is second hand. Q
> 
> Sent from my G3121 using Tapatalk



History books should be enough proof for anyone. Countless biographies and autobiographies of former slaves. That's proof that it happened, and erecting a statue is no more or less proof that it happened than a history book. If anything history books are actually better proof that it all happened.

The difference is that anyone that wants these memorials to stay up imo wants to glorify and memorialize the men that supported and promoted slavery....one of the most evil and darkest parts of this countries history. There is only one real reason why I can think anyone would want to celebrate the life of someone who promoted slavery and fought for the confederacy through a statue....it's because they themselves are racist imo. They may say they're not, they might deny it, but imo actions speak louder than words, and if your actions say that these memorials should be left in place, that to me is very, very racist. There are people, a lot of people that hide behind the lame excuses...it's a part of my heritage, my culture, it's a part of history that can't be denied.

Let's be real. The real reason anyone wants these left up is because they're racist imo. Just call a spade a spade, call it for what it is. Anyone that was against racism would want statues that glorify and memorialize these men taken down. It really is that simple, and it has nothing to do with a statue in a park reminding us that slavery happened, that has got to be the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard.

----------


## kevinjoseph

Agreed InvisibleGuy.  Well-put.

----------


## Otherside

> History books should be enough proof for anyone. Countless biographies and autobiographies of former slaves. That's proof that it happened, and erecting a statue is no more or less proof that it happened than a history book. If anything history books are actually better proof that it all happened.
> 
> The difference is that anyone that wants these memorials to stay up imo wants to glorify and memorialize the men that supported and promoted slavery....one of the most evil and darkest parts of this countries history. There is only one real reason why I can think anyone would want to celebrate the life of someone who promoted slavery and fought for the confederacy through a statue....it's because they themselves are racist imo. They may say they're not, they might deny it, but imo actions speak louder than words, and if your actions say that these memorials should be left in place, that to me is very, very racist. There are people, a lot of people that hide behind the lame excuses...it's a part of my heritage, my culture, it's a part of history that can't be denied.
> 
> Let's be real. The real reason anyone wants these left up is because they're racist imo. Just call a spade a spade, call it for what it is. Anyone that was against racism would want statues that glorify and memorialize these men taken down. It really is that simple, and it has nothing to do with a statue in a park reminding us that slavery happened, that has got to be the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard.



Excuse me? You just called me, Cuchculan, ironman and anyone who disagrees with you flat out racist, without bothering to consider the opposing view. 

You have a riot and you think you have the sole right to determine what is and isn't racist. Good for you.

You forget, or maybe didn't bother to find out, me and Cuchculan live through this. Read his post on northern Ireland. That situation has seeped into both here and southern Ireland for the last century. We've dealt with terrorists, riots, idiots who put the racists in government, peace deals that are "making deals with terrorists." and so fall apart before they even begin. We have morons marching through the streets in orange terrorising people because they live in the wrong part of Belfast. You take down a protestant mural? The first thing that happens is a brick ends up through the window of a Catholic church. 

You've got two people on here who've dealt with riots for a longer time than America has telling you you're making a bad move, that this situation will be and is more complicated than yours making it out to be. You're insistent we're not "because racism". Sure. Go for it. Anyone who disagrees with you is racist. 

You keep saying I am supporting slavery. I am not. Ironman is not. Cuchculan is not. Get that into your head. Stop lightly throwing around those terms because people did not instantly agree with you. 

Confederate history or heritage is not mine. Why? Look to the left. "Location" should tell you exactly why. I can't celebrate a history or heritage that isn't mine. I celebrate my own. Not somebody else's. 

Sent from my G3121 using Tapatalk

----------


## Cuchculan

Slow down a minute here folks. Otherside you are not racist. Neither am I or Ironman. We have views on what will lead to more trouble. We have seen it happen over this side of the world already. In Northern Ireland. Which then even jumped to England. Can I add in that in the 60's and 70's in England, in shop windows, the signs always read ' No blacks, No Irish, No Dogs '. So the Irish became known as the blacks of Europe. We shared houses with blacks in England. Both lots of people stood together and helped each other out. Why? Because we were hated. To call an Irishman racist is an insult. Just because I have opinion on what will lead to worse trouble. We have lived through what you are only starting to enter now. You think it will get better? Think again.   
@Otherside
 you are doing a great job on here. This is not a good enough reason to make you quit. He sees things as he imagines them to be in the near future. A future we have already lived through due to the same mistakes been made. I may not be black in skin colour, but by history I am, and I am proud to be black too. In the Irish way.

----------


## InvisibleGuy

Once again....





> Let's be real. The real reason anyone wants these left up is because they're racist imo. Just call a spade a spade, call it for what it is. Anyone that was against racism would want statues that glorify and memorialize these men taken down. It really is that simple, and it has nothing to do with a statue in a park reminding us that slavery happened, that has got to be the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard.



I never called anyone racist. But, imo, like I've already said....if you support keeping the statues up, if you support immortalizing and honoring and memorializing those that fought to make slaves of human beings then in my mind you are racist. As. Fuq. That goes for anyone and everyone that supports it. There are no exceptions, I don't care if you have one or two good reasons for leaving them up. The overall message is they're being honored, revered, respected and admired by those that want to keep the statues up....honored for wanting to enslave other human beings. That should outweigh everything else. This is something that imo, my kids would be able to understand, to grasp at a very, veeeery young age.

----------


## Cuchculan

What about those groups who like to go out and recreate famous battles during the Civil War. They meant to take up knitting now? LOL Won't be much fun for them if the Confederate soldiers are not allowed be there any more.

----------


## Lunaire

> History books should be enough proof for anyone. Countless biographies and autobiographies of former slaves. That's proof that it happened, and erecting a statue is no more or less proof that it happened than a history book. If anything history books are actually better proof that it all happened.
> 
> The difference is that anyone that wants these memorials to stay up imo wants to glorify and memorialize the men that supported and promoted slavery....one of the most evil and darkest parts of this countries history. There is only one real reason why I can think anyone would want to celebrate the life of someone who promoted slavery and fought for the confederacy through a statue....it's because they themselves are racist imo. They may say they're not, they might deny it, but imo actions speak louder than words, and if your actions say that these memorials should be left in place, that to me is very, very racist. There are people, a lot of people that hide behind the lame excuses...it's a part of my heritage, my culture, it's a part of history that can't be denied.
> 
> Let's be real. The real reason anyone wants these left up is because they're racist imo. Just call a spade a spade, call it for what it is. Anyone that was against racism would want statues that glorify and memorialize these men taken down. It really is that simple, and it has nothing to do with a statue in a park reminding us that slavery happened, that has got to be the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard.



Hey 
@InvisibleGuy
,

Please avoid making blanket statements like this. Regardless of your opinion on the matter, there are undoubtedly people who would disagree with you who are not racist. For example: someone might want these statues and memorials to be left up for their cultural and historical importance. 

You may not agree with the original intentions of these monuments but nonetheless they are still a part of the country's history and some people want that to be preserved. If you disagree with this then please stick to providing evidence to refute this notion or state why you believe they should be taken down rather than resorting to ad hominem arguments.

----------


## InvisibleGuy

> Hey 
> @InvisibleGuy
> ,
> 
> Please avoid making blanket statements like this. Regardless of your opinion on the matter, there are undoubtedly people who would disagree with you who are not racist. For example: someone might want these statues and memorials to be left up for their cultural and historical importance. 
> 
> You may not agree with the original intentions of these monuments but nonetheless they are still a part of the country's history and some people want that to be preserved. If you disagree with this then please stick to providing evidence to refute this notion or state why you believe they should be taken down rather than resorting to ad hominem arguments.



Understood.

I did, however state why they should be taken down, several times over. Statues are not erected for just anyone, and a statue to memorialize someone is not just to "remember the past"....it's meant to honor an individual for the work, progress, advancements, ideas they stood for while they were alive. So. Why would anyone want to leave a statue honoring someone's life work to legalize enslaving other human beings? Why would anyone promote that, unless they were racist?

Also, as I mentioned before, I agree there might be other reasons to want to keep the statues up (heritage, cultural reasons) but the fact that these statues are meant to honor men that promoted slavery should outweigh any other reasons. I think that should be blatantly obvious to anyone, everyone.

----------


## Lunaire

> Understood.
> 
> I did, however state why they should be taken down, several times over. Statues are not erected for just anyone, and a statue to memorialize someone is not just to "remember the past"....it's meant to honor an individual for the work, progress, advancements, ideas they stood for while they were alive. So. Why would anyone want to leave a statue honoring someone's life work to legalize enslaving other human beings? Why would anyone promote that, unless they were racist?
> 
> Also, as I mentioned before, I agree there might be other reasons to want to keep the statues up (heritage, cultural reasons) but the fact that these statues are meant to honor men that promoted slavery should outweigh any other reasons. I think that should be blatantly obvious to anyone, everyone.



If you feel strongly about trying not to honor the original intentions then there are some alternatives to demolishing them. Some examples might be to include a plaque condemning the actions of the people that erected the monument but stating the historical context for them and considering it a cultural heritage site. Another example may be to transport them to a museum.

As 
@Otherside
 mentioned there are historical monuments from the Third Reich that were left up in Europe for their historical value. This doesn't mean that those countries are honoring the actions of Adolf Hitler or that they are all racist... they were left up both as a warning to future generations and for their historical importance.

----------


## InvisibleGuy

> If you feel strongly about trying not to honor the original intentions then there are some alternatives to demolishing them. Some examples might be to include a plaque condemning the actions of the people that erected the monument but stating the historical context for them and considering it a cultural heritage site. Another example may be to transport them to a museum.
> 
> As 
> @*Otherside*
>  mentioned there are historical monuments from the Third Reich that were left up in Europe for their historical value. This doesn't mean that those countries are honoring the actions of Adolf Hitler or that they are all racist... they were left up both as a warning to future generations and for their historical importance.



Fair enough. I disagree though. I think leaving up monuments that (even at one time) honored the third reich is a really dangerous idea, it's misguided, and some may have good intentions but it's completely the wrong way to go about it.

I'm not the only one that thinks exactly as I do wrt this subject by the way lol. There are millions and millions of Americans of all races and creeds and age and from all walks of life that want all of these statues removed. There are valid reasons why they should be removed according to the millions of Americans that feel the same way I do. Reasons I've already spelled out over and over again in this thread

I'll refrain from making blanket statements if it makes everyone feel better, but there are times in life when blanket statements apply. Racism is racism, and supporting the memorialization of slave owners is, in my mind, racist. I'm not going to change my mind about that.

I appreciate you suggesting alternative solutions to removing the statues, but as I've already said there are millions and millions of Americans who want them removed, and we won't settle for anything less. And we shouldn't.

----------


## Lunaire

> Fair enough. I disagree though. I think leaving up monuments that (even at one time) honored the third reich is a really dangerous idea, it's misguided, and some may have good intentions but it's completely the wrong way to go about it.
> 
> I'm not the only one that thinks exactly as I do wrt this subject by the way lol. There are millions and millions of Americans of all races and creeds and age and from all walks of life that want all of these statues removed. There are valid reasons why they should be removed according to the millions of Americans that feel the same way I do. Reasons I've already spelled out over and over again in this thread
> 
> I'll refrain from making blanket statements if it makes everyone feel better, but there are times in life when blanket statements apply. Racism is racism, and supporting the memorialization of slave owners is, in my mind, racist. I'm not going to change my mind about that.
> 
> I appreciate you suggesting alternative solutions to removing the statues, but as I've already said there are millions and millions of Americans who want them removed, and we won't settle for anything less. And we shouldn't.



It's fine to disagree and I'm not trying to support one side or the other on the issue -- I mainly wanted to provide some potentially valid reasons why someone would want to leave them up other than 'they are racist'. 

You may feel that the memorials stand for a racist ideology, but to claim that every single person that wants to leave them up is racist is simply not true. 

Absolute statements are dangerous and unfortunately things are very rarely black and white. if your argument is strong enough you should be able to undermine the opposing view without resorting to comments about their personal character.

----------


## InvisibleGuy

> It's fine to disagree and I'm not trying to support one side or the other on the issue -- I mainly wanted to provide some potentially valid reasons why someone would want to leave them up other than 'they are racist'. 
> 
> You may feel that the memorials stand for a racist ideology, but to claim that every single person that wants to leave them up is racist is simply not true. 
> 
> Absolute statements are dangerous and unfortunately things are very rarely black and white. if your argument is strong enough you should be able to undermine the opposing view without resorting to comments about their personal character.



And I have.

I've stated that even if someone's main reason for wanting to leave the statues up is to "remind us of the past"...they should consider other ways of going about it that don't also memorialize and honor the men that promoted slavery. I pointed out that there are other ways to do it, through history books, through biographies, autobiographies of former slaves, through historical internet sites.

There are people, however, who insist that the best way to teach and remind us of history is through statues that glorify and immortalize former slave owners.

I find that to be very, very curious, when we have history books, and all these other ways of reminding us and educating us about the past. There are people that are hellbent on finding the only way to do that, that also memorializes slave owners. Wow. Why is that.....

----------


## Lunaire

> And I have.
> 
> I've stated that even if someone's main reason for wanting to leave the statues up is to "remind us of the past"...they should consider other ways of going about it that don't also memorialize and honor the men that promoted slavery. I pointed out that there are other ways to do it, through history books, through biographies, autobiographies of former slaves, through historical internet sites.
> 
> There are people, however, who insist that the best way to teach and remind us of history is through statues that glorify and immortalize former slave owners.
> 
> I find that to be very, very curious, when we have history books, and all these other ways of reminding us and educating us about the past. There are people that are hellbent on finding the only way to do that, that also memorializes slave owners. Wow. Why is that.....



As a site administrator everything I say becomes a direct reflection of the site's official standpoint, whether it be intentional or not. My prior points were an attempt to try to foster more lighthearted discussion on the matter and to deescalate things as they had become a bit heated.

Unfortunately I don't feel that I can come up with an adequate response to your questioning here without coming across as supporting one side on the issue so I will invite others on this board that may disagree to chime in with their thoughts.  ::):

----------


## Cuchculan

Wonder has he even read a word I wrote about Northern Ireland? That is how I can the US going. A big divide. Two sides. Who knows what levels that divide will reach? In the North of Ireland there was killings for years. Bombings. So much hatred between two sides. Is this were the US is heading towards? One side has a go at the other side. The other side hits back. Marches begin. Through areas were the other side live. Riots break out on a regular basis. The police? They also become targets. Why? Both sides see them as doing nothing for them. Doing more for the other side. They begin to remove symbols thinking this will help. It never does help. Only serves to make things much worse. That last point was the main thing that those against what you were saying were only trying to point out. It is not racist to say such a thing. Point out something that might happen in the future. That we have seen happen over here. I would rather they let them have their murals up North here and fly their flags rather than see people die. Is it wrong of me to say that? That I prefer to see people not been killed over flags and murals? I do see the North of Ireland as still been Irish. But it is not worth dying over. Too many people have lost their lives over the years. If they handed the North back tomorrow more would die as a direct result of it. Because some people in the North want to be part of the UK. They would kill for their cause. Would people kill for their cause in the US if it went too far? Over a flag and statues. Not talking a whole State here. Only takes a few to kick things off. One bomb in the right place and it would begin. One shooting of a big name. It is not outside the realms of possibility. That was the point I was making. That was the point Otherside was making too. It could lead to something much bigger. Two ethnic groups who begin to really hate each other. Ticking time bomb.

----------


## JamieWAgain

While i admit that I'm not an historian by any stretch of the imagination, here is what i don't understand. (I'll try to type out my thoughts so they are coherent, so please be patient...)

Why doesn't anyone say or acknowledge that (OH God, I'm ready for the insults, but try to understand where I'm going with this...)

Why don't we acknowledge that back when George Washington was our first president, for example, no one thought twice about slavery. It was just they way things were at that time. Obviously now we have evolved and changed and we realize how horrible it was. But back in those days, women stayed in the kitchen, couldn't vote of course, and some plantations had slaves. It isn't something to celebrate but it just was not considered to be anything bad in those days.

So, now that we know slavery was and is horribly wrong, and we know that women can vote and work, why is everyone so upset about the way things were 200 years ago?

My family is from the south (Half of my family) and when we were kids we sent invitations to other children addressed to 'master john doe' or 'miss Jane doe' for instance. It was just a phrase.

Now I get it. Wow. That phrase originated from slavery times. But to me it was just a phrase. Part of our history.

I'm not racist or a biggot and I accept everyone. All the letters of the alphabet. LGBT, everyone. Everyone to me is a human being. An equal human being.

But I don't want to try to erase our history.

Is the Washington Monument next?
What about Washington, DC?

----------


## fetisha

Wow @ this thread

----------


## Cuchculan

I will simply leave this thread with a song.

----------


## Ironman

> Wow @ this thread



Deep thoughts!  
Yeah, this is pretty active, but not the most heated.

----------


## InvisibleGuy

Lol random political thoughts gets pretty heated, and I for one am not surprised. As Kay said, there are bound to be controversial topics here.

----------


## kevinjoseph

I think you'll see that, if you look at when such statues and monuments were erected, they were not built immediately following the Civil War for purposes of "preserving history," but at times of civil rights movements for ethnic minorities.  They were built in a reactionary way to these movements as a back-handed way of...well, I can't think of any better word than "revenge."  Jim Crow era was when they first boomed in construction, then the Civil Rights movement of the 60s.

EDIT: Found a graphic for ya

20882380_1516871391685107_3881726944161957492_n.jpg

----------


## Cuchculan

So just knock them all down? Might not have been the greatest moment in US history. But the civil war still happened. Slavery existed. Just like WWI and WWII happened. That doesn't take back the fact that all those Jewish people were put to death by Hitler. Do you think the Jewish people would want the world to forget what happened to them? I would ask the same of black people in the US. You think they want people to forget what happened to them in history? Just wipe it all out by knocking down statues and renaming buildings and roads. Have to see, as an outsider looking in it has to be silliest thing I have ever heard of. Trying to remove history in this way. It is not like every time a black person walks by a certain statue they think of the bad old days of slavery. Though that is what some white people want to make it look like. As if they are saying ' we are doing this for you '. And every black person in the US should be thankful to them. By some kind of American magic by removing all these things the KKK and other groups like them will simply vanish? Click of the fingers. They are gone. This will only make them more determined than ever before. Feed into their hands. Even give them great numbers to their groups than they have ever had. It will become an ' Us against Them ' type of thing. Those sort of things never end well. We saw the first death at that rally last week. Let us count that as number 1. See how many follow. Because this is only the start of it all.

----------


## InvisibleGuy

> I think you'll see that, if you look at when such statues and monuments were erected, they were not built immediately following the Civil War for purposes of "preserving history," but at times of civil rights movements for ethnic minorities.  They were built in a reactionary way to these movements as a back-handed way of...well, I can't think of any better word than "revenge."  Jim Crow era was when they first boomed in construction, then the Civil Rights movement of the 60s.
> 
> EDIT: Found a graphic for ya
> 
> 20882380_1516871391685107_3881726944161957492_n.jpg



Yeah. The statue of the confederate soldier that's up in Sam Houston Park, the one I joined in protesting yesterday was put up in the 1920's.

I'd just add that removing a statue does not equal forgetting history. That's a very, very lame excuse imo, and that argument does not hold up.

If you think the best way to remember history is to erect a statue that glorifies and memorializes slave owners.....well.....you know what I think about that lmao.

~~~~~~~

*Staff Edit:* Some of the content in this post has been removed until @InvisableGuy clarifies that he isn't making a blanket statement that people that want the historical part up = discriminating/ violating peoples rights. Certainly this isn't the case for everyone. These types of arguments are an Ad Hominem  (sweeping generalization) and against the guidelines of this thread:





> This thread is for posting thoughts you have about any political events around the globe.
> 
> 
> _Ground Rules:
> 
> Civil discussion and debate is welcome.Personal attacks, insults, or sweeping generalizations will not be tolerated.Moderators are community volunteers and their opinions do not necessarily reflect the views of Anxiety Space as a whole.
> 
> _

----------


## Cuchculan

What follows the statues? Books been removed from libraries? Burned in piles on the streets.

----------


## InvisibleGuy

> Staff Edit: Some of the content in this post has been removed until @InvisableGuy clarifies that he isn't making a blanket statement that people that want the historical part up = discriminating/ violating peoples rights. Certainly this isn't the case for everyone. These types of arguments are an Ad Hominem  (sweeping generalization) and against the guidelines of this thread:



I'm not making blanket statements. I think that these statues are racist. It's as simple as that, to me. They are racist, and they need to be removed.

I wonder why anyone would want them to remain. I wonder why anyone would want to memorialize former slave owners. I would question the integrity of anyone who would support having these statues remain where they are.

I wouldn't have them as friends. I wouldn't associate with them in any way. I'd keep them at a distance.

----------


## InvisibleGuy

> Thank you for changing wording/ clairifying! 
> 
> You have every right to your opinion, and it comes across less attacking if you use words like "I think", "I feel might be" or "some" when having a debate rather than making it sound like a fact with statistics, that have none. 
> 
> I like that you changed the wording to the statues are racist; vs the person. Someone could very well agree that the statues are racist, but not want them demolished due to historical reasons (I have an African American friend that feels that way for example). 
> 
> Using feelings vs blanket statements gives more opportunity for opposing views, and can help ensure more civil discussion. It can give new perspective to both views. 
> 
> I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with what you are saying (as I am as well trying to stay neutral in this thread). My main concern is making sure everyone feels safe to post their opinions, and share opposing views, without being in fear of being pre-judged/ labeled. 
> ...



Understood. It makes sense.

I'll be more careful with how I word things. Tbh, it's probably best for me to just keep a few of my opinions to myself lol....some people might find them offensive. There are a few things I just have zero tolerance for....racism, hate based on someone's religious beliefs or ethnicity or skin color are one of those things. But anyway I'll word things more carefully. Or just keep my thoughts to myself, when I can't lol.

----------


## InvisibleGuy

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/...rnight-n794411

"University of Texas President Greg Fenves ordered the immediate removal of statues of Robert E. Lee and other prominent Confederate figures from a main area of campus, saying such monuments have become 'symbols of modern white supremacy and neo-Nazism.' " ~ Associated Press

This is great news. Good to see this happening. I'm sure there will be more, I'm sure other universities, other cities will follow their lead.

----------


## Cuchculan

They have been made into symbols of modern white supremacy and Neo-Nazism over the past while only. Before that nobody saw them as that at all. Like I said so many times, keep removing them and they will really become signs of symbols of modern white supremacy and Neo-Nazism. What were they two years ago? Just statues. It takes people to claim they are signs of symbols of modern white supremacy and Neo-Nazism to turn them into such. Is the new trend sweeping the US.

----------


## kevinjoseph

Cuchman, I don't think people began seeing them as symbols of white supremacy in the past two years.  

They've been erected since the 1920s as such in response to Jim Crow etc

----------


## InvisibleGuy

> Cuchman, I don't think people began seeing them as symbols of white supremacy in the past two years.  
> 
> They've been erected since the 1920s as such in response to Jim Crow etc



Exactly.

I'm really feeling good about the movement to take the statues down. It's happening. Not everywhere, not all at once, but the movement is gaining momentum. Most people do not want symbols of hate and racism, most people do not want memorials of slave owners in their communities. There are other ways to remember the past. There are other ways to educate people. Other ways that don't celebrate and memorialize former slave owners.

----------


## Cuchculan

> Exactly.
> 
> I'm really feeling good about the movement to take the statues down. It's happening. Not everywhere, not all at once, but the movement is gaining momentum. Most people do not want symbols of hate and racism, most people do not want memorials of slave owners in their communities. There are other ways to remember the past. There are other ways to educate people. Other ways that don't celebrate and memorialize former slave owners.



Other ways like what exactly? Say you wanted to teach a person about the Civil war tomorrow. But you wanted to leave out all the bad bits. How would you explain it to them? As they would ask questions. What about books in libraries? Old films. Paintings. Do people have to remove all of them as well?

----------


## kevinjoseph

I don't think that removing the statues is about leaving out the bad parts.  It's about removing negative people from spots of honor.  If you want to teach someone about the Civil War or history in general and you NEED things in public spaces like statues to do so, I would wonder what kind of teacher you are.  You can show people Andersonville where they kept Union POWs, or look at written histories of slaves, or any number of other things that don't commemorate the villains.  

It's not about rewriting history.  It's about removing those from honor who shouldn't be honored in the first place...

----------


## InvisibleGuy

> I don't think that removing the statues is about leaving out the bad parts.  It's about removing negative people from spots of honor.  If you want to teach someone about the Civil War or history in general and you NEED things in public spaces like statues to do so, I would wonder what kind of teacher you are.  You can show people Andersonville where they kept Union POWs, or look at written histories of slaves, or any number of other things that don't commemorate the villains.  
> 
> It's not about rewriting history.  It's about removing those from honor who shouldn't be honored in the first place...



This ^

I really don't think you understand the basic premise here, 
@Cuchculan
 either that, or you just don't want to understand it.

It's not about erasing the bad parts of history. It's not about pretending that our country didn't enslave, murder, torture millions of human beings. History books, the biographies and autobiographies of slaves, historical sites on the internet...all of those can be used to educate. No one is suggesting we leave any of the facts out (except for you). That's insane. That would make no sense.

For the millionth time. Statues are not erected for just anyone. I'm not going to get a statue built to remember me when I'm gone. Neither are you, probably. Having a statue in your name is an honor. It's meant to honor the sacrifices you made while you were alive, or the contributions you made to society, or to acknowledge the fact that you were brave and courageous and did the right thing, even though it may not have been popular at the time. Statues are erected to honor people and the way they lived their lives.

Slave owners are not worthy of being honored. For anything. They are the biggest black eye this country has ever been given. They're a disgrace. An embarrassment. If one of my ancestors, someone on my family tree had been a slave owner or fought for the confederacy, and had a statue erected in their name, I would personally take it down. I honestly don't know what is so difficult about understanding this very, very simple concept. Unless you have some kind of ulterior motive or something.

----------


## Ironman

> http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/...rnight-n794411
> 
> "University of Texas President Greg Fenves ordered the immediate removal of statues of Robert E. Lee and other prominent Confederate figures from a main area of campus, saying such monuments have become 'symbols of modern white supremacy and neo-Nazism.' " ~ Associated Press
> 
> This is great news. Good to see this happening. I'm sure there will be more, I'm sure other universities, other cities will follow their lead.



So, basically ONE MAN is calling for it to go down.  Don't you find this a bit startling?  ONE MAN determines what gets torn down,  We are in a lot of trouble.

----------


## InvisibleGuy

> So, basically ONE MAN is calling for it to go down.  Don't you find this a bit startling?  ONE MAN determines what gets torn down,  We are in a lot of trouble.



Did you even bother to read the article, John? Or did you just reply with a knee-jerk reaction?





> "The decision to take down the others came much quicker. Fenves said he spoke last week with student leaders, students, faculty members, staff members and alumni about what to do after the events in Virginia. 
> 
> "The University of Texas at Austin is a public educational and research institution, first and foremost. The historical and cultural significance of the Confederate statues on our campus — and the connections that individuals have with them — are severely compromised by what they symbolize," Fenves said. 
> 
> "Erected during the period of Jim Crow laws and segregation, the statues represent the subjugation of African Americans. That remains true today for white supremacists who use them to symbolize hatred and bigotry," he said."



 ~ Associated Press

It was not one man's decision. Read the above quote.

Also, I attended a rally / protest last Saturday in which there were four or five hundred people, all there to protest the confederate statue in Sam Houston Park here in Houston.

You make it sound like Greg Fenves is the only man in Texas that wants these racist statues removed lol. That's not the case, my friend. A whole, whole lot of people want them removed.

----------


## Cuchculan

My next question would be about the Native American Indians. Did you treat them any better than you did the slaves? That wasn't a confederate issue. That was your normal cavalry of the day. Same soldiers who would have fought against the confederate army in the civil war. So that only tells me that each side is just as bad as the other. How many Native American Indians died? How much land was stolen from them? The land was originally theirs. What you class as your average Americans only came after them and took what was theirs. How many statues are up of people who fought battles against the Native American Indians? I bet they are not seen as bad as those who had slaves. Double standards.

----------


## InvisibleGuy

> My next question would be about the Native American Indians. Did you treat them any better than you did the slaves? That wasn't a confederate issue. That was your normal cavalry of the day. Same soldiers who would have fought against the confederate army in the civil war. So that only tells me that each side is just as bad as the other. How many Native American Indians died? How much land was stolen from them? The land was originally theirs. What you class as your average Americans only came after them and took what was theirs. How many statues are up of people who fought battles against the Native American Indians? I bet they are not seen as bad as those who had slaves. Double standards.



It is a double standard. Those statues should be removed. I haven't heard anyone argue otherwise. Though, it wouldn't surprise me if a few people posted that it would be a "shame to try to delete a part of history" lmao.

It was the biggest holocaust in recent history, maybe in all of history. Millions and millions of people were slaughtered. Unfortunately this country was founded through a holocaust, we not only took land that wasn't ours to take but we murdered millions of Native Americans while doing it. There shouldn't be any statues up honoring those murderers.

So what's your point?

----------


## kevinjoseph

I think Cuchman's point is that it's a slippery slope if we start removing statues.  I wouldn't agree, but is that your point 
@Cuchculan
?

----------


## Cuchculan

I mean to remove statues of a certain era only is wrong if something even bigger happened and worse happened and things from that era are still allowed and accepted. I think that is my whole point. That most people would accept the removal of those civil wars statues but not of anything of anybody involved with what happened to the Native American Indians. That might lead to a lot of name changes in towns and streets. Also be the end of thanksgiving day too. That is connected back to the days of the earliest settlers is it not? A whole public holiday. One of your biggest holiday days of the year. I am sure people would never accept that.

----------


## InvisibleGuy

> I mean to remove statues of a certain era only is wrong if something even bigger happened and worse happened and things from that era are still allowed and accepted. I think that is my whole point. That most people would accept the removal of those civil wars statues but not of anything of anybody involved with what happened to the Native American Indians. That might lead to a lot of name changes in towns and streets. Also be the end of thanksgiving day too. That is connected back to the days of the earliest settlers is it not? A whole public holiday. One of your biggest holiday days of the year. I am sure people would never accept that.



Well, so much for not lumping all of us dumb Americans together. So much for not assuming we all think alike. So much for not stereotyping.

----------


## JamieWAgain

How will people remove Mt. Rushmore?  I wonder if the energy spent on tearing down statues is better spent on educating all of us. Instead of tearing down maybe instead erect plaques with the facts?  I'm in trouble where I live if I have to start sitting Native American style instead of Indian style. I don't understand why they want to tear down historical statues even though invisableguy keeps explaining it, I still don't get it.

----------


## InvisibleGuy

I guess some people just don't get it.  *sigh*

----------


## Cuchculan

> Well, so much for not lumping all of us dumb Americans together. So much for not assuming we all think alike. So much for not stereotyping.



Never said anything about all Americans been dumb? I am simply saying a lot of bad things have happened, but to right the wrong would mean doing away with some tradition most Americans like. Like Thanksgiving which most people use as a family day. People would never agree to it. Let us be honest about it. It would be impossible to right all the wrongs ever done. So only one is been picked on for now. Which I still don't think will end well at all. Can only see it leading to trouble. Playing into the hands of the haters. Might surprise you to hear I have a lot of American friends who agree with my views. Maybe not on here. But it is debated elsewhere too. They know exactly what I am on about. Sorry if you thought I was offending you or even Americans. That was not my intention at all.

----------


## InvisibleGuy

Well, there are a whole, whole lot of people that agree with me, also. Four to five hundred people showed up at a protest I went to last Saturday. Four to five hundred people risked possibly getting into an ugly confrontation with the opposition. They risked getting into a confrontation with cops. The BLM facebook page suggested that you NOT bring children. They stated that the protesters were a radical left wing group. They stated that they are not there to make anyone comfortable. They are there to get you out of your comfort zone. They are a voice for change. They suggested wearing a bandana or scarf over your face, and at the very least sunglasses. I didn't wear either. I have nothing, nothing to be ashamed of. I have nothing to hide from. I am totally at peace with anyone and everyone knowing exactly where I stand on this issue. If anything, I'd expect the opposition to be ashamed, to be hiding their faces.

There are a lot, a whole lot of people who feel like I do. And the movement to take down the statues is gaining momentum. It's happening, whether you like it or not. If I was you I'd get used to the idea that the statues here are coming down. I think it's a step in the right direction. I think it's long, long overdue.

----------


## Cuchculan

I don't live over there so it won't really bother me at all. I just think it will turn ugly. That was my original point. Just like we have seen over here in Northern Ireland. Us against Them sort of thing. Riots. Even killings. I will watch on with interest. No offense to you ever meant in any of my posts. We have different opinions only. Mine for the reasons I just stated. I know why you have your opinions too. So we can agree to disagree and still get on with each other.

----------


## InvisibleGuy

> I don't live over there so it won't really bother me at all. I just think it will turn ugly. That was my original point. Just like we have seen over here in Northern Ireland. Us against Them sort of thing. Riots. Even killings. I will watch on with interest. No offense to you ever meant in any of my posts. We have different opinions only. Mine for the reasons I just stated. I know why you have your opinions too. So we can agree to disagree and still get on with each other.



I feel the same.

I'd just add that....I have explained my POV in every way possible. People that don't understand it are either flaming or gaslighting, or just flat out refuse to see my POV because they're convinced they're right. Whatever lol.

I can see the opposite POV here. I can see why some people might think it's wrong to take the statues down. But. I don't think they're thinking it all the way through. I don't think they're seeing the big picture. They refuse to see what the statues mean, what they symbolize, what they've always symbolized. They refuse to believe that there are other ways to educate people about the past. It's almost as if they are going out of their way to create an argument to keep the statues up. They have to manipulate, construct these arguments to justify keeping the statues up, when anyone can clearly see they are racist.

If things turn ugly here, if there is a race war here, it won't be because we decided to take down racist statues, statues that glorify slave owners. It will be because there's been racial tension that's been building here for years. It won't be because someone took down a statue.

----------


## Lunaire

Hi All,

I have temporarily closed this thread until we have had some further discussion on how to manage it in the Staff Room. We may open it back up once we have some better guidelines in place or have come to a decision on how to handle the heated nature of these topics.

Please also note that it is *NOT OK* to publicly argue with a forum moderator's decision. If you take issue with how moderation has been handled then please report the post for a site administrator to review and we will handle the matter internally.

Thanks,
Lunaire

----------

