2aHawaii
General Topics => Political Discussion => Topic started by: RSN172 on February 18, 2019, 10:56:23 AM
-
http://www.askaprepper.com/is-america-turning-into-a-communist-country/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=AAP
If the Dems win control of both chambers and the WH in 2020, we will be well on our way.
-
http://www.askaprepper.com/is-america-turning-into-a-communist-country/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=AAP
If the Dems win control of both chambers and the WH in 2020, we will be well on our way.
Don't think so. Oligarchy led dictatorship (i.e., fascism) definitely yes! But a communist state, absolutely not.
Unless the Democrats plan to dismantle Wall Street, jail all the Bankers, and prepare legislation to nationalize all private corporations in 2020, rest assured; the US will not be heading to becoming a true communist state anytime soon.
-
Realistically Hawaii is an Oligarchy,
not a communist state, but run for the
benefit of the party and the rich.
America is more likely to follow that
path. It is unlikely that America will rise up
and kill the Democrat Tyrants and establish
a workers paradise.
More likely will be a Balkanization, and there will
be the very rich and the poor.
Most Americans are too comfortable to go out and
start shooting politicians( unless you are a Democrat
attacking a baseball game), which today is the only way
to get their attention.
Certainly it is a complete waste of time to talk to our Hawaii
politicians, unless you are a Democrat and live on Oahu.
-
Realistically Hawaii is an Oligarchy,
not a communist state, but run for the
benefit of the party and the rich.
America is more likely to follow that
path.
The US as a whole is already run by an oligarchy of the ultra-wealthy, administered by a puppet two political party bureaucracy.
Most Americans are too comfortable to go out and
start shooting politicians( unless you are a Democrat
attacking a baseball game), which today is the only way
to get their attention.
America's relative standard of living as well as its never-ending imperial wars disguised in the name of freedom and democracy are the only two things keeping its citizenry from rising up and taking back their nation from the ultra-wealthy that are fanatically working to transform the US into a neo-feudal state, where the basic rights of man will not exist.
-
And the beat goes on and on and on...... ;)
-
No, we are not becoming a communist country. Even if we are sliding to the left a little we aren't anywhere close to being communist.
-
The commies are using the word "socialist".
Like global warming was renamed climate change.
Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
-
Democratic Communist, Socialist, Fascist or Democratic whatever, we don't have to worry because they promised they are not coming for all our guns. We only want you to register them and have some common sense gun laws. It's for the children.
-
Democratic Communist, Socialist, Fascist or Democratic whatever, we don't have to worry because they promised they are not coming for all our guns. We only want you to register them and have some common sense gun laws. It's for the children.
And they almost all begin their comments with the phrase "I support the Second Amendment, but...". So we can relax knowing they are on our side. :rofl:
-
I know folks talk about civil war more and more lately, but I used to believe most of that was saber rattling and general venting. While I think that's still generally it, I was starting to wonder more about that becoming reality. Discussion on NPR this morning was about how the Dem base has shifted. While NPR is still very much liberal leaning, even they were commenting on how things have changed and the tone sort of conceded that it wasn't for the better. And this is coming from Steve Inskeep. But things on the conservative side isn't much different. If you look at many of the basic issues, they aren't that different from say 2014-2015. Just that now liberals are super vocal and filled with blind hatred of Trump. Why is that. . . [rhetorical]
-
SHTF if Trump ever gets impeached or like thing that takes place. Although Pence will be next in line and many who support Trump like Pence also so I don't think it would be that bad.
Watch after Trump is cleared on Russia collusion, they will call it something else. "Well we found other unrelated laws that were broken with people he's associated with. So the investigation was worth it".
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WP4tcqhoZpM
"...have seized upon that word, Liberal, as a cover-up for their activities. It sounds so innocent, and so humanitarian..."
Please don't criticize unless you've listened to it.
-
https://www.4kdownload.com
Download YouTube videos. Free.
-
many who support Trump like Pence also so I don't think it would be that bad.
\
Do not forget that Pelousy is right behind Pence, and the liberals know all it would take is an "accident" to seize control.
-
\
Do not forget that Pelousy is right behind Pence, and the liberals know all it would take is an "accident" to seize control.
If it gets to that point we will be engaged in 4GW. I have a particular dis-like for Democrats and
I don't think I would continue to "comply" at that point. Not making any threats here, just saying
I don't have to do anything to help them out.
-
The problems we are experiencing now don't stem from communism or capitalism but corruption as a result of complacency. At some point the vast majority of Americans decided to abandon their civic duty and personal responsibility to actively participate in political affairs. Instead the sentiment is to wait around for some messiah to come take care of it for us and bide our time in petty sarcasm and hate speech until that day comes. I'm guilty of this as well but I'm trying Ringo.
-
Watch after Trump is cleared on Russia collusion, they will call it something else. "Well we found other unrelated laws that were broken with people he's associated with. So the investigation was worth it".
The investigation most likely will not "clear" Trump on Russia Collusion, rather what you would more likely see is just a statement that there was no/insufficient evidence of Trump colluding with Russia. It is like the difference between finding someone not guilty and finding someone innocent.
Of course this is all assuming there isn't any evidence of collusion.
-
Watch after Trump is cleared on Russia collusion, they will call it something else. "Well we found other unrelated laws that were broken with people he's associated with. So the investigation was worth it".
Trump will never be cleared. The dems will continue to investigate him until he is out of office or in jail. And it may be whichever is latter. Funny how they (both sides) used to love him until he became POTUS. The Deep State is deeper than we thought and the corruption is rampant.
-
I think we are too comfortable in our current situation and become too lazy to achieve anything. We tend to blame others for our shortcomings or failure to achieve goals. I think that as we become more competitive some of us lack the necessary motivation to generally be better. It takes work to survive in this country. SOme of us are unwilling to put forth the work and want others to do it. Tax the rich. Blame the wealthy - those that have achieved.
Most of us who have lived here all our lives have no idea what communism or socialism is - its failures and its little success. Those that dangle this idea of communism and/or socialism are entertaining those that choose to work at McDs all their lives...not seeking there full potential. They want to stay comfortable at that level and expect others to help them stay at that level but they also want a certain level of comfort. i.e. a house , the "American Dream" all on a "living wage"
-
The Deep State is deeper than we thought and the corruption is rampant.
The Deep State or whatever people want to call them is a power elite that is controlled/influenced by the ultra wealthy. The corruption everyone speaks of can only come from those who have the money to corrupt. And who are those people? The poor starving college students with unmarketable degrees or homeless derelicts? No, only the ultra wealthy has that kind of revenue.
This constant narrative that it is those who advocate socialism that is the reason why the US has the problems that it has is a direct result of misdirection by the Deep State. By getting the masses to go after and blame the liberal college students as well as the homeless, only allows the Deep State to go unscathed and continue their agenda, which is not in the interest of the general populace.
-
If it gets to that point we will be engaged in 4GW. I have a particular dis-like for Democrats and
I don't think I would continue to "comply" at that point. Not making any threats here, just saying
I don't have to do anything to help them out.
I stop complying if they are successful doing anything to Trump. I have had it with these modern "liberals" and their Soviet/Mao style urges.
If they succeed with some of their schemes, the rule of law is over and we should act accordingly.
-
You won't understand what communism really is and how it began unless you listen to what I posted.
People are willing to pick up guns and risk lives to defend the Constitution but few will do the REALLY hard thing, pick up earphones and sit still and spend some time to learn about the Big Picture. Most people's unwillingness to do exactly this is exactly why things are how they are today.
-
Communism will kill all the things we have grown to be comfortable with. We want more of it but we don't want to earn it ourselves. So some of us think communism will provide those things. Communism is that brick that will smash your ego, individualism and put power in the elites that sell you that pipe dream.
We forget...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VVxYOQS6ggk
love it or hate what that speech meant but if you own any type of stock, work for any US entity - Welcome :shaka:
It is what drives us. There are winners and losers - America gives you that choice of who you want to be.
So how many people are fleeing from communist states to come to America?
And how many are fleeing America to join a communist state?
America is too comfortable and I doubt will ever be a communist state. We have forgotten what our founding principles are and the work that needs to be done to sustain it.
-
So how many people are fleeing from communist states to come to America?
Well let's see, there are only around five countries today that partially resemble or proclaim to be communist. They are China, North Korea, Laos, Vietnam, and Cuba. With the exception of China, where those Chinese coming here today have more to do with taking away high paying jobs from Americans rather than fleeing political persecution; there has been no dramatic exodus from the other four nations to the US in the last 20 years or so.
And how many are fleeing America to join a communist state?
Of course none, since there never has truly been a pure communist state as described by Karl Marx since the fall of the Soviet Union.
We have forgotten what our founding principles are and the work that needs to be done to sustain it.
100% correct.
I guess America needs to go back to its colonial heritage of slavery, lack of equal rights to women and to the non-European population, extermination of Native Americans, etc.
THANK GOD the purely racist Chinese Exclusion Act made into US Law in 1882 was deemed illegal in 1902 or else your family would have not been allowed to settle in the US.
-
THANK GOD the purely racist Chinese Exclusion Act made into US Law in 1882 was deemed illegal in 1902 or else your family would have not been allowed to settle in the US.
You assume I identify as the Chinese. I don't identify as Chinese. Why you bring race into this? Ad hominem attack >:( O0
-
I stop complying if they are successful doing anything to Trump.
What if they are successful in doing something to Trump because there became evidence that Trump did something fairly bad?
-
What if they are successful in doing something to Trump because there became evidence that Trump did something fairly bad?
"fairly bad"- is that better or worse than "kinda awful"?
-
"fairly bad"- is that better or worse than "kinda awful"?
The Trump haters have stopped looking for anything "unlawful" and are willing to settle for "kinda awful".
That's a notch below just "awful". :rofl:
The reasons for the shift are:
(1) they failed to find anything to support impeachment. They've resigned themselves to the obvious reality that Trump isn't leaving office before his first term is up.
(2) they are focusing on the 2020 election now. Anything they can use to smear Trump is now worth more than imaginary impeachable crimes.
https://youtu.be/pqiAx5QNWR0
-
The main flaw in Ben Shapiro's argument is that his utopia of capitalism and that America should move towards being a true capitalist state is a pipedream.
The founding fathers had no intentions of creating a nation state based on the economic notions of Adam Smith. In the video above, Shapiro questions the validity of paying taxes to render government services that provides no benefit to him. However, a quick read of the US Constitution, if he truly understands it, would clearly see the creation of a central government and with its prescribed ability, for example, to tax and create a military for the common defense.
Anyone who is a true capitalist knows government and taxes are the true enemy of personal freedom, as Shapiro would state. Therefore, based on his perceptions of personal liberty and capitalism, America should not have any central government, taxation, or standing military at all, as they are all wasteful spending of the money he worked so hard to earn.
Hence, his notions and calls for America to become more capitalistic is as ideologically unrealistic as communism.
-
The main flaw in Ben Shapiro's argument is that his utopia of capitalism and that America should move towards being a true capitalist state is a pipedream.
The founding fathers had no intentions of creating a nation state based on the economic notions of Adam Smith. In the video above, Shapiro questions the validity of paying taxes to render government services that provides no benefit to him. However, a quick read of the US Constitution, if he truly understands it, would clearly see the creation of a central government and with its prescribed ability, for example, to tax and create a military for the common defense.
Anyone who is a true capitalist knows government and taxes are the true enemy of personal freedom, as Shapiro would state. Therefore, based on his perceptions of personal liberty and capitalism, America should not have any central government, taxation, or standing military at all, as they are all wasteful spending of the money he worked so hard to earn.
Hence, his notions and calls for America to become more capitalistic is as ideologically unrealistic as communism.
Brn Shapiros education and experience outweighs yours.
-
Brn Shapiros education and experience outweighs yours.
On that same note, he outweighs yours as well. To his credit though, at least Shapiro will not display his mental deficiencies by posting endless personal attacks. :shaka:
In any case, a person with a few degrees and excellent vocabulary does not necessarily mean they are smarter than everyone else.
-
On that same note, he outweighs yours as well. To his credit though, at least Shapiro will not display his mental deficiencies by posting endless personal attacks. :shaka:
In any case, a person with a few degrees and excellent vocabulary does not necessarily mean they are smarter than everyone else.
Yes he does outweigh my arguments. Hes definitely smarter than I am. Hence I subscribe to his channel. Personal attck? You ASSumed I identify as Asian.
-
Yes he does outweigh my arguments. Hes definitely smarter than I am. Hence I subscribe to his channel. Personal attck? You ASSumed I identify as Asian.
You have on more than one occasion revealed your Chinese ethnicity in your posts on this forum.
-
The main flaw in Ben Shapiro's argument is that his utopia of capitalism and that America should move towards being a true capitalist state is a pipedream.
The founding fathers had no intentions of creating a nation state based on the economic notions of Adam Smith. In the video above, Shapiro questions the validity of paying taxes to render government services that provides no benefit to him. However, a quick read of the US Constitution, if he truly understands it, would clearly see the creation of a central government and with its prescribed ability, for example, to tax and create a military for the common defense.
Anyone who is a true capitalist knows government and taxes are the true enemy of personal freedom, as Shapiro would state. Therefore, based on his perceptions of personal liberty and capitalism, America should not have any central government, taxation, or standing military at all, as they are all wasteful spending of the money he worked so hard to earn.
Hence, his notions and calls for America to become more capitalistic is as ideologically unrealistic as communism.
I think you'all miss one really important point, that being until 1913 or so we did not have federal
income taxes. Government ran off excise, import, and various others fees based on interstate commerce.
As soon as we gave that income tax power to the Federal government we became history as a free people. State government
even one as vile and corrupt as ours were supposed to have the power, with the feds only duty being to make
sure everyone was secure from foreign invasion and rights were applied equally to all men
( plus some administrative stuff like
post service, common money, et al.).
We defined a central government, to allow us to be free and prosper, fairly, independently,
not to be robbed to feed the whims
of the oligarchs in WA DC.
-
I think you'all miss one really important point, that being until 1913 or so we did not have federal
income taxes. Government ran off excise, import, and various others fees based on interstate commerce.
As soon as we gave that income tax power to the Federal government we became history as a free people. State government
even one as vile and corrupt as ours were supposed to have the power, with the feds only duty being to make
sure everyone was secure from foreign invasion and rights were applied equally to all men
( plus some administrative stuff like
post service, common money, et al.).
We defined a central government, to allow us to be free and prosper, fairly, independently,
not to be robbed to feed the whims
of the oligarchs in WA DC.
You are totally correct.
I would only add the introduction of federal income taxes were enacted the same time when private central banking (i.e., Federal Reserve Bank) was reintroduced in the US in 1913. In order to pay the interest on the money the US borrows from the FED, the Revenue Act had to be passed in order for taxes to be collected to pay the principal and interest owed to them.
-
You are totally correct.
I would only add the introduction of federal income taxes were enacted the same time when private central banking (i.e., Federal Reserve Bank) was reintroduced in the US in 1913. In order to pay the interest on the money the US borrows from the FED, the Revenue Act had to be passed in order for taxes to be collected to pay the principal and interest owed to them.
I loan the US government money all the time.
I buy Tbills. That way I earn interest on my money and
It won't be taxed by the Hawaiian tyrants that rape our beautiful
Aina.
I'm not the FED.
If it weren't for Democrats, the Federal government would never
have grown to the monster it has become.
I don't blame the FED, I blame Democrats.
-
I loan the US government money all the time.
I buy Tbills. That way I earn interest on my money and
It won't be taxed by the Hawaiian tyrants that rape our beautiful
Aina.
I'm not the FED.
If it weren't for Democrats, the Federal government would never
have grown to the monster it has become.
I don't blame the FED, I blame Democrats.
Wait a minute, the bloated monstrosity of the federal government goes way beyond the Democrats and their advocacy of endless social programs for the poor, illegal immigrants, and etc. The Republicans are also to blame for that bloat in particular for their unyielding support of military spending, which has historically taken the lion's share of the discretionary spending within the US Federal budget.
Yes, there are many inefficient and unproductive bureaucracies that owe their creation to the Democratic Party platform. However, the number of questionable US bases and garrisons along with its logistical supply the US has all over the World is a product of the Republican Party platform as well.
-
Wait a minute, the bloated monstrosity of the federal government goes way beyond the Democrats and their advocacy of endless social programs for the poor, illegal immigrants, and etc. The Republicans are also to blame for that bloat in particular for their unyielding support of military spending, which has historically taken the lion's share of the discretionary spending within the US Federal budget.
Yes, there are many inefficient and unproductive bureaucracies that owe their creation to the Democratic Party platform. However, the number of questionable US bases and garrisons along with its logistical supply the US has all over the World is a product of the Republican Party platform as well.
Yet, the fact remains that a strong military is a Constitutionally-mandated duty of the federal government,
Supporting the people from cradle to grave is not. Those duties are supposed to be relegated to the states, as they are going to be more efficient and focused on their needs than a federal bureaucracy. Federal welfare programs don't replace state programs. They just add additional cost and overhead -- and control.
To be prepared for war is one of the most effective means of preserving peace.
-
Yet, the fact remains that a strong military is a Constitutionally-mandated duty of the federal government,
Supporting the people from cradle to grave is not. Those duties are supposed to be relegated to the states, as they are going to be more efficient and focused on their needs than a federal bureaucracy. Federal welfare programs don't replace state programs. They just add additional cost and overhead -- and control.
Having a military that is up to challenge of protecting its borders is one thing. Having a military to garrison the planet is another issue entirely. Throughout history, only aggressive empires employed substantial military way outside its borders.
-
Having a military that is up to challenge of protecting its borders is one thing. Having a military to garrison the planet is another issue entirely. Throughout history, only aggressive empires employed substantial military way outside its borders.
So, you're an isolationist?
Screw the rest of the world. If Germany takes over Europe, Russia takes over Asia and Scandinavia, Iran creates a caliphate in the Middle East (nuking Israel as they go) and Japan takes over the Pacific, we'll just let our allies fend for themselves?
Is it really that simple?
-
So, you're an isolationist?
Screw the rest of the world. If Germany takes over Europe, Russia takes over Asia and Scandinavia, Iran creates a caliphate in the Middle East (nuking Israel as they go) and Japan takes over the Pacific, we'll just let our allies fend for themselves?
Is it really that simple?
The examples you raise above would be valid up to the 20th Century. However, in the age of nuclear weapons, nations that possess them have little to no risk of foreign invasion. Hence, it is a laughable position to think some other country would commit suicide by invading the US.
As for the possibility of non-nuclear nations being invaded, that is still possible, but that is what the United Nations is for. If I recall, Iraq thought it could invade Kuwait and it did; but I believe the UN saw that it's occupation of that nation would be a temporary one.
-
The examples you raise above would be valid up to the 20th Century. However, in the age of nuclear weapons, nations that possess them have little to no risk of foreign invasion. Hence, it is a laughable position to think some other country would commit suicide by invading the US.
As for the possibility of non-nuclear nations being invaded, that is still possible, but that is what the United Nations is for. If I recall, Iraq thought it could invade Kuwait and it did; but I believe the UN saw that it's occupation of that nation would be a temporary one.
#1 - I never said the US would be invaded. I said our allies depend on us.
#2 - The UN was the follow-on to the Post-WWI League of Nations. The winners of the conflict basically exerted their will on the losers through that organization. Without the massive military resources of the US, both the League and the UN had no teeth other than economic sanctions. The UN is allowing member states now who are on our enemies list. Expecting the UN to be the world police ignores their historical ineffectiveness since they came into existence.
The UN Security Council, hypothetically, could ignore the fighting in Syria saying there is no impact on member states, but intervene in an attack on Turkey. That's not ensuring peace. That's policing your club members and letting the non-members fend for themselves.
The League of Nations failed to prevent WWII 20 years later. I don't think the UN is any more capable of preventing war if a country is intent on starting one. Iraq is an example. The UN didn't fix the real problem -- the maniacal dictator, Saddam Hussein. He remained in power to threaten security in the region until 9/11 gave the UN, lead by the US, justification to forcibly remove him.
-
#1 - I never said the US would be invaded. I said our allies depend on us.
#2 - The UN was the follow-on to the Post-WWI League of Nations. The winners of the conflict basically exerted their will on the losers through that organization. Without the massive military resources of the US, both the League and the UN had no teeth other than economic sanctions. The UN is allowing member states now who are on our enemies list. Expecting the UN to be the world police ignores their historical ineffectiveness since they came into existence.
The UN Security Council, hypothetically, could ignore the fighting in Syria saying there is no impact on member states, but intervene in an attack on Turkey. That's not ensuring peace. That's policing your club members and letting the non-members fend for themselves.
The League of Nations failed to prevent WWII 20 years later. I don't think the UN is any more capable of preventing war if a country is intent on starting one. Iraq is an example. The UN didn't fix the real problem -- the maniacal dictator, Saddam Hussein. He remained in power to threaten security in the region until 9/11 gave the UN, lead by the US, justification to forcibly remove him.
But, that's the real issue; the US military is not being used as an agent for global peace or to protect its borders, but for imperial hegemonic domination.
The founding fathers were weary being drawn in wars that do not serve the nation's interest. Washington and Eisenhower both were against wars whose purpose were outside of direct invasion. Such wars and the garrisoning of the planet by the US today is fiscally unsustainable and actually is a major cause of the social inequities and infrastructure degredation that have allowed the Democrats to pursue their socialistic agenda today.
-
I believe we are
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/felicity-huffman-lori-loughlin-among-those-charged-in-college-admissions-scandal/ar-BBUG4WY?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid=iehp (https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/felicity-huffman-lori-loughlin-among-those-charged-in-college-admissions-scandal/ar-BBUG4WY?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid=iehp)
-
But, that's the real issue; the US military is not being used as an agent for global peace or to protect its borders, but for imperial hegemonic domination.
The founding fathers were weary being drawn in wars that do not serve the nation's interest. Washington and Eisenhower both were against wars whose purpose were outside of direct invasion. Such wars and the garrisoning of the planet by the US today is fiscally unsustainable and actually is a major cause of the social inequities and infrastructure degredation that have allowed the Democrats to pursue their socialistic agenda today.
Yet, nothing you said negates what I said. Regardless of the results, the fact remains that a strong military is a Constitutionally mandated function of the Federal gov't. HOW that military is employed will always be debatable.
Isolationism doesn't work. We tried to follow that doctrine until Japan attacked. Like it or not, we have interests around the globe, and some of those interests are because we have alliances.
We have the size military we have, not to be imperialistic, but because Russia and China have been real threats for more than half a century. as they grew their military strength, we also needed to grow ours.
It's difficult to argue reducing our military strength when history proves the guy on top of the hill is always going to be challenged. We are, and need to stay, on top.
-
Dont know why you guys arguing. I'm going to McDonalds to enjoy a McTeri, a haupia pie and a caramel ice coffee. Today was a good day....
-
Dont know why you guys arguing. I'm going to McDonalds to enjoy a McTeri, a haupia pie and a caramel ice coffee. Today was a good day....
didn't have to shoot my HK
-
messed around and got a triple double...
don't think communist state would allow me do that.
and they wouldnt let my pager blow up at 2am
or let me own an AK
but then again it was a good day...
-
Joe Lieberman "This is not the Democratic Party I joined under JFK."
Video:
https://insider.foxnews.com/2019/03/12/joe-lieberman-alexandria-ocasio-cortez-ilhan-omar-not-democratic-party-i-joined?nmsrc=email&pos=2&utm_source=newsletter&utm_campaign=scoop&utm_medium=email
-
didn't have to shoot my HK
You mean when you buy one?
-
Isolationism doesn't work. We tried to follow that doctrine until Japan attacked.
Japan's attack on Pearl Harbor was not because of its isolationist's policy, but because Roosevelt wanted to get involved into WWII. In fact, according to Robert Stinnett's book, "Day of Deceit", it was FDR's policy of going to war with Japan; hence, FDR knew and allowed the attack on Pearl Harbor to occur.
Like it or not, we have interests around the globe, and some of those interests are because we have alliances.
Who determines that?
The American who is working his or her tail off on Main Street, or the US multinational corporations on Wall Street?
We have the size military we have, not to be imperialistic, but because Russia and China have been real threats for more than half a century. as they grew their military strength, we also needed to grow ours.
After the Cold War, the US had and still has the largest military in the whole World. The US spends more on its military machine than Russia and China combined. In looking at these expenditures, it is very hard to see Russia and China being the aggressors on this planet, when it is the US that spends more on its armed forces and has participated in more illegal invasions of other sovereign countries than Russia or China during the last 20 years.
It's difficult to argue reducing our military strength when history proves the guy on top of the hill is always going to be challenged. We are, and need to stay, on top.
Well, got some news for you.
Imperial Rome, the Mongol Empire, and the British all believed and behaved similarly like the US, since the US left its isolationist foreign policies; and all those empires collapsed without one tear from the rest of the planet when they did.
-
all this is blatant horseshit
-
However, in the age of nuclear weapons, nations that possess them have little to no risk of foreign invasion. Hence, it is a laughable position to think some other country would commit suicide by invading the US..
good thing we have those ICBM silos on Oahu to prevent countries from invading...
-
good thing we have those ICBM silos on Oahu to prevent countries from invading...
I hope the Apple car caught them but that may be irrelevant to America becoming a communist country.
-
good thing we have those ICBM silos on Oahu to prevent countries from invading...
But, but, but they don’t exist...
I’m gonna say it to myself like 10-11 times. Then it will make it true.
-
But, but, but they don’t exist...
I’m gonna say it to myself like 10-11 times. Then it will make it true.
What I think about those silos is irrelevant, however, it is true that the very existence of those strategic silos makes the Hawaiian Islands a viable target for adversaries of the US imperial army. But like those droids you seek. What droids? Horseshit. I saw droids and the Apple car will prove it.
-
But, but, but they don’t exist...
I’m gonna say it to myself like 10-11 times. Then it will make it true.
Wish granted.
(http://www4.pictures.livingly.com/mp/Qy7MK_5b8wvl.jpg)
-
good thing we have those ICBM silos on Oahu to prevent countries from invading...
<snark>.............
-
SNIP
Are those the droids you looking for?
-
"fairly bad"- is that better or worse than "kinda awful"?
"
They would both suffice
-
America is all about learning how to fish...
Communism is about stealing from the fisherman to give to those that don't want to fish...
-
I don't like to fish, but I like to eat fish and don't mind paying a fair price for it. What does that make me?
-
I don't like to fish, but I like to eat fish and don't mind paying a fair price for it. What does that make me?
but you pay the fisherman for the catch...you good people :thumbsup: :shaka:
-
America is all about learning how to fish...
How many people in the US know how or is learning how to fish these days? Very few, if any.
Communism is about stealing from the fisherman to give to those that don't want to fish...
Nothing wrong with that seeing how communist China has become the World leader in production economics.
-
How many people in the US know how or is learning how to fish these days? Very few, if any.
Nothing wrong with that seeing how communist China has become the World leader in production economics.
Hook and line