Russian Politics Thread: Добро пожаловать!

[Robert Bork]

Says the guy who is literally writing his own dialogue to put stuff into other people's mouth.

Shofistry--the practice of manipulating another poster's words to create a ridiculous and unnuanced caricature of their original post

[Geilinor]

The AfD is growing, but they have less representation than the LDPR (and none federally until the next election).

The issue isn't AfD or LDPR. It's groups like the BNP, or NDP. They even joined a bloc to less us know of their... stance: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alliance_ ... nd_Freedom

Most ironic name ever.

Nobody takes groups like the BNP and NPD seriously. The NPD has also been infiltrated by government agents.

[Allanea]

None of these groups will ever come to power.

[Shofercia]

I had no idea that typing required high energy. I, for one, do not need Red Bull to type.

Correct. The only thing you do before you type is get confirmation from the Kremlin. /sarcasm

Did you come up with that post all by yourself? It's just that you parroted previous personal attacks, while contributing an avatar of a sweaty old guy, so I'm asking.

Says the guy who is literally writing his own dialogue to put stuff into other people's mouth.

Shofistry--the practice of manipulating another poster's words to create a ridiculous and unnuanced caricature of their original post

Borkism - the practice of attacking posters when you're not able to attack their arguments. I also asked Balt what he was referring to, so perhaps you'd care to enlighten me?

This is where you put your response.

The issue isn't AfD or LDPR. It's groups like the BNP, or NDP. They even joined a bloc to less us know of their... stance: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alliance_ ... nd_Freedom

Most ironic name ever.

Nobody takes groups like the BNP and NPD seriously. The NPD has also been infiltrated by government agents.

And that's awesome!

[Baltenstein]

Do I do so with spite? Or with spade?

Your posts are full of spite. Of course you probably don't see it that way because it's only spite when others do it by default.

I've also critiqued Neocon/Neolib policies in the US, which is, most definitely, not a part of Germany.

Naturally, since the most important characteristic by which you measure politicians is wether they're pro-Putin or anti-Putin. Which is why you're already sugarcoating the Front National and will most likely do so with the AfD as well.

Refugees aren't planning to stay for a limited amount of time? And here I thought that they were in there for temporary refuge.

You were asked to provide evidence for a refugee-related claim and instead posted something which has nothing to do with the matter (Foreing students are not refugees). Of course, since your knowledge on the EU countries' domestic affairs is rather poor - unsurprising, considering you've never lived in an EU country and probably don't speak European languages other than English and Russian - I figure you just posted the first thing your google search came up with without checking if it's actually supporting the claim you made.

Ahhh yes, promote consumption - that's brilliant! In a time of great need, let's consume more useless shit.

Rofl. When European governments cut their expenses to balance the budget, you call it "austerity" and whine about it. When they increase their expenses to increase consumption (read: domestic growth) you also whine, despite it being the polar opposite of austerity.
But then again, it's not as if you actually care about EU fiscal politics. You're just using "austerity" as a meaningless buzzword to bash the EU in general.

I recall that a certain country, let's call it Russia, had to deal with hundreds of thousands of refugees from Ukraine. And yet I'm not seeing a massive rise in anti refugee sentiment.

How strange then, that Russia pursues a "zero asylum" policy in regards to Syrian refugees, despite being militarily involved in Syria. Apparently, Russian generosity is for Russophones only.
And racial tensions are way worse in Russia then anywhere in Western Europe. Few countries have as high a number of racist murders and pogroms per annum as Russia.

Now if I was an integration specialist, I would walk up to refugees and ask them "what do you guys need to integrate successfully into our society?"

Most refugees don't know the country they arrived in, its laws, its customs, very often not even its language, and rely on state support and state-provided housing. Of course the receiving country is not going to ask THEM what should best be done, no country does it that way, neither the US, nor Russia, nor anyone.

Now I'm not entirely sure how 100,000 new jobs is going to employ over a million refugees, but perhaps the German Government's mathematicians know better.

Yes, the German government should create a million jobs. For people who don't even speak the local language. *facepalm*
One wonders why unemployment even still exists in the world, since governments can apparently create jobs for anyone.

Maybe those not working can utilize quantitative easing to consume more goods with no Euros, who knows?

Not that you would know such things - as we've already established your poor knowledge of the EU countries' domestic affairs - but the Western European countries provide housing, medical care and a certain amount of cash per month for personal expenses for accepted asylum seekers.
It sure as heck beats Russia's "Zero asylum - get lost" treatment of Syrian refugees.
Which of course, is also the reason why the overwhelming number of refugees is heading for Western Europe instead of Russia.

No, what I said was that mass austerity is a poor policy, that, when combined with massive immigration, leads to disaster.

There is no bloody "mass austerity". European governments are balancing spending and saving to keep their books balanced. It's what every country does if it doesn't want to crash-tank its budget, Russia included - Russia ESPECIALLY included these days, what with their oil price- and sanctions-related financial woes.
But when people point out that Russia is also slashing its expenses, firing public employees and the like, in other words, enacts "austerity" to keep its budget balanced, you either ignore it or justify it.
In fact, wages, pensions, purchasing power and social benefits continue to be far higher, and corruption and the rich/poor divide far lower, in Western Europe than in Russia. So the EU are the neoliberal ones, not Russia, eh?
Not that it matters anyway, because when I point out EU policies that are explicitedly "anti-austerity" in nature, you call it "consuming useless shit in times of need".

They do. Some refugees from Palmyra are returning to Palmyra after the Russian bombing of nearby ISIS camps. In waves.

Russian bombing also drove waves of refugees OUT of Syria, but of course you're going to deny that, because it's only "Western neoliberal" bombs which do that apparently.

Such as?

Any time you write one of your little "hurr durr" speech bubbles. Like this:

"Hey, let's bomb a country in Africa/Middle East. Oh shit, we're getting refugees from these countries we bombed, I wonder, where is this causation thing? Oh well, let's take them all in, while doing a half ass job funding integration programs. Wait, why aren't they integrating? Why is the racial violence on the streets? Damn it, it's all Putin's fault! And Trump's! And Berlusconi's! It's totally not our fault, that people are hurt as a result of our policies, as Neolibs we're innocent lambs! No causation whatsoever!"

Nobody thinks like this. Nobody talks like this. Nobody even mentioned Trump or Berlusconi. But of course, you have to keep writing your own dialogue to portray your opponent as cartoonishly stupid as possible.
It's a blatantly lame conversation technique, and also one of the reasons why people mock you in most NSG threads you show up.
But I guess to you it's probably because they are all "neoliberals" or something.

Did Georgia become a Muslim nation too? Did Moldova? Did Ukraine?

Yes, several non-Muslim countries hold Russia in low regard too. Quelle surprise. We saw the PEW polls on Russia's and Putin's global (un-)popularity earlier in the thread.

Anyways, I've had my share of fun with your nonsense for the day. Off to the hidden post list with you again. You can quarrel with others.

[Germanic Scyths]

Аааа нуууу чееки брееки в дамке!

[Shofercia]

Do I do so with spite? Or with spade?

Your posts are full of spite. Of course you probably don't see it that way because it's only spite when others do it by default.

But how do you know it's not spate?

I've also critiqued Neocon/Neolib policies in the US, which is, most definitely, not a part of Germany.

Naturally, since the most important characteristic by which you measure politicians is wether they're pro-Putin or anti-Putin. Which is why you're already sugarcoating the Front National and will most likely do so with the AfD as well.

So Bernie Sanders is more Pro-Putin than Donald Trump? Welp, there goes that claim. Next!

Refugees aren't planning to stay for a limited amount of time? And here I thought that they were in there for temporary refuge.

You were asked to provide evidence for a refugee-related claim and instead posted something which has nothing to do with the matter (Foreing students are not refugees). Of course, since your knowledge on the EU countries' domestic affairs is rather poor - unsurprising, considering you've never lived in an EU country and probably don't speak European languages other than English and Russian - I figure you just posted the first thing your google search came up with without checking if it's actually supporting the claim you made.

I lived in EU countries before. Thus far you're 0/2 for assumptions about me, but please, continue, maybe you're shooting the moon.

Ahhh yes, promote consumption - that's brilliant! In a time of great need, let's consume more useless shit.

Rofl. When European governments cut their expenses to balance the budget, you call it "austerity" and whine about it. When they increase their expenses to increase consumption (read: domestic growth) you also whine, despite it being the polar opposite of austerity.
But then again, it's not as if you actually care about EU fiscal politics. You're just using "austerity" as a meaningless buzzword to bash the EU in general.

Speaking of the "meaningless" buzzword: https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=an ... +in+europe

I have no issues with government increasing expenditure to boost certain sectors, like education, construction, healthcare, etc. That part of the post was referring specifically to quantitative easing. Let's look it up: Quantitative easing is an unconventional monetary policy in which a central bank purchases government securities or other securities from the market in order to lower interest rates and increase the money supply.

The difference between a stimulus and quantitative easing, is that a stimulus targets key economic sectors and grows them, whereas quantitative easing provides more borrowing ability for the consumers, which still doesn't negate the tragedy of the commons.

I recall that a certain country, let's call it Russia, had to deal with hundreds of thousands of refugees from Ukraine. And yet I'm not seeing a massive rise in anti refugee sentiment.

How strange then, that Russia pursues a "zero asylum" policy in regards to Syrian refugees, despite being militarily involved in Syria. Apparently, Russian generosity is for Russophones only.
And racial tensions are way worse in Russia then anywhere in Western Europe. Few countries have as high a number of racist murders and pogroms per annum as Russia.

Fun fact: I'm not Putin and there are some things that Putin does that I oppose. The Syrian Refugee situation is one of them. Using racist murders per capita, without taking the overall murder per capita rate into account, is a bit misleading. Russia still has a way to go before reaching the levels that Western Europe is at, and I fully acknowledge that. The different is that in Russia, at least prior to the oil price crash and subsequent cuts, the standard of living for the average person was increasing, whereas in Western Europe, it was decreasing. This is best measured by the "number of citizens who think that country is headed in right direction" polling data.

Now if I was an integration specialist, I would walk up to refugees and ask them "what do you guys need to integrate successfully into our society?"

Most refugees don't know the country they arrived in, its laws, its customs, very often not even its language, and rely on state support and state-provided housing. Of course the receiving country is not going to ask THEM what should best be done, no country does it that way, neither the US, nor Russia, nor anyone.

Odd, because I quoted the Russians asking the refugees "what do you need?" and yet, despite that quote, here you are, still denying it.

Now I'm not entirely sure how 100,000 new jobs is going to employ over a million refugees, but perhaps the German Government's mathematicians know better.

Yes, the German government should create a million jobs. For people who don't even speak the local language. *facepalm*
One wonders why unemployment even still exists in the world, since governments can apparently create jobs for anyone.

A million refugees doesn't mean a million jobs, unless, of course, you want child labor. Maybe you do, I don't know.

Maybe those not working can utilize quantitative easing to consume more goods with no Euros, who knows?

Not that you would know such things - as we've already established your poor knowledge of the EU countries' domestic affairs - but the Western European countries provide housing, medical care and a certain amount of cash per month for personal expenses for accepted asylum seekers.
It sure as heck beats Russia's "Zero asylum - get lost" treatment of Syrian refugees.
Which of course, is also the reason why the overwhelming number of refugees is heading for Western Europe instead of Russia.

So you've made a very stupid claim, which was bullshit, and now you're piggybacking on a stupid, bullshit claim, that you've "established" and you expect me to take this part of the post seriously? That's funny. What did you say earlier, was it "rofl?" Yeah, I think it was that. Generally speaking, accepting refugees, without providing them with a reasonable way for them to move forward leads to ghettoization. That's not a good thing.

No, what I said was that mass austerity is a poor policy, that, when combined with massive immigration, leads to disaster.

There is no bloody "mass austerity". European governments are balancing spending and saving to keep their books balanced. It's what every country does if it doesn't want to crash-tank its budget, Russia included - Russia ESPECIALLY included these days, what with their oil price- and sanctions-related financial woes.
But when people point out that Russia is also slashing its expenses, firing public employees and the like, in other words, enacts "austerity" to keep its budget balanced, you either ignore it or justify it.
In fact, wages, pensions, purchasing power and social benefits continue to be far higher, and corruption and the rich/poor divide far lower, in Western Europe than in Russia. So the EU are the neoliberal ones, not Russia, eh?
Not that it matters anyway, because when I point out EU policies that are explicitedly "anti-austerity" in nature, you call it "consuming useless shit in times of need".

I stated that I oppose some parts of it, ignore others, and justify some others. It's a case by case basis. Remember guys, there's no mass austerity, Balt said so. Yo, Balt, want to tell it to these guys:



Since I've apparently never lived in France, (at least according to Balt, reality disagrees with him on that point,) I'm going to presume that the words "Non a l'austerite" means the "Great French March for Austerity" hmmm, is this where I say, what was it, "rofl" again? Interestingly enough, one Robert Bork was quick to parrot your faulty claim, so I wonder, will he be just as quick to claim "Baltestry" as a science claiming that people never lived in places where they actually lived? We'll see.

They do. Some refugees from Palmyra are returning to Palmyra after the Russian bombing of nearby ISIS camps. In waves.

Russian bombing also drove waves of refugees OUT of Syria, but of course you're going to deny that, because it's only "Western neoliberal" bombs which do that apparently.

I've actually stated the exact opposite. What was that you accused me of... putting words into other people's mouth? And then you failed, quite miserably, to provide an example, but the lack of facts didn't stop Bork from parroting it. Well here you are Balt, clearly placing words in my mouth, when it's the opposite of what I've actually said.

Such as?

Any time you write one of your little "hurr durr" speech bubbles. Like this:

"Hey, let's bomb a country in Africa/Middle East. Oh shit, we're getting refugees from these countries we bombed, I wonder, where is this causation thing? Oh well, let's take them all in, while doing a half ass job funding integration programs. Wait, why aren't they integrating? Why is the racial violence on the streets? Damn it, it's all Putin's fault! And Trump's! And Berlusconi's! It's totally not our fault, that people are hurt as a result of our policies, as Neolibs we're innocent lambs! No causation whatsoever!"

Nobody thinks like this. Nobody talks like this. Nobody even mentioned Trump or Berlusconi. But of course, you have to keep writing your own dialogue to portray your opponent as cartoonishly stupid as possible.
It's a blatantly lame conversation technique, and also one of the reasons why people mock you in most NSG threads you show up.
But I guess to you it's probably because they are all "neoliberals" or something.

When my opponent makes up random bullshit about me, said portrayals aren't hard. That was in response to your quote:

I should also point out that the complete lack of causation in your "neoliberal policies -> Anti-Islamic hatred" equation...

Did you, or did you not, say, and I quote, from the above line: complete lack of causation

Is that not your quote?

Did Georgia become a Muslim nation too? Did Moldova? Did Ukraine?

Yes, several non-Muslim countries hold Russia in low regard too. Quelle surprise. We saw the PEW polls on Russia's and Putin's global (un-)popularity earlier in the thread.

Anyways, I've had my share of fun with your nonsense for the day. Off to the hidden post list with you again. You can quarrel with others.

My point being was that Russian policies towards Kosovo had nothing to do with Islam. Do I really need to bring up that entire part of the conversation?

You: What the Russian government has also been very busy at lately, is buliding amicable ties with almost every anti-Muslim party in Europe. Not to mention its traditional stance on matters related to the Yugoslavian conflicts.

Me: Russia's stance on Kosovo isn't anti-Muslim, it's anti-KLA. The KLA does not represent all of Muslims, or even most of Muslims, but hey, if you're grasping as straws, you might as well go all the way.

You: Yes, I'm sure it's stance on Bosnia is similarly balanced, and I'm sure Muslims see it the same way.

Me: Did Georgia become a Muslim nation too? Did Moldova? Did Ukraine? Well, ok, maybe Ukraine did, not too sure what goes on there anymore.

You: Yes, several non-Muslim countries hold Russia in low regard too.

As the above shows, Baltenstein, you have completely failed to grasp that Russia's policies in Yugoslavia have nothing to do with religion.

[The disunited states]

Look, I've got a picture of Libyans protesting Ghaddafi. Gaddafi must be bad!

So Shof why do you still defend the great leader of the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya with the greatest rate of human development in Africa!!!!! Woot woot! Clearly this picture discredits him greatly.

[Teemant]

Where biggest Russian supporters never want to live? Russia.
It is also an interesting phenomenon that Putin is more popular outside of Russia than in Russia. The reason probably is that people who don't live in Russia don't have to experience internal consequences that come with current Russian foreign policies.

To end the post on more cheerful note.
Something funny from Russia (Putin inspecting new "well built" car) -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t1pu3UZRHKU

Look at the door handle!

[Robert Bork]

snip

Ladies and gentlemen, Exhibit A of Shofistry.

[Shofercia]

snip

Ladies and gentlemen, Exhibit A of Shofistry.

A very powerful exhibit of all of four letters. You just *sniped* a post and then wrote something that probably made sense somewhere, but not exactly in this reality. So, once again, are you just here to attack me, or will you actually contribute something to the thread?

Where biggest Russian supporters never want to live? Russia.
It is also an interesting phenomenon that Putin is more popular outside of Russia than in Russia. The reason probably is that people who don't live in Russia don't have to experience internal consequences that come with current Russian foreign policies.

To end the post on more cheerful note.
Something funny from Russia (Putin inspecting new "well built" car) -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t1pu3UZRHKU

Look at the door handle!

Erm, really? Most of Putin's supporters aren't in Russia, eh Teemant? Putin's currently at 80% approval rating among Russians in Russia. That's a population of 116 million. So Teemant, please find me 116 million supporters of Putin outside of Russia.

(Image)

Look, I've got a picture of Libyans protesting Ghaddafi. Gaddafi must be bad!

So Shof why do you still defend the great leader of the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya with the greatest rate of human development in Africa!!!!! Woot woot! Clearly this picture discredits him greatly.

I stated that under Ghadaffi, Libya had the highest Human Development Indicator of any nation on the African continent, excluding islands, which aren't on the continent. That's true: http://hdr.undp.org/en/composite/HDI

I stated a fact. I'm not sorry that it offended you.

[Shofercia]

Ladies and Gentlemen, welcome to an introduction on Robert Bork's most valuable posts in this thread. Actually, I wasn't sure which ones are valuable, so I quoted all of them. He starts out pretending that I'm angwy, (although thankfully not a bird,) and trying to calm me down. On a forum.

Chill out there.

Me thinks you doth protest too much. I'm not offended. Just saying it's a little awkward for you to act so angry.

I understand that you bolded, italicized, and underlined your words. It's the power of three. I know it well. Just simmer a little bit, you know? It's just a forum.

Take it easy.

You don't have to prove anything to anybody else. Just be you, albeit less angry.

That's what the Judiciary Committee said.

And then he left the thread for a bit, only to return after Urmanian's bullshit puppet accusation.

I would definitely not be surprised if Shofercia was puppet-wanking through a proxy account.

I'm saying I wouldn't be surprised if it was true.

Anyone noticing a trend of attacking me and not contributing much to the topic? But hang on, because on his ninth post, Bork makes an actual prediction. I won't spoiler it, mostly because I think it's hilarious.

The account in question is clearly intended to parody Western liberalism.

As for Putin, I'm not really impressed. He's a kleptomaniac who's masterfully strategized himself into a political black hole. He won't be around much longer.

So after saying Putin won't be around much longer, even though he's still going to be president at least until 2018, maybe even 2024, Bork finally enters the debate.

It's true that Russia's temporarily propped up the sick man of Syria. But just as the Russian operation was really designed to bomb both the rebels and ISIS, the American campaign that President Clinton is going to launch will be ostensibly targeted towards ISIS while bombing the shit out of Asaad's forces. Clinton has taught us that in her neoliberal language, "no fly zone" equals "bomb the shit out of the dictator I don't like". So we're definitely going to see a reversal of Russia's goals in Syria soon.

As for their economy, we'll have to see how it turns out, but Putin's quagmire is to fuel increasingly costly wars to promote his domestic popularity. I would question if Crimea has been fully integrated, but really, Putin has invested so much into that region, and it's really for nothing. It's most immediate benefit is his domestic popularity at a huge cost to himself abroad and economically. So he's got two million or whatever new people, some nice real estate (it's like twenty times the size of L.A.), but he really didn't need it.

But of course he was being sarcastic and mocking Clinton. Thus far if you're keeping score: 8 nonsensical one liners, a hilarious prediction, and sarcasm. Just in case you're not sure if it's sarcasm.

I didn't suggest any neoliberal policies. I actually mocked Secretary Clinton at one point.

Shofercia--I was mocking the fact that the U.N. Resolution in Libya allowed for a no-fly zone to protect civilians but developed into a one-sided attack on the Gaddafi. I reasoned the terms "taught us", "neoliberal language", and "bomb the shit out of" would make my own deprecating intent clear. It didn't to you, however. My bad for that.

Consider my most recent post a sarcasm tag then.

There. Now it's most definetely sarcasm, Bork said so. He's about to make another prediction, so no spoiler here:

I wasn't being sarcastic about the Russians, no. I don't think it's a coincidence that Russia left Syria as soon as Asaad's military regained its momentum. Their goal was to prop up the Asaad regime. I don't fault them for that. Syria is an ally of Russia and has the right to call for their assistance.

The U.S. doesn't want Asaad in power precisely because of this relationship. Given her history of deposing dictators under the guise of protecting civilians from violence on either side , Clinton is likely to do the same in Syria, defended by Kosovo and Libya-esque rhetoric . I'm agreeing with you that these interventions are unjustified, but I don't see how you don't agree Clinton wouldn't bomb Asaad in Syria.

Remember, if Clinton wins, she's going to depose Asaad, which she might actually succeed in doing. Deposing Assad can prove to be slightly more complicated than deposing Asaad. Making two predictions can be tough, so why not follow it up with some more attacks:

Comprehension of English is its own kind of sarcasm tag. Sorry about your incompetence in that respect.

/sarcasm so Shofercia doesn't get offended

In response to my post where I cited numerous reasons with Clinton won't intervene, Bork stated:

-snip- You should know Republicans by now, too. They're going to attack Clinton for anything she does regardless. I doubt she's afraid to act based on their perceptions alone.

What was that quote from earlier?

Comprehension of English is its own kind of sarcasm tag. Sorry about your incompetence in that respect.

And here are fine more one liners, the first acknowledging that I noticed something, followed by personal attacks, although one of them does have a "/sarcasm" tag:

You noticed.

Very low energy.

Correct. The only thing you do before you type is get confirmation from the Kremlin. /sarcasm

Shofistry--the practice of manipulating another poster's words to create a ridiculous and unnuanced caricature of their original post

Ladies and gentlemen, Exhibit A of Shofistry.

Bork, when you genuinely want to debate, let me know and I'll gladly oblige. If you're just going to run around the thread tossing one liners and yelling "hurr durr Shofistry" you'll simply embarrass yourself. Now can we get back to the topic at hand?

[The disunited states]

(Image)

Look, I've got a picture of Libyans protesting Ghaddafi. Gaddafi must be bad!

So Shof why do you still defend the great leader of the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya with the greatest rate of human development in Africa!!!!! Woot woot! Clearly this picture discredits him greatly.

I stated that under Ghadaffi, Libya had the highest Human Development Indicator of any nation on the African continent, excluding islands, which aren't on the continent. That's true: http://hdr.undp.org/en/composite/HDI

I stated a fact. I'm not sorry that it offended you.

Whether I'm offended or not isn't important. What is important is that posting a picture of some guys protesting austerity doesn't help your point that austerity is killing Europe and that it's hell on Earth, or whatever your intent was. Especially when the picture originates from France, a place where protesting for dumb shit is a very common occurrence.

[The disunited states]

To tie in austerity and Ghaddafi it is important to note that hdi can be a very unhelpful metric to judge countries off of.

Take a look at Greece and it's recent hdi increases for example.

[Shofercia]

I stated that under Ghadaffi, Libya had the highest Human Development Indicator of any nation on the African continent, excluding islands, which aren't on the continent. That's true: http://hdr.undp.org/en/composite/HDI

I stated a fact. I'm not sorry that it offended you.

Whether I'm offended or not isn't really quite important. What is important is that posting a picture of some guys protesting austerity doesn't help your point against austerity. Especially when the picture originates from France, a place where protesting for dumb shit is a very common occurrence.

Except I posted a picture of a massive anti-austerity demonstration in response to a claim that said: There is no bloody "mass austerity".

If there's no mass austerity, what are the people protesting? I highly doubt that you can get that many frenchmen to protest dumb shit. Would you prefer a German anti-austerity protest?

http://www.abc.net.au/news/image/633086 ... 40x627.jpg

[Shofercia]

To tie in austerity and Ghaddafi it is important to note that hdi can be a very unhelpful metric to judge countries off of.

Take a look at Greece and it's recent hdi increases for example.

About Ghadaffi: I stated a fact and backed it up with a source.
About austerity: I pointed out that intervention, via bombing, of some EU member states in Africa and the Middle East, helped to cause a refugee wave, part of which entered EU member states, at the same time that the EU was/is promoting policies of austerity.

Those are the facts.

[The disunited states]

Whether I'm offended or not isn't really quite important. What is important is that posting a picture of some guys protesting austerity doesn't help your point against austerity. Especially when the picture originates from France, a place where protesting for dumb shit is a very common occurrence.

Except I posted a picture of a massive anti-austerity demonstration in response to a claim that said: There is no bloody "mass austerity".

If there's no mass austerity, what are the people protesting? I highly doubt that you can get that many frenchmen to protest dumb shit. Would you prefer a German anti-austerity protest?

http://www.abc.net.au/news/image/633086 ... 40x627.jpg

You can get many Frenchman to protest if their country adopts Denmark style "neoliberal" labor law reform.

But I think we'd all prefer you make a valid argument about austerity's woes than throw around pictures.

[The disunited states]

To tie in austerity and Ghaddafi it is important to note that hdi can be a very unhelpful metric to judge countries off of.

Take a look at Greece and it's recent hdi increases for example.

About Ghadaffi: I stated a fact and backed it up with a source.
About austerity: I pointed out that intervention, via bombing, of some EU member states in Africa and the Middle East, helped to cause a refugee wave, part of which entered EU member states, at the same time that the EU was/is promoting policies of austerity.

Those are the facts.

Err ok. Never did I once deny any of that. But hdi is a faulty metric.

[Shofercia]

Except I posted a picture of a massive anti-austerity demonstration in response to a claim that said: There is no bloody "mass austerity".

If there's no mass austerity, what are the people protesting? I highly doubt that you can get that many frenchmen to protest dumb shit. Would you prefer a German anti-austerity protest?

http://www.abc.net.au/news/image/633086 ... 40x627.jpg

You can get many Frenchman to protest if their country adopts Denmark style "neoliberal" labor law reform.

But I think we'd all prefer you make a valid argument about austerity's woes than throw around pictures.

The picture was to rebut a single line of a single comment, I'm sorry you missed that. As per austerity's woes, I did:

1. EU member states bomb countries in the Middle East/Africa.
2. Homes of quite a few people are destroyed, partially by the bombings, partially by the terrorists taking over. This results in homeless people who become refugees.
3. The refugees flee to Europe.
4. This, in turn, increases immigration of people into Europe.
5. Meanwhile in Europe, massive austerity measures start taking place.
6. The voters are pissed off and protest austerity.
7. Education budgets are cut, exposing the countries to more ignorance.
8. As austerity and ignorance are on the rise, immigration hits Europe in massive numbers.
9. As a result, some blame the immigrants, since when immigrants arrived, shit got worse, even though the immigrants had little to do with that.
10. Instead of promoting more education programs, the EU promotes more austerity.
11. As a result, the locals start taking their anger out on the immigrants.
12. Having been bombed in their own countries and not quite getting to the promiseland, the immigrants respond with violence.
13. This, in turn, creates ghettoization, which stokes more and more racial violence.
14. The EU responds with even more austerity measures. Ignorance has now taken full control, if only there was this thing, called properly funded integration education...

About Ghadaffi: I stated a fact and backed it up with a source.
About austerity: I pointed out that intervention, via bombing, of some EU member states in Africa and the Middle East, helped to cause a refugee wave, part of which entered EU member states, at the same time that the EU was/is promoting policies of austerity.

Those are the facts.

Err ok. Never did I once deny any of that. But hdi is a faulty metric.

Then what're you complaining about? A picture that you didn't like in a forum thread?

[The disunited states]

You can get many Frenchman to protest if their country adopts Denmark style "neoliberal" labor law reform.

But I think we'd all prefer you make a valid argument about austerity's woes than throw around pictures.

The picture was to rebut a single line of a single comment, I'm sorry you missed that. As per austerity's woes, I did:

1. EU member states bomb countries in the Middle East/Africa.
2. Homes of quite a few people are destroyed, partially by the bombings, partially by the terrorists taking over. This results in homeless people who become refugees.
3. The refugees flee to Europe.
4. This, in turn, increases immigration of people into Europe.
5. Meanwhile in Europe, massive austerity measures start taking place.
6. The voters are pissed off and protest austerity.
7. Education budgets are cut, exposing the countries to more ignorance.
8. As austerity and ignorance are on the rise, immigration hits Europe in massive numbers.
9. As a result, some blame the immigrants, since when immigrants arrived, shit got worse, even though the immigrants had little to do with that.
10. Instead of promoting more education programs, the EU promotes more austerity.
11. As a result, the locals start taking their anger out on the immigrants.
12. Having been bombed in their own countries and not quite getting to the promiseland, the immigrants respond with violence.
13. This, in turn, creates ghettoization, which stokes more and more racial violence.
14. The EU responds with even more austerity measures. Ignorance has now taken full control, if only there was this thing, called properly funded integration education...

This is so bizarre I can't even....

[Baltenstein]

The picture was to rebut a single line of a single comment, I'm sorry you missed that. As per austerity's woes, I did:

This is so bizarre I can't even....

[Shofercia]

The picture was to rebut a single line of a single comment, I'm sorry you missed that. As per austerity's woes, I did:

This is so bizarre I can't even....

I take it you haven't been to Greece.

This is so bizarre I can't even....

Education is used to fight ignorance.
Education budgets are cut under some austerity measures.
Thus ignorance rises with cuts in education.

What is so confusing about that?

[Robert Bork]

Shofercia's finally bringing out some energy. I like that.

We all know there's no real point in going quote-for-quote with Shofercia, because if there's anybody on this forum who's utterly incompetent at keeping anything whatsoever straight, it's him. Shofercia likes to copy and paste random parts of your posts together to create an artificial narrative, belying any actual context. Attempting to address the brown frothy municipal waste dripping from his posts only encourages more of his distortion. I can't tell if this is because English is his third language, or if it's just another example of classic Shofistry. Probably the latter.

So instead of reciting more quotations than a North Korean at an education camp, I'm going to briefly run this point by point.

Shofercia is upset that I haven't treated him so gently. I can't say I'm very sorry for his sensitivity. Indeed, the mere expression that I wouldn't be surprised if he had a puppet on this website made him run to the moderators. If somebody's that sensitive, I honestly don't know what I can do differently to help them out.

Besides, I'm only responding to his corny attempts at comebacks. You really shouldn't complain about people getting snarky with you if you're failing at doing the same thing. Classic Shofistry.

Silly Shofercia proceeds to say that I've done nothing on this thread but employ sarcasm. I don't know how my fellow comrade kicks it, but I'm pretty sure the rest of us can see how sarcasm reveals truths about the world around us. Indeed, in this case, I used sarcasm to mock the neo-liberal policies that Shofercia opposes. But since Silly Shofercia can't see the difference between his friends and his enemies, he sucked up his confidence and launched this desperate attempt to come at me.

Shofercia claims that he listed multiple reasons to prove that Clinton wouldn't depose Asaad, and since I said the word 'alone', I must not understand that he was making a cumulative argument.

Guess what? A bunch of shitty reasons put together don't make a good one.

[The disunited states]

This is so bizarre I can't even....

I take it you haven't been to Greece.

Education is used to fight ignorance.
Education budgets are cut under some austerity measures.
Thus ignorance rises with cuts in education.

What is so confusing about that?

Ignorance and education funding have a very sticky causal relationship.

That is: Schools not being to renovate their playgrounds =/= increased ignorance.

Have you ever been to Spain?

[Shofercia]

Shofercia's finally bringing out some energy. I like that.

We all know there's no real point in going quote-for-quote with Shofercia, because if there's anybody on this forum who's utterly incompetent at keeping anything whatsoever straight, it's him. Shofercia likes to copy and paste random parts of your posts together to create an artificial narrative, belying any actual context. Attempting to address the brown frothy municipal waste dripping from his posts only encourages more of his distortion. I can't tell if this is because English is his third language, or if it's just another example of classic Shofistry. Probably the latter.

I posted your quotes verbatim. I only snipped one of them, and the snip was clearly labeled, so according to you, when your very own quotes are posted, verbatim, they are incompetent at keeping anything whatsoever straight. Skipping your petty and pathetic wannabe creative attacks, aside from the quote that I snipped, one out of many, which quote did I not quote verbatim? Which one? Go ahead, tell me? Tell the rest of us? I too could write that poster so and so did such and such, belying context of blah, blah, blah, something brown, frothy, municipal, *insert buzzword here* but I'm not going to bother sinking to that level.

Let's keep the tally here: despite me quoting Bork verbatim, he claims that I copied and pasted random parts of his posts together. We'll call that Bork lie number one.

So instead of reciting more quotations than a North Korean at an education camp, I'm going to briefly run this point by point.

Oh darn. I have no idea, how will I ever survive this mention of North Korea...

Shofercia is upset that I haven't treated him so gently. I can't say I'm very sorry for his sensitivity. Indeed, the mere expression that I wouldn't be surprised if he had a puppet on this website made him run to the moderators. If somebody's that sensitive, I honestly don't know what I can do differently to help them out.

Generally speaking, making up lies about other posters, tends to get reported. If this is inconvenient for you, I really don't care. You've been attacking me from the day you entered the thread, as the above posted History, which you're desperately trying to discredit with lies, clearly shows. Again, all but one of those posts are quoted verbatim.

Besides, I'm only responding to his corny attempts at comebacks. You really shouldn't complain about people getting snarky with you if you're failing at doing the same thing. Classic Shofistry.

Usually posters who claim to respond to "corny attempts at comebacks" are a tad angry. I'd probably be angry if I had a wall of posts like the one I quoted, in this thread, but I'd be angry at myself.

Silly Shofercia proceeds to say that I've done nothing on this thread but employ sarcasm.

I've stated that you came here to attack me and backed it up with your very own quotes. I didn't even get to sarcasm until your seventh, eights, or ninth quote. So claiming that I did that, would be lying. Again. Bork lie #2.

I don't know how my fellow comrade kicks it, but I'm pretty sure the rest of us can see how sarcasm reveals truths about the world around us. Indeed, in this case, I used sarcasm to mock the neo-liberal policies that Shofercia opposes. But since Silly Shofercia can't see the difference between his friends and his enemies, he sucked up his confidence and launched this desperate attempt to come at me.

Friends don't bait other friends by pretending to tell them to calm down. Friends don't make up lies about their friends.

Shofercia claims that he listed multiple reasons to prove that Clinton wouldn't depose Asaad, and since I said the word 'alone', I must not understand that he was making a cumulative argument.

Good summation of the argument. The only good part of that post. Except, you misspelled Assad.

Guess what? A bunch of shitty reasons put together don't make a good one.

I had no idea that the American Electorate being radically opposed to a move was a shitty reason. I thought you were pro-Democracy, is that no longer true Mr. Bork?