NATION

PASSWORD

DNC leak

For discussion and debate about anything. (Not a roleplay related forum; out-of-character commentary only.)

Advertisement

Remove ads

Is the leaks a massive blow to the DNC?

Yes.
138
79%
No.
37
21%
 
Total votes : 175

User avatar
Ethel mermania
Post Overlord
 
Posts: 126557
Founded: Aug 20, 2010
Father Knows Best State

Postby Ethel mermania » Mon Jul 25, 2016 12:15 pm

Gauthier wrote:Given that even the FBI thinks the leaks were orchestrated by Russia, does that mean anyone complaining about Twitter is in fact rooting for Russia over America and wants Trump to be President?


We are looking for Putin to do a LBO of the United states, and take it over as CEO of USA Inc
He will sell California and Oregon to China to satisfy anti-trust concerns..
The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion … but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.

The most fundamental problem of politics is not the control of wickedness but the limitation of righteousness. 



http://www.salientpartners.com/epsilont ... ilizations

User avatar
Gauthier
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 52887
Founded: Antiquity
Ex-Nation

Postby Gauthier » Mon Jul 25, 2016 12:22 pm

Cymrea wrote:
New Werpland wrote:It makes the accusation more than rash unthinking finger-poking though.

You're going to need to be more clear; what exactly makes which accusation more than finger-pointing?


If you're looking for outright cartoon villain confessions you'll never be satisfied. But if you take recent observations into account, the picture painted is that Russia wants Trump to win the White House, primarily on hoping he follows through on his vow to weaken or destroy NATO by pulling the U.S. out of it.
Crimes committed by Muslims will be a pan-Islamic plot and proof of Islam's inherent evil. On the other hand crimes committed by non-Muslims will merely be the acts of loners who do not represent their belief system at all.
The probability of one's participation in homosexual acts is directly proportional to one's public disdain and disgust for homosexuals.
If a political figure makes an accusation of wrongdoing without evidence, odds are probable that the accuser or an associate thereof has in fact committed the very same act, possibly to a worse degree.
Where is your God-Emperor now?

User avatar
Yorkers
Minister
 
Posts: 2488
Founded: Oct 27, 2015
Ex-Nation

Postby Yorkers » Mon Jul 25, 2016 12:24 pm

Is anyone surprised that the Democrats are being very corrupt? Did nobody forget about their entire history with Tammany Hall?
"Providence has been pleased to give this one connected country to one united people, a people descended from the same ancestors, speaking the same language, professing the same religion, attached to the same principles of government, very similar in their manners and customs."
-John Jay, 1787

Dancing in the moonlight.
I wish that every kiss was never-ending.


An alternate history epic.

sa-wish!

Yorkers is a wealthy WASP playground inspired by L.L. Bean and Vineyard Vines catalogs and 19th Century Anglo-American nativism.

User avatar
Yorkers
Minister
 
Posts: 2488
Founded: Oct 27, 2015
Ex-Nation

Postby Yorkers » Mon Jul 25, 2016 12:26 pm

Gauthier wrote:
Cymrea wrote:You're going to need to be more clear; what exactly makes which accusation more than finger-pointing?


If you're looking for outright cartoon villain confessions you'll never be satisfied. But if you take recent observations into account, the picture painted is that Russia wants Trump to win the White House, primarily on hoping he follows through on his vow to weaken or destroy NATO by pulling the U.S. out of it.


A probably because Trump is the only candidate who wants to be diplomatic towards Russia, rather than the rest of the Republicans who want to bomb it to pieces?

Also, Trump's comment on the Baltic states are wholly justified. They don't contribute their fair share to NATO, so if they get invaded, fuck them.
"Providence has been pleased to give this one connected country to one united people, a people descended from the same ancestors, speaking the same language, professing the same religion, attached to the same principles of government, very similar in their manners and customs."
-John Jay, 1787

Dancing in the moonlight.
I wish that every kiss was never-ending.


An alternate history epic.

sa-wish!

Yorkers is a wealthy WASP playground inspired by L.L. Bean and Vineyard Vines catalogs and 19th Century Anglo-American nativism.

User avatar
Ethel mermania
Post Overlord
 
Posts: 126557
Founded: Aug 20, 2010
Father Knows Best State

Postby Ethel mermania » Mon Jul 25, 2016 12:27 pm

The interesting thing with all the cover up and deception. No one is questioning the veracity of the documents.
The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion … but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.

The most fundamental problem of politics is not the control of wickedness but the limitation of righteousness. 



http://www.salientpartners.com/epsilont ... ilizations

User avatar
Gauthier
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 52887
Founded: Antiquity
Ex-Nation

Postby Gauthier » Mon Jul 25, 2016 12:29 pm

Yorkers wrote:
Gauthier wrote:
If you're looking for outright cartoon villain confessions you'll never be satisfied. But if you take recent observations into account, the picture painted is that Russia wants Trump to win the White House, primarily on hoping he follows through on his vow to weaken or destroy NATO by pulling the U.S. out of it.


A probably because Trump is the only candidate who wants to be diplomatic towards Russia, rather than the rest of the Republicans who want to bomb it to pieces?

Also, Trump's comment on the Baltic states are wholly justified. They don't contribute their fair share to NATO, so if they get invaded, fuck them.


So weakening or destroying a multi-nation defense coalition is now being "diplomatic towards Russia" now? Then again that's what Trump probably thinks. And congratulations on the Chamberlain Award.
Crimes committed by Muslims will be a pan-Islamic plot and proof of Islam's inherent evil. On the other hand crimes committed by non-Muslims will merely be the acts of loners who do not represent their belief system at all.
The probability of one's participation in homosexual acts is directly proportional to one's public disdain and disgust for homosexuals.
If a political figure makes an accusation of wrongdoing without evidence, odds are probable that the accuser or an associate thereof has in fact committed the very same act, possibly to a worse degree.
Where is your God-Emperor now?

User avatar
Yorkers
Minister
 
Posts: 2488
Founded: Oct 27, 2015
Ex-Nation

Postby Yorkers » Mon Jul 25, 2016 12:31 pm

Gauthier wrote:
Yorkers wrote:
A probably because Trump is the only candidate who wants to be diplomatic towards Russia, rather than the rest of the Republicans who want to bomb it to pieces?

Also, Trump's comment on the Baltic states are wholly justified. They don't contribute their fair share to NATO, so if they get invaded, fuck them.


So weakening or destroying a multi-nation defense coalition is now being "diplomatic towards Russia" now? Then again that's what Trump probably thinks. And congratulations on the Chamberlain Award.


No, but winding down our involvement in an organization where we do everyone's bitch work and the other members act like lazy welfare queens is good for us, and dropping the war-mongering rhetoric that we need to intervene in Ukraine or against Assad is being diplomatic towards Russia.

Russia is not some Hitleresque threat.

If Hillary ever gets us into a pointless, disastrous war with Russia, I'll be expecting to see you on the frontlines, since you seem so eager.
"Providence has been pleased to give this one connected country to one united people, a people descended from the same ancestors, speaking the same language, professing the same religion, attached to the same principles of government, very similar in their manners and customs."
-John Jay, 1787

Dancing in the moonlight.
I wish that every kiss was never-ending.


An alternate history epic.

sa-wish!

Yorkers is a wealthy WASP playground inspired by L.L. Bean and Vineyard Vines catalogs and 19th Century Anglo-American nativism.

User avatar
New Werpland
Senator
 
Posts: 4647
Founded: Dec 11, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby New Werpland » Mon Jul 25, 2016 12:46 pm

Yorkers wrote:Russia is not some Hitleresque threat.

Except for the fact that, you know, it's started the first war in Europe since the 90's.

Yorkers wrote:If Hillary ever gets us into a pointless, disastrous war with Russia, I'll be expecting to see you on the frontlines, since you seem so eager.

Well good thing that will never happen. Russia is dangerous because we allow it to be.

User avatar
New Werpland
Senator
 
Posts: 4647
Founded: Dec 11, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby New Werpland » Mon Jul 25, 2016 12:49 pm

Cymrea wrote:
New Werpland wrote:It makes the accusation more than rash unthinking finger-poking though.

You're going to need to be more clear; what exactly makes which accusation more than finger-pointing?

Well first of all they clearly haven't pulled it straight out of nowhere. I'd call it complete finger pointing if they claimed it was all manufactured or something, but they didn't.

Robby Mook is simply saying "hey we did it, but look who's benefiting."

User avatar
Cymrea
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8580
Founded: Feb 10, 2006
Democratic Socialists

Postby Cymrea » Mon Jul 25, 2016 1:02 pm

Yorkers wrote:
Gauthier wrote:
So weakening or destroying a multi-nation defense coalition is now being "diplomatic towards Russia" now? Then again that's what Trump probably thinks. And congratulations on the Chamberlain Award.


No, but winding down our involvement in an organization where we do everyone's bitch work and the other members act like lazy welfare queens is good for us, and dropping the war-mongering rhetoric that we need to intervene in Ukraine or against Assad is being diplomatic towards Russia.

Russia is not some Hitleresque threat.

If Hillary ever gets us into a pointless, disastrous war with Russia, I'll be expecting to see you on the frontlines, since you seem so eager.

Define what the fair share of European nations is. Because any fucking loud mouth can (and does) look at a collection of much smaller nations and denigrate their individual contributions.

America is much larger, spends a fuckton of money on its military - by choice - and chooses to lead and be an example. But doing so and then whining about how we always have to lead and be an example is fucking hypocritical. And selfish. And far too many folks demonstrate those unfortunate traits. The whole bloody point of NATO is collective defense. Not some pissing contest where we shit-talk our smaller partners.

And if you don't see Russia as a very real adversary, you are grossly deluded. Tuck back NATO and see which piece of eastern Europe Putin bites off next.
Pronounced: KIM-ree-ah. Formerly the Empire of Thakandar, founded December 2002. IIWiki | Factbook | Royal Cymrean Forces
Proud patron of: Halcyon Arms and of their Cymrea-class drone carrier
Storefronts: Ravendyne Defence Industries | Bank of Cymrea | Pork Place BBQ
Puppets: Persica Prime (W40K), Winter Bastion (SW), Atramentar
✎ Member - ℘ædagog | Cheese Sandwich is best Pony | 1870 (2.0) United Kingdom of Cambria
SEATTLE SEAHAWKS OREGON DUCKS

User avatar
Ostroeuropa
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 57904
Founded: Jun 14, 2006
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Ostroeuropa » Mon Jul 25, 2016 1:06 pm

Cymrea wrote:
Yorkers wrote:
No, but winding down our involvement in an organization where we do everyone's bitch work and the other members act like lazy welfare queens is good for us, and dropping the war-mongering rhetoric that we need to intervene in Ukraine or against Assad is being diplomatic towards Russia.

Russia is not some Hitleresque threat.

If Hillary ever gets us into a pointless, disastrous war with Russia, I'll be expecting to see you on the frontlines, since you seem so eager.

Define what the fair share of European nations is. Because any fucking loud mouth can (and does) look at a collection of much smaller nations and denigrate their individual contributions.

America is much larger, spends a fuckton of money on its military - by choice - and chooses to lead and be an example. But doing so and then whining about how we always have to lead and be an example is fucking hypocritical. And selfish. And far too many folks demonstrate those unfortunate traits. The whole bloody point of NATO is collective defense. Not some pissing contest where we shit-talk our smaller partners.

And if you don't see Russia as a very real adversary, you are grossly deluded. Tuck back NATO and see which piece of eastern Europe Putin bites off next.


NATO says they should spend 2% of their GDP on defense.

Barely any of them do it.
Ostro.MOV

There is an out of control trolley speeding towards Jeremy Bentham, who is tied to the track. You can pull the lever to cause the trolley to switch tracks, but on the other track is Immanuel Kant. Bentham is clutching the only copy in the universe of The Critique of Pure Reason. Kant is clutching the only copy in the universe of The Principles of Moral Legislation. Both men are shouting at you that they have recently started to reconsider their ethical stances.

User avatar
Gauthier
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 52887
Founded: Antiquity
Ex-Nation

Postby Gauthier » Mon Jul 25, 2016 1:08 pm

Cymrea wrote:
Yorkers wrote:
No, but winding down our involvement in an organization where we do everyone's bitch work and the other members act like lazy welfare queens is good for us, and dropping the war-mongering rhetoric that we need to intervene in Ukraine or against Assad is being diplomatic towards Russia.

Russia is not some Hitleresque threat.

If Hillary ever gets us into a pointless, disastrous war with Russia, I'll be expecting to see you on the frontlines, since you seem so eager.

Define what the fair share of European nations is. Because any fucking loud mouth can (and does) look at a collection of much smaller nations and denigrate their individual contributions.

America is much larger, spends a fuckton of money on its military - by choice - and chooses to lead and be an example. But doing so and then whining about how we always have to lead and be an example is fucking hypocritical. And selfish. And far too many folks demonstrate those unfortunate traits. The whole bloody point of NATO is collective defense. Not some pissing contest where we shit-talk our smaller partners.

And if you don't see Russia as a very real adversary, you are grossly deluded. Tuck back NATO and see which piece of eastern Europe Putin bites off next.


He stated that he doesn't give a fuck if Putin overruns the entirety of Eastern Europe because They Don't Pay Their Share.

Because NATO is now a cable channel or Netflix.
Crimes committed by Muslims will be a pan-Islamic plot and proof of Islam's inherent evil. On the other hand crimes committed by non-Muslims will merely be the acts of loners who do not represent their belief system at all.
The probability of one's participation in homosexual acts is directly proportional to one's public disdain and disgust for homosexuals.
If a political figure makes an accusation of wrongdoing without evidence, odds are probable that the accuser or an associate thereof has in fact committed the very same act, possibly to a worse degree.
Where is your God-Emperor now?

User avatar
Cymrea
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8580
Founded: Feb 10, 2006
Democratic Socialists

Postby Cymrea » Mon Jul 25, 2016 1:11 pm

Ostroeuropa wrote:NATO says they should spend 2% of their GDP on defense.

Barely any of them do it.

What are these members spending their GDP on instead?
Pronounced: KIM-ree-ah. Formerly the Empire of Thakandar, founded December 2002. IIWiki | Factbook | Royal Cymrean Forces
Proud patron of: Halcyon Arms and of their Cymrea-class drone carrier
Storefronts: Ravendyne Defence Industries | Bank of Cymrea | Pork Place BBQ
Puppets: Persica Prime (W40K), Winter Bastion (SW), Atramentar
✎ Member - ℘ædagog | Cheese Sandwich is best Pony | 1870 (2.0) United Kingdom of Cambria
SEATTLE SEAHAWKS OREGON DUCKS

User avatar
Hirota
Negotiator
 
Posts: 7327
Founded: Jan 22, 2004
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Hirota » Mon Jul 25, 2016 1:11 pm

Imperializt Russia wrote:

And then stopped.
I didn't say that or anything of the sort. I simply demonstrated your claim was factually wrong.
Gravlen wrote:CENSORSHIP!!1!
Nor did I say anything of the sort there either. But whatever you want to imagine that will keep you happy, I suppose.
When a wise man points at the moon the imbecile examines the finger - Confucius
Known to trigger Grammar Nazis, Spelling Nazis, Actual Nazis, the emotionally stunted and pedants.
Those affected by the views, opinions or general demeanour of this poster should review this puppy picture. Those affected by puppy pictures should consider investing in an isolation tank.

Economic Left/Right: -3.25, Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -5.03
Isn't it curious how people will claim they are against tribalism, then pigeonhole themselves into tribes?

It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it.
I use obviously in italics to emphasise the conveying of sarcasm. If I've put excessive obviously's into a post that means I'm being sarcastic

User avatar
Ostroeuropa
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 57904
Founded: Jun 14, 2006
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Ostroeuropa » Mon Jul 25, 2016 1:12 pm

Gauthier wrote:
He stated that he doesn't give a fuck if Putin overruns the entirety of Eastern Europe because They Don't Pay Their Share.

Because NATO is now a cable channel or Netflix.


Nations freeriding on others defence spending shouldn't be protected.
If its true that we simply cannot afford to lose these nations, erect tariffs against them so they will end up reimbursing you for defending them.
In the process this also weakens their economy and makes theme less important in the first place.
I'm sure other arrangements can also be made. The point is to prevent freeriding.
Ostro.MOV

There is an out of control trolley speeding towards Jeremy Bentham, who is tied to the track. You can pull the lever to cause the trolley to switch tracks, but on the other track is Immanuel Kant. Bentham is clutching the only copy in the universe of The Critique of Pure Reason. Kant is clutching the only copy in the universe of The Principles of Moral Legislation. Both men are shouting at you that they have recently started to reconsider their ethical stances.

User avatar
New Werpland
Senator
 
Posts: 4647
Founded: Dec 11, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby New Werpland » Mon Jul 25, 2016 1:13 pm

Ostroeuropa wrote:
Cymrea wrote:Define what the fair share of European nations is. Because any fucking loud mouth can (and does) look at a collection of much smaller nations and denigrate their individual contributions.

America is much larger, spends a fuckton of money on its military - by choice - and chooses to lead and be an example. But doing so and then whining about how we always have to lead and be an example is fucking hypocritical. And selfish. And far too many folks demonstrate those unfortunate traits. The whole bloody point of NATO is collective defense. Not some pissing contest where we shit-talk our smaller partners.

And if you don't see Russia as a very real adversary, you are grossly deluded. Tuck back NATO and see which piece of eastern Europe Putin bites off next.


NATO says they should spend 2% of their GDP on defense.

Barely any of them do it.

Because NATO desperately need the Baltics to spend money on defense. :roll:

It's not as if they'd get bulldozed no matter what if Russia decided to invade.

User avatar
Ostroeuropa
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 57904
Founded: Jun 14, 2006
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Ostroeuropa » Mon Jul 25, 2016 1:15 pm

Cymrea wrote:
Ostroeuropa wrote:NATO says they should spend 2% of their GDP on defense.

Barely any of them do it.

What are these members spending their GDP on instead?


That is completely irrelevant to their NATO obligations.
If the obligations were binding, only 5 countries would be in NATO.

UK, Italy, France, Poland, and the USA.
Ostro.MOV

There is an out of control trolley speeding towards Jeremy Bentham, who is tied to the track. You can pull the lever to cause the trolley to switch tracks, but on the other track is Immanuel Kant. Bentham is clutching the only copy in the universe of The Critique of Pure Reason. Kant is clutching the only copy in the universe of The Principles of Moral Legislation. Both men are shouting at you that they have recently started to reconsider their ethical stances.

User avatar
Ostroeuropa
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 57904
Founded: Jun 14, 2006
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Ostroeuropa » Mon Jul 25, 2016 1:17 pm

New Werpland wrote:
Ostroeuropa wrote:
NATO says they should spend 2% of their GDP on defense.

Barely any of them do it.

Because NATO desperately need the Baltics to spend money on defense. :roll:

It's not as if they'd get bulldozed no matter what if Russia decided to invade.


Which is why Trump is proposing they simply pay the USA.
I'd say they should hand over 2% of their GDP. It makes sense, and is fair.

Getting whiney about it is tantamount to freeriding and demanding americans pay money to defend your life for you while you refuse to. Handing over the money means we actually have a common defence fund and everyone contributes, rather than baltic nations, for example, being welfare queens.

The only argument against it is that it hurts their feelings and makes them feel like they are paying tribute. In effect they would be, but without also having to fork over a bended knee and admission of inferiority. It's simply a business transaction between equal nations, which has similarities to the old tributary state model.

Because the alternative is to have the US have the oblgiations of owning tributary states... without any tribute.
Last edited by Ostroeuropa on Mon Jul 25, 2016 1:21 pm, edited 3 times in total.
Ostro.MOV

There is an out of control trolley speeding towards Jeremy Bentham, who is tied to the track. You can pull the lever to cause the trolley to switch tracks, but on the other track is Immanuel Kant. Bentham is clutching the only copy in the universe of The Critique of Pure Reason. Kant is clutching the only copy in the universe of The Principles of Moral Legislation. Both men are shouting at you that they have recently started to reconsider their ethical stances.

User avatar
Gravlen
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 16632
Founded: Jul 01, 2005
Father Knows Best State

Postby Gravlen » Mon Jul 25, 2016 1:19 pm

Hirota wrote:
Imperializt Russia wrote:And then stopped.
I didn't say that or anything of the sort. I simply demonstrated your claim was factually wrong.
Gravlen wrote:CENSORSHIP!!1!
Nor did I say anything of the sort there either. But whatever you want to imagine that will keep you happy, I suppose.

You didn't, but in case you failed to notice, that's the claim this entire thread is predicated on.
EnragedMaldivians wrote:That's preposterous. Gravlens's not a white nationalist; Gravlen's a penguin.

Unio de Sovetaj Socialismaj Respublikoj wrote:There is no use arguing the definition of murder with someone who has a picture of a penguin with a chainsaw as their nations flag.

User avatar
Gauthier
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 52887
Founded: Antiquity
Ex-Nation

Postby Gauthier » Mon Jul 25, 2016 1:19 pm

Ostroeuropa wrote:
New Werpland wrote:Because NATO desperately need the Baltics to spend money on defense. :roll:

It's not as if they'd get bulldozed no matter what if Russia decided to invade.


Which is why Trump is proposing they simply pay the USA.
I'd say they should hand over 2% of their GDP. It makes sense, and is fair.

Getting whiney about it is tantamount to freeriding and demanding americans pay money to defend your life for you while you refuse to. Handing over the money means we actually have a common defence fund and everyone contributes, rather than baltic nations, for example, being welfare queens.


So like Trump, you consider NATO to be a protection racket rather than a mutual defense alliance.
Crimes committed by Muslims will be a pan-Islamic plot and proof of Islam's inherent evil. On the other hand crimes committed by non-Muslims will merely be the acts of loners who do not represent their belief system at all.
The probability of one's participation in homosexual acts is directly proportional to one's public disdain and disgust for homosexuals.
If a political figure makes an accusation of wrongdoing without evidence, odds are probable that the accuser or an associate thereof has in fact committed the very same act, possibly to a worse degree.
Where is your God-Emperor now?

User avatar
Imperializt Russia
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 54847
Founded: Jun 03, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Imperializt Russia » Mon Jul 25, 2016 1:20 pm

Hirota wrote:
Imperializt Russia wrote:And then stopped.
I didn't say that or anything of the sort. I simply demonstrated your claim was factually wrong.

What?
Warning! This poster has:
PT puppet of the People's Republic of Samozaryadnyastan.

Lamadia wrote:dangerous socialist attitude
Also,
Imperializt Russia wrote:I'm English, you tit.

User avatar
New Werpland
Senator
 
Posts: 4647
Founded: Dec 11, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby New Werpland » Mon Jul 25, 2016 1:22 pm

Ostroeuropa wrote:
Cymrea wrote:What are these members spending their GDP on instead?


That is completely irrelevant to their NATO obligations.
If the obligations were binding, only 5 countries would be in NATO.

UK, Italy, France, Poland, and the USA.

You've got that wrong.

Italy spends 1.3% and Turkey spends 2.3%

User avatar
Ostroeuropa
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 57904
Founded: Jun 14, 2006
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Ostroeuropa » Mon Jul 25, 2016 1:23 pm

Gauthier wrote:
Ostroeuropa wrote:
Which is why Trump is proposing they simply pay the USA.
I'd say they should hand over 2% of their GDP. It makes sense, and is fair.

Getting whiney about it is tantamount to freeriding and demanding americans pay money to defend your life for you while you refuse to. Handing over the money means we actually have a common defence fund and everyone contributes, rather than baltic nations, for example, being welfare queens.


So like Trump, you consider NATO to be a protection racket rather than a mutual defense alliance.


If it's mutual, why aren't they doing anything meaningful to defend us? Or paying anything meaningful towards it?
Like I said, getting whiney about it is tantamount to demanding a free ride.

"I know, let's weaken our protector by free riding when we acknowledge we're absolutely fucked without them! That's a great idea!"
Ostro.MOV

There is an out of control trolley speeding towards Jeremy Bentham, who is tied to the track. You can pull the lever to cause the trolley to switch tracks, but on the other track is Immanuel Kant. Bentham is clutching the only copy in the universe of The Critique of Pure Reason. Kant is clutching the only copy in the universe of The Principles of Moral Legislation. Both men are shouting at you that they have recently started to reconsider their ethical stances.

User avatar
Ostroeuropa
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 57904
Founded: Jun 14, 2006
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Ostroeuropa » Mon Jul 25, 2016 1:23 pm

New Werpland wrote:
Ostroeuropa wrote:
That is completely irrelevant to their NATO obligations.
If the obligations were binding, only 5 countries would be in NATO.

UK, Italy, France, Poland, and the USA.

You've got that wrong.

Italy spends 1.3% and Turkey spends 2.3%


So I did. Thankyou for correcting me.
Ostro.MOV

There is an out of control trolley speeding towards Jeremy Bentham, who is tied to the track. You can pull the lever to cause the trolley to switch tracks, but on the other track is Immanuel Kant. Bentham is clutching the only copy in the universe of The Critique of Pure Reason. Kant is clutching the only copy in the universe of The Principles of Moral Legislation. Both men are shouting at you that they have recently started to reconsider their ethical stances.

User avatar
Gauthier
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 52887
Founded: Antiquity
Ex-Nation

Postby Gauthier » Mon Jul 25, 2016 1:24 pm

Ostroeuropa wrote:
Gauthier wrote:
So like Trump, you consider NATO to be a protection racket rather than a mutual defense alliance.


If it's mutual, why aren't they doing anything meaningful to defend us? Or paying anything meaningful towards it?
Like I said, getting whiney about it is tantamount to demanding a free ride.

"I know, let's weaken our protector by free riding when we acknowledge we're absolutely fucked without them! That's a great idea!"


"The continental United States needs troops from the Baltic States to rally to its defense." Good one.
Crimes committed by Muslims will be a pan-Islamic plot and proof of Islam's inherent evil. On the other hand crimes committed by non-Muslims will merely be the acts of loners who do not represent their belief system at all.
The probability of one's participation in homosexual acts is directly proportional to one's public disdain and disgust for homosexuals.
If a political figure makes an accusation of wrongdoing without evidence, odds are probable that the accuser or an associate thereof has in fact committed the very same act, possibly to a worse degree.
Where is your God-Emperor now?

PreviousNext

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Corporate Collective Salvation, Fartsniffage, Gallade, Google [Bot], New Texas Republic, Peacetime, Rary, The Pirateariat, The Selkie, Usaiana

Advertisement

Remove ads