DNC leak

[New Werpland]

Or they're saying NATO should be like a cable channel or Netflix subscription and the amount of defense a country can get in the event of an attack is directly proportional to how much they spend. Because the Baltic States can clearly afford the Platinum Package without bankrupting themselves, but they're being cheapskates and only paying for the Basic Plan which is a handful of green recruits with drill rifles.

Well the a again what is the point of this alliance for the U.S.? I mean communism has pretty well been defeated, war in Western Europe is basically inconceivable and if in some bizarro world a conventional military attacked the USA (I guess The DPRK might but that is a stretch) are our nato allies and their discount armies really going to be much help to us?
I mean ok, if you want to make a moral argument that the USA should intervene if nato members are attacked ok I can kinda see that, but why legally obligate ourselves to when those countries aren't meeting their own obligations to the alliance?

Because Baltic membership in NATO gives us a solid way to check Russian presence in the the Baltic Sea.

Besides that we are ideological aligned with them and they are the best examples of successful post-Soviet nations.

[Imperializt Russia]

What?

Not sure what part of that you didn't understand. I don't want to be patronising, so clarify your question please.

The hashtag trended.
Then it stopped trending.

People allege that this is censorship because of... reasons.
You seem to have leapt on me saying "it didn't trend", which I meant to mean "it stopped trending".

[Gauthier]

Well the a again what is the point of this alliance for the U.S.? I mean communism has pretty well been defeated, war in Western Europe is basically inconceivable and if in some bizarro world a conventional military attacked the USA (I guess The DPRK might but that is a stretch) are our nato allies and their discount armies really going to be much help to us?
I mean ok, if you want to make a moral argument that the USA should intervene if nato members are attacked ok I can kinda see that, but why legally obligate ourselves to when those countries aren't meeting their own obligations to the alliance?

Because Baltic membership in NATO gives us a solid way to check Russian presence in the Baltic Sea.

Besides that we are ideological aligned with them and they are the best examples of successful post-Soviet nations.

Nah, we should let Russia reclaim them because they didn't pay the cable bill. *nod*

[New Werpland]

Because Baltic membership in NATO gives us a solid way to check Russian presence in the Baltic Sea.

Besides that we are ideological aligned with them and they are the best examples of successful post-Soviet nations.

Nah, we should let Russia reclaim them because they didn't pay the cable bill. *nod*

If they all paid us 2.1% of their gdp for protection, we could just barely afford another nuclear submarine.

And they refuse to pay! What a travesty!

[Unified Governments]

Obviously it's a massive blow since DWS is now resgning.

Hmpf, gotta love the anti-Semitic jokes in the emails and the plans to target Sanders over his religion.

Anti-Semitic Democrats? Say it ain't so!

[Shofercia]

How do you know that Clinton won't benefit Putin more?

How can this be a real question?

It has a question mark behind it, and Clinton benefited Putin more than Trump, i.e. the e-mail scandal.

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.

Godwin alert!

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.

Apparently the EU must be full of Chamberlains too: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8281990.stm

The war in Georgia last year was started by a Georgian attack that was not justified by international law, an EU-sponsored report has concluded.

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.

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

NATO doesn't desperately need anyone to spend money on defense. But if you're going to constantly complain about the Russian threat, you probably should meet the minimum requirements for NATO.

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.

No one's forcing the Baltics to remain in NATO. They can leave if they want.

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.

Perhaps. But whatever amount of money the Baltics states can pay to the US will going to be miniscule and useless.

If you really care about NATO free riding, attack the countries that actually matter.

If you really care about taxes, attack the taxpayers that actually matter; let the others get a free ride. Wait, why's US debt increasing?

[The Lone Alliance]

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.

Shows how little you do know, you know what countries DO pay their fair share in NATO?
Along with the UK and Greece there are the Eastern European countries of Estonia and Poland, IE the countries that actually have to worry about Putin.

You know who doesn't pay their fair share?

The western European Nations who know they have nothing to fear from Putin... Unless you think he's going to conquer Luxembourg.

[Shofercia]

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.

They are supposed to contribute at least 2% of their GDP to defense, which barely any of them do. Instead, they expect to leech off of the American taxpayer and think that Uncle Sam is going to get in the trenches to defend their nation because they're too cowardly or lazy to do it themselves.

NATO is collective defensive, and the other nations aren't contributing to the collective.

Also what is Russia doing that means I should be scared of it. More Americans have been killed by Islamic terrorists than by Russians.

Democrats are trying to cram their most unpopular politician down the throats of Americans. And they'll use the "hurr durr Rusha Bad" argument if that's what it takes.

What's so dangerous about Russia? How am I, as an American, threatened?

The observation that Russian interests hacked the DNC (taken in context with Trump's recorded statements) in a very likely flagrant attempt to subvert the country's electoral process aren't enough for you. I guess you have to see Little Green Men in the continental United States re-enacting the opening of Red Dawn before you finally register it.

What's more of a threat: a completely corrupt political system that wastes billions of taxpayer money on lobbyists or Russian hackers?

Well done on demonstrating you apparently have no idea what a protection racket is. Either that, or you don't let pesky definitions get in your way.

You don't need to jump to Ostro's defense everytime you think someone hurt his feelings.

And yet, he's right about your misunderstanding of what a racket is.

Nah, we should let Russia reclaim them because they didn't pay the cable bill. *nod*

If they all paid us 2.1% of their gdp for protection, we could just barely afford another nuclear submarine.

And they refuse to pay! What a travesty!

So if someone's taxes are less than $5k, they shouldn't have to pay taxes?

[New Werpland]

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

Apparently the EU must be full of Chamberlains too: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8281990.stm

The war in Georgia last year was started by a Georgian attack that was not justified by international law, an EU-sponsored report has concluded.

Superb trigger material Shof, well done.

I'll just leave this here to hint at the silliness of your Manichaean interpretation of that war: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_Georgia_missile_incident

NATO doesn't desperately need anyone to spend money on defense. But if you're going to constantly complain about the Russian threat, you probably should meet the minimum requirements for NATO.

NATO really needs that nuclear submarine I see.

If you really care about taxes, attack the taxpayers that actually matter; let the others get a free ride. Wait, why's US debt increasing?

Yes because making sure the average fork lift driver pays his taxes is more important than the average multimillionaire. And that's of course ignoring the fact that these are not taxes here we are talking about!

Funny how your one complaint about Bernie used to be tax increases eh?

[PaNTuXIa]

Already gave a lecture to Eol Sha about this, but this proves that Hillary Clinton is not a liberal. I now consider equally as bad as Trump.

[New Werpland]

Already gave a lecture to Eol Sha about this, but this proves that Hillary Clinton is not a liberal. I now consider equally as bad as Trump.

Liberals can't be corrupt?

[Hirota]

You seem to have leapt on me saying "it didn't trend", which I meant to mean "it stopped trending".

Well, if you said what you meant, as opposed to what you said, then maybe I wouldn't have had to correct you. Clarity is important.

You didn't, but in case you failed to notice, that's the claim this entire thread is predicated on.

Indeed, but one of the elements to counter the claim of censorship appeared to be that the content was never trending.

[PaNTuXIa]

Already gave a lecture to Eol Sha about this, but this proves that Hillary Clinton is not a liberal. I now consider equally as bad as Trump.

Liberals can't be corrupt?

They can. They just aren't supposed to hate on atheists.
https://theintercept.com/2016/07/22/new ... ainst-him/

[United Latin Lesbians]

Already gave a lecture to Eol Sha about this, but this proves that Hillary Clinton is not a liberal. I now consider equally as bad as Trump.

Being a US Dem inherently precludes being a liberal.

[Unified Governments]

Liberals can't be corrupt?

They can. They just aren't supposed to hate on atheists.
https://theintercept.com/2016/07/22/new ... ainst-him/

And you know this because you've tapped into the liberal hivemind?

[Uiiop]

Liberals can't be corrupt?

They can. They just aren't supposed to hate on atheists.
https://theintercept.com/2016/07/22/new ... ainst-him/

...Where the hell is Hilary? You used this for proof that she isn't a liberal...but i'm only seeing actions not done by her. Are they a dickmove? Yes of course...but nothing in there indicates she was involded.

[PaNTuXIa]

They can. They just aren't supposed to hate on atheists.
https://theintercept.com/2016/07/22/new ... ainst-him/

...Where the hell is Hilary? You used this for proof that she isn't a liberal...but i'm only seeing actions not done by her. Are they a dickmove? Yes of course...but nothing in there indicates she was involded.

So you think there isn't the slightest possibility that DWS and HRC were partners in conspiracy? DWS has been Hillary's puppet for a long time now.

The point is, they did it on behalf of her. Considering this isn't some insignificant politician, rather the actual head of the DRC, shows that most of the establishment Democrats will do dirty work for her.

[Uiiop]

...Where the hell is Hilary? You used this for proof that she isn't a liberal...but i'm only seeing actions not done by her. Are they a dickmove? Yes of course...but nothing in there indicates she was involded.

So you think there isn't the slightest possibility that DWS and HRC were partners in conspiracy? DWS has been Hillary's puppet for a long time now.

Nope just that if it happened the evidence isn't here. Also i see no evidence of a puppet...there is a difference between someone favoring a person and being a puppet of them so if you only got evidence of the former(Which is still valid to criticize mind you) then you have nothing.

And even if they were that doesn't necessarily mean Hilary was ok with this plan in particular thus even if you proved everything else under your definition you still haven't proved she isn't a liberal.

Hell from what i can understand on how you jumped to conclusions it would make more sense if you thought it was the other way around with Hilary being a puppet for the DNC. That would be the only reason in my mind how one can think that she agrees with whatever the DNC says without seeing what she thinks.

[54e]

Delegates: This candidate is right wing and shitty, and the primary was rigged. We are upset.

DNC: UGHHH YOU PETULANT CHILDREN. JUST ACCEPT THE OLIGARCHY. ACCEPT IT

[Shofercia]

Apparently the EU must be full of Chamberlains too: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8281990.stm

Superb trigger material Shof, well done.

I'll just leave this here to hint at the silliness of your Manichaean interpretation of that war: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_Georgia_missile_incident

My interpretation depends on facts. Saakashvili comes to power. Becomes nationalist. Attacks South Ossetia in 2004. (2004 is before 2007, New Werpland, just an FYI.) Fails. Runs military budget up to 9% of the country's GDP. Attacks South Ossetia again in 2008. Fails. Clearly, according to new Werpland, Putin's guilty.

NATO doesn't desperately need anyone to spend money on defense. But if you're going to constantly complain about the Russian threat, you probably should meet the minimum requirements for NATO.

NATO really needs that nuclear submarine I see.

An extra nuclear submarine certainly wouldn't hurt. But that's not the point. The point is the principle. If everyone pays, no one has an excuse to skimp. If you let some skimp, others will try to do just that.

If you really care about taxes, attack the taxpayers that actually matter; let the others get a free ride. Wait, why's US debt increasing?

Yes because making sure the average fork lift driver pays his taxes is more important than the average multimillionaire. And that's of course ignoring the fact that these are not taxes here we are talking about!

Funny how your one complaint about Bernie used to be tax increases eh?

You do know that there's a difference between tax increases and tax collection, right? And it's probably easier to collect taxes from a fork lift driver, than from various lawyers of a multimillionaire.

[Llamalandia]

Apparently the EU must be full of Chamberlains too: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8281990.stm

Superb trigger material Shof, well done.

I'll just leave this here to hint at the silliness of your Manichaean interpretation of that war: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_Georgia_missile_incident

NATO doesn't desperately need anyone to spend money on defense. But if you're going to constantly complain about the Russian threat, you probably should meet the minimum requirements for NATO.

NATO really needs that nuclear submarine I see.

If you really care about taxes, attack the taxpayers that actually matter; let the others get a free ride. Wait, why's US debt increasing?

Yes because making sure the average fork lift driver pays his taxes is more important than the average multimillionaire. And that's of course ignoring the fact that these are not taxes here we are talking about!

Funny how your one complaint about Bernie used to be tax increases eh?

Actually to your last pount technically the irs isn't supposed to discriminate between tax payers, so actually yeah, in theory at least the fork lift operator and the multimillionaire who cheat on their taxes should each have a roughly equal probability of being audited. It is as bit more complicated but basically the law is suppose to apply fairly and equally to everyone.

[Uiiop]

...Where the hell is Hilary? You used this for proof that she isn't a liberal...but i'm only seeing actions not done by her. Are they a dickmove? Yes of course...but nothing in there indicates she was involded.

So you think there isn't the slightest possibility that DWS and HRC were partners in conspiracy? DWS has been Hillary's puppet for a long time now.

The point is, they did it on behalf of her. Considering this isn't some insignificant politician, rather the actual head of the DRC, shows that most of the establishment Democrats will do dirty work for her.

I'm making a post because of the edit.
Still doesn't show that Hilary herself was involved in it. Like i said favoring someone is different some working with someone and having them agree to whatever scheme you got to make thing favor for her.

[New Werpland]

Superb trigger material Shof, well done.

I'll just leave this here to hint at the silliness of your Manichaean interpretation of that war: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_Georgia_missile_incident

My interpretation depends on facts. Saakashvili comes to power. Becomes nationalist. Attacks South Ossetia in 2004. (2004 is before 2007, New Werpland, just an FYI.) Fails. Runs military budget up to 9% of the country's GDP. Attacks South Ossetia again in 2008. Fails. Clearly, according to new Werpland, Putin's guilty.

Anywhere to continue this where it wouldn't be considered a threadjack?

[New Werpland]

Superb trigger material Shof, well done.

I'll just leave this here to hint at the silliness of your Manichaean interpretation of that war: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_Georgia_missile_incident



NATO really needs that nuclear submarine I see.



Yes because making sure the average fork lift driver pays his taxes is more important than the average multimillionaire. And that's of course ignoring the fact that these are not taxes here we are talking about!

Funny how your one complaint about Bernie used to be tax increases eh?

Actually to your last pount technically the irs isn't supposed to discriminate between tax payers, so actually yeah, in theory at least the fork lift operator and the multimillionaire who cheat on their taxes should each have a roughly equal probability of being audited. It is as bit more complicated but basically the law is suppose to apply fairly and equally to everyone.

Exactly which is why I said "And that's of course ignoring the fact that these are not taxes here we are talking about!"

[Shofercia]

My interpretation depends on facts. Saakashvili comes to power. Becomes nationalist. Attacks South Ossetia in 2004. (2004 is before 2007, New Werpland, just an FYI.) Fails. Runs military budget up to 9% of the country's GDP. Attacks South Ossetia again in 2008. Fails. Clearly, according to new Werpland, Putin's guilty.

Anywhere to continue this where it wouldn't be considered a threadjack?

Not at the moment. But there's been plenty of threads on it already on NSG. Earliest I could find dates back to April: viewtopic.php?f=20&t=373952&start=425

You can ask the mods if you can bump that one, if you really want to continue the conversation.