Rise of Domestic US terrorism fueled mostly by far right

[North Washington Republic]

Isn't AOC and a few other of the more radical dems an example for that?

Centrists are not "extreme".

AOC is isn’t a centrist, but she isn’t batshit crazy unlike the far-right in America.

[Great Confederacy of Commonwealth States]

Centrists are not "extreme".

AOC is isn’t a centrist, but she isn’t batshit crazy unlike the far-right in America.

She is a social democrat. A left-leaning ideology, but capitalistic at the core and certainly not socialist.

But yeah, calling her a centrist is misleading.

[North Washington Republic]

AOC is isn’t a centrist, but she isn’t batshit crazy unlike the far-right in America.

She is a social democrat. A left-leaning ideology, but capitalistic at the core and certainly not socialist.

But yeah, calling her a centrist is misleading.

Ohh, I wouldn’t consider her to be capitalistic. Just because someone doesn’t support implementation of a stateless, communist society doesn’t mean they’re capitalist. She supports a market economy, but not necessarily a free market economy.

[Esternial]

It's getting old. Group A gets angry because Group B is gaining more influence or power & tries to hold on to power.

If the United States gets a left-wing equivalent of Trump as their President I'll consider the balance of power overly-shifted towards the left and we can complain about that. Until then, some of us could do with being less dramatic.

Isn't AOC and a few other of the more radical dems an example for that?

Let me use a metaphor.

If you're not used to spicy stuff a Jalapeño will probably make you cry.

[Lady Victory]

It's getting old. Group A gets angry because Group B is gaining more influence or power & tries to hold on to power.

If the United States gets a left-wing equivalent of Trump as their President I'll consider the balance of power overly-shifted towards the left and we can complain about that. Until then, some of us could do with being less dramatic.

Isn't AOC and a few other of the more radical dems an example for that?

>AOC
>"radical"

Pick one.

[Kubra]

Sending guns, money, and aid to violent religious extremists who would overthrow a legitimate, secular, modernizing government and replace it with a backwards fundamentalist dictatorship while exporting their rabid militants across the globe to destabilize other countries and then fly planes into the heart of the largest city on Earth killing almost 3,000 people in the process is a bit more than a "mistake" or "misstep".

you mean the "legitimate, secular, modernizing government" that was in bed with the Soviet Union, who was still claiming they wanted to destroy us. Remember a proverb from that part of the world, "The enemy of my enemy is my friend", the same reason we supported Stalin in WW II who later repaid us in a similar fashion.

Yes, the long-term effects of that support worked out poorly but those could not be anticipated at the time. The immediate result was tying down Soviet forces in a quagmire and eventually sending them out with their tails between their legs.

when did the Soviets ever say they want to destroy the US

[Great Confederacy of Commonwealth States]

She is a social democrat. A left-leaning ideology, but capitalistic at the core and certainly not socialist.

But yeah, calling her a centrist is misleading.

Ohh, I wouldn’t consider her to be capitalistic. Just because someone doesn’t support implementation of a stateless, communist society doesn’t mean they’re capitalist. She supports a market economy, but not necessarily a free market economy.

Sure, but if people want to maintain the ownership of the means of production for people who paid for it, then yeah, her ideology is one that assumes capitalism. At least, as far as she has ever said anything publicly.

[The Derpy Democratic Republic Of Herp]

Ah yes, America where center right politicians like Obama and Clinton are now ""far left"".

Europe is only "far left" if you forget Hungry and Poland existed. Even then it's center left.


People here forgot Reagan also supported the Contra terrorists.

Of course as pointed out earlier, he was part of Operation Cyclone, backing the Mujahideen.

And the Mujahideen never once ever betrayed America. By the power of unicorn pee and dragon poo, the Mujahideen had a long lasting peaceful government, and was a very loyal ally to the US. They never ever ever attacked America in the largest terrorist attack in history. Nope. Nothing happened on September 11th 2001. Nothing at all. (this was sarcastic btw)

Whatever. If Clinton blames her loss in the 2016 election based on only her gender, and Obama making fun of those who "cling to their guns and religion", then I can't imagine how much worse/better "center left" in Europe may be.

Europe is still cool because of it's people and culture, but not it's modern politics.

I'm not sure but I don't think she blamed it on gender.

She was more gracious in defeat then Trump was in 2020 tho.

Obama made fun of people who make guns into there whole personality? It's almost like he has freedom of speech or something.

No, there modern politics outside of Poland and Hungary are cool.

[Page]

Ah yes, America where center right politicians like Obama and Clinton are now ""far left"".

Europe is only "far left" if you forget Hungry and Poland existed. Even then it's center left.


People here forgot Reagan also supported the Contra terrorists.

Of course as pointed out earlier, he was part of Operation Cyclone, backing the Mujahideen.

And the Mujahideen never once ever betrayed America. By the power of unicorn pee and dragon poo, the Mujahideen had a long lasting peaceful government, and was a very loyal ally to the US. They never ever ever attacked America in the largest terrorist attack in history. Nope. Nothing happened on September 11th 2001. Nothing at all. (this was sarcastic btw)

Whatever. If Clinton blames her loss in the 2016 election based on only her gender, and Obama making fun of those who "cling to their guns and religion", then I can't imagine how much worse/better "center left" in Europe may be.

Europe is still cool because of it's people and culture, but not it's modern politics.

America is 95% neoliberalism and 5% social democracy. Europe on average is more like 75% neoliberalism and 25% social democracy. Europe is just as much a part of the capitalist hegemony as America, they just don't let as many poor people die.

[Great Algerstonia]

you mean the "legitimate, secular, modernizing government" that was in bed with the Soviet Union, who was still claiming they wanted to destroy us. Remember a proverb from that part of the world, "The enemy of my enemy is my friend", the same reason we supported Stalin in WW II who later repaid us in a similar fashion.

Yes, the long-term effects of that support worked out poorly but those could not be anticipated at the time. The immediate result was tying down Soviet forces in a quagmire and eventually sending them out with their tails between their legs.

when did the Soviets ever say they want to destroy the US

Stalin stating that war was inevitable with the Western Powers on February 9th 1946 due to the "capitalist development of the world economy" and them literally putting nuclear missiles in Cuba.

[Page]

when did the Soviets ever say they want to destroy the US

Stalin stating that war was inevitable with the Western Powers on February 9th 1946 due to the "capitalist development of the world economy" and them literally putting nuclear missiles in Cuba.

In response to the US putting nuclear missiles in Turkey.

[Great Algerstonia]

Stalin stating that war was inevitable with the Western Powers on February 9th 1946 due to the "capitalist development of the world economy" and them literally putting nuclear missiles in Cuba.

In response to the US putting nuclear missiles in Turkey.

Mhm, mutual destruction. Both sides wanted to destroy each other

[The Derpy Democratic Republic Of Herp]

Yes, the long-term effects of that support worked out poorly but those could not be anticipated at the time. The immediate result was tying down Soviet forces in a quagmire and eventually sending them out with their tails between their legs.

Hmm, maybe if the Cia didn't fuck over the Mujahideen when they asked for money to fund roads schools and hospitals the effects would have been better?

And yet the long term results where dooming nearly 3000 Americans (and others) to die on september 11th.

24 of my people died beacuse you couldn't just let the Soviets have Afghanistan.

3562 Coalition forces dead beacuse of the actions of the CIA. (the Cia under Ragan admin)

With no 9/11 there would have been no way to get the Iraq war started. Congress would have never have voted for the actions without the context of 9/11.

31,608+25,069+405,000 for a total of 461,677 dead.

This isn't even counting the dead from the later ISIS attacks or, the Genocide of the Yazidis by ISIS.

[Kubra]

when did the Soviets ever say they want to destroy the US

Stalin stating that war was inevitable with the Western Powers on February 9th 1946 due to the "capitalist development of the world economy" and them literally putting nuclear missiles in Cuba.

Yeah Stalin did, but he had less than a decade left in the ol' ticker. As for the missiles, we all know why that happened and why the whole thing de-escalated. If anything Khrushchev was quite accommodating, more so than Kennedy.
If there is any more rotten a legacy of the cold war, it was the framing of simple national interest issues as existential.

[Elwher]

you mean the "legitimate, secular, modernizing government" that was in bed with the Soviet Union, who was still claiming they wanted to destroy us. Remember a proverb from that part of the world, "The enemy of my enemy is my friend", the same reason we supported Stalin in WW II who later repaid us in a similar fashion.

Yes, the long-term effects of that support worked out poorly but those could not be anticipated at the time. The immediate result was tying down Soviet forces in a quagmire and eventually sending them out with their tails between their legs.

when did the Soviets ever say they want to destroy the US

The most obvious example was Soviet First Secretary Nikita Khrushchev's "We Will Bury You" on November 18, 1956. The emplacement of IRBM's in Cuba was a non-verbal example of the same threat.

[Lady Victory]

when did the Soviets ever say they want to destroy the US

The most obvious example was Soviet First Secretary Nikita Khrushchev's "We Will Bury You" on November 18, 1956. The emplacement of IRBM's in Cuba was a non-verbal example of the same threat.

My man, when it came to Afghanistan there were two evils: the Soviets or the Mujahideen. It was the former, not the latter, that were in fact the lesser of those two evils. That neither the CIA nor Reagan had the sense or intelligence necessary to figure that out does not absolve them of their actions in aiding them.

Zealots are unpredictable by nature, and if neither our intelligence community nor elected representatives can figure this out then they are very much bad at their jobs and should be removed from their posts for gross incompetence.

[Kubra]

when did the Soviets ever say they want to destroy the US

The most obvious example was Soviet First Secretary Nikita Khrushchev's "We Will Bury You" on November 18, 1956. The emplacement of IRBM's in Cuba was a non-verbal example of the same threat.

An unfortunate outburst for which he had to spend many years contextualising to anyone who would listen. Needless to say, he did not mean with tanks.
As for the missiles, again, Turkey.

The most obvious example was Soviet First Secretary Nikita Khrushchev's "We Will Bury You" on November 18, 1956. The emplacement of IRBM's in Cuba was a non-verbal example of the same threat.

My man, when it came to Afghanistan there were two evils: the Soviets or the Mujahideen. It was the former, not the latter, that were in fact the lesser of those two evils. That neither the CIA nor Reagan had the sense or intelligence necessary to figure that out does not absolve them of their actions in aiding them.

Zealots are unpredictable by nature, and if neither our intelligence community nor elected representatives can figure this out then they are very much bad at their jobs and should be removed from their posts for gross incompetence.

I mean in fairness the afghani communists were quite, well, zealous. Soviet advisors had to constantly tell them "k but maybe you guys should less, like, communistic."

[Lady Victory]

The most obvious example was Soviet First Secretary Nikita Khrushchev's "We Will Bury You" on November 18, 1956. The emplacement of IRBM's in Cuba was a non-verbal example of the same threat.

An unfortunate outburst for which he had to spend many years contextualising to anyone who would listen. Needless to say, he did not mean with tanks.
As for the missiles, again, Turkey.

"History is on our side and we will bury you!" said the dead guy who prescribed to a once-popular-now-fringe ideology and who lead a country which doesn't exist anymore.

The irony is what makes the quote so great tbh.

[Kubra]

An unfortunate outburst for which he had to spend many years contextualising to anyone who would listen. Needless to say, he did not mean with tanks.
As for the missiles, again, Turkey.

"History is on our side and we will bury you!" said the dead guy who prescribed to a once-popular-now-fringe ideology and who lead a country which doesn't exist anymore.

The irony is what makes the quote so great tbh.

Hey can't say he didn't have conviction
All that can be said is he didn't have enough corn.

[Lady Victory]

"History is on our side and we will bury you!" said the dead guy who prescribed to a once-popular-now-fringe ideology and who lead a country which doesn't exist anymore.

The irony is what makes the quote so great tbh.

Hey can't say he didn't have conviction
All that can be said is he didn't have enough corn.

You know what? I can actually respect conviction even if it's for a movement/ideal I disagree with. So few people have any these days.

So yeah, hats off to him for that.

[Bear Stearns]

so reading the DHS report, it literally counts minecraft shitposting as terrorism

[Vassenor]

so reading the DHS report, it literally counts minecraft shitposting as terrorism

How so?

[The Derpy Democratic Republic Of Herp]

so reading the DHS report, it literally counts minecraft shitposting as terrorism

Ok, if they do thats wrong, but there is still lots of other alt right garbage terrorisms counted too.


So the criticism of one element is valid, but it doesn't apply to all of the report.

[The Rich Port]

so reading the DHS report, it literally counts minecraft shitposting as terrorism

I meaaaaaaaaan what if someone makes death threats or bomb threats over Minecraft? That's still pretty bad, it being terrorism notwithstanding.

[Nakena]

so reading the DHS report, it literally counts minecraft shitposting as terrorism

I meaaaaaaaaan what if someone makes death threats or bomb threats over Minecraft? That's still pretty bad, it being terrorism notwithstanding.

I don't think that is what's meant here. ^^