shitposting
Discord ID: 398973785426100234
85,553 total messages. Viewing 250 per page.
Prev |
Page 97/343
| Next
not to mention my country did the intentional genocide too
[7:22 AM] Aktricast: hey aussie can you define "white genocide" for me?
So the natives genocided the natives. Why are you biching about American doing soming the natives did to eachother?
actually scientists beleive that the ashkanazi jewish population of europe began with only 400 population that fleed into europe from jaerusalem
Here is the UN Definition of genocide. Article II
In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:
Killing members of the group;
Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; (e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group
White genocide is that to white populations.
im bitching about scale and also when natives war with natives and potentally cause genocide they are doing it to populations they have such a close relation to that their biology is still adapted to that envirnment and they maintain a genetic connection to the territory while when europeans do that shit, they dont
If you can give me a source on that I wold like see were you get the 400 number.
woops, that was 400 familys never mind
So fighting with another grop over control of land is genocide.
That would make more sence.
if you exterminate the population from that land, yes
Because the americans were sucessful
If you force them to leave like the trail of tears after you win wars against the your enemies for control of a territory then no that isn't extermination it's relocation.
that is part of the definition of genocide, forced relocation
No it isn't. If it is then show me where I can find it.
right the holocaust wasn't a genocide because the nazi's just relocated the jews to the ovens
not genocide my boys
look im not saying europeans need to be kicked back to europe and america needs to be handed back to natives, because thats both impracticle and doomed to fail, however europeans dont have genetic ties to north america we only have colonial ties here, sure we can stay, but its not as moral a fighting ground for ethnonationalism when your ethnicity isint native to a geography
i should have clarified
Its not in the dictionary but its an often repeated definition from people on the left
its one reason im not solidly ethnonationalist when it comes to the united states, not till 5 thousand years of selective breeding turns me red due to the lower latitude than my genetic heritage evolved for.
DA JOOS
@Arch-Fiend American built America you have ties there because yo guys built America a country that wasn't their before the European settlers arrived.
The Anglos haven't been in England for 5 thousand years so by your logic they shouldn't be ethnonationalists.
Also why do you want Americans to become like the natives? Americans can build and maintain a civilization.
@Blackhawk342 I don't see forced relocation as genocide.
Well its just... Relocation really.
Unless its forced relocation to an environment that is extremely hostile then maybe theres an argument there?
The fact is that Americans were fighting with the natives over control of land and the Americans won so they forced the natives to move to land that they didn't want. If it was a genocide then the Americans would have just killed them all or otherwise wipeout whole or part of the native population not let them live on.
Generally I would agree, forcing someone to move to a different location even permenantly isnt genocide.
though as ginga said, if the land is somehow harmful to them there may be an arguement there
Cant force people to move to an active minefield afterall, that would be murder by proxy
True if you did move people to a minefield they would die and that would be genocide but I don't think that is a fare comparison to land that Americans didn't want.
we have ties to north america but not as many ties as we would have if we were natives thats all im saying. we have just as much ties to this land as most people who live here now do reguardless of their genetic lineage
I understand where your coming from. I disagree with you about Americans having as much ties to America as foreigners do but I gess we can agree to disagree on that.
ive argued that before for lols
i dont agree but its funny to try and get these people into logic traps anyway
>We do not enforce the hijab on women
smh
isn't that like putting makeup on a baby
I always wanted a goat when I was younger: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vVWMIsHMQPs
Heres the missing link for those people:
Gamers don't care about the gender/sex of the protagonist
Gamers care the protagonist feels genuine
Yup
Just sticking women in for diversity doesn't add to the game at all. Everyone (man or women) needs a reason for being there.
is it so wrong to be a lore whore?
yes because being a whore is sexual appropriation
Control, another game unveiled at E3 with a female protagonist, looked awesome. The Assassins Creed game on the other had looks like garbage. Tomb raider was fine too, but Gears of War looks like trash.
Battlefield V also looks like trash, at least the first trailer did.
"Social Justice" IS something to be avoided. If you have to qualify the word "Justice" there is something seriously wrong.
@Dennafen which first trailer? the cinematic one or the one with actual gameplay?
both?
idk, actual gameplay looks promising. probably gonna hold off on buying it
until first few weeks or month of reviews come in
actual gameplay looks like a bland run off the mill shooter with no redeeming qualities outside of being the newest one
or in other words: no one will be talking about it in 5-10 years
its looks like battlefield
exactly
the new game mode seems intriguing
but lets be real, if it didn't look like battlefield, would the people who like battlefield buy it?
i don't know... i mean... it could be... you know... good?
why would i buy battlefield 5 and not just wait for 6? what do i miss?
i mean, why buy any battlefield and not just the next one?
that's what i'm saying ๐
the reason to buy it would be there was enough small changes that most people moved to that, so that is where the people you will play with are.
we are getting down into why buy any game in any IP past the first version where it might be "new"
well... i should not talk about multiplayer shooters... those are the worst games there are anyway... even worse then bethesda RPGs ๐
clearly not for you
although i agree that obsidian makes better bethesda RPGs than bethesda
inxile makes better fallout games than bethesda ๐
and pretty much everyone makes better RPGs than bethesda
idk, JRPGs annoy the fuck out of me
jrpg is really hit and miss for me
some are absolutely great, some are bad to meh
i liked battlefield 1. i didn't get 4 because when i played the beta and sniping felt messed up, i liked 3 a lot, liked bad company 1 and 2, 5 seems more of what i like, the ability to move while quick repairing while flying seems like a nice change, plus you need to rearm your ground attack weapons which seems cool. the new mode is like operations, which i really liked, but sounds tweaked with stuff like building fortifications.
the only good bethesda game i can think of is doom... and that is only because they bought id
read that as "eugenic personality"
why are the legs so short?
@Grenade123 The cinematic one.
yeah, that first one was a disaster
The second one was okay, the fact that everyone has an assault rifle kind of annoyed me.
fanta is what you get when nazis can't get their hands on cola... literally.
Lmfao
Is that a Poe?
ctrl alt del
not enough sand.
Free us from the tyranny of undergarments!
Fuck my eyesight bad. I hope someone made a transcript of that letter
soon tm
are you typing it up?
btw, i'm transcripting the tommy robinson letter, can someone help me figure out what this word is?
aw rip pepe
@Deleted User is that filtering?
doesn't make sense
are just ________ their way to me
filtering doesn't fit
making does, but it doesnt looks like "making"
TOMMY GET A BETTER HANDRITING
CUNT
nah it might be filtering. like more like "and are just moving their way to me"
yep
makes sense to me. might not be correct grammar but it works
should i replace the word with"making"?
or put in "filtering"
also his son's name is spencer lmfao
making (sic)
For a minute I though he was saying richard spencer was upset
lol what
is that his son?
yep
You can send money to tommy rn
and you can email him rn
Shit I kinda have to feel bad for his family really.
I thought you guys might find this interesting
No white hetero men in the list?
I think thats why they used to call it the "Gay mans disease" like 30 years ago
And it kinda still is after these many years ๐
also white hetero men is on there, its uhm, like 35k, cuz white men fucked everybody
And now white hetero countries have no immunity against illegal immigrants ๐
Lol, so going in raw is a thing there
they left off white men because those heroine addicts sharing needles throw the numbers from making the blacks and the gays look bad.
this is hilarious
https://twitter.com/GamingAndPandas/status/1008214757680320512 so twitter people decided to report an indonesian artist to religious officals in his country for posting a pro-gay rights anti-islamic comic. he later commited suicide
Huh, so hes indo
Was wondering what
Is this like, Lo Ping's new account or something?
Fuck me it is. Yeah that guy was also in trouble, he is in SEA as well and someone made it known he was gay as well.
well his organs are failing now with no hope to recover and basicly they have him on painkillers till he passes away
You sure? I last heard hes recovering from surgery
Unless that has passed as well
I also heard that they know who did it.
And are now seeking legal means to do it.
Should run to Msia for now, people are a little more tolerant here.
well it seems like his kidneys may be ok but his liver
seems like thats not sorted out yet
Well, all I can hope for is justice really.
Indo is really backwards.
Not like Msia here is any better.
But if it was really that unsafe, should have tried finding a job in Msia or something. Its a bit safer there, unless you are a muslim.
Non muslim gays get away with alot of shit.
Seen some crossdressers here as well.
Dont expect anything like pride however, though Id like it that way.
No pride.
Just couple of dudes banging out of sight, out of mind
yeah it just really makes me angry
Eh it has to come naturally, you can either leave, or stay and become like that guy.
Cant force it, Msia had to go through alot to get this new govt. Obama would have forced diversity and alienate the same voting bloc that allowed the change in the first place.
i dont see why that has anything to do with being angered at such treatment of other humans as this. we dont look at the way north korea treats its people and go "eh thats just the way that country is so i wont really be upset about it"
sure it IS a reality of living in that country that your likely to be treated that way, but that doesent change empathy and shouldent change empathy
I know, thats why you have to let change come when its ready. Or you end up with someone worse.
Voting blocs are volatile here.
It took alot of effort to break the racial mindset, pushing diversity and shit like that will only make them revert back.
theres a difference between wanting to live in a country where you wont be hurt for your sexuality and pushing divercity. though ill admit there is a problem where the 2 have been forced together which is something im against dispite th people supporting them both being the ones who are making that poor decition to make sexuality protection and forced divercity inseporatibly merged together
Pretty much, keep it to yourself.
ANd no harm will come to you.
You dont see people revealing their heterosexuality like a badge. Why do non hets feel the need to?
When I say harm, I mean absolute mockery
Aint wrong.
freedom fries and cuck ham
Chad fries vs the cuck ham
*dab*
<:robdab:412246805191983107>
my god i had a dab emote
I think I could've done better.
I feel like Iโve heard that sound in a bunch of creepy pastas.
It's a staple.
a certain video game song played backwards.
is this even shitposting when it feels literally true
@RyeNorth lol yeah, officer teabag'd him. what a fucking retard, *bro*
As if military action justifies vaporizing civilians
It was either the west Nuke two cities or the soviet union would have gotten more land in Asia.
Wasnโt it either nukes or ground invasion?
I'm usually more of a "let things sort themselves out" sorta guy myself, but i completely believe the bombing was an ethical thing to do.
The ground invasion had a chance of failure and catastrophic casualties on both sides.
Military casualties
Yes but Japan would have surrendered a few months after if America did Nuke Japan even if Amercia didn't lead an invasion
There's always civilian casualties in war
That doesn't mean you can deliberately target them
It did.
If America didn't then how much more land would the Soviet Union have gotten?
Doesn't now, of course. our LOAC and ROE are vastly different.
The Soviet Union collapsed by itself anyway
More then 50 years latter.
60 years later
And I wouldn't just consider Japan as Russian territory if that happened. China, too.
More than it is, by communism's control
How does that translate to "leveling cities is ethical"?
I mean if Japan wasn't nuked the war wold have continued for a few more months giving the Soviet Union more time to take more land From Japan. What if they had enough time to take all of Korea?
Then Korea would've been part of the Soviet Union for 60 years, I guess?
So?
Depends on what you think is ethical. Are things better in the Pacific and Asia without Japan or Soviet rule, or would they be better off?
Yes and that would mean the Communist world would have been bigger which is a bad thing for the non-communist world.
I support the nukes. At the least, it ended the war for Japan
A prolonged war would have been bad for everyone involved
It was necessary to prevent the Soviets gaining more land.
I bet Tim supports the nukes. Koreans hate the Japanese.
I see. A situational ally of ours might take more land, so we need to kill a ton of noncombatants in a completely different country
Pretty much.
I refer to the meme that started this topic.
Don't get me wrong, Pearl Harbor was *also* unethical
Unprovoked attacks tend to be
the japanese population was trained to die trying to protect their land from invasion, we saw that behavure from the invasion of okinawa. the major japanese islands would have been even more martyristic than that. the nukes were used to express to the japanese government the full extent at which the united states would take to end the war by unleashing a weapon like the world had never seen before. if the nukes hadent actually had that effect we wouldent have used any more afterwords and infact the nukes didint actually contribute to as much death per square mile as our firebombing did
I don't think the firebombing from all sides of the war was all that great either
its war
the world wars are seen as terrible for reasons
Yes, the aforementioned 20 million dead sounds pretty unethical to me. Doubtful they were all military.
its not because they were fun highly chivilrous and ethical combats
And perhaps you're not realizing the impact guerilla tactics have in a war. They were seen as unethical then.
85,553 total messages. Viewing 250 per page.
Prev |
Page 97/343
| Next