My bad northern you right

<:yeboi:452552734076305418>

tho... I do have to thank you Brits for what u did a 100 years ago

🙏

If we had to get pretty picky

Proper noun. Estonia (plural Estonias) A country in northeastern Europe, on the southeastern coast of the Baltic Sea.

So there’s eastern in there

<:pepe:320960583098695680>

*no.*

***NOOOO***

only Northern

Guess wiki is wrong

Lol

yes

Wiki gay

<:comfpepe:506676024654823444>

Bad times

UK is also north-western, but no one calls u that

we call u western

True dat

so, I think we can all I agree that we shall call Estonia as *Northern*

👍

```the system needs to properly account for environmental impacts and provide those who want to work a job which allows them to sustain themselves, it’s possible under capitalism more controls are just needed imo```

"the system needs to properly account for environmental impacts" that would require years of research, and alot of investment

and meddling in other countries politics

but ok

"and provide those who want to work a job which allows them to sustain themselves"

thats is also possible

the difference between (for example) soviet union and today is that people were forced to get a job. it is possible to get a job, so the claim that there is no way a person can get a job is BS

there was no such thing as a person not working in USSR

and I see no need for "more controls" unless when in recession

like F.D.R-s The new deal

The USSR was hardly socialist so im not going to touch that

We do have heart full employment, but real wages are frozen and have been for 50 years despite amazing economic growth.

There should be a federal jobs guarantee and everyone should be paid a living wage.

It wouldn’t take foreign involvement to say, hey factory you’re going to be charged for your pollution, for imports you could heavily tax those from countries with loose environmental regulations to penalize them for their cost cutting measures to the point their goods are more expensive than those that meet high standards

```We do have heart full employment, but real wages are frozen and have been for 50 years despite amazing economic growth. ``` That statement requires for us to dig further into WHY it is so. The wages of workers are influenced by many things. Main reasons are supply of workforce, demand of workforce, cost of living etc... for America those things have been pretty stable for decades. What currently keeps the wages at check is immigrants and outsourcing. America also has an aging demographiq and US industry has coped with that by... moving most of their "man-heavy" production to other countries like Mexico. and in some level, the use of immigrants is also a way. The use of developing countries will become more prevelant in coming years. I bet if you take off your shirt (or bra 😉 ) it prolly says something along the lines of "made in Bangladesh". whilst your guitar may say "Made in USA".

```It wouldn’t take foreign involvement to say, hey factory you’re going to be charged for your pollution, for imports you could heavily tax those from countries with loose environmental regulations to penalize them for their cost cutting measures to the point their goods are more expensive than those that meet high standards``` You would start a trade war with it, and cause an inflation (or just goods becoming too expensive to buy for people) which is either way bad for the economy. It never takes 1 country to change that. They will use other loopholes, like some US/chinese companies have do so by evading sanctions on China. They will make an shadow firm in lets say "Panama" and legally transfer it through Panama company, and evading tariffs by doing so.

```There should be a federal jobs guarantee and everyone should be paid a living wage.``` Thats usually used during recessions, but outside that... its too costly for the goverment and produces inflation which means that the average pay will rise, which means cost to live will rise, which means that they have to raise the pay. its an endless witch circle. Too costly.

Estonia is an odd Country. It's an Slavic country that wants to be Nordic.

"USSR was hardly Socialist"

Are you fucking kidding me?

Wages is a whole can of worms

At least to me, I would like good relations with Russia & Ex-USSR countries after *Brexit* the term that shouldn't really exist but does, is over.

Russia has just recently developed their new frontline tank which other countries such as mine (the UK), America & Germany have struggled just to keep up with. That obviously says their engineering industry is still quite alive, and if a good trade deal was struck on those grounds it would be beneficial for both Russia & UK and spur life into the strong ties we once had with that large country.

Russia's educated population is dying out quick. As far as the T-14, it could be great or a total piece of junk. Won't know until the Russians battle test it.

@Tyberius D I'm sorry but there is a form of Marxism that can be seen in socialism mate

Which is?

What was that graph all about

Russia's educated population is dying out.

Marxism is one of the many forms of communism bte

Bte

Btw

@Tyberius D all it shows is the population so that isn't really evidence

I don't understand how people aren't "educated"

You have the Marxism/Communism statement backwards.

Russian education system collapsed with the wall, and was primarily male.

@Tyberius D OK when the wall was up why was there so much poverty in eastern/comunist side

We are smarter then what we were back then except feminists obviously

You act like most of those nations are better off economically post collapse.

Well I've got to say in the economic way pre collapse was better but the way they treated there population was horrible

Agreed

I'm sorry you sound like you want to bring socialism back why don't we try and mix the riches of socialism with peace bcs you have to think pre collapse communists where cunts

You like to draw conclusions that aren't stated don't you?

OK sorry your centrist sorry my bad I've never heard of centrist care to explain what it is?

Socialism like Capitalism has its issues. I always support some version of a mix because we have seen that highly capitalist and socialist structures don't work out well.

What governs how much you should have I have color coded on this map. The blues and greens should be more capitalist, the orange and reds more socialist.

Yea but what are centrists?

Oh, my bad. Mis read there.

Centrists are political moderates.

So your in between the leftists and right

@Deleted User T-14 Armata is shit, I also so have a knowldege of military stuff so...

@Tyberius D and Estonia is not a slavic country, far from it. Its like saying china is slavic

1@McBacoon You're not really stating any reasons why you think its bad.

So...

T-14 Armata is a hype beast. Because its a new weapon system, as usual Russia hypes it up with statements like "abrams killer" "best tank there is". Russia specifically madr this tank to have an answer to USA-s Abrams. Russias current tank doctrine (since pre ww2) is "alot of good enough tanks". With T-14 they tried to change that. But there are multiple problems: the tank itself, strategy and tactics. 1) The tank itself is a pure hypebeast. I get thats still kinda in development (like the F-35), but what we can tell from offical footage, its not good. The tank has never been seen to operate its vertical stabilization. When it has been firing, the tank can be seeing oscillate back and forth, and under dampened movement like this is bad and much worse on a moving tank. T-14 uses auto-loader, and most tankers are pretty sure that its not a a very reliable system, as it enters re-loading phase, the gun is still seen not in control of its recoil. There is also evidence that T-14 has problem with accuracy, that is probably caused with wrong ammo screening data and/or gun not being stabilized. Its a hype beast that gun outgunned by M1A2 SepV3. 2) The strategy: Russia simply cannot use this tank. They can, but only a few, because they simply dont have enough money to build them, let alone operate them. If they really-really wanted to, they could make a T-14 division in 20 years. But considering Russia has 20K tanks, it really counts for nothing. The current plan that was to build 100 tanks, has also been put to hold. 3) tactics. Russia fared pretty badly with their armour units in Checnya and Georgia. Obviously they have learned something, but Ukraine wasnt eny better either. If russia doesent learn how to use their tanks WITH infantry, meaning that the infantry covers the tank from RPG-s from buildings etc...

@Deleted User

I think I have stated my reasons.

Now you have, yes.

Sorry for making a mess... I wrote this on my phone... so not much of a way to make it less cancer looking

You're right, my mistake.

<a:iwank:454778651955822612>

<a:398237697485045762:511986511403548682>

I just read your book. I'm not privy to info on the 14 but I don't doubt anything you said.

What I have heard was the Russians went defense heavy with this tank, but we won't know how good the armor is until it's deployed and shot at.

I'm pretty sure Russia's tank backbone is ment to be the T-90MS. They have continued to build the 90 family for the last 25 years.

Russia´s backbone is still T-72 and T-80

I have also heard of the T-14 going "defense heavy" but no exact info so... but they do use Afghanit

here, my friend sums it up pretty good: https://youtu.be/L2nAVzKUVRE

What is his creditals?

creditals?

you mean like... does he have mailitary backround?

That, or has quality sources

he has quality sources + he himself know alot about military stuff and has been dealin with it for quite some time now

but no, no military backround

I'll take it a pinch of salt

why?

because documented facts lie?

lmao

Because information and facts are no longer used by most people to establish what is but to confirm their bias. I need to make sure your friend is not guilty of conformation bias.

Yeah bias happens a lot.

I am going on about the tank that Vladmir Putin released in 2015.

Ya, it's pretty modern.

I mean if there isn't a world war three then as Tyberius said, we won't really have an idea of how it will perform.

From what I can see in the UK, we have also focused on defense (again) but heightened awareness and intel on the Ajax line of tanks.

The other additions in the series are mostly utility & resupply based along with maybe another frontline one being developed.

If the reports of what I'm hearing is correct, we might find out very soon how good the T-14 is. The Russians are moving military forces on Ukraine border again, and this time it looks like they're going to go for it.

if you look at the video, there is no opinion presented in there. Its just pure fact video, explaining more graphiqally how the systems work. What could you even opinionate in there? That afghanit doesent use a single projectile? lmao

And no, there will be no war in Ukraine. Pure bullshit and everyone who has no clue of the subject is panicing right now.

And there is no way, that they are going to deploy T-14.

They are moving forces to Ukranian border as a political move. Although Ukraine really has no hostile thoughts. But just in case, they are deterring them from Ukraine making a possible attack towards LNR/DNR.

LNR= Luhansk

DNR= Donetsk

Again, facts can be cherry picked. Just ask FOX, CNN, or NBC.

Can't agree with you here. There's been hardly any response to Azov and the Russians want everything East of the Deneiper

<:facepalm:411854707376783370>

"cherrypicking facts on a WEAPON SYSTEM"

lmao

its like saying

Cherry bombs

"actually, french cars drive only backwards"

"thats why they have 5 gears"

lmao

do u understand how stupid that sounds?

So they have surrender built in?

Seems legit

yes

because, french flag has white in it

perfect for surrender

Eh eh I like how you think

Look, I don't know how things are in Estonia. However, here we have serious issues with people cherry-picking facts to support their point of view.

Example, Fox news last year would not shut up about the Americans giving the Persians money as part of the Iran deal. The problem here, they forgot to mention that it was the Persians fucking money!

We see shit like that here in the US, EVERYWHERE!

@Tyberius D you Muricans have been retarded for a pretty long time, doesent really surprise me anymore.

its as if you no more have such thing as "news", as you have fairy tales.

Explain how it was already their money

Why did the US have it then?

Do I need to google this

@beyond_gravity because they arrested Iranian assests that were abroad.

yeah @Tyberius D you're kinda cherry picking right now

Ah ok

So there was good reason for that

It was iranian money that was stored in other countries banks. and US has this nice thing called "patriot act"

Yea but if you gonna start building nukes

We got to take your money honey

That’s how these things work

you already took them off SWIFT

@beyond_gravity the dollar is the worldwide currency for exchange of goods, the Bush Jr. And Obama administrations went around freezing assets that were Persian controlled in response to their nuclear program. When the deal was signed, we agreed to give it back to them.

now, its either cash or MIR

I do hope people kow what SWIFT and MIR are...

Freezing assets is necessary

Anything that stops a nation state from nuking the rest of the world is going to be a good thing

yeah, just that.. it wont

How stable is Iran’s government ?

*meh*

They threaten to nuke America every other day

Should we just ignore that

yes

the same with NK

Yea don’t worry boys they only joking

They won’t rally send nukes

It’s just a prank bro

yes

the same applies to NK

I rate North Korea as more sane then Iran

there is currently no effective way for US and the west to stop these nations from acquirign nukes.

Hey guys

@jack hello.

Fat boy is smart boy

What is is this

a discord server.

It’s 9th level of hell

Welcome

@beyond_gravity here was the important part about Iran, they still don't have a missile that even gets to Europe. The Americans had fuck all to worry about.

Lol ok so I can sleep now

They only can hit how many countries

mid-east

Guess it’s cool then

and thats without nukes

Well I have a nuke

as they dont posess any, and minituarizing them is a though one

@jack in your pants?

Let’s not worry they can’t improve their technology ever

So we should be fine

here is a good question to ask when looking at this, if someone was making a gun in front of you and threatened to kill you with it, what would you do?

dont underestimate them tho @beyond_gravity

Exactly

Yea I am being factious

(Obviously imagine you are the American government and not just a citizen)

@Son of Malice Kregger then I would tackle they guy, as he is still making the gun, so its not a threat to me.

Yea this guy keeps threatening

You

yes

with his fingers

Yeah so you would stop them from finishing, they don't need it, if it's just to kill you

So you wait till he gets his knife

And then gun

Nope

You kill him before

<:facepalm:411854707376783370>

no no, you threaten his family first

Dude they are not throwing stones

It’s a ducking nuke

or build a gun faster than him

That works

Anyhoo why should we ignore Iran

One day they have super fast big nuke

Then what

@beyond_gravity you shouldnt ignore Iran

but you shouldn't curb stomp them

Duck yes you should

Like in any fight

Why let your enemy arm up

That’s like failure 101

You guys ever watched boxing

Do you let the other guy get the edge against you ?

Iran has everyone in their neighborhood that they would rather fight than the Americans, that shit is not our problem.

The only time I would personally side to fight the Persians, is if they would actually go to war with Israel. Which even that is unlikely, there is four countries in the way.

So they aren’t a problem now

Doesn’t mean that is the case down the road

Ignoring your problems never works!!!

@Tyberius D That shit is everybit your problem, ever since you helped to put the Shah in power.

Oh yea I blame America for that shit

yes, I do

Stupid idea bad outcome

They would never get to be a big enough to be problem, because before they could get there the Russians or the Indians would wipe them off the map.

Thanks Obama

The Shah got ousted in 1979

Obama is black guy?

Yea

Why

@Tyberius D The same kind of logic caused the problem that the NK is now. Waiting, doing nothing.

K

never does any good.

Twiddling thumbs

Makes small enemies big enemies

Lol

Typical Adolfo

Always hating on the J

@McBacoon North Korea still isn't a problem. They still have to miniaturize a nuke and somehow get it to the Americans. And even if they do that, we have a thousand for every one they have. MAD is a thing.

@German Soldier Like is there a bot code I could enter to get you to say something new and less stupid

Guess not

OH GOD ITS MULTIPLYING!

Now there are two

@Tyberius D They dont even need to launch that. NK doesent even need to reach mainland USA. Because all it needs is to have reach for Japan and SK. They will in time minituarize the nuke and will have a way to send it to USA. That gives them political and startegical leverage, ansd that is bad for you.

Don’t worry we have the high ground

Did someone program an Adolfo bot

Cause his AI is weak

<:NPC:509051323069497345>

*Pulls out soviet Russian flag and throws a snowball at* <@298217492030029824> 1v1 me

@McBacoon strategically it is no concern us. If you want to pick that fight we can, but it makes no real sense that we do that.

I personally am all for helping the South Koreans, but most of my nation is not.

@Tyberius D just because something is far away does not mean it ceases to exist or impact you

It’s like you don’t know the world is out there

It is and it wants blood

@beyond_gravity that is valid, see Pearl harbor. Problem, doesn't mean you can win the fight.

Yea

It’s hard to win these things

When there are no win situations all over

@Tyberius D The real leverage stands from not doing the action, but rather having the option to do that. All they need is a missile that can reach LA. and LA is much more prescious to you than some shithole Pyeongyang. The same applied with USSR during the cold war, so no side could be REALLY cocky as they had the MAD (Mutually assured destruction). And if it comes public that they have a missile that can reach LA, then you will start complaining and you will become interested. But then.. its too late.

@beyond_gravity I'm okay with no win situations. It tends to make people out think about their problems instead of out fighting them.

And not even mentioning US allies in the region... that are some of the biggest GDP-s in the world..

@McBacoon comparing it to the USSR made my point for me, and then you try to separate it for some reason. I don't care if the North Koreans can throw a nuke, there is no way they can use it and win.