Message from @Jokerfaic
Discord ID: 631976951871045646
An act of increasing the nations land
LOL
Ones generally that have been agreed upon internationally
As shown through those definitions.
you keep saying that as if the definitions take the context into account
is english your first language?
They don't need to take the context into account
No, Norwegen
>definition don't need to take definitions into account
A, yes, they kinda do,
B, if they don't what the fuck's the point of saying "they all say the same thing"
"Expansionism" is an act. An act of expanding the land of a country.
If you practice expansionism, then you're an expansionist.
if that country already had that land and lost it, taking it back isn't a fucking expansion, jesus christ
Syria wanting to take the Golan Heights means doing that act.
Of expanding the land of their country.
That is expansionism
BY DEFINITION
LITERALLY BY DEFINITION
<:pot_of_kek:544849795433496586>
You can't even disagree with it. It's literally the definition.
And I've shown you that
you're just pretending my argument doesn't exist
Your argument is just straight false.
And I've shown that
Through those definitions
How can you argue against internationally agreed upon agreements?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lE8Hr8jV9dU - The Jimmy Dore Show - FBI & CIA Implementing Coup On Trump?
Again. Expansionism is an act, the act of expanding ones controlled land. Retaking lost land, is expanding your controlled land. Thus is expansionist.
you haven't shown jack shit, you've literally avoided directly addressing my argument, and shown sources that explicity avoid the basis of my argument. How the fuck do you expect to disprove what you actively avoid addressing?
Again. Expansionism is an act, the act of expanding ones controlled land. Retaking lost land, is expanding your controlled land. Thus is expansionist.
Your agument is false.
I've shown you how it's false.
"Again. Expansionism is an act, the act of expanding ones controlled land. Retaking lost land, is expanding your controlled land. Thus is expansionist"
That right there. Shows your argument is false.
I can post the definition of "expansionism" or "expansionist" for you again.
If you want.
>I've asserted and repeated my own claim, therefore I've shown yours to be false
oh by all means, continue citing definitions that explicitly don't address my argument
You're literally trying to argue the definition is something else.
I've shown you proof.
Show me some.
There we are: