Armedassault.info End of Days Superparty, Celebrating the end of the world since 476! Options

[JdB]

Again: "You?" A few angry leftists from Germany more like.

You're a conservative, you no doubt voted for the CDU and so you share responsibility for putting that mentally unstable plumper in the position to ruin Europe even further

[pMASTER]

*Sandor Clegane voice*: You keep your dead babies.

Seriously though... first of all, I voted CSU not CDU. And even though a vote for the former directly helps the latter I certainly didn't vote for a chancellor who'd go full retard and betray her country, her party and her convictions. I voted for a program that's been ignored. Big difference. You don't agree? If you order an espresso, why would you have to roll with a waitress who serves a caffeine-free latte instead?

[D@V£]

Actually, I changed my mind. I want Hillary to win, but in a completely bullshit way, like Dubya did the first time around, so Trump's supporters start a civil war.

Credit where it's due, the Yanks really know how to have a good civil war.

(huh, the "W" is short for "Walker". Never knew that.)

[JdB]

If you order an espresso, why would you have to roll with a waitress who serves a caffeine-free latte instead?

That would depend on the size of her shirt and that of her mammas. I wouldn't mind just having warm milk per se under the right circumstances.

There is nothing that could make me consider circumstances right to ship in loads of economic refugees, so your example is flawed as it can never compete with the main selling points of a an above average waitress

While voting you forgot the most universal trait of all politicians: If they are talking that means they are lying.

This post has been edited by JdB: Nov 9 2016, 00:46

[pMASTER]

Merkel wasn't lying. She has a split personality, I'm sure of it; the evil voices hadn't talked to her yet.

As for the American elections, I'm in a comfortable position. I find both candidates deplorable, but I could get something out of anyone's defeat. That's because programmatically, I'd have to vote Republican but I can't stand that pompous asshole Trump.

[JdB]

Merkel wasn't lying. She has a split personality, I'm sure of it; the evil voices hadn't talked to her yet.

As for the American elections, I'm in a comfortable position. I find both candidates deplorable, but I could get something out of anyone's defeat. That's because programmatically, I'd have to vote Republican but I can't stand that pompous asshole Trump.

Why would you have to vote Republican?

I mean, when Americans call Obama a socialist it really just shows that they've never ever met an actual socialist. The Democratic party would in Europe be considered center right while the Republicans are not quite extreme right, but based on all of the stuff that Trump has said they're not far removed. Compared to the tree hugging terrorists we have here both parties are conservative as hell and far removed from the left as much of the world knows it.

This post has been edited by JdB: Nov 9 2016, 03:25

[pMASTER]

Why would you have to vote Republican?

As I've said: for programmatic reasons. Show me ten proposals from both camps each and I'm likely to agree with more Republican than Democratic ones. This is true even though some of Trump's additions to the Republican agenda are clearly bollocks.

I mean, when Americans call Obama a socialist it really just shows that they've never ever met an actual socialist.

Yeah --- so what? This nuance has historical reasons and it's not the only one neither. Across the pond, 'liberals' are considered 'leftists'. Here, he who says 'liberal' means 'rightist'. It doesn't really matter.

The Democratic party would in Europe be considered center right while the Republicans are not quite extreme right, but based on all of the stuff that Trump has said they're not far removed. Compared to the tree hugging terrorists we have here both parties are conservative as hell and far removed from the left as much of the world knows it.

I beg to differ with this sentiment. The Democratic Party took a far left turn during the past eight years and is by and large gathered around Barack Obama and his spiritual heir Hillary Clinton. While it's true that there is some sort of rift between the camps of Bernie Sanders and Clinton, it's nowhere near as substantial as the Republican rift between Tea Party, Donald Trump, libertarians and progressives. For Sanders's people, Clinton is not radical enough; for the powerful Ryan-Cruz-Bush-camp, Trump is too radical. That's an important distinction right there since radicals are more likely to support moderates (in order to get "something" out of an election at least) than moderates are to support radicals. The controversies and partial mutinies surrounding Trump's bid clearly show that he doesn't has the support of his party; he merely managed to take over by mobilizing non-voters who hadn't supported previous Republican presidency bids and had therefore been written off already, and the rest is only tagging along now to both prevent Clinton and looking like they do not want to win.

[D@V£]

Well, then.

That happened.

[pMASTER]

Ordinary folks are just fed up with being told by smug elites what to think, what to say and whom to elect. I rubbed my eyes in disbelief everytime some idiot popped up and went like "It'll be the apocalypse!" and "He's worse than Hitler!" instead of debunking his arguments and claims as they should have. Each and every one of those idiots helped Mr. Trump and they didn't even notice, since they're not grounded in reality anymore. They were awefully sure that they could drop a pompous one-liner and everyone had to bow low in agreement.
The most revealing comments on Trump's victory might be coming from Hollywood --- they just don't know what ordinary life looks like anymore. Folks have bigger issues to worry about than gender-conscious speech.

One of the biggest fallers of November 8 2016 could turn out to be the United Kingdom, by the way. It is easily conceivable that, as a response to Trump's announcement that he could smash NATO and free trade, the European Union will seek a closing-of-ranks extraordinaire. If he lives up to these threats, small EU+NATO-members like the Baltics will flock to a new ally and happily sign everything in return for protection. I'm speaking of France, backed by Germany. As the only EU-member with nuclear weapons and means of power projection left, France will happily accept a military leadership role for the European Union, especially so if Germany springs for it in return for inconspicuous participation in power. Unprecedented change could lie ahead, especially so if this happens prior to the general elections in France and Germany next year, offering opportunity to display power and statesmanship, and show what the EU could be good for. We're headed towards a massively multi-polar world. Without European backing, UK will not be able to compete with the US, Russia, India, China --- or a unified European Union. In other words, Brexit was bad timing.

[D@V£]

I've been reading the Dr Fu-Manchu series recently... gotta say, a lot of people are calling Trump racist, but he's done wonders for redefining the term "yellow peril"...

I wouldn't put high hopes in the EU, Le Penne's basically Trump with tits, and she wants out. "Czechit" is also apparently a thing, at which point you have a mess of border-gore... it's the Holy Roman Empire all over again!

So, anyone know how good Duolingo's mandarin is?

(Oh, and, hey, you know how I always have a bit of a rant about how the UK's system of choosing MPs is a complete mess? Weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeell, it turns out, the US actually has the exact same system for Presidential Elections. And if you count votes alone, Clinton actually won. Democracy in Action! Woo!)

((You know what the worse part of this election is? I have to go to, like, page 20 of all.reddit.com before I get to the porn, and that's just for the most vanilla stuff, this is bullshit!))

[JdB]

Ordinary folks are just fed up with being told by smug elites what to think, what to say and whom to elect. I rubbed my eyes in disbelief everytime some idiot popped up and went like "It'll be the apocalypse!" and "He's worse than Hitler!" instead of debunking his arguments and claims as they should have. Each and every one of those idiots helped Mr. Trump and they didn't even notice, since they're not grounded in reality anymore. They were awefully sure that they could drop a pompous one-liner and everyone had to bow low in agreement.

Trump won by using the same kind of one-liners, only more xenophobic ones. This election was X-Factor/The Voice USA. Most voters, as is the average citizen in general, thought something along the lines of "Meh how much worse can it possibly get, let's vote for the screaming buffoon lol YOLO!". If you don't like a program you just switch to the next channel. That is what people are like today, the attention span of a fruit fly.

One of the biggest fallers of November 8 2016 could turn out to be the United Kingdom, by the way. It is easily conceivable that, as a response to Trump's announcement that he could smash NATO and free trade, the European Union will seek a closing-of-ranks extraordinaire. If he lives up to these threats, small EU+NATO-members like the Baltics will flock to a new ally and happily sign everything in return for protection. I'm speaking of France, backed by Germany. As the only EU-member with nuclear weapons and means of power projection left, France will happily accept a military leadership role for the European Union, especially so if Germany springs for it in return for inconspicuous participation in power. Unprecedented change could lie ahead, especially so if this happens prior to the general elections in France and Germany next year, offering opportunity to display power and statesmanship, and show what the EU could be good for. We're headed towards a massively multi-polar world. Without European backing, UK will not be able to compete with the US, Russia, India, China --- or a unified European Union. In other words, Brexit was bad timing.

Don't count on it. They will still look to the US hoping (perhaps in vain) that they will continue to foot the bill so politicians here don't have to bring it up. Doing nothing and hoping it sorts itself out if the Americans don't regardless of the security/power situation around Europe has been the unofficial policy since 1990. Politicians don't say it out loud, but every election campaign, every annual budget proposal, every debate in parliament makes it very clear.

The government says that Russia is knocking on the border, that terrorism is everywhere, that we need to defend economic interests around the world, that much of our equipment is in need of replacement and that supplies and spare parts are virtually non-existent. The defence budget was cut in half since 1990, the number of forces down by 65%. So what did the government do to fix this? They added 150 million Euros to the budget on a total annual government budget of 70 billion, it's the change the PM happened to find in his pocket after literally every other department had taken priority over defence and law enforcement.

But do not fear, because as poorly as the armed forces are off the police is in a complete state of underfunded disarray! The only places that are properly protected are is parliament complex and the palaces of the royal family.

How do people get the idea to vote for someone that isn't a part of the political elite some wonder ...

This post has been edited by JdB: Nov 10 2016, 18:08

[pMASTER]

@John

What did I mean by "one-liners"?
It is my impression that the political left has hijacked moral and ethics, and interestingly so you just cited an example yourself. Trump, for example, said something along the lines of: 'We need to build a wall at the Mexican border to curb immigration because many Latino immigrants are rapists'.
This statement may or may not be true, this proposal may or may not make sense.
However, his motion is grounded in an observation that may or may not be verified. It is not grounded in an opinion, i.e. in a "fact" only its author could verify.
The left responds: 'Trump is xenophobic'.
He might as well be; what if his observation is true, though? Will he be a xenophobe regardless?
The FBI crime stats (still having the guts to distinguish between "races") show that Hispanic males in the US are actually responsible for more sexual assaults than members of other ethnicities save African-Americans. Actually a short gander beyond the border would've made the "ni una menos"-campaign against misogynist violence known to the left: Hundreds of thousands of women in South America have for months been protesting the fact that on this continent one woman is raped or killed every 20 minutes.
In other words, the problem is real. Trump made a comment that could be called citing a fact, if in an exaggerated manner. How can it per se be 'xenophobic' to notice facts? I'd say it is not, but I cannot prove this, since the left has coined this term. They created its definition, they are using it to silence others.

The left claims they fight for the undeniably good. How can you be against the undeniably good? How can you deny the undeniable?

They want to build wind turbines to protect the environment. Can you be against this plan (for reasons of landscape protection)? No, you'd be an enemy of nature.

They want you to use gender-conscious speech. May you (out of laziness) forgo distinguishing between policeman and policewoman? No, that would make you a misogynist.

They want unlimited immigration. Can you point out the risks (of cultural clash)? No, that would make you a racist.

They don't care about the parts in parentheses. They arranged it so they don't have to bother. They've invented a weapon to brush off all arguments as a means of securing their power. I hear it wherever I go and I'm convinced it's the same in the US and everywhere else in the Western World: Ordinary folks have grown sick of this. They don't want to get told what words to use, they don't want to get called names for speaking their opinion, they don't want people who travel first class and have body guards deny their observations of what economy class and harsh reality look like.

[D@V£]

作為我們持續堅定的反俄政策的一部分，這個討論話題已經被改造為我們的親中政策的試探台。 我們要感謝新的最好的朋友中國允許我們這個機會。
As part of our continuing strong anti-Russian policy, this discussion has been transformed for our Pro-policy temptation. We would like to thank the new best friend of China to allow us the opportunity.

[pMASTER]

I'm kind of pissed that this forum's software supports Chinese syllables but not some basic unicode characters...

[D@V£]

I'm kind of pissed that this forum's software supports Chinese syllables but not some basic unicode characters...

وهو يدعم العربية، أيضا!

[pMASTER]

I'm only able to read g@g in fancy lettering… wait, what? That's racist, you say?

[D@V£]

Not really racist, unless we take it in the context of the last 274 pages of your ranting over how the oriental gentlemen is more predisposed towards their base instincts than pure-blooded German Europeans. Also, the tail on the @'s in the wrong place, so it kinda looks more like "gulag" to me. Then again, I'm an evil lefty, you're a perfect example of the German tendency towards decadence in the bedroom, so I guess we're both only seeing what we want to.

Middle Eastern calligraphy's weird. It'd be like if we only wrote stuff in *sudder* cursive.

Like, whoever made it so computers could only output the arabic alphabet as calligraphy, instead of block letters, like literally every other alphabet, that's the guy whose the real racist here. It was probably Steve Jobs. I always thought he was a bit of skinhead, I bet he only wore those turtlenecks to cover up his extensive aryan brotherhood initiation tattoos...

[pMASTER]

Not really racist, unless we take it in the context of the last 274 pages of your ranting over how the oriental gentlemen is more predisposed towards their base instincts than pure-blooded German Europeans.

Germans don't have instincts. Wanna know how to have fun in Germany? There is no fun. Go back to work.

Wait, this was racist again!

Then again, I'm an evil lefty, you're a perfect example of the German tendency towards decadence in the bedroom, so I guess we're both only seeing what we want to.

Oddly enough I was considering this angle, not yours. Anglicisms…

Middle Eastern calligraphy's weird. It'd be like if we only wrote stuff in *sudder* cursive.Like, whoever made it so computers could only output the arabic alphabet as calligraphy, instead of block letters, like literally every other alphabet, that's the guy whose the real racist here. It was probably Steve Jobs. I always thought he was a bit of skinhead, I bet he only wore those turtlenecks to cover up his extensive aryan brotherhood initiation tattoos...

The right-to-left writing direction is what gets me. Totally counter-intuitive, whether it's a modern book you'll be wanting to read or an ancient stone tablet.

[JdB]

The Sun (so don't let your eyes stray from the main article), but still a recommended treat for all young ladies imo.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/living/2138407/thi...perm-smoothies/

[pMASTER]

Why the everloving fuck would anyone want to appear under so stupid a headline.