Sound familiar?

You just call Nazis by aristocratic titles because you're a ****ing Nazi lover.

And holy **** at you calling someone else ultra-nationalist! There's no possible hint of a criticism of anything English that doesn't put your knickers in a bunch.

And I certainly haven't forgotten how you post Nazi propaganda in a massively antisemitic troll of Jewish posters.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/natio...=.ec28287aea72

yeah, **** these people, vote for Republicans then you selfish pricks

There is a massive hypocrisy from all parts here and everywhere I read,about chemicals weapons.
Its perfectly fine to gear up thoushands of nukes,use them in ww2 (according to some previous post 40 years after chemical weapons being frowned upon).
Its perfectly fine that everyone own a gun and its soooo evident that some kills are cleaner than other.
Seriously.
this is unreal bs and hypocrisy.
Its the same logic that people go when they want to save dolphins and baby seals,and kill sharks and mosquitoes.
This is really tilting reading all the people screaming CHEMICALS,when the rest of the year they say nothing about equally bad weapons.

ps:if I wasnt clear Im against all weapons,there is no such thing as clean war and kill.

Weez you have no idea what you are talking about.

Yea, this chemical weapons stuff is BS. War is war.

It just shows the elite look at war as a way to profit. But dammit, you better not make it look bad! Chemical weapons are a no no! Drone strikes killing civilians are OK though. It's easy to say something like "It was an unfortunate mistake" when 200 civilians are killed in a strike. Hard to make that argument when you get chemical weapons involved.

lol, your PM ****ed a pig.

Trump may have a better chance to get an Israel-Palestinian deal than people think. Not because he is a good negotiator but rather because Israel might make concessions that they otherwise wouldn't so that credit goes to Trump and his Orthodox Jewish son in law.

No, no no. Chemical weapons are terrible. Drone strikes killing civilians are not okay either. The U.S. has committed some terrible crimes in the past including torture and killing civilians. But there IS a good reason why war crimes are war crimes. People decided a long time ago that war is inevitable, but that it could be conducted in such a way as to hopefully not maximize the horror and brutality of war (especially towards civilians, women, and children). These ideas are very important and the fact that 45* surely doesn't understand this is crucial to understanding the next few years.

LOL no. Trump is fighting 50 battles in 500 different directions.

No Bibi's priorities are the opposite of that. He likes 45* because 45* enables and even legitimizes, to some extent, his apartheid-like state against the Palestinians. He doesn't give a damn what people in the U.S. think of him.

Is this a serious post?

Israel just built its first new settlement in like 20 years and you think they are more likely to make CONCESSIONS?

A corollary to this: prison is inevitable, but cruel and unusual punishment is still supposed to be unconstitutional and not allowed even for the worst of the worst offenders. Extended solitary confinement, for example, should not be allowed. There are ways of conducting law enforcement while harming the population far less than our current system allows.

Who knew the secret to solving the Israeli/Palestinesn conflict was to have a token Jewish friend?

I agree with you. But I don't think the people that want war really care. They tow the line for the reasons you mention, but other than that, they don't give a ****. Why would they? They aren't the ones doing the fighting.

That's why war is tidied up to make it look like something its not. You have millions of refugees and half the US thinks they are terrorists so we can't bring them in. They don't want to know what really goes on in war. They just know it's a bad thing and bad things happen. But other than that, they don't know what happens and they don't want to know. Showing kids attacked by chemical weapons brings the true reality of war to the forefront. That's why its so jarring and upsetting.

That's a fair point. I remember when W banned video of the bodies coming back home in coffins. But that's definitely one thing that won't be popular with the working class American base. They've been through a lot of war over the last two decades, I think the last thing they want is to start up that unending cycle all over again.

Yeah lets start mass producing chemical weapons and atomic bombs and lets allow them to be traded & sold.

You have no idea what you are talking about.

Neither do I tbh, I'm not a weapons expert. But the thought that someone who is clearly not an expert on the matter (if you are you you are really bad at expressing that in your post) would just think it's ok to spout things like "lol what's the big deal napalm their asses" with authority is ridiculously scary considering that pretty much every expert in the field condemns the use of them.

As a complete noob on the matter, there are a few obvious differences between assaulting a village with firearms and dropping chemical weapons on them:

1) With firearms you can try and limit innocent victims. Chemical weapons everyone dies.

2) With firearms innocent people have a chance to surrender or flee. Chemical weapons everyone dies.

3) With firearms violence can easily stop at any moment. Chemical weapons have to run their course and cannot be stopped.

4) A clean kill with firearms limits unnecessary suffering. There is no clean kill without suffering with chemical weapons.

The Trump kayfab with the mainstream media

http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politi...rump-war-media

The hot takes, on basically every subject have been absurd the last few weeks. This thread goes off the rail at least once a day, mimicking the subject at hand quite well.

There is a difference between not knowing what war is and deciding to not watch graphic images. There is nothing wrong with people deciding not to watch graphic war footage because they don't want those images in their life.

There is also nothing wrong with having a critical voice about the refugee crisis and the potential impact it can have on our societies. It is an important discussion that needs to be had.

Neithere of those 2 things are mutually exclusive with people not knowing that war is full of horrors.

You think Caitlin Jenner has LGBT rights at number 45 on her list because she has money? That's a pretty cynical thing to say, maybe you should just stick to posting other people's tweets, at least then we won't KNOW you're an *******.

They are still building settlements. Like right now. So no.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

She's famously Republican, isn't that putting money before LGBT rights?

I am genuinely confused by this post. Why do you think Caitlin Jenner is a Republican?

He voted for Trump.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk