Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'General Discussion Forum' started by R.Graves, Feb 21, 2017.
Put a razor or blade in the name for good measure.
It's pretty funny in and of itself watching a German develop a sense of humor.
Where do you think all the jokes about jews came from? Germans are full of humor!
Can't spell Auschwitz without Witz.
Except every punchline is "Gaskammer" or something about beer hall putsches.
Too bad Youtube wasn't invented back then, we could have easily gotten out of WWI and its sequel by just claiming "IT'S A PRANK BRO".
We interrupt this episode of Hogan's Heroes to bring you an unpopular opinion
Women lie a lot. Like, a fucking LOT.
The superior race: blond like Hitler, slender like Goering and tall like Goebbels.
Personally I suspect most germans secretly still see themselves as superior, they just know better than to say it out loud now.
So basically like everyone else except for the keeping quiet part.
Ohh, the good 'ol Tu Quoque.
It's true tho. Don't tell me you're not so much superior to the Limeys that you can easily wrestle the properly british Falklands off of them.
With the current state of the Brits I wouldn't bet against the Argies. I would almost expect a wave of "anti-colonialist sentiment" to basically cow Theresa May into keeping the Royal Navy/Marines at home, at this point.
Don't worry, we are worse off than you even. We have the local version of Berlusconi as president. Too bad, this could had been our chance.
Wait, you guys had someone who would also call Merkel an unfuckable lard-arse? That sounds potentially fucking hilarious.
Nah, he is much more likely to make an ass of himself, and the rest of us in the process.
From the URL I was actually expecting something much worse than that. Though, I mean, referring to Bill Clinton as a gentleman even JOKINGLY is setting yourself up to fail.
The Falklands belong to the Fuegians!
In any case they belong to South America, certainly not to some far away European nation. What is this, the 19th century?
While I'll traditionally root with the continent of half of my heritage, on this matter I'm actually not so sure.
There's a lot of "what's done is done"-ness in human history, especially in terms of settling land.
When you say what you say, you must be refering to geography, because the population on the islands have nothing to do with the South American continent - they are super-British. But when we narrow something down to geographical proximity, we'd have to unravel a whole lot of the world, who owns what and why. Every migration, every conquest, every colony that left behind large bulks of their own culture - such as the entire modern country of Argentina, not to mention nearly every other southern *and* northern American country.
Relating to this issue as a matter of pure geographical proximity, in my opinion, is a little bit arbitrary.
The most pragmatically rational thing to do, would be to grant the islands independence. They'd be neither British NOR Argentinean. However, the population seem to have no such desire, so, British they stay.
(Not to mention, independence for a nation of, what, 2000 people? They'd never make a living)
The Islands, their ownership, their history - and their obvious geographical position, are in themselves all highly contentious issues - by their very own merits. It's not like the Falklands populations have posed some kind of threat - or that the islands are of exceptional strategic significance - so much so as to become a vital geopolitical factor for Argentina or any other such tangible issue. It's just proximity *itself*, the nationality of the population *itself*
French Guyana could theoretically have been in the same situation if Brazil had had any political reason to make a claim and pursue the issue. The reasons would be the same: proximity, European colonialism, a sense of logic "It's basically part of Brazil anyway!"
I know there's also who-owned-what-first, but geopolitics *around the world* is marked by who-owned-what-first, there's territorial claims all over (if not formal claims, there's even more "traditional" claims), but that has always been the way frontiers change - how land is controlled. Whoever exercises physical control is the owner by merit of actively exercising physical control. Argentina did a valiant attempt at exercising physical control over the islands. Britain reasserted physical control. Everybody knows that Argentina is free to try again. Every country in the world is free to try any kind of conquest or liberation or whatever, but they all weigh the cost and the risk and the merit of such a venture. UN and NATO and other organizations make these kinds of moves rare in the modern age, but every now and then it happens, like Ecuador trying to get back some piece of Peru, before UN made them cool it or else sanctions etc.
I guess that could count as somewhat of an unpopular opinion, in particular from someone who speaks Spanish :v
Nobod really has any need for the Falklands, but the Brits want to hold on to them for the sake of having them (and for the sake of the population that wants it so), and the Argentinians want them because they're next to them and feel like they belong to them. And because they're uberbutthurt that they lost the war.