Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'General Discussion Forum' started by Throatpunch, Jul 25, 2016.
'The left' is insanely fragmented because there are so many branches of views that people hold to so incredibly tightly, and that's not even opening the can of worms of the retarded communists and socialists who have as many variations of anarcho-syndicalist-primitivism as there are stars in the sky and they all equally hate eachother, and liberals even more. The right, meanwhile, has never really had issues dropping or switching ideals and policies for the sake of greater consolidation and "falling in line". In my view much worse from the standpoint of moral fibre but oh so much better from a pragmatic point.
The left also has a populism issue as of late same as the right with the exact same kind of policy-devoid meme spouting hyperbolic nonsense. Instead of being about immigrants, blacks, jews and gays it's about capitalism, billionaires and the police. That's not to say that right-populists and left-populists are equal (Because being a racist is worse than being a regular brand of moron) but they both do the same shit where they say provocative things on Twitter that if you pressed them on, they'd crumble.
Police reform is important and change really needs to be had but it's so much less sexy and aesthetic to point towards policy goals like "Campaign Zero" rather than shout "ABOLISH THE POLICE" on Twitter.
Not to imply the left aren't or can't be racists, they just have a different way of going about it.
Sure but with right-populists the racism is the goal, the objective, rather than a symptom of the idiocy. Blue tick retards on twitter want to "abolish capitalism" and establish a communist disneyland, Anime-Avatar retards on twitter want a racially cleansed ethnostate. You are correct in that racism pops up on the left not that infrequently, but that doesn't mean you can dishonestly play "racism hot potato" between the two.
The only thing consistent about them is the malice behind every action they take and every lie they spread. They aren't poor souls with heads full of lies, they're cruel souls who knowingly spread those lies for their party's benefit.
Did you know? The African tribes of Africa were warring with and enslaving each other and raping each other long before white people showed up. The same is true for "Native American" tribes.
If I bring up how white people bought their slaves from the African tribes in control, and later tried to end the African slave trade in Africa upon deciding amongst themselves that slavery is bad, and if I bring up how slavery is alive in Africa right now because they're enslaving each other without us stopping them, will you get so angry that you get a brain aneurysm and die?
Come to think of it, considering how much democrats love voter fraud (Remember those "Missing" and "Spontaneously found" ballots and trucks? Remember when they got caught signing up dead people as Democrat voters?) your death probably wouldn't stop the marxist satanists from faking a few hundred votes for them in your name.
Here is something brief on gun control. Make sure you read the comments.
Petition to change the thread name from 'Gun Control' to 'Autism Awareness Test'.
Bringing it all back to Gun Control not Left or Right hysteria. I like what this man has to say.
See? I'm totally down with that. You don't ever pull a gun on someone unless you fully intend to send the message that you're going to shoot them. You can't just pull out a gun and expect not to get shot back. I agree, when it truly comes down to living or dying, there is no politically correct. It's about protecting people's lives.
So are we all in agreement that:
1. gun rights are good because they let good people defend themselves from rapists/killers/murder-suiciders/thieves/terrorists and more
2. gun rights should be protected from everyone including the agitprop terrorists who want you dead and genuine dumbass pricks who don't get how guns can save lives AND don't feel obligated to listen to anyone smart on the issue
3. anyone who comes in here saying "Legal gun owners should be blamed for illegal gun acts, ban guns, change gun culture to be less pro-gun, every sixty seconds a child is shot in America, all white people are Nazis and all Americans are double Nazis so all white Americans are triple Nazis, America should be more like my Weeaboo-Tier Delusional Interpretation of what some european country, anyone who disagrees with me is a big gay racist poopyhead idiot I will type laughter at for days, and if my side's politicians took power nobody would ever die again!" is just trying to start shit and attack American values/American rights
4. Nobody harms anyone by liking pineapple on pizza or hating it, because the anti-pineapplers aren't trying to get pineapple on pizza banned. If they were, and if they were voting in politicians who promise to ban pineapple, then all anti-pineapplers who don't leave the movement are horrible people trying to force their way of life onto others and limit the freedom of others. If the entire anti-pineapple movement says "Pineapples are evil, pineapples cause school shootings, pineapples must be banned" then there are no such thing as "Moderate" anti-pineapplers. There are no such thing as moderate leftists because they all want to seize power and they will team up with criminals against good people if they think it will further their ambitions.
I'm not even joking when I ask but are you okay? What happened?
Hey, it's an improvement. He got in one coherent sentence before he went off the rails again.
Why do lefties love using this "Fake empathy" "omg who hurt u uwu" bullshit in place of actual arguments? You're the ones who belong in mental hospitals. If I was hurt tomorrow, you'd laugh and cheer and celebrate like you laughed and cheered and celebrated when Tommy Robinson got arrested for defending his daughter from a rapist.
You hurt the futures of entire generations of people with no reason to respect you, and plenty of reason to want you gone.
Can you ever not REEEEEEE the fuck out? I'm honestly fed up with reading the same shit from you over and over again.
Every goddamn time anyone says anything to you. So, everyone, just fucking ignore this dude. He's never gonna respond in any different way. It will always be slippery-slopey screeching about the evil lurrals.
Please take your political bickering somewhere else. Your continued existence in this one thread is irritating and I am about to molest you. Spergatory would be ideal for your butthurt. I am trying to maintain it. Maybe post there and less in this gun thread. You fucking retard. Yes, Lefty Circus Show is bad. We get it.
Yahoo was trying to call this a tank when it appears to be the first US self propelled artillery vehicle. They are just called Guns in the Army. Gun Control thread. So controlled they never used it.
Ah the lovely T-28. It's a self propelled gun though rather than artillery.
Yeah it can't move the gun around but it is pretty close to a Howitzer on treads. Anyway I want one.
Rather a super heavy weight assault gun, not unlike the German Stug or Brummbär which had the purpose to use short guns to support infantry units with high explosive shells. If my memory is right the T-28 however was a prototype with the purpose to get as close as possible to heavily fortified positions and simply blow them away at pretty much point blank range with it's gun rather then indirect fire. If the war would have seen an invasion of Japan the T-28 might have been used there. Hence the heavy armour and slow speed. A self propelled howitzer usually doesn't have this kind of protection and weight as they are not expected to get in direct engagements where enemy units could hit them. Howitzers would be rather build like the M7 Priest or M-40 with its 155mm gun. Which doesn't mean that a direct hit by them wouldn't mess up your day as a tanker. While the Germans and US had more strict designations for their tanks the Soviets often used their self propelled artillery like the SU-155 or SU-122 in anti tank roles as tank hunters as well as the large gun had devastating results even on enemy armour if used with high explosive shells. The Germans in particular would only see a turretless vehicle with a long high velocity gun as a tank destroyer and pretty much everything else either as assault gun or artillery and use it for the most part in such manner.
Now the T-30 on the other hand is an interesting little bugger. It's a T-29 prototype which had a 120 mm anti tank gun using a 155 mm gun.
Yeah it would have to be used like that without a turret. Reminds me of those flamethrower tanks. I want one of those too. Actually those hand held flamethrowers that came out recently sound nice.
Anime avatars are actually femboys larping as "Nazis" and are on a different level from a blue check mark on twitter with tens of thousands of followers on twitter. You're conflating the term "right-populist" with alt-right who may have people who unironically advocate ethnic cleansing that's hardly a populist position on the right, bro.