#politics
1 messages Ā· Page 73 of 1
Afghanistan has fallen to the Taliban
well, "fallen" sounds like there was ever another option
no way anything else was going to happen, people thought it might take 3 months
but it took a week
sure, you still have the traditional antivax people, but for the lot of people against the vaccine, its more so political right now.
I got it because why the fuck not, but I am not carrying a piece of paper that states I did so
You just need the QR code.
Most likely, it was developed by them at Oxford.
And that's your right, as it is a businesses right to refuse entry without it. Freedom! š„³
A business can refuse you entry regardless of their undisclosed reason. As soon as you're asked to leave without warning, your refusal constitutes trespassing under most western laws.
I understand people might not want to get the vaccine, because they watch Fictional news (Fox news), but what irritates me is, "Why should I have to wear a mask"
and then they list about how the vaccine is a "Tracker" or how its "Just the flu", or got an immune system so "It will just fight it off"
As far as them disclosing the reason, that varies, especially when it comes to medical. Most countries actually protect a persons right to medical privacy, which would make it illegal.
the whole "it will just fight it off" thing is true tho... before the vaccines were even deployed, most people still have a low chance of dying from it
Millions died from it
did I say no one died? no I didnt
There are many who would not want to get it due to statements made by Harris, and I think Biden too.
Also the florida governer is trying to make it illegal to mandate masks
Ya but its a higher risk then just the flu
also, how many people got it already, were asymptomatic so they didnt know about it, and then if they get it again, their body is much more prepared than if they hadnt gotten it at all
yes, but there are also many people who got it once and survived and then got it again and died
Regardless, vaccine is out. It's up to individuals to get the vaccine if they want its protection.
If people choose not to take it, they take the risks associated with that.
how many, is that percentage worse than the flu?
Idk the percentage
Im worried that with new variants coming out that the vaccine might not protect vaccinated people as much, as there are already a tiny tiny amount of vaccinated people getting severely sick from covid
Hopefully this all ends before then
That's generally how it works. If you don't get the new vaccines you're not protected.
What bugs me is the people who dont get vaccinated, but insist they dont have to wear a mask, like if your not vaccinated, thats fine, just wear a mask to protect others
Why when there is a vaccine?
wdym?
Provided you have had the opportunity to get the vaccine, why would it matter if they don't?
I dont care is they dont get it, im saying just wear a mask to protect others
The range of reduction of re-infection from COVID-19 was between 82% to 95% among six studies that encompassed nearly 1 million people conducted in the U.S., the U.K., Denmark, Austria, Qatar, and among U.S. Marines. The
But the others could have chosen to get vaccinated?
thats like equivalent to the vaccine
Why do they need protecting if they wont protect themselves?
to protect others
But the're vaccinated.
people with complicated immune systems/elderly are still at risk
Person A unvaccinated not wearing a mask, Person B vaccinated not wearing a mask. Where's the issue?
those groups of people are at higher risk of dying because they exist
Its so bad that the cdc said you should wear masks inside even if your vaccinated
And we can mitigate that by getting vaccinated/wearing a mask
people with compromised immune systems and old people have a higher change of death/hospitalization regardless of covid
if covid didnt exist they STILL would be at higher risk
Also I don't recall there being a mandate to associate with people regardless if they wear a mask or not
so we wear masks forever?
I was under the impression that most countries made that a free choice
there is no shortage of vaccine in the US, if you want it, you can get it today
The issue comes when we have person A unvaccinated not wearing a mask, person B vaccinated and not wearing a mask, and person C who is unvaccinated and wearing a mask. Person C is now being put in danger by A refusing to do anything; that's not C's fault for not being vaccinated
im not saying thats the issue
if they choose not to, I'm done going out of my way to try and protect them
im saying the people going around spreading it unvaccinated maskless is
why isnt C vaccinated in this scenario
Person C chose not to get vaccinated, they put themselves at risk by being around other people who are not wearing masks and not getting vaccinated.
yes but the point is A should be wearing a mask and A is not only endangering themselves by not doing so but also C
Provide a case for that.
no no, you take steps to protect YOURSELF first
Other than Person C, since that's logically invalid.
C chose not to get vaccinated
a case for what...?
A case for why Person A should be wearing a mask.
why are you trying to rely on someone else for your own safety when you can take a step to improve it yourself
Ya protect yourself and get the vaccine, then everyone is happy
I agree with protecting ourselves.
yes, and theres no shortage of vaccine, if you havent gotten it, you dont care enough for me to go out of my way to try and protect you
Be that via a vaccine, masks, avoiding people who have not taken steps to our satisfaction to do the same, avoiding interactions, etc
im not saying you should wear the mask, im saying the unvaccinated one should to protect you
The vaccine has been out for shorter than any other and could still have unknown side effects; it's not your business nor A's to know why C isn't vaccinated. The point is, if person A doesn't have the vaccine, they are still very likely to be endangering others and should be wearing a mask or get vaccinated themselves
C is wearing a mask... and unvaccinated
er yeah typo one sec
there
ya c is pretty dumb
ok so you are promoting vaccine hesitancy then
unknown side effects, hasnt been out for long enough
the covid vaccine is fine
not really promoting it, promoting people's right to be hesitant of it
and getting the vaccine is alot better then dropping dead to covid
Is dying from the vaccine better than getting covid and living too?
I've gotten the vaccine (well halfway, haven't gotten the second dose yet); I'm not saying people shouldn't get it. What I am saying is, if someone who hasn't gotten it wants to walk around with a mask on, they shouldn't be in danger from people who both refuse to wear a mask and refuse to get vaccinated
The vaccine is not going to kill you though
It has killed people.
which one
I know for certain AstraZeneca has, can't speak specifically about the others.
sry im talking about the pfizer one
The pfizer one is perfectly safe, for most people
109 cases reported in Australia of deaths resulting from Pfizer
Seems like you're wrong.
I thought australia only had
astrozenica
yeah, as of now. But there are concerns about it causing heart problems, especially in males. It is anyone's right to wait that out a bit if they so choose. It's also anyone's right to get it anyway if they deem the risk to be less than that of covid
Nope.
out of 400,000 vaccinations
I didnt say Perfectly
You edited that too, it originally didn't have that last part
I cannot speak as to when that occurred
I added that back a while ago lol
right after I sent it
sorry, not 400,000,there is 900,000 ā1,000,000 vaccines of pfizer
I gtg
Vaccine side effect past like 2 months would be a crazy thing
I wanted to wait before too but after a few million people got it and someone explained side effects from vaccines are basically impossible more than 2 months past your final shot I went for it
interesting convo and i missed it
I am double jabbed but i will defend anyones rights not to get vaccinated . If a vaccinated person doesn't feel safe after being vaccinated then they should wear a mask. No one should impose their will on another. Its a violation of their human rights. My body my choice š
get the vaccine so i don't have to wear a mask anymore and the virus stops mutating
prob too late, prob stuck with covid like the flu
Funny that you say my body my choice, cause anti vaxxers are often the same that are against abortions....
I wish everybody would accept that sentence
Here, for now, gov basically says you need to have had it, have the vaccine, or have a test, to participate in many aspects of daily life. Tests are free, for now.
But stuff will be changing a bit, In two months tests will no longer be free for people who could get the vaccine but don't want to (why should society pay for their tests if they have another free and better option, the vaccine?) and football stations in particular have started to only let vaccinated people in (in hopes that they get allowed to increase capacity back to 100% then)
Masks are still required here tho
There is a difference between being hesitant about a vaccine and being anti-vax
It's always the same arguments tho?
and it's pretty much always imeediatly shutdown as YOU'RE KILLING GRANNIES rather than actually trying to address the concerns that people have
There are many who think even having a discussion about hesitancy or that understand hesitancy constitutes being anti-vax. There's also a big difference between deciding to have a procedure done, and refusing to have a procedure done.
Conflating the two is just not intelligent.
I held out on the vaccine due to my health, should I be barred from doing anything in public life because my health issues put me in a spot where I didn't feel comfortable having the vaccine?
Kind of, yeah
Like, if you have health issues that made you worried about getting the vaccine those same issues probably make covid a bigger concern too
That's not true, your GP here is happy to talk you thru all questions you might have, even the doctors at my companies asked me at like 3 different points in time and would have answered my everything, I saw a coworker talk to them for a while
What if you're of a population that inherently distrusts the government due to past experiments done on them? COUGH COUGH Tuskegee?
at what point do I have the automy to say that, I've been stuck in the house for 18 months and the lack of socialisation is causing even greater health issues for me
At least in Germany, if your doctor says the vaccine might not be a good idea for you, you still get free tests and will be treated similar to vaccinated people
I moved away from my doctors and haven't been able to get into the GPs office nearby to get registration forms and such
The issue isn't the hesitation. It's not even distrust in the government. It's that people consume too much Facebook instead of talking to experts about their questions and concerns.
Care to back that up with anything more than conjecture?
Anti-vaxers existed before Facebook did.
Facebook is a synonym for misinformation
So what causes said misinformation? Also I disagree with that premise.
Why wouldn't people want to just believe what the people "in the know" say?
Would it be, say, mistrust?
My sister refuses to have my nieces get vaccinated even though epidemiologists and reproductive health experts say they can't think of any way the vaccine could have any effect on fertility
Because she saw something on Facebook
So what makes her believe that over the government and health officials?
She wants there to be a study done specifically on that first
that goes back to what James said, why would they believe facebook over health officials?
Is it because she trusts the officials too much for example?
people have concerns around a vaccine in which politicians slated pre-day zero and then flipped course in the blink of an eye one day, people have heard of people dying or having severe reactions to the vaccine, in which vaccine makers for this vaccine of special contracts which protects them from being sued for such instances, and meanwhile, anybody who has concerns about the vaccine is labled a wing nut anti vaxxer who is killing grannies
People don't trust people in power, that's universal, regardless of your gender, race, age, political alignment, creed, or otherwise.
Well, the vaccine can impact your period cycle or whatever but that's generally somewhat short lived, same for the flu vaccine too
That's true of a lot of diseases, isn't it? Probably would be for a lot of vaccines too if you regularly got them after puberty
Also I don't know about you, but I've had a few (think two) "no it can't be that" from doctors where they were flat out wrong.
I think as always there are people against it just because the politicians said they should, but, there are people who actually have valid concerns and would take it when those are addressed, just, the constant "you're killing grannies" shuts down all hopes of addressing these concerns and pushes people who where mearly somewhat hesitant into a corner
That's anecdotal, and shouldn't be construed as me saying we shouldn't trust them.
But it's easy to see that it's a very likely reason people do not trust them.
Case and point is Harris, she basically said words to the effect of that regarding Trump and the vaccine.
Yeah I was pretty sure he did, but I couldn't exactly remember his words.
at a time when trust is eroding of these public entities, image is everything, and image is too easy to spin
I remember it being along the lines of he'd not trust the FDA if Trump was involved.
Same for Harris.
It was sowing seeds of doubt in public that did not need to trust the government less..
harris was fine with the FDA saying it iirc, just not if trump said it
Maybe I misremember, in any extent it wouldn't matter if Trump said anything then. The only way Americans can get it is on the FDA's say so.
Wow
These videos are so disturbing
I hope there are no vids capturing the impact
None yet.
Some things are better left unseen
This is horrible enough
Imagine being the pilot in that plane
Can they fly without closing the tire compartment? Cause that's where they are sitting one, one button press and they all dead
no
flying with the tire compartment open creates a huge amount of drag which massively increases fuel consumption
at cruising altitudes, people would die of hypoxia assuming they don't freeze to death first
Well, they only need to cross the border I guess
flying low consumes large amounts of fuel, and I have heavy doubts that they're just gonna cross over a country
The plane won't, but the passengers are.
https://twitter.com/ianbremmer/status/1427214729668333570?s=21
ā ļø Sensitive ā ļø
Still doubting there will be much if any political downside to bidens choice to leave now, and the way they did. Just how it works now. Itāll be a story, and itāll go away.
The US people wanted out, and they got it.
Bidenās not doing any public events today, and I donāt think he had any yesterday. And Jen Psaki is taking a break and directs questions to other press officials. Coincidences. I did see that blinken was on Tapper yesterday tho, so they arenāt being completely silent
I saw something about trump removing things related to withdrawing troops off his website too, not sure how valid that claim is though. If true wouldn't doubt Republicans will be using it to make people mad at biden lol
To my understanding, there was much set in motion by trump which was written down and basically thrown out when the new admin took over
There was apparently a good chunk of stuff intending to try to leave some form of conducive moving forward toward but also leaving the "if you do shit, we'll be back" on the table
I think it was the RNC not trump. But it was about trump
See, I think the Taliban knows this, Iām guessing they are going to be rational here, and if they keep to that small part of the world, and donāt mess with any western powers, the US isnāt really going to care
Top officials will say they care, like Pelosi putting out her stupid statement on āthe world is watching you Taliban, donāt do anything badā, but nothing will happen
Wasn't the whole point of the Taliban to stop the US from taking their oil and other stuff they had?
Part of me kinda wishes we could clone the universe and see what woulda happened if trump was still in charge
I mean that sounds like āresisting the foreign invaders ruining our cultureā, a common theme in history.
I mean, not my strong point here, I generally have the brain of a potato but they're basically an islamic extremist group whom showed up when the USSR collapsed
Congress shares the President's concern for Afghans who have assisted U.S. efforts in country.
- Pelosi
Ah yes, I forgot all you needed to get to the US was āconcernā from top officials
Well, I mean, I personally kinda think that trump, for all his downfalls, has a stronger boot
Expected. In that case. Thanks US.
Ya feels like with trump you know what you'll get for acting out but with biden or democrats they just drone strike you in the middle of the night with 10 minutes warning
Early Taliban were motivated by the suffering among the Afghan people, which they believed resulted from power struggles between Afghan groups not adhering to the moral code of Islam; in their religious schools they had been taught a belief in strict Islamic law.[7][8][9]
Says it all, really
I think that the islamic religion is generally just as bad, if not worse, than christianity
I mean, I get the whole basis of having a moral compass is good, but, it's too easy to create people who see horror in the world and think that the solution is to basically "purge the sinners"
Like, part of me is kinda glad that christanity is at least slowly dying off in the UK
yeah, but you get to ruin someones culture if it involves beating other people
tfw you started a 20 year war and people are arguing whether to blame Biden or Trump https://t.co/jDwQMkU0vp
4138
18114
(Video)
I mean sure he "started it" but we'd probably eventually have to provide aid at some point
Trump is 100% at fault for withdrawing tho
Biden could have overturned it like he did with all other Trump policies, to blame everything on Trump is what people do, but this is totally Biden administration fault.
I believe Trump had a plan but Bidens administration didn't follow that
Biden had promised 0 troops in there as well which I still disagree with. Trump was the one who reduced the military presence long before Biden was sworn in tho: https://amp-usatoday-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/amp.usatoday.com/amp/4667248001?amp_gsa=1&_js_v=a6&usqp=mq331AQKKAFQArABIIACAw%3D%3D#amp_tf=From %251%24s&aoh=16291330243251&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&share=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.usatoday.com%2Fin-depth%2Fnews%2Fpolitics%2F2021%2F03%2F17%2Fus-troop-withdrawal-afghanistan-trumps-deadline-weighs-biden%2F4667248001%2F
And Biden's admin was going to continue reducing troops overseas but given what the Taliban has done now, they just authorized thousands more to go out
Trump's been out of office for 8months
However Biden still is commiting to 0 in Afghanistan by the time he leaves office which idk if I like
What are you trying to insinuate
Tbh Biden doesn't know what day it is
I think he manages just well
If you've got real criticisms I'd love to hear them but the dementia line is pretty old :/
For all intents and purposes, Biden's Afghanistan policy was the exact same as Trump's. Trump made the first move and he gets to share equal blame with Biden, Obama, Dubya, and the American public.
Trump wanted the troops out by May 1st of this year, Biden delayed it but the effect was the same.
Just need to watch all different news sources to get the whole picture
Want to enlighten me?
Well I'd love to hear some things that you notice
Yeah, sure, you have to watch all the different news sources. Except for the "liberal" news media.
Just curious about some of the things I've missed out on
That doesn't sound right.
I rephrased it
Could you please give me some examples
I will in a while
AFAIK, Trump would have still pressed the withdrawal and instead of the right being outraged by it, it's "centrists" instead.
From a completely unamerican view, besides his pretty right leaning politics, he's doing pretty well
It's unfortunate, but we had a choice between staying there indefinitely or leaving and letting the Taliban take over. We couldn't and wouldn't stay indefinitely.
The Afghan government could not pick up its own weight and it's unreasonable for us to keep supporting them.
Bidens Border policy
the border was secure until they got rid of the remain in mexico policy
Biden's border troubles have been well-documented in the "liberal media." The difference is that they don't squawk as loudly about it.
they should give it more focus , when trump was in office the press hounded him
even the cages that were used by obama were blamed on trump
And personally, I do not care about the border. It is not any of my business, and as an anarchist, I think the border, natch, the state, should not exist.
Biden lied about saying he will unite people but hes creating a huge divide between people
Trump's issue was separating families, something Biden stopped day 1
and u dont think they dont get seperated now?
do they?
If they do it's rounding error
Please elaborate on this divide he's creating. Is it the one where he says people should get vaccinated? š¤£
more vunerable people who are coming in have suffered sexual assuslt - they arent always families
some are
We can't choose which demographic wants to flee their previous home
so if a man committed a crime then that person is seperated from there children when they go to jail
and entering a country illegally is a crime
that sounds like a regular person going to jail... prison is meant to strip you of your family and that which you know and love
So yes, it may scare you, but I support "open borders"
if u open your borders totally then u lose your way of life
i don't think i support just open border but can you elaborate on that statement?
just about none of our countries over here have closed borders
if u import south america u will become south america
Nah I'm pretty sure it's still America
you seen what whats happened in sweden?
rapes up
The EU has essentially open borders with all their member sites. I don't think Germany has gotten any less German, or France any less French.
I mean I wouldn't support the EU's open borders for the states
france? u seen how much terrism they get?
But a faster immigration process would be nice
And each U.S. state has "open borders" too.
That's because we're humane enough to say that 1 instance = 1 case. That means if someone does it 3 times to 1 person, that carries the punishment of doing it in three separate cases, and as such statistics are also affected
Note that it was changed to count it like this quite a while after the immigration started
rape is rape
exactly. The US and most of Europe counts 1 and 10 instances as a single case
Sweden does not. 10 is 10
swedens crime rate has rocket since they had so many immagration
š Source: NTU 2020
i believe sweden stopped recording the ethnicity of the criminals to hide who is doing it all
We had 200k more reports in 2020 than 2011; that's not a large increase whatsoever
And I should mention on the topic of Afghanistan that the security forces the U.S. trained and paid for were not particularly effective. Some of them were exceptional soliders, but there was a lot of chaff in there. https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/afghan-security-forces-capabilities/2021/08/15/052a45e2-fdc7-11eb-a664-4f6de3e17ff0_story.html?utm_campaign=wp_main&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook
look from 2015 to 2020
We changed how crime cases are counted in 2015
It's almost like the graph very clearly shows that
lol
In fact, according to documents obtained for the forthcoming Washington Post book āThe Afghanistan Papers: A Secret History of the War,ā U.S. military officials privately harbored fundamental doubts for the duration of the war that the Afghan security forces could ever become competent or shed their dependency on U.S. money and firepower. āThinking we could build the military that fast and that well was insane,ā an unnamed former U.S. official told government interviewers in 2016.
There have been more than 100 bombings in Sweden this year - more than twice as many as in 2018. Experts blame the violence on feuding criminal gangs. And the police seem powerless to act. The organization No2Crimes, in the city of Malmo, is working to put an end to the problem.
Subscribe: https://www.youtube.com/user/deutschewelleenglish?sub_co...
[Maj.] Escobar said he came to realize that the whole exercise was futile because the U.S. military was pushing too fast and the Afghans were not responding to what was, in the end, a foreign experiment. āNothing we do is going to help,ā he recalled in an Army oral-history interview. āUntil the Afghan government can positively affect the people there, weāre wasting our time.ā
But perhaps the biggest hardship was having to teach virtually every recruit how to read. Kem estimated that only 2 to 5 percent of Afghan recruits could read at a third-grade level despite efforts by the United States to enroll millions of Afghan children in school over the previous decade.
āThe literacy was just insurmountable,ā he said in an Army oral-history interview. Some Afghans also had to learn their colors, or had to be taught how to count. āI mean, youād ask an Afghan soldier how many brothers and sisters they had and they couldnāt tell you it was four. They could tell you their names, but they couldnāt go āone, two, three, four.āāā
Just some choice quotes, in case you get the paywall
More Sweden documentaries - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLBRLKmBip4335qwX_HPW232kt0HyChcQo
At the height of the immigrant influx into Europe in 2014 and 2015, Sweden with a population of 6.7 million, accepted 244,178 asylum seekers ā by far, the highest rate per capita in the EU. Since then the rate of violent crime has soared, partic...
rt š¤
ah yes, that reliable news source, RT
sometimes u have to listen to the enemy too
A film about Sweden. But also about us. And liberal democracies everywhere.
Please subscribe HERE http://bit.ly/1rbfUog
Yeah, we have issues with bombs and hate crime. It's nowhere as bad as you can imagine, though; the cops are increasingly getting better at handling it, and I'm sure it will improve drastically now that they've evidently started getting the hang of the issue
bbc?
u need to look at all sides
and you're crazy if you think anyone here's gonna bother watching 20min & 50min videos due to a single guy in a political debate who only has an outside perspective
I can take little doses here and there: I do read the definitely American conservative Wall Street Journal and Fox News.
No, not really. You need to look at accurate sides. Propaganda isn't going to be useful if looking for truth. (Sure, it's useful for other things like analyzing manipulation of a situation, but if we're just looking for the reality on crime we don't need propaganda for it)
But only in moderation.
Just like how I won't look at election results on a Qanon site, I'm not going to look to RT for immigration info.
you choose what u want to believe
Don't y'all have some statistical bureau over there?
surely they'd be the best choice to believe?
Oh no, are you trying to turn this into a "facts are my feelings" thing
thats the lefts job
How quickly the GOP changed its tune https://apple.news/Ahi76wdRLTo2k9DqEiPwMGQ
Did you come here to discuss or to just try to insult groups of people?
to this
i like to watch and listen to people
I didnt mean to offend anyone but the left are very much into feelings more so
[citation needed]
No, you're just reacting in an emotional way to what should be a discussion based merely on facts
And nobody wants to talk to people who do that
i apologise
you're fine
And just like 1/6, the GOP is now rewriting history on Afghanistan. Never mind Trump wanting to exit and striking the cushy deal with the Taliban, now they can try to beat Biden over something Donald Trump himself wanted.
when people don't want to hear your opinion because it offends them, then yes, they are operating only on feelings
there are things i want to say but it'll just get shut out
when my world is being seemingly upended by what certain groups want to do, like allow men and women to share the same bathroom, that is atrocious to me. Label me a bigot and not even try to discuss with me why I think so, it's a feelings-oriented culture
biden did do it tho... he stopped and reversed so many other things trump had started, but not this
sorry this came out of nowhere
but Americans are better at complaining than actually talking about differing views
i have great respect for this channel, a lot of discords wouldn't even think of having such a channel
indeed, RIP afghanistan...
I'm aware of all-gender bathrooms, my church even has them, but that's not what i meant
If you say "allow men and women to share the same bathroom" and then state you don't mean "all-gender bathrooms", what are you saying?
actually using them at the same time
I will never understand why that is such a big deal for some
what i understand an all-gender bathroom to be is anyone, doesn't matter their gender, can use that bathroom, but that all genders don't share it together
I don't give a shit who's around when I take a shit
well
i dont really care. everyone uses the bathroom, why does it matter?
Separating bathroom is horribly inefficient
@near glen where there ever separate bathrooms where you live? like men's or women's
I don't follow. An all-gender bathroom is where you can have people using them at the same time. Unless you mean two people one toilet? In which case I don't think there's a big movement for that.
Yes, almost everywhere
But it's common for women to use men's bathroom to skip the line on the women's, lol
i see the separate facilities as more to do with privacy
it's a little strange that i have to contemplate this, when i've never had to think of it before
depending on the context i'll say
I don't really want anybody looking at my private bits without invitation. I don't really run into this issue in public bathrooms, though.
One exception, though, being this one theater I went to where the urinals were all just touching with no barriers. That wasn't pleasant, and my dislike of it wouldn't change if they'd allowed women in as well because it's already a big no thanks.
like this trough
Oh cool a communal sink... oh no.
They exist at clubs here, but everybody is so drunk you don't give a shit
lol
i guess the construction of a bathroom at a bar should include the consideration of "well they're probably drunk when using this, so we can cut corners, they won't mind"
Sole reason they are used is you can pressure wash them easily
The 5 weeks old comment from Uncle Joe didn't age well though. "The likelihood that there's going to be the Taliban overrun everything and owning the whole country is highly unlikely.". Also saying "yea but Trump" is classic deflection.
Also a point to that, the DNC controlled congress didn't block it this time.
im done waiting for the GOP to make sense lol
Which retraction?
Afgan, original deal was may 1st
Not really, Obama did.
If you want to go to "who started withdrawing" rather than who is responsible for the current withdrawal.
Troop numbers in Afghanistan dropped 9 times more under Obama with his planned withdrawal than ever existed during Trumps presidency.
In fact I believe there was a single year where 40k troops were withdrawn.. 2014 if I remember right.
Arguably both were relatively stupid for thinking they could leave a giant power vacuum and it not turn out like this. But it's more damning for Biden in my opinion since he specifically said 5 weeks ago this would not happen.
does this count as politics?
oh the Australien government ads? those are hilarious
oh, well they usually are from the "Australien government"
seems like she's lip syncing lol
as was said earlier, am pretty sure that trump left a book on afghan and basically it was thrown out by biden
The southern border is it a high of migration since like the 70s or something, and yet the biden admin will lie and just say it's a typical summer, yet, acoording to the charts, we're past that, and trends where still rising; theres also a % of people who come across with coyotes whom bring along children that are not theirs for various reasons, and, my sources are iffy here but much of it is economic migration, not refugees
open borders is also stupid
Yes, I would love open borders, but, heres the sad fact: There are people who wanna kill you, just because you live in the states, just because your country is primarily a christian country, etc, etc
She is. All the videos are lip synced
Husband and wife make the videos and a set of twins does the onscreen stuff iirc
oh ok
Likewise with Trumps withdrawal plans.
Just conjecture, but I'm guessing Biden was in a proverbial measuring contest and wanted to be the "big guy" responsible for a measure most of the American public supported. He also still backs it (after knowing the current consequences), for better or worse.
I really liked Bidenās speech
I mean I always supported withdrawal, my issue specifically is that when Trump does it it's going to lead to this outcome, but Biden does it, it's going to all be fine, and if it isn't, it's Trumps fault.
Regardless of how quickly they withdraw it's going to leave a power vacuum, that could have been better done.
Also the fact they blocked Trump doing precisely what Biden did, fearing this exact outcome.
I mean, I think that for all of trumps mean tweets, his presence on the world stage at least exhumed some form of "don't fuck with us", and I felt that trump putting his foot down on stuff more shuddered the world vs the biden admin
I mean, apparently the afgan government basically lied and fabricated many dozen reports saying that they're ready for this
300k strong army
Biden didnāt blame trump much if at all
Trump was leaving, Biden wanted to leave too. Biden said it himself, there is never a āgoodā time to leave
So the sooner the better
Let me see if I can dig up the comments, most of the info is shrouded by current events.
The rapid collapse of the country only provides more reasoning to leave now.
More time wonāt do anything
i think last time it came up back when trump wanted to leave the criticism was that he was trying to do it too rapidly
Yeah it's been going on 10 years and several trillion dollars too long, everything that could be accomplished was ages ago.
and apparently it doesn't even matter because doing it slowly still had the same result lmao
I mean, to my understanding, the withdrawl agreement was founded upon a stance of mutual discussion between the two governments and the "We'll come kick your ass if you violate this"
Well actually, he announced withdrawal in July didn't he?
Yep
i just know it's been like a year+ in the making
there was some discussion but apparently the talibans had agreements with varying border cities of kabul in order to just let them walk through without harm to the citizens and such
Like, this has been months in the making and it's like, is this a case of, we're just finding out now, or, did somebody know?
How do you know that exactly?
we talked about it when trump was in office like last year
Yeah gotcha, so Trump planned it, and Biden put a stop to that as one of his first EO's
Congress also stopped it via NDAA
Or drastically slowed it
i think my only criticism at the time was that trump wanted to do it really quickly and otherwise it was probably a fine thing
but now we're seeing that it doesn't matter
because the taliban just have most of the country now anyways lol
Yeah gotcha, he actually asked for it to be planned back in 2018 I believe
Let me see if I can find something more concrete though
Pretty sure I'm wrong, never mind!
Early 2020, under the peace agreement they formed
Part of that agreement was based around troop withdrawal requirements, be interesting to figure out what those were
It's one of those sad things where we probs won't know the entire thing of what was agreed and what happened, etc, for 50 years or something unless the media gets their hands on it
but, hey, 'least we know that UFOs exist
Im going to have to wear masks to school because only 30% of the town is vaccinated
Even with most vaccinated it's a good idea to wear a mask at least on the floors
Ya I cant wait for this to end
I am pretty tired of wearing a mask 7 hours a day
Why? This goes back to the thing I said earlier. Where I am, if you want the shot, you can get it within the hour. If you havenāt gotten it, thatās on you, not me. Why do I need to take steps to protect you when you wonāt protect yourself?
even with the shot you can still get the virus and spread it
That will always be the case, we gonna be wearing masks forever?
I mean
I can get it, but my chances of dying from it are very very low (if Iām vaccinated), the chances of dying from it without being vaccinated are still low, but they are higher
The reason why vaccinated people should be wearing masks is because you can still spread it, possibly allowing unvaccinated folks to create more variants which don't work on the vaccine
We're not at a threshold where we have heard immunity
The way I see it, is we're fucked either way, but, I mean, apparently its the lockdowns which potentially caused the delta variant, soo..er...
I am going to be insensetive for a minute.
It would have been best from the start to let the virus infect who it was going to infect, and kill who it was going to kill. That way, we don't give it time to evolve, and we don't draw it out.
Lockdowns were a terrible idea from the start because it only takes 1 person not wearing a mask, or 1 person to throw a party to spread the virus.
By making this a political issue, we have failed to view the issue from a logical standpoint.
masks don't stop it, that's the thing, and I'd imagine most cases where mask wearing is essential, it's just gonna spread anyways, even in places which have been stupidly strict on mask mandates see transmission
and you can't isolate people fast enough, thats what you try initially
Only thing which really worked was lock downs, but, that's more because people bumped into people less, only way it would work was if you'd be ultra militaristic, no leaving the house for a month unless you have to, strict enforcement of rules in stores, etc
The reason why vaccinated people should be wearing masks is because you can still spread it, possibly allowing unvaccinated folks to create more variants which don't work on the vaccine
If it were just about killing those who didn't get vaccines it would be very simple
Yes, we tried to lower the rate of infection and isolate the people who had it. This virus makes that difficult though.
But the problem is they could hurt those who did the vaccine in the long run
Why should vaccinated people be made to protect the unvaccinated? Where I live, the vaccine has been available (without appointment) for a couple months. I've talked to the people who give the shots, and they've confirmed that they have had (for months) a surplus of vaccinations. If you don't have the vaccine at this point, it's because you don't want it (or if there is a specific medical condition, but I would assume that isn't the norm)
So in just my county, lets say, why should I be forced to wear a mask to protect the people who wouldn't protect themselves?
The problem is if the unvaccinated don't die (which is more likely anyway) they can mutate a variant that works even against vaccinated people
I suppose that's fair.
So vaccinated people need to wear masks so they reduce ANY spread and thus chances to let it mutate
Yeah you're also protecting yourself to some case too
but that's the exception not the norm
To my knowledge the vaccine only accelerate the immune system's respone to fighting against covid after you have it.
That's fair, but it may be better to incentivise vaccinations that way.
Like; "Hey, you never need to wear a mask again if you get the shot"
we did before delta but unfortunately that can't be done atm
That incentive didn't work?
It probably did but until we get higher vaccination rates that's not something we can offer
We are offering money + paid leave atm
I live in pennsylvainia, our vaccination rates are pretty high
I wonder if I can check vaccination rates by county
Google has a neat chart for it iirc
Idk if it goes to county level
But the CDC has those stats and only recommend vaccinated people wear masks if the county is high risk
My state, despite being the one of the most vaccinated in the country is high risk
Did delta emerge after most mask mandates were dropped?
delta was first identified in India
some people where blaming the lockdowns for it, but, god knows
I don't know too much about covid worldwide, but I do remember hearing that india was a shit show awhile back.
so I certainly can't use that to justify not wearing masks.
It is my opinion that cesspools like florida should have mask mandates. I am not sure about other places though
Florida is definitely covered by CDCs high risk definition
But they need the governor to enforce it
Iām stuck in Texas lol
You gonna be okay?
I still believe that low risk areas shouldn't be required to wear masks, as long as you are vaccinated. I believe that if you are not vaccinated, you should be required to wear a mask while indoors.
It seems that vaccinated people with the delta variant are more likely to spread it. In areas where the delta variant is having a field day, vaccinated people should be required to wear masks.
Yeah. Worried about other family since most of my moms side wonāt get vaccinated despite the fact that a good few of them are/were nurses
Do they work in hospitals or rehabs (or other)?
rehabs usually send covid positive patients to hospitals
So there is less risk to those nurses
Nursing homes mostly. Grandma is āretiredā but still helps out at pediatric care and the nursing home
My aunt got it a few days ago and is pretty sick
She manages the nursing home which luckily made her get vaccinated
The papers im reading for my AP work and my Teacher keeps referring to Native Americans as Indians
Relearning the American revolution, again, for about the hundredth time
iirc they prefer to be called indians
has Trump been blamed for the disaster of troop withdrawal in Afghanistan?
just looking to see if he's still the evil boogeyman somehow
i can if u want me to
In this case, the term Indian is short for Indigenous People which means "Original People." Indie is used to describe something original, hence why Minecraft used to be called an indie game. There are also indie films. The term Native American tends to be more politically correct for some reason, but Indians is also proper terminology.
Im talking about American history, where Christopher Columbus thought America was India, which is why they are called indians
Most of the people deciding the PC terms generally have little to do with the actual communities involved
I've only spoken to one or two indians but in my exerience that seems to be what they prefer to be referred as
Where I'm from, Indians are still a large part of the community. A lot of places pay tribute to them. Most of the tribes have the word "Indian" in their name.
That doesn't make what I said wrong.
I think for History we should earn more about the world then just the America revolution and Civil war, we focused on that all year and only spent a week on ww1
All we leaned about ww1 was Europe are fighting eachother, Britain conqueror people and be mean, Germany be mean to France, America come and save Democracy and Freedom,
Daily reminder that your school system is focused on your country.
We didn't even get WW1, only WW2
I understand focusing on the American part of history, but we are not shown anything about the rest of the world, history
Everything Im thought is America is good, save world and Democracy, world bad, America must save, and class just brushed over the slaughter of Native Tribes and Captivity of Africans, and the fact that America tried imperialism aswell as Europe
It is an American History class, is it not? The focus is on the USA, not really other countries. Take a World History class once you get to college if you're interested in that part of history. College offers many courses on specific periods and locations in History. Cool stuff.
Even when i did take World history they still managed to fit the narative of "America free, everyone else bad" into it
I don't find american history particularly interesting either
i know people who love it a lot
Oh yay, 3rd world state California is turning off my power for 44 hours starting in a couple hours
Thanks, Newsom!
PG & E said it will take a decade to fix their shit. Yikes
Where in CA are you?
Napa Valley
I got accepted to Sonoma State for next Spring. Is the area nice up there?
Still deciding where to go...
Me realizing Sonoma State is not in Sonoma...
Well itās nearby.
Oh yeah, I like it. Iāve lived here my whole life, minus my time in Arizona for college. Though It gets hot in the summer, and with all the fires California gets, it can get pretty smokey
I'm down in the Santa Clarita Valley. We get our fair share of smokey fire seasons too.
But boy are you right about California being a 3rd-world state. I drive by landfills on the sidewalks and miles of homeless peoples' tents on street corners and under bridges. It's sad, but it's not safe to be in the metropolitan areas, even in the daytime. When you look at the people running the state, nearly every single one is Democrat. And yet, people keep putting them back in office. It makes no sense.
I had no idea California was that bad tbh; all I really hear about them is how often they're on fire
Yeah, the fires suck. If we had better forest management, a lot of them would be prevented. I got on hikes a lot in the mountains, and there are tons of dead brush and dead trees just waiting to catch fire when the wind picks up.
An easily preventable natural disaster just isn't as important as the stupid things happening in this state.
I just don't like big cities in general, regardless of cleanliness. Napa with 75k people is about as big as I can stomach
Well, hey
Cali's energy infra is so green, you can get paid to run a generator to power your house!
@silk quarry you can thank environmental activists that prevent any sort of forest management. nevermind the species of trees that live in california tend to want to be put on fire.
as some trees use wildfires as part of their reproduction process.
activism took over california's politics long ago, and even with a super majority in their state, they for whatever reason cannot pass sane laws or do proper management of their state
Maybe, just maybe, because it's not as easy as you think?
considering how homelessness is a major problem, you would think it would be solved overnight having a supermajority at the state and local levels
no, its not
then again, I dont live in a state that sucks money out of its citizens and offer little in return.
We have one of the highest tax rates in the country, yet our state is one of the worst places to live aside from New York and Chicago.
Our freeways are always under construction. They literally never finish them.
Not sure about that, but that would not surprise me.
yeah, it doesnt shock me with the activism and regulations just needed to repave a highway
The problem is construction companies lobby the politicians, and then are hired to do a job that isn't even needed. Then they take 10-20 years to complete it, all while being paid based on time it takes rather than qaulity.
that also
but for companies that want to do the job as efficiently as possible get stonewalled by regulations and activism
also doesnt help that unions are in bed with the government
Precisely.
I strongly believe than lobbying should be illegal.
Politicians don't have the best interest of the people in mind.
I dont think it should be illegal, but companies should not be represented as entities
Lobbying is fine, it just needs to transparent
and a lot of restrictions to be put in place to prevent more powerful people from getting control over the process.
We need a website with entries for every time a politician talked to somebody that isnt employed by the gov, with who they are, who they represent, who paid and what bill was talked about
I don't think it can ever truly be transparent, which is why I say it should be gone entirely.
But it will never happen
Politicans are by definition dum, they aren't experts, they need to be allowed to talk to the people which are affected by their actions
Lobbying includes both NGOs and profit lobbying by companies
Not true. We need to stop electing stupid polititians.
Politicians don't need to be experts, that wouldn't work, they need other skills
enviromentalists went crazy against prescribed burning in cali
It means that when shit catches fire, there is much more crap on the ground to burn
This is directly an environmental policy which goes against the entire ethos of forest management
āļø
forests haveburned on their own since the beginning of time, and the whole "we gotta put the fire out asap" is what leads to this
then they go bitch when the next wildfire happens, and claims they need the state to do more
finally,they've admitted that you know what, maybe putting out every single fire is not a good idea
It matters when the fire starts burning down residential areas.
people should be building fire lanes around residential areas
but people dont want to see fucking 50 ft of ditch
Theoretically, that's a good idea.
But fire can jump. I've seen fire jump an entire freeway.
it doesnt prevent it jumping, but it would be additional protection in case it does
it's about minimisation and accepting that there is always going to be the risk when you live in a forest
yes
In California, we don't get forest fires exactly. It's more brush fires. In the mountains, dead grass rubs against itself due to high winds, and a fire starts.
It depends on your definition of forest actually.
okay, area with metric fuctons of trees and greenry which naturally burns on its own
And that's another fun thing for cali with their forest mismanagement is that it's like, they're literally surrounded by trees
regardless, its insane for an environmentalist to think we should do nothing when it comes to saving forests yet watch it burn due to inaction.
might as well not have a forest than manage it
The thing is that it needs to burn, these forests have burned before humans even set their foot there
oh yeah
it's humans putting it out which causes the issues as it's allowed all this crap to stack up to the degree that when it burns, there is oh so much material there to burn
Fire department conducts controlled fires yearly.
Maybe not enough, but they do it in some areas.
Yes, and they're finally massively increasing the number of them over the past few years
Issue is that they've got years upon years of land management to catch up with
I recall reading that apparently one fun issue that cali has is that it's basically an island seperated by trees, so, any critical infra which needs to connect elsewhere is practically guranteed to go through wooded lands
wooded lands which have been severely mismanaged, and the energy network iirc was heavily "not our problem", but, it's basically meant that any upgrades to that stuff have generally been lackluster, which means that energy imports are limited to all heck
as said, the government there is literally paying people to run generators to take load off the grid
My parents used to get paid for having solar panels. They would generate more energy than they used.
@faint radish PG&E has shut off our power too
i think when the town of paradise got destroyed, that was THE fire, or at least one of them, that set a precedent for these power shutoffs... man I hate them
it's dumb that california is known for its fires, fire season, it replaces winter season where I grew up (in Michigan)
heh
Regarding transparency and lobbying etc, I think that's actually a relatively complex issue. There are people who would use lists of donors etc as a way to find out who to persecute.
That was believed to be what happened with the NAACP back in the 50s where a state tried to force them to turn over their member/donor list.
All donations are already public iirc
Explore current and historic federal campaign finance data on the new fec.gov. Look at totals and trends, and see how candidates and committees raise and spend money. When you find what you need, export results and save custom links.
That's not really how listening to lobbying is compensated nowadays, because it's so transparent. Here, the politicians just have 10 side jobs in the industry while serving their mandate and for some reason we accept that
Super PAC money isn't instantly public which is a less than ideal thing
I was just saying that individual contributions are public
do political memes count?
No, this is only discussing politics
ok
Fossil-fuel free steel, this is a big deal (in Swedish, Google Translate will give you a decent approximation of what it says) https://twitter.com/LKABgroup/status/1427574176538320915
Nu tar vi nƤsta kliv mot en fossilfri framtid! Imorgon, onsdag, gƶrs vƤrldens fƶrsta fossilfria stƄl redo fƶr att levereras till kund. LƤs mer och fƶlj sƤndningen med @SSAB_AB och @Vattenfall_Se direkt frƄn SSAB:s stƄlverk i Oxelƶsund: https://t.co/XQK3WiHvaV @hybrit_project
259
sorry I'm watching Hasan
2022 elections? Aren't the next elections in the US in 2024?
mid terms
fossil fuel free steel is interesting, but, we'll see where it goes long term I guess
Hasan 
density
š
threatens bombing a democratic institution
"it's because you're dictators!"
outstanding logic
The height of American Politics
Can't forget the tens of thousands of lives wasted
Oh sorry, hundreds of thousands
212191+ (per UCDP)
50k civilians alone
yea millions of lives was included
speech time
Fuck I can't read
That tweets very reductionist but idk what I expected
that tweet is such a bummer
The goal per say in Afghanistan was to attempt to train their army to fend for themselves
That was accomplished through direct training plus investing a shit ton into their infrastructure like schools and so forth
However in the more recent years it became increasingly obvious it wouldn't pay off in the long run
VOX had it like 10 years ago, from the ground, that once the US left, the afghan army would basically join the taliban or disappear off the face off the earth
Figured after pulling out they'd last a year or two but nobody expected them to fall in like months
But yeah it sucks to sit in front of all of America and say "our trillion dollar investment failed"
Likely why nobody did that before Trump
US pull out game was literally a mismanagement hell, they delayed until the taliban where basically in prime position and left a lot of gear there, apparently the US also is preventing contractors from going over there to help with stuff like maintaining the afghans gear, but, I mean, if the afghan army ain't gonna defend their country, it's like, what's the point
apparently early in the year, a plan that was left to aim to get US citizens and such out of afghan if needed was thrown out too
nation building is pointless
You need to replace an entire idealogy
islam is just not compatiable with western democracy
Yeah in the middle east it probably wouldn't work
When a large majority of the country wants stuff like Sharia law, pack your bags and leave, imho
Well yeah but the goal was to have some kind of ally in the middle east
false hopes, imho
With the state of their army yeah
the only way we'd ever have an ally over there is if the ally was basically ourselves propped up by whatever they can offer
and they basically folded day 1
But the US was trying to see if they could via infrastructure prop them up to be better
Which is why presidents didn't want to pull out
Because it sucks to see a trillion dollar investment go tits up like that
well, yea, nobody wants to see such an investment go up in flames, but, what do you do, keep stoking the fire with more dosh?
The idea was that eventually it would improve
Nobody ever thought it would fuck up this badly
think that the US woulda needed to maintain presence for like another 100 years for that
Probably but it's too politically unpopular for anyone to continue doing that
That's really dishonest, just this year tens of thousands of afghans gave their lives trying to defend their country
As they had the last two decades
They surrendered now, because the situation got hopeless, but you made it sound like they never even tried
There are videos of the taliban flying US choppers
I mean, given that there was only one side of the country tought how to use this gear, I do wonder who is at the hands of the controls
the US pulling air support was basically a disaster, especially given how much the afghan forces where relying on it
But the army was woefully undertrained and apparently some areas hadn't been paid in months, as well as dwindling rations
The government was acting like they had a 300k strong army, but, given all the corruption, the training targets where apparently severely missed, apparently desertions where common
the afghan government apparently classified readiness reports because of how bad it was vs how much they where tryna show they where ready
The only way that war coulda been won is by the US standing there for muuuuch longer, according to some articles, the number of shots fired while the taliban was taking territory was basically minimal
i mean, if they will go as far as to lie about how ready they were, they were kinda asking for this to happen
there was practically 0 moral and 0 reason to them to stand their ground and defend their own country
Yea, sure, when the US was there they where still up and standing, but, that was literally the entire contract for that army to be doing stuff was to literally have another country on the ground defending their own country for them
as soon as the US went, so did their morale
things would have gotten smoother if we pulled out non essential non military people out first, then take as much equipment, or blow up what cannot be taken, then pull the military out
Biden waited till the last minute to pull everyone out
and intelligence agencies KNEW something like this were to happen.
Source?
I think there was something on politico
takes a few minutes for my news feed to go back
"Intelligence Agencies Did Not Predict Imminence of Afghan Collapse, Officials Say - The New York Times" https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/18/us/politics/afghanistan-intelligence-agencies.html
First thing I find when googling lulw
Apparently people on the ground knew much more than the intelligence agencies is what I've been gathering
apparently the US agencies have generally heavily been ignoring what's been said on the ground, which, not all that surprising
you know, id love to fucking read that article, but im not since its paywalled
also I dont think the ny times are a great source.
oh actually, I do have that article
my news feed managed to rip it correctly
they cant seem to decide which narrative to use
Intelligence agencies predicted that should the Taliban seize cities, a cascading collapse could happen rapidly and the Afghan security forces were at high risk of falling apart. It is unclear whether other reports during this period presented a more optimistic picture about the ability of the Afghan military and the government in Kabul to withstand the insurgents.
Yeah, itās gone back and forth. Bidenās interview with stephonopolus suggested he knew it would happen, and then an hour later Gen. Miley said he didnāt know it was gonna happen
the link I posted is that a lot of sites are painting largely
not the agencies didnt know shit
@faint radish this is why I hacked up an article ripper, in event something like this would occur
That kind of nation building only works if you do it like Germany, Japan, and Korea
You have to stay for generations
well that along with snuffing out an ideology hell bent on control through terror.
Apparently. Well, that and the people living there donāt think you are satan incarnate.
South Korea was a failed state for quite some time after the "end" of the war
It was only the US presence that stopped a complete collapse
The thing is that you're tryna change an entire set of ideology
America didn't build the German nation, that's bullshit
hence why I say 100 years, as you've basically gotta stay there for generations to basically die off and hopefully take their ideologies with them
We had democracy before Hitler, don't forget that
It's sorta like how with those who "don't understand the gays" it's like, fuck em, they're gonna die soon anyways, why care about 'em
Yeah, estimates were for Afghanistan to really change it would take ~100 years of intervention
(Crass example, but, yea)
@foggy fern the US just didnt continue beating the shit out of germany when it surrendered. compared to the first world war which everything fell onto germany.
or at least west germany
east germany was a different situation
the kind which allows a dictator to come to power and kill millions of people? 
South Korea wasn't a real democracy until 1997, 44 years after the "end" of the war
The thing is that hitler was a societal breakdown
Fun fact: american constitution has the same loop hole
It's not that simple (tm)
there was many right conditions which basically allowed for turning people against their own neighbours
Germany suffered badly not only under the effects of WW1, but also under reparation payments
That kinda stuff is what allows extremists to gain popularity
Japan actually had a pretty quick turnaround, they went all in on American culture and ideas
Germany probably would have been okay without too much effort if the Cold War wasn't a thing
So South Korea is the main example there
America isn't a parliamentary system
Hitler ruled via decree
You wouldn't have an elected president appointing some guy
I would argue that there is a big societal breakdown happening right now in america that is leading to more and more extremist from both sides rising to power
Declared national emergency
The US has safe guards to protect against such rises to power
Largely the fact that the Congress is all elected by people who want to be reelected
now, yes
I mean it's kinda hard to not support some guy that could end up killing you if you say you don't eh?
That was earlier
Iirc everything up to 1932 were considered fair elections
33 was when he actually used military power
breakdown? the extremists don't really have power anyways they're all in safe districts while the majority is more moderate
But he got 1/3rd of votes in free and fair elections
The only real crazy ones are the Taylor green girl
Gatez is probably a crazy too
And I guess justice Dems are "extreme" too (based on the majority of the US's opinions) but not dangerously crazy
In the way Taylor and gatez are that is
Theres crazies all over the board
Did trump assign 3 seats in the supreme court? Or was it just 2
Was just a side question not related to the crazies
No vaccines but they'll try this...
"At least 70% of the recent calls have been related to ingestion of livestock or animal formulations of ivermectin purchased at livestock supply centers," stated the alert, which did not specify the number of total calls.
How ironic, climate catastrophe induced flooding destroyed trump's "wall"
Tbh the laws surrounding fences at actual houses in the US seem to show making a wall for the country makes sense and can be used in defining what trespassing is in certain places. It's not really about how effective the walls are XD but what they represent. You can obviously jump the fence of your neighbors place (well maybe not legally depending on the circumstances) but they're still there for a reason
That aside, Afghanistan has had a pretty crazy time O_o
Was kinda funny how the media went mental on Trump's accusations of fraud in the election when this happened to another country https://theconversation.com/myanmar-coup-how-the-military-has-held-onto-power-for-60-years-154526 though
People were worried Trump was going to try to do that here, especially when some of his friends started talking about it
The stuff happening in Myanmar was so fucked, the videos coming out from when the coup started
Havent even seen much of it anywhere since then though so I guess the media moved on
It's not really interesting I guess
Headline could be "shithole country does shithole things" and ppl just move on
Even tho it's a really beautiful country
Well before he went all crazy he won the hearts of the people via his charisma. People loved him way before then.
Additionally the biggest risks to something like Nazi Germany happening again are: 1. People don't tend to associate the people who helped the regime, they associate with Hermine Gies, or Oskar Schindler. However they're almost guaranteed to be the ones who help the regime since they're blind to their own self preservation. 2. Regardless of party, people seem to accept the government taking more and more power that curtails the freedom of the citizens.
It did yes but it was in laws not the constitution itself, it was very promptly closed by congress. People don't realize that FDR basically had equal emergency powers to those that the Chancellor had after the Reichstag fire.
!ban @shy gulch nitro scam
:raised_hands: Banned SkIn-N-BoNeS#0069 (nitro scam) [1 total infraction] -- Machine Maker#3443.
ey! ban #1 for me š
wow, he does something
LOL
Old article but... huh https://www.apa.org/news/press/releases/2000/12/anxiety
Studies Show Normal Children Today Report More Anxiety than Child Psychiatric Patients in the 1950's
Published in 2000, the study it's about finished in 1993 so computing and the internet wasn't a factor
This is fine (tm)
Who would have thought that the Taliban would laugh into the world's face after an uncontrolled fleeing
I actually have never seen that image before, i testing how little I know about the war in the Pacific
School always focused on Europe
Yeah, itās a pretty famous image from Iwo Jima I believe. Actually, I forget if itās portraying the first flag raising or not. Cause a group of soldiers raised the flag first, then they were all killed, cause they had missed some Japanese soldiers who were left, and so it had to be done again
Totally makes sense that youād focus on Europe anyways. Itās in your backyard. I know the brits fought all over the place, is it mostly Europe there too? Ofc the UK was attacked constantly from Europe so itād still make sense there
Even in the US I feel more emphasis is put on the European theatre, even though the pacific is was got us into it in the first place
Most of our history lesson was basically the Romans and ww2
Maybe some Anglo-Saxon in there too
Maaaybe? I think we may have covered it s little but most of what I recall studying was ww2
The primary focus is like 1066+, we did cover WW1 to a degree iirc but not as much as WW2, but, I think WW2 stuff was sorta like, we spent much more time on it
Theres no real like strongly set set curriculum for us so it seems, tbqh
There is a hell of a lot of history & not always a lot of time to teach it.
So, like schools in most countries, students are taught about the 'big ticket' events of history, the events that are seen as those that had most impact on forming the mo...
lol, Tony Blair is trying to criticize Biden for getting the US out of Afghanistan
I wonder why, is it the disaster that is going on trying to get people out of the country?
Are things going great? No. Is Tony Blair in a position to say anything about it? No.
im not too sure what you mean by that? If a man wants to say something about what is going on, they should say it.
He isn't even talking about that part, he is saying we shouldn't be leaving at all
ah ok
no, we should leave, but not in the clusterfuck that is happening
Biden should have made it a priority to get non essential persons out first months ago
iirc that was a combination of intelligence failures, optics, and people being stubborn
Ended up as a failure because they were pushing things too close to the edge due to not wanting to cause panic by appearing to flee early and then the intelligence on when the collapse was likely to happen was wrong
Josh Hawley then: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E9LH4szXoAMRPTm.jpg:large
Josh Hawley now: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E9LH5ykXoAgJJLe.jpg:large
Look, I know the GOP is trying to retcon this, but this is stupid.
Trump would have done just as "bad" of a job that Biden did. Considering the circumstances and Biden only stretching the leave-by date but leaving Trump's plan largely unaltered, I'd say the U.S. held up its end of the deal fairly well.
The difference is that the GOP would be giddy and centrist Democrats would express outrage
The progressives would back the GOP on this one, they would've wanted to exit Afghanistan as soon as they could
Biden delayed until a point of the year where the taliban is more pro-active and cancelled a trump plan aimed to get US peoples out of there earlier
The thing is, it wasnt completely trump's plan, It was biden's plan. Biden decided to delay everything, nevermind pulling the military out first BEFORE other us citizens and equipment
he ignored warning signs going on.
Hell, the taliban knew that this administration could be pushed around since biden made it an unconditional withdraw
But the framework was Trump's and he owns it.
Yes, and biden failed to implement it
Trump and pompeo from reviews and articles (given the left wing doesnt look at other sources outside of the left wing sphere, this isnt surprising), they have stated they wouldnt have done what Biden has done. They have stated clearly that they would have pulled citizens out of the country first, then take the equipment, and finally pull out the military.
To be fair, this is mere speculation at this point.
Uh no, they have bluntly stated this,
Nope, it's speculation. Why is it speculation? Because Trump is not president and Pompeo is not Secretary of State.
they were former president and secretary of state.
We don't know how they'd react as the withdrawal happens.
no, we dont, but it sure as sounds like they knew what they were doing when they drafted the deal with the taliban
And in any event, I doubt they'd manage the withdrawal all that well.
Instead of a massive Taliban offensive in July, we'd get one in April probably.
actually, there was an offensive in april
Tux: You can be for getting out of afghanistan and also think that what happened/is happening is really bad
Wasn't Trump's agreement with the Taliban for our unconditional withdrawal? The only thing in it didn't have any enforcement specified, it was just a request (don't shoot at us on the way out)
Biden delayed to give allies like the UK time to plan their withdrawal too, Trump's timeline was too fast for everyone with no warning ahead of time
Doesn't mean the actual withdrawal isn't a shitshow
no, trumps agreement was conditional
So Biden was just unable to reverse the decision to withdraw, or to adjust the timeline etc? Would you say that makes him an effective or ineffective president? Also when he announced it he said it wasn't going to be rushed, was going to be responsible, deliberately, and safely. I'd also argue that his official plan for withdrawal (Biden's) which he announced in 2019 is exactly what Trump actually did. Also was he also unable to bring himself to criticize his best friend and predecessor and instead praised the withdrawal as the right move after the Taliban had taken control?
Also yea, it was conditional. Also complete withdrawal was meant to have occurred by 1 May 2021, which means the US breached the agreement since Biden announced that the withdrawal operations would start by then.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_M9bhx24pug
Yes, this is ben shapiro, but I dont see CNN asking former trump admins
My new book, āThe Authoritarian Moment: How the Left Weaponized Americaās Institutions Against Dissent,ā is out now! Grab a copy of the book signed by me for only $30 by clicking here:Ā https://utm.io/udu9b. You can also purchase an unsigned copy on Amazon by clicking
here:Ā https://utm.io/udsnE.
LIKE & SUBSCRIBE for new videos everyday.Ā https:/...
So they keep talking about conditions conditions conditions
Come to think of it, the fact that the withdrawal operations stopped, and begun again in May 1st 2021, leads me to be a bit confused. How did Trump's framework interfere with Biden's seemingly new plans that clearly were not part of the agreement (and no agreement was forged as far as I know)?
After briefly reading over Trump's original agreement just now I don't see any conditions that they would have broken in Trump's immediate timeline
That is to say I don't see anything that would have stopped part two from going into a fact if Biden were not to push it back
Resulting in the same inevitable collapse of Afghanistan army
At the end of the day fighting this war isn't popular among the United States voters
collapse was basically inevitable
I mean, the taliban had seemingly gone back on their plans to actually start progress towards peace
I can probably agree with that statement Cat.
We put trillions of dollars into infrastructure such a schools to try and train children better and directly with training armed forces there and they still surrendered with a mere weeks of us leaving
That's after years upon years of training
I mean, the afghan army was basically giving up without a single fight
The country was a shithole before the US intervention, and it will be probably longer than our lifetimes.
At the end of the day this was going to be a botched investment that was never going to work out
Had to be cut at some point
Yep I agree, just think the actual withdrawal was sloppy.
On a humanity level sure it probably makes sense for the United States to stay there but it's not politically popular so it's pretty much political suicide to stay there
inteligence reports apparently indicate that going on for months the taliban where conducting missions in which basically the afghan army pretty much immediatly surrendered and handed their gear over
Especially when the former administration had an agreement to get them out of there
Could you imagine if Biden doubled down on something politically unpopular
Biden ran on withdrawal.
there was plans apparently on trumps side to leave 2,500 people and still offer things like air support as needed
I don't know what kind of plan the right thinks Biden can pull out of his ass
The previous administration is irrelevant to that.
Biden apparently prevented contractors from going over there to even help the afghan army with their own planes, etc
Well previous administration had a plan for withdrawals what I was saying so if Biden wanted to reverse that it looks really bad on him since it's already politically unpopular to have a war there
Yeah that's correct Cat.
Trumps plan also apparently included things like getting troops and gear out of there before cutting down back to a minimal presence more or less
The planes were also a key part of the military training the US gave ground troops.
and, the biden admin killed off something which was there to provide a method of getting citizens out
The airstrikes were a key part of the ground infantries toolkit.
Biden himself has clearly taken responsibility by standing by the withdrawal in any event.
I dont think the collapse was going to change, but what biden is undergoing was that we left people and equipment stranded
I mean, there was the agreement that the taliban would hold up their end of the deal
they didn't
The US didnt.
biden still pressed with GTFO
The complete withdrawal deadline was breeched.
Trump's plan was to get US citizens and equipment out before the military withdraws
Yeah allegedly. I still think it would have had blunders, but we'll never know.
100%
Not because any persons involvement, just military planning has a track record.
I mean, the taliban practically walked through surrounding areas with little fire fight
Yeah, because the infantry were trained to rely on air support lol
And there was none.
Hopefully they managed to sabotage all the US military equipment, but I doubt it since that is very unlikely to be part of their training.
They don't seem competent enough to improvise either.
I think that the situation would have gone better under trump, but, even vox had people on the record in like 2013 saying that people in the afghan army would basically desert if the taliban marched up to them if the US left
the afghan army apparently where keeping readiness reports classified because of how abysmal they where, dessertions where a common occurance, it was a 300k "strong" army to the effect of having card board targets in a shooting range sigh
Yeah probably because they're the scum of the Earth, and would murder/rape family members of whoever resist them if they knew who they were.
Also the Taliban escalated their violent operations post Biden's announcement. About 5-6K different attacks, which were all breeches of their agreement with the US. That's plenty of ammunition for Biden to say "nope, not withdrawing now".
US intelligence were also reporting to executive that the imminent takeover was happening it turns out.
At around the time Biden said the Taliban were not going to takeover the country.
I mean, it's that hard call, everybody wanted out, and, honestly, on the news of hearing that the taliban where launching new attacks at the scale they where and the cards where falling over as fast as they was, I'd rather have stayed rather than tossing 20 years down the line
I mean, for many that would be a politican disaster, but, honestly, the way I see it it woulda been the better move rather than letting the castle fall down
Yep I agree.
My understanding is that the attacks basically went from meeting the agreement mostly to that after Biden's announcement indicating that the US was not meeting its end. Though I've not checked that information.
I doubt they'd have kept their end after the withdrawal. But who knows.
I mean, it's "fun", my brain has issues keeping chrono order with stuff but it seems right now theres a lot of info coming out which people knew or was classified which offers a lot of considerations to what is going on right now
How much is just being found out now vs how much did the people in charge actually know
I mean, it's pretty hard to imagine the intelligence community not knowing about 5,500 attacks that basically met with no resistance.
yea...
If that data can be obtained by normal people (providing it's accurate).
WSJ reported a source told them in early June (they reported it in early June) that Afghanistan was going to collapse within 6 months of US withdrawal based on US intelligence assessments.
My guess would be that source is an executive branch aid.
Also most of those 5,500 attacks resulted in the Taliban obtaining US supplied military equipment like Humvee's etc.
@shut vine the taliban isnt done yet with getting US supplies, It will not shock me if we have to bribe the taliban to get our people back
and they know this administration is going to cave on that
Do we have numbers on how many are still stranded?
11,000 to 15,000 RIP
Intel is suggesting the Taliban are going door to door looking for certain people too š¦
most of the land equipment is going to be blown up shortly after evacs are cleared anyways by drone strikes
We don't actually know how many Americans are still in the country
Some people registered with the embassy but never reported in when they left, some people never registered to begin with
They're going through the list and calling everyone to try to at least get a minimum bound
btw, luckily all our equipment breaks down within hours to days without proper maintenance so they won't have any of it for long š
it's funny cos it's true
The argument for it is that if it was more durable or reliable we could make it lighter, faster, tougher, etc instead and it'd do a better job
I mean, it's the same reason boeing doesn't make (have they yet?) reusable boosters
more profit on selling one time goods than making something which lasts
there is technology for semi-reusable booster stage rockets, but since boeing sucks off the government, its not a priority for them
@mystic ermine its one of the reasons why the US relied on russia for so long on getting people into space after the shuttles were retired
Companies stopped giving a crap until SpaceX and other startups came onto the stage
Boeing's normal consumer line of aerospace is doing wonderful in advances, whereas military/government we still rely on dated equipment, hell, we still use planes built from the 50's to do quite a bit of heavy lifting.
@foggy fern also, you would be surprised how durable some military tech is. I wouldnt be shocked if heavy equipment starts failing early, but military rifles designed for the US military can survive really harsh environments. Moreso than some european designs that some countries started to adopt AR-15 like rifles.
To be fair
Click to subscribe! http://bit.ly/subAIRBOYD
A JTAC evaluation at the Nevada Test and Training Range including live 30mm rounds and practice bombs from an A-10.
Video by Airman 1st Class Dylan Murakami Nellis AFB Public Affairs
The appearance of U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) visual information does not imply or constitute DoD endorsemen...
Well dont expect the taliban to get one of those operational if they found one
Rest of the world: Let's add guns to our planes!
brrrrrrrt is pretty epic
US: Let's add wings to our guns!
before that, it was adding wings to bombs
The AGM-86 ALCM is an American subsonic air-launched cruise missile (ALCM) built by Boeing and operated by the United States Air Force. This missile was developed to increase the effectiveness and survivability of the Boeing B-52H Stratofortress strategic bomber. The missile dilutes an enemy's forces and complicates air defense of its territory....
I think B52s could carry 20 of those
fired first shots of Desert Storm setting the record (which I think still stands) for the longest bombing raid in history. from Barksdale Louisiana to Kuwait and back
B52s are expected to be used until like the 2050s
Join us for our next conference: https://goo.gl/B2bqQ6
Long before Agile and Lean became buzzwords, a scrappy group of aerospace engineers at Lockheed's Skunk Works were using similar practices to produce some of the most amazing aircraft ever built. The famous U-2 spy plane, the SR-71 Blackbird, and the F-117A Stealth Fighter are among the incr...
watched that a while ago and was pretty enjoyable
made me grab an audio book which I've not gotten to listening to since I moved
The count of remaining US citizens is in the thousands at the very least as per US intelligence.
planes carrying planes...
The US had a reaaaallly strong bet on durigibles iirc
I think that the hindenburg disaster kinda killed it though,forget the timeline
not adding up to 100%
Context: survey for next chancellor, those are the three candidates of the popular parties
oh and the piecharts are disproportionate
Not adding up is fine-ish, as it's not an exhaustive list, most likely rest is "i don't know, I don't wanna say"
Yep, laschet, left, candidates of the conservatives, 12%, has 2/3s of the pie, while bedrock, right, candidate of the greens, 13%, has only 1/5th, even tho she has a higher percentage
I wanted to say that's a subtle way to influence of the public, but is that subtle? š
Just so that you guys know, there are bad German news site too, it's just overall not as bad as the US
@near glen what party is the middle guy?
Social democrats
Basically, if you wanna draw a line from left to right, in Germany it's the left, the greens, the social democrats, the conservatives, the neo liberals, and the nazis
He's only leading polls (this is not party polls btw, just "i like this person" polls, it's different) because laschet, the one who should be winning, cause his party has the best numbers, goes around and doing stupid things
Pfizer vaccine has been fully approved!
you are the kinds of people that are never going to help the world be a better place, fyi, those of you who like to spam things in this channel
That's not a very nice thing to say to automated spamposters.
oh kek i posted the poggies sticker after i saw mini's bans, didn't even realise i was in politics tbh
this is an interesting post https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/p8wv1a/biden_we_are_considering_every_means_to_get/h9txday/
Swedish politics https://apple.news/AoFLEVkCpQZyngCAH7aIWIA
Stefan Lofven has been a survivor. The Swedish prime minister navigated seven years of fractious politics and fragile governing coalitions. He hung on as the coronavirus pandemic devastated his country ā its response coming under increasingly harsh scrutiny ā and he recaptured his seat after being ousted in June.
K, now that the pfizer has been fully authed by the FDA, thereās like no reason for vaccinated people to wear masks.
But we shall see exactly how long it takes for the mandates (where I live at least) to go away
That is not the reason vaccinated people are told to wear masks
the mandates were re-added in high risk areas because vaccinated individuals could still spread it to unvaccinated folks, increasing the chances for another variant being made
(one that the vaccine may not work on as well)
thus creating a problem for vaccinated individuals
I don't even know if there is a mandate in Texas anywhere anymore
I kinda stopped paying attention and just wear mine regardless if I'm out in public
I know why they were implemented. But itās never going to 100% go away
And if you arenāt getting the vaccine, thatās not my problem anymore. We arenāt going to be wearing masks forever.
The people who wonāt get the fully approved vaccine⦠like none of them live where I live, and the people who canāt get the vaccine, well there have always been people who couldnāt get vaccines
And if you arenāt getting the vaccine, thatās not my problem anymore. We arenāt going to be wearing masks forever.
the point is it will end up becoming your problem
if a variant is made that the vaccine won't work against
The chance the virus would mutate was still true when mask mandates were repealed for a few weeks
In fact it was higher then. Only 25% of the world is fully vaccinated. Most of that isnāt in the US, so if thereās going to be a ābadā variant, itās probably not gonna be from here
much of the details really... er...
And if there is no, thereās no chance it wonāt spread everywhere, no stopping that
Like, vaccinated you still need a mask to prevent the spread, as somebody who is vaccinated you can still get sick, you can still die, you can still transmit the virus
Cat, that really doesnāt matter. That has always been the case pre-Covid with other things, and will always continue to be the case post Covid. Why is it different now?
masks do help reduce the amount of transmission, but, getting R below one is more lockdown territory but, I mean, only real way to totally quell the virus is to have the military walk the street and shoot anybody they see on sight
Among the vaccinated, or people with immunity gained from already having the virus, the chances of dying are extremely low. Like wayyy small. Over 99.999% of fully vaccinated Americans havenāt been hospitalized much less died from Covid after having the vaccine
Is that close to the flu now?
Cause if it is, then why is it being treated any differently from it
I mean, at this point, the government fucked up to all shit, we're gonna have to live with this; the fact that the vaccine has been approved changes nothing in terms of the statisitics or anything, hopefully enough people get vax'd to the degree that this it helps reduce many of the risks but I mean, each transmission basically increases the risks of a mutation, which, could potentially put us back to stage 1
The flu is a virus, it could mutate too right?
I mean, a lot of it is optics and the flu has been around for so long that we generally have a level of immunity to it, even if it ravages the world consistently
And the same will happen with Covid probably. Hundreds of thousands will die a year from it.