Jump to content
IGNORED

Are we on the brink of World War III?


RH

WW III  

60 members have voted

  1. 1. Are we on the brink of World War III?

    • Yes
      16
    • No
      44


Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, MrWunderful said:

Probably low because the majority were peaceful as “cities burned”. Minor misdemeanors for bullshit like disturbing the peace.
 

Anyone committing arson or property damage should be persecuted to the fullest extent of the law, but like before mentioned, not even remotely similar to seditious conspiracy to overthrow the government.  

Yeah = we will be peaceful while we watch a lot of our fellow mob members burn things - we don't need to stop them.  Aidinbg and abetting.

Again how much damage resulted from the two sets of occurrences.  The ninnies on the sixth had no plan to take over anything - no org charts for the new government nor any plans to either stop or subvert armed forces.  If you don't get this I suggest you read up on the 1944 bomb plor against Hitler.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Tulpa said:

Yeah, attempting to defend sedition tends to get me riled up. 🙂

In any event, Trumpers can't say they are patriots anymore. That argument died on that day in January.

People burning down cities under whatever flimsy pretexts gets me riled up.  Far more people were damaged by those but that doesn't seem to bother a lot folks. ^___^

If the latter is aimed at me you are off  by a country mile.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Tabonga said:

Yeah = we will be peaceful while we watch a lot of our fellow mob members burn things - we don't need to stop them.  Aidinbg and abetting.

Again how much damage resulted from the two sets of occurrences.  The ninnies on the sixth had no plan to take over anything - no org charts for the new government nor any plans to either stop or subvert armed forces.  If you don't get this I suggest you read up on the 1944 bomb plor against Hitler.

Speaking of flimsy pretext lol

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, MrWunderful said:

Speaking of flimsy pretext lol

Oh the amount of damages doesn't justify anything - so not a pretext.  It does indicate the relative actual damages done by the two sets of events.

(There is a concept in law where partipants of a crime share blame equally - so if a bank is robbed and a guard killed the getaway driver is equally culpable even though he/she may not have been armed or in the bank.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Tulpa said:

Yep, defending sedition. Can't really say much more.

 

I haven't defended sedition - punish the ninnies from the sixth.  I just wanted it viewed in a proper perspective in regards to the rest of the insanity that has taken over the country

 

(You seem to want to defend the sedition in Portland though.)  

  • Agree 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Tabonga said:

I haven't defended sedition - punish the ninnies from the sixth.  I just wanted it viewed in a proper perspective in regards to the rest of the insanity that has taken over the country

Yeah, I get it. You want to minimize it because it makes your side look bad. Sorry, it'll be hanging over you for a long time.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Tulpa said:

Yeah, I get it. You want to minimize it because it makes your side look bad. Sorry, it'll be hanging over you for a long time.

I don't particularly have a side.  As I said punish them (6th) - but if you want to have anything resembling an orderly society  that is not going to happen if you allow mob rule if it suits your needs,  Reminds me of the mob and bread in Rome.  That turned out really well didn't it?

For what it is worth I sleep just fine if that is what you are trying to get at.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Tabonga said:

People burning down cities under whatever flimsy pretexts gets me riled up.  Far more people were damaged by those but that doesn't seem to bother a lot folks. ^___^

If the latter is aimed at me you are off  by a country mile.

Flimsy pre-text meaning people should not be upset that the cops continue to murder black people for no reason?

First amendment to the constitution protects freedom of assembly. 

If you think these protest were wild you should read about the protests that got us the 40 hour work week and child labor laws. Last couple years was nothing compared to those protests.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Californication said:

Flimsy pre-text meaning people should not be upset that the cops continue to murder black people for no reason?

First amendment to the constitution protects freedom of assembly. 

If you think these protest were wild you should read about the protests that got us the 40 hour work week and child labor laws. Last couple years was nothing compared to those protests.

Came to the party late huh?  As Jeevan said this has gotten off track.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is another good (in a depressing sort of way) from way back in 1959.  I couldn't find a decent trailer for it so this will have to do.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Beach_(1959_film)

No happy endings in this one either.

This one and "The World, the Flesh and the Devil" (also 1959)  were probably the first serious big budgeted movies about nuclear war (nuclear bombs weren't the cause in "The World, The Flesh and the Devil" but the cause was the not clearly defined weaponized use of "nuclear isotopes").

Edited by Tabonga
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Tanooki said:

Ugh never heard of that movie before, and from that trailer, you're right.  And given the insanity and thirst of Putin who could say that isn't a possibility on the table at this point.

The fact that Putin is lying to his people about this tells me two things.

1) he is afraid of what they'd do if they knew the truth

2) in rationalizing his actions, he sees a way out, or is trying to create one.

I'd be far more concerned about Nuclear War if Putin was out right telling his people "yeah, I'm commiting genocide, what're you gonna do about it?"

As long as he isn't cornered, and as long as the USA and NATO don't take his bait, we'll be fine.


 

Edited by Jono1874
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Jono1874 said:

The fact that Putin is lying to his people about this tells me two things.

1) he is afraid of what they'd do if they knew the truth

2) in rationalizing his actions, he sees a way out, or is trying to create one.

I'd be far more concerned about Nuclear War if Putin was out right telling his people "yeah, I'm commiting genocide, what're you gonna do about it?"

As long as he isn't cornered, and as long as the USA and NATO don't take his bait, we'll be fine.


 

Maybe, but it may just be a matter of time.  I truly do not believe those maps from that twit leader of Belarus were outright not correct, a large mix of done movements and those happening, but one showing a raid into Modolva to take at least Transnistria if not more... that would spark a fire.  While not in NATO after that threat go out they just fast track applied too to the EU as Ukraine did.  They're in the area, on the ground and all that, they're not stupid and see what's up more than some loaded news coverage and that should be more worrying.  Well that or if they do something utterly idiotic purposeful or not to any reactors in Ukraine, that'll push it over the top.

Putin is a coward, now talking maybe martial law, now perhaps push to pass a bill in their duma to allow for conscription into service in ukraine for anyone publicly protesting that presintator douchebag.

 

Presintator= President+Dictator (if it wasn't obvious) just like Pooh Bear Xi in China.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Screenshot-from-2022-03-06-15-06-07.png

BCA Research, a Canadian business, told clients to “stay bullish” on stocks and “largely ignore existential risk” as their investments will become “irrelevant” if the Ukraine crisis leads to nuclear armageddon.

Mr Berezin said: “If Putin concludes that he has no future, the risk is that he will decide that no one else should have a future either.”

Boy, it would be nice to think Putin is just "sable rattling" but let's be realistic here - he's deranged and if he figures he will take down the West with him, more than likely that is that...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, avatar! said:

BCA Research, a Canadian business, told clients to “stay bullish” on stocks and “largely ignore existential risk” as their investments will become “irrelevant” if the Ukraine crisis leads to nuclear armageddon.

I mean, it may sound ridiculous, but the advice is logically sound...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...