Jump to content

hpslugga

Legacy Members
  • Posts

    3287
  • Joined

Posts posted by hpslugga

  1. 6 minutes ago, Iconoclast Texan said:

    Don’t waste your time. You’re arguing with a guy who smugly thinks he knew more about Allende than Rimbo even though Rimbo focused an entire semester on the Pinochet coup and couldn’t counter what he was saying

    Ha. I posted you an in depth history of the origins of socialism and you sat totally silent and maintained your position as if no one said anything. This is literally sticking fingers in your ears, closing your eyes and saying "LALALALALALALALALA."

  2. 4 minutes ago, Crusher said:

    What!!!??? Your own article that you posted disagrees with you in the first paragraph.

    CARACAS – CARACAS (AP) — It's President Hugo Chavez's biggest economic battle cry, and it's getting louder as Venezuela suffers a recession: "We're going to bury Venezuelan capitalism."

    Edit: go ahead and neg me again you douche.

    Still reading selectively, I see. Or are you one of those superficial idiots who thinks that political rhetoric is an accurate depiction of policy? Because that's exactly what the article sought to dispel from the very outset, which you've have noticed if you had continued. Hell, right after that selective copy and paste of yours reads:

    "Yet creating a socialist economy is one of Chavez's most elusive goals — a stark example of the disconnect between the president's rhetoric and the reality on the ground. In fact, the private sector still controls two-thirds of Venezuela's economy — the same as when Chavez was elected in 1998, according to estimates by the Central Bank."

    • Like 1
  3. 11 minutes ago, Crusher said:

    Edit: You don't have to neg every post I make. I get it. You and I disagree. I don't do that to you or anyone else I disagree with on this site.

    I don't neg you for disagreeing. I neg you for being incapable of understanding the most basic of issues and being fantastically dishonest in doing so. I've very frequently referred to Icono as being a walking, breathing example of the Dunning Kruger effect, but clearly I'm wrong about that because you're Bob Beamon'ing him here.

    And you still don't get it regarding Maduro and Venezuela. They are not socialist by any means, they never have been, and even Fox News has an AP article on their website acknowledging that in rather spectacular detail and it was written quite a while back.

    https://www.foxnews.com/world/what-socialism-private-sector-still-dominates-venezuelan-economy-despite-chavez-crusade

    • Like 1
  4. On 2/22/2019 at 4:42 PM, bad_teammate said:

     What we did to Nicaragua was criminal.

    This isn't even debatable as we have an ICJ judgment, which bore on that exact question, against us. What isn't discussed very much, however, is that what we did in Guatemala, El Salvador and even Honduras was far worse. But of course, this is the United States of us; the one country in the industrialized world which internally debates the existence of evolution and manmade climate change (and if you watch Fox and Friends, the germ theory of disease, apparently), so the Little Engines That Could easily come along and "re-open" this subject.

    On 2/22/2019 at 4:42 PM, bad_teammate said:

    It's going to be a wild 2 years watching the Democrats express their fandom for the blood-soaked Latin America policy of Ronald Reagan and the ghouls underneath him like Elliot Abrams.

    That party really is a paradox. I remember watching a debate on the Nicaragua subject between Noam Chomsky and John Silber on YouTube about 10 years ago. Silber's positions were not only completely fraudulent, but they were also morally abhorrent. Then I looked him up and saw that he was a Democrat...and that was back when that party was a bit further to the left on the political spectrum than they are now.

  5. Just now, Crusher said:

    I watched the video.."right wing hawk Elliot Abrams" and blah ,blah blah.. "The aid is politically motivated" Really? I have never seen people willing to risk there lives to get food for their families just because of a "political hoax".  I guess that the video I posted above was shot at another border where we have a "manufactured crisis". That blood on that women's face looked pretty real. The cut on her forehead will results in a scar that she will carry for the rest of her life.

    Again, you didn't even bother to notice that the bulk of it was spent interviewing a Maduro critic who also argues that this is not humanitarian aid. You get upset and imply that I called you stupid for disagreeing with me. I don't say that. I say that you're incapable of understanding that two things can be true at the same time. Here are the two things:

    1. Maduro is a corrupt thug that shouldn't be in power for another microsecond
    2. The "aid" that the US is sending Venezuelan is not humanitarian.

    People who refuse to view the world strictly in black and white like you do can understand things like this.

    Just now, Crusher said:

    But, you go ahead and back a Dictator that the rest of the world is lining up to condemn. 

    I don't support Maduro, and you know that. You are lying, and you're going to be told that as long as you keep up this bullshit circus act.

  6. 16 minutes ago, Crusher said:

    Really. A website called democracy now is backing a proven , definition of a socialist, dictator Maduro.

    You didn't even bother to read the transcript or watch the video. If you had, you'd notice that they were interviewing a rather eloquent, not to mention ardent, Maduro critic. Edgardo Lander is not a Maduro supporter, and he demonstrated that clearly even to the simplest of minds.

    16 minutes ago, Crusher said:

    Pretty weak argument there...

    Pretty fraudulent of you to make such a claim when you don't even know what the argument is. 

    And it's pretty hilarious that you think you "won" the "argument" by talking about Guaido when his interim Presidency is, by their own constitution, scheduled to end after 30 consecutive days and they have to hold new elections. Yesterday was the 30th day, no such election is in sight. That somehow gets lost on people here.

  7. 11 minutes ago, Crusher said:

    Well, you picked a strange hill to die on my friend.

    If it doesn't have any thing to do with socialism then please enlighten me. Why are people dying today in Venezuela?

    This has nothing to do with dying on a hill, Venezuela isn't a socialist nation, and Maduro isn't in any way a socialist head of state (that's a contradiction in terms just on its face). 70% of their economy, as I've said before, is controlled by the private sector. Your insistence to the contrary is an indictment of your utter incapability to understand anything meaningful, including those political buzzwords that you sloppily throw around while being absolutely wrong about absolutely everything that you've said thus far.

    Why are people dying in Venezuela? They have an authoritarian despot whose government can't keep their fucking hands out of the till, and that's being exacerbated by US sanctions that are imposed for politically selfish reasons that have absolutely nothing to do with any humanitarian concerns for Venezuelans.  

    • Like 1
  8. https://www.democracynow.org/2019/2/22/this_is_not_humanitarian_aid_a

    AMY GOODMAN: We begin today’s show in Venezuela, where a standoff is escalating as opposition leader and self-proclaimed president Juan Guaidó claims he’s preparing to deliver so-called humanitarian aid from the Colombian border Saturday. Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro has rejected the plan, saying the effort is part of a broader attempt to overthrow his regime.

    This comes as Trump’s special envoy to Venezuela and right-wing hawk, Elliott Abrams, is leading a U.S. delegation traveling by military aircraft to the Colombian-Venezuelan border, supposedly to help deliver the aid. It’s been one month since the U.S. recognized Guaidó as Venezuela’s new president, in an attempt to oust Maduro from power. Since then, it’s placed sweeping sanctions on Venezuela’s state-run oil company and rejected calls for an international dialogue to resolve the crisis. The United Nations, the Red Cross and other relief organizations have refused to work with the U.S. on delivering that aid to Venezuela, which these groups say is politically motivated.

    This is Venezuelan opposition leader Juan Guaidó speaking to Fox Business.

    JUAN GUAIDÓ: [translated] We will have a fantastic opportunity this Saturday to accept important humanitarian aid that the government in Venezuela has forbidden. And we have a fantastic example to pull our country out of this crisis.

    AMY GOODMAN: On Thursday, Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro announced plans to close the border with Brazil, and possibly also with Colombia, ahead of the Venezuelan opposition’s plans to bring in the aid despite his objection.

    PRESIDENT NICOLÁS MADURO: [translated] Starting at 8 p.m. today, Thursday, February 21st, the land border with Brazil will be completely and absolutely closed until further notice. It is better to prevent than to regret, to take all the measures for the assurance and protection of our people. I am considering a complete closure of the border with Colombia. A prepared man is worth two. A prepared people is worth two.

    AMY GOODMAN: Tonight, the Venezuela-Colombia border will be the site of dueling concerts—one organized by the British billionaire Richard Branson, the other by the Venezuelan government. This comes as U.S. Vice President Mike Pence is scheduled to visit Colombia Monday to demand President Maduro step down. Pence will deliver remarks to the Lima Group. Mexico is the only country in the group of 14 nations that has refused to recognize Juan Guaidó as Venezuela’s new president.

    Meanwhile, in Washington, D.C., Medea Benjamin, the co-founder of the peace group CodePink, disrupted an event there, where Guaidó’s envoy to the United States spoke.

    CARLOS VECCHIO: So, Gustavo.

    MEDEA BENJAMIN: Excuse me. Just as you are trying to take over the Venezuelan government, I want to say these people are a fraud. They don’t represent the Venezuelan people. They are representing the U.S.-orchestrated coup. This is a very dangerous situation. They want to create a crisis at the border that would be a justification for U.S. intervention. This has nothing to do with a humanitarian situation. Indeed, for a humanitarian situation, the U.S. would lift the economic sanctions that have exacerbated the crisis. The issue at the border now is something that is politicizing humanitarian aid. That is why the Red Cross, the United Nations and all the legitimate humanitarian groups have insisted that they will not touch this aid.

    What we need now is negotiations. These people here want to take Venezuela to a path of civil war and U.S. intervention. What the Venezuelan people need is negotiations mediated by Mexico—I’m almost finished—mediated by Mexico, by the Uruguayans and by the Vatican. So, let’s say that if you indeed care about the people of Venezuela, you will be calling for negotiations. You will not recognize these people who are willing pawns in a Trump-orchestrated coup d’état. Thank you for listening to the voice of reason.

    AMY GOODMAN: That was Medea Benjamin [inaudible] Venezuela news conference in Washington, D.C.

    Well, for more, we go to Caracas, Venezuela, where we’re joined by Edgardo Lander, a sociologist who’s part of the Citizen’s Platform in Defense of the Constitution. Lander is a retired professor at the Central University of Venezuela. Because it’s in Caracas, there is a long audio delay, so please bear with us.

    Edgardo Lander, welcome to Democracy Now! Can you describe the situation in the country right now and the effect of the pressure on the border?

    EDGARDO LANDER: Good morning, Amy. Glad to be with you.

    The situation in Venezuela right now is really quite, quite tense. The 23rd—that is, Saturday—when the so-called humanitarian aid is supposed to come into the country, according to Guaidó’s people, no matter what, presents a very, very serious threat to Venezuela, a very serious threat in terms of the possibilities of violence. This is certainly not some humanitarian aid; it’s a humanitarian intervention.

    If the United States were really interested in democracy—the government, of course, were interested in democracy and human rights and the humanitarian situation of the Venezuelan population, the first thing they will have to do is stop the blockade that’s impacting the Venezuelan people enormously, as the Venezuelan government has extreme difficulties in gaining access to foreign markets. Its trade is made extremely difficult because the whole financial system is, in one way or another, controlled by the United States. And this blockade limits the possibilities of access to trade partners, etc.

    On the other hand, enormous amounts of money, billions of dollars in Venezuelan assets, have been taken over by the U.S. government. And it’s absolutely cynical that the U.S. government is claiming to be worried about the humanitarian situation of Venezuelans, offering a few million dollars, when billions of dollars are being kept away from the Venezuelan government’s capacity to respond to the deep crisis that the Venezuelans are facing.

    There is this threat of going into Venezuela no matter what. The hawks and the neocons that accompany Trump in these policies are well known. These are people like Abrams or—Elliott, or Bolton, that have had well-known trajectories of military interventions in different places of the world. And obviously there’s no concern whatsoever for the lives of Venezuelan people. The situation is so tense that the 23rd could be the spark that starts a violent, even civil war situation in the country. So, the absolute need to find some sort of solution, some sort of negotiation, that would stop this escalation of violence, is absolutely critical. And this has to be done soon, because Saturday is a very critical day.

    AMY GOODMAN: So, if you can talk about the role of Venezuelans themselves in negotiating a solution? The possibility, the calls for the pope to be involved—of course, the pope is originally from Argentina—the pope to be involved, Mexico to be involved, with the new president, AMLO, Andrés Manuel López Obrador. And what about the people themselves in Venezuela? Your group—what is Citizen’s Platform calling for?

    EDGARDO LANDER: The Citizen’s Platform in Defense of the Constitution is calling for a referendum that has been established in the Venezuelan Constitution when issues of critical national importance have to be faced. This is a situation where we face a deep constitutional crisis. We have a struggle between the National Assembly, on one hand, and the executive, on the other hand. They don’t recognize each other as legitimate. And as a consequence, there is this tug in which politics is seen as an enemy-friend confrontation in which the purpose of policy is to destroy the enemy, to completely squash it. There’s no will on either hand today to enter into some sort of agreement that would allow for the Venezuelan people to decide what they want their future to be.

    The Citizen’s Platform in Defense of the Constitution, as well as other groups—mainly from the left, but not only—have been arguing that we need this consultative referendum in order to have the Venezuelan people decide if they want to have new authorities overall in the country—that is, all the national powers, including the executive and the National Assembly. But that requires an agreement, because we need a new National Electoral Council. The current Electoral Council is completely controlled by the government, and it’s not trustworthy for the majority of the Venezuelan population. So we would need, as a first step, some basic agreement, a consensual National Electoral Council, and then this call for a referendum in which the Venezuelan people can actually give their own opinion and decide whether they want to keep the present authorities or if they want to completely renew the political system—not the structure of the system, but who’s the president today, what’s the Assembly.

    As it is right now, the National Assembly is calling for the need for presidential elections, and, on the other hand, President Maduro is calling for the need for new parliamentary elections. So, none of the sides is willing to reach an agreement. We would, of course, need some sort of accompaniment by some international actors. And as you mentioned, the possibilities of having the presidents of Uruguay, of Mexico, maybe the secretary-general of the United Nations and the pope, would be extremely critical in terms of the possibility of reaching such an agreement. So, this requires—there’s two things: on one hand, pressure and involvement by these people who are not interested in violence but trying to avoid a civil war, and this has been the statement of Uruguay, Mexico, the pope, and, on the other hand, pressure from the Venezuelan people to have this minimal agreement for a new Electoral Council and the referendum that would let people decide.

    There are reasons why there is huge, huge, massive discontent in Venezuela in relation to the Maduro government. The crises that the Venezuelan people are facing are, to a great extent, the responsibility of this government, that has been extremely corrupt, inefficient, and has become increasingly repressive. But that in no way justifies a U.S. military intervention or this attempt to strangle the Venezuelan economy, which is of course doing much [more] harm to the Venezuelan people than to the Venezuelan government.

    So, in this situation, where today, I would say, a majority of the people in Venezuela reject the Maduro government, and, on the other hand, a great majority also reject U.S. intervention, we need a negotiation that opens the way for Venezuelans to decide by themselves. And this is the option of both this negotiation with some international backing, on one hand, and this referendum that we are calling for, from the platform and other groups in Venezuela that think that the biggest threat for Venezuelans today is the threat of this escalation of violence, the possibility of a civil war and the possibility, that has been announced again and again, of a military intervention by the United States government.

    AMY GOODMAN: During his speech on Monday, President Trump called Maduro a, quote, “Cuban puppet.” This is what he said.

    PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: Incredibly, there are members of the Venezuelan military still barely supporting this failed dictatorship. They are risking their future. They are risking their lives and Venezuela’s future for a man controlled by the Cuban military and protected by a private army of Cuban soldiers. Maduro is not a Venezuelan patriot; he is a Cuban puppet. That’s what he is.

    AMY GOODMAN: During his speech on Monday, Trump laid out what he called a, quote, “ugly alliance” between Cuba and Venezuela.

    PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: For decades, the socialist dictatorships of Cuba and Venezuela have propped each other up in a very corrupt bargain. Venezuela gave Cuba oil. In return, Cuba gave Venezuela a police state run directly from Havana. But this is a much different day, and those days are over. The ugly alliance between the two dictatorships is coming to a rapid end.

    AMY GOODMAN: That was President Trump speaking in Miami Monday. A new book out this week by former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe reveals Trump privately discussed going to war with Venezuela in 2017. McCabe writes, quote, “Then the president talked about Venezuela. That’s the country we should be going to war with, he said. They have all that oil and they’re right on our back door.”

    So, Edgardo Lander, as you speak to us from Caracas, can you respond to what exactly the U.S. is doing, who Guaidó is, and this issue of humanitarian aid, the concerns of many? You have a plane that’s been flying in back and forth, or planes, from a company in North Carolina—apparently, about 40 flights. The Venezuelan government found weapons stash, perhaps from one of those flights. It’s a company that has previously worked with the CIA. The fact that the United Nations and the Red Cross have both said they won’t work on this so-called humanitarian aid, because it is politically motivated, and that it is not humanitarian aid. What you think will be happening on the border, with Elliott Abrams being flown in by military transport with his delegation to the Colombia-Venezuelan border? And the significance of Maduro closing the Brazil-Venezuela border and considering closing this border, the Colombia-Venezuela border?

    EDGARDO LANDER: Well, in the first place, I’d like to insist on the fact that this certainly is not humanitarian aid, and it’s not oriented with any humanitarian aims. This is clearly a coup carried out by the United States government with its allies, with the Lima Group and the extreme right wing in Venezuela. The opposition, the right-wing opposition, in Venezuela, the people who control Parliament and the opposition parties, have been weakened over the last few years, and they had not been able to agree on any single policy in relation to ways to confront the Maduro government. But now it’s obvious that this very extreme right wing has been in close coordination with the United States government for some time now. And this script that has been followed since Guaidó self-proclaimed himself as president is a script that’s basically a U.S. script. And this script is on the works right now.

    There is no concern about the situation of the Venezuelan population, because, as I said before, if you take away billions from the capacity of the government in Venezuela to respond to the needs for medicine and food, on one hand, and you offer a few million dollars in food and medicine on the Colombian border, there is no proportion whatsoever, and it’s clear that the purpose is not to respond to the situation of the Venezuelan population, but to create a conflict in the border. As people have been called by the Guaidó—by Guaidó and his people to concentrate at the border, and this concert has been organized on the Colombian side of the government, this could lead to a confrontation between the two sides. The Venezuelan government has announced that it might close the border. It hasn’t been decided yet. But the possibility of the closing of the border means that, as there is now—there’s Venezuelan military presence in this side of the border, and there’s obviously all sorts of paramilitary groups, CIA representatives, members of the armed forces of Colombia on the other side. And anything could spark some violence that could lead to the beginning of a confrontation. I don’t think that Saturday will be D-Day, in which a great confrontation will start, but it’s a possibility that it could be the spark that could lead to increased violence and the possibility of a civil war.

    So, we have to confront this supposedly humanitarian aid, which is not humanitarian aid. It’s just direct intervention in order to have regime change, which has been the purpose of the Trump government from the very beginning. And we know what regime change has meant in other places. We know the experience of regime change in Libya. We know the experience of regime change in Iraq. We know what the people in Syria are facing today as a consequence of these imperial attempts to have regime change. So, there is no possibility that this so-called humanitarian aid will make any positive contribution to the Venezuelan situation. It’s just going to make it worse, because it’s deepening the crisis in terms of medicine and food for the Venezuelan people, on one hand, it’s increasing the likelihood of an escalation of violence, and it’s opening up the doors to the possibility of a civil war.

    So, the need for some sort of negotiation, for putting a stop to this escalation, and to put the blame, on one hand, on Maduro’s responsibility for having, throughout this six years of government, created such an incredible collapse of the Venezuelan economy—today, the economy is half of what it used to be when Maduro came to power, and this is basically the government’s responsibility. U.S. sanctions against Venezuela, Trump’s sanctions against Venezuela, started a year and a half ago, around mid-2017. But the crisis came from way before. U.S. sanctions have deepened the crisis, but they are not the main cause of the crisis. The main cause of the crisis is ineptitude and massive corruption by the Maduro government.

    So, we in Venezuela are faced with these two evils, with these two confronting enemies that have the Venezuelan people in between, paying for their own ineptitude, for their own violence, for their own political purpose, which are not the purposes of the Venezuelan population. We need to have some sort of pressure on the U.S. government to stop this level of intervention, this threat of military intervention. And we have to call on the Maduro government to be willing to open up a negotiation, because there are a lot of reasons why people in Venezuela don’t really trust Maduro when he calls about his willingness to negotiate, because he always says the same thing. But when negotiations are always carried out, they are negotiations in which he has not been willing to do anything. He hasn’t been willing to cede on any one basic issue.

    AMY GOODMAN: Edgardo Lander, I want to thank you—

    EDGARDO LANDER: The Venezuela government today is—

    AMY GOODMAN: —for being with us. Edgardo is a sociologist, speaking to us from Caracas, Venezuela, where he’s part of the Citizen’s Platform in Defense of the Constitution, a retired professor at Central University of Venezuela.

  9. 2 minutes ago, Crusher said:

    Damn straight. Sickening to see some of the socialists sycophants around here nuzzle up to Maduro's balls the way they do..

    This has nothing to do with socialism or anyone's imagined affinity for that thug Maduro. Show your ass elsewhere

  10. 25 minutes ago, elfenix said:

    uh, the english currently feel like this about the irish

    Well the english are pricks like that. 

    1 hour ago, Brisketexan said:

    Holy shit...that second paragraph is rational, decent, and sane. Who the fuck got hold of Icono’s login?

    It's either a hack, or it's disingenuous at best. It wasn't long ago on this thread that he was praising every single effort the Trump administration has made, and now he's "advocating" for steps that everyone and their fucking mother knows they will not take. It's like when Cartman said "I broke the dam" after everyone else did.

    Take this dissertation on rocket surgery from just a month ago: 

    "It would be worth it for a Democrat to get elected espousing such bullshit because it would lead to a backlash so severe that the GOP would rule for a generation and we would then finally put a stop to illegal immigration once and for all."

    The GOP and Trump's position(s) on immigration is certainly not to curtail it via "save the money from the wall and send it to Honduras and El Salvador and help those countries so the migrant caravans can be alleviated by improvements."

    Wanna know how I know that? Because 1) they're the party of the Wall and 2) if that indeed was their platform, I'd endorse it. I do not endorse their platform because their platform, more or less, is this other example of a brain science dissertation from Icono which reads:

    "Finally, it’s attitudes of illegals who say shit like this that pisses me off and why I’ll never support a hayden horn “let them all in” policy.

    ”I honestly don’t want to cross illegally, but I don’t really have a choice,” said Mr. Moreno, 37.”

    you have a motherfucking choice. Stay in Mexico or go back to the shithole you came from, learn English, get an education and try to immigrate legally and actually have something worthwhile to add to this country."

    I've seen more morality and honesty from Ahrimanism than from that verbal effluvia. 

    • Like 1
  11. 7 hours ago, F250 said:

    Another thing that trips me out about this thread is Icono's posts.

    As a little kid in the early 1980's, I remember the Iranian refugees that were attempting to integrate into our local community while being faced with racism. People talked so much shit to the Iranians and they were about as welcome in our community as an Arab was after 9/11.

    I also remember hearing adults say Iranians didn't bathe regularly nor wash their hands after taking a dump. Don't eat their food, they eat with their bare hands. "Never shake an Iranian's hand because they wipe their ass barehanded." They smell like arm pits because they don't wear deodorant. These things were repeated often while the men laughed and the women would gross out.

    Anyways, not all families treated the Iranians this way. My older sister was friends with an Iranian girl and our families shared meals together. After a number of years there was integration but it started with the Hispanic and mixed families. The Hispanic and Anglo/Hispanic mixed families were the first to open up their homes to the Iranians in our community.

    A generation later, we have a product of Iranian immigration shitting on immigrants from the same ethnic group that welcomed his own people.

    Sad!

    Oh it's always been like that too. I cannot for the life of me comprehend why there was such open hostility towards, of all people, the fucking Irish in a country that comprised mostly of immigrants from the British Isles. It's maddening, but it does happen.

    2 hours ago, tjhooker said:

    Did they come here legally or illegal? 

    It's not about legal/illegal; it's about ethnicity. My extended family, for example, is predominantly Celtic-blooded genetically (Scotland/Ireland/Wales), and some of them do have these anti-immigration views, but I'll be goddamned if any of them would be hostile towards illegal Scotsmen or Irishmen. When they prattle on about "illegal immigration," they're really just talking about Latin Americans.

    And forget my family, just look at your own prejudice. When you see someone of Chinese, Korean, or Indian descent, do you ever question whether or not they're illegal? 

    In Icono's case, given that it was during the reign of the Shah, I'd chalk that up to "refugee," which is what the Salvadorans/Guatemalans/Hondurans are trying to do right now especially since they live in far worse conditions (which, like Iran under the Shah, we imposed). I guarantee you Icono has no issue whatsoever with Iranians coming here illegally today, even if he trolls that he does here on Surlyhorns.

    That question that you posted is just a pretext. 

    • Like 3
  12. 5 minutes ago, F250 said:

    It is funny how the same anti-immigrant canard is rolled out generation after generation. "Those past immigrants were different, these new ones will never assimilate."

    Puck-Mortar-of-Assimilation.jpg

    Exactly. Only the names change. The underlying sentiment never does

    • Like 2
  13. 2 hours ago, Captainant said:

    Ah yes, fox news, the beacon of fact-based reporting. Please show me that facts that they're citing for their argument. Because I really doubt that there have been over 40k apprehensions just near el paso.

    Seriously, if someone doesn't give a reason to believe them, we've no reason to believe them.

  14. 2 minutes ago, sidis said:

    the most hilarious part of all this is the british government (and its population's) utter surprise and disappointment that the e.u. didn't just lay down in the negotiations and give them everything they wanted.  fucking hilarious nincompoops.

    They still believe that the world revolves around them. Brits like to squawk about "French arrogance" or "American arrogance," but that's like Usain Bolt deriding Richard Thorempson and Walter Dix for running the 100 meter dash. 

  15. 19 minutes ago, Ghost of LL said:

    Yeah, but at this point, the EU would agree to a three-month extension of Brexit in order to hold a second referendum.  That'd be especially true if the options were "Remain" or "No-Deal Brexit."  Remain would win going away, which us ultimately what the EU probably wants.

    That's all well and good, but there's a second problem:

    Would they actually vote to remain in the EU on such a short notice? I mean I get that the parliament is overwhelmingly against this, but I have no reading on the population. Are there any indications that such a referendum would yield a different outcome?

  16. 36 minutes ago, yaqdum said:

    apparently the first ref was ridiculously simple.  along the lines of:  do you want to go or do we stay?

    oliver correctly says that muddying the question with the various alternatives is likely tantamount to disaster, so make a new ref just as simple:  do you still want to go or do we stay?  if the vote is still to go, then it is a real problem that is going to have to be resolved, but if the vote is to stay, then disaster averted.

     

    The problem is, as Oliver correctly states, such a referendum couldn't be properly organized for nearly 4 months, and they're set to get out in less than 2. They're beyond screwed, and both Scotland and Northern Ireland need to seriously consider referenda regarding, respectively, independence and reunification in the coming years. Northern Ireland is particularly screwed with that hard border nightmare scenario, and Scotland voted down that 2014 referendum largely because there was an understanding among the No voters that the UK would remain in the EU. Had they the slightest idea that they'd lose their fucking minds with this silly-assed Brexit nonsense, that referendum would have been Yes'ed out the ass. I would recommend the same for Wales, but they're cowards, so fuck them.

  17. On 2/18/2019 at 2:20 PM, WhatTheBuck said:

    When I saw this thread was bumped I figured it had to be John Oliver's piece from last night. Brilliant. So glad he's back. Three months was a long wait. 

    It was a great piece and if anyone still harbors the idea that Brexit is a prudent thing to do, they need to have their head examined.

    • Like 1
×
×
  • Create New...