BrokebackHampton

deleted by creator

Those savages living in the modern recreation of the Warsaw Ghetto we created for them attacked us! It was completely UnPrOvOkEd!

The EU should be ashamed of how incredibly hypocritical its diplomacy and foreign policy is showing itself to be in the last few months of international events.

It’s been like that for far longer but now it’s harder for people not to realize how low is to do all this grandstanding about evil Hamas killing those poor Israeli civilians while looking the other way and letting Azerbaijan do just whatever the fuck they want in Nagorno-Karabakh because we so desperately need their gas.
Where was all this “the scale of terror and brutality makes it so there can be no business as usual” energy then? Are we going to start calling Armenians terrorists in order to justify that one too?

Europe has deciduous morals with a shelf life of half a Truss.

Surely you understand the meaning of consensual.

I don’t see how the military hegemony you openly spouse could lead to any sort of consensual agreement. Hegemony, by definition, is directly opposed to consensus.

Next thing you’ll tell me the settler colonialism and de facto apartheid state Israel is directly enabling are absolutely necessary, for geopolitical reasons obviously.

Besides all that, if the point you’re trying to make is that Israel needs the military spending to maintain its territorial integrity, I seriously question they would need 38bn USD in foreign aid just for that.
And that would be ignoring the fact Israel has been increasingly extending its territorial integrity over palestinian land for the duration of the conflict, and will continue to do so. Not a lot of “two-state solution” in that.

That’s why Israel is getting 38 billion dollars (!) in a ten year period from the US, everyone knows you need an absurd amount of military equipment to reach a consensual two state solution.

No. Legally they are property

According to which laws, exactly? My country has animal wellbeing laws that classify pets as companions and living beings, their legal status is explicitly above personal property.

deleted by creator

Octobass, nobody suspects a thing 🎶

Oh no! What will I do now without the prescient geopolitical insight of the Chattanooga Evening Telegraph?

One of the reasons billionaires managed to gather so much power and influence in our current system is because they are more coordinated and way better at class warfare than us workers.

I’d say that and the obvious mind-boggling amounts of hoarded wealth are the two main ones. And never forget those billions are, for the most part, stolen from workers through wage theft, which circles back to billionaires waging class war on us.

I want to get off Mr. Bones’ Wild Venture Capitalist Ride

Say it louder for the libs in the back

7!!! ≠ [(7!)!]!

7!!! = 7 * (7-3) * (7-6) = 28

Source

deleted by creator

Boy do I have a movie for you

deleted by creator

Literally advocating for XIX century-style Dickensian child labor.
Yeah Imma go with troll as well

I was going to post a comment saying how thankful I am we could leave the extreme and unabashed aporophobia over at Reddit but… uh, never mind.

Still pretty tame compared to the gems you’d find there I guess.

deleted by creator

That is factually false information. There are solid arguments to be made against nuclear energy.

https://isreview.org/issue/77/case-against-nuclear-power/index.html

Even if you discard everything else, this section seems particularly relevant:

The long lead times for construction that invalidate nuclear power as a way of mitigating climate change was a point recognized in 2009 by the body whose mission is to promote the use of nuclear power, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). “Nuclear power is not a near-term solution to the challenge of climate change,” writes Sharon Squassoni in the IAEA bulletin. “The need to immediately and dramatically reduce carbon emissions calls for approaches that can be implemented more quickly than building nuclear reactors.”

https://www.dw.com/en/fact-check-is-nuclear-energy-good-for-the-climate/a-59853315

Wealer from Berlin’s Technical University, along with numerous other energy experts, sees takes a different view.

“The contribution of nuclear energy is viewed too optimistically,” he said. “In reality, [power plant] construction times are too long and the costs too high to have a noticeable effect on climate change. It takes too long for nuclear energy to become available.”

Mycle Schneider, author of the World Nuclear Industry Status Report, agrees.

“Nuclear power plants are about four times as expensive as wind or solar, and take five times as long to build,” he said. “When you factor it all in, you’re looking at 15-to-20 years of lead time for a new nuclear plant.”

He pointed out that the world needed to get greenhouse gases under control within a decade. “And in the next 10 years, nuclear power won’t be able to make a significant contribution,” added Schneider.