No, no, I was assured Hillary Clinton was Basically The Same as Trump and Both Sides Were Bad.

King Juan Carlos of Spain.

If it did, he could just outlaw felons from becoming President. SCOTUS doesn’t want that.

“I have ordered the military to detain Donald Trump in a Federal max security prison and destroy all ballots marked with his name on election day. This is not a change in the laws of our great nation, this is just an act that I am ordering to be performed in my official capacity as POTUS. God bless America.”

Solitary, for their protection.

Wow, and here I thought he was an old guy with a stutter getting flustered while a fascist fuckwad spewed inane garbage.

While I’m aware of the ‘Lettergate’ scandal and have different conclusions than you on the matter, upon reflection, I’m being tetchy above and beyond even what I normally am because I’m in pain today. That’s no excuse for my dismissive rhetoric, and I do apologize.

No, because the people who like renewable energy are the same ones who are either:

A. Already voting for him

OR

B. Saying “It’s not enough!” and using that as a justification to usher fascism into power.

deleted by creator

Lol what? If you conquer a country’s capital, that country falls unless its government moves elsewhere and establishes a foothold which doesn’t happen often. When the Germans conquered Paris, the French government basically collapsed and from the Germans were able to take control and establish puppet governments.

Yeah, like when DC fell in the War of 1812, or when Moscow fell in Napoleon’s invasion, or when the Japanese took Nanking during the Second Sino-Japanese War, or-

Nobody thought that the Nazis were liberators.

See, this is the insane thing - many DID think of the Nazis as liberators. Numerous national independence movements were suddenly excited to collaborate after the start of Operation Barbarossa, for about all of three or four months, at which point it became apparent that the Nazis were even worse than the Soviets.

Those governments were Russian puppets. Russia was always a multi ethnic empire that favored Russians and oppressed the rest. There’s a reason why Stalin went through his “deportation” (read: genocide) plans. They weren’t good.

I’m not arguing that the Sovs were good. Far from it. My point is that there weren’t well-formed independence movements waiting in the wings to take power should the Soviet government falter - all power was tied up in the Party and its bureaucracy, and the only organized institutions capable of taking action would have been Soviet puppets who were ‘all-in’ on the Soviets by a mixture of clientism and purges. If Moscow fell, the idea that the Central Asian SSRs would suddenly turn, or lose their grip, just… doesn’t strike me as realistic.

I think it’s pretty clear given the context that I meant the rate of shipments accelerated

I wouldn’t say ‘pretty clear’, but if I misread it, I misread it.

deleted by creator

Oh I’m sorry I should have said the past 3 months of your terminally online ass

Eight Biden posts over the course of three months - what a horrific torrent of spam! Lmao.

A personal screw you for putting Pakistan on the wrong rail for this one:

Aw, you think the Republican Party will be sweeter on Pakistan than the Democrats? How adorable.

It fucking stuns me that we still use coal in this day and age.

Not the biggest fan of the sub’s name myself.

Some days I just try not to think about it.

Colonization of the 16th-18th centuries consisted of organized groups of people under the authority of a state arriving in a land without a central government, seizing territory for a new settlement, carrying on their own ways with an intent to do so indefinitely, and extend the reach of the monopoly of force of their mother state over the surrounds.

Immigration of the 19th-21st centuries consists of individuals or small groups outside of the context of a state-sanctioned expedition being accepted in by the authority of the native state already exercising a monopoly of force over the area, and in doing so, renouncing other loyalties either implicitly or explicitly, arriving in settlements already dominated by the majority ethnicity, assimilating, and participating in upholding the social contract between government and citizens.

You will note, I hope, that colonization necessarily excludes the prospect of the colonizers joining the settlements of the pre-existing majority ethnicity of the land, that colonizers set up a state or an extension of a state that is non-native, explicitly refuse the prospect of assimilating into the majority ethnicity of the area (though to be entirely fair, there were few places with a true ‘majority’ ethnicity that managed to be colonized - that’s another discussion entirely, though), and that colonizers do so in the form of organized groups seeking a collective gain for the group, not individuals and their families or small social circles seeking individual gain.

Dude the Wehrmacht reached a town called Krasnaya Polyana which is 18 miles away from the center of Moscow. If they took over Moscow, which was a very real possibility then the Soviet Union would’ve fallen like France, or at the very least the European portion of it would.

That’s not how capitals work. France itself only nominally fell because it appointed an ultraconservative collaborator (Petain) to the highest position of government.

I would assume the oppressed minorities within the empire would used them opportunity to get independence.

Most of the oppressed minorities were in Nazi-occupied Eastern Europe, and very quickly found out that the Nazis were no liberators. Most of the remaining Soviet population was Russian, not ethnic minorities. A few of the central Asian SSRs were around, but their governments weren’t oppressed, but participants in the oppression - why would they rise up?

I didn’t imply that they weren’t?

After trying to previously avoid war with US, he went and did it for no good reason. This brought second wind to the allies as Americans weapons starting pouring into the UK and the Soviet Union

You’re really not getting it. Sending aid, even with strings attached as to what it’s used for, is not even close to the same as an internal decision by the national government of the country of origin to change their investment priorities.

I’m not really sure you understand the difference in the paradigm between 16th-18th century colonization and 19th-21st century immigration.

Hitler was never even close to winning. The fact is, the war plan was screwed from the moment the Sovs decided they were going to fight back after the surprise attack, despite Stalin’s initial breakdown. One of the first things the Sovs did after Operation Barbarossa began, after all, was to begin moving industrial equipment east. They were preparing for the long haul - while Germany exhausted itself considerably in the opening stages of the invasion. Once the initial surprise of the attack was over, the sheer material calculus was just not in their favor - casualty ratios and equipment loss were about equal, but the Sovs had something like 3 times the population and had the same proportional advantage in vehicle production. Taking Moscow just would not have made enough of a difference.

As for the UK, they were receiving lend-lease BEFORE the invasion of the Soviet Union.

So, you’re really not talking about permanent immigration, you’re talking about training.

… no, that’s literally the opposite of what was said. The country of ORIGIN is driven to invest in their education system by this, not the country of DESTINATION.