Tab Content
  • r3volution 3.0's Avatar
    11-10-2019, 12:26 AM
    Well, ...don't not be French
    46 replies | 488 view(s)
  • r3volution 3.0's Avatar
    11-10-2019, 12:15 AM
    Look at that spinach, sardines here and there, butter (don't not be French)
    46 replies | 488 view(s)
  • r3volution 3.0's Avatar
    11-10-2019, 12:04 AM
    Three Cheers for General Bone Spurs
    13 replies | 187 view(s)
  • r3volution 3.0's Avatar
    11-10-2019, 12:00 AM
    Tofu doesn't ride on that particular horse
    46 replies | 488 view(s)
  • r3volution 3.0's Avatar
    11-09-2019, 11:48 PM
    We like Sedan sneakers, only a little Bonaparte
    46 replies | 488 view(s)
  • r3volution 3.0's Avatar
    11-09-2019, 11:39 PM
    On the other hand, hats, mutual exhibition of hats in anger!
    46 replies | 488 view(s)
  • r3volution 3.0's Avatar
    11-09-2019, 11:35 PM
    Voting for hats and tailors isn't optional.
    46 replies | 488 view(s)
  • r3volution 3.0's Avatar
    11-09-2019, 11:15 PM
    He invented the calculus, but, being a pig, made Christmas dinner.
    46 replies | 488 view(s)
  • r3volution 3.0's Avatar
    11-09-2019, 11:13 PM
    The pig woke up a teamster.
    46 replies | 488 view(s)
  • r3volution 3.0's Avatar
    11-09-2019, 10:44 PM
    Small state systems (such as ancient Greece or medieval Italy) fight many more wars than empires (e.g. Rome). But, as interesting as this topic may be, it isn't really relevant to the issue in question, is it? One war between one nuclear armed power and another means the end of the world as we know it. If that war happens yearly, then we're all dead in a year; if happens every 5 years, then we're all dead in 5 years; etc. SS, if the year were 550 A.D., and it were spears and bows, I wouldn't be so worked up.
    65 replies | 473 view(s)
  • r3volution 3.0's Avatar
    11-09-2019, 10:29 PM
    Don't be an ass. There's no reason that criminals have to commit crimes, ...and yet they, somehow, do. Maybe you can identify for us a time and place in world history when and where neighboring states didn't go to war. Ancient Greece...nope
    65 replies | 473 view(s)
  • r3volution 3.0's Avatar
    11-09-2019, 10:06 PM
    There's no reason that a federation (whether of American states, or European states, or Western states, or all of the states in this world) has to be tyrannical, that's just your silly nationalistic bias. But if there isn't some kind of union, if war continues, the endgame is pretty obvious. We (or our ancestors, depending on our age) could very easily have all been annihilated in October 1962. On a long enough timeline, with enough of those crises, it will eventually go wrong. And then, additionally, we have "missile defense," which actually means the ability to launch a first strike and survive the retaliatory strike. This is becoming a real possibility and is severely undermining MAD, which has kept the peace since the end of the last war. If there are any statesmen, as opposed to politicians, remaining in this democratic world, some very serious choices are going to need to be made quite soon. Do we want to get nuked and lose every development of the last two thousand years in the name of Germany and America and Japan and so forth, or do we want to not have that war.
    65 replies | 473 view(s)
  • r3volution 3.0's Avatar
    11-09-2019, 09:35 PM
    States don't have much incentive to nuke their own subjects. I'd like to see all of the people of the West united in a federation, which would mean the US et al joining the EU, or everyone joining some new entity. This would include Russia, ultimately, after a non-retarded US President negotiated a solution re Ukraine and Georgia. This would prevent a Sino-American war, simply because the Chinese couldn't possibly win against that kind of block. The very big picture is that human beings on Earth will have to come together at some point, contra this tribalism, or there will be a nuclear war and we will revert to the stone age.
    65 replies | 473 view(s)
  • r3volution 3.0's Avatar
    11-09-2019, 09:16 PM
    Suppose that you're wrong and the nationalism you're endorsing will lead to apocalyptic nuclear war. ...6 billion dead people. ...might be something to cogitate on.
    65 replies | 473 view(s)
  • r3volution 3.0's Avatar
    11-09-2019, 09:00 PM
    If John McCain were still haunting us, he'd make the same argument as you are @Swordsmyth ...because the US foreign policy establishment is desperately opposed to European unity. The purpose of the US commitment to Europe has always been: Russia out, America in, Germany down. Well, Russia's finished as a great power (and will in the very long run join us against their aggressive neighbor China anyway) and Germany already controls Europe financially, because they're far more productive than the French. So why is the US there? To prevent German informal domination from becoming formal domination. The US is in the process of "Copenhagen-ing" the EU, or Germany in particular, if you understand that historical reference. They want to control Europe, but that isn't possible, and they're going to end up alienating it. But, the US is going to be stretched to the breaking point with China, which, contra your belief, is not on the verge of collapse. The Chinese is probably already a larger economy than ours, if you use a purchasing power parity measure of GDP, which makes more sense in the case of China than nominal because they don't import all that much. In any event, the US is going to bleed itself white (to use the term of General Falkenhayn) trying to contain China over the next couple decades, and the Europeans are going to offer moral support: which is to say they're going to let the US (and little buddy Britain) bleed themselves white while they themselves make trillions of dollars trading with the Chinese and their associates.
    65 replies | 473 view(s)
  • r3volution 3.0's Avatar
    11-09-2019, 08:04 PM
    Do you have no understanding of how the federal government here operates? Google "federal preemption." Look into how federal highway funds and other funds are used to bribe states to follow federal diktat. The federal government here can do virtually anything, at its own discretion, without even informing the States. If you say that this is the same as in the EU (where most things require unanimous consent of members), that means that either:
    65 replies | 473 view(s)
  • r3volution 3.0's Avatar
    11-09-2019, 07:34 PM
    Perhaps the greatest irony of the whole business is this: Britain wants to leave, and the EU is letting them leave. How did that work for South Carolina? ...I don't see Macron leading an army across the chunnel to burn London to the ground. (I see moronic Englishman unwilling to accept the consequences of their decisions and dithering)
    65 replies | 473 view(s)
  • r3volution 3.0's Avatar
    11-09-2019, 07:29 PM
    The EU is more tyrannical relative its member states than the US federal government is relative our states...? The EU can do almost nothing without unanimous consent of all member states. The feds here can do virtually anything, without even talking to the states. Like the one in the District of Columbia, which is in every way more powerful than the one is Brussels?
    65 replies | 473 view(s)
  • r3volution 3.0's Avatar
    11-09-2019, 07:20 PM
    Of course my horse... If you find the EU tyrannical, I assume you are for the immediate dissolution of the federal government of the United States? ...and you fail to understand that, if the feds didn't monopolize X, the states would take over the regulation of X, and do just the same thing. What's that great line from "The Patriot" - 1 tyrant 3000 miles away or 3000 tyrants 1 mile away :confused:
    65 replies | 473 view(s)
  • r3volution 3.0's Avatar
    11-09-2019, 07:05 PM
    No, nationalist 21st century person, it was in fact created by French and Germans who didn't want to bury their entire families again. I find that most people who criticize the EU have no idea how it works. Anything of consequence in the EU must be passed unanimously by the member states. In comparison, if Texas doesn't like a federal law, what happens?
    65 replies | 473 view(s)
  • r3volution 3.0's Avatar
    11-09-2019, 06:46 PM
    I might add, as to the neocon desire to destroy the EU, this is an instance of the East Coast Establishment's slavish devotion to Britain. That is, this is a continuation of England's age old policy of stimulating wars on the continent, to benefit England. ...that would be a real "deep state," Trumptards..
    65 replies | 473 view(s)
  • r3volution 3.0's Avatar
    11-09-2019, 06:41 PM
    The EU was created in response to the one hundred million people killed in the last two wars. Its basic purpose was to prevent that from ever happening again. Serious liberals, and I mean liberals in the proper sense of the word, liberals like Mises, played a major role in creating it. If you don't like it now, make a complaint in Paris or Berlin or Rome, not Brussels; Brussels has no power. The EU is the loosest of loose confederations.
    65 replies | 473 view(s)
  • r3volution 3.0's Avatar
    11-09-2019, 06:30 PM
    Fish don't vote.
    46 replies | 488 view(s)
  • r3volution 3.0's Avatar
    11-09-2019, 06:24 PM
    The neocon plan has always been to destroy the EU, for the perceived benefit of the US (as to world domination). MAGA adds to this, maybe, perhaps (what phase of the moon is it?), the casual destruction of NATO. ...which means the destruction of the EU, since the EU doesn't yet have a common army. It would be in the interest of the neocons for the EU to dissolve, and for there to be another war in Europe. ...here's hoping they fail, massively.
    65 replies | 473 view(s)
  • r3volution 3.0's Avatar
    11-09-2019, 06:10 PM
    Giving up shoes is easy for the shoeful.
    46 replies | 488 view(s)
  • r3volution 3.0's Avatar
    11-09-2019, 06:06 PM
    At what velocity?
    65 replies | 473 view(s)
  • r3volution 3.0's Avatar
    58 replies | 2071 view(s)
  • r3volution 3.0's Avatar
    11-09-2019, 05:55 PM
    Jeff Gundlach (i.e. "the bond king," post Bill Gross), who predicted that Trump would win in 2016, has been predicting a serious 3-way race. I don't see Bloomberg being that third guy, next to Trump and Biden, but one never knows. Laughter is suitable in all cases.
    28 replies | 368 view(s)
More Activity

Statistics


Total Posts
Total Posts
16,645
Posts Per Day
8.01
Visitor Messages
Total Messages
3
Most Recent Message
04-18-2018 10:10 PM
General Information
Last Activity
11-10-2019 09:19 AM
Join Date
03-06-2014
Referrals
0
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

10-12-2019


08-24-2019


08-13-2019


07-27-2019


07-22-2019

  • 11:42 PM - Hidden

07-03-2019


06-14-2019


02-02-2019

  • 04:02 AM - Hidden

05-21-2018


04-18-2018


04-08-2018


03-17-2018


01-22-2018


01-08-2018


12-30-2017


12-02-2017


09-23-2017


08-27-2017

  • 10:31 AM - Hidden

08-22-2017



Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
No results to display...
Page 1 of 372 1231151101 ... LastLast

11-11-2019


11-10-2019


11-09-2019



Page 1 of 372 1231151101 ... LastLast