ToxicSlurpee posted:

It was a failure for the rest of the world because they started it.

It was a success for the U.S. because we ended it.

Totally alone.

Seriously.

It was won on D-Day with zero help whatsoever from anybody but American infantry.

Jurgan posted:

The real truth is that it was a success for the U.S. because we hung back until most of the world powers had wrecked each other, then jumped in on the winning side. That way, we got to win a war and come out as the only powerful country still standing.

ToxicSlurpee posted:

It was a failure for the rest of the world because they started it.

It was a success for the U.S. because we ended it.

Totally alone.

Seriously.

It was won on D-Day with zero help whatsoever from anybody but American infantry.

ToxicSlurpee posted:

We also got a rather significant amount of help from said wrecked nations. Though really a ton of the heavy lifting in Europe was done by Russia.

Sebadoh Gigante posted:

DeusExMachinima posted:

This except American economy. Without that the noble worker's war on the eastern front would've been very different. Millions more of them would've starved without evil capitalist food aid and they'd never have made it to Berlin without our massive lend-leasin' welfare.

FuzzySkinner posted:

I saw a right wing fwd fwd fwd featuring Vilerat pop up in my timeline.

There's some irony on that

https://twitter.com/Rene_gadeCowboy/status/684522021695307776

e:

Renegade Cowboy ⚓️ ‏@Rene_gadeCowboy 28s28 seconds ago
"how about you F off and worry about your own tweets"

Jurgan posted:

Double Jeopardy. I haven't read that much about it, so there could be relevant details I'm missing, but from what I remember they were convicted, served a sentence, got out, then a federal official said "nope, I found a federal law that has a mandatory minimum, so back to jail you go!" It's a pretty sketchy way to keep someone in jail. Of course, that doesn't justify the reaction, and the people in jail have outright said "we don't support this protest." It's pretty obvious they were just looking for an excuse to screw with the feds.

quote:

Bundy Refuge Takeover.

As a local businessman, pastor and member of our community, I was invited to join a group of men and women to go into the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge headquarters to meet with the people involved in the refuge standoff. As we approached refuge headquarters, we drove past the media vans with their huge satellite dishes on top some with camera lights still shining on people being interviewed. We were allowed past the vehicles blocking the lanes winding down the hill to the small cluster of buildings that make up the refuge headquarters.

Inside the old stone building in a small office area, we introduced ourselves to Ryan Bundy, Shawna Cox and one big, tattooed dude known as "Buddha" who I was later told is a bodyguard for one or both of the Bundy's. We weren't searched or even patted down. (I thought it best to leave my firearms at home but at least one of our group was packing.) We explained that rather than listening to the rumors and succumbing to the fears running wild in our community, we wanted to hear from them personally as to what was going on and what they wanted to achieve.

They thanked us for coming, Shawna proudly announced they had come up with a name and mission statement for their group. People for Constitutional Freedom, I believe is the handle they've tied to this operation. (To think that no one had formed that into words prior to the occupation surprised me. This really does seem like a fluid, fly-by-the-seat-of your pants operation.)

So, after some general talk about the day's events, Ryan Bundy began a short course on the United States Constitution and the forefather's limitations on the federal government particularly as it pertains to landownership. He explained that the role of federal government is, with the exception of the 100 square miles making up Washington D.C., only to dispose of property and land not to possess it. The discourse seemed sound with some of their own interpretation of who exactly should own the land thrown in whether that be state, county or private ownership.

Bundy also told from their perspective the story of the struggles they went through with the federal government on the family ranch in Nevada. He laid out the events and decisions they made that led them to the 2014 standoff that also made national news. Cox shared about an event in Utah where she saw the federal government allegedly abuse their power to remove a widow's cattle from an area the government wanted to designate a National Monument. Albeit all from their perspective, you began to see the motivations behind the group.

Individuals of the occupying group came and went from the tiny room during our stay of slightly over an hour. They ranged in dress from the latest, pseudo-military camouflage jacket to a sport coat. No one seemed particularly on edge or overly nervous. The guy in the camo jacket did stay at the door behind our group for a time before entering into the office and even into the conversation from time to time.

Ammon Bundy, evidently finished with the media blitz and whatever else a revolutionary leader does with his days, came in, shook the hands of several of our group and listened attentively to some suggestions as to how they might overcome some of the negative reactions within our community and possibly get their message out in a more succinct way. He made some notes on a sheet of plain paper lifted from a nearby table.

The biggest piece of advice I added to the discussion, more for our communities' benefit than theirs, was suggesting they actively address the rumors physical threats encircling our county. (The fact that our public schools had closed for the week seemed to genuinely surprise them.) There are many rumors of individuals, their families or government property being threatened with attack but with no substantiation. The fear in the community seems irrational or at least it would be if everyone sought to determine the legitimacy of the threats. Substantiation seems to be lacking as the small-town rumor mill spins somewhat out of control.

One of our group suggested having a meeting with some of the leaders and influencers in our community to help the locals understand their history and what they wanted to accomplish. Ammon, when asked if he could go into town for a meeting, almost looked surprised and and said he had "been all over the county today". He didn't seem to see why not. I'm not sure he knows how many rooms the FBI has booked in the small town of Burns.

As the impromptu meeting wound down, I asked if I could pray for them. They were more than willing and hats came off all around the room. I prayed just as I had prayed in every public place since this national event began in our isolated county. I asked for their personal protection, for wisdom in handling the situation, for restraint and level-headedness on both sides and that their voice be heard which I believe is their primary goal. The prayer seemed to be received gratefully.

Am I a convert? No, they are still breaking the law even if just for trespassing but I do feel I understand their position as well as our constitution much better. I also feel much better about the safety of our community. And, whether I agree with the course of action, I hope the message does get out. Our federal government seems to be so far past the authority our constitution gives it that just the idea of reigning it back into the role the founding fathers gave it does seem pretty radical. Government overreach is taken more seriously when it causes an individual's medical insurance premiums to rise than when it affects the economies of families and communities in the middle of nowhere.

Where in the heck is Burns, Oregon anyway?

Vargatron posted:

Every generation has the notion of "those loving kids" ruining everything and being entitled. This is not a new concept.

Now the big thing to do is use "Millenials" in a derogatory fashion by older people. It's so loving witless.

Ron Jeremy posted:

FB fwd about the yallqaeda people

Ron Jeremy posted:

FB fwd about the yallqaeda people

TheKennedys posted:

"I knew Sean Smith. Sean Smith was a friend of mine. Sir, you're no Sean Smith."

VitalSigns posted:

From what I've read: arson on federal lands has a five-year minimum sentence, the trial judge said that was too harsh and sentenced them to a few months, the prosecution appealed because the trial judge refused to follow the law, and every higher court that looked at it went "are you crazy, they set fires that nearly killed someone, why are you ignoring the law" and gave them the proper sentence.

It's not double jeopardy to appeal an unlawful verdict and get a higher court to sentence the defendant according to the law.

FuzzySkinner posted:

My grandfather served in the Army during WWII. I asked my father if he ever said anything to him about it or he ever mentioned what he did over there.

"Nope. Just kept quiet."

It always feels like the loudest "ARR TROOPS" types are people that have never served. Every serviceman and woman I've met were extremely humble people.

Argue posted:

This one is related to the Philippines, so I need to give some quick backstory here. The presidential race is on, and one of the most popular candidates is the mayor of Davao City, Rodrigo Duterte. He has a lot of cheerleaders, from all sides, because he runs one of the cleanest and most livable cities in the country. However, even my liberal friends have a blind spot for the horrible things he does, because they somehow manage to spin these into making him look badass. There's a lot of terrible surrounding him, but the one specifically relevant here is that he has ties to armed vigilante groups that kill suspected criminals, is suspected of funding or even running them, and has openly expressed sentiments supporting them.

I can see why he appeals to some people because there are some cool things he supports no other politician in the Philippines openly does, like gay marriage and federalization, buuuut... it's one thing to have a friend who supports him, and another who flat out writes about the merits of extrajudicial killings.

seiferguy posted:

Isn't the southern part of the Philippines the most dangerous area? I've visited Manila once, and have several Filipino friends, and all of them say "stay the hell away from the south islands. You'll get kidnapped." It wouldn't surprise me that someone like that would come from there.

Guavanaut posted:

SpeedyCow posted:

So I wonder if whoever made this actually saw First Blood

Sebadoh Gigante posted:

SpeedyCow posted:

So I wonder if whoever made this actually saw First Blood

Technical Analysis posted:

Eh, I can agree with this, so long as you put the spanking into context. I was spanked all of once in my life. I was four years old, I unbuckled my seatbelt in the car, my mom pulled over swatted my rear end twice, then after I calmed down she sat me down and explained to me why what I did was dumb as hell.

It probably could have been done without the spanking, but knowing the kind of kid I was, the lesson wouldn't have stuck nearly as hard as it did.

Brawnfire posted:

The message would be far more direct if she just slammed on the brakes.

Willatron posted:

Soooo, you're against spanking but in favor of disciplining children by potentially giving them severe head injuries?

Technical Analysis posted:

Eh, I can agree with this, so long as you put the spanking into context.

BUBBA GAY DUDLEY posted:

If your child takes off their seatbelt the appropriate thing to do is throw on the handbrake and turn the wheel to the left real fast.

RabbitWizard posted:

I'm sure people sharing that kind of images always "put it in context" when they cause physical pain to their children.

RabbitWizard posted:

I'm sure people sharing that kind of images always "put it in context" when they cause physical pain to their children.

Stereotype posted:

Ron Jeremy posted:

I have spanked my children. Kids, especially in the 2-4 range, just aren't particularly rational. You can correct, you can reason, but at a certain point they need to be corrected in a way that reaches them. A swat on the hand or the butt works. It doesn't have to be a ceremony of punishment like pulling down the pants or getting a switch. Just a quick swat.

Also, there's a spectrum of correction imo. Spanking or any sort of pain is really on the far side of it. It should be reserved for the most necessary situations because if it's used for less, there's nowhere else to go from there.