Hanaguma

Then, sadly, they find out that their promised "72 Virgins" are named Ahmed, Ishtar, Mohamed, Isak, Ishmael, Mohamar...

Yeah, that is the common line, but not true. When the Israelis left Gaza, they left behind the means to make the desert bloom. There were greenhouses, the basics for an economy, etc. Yet the Gazans chose to destroy everything. Gaza has also received billions in aid, which was stolen, given to, or expropriated by Hamas. Also used to.......... buy and make rockets to fire into Israel! Why should Israel help Gaza when thousands of unguided rockets are fired FROM Gaza? They made their bed, now they have to lie in it. And even if ALL the propaganda you spewed was true, it was still NO justification for the slaughter of innocents that happened on October 7. The kibbutzim on the border of Gaza and Israel were all good people, simple farmers, and peace loving Israelis. They had (they thought) good relations with their Gazan neighbours. Helped them. Treated their children in clinics in the kibbutzim. Ad their kindness was repaid with blood, rape, murder, and pillage. I dont blame them if they want to see Gaza turned into a parking lot now.

How is it possibly fair? How about this for fair.... if an illegal immigrant marries an American citizen, they can go back to their home country. Then, apply for a spouse visa. Their sponsor (the American citizen) can provide evidence that they have the means to support the illegal immigrant spouse without using social services. Then process the application. THAT sounds fair, doesn't it?

I could never understand, why does "Pride" get a month, but soldiers who made the ultimate sacrifice to protect our freedoms only get a day?

Absolutely untrue. The "smallpox blanket" story has been around for a while, even your links do not provide any evidence that it was anything more than one idiot British officer's malignancy. Not a national policy. Plus, the vast majority of Native Americans who succumbed to European based diseases did so in the 16th century. By the time of large scale colonization, the population had already been cut to perhaps 10% of the pre-contact number. This was simply terrible luck, not a deliberate policy on the part of the colonizers. There was no intention to inflict disease on the indigenous people. By the 18th and 19th centuries, the damage had already been done.

It is unbelievable that this can be seen as a controversial statement.

You need to read the entire thread before commenting. That was discussed waaaaaay back. Of course the sicknesses came from the various Europeans who came. But that was medical ignorance, not genocide. On First Contact, the natives suffered terribly due to diseases that the Europeans had developed immunity for. But it was not deliberate.

Agree 100%. Traditionally, service in government was not to be a career. It was to be a sacrifice to the public good. Then, you go back to your 'real' life. The idea of professional politicians was anathema to the Founding Fathers.

Check the actual statistics before spouting off such inaccurate and ahistorical talking points. The vast majority died from diseases that they tragically had no immunity to.

I am sure they did, when they weren't killing each other. The only reason they didn't do more environmental damage was that their numbers were so small. The land could easily recover. But in areas where the population was denser and agriculture was more present, there was an impact. According to research from Baylor University; "The findings conclusively demonstrate that Native Americans in eastern North America impacted their environment well before the arrival of Europeans. Through their agricultural practices, Native Americans increased soil erosion and sediment yields to the Delaware River basin." https://news.web.baylor.edu/news/story/2011/baylor-study-shows-native-americans-significantly-modified-american-landscape-years#:~:text="The findings conclusively demonstrate that,to the Delaware River basin." In Canada, "Buffalo jumps" were used to kill buffalo in the thousands- buffalo were herded over high cliffs, to plunge to their painful deaths. There was no way for all the meat and hide to be used economically- tons were lost to rot and waste. So much for stewardship and respect of the land. And please show me where I said that the "superior white race" was even a thing.

Possibly true. But...the West Indians, as well as the "real" Indians all were at least members of the Commonwealth and shared a great many cultural/social traits with the host society. Later groups are more distant in both language and religion, and assimilation, if it can ever occur, will take a great deal longer. Not to mention that the numbers are vastly different- immigration in the 50s and 70s was not in the same quantity as the 21st century. West Indian immigration was about a half million people over a period of more than 30 years. That means less than 20,000 people a year on average. Hardly comparable to today.

Cool. So if "Natives" did not consider that they owned the land, then they don't need compensation for it's theft, right? You seem to have a very romanticized and pollyanna view of the various Native tribes, assuming that they all think and act and philosophize in lockstep. Reality was rather different. They did not respect and care for the earth when they were burning each others' crops or destroying settlements, nor enslaving members of defeated enemy tribes. There is no need to infantilize "Natives". They matched any other group in their greed, venality, and violence. They only lacked the technology to do it as well as the Europeans.

Is that the standard of proof needed to demand compensation? "You can't prove my group DIDN'T steal this land from someone else, so pay up!". And yes, given what archaeologists have discovered, most native groups fought and killed and died. Or do you have proof that they simply settled on a patch of earth and stayed there for 15,000 years, living in natural harmony until the evil white folks came along?

From the BBC; Sweden has been a European hotspot for gang-related shootings and bombings for several years. But recently the violence has shifted beyond low-income, vulnerable urban areas and police say one reason is that gang members are increasingly targeting rivals' relatives. Detectives suspect some of the latest violence has been organised by criminal leaders based in other countries, including Turkey and Serbia. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-67342368 Somehow I don't think that gang violence was a Swedish thing in the past. Not to mention the women being forced to walk around wearing head to toe coverings, the aggression on the streets, the general unease.

This seems like a sour grapes article designed to frighten people in the wake of the European Parliament elections. The danger in Sweden is not from a tiny group of far right idiots, it is from the thousands upon thousands of immigrants who refuse to embrace Swedish culture and instead bring their heathen ways to their new home.

You support WW3 if you support NATO attacking Russia. That is the definition of WW3. And the specious comparisons to the pre WW2 days do not help either. "Putin needs to be crushed".... talk about dangerous rhetoric! And just who will replace him if he is "crushed", do you think? The Russian version of Barack Obama? Or perhaps a worse version of Putin....

Good to see where you stand. World War 3 to save the Zelensky regime. Good lord. Again, the simplistic rhetoric of "you are Putin's puppet" if a person does not wholeheartedly and unreservedly support World War 3. Unbelievable.

Nope. I am saying that nobody can claim victim status because everyone shat on someone at some time. So why compensate a group for "stolen land" when they stole it from someone else in the first place? If I steal a car from a car thief, the thief doesn't get to cry for compensation.

Talk about changing the subject.... I simply said that the idea of Biden as a warmonger in large part is due to his full throated and expensive pledges to keep Zelensky afloat at a time when the money is needed domestically.

It has done the opposite of stabalize Europe, plus caused inflation and chaos to boot. You know what would stabilize Europe? A truce. Not to mention it is not just a flick of a switch to produce modern weapons and ammo. It takes years to replenish supplies that are lost and/or given away. But the most important thing they will run out of is soldiers. So unless you are willing for NATO to jump into the war, the actual weapons systems available will not really matter in the long run.

Of course, no need to be stroppish. Just suggesting the reason for the accusation of Biden. When veterans are homeless on the streets of America, it is a hard sell to spend that kind of treasure to prop up a distant regime.

Probably p!ssing away close to $200 billion on Ukraine.

Biden can run on "democracy", whatever that is. Trump will run on closed borders, 2 dollar gas and 2 percent mortgages. Guess who will win? He can't run on the economy- polls show that trust in Biden to deal with the economy is at an almost historic low. So, I guess it is fearmongering until the bitter end. And most people are smart enough to see through the "dictator on day one" nonsense. IF Trump wanted to be a dictator, the Covid crisis was the perfect opportunity. National crises leave countries vulnerable to dictators. Yet Trump did nothing of the kind.

If you don't believe me, perhaps you would believe the NIH. Their research shows that up to 95% of deaths among native people were due to disease. It is estimated that 95 percent of the indigenous populations in the Americas were killed by infectious diseases during the years following European colonization, amounting to an estimated 20 million people. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8785365/#:~:text=It is estimated that 95,an estimated 20 million people.

Untrue. Most died from diseases and sicknesses that they did not have immunity to. They weren't "killed off", which implies a genocidal intention on the part of "the Europeans".