• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Conquistador

  1. How do you know ho hates and doesn't hate the price-gouging Shrekli? That's just another one of your seemingly limitless assumptions that conveniently have a far left conclusion despite your rather laughable attempts to pretend you're not. It's not too much to ask you to actually prove anti-Semitism when you accuse someone of it- imagine what sort of oppression a person you erroneously accuse of anti-Semitism might have to endure. Meanwhile, you don't seem to notice those who really are anti-Jewish, further compounding the problem. 


    Taking down the pound in 1992 was a big deal and caused a lot of economic pain as well as impacting the euro and later Brexit since the UK never joined the eurozone as a result. 


    He's funded a lot of left-wing groups and political candidates that have agendas such as open borders that some people like and others don't. If you don't like them, then you have plenty to criticize, although apparently that couldn't possibly occur to lazy thinkers on the left. To them, it could only be that he was born Jewish rather than the extremism of the groups' agenda. 


    Soros also funds anti-Israel groups, so it's actually more likely that anti-Semites approve of his actions. 



  2. 19 hours ago, yourkeau said:

    Experience from living in 3 countries, visited 40+ countries on 3 continents. People are more similar than one can imagine.

    Sorry, but that's ridiculous. That's looking for a connection that simply doesn't exist. Funny how when people do foul shit to me you don't accuse any of them of being anti-Jewish. ;)


    Soros, for example, does a lot of bad stuff, and comes under criticism from me, too. At any rate, does he even consider himself Jewish anymore? 


    Jeremy, I think yourkeau would be more comfortable with a Russian lady. There might be some lively debates over Putin. 


  3. No one is tethered to this forum like you are, yourkeau. You can't even keep track of what you're posting- stuff just dribbles out constantly and then you don't want to take responsibility for its inaccuracy. Somehow I doubt this latest claim of yours has legs.


    At any rate, what makes you think anyone on this forum other than you would be familiar with anything in Ukrainian, especially something obscure? 




  4. Do me a favor, yourkeau (and everyone else, for that matter), but please do not imply someone is anti-Jewish without having a really good reason to believe it (and Jeremy isn't). We have enough of a problem with some people ignoring real antipathy against Jews without someone crying wolf in a case where there is none.  


  5. On 6/13/2018, 12:29:09, El Jeffo said:

    His bizarre - and, yes, unpresidented - attacks on decades-long allies like Canada, the UK, and Germany and repeated coddling up to dictators like Duterte, Kim, and Putin aren't even on that list.


    Of course, the above quote is from the Failing New York Times, so I'm sure those who prefer to shut both eyes in the name of STIGGINIT will just shout FAKE NEWS and move on.


    Meanwhile, those of us living in objective reality are horrified that Trump is playing pigeon chess on the stage of international diplomacy: knocking over all the pieces, shitting on the board, and declaring victory.

    Ah, Harvard political science professors. Now that's a group known for their even-handedness in politics. Much like Carlos Slim's NYT. Funny how they didn't notice the danger to democracy posed by the CIA's attempt at a soft coup against an elected president who dared to defeat its preferred neocon deity. NSA spying on US citizens? Didn't even show up on their radar screen. 


    The EU countries are military dependencies and the main ones are economic competitors (all are trading partners).The EU also is a geopolitical competitor. If they are such great allies, why set up the VAT-friendly WTO to benefit themselves at the expense of the US? Kyoto and Paris? Why do most of our NATO allies refuse to spend the 2% of GDP on defense that they all agreed to? And so on. 


    The US has simply offered them a great deal- military protection and easier access to its markets than the other way around, and even made the EU and the international trading system possible. No one would blame the EU countries for taking it, but neither should anyone, especially a USian, pretend that we have to suck up to them and keeping screwing our own manufacturing industries just to please the EU, which knows it will get no better deal than with us. Just imagine what China would/will offer them. 


    Canada is a neighbor and thus the relationship is more trade-oriented, but even there, by serving, along with Mexico, as a NAFTA-backdoor relay for Chinese- and EU-made products (a serious flaw in the NAFTA treaty), it is not behaving as an ally. 


    As for coddling dictators, I didn't see any posts from you or anyone else criticizing Obama's coddling of Russia (cough, Uranium One, Hillary's "reset", "I'll have more flexibility after the election"), the lopsided nuclear deal he signed with Iran's dictatorial regime and didn't bother to submit to the Senate, normalization of relations with Cuba, a country that has since harassed our diplomats there. And so on. 


    Fact is, there are times you have to hold your nose and deal with dictators for the greater good (did we ignore the Soviet Union during the Cold War or were the SALT treaties imaginary?). Russia is a geopolitical rival, but we don't want them cooperating too closely with China, so that means there needs to be some engagement with them to further US interests, also in the scientific realm, and intelligence cooperation. Russia has great intelligence sources in crucial parts of the world like Central Asia, particularly humint, where the US is traditionally weak, so we still need to play ball with them to some extent.


    I don't see how you get to a peace treaty with North Korea without talking at all to Kim, and look at the benefits to the Korean people as well as to the US if a durable peace comes to the Korean Peninsula.  Where is this alleged coddling of Kim? Holding a brief summit with him?



    As for the below list, where is the actual, specific evidence Trump has done this? His opponents, in fact, are guilty of all of these things! The idea that he is "curbing the corporate media" by criticizing their propaganda and countering them with his bully pulpit (which is, from their point of view, an unforgivable sin) is laughable. 


    1. The leader shows only a weak commitment to democratic rules. (FISA abuse in 2016, NSA spying on US citizens under Bush 43 and Obama, IRS abuses of Obama political opponents) 
    2. He or she denies the legitimacy of opponents. (The whole "collusion with Russia" nonsense, attempts to manipulate the Electoral College in 2016)

    3. He or she tolerates violence. (you know, those guys in masks attacking Trump supporters)
    4. He or she shows some willingness to curb civil liberties or the media. (Patriot Act and NSA spying under Bush 43 and Obama)


    Next time, Jeffrey, maybe you can come up with some actual evidence, although that is admittedly difficult for anyone who has lived in echo chambers their whole life. 


    Unsurprisingly, yourkeau has been MIA when it comes to actually backing up his claims. 





  6. 11 hours ago, yourkeau said:

    Well you even think that I'm anti Trump :P

    But I write in good English (as confirmed by other native speakers). So if you can't understand my simple English you definitely can't understand ARD's German.


    Or may you just tend to put in "anti Trump" camp everyone not licking his ass good enough. But then why you are offended when we tell that Trump has certain non democratic views? If this is how you see the world you aren't a democrat either.


    You must have been in coma for the last 40 years. It is 2018, and the world's top capitalist economy is ruled by the Communist Party, while Soviet Union is now called Russia, and is capitalist, too.

    So basically you have no answers to what I posted and are too ashamed to admit it. No surprise there. Showing unemployed steelworkers in the US Midwest  isn't a matter of being pro-Trump, it was almost certainly a matter of denigrating presumed Trump supporters. At any rate, it was not pro-Trump. Unsurprisingly, you can't back up anything you say, so you resort to yet more nonsense you can't back up.


    No reasonable person would, after reading your comments about him, conclude that you are not anti-Trump, so I do'nt know why you pretend that you are not. 


    Anyone even slightly familiar with the huge role of goverment in the Chinese economy would know better that to imply it is unfettered capitalism. At best, it's crony and state-controlled capitalism. You're the one who specifically brought up the Soviet Union, something I would expect you know a bit about, and that's what I responded to. The Russian economy also has a lot of state involvement, as I am sure you know, especially being the Putinversteher you are (meant sarcastically). 


    Given your comments, I am not sure you even realize what would constitute democratic views, but you're welcome to surprise the the world and actually tell us specifically what these "certain non-democratic views" are that Trump has? Then again, you seem to be afflicted with the terrible malady of thinking anyone who disagrees with your bizarre statements is bad. Just try to back up what you say. You can't live life within whatever echo chamber you're imprisoned in. 


  7. Germany's state-controlled media are/were "neutral" about Trump? What alternate universe do you live in? ARD is as anti-Trump as it gets. 


    Rather than merely declaring Obama a statesman since you obviously worship him, at least tell us why you think he is? 


    Please be specific about what you mean when you claim "Trump attacked Latinos"? You state a lot of stuff as facts that is badly distorted if not outright false. 


    I wouldn't know if the Soviet Union was pro-Trump, yourkeau, so how could I erase that from my memory? You are the one from the former Soviet Union, not me. However, I find it unlikely that a capitalist was feted in the Land of Lenin, Stalin & Brezhnev. Again, what alternate universe do you inhabit?  


  8. 40 minutes ago, Keleth said:

    But if that’s the case does his base know that and does he realize his base doesn’t know that ?

    Given he was the first Republican candidate since 1988 to win Michigan and Pennsylvania, and he opened the first presidential debate by mentioning that the trade deals the US signed in the past couple of decades were bad for the country, I'd say people got the message. 


    Trump's been a Democrat and a Republican during his lifetime, don't forget. 


  9. 23 hours ago, yourkeau said:

    He definitely can't throw people out on the street as he doesn't own all the companies in the US.


    But don't you deny that his campaign was based in racism, redneckism and nostalgia of times of segregation. He did not say "I will make America great", he said "I will make it great again" assuming that in the 1960s it was better. It wasn't.


    Now that he took office he slowly moved towards Realpolitik despite still using certain populist language. I don't remember what I wrote in 2016, but I expected exactly this scenario. I assessed 50% that he was a troll and 50% that he was a fascist. Now it seems that he is rather a troll.


    He decided to push for protectionism. This will bring short term benefits to the US. He only thinks about own ego and own re-election. Obama was thinking 50 years ahead, Trump only thinks 8 years ahead. Obama was a statesman, Trump is just another average president. Obama will be in history, Trump will be forgotten in 30 years.


    Can I be mistaken? Sure. If you accuse others for being mistaken you basically advocate that doing nothing is the best strategy (then you can't make mistakes).

    Rather strange that you simply assume that Trump wanted to bring back segregation. Then again, you get your news from state-controlled German television, the mouthpiece of  Merkel. The former Soviet Union engaged in a lot of anti-US propaganda over civil rights post-WWII.


    But what else was the US in the 1950s and 1960s? The world's greatest manufacturing power, something important to Trump. That's what he's talking about with MAGA. 


    Statesman? Obama was an empty suit as president. Understandably, a lot of non-USians liked him because it was cool to do so and he did not advocate for US interests like Trump, because Obama was only out for himself and his puppeteers. Of course that made people outside the US comfortable- they continued to have the US serving their needs and wants, not the US looking out for its own people's best interests. This is also the crux of the matter of the anti-Trump derangement. 


  10. 1 hour ago, Keleth said:

    Not worth it now maybe but damn sure they thought it worth it before the collapse of the Soviet Union.

    I have no problem with American not being concerned etc about Europe but I love the revisionism that it was all done for the good of Europe rather than it was done because of the Americans fear of the spread of communism.

    Or was Vietnam also done for Vietnam rather than fear of communism

    Before the collapse of the Soviet Union, absolutely. That was 26 years ago, though, and in the case of Vietnam 46-53 years ago. And, yes, it was intentional US policy to build up European and Asian allies to withstand Communism, particularly by allowing them access to the US market and providing military protection. 


  11. 1 hour ago, Keleth said:

    From what I understand though is that the US has a massive trade surplus with Canada so why go trying to fuck up that relationship?

    The US does not have a trade surplus with Canada. The problem with Canada really boils down to the EU and China using it and Mexico as a pass-through to the US market, i.e., the requirements for North American content in NAFTA, especially for autos, are too low. 


  12. You know very well that is not what J0ker is saying. He is simply saying that black-on-black crime is largely (or maybe completely) ignored and is much greater than any police shootings of blacks. And that was in response to the ridiculous implication on your part that black unemployment in the US is at a record low due to police shootings. How then do you explain record-low Hispanic unemployment? 


    Where is the evidence that Trump is the evil racist you and others say he is, Keleth? You don't have to like the guy's politics to refrain from making shit up. 


    Regarding the chronic and longstanding US trade deficits, it's clear something is wrong even where there is disagreement over the causes and possible solutions. It's not short-termism to take on the issue, though. 


  13. No, yourkeau, it's been remarked numerous times that Merkel has no scruples and will do anything to promote or save her career, including cover-ups. Surely you, of all people, recognize the behavior of a Communist apparatchik from the former DDR. 


    Moreover, some speech primarily for Union consumption has no effect, whereas her open borders policy has and will have huge effects on German society. It's how you govern, not how you talk, that counts.


  14. 1 hour ago, corrado said:

    this is so easy that there should be no need to STILL reapeat it, but:
    next time a german (or someone coming from "good" nationality) commits an awful crime, i'll be waiting for outraged people to ask for all germans to be deported out of the country. i'm counting on you guys.
    i want a desert germany by july 2018.

    Never mind your straw men, but perhaps you can show us where anyone has "asked for all migrants to be deported"? 


    That there are violent criminals among the native population is hardly a secret, but I think everyone knows that you can't deport one of your own citizens (and why). There is a process in EU treaties for deporting EU citizens that are a threat to public safety, and a non-EUer from a developed country who commits an awful crime, as you put it, definitely gets deported (there's no Duldung for them), so you're talking about a non-existent problem as if it were coexistent and coequal. 



    6 minutes ago, yourkeau said:

    Because BND (which was 100% used here) and BAMF Beamte are equally qualified...


    Do you realize that all land in the world is occupied by sovereign countries? When a sovereign country refuses to recognize the person as its citizen without long bureaucratic confirmation, you cannot deport this person. But of course Das Volk knows better...


    Alternative is become like Australia which arrests own mentally ill citizens who forgot their name and puts them into jail as "illegal migrants", see Cornelia Rau case. Yeah, very nice country, so safe due to so good migrant control.


    Or maybe all besorgte just migrate to Australia? There is no Merkel "dictatorship" there, the sun is shining etc.

    That is the gist of the same message one always gets from the supporters of the mass migration: "nothing can be done about it, so just shut up- you role in all this is simply to pay taxes to fund it, no matter how badly everything gets screwed up (not that we supporters would ever admit anything got screwed up). If you dare to say something about it- we'll defame you, and, if we can, criminalize your dissent".




  16. 28 minutes ago, desdemona said:

    If they could extract someone from one of the most chaotic regions on the planet in a matter of days, they should also be fully capable of processing asylum applications at the same speed and deporting all rejected asylum seekers on Duldung status. Duldung status creates a limbo state where one can’t be productive, and adding to that the stressful living conditions in refugee centres, this could turn people to drugs and related crime. The goal should be avoiding putting anyone in this limbo. Either reject them from entry or process their applications within days, upon which rejection they are deported immediately. 

    This wiffle waffle attitude of the government is what makes the business of people smugglers flourishes. “We’ll take you into the country, once you’re in they won’t be able to send you back.”

    Exactly. Given that she knew about the BAMF lack of resources back in 2013, it's obvious she didn't care and simply tried to cover everything up, DDR-style, even going so far as to lie, "Wir schaffen das", when she knew that was not the case. The cover-ups are a recurring problem with Merkel. 


    Piggy, some people obviously don't want the flows to slow down, which is why the German government is so half-hearted about it (at best)


  17. When even the Dear Leader is taking some baby steps toward admitting something is wrong and she is responsible for it (although she is obviously just trying to avoid an investigation and save her own hide), the usual game of trying to distract everyone from the abject failures of the mass migration by blaming and defaming those who see what's wrong is even more delusional:


    Die Kanzlerin weiter: „Der Fall zeigt doch, wie wichtig es ist, dass die Menschen, die keinen Aufenthaltsstatus haben, schnell ihr Verwaltungsgerichtsverfahren bekommen und schnell wieder nach Hause geschickt werden können.”


    Interior Minister Seehofer has been quoted as saying  with regards to the government's policy on the mass migration: "We don't have the situation under control". Indeed- doesn't seem to be a good idea to keep your head buried the sand and pretend nothing is wrong.  


  18. I'm glad you acknowledge that yours is a conspiracy theory, yourkeau. Gauland may say something stupid now and then, but Merkel is in power, has neutered the political opposition to the extent that there is barely any, and few seem willing to try to stop her. She also has state-controlled media at her disposal and the other media is quite tame in any criticism of the Dear Leader.