MovieChat Forums > fc31 > Replies
fc31's Replies
Wait for streaming seems to be the consensus from reviewers.
Now a small black female politician can beat multiple huge fully armed mercenaries twice her size with her bare hands.
Other than demonstrating how far identity politics can go, what does that serve?
I wonder even the most gung ho black feminists would find that plausible.
With Boeing's safety records, not sure whether that should be considered an assassination attempt.
That is kind of lame, Sam Wilson should not have survived the impact, he is not an enhanced being.
I know from his simply languages and from times crude way of expressions people assume he is foolish.
But no, his success was not by chance, not twice anyway.
And Gaza will always be back in the hands of Israel, it is never going to be American territory.
I don't know if you are just saying that because you are trying to win an argument, or you really believe that.
But that is the end I am willing to discuss this topic.
It is late, 1AM in Australia, even I am retired I still need to sleep.
Bye now.
Like I said before no historian would tell you robbing the Jewish was the key to Nazi Germany's success.
Trump just agreed to take over Gaza, do all the dirty work, for Israel, and receive no benefit whatsoever.
Why?
Don't just accept what you are told, think about it.
Think about what you said.
You basically just agreed with me.
Or do you think they would say robbing the Jewish was the key to Nazi Germany's success?
But it was the Jewish wrote the history, wasn't it?
Sometimes things are not so complex.
I think the obvious answer was right there.
Yeah, right, when you are broke, that is when the banks come to help, because that is what the bankers were known for, helping people.
By the way the banks were largely owned by the Jewish, I am sure they were super excited their people were being slaughtered.
Well, then you clearly know what I was talking about.
<blockquote>if the government hires people and pays them wages</blockquote>
And ordering a large amount of military equipment, that of course will boost economy.
BUT, where did the money come from?
No, that is not convincing at all.
It is like Hitler was some sort of economic genius, which I doubt very much, because he was just not the type.
The simply answer is he robbed the Jewish.
Occam's razor: One should prefer the theory that requires the fewest assumptions.
"Liberal democracy" is a term, to call western electoral system in general.
"Always dispose of the most difficult bit in the title. It does less harm there than in the text." - Sir Humphrey Appleby
It is a trick, repeatedly calling it democracy so people would accept it.
Like in the US, it is a 2 party system, the billionaires pre-approved 2 candidates, both backed by money. It is "Head I win, tail you lose", but you get to choose.
We don't really have free choice.
By and large that is liberal democracy, all the viable candidates are backed by wealth.
No, the economic part was not right at all, when you hire soldiers you need to pay them, when you buy tanks, aircraft, artillery, etc. you need a lot of money.
German military was very modern, and much better equipped than all other European military, that is why Germany annihilated them, those things were not cheap, where did the money come from? When Germany was almost broke from the previous war.
I did not ask because that would be way too much details.
I am not in anyway historian, but what you said is not convincing me, the economic part is especially shaky, let's not pretend we are actual historians, and end that part of discussion here.
On that note, I remembered a video I watched before, which had a similar way of thinking, but it was about UK: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uK7DINiVuPA
I did not say democracy, I said liberal democracy.
Switzerland is more of a special case, with a lot of direct democracy (referendums), which I consider real democracy.
Well, you can't just target rich people without a pretext.
And the Jewish had, let's just say, high percentage of wealthy individuals at the time.
I think Hitler couldn't just say he targeted those people because they were rich, not on a large scale anyway, so I think that is why he used the racial targeting.
He needed a large amount of money to re-industrialise Germany, and I think robbing all of the Jewish just about doing it. The average Jewish people I don't think he really cared, but once you start a policy, you need to follow through, otherwise people would see through it, anyway there was at least some money, it was better than nothing.
Also he himself was backed by German industrialists, he still needed them, he probably did not want them to think they were next.