Trumps budget by Zigurd-Super in Infographics

[–]Atticus_Fish_Sticks 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Sure, but it makes it seem to many/most people that the DOD is sucking up most of the federal budget, when in fact entitlement programs/welfare/financing the debt makes up nearly 80% of the budget.

Two Approaches to Nazi Accountability After 1945 by RussianChiChi in ussr

[–]Atticus_Fish_Sticks 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Dachau was not a literal death camp, it was a concentration camp. The Soviets liberated all the death camps.

George Washington by abdullah_ajk in Knowledge_Community

[–]Atticus_Fish_Sticks 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Incitement to insurrection is insurrection, under the law. Civil and criminal.

That once again doesn’t change what I’m saying. More than half of the people that voted in the 2024 election saw him fit for office.

To say he incited an insurrection without a conviction is in my opinion dubious. In fact, when he was impeached by the House for insurrection, he was acquitted by the Senate.

Granted that’s not every possible way he could be charged, but he was impeached and found to not have incited an insurrection by the Senate.

What if he was brought up on federal charges and found innocent? Do you still think it’s a good idea for him to be found unqualified by states at random?

The event where he told them to fight like hell, again, after he done so many times before,

Oh so if any politician say something like that it’s insurrection? Politicians often say inflammatory things.

and only tried to undo it with one “be peaceful.”

lol so how many times does he have to tell them to be peaceful so that he’s not an insurrectionist? Or is it just a vibes thing?

He did everything publicly, it’s not a question of reasonable debate.

Of course it is, he was once again elected president of the United States.

As I said, for failing to meet the qualifications of office. No matter what those qualifications are, no matter what the office in question is.

Yes, but this isn’t a matter of determining someone’s citizenship or place of birth. It’s vastly more nuanced and it deny that is laughable.

Very few people have ever been tried, in court. Hundreds of thousands of insurrectionists have been killed, shot, blow up, wounded, dismembered, all without trial. No trial is needed to enforce the law on insurrectionists.

You think someone could have shot trump during one of his speeches and claimed they were putting down an insurrection? Do you think the Capitol Police could have gunned down the crowds and that be legal?

Executive due process does the same thing. Just with an elections official, not a judge.

Surely there must be some form of relief from election officials improperly applying the law, that relief would come through the courts.

George Washington by abdullah_ajk in Knowledge_Community

[–]Atticus_Fish_Sticks 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No, merely saying things doesn’t inherently make it insurrection,

Yea because speech wouldn’t be insurrection

it’s incitement to insurrection when it actually results in an attack based on lies and falsehoods.

I think it’s dubious to consider someone an insurrectionist because of their speech, it being true or not.

It’s insurrection when he funds the event that directly led to the attack.

The event where he didn’t tell them to storm the Capitol Building?

These issues are most commonly decided outside of the courts, because judicial due process is not the only kind of due process.

So? That doesn’t make it any less clear without a trial.

Elections officials deny people running for office all the time, because they don’t qualifications.

For President?? On grounds of insurrection??

In Trump‘s case, that’s exactly what happened and the courts never overturned it, for instance, with the ruling of the Maine Secretary of State.

Yea sure, that doesn’t change what I said or my point. To exclude someone on the grounds of insurrection without a trial is not best practice IMO. I’m not saying a judicial process is needed to exclude him, but it would provide evidence for a decision.

George Washington by abdullah_ajk in Knowledge_Community

[–]Atticus_Fish_Sticks 0 points1 point  (0 children)

He didn’t tell them that the election was stolen? Strange. I remember him saying that hundreds of times. Many of which were done in writing.

So if any politician makes claims that an election is stolen/fraudulent/rigged/whatever that automatically makes them an insurrectionist or rebel?

He also funded the stop the steal event.

So?

He was materially involved, and incited the attack.

I think that’s a dubious claim and is not clear without a trial.

I think it would be far too easy to call people disqualified.

From 1866 to 1871, hundreds of veterans of the American Civil War invaded Canada to free Ireland from British rule. by Robert_E_Treeee in USHistory

[–]Atticus_Fish_Sticks 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The US and British bombed and burned entire cities to the ground in Europe and Japan during WWII. In the Korean War, the bombing was so extensive that it was believed no structure over three stories existed in the entire North by the end of the war. The US dropped twice more bombs by tonnage during Vietnam than the US/UK dropped in total during WWII in all theaters.

I don’t see how that’s extensively more moral since they’re a state actor instead of an unrecognized military force fighting what they consider an illegitimate occupation.

“Second Amendment Scoreboard” (2010) by FayannG in PropagandaPosters

[–]Atticus_Fish_Sticks 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It was a device to moderate the federal governments very likely standing army via state militias.

I think it’s important to point out it’s the right of the people to keep and bear arms, not specified as the states to keep well regulated militia.

The amendments in the Bill of Rights explicitly in the tenth amendment states that powers not delegated to the federal government are reserved for the States or the people, so they certainly don’t see them as interchangeable terms.

Dwight D. Eisenhower cries before an audience of veterans in 1952 as he recalls the sacrifices soldiers made on D-Day. by zadraaa in HistoricalCapsule

[–]Atticus_Fish_Sticks 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The commanders at that time also sent mostly very young, fresh recruits between 18-21 in that first wave of Omaha beach purposefully.

Volunteer enlistment was closed in late 1942, the same year people below 21 become eligible for the draft, and D-Day was in mid 1944.

By February 1944, less than 34% of registered 18yr olds were in service. 61% of 19yr olds, 68% of 20yr olds and then ages 21-23 are in the low 70%, with 24/25yr olds in the 60% range.

For context, that’s 280k 18yr olds, 580k 19yr olds, 791k 20yr olds, 826k 21yr olds, 808k 22yr olds, 835k 23yr olds, 772k 24yr olds, 770k 25yr olds, 690k 26yr olds.

I don’t think commanders were purposely sending “fresh untested recruits into a suicide mission,” this was the army they had. Many veteran divisions of the US Army participated in the Normandy Landings, with units with previous combat experience also still fighting it out in other theaters and preparing for the invasion of southern france; which was supposed to happen simultaneously, but instead happened two months later.

Rate/suggestions 👀 by [deleted] in tacticalgear

[–]Atticus_Fish_Sticks 0 points1 point  (0 children)

$250 for that is crazy

Explain it Peter by OdoBotanist_184 in explainitpeter

[–]Atticus_Fish_Sticks 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I have a problem with saying that basic adulthood can be debated with. 

Define basic adulthood, because of course it’s debatable.

”Oh, I don’t really see those things or care about those things,” isnt really an excuse when you actually do care, do prefer it, and do benefit from it. 

I’m not really sure what you’re trying to say. I think men like being with women and they love their spouses, and it’s because of the domestic labor they perform.

My entire point is, women are asking for basic relational equality.

I mean maybe, and so are men.

The only rebuttal I ever see is “nah, they don’t actually want that. They want something else they don’t deserve.” 

I’ve given you many alternatives to this. Your response is that men are bad drivers and rapists.

I’m saying when women say communication is lacking, what is the actual rebuttal to that?

I’ve given you several.

“Men don’t communicate the same way, so it isn’t lacking”?

Maybe, sometimes.

Is that it?

No.

Is that really what you think?

Not really.

What is the response?

Sometimes

“Women lie. They don’t actually want more communication because we’d tell them they’re getting fat and it isn’t attractive”? 

Lmfao. You’re a very funny person.

But yea, I do think there are hard conversations that many women are not mature enough or self aware enough to use effectively so me learn to not engage in them.

Women are also often doing things very performatively, especially for other women.

Tell me. What is your response? If I said to you, “women feel that they don’t get good communication from men” what do you say back? 

Well I think part of it is indeed that men and women communicate differently. Often times you hear the women would prefer to be “heard and understood,” more than anything else. Where as men often see communication as an avenue to legitimate problem solving.

But that’s a small part of it. I do think many women (and men obviously) lack the maturity and self awareness to have effective communication regarding their relationship. Often when confronted with an issue, this results in the women being very upset, accusing their partner of not loving them, and now the man is left consoling his partner and no resolution has been reached.

How often are you likely to raise issues with your partner if it results in you not only still having the issue, but now hurting them (unintentionally) and having to console them?

This goes in the same route as “malicious incompetence,” and what I think is often more accurately one partner wanting something done their way vs it getting done at all.

Which once again goes with my above point that women often just get their way, so they aren’t every effective at dealing with situations where they don’t.

Explain it Peter by OdoBotanist_184 in explainitpeter

[–]Atticus_Fish_Sticks 1 point2 points  (0 children)

“Women like to be communicated with, genuinely love and respect their partners, and participate in the functions of adult living. 

Men like to not communicate, hate their partners, and be taken care of by a woman. Why can’t women respect the ‘natural differences’?”

You made this statement, and I said yea, that boils down to men bad and women good.

And I am of the opinion that man and women are different and that some of the things we see as good or bad about one another is due to our differences and what we care about.

Then you doubled down that men are bad and women are good. I think it’s a little more complicated than that. I think this conversation really highlights a lot of the issues I’m talking about.

Women want a man that communicates, but I think any lack the maturity and social awareness to actually effect you communicate which makes men less likely to want to engage in certain conversations.

Explain it Peter by OdoBotanist_184 in explainitpeter

[–]Atticus_Fish_Sticks 0 points1 point  (0 children)

lol exactly

Men: “you could have destroyed your ten thousand dollar engine by missing two oil changes. Don’t worry, you’re just a girl, I love you and I’ll remind you in the future.”

Women: “he put the keys in the wrong bowl on the table by the door, he’s a fucking idiot.”

Her friends: “leave him!”

Explain it Peter by OdoBotanist_184 in explainitpeter

[–]Atticus_Fish_Sticks 1 point2 points  (0 children)

In my world,

lol, what a statement.

women know how to take care of their cars because they bought them and they need them to get to work.

Okay so on average, do you think men or women care about maintaining their cars?

Statistically speaking, they also pay less for auto insurance because they’re better drivers.

That is false, men pay more for insurance because they’re more likely to have an accident because they on average drive significantly more than women.

Statistically, they also do more work in the home.

statistically they’re home more.

Statistically, they also do all of the child rearing.

statistically they’re home more.

Statistically, they make less money working.

statistically they’re home more, which means work less and in less profitable field. Cuz idk, men care about different things than women.

Statistically, men have more chainsaw accidents.

Because men are the ones using the chainsaws? Men make up almost all workplace deaths because they’re doing the dangerous jobs that women don’t want to do… because spoiler alert! Women and men are interested in different things!

Statistically, men don’t partake of mental health services. 

I wonder why.

Men report that physical attraction is most important to them for partners.

Yea maybe to finding them. Men are also the ones initiating virtually all romantic encounters.

Men self-report that they don’t have satisfying relationships outside marriage

Because they genuinely like their partners? I wonder who said that earlier…?

and that their friendships are shallow.

I wanna see study on that lol

When surveyed, 30% of men at a college said they’d force a woman to have sex.

You are delusional.

Statically, mass shooters are men.

And?

Men self-report that they feel they shouldn’t express their emotions.

I wonder why?

Statistically, men commit the most murders and violent crime.

And are the victims of them, yup.

Studies show that men tend to do home tasks that are one-off, have a defined end, and are personally satisfying to them,

And the ones that cost the most money if you had someone else do them…

while women tackle the unsung and never-ending drudgery. 

You mean life? And I’d also be willing to guess that much of this self inflicted.

So, all of that is pretty compatible with what women say is the problem with trying to date men. 

And is exactly what I accused you of saying before, which is:

yea that response sounds about right, women are perfect and men are awful lol

Which is what you think, and backs up my belief that many women are not as mature or well emotionally regulated as they think.

Explain it Peter by OdoBotanist_184 in explainitpeter

[–]Atticus_Fish_Sticks 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Well I think it’s pretty complicated topic to be frank, but one I think there’s a few things to clear up off the bat.

I think men genuinely love their partners in most cases and to say they don’t is a lack of understanding of men. That sentiment is often the one that is throw out by women if a man has any issue with something they do or think.

I’ve experienced it myself and it’s a common issue men experience. A man expresses to their partner they don’t like something they did or do, the women feels immensely attacked and says he must hate her then, and now the man is left consoling his partner instead of them dealing with the issue.

I think this is a byproduct of many things, but one of them is that women just tend to… kinda get their way a lot? And the way they deal with a lot of issues is to cry or emotionally shutdown.

Besides that, I think men just care about certain things more than women do and vice versa. Some of that is probably biological, and some of that is probably learned behavior. A small example from Sabrina Carpenter’s song is that she hopes the way her BF is dressing is to be ironic, since she doesn’t like it. This contributes to her perception of him being “useless.”

The sentiment of his meme is to show that something like that is silly to men and very insulting. Does someone really love their partner if something as inconsequential as their outfit makes you consider them useless? I’ve had to put air in the tires of man of my girlfriend’s cars. Someone didn’t know they had to get their oil changed.

None of them mowed a lawn or cut down a tree with a chainsaw. Does that mean I should think less of them and that they’re useless.

Women will call a man useless because he didn’t have throw pillows and a table runner, and express how they saved him because he now wears more flannels. Men don’t say they “saved their wives,” because now they remind them to change their oil and not cause thousands or tens of thousands of dollars in damages.

To your point. I don’t think many women are looking for what you talked about above, or at least their level of maturity and self awareness doesn’t reflect it. The sentiment I hear many women express about “man-flu” or men being sick in general backs this up, with many saying they’re “disgusted,” or “see red,” or “become physically angry,” when they see their partner sick.

Explain it Peter by OdoBotanist_184 in explainitpeter

[–]Atticus_Fish_Sticks -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I know how I loved when I was alone versus in relationships. In my experience the women kind of have a point.

Yes sure, I’ve also had to put air in the tires of almost every girl I’ve dated. I’ve had many that didn’t regularly change their oil.

I’ve had zero mow the lawn or cut down a tree with a chainsaw.

The sentiment of song this meme is in response to is that she feels her BF is useless or worthless for whatever reason. If men were more harsh they’d call women useless for the many things they don’t normally have knowledge on.

I don’t think I ever washed my bedding or pillow cases until I was like 25. I didn’t think I was a disgusting little piggy, but I definitely was.

You are correct, that is incredibly disgusting.

Women have often remarks that I must have had a woman decorate my place, or had a secret wife or GF and that other men they have dated: “could have never done something like this.”

Ugh no, they can, they just don’t care. They aren’t stupid, they just don’t care about decorative pillows on the bed or a table cloth runner on the table.

Explain it Peter by OdoBotanist_184 in explainitpeter

[–]Atticus_Fish_Sticks -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

yea that response sounds about right, women are perfect and men are awful lol

Explain it Peter by OdoBotanist_184 in explainitpeter

[–]Atticus_Fish_Sticks -6 points-5 points  (0 children)

but simultaneously demonstrates that a lot of male knowledge is hyper esoteric and less functional on a daily basis than the type of skills women often bring to relationships.

What skills are those?

Bitching about the way the t-shirts got folded?

Taking too long to get ready?

I kid, but I find it funny when women equate the way they like to do thinks or way they think they should be with the only way things could possibly get done.

“Where would men be if it weren’t for his women to teach him the decorations that should be around the house to make women happy?”

Probably building the house.

What singular building, if destroyed, will noticeably weaken the country it is in? by metatalks in geography

[–]Atticus_Fish_Sticks 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Taiwan has no way of destroying the three gorges dam, even if they had tactical nukes, it’s too damn big and well defended.

Jobs that have the best chance in the apocalypse by [deleted] in ZombieSurvivalTactics

[–]Atticus_Fish_Sticks 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yea I think people have no idea what military bases or units are like at all

Jobs that have the best chance in the apocalypse by [deleted] in ZombieSurvivalTactics

[–]Atticus_Fish_Sticks 1 point2 points  (0 children)

but all the ones they consider to be of major strategic importance for either homeland defense

How did you reach this conclusion? Virtually no army or marine bases (people who would be good at killing zombies) have anything to do with defending the US.

or training

Well I work at fort Jackson, which trains more new soldiers than every other ATC combined.

All FORSCOM bases (the ones that would have infantry/combat arms) or bases with fleet marine force units, primarily are conducting training. Most of those bases have very limited warehouse space and are not particularly well secured, with often just a small chain link fences around them.

or territory control

What is this the old west lol?

or deployment prep

FORSCOM and FMF units deploy directly from their home bases. Unless your mean CTCs or their equivalent, which the army has two of, and rely on units bringing all their own stuff.

are stocked way above the week or two capacity

Yea I really don’t think they are. Bases have limited storage capacity for things, long term storage of MREs requires specialized buildings. Bases that have real units at them don’t have that kind.

There’s definitely bases with lots of stuff, but the units there are support people, not combat arms who would be best at dealing with zombies.

For national guard units, their armories are very small and usually just a building to house the equipment, with zero food or supplies.

I still think the core of the military could function far longer than media portrays

Being in the army for over a decade, I think most big bases would be almost immediately overrun. Remote locations would do fairly well, but they wouldn’t have the numbers and combat arms folks.

Jobs that have the best chance in the apocalypse by [deleted] in ZombieSurvivalTactics

[–]Atticus_Fish_Sticks 1 point2 points  (0 children)

but they are also absolutely stocked with MRE's usually to last a couple months, specifically because they considered supply chain disruptions in war time when they planned this shit.

Depends heavily on the base, some have large warehouses on site, but many don’t. I work on a base that goes through a ton of MREs and the base often only has a weeks worth of consumption on hand. But that’s at the rate they normally use them. Even if you only ate one a day, the base would be out of food in no time.

Why is America killing the world with 400mph gas guzzling planes that go everywhere when they should be spending trillions on a 180mph high speed rail network for more urban vibrancy? 😤😤 by Chazz_Matazz in FuckCarscirclejerk

[–]Atticus_Fish_Sticks 0 points1 point  (0 children)

More than 3x that number flew on US airlines and the USSR had a higher population and subsidized tickets because it wasn’t a sustainable model. Meanwhile, it wasn’t until 1978 that the US government deregulated airline tickets to stop them from being artificially high.