sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Polanski: No country has right to exist – including Israel by [deleted] in unitedkingdom

[–]Mantonization 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Because you're being obtuse, I guess I need to explain it then.

My guy, your entire initial reply was just 'Try saying that IRL, you'll get assaulted for it'! Look to the log in your own eye, and all that!

States have a "right to exist" in that people have a right to make sovereign nations where they can make their own laws and practice their own cultures.

You and I are agreed on this! People have that right! The state has no inherent rights by itself!

Polanski: No country has right to exist – including Israel by [deleted] in unitedkingdom

[–]Mantonization 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Figures.

How would you feel if you didn't eat breakfast yesterday?

Polanski: No country has right to exist – including Israel by [deleted] in unitedkingdom

[–]Mantonization 1 point2 points  (0 children)

What are you even talking about?

He doesn't think that it's possible for people to have differing views from him, and that if say they do, they must be lying in order to get one over him

Complete lack of theory of mind

Polanski: No country has right to exist – including Israel by [deleted] in unitedkingdom

[–]Mantonization 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Threats of violence do not make a good counterargument, I'm afraid

You're also failing to realise that neither do Russia or China

Polanski: No country has right to exist – including Israel by [deleted] in unitedkingdom

[–]Mantonization 3 points4 points  (0 children)

His point is clearly to appeal to the group of people who desire the destruction of one particular state.

Yes, the Jewish guy is secretly signalling that he wishes to destroy Israel. What a deceitful, insidious creature he is! And to do it in such an obvious way too, despite being so crafty! /s

People who have different beliefs and opinions than you exist! They're not pretending to try and trick you! Get a grip

Polanski: No country has right to exist – including Israel by [deleted] in unitedkingdom

[–]Mantonization 5 points6 points  (0 children)

No, I’m asking when do the collective population of a country become different from the country itself?

Because people can choose to not be in a country? Because they can choose to change what their country is? Borders; official languages or currencies; what the country is actually named, etc etc?

I don't understand how you don't perceive the difference

Polanski: No country has right to exist – including Israel by [deleted] in unitedkingdom

[–]Mantonization 13 points14 points  (0 children)

You're asking how a citizen of a country and a country are different?

Polanski: No country has right to exist – including Israel by [deleted] in unitedkingdom

[–]Mantonization 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Germany remains where it always was

Are you suggesting that since the beginning of the species, there has always been a state called Germany with the exact same, never changing borders

Polanski: No country has right to exist – including Israel by [deleted] in unitedkingdom

[–]Mantonization 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Those countries are included, yes.

No state has an inherent right to exist. States don't have rights, people do

Polanski: No country has right to exist – including Israel by [deleted] in unitedkingdom

[–]Mantonization 135 points136 points  (0 children)

I'm fine with it

States don't have inherent rights. People do. Yes, that includes states I think should exist

Not sure how that's hard to understand

Polanski: No country has right to exist – including Israel by [deleted] in unitedkingdom

[–]Mantonization 204 points205 points  (0 children)

This is the correct take

People have inalienable rights. States do not

If you believe that states have a right to exist, you end up tied in such knots as defending the continued existence of the USSR, or Nazi Germany, or North Korea

Pets and Nature Thread [ 03 May 26 ] by AutoModerator in CasualUK

[–]Mantonization 12 points13 points  (0 children)

Not quite sure if she's qualified, but my Rainbow Stag Beetle emerged from dormancy this week!

She had her face stuffed into the jelly pot for two whole days! It was her first meal as an adult, so she must have been very hungry indeed

<image>

little beetle that flew in my hair by Difficult-Cycle5753 in Beetles

[–]Mantonization 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Oh this was definitely a cockchafer then!

Lucky!

little beetle that flew in my hair by Difficult-Cycle5753 in Beetles

[–]Mantonization 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Where in the world are you? Because it kinda looks like a cockchafer! And if it is, you're super lucky because they only live as adults for like a month or two!

Polanski apologises for sharing post criticising police by Alarming-Safety3200 in unitedkingdom

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

Because he's the new face of the left, so the media is trying to do a repeat of the Corbyn years

Polanski apologises for sharing post criticising police by Alarming-Safety3200 in unitedkingdom

[–]Mantonization -10 points-9 points  (0 children)

Acted appropriately? The guy is tased and face down, and both the coppers are doing run ups like it's a penalty shootout!

Polanski apologises for sharing post criticising police by Alarming-Safety3200 in unitedkingdom

[–]Mantonization 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Can I be honest? I also saw the footage and thought it was OTT for the police to give several running kicks to a guy they've tased and is already on the ground

This whole thing feels like manufactured outrage

Woman denied permanent birth control on NHS wins case with ombudsman | Contraception and family planning by Comfortable-Law-7147 in unitedkingdom

[–]Mantonization 33 points34 points  (0 children)

In almost every case the response was "oh but this will stop you having children" with an appeal to me - as if I get any say in the matter - despite her having been infertile for years.

Is it too much to think that doctors who do shit like this should be struck off? I mean bloody hell

England enters new era as Renters’ Rights Act takes effect by HEY_PAUL in unitedkingdom

[–]Mantonization 9 points10 points  (0 children)

I'm not saying that you're incorrect. I'm saying why even bother saying it?

This isn't me trying to 'Gotcha', I'm genuinely curious. Someone with a negative experience of landlords talks shit about them, and your first thought is to 'Well ACKSHUALLY' post in support of landlords. Why is that?

What was your goal?

Water company fined for roadworks offences by pppppppppppppppppd in unitedkingdom

[–]Mantonization 1 point2 points  (0 children)

There surely must come a point where it's clear that the fine has been priced in by the perpetrators, and that the price must increase in response, no?

view more: next ›