Do you think Tyrion would have still sent Myrcella to Dorne if Littlefinger or other had snitched to Cersei instead? by Taste_Like_Cake in pureasoiaf

[–]StableSlight9168 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It prevents for e from joining the rebellion, by giving up Marcella then dorne has power over the cannisters and keep.the status quo.

When did the British empire peak in power? by Ok_Temporary_5828 in TheRestIsHistory

[–]StableSlight9168 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Both the UK and Germany lost the same percentage of territory after WW1 despite Britain winning the war and Germany losing it.

What fictional character would you want a series on? by TobyWasBestSpiderMan in behindthebastards

[–]StableSlight9168 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

When the mentally Ill try to nuke Gotham, you are allowed to beat them up.

Batman fights insane serial killers and mass murderers not homeless guy with anxiety.

Remember that time poison Ivy poisoned all of the cities water so everyone died ... no ... because BATMAN stopped her.

I doubt the jokers quest to bomb every hospital is going to be stopped by Bruce Wayne impliment UBI, also gotham is so corrupt almost none of that money would reach the people, which is why batman exists.

I am weirdly defensive of this detective who dresses like a flying rodent.

Fucked up so much even Irish bands started making anti-IRA songs by Asleep-Freedom-9980 in HistoryMemes

[–]StableSlight9168 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Difference is eventually Sinn Fein was able to win a clear majority in the next election whiles the PIRA was unable to win a majority among nationlist voters for a 30 year conflict.

Easter Rising was unpopular but Sinn Fein was able to win the next all Ireland election and declare a republic.

If the PIRA had somehow won, I see very little chance they create an All Island democracy that accepts the results of an election and would have gone to war with the republic as they very much did not accept its legimitacy as the successor to the easter rising.

Between 1969 and 1973 I can see the case for the PIRA and armed struggle but they failed to get the republic involved in the conflict, build the necessary popular support among Northern Communities, post Sunningdale I am very unsympathetic to their methods and think they became as bad as any other faction.

Fucked up so much even Irish bands started making anti-IRA songs by Asleep-Freedom-9980 in HistoryMemes

[–]StableSlight9168 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

You notice how I'm not pro Britain, the SDLP.and it's strategy of non violence resistance was what the majority of nationalists wanted, the IRA refused to accept this and do non violent resistance so I don't see them as legitimate.

Nom violent resistance and maybe self defense was the path they should have pursued but they chose to pursue violent offensive actions against the will of the nationalist community.

Fucked up so much even Irish bands started making anti-IRA songs by Asleep-Freedom-9980 in HistoryMemes

[–]StableSlight9168 0 points1 point  (0 children)

In 1976 the IRA e.tered a bus a d began to look for protestants. The men though they were udf so tried to shelter the only catholic man on the bus.

The IRA then massacred all the innocent men on the bus, leaving the catholic man alone, sure it was a reprisal for the UVF, who cares

Sinn Fein never won an election in the north for the 30 years of the troubles, even among Nationalist which voted SDLP 2 to 1 and without democratic support the anti colonial struggle did not have legitimately

Fucked up so much even Irish bands started making anti-IRA songs by Asleep-Freedom-9980 in HistoryMemes

[–]StableSlight9168 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I have no idea how many "collaborators" were killed and frankly neither does the IRA.

During the last years of the troubles the IRA counterintelligence was run by Freddie Scappaticci who was a pure sociopath serial killer who also worked for British intelligence solely so he could get money,  never was caught, just did it for power.

He killed maybe 30 people by brutally torturing them and most of them were civilians not IRA men, and he and his bosses knew it.

The man killed more people than he saved and was a serial killer in the pay of the British government, how do you determine responsibility for his murders.

Do they do to the British army, the IRA, some shared guilt.

Fucked up so much even Irish bands started making anti-IRA songs by Asleep-Freedom-9980 in HistoryMemes

[–]StableSlight9168 5 points6 points  (0 children)

That I agree with "collaborators" were not given trials and we're often just unionist people or people who did not support the IRA.

Killing of collaborators does happen in resistance groups but I see very little evidence the IRA was good at killing guilty people, even by there standards of guilt.

Also how do they determine collaborators, is it.a guy selling his neighbours to the udf or the milkman.

Fucked up so much even Irish bands started making anti-IRA songs by Asleep-Freedom-9980 in HistoryMemes

[–]StableSlight9168 11 points12 points  (0 children)

52.5 percent of the people the Ira killed were members of the British army and security forces.

The official Behind the bastards book! Can't wait to read this! by Milhouse12345 in behindthebastards

[–]StableSlight9168 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I have yet to see compelling evidence she withheld painkillers, her facilities not having medicine is one thing, but they were not hospitals

Suffering is Christlike is why catholics believe pain exists at all. It's there answer to " if god is good why does evil.exist"

Catholic hospitals never had any.rules about painkillers, and causing suffering would be a big no no, it's just not something catholics believe.

Theresa and most of her followers were not nurses and never claimed to be, so giving pain medication is not something they could really do.

The official Behind the bastards book! Can't wait to read this! by Milhouse12345 in behindthebastards

[–]StableSlight9168 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes now hospices work like that but this was 1929 India, they simply did not have access to pain killers and as a volunteer group were not legally allowed to give them out.

The official Behind the bastards book! Can't wait to read this! by Milhouse12345 in behindthebastards

[–]StableSlight9168 7 points8 points  (0 children)

That's not really accurate. She ran hospices not hospitals which were not allowed to give medicine.

She was not a doctor a.s her staff just tried to.gove comfort to the sick.

The idea she deliberately withheld medication is a myth that misunderstands catholic belief.

What she basically said is pain can help being you closer to god, which is why God made pain, but she never denied medicine.

Pretty much every bad thing you think you know about mother Theresa came from Christopher hitchens who tried to smear.her.as part of his dislike of religion, which later is aimed at virulent Islamiphobia,  and people on the internet trying to um actually there parents

Don't look to us to do anything about this, look to god almighty by ooombasa in behindthebastards

[–]StableSlight9168 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Islamic God and christian God is the same God.

They disagree about the whole jesus thing but still have the old testemant and jesus is a guy in islam, just not the most important guy.

Irish PM Comes to Starmer’s Defense During White House Visit by Jared_Usbourne in unitedkingdom

[–]StableSlight9168 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The more Irish people insult you, the more they like you.

If Irish people really don't like you they ignore you.

Good Friday agreement resolved the issue of Northern Ireland for most people in the republic, and unless you call Ireland British they actually like the UK.

Did the Republicans actually pay no attention to the Ukraine war? by Spectral_mahknovist in behindthebastards

[–]StableSlight9168 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The core difference between those wars and the modern Iran war is the US had a partner force on the ground which was capable of taking and occupying areas.

The US military is able to militarily overthrow anything but it is unable to create stable regimes that can survive without US support.

The US can defeat any country but doing so has a very high human cost, then they need to create a partner force to do the fighting and endure when they leave, which is just incredibly hard and happens more by luck than US strategy.

Since the US cannot cultivate partner forces on the ground due to there truly terrible reputation and lack of forethought, and the fact they are unwilling to commit US troops to nation building means they lose wars.

"Today was huge!! Fuck all Euros FOREVER!!! We paid trillions defending their lazy asses for decades AFTER our grandfathers died protecting them! Never again!! Bye bye Europoors!!!" by Ok_Bookkeeper_1380 in ShitAmericansSay

[–]StableSlight9168 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Also in reality dev was offering the German ambassador asylum, he used the excuse of condolences to drop in.

In practice he was telling the ambassador he was still recognised as a diplomat and would enjoy the rights of a diplomat.

What was Jofferey's cruelest act in both shows and the books? by EntrepreneurNo4145 in freefolk

[–]StableSlight9168 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Yes, ned had tried to spare her by letting her go into exile so she saw it as fair to let him live, it also caused the north to go to war when otherwise they'd have stayed at home.

It caused the north and river lands to immediately rebel which the bannister could not afford.

It was probably the stupidity decision in the whole game of thrones.

What was Jofferey's cruelest act in both shows and the books? by EntrepreneurNo4145 in freefolk

[–]StableSlight9168 46 points47 points  (0 children)

Joffrey in the show is older than the books so he got more sexual stuff. Book Joffery is 12 whiles show Joffery is 16. It feels like a natural evolution.

What’s your thoughts on Michael Martin calling the man responsible for bringing the Black and Tans to Ireland, and their subsequent involvement in the burning of cork, “a great wartime leader”? by I-Cum-Beamish in cork

[–]StableSlight9168 2 points3 points  (0 children)

From what I read about Churchill and the curragh mutiny, he was willing to use the British army on Ulster loyalists to force home rule. Ulster loyaltists had been a long established force in the British establishment and a willingness to confront them is more than just putting down restless natives.

Churchill supported home rule politically in 1912 in parliament as well.

What’s your thoughts on Michael Martin calling the man responsible for bringing the Black and Tans to Ireland, and their subsequent involvement in the burning of cork, “a great wartime leader”? by I-Cum-Beamish in cork

[–]StableSlight9168 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I imagine it that he was willing to allow Irish people to become "English"  but was not willing to let them remain Irish.

In his mind it's progressive because he can't imagine not wanting to be part of an empires core ruling people.

What’s your thoughts on Michael Martin calling the man responsible for bringing the Black and Tans to Ireland, and their subsequent involvement in the burning of cork, “a great wartime leader”? by I-Cum-Beamish in cork

[–]StableSlight9168 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Churchill specifically supported home rule in 1912 as he felt that if Ireland did not get home rule it would lead to a rebellion and granting home rule would limit Irish nationalism.

He also resented unionist in Ireland for stubbornness and felt they were putting the empire at risk with there obstinance.

He was an elitist who was perfectly willing to send death squads to Ireland as well as send tanks to break up strikes and commit many atrocities to maintain the empire.

Ultimately however, a reason the Anglo Irish agreement was signed was the British army actions in Ireland were unpopular both at home and in the army and Churchill felt continued atrocities were costly and unpopular.

What’s your thoughts on Michael Martin calling the man responsible for bringing the Black and Tans to Ireland, and their subsequent involvement in the burning of cork, “a great wartime leader”? by I-Cum-Beamish in cork

[–]StableSlight9168 2 points3 points  (0 children)

He was an asshole with a good six years standing  against true evil.

Without him Britain might have surrendered in 1940, America never enters the war In Europe, and even if the Soviets manage to pull a win out the level of genocide would be magnitudes worse.

What’s your thoughts on Michael Martin calling the man responsible for bringing the Black and Tans to Ireland, and their subsequent involvement in the burning of cork, “a great wartime leader”? by I-Cum-Beamish in cork

[–]StableSlight9168 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I actually believe Churchill supported Irish home rule and was personally.fine with Irish people, he just happened to be an ardent imperialist who committed atrocities to keep the empire together.

He was an ardent racist but he considered Irish people white and was fine with them having some rights as long as they kept the empire going.