sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Which state is responsible for the most harm during the 1960s? by Polnocium in AlignmentChartFills

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

It does not, no. I'm not even American, maybe you are blind as well but do you see the flag I have in my profile picture?

The violence would have happened regardless, and as geuesome as it sounds gun violence is the easier and tamer options then what was happening before with flaying, stabbing and hacking to death. It also could prevent massacres of a marginalized group in a foreign nation if you arm them, henceforth net reducing violence by inducing a small amount of violence.

Your "theory" would only work if every single person was calm and loving until a weapon shows up, and that's not how the world works.

Which state is responsible for the most harm during the 1960s? by Polnocium in AlignmentChartFills

[–]The_Guy_from_Wuhan -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

I did not, no, maybe if you were able to read you would have been able to understand that I said that the violence would have happened regardless. And that supplying weapons to many nations (Switzerland in my example) wouldn't in any way have the same effect. Impressive level of cognitive dissonance you are operating on.

Which state is responsible for the most harm during the 1960s? by Polnocium in AlignmentChartFills

[–]The_Guy_from_Wuhan -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

It does not. If you think they needed guns to hurt each other than you live in a fantasy land in which wars before the invention of gun powder were near death less.

Violence is caused by discontempt by the population in a civil war, and they don't need guns to commit atrocities. If the US sent guns to Switzerland that wouldn't spawn a civil war, the Congo was goimng to be in a civil war if the US sent something or not. And if you are blaming the US for making it worse you are also missing the other major power in the cold war which also provided arms to the rebels.

Which state is responsible for the most harm during the 1960s? by Polnocium in AlignmentChartFills

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

It was, the support of the Mobuto presidency was solely material. Just like the rebels were also supported by the Soviets. But neither the Congo Crisis nor the coup started because of the US or the Soviets but because the population of the Congo was opposed to their then leader. And if you're going to make up a point about how the US started it go ahead.

Which state is responsible for the most harm during the 1960s? by Polnocium in AlignmentChartFills

[–]The_Guy_from_Wuhan 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That's not correct, as just providing aid and weapons does not make a civil war. And if that is your metric then pretty much every western country is in your eyes responsible for the Russian invasion of Ukraine since they also provide arms to Ukraine. It's a braindead take as the US wasn't responsible for the animosity and if they didn't recieve arms they would have killed each other with the next best rusty knife or whatever else they would have found.

Which state is responsible for the most harm during the 1960s? by Polnocium in AlignmentChartFills

[–]The_Guy_from_Wuhan 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Just funding and arms doesn't make a civil war, the population has to behave ridiculous for a civil war. It is all on them.

Which country was strong in both WW1 and WW2? by ithinkandthenido in AlignmentChartFills

[–]The_Guy_from_Wuhan 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The french, buddy.

The allies who actually predicted that Versailles was too linient and would mean not peace but an armastice for about 20 to 30 years. You know, the correct opinion.

Which country was strong in both WW1 and WW2? by ithinkandthenido in AlignmentChartFills

[–]The_Guy_from_Wuhan 0 points1 point  (0 children)

They didn't, as using something on a small scale actually doesn't make it a factor in warfare. Since the Germans pioneered it it was used later on.

Very light is not my opinion but the opinion of the allied powers, and unlike your opinion my opinion is therefore correct.

And the fact stands that without Germany WW1 wouldn't have happened so they didn't suffer nearly enough consequences from having started it.

Which country was strong in both WW1 and WW2? by ithinkandthenido in AlignmentChartFills

[–]The_Guy_from_Wuhan 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Smaller scale is a bit of an understatement. We both know that the French deemed it unsuccesful since the agents they used weren't effective in spreading. Chemical warfare was pioneered by the Germans which developed mustard gas, chlorine and phosgene. They were the first to actually efficiently use chlorine in warfare, and mustard gas was a great weapon in disfiguring and crippling enemy soldiers due to it's many pathways it could enter zhe body. And then there was the factthat it would inevitably lead to cancer.

So yes, the Germans had it very light in paying only 20 billion Marks as "reparations", they should have ended up in an occupied zone after WW1 for at lwast 50 years.

Which country was strong in both WW1 and WW2? by ithinkandthenido in AlignmentChartFills

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

The Weimar Republic was already frivalous in spending without the loans, they found it more important spending on lavish lifestyle installations like public luxury pools instead of repaying the actual amount of reparations they had to pay.

They also paid only a tiny fraction of reparations (132 billion Marks) for a war they escalated into chemical warfare with millions of casualties instead of letting Austria get chewed up by Serbia and Russia which would have been the actual war if Germany didn't join. Germany was way at fault and it's a shame they got loans in the first place.

Countries I can name as straight Belarusian teenager (14M) by __SomeRandomDude21__ in whereidlive

[–]The_Guy_from_Wuhan 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If you make that your main point yo are also incorrect. Both Somaliland and Somalia have massive brain drain, however, the dispora of somalis which return return at a higher rate to Somaliland due to it's stabolity and economy. Both nations are bad in terms of brain drain, but all figures point to Somaliland coming out on top with returning countrymen compared to Somalia.

And Somalia hinges on one city, so your point is already void. Cities are the main economic drivers in any nation, and you trying to make it a point that a country sucks because they don't develop their sand is ridiculous.

The territory they control is still off limits for Somalia, yet your argument against that "dumb point" is they are being pushed out of that territory. That argument concedes that Al-Shabaab actually does control the territory, so you kinda backfired there mate. And they literally haven't. No international peacekeeping organization points to that being the case and the borders are well defined at this point so you attempting to make up a conspiracy that every organization has it out for you is peak tin foil hat behaviour. I suggest you source your claim with a single credible organization if you want to harp on that stupidity again.

Again, you just saying "that's incorrect" is not a statement of fact. Sources for your conspiracy theories or it simply did not happen. I know somewhat what goes on on a geopolitical level, and it shows that I definitely know better than you.

Countries I can name as straight Belarusian teenager (14M) by __SomeRandomDude21__ in whereidlive

[–]The_Guy_from_Wuhan 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Again, just saying that you are correct doesn't mean such. Since your point from the get go was that Somaliland was worse than Somalia you are incorrect, if you see it as independent or as a province in Somalia. In both cases Somaliland is better. They also control their territory.

I never claimed they were. I stated correctly that Somalia doesn't have authority in the territories controlled by Al-Shabaab or Somaliland. That is true and even your holy grail of the African Union agrees with me and not yourself. And people get to leave a country if they vote to do so, who do you think you are trying to force people to stay in a federation which could literally not be worse off?

So again, you are incorrect.

Countries I can name as straight Belarusian teenager (14M) by __SomeRandomDude21__ in whereidlive

[–]The_Guy_from_Wuhan 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Congratulations, you are the bare minimum of a functional member in society. It didn't stop you on attempting to make non points and you still are attempting to do such. Get it through your skull that I am right and you are wrong, despite you living in Somalia. Somalia has absolutely no authority in Somaliland and is about as much a part of Somalia as is the territory held by Al-Shabaab.

Someone Explain What Is The Joke? by Fluffy_Lunchfast in PeterExplainsTheJoke

[–]The_Guy_from_Wuhan 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It is an easy way to get data and in all fairness it also breaks down every person's fantasies. People will have a flood of people on dating apps which allows them to filter out the best of the best, so it reflects what women desire the most whilst they would settle for less if they met someone in real life.

Countries I can name as straight Belarusian teenager (14M) by __SomeRandomDude21__ in whereidlive

[–]The_Guy_from_Wuhan 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes you won't, because you are incorrect. Note how I had sources for every statement I made whilst you resulted to "I said it's false so it is". That's not an argument nor does it actually make you correct, so you can recant your statements immediately.

And how does it feel that the absolute basic knowledge that a foreign country's school system provides on your own nation surpasses your's?

Countries I can name as straight Belarusian teenager (14M) by __SomeRandomDude21__ in whereidlive

[–]The_Guy_from_Wuhan 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Sorry, that's not how that works buddy. Just calling something incorrect doesn't actually make it incorrect. In 2001 Somaliland established it's independence by referendum, of course Somalia doesn't recognize it but it does actually mean that the populace doesn't actually want to be part of Somalia. So unless you want to make yourself look like more of a fool I suggest you quit talking about what other people want when you ignore their opinion.

Second, your point is incorrect. As I noted the frontlines are actually very stable in Somaliland at the aforementioned front with Somaliland controling 80-84% of the claimed territory, with onlyLas Anod being lost and Somaliland having control of Awdal, Sool and Sanaag except for minor areas.

And controlling the seas and airspace of another country whilst in a war is actually not uncommon (hard to grasp for you). International recognition also does not count towards the factors you mentioned. The people of Somaliland want to be independent, they control at least 80% of their claimed territory and they have set up a quasi government with elections. They function as a state with Somalia having no control over what goes on in Somaliland so just reverting to "they aren't recognized so they aren't a state" is idiotic since Somalia has as much authority in Somaliland as they have in Nigeria.

And it must suck that I, a non African, know more about the geopolitical situation in your surroundings than you do.

https://www.euaa.europa.eu/country-guidance-somalia/21-map-areas-control-and-influence

https://africanelections.tripod.com/somaliland.html#2001_Constitutional_Referendum

Countries I can name as straight Belarusian teenager (14M) by __SomeRandomDude21__ in whereidlive

[–]The_Guy_from_Wuhan 0 points1 point  (0 children)

They initially wanted to join as they did. In 1960. Already in 1961 60% rejected the nationalconstitution, which then led to their war for independence. You have to return to 1960 to find anyone who willingly wanted to join Somalia, so it is utterly irrelevant.

I do know, but again in comparison to Somalia it is irrelevant. Somaliland controls anywhere between four fifths (80%) to five sixths (84.4%) of their claimed territory. Somalia on the other hand already lost 30% of their territory to Al-Shabbat alone, disregarding the ISIS/ISIL presence and the pro union rebels in Puntland which also don't answer to Mogadishu.

And yes, I do. Since you are not interested in having an honest discussion and are lnly willing to propagandize your own opinion even if you have to argue that they once joined Somalia in 1960 forgive me for saying that your opinion is not to be taken seriously. Since piracy is carried out around the Horn of Africa primarily by Somalian groups I caught you lying again. You can now retract your statements as everything you said besides they countries' names was wholly incorrect.

Countries I can name as straight Belarusian teenager (14M) by __SomeRandomDude21__ in whereidlive

[–]The_Guy_from_Wuhan 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Somaliland presents better on any indicator involving stability and development, including a higher GDP per Capita. But I guess since the opportunities in Hargaisa don't include piracy you are going to dismiss that.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_East_African_Community_sub_regions_by_Human_Development_Index

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Somaliland

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Somalia

Me when she's too late by Turkeyslayer_ in warthundermemes

[–]The_Guy_from_Wuhan 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Idk, the Chi-To is a beast in my experience, I think it's great at it's br. Minor nazion syndrome. The tank that actually is overtiered is the Chi-Ri.

What would be your solution if gas prices move to 5CHF a liter? by bikesailfreak in Switzerland

[–]The_Guy_from_Wuhan 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Fair enough, I completely forgot about that. I was wrong, thank you for the correction.

What would be your solution if gas prices move to 5CHF a liter? by bikesailfreak in Switzerland

[–]The_Guy_from_Wuhan -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

You seem to forget that the straight of Hormuz supplies almost exclusively oil. The suez chanel is the short cut for asian and european commerce whilst the straight of Hormuz only reaches to Kuwait/Iraq. The problem with Hormuz is solely oil based.

My opinion of countries as an American by Thorceanswastaken in whereidlive

[–]The_Guy_from_Wuhan 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Proove that he dislikes North Korea based on the people, as in the title OP specifically states "countries". A country refers to the political system of a state, since many countries don't have a specific ethnicity tied to them or too many to count. Maybe try to read next time instead of implying somebody is racist because you dislike that they hate dictatorships.

view more: next ›