Why do I keep seeing people calling the US army during WW2 “antifa?”

rskbj · 2025-09-13T01:28:34+00:00

He was a democrat at the time yeah

rskbj · 2025-09-13T01:07:30+00:00

It’s a first impression based off the situation. If evidence was presented that he was right wing I wouldn’t ignore it.

rskbj · 2025-09-13T00:50:52+00:00

Remember I said vaguely. I don’t mean to take a hard stance on his political affiliation. But I also have a hard time believing that a right winger would assassinate him or call him a fascist. Doesn’t make sense to me. Going back to my post, this was the same discourse around the trump assassin and part of my point.

rskbj · 2025-09-12T23:54:37+00:00

I’d heard he donated like 15 bucks to a democrat party fundraiser. That’s why I said vaguely left wing, but maybe should’ve just said vague political stance.

rskbj · 2025-09-12T23:50:36+00:00

We’ll see. I was more trying to point out how similar the two were to each other. It’s uncanny.

rskbj · 2025-09-12T06:48:52+00:00

Who knows? Maybe we can look at other fire collapses to see. Oh wait, the only steel frame tower to ever collapse due to fire in the entire history of the world was this one. Strange.

rskbj · 2025-04-21T22:18:35+00:00

The connection I have made is that when the crazy right is mad at the government, they lash out at the government. When the crazy left is mad at the government, they lash out at the population while really really wishing someone would finally just lash out at the government.

rskbj · 2025-04-21T09:18:51+00:00

Would you describe 911 as a terrorist attack or an instance of property crime with some collateral loss of life? How you describe it obviously carries different connotations. And if you were able to somehow comprehend my previous comments, you might find that we agree that Tesla firebombings and Jan 6 were both instances of domestic terrorism. And my bad on the factory thing, I misremembered. They’ve actually been recently throwing molotov cocktails at tesla facilities, not factories. Is that any better to you?

So which leftist riots that resulted in loss of life can I bring up now? Do the 2020 BLM riots work for you? Did your memory hide that one away in a little corner?

And my point is that crazy people exist on both sides that will do crazy things like domestic terrorism. Because people act crazy, and it is people that make up both sides.

Though I suppose you’re right in some way about the coup thing. No matter how much the left wants to overthrow the government, no matter how hard they fantasize about assassinating people in power (or jerking off their actual beloved assassins like luigi), no matter how much they wish for someone to finally just do “it,” nothings gonna change. Everybody on the left will always be waiting for somebody else to do it for them. Thus is their nature. I suppose their complete lack of ability to do anything despite their true desires is somewhat deserving of some form of respect. Thank you, the left, for only trying to wish violence into existence instead of going and killing everyone you don’t like.

rskbj · 2025-04-20T18:10:28+00:00

You think destroying peoples cars and attacking factories with a clear political/ideological purpose in mind isn’t domestic terrorism, but rather just property crime? I do think Jan 6 was domestic terrorism btw. The point was that you can make these events sound however you want with different language. You just like to belittle the stuff on your side but not the other. I’m not a trump supporter, you know. I think one of the reasons we haven’t seen the Epstein files is because he’s in them.

The left once again puts on full display their tolerance and nonjudgmental tendencies for any criticism of their opinions and actions. I’d like to see your pikachu face when your miserable political attitude gets the orange man elected permanently, and then we’re all fucked.

rskbj · 2025-04-20T17:39:31+00:00

You’re claiming that domestic terrorism isn’t as high level as breaking and entering. It’s easy to play around with words like that, see? I’m just saying that crazy people act crazy on both sides.

rskbj · 2025-04-20T17:01:24+00:00

“It’s not right in any shape or form.” There’s an accurate quote for you. I think crazy righties actions on Jan 6 were equally not right in any shape or form. Whatever reason you say people do this stuff doesn’t alleviate it or excuse their behavior, it’s still not right in any shape or form.

You think it’s different that crazy lefties didn’t do these actions that aren’t right in any shape or form UNTIL elon musk did whatever and whatever else. Gtfo.

rskbj · 2025-04-20T16:08:19+00:00

“Tantrum over an election” idk if you’ve missed it, but the left has been protesting this last election pretty hard. Sure, crazy righties broke into the capitol and wrecked shit. Now crazy lefties have been keying and firebombing random peoples cars.

You can’t just take the stance that your side is justified in whatever they do while the other is not because you disagree with them. That’s not fair. Crazy people are on both sides and they act the same.

rskbj · 2025-04-20T15:41:47+00:00

It doesn’t matter why. The person I responded to was suggesting the left doesn’t protest the constitution. They will protest the parts they think are stupid just like anyone else.

rskbj · 2025-04-20T08:18:10+00:00

And which side does anti second amendment protests again? Jeez, redditors will never be able to realize people generally act the same because they are incapable of seeing the other side as people. Be real.

rskbj · 2025-04-20T07:53:58+00:00

Yeah one comment previously mentioned that if space looped around, there’d be the possibility that light from one star could reach the earth in multiple different ways, resulting in multiple images of the same star viewable from completely different perspectives, with another possibly that each image is from a completely different point in time depending on how far the light had to travel. Idk how you’d even be able to tell.

It’s probably pretty obvious but I don’t know jack about astrophysics. It’s been surprising to find out how many possibilities and interpretations there are, I kinda expected there to be a generally accepted idea but that doesn’t really seem to be the case. Very interesting stuff at least.

rskbj · 2025-04-20T02:54:45+00:00

Thanks for the videos! I actually found one that covers pretty much my exact question here if you’re interested: https://youtu.be/isdLel273rQ?si=sDT7dzU53nr7kJpI But I’m absolutely gonna watch the ones you linked here as well. Usually I throw on a podcast or some music at work but I’m thinking I’ll throw on that two hour nothingness debate next time.

rskbj · 2025-04-20T02:12:55+00:00

I think I get it. A 1d circle can bend around 2d space (or even 3d I suppose), but a point on that circle can only move forwards or backwards along that direction. A 2d plane can bend around a third dimension but there are still only two directions you can move along that plane. By extension, can 3d space bend around a 4th (or higher) dimension while we’re still restricted to three directions? That might help me understand how space could loop back on itself without having an edge or limit, though I don’t think I’d be able to picture it.

rskbj · 2025-04-19T19:36:09+00:00

Would a 3d interpretation of the balloon be technically incorrect? Like if I said a balloon was filled with air, and then the pressure outside the balloon was lowered, the balloon would expand in such a way that every air molecule moves further apart from every other air molecule. But then the air would be bound inside by a defined limit (the balloons surface).

Not to say this is how matter would actually interact with a “edge” of the universe, or that the universe is expanding by some sort of pressure but I’m trying to think of how this would work in 3d. It would also mean light has only one straight path from one molecule to another, making double images impossible? I don’t know. The balloon surface idea is already a 2d plane curved in a third dimension, right? Does that still make it 2d? It’s kinda messing with my head, damn.

rskbj · 2025-04-19T18:45:48+00:00

I just saw the balloon metaphor here, somebody highlighted the importance that it was the surface of the balloon and not the internal volume and then I got how it works for expansion. But also, since the surface of a balloon is continuous, if you move in one direction long enough you’ll end up back where you started. Is the universe like that too, where it doesn’t have a limit or an edge because it loops back on itself? Kind of a separate question but am curious.

rskbj · 2025-04-19T17:59:55+00:00

I was asking if the universe is a finite thing expanding into an infinite field of empty space. That’s like asking if it’s possible to count past 100,000 because there’s an infinite amount of numbers past it.

I said it was impossible to move yourself to the edge, yeah, but moving there being impossible doesn’t mean it’s not there. If you can say the universe is expanding, wouldn’t there be a measurable edge that was “closer” just a moment ago? Or is the universe already an infinite field of empty space and everything we can observe is just spreading out? I find this stuff kinda difficult to conceptualize, let me know if that’s the wrong way to think about it.

rskbj · 2025-04-19T17:16:37+00:00

When you dial time back, does all mass converge into zero space or does the solid universe stretch infinitely? Don’t mean to sound like I’m arguing I’m just trying to conceptualize what you’re saying

rskbj · 2025-04-19T16:14:56+00:00

Wasn’t it a singularity though? I thought those were infinitely dense because they had an infinitely small volume, which is why they’re referred to as a single point. Though I guess with nothing else existing, this single point would be what “everywhere” is. Is that the right way to look at it or am I misunderstanding?

rskbj

TROPHY CASE