Can you explain? I seriously doubt it.

When did China ever eradicate more people than they created over the same period of time? China adds 50000 people PER DAY. It took 8 years for them to incarcerate 1million Uyghers….most survived.

If you birth more than you eradicate, you culled nothing. 🤦‍♂️

Average gas prices are temporarily $.06 higher than 2008. Oil prices are dropping fast. Oil companies aren’t pumping oil they have and aren’t near top production levels at refineries, but are complaining they can’t have more preserve land and offshore preserves to drill on.
You want to compare to 2020, and you want to ignore the absolute disaster of leadership that made the economy so bad that gas prices dropped significantly and oil went to -$40 a barrel at one point. You want to forget the -36% gdp and 750000 dead Americans, and between $10-16 TRILLION dollars in wasted money it took to have those lower gas prices (with no where to go because everything was closed, and nothing to buy because all supply chains were broken).
For a family of 4, the debt left by Trump’s Covid failures is well over $200000. How many tanks of gas would that have bought you?
Yes, I maintain my position that the pandemic response team global response unit could have likely identified and stopped Covid in the very early stages and evaded even an epidemic in China had they not been eradicated, and you can’t prove different. That puts it all on you know who’s shoulders.

BTW, liberal California is poised to rebate every taxpayer $400 to cover increased gas prices thanks to our functioning economy and budget surpluses.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7604733/

With all the Trump and Trumpist failures, I think it could be a total ass kicking BY Democrats. The shine is off the Trump penny, and everyone outside the cult can tell it’s just a blank slug painted copper…that includes many in your party, causing a deep divide for Democrats to exploit. Numerous Republican candidates are being challenged in court to bar them from public office for being part of an insurrection….including Trump in 6 states. Can’t win if you can’t hold office. D’oh!

Are you sad about duckduckgo? It seems your ilk are outraged that the platform has decided to limit (not even censure) Russian propaganda, moving it away from the top of their news feeds, and without their Russian propaganda spoon fed to them, they’ve started throwing tantrums and stomping away in search of a site that will tell them the lies they want to hear. Such infants. Are you one? Be honest. (Ha, like you would)

Jesus fucking Christ!
Yesterday Green again called for civil war, but now admits she wants it to end with the dissolution of the union, a “national divorce”. She wants the new countries to be small and injured enough that China and Russia won’t need to deploy much of their armies to take them. (She also announced her plan to remove voting rights from Democrats who move to new states, but apparently not for Republicans that move.)

Paul recently stated "The idea of democracy and majority rule really is what goes against our history and what the country stands for."

Republicans, so in love with the USA and democracy that they want to eradicate both, and publicly say so….and then insist that’s patriotic.

Just wow, buddy. Just wow.

Your video, Abbot Claims Prosecuting Rape Will Eradicate Rape In Texas, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

This achievement has earned you your "Pop Star" Level 277 Badge!

Yes, he's making his point quite well.
He's pointing out all the ways they follow the law and rules of civilization, even though they're sometimes inconvenient or uncomfortable, even though many laws are to protect others more than themselves. He's doing it in a way that no one ignores. He's exemplifying the selfish, outrageous behavior they are championing in such a way that they can't help but disagree with him, which MAY lead to them questioning their own actions and recognising they resemble that display he put on.

When did he call them names?

Mask mandates are in place, put there by responsible representatives. This meeting was to explain why to those too obstinate to understand why, not to let them choose.
They have been told hundreds of times by calm reasonable people, calmly and using data and statistics to explain why masks and vaccines are necessary, and the answer was "keep yer govment vaxine urtta mah blud and yer Fouchi facemask off me and mah chilin!"

Only enforcing it when it's absolutely necessary, only where it's absolutely necessary, and for as short a time as possible has led us to wave 4, the worst yet. It's necessary now until the virus is gone, it's necessary everywhere so the virus doesn't have a Petri dish to evolve in and become far more virulent and dangerous, it's necessary to continue wearing them and getting vaccinated/boostered until the virus is eradicated....maybe until civilization falls if we're unlucky or too stupid to follow directions.

I have no idea why this touches such a nerve for you. It seems so obviously proper to most of us, and an excellent way to show them that they already do tons of annoying stuff for other people's safety, like driving the speed limit and stopping at lights and wearing clothes, not starting random fires, etc....all stuff mandated by the government.

Explain please, why that's improper.

Wait....so you say we shouldn't have a discussion at all with anti maskers/antivaxers, because they'll spout some nonsense?!
Um.....no.
You don't convince people to do the right thing by ignoring them when they do the wrong things for the wrong reasons. WTF are you saying?! Don't have any discussions because extremists will take hold and you think reasonable people can do nothing. Only true if reasonable people stop trying to discuss and convince them of reality, which is your suggestion? Um......

It was something interesting that I didn't know. I'm almost always ready to eradicate my own ignorance whenever it's spotted. I still want to know more details, like how do the new ones expire and go to a "safe" mode?

Thanks for the pp.

Big assumption. Many Hitler youth made the choice to fight for Germany, and joined on their own before children were being drafted.

As for those that were conscripted, is it your position that draftees are somehow immune from responsibility for murdering their neighbors, women, children, rapes, burning towns, or planting millions of landmines on foreign soil, etc? How convenient for them. I don't believe that's a popular or legal position.

I take responsibility for my actions. If their fate was mine, I would be eternally grateful I was treated so much better than I would have treated them if the tables were turned. I would be part of an invading Nazi army, trying to undo just a tiny bit of the damage we had caused, doing so at the direction of my superiors just like when I caused the situation. I would deserve execution, not release. This assumes I wouldn't have the spine to refuse to be a Nazi and be imprisoned or executed.

If the majority of Germans weren't complicit, the Nazis would have never come to power. You give them far too much credit. From the holocaust encyclopedia- "Opposition to the Nazi regime also arose among a very small number of German youth, some of whom resented mandatory membership in the Hitler Youth." Same with adults, the opposition was a minority by far, not the majority of Germans. Who told you that?

"Survived the fighting"? "Here"? "They"? Please finish your thoughts so they have meaning. You seem to be equating Nazi soldiers with the Jews they tried to eradicate. What?!?

The Geneva convention we know today was ratified in 1949. The accords of 1929 were found to be totally insufficient to protect POWs, civilians, infrastructure, etc. Yes, Germany did appear violate it's vague provisions....so did the allies. That's why it was strengthened in 49.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geneva_Conventions

What provision of the 1929 version do you claim this violates?

Articles 20, 21, 22, and 23 states that officers and persons of equivalent status who are prisoners of war shall be treated with the regard due their rank and age and provide more details on what that treatment should be.
Or
Articles 27 to 34 covers labour by prisoners of war. Work must fit the rank and health of the prisoners. The work must not be war-related and must be safe work. ("Safe" and "war related" being intentionally vague and unenforceable).
Please explain the specific violation that makes mine removal a "war crime". It's not war related, the war was over, and it's "safe" if done properly.
Since this was done at the direction of German officers, the convention as written then doesn't apply.

Death camp!!! LOL. Now I know you aren't serious.
"The removal was part of a controversial agreement between the German Commander General Georg Lindemann, the Danish Government and the British Armed Forces, under which German soldiers with experience in defusing mines would be in charge of clearing the mine fields.
This makes it a case of German soldiers under German officers and NCOs clearing mines under the agreement of the German commander in Denmark who remained at his post for a month after the surrender - this means Germany accepted that they had responsibility to remove the mines - they just had far too few experienced mine clearance experts and far too many “drafted” mine clearers with no real experience in doing so." So, if it's a war crime, it's one the Germans committed against themselves.

I'm happy to say that anything done to a Nazi soldier is ethical, age notwithstanding. Many Nazi youth were more zealous and violent than their adult counterparts. Removing their DNA from the gene pool would have been ethical, but illegal. Taking their country to create Israel would have been ethical, but didn't happen.

At the time, there were few mechanical means of mine removal, they didn't work on wet ground, they required a tank and that the area be pre-cleared of anti tank mines, they often get stuck on beaches, and had just over a 50% clearance rate, cost $300-$1000 per mine removed, and they were in extremely short supply after the war. The Germans volunteered in this instance. Now, the Mine Ban Treaty gives each state the primary responsibility to clear its own mines, just like this agreement did.

So you know, the film is fiction, not history. Maybe read up on the real history before attacking countries over a fictional story. History isn't nearly as cut and dry as it's presented, neither are war crimes.

Explain please.

The first wrong was being a Nazi youth invader attacking their neighbors and trying to subjugate or eradicate them....IMO that's actually three wrongs at a minimum, but I digress.

What's the second wrong? Using POWs this way was common practice then....no Geneva convention yet banning it. Most POWs were treated exponentially worse, starved and tortured to death or used as slave labor and worked to death on dangerous projects. By comparison, these Hitler youths were coddled.

Being forced to clean up a small mine field before release is hardly on par with that....there are still allegedly POWs alive in Vietnam and elsewhere....They would jump at the chance to clear mines and be released.

And what's the alternative? Leave the mines to kill civilians? Have the victims of invasion do the dirty work of cleaning up the mess the invading Nazis left? I think forcing the invaders to clean up the mess they made is the ONLY right move, anything else is wrong....like what we do, dropping hundreds of thousands of mines on foreign soil from the air with no idea where most end up and just leaving them to disable a country for generations. That is wrong....this isn't even harsh IMO.

Rightly so. He's responsible.

He eradicated the agency that was protecting us from exactly this kind of disease. He let it in the country by only stopping Chinese people from entering, he let it spread by refusing to quarantine, he made it exponentially worse by telling you idiots it was just the flu, go about business as usual. He did nothing right and failed miserably to lead.

This is the Trump pandemic, I blame all American deaths on his actions directly. We had every opportunity to avoid any outbreak at all, and he squandered every single one.

I thought I addressed that. Travel was also open between states, and many countries with "free travel amongst nations" had no-travel/stay at home orders in place, unlike the U.S., and afaik, mandatory quarantine for all international travelers.

Again, because he eradicated the international Global Health Security and Biodefense unit, I can legitimately ascribe every single non Chinese death and most Chinese deaths to his actions directly. A pandemic on this level WAS foreseen after SARS, Ebola, and Swine Flu, it's why we created the GHSB. It's why we had a pandemic response plan that Trump completely ignored and actually denied it existed for months and months.

I also am going by facts. My facts say that at least four things Trump did against professional advice took us from prepared to minimise any pandemic to at worst a foreign epidemic to a place where months after pandemics start our leader denied any danger and made no moves to stop it.
1) Eradication of the GHSB, missed opportunity one to have zero US cases and avoid a pandemic completely.
2) Repeated early public denial of the danger while encouraging others to do the same and go about business as usual, missed opportunity two to have zero US cases, and a missed opportunity to minimize any spread if quarantining travelers (something else he failed miserably to even consider early on) failed.
3) Encouragement of those who trust him to ignore all mitigation efforts, don't mask, don't social distance, don't shut down non essential businesses, don't close schools, don't listen to medical professionals....missed opportunity number three to minimize US infections to thousands instead of hundreds of thousands. Remember the many months he said grandma would gladly die to get people back to work, pretending many months in that only feeble octogenarians get sick?
4) Denial of a prepared response plan, never following it and claiming total ignorance, missed opportunity number four to follow prepared plans based on science from day one, missing the opportunity to keep our infection rate at S Korean levels.

That's four well researched and vetted moronic, irrational, and irresponsible mistakes he personally made that multiplied our infection rate by 100- infinity times (if we could have had zero without his multiple massive and stupid mistakes, which is not just possible but likely, he can be said to have CAUSED every single US case, multiplying our infections by infinity.). There were more, but I'm beating a dead horse.
Remember, his real plan was natural herd immunity, with an expected 3-60 million deaths depending on who you asked.

I say if intelligent decisions could have avoided all US infections, and that's undeniable IMO, you can lay the blame for as high a percentage as you like on the leader who made bad dangerous decisions out of pure narcissistic ignorance and hatred of his predecessor...up to 100%. 80-90% still seems like I'm coddling him, at least two failures could have made cases zero, and others minimized it to under 10% of what we have. All four I listed almost certainly allowed >90% giving every doubt and giving him all possible credit....so yes, I'm satisfied I'm not exaggerating.

Obama's responsible and responsive planning and execution stopped Ebola from ever spreading here despite it making it to our shores, and it was FAR more contagious and deadly. Had we had Trump then doing the same things, there would be tens of millions dead and likely still spreading disease, imo.


Edit: let me try analogy...If a mayor removes the stop signs from 4 way highway intersections, they are responsible for every wreck that happens, even though other towns with stop signs still have wrecks at intersections. Trump pulled the signs, removed the flashing red light, and cut first responder funding, and claimed there never was a highway code to follow and he takes no responsibility for the jump in highway deaths.

To them I say your God gave man intelligence, reason, and logic which together eradicated any need for God at all to explain the universe and all it contains, including that intelligence, reason, and logic.

Also....the babble fish. Case closed. Now I've got to go before the zebra academy across the street let's out for lunch.

Just remember, Texas refused the federal money to implement the ACA. It worked better, still not perfectly, in states that embraced it.

It's possible they could go overboard on guns, but I think there are plenty of democrats out there that want more gun control but not gun eradication or removals. They won't back representatives that back extreme gun laws.

You're probably right about the 96 ban returning and becoming permanent if dems have full control.

Silly, just a ban on selling one style of rifle, not a type. Are they still actually working on that, or are you talking about past attempts? I thought that has gone nowhere since Jan 2019 when it was introduced and shelved. New bill number please.

Supressors/silencers, not a firearm but an accessory, like bump stocks. That's not anti gun.

D I Y, good luck. Who's actually trying any such thing? They would have to ban each design, because they can't ban the method. I've not heard of any actual legislation, just moaning. Bill number please.
Ghost guns, pre manufactured kits but requiring assembly, should be treated like any gun imo. That means serial numbers and background checks, that's not anti gun legislation.

Private sales loophole, exactly what I mentioned, and in no way anti gun. They aren't trying to ban private sales, just require background checks.
I think you're making that up, where did you get the idea most illegal guns are bought by girlfriends?
I bought a new gun from a dealer at a show in Florida with no check myself once, so nope. You're just wrong.

I feel like you are almost certainly just parroting right wing claims without actually seeing if they're true. Give me current bill numbers in the house or Senate please.

Banning modifications is not anti gun, it's anti modification.

You can buy guns online, just not safely or legally. You can buy prostitutes and fentenal online. You can buy kits that require you to make one drill hole to make a functioning unlicensed unregistered unidentifiable gun online legally.

Crazy people can certainly buy guns, in private sales with no background checks. That's why the loopholes should be eradicated, or do you support giving terrorists a method to secretly buy guns legally? That's the outcome of fighting closing loopholes.

*doublepromote
Time to release the SEV (simian eradication virus).