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.

Oh shit! You want solutions!? Uh oh.

Maybe a sift talk post or poll to see if changing the definition or policy is popular would be a good start?

In many cases last summer, there was no rioting, but still orders to disperse quickly followed with violence before any opportunity for the command to be heard by most, much less followed.

Portland excluded, most BLM marches, 97%?, had no violence at all, and half the 3% was violence against them...reportedly 1/2 of the remaining 1.5% was by opportunists not involved with the March but using it as cover for crimes. BLM isn't blameless, but they are targets more often than perpetrators. It's hardly fair to charge them with the violence perpetrated against them.

The reporters I watched be beaten were 1) asking police where they wanted him to go when beaten mercilessly and 2) sitting on the sidelines well back from any order to disperse given to a peaceful crowd and trying their hardest to comply as soon as they heard an order, punched in the face and bloodied and shoved hard repeatedly breaking their camera while offering zero obstruction and attempting compliance. I didn't see any intentionally refusing to follow orders.

I'm going by what their representative said. It wasn't over one person, it was over fear of accountability, because they cannot do that job without violating people's rights, they don't have the patience or restraint.

Portland isn't a BLM issue, it's what happens when outsiders take over a popular nonviolent protest.

Biden is such a virile, imposing leader that Republicans are terrified to be in the same room, so they have announced the entire party plans to skip his address to congress....because they claim they want bipartisanship and respect. 🤦‍♂️


So much for bipartisanship. No more concessions to you snowflakes. The obstructionist party has proven conclusively for decades that sour grapes and obstinate obstruction are more important to them than leadership or legislation, more important than fighting the pandemic, more important than the economy, more important than infrastructure projects, more important than America.

Biden's approval rating has yet to dip near as low as Trump's best day. His plans are popular among even Republican voters. Your feeble little cries, dumb whining, sour grapes, and blind projection are music to our ears. Enjoy the next 8 years.
Covfefe.

Oh excellent - thanks! Had to look her up, and this appears to have been the first of a set of recurring bits with her.

(shamelessly ripped from wikipedia) "In her early career as a regular on The Smothers Brothers Comedy Hour of the late-1960s, French portrayed a somewhat spaced-out or ditzy hippie named Goldie O'Keefe. The character was originally introduced, in an ostensible studio-audience interview segment, as Goldie Keif; both "Goldie" and "Keif" were slang terms for marijuana at the time. Reportedly, the slight name change to O'Keefe when she became a semi-regular was at the television network's insistence. Her segment of the show was called "Share a Little Tea with Goldie." At the time, "sharing tea" was a popular euphemism for getting high on marijuana. Following suit, her segment consisted largely of "helpful" household advice loaded with sex and drug-related double entendres."

Filing away "goldie" and "sharing tea," those were new to me

"What on earth are you talking about?"
-newt

The rules for property and income when one or both parties decide they no longer want to be in the relationship.




"not having a marriage means you almost certainly will pay for them for 18+ years but won't have many rights to be in their lives"
-newt

Incorrect. If you are on birth certificate, you have the same rights and obligations.
The only pitfalls are that :
- Child support is calculated from the income of the parent with less custody (rather than from the true cost of raising a child).
- Women almost always get custody if the choice is between two parents (like when they live far apart and child can only be at one or the other).



"and may lose your rights to any assets if she grabs first"
-newt

Negative. Co-parenting does not conflate property.

Shared assets when not married are divided either by percentage of purchase price contribution, or by percentage stated in a contract.




"My brother paid well over a hundred thousand dollars for his divorce in Texas"
-newt

"My brother won."
-newt

Won by your own definition. Hence I congratulate.




"You assume women take off time to raise the kids"
-newt

No assumptions. Although afaik they still do it more often.




"You start from a false position that men work both harder and better, but you have no data to back that up. "
-newt

Top result from a zero effort google of "men working hours vs women working hours"

https://towardsdatascience.com/is-the-difference-in-work-hours-the-real-reason-for-the-gender-wage-gap-interactive-infographic-6051dff3a041




"Um...so since you admit many women outearn men and the trend reinforces that"
-newt

I admit that women [as a group] under 35 out earn men under 35 because of preferential admittance (such as to higher education) and preferential hiring (such as to managerial positions).

I did not say that women earn more in the same position for the same hours worked. Young men are simply getting shut out of opportunities, so their incomes are lower. As by design.

It does however highlight how affirmative action is being poorly controlled.
The target statistic is based on overall population at all ages.
The adjustment is skewed to younger ages (school admission is typically for younger people).
So the system is trying to balance out incomes of older men by trimming up incomes of younger women, with no accounting for the effects on younger men or consequences of older men retiring.
The situation is doomed to overshoot with time.

A natural result is the popularity of people like Jordan Peterson, with messages like : "Young men, nobody will help you, stop waiting for someone to help you, stop lamenting your situation, you gotta pull yourself up by your boot straps. Start by cleaning your room, then go make something of yourself".






"Bullshit. You said you would immediately dismiss any woman who has...
"Long dating history? Too much risk[etc]" -scheherazade "
-newt

Straw man argument.

You know I stated that those marriageability criteria exist specifically due to risk of consequences of divorce.

I never stated that I have personal issues with those attributes.
I have dated women on that list. I didn't /marry/ them.

My only criteria for a relationship that I am happy being in is :
- We are mutually attracted
- We like each other
- We are nice to each other
I don't care what your religion is, your politics, your family status, whatever. It's all just noise to me.





" And again, prenuptial. Do you not know what they are?"
-newt

Prenups can be negated by these simple words :

"I did not understand what I was signing"
or
"My lawyer was not present".

Poof. Prenup thrown out.




"their husbands are more likely to break their vows first"
-newt

A woman to cheat needs a willing man (easy)
A man to cheat needs a willing woman (hard)

Times have changed. Online dating made chatting someone up in person and make an impression uncommon, and even considered creepy/unusual. Now people are picked on their online profile based on looks/height/social-media-game.

Dating apps and sites publish their statistics. Nowadays, around 20% of men match with around 80% of women.
Most men aren't having sex. Most men can't find a match to cheat with if they wanted to.

The tall cute photogenic guys are cleaning up.
The 20% of men that match the bulk of women are going through women like a mill. They will smash whatever bored housewife crosses their path.

A 2 second google result :
https://usustatesman.com/economics-of-dating-2-the-brutal-reality-of-dating-apps/




"Women don't like men that believe wholeheartedly that all women are just lessers, leeches"
-newt

Agreed.

Fortunately, I never say that about women.






" you can't grasp that a codified, delineated, agreed to partnership is almost always better, more fulfilling, and has many benefits cohabitation lacks"
-newt

False equivalence.

Cohabitation and Partnership are mutually independent.
Meaning both can exist at the same time.


-scheherazade

Bingus is a hairless Sphynx cat that originated from a video in which he is pet while staring at his owner. Attracting attention on Instagram in March 2020, Bingus' popularity exploded in September after he appeared in a viral Reddit post, which later resulted in online users referring to all Sphynx's as "Bingus."

Impeachment already happened for a second time. You mean the trial.

It is pretty definitely constitutional because he was impeached while still the sitting president.

One reason for it is, in a criminal trial, they have to prove he intended to start a violent insurrection, a very difficult bar to clear especially considering his contradictory instructions in his speech and his mental state....in an impeachment trial they only have to show that his words incited it, not his intent. That’s a no brainer.

The only way it hurts Democrats in 2022 is it would hinder his creating a new party that would split “conservative” votes and guarantee victory for democrats across the board. Thinking conservatives should be itching for conviction and a ban from office to save the Republican party in 2022, if he’s let off conservatives are domed....republicans can’t win without Trumpists, Trump can’t win without Republicans. Conversely, letting him off with no consequences would hurt the democrat vote badly...why elect them if they let Republicans get away with everything including violent and deadly insurrection and attempted assassination.

Your fear of libs coming for your guns makes me sad. You drank the fear flavored koolaid, they just aren’t unless you go violently nuts, stalk someone, or beat your wife up, or if you need to buy them illegally because you’re a felon. Note, the NRA went bankrupt under Trump and McConnel, not Biden.

If Republicans want to fight everything because a murderous and treasonous coup is prosecuted as if it were disturbing the peace with no prison time possible, they should be tossed as traitors to the constitution that they swore to uphold that requires a punishment for inciting insurrection and attempting a government overthrow. Really, they want an excuse for fighting everything, it’s a foregone conclusion that they will no matter what, they have zero interest in compromise or bipartisanship. They insisted Trump had a mandate and should ignore Democrats completely because he won the electoral college, but now that Biden won it and the popular vote and the house and senate they insist he has no mandate and must let the minority call the shots. It’s not consistent because they aren’t honest about anything anymore.

No one that thinks prosecuting directing an attempted coup is wrong would be voting democrat anyway. Prosecuting incitement of murderous insurrection is not vengeance, it’s barely a thin slice of justice, but it’s the best that can be reasonably hoped for in today’s hyper partisan climate.

Sweet Jesus you dishonest brain dead slug. You are either being as dishonest as possible or have severe brain damage....or both.

I’ve never once denied that Democrats WERE once the party of racism and anti civil rights until the 60’s when they decided it was in their interests to support civil rights and oppose racism. When they did that, they became far more popular and Republicans, to have a chance of winning another election, changed their platform to anti civil rights, pro racism in order to gain the southern white racist vote. That was called the southern strategy that you just deny happened despite all evidence proving it did. This is at least the 10th time I’ve pointed this out with references to prove it, and you still act ignorant. Do you have a severe memory problem, or are you just being a dishonest troll starting the same argument for the 11th time because you might get away with it this time?

Yes, the Democratic south WAS the OG of racism and anti civil rights right up till the 60’s when they, like Iced T, changed their thought process and straightened up. Shortly afterwards, Republicans were losing elections and the party was dying, so Goldwater and Nixon courted those abandoned southern white racist voters. Since then, Republicans have been the party of racism and anti civil rights (for non whites). I expect, like at least 10 times before, you’ll take the first 1/2 of the first sentence of this paragraph, remove the word “was”, and pretend I just said Southern racists ARE Democrats because you are nothing but a dishonest bullshit artist (but a horrendously bad one).

Iced T WAS an OG gangster rapper, now he’s a rich actor. Same for Ice Cube, J Z, etc.

I’ve never denied the truth, or history. If Democrats and Republicans had not switched positions I would be Republican and you would be a Democrat...but they did. When are you going to accept the truth? It’s been over 50 years and you still deny it. We aren’t living in the 50’s...you seem confused about that.

Again, if Republicans aren’t the party of racism, how do you explain the fact that they get 100% of the racist white supremacist vote and well under 10% of the black vote?
So infantile Bob. You just have to deny reality every time to ever make your point.

🤦‍♂️

This is like travelling "faster than the speed of light". No idea what thats about either.

Nice SF story.

According to the currently most popular simplest many worlds theory the universe splits every time anything happens at the quantum level - good luck keeping up. Also good luck "communicating" without splitting more universes.

Also its just a theory.

Im sorry this is totally made up, I do wish ice-hockey was that popular!

Not by winning the vote.
Even Clinton was liked more than Trump by over 3000000 Americans AFTER screwing Sanders out of a fair shot....explain that.
Biden has always been more popular than her.
Sorry sunshine.

Your video, The Most Popular Programming Languages - 1965/2020, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

I think the President figured out he was losing the popularity battle on this one---and withdrew the Federal troops from Portland...

The only dispute over the 2016 election I know of was due to the popular vote, the same as Gore Vs Bush in 2000.

Can you cite a single case of Democrats fucking things up since 2016?

We have already established that your use of "finger banging joe" is pro Biden, why do you keep showing support for Biden while extolling the virtues of a wannabe despot?