Latest Diablo 3 News
Support the site! Become a Diablo: IncGamers PAL - Remove ads and more!

"How does it feel?"

Discussion in 'Off-Topic' started by jmervyn, Nov 4, 2015.

  1. Glurin

    Glurin Diabloii.Net Member

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2004
    Messages:
    1,050
    Likes Received:
    65
    Trophy Points:
    126
    You know, every time I see krischan mention that secession is illegal or not allowed or whatever, I can't help but picture the founding fathers...

    "Alright, lets get this declaration signed and in the mail."

    "Wait! Guys! We can't do this. I just got word back from England. King George says we aren't allowed to leave."

    "Ah, darn it! Okay then. Lets all go back home and drink more tea. Hancock, you can just toss that in the fire. The king said we can't leave so lets just pretend this never happened."
     
    jmervyn likes this.
  2. krischan

    krischan Europe Trade Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2003
    Messages:
    30,154
    Likes Received:
    1,141
    Trophy Points:
    416
    You must be joking. Then there's no sovereign country at all. Your concept of sovereignty is useless.

    Well, I don't think it is like that.

    That's fine for you because the US is big enough to get its things done on its own while European countries are usually too small in order to achieve the same. That's where alliances come into play. The drawback is that a member has to do a certain amount of what others want. If it doesn't want to do that, then it has to leave the alliance. The Brits did that, fine.

    I've never heard of this wall of cheese nonsense or silly plans aboutf isolating the UK. Probably the pro-brexit faction of the UK made it up... but yes, if the UK sets up a hodtile environment by taking advantage from claims that the EU are the bad guys, then we might insist on doing bad things if it's opportune, like isolating the UK.

    Whatever, if they leave, it starts at zero for everybody. Nothing is for granted. That't not isolating the UK, that's a starting point for discussions. Leave first, then we start talking.

    Why don't they declare the leave right now? Let's say tomorrow? The reason is simple: They want to discuss the future before leaving, so it look as if it's not that bad to leave the EU. I don't know if it's true, but if you put a frog into cold water and slowly warm it up, it will not leave, so you can boil it alive.

    Why should the EU start negotiating about the time after the brexit if the UK hasn't declare the leave? Are they afraid of their courage? Or do some people hope to find an excuse for ignoring the plebiscite? Something like "We can't do a thing, the EU is forcing us to stay in because they don't want to let us keep EU privilege #34, #56 and #216. Help!!11!" And then

    Yes, that was my reasoning as well during the last plebiscite, but now the issue has become useful for divide and conquer by an foreign alliance, another strategy which bad guys might try. I'm not saying that this would be a fair treatment, but fair treatment might not come for free as well when dealing with evil.

    If Scotland* cannot achieve enough things on their own, they will suffer, that's right. My crystal ball is a bit shady about their future, however.

    * Edit: Scotland, not Ireland.
     
    Last edited: Jun 27, 2016
  3. krischan

    krischan Europe Trade Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2003
    Messages:
    30,154
    Likes Received:
    1,141
    Trophy Points:
    416
    Who would need a war in order to secede from the union, the southern US states in the 1860s or the UK in 2016? That was my point. What's yours? I haven't said that you must not do forbidden things.
     
  4. jmervyn

    jmervyn Diabloii.Net Member

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2003
    Messages:
    15,499
    Likes Received:
    474
    Trophy Points:
    509
    I think you may have a fundamental misunderstanding of the terminology. "Sovereign" simply means self-directing; it has no inference of influence or lack thereof. WildBerry, were he here any longer, could probably wax prolific on how his nation was sovereign, yet at the same time they became part of the Axis and eventually lost their sovereignty (first to Germany, then to Russia, if I recall my history correctly). At some point they regained it, yet still suffered under the USSR's influence.

    The EU will continue to influence, if not extort, the UK and/or Britain. However, they will be sovereign once again, as the minimal requirements for national sovereignty are borders and status of citizenship.

    It's already well established that your thinking does not align with mine, nor with reality under many circumstances. This happens to be one of those.

    Here's another of those circumstances (where your thinking isn't in line with reality). The individual American states aren't terribly different in size, policy, & scope than a European country, except that Europeans conduct their own international policy ... under the current administration, the Federal uber-staadt is far more prone to intervention and suppression than with previous administrations, particularly in the areas of immigration and voting rights. They have no authority to do this, and rely on the unreasonable distortion of Federal jurisprudence (and lethargic citizenry) to pull it off. On other matters, individual states are fully within their rights to make international political decisions - the dickwads in California routinely pass anti-Israeli legislation of various sizes and scopes - and the Governor of every state has their own private army. Some of those private armies are the size of larger European ones.

    It's the contrary of what you claim, of course; it's people of your "camp" who are already trying to figure out ways to feck over the British while at the same time blame them for everything that goes wrong from here on out - in particular, for the massive market correction/collapse that I want laid squarely at Obama's doorstep.

    Sour grapes much? The point is, Britain & the UK were members of European agreements long before the sucker's deal that the EU became. There's no reason whatsoever that they couldn't just dial the nasty bits back & keep limited other rights - except, of course, that Brussels is planning to crucify them lest other nations follow suit. It's the same problem that the "tragedy of the commons" always presents. However, I wouldn't read too much into the timelines & the departure dates; none of the pro-statist #remain bureaucrats in Britain imagined they would lose the vote, and therefore haven't even planned anything and are likely to try their damnedest to weasel out from under the results. What's most likely is a watered down pre-EU / EEC arrangement where Britain regains certain rights like borders and perhaps currency, but loses others like taxation of EU goods. China benefited greatly from the existence of Hong Kong; it wasn't a one-way deal to any degree.

    EDIT - more discussion about my "Hong Kong" analogy, in a sense.
    Trade and Immigration After Brexit
     
    Last edited: Jun 28, 2016
  5. Glurin

    Glurin Diabloii.Net Member

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2004
    Messages:
    1,050
    Likes Received:
    65
    Trophy Points:
    126
    That remains to be seen. The people have voted and there is a clause in the EU documents allowing them to leave the EU, but is the parliament going to obey the will of the people? Is the EU going to to have the moral integrity to allow them to go? Are the people who voted to stay going to accept the decision or are they so fearful of the future that they would lash out against those who voted to leave? There's still a lot that can happen that could potentially turn this whole thing very, very ugly.
     
    jmervyn likes this.
  6. LozHinge the Unhinged

    LozHinge the Unhinged Diabloii.Net Member

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2007
    Messages:
    8,877
    Likes Received:
    514
    Trophy Points:
    220
    The EU Project is a fervent desire by Elites within Europe to eliminate the current status of the countries which it comprises. The ultimate goal is the creation of "Europaland (if I was being churlish, I would call it Greater Germania but I am anything but churlish).

    Before addressing issues such as, "Will I be better or worse off?" pr "AM I a racist?", you need to ask yourself, "Do I think I will be happy living in Europaland rather than in England/Scotland/France/Germany/Italy/etc?". If you do not care where the seat of government lies or what former nationality your leaders and lawmakers are, you may then proceed on to the next series of questions.

    What is so ****ing hard about this issue that the media (in the UK) was unable to formulate the question in public?

    If you doubt my interpretation of the EU Project, the clue is on the outside of the packaging - "Ever Closer Union". You discount what this means at your peril.

    Edit: I am reminded of a scene in the movie, The Addams Family: "'We gladly feast upon those who would subdue us'. Not just pretty words". Ever Closer Union.
     
    jmervyn likes this.
  7. Glurin

    Glurin Diabloii.Net Member

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2004
    Messages:
    1,050
    Likes Received:
    65
    Trophy Points:
    126
    It's probably not so much a case of the question being hard to ask as it is a case of they simply won't ask it. You can figure out your own reasons why. Personally I suspect they have something to do with one of CNN's "journalists" announcing as fact that the vote was motivated entirely by xenophobia and racism and Donald Trump. Plus all the doom and gloom and predictions of Londoners living in mud huts or something from here on out. You'd think Britain just voted to devolve back into neanderthals if you listen to some of these people.
     
  8. krischan

    krischan Europe Trade Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2003
    Messages:
    30,154
    Likes Received:
    1,141
    Trophy Points:
    416
    I'm fed up with playing the advocate of a union when I'm opposing large parts of it. I have no problem with the UK leaving it, I just I don't want to hear any complaints about the consqeuences from across the channel, I'm fed up well enough with complaints and the wailing from over here.

    As I said, if the UK is fine with the drawback and thinks and knows that they appreciate the new freedom to a greater extent, then congratulations, UK, seriously! They just shouldn't expect that the others will endure any suffering beyond what comes from the loss of a member of such a significance.

    That's not a matter of the EU, but of the UK itself.

    In which manner can they prevent it? It's obvious that not being a member of an alliance means the loss of all privileges for membership, as well as the end of meeting the obligations. The people of the UK decided to do that. I expect them to give up their claims on anything which the EU provides, just like stopping to fulfill the demands. As soon as they officially resign the membership, they can do the second, just like the EU will do the first then. Isn't that blatantly obvious? A contract is cancelled, that's it.

    Indeed.
     
  9. jmervyn

    jmervyn Diabloii.Net Member

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2003
    Messages:
    15,499
    Likes Received:
    474
    Trophy Points:
    509
    Here's a piece on that very subject, also pointing out the inconsistencies of linking #Brexit to American Progressives' hysteria over Trumpism.

    How Brexit shattered progressives' dearest illusions

    Is that your picture is in the dictionary under the definition of 'churl'? Ain't mine.
    There's nothing hard about it; the bulk of non-Internet media is completely in the tank for Progressivism.
     
  10. jmervyn

    jmervyn Diabloii.Net Member

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2003
    Messages:
    15,499
    Likes Received:
    474
    Trophy Points:
    509
  11. krischan

    krischan Europe Trade Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2003
    Messages:
    30,154
    Likes Received:
    1,141
    Trophy Points:
    416
    I just read the headlines and took a quick glance on the articles, if at all, as usual.

    #1: I'm pretty much amused about all that hangover atmosphere as well. You can also notice it among the pro-Brexit people.

    #2: I agree that Schulz is on the wrong track, but I don't think he's dumb. Therefore I'm not sure that he literally said that the crowd isn't meant to decide its fate. That sounds like some trickery with the translation. I haven't found his original words so far, however.

    A commentator of Der Spiegel wrote about him that he's a typical Rhinelander, so if he's asked for the way to a certain destination, he will always give an answer, even if he doesn't know it, to avoid that his lack of knowledge becomes apparent.

    It might be a problem with democracy that it involves the idiots as well, but if you ask the crowd, you must bow to their answer, period. I don't like the ignorance of the mob, but I appreciate the rulers' fear of them.

    #3: Is it your new personal opinion that Britain should stay in and it's all Cameron's fault that they can't do so anymore?



    I think we give the Brits a few days of time and then they are doing it. As long as they don't declare their leave, they haven't left, for good and for bad.
     
  12. jmervyn

    jmervyn Diabloii.Net Member

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2003
    Messages:
    15,499
    Likes Received:
    474
    Trophy Points:
    509
    Your loss. I was trying for a fair sampling, expecting you to attempt to "call me on it".

    Doubtless, but I've just read this piece about the media hyping the shyte out of a barely existent "regret" story. Since their narrative is based at least partially on what has turned out to be a hacker collective's hoax, I would have thought they'd be ashamed to make such bullcrap claims. Then I recalled that they're media, and therefore not much different from $10 prostitutes.

    Not that there's anything wrong with a $10 prostitute; you just need to recognize the risks beforehand.

    So kind of a German Trump then.

    No, I provided the piece in an attempt to encompass a variety of non-Progressive-narrative pieces, as I generally attempt to do. Personally I think there's nothing whatsoever wrong with Britain going back to the EEC status it had either when or shortly before I lived there, retaining national sovereignty but complying with discrete (context isolated or individual) portions of the EU's general pact.

    I'm interested to know what you thought of the 4th piece, which is why I mentioned you specifically.
     
  13. krischan

    krischan Europe Trade Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2003
    Messages:
    30,154
    Likes Received:
    1,141
    Trophy Points:
    416
    I wouldn't call Schulz a German Trump. I can't think of any German who is or was even remotely like Trump. Charlie Chaplin in The Great Dictator doesn't count, right? OTOH, he was from Italy, the motherland of fascism, and he supported communism as well, that might count in your book.

    I haven't heard about #4 so far. An EU superstate is highly improbable. It would need the consent of all countries and that's never, ever going to happen. I can hardly imagine that even close members will approve, not even Germany and France. I guess it's just anti-EU propaganda.
     
  14. jmervyn

    jmervyn Diabloii.Net Member

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2003
    Messages:
    15,499
    Likes Received:
    474
    Trophy Points:
    509
    Because after all, it's not like the EU does things regardless of the will of its subjects... er, members.


    Pure delight at the 4 minute mark.
     
  15. krischan

    krischan Europe Trade Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2003
    Messages:
    30,154
    Likes Received:
    1,141
    Trophy Points:
    416
    Yes I heard that. He's probably right, but the same could be said about Nigel, to be fair.
     
    LozHinge the Unhinged likes this.
  16. jmervyn

    jmervyn Diabloii.Net Member

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2003
    Messages:
    15,499
    Likes Received:
    474
    Trophy Points:
    509
    ‘Foreign Men’ Molest And Rape 40 Girls At Swedish Music Festival

    of course, not to forget the obligatory

    Raped German Politician Lied About Attackers’ Nationality To ‘Stop Racism’

    Talk about taking one, or multiples, for the team. I wonder if she bothered to think about what her thinking led to? She essentially provided an alibi to her rapists by having the Polizei chasing German guys. Of course, hating non-Leftists more than savages despite their sexually abusing you... is pretty much par for the course now.

    EDIT - just for fun -
    Shhh, don’t mention the truly terrorible
    PEOPLE keep dying in violent and terrible ways, and nobody seems to know why. Following the recent slaughter of 44 people at Istanbul’s Ataturk Airport, US secretary of state John Kerry told a press conference: “We’re still trying to ascertain what happened and who did it.”

    One day, many years from now, with the assistance of global police networks, we might have an answer. At US news outlet MSNBC, this post-Istanbul question was asked: “Is there a pattern to recent terror attacks?”
     
    Last edited: Jul 7, 2016
  17. krischan

    krischan Europe Trade Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2003
    Messages:
    30,154
    Likes Received:
    1,141
    Trophy Points:
    416
    I don't know what happened in detail, but to my knowledge, Sweden has rather disturbing rules about what's rape and what counts as a proof.

    A matter of reality being in conflict with one's view of the world and the people, aka "that which must not, cannot be". Many cases of rape remain unrevealed because the victim has some kind of relation to the culprit. I wouldn't address that just to "left wing" people, but you can probably assign certain variants to certain kinds of people.

    BTW, two days ago, the German parliament has changed the law about rape. An assault doesn't necessarily have to involve violence anymore or a threat thereof to count as rape. It's enough to declare that you don't want it (aka no means no). Before, it was pretty much impossible to prove it if there weren't any signs of violence on the victim's body. In that case, the accused had a good chance to get away with saying that it was consensual.

    The issue of proving it still remains, of course, but that's a matter of contitutional states demanding a proof of the crime rather than of the innocence (aka in dubio pro reo) and it applies to all crimes, not just to rape.

    I'm not sure what your point is here.

    The truly terrible is that there are whole lots of places which cannot be protected from things like lone nuts on a suicide bomber mission.
     
  18. jmervyn

    jmervyn Diabloii.Net Member

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2003
    Messages:
    15,499
    Likes Received:
    474
    Trophy Points:
    509
    Since you probably didn't read the article (*yet again) they were careful to point out that it wasn't "Julian Assange" style rape, or morning after regrets, or what have you. It was good ol' fashioned punch-the-girl-in-the-head-while-you-&-your-buddies-shag-her style. Why do you think I have such disdain for Merkel & your officials attempts to pretend otherwise?
    I didn't attempt any off-color "biatch was beggin' for it" joke purely on the basis of what you mention. For someone to be so twisted that she excuses being violently forced to suck off these sub-humans, AND goes on to attempt to shift blame to her political enemies? My mind boggles.
    Just that the oligarchs who rule us are not only "whistling past the graveyard", but that they think we're really so stupid that we believe them.

    Well, that people like <me> believe them, at any rate.
     
  19. krischan

    krischan Europe Trade Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2003
    Messages:
    30,154
    Likes Received:
    1,141
    Trophy Points:
    416
    This happened in Sweden, so what has Merkel have to do with it? Stop making me defend her!!11!

    I haven't said nor meant anything like blaming you of having made a "bitch begged for it" joke. My comment meant exactly what its letters state. When I'm joking or there's a meaning between the lines, it's usually blatantly obvious. I think you should know me well enough by now, so I'm asking if this is a variant of a "press krischan's buttons" game? *scratch chin smiley*

    She did not try to shift blame to her enemies. She tried to avoid blaming somebody who is among those she supports and thus hopes for appreciation. Is it so difficult to understand? It's not a matter of reason.

    Many people don't go to the police if abused by their father, for example. Not just because he has power over them, but also because he's an important part of their world. It needs time to overcome that, often years... and I guess in a lot of cases it's never revealed.

    To be precise, they don't care that much if they can really make you believe it. They care about you acting in the intended manner. If they want you to tell them "I love you" and to make love gifts, they don't care if you are lying and your gestures and deeds of appreciation are feigned, as long as you perform them and don't talk back openly.

    Hating them in secret or expressing it anonymously (like here) isn't enough. You will have to step up and give them a kick into the groin when everybody is watching. Of course, that's as easy to say for me as for you.
     
  20. jmervyn

    jmervyn Diabloii.Net Member

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2003
    Messages:
    15,499
    Likes Received:
    474
    Trophy Points:
    509
    Point of fact, most of the Swedish rapefugees come via Germany. Merkel's policy, lack thereof, and general stance may not cause the rapine, but they definitely contribute to the mindset of the rapefugees.

    They've said so themselves.

    As the normal recipient of that game, trust me when I say that wasn't the point I was making. However -
    She explicitly did so. She blamed German (white) men, deliberately painting a false picture of anti-immigrant PEGIDA types being her rapists. She's certainly not going to admit it now, but I have no doubt you can find the original coverage if you go looking.

    Again, I didn't make any joke, but since all she had to do was swallow, one could conjecture she wasn't particularly traumatized by being raped (again there's a semantic argument to make, in that forced oral sex is rape by legal definition). Most other women would definitely be traumatized.

    Not quite sure why you're comparing apples and orangutans.

    It's slightly more real-world on social media, which is why the Progressive Left is curtailing speech by conservatives on Twitter and Facebook, while allowing "Black Lives Matter" or Muslim terrorists to speak freely. The plutocrats can't afford to let the serfs organize.
     

Share This Page