Jump to content


Photo

It is a sad day for America

Steel Penn

  • Please log in to reply
257 replies to this topic

#41 Erik

Erik

    Red Belt

  • Manager
  • 2,874 posts

Posted 31 January 2017 - 04:54 AM

Nobody, anywhere, ever, has been able to actually prove with actual evidence that in person voter fraud is happening at any significant level.  For in-person fraud to even be in any way effective you'd need something systemic, and that would be pretty easily identified long term.

 

Also, unless the state provides a free valid id, I'm not sure how you could argue that it's not a poll tax -- which is prohibited.


  • 1

Frank Zappa was a troll, you are just a twat.

 

See You Next Tuesday


#42 GiankaBonghi

GiankaBonghi

    Black Belt

  • Manager
  • 1,685 posts

Posted 03 February 2017 - 07:18 AM

So pathetic seeing all the retards rioting and protesting and a lot of them can't even tell you why they are protesting. People still crying about Trump being president is pathetic as well... Give the man a chance and get on with your useless lives.

HE WILL NOT DIVIDE US!

 

*facepalm*


  • 0

#43 shiftas

shiftas

    Red Belt

  • Manager
  • 5,380 posts

Posted 04 February 2017 - 09:23 PM

5484dbf44e6b5735b390605c5cdcb9fe891.jpg

I'd love to hear something said about this by a trump supporter :)


  • 0

#44 JLP

JLP

    Red Belt

  • Developer
  • 5,893 posts

Posted 04 February 2017 - 09:30 PM

5484dbf44e6b5735b390605c5cdcb9fe891.jpg
I'd love to hear something said about this by a trump supporter :)

I'm not a trump supporter, just someone who calls bullshit when I see it. That being said, your graph there has no factual basis in reality. It's an argument designed to fool the ignorant. Thanks for posting it.
  • -1

#45 shiftas

shiftas

    Red Belt

  • Manager
  • 5,380 posts

Posted 04 February 2017 - 09:44 PM

Here are the facts. The 9/11 hijackers didn't come from Sudan, Somalia, Yemen, Iran etc. It's public knowledge that they came from Saudi Arabia, Egypt etc. The boston martathon bombers, both kyrgizian, not those in the ban. So why ban countries that didn't really pose that big of a threat, but avoid those that bring some business in? Simple, cash.

 

Second fact, Russia is back again at taking war actions in eastern Ukraine because Trump is already bringing down sanctions for Russians. So wait a second, if he really wants that "World peace" and so on, why isn't he doing anything else but create more wars? 

 

Third fact, never in history a country has been so happy that a certain individual was elected somewhere so far away. United Kingom don't throw parties, Germany don't throw parties, nobody does, except for Russia, they were soooooo happy for no reason that Trump won. Now when they get those sanctions removed piece by piece we know why.

 

And if you think that he'll make it great for you again well he might for an average bloke, but trust me, you're going down technology wise. Nobody of the big companies will spend big dollars on talent research anymore because it's simply isn't worth spending millions of dollars bringing people in, training them and then finding out that their president deports them. Google is already thinking about moving to Europe, it's just a matter of time before they and the other big IT corporations do.


  • 1

#46 JLP

JLP

    Red Belt

  • Developer
  • 5,893 posts

Posted 04 February 2017 - 10:13 PM

Here are the facts. The 9/11 hijackers didn't come from Sudan, Somalia, Yemen, Iran etc. It's public knowledge that they came from Saudi Arabia, Egypt etc. The boston martathon bombers, both kyrgizian, not those in the ban. So why ban countries that didn't really pose that big of a threat, but avoid those that bring some business in? Simple, cash.
 
Second fact, Russia is back again at taking war actions in eastern Ukraine because Trump is already bringing down sanctions for Russians. So wait a second, if he really wants that "World peace" and so on, why isn't he doing anything else but create more wars? 
 
Third fact, never in history a country has been so happy that a certain individual was elected somewhere so far away. United Kingom don't throw parties, Germany don't throw parties, nobody does, except for Russia, they were soooooo happy for no reason that Trump won. Now when they get those sanctions removed piece by piece we know why.
 
And if you think that he'll make it great for you again well he might for an average bloke, but trust me, you're going down technology wise. Nobody of the big companies will spend big dollars on talent research anymore because it's simply isn't worth spending millions of dollars bringing people in, training them and then finding out that their president deports them. Google is already thinking about moving to Europe, it's just a matter of time before they and the other big IT corporations do.


The countries that received the ban are middle eastern countries that lack a functioning government at this time. (Some of them because Obama has been bombing them for quite some time while the media and progressives pretend he isn't.). That makes vetting immigrants very difficult. Saudi Arabia, Lebanon, Egypt, and the uae aren't currently war zones. That makes vetting these immigrants easier. Your graph listing 0 Americans killed by people of the banned countries is as dumb as can be. How anyone could look at that and think it's anything other then garbage is beyond me.

I'll combine your second and third points. I think this is the true basis of your problem with trump anyway. Honestly, I don't care what happens in the Ukraine. It's none of my business and if intervening on the ukraines behalf even has a 1% chance of starting a war with Russia, then I'd oppose it 100%. It's about time that the EU and Eastern Europe in particular figure out how to provide their own security and not assume the U.S. is going to protect them anymore. Of course the Russians are happy with trump over Clinton. Clinton would have undoubtedly continued with sending troops to Russia's border like Obama did. It's beyond ridiculous to post large numbers of troops overseas at a huge expense with no benefits to our countries security.

Your fourth point is just conjecture and has no basis in reality. Companies go were they can make the most profit and pay the least amount in taxes. The idea that our technological edge is going to slip because of a temporary travel ban is beyond laughable.

Trump announcing that he plans to repeal Wall Street regulations is the first really bad decision he has made. Most of the other stuff is incredibly minor.
  • 1

#47 ville

ville

    White Belt

  • Manager
  • 9 posts

Posted 04 February 2017 - 10:22 PM

Trump announcing that he plans to repeal Wall Street regulations is the first really bad decision he has made. Most of the other stuff is incredibly minor.

 

I was surprised by this as well. The other stuff could just be to show that there's a new sheriff in town. 


  • 0

#48 shiftas

shiftas

    Red Belt

  • Manager
  • 5,380 posts

Posted 05 February 2017 - 08:39 AM


I'll combine your second and third points. I think this is the true basis of your problem with trump anyway. Honestly, I don't care what happens in the Ukraine. It's none of my business and if intervening on the ukraines behalf even has a 1% chance of starting a war with Russia, then I'd oppose it 100%. It's about time that the EU and Eastern Europe in particular figure out how to provide their own security and not assume the U.S. is going to protect them anymore. Of course the Russians are happy with trump over Clinton. Clinton would have undoubtedly continued with sending troops to Russia's border like Obama did. It's beyond ridiculous to post large numbers of troops overseas at a huge expense with no benefits to our countries security.

Your fourth point is just conjecture and has no basis in reality. Companies go were they can make the most profit and pay the least amount in taxes. The idea that our technological edge is going to slip because of a temporary travel ban is beyond laughable.

Trump announcing that he plans to repeal Wall Street regulations is the first really bad decision he has made. Most of the other stuff is incredibly minor.

So basically your view is fuck everyone as long as I got cash and freedom and I don't give a single fuck about how anyone else lives right? They will never figure out a way, no way a country that big and powerfull which controls gas for the whole eastern europe would listen to somebody like the baltics or ukraine or finland and the rest. That's where you fells come in. Like it or not you're the only ones who got the actual power to do something about it, not just by sending troops and bombing shit. Why do you think Russia stopped attacking Ukraine once you guys put some sanctions on them? Because they work. Ruble went down faster than Ronda did agains Nunes, they just couldn' afford it anymore. I'd honestly love to see you live somewhere near a country like that and say "I honestly don't care if they invade us or not, I just want an orange man to ban muslims and build walls, because as history showed us, the Berlin wall was the greatest thing ever, yes it didn't help them to win the war, but at least it was a beautiful wall."

 

IT companies won't go away just like that, but if you got no new talent coming in how will you improve and expand? You just wont. And the new bans he might put in place could further damage them, what if he decides to deport every Iranian person? You lose not only employees who you spent money training and paying and potentially even losing projects that were in development. Let me be clear, you won't lose technology that's already invented, it will simply prevent improvement. And do you really think Europe would say no to someone like google or apple to come there? They would make the taxes as sweet as they can to bring them over.

 

 

Now it might look like I'm all against Donald, but I'm just against his current methods of fixing stuff. He has a great idea of filtrating immigrants which is good, but banning them is stupid right now. Instead how about all people coming in from there get extra checks while he puts normal border security in place? He needs to think ahead before doing anything quickly in my opinion or else it might backfire badly.


  • 0

#49 Mentor

Mentor

    Red Belt

  • Developer
  • 5,200 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Cyprus
  • Interests:Games, MMA, Basketball
  • Manager Profile

Posted 05 February 2017 - 04:25 PM

I am not American, but frankly speaking, i like what i am hearing from Trump. These bans also make plenty of sense. Should he expand the ban to include countries such as Saudi Arabia and other countries mentioned above? I think yes, but he can't do that due to the reliance on these countries + the fact that technically they are your middle east partners.

 

What a lot of people fail to understand is that the world is not a "fair" place. You as a country need to do what is best for your people and sometimes it could mean finding a compromise with certain countries you do not always see eye to eye (that could include Russia, China or whatever). One this is certain though, you do not need more immigrants from places like Iran, Iraq and Lybia, I think that is common sense. I think the USA can survive without the influx of "talented programmers" from those countries, which is about the only excuse i have heard from liberals.


  • 1

#50 Timqwe

Timqwe

    Black Belt

  • Manager
  • 1,603 posts

Posted 05 February 2017 - 04:55 PM

Bans make zero sence at all. Every terrorist in in Europe lately is born or has lived in Europe for a long time. The only thing it will do is drive more people to radical groupes. Up the Visa checks for all you want, even only let in people actually contributing to society, but straight up forbidding an entire group of people isn't going to do any good.


  • 2

15017318482-familia.jpg\


#51 JLP

JLP

    Red Belt

  • Developer
  • 5,893 posts

Posted 05 February 2017 - 07:38 PM

So basically your view is fuck everyone as long as I got cash and freedom and I don't give a single fuck about how anyone else lives right? They will never figure out a way, no way a country that big and powerfull which controls gas for the whole eastern europe would listen to somebody like the baltics or ukraine or finland and the rest. That's where you fells come in. Like it or not you're the only ones who got the actual power to do something about it, not just by sending troops and bombing shit. Why do you think Russia stopped attacking Ukraine once you guys put some sanctions on them? Because they work. Ruble went down faster than Ronda did agains Nunes, they just couldn' afford it anymore. I'd honestly love to see you live somewhere near a country like that and say "I honestly don't care if they invade us or not, I just want an orange man to ban muslims and build walls, because as history showed us, the Berlin wall was the greatest thing ever, yes it didn't help them to win the war, but at least it was a beautiful wall."
 
IT companies won't go away just like that, but if you got no new talent coming in how will you improve and expand? You just wont. And the new bans he might put in place could further damage them, what if he decides to deport every Iranian person? You lose not only employees who you spent money training and paying and potentially even losing projects that were in development. Let me be clear, you won't lose technology that's already invented, it will simply prevent improvement. And do you really think Europe would say no to someone like google or apple to come there? They would make the taxes as sweet as they can to bring them over.
 
 
Now it might look like I'm all against Donald, but I'm just against his current methods of fixing stuff. He has a great idea of filtrating immigrants which is good, but banning them is stupid right now. Instead how about all people coming in from there get extra checks while he puts normal border security in place? He needs to think ahead before doing anything quickly in my opinion or else it might backfire badly.

So you basically are saying because the U.S. is the only country that can stand up to Russia we should potentially risk our security, the lives of our citizens and our financial well being to defend countries that refuse to defend themselves. I wholeheartedly reject that argument as lacking any benefit to the U.S. and making no sense at all. If Russian tanks roll across your border tomorrow ( which is an absurd fear based fantasy) then the U.S. would be obligated to come to your aid due to NATO obligations. Ukraine is not a NATO member and there is no obligation there.

Trump has talked about pulling out of NATO and I would applaud that move. Too long the U.S. has been one of the few members actually fulfilling its NATO obligations for a pointless and obsolete alliance. Of the countries you listed, only Poland meets its military spending requirements. http://www.wsj.com/a...bers-1434978193
http://money.cnn.com...ding-countries/
The majority of NATO relies on the U.S. for security but refuses to fulfill their own obligations. I can't think of a single reason we should risk damaging our lives here for people who won't even take the steps necessary to defend themselves. Russia is your neighbor, you have to grow up and figure out how you are going to deal with it on your own.

Once again, your whole idea that American technology/business has some huge reliance on recruiting IT people from the 7 countries that received the temporary travel ban has no basis in reality.
  • 0

#52 JLP

JLP

    Red Belt

  • Developer
  • 5,893 posts

Posted 05 February 2017 - 07:41 PM

Bans make zero sence at all. Every terrorist in in Europe lately is born or has lived in Europe for a long time. The only thing it will do is drive more people to radical groupes. Up the Visa checks for all you want, even only let in people actually contributing to society, but straight up forbidding an entire group of people isn't going to do any good.


What entire group of people has been targeted in the temporary ban?
  • 0

#53 Timqwe

Timqwe

    Black Belt

  • Manager
  • 1,603 posts

Posted 05 February 2017 - 08:07 PM

What entire group of people has been targeted in the temporary ban?

The people that are from those countries, or have bonds to those countries.


  • 1

15017318482-familia.jpg\


#54 shiftas

shiftas

    Red Belt

  • Manager
  • 5,380 posts

Posted 05 February 2017 - 08:30 PM

So you basically are saying because the U.S. is the only country that can stand up to Russia we should potentially risk our security, the lives of our citizens and our financial well being to defend countries that refuse to defend themselves. I wholeheartedly reject that argument as lacking any benefit to the U.S. and making no sense at all. If Russian tanks roll across your border tomorrow ( which is an absurd fear based fantasy) then the U.S. would be obligated to come to your aid due to NATO obligations. Ukraine is not a NATO member and there is no obligation there.

Trump has talked about pulling out of NATO and I would applaud that move. Too long the U.S. has been one of the few members actually fulfilling its NATO obligations for a pointless and obsolete alliance. Of the countries you listed, only Poland meets its military spending requirements. http://www.wsj.com/a...bers-1434978193
http://money.cnn.com...ding-countries/
The majority of NATO relies on the U.S. for security but refuses to fulfill their own obligations. I can't think of a single reason we should risk damaging our lives here for people who won't even take the steps necessary to defend themselves. Russia is your neighbor, you have to grow up and figure out how you are going to deal with it on your own.

Once again, your whole idea that American technology/business has some huge reliance on recruiting IT people from the 7 countries that received the temporary travel ban has no basis in reality.

Refuse to defend themselves, how are we, suppost to defend ourselves? For example, Lithuania has less than 3 million people right now, Latvia less than 2 million, Estonia 1.3 million. So if we put all that together lets say it's less than 6.3 million people. Russia has 144 million people, and that's by the official numbers, there are tons of illegal immigrants so it's closer to 154 million actually. So how are we, who have more than 10 times lower budgets, almost 23 times less people defend ourselves? Now if we put every countries in eastern europe together then yeah maybe we got a chance, but I don't really think so, because there are tons of russians living in Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, Ukraine, Poland and everywhere else here. For example, and humors can put the correct number here, in Riga it's more than 50% russian population there.

 

Absurd fear based fantasy, well if you would've asked me 6 or 7 years ago I would agree with you 100%, but today after seing how quickly Ukraine has fallen it's far from a fantasy. I understand that you live far away and feel safe from everyone, but if you lived in a place that has been occupied for years and see the same things happen really close to you I'm pretty sure you would talk different.

 

About meeting requirements, it's not that simple to just spend more on defense. We really really spend more, but we just can't magically say "well forget elderly, forget everyone and just buy weapons", it doesn't work that way. The prices are going up rapidly, everything is getting more expensive, so we should abandon every other economical sector and spend money on guns? Don't know how it's like in other baltic countries, but here we brought back conscription, we buy new weapons, tanks, etc. It just takes time to get economy up (and good government which we don't really have).

 

" I can't think of a single reason we should risk damaging our lives here for people who won't even take the steps necessary to defend themselves" But war is an absurd fantasy idea?

 

 

All in all, think less about yourself and more about the rest of the world who aren't so fortunate with geographical spots.


  • 1

#55 JLP

JLP

    Red Belt

  • Developer
  • 5,893 posts

Posted 05 February 2017 - 08:41 PM

Refuse to defend themselves, how are we, suppost to defend ourselves? For example, Lithuania has less than 3 million people right now, Latvia less than 2 million, Estonia 1.3 million. So if we put all that together lets say it's less than 6.3 million people. Russia has 144 million people, and that's by the official numbers, there are tons of illegal immigrants so it's closer to 154 million actually. So how are we, who have more than 10 times lower budgets, almost 23 times less people defend ourselves? Now if we put every countries in eastern europe together then yeah maybe we got a chance, but I don't really think so, because there are tons of russians living in Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, Ukraine, Poland and everywhere else here. For example, and humors can put the correct number here, in Riga it's more than 50% russian population there.
 
Absurd fear based fantasy, well if you would've asked me 6 or 7 years ago I would agree with you 100%, but today after seing how quickly Ukraine has fallen it's far from a fantasy. I understand that you live far away and feel safe from everyone, but if you lived in a place that has been occupied for years and see the same things happen really close to you I'm pretty sure you would talk different.
 
About meeting requirements, it's not that simple to just spend more on defense. We really really spend more, but we just can't magically say "well forget elderly, forget everyone and just buy weapons", it doesn't work that way. The prices are going up rapidly, everything is getting more expensive, so we should abandon every other economical sector and spend money on guns? Don't know how it's like in other baltic countries, but here we brought back conscription, we buy new weapons, tanks, etc. It just takes time to get economy up (and good government which we don't really have).
 
" I can't think of a single reason we should risk damaging our lives here for people who won't even take the steps necessary to defend themselves" But war is an absurd fantasy idea?
 
 
All in all, think less about yourself and more about the rest of the world who aren't so fortunate with geographical spots.

Those are your problems not mine. You are also thinking only about yourself. Enough Americans have already died in euro wars. Non- interventionism is the way to go. Being the worlds police didn't benefit the U.S. one bit in the last century or the beginning of this one.

You guys need to man up and figure it out on your own. A good first step would be honoring NATO military spending commitments. A second step would be to realize that you don't have the right to dictate to other countries that they should make choices that go against their national interests just cause your unwilling/unable to stand up for yourselves.
  • 0

#56 shiftas

shiftas

    Red Belt

  • Manager
  • 5,380 posts

Posted 05 February 2017 - 08:49 PM

Well enjoy your sinking ship then. We'll see you at the bottom :)


  • 1

#57 JLP

JLP

    Red Belt

  • Developer
  • 5,893 posts

Posted 05 February 2017 - 08:50 PM

The people that are from those countries, or have bonds to those countries.


Right. People traveling from currently unstable countries listed by Obama as "countries of concern" in regards to terrorism. Five of the seven countries were bombed liberally (illegally imo) by Obama. Iran hasn't been bombed yet and the Sudan was last bombed by Clinton in 98. But you'd have me believe that temporarily banning travel for 3 months is going to spike extremism? Is temporarily banning travel for 3 months going to create more extremism then bombing and killing people in that country? If bombing is worse, why wasn't there any protest during Obamas extensive bombing campaigns?
  • 0

#58 JLP

JLP

    Red Belt

  • Developer
  • 5,893 posts

Posted 05 February 2017 - 08:51 PM

Well enjoy your sinking ship then. We'll see you at the bottom :)


Good luck against the Russians.
  • 0

#59 Mentor

Mentor

    Red Belt

  • Developer
  • 5,200 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Cyprus
  • Interests:Games, MMA, Basketball
  • Manager Profile

Posted 06 February 2017 - 09:30 AM

Not sure how this has happened, but i think i am agreeing with JLP here. I think the USA has been getting involved into a lot of conflicts they did not need to and it seems Trump is looking for a different root for that. In regards to Lithuania / Baltic's being invaded by Russia (Shiftas is saying that is / could happen), i think there is about 0.1% chance of that happening. Russia does not go around randomly invading countries. The only way it can possibly occur is if the Baltic countries continue their ultra negative stance towards their much bigger neighbor. The fact that they are in the EU and NATO has given them this felling they are invincible and they are acting a bit naughty. If they stay calm and controlled, nothing will happen. A lot of people compare the situation there with that of the Ukraine, but they are 2 totally different cases.

 

Either way, one good thing has come out of Trump being president............................there is plenty of funny videos on youtube about him every day, lol


  • 0

#60 Rambo

Rambo

    Red Belt

  • Developer
  • 9,107 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ganja Paradise
  • Interests:MMA, Football, Marijuana, Politics
  • Manager Profile

Posted 06 February 2017 - 05:01 PM

The United States is the 3rd most populated country in the world, for that reason alone we should stop immigration.  You know what the 3rd most populated country in the world looks like in 20 years?  China.

 

 

We shouldn't harbor refuges imo.  Various reasons.

 

 

I think America should focus on America for a while. Isolationism.  Rebuild the country and educate the idiocracy we have in our population.  Make peace, not war.  Get away from war profiteering.  There's way too many powerful people invested in companies that thrive and depend on war.

 

 

Ukraine and Syria are not America's problem.  Russia didn't stop us from illegally invading Iraq 16 or 17 years ago.  Not our problem.

 

 

Dealing with ISIS could be pretty simple.  Sit their leader(s) down and ask them, "what do you want from us?" and they will answer:

  1. stop the military occupation of the middle east
  2. stop funding Israel

 

so what would I do?

  1. withdraw all troops
  2. stop funding Israel

 

or if I really, for some reason, needed to fund Israel, I'd keep that info classified. like sending secret planes or some shit with boat loads of cash on it  :yawn: because by now, at this point in time, after billions and billions of dollars of aid, they should have a very Trump like Great Wall of fucking China on steroids with 50 caliber machine guns and gatling guns and homing laser missiles aligning their walls, surrounding the entire place and enough military technology to level any opposing/invading force.  And if they don't, then those political leaders who have golden showers and golden toilets and golden statues of Yeshua should of invested their defense budget a little better.

 

 

I would also tell the leaders of ISIS that if we uphold our end of the agreement, and you attack American soil, we're going Nagasaki on everything they love until there's nothing left.  Of course I'd coordinate with Russia, China, and all relevant allies to make sure we have the green light to go full nagasaki on them before we had this conversation, and if everybody was in an agreement, I'd pitch them that sales pitch.

 

 

You withdraw, you stop funding, you wait a year, maybe two, maybe three, and your priority targets from ISIS, their supporters, and their locations should be clear and visible if intervention is needed or necessary.


  • 0

Posted Image

Posted Image






Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: Steel Penn

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users