The Box of Chocolates Thread (You never know what you're going to get!)
Welcome to the General Discussion thread. If you have a topic that doesn't warrant its own thread, post it here. Have a free form discussion going that no longer fits in the original thread? It may be moved here to give it a place to wander. Also, general chit chat is welcome!
why do I engage with you? bruv I engage with everyone. wrong and dumb posts are like catnip to me. its proly an addiction.
and speaking of wrong things, I dont want you banned. I dont ever ask for people to be banned.
but to the content, no they did not need massive shipments to win. they had already beaten the Nazis before the large shipments had arrived. if it was some great plan by the West, they could have bled a lot more Russians if
Lend-lease was extended to the USSR in september , 1941.
If your answer to the question “ why are black people 6 times more likely to be incarcerated in the state of Kansas?” is “I don’t see race”, then you are unwittingly or purposefully promoting racism.
If outcomes are different between differentethnic groups that's not necessarily because of racism. That's a completly false assumption, and it's usually false unless proven true.
Nigerian americans don't have higher incomes than vietnamite americans because of racism, do they?
I'm not denying that the idea of gender, and especially gender roles, doesn't have real affects on people's lives, because of course it does. In fact, I think that gender roles are a pretty big part of what makes people feel they are trans. If men and women were treated exactly equally by society in every way, they had exactly the same opportunities and the same (lack of) expectations, I believe far fewer people would feel they have been
As a man that's easy to say, but that would mean no biological woman could actually ever win anything at the top level of most sports for example. You sure that's an outcome you would agree with?
The times with which women win olympic golds don't even qualify you for the american nationals for men in most timed competitions across all sports .
100m freestyle, 51.96 won the gold for Emma McKeon in 2021
To qualify for nationals in 2023 in the USA you needed under 50 as a man. under 51 for college level nationals lol.
Then there are changing rooms and jails to discuss. And i *do not* believe you would be ok with man police patting down women regularly, and not only in the rare occasion no woman police is there and there is an urgent need to pat down someone.
I believe that competitive sports are a net negative for society and would be thrilled to see them all dissappear. So really I don't care about who wins athletic contests.
As I have recently said in the trans thread, restrooms and changing rooms should all be individual. I don't want to be around naked men any more than women do.
Jails should have individual cells and should be protecting individuals of either sex when prisoners are not in their cells. I don't want to be raped any more than women do either.
Pat downs should be a thing of the past. They don't pat me down at the airport, machines do a much better job.
I get patted down all the time after going through the machine even though I checked all my pockets and had nothing
Barbarossa failed by fall -- unable to take Moscow, Leningrad, and Stalingrad. Not much gear could have arrived at that early date. But Lend-Lease does become more significant as time goes on.
The USSR had received vast shipments of British and US aid by the time of the decisive battle of Kursk in summer 1943. But Western intelligence predicted that Barbarossa was bound to fail anyway because German logistics and manpower could not sustain such a large front for long. (Germany's fuel position was very weak, Germany hadn't got rolling stock compatible with the Russian railway gauge and overall the USSR was vastly superior in manpower, industrial base and raw materials.) Keeping and holding the Soviet oilfields in the south might have changed the picture, but the Germans couldn't manage that.
The Churchill indian genocide (through artificially exacerbated famine ) was bad . We don't talk much about it because Churchill then went on to be a hero of freedom against Hitler, but it was bad.
Churchill didn't even know about the Bengal famine of 1943 until it was halfway over. It was caused by a cyclone that wiped out the December 1942 rice crop and was exacerbated by two factors:-- the Japanese occupation of Burma, which denied the usual imports from that region, and the refusal of the neighbouring self-governing Indian provinces to lower their tariff barriers and allow relief supplies into Bengal until they were ordered to do so by the Viceroy in late summer 1943 (around the time that the famine was brought to the attention of the War Cabinet in London). Even when relief supplies were released, Indian merchants engaged in hoarding and the price of rice on Bengal's markets became wildly unaffordable. Despite Churchill's sometimes tasteless remarks about the famine, there was not much the War Cabinet could do -- they certainly couldn't magically and immediately ship the million tons of grain that the Viceroy asked for, with the huge demands on Allied shipping at the time, and they offered 100,000 tons or so in the first instance, but the problem (hoarding and price-gouging) and the solution (adequate grain supplies) actually lay to hand in India. Even in spring 1944, with the famine largely over due to a successful Bengal rice harvest in December 1943, Churchill was asking Roosevelt for shipping to help the situation, but Roosevelt said no, because with Overlord imminent even the US hadn't the shipping to spare.
lol Churchill apologists
Or maybe the DEA are on to you and your Ukrainian accomplice.
One of the greatest men of the 20th century, and probably of the last 1000 years in my books. The world was very fortunate to have him on the side of the good guys. And that's without once considering the exquisite written works he leaves the world.
The people on the other side of that take are a minority, and I lump them in with flat earthers, 9/11 was an inside job, and we didn't land on the mooners.
Yeah because great people rise to the top of genocidal empires
One of the greatest men of the 20th century, and probably of the last 1000 years in my books. The world was very fortunate to have him on the side of the good guys. And that's without once considering the exquisite written works he leaves the world.
The people on the other side of that take are a minority, and I lump them in with flat earthers, 9/11 was an inside job, and we didn't land on the mooners.
He's not too popular in Ireland. Does that mean we're flat Earth 9/11 truthers?
You are aware he thought Communism was a result of an international Jewish conspiracy, right? And said some quite nice things about Mussolini?
You also never answered on whether or not you support colonialism, btw.
One of the greatest men of the 20th century, and probably of the last 1000 years in my books. The world was very fortunate to have him on the side of the good guys. And that's without once considering the exquisite written works he leaves the world.
The people on the other side of that take are a minority, and I lump them in with flat earthers, 9/11 was an inside job, and we didn't land on the mooners.
He was and we were. He also had an incredible life even before WW2.
but he was far from a perfect good guy which is not just some minority view (or jsut revisionist)- despite being an extraordinarily popular and victorious war leader he lost the election in 1945.
Oh, so you're deciding posthumously that these guys would have agreed with Marx, so they're the "mainstream economists" you were referring to? 🙄
Ricardo and Smith used some versions of the labor theory of value , which made more sense (=were less obviously false) before the industrial revolution was completed.
Marx went allin on that and every day that passed, even when he was still alive, proved he was wrong, for various reasons starting from the need for capital accumulation and risk taking in generating value.
Then a whole different framework was developed based on utility theory and so on and on
Keeping and holding the Soviet oilfields in the south might have changed the picture, but the Germans couldn't manage that.
Nazis didn't manage that BECAUSE of lend lease. After the 41-42 winter, when Germany made the classic "winter in Russia" mistake, USSR would still have been too weak to hold the southern Caucasian oil fields if not for our help
