The Atlas Asylum of absurd/ignorant posts IX

[TheReckoning]

The quote from the German Admiral makes clear that even if Germany had won the Battle of Britain, the invasion would’ve still been a total failure.

Seriously, why are you even still doing this? Arguing that Sea Lion had a >0% of success just makes you look like a complete moron.

As you insist on being serially dishonest, this is the critical paragraph from the section of the book that you have just cited:

_{'At the end of the campaign in France in 1940, both sides found themselves unready for an invasion of Britain. The Germans were unprepared to conduct an amphibious operation, and the British were not ready to defend against one. As ill-prepared as the Germans might have been, their chances for success were greatest right after Dunkirk when the British were still in a state of shock and at their weakest in terms  of material preparedness. The British realized that any delay would work to their advantage. As General Ironside noted on 17 June regarding the German failure to act, "They will be very stupid if they delay much longer".'}

This view, which is not the one that you have been espousing, is essentially the historical consensus on the matter, to the extent that there is one, and is the position that I have been consistently advocating since this absurd 'debate' began as anyone with the intellectual capacity of Winnie the Pooh can see from my posts.

The book then goes on to note the opinion of Vice Admiral Assmann that had the Battle of Britain been successful, an invasion would have followed and would have been, in his words, 'smashed', and indicates agreement with his assessment. Which, as you should note from my earlier citation of the 1974 Sandhurst war game, I actually agree with: an autumn invasion would almost certainly have ended very badly for the invaders. This does not mean that it would still not have constituted a severe threat to the British state* and this does not mean that a hypothetical earlier invasion would not have been quite so hopeless an assault, as the book notes in the quoted paragraph above. I am uncertain whether your misunderstandings here stem from dishonesty, poor reading comprehension or simply not reading the material that you have chosen to cite.

How would an invasion be a threat to the British state if it was bound to fail? The point is that Britain didn’t have to worry about losing its sovereignty at any point during the war because of a supposed invasion. You seem to be claiming that Sea Lion, if launched at the right time, had a >0% of success, which is an analysis I am in complete disagreement with. And plenty of historians, and generals from the time period, would agree with me. So yeah, I did “f**k off and read some history” and I didn’t see anything to indicate that Germany ever had a chance of invading and occupying Britain successfully.

[Anti-Trump Truth Socialite JD Vance Enjoying Juror]

TheReckoning, who apparently "is not a fascist," threw a fit about his giant sig portrait of Hitler being removed.

So portrait of someone who commits genocide against Ukraines (Stalin): Fine

Portrait of someone who commits genocide against ethnic minorities in Cambodia (Pol Pot): Fine

Portrait of someone who commits genocide against Jews (Hitler): Gets taken down in 10 minutes

Tell me again how moderation rules aren’t completely arbitrary.

Didn't even realize he was already here embarrassing himself with a different discussion of WWII until after I started posting. How fitting.

[TheReckoning]

TheReckoning, who apparently "is not a fascist," threw a fit about his giant sig portrait of Hitler being removed.

So portrait of someone who commits genocide against Ukraines (Stalin): Fine

Portrait of someone who commits genocide against ethnic minorities in Cambodia (Pol Pot): Fine

Portrait of someone who commits genocide against Jews (Hitler): Gets taken down in 10 minutes

Tell me again how moderation rules aren’t completely arbitrary.

Didn't even realize he was already here embarrassing himself with a different discussion of WWII until after I started posting. How fitting.

What I’m annoyed about isn’t the fact that I can’t have Hitler in my signature. I was going to take it down within a day or two regardless of whether or not there was mod action. What I’m annoyed with is how arbitrary rules here are. Apparently, having some genocide orchestrators in your signature are allowed, while having others isn’t.

I’m not planning on having any people who committed genocide to be in my signature at all. But it does show how rules aren’t applied consistently and fairly.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

TheReckoning and controversies involving WW2, name a more iconic duo.
On a sidenote, I was watching a video from a Japanese language Youtube channel, talking about war stuff, and the exact same image TheReckoning used of Stalin was used there as well. The first thing that came to mind was his signature.

[FairBol]

Geez....I don't want to get involved, but talk about a Nazi apologist.  :-O

[fhtagn]

The problem with this question is that marijuana laws actually doing exactly what they're intended to do, which is fill up prisons.

If this is really the answer, then what's wrong with filling up prisons with gun nuts?

[Schiff for Senate]

The problem with this question is that marijuana laws actually doing exactly what they're intended to do, which is fill up prisons.

If this is really the answer, then what's wrong with filling up prisons with gun nuts?

[YE]

Is is shocking so many liberals/Dems support this, especially on this forum? They are becoming the morally uptight, scolding paternalist party. They cheer on banning menthal cigarettes, and vapes. They view porn and prostitution through the lens that it harms women (where a definition can finally be used) so it should be banned. They support taxes and limitations on sodas and meat. And of course, they took the most authoritarian approach to covid possible. This Democratic Party is antithetical socially to the left-wing hippies of the 70's.

They are becoming the anti-libertarian party in nearly every way. It's only going to take a few more years until they flip on their historical positions such as marijuana/drugs and this before the transformation is complete, along with their increasingly hawkish foreign policy.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Is is shocking so many liberals/Dems support this, especially on this forum? They are becoming the morally uptight, scolding paternalist party. They cheer on banning menthal cigarettes, and vapes. They view porn and prostitution through the lens that it harms women (where a definition can finally be used) so it should be banned. They support taxes and limitations on sodas and meat. And of course, they took the most authoritarian approach to covid possible. This Democratic Party is antithetical socially to the left-wing hippies of the 70's.

They are becoming the anti-libertarian party in nearly every way. It's only going to take a few more years until they flip on their historical positions such as marijuana/drugs and this before the transformation is complete, along with their increasingly hawkish foreign policy.

Sadly not even the dumbest thing he's said (after that "white privilege tax" thing.)

[Politician]

"Republican"

Who knows? Maybe the GOP actually WANTS the worst of climate change to happen. It'd track with their actions. Because think about it. It would mean the East and the West Coasts go underwater. They've always hated and mocked the 'liberal coastal elites.' Maybe they're playing 4D chess in attempt to get rid of them once and for all. Politically speaking, washing away the coasts would help the GOP immensely in coastal states. The GOP is so vile I wouldn't put even this past them at this point.

[Schiff for Senate]

"Republican"

Who knows? Maybe the GOP actually WANTS the worst of climate change to happen. It'd track with their actions. Because think about it. It would mean the East and the West Coasts go underwater. They've always hated and mocked the 'liberal coastal elites.' Maybe they're playing 4D chess in attempt to get rid of them once and for all. Politically speaking, washing away the coasts would help the GOP immensely in coastal states. The GOP is so vile I wouldn't put even this past them at this point.

Yeah at this point 'CentristRepublican' is just my username. I like it and I've had it for the year plus I've been here, so I'll keep it, but obviously I don't even pretend to be a Republican anymore. Have waaaay too much contempt for the party to be a part of it. And I admit one of my main justifications for being a Republican earlier - muh 'party of Lincoln' and muh 'antislavery party', as if parties can't and don't take a 180-degree turn in 150+ years - was exceptionally cringey.

That post of mine you quoted was only half-serious, by the way. They're (probably) just in it for the fossil fuel lobby's money, not for psychotic reasons like drowning a solid percentage of the country's population.

[Badger]

TheReckoning, who apparently "is not a fascist," threw a fit about his giant sig portrait of Hitler being removed.

So portrait of someone who commits genocide against Ukraines (Stalin): Fine

Portrait of someone who commits genocide against ethnic minorities in Cambodia (Pol Pot): Fine

Portrait of someone who commits genocide against Jews (Hitler): Gets taken down in 10 minutes

Tell me again how moderation rules aren’t completely arbitrary.

Didn't even realize he was already here embarrassing himself with a different discussion of WWII until after I started posting. How fitting.

What I’m annoyed about isn’t the fact that I can’t have Hitler in my signature. I was going to take it down within a day or two regardless of whether or not there was mod action.

How......reassuring.

[Badger]

TheReckoning, who apparently "is not a fascist," threw a fit about his giant sig portrait of Hitler being removed.

So portrait of someone who commits genocide against Ukraines (Stalin): Fine

Portrait of someone who commits genocide against ethnic minorities in Cambodia (Pol Pot): Fine

Portrait of someone who commits genocide against Jews (Hitler): Gets taken down in 10 minutes

Tell me again how moderation rules aren’t completely arbitrary.

Didn't even realize he was already here embarrassing himself with a different discussion of WWII until after I started posting. How fitting.

Watching the Reckoning try to debate oh, well.... Anything, but in this case particularly Al regarding nearly any aspect of English History reminds me of this sketch.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ni-QOPmJuzU

The Reckoning, we encourage you as our loyal subject please stay down

[TheReckoning]

TheReckoning, who apparently "is not a fascist," threw a fit about his giant sig portrait of Hitler being removed.

So portrait of someone who commits genocide against Ukraines (Stalin): Fine

Portrait of someone who commits genocide against ethnic minorities in Cambodia (Pol Pot): Fine

Portrait of someone who commits genocide against Jews (Hitler): Gets taken down in 10 minutes

Tell me again how moderation rules aren’t completely arbitrary.

Didn't even realize he was already here embarrassing himself with a different discussion of WWII until after I started posting. How fitting.

What I’m annoyed about isn’t the fact that I can’t have Hitler in my signature. I was going to take it down within a day or two regardless of whether or not there was mod action.

How......reassuring.

If you seriously think I’m a Nazi because of my signature, then I must also be a Stalinist as well, and a Khmer Rouge supporter-because the most prominent of those were also displayed in my signature.

And I’m 100% correct about how Operation Sea Lion had a 0% chance of success.

[scutosaurus]

Urban political culture is inherently corrupt.

Not like the squeeky clean political culture of the rural south amirite?

Eh, that wasn't really the distinction I meant to draw.  I do not mean "urban" as the opposite of rural, in this context

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

At least Dule has never engaged in the single lamest and least funny meme in forum history.

See poll numbers. I speak for the forum majority: https://talkelections.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=321408.0

[S019]

At least Dule has never engaged in the single lamest and least funny meme in forum history.

See poll numbers. I speak for the forum majority: https://talkelections.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=321408.0

K

[Badger]

TheReckoning, who apparently "is not a fascist," threw a fit about his giant sig portrait of Hitler being removed.

So portrait of someone who commits genocide against Ukraines (Stalin): Fine

Portrait of someone who commits genocide against ethnic minorities in Cambodia (Pol Pot): Fine

Portrait of someone who commits genocide against Jews (Hitler): Gets taken down in 10 minutes

Tell me again how moderation rules aren’t completely arbitrary.

Didn't even realize he was already here embarrassing himself with a different discussion of WWII until after I started posting. How fitting.

What I’m annoyed about isn’t the fact that I can’t have Hitler in my signature. I was going to take it down within a day or two regardless of whether or not there was mod action.

How......reassuring.

If you seriously think I’m a Nazi because of my signature, then I must also be a Stalinist as well, and a Khmer Rouge supporter-because the most prominent of those were also displayed in my signature.

How additionally......reassuring.

[Hammy]

Almost like the whole thing was a partisan scam all along.

It's not. Republicans were offered a seat at the table, but almost all of them refused.

January 6th is one of the worst things to happen to American democracy in our entire history. It requires investigation. Republicans are cowards, though, and don't want to inspire the anger of Donald Trump, which is also why most of them didn't vote for his conviction.

I know that you know this, so it's surprising to see you degrade it.

It was worse than The Civil War, Pearl Harbor and 9/11 COMBINED.

basic reading comprehension failure

[Politician]

Section 1: The US Senate shall be abolished, and the US House shall be the sole legislative chamber in the Country.
Section 2: States shall be required to set up an independent citizens commission for the purposes of drawing Congressional Districts. Said commissions may not use any kind of partisan data when constructing the maps.
Section 3: The US House, by a simple majority vote, shall be in charge of the process of advice and consent previously given to the US Senate.
Section 4: The US House shall have the power to impeach federal officials by a simple majority vote, and to convict them with a majority of two thirds following an impeachment trial.
Section 5: Legislation shall become law upon passage by the US House, followed by a signature from the President. The President may also veto legislation, in which case the House may override the veto with a majority of two thirds. Ratification of treaties shall be treated as regular legislation.
Section 6: All judiciary offices whose officeholders US Senate confirmation occured with Senators voting to confirm them reperesenting a minority of the nations population according to the contemporary preceding decennial census shall be immediately considered vacated upon ratification of this amendment.
Section 7: The Electoral College shall be abolished, and the President shall be elected by a national popular vote.
Section 8: Elections for the President and the US House shall be conducted using ranked choice voting.

[GeneralMacArthur]

Hopefully they keep going up, to the point where we stop using oil and gas period.

I'm ready for $300 a gallon gasoline and $50,000 in heating fuel tomorrow please.

Many people cannot afford electric cars, and charging stations aren't always available in rural areas/small towns

As a pro-environment person, I don't give a sh**t about whether you can afford an electric car.

If gas prices are that high, what are the working class in areas lacking in public transit supposed to do to get around. How are they supposed to heat their homes?

We did just fine using natural fire as fuel.

In large numbers, wouldn't that be even worse for the environment than having ability to use gas?

Yes, hence why I've suggested before that human extinction (or at a minimum a dramatic reduction in the human population) is kind of necessary if climate change is to be avoided.

But none of this is my decision to make, and if humanity wants to end life on earth, we should let them.

Always fun to start digging into someone's statements and get through to their true root beliefs.

[Хahar 🤔]

Come on, NewYorkExpress posts hardly count.

[Badger]

Section 1: The US Senate shall be abolished, and the US House shall be the sole legislative chamber in the Country.
Section 2: States shall be required to set up an independent citizens commission for the purposes of drawing Congressional Districts. Said commissions may not use any kind of partisan data when constructing the maps.
Section 3: The US House, by a simple majority vote, shall be in charge of the process of advice and consent previously given to the US Senate.
Section 4: The US House shall have the power to impeach federal officials by a simple majority vote, and to convict them with a majority of two thirds following an impeachment trial.
Section 5: Legislation shall become law upon passage by the US House, followed by a signature from the President. The President may also veto legislation, in which case the House may override the veto with a majority of two thirds. Ratification of treaties shall be treated as regular legislation.
Section 6: All judiciary offices whose officeholders US Senate confirmation occured with Senators voting to confirm them reperesenting a minority of the nations population according to the contemporary preceding decennial census shall be immediately considered vacated upon ratification of this amendment.
Section 7: The Electoral College shall be abolished, and the President shall be elected by a national popular vote.
Section 8: Elections for the President and the US House shall be conducted using ranked choice voting.

Really uncertain as to why this is so absurd or ignorant. There's a reasonable argument to be made that given the Senate's grossly undemocratic lean, plus the fact that divisions from state-to-state are not nearly as dramatic in 2022 as in 1789 so as to Warrant still giving California and Wyoming to Senators a piece, or Texas in Vermont for that matter,.

If you believe this position to be so ignorant or absurd, perhaps the best route would be to present an argument against it in the thread where this post was made, rather than merely dumping it in this thread, as I respectfully submit it is nowhere near so tangibly and obviously absurd a proposition.

[Politician]

Section 1: The US Senate shall be abolished, and the US House shall be the sole legislative chamber in the Country.
Section 2: States shall be required to set up an independent citizens commission for the purposes of drawing Congressional Districts. Said commissions may not use any kind of partisan data when constructing the maps.
Section 3: The US House, by a simple majority vote, shall be in charge of the process of advice and consent previously given to the US Senate.
Section 4: The US House shall have the power to impeach federal officials by a simple majority vote, and to convict them with a majority of two thirds following an impeachment trial.
Section 5: Legislation shall become law upon passage by the US House, followed by a signature from the President. The President may also veto legislation, in which case the House may override the veto with a majority of two thirds. Ratification of treaties shall be treated as regular legislation.
Section 6: All judiciary offices whose officeholders US Senate confirmation occured with Senators voting to confirm them reperesenting a minority of the nations population according to the contemporary preceding decennial census shall be immediately considered vacated upon ratification of this amendment.
Section 7: The Electoral College shall be abolished, and the President shall be elected by a national popular vote.
Section 8: Elections for the President and the US House shall be conducted using ranked choice voting.

Really uncertain as to why this is so absurd or ignorant. There's a reasonable argument to be made that given the Senate's grossly undemocratic lean, plus the fact that divisions from state-to-state are not nearly as dramatic in 2022 as in 1789 so as to Warrant still giving California and Wyoming to Senators a piece, or Texas in Vermont for that matter,.

If you believe this position to be so ignorant or absurd, perhaps the best route would be to present an argument against it in the thread where this post was made, rather than merely dumping it in this thread, as I respectfully submit it is nowhere near so tangibly and obviously absurd a proposition.

The founders created the Senate so that small states would have the same voice as big states and not be drowned out. I do agree with you about CA but a better solution to that would be to split it into two states.

Besides, he wants to abolish the Senate because most small states are red states, thus the dynamic of the Senate currently helps the Republican Party. If the situation was reversed and most small states were blue states, there is no doubt he would support the Senate.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Since Garcia outperformed Biden by a massive amount, I think those crossover voters didn't approve of voting not to certify. So really, Garcia has a 13 point deficit to make up. The swing probably makes up most and ignorance the rest but he's cutting it close.

The idea that the average person cares about this above everything else is why you guys continue to embarrass yourselves. You guys live in a political ecosystem hyper-obsessed with "Trumpism" and "democracy" to the detriment of anything else. Why we arrogantly assume they will think the same way we do, is still dumbfounding.

How dare people on a forum about election results be obsessed with democracy!