Mr Fixit

Members
  • Content count

    2,033
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Mr Fixit

  • Rank
    Council Member

Profile Information

  • Gender Male
  1. 2016 US Election: what happened in Nevada?

    Indeed. I need those laser nipples. I need them hard.
  2. 2016 US Election: what happened in Nevada?

    I hope he is correct. I also hope the US is in for some rude awakening, for its own sake and for the sake of the rest of the planet.
  3. 2016 US Election: what happened in Nevada?

    My response to that would be: let the democratic process play itself out! Why should someone bow out early? It's not only about getting enough delegate votes to win, which as of this moment is highly unlikely for Bernie, but also about having policy leverage against the other candidate when the times comes to, how the guys over there like to say, unite the party. Because, let's face it -- though many will certainly disagree -- Hillary has made a career of lying and "pivoting" and changing positions. The so-called pundits are already going on about how Bernie forced her to the left on many issues, and that's the truth. He brought certain issues into the limelight and it can only be seen as beneficial to the party identity (and certainly to the party base). The more pressure he exerts on her in pursuit of his policies, the better! Anything else is pure establishment defense. Like those Democratic and Republican party elites have some god given right to run the country however they see fit and then a spoilsport comes along and refuses to play the part of a preordained loser who's only there to convince everyone else that "see, this is a democracy, you have a choice!" If I were part of both party elites, I'd start asking the right questions for a change. And those questions are: "Why has our political process become so broken that on both sides non-establishment candidates openly scornful of the system are doing so well? Why is according to the latest polls Congressional approval at mindblowing 4%? Why has the US, according to the study done by professors from Princeton and Northwestern, become an oligarchy?" The question is most definitely not: "When will Bernie bow out? Doesn't he see how much damage he does to party unity?" (In your own words: "he wants to burn everything to the ground." Well, Even if he does -- which he most certainly does not -- I'd say, let him. Should the American people cry over the demise of a rigged corporate-owned one-party system?")
  4. 2016 US Election: what happened in Nevada?

    I agree. He should have bowed out already, just like Hillary in 2008. Right? PUMA rings a bell? No?
  5. U.S. Elections: We're All Qualified To Post Here

    I am not quite clear on the language being used. In every other country around the world, when their politicians advocate wars and invasions, such policies areusually called "nationalistic" or "aggressive", and that's putting it mildly. It's only in the US that it's called "hawkish" or "interventionist". Invadingcountries on false pretenses,contributingto deaths of hundreds of thousands of people, and destabilizing whole regions isnot an intervention. And neither are people who do that hawks. I believe they have a different term for them in the Hague.
  6. U.S. Elections: We're All Qualified To Post Here

    Sure, with organ thieving former Prime Minister and current President and the whole country being practically run by people with long-standing mafia connections. People who are in the know about Balkans are fully aware of the disaster that is Kosovo on every imaginable level. It's worth noting that that war was also launchedon false info and outright lies. It was in essence an attempt at regime change as well.
  7. US Elections: When Murder isn't Murder

    This is actually an excellent point. For a people that pridethemselveson great flexibility,capacity for change, and out-of-the-box thinking, Americans seem strangely risk-averse and conservative, almost defeatist, in their viewof politics.
  8. Dutch referendum on EU-Ukraine treaty

    If this wasn't so tragic, it'd be a laughing matter. I really hope the entire Ukrainian political elite, pro-Russian and pro-European, is cast into the deepest recesses of Hell. Thosepuppet morons destroyed theirown country because power grabs and endless corruption -- cheered by theirrespective Big Daddies in West and Russia -- are more important to them than the well-being of their own people.
  9. Middle East and N.Africa v.21- WorldWarSyria

    One word: petrodollar.
  10. Middle East and N.Africa v.21- WorldWarSyria

    ETA: Playing nice.
  11. Middle East and N.Africa v.21- WorldWarSyria

    ETA: Playing nice.
  12. Middle East and N.Africa v.21- WorldWarSyria

    Please change the subject. Moderators, I implore you to either shut this thread down or warn the posters to stick to the subject.
  13. Middle East and N.Africa v.21- WorldWarSyria

    See what I mean? See how the topic on the Middle East gets inevitably steered into Estonia, Finland, Russo-Swedish war from 18th century? That's just thebasic MO not only on this forum, but in the mainstream media as well. Always change the relevant subject at hand and just drone on and on how Putin and Russia are gonna invade Jupiter unless we stop them. And that's the whole point; it's the foreign policy equivalent of ad hominem. Just how people try to attack others all the time on personal grounds so if it sticks, it makes a recipient of the message disregard what the target of ad hominem actually says. That is exactly why we hearso much about Estonia and Jupiter and Alpha Centauri. Because the point is to a priori disqualify what the other side has to say by continually bringing up unrelated topics. If Putin went on TV tomorrow and said that Earth is round, there'd a bunch of "pundits" condescendingly saying that you can't believe a thing he says because "Ukraine, Estonia, Jupiter". That's no way to discuss anything. And it's intellectually dishonest.
  14. Middle East and N.Africa v.21- WorldWarSyria

    This just disqualifies you from any rational discussion. This, as you say, is pure claptrap,ifyou feel the need to go back hundreds of years to Russo-Turkish wars or the war with Sweden 300 years ago? Do you not see how petty this all feels? Not to mention, you seem to be one of those historical revisionists who shiftthe blame for WWI on someone else (probably Serbia and their Russian allies). I can play the game of silly historical examples too. Let me paraphrase you: "US has been a bad actor from the very first moment it has emerged as a great power. ALL US neighbours have been victims during its imperial history. Canada in 1812, Mexico in 1840s, let's not even talk about Cuba orHaiti. They occupied Phillipines in 1898 and became a colonial power. They purposefully broke up Columbia and supported independent Panama for their interest in the Panama Canal. And that's just 19th/early 20thcentury." Don't you see how random and silly all these examples are?
  15. Middle East and N.Africa v.21- WorldWarSyria

    Look man, you're wasting your breath here, as I've repeatedly found. Russian are to blame for everything that goes on in the world andSt. USA and St. NATO are burdened by their holy responsibility to lead and protect. That's basically it. The whole line of this discussion is one long concocted bull**** that gets repeated a thousand times so that Goebbels starts believing in the end: Russia will attack Baltics, Finland, Poland... Russia will attackBaltics, Finland, Poland...Russia will attack Baltics, Finland, Poland... It's a mantra that no rational discussion can end, because they'll always comeup with "well, how can you be sure they won't?" And what can a person say except pointing out how silly and nonsensical this hypothesis is?