If a guy went topless nobody would have given a fuck is the more appropriate comparison, the fact that you have to intentionally reach for the wrong example to make your point work is proof, that the people calling you misogynistic are not far off.
Well at least Tucker was fired over it?
it took 2 nuclear weapons and the promise of more, and they were already in the verge of losing.
Some historians argue that the bigger factor was the sowjets preparing to enter the war against Japan and that the nuclear bombs just kind of sped up the decision that was coming anyway.
Ah, I was not aware thank you!
Is Cassettes a mistranslation? Or am I missing something here?
The start of the issue was when Europeans wanted Jewish people out of Europe after WW2 so they stole a shit ton of land that’s important to three different religions from the Palestinians and called it Israel…
That’s not what happened. There was a strong desire for a Jewish state in Palestine for hundreds of years, in the beginning of the 20th century this was accelerated through the British mandate and immigration. The real story is way more complex and your representation of it is not only wrong but also negates the agency the Jewish population living there for centuries had in creating the Jewish state.
Of course the horrors of the Holocaust had part in the decision but it was not because “Europeans wanted Jews out”
Like I said the real history is waaaaay more complex, I suggest you read up on it - the is a got starting point.
Edit: link didn’t post for some reason - https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mandatory_Palestine
Another dishonest tactic - deflecting to an unimportant part of the argument to hold up the participant with needless explanations for metaphorical concepts.
What the other user meant is that all we know about space travel is, that we need a lot of protective layers around our crafts just for leaving the atmosphere, so one would assume that craft that supposedly travel hundreds of light-years would need a very sophisticated kind of protection. But there is no way to deliver evidence to a theoretical concept, hence why I said your arguing is in bad faith my dear.
edit: and now he takes the cowards way out of a failing argument by deleting his comments. That’s another tactic - ending the conversation, rendering all our arguments worthless and essential wasting our time. Jean Paul Sartre described it well in his quote about anti semitism.
It’s impossible to prove a negative, you simply can not prove that something ISN’T there. It’s such a transparent deflection and you know that, it’s a common conspiracy tactic, dishonest argument 101.
As long as there is no physical evidence that proves the existence of extra terrestrial UFO we have to assume that they are not real. So if you want to maintain they exist, you’ll have to cough up some proof.
Interesting, never heard that, got a tip where I can read more about that?
Some of those that work forces…
Coming from reddit you really had me in the first half, I felt my blood pressure rising dramatically until the last sentence.
Fuck fuck fuck fuck FUCK fuck fuck fuck fuck FUCK fuck fuck fuck