Guilty as charged. I do believe in... *checks notes* Israel's right to exist.
But the bigger point here is these are governments waving foreign flags not civilians
Eh, it's just empty virtue-signaling, like turning the Brandenburg Gate into the colors of the French flag after yet another mostly peaceful terrorist attack.
cool now if only zionists stopped making america fight their wars for them in the middle east and having america give them billions of dollars every year for free for absolutely no reason, and fought their own wars.
having america give them billions of dollars every year for free for absolutely no reason
There actually is a reason, not a good reason mind you, but there is a reason. Israel gets $3.3 billion dollars and Egypt gets $1.3 billion dollars as part of the agreement that Jimmy Carter brokered with the two countries. Now the world is very different today than in 1979, so in my opinion, the U.S. can stop paying both countries. But its incorrect to say "absolutely no reason".
...Is that it? Hate to say it, but for all the furore on here about American money going to Israel, I was expecting a bit more. A Gerald R Ford aircraft carrier costs about three times as much as that.
Considering that almost everyone is a Zionist, except for some people on the far-left and the Nazi right, sure you can blame everything that happens on 'Zionists'.
yes lets pretend that it isn't jewish bankers and zionists getting america in to war with iraq, libya, syria and trying to get in to war with iran as well. ,
well you can start with libya and how it tried to have its own banks and gold standard and break away from the global banks for one. but that's a no no
No, but I have a larger argument that this is actually going to be the new normal for warfare.
I'll put it simply because I don't want to derail too much, but in the future, geographic proximity will no longer be a necessary component for warfare. Instead, If two nations go to war, all nations will have to be wary of each factions partisans or irregular forces launching irregular attacks on the other faction's strategic interests.
For example, if Israel and Syria go to war, you may get:
A Mossad raid of Syrain financiers in Canada
Syrian partisans in Denmark may storm the Israeli Embassy
A port in Brazil may be seized by Syrian special forces to steal an Israeli ship.
Due to the world's economic interconnectedness, a country's economic sphere of influence, even for small countries may be extremely broad. This means that fighting over those strategic interests may take place anywhere in the world.
What we are seeing now with both Israeli and Palestinian supporters attacking each other in the street is a political version of what you can expect to see become more formalized as part of world-wide asymmetric warfare.
This actually does mean that countries, even like the US, are at risk of partly losing control over their own domestic security without a robust militia system. If the Boston Harbor was seized by any foreign military forces, even temporarily it would be embarrassing. The police themselves would not be well trained or equipped enough to dislodge a proper irregular force, and it's likely the irregulars would not be there long enough to provoke a slow conventional military response.
Panama is actually a good example of a nation that is extremely wary of this because every nation uses it's canal. They have a small but highly professional force that is keenly aware of subterfuge from all possible countries, even the US. The world will slowly become more like a Panama, or a pre-civil war US with significant regional militias to act in quick response to irregular warfare threats.
Kinda justifies internment camps... if the shit hits the fan, these camps will come back just because people living in your country has more allegiance to another.
The flying of flags, I don't think so (but I could be wrong).
But the taking sides, yes. WWI occurred because nations took sides. The French took America's side during the revolution. Whenever it serves a country's foreign interests, they tend to pick a side.
Is it normal for people to wave flags of countries that do not even exist, like Palestine?
Comment Reported for: Rule 12: Falsehoods
Comment Approved: That's not how this rule works.
Your zionism is showing. But the bigger point here is these are governments waving foreign flags (israel's flag) not civilians
Guilty as charged. I do believe in... *checks notes* Israel's right to exist.
Eh, it's just empty virtue-signaling, like turning the Brandenburg Gate into the colors of the French flag after yet another mostly peaceful terrorist attack.
cool now if only zionists stopped making america fight their wars for them in the middle east and having america give them billions of dollars every year for free for absolutely no reason, and fought their own wars.
There actually is a reason, not a good reason mind you, but there is a reason. Israel gets $3.3 billion dollars and Egypt gets $1.3 billion dollars as part of the agreement that Jimmy Carter brokered with the two countries. Now the world is very different today than in 1979, so in my opinion, the U.S. can stop paying both countries. But its incorrect to say "absolutely no reason".
...Is that it? Hate to say it, but for all the furore on here about American money going to Israel, I was expecting a bit more. A Gerald R Ford aircraft carrier costs about three times as much as that.
No one forced you, stop blaming everyone else for your own foolishness.
In fairness, as with China, no one's making anyone take a bribe.
You just stop accepting them.
The Israelis look out for their own interests. Isn't their fault if the American government is corrupt and weak.
Considering that almost everyone is a Zionist, except for some people on the far-left and the Nazi right, sure you can blame everything that happens on 'Zionists'.
yes lets pretend that it isn't jewish bankers and zionists getting america in to war with iraq, libya, syria and trying to get in to war with iran as well. ,
If only there weren't any Jews then all the Arab countries would be like Sweden.
Did i say that? They certainly would be more peaceful without all the wars being pushed by zionists trying to overthrow govts .And the invasions.
Alright, show me how "Jewish bankers" did all that.
well you can start with libya and how it tried to have its own banks and gold standard and break away from the global banks for one. but that's a no no
It's normal for citizens It's not normal for governments... unless we are about to go to war
No, but I have a larger argument that this is actually going to be the new normal for warfare.
I'll put it simply because I don't want to derail too much, but in the future, geographic proximity will no longer be a necessary component for warfare. Instead, If two nations go to war, all nations will have to be wary of each factions partisans or irregular forces launching irregular attacks on the other faction's strategic interests.
For example, if Israel and Syria go to war, you may get:
Due to the world's economic interconnectedness, a country's economic sphere of influence, even for small countries may be extremely broad. This means that fighting over those strategic interests may take place anywhere in the world.
What we are seeing now with both Israeli and Palestinian supporters attacking each other in the street is a political version of what you can expect to see become more formalized as part of world-wide asymmetric warfare.
This actually does mean that countries, even like the US, are at risk of partly losing control over their own domestic security without a robust militia system. If the Boston Harbor was seized by any foreign military forces, even temporarily it would be embarrassing. The police themselves would not be well trained or equipped enough to dislodge a proper irregular force, and it's likely the irregulars would not be there long enough to provoke a slow conventional military response.
Panama is actually a good example of a nation that is extremely wary of this because every nation uses it's canal. They have a small but highly professional force that is keenly aware of subterfuge from all possible countries, even the US. The world will slowly become more like a Panama, or a pre-civil war US with significant regional militias to act in quick response to irregular warfare threats.
I guess in the age of virtue signaling it is. Ooo, "solidarity." Like that helps anything. If you want to help send actual help. Otherwise who cares.
I'd fly the flag of indifference myself.
Kinda justifies internment camps... if the shit hits the fan, these camps will come back just because people living in your country has more allegiance to another.
Only in certain conflicts
The flying of flags, I don't think so (but I could be wrong).
But the taking sides, yes. WWI occurred because nations took sides. The French took America's side during the revolution. Whenever it serves a country's foreign interests, they tend to pick a side.