An understandable reaction
All the rumors I've seen are suggesting that potential nominees will be women. Which on one hand I understand because of good optics, Ginsburg's feminist leanings and so on, but on the other hand choosing people based on gender is still sexism and more importantly is retarded.
Apparently "sources close to the President" say that he plans on moving forward with a nomination. Not sure how legit that is however.
Pretty sure that would count as a booby trap and therefore be illegal. Shame, because it would actually be effective.
"Hey Pablo, what do you think of Trump's latest tweet promoting racism and transphobia?"
"Que?"
Fuck em. Not voting Biden and anyone who comes after me because of it will get Kenosha'd.
and then, for no reason at all, people voted Hitler into power
Not a Bernie bro either. But a Bernie vs Trump race would be genuinely more interesting than what we have now.
Why can't both be true? They aren't mutually exclusive
Probably yes. FDR was aware of the Japanese threat, (which was part of his motivation for cutting off oil) but he was personally more oriented towards the European theater.
Also, keep in mind that while Germany and Japan were technically in an alliance, it wasn't a close one, partly because of differing goals and partly because of the sheer distance between Europe and East Asia. So while they were on the same "side" (mostly because of having common enemies) and had diplomatic relations, they didn't share much intelligence or really coordinate. Which makes sense, because neither was much interested in things happening on the oppposite side of the world, far beyond their respective spheres of influence or desired conquests.
So in a scenario where the Allies push the Germans back to Germany but come to a mutual anti-Russian truce, the Japanese would not be part of such a truce, and would continue fighting. Assuming that Pearl Harbor plays out similarly, America would still fight and win the Pacific War again. Realistically, the only scenario where the Japanese maintain their massive empire is one where they don't start a war with the U.S.
Australia would be a bit of a wild card- in our timeline they also fought the Japanese in Indonesia and Southeast Asia, but with aid and intelligence sharing from the U.S. Japan would never be able to conquer Australia, but could theoretically bomb it or attempt an invasion. And Australia might be able to make significant inroads into Japanese holdings without American help. That brings in way too many new variables so I don't know how a Japan-Australia war would ultimately play out.
I had a political science professor who liked to discuss these sorts of alternate history theories, and he had an interesting take.
Basically his argument was that the war was justified, because of Germany subjugating most other countries in Europe. BUT he thinks the Allied demand for "unconditional surrender" was a bad idea, because a) it led to much greater destruction on both sides that could have been avoided, b) in the long term, a strong, unified, self ruling Germany was a better deterrent to the Soviets, and c), if they were open to a truce or conditional surrender, Europe could ultimately be better off and more unified today, as opposed to half of it being oppressed under Communism for 50 years and all the resulting inequality from that.
Also without the need to completely rebuild Germany, that puts Western Europe, and America, in a much better economic position, allowing them to recover more quickly.
That was his thinking, my addition to that is, in a scenario where the Axis and Allies teamed up on Russia as opposed to fighting each other to the death, the European powers would likely have been able to hold onto their colonial empires. Probably not indefinitely, but at least been able to afford them for a few more decades. That would have completely changed the timeline of decolonization (if it ever happened), so Africa and Asia would look different today.
Not sure how Japan fits into all this, though.
This appears to be the actual post he got suspended for:
You know as I fly across the United States today I’m ready various people’s political views and I have to say a famous four star Military General that I spent time with in the MidEast told me Mike let me give you some advice don’t ever get in a conversation about politics or religion unless you are really smart. I said why do you say that comment His response it’s like being balanced on a single edge razor blade if you slip you will get cut!
Think about that before we all make foolish uneducated post! Moral of this story is most of use just repeat what we have heard we really don’t know.
Have a great positive day!
.....
.....
.....
He was suspended for sharing advice and making a truthful observation...and nothing he said was derogatory or insulting.
Han shot first
Rodian Lives Matter
Disney Star Wars in a nutshell
Also was it just me or did it seem like they focused way less on including aliens/having alien characters in the background?
Unconventional, I'd say. He's probably Scotch-Irish-Welsh in origin, maybe some English too. It's a relatively common phenotype among people of a certain ancestry/background. I look a bit similar, but with less oriental eyes and a different head shape.
Interesting. Thanks for explaining, never knew any of that.
Why? What's his reasoning? Is it because Biden was for many years a tacit segregationist?
Actual headline from the Washington Post
Trump’s family members, conservative allies dominate GOP convention lineup
...ok?...duh? Who else but family and allies would dominate any party convention?
Maybe I'm reading too much into it, but it seems like a really pointless article.
Rule Britannia!
Coons beating coons? Who woulda thunk?
But then it would actually have to make a living
You're a troll. No one could be this obtuse. Good job, had me fooled for a minute there.
You have no problem blaming all men, but refuse to address the specific category of men responsible for most of it.
Yes it is, the only other relevant factor is age
No other category is a stronger correlate to violent behavior.
Despite being 6% of the population, black men commit 57% of all violent crime.
Mathematically, that's actually a stronger correlation than 50% doing 95%.
And another interesting note: 85-95% of men in jail are raised by single moms. Look it up if you don't believe me.
One of the strongest factors for commiting a crime and going to jail, is not having a male parent and only being raised by a woman.
So according to your logic.... let's blame women. All of them. Because they are responsible for divorcing men and making their sons into criminals.
And if you are still so adamant about blaming all men for being the main commiters of violent crime...
then you should blame all black men for being responsible for most of that violence and skewing the statistics for the other 94% of men.
But you won't do that because you're a hypocrite, who just wants to use incomplete data to have an excuse to hate "men" in general, without saying the word "black", or "bad parent" because you don't want to be racist or sexist.
It is absolutely ridiculous to place blame on one group because of a correlation of violence, while ignoring the subgroup that has a much higher correlation and thus skews the statistics for the whole group in general
Don't you understand pattern recognition, or are you just brainwashed by the patriarchy?
Men between the ages of 14-40
Oh I 100% understand pattern recognition. And you're getting closer. What type of men in that age range commit more violent crime than all other groups put together?
What does that matter?
We want to be accurate, don't we?
Obviously the problem is men. That's the most correlated category to all violent crime
It's not just "men". It's a specific subgroup of men. The most correlated category in all violent crime is....
Here's a hint: Biden says they lose their racial identity if they don't vote for him.
I believe Amazon has a thing where they basically allow people to self publish books. Not familiar with the process or limitations, though.
A lot of fanfiction and storywriting sites exist, and many have little or no barriers to entry. But as you probably know, most of them have low average quality in terms of content. And you won't get any money out of it. Although if you have above average writing skills you would stand out there, and if your goal is to reach an impressionable audience, those sites may actually be a good option.