I don’t disagree with your point that he was just a symptom of an underlying problem.
Problems are pretty nuanced when discussing systemic issues.
People, ideology, beliefs… These are all small parts but together they make a big picture.
All I really want is that people think at a multidimensional level.
The fact you lot are more concerned about a guy who had no political influence for 40 years and is now dead, while turning away from the cunts that are fucking up our society up today shows how weak as piss you lot are.
Omg here is a guy that we all agree sucks and died. 🥳🥳🥳
I don’t want to fight against the real problems of today so let me dogpile on an easy dead target. I feel good now.
Oh fuck off he was responsible for the death of millions of people. That’s such bullshit I already feel dirty just asking for some sources.
You are going to give me an IamRight link to support your claim, I’m going to post a rebuttal showing I can prove Aliens rule the earth because “here is a webink” and then you are going to dismiss me with some cliche bullshit about “hurr durr sheeples, troll, shill” argument.
So let’s cut the crap. Your agenda is to support the narrative of the populists, and my agenda is to argue against binary arguments.
Can we move on now?
Remind me when this guy commanded troops?
I must have missed that part in history lessons. Unless you are saying that all advisors to the leadership are responsible for the leaders actions.
Well actually those who continue it as well right, for example every US president since Roosevelt.
Hang on, let’s start the list, please feel free to add to it; Stephen Hadley, Condoleezza Rice, Colin Powell…
Yawn, not really interested in your dismissal. I wanted to ask that we have a News channel without an opinion comment in the headlines.
But you don’t want that so let’s go.
To quote you Kissenger was responsible for “millions of deaths”, and lived his last days “Like Hitler living out his days…”
So source for Kissenger killing millions? You mean he was an advisor during Reagon? So Bush is not responsible for Iraq? Only his advisors? Get fucked!
Kissenger fled NAZI GERMANY at 15 with his family to the US, then drafted in 1943 to fight the Nazis. Something none of us know about.
The guy was not a saint. But you want to inject your view in a news thread and I just showed you a counter point. So go on and double down you dismissive prat.
So you counter an inflammatory title with hyperbole. In 2021, in just Afghanistan, 14 percent of people killed were women and children.
In Palestine people are dying daily. In Ukraine they are fighting against a mad man… So on and so forth.
But here is a guy who for over 40 years has been out of the power structure, has no influence and dies when most of the grips you lot claim happened before you were born, but you have a massive hardon for him.
Must be nice to fight against a problem that doesn’t exist.
If you are going to have a news thread and allow opinionated titles, that means your community supports political commentary headlines and not factual news.
The titles should be nothing other than neural summaries.
“Henry Kissenger died at age 100, He was a controversial figure in American politics”. That’s a factual title.
The published title of this post is opinionated commentary and not factual news posting.
EDIT: You won’t even support the idea of non-bias news posts. And you expect to be taken seriously. Fucking shaking my head right now.
Winning a debate should not be the goal. It should be to progress disclosure and help finding some resemblance of “truth”.
Hence why I asked which of the two possible ironic statements I made you were asking about.
I’m wrong all the time. But discourse helps us all to learn.
However I would counter with the point that those with a binary view point must be debated in like.
How can I debate the grey with a person who cannot see it?
I think I should have stated “whom” to remove the qualifier ambiguity.
I hate using whom but in this case it was probably needed.
Because I would only support religious education if it adhered to my viewpoint while claiming conservatives can only see binary viewpoints?
Or because I have a binary view point of conservatives while at the same time levelling this against them?
Both are ironic in some sense.
I mean if a woman wants to marry a person who is a Trump supporter, then while I question her sanity… Okay I guess? 🤷♂️
But this idea that women are not marrying Trump supporters because of “social pressure” just sounds to me like another of the long line of “women are weak and can’t make their own decisions” arguments.
But then again what can you expect from conservatives who can only think in terms of binaries?
I said it back in 2001 when the war on terror started.
First it will be the “terrorist”, then the “extremists”, then it will be the “dissidents” and then finally the “undesirables”.
Seems we are at the dissidents stage.
The idiots behind this shit really should have paid more attention in history class.
I was referring to the comment that transoceanic electrical transmission is too expensive and impractical.
In the case of the NT - Singapore project, it is probably the most practical and cost effective option IF solar is the way they want to go.
That’s possible. You will still need to have the generation somewhere, and if you are going solar then the Northern Territory is an ideal location as it has very little rain and abundance of sunshine.
I’m not suggesting your idea is invalidated by the example I give. I’m simply pointing out that in this example, transoceanic electrical transmission isn’t a bad idea.
When all things are considered in this specific example. The infrastructure cost is outweighed by the impracticality of Singapore generating solar energy.
Learn the concepts behind Propositional Logic and First Order Logic. Then how to apply them to critical thinking.
You will be surprised how much bullshit you can instantly see through by checking the subset of propositions in a statement, their conclusions and their mutually exclusivity.
As an example of Propositional Logic… It is raining today but there is not a cloud in the sky.
Proposition 1 = It is raining today
Proposition 2 = There are no clouds in the sky today
Both Propositions 1 & 2 are mutually exclusive therefore the statement as a whole is false.
I’ll assume you are unfamiliar with the size of Singapore and the geography of the Northern Territory.
Singapore lacks the space for pumped storage. Singapore’s density is 8592 per square kilometre. Compare this to India at only 481 or the US at 37.
The Northern Territory in Australia is extremely flat and extremely arid, as such it lacks the topography to build water storage and the water required for it.
Oh great, now we need to take it down from Big Ben and de-magnetise it. 🤦♂️
No he hasn’t. After he left his role in the state department he went into non-profits which try to influence policy.
That’s so far removed from policy making I may as claim I set policy because I know my reports are in briefings which go to policy makers.
Which by association, I’m a mass murderer based on the sentiment of Lemmy at this moment.