Taking down a tyrant is one thing, putting stephen miller in charge of running a foreign nation and explicitly doing it to give the corporations that own the government billions of petrodollars is another lol

they don't need to do the second half, i dont need to glaze the second half because they took out maduro. If they took out maduro and didn't want to put Miller in charge and Trump didn't confirm that he was solely acting as the private army of the oil companies, that would be a different story.

Why do you want everyone to ignore that because they took out maduro? pussy shit.

Why do you want to pretend that the current USA is full of people who want to preside over a Germany like reconstruction of Venezuela? Everyone who wanted to invade and take the oil hates everyone there lmfao, they think they’re subhuman

Be prepared for every time news of dissenters being arrested in Venezuela comes out to be followed by a video of Stephen miller screaming that everyone mean to him is siding with murder rapists
First of all I'm unaware of Stephen Miller being the new dictator of Venezuela. We are saying the same structure of Venezuela taking charge of it. Sure US is supervising it by Stephen Miller but unfortunately not much is changing. The people is still under the same old dictatorship. So what you are really complaning here?

Even if Trump have done it just for the oil companies that were STOLEN from US. It is in their right.

Sorry pal you have nothing to complain about it in here.
 
It’s hard for me to take the Minnesota daycare fraud thing seriously when it’s very clearly being weaponized by the most violently racist people on the planet.

These folks very clearly just want to deport people for being black and Muslim. They’re not even really hiding it. Absolutely no reason to engage with these folks as if they’re acting in good faith.
You see racism where their isn't any, or make it about racism instead of the actual issue.
That's what's wrong with it all.
 

Jew D. Boy

I Can Go Lower
I hate billionaires and Zohran Mamdani. Both are possible :beckmoji:
Sure, but one’s morally correct and the other is fucking stupid, I’ll leave it to you to figure out which one is which:Gaban_Smug:
[automerge]1767743286[/automerge]
You see racism where their isn't any, or make it about racism instead of the actual issue.
That's what's wrong with it all.
*montage set to the Curb Your Enthusiasm theme begins showing the dozens of race-baiting YouTube videos you’ve posted over the years* :luffyswat:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Sure, but one’s morally correct and the other is fucking stupid, I’ll leave it to you to figure out which one is which:Gaban_Smug:
[automerge]1767743286[/automerge]

*montage set to the Curb Your Enthusiasm theme begins showing the dozens of race-baiting YouTube videos you’ve posted over the years* :luffyswat:
Talk to Cubans, Eastern Europeans, North Koreans, etc. about how morally correct he is.

Some of you are just straight up brainwashed libtards.

Look at the countries with the highest living standards in the history of the world, and tell me what system they had.

The issue is not capitalism, it's a political system captured by special interests.
 

Jew D. Boy

I Can Go Lower
Talk to Cubans, Eastern Europeans, North Koreans, etc. about how morally correct he is.

Some of you are just straight up brainwashed libtards.



Look at the countries with the highest living standards in the history of the world, and tell me what system they had.

The issue is not capitalism, it's a political system captured by special interests.
Don’t you ever call me a liberal again; I will accept socialist, leftist, progressive, or even communist, but I refuse to be lumped in with those spineless, ineffectual Democrats…regardless, better red than (brain)dead like every conservative in this thread/world :BigW:
 
A system that prevents any non-capitalist societies from blooming.


That's what capitalist does...

Literally.
No it doesn't. In a healthy democracy, those special interests are checked. This is what Scandinavian countries do. People think they are "socialist", but they're anything but. They are heavily capitalist countries and strong private property laws, but with strong social programs. You can advocate for stronger social programs without a centrally planned economy.

You're instead attributing a political failure to an economic system. Capitalism is simply recognizing the limitations of government and a centrally planned economy. Politicians are dumb as fucking shit and letting them control every aspect of the economy is just wanting to shoot yourself in the fucking face. Mamdani is the perfect example: a dumbass trust fund kid that couldn't hold a job for more than 6 months, now is in charge of 100 billion dollar budget. It's a disaster in the making.
 
In a healthy democracy, those special interests are checked.
There are no such things, I'm sorry...

You're instead attributing a political failure to an economic system.
Legitimately


Politicians are dumb as fucking shit and letting them control every aspect of the economy is just wanting to shoot yourself in the fucking face.
Who is talking about politician? What about giving the power back to the people?
 

Apollo

The Sol King
@Apollo
Why did Khomeini conspire with Gaddafi to kill Musa al Sadr?
Not sure if Khomeini conspired on it especially since at the time, he was in exile in Iraq and was moved like a month after his death to France.
The Shah could have been behind it, just like he was behind Khomeini being kicked from Iraq.
Or other revolutionary hardliners maybe. I lean more towards this possibility.

But Khomeini himself? I don't think so.
 
The Shah could have been behind it, just like he was behind Khomeini being kicked from Iraq
a Socialist Shia Mullah was probably His Worst Nightmare , but Musa didn't believe in Clerical rule like Khomeini so some Believe the Shah preferred Musa

But Khomeini himself? I don't think so.
He already had a lot of influence at the time, especially in Lebanon, Jalal Eddine Al Faresi's comments only makes things more suspicious
 
Top