7 when the story happened, tells it 15 years later in 2020, so I’m supposed to believe this guy is 7 - 15 + 2025 - 2020 = -3 today. Something doesn’t check out about this story.

Facts don’t care about your feelings. You’ve presented zero evidence to the contrary, how are you this confident about your assertion? This is such a joke

I’ve looked at these, and here’s a blog post carefully going over the points made, meticulously refuting them one by one.

Oh hey look a guy on the internet who doesn’t when someone contradicts his baseless claims with evidence. There’s something you don’t see every day.

I never really looked into this (relation between speed limits and accidents/safety), so I figured I’d verify your statement with a quick google search and it turns out you’ve got it all wrong. There is a deep well established link between speed limits and accident risk, see for example here:

https://road-safety.transport.ec.europa.eu/eu-road-safety-policy/priorities/safe-road-use/safe-speed/archive/speeding/speed-central-issue-road-safety/speed-and-accident-risk_en

Now you know! :)

That’s verifiably nonsense. I don’t know how you feel about holocaust deniers, but that’s what you are to me right now. And to many others. There’s no room in society for you, as far as I’m concerned.

I’m with you on this one. What could they do but hvae their snipers target the elderly, children, and disabled? And they were being humane too! They were aiming specifically for the knees so rhat they wouldn’t be killed, but just completely disabled for the rest of their lives. Honestly confused as to why Israeli leadership wasn’t nominated for a Nobel peace price for that one.

And what do you personally think of this strategy?

Nooo poor Hitler :(

They probably just scrum pokered really well

Your takeaway from WWII is that the guy shoving the kids into the gas chambers should not be condemned? What the fuck is wrong with you?

I still don’t really understand what you mean. What does “it” refer to? And what are nice normal countries?

I’m not sure I understand what you mean. To be clear about my own position in this:

1. Chanting death to the idf is, to me, morally equivalent to chanting death to the SS. Both are ok, even though the SS had forced conscription.

2. Forced conscription is bad, but not really on topic.

Sure, but that’s a whole different convo from finding “your honor, I had to murder the 5 year old; the alternative was a couple of months in prison and flipping burgers for the rest of my life” at all agreeable.

So this is pretty much exactly the line of reasoning that the nazis used to defend their participation in the holocaust. It wasn’t convincing then, and no, it isn’t convincing for the current genocide either.

The only thing I can find in this direction is a letter from beverage companies (including coca cola) opposing these measures. But that’s based on a very shallow google search, so take it with a grain of salt. Where can I find info about what coca cola lobbied for or against?

Love that the “just following orders” defense is making a comeback. Just as valid today as during the Nuremberg trials.

Sorry no. You can’t be an apartheid state and call yourself a democracy. That’s not how words work.

Between this and USAID I can’t say I’m unhappy about it. Of course dismantling imperialism is a good thing, but I also don’t understand. The republicans should be all about illegal invasions, bombing civilians, and installing puppet dictators, so they should love USAID and NATO, yet here we are. Is this just incompetence?

Does anyone else pronounce it “schmod”?