This is intended for people interested in the subject of military guns and their ammunition, with emphasis on automatic weapons.
Latest 13:21 by stancrist
Latest 13:09 by EmericD
Latest 5:44 by Guardsman26
Latest 1-Oct by stancrist
Latest 30-Sep by Mr. T (MrT4)
Latest 29-Sep by stancrist
Latest 27-Sep by Mr. T (MrT4)
Latest 26-Sep by stancrist
Latest 24-Sep by schnuersi
Latest 24-Sep by Mr. T (MrT4)
Latest 24-Sep by farmplinker2
Latest 22-Sep by Mr. T (MrT4)
Latest 20-Sep by Mr. T (MrT4)
Latest 20-Sep by Mr. T (MrT4)
Latest 20-Sep by gatnerd
Latest 19-Sep by stancrist
Latest 19-Sep by stancrist
Latest 19-Sep by smg762
Latest 18-Sep by JPeelen
Latest 17-Sep by graylion
Latest 17-Sep by schnuersi
Latest 16-Sep by gatnerd
Latest 14-Sep by smg762
Latest 7-Sep by EmericD
Latest 5-Sep by stancrist
Latest 4-Sep by renatohm
Latest 4-Sep by Mr. T (MrT4)
Armed citizenry is universally despised, even in Ukraine they first handed out arms, but have already 'recalled' the guns and are threatening criminal prosecution for the outstanding guns not returned and that it in midst of ongoing war.
I spent two years lobbying and drafting our gun laws and had the luck that we had at the time 'far right' government that was open to it so we were able to enact one of the best gun legislations in EU within the limitations of the EU framework 2 or 3 paragraphs of the gun law is actually my text 1:1 , funny enough the far right government that was despised and i was no fan of but like it or not was most open to the gun law amendments so we used that to the full.
It seems French 'nobility' mostly despises its plebs, couple of weeks ago, perma- tan probably buys the same shower body paint as Trump, Christine Lagarde was promoting another freedom tool digital while invoking Batacalan ( she literally said that attackers have been financed with small donations so with the digital currency we can control that !!?).
I think it would be a hard sell to really claim foreign policy promoting war and regime change projects in Syria and Libya that destabilized the ME and North Africa has no backlash in the form of ME folks coming to France intent on committing terrorist acts? Terror mostly happens in countries involved in this kind of projects be it Russia,US , UK or France. and is always directly linked to domestic or foreign policy of said countries.
Nobody ever said democracy is perfect or the governments of democracies are.
Winston S Churchill, 11 November 1947:
‘Many forms of Government have been tried, and will be tried in this world of sin and woe. No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed it has been said that democracy is the worst form of Government except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.…’
First Leopard on the frontlines
Augmented RPG7 warheads
Still waiting for Romanian TRI-RPG to appear in Ukraine
you know mate, we live on rather opposite ends of the political spectrum.
What makes you say that?
It would be quite difficult BTW because I don't belong to any spectrum. I am not intrested in doctrines or wings just in solutions.
I am not going to answer all you arguments. Besides being to lazy I also think its pointless in a discussion, written on the internet.
Furthermore I don't want to derail this threat too much.
Just on thing for all you arguments: What you do is pretty common these days but this is neither an excuse or makes it better or understanable in the slightest.
You pick one extreme incident or circiumstance, often completly out of context, and argue as if its the average normal case. Even if the extreme case is true it can by no means be used to draw conclusions of the general whole.
This is why people like me say things like: democracy is not perfect but its better than all alternatives.
You argue in the lines: its not perfect in they way I want so it must be bad and everything around it and related to it are bad and need to be abolished.
Strictly speaking, fascism is the truest form of democracy. All groups (corporations as fascist theorists called them) have representatives in an assembly.
Whereas various critics assure us the current system limits the participation of certain groups.
In this case its pretty obvious that the definition of fascism you use is not the one generally used.
Fascism by definition is an authoritatian rule with the main goal of centralising power with the foundation of a (in a nutshell) blood and soil ideology.
It is true that fascism is highly flexible in its means to get into power, maximising it and if possible increase it. But in the end its just temporary. Fascism uses free market economy as long at it serves its needs. If it doesn'T its replaced in the blink of an idea. By all means necessary. Which is on of the other defining elements of fascism. The end justifies the means for a fascist.
So by definition fascism is directly oposit of any form of democracy. For a time a fascit leader or regime might tolerate some form of democracy or political participation if it serves his or its needs. As soon as it doesn't its gone. Or some form of token or fake participation remains. Fascism also shared a lot similarities with Communism. The difference is in the doctrinal foundation. Communists define by class fascists by nationality. The regime of North Korea for example could be text book fascist if they would not have the class struggle in their background and ideology. If this would be exchanged for nationality and ancestry they would be fascist.
Genuinely new and surprising weapon to show up:
REAL FASCISM HAS NEVER BEEN TRIED!
I think you could claim the same for many systems, each is specific to the time and populations its applied to, probably none fit in a box of definitions or better jet definitions get crafted around one particular example and are then applied to other roughly similar regimes.