RA

Economic collapse? Iran's Khamenei Tells Rouhani, Ministers, To Solve Economic problems

Recommended Posts

I will take this opportunity to remind our users that while we encourage lively and passionate debate, you must do so without resorting to name calling or making disparaging remarks about another community member. You do not need to verbally attack another user in order to make your case. 

thank you!!

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Alavib said:

Iran does not have a functioning government it has a few selected puppets who’s sole job is to serve the mafia really running the country so all this talk by the leader is smoking mirros trying to ignore the real problems in the country which is the massive corruption at every level 

Quick question what does it matter the level of corruption? Should all countries that are corrupt be subject to sanctions? If so why is the Ukraine, Kazakstan etc not subject to US sanctions along with all the other countries below Iran in the world corruption table? Seems like if you are corrupt and are friends with the US all is fine.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corruption_Perceptions_Index

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Eodmatt
I am having difficulty editing posts for reply so will put your quotes in inverted commas to make this easier to reply to.


"If you think that public executions get me exited, you must watch some very strange and disturbing websites. But thats your choice - you should prolly use a VPN before the authorities take an interest in you."


How does my saying you are excited about public executions link to me watching them? I don't and your suggestion is bizarre sounds like you are just making things up at random. I said you were excited by them as you are keen to tell us all about them however what has that to do with anyone outside of Iran? Why do you think that what a government does in its own country is any reason to involve America? Are American citizens being hung, what right has America to intervene when they don't intervene in Saudi who do public executions? 

"Did I tell Iran that they are wrong for "wanting public executions"? Cant you show me where I said that? Who told you that public executions are something that the Iranians want? Do you think that there is a democratically elected government in Iran? If so please tell us why you imagine that."


OK so you agree that public executions are fine if the population agree, please clarify? Please explain why you brought the topic up on public executions I am at a loss as to what your point is. As for the population wanting them or not, I suggest they do as that is their chosen form of law, just as it happens in Saudi, Iran is not the only state ruled by Islamic law yet you seem to think they should not be allowed to. 


"Why are you asking me why the US government doesn't sanction Saudi Arabia for applying the same laws as Iran in their abuse of homosexuals? Does Saudi Arabia hang people in the street for allegedly being homosexual? Have you seen that? Do you agree that someone who is alleged to be homosexual should suffer death by being publicly hanged in the street?"


Saudi do not hang people they chop their heads off the result is the same and yes homosexually warrants the death sentence there.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_punishment_in_Saudi_Arabia I am assuming you are not for head cutting the same as you are against hanging or does the method of death make one form off execution acceptable?

"Why shouldn't I ask you if you have been to Iraq, since you have an opinion on the country? You have apparently not been to Iraq - by your own admission - and you therefore formulate your opinions on that country purely based on your selective viewing of what you see from where you are. Is that by telescope, binoculars or with unassisted myopic vision?"


You should not ask as I already said I had not so a pointless question. I have already said I speak to Iranians I know and get their opinion so not based on my selective viewing but on views of others from that country I also try to view things from others point of view I am not a religious man but others may be and may actually prefer sharia law to our laws.


"Why are you blethering on about: "I suggest the amount of people killed there by the West's invasion and the destruction caused is in now way proportional to what they now have which is a county devastated by war that cannot agree a Parliament due to the massive divisions between mainly religious parties!"? Do you think that Saddam Hussein was democratically elected? Did you think that Iraq's invasion of Kuwait was justified? If so please provide your justification (in not more than 500 words, I have a low boredom threshold). Do you think that Iraq's use of chemical weapons against the Marsh Arabs, since 1968 was justified? Does your chewing gum lose its flavour on the bed post overnight?"


I hope you don't have a heart condition you certainly seem to be getting very excited about your point off view.
My point regards Iraq was the war allegedly was to remove Saddam and his long range weapons of mass destruction, still to be found. Saddam has gone, many people have died and continue to do so due to the birth from the conflict of ISIS in the region. The invasion started many more conflicts and now an anti American Shia cleric with leanings towards Iran has the largest political party after the recent elections it sounds like many people in Iraq are not so happy with their American liberators and want to turn to an American enemy and to Islam.Will America start sanctions when Iraq leans further to Iran just to finish off the irony? Was all the deaths worth it? What long term benefits has the mass destruction of war produced? Regardless of the past the cure should not be worse than the illness as I strongly suggest it is in this case.  American intervention has brought no good to the area or even the country judging by what the people are saying in their voting preferences.

To summarise my points as I feel we are moving away from the topic.
Iran had an American puppet ruling them they removed the puppet and put a religious leader in place and Islamic law America has never tried friendship with them as they did not like having their man removed. Iran many here have pointed out have never shown any sign of peace towards the US however I suggest the US has done similar whilst trying to undermine and remove the regime, Saddam was backed by the US in his war v Iran for example. America should have tried to show they were willing to deal with Iran not vice versa as they were the original aggressors. How Iran runs its country is irrelevant as America supports similar regimes around the world so that is not an argument for bringing the country down. All we are left with therefore is the nuclear weapons issue which a deal had been reached on and peace between America and Iran may have developed from that however again the Americans have turned aggressor. Looking from the Iranian side of the argument and you can see why they are a bit annoyed at the double standards being employed.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Eodmatt said:

"Inflammatory remarks regarding another contributor [edited].  Matt's comment: Inflammatory?  I was being polite (big cheesy grin!)

This was assuredly a remarkable display of humble self-perception!  

Gotta love these Edits.  Looks like you beat Rodi to the Edit Board.  My congratulations!

Anyway, kinda does sum up the big problems inside that society, now doesn't it?  Here's the kicker: half of Iran's population is below the age of 25 and has zero use for, or truck with, all the crazies so deftly outlined by Matt.  However, in contrast with say the USA, they are unarmed, and thus not in a position to overthrow their oppressors.  The best they can do is some form of passive internal resistance  (any maybe figure out how to build drone bombs).   Meanwhile, in case this tidbit is lost on those who do not follow the US legal system, the US is specifically prohibited by Federal Law to attempt to assassinate any "foreign leader," no matter how tenuous that person's grasp of reality.  An exception seems to have been made in the case of Libya, but then again, note how the Colonel changed his behavior after his tent got bombed by those B-2 stealth bombers. [He had apparently left the tent and gone to the can when the bombs hit, talk about timing!].   

Apparently Thomas Jefferson made the comment that a (bloody, armed) revolution was necessary every thirty years or so, to sweep out the deadwood that would accumulate in Washington. That was his idea for the US 2nd  Amendment and open-carry. Seems to be the case around the planet.    No matter how bad it is, the final check on any "government" is the ability of the population to rise up and toss out the whole lot by force.  An interesting political concept, to be sure. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

F-111s. Tents bombed with F-111s. Chose not to use the F-117, a tactical bomber, to keep it secret. Libyans lit the sky up so much with flares the crews switched to daylight tactics. And yes, Kadaffii mostly did behave after, and gave the US sage advice to our activities in Iraq and Syria, which had we followed, no ISIL. He couldn’t believe how poorly we misread the region, the Arab Spring, and the peoples. We misread him too, to his doom.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Jan van Eck said:

Apparently Thomas Jefferson made the comment that a (bloody, armed) revolution was necessary every thirty years or so, to sweep out the deadwood that would accumulate in Washington. That was his idea for the US 2nd  Amendment and open-carry. Seems to be the case around the planet.    No matter how bad it is, the final check on any "government" is the ability of the population to rise up and toss out the whole lot by force.  An interesting political concept, to be sure. 

And that, my friends, is why we carry. 

[Rodent racks one in the chamber]

the day the populus gives up their firearms is the day they give up their ability to revolt. 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Rodent said:

And that, my friends, is why we carry. 

[Rodent racks one in the chamber]

the day the populus gives up their firearms is the day they give up their ability to revolt. 

THIS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Rodent said:

And that, my friends, is why we carry. 

[Rodent racks one in the chamber]

 

Rodi, do go easy on that "racking the round" thingy when your new date comes to collect you for dinner.  You don't want to totally spook the nice fellow!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

On 9/5/2018 at 4:42 AM, John Foote said:

Kadaffii mostly did behave after, and gave the US sage advice to our activities in Iraq and Syria, which had we followed, no ISIL.

I have watched a UK documentary that had an alternative view of Gadaffi. It claims he was basically chosen as the bad guy by the US as they did not want to against Assad who all the evidence pointed to for Lockerbie and other terrorist acts. They brought him back to the good guy side as it aided them at a later date. Something to explore if you get a chance and have BBC iplayer its called Hypernormalisation and the second part Bitter Lake. It opens a few new ways of looking at things, Gaddaffi is only a small part of it it focusses on  the Middle East and how Western policies have affected the region and the world for that matter.

Edited by jaycee
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

On 9/4/2018 at 2:43 PM, jaycee said:

Eodmatt
I am having difficulty editing posts for reply so will put your quotes in inverted commas to make this easier to reply to.


"If you think that public executions get me exited, you must watch some very strange and disturbing websites. But thats your choice - you should prolly use a VPN before the authorities take an interest in you."


How does my saying you are excited about public executions link to me watching them? I don't and your suggestion is bizarre sounds like you are just making things up at random. I said you were excited by them as you are keen to tell us all about them however what has that to do with anyone outside of Iran? Why do you think that what a government does in its own country is any reason to involve America? Are American citizens being hung, what right has America to intervene when they don't intervene in Saudi who do public executions? 

"Did I tell Iran that they are wrong for "wanting public executions"? Cant you show me where I said that? Who told you that public executions are something that the Iranians want? Do you think that there is a democratically elected government in Iran? If so please tell us why you imagine that."


OK so you agree that public executions are fine if the population agree, please clarify? Please explain why you brought the topic up on public executions I am at a loss as to what your point is. As for the population wanting them or not, I suggest they do as that is their chosen form of law, just as it happens in Saudi, Iran is not the only state ruled by Islamic law yet you seem to think they should not be allowed to. 


"Why are you asking me why the US government doesn't sanction Saudi Arabia for applying the same laws as Iran in their abuse of homosexuals? Does Saudi Arabia hang people in the street for allegedly being homosexual? Have you seen that? Do you agree that someone who is alleged to be homosexual should suffer death by being publicly hanged in the street?"


Saudi do not hang people they chop their heads off the result is the same and yes homosexually warrants the death sentence there.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_punishment_in_Saudi_Arabia I am assuming you are not for head cutting the same as you are against hanging or does the method of death make one form off execution acceptable?

"Why shouldn't I ask you if you have been to Iraq, since you have an opinion on the country? You have apparently not been to Iraq - by your own admission - and you therefore formulate your opinions on that country purely based on your selective viewing of what you see from where you are. Is that by telescope, binoculars or with unassisted myopic vision?"


You should not ask as I already said I had not so a pointless question. I have already said I speak to Iranians I know and get their opinion so not based on my selective viewing but on views of others from that country I also try to view things from others point of view I am not a religious man but others may be and may actually prefer sharia law to our laws.


"Why are you blethering on about: "I suggest the amount of people killed there by the West's invasion and the destruction caused is in now way proportional to what they now have which is a county devastated by war that cannot agree a Parliament due to the massive divisions between mainly religious parties!"? Do you think that Saddam Hussein was democratically elected? Did you think that Iraq's invasion of Kuwait was justified? If so please provide your justification (in not more than 500 words, I have a low boredom threshold). Do you think that Iraq's use of chemical weapons against the Marsh Arabs, since 1968 was justified? Does your chewing gum lose its flavour on the bed post overnight?"


I hope you don't have a heart condition you certainly seem to be getting very excited about your point off view.
My point regards Iraq was the war allegedly was to remove Saddam and his long range weapons of mass destruction, still to be found. Saddam has gone, many people have died and continue to do so due to the birth from the conflict of ISIS in the region. The invasion started many more conflicts and now an anti American Shia cleric with leanings towards Iran has the largest political party after the recent elections it sounds like many people in Iraq are not so happy with their American liberators and want to turn to an American enemy and to Islam.Will America start sanctions when Iraq leans further to Iran just to finish off the irony? Was all the deaths worth it? What long term benefits has the mass destruction of war produced? Regardless of the past the cure should not be worse than the illness as I strongly suggest it is in this case.  American intervention has brought no good to the area or even the country judging by what the people are saying in their voting preferences.

To summarise my points as I feel we are moving away from the topic.
Iran had an American puppet ruling them they removed the puppet and put a religious leader in place and Islamic law America has never tried friendship with them as they did not like having their man removed. Iran many here have pointed out have never shown any sign of peace towards the US however I suggest the US has done similar whilst trying to undermine and remove the regime, Saddam was backed by the US in his war v Iran for example. America should have tried to show they were willing to deal with Iran not vice versa as they were the original aggressors. How Iran runs its country is irrelevant as America supports similar regimes around the world so that is not an argument for bringing the country down. All we are left with therefore is the nuclear weapons issue which a deal had been reached on and peace between America and Iran may have developed from that however again the Americans have turned aggressor. Looking from the Iranian side of the argument and you can see why they are a bit annoyed at the double standards being employed.

 

I will go easy as you seem to be a bit hard of understanding. So here goes:

1.  "How does my saying you are excited about public executions link to me watching them? I don't and your suggestion is bizarre sounds like you are just making things up at random. I said you were excited by them as you are keen to tell us all about them however what has that to do with anyone outside of Iran? Why do you think that what a government does in its own country is any reason to involve America? Are American citizens being hung, what right has America to intervene when they don't intervene in Saudi who do public executions?"

Ans:

I mentioned public executions simply as an example of whats wrong with the regime in that place. Your response is bizarre. Waffling nonsense in fact.

2. Your next point: Well, waffling nonsense again.

3. I'm beginning to see a pattern here.

4. A heart condition? Whats that got to do with anything?

5. What a load of old codswallop

6. Your summary. I didn't bother to read it. I doubt if anyone else will either. It's just more waffle.

To summarise: Reading your posts is a waste of time. Have a nice day.

Edit: I forgot to ask why you didn't answer my chewing gum question: "Does your chewing gum lose its flavour on the bedpost over night?" Please limit your answer to a single word as I am bored with your unspectacular ability to bloviate without restraint.

Edited by Eodmatt
He didn't answer the question
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 9/5/2018 at 9:58 AM, Jan van Eck said:

This was assuredly a remarkable display of humble self-perception!  

Gotta love these Edits.  Looks like you beat Rodi to the Edit Board.  My congratulations!

Anyway, kinda does sum up the big problems inside that society, now doesn't it?  Here's the kicker: half of Iran's population is below the age of 25 and has zero use for, or truck with, all the crazies so deftly outlined by Matt.  However, in contrast with say the USA, they are unarmed, and thus not in a position to overthrow their oppressors.  The best they can do is some form of passive internal resistance  (any maybe figure out how to build drone bombs).   Meanwhile, in case this tidbit is lost on those who do not follow the US legal system, the US is specifically prohibited by Federal Law to attempt to assassinate any "foreign leader," no matter how tenuous that person's grasp of reality.  An exception seems to have been made in the case of Libya, but then again, note how the Colonel changed his behavior after his tent got bombed by those B-2 stealth bombers. [He had apparently left the tent and gone to the can when the bombs hit, talk about timing!].   

Apparently Thomas Jefferson made the comment that a (bloody, armed) revolution was necessary every thirty years or so, to sweep out the deadwood that would accumulate in Washington. That was his idea for the US 2nd  Amendment and open-carry. Seems to be the case around the planet.    No matter how bad it is, the final check on any "government" is the ability of the population to rise up and toss out the whole lot by force.  An interesting political concept, to be sure. 

I'll tell you what...... The UK is now a seething craphole of political correctness. lefty liberal loveliness and elected representatives who get elected and then go on to please themselves what they do and never mind the electorate.

An example: A few years ago the liberal tossers decided that the police were "stopping and searching too many "black" people and far too many of them were ending up in court for carrying concealed weapons. This was seen by the liberal left rug munchers as being "racist". This despite the fact that the areas of London where stop and search was most productive in terms of weapons found, were mainly ethnic areas. So the leftie liberal lovies were screaming that not enough white people were found to be carrying concealed weapons. And this was because ....... I'll leave to your discretion as to the reason. But heres a warning - If you thought that less pink people than non reflective people carry concealed weapons then that is proof that you are 1. A racist, 2. a member of the hated pink, middle class. tax paying community, 3. Guilty of "hate crime" for not standing up for the underprivileged, yada, blah .....

Anyway, the then member of parliament responsible for LAW AND ORDER, decided to stop the police from undertaking stipend search activities, except in the case that the police officer could prove that a crime "was about to be committed". presumably that meant, "If the law officer saw e.g. a knife, about to be thrust into someones person".

The result was that this year we have had over a hundred deaths from stabbings in London alone this year. 

Who was the person responsible for the change in the law? Theresa May, who is now supposedly negotiating the UK's withdrawal from the EU (and the sooner the better) but, but, she doesn't believe BREXIT, she voted against it. God help us.

Rape and other crimes involving so called ethnic minorities in the UK have gone largely  un-investigated by the police in some areas (Sheffield, Barnsley, Huddersfield etc - mainly the cities of the  old industrial north with large immigrant populations) for many years now, simply because the rapists have screamed RACISM at the police and a number of liberal lefty tosser organisations have scrambled to provide them with lawyers and newspaper propaganda. This particular matter is so bad that around 200 men (mainly from a country other than UK) have been arrested recently - 31 men last week alone - because people were starting to talk about taking unilateral action.

We are seeing the breakdown of society in the UK and it is caused in the main by the kind of social engineering forced upon us by the EU - uncontrolled immigration being one big facet of it.

If you read the press and statements made by the vociferous liberal lefties, you will see that anyone opposed to uncontrolled  immigration is shouted down as a RACIST and a xenophobic.

In fact what people in the UK are concerned about - and this was the reason we didn't join Schengen, the scheme for free movement of people within Europe, is that the European external borders are so porous that the countries with external borders can't stop illegal  immigration, nor can they control it. And by and large those illegal immigrants head for UK with its lax laws, free money, free hospitals, free doctors, free schools etc.

As for the term "Populist", in the UK this has been construed by the vociferous liberal lefty movement as being a move towards Fascism that must be stopped at all costs, including by dismantling democracy. The real facts are that people are reacting to the threats to their safety posed by uncontrolled immigration, by voting to the right, because there is now no middle ground.

We are not allowed to carry weapons (pistols) in the UK. Look where its taking us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, Eodmatt said:

I will go easy as you seem to be a bit hard of understanding. So here goes:

1.  "How does my saying you are excited about public executions link to me watching them? I don't and your suggestion is bizarre sounds like you are just making things up at random. I said you were excited by them as you are keen to tell us all about them however what has that to do with anyone outside of Iran? Why do you think that what a government does in its own country is any reason to involve America? Are American citizens being hung, what right has America to intervene when they don't intervene in Saudi who do public executions?"

Ans:

I mentioned public executions simply as an example of whats wrong with the regime in that place. Your response is bizarre. Waffling nonsense in fact.

2. Your next point: Well, waffling nonsense again.

3. I'm beginning to see a pattern here.

4. A heart condition? Whats that got to do with anything?

5. What a load of old codswallop

6. Your summary. I didn't bother to read it. I doubt if anyone else will either. It's just more waffle.

To summarise: Reading your posts is a waste of time. Have a nice day.

Edit: I forgot to ask why you didn't answer my chewing gum question: "Does your chewing gum lose its flavour on the bedpost over night?" Please limit your answer to a single word as I am bored with your unspectacular ability to bloviate without restraint.

I will answer the one question you posed I am assuming the chewing gum post is your vain attempt at humour.
My answer is clear if public executions are acceptable to America in one country why not another? Your attempt to accuse me of watching execution porn on the internet from my first reply is insulting as well as bizarre and deviating from the point.
In summary to the rest of your post I would say you are not very good at this debating thing are you? Your answer is the only one and all replies to it are waffle seems to be your point off view. Please don't reply to my posts I can't be bothered speaking to people with only view point on the world, their own.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a gentle reminder to everyone, try to keep discussions friendly. 

Disagreement is not an issue, but it is helpful to try to keep discussions on an amicable level.

 

Community Guidelines

DO’s

Be nice

  • Welcome new members.
  • Assume good intentions.
  • Help others - new members may not know all the rules yet - be patient.
  • Always strive to add value to every interaction and discussion you participate in.

Be Patient

  • There are a lot of discussions that happen every day. Before joining in a discussion, browse through some of the most recent and active discussions happening in the community, especially if you’re new here.
  • Share your knowledge - we have members from veterans to university students - we are here to discuss, share knowledge, and help each other excel.

Report - Help us keep the community strong

  • If you see something, say something.
  • Moderators are at the forefront of combating spam, mediating disputes and enforcing community guidelines and, so are you.

Don’ts

Spamming

  • Posting advertisements for any products or services
  • Using JavaScript or active code, making repetitive posts or otherwise taking actions that interfere with site operations.
  • Discussing or reposting deleted posts or warning letters.
  • Including your own or another person’s or company's contact information and/or email address in a post.

Vulgar Text and Graphics.

  • Including profanity (when used to directly attack another member or group) , vulgarity, hate speech, insults, disruptive or hostile comments, interpersonal disputes or threats of violence in a post.
  • Including material (graphic or text) that is obscene, pornographic or adult in nature.
  • It's never OK to encourage violence or attack anyone based on their race, ethnicity, national origin, sex, gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, religious affiliation, disabilities, or diseases. When hate speech is being shared to challenge it or to raise awareness, we may allow it. In those instances, we ask that you express your intent clearly.
  • Serious threats of harm to public and personal safety aren't allowed. This includes specific threats of physical harm as well as threats of theft, vandalism, and other financial harm. We carefully review reports of threats and consider many things when determining whether a threat is credible.

Impersonation of an individual

  • A user creates a profile using another individual's real name, image, or other personal information to deceive people into thinking they are someone else on the Oilprice community.

Community Language

  • We currently only support English-only discussions. Non-English comments and discussions will be removed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

1 hour ago, Eodmatt said:

 

The result was that this year we have had over a hundred deaths from stabbings in London alone this year. 

........We are not allowed to carry weapons (pistols) in the UK. Look where its taking us.

I live in a State in the USA that has no gun laws.  You can buy what you want  (subject to Federal intrusion and Federal regulation), you can carry around whatever you want  (open carry, concealed carry, carry in cars, whatever you want), and  other than in built-up areas you can blaze away as much as you want out in the country.  Although the countryside is heavily armed, there is basically no gun violence.  Indeed, there is little violence, the State is very peaceful.  The big issue is various thefts to support opiate habits, fuelled by drug dealers from the Big Cities in other States (and who, if caught, are dealt with harshly).  

There is a college in town that has a military component, for training of future army officers.  The locals see these kids, age perhaps 19-21, hiking on 20-mile hikes along the local roads, carrying a pack and an M-16 rifle and magazine.  Nobody bats an eyelash  (some of the tourists might; the rest of us have no worries.).  Why worry?  These are future Army and Marine Officers, sworn to protect us.  If they want to march with big guns, hey go for it.  (When we come upon a tuckered-out student with his rifle way out in the countryside, the locals affably offer a ride back to campus, gun, ammo and all.  Hey, who cares? It is not as if he is going to hijack your car, now is he?)

I would posit that the probability that every person, every woman, and every motorist is "carrying" is a factor in the admirable restraint in the society. The restraint is so profound that there are no metal-detector security checks even in Court entrances. The majority of gun deaths are suicides and accidents.  I think the entire State averages about three or four "homicides" a year, and it is very rare for those to be between strangers.  Basically, muggings, following women, catcalls, that type of behavior is unknown.   (The very likely prospect of having a gun in your face if you try to "follow" a woman on the street is a salient deterrent, I should think.)  I don't own a gun; I don't have to.  My neighbors are heavily armed, and they are my personal police force.  In the country, police response is at least 15 minutes, likely 30-45 minutes, for an urgent call.  The folks are very much on their own, and gun possession prevents bad behavior.  Really does seem to work. 

Edited by Jan van Eck
Insert paragraph on college students with guns
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

4 hours ago, jaycee said:

I will answer the one question you posed I am assuming the chewing gum post is your vain attempt at humour.
My answer is clear if public executions are acceptable to America in one country why not another? Your attempt to accuse me of watching execution porn on the internet from my first reply is insulting as well as bizarre and deviating from the point.
In summary to the rest of your post I would say you are not very good at this debating thing are you? Your answer is the only one and all replies to it are waffle seems to be your point off view. Please don't reply to my posts I can't be bothered speaking to people with only view point on the world, their own.

I only wanted a one word response. As for my "vain" attempt at humour, it wasn't in vain since it amused me. Just one more question, Товарищ do you shout at pidgeons in the park?

 

Edited by Eodmatt
Pedgeons? Pigeons, damnit

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, Eodmatt said:

I only wanted a one word response. As for my "vain" attempt at humour, it wasn't in vain since it amused me. Just one more question, Товарищ do you shout at pedgeons in the park?

 

Too subtle for me mate I am not Russian unless you are insinuating I am a Russian troll in which case you need to see a shrink as you live in your own private little world. Try to actually listening to what people are saying and understand there are two sides to every story not just yours and shouting loudly and trying to make clever little jokes only makes you look like a small kid and does not make your point any more valid.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Jan van Eck said:

I live in a State in the USA that has no gun laws.  You can buy what you want  (subject to Federal intrusion and Federal regulation), you can carry around whatever you want  (open carry, concealed carry, carry in cars, whatever you want), and  other than in built-up areas you can blaze away as much as you want out in the country.  Although the countryside is heavily armed, there is basically no gun violence.  Indeed, there is little violence, the State is very peaceful.  The big issue is various thefts to support opiate habits, fuelled by drug dealers from the Big Cities in other States (and who, if caught, are dealt with harshly).  

There is a college in town that has a military component, for training of future army officers.  The locals see these kids, age perhaps 19-21, hiking on 20-mile hikes along the local roads, carrying a pack and an M-16 rifle and magazine.  Nobody bats an eyelash  (some of the tourists might; the rest of us have no worries.).  Why worry?  These are future Army and Marine Officers, sworn to protect us.  If they want to march with big guns, hey go for it.  (When we come upon a tuckered-out student with his rifle way out in the countryside, the locals affably offer a ride back to campus, gun, ammo and all.  Hey, who cares? It is not as if he is going to hijack your car, now is he?)

I would posit that the probability that every person, every woman, and every motorist is "carrying" is a factor in the admirable restraint in the society. The restraint is so profound that there are no metal-detector security checks even in Court entrances. The majority of gun deaths are suicides and accidents.  I think the entire State averages about three or four "homicides" a year, and it is very rare for those to be between strangers.  Basically, muggings, following women, catcalls, that type of behavior is unknown.   (The very likely prospect of having a gun in your face if you try to "follow" a woman on the street is a salient deterrent, I should think.)  I don't own a gun; I don't have to.  My neighbors are heavily armed, and they are my personal police force.  In the country, police response is at least 15 minutes, likely 30-45 minutes, for an urgent call.  The folks are very much on their own, and gun possession prevents bad behavior.  Really does seem to work. 

I don't think that would work in the UK now, unfortunately, although I do know what you mean since I lived in Canada (New Brunswick) for six months, followed by 7 months in Alberta and in both places I had no probs getting whatever was necessary to allow me to go shooting for the pot. I have also spent time in Virginia, NYS and the Eastern seaboard of the USA and spent many a happy hour blatting away with pistols and rifles on home ranges in places like Penobscot County with nary a problem.

I was also a licensed Jäger in Germany having passed the hunting exams there and was expected to carry a pistol every time I went shooting, along with my Mannlicher 30.06 hunting rifle. Hunting and shooting sports are very big in Germany and in fact it's part of the "kultur". The ritual of placing of heather in the beaks or mouths of the shot animals - which are laid out according to their traditional status at the end of the shoot, by the light of a big bonfire, whilst the horns play traditional hunting calls, still sends shivers up my back.

But in UK we just don't have a gun culture. And in fact, sadly, we don't actually have much culture left at all. In many places we are not allowed to fly our national flag because it is seen as "provocative" by the loony liberal left. We are told to "embrace" alien cultures, but recently a famous chef in UK was accused of "Racial Appropriation" by some looney group because he made a dish according to a foreign recipe and called it by it's foreign name.

Of course I was heavily tooled up in Northern Ireland, but not allowed to let loose a single bullet unless fired upon first. This seemed to me to be a bit asymmetric since we were wearing easily identifiable camo combat kit and the terrorists weren't.

Anyway, to be honest I think I would prefer living in your state than going back to live in Yorkshire.

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, jaycee said:

Too subtle for me mate I am not Russian unless you are insinuating I am a Russian troll in which case you need to see a shrink as you live in your own private little world. Try to actually listening to what people are saying and understand there are two sides to every story not just yours and shouting loudly and trying to make clever little jokes only makes you look like a small kid and does not make your point any more valid.

Shoo. Go away. You intimated that you didn't want to talk to me. So, walk the walk, don't endlessly talk. 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Eodmatt said:

Anyway, to be honest I think I would prefer living in your state than going back to live in Yorkshire.

 

Vermont is very pleasant and peaceful, albeit a harsh winter climate.  Solzhenitsyn lived here (in exile) for some 20 years until the USSR collapsed, basically because the Vermonters were both hospitable and respectful of his privacy, he had a place about 40 miles from me.  Even today, you go to Cavendish, and the locals will flatly refuse to tell you where his farm was.  Privacy is a big deal in Vermont. 

During deer hunting season, these guys carry hefty pistols in case they confront an angry bear.  You see them in the diner having breakfast with some monster .50-cal Desert Eagle strapped across the chest  (so they can draw while tussling with a bear), and nobody bats an eyelash.  You can walk into a bank with a (holstered) gun and nobody reacts.  Indeed, you can carry a handgun on the street and as long as it is pointed downward it is perfectly legal  (although I wouldn't do it, but I would not be alarmed if someone did).  It was a real culture shock to see how peaceful a heavily armed State can be.  Amazing stuff. I have not had a horn beeped at me in two years, except for some moron from Massachusetts (probably Boston).  It is a very polite State.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Eodmatt @jaycee

@Tom Kirkman gave a gentle reminder regarding your treatment of community members, which needs to be civil. Name calling and verbally bashing another community member is not allowed. The gentle reminders are now over. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Jan van Eck said:

Vermont is very pleasant and peaceful, albeit a harsh winter climate.  Solzhenitsyn lived here (in exile) for some 20 years until the USSR collapsed, basically because the Vermonters were both hospitable and respectful of his privacy, he had a place about 40 miles from me.  Even today, you go to Cavendish, and the locals will flatly refuse to tell you where his farm was.  Privacy is a big deal in Vermont. 

During deer hunting season, these guys carry hefty pistols in case they confront an angry bear.  You see them in the diner having breakfast with some monster .50-cal Desert Eagle strapped across the chest  (so they can draw while tussling with a bear), and nobody bats an eyelash.  You can walk into a bank with a (holstered) gun and nobody reacts.  Indeed, you can carry a handgun on the street and as long as it is pointed downward it is perfectly legal  (although I wouldn't do it, but I would not be alarmed if someone did).  It was a real culture shock to see how peaceful a heavily armed State can be.  Amazing stuff. I have not had a horn beeped at me in two years, except for some moron from Massachusetts (probably Boston).  It is a very polite State.

Sounds like my kind of place!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Eodmatt said:

Shoo. Go away. You intimated that you didn't want to talk to me. So, walk the walk, don't endlessly talk. 

lol, no I said dont reply to me and you did and you even asked me a question, at least read what I write and remember what you wrote instead of making up things.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, jaycee said:

lol, no I said dont reply to me and you did and you even asked me a question, at least read what I write and remember what you wrote instead of making up things.

See, you have got a sense of humour and, you can write short sentences. Excellent. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

On 9/3/2018 at 11:27 AM, Eodmatt said:

( edited for community guidelines). I'll just take one of your statistics, "Russia 411". So, does that include the thousands who are incarcerated in forced labour camps? Note that in 2017 the Russians commenced  reinstating the Gulag system (in fact my father was a prisoner in a Russian Gulag). And  bit of history for you: "Many historians have suggested that Stalin was responsible for death total of around 20 million, citing much higher victim totals from executions, Gulag camps, deportations and other causes. Simon Sebag Montefiore suggested that Stalin was ultimately responsible for the deaths of between 20 and 25 million people.."

Brainwashing and manipulation - a speciality of Russia since Stalin and before.

It is. In last 5 years number of prisoners in Russia droped by 40%  Im sorry but thats just fact USA has the highest incarceration rate in the world. Just read wikipedia for numbers.

Quote

in March 14, 2017, the Federal Penitentiary Service of Russia (FPSR) published a report claiming that the number of prisoners in Russia has reached a record low since the collapse of the Soviet Union. 

“In 2016, the lowest number of persons held in detention facilities in the contemporary history of the Russian Federation was reached,” read the statement.

The report said that as of January 1, 2017, there were about 107,000 people in Russia’s jails and approximately 523,000 in its prisons, out of which over 40,000 were women and 20,000 persons with disabilities. A few months earlier, the FPSR put the total number at 626,282.

 

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incarceration_in_the_United_States#/media/File:US_incarceration_timeline-clean.svg

350px-US_incarceration_timeline-clean.sv
 
Total U.S. incarceration by year
350px-U.S._incarceration_rates_1925_onwa
 
A graph showing the incarceration rate under state and federal jurisdiction per 100,000 population 1925–2013. Does not include unsentenced inmates, nor inmates in local jails.[1][2]
350px-Adult_incarceration_statistics_for
 
Inmates held in custody in state or federal prisons or in local jails. From U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics.[2]

Incarceration in the United States is one of the main forms of punishment and rehabilitation for the commission of felony and other offenses. The United States has the largest prison population in the world, and the highest per-capita incarceration rate.[3][4][5] In 2016 in the US, there were 655 people incarcerated per 100,000 population. This is the US incarceration rate for adults or people tried as adults.[6][3]

Edited by Tomasz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.