Trump Derangement Syndrome - Orange man bad. Read the OP! (ᴛʜɪs ᴛʜʀᴇᴀᴅ ɪs ʟɪᴋᴇ ᴋɪᴡɪ ғᴀʀᴍs ʀᴇᴠɪᴇᴡs ɴᴏᴡ) 🗿🗿🗿🗿

The fact that this orange bastard can make rhinos, shitlibs, and trannies seethe like a thousand suns is his only redeeming quality. I'm holding my vote for a distinctly anti-china candidate.
The only possible way that would happen is if we elect someone with Korean or Japanese ancestry.

You want anti-china? They have it in spades.
 
1622858088108.png


Twitter
 
But FDR didn’t go to war with Germany. Hitler declares war first, after the Japanese.
Wasn't joining the war extremely unpopular in America, to the point where the government had to actively avoid looking like they were supporting Britain? I barely have a surface level understanding of WW2 but even I know that America wanted little to do with stopping the Nazis until Pearl Harbor happened. At the very least, they probably wouldn't have joined in for a few more years if it hadn't happened anyway.
 
Wasn't joining the war extremely unpopular in America, to the point where the government had to actively avoid looking like they were supporting Britain? I barely have a surface level understanding of WW2 but even I know that America wanted little to do with stopping the Nazis until Pearl Harbor happened. At the very least, they probably wouldn't have joined in for a few more years if it hadn't happened anyway.
Yeah. The entire premise of the Monroe Doctrine was no European involvement in the Americas and vice versa.
 
Wasn't joining the war extremely unpopular in America, to the point where the government had to actively avoid looking like they were supporting Britain? I barely have a surface level understanding of WW2 but even I know that America wanted little to do with stopping the Nazis until Pearl Harbor happened. At the very least, they probably wouldn't have joined in for a few more years if it hadn't happened anyway.

Roosevelt wanted to back Britain, but most of the country wanted fuck all do with Europe and its ills, especially after the first world war. London was a finance center, and most bankers including JP Morgan, also supported intervention on behalf of Britain (not least of all because Germany defaulted on its loans). Morgan helped come up with Lend-Lease.
(Coincidentally, wanting to stick his dick into WWII made Roosevelt stop his war on the banks)

Only once Pearl Harbor happened and everyone was clamoring for Nip blood did war with Germany become a popular idea.

And trump wouldn't have needed to go to war with Germany. He'd have destroyed Hilter Chamberlain with weaponized 140 character tweets telegrams.
"@Literally_Hitler is being allowed to expand germany's borders at the cost of the wonderful Czech people, Stop. Britain should be ashamed to have a prime minister giving in to a man who can't grow a beard, Stop. His moustache is SAD, Stop. MANY SUCH CASES, Stop."
 
Last edited:
They have, gleefully asserting that the woman surrounded by riot officers had to be shot because she so much as leaned on a broken window.
That... is very flimsy reasoning. By that logic, they should have shot more people because they were just standing there and breathing.

As much as I like to rag on the supporters for the protest, the people against it are by far the more simple-minded and one-sided of the debate seeing as they need to justify the death of someone who probably was just minding their own business.
 
I'd argue that BLM and Antifa burning down whole cities last summer in the name of a career criminal ODing on fentanyl while resisting arrest was WAY more bad than what they're whining about and won't shut up about, but I know they won't condemn left wing political violence (not that I'd call the capital walk-in "political violence") because "it's okay when WE do it."
 
I'd argue that BLM and Antifa burning down whole cities last summer in the name of a career criminal ODing on fentanyl while resisting arrest was WAY more bad than what they're whining about and won't shut up about, but I know they won't condemn left wing political violence (not that I'd call the capital walk-in "political violence") because "it's okay when WE do it."
The whataboutism regarding the George Floyd riots and 1/6 shouldn't even exist in the first place. It's morally reprehensible to even declare that argument and compare the two. The more I hear about 1/6, the more desensitized I get of it even though I watched it live. Ignoring the absurd comparisons to the Civil War, 9/11, etc, I've also watched several cities burn nationwide in the name of social justice. Very little response from the media or government other than sheer justification of "peaceful protesting" and "racial injustice."

Objectively speaking, one event was worse than the other based on collateral damage, social impact and prolonged continuity. Both are abused for clout and fear mongering. In a just society, neither should have happened in the first place.
 
Back