I agree, but that doesn’t dent the fact the millions still live in them to this day.

Sure, but how in the world would you ever prove that? I doubt less then 1 percent of the receipts from those transactions survived.

This guy made this completely up, there is no source at all to back up anything he is saying.

There were no “FSB warnings” or “Urgent phone call with locations and times”.

Putin called Bush on September 9th to tell Bush that the anti-Taliban Afghan leader was assassinated by suicide bombers posing as journalists and that this was a bad sign for things to come in the Middle East. That was all that Putin said.

I’m reality, the ALGERIAN intelligence agency actually attempted to contact the CIA and MI6 in the days leading up to 9/11, as they had intercepted several Al-Queda transmissions that hinted at a larger conspiracy and incoming attack.

This was also backed up by British intelligence who had operatives infiltrating several Jihadist groups and they had also heard of an incoming strike against the US.

It’s small police boats used by the coast guard for fast attack operations against narcotraffickers.

So they’re counting speedboats, and other small vessels.

I didn’t say it was impossible, it’s not like if you use concrete it’s going to instantly vaporize and explode.

However it will require significantly more upkeep and repair, and will become dilapidated quickly without proper maintenance.

Just look what happened to all the khrushchevki after the Union fell. Many stop receiving support and fell apart quickly.

Also I don’t know what you mean by the reason not holding water. It’s not the end all be all, but it’s simply science. Concrete expands and contracts to much in the face of water and temperature to make a viable long term building material without constant upkeep.

That’s all true, but stones are also much harder to transport, weigh more, are harder to acquire then wood, and are significantly more expensive then wood. That’s why masonry is much more common in Europe as opposed to the US as Europe has plenty of quarries in close proximity to all its population centers while the United States does not.

On the other hand, much of Europe has extremely limited wood so people turned to stone.

It’s just basic supply and demand, and what’s easier and cheaper to access.

The selling influence stuff is tenuous if not impossible to prove as it’s mostly political speculation and the republicans doing their best to try and find a boogeyman. Plus even if it would 100% true; then everyone in congress would be guilty of that, and there’s no way they would want to risk setting a precedent.

Could you link the Ukraine video though by any chance? That sounds interesting.

Concrete and metal can not withstand the temperature fluctuations in the United States, that’s why wood is used. If you take concrete from -10C to 40C, its going to crack and fail after a few years.

The problem is that the wood has gotten significantly more cheap over the years. But if you’ve seen actual wood houses, its absurd how they last centuries while concrete weathers and turns to dust, and metal corrodes.

Further, wood stands up just as well as brick and concrete do in the face of tornados and earthquakes… In that they don’t. They all collapse. the foundations are made with brick or concrete but its cheaper to rebuild the top if its wood then another material. You’re not saving your house if it gets hit with a tornado.

Also concrete requires steel supports in order to be load bearing, which is again very expensive. If you don’t put structural steel in the concrete, then you’ve created a death trap.

Are you claiming that the source you linked is lying? He just quoted the article you sent, and it clearly states that the claim first appeared in Nazi propaganda press.

Do you believe other Nazi propaganda?

Weird how a lot more Russians, Belarussians, and Kazahs starved when the government was trying to specifically target Ukraine supposedly.

No. This is political theater and they know this will go absolutely nowhere.

China’s navy along with the vast majority on that list follow or followed a Green Water doctrine, meaning most of their ships are tugs, small patrol boats, corvettes, fast attack craft, with the biggest ships usually being destroyers. All of those have very low tonnages so that’s why their numbers are pretty slanted.

Plus North Korea’s navy are mostly WW2 vessels given by the Soviet Union and China.

Well, there’s Super Bowl Sunday and Valentine’s Day in the same week, but that’s scrapping the barrel. They probably wouldn’t be too bad if they weren’t monetized to hell and back.

But its not really “self-identification”, its not really a personal choice is it? You can’t just self-identify as another ethnicity, race, or background, and most people don’t give theirs a second thought.

Education should just be done overall. I just don’t see the point in otherizing and targeting certain groups on factors such as race, sexuality, ethnicity, or background, barring other overt reasons. I’m definitely not defending racist white chuds and they’re the first ones that could use reeducation, but it just feels like belief and views should be a primary concern. I’ve met plenty of gusanos, extremely out of touch extremely wealthy minorities, and people with racist families who grew beyond that. It just feels the main separator is class and education more then anything.

Again, going back to it, dividing a clean cut colonizer and colonized just seems to be near impossible in the United States. It feels like other factors should be taken into account first.

Sure, but that’s not really Israeli borders. No one recognizes it as theirs. It is still “Syrian” territory.

That does seem like a good criteria, but that is an extremely small and limited amount of people. Slave owners were by far concentrated in the South, and only the ultra-wealthy could afford to own slaves to begin with. It was only a 1-2 percent of people owning 95%+ of all slaves. As most free people in the South, white or black, were themselves near destitute and extremely poor.

Plus records of that would be difficult to work with, yes a direct relative would be an easy find, but we would go after someone for their great great great great great uncle twice removed owning slaves?

Also the Caucasian label is itself extremely tenuous, as you would catch the decent majority of slavs, turks, some arabs, Romani, and a whole hell of a lot of bizarre and “non-white” groups by going after the Caucasian label.

Plus then you run into the problem of a decent chunk of people being mixed, meaning no single label would work well for them, or you could have a family where one partner could have had a slave owning ancestor, while their partner had a ancestor who was a slave, and one of their children is extremely dark, while one of their siblings could be much lighter, and then another that’s white as snow. There would be an absurd amount of unique scenarios you would have to grapple with, this is just one.

In the abstract sense in that current “Israeli” borders are maintained when it becomes a Palestinian state? Yes. It should not be reduced or divvied up among its neighbors.

As it currently stands as a geopolitical entity that we consider Israel? No. What is considered currently as Israel should be a Palestinian state.

Who is included in the colonized and colonist categories in this sense? All “white” people? All white passing people no matter background? Recent (last 50 years) migrants of all races?

What would the differentiation be, and what is the line in the sand? This doesn’t seem to be nearly as cut and dry as “Isreali vs Palestinian”.

You ever fight an extremely angry feral cat? I feel like even tiny raptors could easily hospitalize a regular person if you don’t get lucky.

Comically large icepick