Red Mosquito

Anyway Winston Churchill was also a massive piece of shit who upheld and perpetuated his own brand of global imperialism so.

Mickey wrote:

Anders wrote:

Mickey wrote:

Anders wrote:Should statues only be those who lead perfect lives, and had similar values like those which the left holds in high esteem in 2020? And I guess the same in 2030, 2040 and onwards. Here they want to tear down statues of Churchill. Winning the war against fascists wasn’t enough.

Technically the Red Army won the war against the Fascists.

They weren’t even on the allied side when the Nazis were steamrolling Europe. They changed sides because Hitler broke their pact. But of course we give huge thanks to the Soviet soldiers that helped turned the tide captured Berlin.

You know they captured Berlin, because the US pulled back their troops? Capturing Berlin was very minor in the greater theatre of war. Stalingrad was were Hitler broke his back. That’s the major Soviet victory. But it would not have happened without Churchill / the UK and their allies fighting back and holding on, even when the Soviets were on the other side.

Huh, starting to sound like Churchill actually didn't "win the war," imagine that.

Jorge wrote:Tbh I was very excited the showrunners were writing Burt back into the story but I feel like they made him extra cartoony and over the top. Are they just making up for all the Burtness we missed last season? Hopefully they settle into something that feels more natural and authentic

Holy shit, that made me laugh.

Mickey wrote:Huh, starting to sound like Churchill actually didn't "win the war," imagine that.

He was the most important leader on the winning side of the war. He didn’t drop down in a parachute in Berlin and execute Hitler, but he did win the war. Most importantly, without him we would have lost.

This CHAZ thing is just amazing.

Time to cut cell and city wifi coverage to the area and then let's see how autonomous they really are.

Anders wrote:

Mickey wrote:Huh, starting to sound like Churchill actually didn't "win the war," imagine that.

He was the most important leader on the winning side of the war. He didn’t drop down in a parachute in Berlin and execute Hitler, but he did win the war. Most importantly, without him we would have lost.

Sure! Without Stalin and the Red Army you would certainly have lost too. Are there perhaps reasons for not having statues of Stalin? Might we in fact decide that what one did in WWII does not outweigh all their other behavior?

Bi_3 wrote:This CHAZ thing is just amazing.

Time to cut cell and city wifi coverage to the area and then let's see how autonomous they really are.

McParadigm wrote:McParadigm’s Rule: In any discussion about change, Americans are never more than a day away from losing the ability to track the difference between nuanced conversation about policy proposals and the extremist static created by whichever fringe group is currently the loudest.

Bi_3 wrote:This CHAZ thing is just amazing.

Time to cut cell and city wifi coverage to the area and then let's see how autonomous they really are.

Didn't the homeless people they invited in the other night steal all their food? I saw one of their leaders begging for vegan cuisine to be donated to them on Twitter the other night because of it.

Mickey wrote:

Anders wrote:

Mickey wrote:Huh, starting to sound like Churchill actually didn't "win the war," imagine that.

He was the most important leader on the winning side of the war. He didn’t drop down in a parachute in Berlin and execute Hitler, but he did win the war. Most importantly, without him we would have lost.

Sure! Without Stalin and the Red Army you would certainly have lost too. Are there perhaps reasons for not having statues of Stalin? Might we in fact decide that what one did in WWII does not outweigh all their other behavior?

Stalin was a terrible tyrant, deliberately killing about 6 million (and that’s the lowest number you are likely to find, I have seen less reliable estimates as high as those deaths attributed to Hitler). Not including any famine under his rule, or the war. He even made a deal with the nazis, only broken off by being attacked by the nazis.

Still there are plenty of statues of Stalin.

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

Anders wrote:

Mickey wrote:

Anders wrote:

Mickey wrote:Huh, starting to sound like Churchill actually didn't "win the war," imagine that.

He was the most important leader on the winning side of the war. He didn’t drop down in a parachute in Berlin and execute Hitler, but he did win the war. Most importantly, without him we would have lost.

Sure! Without Stalin and the Red Army you would certainly have lost too. Are there perhaps reasons for not having statues of Stalin? Might we in fact decide that what one did in WWII does not outweigh all their other behavior?

Stalin was a terrible tyrant, deliberately killing about 6 million (and that’s the lowest number you are likely to find, I have seen less reliable estimates as high as those deaths attributed to Hitler). Not including any famine under his rule, or the war. He even made a deal with the nazis, only broken off by being attacked by the nazis.

Still there are plenty of statues of Stalin.

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

Might we in fact decide that what one did in WWII does not outweigh all their other behavior?

I will take that as a yes, and assume that while you may disagree with calls to take down Churchill statues, it is only on the grounds that his policy towards India, which killed at least 2 million people and almost certainly were motivated in part by his racist views of non-whites, is not bad enough.

Mickey wrote:

Anders wrote:

Mickey wrote:

Anders wrote:

Mickey wrote:Huh, starting to sound like Churchill actually didn't "win the war," imagine that.

He was the most important leader on the winning side of the war. He didn’t drop down in a parachute in Berlin and execute Hitler, but he did win the war. Most importantly, without him we would have lost.

Sure! Without Stalin and the Red Army you would certainly have lost too. Are there perhaps reasons for not having statues of Stalin? Might we in fact decide that what one did in WWII does not outweigh all their other behavior?

Stalin was a terrible tyrant, deliberately killing about 6 million (and that’s the lowest number you are likely to find, I have seen less reliable estimates as high as those deaths attributed to Hitler). Not including any famine under his rule, or the war. He even made a deal with the nazis, only broken off by being attacked by the nazis.

Still there are plenty of statues of Stalin.

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

Might we in fact decide that what one did in WWII does not outweigh all their other behavior?

I will take that as a yes, and assume that while you may disagree with calls to take down Churchill statues, it is only on the grounds that his policy towards India, which killed at least 2 million people and almost certainly were motivated in part by his racist views of non-whites, is not bad enough.

No, I don’t agree. What Churchill did during the war, deserves a statue. Nor am I angry at or want to tear down the Stalin statues.

I think if you use that kind of reasoning, you should probably change all names using America, Columbus and Washington. None of whom were innocent in 2020 values.

The social media buzz on who can have the wokest protest between Seattle and Portland is why we need sports and the supersonics back in the NBA. Send these people to blazers/Sonics games

verb_to_trust wrote:

Bi_3 wrote:This CHAZ thing is just amazing.

Time to cut cell and city wifi coverage to the area and then let's see how autonomous they really are.

Didn't the homeless people they invited in the other night steal all their food? I saw one of their leaders begging for vegan cuisine to be donated to them on Twitter the other night because of it.

This is simply to perfect to be true.

Best CHAZ take, hands-down

Mickey wrote:

Anders wrote:

Mickey wrote:Huh, starting to sound like Churchill actually didn't "win the war," imagine that.

He was the most important leader on the winning side of the war. He didn’t drop down in a parachute in Berlin and execute Hitler, but he did win the war. Most importantly, without him we would have lost.

Sure! Without Stalin and the Red Army you would certainly have lost too. Are there perhaps reasons for not having statues of Stalin? Might we in fact decide that what one did in WWII does not outweigh all their other behavior?

wease wrote:

Jorge wrote:Tbh I was very excited the showrunners were writing Burt back into the story but I feel like they made him extra cartoony and over the top. Are they just making up for all the Burtness we missed last season? Hopefully they settle into something that feels more natural and authentic

Holy shit, that made me laugh.

Yeah, man. If Alex was still doing Power Rankings, there's little to no chance that post doesn't put Jorge in the #1 spot.

There should be a statue for Russian Winters cause that's really their ace in the hole.

CHAZ looks like a great place for people who like to take dumps in the middle of a city street to take a dump in the middle of a city street