• Help Support The Rugby Forum :

A Political Thread pt. 2

For **** sake man, we are talking about you simply admitting that criminal behaviour is wrong and you can't even do that. What is wrong with you? You happily talk about everything else but the second it turned to Trump's criminal behaviour you are suddenly like "oh I don't want to talk about this" and find every excuse under the sun.
The content I generally consume is American, left and right.

Most of what I read on the right is full of hate and bile.

If course there is some of that from the left, but nowhere near as much.

It appears that most of the right is about control, whereas the left/centrist believe in a more lively and let live and the freedom of choice which seems to be very lacking from the MAGAs.

For example the right is terrified of critical race theory, Florida wanted to ban teaching a good deal of history because desantis doesn't like it, he's a revisionist.


The US annexed Hawaii under false pretenses, the Monroe doctrine you mentioned earlier wasn't worth the paper it was printed on. You did nothing with it, in fact you basically ignored it for near on 100 years until you made up an excuse with blowing up of the USS Maine to start a war. Coincidentally the same style of use as the gulf of Tonkin incident, false claims leading to war.


US state department link, every one says the same difficulty. The US government can't even get that right
 
Last edited:
That's quite a callous and privileged way of looking at drug use to be honest.
But honest. Noone forced them to buy and cobsume illegal drugs

I have also had the opinion the war on drugs was a.rse about face.

Go after the users, bang them up or give them 90 days sweeping the streets even. Not at their convenience but immediately in sequence.

Make them see they can lose their living. Users take no responsibility for their actions, time to make them pay.

Kill the market, then the cartels have no demand. Try to catch the makers and dealers just means a gap opens and someone will always fill it if there's a market.
 
But honest. Noone forced them to buy and cobsume illegal drugs

I have also had the opinion the war on drugs was a.rse about face.

Go after the users, bang them up or give them 90 days sweeping the streets even. Not at their convenience but immediately in sequence.

Make them see they can lose their living. Users take no responsibility for their actions, time to make them pay.

Kill the market, then the cartels have no demand. Try to catch the makers and dealers just means a gap opens and someone will always fill it if there's a market.
You must be pushing 70+
 
You must be pushing 70+
Nope. It's always been my opinion.

What has been achieved with locking up distributers and dealers? Nothing, the trade continues.

If anything it's been made easier for them by not prosecuting users.

If there is no market, then what's the point of growing the stuff.
 
A GOP lawmaker held a town hall tonight in North Carolina. Here's some of what he heard

North Carolina Rep. Chuck Edwards held a town hall tonight in Asheville where he was met with anger and yelling as the crowd pressed him about cuts to the federal government made by the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE).

Some of the loudest boos for the Republican congressman came when he complimented DOGE leader Elon Musk.


Here are some crowd responses:

"I'm a veteran and you don't give a f**k about me," said an attendee, moments before four deputies escorted him out of the room at Edwards' request. The shouting happened after Edwards' comments about voting for the House budget resolution.

"Why are people losing their jobs at record numbers with no research?" one woman asked directly to Edwards in protest of federal workers losing their jobs.

"Tell us five things you've done this week," someone asked, prompting laughter and a standing ovation among the crowd. The question is a play on Musk's email sent to federal workers in late February asking them to explain what work they accomplished the previous week.

Edwards was also asked about US support for Ukraine. Here's what was discussed:

On Russian President Vladimir Putin: "I believe the president recognizes that Putin is a murderous dictator," Edwards said when asked if he supports Ukraine, given his backing for President Donald Trump.

The US president however last month declined to refer to the Kremlin leader as a dictator, something he falsely called Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.

On supporting Trump: "Why do you support a president who cares nothing about NATO, Ukraine and democracy but cares about Putin and other dictators?" an attendee asked and got a standing ovation from the crowd.

On funding Ukraine: Another attendee later asked the congressman if he will "stand up for Ukraine funding and protection?" The congressman said he voted that way. "I spent nine days in Ukraine," he said, adding that he witnessed bombings. "I came back committed that we cannot stand idly by and watch the type of evil taking place like we see it taking place over there," he said, which prompted applause from the crowd.
 
See I actually think like cocaine, ecstasy etc should be legalised. Provide safe, legal routes for shipment and distribution - reduces the need for gangs to arm themselves amid conflict with other gangs because they are now legal enterprises, no areas of influence because the merchants are now...merchants. No need for very impoverished young men to feel the need to join a gang because they can now find reliable, legal, salaried employment. Apply taxes scaled relative to strength, incentivises distributors to supply weaker products in order to have competitive prices. Fine companies selling products above an agreed strength level. Use some of the income from taxes raised to focus on whatever illicit drugs trade remains. Frees up existing police resources to deal with other types of crime and will also reduce some of the burden on the NHS
 
can i ask your stance on the second amendment? or possibly not so much the actual "right" but how it is currently being interoperated?
I'm in support of the 2nd amendment. While you will never stop every shooter, a major issue right now is people get flagged and are supposed to have their guns temporarily possessed by authorities but the police agencies don't communicate with each other.

That's why the whole "pass more laws" crowd keeps losing: because the current laws are not being enforced. Enforce the laws on the books and then we can talk about further restrictions.
 
Trump administration demands humanitarian agencies disclose any 'anti-American' ties

The Trump administration has sent a questionnaire to U.N. humanitarian agencies that receive U.S. funding asking them to confirm it's "not a climate or 'environmental justice' project."

The organization must also agree that it encourages free speech and "does not work with entities associated with communist, socialist, or totalitarian parties, or any party that espouses anti-American beliefs."

They must also explain if they provide abortion-related care, or services related to DEI or "gender ideology" issues.

UNICEF and the U.N. Refugee Agency were among the agencies that received the questionnaire, as well as several offices at the recently dismantled U.S. Agency for International Development.


Read the second paragraph very carefully. Free speech is encouraged unless it is "un American"
 
I'm in support of the 2nd amendment. While you will never stop every shooter, a major issue right now is people get flagged and are supposed to have their guns temporarily possessed by authorities but the police agencies don't communicate with each other.

That's why the whole "pass more laws" crowd keeps losing: because the current laws are not being enforced. Enforce the laws on the books and then we can talk about further restrictions.
Don't you think that if trump wants to hold Mexico responsible for fentanyl smuggling, then the US should be held responsible for weapons smuggling to the US?
 
yeah, why i ask is some attitudes i see when talking to Americans that feel quite conflicting, the drug problem is other countries allowing drugs to come into the country, its not a problem with the individuals, but when it comes to guns its not the over abundance of them in the states, its all "guns dont kill people people kill people", if someone commits a crime then punish that person
 
Trump administration demands humanitarian agencies disclose any 'anti-American' ties

The Trump administration has sent a questionnaire to U.N. humanitarian agencies that receive U.S. funding asking them to confirm it's "not a climate or 'environmental justice' project."

The organization must also agree that it encourages free speech and "does not work with entities associated with communist, socialist, or totalitarian parties, or any party that espouses anti-American beliefs."

They must also explain if they provide abortion-related care, or services related to DEI or "gender ideology" issues.

UNICEF and the U.N. Refugee Agency were among the agencies that received the questionnaire, as well as several offices at the recently dismantled U.S. Agency for International Development.


Read the second paragraph very carefully. Free speech is encouraged unless it is "un American"
Schumer backed down huh? So much winning.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Latest posts

Top