Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Kimmo

Bernie. fucken. SANDERS

Recommended Posts

Yeah,

 

The latest news on the Poseidon Tsunami torpedo is that Putin, according to some analysts whom I do respect, is pushing it as a big stick to wave at NATO.

In other words if he were to invade a NATO nation the U.S. would be reluctant to use nukes to stop him, possibly even conventional forces because they could lose coastal cities or an entire carrier group to a Poseidon strike.

With the U.S. bound by article 5 of the NATO treaty if they did not support a NATO ally under attack then essentially NATO falls apart and Putin could retake the Warsaw Pact nations or even go further.

That's playing brinkmanship with an Armageddon weapon with massive risk of doomsday escalation.

I rather doubt Putin would push that far, he's Poseidon aside outgunned, especially on accuracy but the gap is closing on weapons quality on the conventional front making a conventional war more likely than it has been in a long time.

Meantime though he is driving Russia back towards bankruptcy again and the new breed of oligarchs would not like that at all.

Another Russian revolution is on the cards, at which point all bets are off.

...Interesting times...

Cheers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Cybes said:

To me, it seems odd for them to target people closer to their own political stance - unless Vlad has an interest in keeping Agent Orange on the throne?

Watchoo talkin bout, Willis. 

Vlad's political stance is kleptocracy. Totally fits. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Feel the bern

The fuel bern that is; of the private charter plane ferrying Sanders around the country while campaigning for Clinton.

 

You gotta love millionaire socialists telling the rest of us about climate change from their private jets.

 

https://nationalpost.com/news/climate-change-foe-bernie-sanders-insisted-on-private-jets-in-2016-clinton-staffers?utm_term=Autofeed&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook&fbclid=IwAR0x2uPK6nHglYiQGXKEzuOMN5EmBEAK1Zw11j8kjOXf-Cq-CfBOiMLwv8g#Echobox=1551201493

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Leonid said:

You gotta love millionaire socialists telling the rest of us about climate change from their private jets.

Don't pretend to be stupid - it doesn't suit you.  You know as well as I do that nobody makes a green aircraft, and that campaigns need you to be in many widely separated places in swift succession.  That means you get a damn charter, even if you'd rather ride there on a pushbike - which I strongly doubt he could do.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Cybes said:

Don't pretend to be stupid - it doesn't suit you.  You know as well as I do that nobody makes a green aircraft, and that campaigns need you to be in many widely separated places in swift succession.  That means you get a damn charter, even if you'd rather ride there on a pushbike - which I strongly doubt he could do.

I expect people who go to climate change rallies to arrive there via the greenest form of transport in a specific category.

Last I checked, you can get between all US major cities by commercial which is far more climate-friendly and from there you can take a short hop in regional air expresses to any small town in America above a population of 300 souls.

Call me crazy, but if you position yourself as a prophet, do as you expect others to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

🙂

TBH the fuel burn on a Gulfstream is a damned sight less than that of Trump Force One, a 757 that he used in his campaign.

The Gulfstream is one of the most fuel efficient bizjets around, only a Citation would be likely to do better and probably not then on a seat/mile cost but that's rather irrelevant. A candidate for President can hardly do his job crunched up in cattle-class especially when a lot of places he would want/need to go to don't have commercial airlines operating there.

The travel bill stated in that article is a drop in the ocean compared to total cost of a campaign and the environmental impact of a Gulfstream would be irrelevant in the scheme of a days worth of commercial air movements in the U.S.

I wonder what the Trump impact is of jetting to Florida to play golf rather often?

Cheers

 

 

 

🙂

And get very little done whilst in flight Leo?

Air Force one does exist for a reason so does efficient transport point-to-point for any candidate.

The worst offenders in terms of pollution in the U.S. are semi-trailers that deliver 70% of all freight in the country, an unfortunate reality but America runs on 18 wheelers 🙂

Cheers

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trump did not position himself as the Oracle of Climate Change 🙂

 

Look if a religious Christian politician gets caught with his dick up the arse of a male hooker or an altar boy - we’re all like “hypocrite” and “typical” amirite?

 

But the minute a multi-millionaire one-percenter Socialist starts flying private charter to tell the rest of us plebs how we should all live we’re all like “but [excuses]”.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Leonid said:

Last I checked, you can get between all US major cities by commercial which is far more climate-friendly and from there you can take a short hop in regional air expresses to any small town in America above a population of 300 souls.

Time pressures.  You are aware that actual humans have those, I assume?  A commercial flight will add 2 hours minimum to any trip, and add more if you need a connecting flight.

As Chris has just pointed out, it's a minimal cost anyway, but it's also irrelevant: the man's goal is a far larger reduction than any cost incurred now, but if the cost isn't paid he doesn't get a chance to enact it.  Like solar panels EVs pollute to make, but save on pollution over time.

Leo, you are capable of much better argument than this Tucker Carlson shit - I'm going to assume you're tired.  Put down the keyboard and get some sleep.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Cybes said:

Time pressures.

Climate pressures

2 minutes ago, Cybes said:

the man's goal is a far larger reduction than any cost incurred now, but if the cost isn't paid he doesn't get a chance to enact it.

I like that. End justifies the means 🙂

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Leonid said:

Climate pressures

Didn't bother reading past the first line, I see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

🙂

Just as well Trump didn't campaign on climate change since he seems not to believe in it 🙂

An analogy I remembered is Elon Musk, the champion of electric cars, there's a short piece on-line of the helter-skelter flight itinerary he had to perform last year I think it was, to keep the company afloat.

The ends can justify the end goal  🙂

Cheers

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Leonid said:

millionaire socialists

You're fucken shameless. Worth maybe two million, half of that from a book deal because he ran for prez, and he's in his seventies, by which age many of us would be kinda screwed without that sort of scratch, particularly in a country that does health care in your preferred neoliberal fashion, and there you are, going, ooh, look at the big millionaire. I mean really.

I'm thinking you were subjected to some sort of stimulus early on which ossified your misbegotten politics; perhaps as a youngster you were trying Milton Friedman's arsehole out on your tongue, and the wind changed. Or maybe it goes back further and you were doomed from the start - William F Buckley raped your mum and then convinced her she deserved the misfortune. There, is that how you're supposed to do politics; whatever will piss off those you disagree with? 

Whatever the reason you imagine you chose to lick the boots stamping on our faces, just fucken keep your pathetic trolling to yourself. The next time you think it might be a good idea to dribble your shit my way, I want you to just picture me flipping you the bird over my shoulder as I walk away. You can start practising that exercise right now. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Kimmo said:

You're fucken shameless

I just wish I was a capitalist-rich Socialist as he is.

Maybe I’m doing something wrong?

Should I run for President on a platform of screwing the poor and future mass graves, but mask it with rainbow promises of equality and fairness for everyone?

Please advise....

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Few home truths for you lot.

Any time a celebrity male professes to be a feminist, you can start the clock on the rape charge

Any time a celebrity male that strongly identifies with family values or religious morals, you can bet your bottom dollar they’re fucking a hooker on the side

Any time a socialist tells you how to live, you can bet every cent in your family’s history and future, that they only mean that life for you - it doesn’t apply to them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice response 're running for president Leonid ... Nice and chilled 😉

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, eveln said:

Nice response 're running for president Leonid ... Nice and chilled 😉

I just know Kimmo’s type well. Every student of history does.

They’re the ones who dig the mass graves and are then made those graves’ first foundational layer.

Nothing fixes socialists like socialism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

🙂

I think we should nominate Leo for office in Australia, forget the U.S. he doesn't qualify - condition - he has to campaign on a tricycle...

Cheers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nah mate I’ll fly private.

My solution to climate change is nuclear power with Newtown and similar suburbs converted to use for nuclear waste storage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, chrisg said:

we should nominate Leo for office

What, we don't have enough IPA hacks shredding the fabric of our society? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Leonid said:

student of history

Oh? Student of history, eh? So what's your explanation for the patterns in the vast trove of data compiled by Thomas Piketty and his team? 

And it's a bit odd how you jump up and down crying gulags at the prospect of some policies to reverse the upwards wealth redistribution that's been unrelenting for the last four decades, and moves to reinstate the kind of checks and balances that gave rise to and sustained what pretty much everyone (particularly your MAGA chums) regard as a golden age. Nothing about Bernie's platform would be considered at all radical between 1930 and 1970.

Put down the fucking Chicago School kool-aid. That shit is the propaganda of class war, honky. 

Edited by Kimmo
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Kimmo said:

What, we don't have enough IPA hacks shredding the fabric of our society? 

Yeah we’re doing so badly because of the IPA.

I just asked a Venezuelan eating rubbish out of a garbage truck and he definitely doesn’t want any part of the IPA’s ideas.

4 minutes ago, Kimmo said:

the prospect of some policies to reverse the upwards wealth redistribution that's been unrelenting for the last four decades, and reinstate the kind of checks and balances

Look chump.

I know you don’t know much... but seriously.

There has never been more inequality in any country in the world as between the socialist elites and the plebs in socialist states.

And spare me the “they weren’t true socialist” crap. Nothing is ever socialism to you lot, even when it’s socialism.

Its also probably fair to say that no ideology does as much environmental damage locally as does socialism. There’s just no benefit to cleaning up after yourself when the government makes the profit and pulls wool over the eyes of the masses.

If you can name a greater environmental disaster on populated landmass than what Russia did to the Aral Sea, without any consequences to anyone or even a fucking investigation - I’ll be extremely surprised.

Edited by Leonid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fuck you talk shit. We had socialism here, you utter ninny. 

You know, when union membership was still a thing, when higher education was free, before public utilities were privatised, before 'public-private partnerships', before tax cuts and deregulation and corporate welfare. All that neoliberal class warfare you're so fond of. 

And you have the gall to call me ignorant, you ridiculous tit. Trying to draw equivalents between your fucked-up homeland, which by the way, was probably somewhat better off before it was pillaged by the kleptocracy, and western societies pre Reagan/Thatcher/Fraser/ other fucking bastards. You're a bad joke. Resuming dead air. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

" You know, when union membership was still a thing, when higher education was free, before public utilities were privatised, before 'public-private partnerships', "

^^ That was a more inclusive style of Government that ran all the essential services. Capitalism worked along side it. Private family owned companies were run in the cities as well as the country. It was making those big privately owned  businesses into public corporations that began the wider corruption of us all . imo.  Unions came into being through the sheer need of making all business operations run more humanely and more importantly still, to stop child labour.

The Government of the day was still voted in by adult Aussies ... it just took a while to include aboriginals and women ... the Government running essential utilities does not sound like socialism. foes it ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Kimmo said:

We had socialism here, you utter ninny.

No. We are more socialist than some states - ie more socialist than the Scandinavians in terms of management of resources and duplication of government functions - but we never had a socialist system here. We were never more   than any other comparable state for its time.

Australia was freer for business than the UK, even after the Thatcher reforms.

5 hours ago, Kimmo said:

You know, when union membership was still a thing

You know unions aren't socialist, yeah? They've been around for centuries longer than Socialism existed as a theory.

5 hours ago, Kimmo said:

before public utilities were privatised

One of the outstanding features of socialism is the awesomely shit state of expansive public utilities.

Thank fuck some of them were privatized.

5 hours ago, Kimmo said:

before 'public-private partnerships'

Yeah they're horrible. Imagine how awesome it would be if the government ran charities for international aid as opposed to give it to private charities in a public-private synergy?

5 hours ago, Kimmo said:

before tax cuts and deregulation and corporate welfare

There's the socialist alternative:

- High taxes

- Shit public services

- No corporates or businesses of any sort that could threaten government total control of the economy

- All business profits go to the party, for golden toilet seats

5 hours ago, Kimmo said:

And you have the gall to call me ignorant

To be fair, that describes you to a tee...

5 hours ago, Kimmo said:

Trying to draw equivalents between your fucked-up homeland

Archetypal socialist society

5 hours ago, Kimmo said:

and western societies pre Reagan/Thatcher/Fraser/ other fucking bastards

Yeah. They were great.

Women didn't work, stayed home and cooked, didn't have the vote and Aborigines were classed with fauna. Marital rape was OK and if you had to backhand your wife to make the bitch understand, that was fine too.

"Niggers"? Fair game. You ran one over... so what, right?

 

Also try compare your bullshit gilded age nonsense with today. Just use the US to compare.

 

In the 60s a third of poor households had no phone. Today everyone has a mobile phone and half have a computer. In the 70s, less than a third of poor households had a car. Two-thirds of poor households do, today.

In the 60s, 20% of the US population and roughly 35% of poor people had diets that did not meet the the minimum dietary standard. In (USDA-2013) 5.6% of US households had "very low food security". Even among people below the poverty level, only 18.5 percent report very low food security.

In short: poor people are FAR better off today than they were before Reagan and Thatcher. In fact, the global expansion of capitalism coincides with the lowest rate of global poverty in recorded history.

 

But more importantly, going back to those societies means going back to them and their problems. You can't just pick and choose certain economic policies which you like because there were social policies that propped them up. And yeah that means no Aboriginal welfare because they were classed as animals.

6 hours ago, Kimmo said:

You're a bad joke

And you're a sack of bones at the bottom of a mass grave if your theories are ever implemented.

Say hi to Trotsky if you meet him. Be careful though, he has a splitting headache.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×