Forum Replies Created
I would spend more time on here if I could. I mainly miss the old SMF function that showed all unread posts on a single page. With school ending I hope to be able to get on more anyway.
Prussian and German sovereignty were not lost in 1918. How do you come to that conclusion? The greater German Reich signed the armistice and was subsequently transformed into a parliamentary democracy by the Kaiser along the lines of the Frankfurt constitution of 1848. The Kaiser voluntarily abdicated on the advice of his cabinet and military commanders in order to get the Allies to agree to an armistice.
That was exactly why Egyptian agriculture was so productive. Remember, Egypt was Rome’s breadbasket. That is why Caesar went there in the first place, the Egyptians were threatening to stop grain shipments.
Lebanon was famed in antiquity for its trees. It was known for quality cedar and as a source of ship’s masts. Egypt was the bread basket of the ancient world. I read somewhere that ancient Egyptian agriculture was upwards of twice as productive as it is today.
I would imagine environmental and societal factors led to the plants extinction. The Holy Land was a much greener place in antiquity than it is today. As to why the seeds did not decay, that is question I would like to know the answer to as well. I have planted seeds that were up to ten years old and had only 10-15% germinate. I am not a plant biologist either, I just threw mine in the dirt and gave em some water then waited to see what happened.
They occupied an unmanned site. They also spouted some sovereign citizen type garbage in their rhetoric. Soft craniums are not limited to the left.
If you remember, as soon as the thing in Oregon got violent the cops shut it down with a quickness.
“Generally speaking, those on the right want to be left alone, whereas those on the left require the state to get more involved in people’s lives.”
That I can agree with. It does seem that the liberals want to have more control over the individual than do conservatives. Something else that I have noticed is that liberal extremists tend to be more prone to violence than do conservative extremists.
I also think that much of the outrage is largely media driven. Compare the sympathetic coverage BLM gets with the derisive coverage of conservatives such as those in Oregon this past winter. There is definite media bias at work and in the media driven society we have the unaccountable media has an outsize influence on shaping opinions.
I think things are going to get much worse before they get better and the results of this fall’s election matter more than any of us know. They matter because there is not a leader like Lincoln anywhere on the horizon and the country could very fracture in a leadership void.
I think the problem bridges the liberal-conservative divide. There is no doubt an element of racism in some of the shootings and in some police interactions. That is not the whole thing though. Yes, liberals jump to conclusions that confirm their own bias, that is not an exclusively liberal problem though. If it were how do you explain the rise of Trump? Trump is famous for spouting off on policies that not only ignore objective reality but are also impossible to implement and getting cheered for it by conservatives, examples include building a border wall and expelling illegal immigrants and muslim refugees.
There is plenty of magical thinking all over the political spectrum. For every BLM and SJW type on the left there is a sovereign citizen, or religious fundamentalist on the right that engages in the same type of garbage. It is these differences that are driving the wedges in American society deeper and the media is egging it all on because they get ratings and advertiser dollars out of it.
I am starting to think if a civil war comes, which I admit is a possibility, then it needs to come soon while I am still young enough to enjoy it.
If you want to know what racism by non-whites looks like, that is one example.July 11, 2016 at 12:41 am in reply to: Toynbee’s "Departure and Return" theory of history #57477
The guy I wanted did not run as he expresses no desire to be a politician. I wanted “Mad Dog” Mattis to run. He declined but i am still considering writing his name in. Absent Mattis I was a fan of Jim Webb.
The problem as I see it is that nobody worthwhile will run because the presidential race is not about who would make a good president anymore and really hasn’t been since at least the mid-90’s if it ever was. Now it is mostly a contest to see who can energize their own party while not alienating too many in the center and thus getting elected. that leaves us with the Hobson’s choice we have this year where both nominees are essentially equally worthless.
In other news, am I able to start a topic in this new format and if so, how? I actually have a couple of historical things I would like to post but am too stupid to figure out how.July 10, 2016 at 2:50 am in reply to: Toynbee’s "Departure and Return" theory of history #57466
I don’t want a candidate that will do less harm than the other. I want someone who will do good things and improve the country, not just make it suck more at a slower rate. Maybe the tree of liberty does need some refreshing. I just don’t know anymore, about the only thing I do know is that bad things are coming, I just don’t know exactly what and how bad those things are going to be.July 8, 2016 at 1:16 am in reply to: Toynbee’s "Departure and Return" theory of history #57464
I have turned very much apolitical. I just want a candidate who I think has the interests of the nation at heart to run. The last such I can think of is probably Steve Forbes or maybe even Ross Perot. Everybody who has run recently seems to have some kind of angle and the national interest is always far down the list. I look around the world and see parallels with the 1930’s everywhere.July 7, 2016 at 1:12 pm in reply to: Toynbee’s "Departure and Return" theory of history #57462
Since I don’t think Trump would make a good president I could care less who he picks as VP. That being said, him picking Gingrich, if he indeed does, seems kind of fitting. Both are ideologues to a greater or lesser extent.