Miscellaneous News

Abominable

Major
Registered Member
No, we should not applaud Nazi Germany, we just need to remember to also mention that the British Empire was even worse for our earth than Nazi Germany.
Nazi Germany was around for 10 years, the British Empire was around for hundreds, and changed considerably over time. I think it's a bit unfair to compare the two.

Hitler and Churchill did have many things in common, both believed they were the superior race, and that it was their duty to conquer and rule over inferior races. Both also believed communism was a Jewish plot.

However in actions Churchill was based, he refused to surrender to Nazis even when the entire of Europe did, he won the war broke up Germany into 4 pieces as it should have remained until the scheming Yanks got involved. He also singlehandedly ended the British empire. He was even good friends with Stalin and recognised eastern Europe as being Russian.

Not bad for a guy who was born in a toilet.
 

FairAndUnbiased

Brigadier
Registered Member

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Okinawa protesters call for closure of U.S. military bases​

Thousands of protesters gathered near Kadena Air Base in Okinawa on Saturday to call for the closure of U.S. military bases on the Japanese island. 72% of Okinawa people have voted for closure of US military bases.

View attachment 112596View attachment 112597

Protesters chanted “Give us back our peaceful life!” and “Osprey get out!” — a reference to the military helicopters often seen in the skies over the island.

Background: The U.S. military has had an extensive presence on the island since 1945, and occupied it until 1972, when it was returned to Japanese sovereignty.
  • Chemical contamination in areas close to the bases and crimes committed by U.S. servicemen, including
    Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
    , have in the past enraged the population and sparked massive protests.
  • Protesters told Axios that they feel they have long been forced to bear a disproportionate burden of the U.S.-Japan military alliance. Okinawa makes up less than 1% of Japan’s total land area but hosts more than 70% of all U.S. military facilities in Japan.
Okinawa Gov. Denny Tamaki has lobbied the Japanese and U.S. governments to reduce the military presence on the island.
  • President Biden
    Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
    last year that he was "profoundly grateful for Japan's resolute support for democracy, freedom, and the rule of law and for Okinawa's contribution to advancing these ideals."



On an unrelated note, why is it the US ambassador welcoming the PRC delegation to Japan?
Lmao the Japanese are going apeshit over this. They're very into the formalities and stuff, so I understand. Chinese look on with bemusement as murican racism and callousness scores yet another public opinion own goal.
 

Eventine

Junior Member
Registered Member
Nazi Germany was around for 10 years, the British Empire was around for hundreds, and changed considerably over time. I think it's a bit unfair to compare the two.

Hitler and Churchill did have many things in common, both believed they were the superior race, and that it was their duty to conquer and rule over inferior races. Both also believed communism was a Jewish plot.

However in actions Churchill was based, he refused to surrender to Nazis even when the entire of Europe did, he won the war broke up Germany into 4 pieces as it should have remained until the scheming Yanks got involved. He also singlehandedly ended the British empire. He was even good friends with Stalin and recognised eastern Europe as being Russian.

Not bad for a guy who was born in a toilet.
Most of the British Empire's atrocities against native peoples in the New World were committed not by the empire proper, but by their colonists, who acted independently or were actually independent - in the case of the US.

This is one of the less known facts about British, American, Australian, etc. colonization. The colonial governments of these respective regions were often less predatory than their people. White frontiers men literally believed that the natives were in their way to prosperity, and so resorted to all sorts of tactics to drive away and/or kill the natives. Tons of conflicts were actually started by white frontiers men pushing the boundaries themselves, rather than by a centralized campaign of conquest.

In other words, British colonial savagery was bottom up. Remember, the imperial government was mostly upper class, elite English men who considered themselves refined aristocrats and above petty murder. They didn't apologize for it, but they didn't care for it, either. On the other hand, the lower ranks were filled with violent, greedy racists who saw the New World as a license to satisfy their worst urges.
 

FairAndUnbiased

Brigadier
Registered Member
Most of the British Empire's atrocities against native peoples in the New World were committed not by the empire proper, but by their colonists, who acted independently or were actually independent - in the case of the US.

This is one of the less known facts about British, American, Australian, etc. colonization. The colonial governments of these respective regions were often less predatory than their people. White frontiers men literally believed that the natives were in their way to prosperity, and so resorted to all sorts of tactics to drive away and/or kill the natives. Tons of conflicts were actually started by white frontiers men pushing the boundaries themselves, rather than by a centralized campaign of conquest. Savagery was bottom up.
Exactly! The big difference between the Nazi Germans and the Imperial British: at least some Nazi Germans protested the war but the British only protested when the colonial government was too accommodating of the victims. NA colonies rebelled against the Royal Proclamation of 1763 which restricted settlement in native lands.
 

sequ

Major
Registered Member
My own calculations so far for the Turkish elections:

At at 34.4% of votes counted, Erdogan is leading at 53.2%, and main oppostion candidate at 40,9%.

According to my calculations so far it will be 47,2% and 46,9% for Erdogan and KK respectively when 97,4% of votes are counted.

So it'll most likely go to 2nd round.
 

KampfAlwin

Junior Member
Registered Member

sequ

Major
Registered Member
My own calculations so far for the Turkish elections:

At at 34.4% of votes counted, Erdogan is leading at 53.2%, and main oppostion candidate at 40,9%.

According to my calculations so far it will be 47,2% and 46,9% for Erdogan and KK respectively when 97,4% of votes are counted.

So it'll most likely go to 2nd round.
The rate of losses for Erdogan has gone down. My calculations put him at 50,9% when 90,6% of votes are counted. I still believe it'll go to the second round.

I base this on 56,2% of votes counted thus far.

EDIT: I base this on AA numbers, not ANKA
 
Last edited:
Top