Ooops

joined 2 years ago
[–] Ooops@kbin.social 11 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (3 children)

Maybe you personally. But money would actually solve all their problems.

All they provide today is a shitty job with bad pay and no future prospects.

They are not finding enough soldiers because all these soft modern young adults are too selfish for that job, just like companies find no employees because those spoiled brats are too lazy to work. Obviously none of it has to do with not providing reasonable payments of course. So forced labor is the the proposed solution.

[–] Ooops@kbin.social 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

The winner of that statewide election gets all the electoral college votes for that state.

Which is actually optional. States can split them (but iirc only 2 out of 50 do...). It just doesn't make that much sense in a two-party-system mostly split in the middle. That's the bigger problem.

[–] Ooops@kbin.social 11 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Oh, are you telling one of your favorite propaganda lies again?

In reality Germany -a small country with just ~16% of the US' GDP- is providing 40% of the US' support just in military aid (also more than the next 5 countries combined), and about three times as much measured by share of GDP in total.

Yet still after nearly two years the lie that Ukraine's by far biggest supporters are actually NoT DoInG aNyThInG bUt ThE bArE mInImUm is still Russia's top export.

[–] Ooops@kbin.social 3 points 2 years ago

Do they only kill flying whales or are the others at risk of accidently jumping into the blades, too?

[–] Ooops@kbin.social -1 points 2 years ago

All countries get agricultural subsidies and Poland is not one of the big ones. They sit on place 5 with all 4 before them production at least twice as much. (see here, page 10)

[–] Ooops@kbin.social 9 points 2 years ago

Since most phone apps nowadays use the same set of emojis and just generally come with a skin tone selection for all of them that's not an issue anymore.

[–] Ooops@kbin.social -1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

I’m frankly surprised there’s assets left to give Ukraine at this point?

Many countries have really strict laws in place when it's about the government'S ability to seize money, because those who don't might see opposition funds and then democracy gone...

[–] Ooops@kbin.social 9 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Flavorful characters can be quite OP in their specific area of expertise (no pun intended) and bad at other stuff.

Why do we always need to pretend that it's one or the other?

[–] Ooops@kbin.social 39 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (9 children)

Fire itselt doesn't necessarily leave marks on the stone floor unless it's long and hot enough to melt stone, that's just byproducts of stuff not burning properly.

The testing familiar -just like yours- didn't leave any traces in all the trial runs, it just vanished to its realm of origin.

Now, continue playing your class instead of cosplaying as a rules lawyer.

[–] Ooops@kbin.social 6 points 2 years ago

It's not. It's just acknowledging the reality that with a lot of countries (including the EU) and several states of their southern neighbour putting bans on combustion-engines in place for 2030-2036 that industry will simply be dead.

Not banning them by 2035 would have the exact same result as you simply don't buy anything but an EV when that's the only option left by then.

[–] Ooops@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago

"Wir sind gegen <hier beliebe Regierungsmaßnahme einfügen>, die wir gerade erst gestern zwischen den Regierungsparteien verhandelt haben. Denn nachdem wir bekommen haben, was wir wollten, ist ja vielleicht noch mehr drin und als billige PR Aktion reicht es sowieso."

FDP Regierungsarbeit in Vollendung. Mal sehen, ob sie in den noch fast 2 Jahren den Rekord von "5 mal beim exakt selben Thema immer nach interner Zustimmung öffentlich die Meinung ändern" noch einstellen können.

[–] Ooops@kbin.social 1 points 2 years ago

Wie oft müssen die Medien für dich in einem Artikel zu einem aktuellen Krieg erwähnen, dass es dort einen aktuellen Krieg gibt?

Mehr als "niemals". Dieser "Artikel zu einem aktuellen Krieg" schafft es nämlich das Wort Krieg (wieder einmal) nicht zu erwähnen, sondern redet nur von Kriegsverbrechen. Natürlich exklusiv in Verbindung mit dem ursprünglichen Hamasanschlag.

In dem Zusammenhang und bei konsequenter Vermeidung des Wortes Krieg ist "militärischer Gegenschlag" dann schon gleichwertig zu einer gewissen "militärischen Spezialoparation". Aber das fällt dir natürlich rein zufällig nicht auf.

Das ist das letzte mal das ich auf einen deiner langatmigen Ergüsse antworte.

Das ist schon okay. Du must auch nicht so tun, als wenn du mir mit deiner fromulierten Realitätsverweigerung einen Gefallen tust.

view more: ‹ prev next ›