Afghanistan Megathread

[unsunghero]

Originally Posted by Horza [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Sorry your guys' attempted coup failed miserably.

Yeah yknow the whole not bringing guns part really fucks over your chances. That one old lady did have a tiny American flag tho which I imagine the wooden stick for that could give you a nasty poke

[Mesocyclone]

The people who murdered the 4 police officers after the riot and called them all suicides in the press are infinitely more dangerous than the Taliban.

[unsunghero]

Originally Posted by Mesocyclone [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

The people who murdered the 4 police officers after the riot and called them all suicides in the press are infinitely more dangerous than the Taliban.

I did not hear about this. Suicides? Did you not see the autopsy reports?

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...ck/7128040002/

Natural causes, natural causes, accidental overdose, and the one named Brian Siknick was ruled as stroke:

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/pol...-riot-n1264562


Where the F did you hear suicide? You talk to Hillary Clinton?

[Ravager]

If you defend the rioters, before you argue any more, just stop and think and answer this question: "Why were they there?"

[unsunghero]

Originally Posted by Ravager [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

If you defend the rioters, before you argue any more, just stop and think and answer this question: "Why were they there?"

Can you point out where someone is defending the rioters?

Pointing out that they didn’t have guns, maybe because they were too stupid to bring guns for all I know, is not defending the rioters

Pointing out that no one was murdered is simply stating a fact. Another fact is that they trespassed in a federal building, which they are currently in jail for

I’m saying that the “insurrection” on Jan 6 is nothing like an actual insurrection in Afghanistan. Dems just love to use the term because it sounds so serious and provocative. But I’m glad you called it a riot, because that’s a lot more accurate of a description, you seem to have a good understanding of it

[Ravager]

Originally Posted by unsunghero [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Can you point out where someone is defending the rioters?

Pointing out that they didn’t have guns, maybe because they were too stupid to bring guns for all I know, is not defending the rioters

Pointing out that no one was murdered is simply stating a fact. Another fact is that they trespassed in a federal building, which they are currently in jail for

I’m saying that the “insurrection” on Jan 6 is nothing like an actual insurrection in Afghanistan. Dems just love to use the term because it sounds so serious and provocative. But I’m glad you called it a riot, because that’s a lot more accurate of a description, you seem to have a good understanding of it

The intent was to overturn the election and overthrow government, so yeah, it was insurrection, no matter how stupidly incompetent it was. That was the point of the exercise I proposed.

[unsunghero]

Originally Posted by Ravager [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

The intent was to overturn the election and overthrow government, so yeah, it was insurrection, no matter how stupidly incompetent it was. That was the point of the exercise I proposed.

Where did they state that intention? How was breaking into the building going to overturn the election? All I heard was that they didn’t feel the election was fair. Why are they not being charged with treason or any more serious crimes for an insurrection? Gonna have to cite some sources documenting their stated intentions. I’m big on sources

Not saying it’s not accurate, just saying I don’t believe it

Edit: That is, unless you are implying that anyone who breaks into a federal building is trying to overthrow the government. In which case we have a LOT of insurrections that have occurred

[Gwaihir]

Originally Posted by Ravager [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

The intent was to overturn the election and overthrow government, so yeah, it was insurrection, no matter how stupidly incompetent it was. That was the point of the exercise I proposed.

"Government" has overstepped their bounds though. As a denizen of the left, you cannot say "government" has not overstepped their bounds, unless you dismiss BLM to do so. Just because the right is wrong doesn't mean the left is right.

The left is right.

I mean, you gotta be fucking retarded to make that distinction, don't you?

[Gwaihir]

Originally Posted by Ravager [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

If you defend the rioters, before you argue any more, just stop and think and answer this question: "Why were they there?"

I know that (((((!!!!! I. ???)))) Did not take time off work and incur the expense to go down to capitol hill on Jan 6th to insurrect, because (((!!! I. ???))) understood the threat of deplatformation as being perspective, and even if it was ACTUAL it was actual for the point of balance.

Righteous is not a matter of majority support, or the balance point of the power differential.

Right is right and wrong is wrong, independent of majority opinion.

[Jibartik]

These rioters are mostly peaceful protestors

These rioters are insurrectionists

It's dumb and bad gaslighting.