Skarpen

I think you misunderstood the story here. It's about western tourists who travel to those countries and beg to finance their trip. Even though they could afford the normal costs themselves. A little bad consisering some of those countries are very poor.

So if a country does horrible things to your country it's a good idea to move there?

How is that funny? Americans claim how progressive and empowering to women they are, yet are mocking rape victim for years and praising her rapist. Disgusting.

When Trump derangement syndrom hits so hard you see Trump towers everywhere. https://www.google.com/amp/s/beta.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2019/07/10/lion-king-is-fascistic-story-no-remake-can-change-that/%3foutputType=amp

I hate when people use this term incorrectly. Medieval fantasy is a fantasy placed in actual medieval times. King Arthur and knights of the round table is medieval fantasy, because it takes place in actual medieval Europe. Anything placed in any never never land is not medieval fantasy even if the setting and technological advance is similar. I also don't like when people use frases like "it wasn't possible then". What do you mean then? Are you a historian for a fantasy land now?

USSR joining the war. USSR switching sides. Fixed

You ALSO have the freedom to succeed. The view that the only way for someone is to become wage slave is like XVIII, XIX century. Nowadays you have thousands other options to pursue. I don't agree that being born into the riches is necessary to make economical success, or any other success for that matter. Just ask Bezos, Gates, Zuckerberg if being born into riches is required to make a financial success. It's not. Is it possible for everybody to become super rich? Of course not for numerous reasons. Is everyone aspiring to be super rich? Of course not, also for numerous reasons. Is everyone who is less successful lazier and dumber? Of course not, what a preposterous proposition. Being economically successful is not a measurement of anything else than being economically successful. Is a soccer mom who is happy with her husband and two kids living in a nice neighborhood not a success because Bezos has more money and stuff? Preposterous. Is a teacher who loves his job and doing it with passion and dedication not a success? The view that only being the 0,1% of richest people is success is a rather limited view. Nowhere I said anything about only legal restrictions matter in determining freedom. I said that economical status have nothing to do with freedom. Handholding is not freedom. The all powerful protective state failed each and every time and produced nothing but death and servitude. A good government would be the one that ensures you can pursue your goals and prevent others, including the government, from restricting your freedom to do so. Also to ensure you are not stomping on someone else freedom. Thought I need to include this as you guys seem a little picky. Some of them do. Agree. It's a silly assumption that if not everyone will succeed and become super rich somehow the system is broken and doesn't provide freedom. Free markets (or capitalism) are very similar to democracy. It's the worst system except for every other system ever created.

Ok. So we can agree that not everything people agree it's legal is good. But that doesn't mean everything they agree on is bad. So we should argue about particular cases rather than assume something is good/bad because it's legal/illegal. On the other point I think you equalize freedom and safety. That's not the case. You can be broke, unfortunate, unemployable failure dying in the gutter and still be free. Freedom means also being free to fail. I also like BruceVC don't see the point of your links in bashing capitalism. Neither Greek crisis nor Bolivian one were results of capitalism. For example Greece had massive social programs that they financed by bank loans and at some point Germany said they will not bankroll this lunacy.

And how exactly would that apply to capital goods? Are capital goods freedom or democracy in this situation?

It's not about being factually correct it's about being morally right.

Not really. NK is his pet project from the start.

The Sinking City:

Antifa are just ppl looking to beat someone or destroy/steal stuff. They are leftists darling because they have politically coreect name and to leftist the label is everything. I doubt it would be Bernie. Bernie might be one of the first to end up on guillotine. My bet would be on the youngbloods. AOC seems bloodthirsty enough.

How about Norwegians seeking asylum from them in other countries? https://visegradpost.com/en/2019/01/12/poland-land-of-asylum-for-norwegian-families/ I wouldn't call conviction by European Court of Human Rights as "doing fine".

I think you vastly exaggerated my comment.

I'm going with this, kinda fresh studies: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-48146305 https://aleteia.org/2019/05/06/christians-are-most-persecuted-group-in-the-world-study-says/ https://www1.cbn.com/cbnnews/politics/2019/april/global-persecution-report-christians-are-the-most-persecuted-and-its-accelerating Nice joke. Goes in match with the latest Trump 4ever tweet and will probably throw US media into the same level of frenzy.

Might be wrong, it's just a vibe I got from comment. I agree Australia is not jeopardy for Christians despite some claims in recent years. No excuse for bashing them though.

Isn't that the case in every country ever? Those things are implemented to make money. Case in point numerous local administrations in Poland had stationary speed radars removed because they weren't making enough money, because (and here's the kicker) drivers knew there were there and weren't speeding. Couldn't agree more. The more power in the executive branch the less "serve and protect", more "obey and keep quiet". How's that Barnevernet doing this days? Sorry, mate. But it seems to me you have more objection to the guys being Christian than anything else that has to do with the story, Christians are already the most persecuted group in the world no need to add to it.

Well, you could ask the same question for every DnD based game or any other tabletop adaptation. There are always gonna be some things you have to adapt.

Would that comment be made (or was ever) for a male candidate with military background? Doubt it. Having military background is appealing for US voters so of course every candidate that can would capitalize on this.

I think you are a bit harsh here for your own country Gorth. This is hardly embarrasing. Much worse things happens in first world countries. At least the guy is consistent. Religious freedom exceed as much as any other freedom and that is someones else freedom. If the guy actually threathen violence for gays then yes he should face consequences.

Wow, there is so much wrong it's hard to even find a place to start. So I make it brief. 1) Papers, files all the same thing . People tend to have rich vocabulary and actually comprehend meaning of words and phrases. 2) I never said anything about Mueller report. I made a hypothetical scenario about those +1000 putting the money where their mouth is. It's an idiom and it's meaning is not literal. I don't want you rambling about how unhygienic actually putting money in mouth is. 3) I never talked anything about who those +1000 former prosecutors are. It's irrelevant. You just make things up. 4) Why would I have to identify retired military men on this board? To what purpose? Unlike you I don't have some obsession about who is who on internet message boards. 5) I don't evade anything. It's just that you don't comprehend what's being said, that's all. Let's bring the original statement: "There's nobody on Earth who could bring an obstruction case based on these facts," he said." +1000 former fed prosecutors disagree.  To which my response is and I will try to use simple terms: Produce this person who will bring obstruction case or your disagreement means nothing. Simple as that. It's a big country, plenty of people in the legal field. Finding someone who isn't fan of the current president shouldn't be hard.