scrubbedexpat098

I wasn't trying to distract from anything, I was merely posting something I came accross, I mentioned the age of the article if you can remember back a couple of posts.

Beoz

Next time I will include one of these

Beoz

Nor was Steve. He is merely laughing at the intolerant nature of the left, their hypocrisy, their lies, and their high almighty attitude towards Trump voters.

scrubbedexpat098

haha fair play, it doesn't come across on a post does it, hands up I'm an idiot

Amazulu

Nothing wrong with punching someone in the face now and again - violence has solved much more than words

Beoz

The Guardian (note the hypocrisy of that far left rag) has asked the same question. Even begged for it to be "yes"

https://www.theguardian.com/science/...punching-nazis

knockoff nige

Like what?

scrubbedexpat098

Hitler's attempt to take over Europe springs to mind

Amazulu

I won't go down the Hitler route so let's have a look at a recent example - Mosul

Those muslim assholes are having to be killed street by street, house by house, one at a time. Not nice for the good guys but no amount of talking is going to stop those pricks

Violence has solved more than dialogue has - have a look at a history book

knockoff nige

But don't our 'differences' in literature or beliefs lead to violence? Maybe if our acceptance of each would solve far more than violence. But you always seem to have an us versus them position and have incredible ignorance to anyone who disagrees with you. Violence has been necessary at times but I think only because of our lack of willingness to compromise and accept other cultures or races.

You've posted before about how great it was that Australia was invaded and much violence was carried out for the sake of you're new privilege life. No surprise to see your position on violence in the world. All from your armchair, of course.

Amazulu

More SJW revisionist nonsense aka seeing history through the prism of your comfortable, PC, 21st century life

I just have to open a history book to see what violence solved so you are arguing against historical facts - which is straight out of bizarroland

I do like what Britain did to colonise the world (we are better off for it) but that's immaterial - what happened, actually happened. My opinion or your lefty hand-wringing is not going to change that one iota

All from my (very comfortable) office chair actually

GarryP

OK, if you say you weren't dredging up something from last month as a distraction, I'll believe you. As you can tell however, its a repetitive trick of those on the far right to try and avoid reality by constructing themselves a little fantasyland of nasty leftwingers - ignoring the criminality being manifest in the highest rungs of their ranks.

knockoff nige

But what did any of this violence 'solve'? The world is still very divided and we seem to be under threat of terror everyday. Some would argue because of our own position (or that of those who lead our 'free' nations) in going to war without legal or moral justification.

No point in arguing with your ignorance though.

Beoz

Until he's impeached or prosecuted, if that ever happens, then all the nasty left wingers have is their fantasy left wing rags and pre-conceived ideas. Innocent until proven guilty would be the centralist approach to take. Which side are you leaning?

GarryP

Err, if you remember I pointed out he was too much of a lying, psychotic, narcissistic little criminal to be allowed to run - last year.

Frankly everything he's done since has demonstrated that he was unfit for any office, many times over.

We're now just talking about what institution with bars on the windows he should be put in; maximum security prison, mental institution, or death row.

The mental institution is the centralist position, the right would put up in maximum security and the left would execute him.