Civil war: Whose side are you on?

But, @Coloratura, have you ever considered that the Holocaust might have been caused by lack of compromise?

After all, the concentration camps wouldn't have been necessary if all of those Jews and gays had simply offered to commit suicide! They could have avoided a lot of extra pain and suffering if they had just been willing to meet the Nazis halfway.

I know you joke, but I've met people who think this way. "If the Jews would have just left like they were told, all of this could have been avoided." It's the same shit we saw in the South during the Civil Rights marches and voting acts. I have no doubt whatsoever that FF actually thinks this way. Anyone who can't answer a simple question, even if it's an answer they know others might not like, is hiding something, and they know that something is very bad.

I considered that argument, then remembered that many of them did leave, but to countries that later got occupied — or sought asylum but were turned away.

The US is deeply culpable for that. They came here desperate and we turned them away, and back they went to arrive just in time to be sent to the camps.

For all the good he did, FDR's decision here was abominable and indefensible.

I can answer the question, but I want to know why out of nowhere @Diacanu is asking me this question and only me. When I get that answer, then I will gladly answer his question. Until then I will remain silent on the matter. Oh and don't start with the, "it's a simple question, why can't you answer yes or no?" You people loose your shit when I ask a simple question with a yes or no answer. Fuck the fuck off.

A) Link to anyone losing their shit over that?
B) Who on earth would be hesitant to answer that question regardless?
C) "Fuck the fuck off" doesn't actually mean anything. It's like saying "Go the gone."

B) because I know how you bullshitters operate.

"Oh, he said he believes the Holocaust is real! We've got him now!"

Weird. I know how you operate, but I don't let it paint me into a corner.

That is a lie.

If you need a reason to answer because you think it's a trap, then you're definitely hiding something truly awful and don't want to share it. No one here loses their shit when you are given the question "is the holocaust good or bad" and you answer "bad."

If you had any principles at all, you'd say what they are. Instead, you hide like a weasel because you are a weasel, which is an affront to weasels and I apologize to weasels for comparing them to you.

I have no idea what the circumstances were in that situation, if there was any improper use of force, or if such usage was policy or the actions of an individual.

^ See, that's weasel talk.

It's pretty clearly explained in the post.

Also, this has the same energy as those senators who pretend the haven't seen Trump's tweets.​

Then would someone out of the blue ask whether they think the holocaust were real, unless there's agenda behind it?

This is going to sound super weird, but you know I'll say it anyway: sometimes people want to know your positions on things.

ole Joe did not have troops in the streets and you Nazi's were able to have your 'torch' parade tribute to toltalianariasm geeze you are blind little mote who exactly did ole Joe Genocide ?????? hmmm do you even have a clue or you just typing straight out of mein kampf poor little conservative. mean ole Joe genocded people but you can't come up with any names. oh and the shit libs went back to TRYING to preserve SOME KIND OF FREEDOM from your slimy asses. now go give something a nazi salute.

Baghdad Bob nothing to see here and i sure don't want to look it might make me pee pee my pants or cum

No, it's not. These guns have been owned by civilians for decades and long after the law made any distinction between civilian and military arms.

You say they're military weapons, but militaries don't use semi-auto rifles and civilians have always owned them.

You need to ignore history in order to redefine terms.

That's commonplace for law enforcement. I provided several examples of police using masks and tactical gear. And the law requires them to identify on request during an enforcement action.

No weasel talk would be taking a picture of an ICE officer and putting a bunch of supposition on it and tweeting it out for the world to see.

No, Lubak yesterday with his "if you don't want Gaza bulldozed you're an anti-semite" shit was some slimy agenda mongering, and he didn't plant a sneaky moustrap, he just came right out with the lie.

What is your position on the Holocaust?

Again, why is that relevant?

@Ancalagon disagrees, with photos!

Actually, it's not. You normally only see that on riot squads.

Masks intended to protect, not conceal.
And wearing identifying markers.
And I specified fatigues, not "tactical gear".
And there is ample evidence ICE officers are refusing to ID themselves.

Some people are just so weird, and not in a good, fun way, but in a "I can't let people know my opinions while denying validity of their opinions" kind of way. It's not difficult to say "an ICE officer shooting a priest praying is bad." "The Holocaust was bad." "Tying children up with zip ties and having them standing outside half naked while their parents are arrested is bad."

Yet there are people here who won't say it, like it's pulling teeth, so why is that? Is it because they don't know if it's good or bad? They've never been taught basic human respect? They're confused by why someone might want to know if there's a person in their midst who loves seeing children zip tied and immigrants beaten?

Is that what it is? Are there people here who are in favor of fascism but are afraid to say it? Who can say? Definitely not FF, Paladin, UA, or others, who continue to squirrel around the questions because heaven forbid someone actually get a solid position from them that doesn't change almost immediately or end up being a lie.

Ah, the Hegseth Defense.

Doesn't work for Drunky McDrunkface.

Doesn't work for you.

Your argument is that they're military weapons. But decades of history shows they're civilian weapons and are commonly owned by civilians.

History matters, common usage matters. Which is why efforts to ban them will ultimately fail.

The military has options for all kinds of weapons for many purposes. But the standard rifles carried by the U.S., U.K., France, Russia, China, Germany, etc. are fully automatic.

And?

They only have to identify themselves to you when: (1) they're performing an enforcement action on you; and (2) you request it.

Simply screaming "What's your name?" at an agent while they're working doesn't count.

Common usage including for mass shootings.

No no. Can't move these goalposts. You specifically said "militaries don't use semiauto rifles." And you were wrong.

And, therefore, not standard LEO apparel.

Do museum workers making a request count?

That's weird, because when people were criticising them previously you just kept insisting they followed all the rules so weren't doing anything wrong

Were you lying, or just making up shit you hadn't done any research on?

Considering he was wrong about:
1) Whether other country's LEO'S operate anonymously like ICE
2) Whether AR15's are military weapons
3) Whether the military uses semi auto rifles
4) And when an ICE agent is supposed to ID themselves

I'm guessing no, he doesn't really do any research before answering.

No fatties.

Oh, and Paladin was also wrong when he said it was always owned by civilians. AR15's weren't sold to the public until almost a decade after they were created.
How the fuck do I know more about guns than him?!?