Aceticon

Oh, it's totally fucked up and I do agree that Europe should proactively work against Dogey America.

My point is that Europe militarily intervening in an American Civil War doesn't have enough upsides for Europe to offset the downsides.

Well, been * ahem * told that a friend of a friend didn't found any videos there were "Your friendly neighborhood geek goes into the house of a hot milf to upgrade her Windows 10 machine to Arch and she shows them how hot she found their Linux install skills and how thankful she is", so that seems unlikely.

I was born in Portugal, a country which was back then under a Fascist Dictatorship.

It was a dirt poor European country were things were so bad that it got Food Aid from other countries.

Fortunatelly, there was a Revolution not long after I was born. In the 5 - 10 years after the Revolution quality of life and average wealth in my country went up dramatically.

In my own country, Fascism came to power when the Finance Minister during Republican years who saved the country from Financial Ruin, just captured power and made himself President - so yeah, starting from a very low point Fascism can improve things a bit for a while, but it doesn't take that many years for it to turn the whole thing into shit and that's what happenned in Portugal.

Fascists might sometimes cause a little Economic bump if they take over from a very low point (the same happenned with the Nazis in Germany), but it never lasts, and the ones in America are already going at it so ineptly and haphazardously that I bet there's not going to be any Economic bump.

The Fascists are incompetent as fuck and seriously regressive, so they eventually drag down any nations they take over once the cummulative side effects of their actions have time to work through the system. As America is already in a post-Imperial decay stage, Fascism will just accelerate that decay.

From your own link: "This data set, which includes only official deaths in which identification could be confirmed"

Who did most of the counting and identification? The Gazan Hospitals that Israel blew up.

Corpses shoved to mass graves by IDF soldiers (who have even posted photos and videos of doing it) don't get counted, much less "identified". And don't get me started op those burried under the rubble of bombed buildings, especially once the Israelis started targetting ambulances and rescue services.

That kind of shit is like mid Nazi Holocaust claiming there were no deaths in Auchwitz, since the Nazis didn't care to keep track of the identity of those they killed hence the count of "official deaths in which identification could be confirmed" was zero.

"The Lancet is a weekly peer-reviewed general medical journal"

(Source)

Yeah, I suspect you're right.

Yeah, right, it's because you're wholly apolitical and concerned above all with the plight of Palestinians that under an article about Evidence pointing to Israel's continued used of Starvation to inflict Genocide on Palestinians you felt the need to explicitly make it about Trump and mentioned no other of the many supporters and enablers of Israel and its Genocide

Go pull the other one.

If you weren't trying to bring in your pet peeve in American politics you would've just said "America" (since the whole fucking political mainstream there are Genocide enablers) or, even better, mention all of the most egregious supporters of Israel and its Genocide: America, Britain and Germany (in all of which, curiously, the whole fucking political mainstream are Genocide enablers).

Nah, low ceilings are horrible and oppressive.

The rest is fine.

You're confusing "not being counted because the Gaza Hospitals were they did the counting were destroyed by Israel" with "not occurring".

There was a study published in the Lancet Medical Journal about 6 months ago that back then estimated around 200k Palestinian dead even while the official figures remained stuck around the 50k mark since about 3 months into the invasion (when most Hospitals in Gaza were destroyed).

You're parroting Zionist propaganda and I don't really know if it's because you yourself have fallen for it or some other, malevolent, reasons.

(Given that you're doing this under an article about how Amnesty International gathered evidence that Israel is "using starvation of civilians as a weapon of war against Palestinians", I know which of those two possibilities I would bet on)

They're activelly destroying Science in the US, pretty much guaranteeing their own fatal weakening in the mid and long term if they did win and ended up controlling North America.

With the notable exception of the US ending up using nukes and causing the end of the World, there is no way Europe would lose more from merely letting present day America eat itself up than it would from militarily intervening in a civil war in the US, because even a win by the Neo Confederates would yield a weakened American in the short term (because of the destruction of a Civil War) and even more in the long term because of their anti-Science stance, and likely braindrain.

(People seriously underestimate the likelihood of rich countries regressing. To give you an example, Argentina used to be the 5th weathiest country in the World and look at them now. America absolutelly would end up regressing, FAST, if the MAGA crowd with the policies it is already practicing gained absolute power).

Not to say that many Americans who aren't Neo Confederates wouldn't deserve the help, just saying that pragmatically speaking letting America consume itself would be better for Europe than militarily intervening in an American civil war.

Now, if this was 40 or 50 years ago it would be different, but present day America isn't a force for good and there being a EU gives Europe enough strength as a team to stand up by itself to powers like China and Russia if they try anything, so there both isn't all that much good (for the World as a whole) in America to be worth saving and Europe doesn't actually require American support.

It's about Russia and it's militarist expansionism, not about Trump.

Well, yeah - he's a stereotypical bully (just notice how he uses the threat of lawsuits to bully small contractors supplying his companies which he doesn't want to pay) and those invariably see appeasement as proof of the weakness of the other side and will double down on the bullying if they get concessions to extract even more.

Bully, get concessions, bully some more, get more concessions, bully some more, get more concessions and so on is a pretty standard process for bullies.

The way to deal with bullies is to do the exact opposite of giving concessions: go in the very opposite direction and fuck them up, don't just respond in kind, respond with a more hurtful response than their original action. If they react to this by pushing harder, push them back even harder and they always end up backing down, especially if they can come up with some bullshit to save face: China has perfectly demonstrated this process with Trump's tariffs.