There is no 'right' v 'left': it is Trump and the oligarchs against the rest

Gquebed

Gquebed

Well-Known Member
Fogdog said:
Maybe it's because you are outraged when it's pointed out that Russia's revolution ended in a totalitarian government that needlessly starved 10's of millions of Ukrainians and that was just the beginning of Soviet Communist death camps. All prior to WW2.

You can have your revolution and your firebombs. We don't need millions of dead to prove that peaceful change is preferable to all out violent revolution.
Click to expand...
When has change ever been peaceful?
Read some history then come back son.
 
Gquebed

Gquebed

Well-Known Member
Unclebaldrick said:
Uh huh. Seems like you are projecting here.

Telling somebody who just kicked your ass in a history pissing match to read up on history seems kind of self defeating.
Click to expand...
This is yet another self-congratulatory post of yours. You sound like a fat chick who constantly tells herself how sexy she is... and everybody else... hoping she might actually believe herself one day...
 
Fogdog

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
Gquebed said:
When has change ever been peaceful?
Read some history then come back son.
Click to expand...
1932: FDR made real changes. Also, the Civil Rights movement in the 1950's and '60's made real changes

I'm saying that you can have your firebombing and shove it up your ass. We need change but not the kind that almost always ends in dictatorship or totalitarian rule as violent revolution usually does.

So, you advocate the violent overthrow of the US government, justified how? You have practically zero knowledge of history if you think meaningful positive change for the masses comes from violent revolution. By what you say, you show that you know nothing of history, not even in your Russian homeland. Tell me how much better off Ukraine was under Stalin. Tell me how the people of China thrived under Mao. Tell me how great it is that China's rule was passed down from the Revolutionary Guard to their children who now form a corrupt oligarchy with autocratic rule. Tell me how much better it was under Pot Pot or Daniel Ortega or Iran's theocracy. What you advocate would satisfy only Putin and those other dictatorships.
 
Gquebed

Gquebed

Well-Known Member
Fogdog said:
1932: FDR made real changes. Also, the Civil Rights movement in the 1950's and '60's made real changes

I'm saying that you can have your firebombing and shove it up your ass. We need change but not the kind that almost always ends in dictatorship or totalitarian rule as violent revolution usually does.

So, you advocate the violent overthrow of the US government, justified how? You have practically zero knowledge of history if you think meaningful positive change for the masses comes from violent revolution. By what you say, you show that you know nothing of history, not even in your Russian homeland. Tell me how much better off Ukraine was under Stalin. Tell me how the people of China thrived under Mao. Tell me how great it is that China's rule was passed down from the Revolutionary Guard to their children who now form a corrupt oligarchy with autocratic rule. Tell me how much better it was under Pot Pot or Daniel Ortega or Iran's theocracy. What you advocate would satisfy only Putin and those other dictatorships.
Click to expand...
You picked some bad examples to support your argument... 1932 was a bad year for hunger marches. I believe 60 wounded and 4 dead in detroit when police opened fire on thousands of desperate, hungry people who marched in protest. Never mind all the upheaval across the country around that time when the great depression started up.

Civil rights? How many thousands marched and clashed with police? How many cities burned and how many dead through the 100s of race riots across the country for 10 years. What about the assasination of MLK?

Ya... peaceful change...
Late 20s and early 30s were some of the most violent in US history. As were the 60s.

You dont even know your own history never mind the rest of the world.

Try again idiot.
 
Last edited:
Fogdog

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
Gquebed said:
You picked some bad examples to support your argument... 1932 was a bad year for hunger marches. I believe 60 wounded and 4 dead in detroit when police opened fire on thousands of desperate, hungry people who marched in protest. Never mind all the upheaval across the country around that time when the great depression started up.

Civil rights? How many thousands marched and clashed with police? How many cities burned and how many dead through the 100s of race riots across the country for 10 years. What about the assasination of MLK?

Ya... peaceful change...
Late 20s and early 30s were some of the most violent in US history. As were the 60s.

You dont even know your own history never mind the rest of the world.

Try again idiot.
Click to expand...
Try reading.

LOL. Yeah, FDR caused those riots. Simpleton
 
Gquebed

Gquebed

Well-Known Member
Fogdog said:
Try reading.

LOL. Yeah, FDR caused those riots. Simpleton
Click to expand...
Who is the idiot?
I never said he caused the violence.
I said change rarely comes peacefully. FdR was in power during a time of huge civil unrest and it was that unrest that forced change. Same with the race riots that effected civil rights change.
How hard is that to understand. And it isnt my opinion. It is the opinion of many great historical writers that i merely repeated, for your benefit.
But you tried to argue it, using examples that proved my point.
Thanks.
 
Fogdog

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
Gquebed said:
Who is the idiot?
I never said he caused the violence.
I said change rarely comes peacefully. FdR was in power during a time of huge civil unrest and it was that unrest that forced change. Same with the race riots that effected civil rights change.
How hard is that to understand. And it isnt my opinion. It is the opinion of many great historical writers that i merely repeated, for your benefit.
But you tried to argue it, using examples that proved my point.
Thanks.
Click to expand...
Goddam

firebombs. You said we should start firebombing. Point out when a firebomb produced positive results in the modern US.

take those firebombs and cram them up your ass.
 
Gquebed

Gquebed

Well-Known Member
Fogdog said:
Goddam

firebombs. You said we should start firebombing. Point out when a firebomb produced positive results in the modern US.

take those firebombs and cram them up your ass.
Click to expand...
Oh.
Youre an imbecile.
Wish i figured that out sooner and saved myself some time.
 
Fogdog

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
Gquebed said:
Oh.
Youre an imbecile.
Wish i figured that out sooner and saved myself some time.
Click to expand...
name it, coward. Name an incident where a US firebombing in the modern era had a positive outcome. You continue to claim it would, I'm saying you have an unfounded belief.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top