|
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
On November 08 2024 21:37 JimmyJRaynor wrote:one other thing about condom use. You can go to Queen and Sherbourne in Toronto and just wander around. WIthin 20 minutes a drugged out zombie female will offer sex without a condom for a scarey low price. According to the owner of a large XXX film label who is a customer of mine: Sex workers did not offer sex without a condom in the 80s and 90s. He is concerned about the lack of condom use by his employees. So, I think condom use is way way down compared to the 80s and 90s. Show nested quote +On November 08 2024 21:24 Acrofales wrote:
Yes, and healthcare workers have been warning for a few years now that STDs are on the rise again, because people are having more unprotected sex. What is your point?
my point is condom use is way down and AIDs is not killing any one.
If condom use is way down then surely sexually transmitted diseases will start to take hold though, even if they aren't fatal, its not exactly something you want.
|
Jimmy there is PREP now. Dont you ever see the commercials? My guess is thats why you would see more gay men having sex without condoms than 30 years ago.
|
On November 08 2024 21:40 Jockmcplop wrote:Show nested quote +On November 08 2024 21:37 JimmyJRaynor wrote:one other thing about condom use. You can go to Queen and Sherbourne in Toronto and just wander around. WIthin 20 minutes a drugged out zombie female will offer sex without a condom for a scarey low price. According to the owner of a large XXX film label who is a customer of mine: Sex workers did not offer sex without a condom in the 80s and 90s. He is concerned about the lack of condom use by his employees. So, I think condom use is way way down compared to the 80s and 90s. On November 08 2024 21:24 Acrofales wrote:
Yes, and healthcare workers have been warning for a few years now that STDs are on the rise again, because people are having more unprotected sex. What is your point?
my point is condom use is way down and AIDs is not killing any one. If condom use is way down then surely sexually transmitted diseases will start to take hold though, even if they aren't fatal, its not exactly something you want.
yes, i agree. i think it is a bad idea to have casual sex without a condom.
On November 08 2024 21:40 Sadist wrote:
Jimmy there is PREP now. Dont you ever see the commercials? My guess is thats why you would see more gay men having sex without condoms than 30 years ago.
My mom administers PREP. The big thing that caused the decrease in AIDs deaths was not PREP. The big turning point was a drastic lowering or complete elimination of using AZT. That happened in the 90s.
|
Northern Ireland27200 Posts
AIDS deaths globally were over a million when they peaked as recently as 2004. Aside from people being more careful having sex (not just condoms, but checkups), there’s mitigating treatments that got developed
Also, for the climate change deniers, why not go Pascal’s Wager? Sure it’ll cost some moolah, but you’ll get some cool shit, you’ll incentivise a new manufacturing boom. You’ll have increased (not total) energy independence in many places, and thus be more politically free from the influence of the big oil producers. You’ll have a cleaner environment in general.
You still get all that even if climate scientists are wrong, which I don’t believe for the record
|
On November 08 2024 21:37 JimmyJRaynor wrote:one other thing about condom use. You can go to Queen and Sherbourne in Toronto and just wander around. WIthin 20 minutes a drugged out zombie female will offer sex without a condom for a scarey low price. According to the owner of a large XXX film label who is a customer of mine: Sex workers did not offer sex without a condom in the 80s and 90s. He is concerned about the lack of condom use by his employees. So, I think condom use is way way down compared to the 80s and 90s. Show nested quote +On November 08 2024 21:24 Acrofales wrote:
Yes, and healthcare workers have been warning for a few years now that STDs are on the rise again, because people are having more unprotected sex. What is your point?
my point is condom use is way down and AIDs is not killing any one. Yes, STDs are rising. Personally, I'm an advocate of sexual temperance and only having sex within marriage.
With "nobody" I presume you're just ignoring the ~600k people who do die of AIDS-related diseases every year, because most of those are in Africa and we don't care about Africa. In the west people don't die of AIDS because of ARVs. ARVs are good at stopping the development of AIDS (although you do need to take them for rest of your life if you're HIV positive). Guess what we didn't have in the 80s and early 90s when people were scared of the AIDS pandemic...
This is about as idiotic a take as wondering why the COVID pandemic of 2020 is no longer killing people. Firstly, covid is still killing people, and secondly, it's because we developed effective preventive measures and improved treatment...
|
The whole HIV+ thing is fishy anyway. As I've posted here before. The Gallo//Montegnier affair wreacks of BS.
On November 08 2024 21:46 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On November 08 2024 21:37 JimmyJRaynor wrote:one other thing about condom use. You can go to Queen and Sherbourne in Toronto and just wander around. WIthin 20 minutes a drugged out zombie female will offer sex without a condom for a scarey low price. According to the owner of a large XXX film label who is a customer of mine: Sex workers did not offer sex without a condom in the 80s and 90s. He is concerned about the lack of condom use by his employees. So, I think condom use is way way down compared to the 80s and 90s. On November 08 2024 21:24 Acrofales wrote:
Yes, and healthcare workers have been warning for a few years now that STDs are on the rise again, because people are having more unprotected sex. What is your point?
my point is condom use is way down and AIDs is not killing any one. Yes, STDs are rising. Personally, I'm an advocate of sexual temperance and only having sex within marriage. With "nobody" I presume you're just ignoring the ~600k people who do die of AIDS-related diseases every year, because most of those are in Africa and we don't care about Africa.
AIDS stopped killing people in NA once the MDs stopped administering AZT. That was a key factor in NA in the 90s and an undocumented turning point in treating AIDs. AZT never should've been administered in the first place. Thank god vigiliant MDs stood up for their patients.
Big Pharma was in love with AZT and pushing it hard.
|
Jimmy this is some conspiracy theory stuff on aids from you. Did you just watch Dallas Buyers Club or something?
It seems like you want simple solutions for complex problems
|
Northern Ireland27200 Posts
On November 08 2024 21:21 VHbb wrote:Show nested quote +On November 08 2024 20:07 JimmyJRaynor wrote:We had an impending nuclear apocalypse for 40+ years. Everyone loves a world ending scenario and the media loved the ratings such scary predictions yield. The nuclear apocaplypse never came. US Tax Payers had to pay the bill for pointless military extavagancies because "we are on the verge of WW3". Same thing is going on right now with the Global Warming Apocalypse. The average US tax payer is hit hard by these environmental scare tactics. I do not think it is anything to worry about at all. Had the USA been reasonable during the 50s, 60s, 70s, and 80s they could've spent a lot less tax money on military. The Soviet Union was no where near as strong as being advertised by the media. The US government would have improved the lives of working people by either lowering taxes or putting that military money into anything but exotic unnecessary bombs and air force toys. Hopefully, Trump makes good on his energy plans and does the right thing for the working people of the USA. Hopefully, Trump ignores the environment alarmists. Going "green" has crippled the Canadian economy. The average working Canadian has gotten crushed. Hopefully, Trump avoids the whole thing and gives working people a chance at a decent life. Middle East IssuesOn January 20th , 1980 Iran released the US hostages after 444 days in captivity just as Ronald Reagan was being inaugurated. I suspect this is 100% calculated and a direct shot at Jimmy Carter and his administration. I think Reagan was going to burn Iran to the ground had the hostages still been in Iran. It is interesting how people will go hard at a reasonable leader such as Jimmy Carter. When faced with someone they know will instantly end their lives the "hard line psycho terrorists" suddenly became like Canadian negotiator diplomat guys.I wonder if the Gaza conflict will magically come to an end just as Donald Trump arrives on the scene?  I truly am scared that I live in a world where people can be this obtuse. I reassure myself thinking it's just a person in a forum who thinks that "the family unity" is more important than global warming, that "men" and "women" have to have distinct roles in a society, that nuclear war is not scary because it has not happened yet, but it still makes me so scared and enraged. I hope something more radical will come out of all of this, and that a path exists towards a future that is livable (for all, not only for some). I never write on TL but often lurks, but I cannot read this thread anymore without feeling dread from the comments of people like this, and what shocks me is that you probably have no idea and no concern of the violence that your words carry.
Hello lurker, yeah I feel you sometimes there. Part scared, mostly disappointed.
My partner isn’t massively, but a bit younger than me. I was trying to explain why I was so bummed out in general, and I think a big chunk of that is I recall a relatively brief period where things actually seemed to be getting better. Ye olde internet was connecting all sorts of people, opening access to information and, briefly I felt people were getting more engaged and better informed.
Now it’s flipped seemingly to the opposite trajectory
Still, here is nothing near as depressing as doing politics lurking on Reddit or Twitter
|
I had to google what the fuck you are talking about and it's up there with flat earthers for idiotic nonsense. You should probably stop talking about AIDS.
E: apparently it was recently peddled by Robert F. Kennedy. Have fun with your future head of the Department of Health, USAers!
E2: makes perfect sense now. JimmyJR, did you get your annual brain worm checkup? I think you might be infected.
|
On November 08 2024 17:54 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:Show nested quote +On November 08 2024 17:36 EnDeR_ wrote:On November 08 2024 15:49 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:On November 08 2024 15:31 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 08 2024 14:04 KwarK wrote:On November 08 2024 13:04 Salazarz wrote:On November 08 2024 11:46 Razyda wrote:On November 08 2024 10:57 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 08 2024 10:40 Falling wrote:On November 08 2024 08:00 GreenHorizons wrote:
[quote]
I do think it's silly to find Trump an unacceptable person to vote for but a reasonably acceptable person to give control of the most lethal military in the world after he said he would be a day 1 dictator.
It may avoid charges of hypocrisy, but strikes me as pretty irresponsible
EDIT: Especially after the Supreme Court already gave him immunity to do practically anything he wants legally The dictator on day one rhetoric is yet another reason why I am a never-Trumper (from afar as I can't vote, for obvious reasons.) It's disqualifying even if it was just a metaphor or however it might sanewashed by Trump loyalists. I don't see any way to be consistent and call oneself a believer in limited government who is conserving the constitution, not as a principled conservative, not even as a pragmatic one. However, until and unless he becomes a dictator on day one, I think it is premature to treat him as a dictator though the electorate did indeed give him control to the most lethal military in the world. But it was not me who is giving him anything. I think it is premature because generally speaking I think the most effective way to remove a dictator is to shoot or otherwise kill them though I guess you could forcibly remove him instead. I'm not prepared to do any of that Minority Report style. Are you? If you actually believe he attempted an insurrection, then taking care of him might have been the first thing Biden should have done as president and let the immunity thing come to the court that way (if the CIA/FBI/NSA/ST6/whatev somehow was traced back to him). Then, once Biden knew he would be immune from prosecution for pursuing justice for treason, that was another pivotal chance passed. Now, he knows this treasonous insurrectionist (set aside the fascism for the moment if one wishes) is going to get what he was after during his treasonous insurrection attempt, and he's got a chance to stop that from happening. If I believed Trump was a treasonous insurrectionist (let alone also a fascist with the whole project 2025 crew in tow) as a never-Trump conservative (dunno if that's a close enough descriptor for you) I would support Biden enacting patriotic justice based on that alone. I just quote this post, but GH to put last few pages of your posts in context of your usual stance: Liberals will descend to fascism - now you advocating for Democrats to become a fascist to stop Trump. Lesser evilism = bad, but Democrats becoming fascist is better than Trump becoming president, therefore in this case lesser evilism good. Sort of makes sense - you can then claim "told you Democrats will become fascists". You come across much more dictatorial than Trump ever did (bolded parts). You are not afraid that Trump can become dictator, you are angry that you wont (or whatever Secretary you happened to be infatuated with). Arresting a guy for leading a coup is not fascism, it's just following the laws. Plenty of randos in the crowd that stormed the capitol got criminal charges. The way I see it, there's a huge disconnect in messaging and actions of the Dems. Either Trump is all the things they say he is, and then them not dealing with him is a massive failure to uphold the law and security of the country; or he is not, in fact, all the things they say he is and they're just trying to push people into voting for them because 'big bad orange will get ya' otherwise. It's the first. They trusted in institutions that couldn't be relied upon. Sooo the same thing they are doing by handing Trump/Project 2025 control of the most lethal military in the world? That' should work out well /s We can ignore all the warnings people got that this would happen, and just go with "fool me once, shame on you, fool me 542 times..." Also, to be fair, the institution of the Supreme Court did give Democrats the power to hold him accountable. Unfortunately, Democrats are even less reliable than Trump's Supreme Court. He already had control of the military for 4 years and the world was a far safer place than it is now.Enough with the hyperbole.It's like that Selzer poll from 5 days ago that had Harris up +3 in Iowa, Trump wins it by 13.Total fake news.Just relax and don't get so worked up about whats on TV. Regarding Ukraine they've lost 25% of their population the past 2 1/2 years either via people fleeing or Russia controlling territory.The sanctions have not had the desired effect on Russia, probably even hurt Germany and Europe more than Russia.Ukraine is losing territory and losing the war, the only chance for them would be if NATO escalated which could easily spiral into WW3 which is a scenario far more likely under Harris than Trump. Conversely, Israel will most certainly feel emboldened to keep escalating its war in the Middle East, which might end up pulling the US into yet another war. Unlike Ukraine, you would actually have to put boots on the ground for this one. Either way, we are heading into turbulent times. Having the guy who pretty much shat on all of the US' traditional alliances at the helm at a time like this is unlikely to lead to a more secure and stable planet. This is the guy who walked into North Korea and shook Kims hand.Trump is the peace president. I think people will be surprised at the positive transformation in the USA over the next few years, from RFK Jr dismantling most of the FDA to Ron Paul cutting 50% of all Govt departments.Trump has assembled a dream team. The transition will be rocky but great things are coming.
Trump is the "peace" president who bombed the ME much harder than Obama. Sure...
|
On November 08 2024 15:49 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:Show nested quote +On November 08 2024 15:31 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 08 2024 14:04 KwarK wrote:On November 08 2024 13:04 Salazarz wrote:On November 08 2024 11:46 Razyda wrote:On November 08 2024 10:57 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 08 2024 10:40 Falling wrote:On November 08 2024 08:00 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 08 2024 07:19 Falling wrote:What is terrifying to me is that libs/Dems are just going to retcon the "Trump is a fascist that will destroy democracy" thing, as we see happening now. Well, while you are building up your narrative of what is going on TL, make sure to not include my posts as part of the pattern of Lib/Dems as I am neither a liberal nor a democrat, nor am I walking back from my position on Trump as I do not believe I ever called Trump a fascist or Hitlerian or anything like it, but you can fact check me on that if you want. I do still think he is demonstrably too corrupt and too unconcerned about the separation of powers in federalism/ the branches of government to ever vote for. I do think it's silly to find Trump an unacceptable person to vote for but a reasonably acceptable person to give control of the most lethal military in the world after he said he would be a day 1 dictator. It may avoid charges of hypocrisy, but strikes me as pretty irresponsible EDIT: Especially after the Supreme Court already gave him immunity to do practically anything he wants legally The dictator on day one rhetoric is yet another reason why I am a never-Trumper (from afar as I can't vote, for obvious reasons.) It's disqualifying even if it was just a metaphor or however it might sanewashed by Trump loyalists. I don't see any way to be consistent and call oneself a believer in limited government who is conserving the constitution, not as a principled conservative, not even as a pragmatic one. However, until and unless he becomes a dictator on day one, I think it is premature to treat him as a dictator though the electorate did indeed give him control to the most lethal military in the world. But it was not me who is giving him anything. I think it is premature because generally speaking I think the most effective way to remove a dictator is to shoot or otherwise kill them though I guess you could forcibly remove him instead. I'm not prepared to do any of that Minority Report style. Are you? If you actually believe he attempted an insurrection, then taking care of him might have been the first thing Biden should have done as president and let the immunity thing come to the court that way (if the CIA/FBI/NSA/ST6/whatev somehow was traced back to him). Then, once Biden knew he would be immune from prosecution for pursuing justice for treason, that was another pivotal chance passed. Now, he knows this treasonous insurrectionist (set aside the fascism for the moment if one wishes) is going to get what he was after during his treasonous insurrection attempt, and he's got a chance to stop that from happening. If I believed Trump was a treasonous insurrectionist (let alone also a fascist with the whole project 2025 crew in tow) as a never-Trump conservative (dunno if that's a close enough descriptor for you) I would support Biden enacting patriotic justice based on that alone. I just quote this post, but GH to put last few pages of your posts in context of your usual stance: Liberals will descend to fascism - now you advocating for Democrats to become a fascist to stop Trump. Lesser evilism = bad, but Democrats becoming fascist is better than Trump becoming president, therefore in this case lesser evilism good. Sort of makes sense - you can then claim "told you Democrats will become fascists". You come across much more dictatorial than Trump ever did (bolded parts). You are not afraid that Trump can become dictator, you are angry that you wont (or whatever Secretary you happened to be infatuated with). Arresting a guy for leading a coup is not fascism, it's just following the laws. Plenty of randos in the crowd that stormed the capitol got criminal charges. The way I see it, there's a huge disconnect in messaging and actions of the Dems. Either Trump is all the things they say he is, and then them not dealing with him is a massive failure to uphold the law and security of the country; or he is not, in fact, all the things they say he is and they're just trying to push people into voting for them because 'big bad orange will get ya' otherwise. It's the first. They trusted in institutions that couldn't be relied upon. Sooo the same thing they are doing by handing Trump/Project 2025 control of the most lethal military in the world? That' should work out well /s We can ignore all the warnings people got that this would happen, and just go with "fool me once, shame on you, fool me 542 times..." Also, to be fair, the institution of the Supreme Court did give Democrats the power to hold him accountable. Unfortunately, Democrats are even less reliable than Trump's Supreme Court. He already had control of the military for 4 years and the world was a far safer place than it is now.Enough with the hyperbole.It's like that Selzer poll from 5 days ago that had Harris up +3 in Iowa, Trump wins it by 13.Total fake news.Just relax and don't get so worked up about whats on TV. Regarding Ukraine they've lost 25% of their population the past 2 1/2 years either via people fleeing or Russia controlling territory.The sanctions have not had the desired effect on Russia, probably even hurt Germany and Europe more than Russia.Ukraine is losing territory and losing the war, the only chance for them would be if NATO escalated which could easily spiral into WW3 which is a scenario far more likely under Harris than Trump.
So if it does not happen, and Trump does not bring a more peaceful world, does not stop inflation, does not go after big pharma, big food, does not bring down energy prices, middle class continues to shrink, deficit grows even more. Will it be his fault since he controls all 3 branch of elected officials and the supreme court. Or will it still be the Dems and radical lefts fault?
I'm guessing the latter because Trumps history is a great at blaming others, and very poor at solving problems.
|
On November 08 2024 21:51 Sadist wrote:
Jimmy this is some conspiracy theory stuff on aids from you. Did you just watch Dallas Buyers Club or something?
It seems like you want simple solutions for complex problems
Rubber is about to hit the road. All these people claiming to have these simple solutions are now going to have the power to implement them. I'm ready to be wrong if they work. Are these people who have zealot level faith in these people ready to change their perspective when they don't work?
|
On November 08 2024 21:57 Magic Powers wrote:Show nested quote +On November 08 2024 17:54 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:On November 08 2024 17:36 EnDeR_ wrote:On November 08 2024 15:49 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:On November 08 2024 15:31 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 08 2024 14:04 KwarK wrote:On November 08 2024 13:04 Salazarz wrote:On November 08 2024 11:46 Razyda wrote:On November 08 2024 10:57 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 08 2024 10:40 Falling wrote:
[quote]
The dictator on day one rhetoric is yet another reason why I am a never-Trumper (from afar as I can't vote, for obvious reasons.) It's disqualifying even if it was just a metaphor or however it might sanewashed by Trump loyalists. I don't see any way to be consistent and call oneself a believer in limited government who is conserving the constitution, not as a principled conservative, not even as a pragmatic one.
However, until and unless he becomes a dictator on day one, I think it is premature to treat him as a dictator though the electorate did indeed give him control to the most lethal military in the world. But it was not me who is giving him anything. I think it is premature because generally speaking I think the most effective way to remove a dictator is to shoot or otherwise kill them though I guess you could forcibly remove him instead. I'm not prepared to do any of that Minority Report style. Are you? If you actually believe he attempted an insurrection, then taking care of him might have been the first thing Biden should have done as president and let the immunity thing come to the court that way (if the CIA/FBI/NSA/ST6/whatev somehow was traced back to him). Then, once Biden knew he would be immune from prosecution for pursuing justice for treason, that was another pivotal chance passed. Now, he knows this treasonous insurrectionist (set aside the fascism for the moment if one wishes) is going to get what he was after during his treasonous insurrection attempt, and he's got a chance to stop that from happening. If I believed Trump was a treasonous insurrectionist (let alone also a fascist with the whole project 2025 crew in tow) as a never-Trump conservative (dunno if that's a close enough descriptor for you) I would support Biden enacting patriotic justice based on that alone. I just quote this post, but GH to put last few pages of your posts in context of your usual stance: Liberals will descend to fascism - now you advocating for Democrats to become a fascist to stop Trump. Lesser evilism = bad, but Democrats becoming fascist is better than Trump becoming president, therefore in this case lesser evilism good. Sort of makes sense - you can then claim "told you Democrats will become fascists". You come across much more dictatorial than Trump ever did (bolded parts). You are not afraid that Trump can become dictator, you are angry that you wont (or whatever Secretary you happened to be infatuated with). Arresting a guy for leading a coup is not fascism, it's just following the laws. Plenty of randos in the crowd that stormed the capitol got criminal charges. The way I see it, there's a huge disconnect in messaging and actions of the Dems. Either Trump is all the things they say he is, and then them not dealing with him is a massive failure to uphold the law and security of the country; or he is not, in fact, all the things they say he is and they're just trying to push people into voting for them because 'big bad orange will get ya' otherwise. It's the first. They trusted in institutions that couldn't be relied upon. Sooo the same thing they are doing by handing Trump/Project 2025 control of the most lethal military in the world? That' should work out well /s We can ignore all the warnings people got that this would happen, and just go with "fool me once, shame on you, fool me 542 times..." Also, to be fair, the institution of the Supreme Court did give Democrats the power to hold him accountable. Unfortunately, Democrats are even less reliable than Trump's Supreme Court. He already had control of the military for 4 years and the world was a far safer place than it is now.Enough with the hyperbole.It's like that Selzer poll from 5 days ago that had Harris up +3 in Iowa, Trump wins it by 13.Total fake news.Just relax and don't get so worked up about whats on TV. Regarding Ukraine they've lost 25% of their population the past 2 1/2 years either via people fleeing or Russia controlling territory.The sanctions have not had the desired effect on Russia, probably even hurt Germany and Europe more than Russia.Ukraine is losing territory and losing the war, the only chance for them would be if NATO escalated which could easily spiral into WW3 which is a scenario far more likely under Harris than Trump. Conversely, Israel will most certainly feel emboldened to keep escalating its war in the Middle East, which might end up pulling the US into yet another war. Unlike Ukraine, you would actually have to put boots on the ground for this one. Either way, we are heading into turbulent times. Having the guy who pretty much shat on all of the US' traditional alliances at the helm at a time like this is unlikely to lead to a more secure and stable planet. This is the guy who walked into North Korea and shook Kims hand.Trump is the peace president. I think people will be surprised at the positive transformation in the USA over the next few years, from RFK Jr dismantling most of the FDA to Ron Paul cutting 50% of all Govt departments.Trump has assembled a dream team. The transition will be rocky but great things are coming. Trump is the "peace" president who bombed the ME much harder than Obama. Sure...
Not to mention that Trump is absolutely anti-peace when it comes to anything within the United States. Promoting violence and hate and fearmongering within the country, attacking every demographic he can think of, galvanizing his supporters to riot, etc. Outside the United States, he's promoting "peace" insofar as wars will technically end if Russia and Israel successfully obliterate their victims.
|
Northern Ireland27200 Posts
On November 08 2024 22:03 Billyboy wrote:Show nested quote +On November 08 2024 21:51 Sadist wrote:
Jimmy this is some conspiracy theory stuff on aids from you. Did you just watch Dallas Buyers Club or something?
It seems like you want simple solutions for complex problems Rubber is about to hit the road. All these people claiming to have these simple solutions are now going to have the power to implement them. I'm ready to be wrong if they work. Are these people who have zealot level faith in these people ready to change their perspective when they don't work?
The zealots will almost certainly not. Didn’t matter how many things I’d been told I was bullshitting or fearmongering about happened exactly as I said, zealots would never admit it.
More middle of the road people who aren’t super invested, sure
|
On November 08 2024 21:10 Silvanel wrote:Show nested quote +On November 08 2024 20:54 Simberto wrote:
You don't need a lot of power. As long as you have 50 nukes on ICBMs, you can start armageddon. Start? Yeah. Assuming there will be response. However 50 nuclear devices alone, although it will kill many milions of people directly and indirectly, is not enough to end life on Earth or human civilization. True armageddon is more in the range of 5000 nuclear devices. The scary thing is, both US and Russia, have enough for this purpose.
Of course, 50 nukes alone will not destroy humanity. But if the sowjet union has 50 nukes on ICBMs, they are very, very scary. And they had more.
50 nukes means New York, LA, Chicago, Houston, Phoenix, Philadelphia, San Antonia, San Diego, Dallas, Jacksonville, Austin, Fort Worth, San Jose, Columbus, Charlotte, Indianopolis, San Francisco, Seattle, Denver, Oklahoma city are gone. (And those are just 20, because i got too lazy to type the list from wikipedia afterwards, the next biggest 30 cities are also gone)
One can imagine how that plays out for the US. And how the US reacts to it.
|
On November 08 2024 21:51 Sadist wrote:
Jimmy this is some conspiracy theory stuff on aids from you. Did you just watch Dallas Buyers Club or something?
It seems like you want simple solutions for complex problems
This comes from my medical family. AZT is nasty and brutal. Thankfully, it was dropped as a course of treatment.
According to several MDs in my family the 90s was a battle between front line MDs treating real world HIV patients and Big Pharma pushing AZT hard. Big Pharma wanted AZT administered as early as possible. In 1989, what evidence did we have that AZT is effective? All Big Pharma had was theories and big profits motivating them.
I must give Earvin "Magic" Johnson credit for being smart enough to never take AZT. He is alive today because of that decision.
EDIT: At this point this belongs in the TL Health Thread. If you want to discuss AZT in the health thread I will respond.
|
Ok sure.
Do you not believe the IPCC climate data? If not, why?
|
GOP lost NC Governor race badly. Drumpf outperformed the downticket basically everywhere. Fascinating.
I don't know why AZ and CA can't count. Lake's race looks tighter now. The GOP is at 53 senators or 53.5 if you include Manchin who is the independent who most crosses the aisle. They need that buffer because there are still anti-Drumpf holdouts and McConnell is pushing for an immediate leadership election, before the new senators join. With Vance they can pass things at 50 so they can suffer no more than 3 people not playing ball if current NV/AZ numbers hold.
Also needs to dump Mike Pompeo and start hiring Colonels instead of Generals, who are inherently political.
|
JJR might not know that AZT is still in use today because it's in fact considered safe.
|
Just glancing over its side effects it seems like a dogshit drug to take. Let's say we disagree on how we interpret this, MP. Anything that even remotely looks closely like a ribonucleotide or ribonucleoside you should nope out of imo.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
