Trump 2024: The Joe E forever and let the games begin.

Nov 14, 2015
12,730
12,972
oh vino

yer a troll

and yer fuckin dumb

and shot

its just all over pathetic.................


trump wont be able to expand the court, even if he wins the election

dummy

now go google WHY that is and be sad


does it really smell when walk out onto the back porch or are you used to it now?

16421
 
Oct 22, 2012
5,862
1,215
It doesn't belong in this thread, but regarding Mihailovic and his forces, if I remember right, they were the first group the allies through their OSS contacts, who were favored the most in terms of support in the early phase among the different partisan factions in the area. His Chetniks had given and received crucial intel, and we're supplied arms, but it wasn't long before, in their view, they felt that he wasn't the guy. Their faith as they claimed, had begun to waver in him. Compared to other parallel factions, he was reluctant in their view to make much meaningful engagements against AXIS forces. And his first major offensive against AXIS forces went pretty darn tragic, and what remained hunkered down for a bit, licking their wounds.

This is not to say all Chetniks essentially ceased all their activities against the AXIS. While they weren't the reliable partner the others hoped for, it's not like they all surrendered to AXIS forces. But after their failed offensive, they're visibility and activity and effectiveness dropped.

His strategy allegedly was to wait on an coming Allied landing, and then consolidate control with his forces with the support of allied troops taking the main offensives to Axis forces. This didn't help when the OSS support's confidence in him was already low as they began to see them as unreliable and reluctant to commit to the effort they saw as needed.


(Churchill had proposed this strategy, which would have included more forces deployed in the region, but ultimately, Normandy landings were chosen, this would of course been what he was hoping for)

Mihalovich may unfairly been abandoned or sidelined as an asset in that region, but the confidence in
him was already gone.
His military shortcomings, reluctance to proactively engage in intelligence and offensives, not to mention his appeal really only was limited to Serbs almost exclusively, all added up. Which led to the Partisans getting the support as they were much more reliable partners for them in their view.
 
Last edited:
Reactions: SwollenGoat

SwollenGoat

Deicide
May 17, 2013
65,121
24,461
The House that Peterbilt
It doesn't belong in this thread, but regarding Mihailovic and his forces, if I remember right, they were the first group the allies through their OSS contacts, who were favored the most in terms of support in the early phase among the different partisan actions. His Chetniks had given and received crucial intel, and we're supplied arms, but it wasn't long before, in their view, they felt that he wasn't the guy. Their faith as they claimed, had begun to waver in him. Compared to other parallel factions, he was reluctant in their view to make much meaningful engagements against AXIS forces. And his first major offensive against AXIS forces went pretty darn tragic, and what remained hunkered down for a bit, licking their wounds.

This is not to say all Chetniks essentially ceased all their activities against the AXIS. While they weren't the reliable partner the others hoped for, it's not like they all surrendered to AXIS forces.

His strategy allegedly was to wait on an coming Allied landing, and their consolidate control with his forces, being recently emerged. This didn't help when the OSS support's confidence in him was already low as they began to see them as unreliable and reluctant to commit to the effort they saw as needed.


(Churchill had proposed this strategy, which would have included more forces deployed in the region, but ultimately, Normandy landings were chosen, this would of course been what he was hoping for)

Mihailovic may unfairly been abandoned or sidelined as an asset in that region, but the confidence in
him was already gone.
His military shortcomings, reluctance to proactively engage in intelligence and offensives, not to mention his appeal really only was limited to Serbs almost exclusively, all added up. Which led to the Partisans getting the support as they were much more reliable partners for them in their view.
the thing about the chetniks is thjat they were not a strongly centralized force and Mihailovic was only nominally in overall command...............the top generals were,essentially,independant warlords and quite often did as they pleased

Mihailovic himself probably didnt do much by way of straight 'collaboration' but the chetniks did.................Mihailovic should probably be more remembered for his ethnic cleansing and other shenanigans..............
 
Reactions: Leftsmash
Oct 22, 2012
5,862
1,215
the thing about the chetniks is thjat they were not a strongly centralized force and Mihailovic was only nominally in overall command...............the top generals were,essentially,independant warlords and quite often did as they pleased

Mihailovic himself probably didnt do much by way of straight 'collaboration' but the chetniks did.................Mihailovic should probably be more remembered for his ethnic cleansing and other shenanigans..............
Yes from my perspective, their lack of cohesiveness was an early weakness hence why some Chetniks (or at least those calling themselves as ) obviously did collaborate in the instances already noted. Mihalovich main objective was to restore the old power system, he showed little interest in consolidating power with those chetnik factions, at least not effectively . He just wasn't the capable military type of guy needed to do it.

But I will be fair here to @VinoVeritas, many remained committed strongly to the partisan activity against the AXIS, but those that were effective, also were the ones who got bogged down in parallel wars with the others, while the Axis were still there. The OSS were furious with both for that, but their rep and relationship went down further with the Chetniks.

I think you're right in that he didn't directly collaborate with AXIS people, but he did collaborated with those that had collaborated with them, guys like https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milan_Nedić

toward the end of the war.
 
Last edited:
Reactions: SwollenGoat
May 10, 2013
4,683
3,755
You see, this is why I consider you functionally retarded. A Senator's obligation is not only to the people that voted for them, retard, but to the entire state that he/she represents... you know, in the same way that Trump was supposed to represent all Americans...

Dumbass.

Yes and their state elected them, not the whole country. They represent the voters in their state, those voters expect them to vote in favor of policies that are pro life. Holy shit. You are the gift that keeps on giving. If the voters of those states didn't want them voting in favor of ACB they wouldn't have elected a Republican.

You do know that every single fucking republican is pro life right? This isn't the first judge that the Republicans have confirmed despite the whining from Democrats. You're only upset because the Democrats fucked up.

I still can't tell if you're pro life or a fake Christian. Can you tell me that? Please be so kinda as to answer such a simple question that you've been avoiding.

Are you pro life or a fake Christian?
 
Oct 22, 2012
5,862
1,215
Yes and their state elected them, not the whole country. They represent the voters in their state, those voters expect them to vote in favor of policies that are pro life. Holy shit. You are the gift that keeps on giving. If the voters of those states didn't want them voting in favor of ACB they wouldn't have elected a Republican.

You do know that every single fucking republican is pro life right? This isn't the first judge that the Republicans have confirmed despite the whining from Democrats. You're only upset because the Democrats fucked up.

I still can't tell if you're pro life or a fake Christian. Can you tell me that? Please be so kinda as to answer such a simple question that you've been avoiding.

Are you pro-life or a fake Christian?
That last sentence is pure fallacy. It presents a false dilemma. One can be pro-life in their outlook in a religious senseb, but can still differ when it comes to government and legislation.
 
Reactions: SwollenGoat

steviebruno

CHB NYC Delegate
Jun 5, 2013
17,576
7,768
New York City
Yes and their state elected them, not the whole country. They represent the voters in their state, those voters expect them to vote in favor of policies that are pro life. Holy shit. You are the gift that keeps on giving. If the voters of those states didn't want them voting in favor of ACB they wouldn't have elected a Republican.

You do know that every single fucking republican is pro life right? This isn't the first judge that the Republicans have confirmed despite the whining from Democrats. You're only upset because the Democrats fucked up.

I still can't tell if you're pro life or a fake Christian. Can you tell me that? Please be so kinda as to answer such a simple question that you've been avoiding.

Are you pro life or a fake Christian?
How can every single Republican be pro life when they fight to the death to support the 2nd Amendment? You seem to be equating Christianity with right wing partisanism, which is idiotic on so many levels.

A week to respond, and you're still just as dumb as you were when I left you. Smh.
 
Oct 22, 2012
5,862
1,215
I mean most people don't advocate more abortions. Pro life or pro choice, but does it mean one has to combined their religious feelings by the same token to how it stands in the state role's in it?
 
May 10, 2013
4,683
3,755
That last sentence is pure fallacy. It presents a false dilemma. One can be pro-life in their outlook in a religious senseb, but can still differ when it comes to government and legislation.

No you can't mate. No Christian openly supports abortion. In their eyes it is literally murder. If you support legislation for the government to have a say in whether abortions are legal then you are not a Christian as it goes against the core of your belief system.
 

steviebruno

CHB NYC Delegate
Jun 5, 2013
17,576
7,768
New York City
I mean most people don't advocate more abortions. Pro life or pro choice, but does it mean one has to combined their religious feelings by the same token to how it stands in the state role's in it?
Being pro choice is not the same as advocating for abortions. I think that a young girl that is raped should not have to carry the rapists baby for nine months if she does not want to. One may as well advocate rape if one believes that such is an appropriate way to force life into this world.
 

steviebruno

CHB NYC Delegate
Jun 5, 2013
17,576
7,768
New York City
No you can't mate. No Christian openly supports abortion. In their eyes it is literally murder. If you support legislation for the government to have a say in whether abortions are legal then you are not a Christian as it goes against the core of your belief system.
The core belief of Christianity has nothing to do with abortion. Do you need my help here?
 
May 10, 2013
4,683
3,755
How can every single Republican be pro life when they fight to the death to support the 2nd Amendment? You seem to be equating Christianity with right wing partisanism, which is idiotic on so many levels.

A week to respond, and you're still just as dumb as you were when I left you. Smh.

Those are two entirely different topics. The 2nd amendment has nothing to do with being pro life or pro choice. I'm a pro choice and 2nd amendment supporter.

Abortion is a partisan issue, simple as that. If you're voting for a Democrat you're pro choice. If you're voting for a Republican you're voting pro life. You may not necessarily agree with the sentiment that all republican voters are pro life, but if you're voting for a republican you know what you're getting and that is someone who will select a pro life judge if possible. Same with a Democrat, they will always legislate policy for pro choice. For a majority of republican voters this is a key issue.

This is the reason I've never voted Republican in my life because I know that they will make policy decisions supporting pro life.

Again you're ignoring the question and still proving to be a fake Christian.
 

tommygun711

You don't have the capability for mayhem
Jun 4, 2013
13,466
4,772
Remember when I told everyone I would bring the Biden haters Swollen, Bach, and Tommy into the cult of sweet Uncle Joe?


Mission accomplished
I didn't vote for Biden because of what you have said on here. :lol:

I ultimately voted for Biden because I view him as the lesser evil. Harm reduction. While I like parts of his campaign platform, I kind of expect him to be a shit president.

I will be seriously impressed and happy if Biden does a small fraction of what he says he will do. In fact I will also give you credit if it happens. Best case scenario, we will get small steps towards some progressive objectives.

While politicians can certainly change their mind on the issues... I am not happy with Bidens record.
 
May 10, 2013
4,683
3,755
The core belief of Christianity has nothing to do with abortion. Do you need my help here?

In the eyes of true Christians supporting abortions is murder. Doesn't matter if it's justified or not. I agree with abortions, but at the same time I acknowledge it for what it is, the taking of a human life.


Being pro choice is not the same as advocating for abortions. I think that a young girl that is raped should not have to carry the rapists baby for nine months if she does not want to. One may as well advocate rape if one believes that such is an appropriate way to force life into this world.

I'm pro choice and I acknowledge that we are ending a life. It's still murder. The fetus had a heart beat after 6 weeks.
 
Oct 22, 2012
5,862
1,215
Being pro choice is not the same as advocating for abortions. I think that a young girl that is raped should not have to carry the rapists baby for nine months if she does not want to. One may as well advocate rape if one believes that such is an appropriate way to force life into this world.
Yes exactly. By US standards I'm pro-choice but stand against late term abortions, unless it involves the health of the woman carrying. I concur fully on the rest.
 
Last edited:
Reactions: steviebruno
Oct 22, 2012
5,862
1,215
Do we apply this dilemma to say American Jewish folk? 80% make up a pretty decently sized liberal voting block, do we raise the Torah and Tanakh with them too?
 

steviebruno

CHB NYC Delegate
Jun 5, 2013
17,576
7,768
New York City
Those are two entirely different topics. The 2nd amendment has nothing to do with being pro life or pro choice. I'm a pro choice and 2nd amendment supporter.

Abortion is a partisan issue, simple as that. If you're voting for a Democrat you're pro choice. If you're voting for a Republican you're voting pro life. You may not necessarily agree with the sentiment that all republican voters are pro life, but if you're voting for a republican you know what you're getting and that is someone who will select a pro life judge if possible. Same with a Democrat, they will always legislate policy for pro choice. For a majority of republican voters this is a key issue.

This is the reason I've never voted Republican in my life because I know that they will make policy decisions supporting pro life.

Again you're ignoring the question and still proving to be a fake Christian.
Yes, abortion is a partisan issue. Thank you. It is not, however, an issue of faith.

... Not any more, or less, than support for the 2nd Amendment, even after babies got mowed down in Sandy Hook.

Support for abortion rights isn't an advocation for the act... it is an advocation for a woman to have the right to choose. It is an advocation for the woman (or young girl) to have the procedure done safely, not in some backwoods alley... or at home with a wire hanger. You should probably research how abortions were done before it was allowed to be practiced by licensed personnel, develop a better argument, then come back.

I guess that you consider most black Protestants "fake Christians". I couldn't care less what an idiot like you think of me, and I feel no need to prove myself.
 
Oct 22, 2012
5,862
1,215
I didn't vote for Biden because of what you have said on here. :lol:

I ultimately voted for Biden because I view him as the lesser evil. Harm reduction. While I like parts of his campaign platform, I kind of expect him to be a shit president.

I will be seriously impressed and happy if Biden does a small fraction of what he says he will do. In fact I will also give you credit if it happens. Best case scenario, we will get small steps towards some progressive objectives.

While politicians can certainly change their mind on the issues... I am not happy with Bidens record.
In your absence, many have come to realise he's the true progressive we need. Imperator Biden.

Biden is that far left candidate that Trump portrays him as though, @Pedderrs even said Biden has the same devoted base that Donnie has. Maybe he's right, and that I, along with others, share the same fervour as the MAGAs.

I quoted @Bachafach^^^ a couple pages back.
 
Reactions: tommygun711