2 points ·
"significant penalties"
Joined
2 points ·
"significant penalties"
19 points ·
Why would he care? What's trump gonna do? Stop sucking his dick and build his own camps in the US? That won't fly for at minimum several months yet l, even with his bloodthirsty base and he knows it. The US is a global paria at this point. There's no one else trump could get to take them. To misquote a spudbrained dipshit "trump doesn't have the cards". If he wants to do something with the prisoners once he has them, trump can't afford to object
3 points ·
I mean, it would make no sense to call me a bot so yeah
2 points ·
Wait I'm confused. Did you just admit to being a bot account?
6 points ·
North Korea is balmy too. I just don't get why anyone would risk it
1 points ·
Being South American doesn't make it any less likely to be put into a concentration camp for jaywalking
Despite recent events, the camps weren't built with holding North Americans in mind...
112 points ·
I mean I guess but I'm more disturbed by the fact that they have so much tourism given the fact they've had concentration camps for years
Who the fuck was going to El Salvador?
6 points ·
Are you suggesting we should feel bad about something here?
8 points ·
I mean... Russia would own Ukraine by year three of this war and wouldn't be using WW2 munitions if they were prepared and strong. There's *something* to be said about the Russian military preparedness
0 points ·
If you were in Thailand or China and you posted what you did, you're even more of a moron than I thought.
I reject your false framing. You're conflating society and the government in your question.
To answer the question I'm pretending you meant to ask: No, The government should not have the requisite monopoly of violence necessary to enforce speech laws. It is a human right. Any sanction should be exclusively received from society.
1 points ·
Except you can and projecting your beliefs onto others is the literal definition of society. You can't *not* project your beliefs onto others
We are not bystanders. All societies are negotiated both within them between members and between members and observers outside. The idea that anyone should forgo their opinion on another culture is naive and asinine. You're asking for all social exchange to stop in order to preserve an arbitrary set of rules in amber. The system you want to uphold as precious is both not real, and not valuable enough to justify the cost
Oh also, free speech *is* an inalienable right. In fact I'd go so far as to say learning it's inalienable is how you learned the word inalienable. Free speech is a human right. Anyone anywhere who is limiting it is commiting a crime against humanity. The opinion of the people in charge doesn't change that. That's literally how inalienable rights work. So, no fucking clue what you were on about there
Also also, if you were Canadian, what trouble could you possibly get in being critical of Thailand? You're either an insane coward or a liar for that one
3 points ·
Not being invested enough to engage isn't pathetic, it's the normal response. It's not pathetic to not be chronically online my dude
I don't doubt op has a stalker, but not commenting everywhere isn't what makes them pathetic. It's all the times when the stalker *is* engaging that are pathetic, not the times when they aren't
2 points ·
Most of the time it's accompanied by "sins of the father" rhetoric where nothing changes but we'll see I guess
15 points ·
They're admitting that now dead people did bad things a long time ago. Not exactly impressive
19 points ·
No. And I very much doubt they'll agree to it seeing as trump already threw away all his leverage over them. They have no reason to listen to anything America has to say anymore