They let the germs and Soviets weaken themselves, they saw both as their enemies.

Saying that they only joined the war when it was clear that the Soviets were going to win is just ahistorical.

Again, only after the battle of Stalingrad decided the future outcome in 1943 did they enter the European theater.
Those are 2 facts and historically accurate.
Yes the Soviets were glad the west did a (small) part against the nazis.
But that only was a temporary marriage of convenience.
And again, they only went in to grab a piece of the loot as the opportunistic vultures they are so the Soviets wouldn’t get it.
Which they still could if they wanted to, and chase the combined western ‘allies’ out too if they decided to continue the war.
I’m certain they don’t teach that in most US schools but they do at West Point military academy BTW, in case you want to call that ahistorical again.
The US deserves to be shit on for all the awful things they do and did.
If you’re looking for a win for your country, WW2 is not it.
As I said, we Europeans became US vassals, same as the Japanese.
So no, they were not the good guys despite the liberator heroes propaganda BS.

The Japanese were slaughtering literally millions of Chinese people

Yes that’s awful but I guarantee you the US couldn’t care less about that.
The examples of the brutalities in the Philippines and other places in the area show enough about their attitude. (nothing has changed about that BTW)
I guess some people believe also they really want to help the Iranians from their evil government.
I repeat, they only did it out of self-interest, certainly not out of some humanitarian motivation.
And the same goes for their actions in Europe.

The sensible military experts knew moving their main base to Pearl Harbor was crazy and creating a juicy target.
They most definitely expected an attack from intercepted messages and other intelligence.
And the embargo on Japan from resources is at least an act of aggression if not war.
They knew the Japanese certainly saw it that way.

Of course the US didn’t fight fascism as many industrialists liked that ideology.
They only acted against them when they were sure they would lose against the Soviets.
From then on they actively helped to evacuate and save nazis for their future war against communism.

All of Europe would’ve been liberated by the Soviets.

only involved out of self-defense.

The oil embargo on Japan was a virtual declaration of war.
As always the US wants war to defeat their economic rivals.
In Europe they waited royally late until the decisive battle of Stalingrad in 1943.
The reason they ‘liberated’ western-Europe was to take a part for themselves and stop the Soviets from going all the way to the Atlantic.
Making Europe vassals to this day.
There was no self-defense only opportunistic self-interest.

Can you?

Funny because it was launched by Deutsche Bank.
All it will do is replace the existing national payment systems in a European one.
We have Payconiq in Be.
WERO can normally already be used in Be Fr and Ge.

Also, I don’t really see this as a politically motivated thing.
The EU will continue to be vassals and even more so.

Mussolini would be proud

I can smell the corporatism coming

Guess she’s not the only Karen.
You would probably cry about your human right to food being violated when a 3 star restaurant denies you entrance because you showed up in your filthy flip flops.
Just downvote like the other cowards who have no arguments so you look less like a fool and get on your way.
LOL

don’t you just shoot babies?

Never a bad time to mention that besides killing almost 3 people per day american cops also shoot a huge number of dogs per year.

The Department of Justice estimates that American police officers shoot 10,000 pet dogs in the line of duty each year. It is impossible to ascertain a reliable number, however, because most law enforcement agencies do not maintain accurate records of animal killings. The tally may be substantially higher, and some suggest it could reach six figures.
…some animals have been deliberately shot and killed under questionable circumstances, including through doors or while tied, running away, or hiding. Studies show that some officers shoot pets unnecessarily, recklessly, or in retaliation, and that subsequent civilian complaints are investigated inadequately. Moreover, not every animal that police officers shoot is a large dog that may be more likely to pose a genuine risk to human safety—or even a dog at all. Police claiming a threat to human safety have shot puppies, Chihuahuas, Miniature Dachshunds, and domestic cats, among other pets. In some tragic cases, bullets missed their nonhuman targets and injured or even killed human bystanders instead.

I’m glad she lost.

More than a billion people lack safe drinking water and almost two and a half billion live without access to sanitation systems.
It’s about getting people out of poverty, making sure multinationals don’t steal or pollute drinking water for their benefit,etc…
That’s the reason why the UN and other organizations declared it a universal human right.
Or on an individual level a dangerously dehydrated person in some desert should not be refused water.
This woman’s situation having to buy a bottle is in no way comparable and frankly it’s insulting.
That place is a high end ski resort.
She shouldn’t be surprised when they don’t want to serve tap water.
It’s a snobby attitude, “vulgar tap water is something the plebs drink!”
The kind of place where they also charge extras for the smallest of services.
We don’t have to like it but it’s the place she chose to stay in.
In no way did she not have access to water. If she really wanted to drink tap water she could’ve filled a bottle in her undoubtedly fancy bathroom. But probably she didn’t want to look like the a cheapskate.
So no, her human rights have not been violated.
This is rich Karen drama queen behavior.

Sugar tax is simple and highly effective.
What I see is they do not put much effort into it, certainly not compared with the witch hunt on tobacco.
Especially since a large percentage is suffering from obesity and only getting worse.
But as I said, electoral suicide.
Imagine paying 6x more for a soft drink, that would be the equivalent of tobacco taxes.

why and how would smokers contribute more?
As I said, taxes are extremely high on tobacco. 85%
Even disregarding the amount in general taxes smokers also pay for healthcare that alone is more than the cost of smoking to healthcare.
Unfortunately couldn’t find the study I read but it came down to a few 100 million surplus (in NL).

And yes not needing to pay pensions is a big part of the gains to to the state but also not having to pay for the plethora of other diseases the elderly invariably get.
And while obese people indeed have premature mortality that is often preceded by decades of chronic illnesses and care.
And same as smokers that includes increased risk of cancers.
Unlike most smokers very obese people often can’t perform physical labor the average human can.
There’s more, like logistics and how many hospital workers and specialized ambulances or equipment it takes to simply move the more extreme cases but I think this will do.
To be clear, I’m not defending smoking but the argument of how they don’t want to help smokers (basically addicts and victims) because it costs their health system is wrong.
Not to mention anti-social and selfish.
As I mentioned in the other comment, that’s a slippery slope.

Dead wrong.
The whole population benefits from what smokers pay.
From a study in NL it shows that they generate far more than what it costs in healthcare.
And it also said should the small percentage of smokers suddenly quit and live longer, the loss of income for the state and the extra cost of them living longer and needing more care would be unsustainable.

And if you want to be selfish and not have solidarity then let’s start about the much bigger cost of the SELF-INFLICTED diabetic epidemic.
They require an avg of 28 years of aid.
And almost no country wants to tackle that because of their opportunistic politicians.
Who cares about antagonizing a small percentage that smokes.
But the many sugar addicts poisoning themselves are too important for their precious votes to touch.
And those same hypocrite politicians can be seen regularly with a glass of alcohol (hard drugs) in their hand.
And as an edit, I don’t want to pay for your skin cancer treatment also, should’ve stayed out of the sun.

Yet they attack France for banning nicotine pouches and calling it an attack on the Swedish way of life.

Removed by mod

There are plenty of ML’s who would gladly and thoroughly debunk your other claims with plenty sources and evidence (as I hope they do).
As it’s a good thing to educate people.
But I just pointed to the most staggeringly ridiculous one showing you’re pretty far gone.
You need a lot of work and studying.
Too early in the day and too hot, I have other work to do.

It was also fascist.

LOL
you certainly didn’t fall for American propaganda.
IDK what the people using the idiotic term ‘leftists’ to describe themselves mean by it, but they usually aren’t left.
I think you’re far from figuring out the truth.