« First « Previous Comments 121 - 160 of 167 Next » Last » Search these comments
Yes, because they considered the statues "un-Islamic," and publicly said so. Just like how Stalin blew up cathedrals in the name of Communism.
I'm glad the USSR is dead, but I can entertain the idea that the US was actually helping the country at that time, although I'm probably being overly optimistic about that, considering Operation PBSuccess and Ajax.
I mentioned the 200-year monarchy to show that Afghanistan wasn't ALWAYS a hellhole of large antagonistic groups (though always had low level clan fighting) as claimed.
Forgot to mention the USSR poured huge sums into Afghanistan to extract resources as well in the 50s-80s and built pipelines to connect to their 'Stans in the North.
May be ww3 now
@VivekGRamaswamy
“Diversity” is not our strength. Our strength is what unites us across our diversity. Free speech. Self-governance. Meritocracy. TRUTH.
VivekGRamaswamy
“Diversity” is not our strength. Our strength is what unites us across our diversity. Free speech. Self-governance. Meritocracy. TRUTH.
Boom! Another truth bomb from Ramaswamy.
Democracy is supposed to be above any elite class, but it doesn't work if there is too much diversity.
Alle menschen seinen brider,
Veise, schwartze, gele, broyne.
S'iz and oysgetrachte meise...
No one emigrated to France to become French. No one emigrates to Italy to become Italian. It used to be that people emigrated to America to become “American.”
That last part is important. That used to be the glue that held us together. I fear we’re losing that.
In short, the fastest growing demographic in the modern world is also the one most opposed to liberal democracies and republics. That’s a problem.
... because it creates a pressure group inside each country that does that.
... because it creates a pressure group inside each country that does that.
Nair is explicitly conceptualizing DEI as a means of inserting a political police force whose task is to scrutinize nuclear facility personnel to ensure that only regime loyalists who think regime-approved happy thoughts are allowed near to the facilities. The idea that the primary threats to American nuclear infrastructure come from foreign adversaries is antiquated and racist; the real threat is now internal, posed by ‘domestic violent extremists’. ...
Just because someone looks foreign and speaks with an accent doesn’t mean that you should scrutinize them more carefully before letting them close to a nuclear reactor. It would be racist to operate on the assumption that Muhammed Al-Muhammed might be working for ISIS, or that Wang Wei could be an operative for the CCP. Conversely, just because James Jackson’s family has been in North Carolina since the 18th century and has fought in every war since the French and Indian is no reason to think he’s a loyal American.
In a sense, she isn’t wrong about this – this is an inherent complication introduced by mass immigration. A racially diverse population loses all external signifiers of belonging: neither appearance, nor language, nor faith can serve as a reliable in-group indicator. As the state peels away from the ethnic loyalties that once bound it together, it can no longer count on the default loyalty of its core population. The result is that everyone is under suspicion.
« First « Previous Comments 121 - 160 of 167 Next » Last » Search these comments
#diversity