Skip to main content

Recent Posts

91
DnD Central / Re: What's Going on in the Americas?
Last post by ersi -
Merkel said it - we need an European army.
But a European army won't work when it is powered by Russian oil, I'd assume.

Then again, Hitler made something like this almost work when he attacked Russia.
On February 11, 1940, Germany and the Soviet Union entered into the German-Soviet Commercial Agreement... The trade pact helped Germany to surmount the British blockade of Germany.[97] The main raw materials specified in the agreement were one million tons of grain, 900,000 tons of oil and more than 500,000 tons of various metal ores (mostly iron ore) in exchange for synthetic material plants, ships, turrets, machine tools and coal.[128] The agreement also contained a "Confidential Protocol" providing the Soviet Union would undertake purchases from third party countries of "metals and other goods" on behalf of Germany.
Do we want to be like Hitler?

Edit: This reference is not random. It was not too long ago when Merkel was ultra-cozy with Putin and they envisioned visa-freedom with Russia and even an eventual EU membership for Russia. This coziness had been established by earlier Bundeskanzlers who outlined more ways to bring in more Russian oil to Germany.
92
DnD Central / Re: What's Going on in the Americas?
Last post by Belfrager -
What is that spoiler thing at ensbb3 post?

From the perspective of the European powers of the day, a Divided States of America would have been preferable.
Europeans powers of the day, yesterday as today and, probably, tomorrow, are not exactly the best for Europe.
We still live under American protection.

Merkel said it - we need an European army.
93
DnD Central / Re: What's Going on in Eurafrica?
Last post by Belfrager -
Things in Portugal are beyond your capacity of comprehension,
94
... I assume you only have one way to go. The way many countries have gone. Ban them [guns].
Which country? Can you bring an example?

I'm not @SmileyFaze but I can at least respect his opinion. I'd do the same with you. Mine is well documented. I'd go over it again with proper cause to.
My opinion is also very well documented here, in essay-length posts.

The best documented opinion in this thread is SF's. Because it's the most simple-minded opinion: More guns! Well regulated means no regulation! Let's not be like those other countries where govt is evil, they take your guns away and you have no rights!

You are not SF, but you appear to willing to bring up a country for comparison, right?
95
DnD Central / Re: What's Going on in the Americas?
Last post by ensbb3 -
but this would just not be the same without the subtle historical expertise of rjhowie.
Indeed. You can't appreciate how insignificant it all was until compared to a proper empire's goings-on.

From the perspective of the European powers of the day, a Divided States of America would have been preferable.
You'd think so. One wonders why the BE didn't want to be more aggressive. Aiding the Confederates was yet another chance to slap the yanks in the face. Possibly even reconvene The King's Continental Congress for another session.
96
DnD Central / Re: What's Going on in the Americas?
Last post by jax -
Thus beginning the war of northern aggression.

I take that as an invite, and little is as delightful as discussing other people's civil wars, but this would just not be the same without the subtle historical expertise of rjhowie.

From the perspective of the European powers of the day, a Divided States of America would have been preferable.

On the bright side, judging from the current political threads we may have gotten them now, just a century and little later. That of course also applies to the Divided States of South and Central America.
97
You did not invite me explicitly, so there was nothing to reject. Not explicitly anyway.
It's a contextual thing. :)

What more do you find worth discussing or debating on this issue? In the absence of the other side, should we blow the apparent differences out of proportion on the same side we are on?

How else do we know if we agree or not? You assume a bit much.

Perhaps I'm the only one of us that remember how this ends between us. Raincheck? Have a good day.
98
I invited you to a debate. Rejection noted. Again.
You did not invite me explicitly, so there was nothing to reject. Not explicitly anyway.

What more do you find worth discussing or debating on this issue? In the absence of the other side, should we blow the apparent differences out of proportion on the same side we are on?
99
No idea what that means.

I invited you to a debate. Rejection noted. Again.
100
I see. SF wins, as usual. KO by name-calling.