Political Thread
At the time of typing (12:12pm) there is a shit load of political and welfare based debates happening across the many threads, so I thought it would be worthwhile putting up a whole new thread dedicated to said discussions.

Put whatever you want concerning any political events or debates, providing they also follow Konachan's posting rules.

Do keep in mind that everyone is entitled to his or her own opinion and there is going to be a difference in opinion. If you don't like what is being discussed, try not to hammer your own opinion on and on as if it is the only right opinion.

Most important of all, have fun and remember this is the internet where crazy shit happens :D
Well... I'm not sure how well this thread will be taken. For my sake it's fine, especially if it means that political discussions stay here and out of the friendly topic. Just remember that almost everybody will argue over politics, also why there's no "religious thread".

I will do my best to stay out of it though, since nobody agrees with my political beliefs.

Have fun ;)
Just seemed a good idea that may or not happen :P
Well, if it simply puts an end to the political talk because no one wants to post in the "Political Thread", that works too.
This is a bad idea. One of the quickest way to get people to start fighting is to talk about politics and where your beliefs stem in reference to them. Nothing good can come from opening up this can of worms, and I anticipate a lot of screaming and flaming as a result.
You read the last few pages on the friendly topic? :P

Besides, if no one wants to put anything here, then so be it. I just didn't like the idea of the Friendly Topic filling up with such agro.
Well, I tried to keep politics out of my posts there and comment only on:
  • The lack of globally accepted ethics using hypothetical situations.
  • Faulty generalizations and what the crime rate is more likely related to.
But I did end up making a casual remark on regulations and expressing my view that (generally speaking) just keeping a group of people out seems like a peaceful, acceptable solution to a significant threat posed by an unidentifiable subset of that group.

If someone feels it's a terrible injustice to not be able to enter the US, or that it's better let them all in and then try to arrest the 5% (hypothetical percentage) that are killing people, that's a valid point of view as well. Like I keep saying, exactly where to draw the line is something people will have widely varying opinions on, everywhere from one extreme to another. There is no right answer (or they are all right answers).
Wait, what, it's an injustice to not enter a country that doesn't want you? Who's the retarded person? If you're of great value, there won't be a problem for you entering (i.e. work experience in a certain domain and stuff of the sort).
And there are a million ways to twist a point of view. I think what those two were saying is more like, "It's an offense to be denied access based solely on your religion, due only to the actions of others that share your religion (to no fault of your own or your own beliefs)." I can certainly understand that point of view, though I believe it to be the lesser of two evils, so to speak.
Oh, it is.

But I do believe that people don't even know what a nation is.
Zolxys said:
And there are a million ways to twist a point of view. I think what those two were saying is more like, "It's an offense to be denied access based solely on your religion, due only to the actions of others that share your religion (to no fault of your own or your own beliefs)." I can certainly understand that point of view...
Yep that was my pov. While I don't agree with keeping a group of people out because of terrorism I can also understand why you feel like that can be the most peaceful solution generally speaking.

Tensa said:
But I do believe that people don't even know what a nation is.
I thought it was extremely un-American to infringe upon the 1st amendment of the bill of rights.
......................................... I must have been REALLY tired yesterday when I wrote this and this to not link vf's post to the Muslim situation. When someone says "God", I just immediately think Christianity unless they specify otherwise.
Bengi said:
I thought it was extremely un-American to infringe upon the 1st amendment of the bill of rights.
What's the Bill of Rights?
No, don't link it. It's self explanatory why I asked.
I guess we can keep this thread going. People are gonna argue politics in the friendly topic again, i think it's fine to keep it in a seperate thread. As long as we can be civil about it! as Jack of Sound said in the intropost. And the political discussions should then stay here and not get dragged to the friendly topic. That's my opinion ^^
Visitors/Refugees.

Except for a country's citizens, no one has any right to enter a country, even diplomats. The US (as well as other countries) has on multiple instances denied entry to other countries official diplomats as well as many many others.

Any guest (non-citizen) has no right to expect to be able to stay in a country. A country can revoke a visa at any time, for any reason. The US has revoked visas, even residency permits for a variety of reasons, including criminality As Well As Political reasons.

There are two types: of refugees:

  • Those fleeing war or persecution and seeking asylum. By international Law, ONLY the first "safe" country these refugees enter is required to accept them. If these refugees move onward to other countries, they then become the second type of refugee =>
  • Economic Refugees - No country is required by any international agreement, UN convention or any other treaty that I am aware of, that requires ANY country to accept economic refugees.
Every refugee "fleeing" to Europe who is not from a recognized war zone can be "legally", by force if needed, be refused entry and returned to their home or originating country (eg Turkey).

Europe could "solve" this current refugee crisis very easily....if they had the political will to do so.
As I said, there aren't any politicians with a backbone. Except Victor Orban from Hungary and the Polish, to some extent. As well as the Slovaks or Czech.
With the exception of Bulgaria, none of the East European countries really had anything to do with this crisis. None of them were chanting the "Assad must go" mantra or supplying/training the not so "moderate" terrorists. Yet these countries are paying a heavy price as the refugee highway to Austria and onward to Germany for their EU association.

I single out Bulgaria because Bulgaria's stonewalling on SouthStream resulted in the Turk'Steam deal. I believe Turkey's strongman thought this pipeline deal was so important to Russia, that he had a free hand in Syria. A terrible miscalculation and that was just the first of his math mistakes. Bulgaria's ban on overflights is not going to be forgotten either. It is sad as Bulgaria has sacrificed more than Bulgaria will ever get from EU/US for their "sacrifice".
The EU is a mistake. Too much freedom for people from abroad. Needs to adopt Swiss toughness. They don't kid around.
Tensa said:
The EU is a mistake. Too much freedom for people from abroad. Needs to adopt Swiss toughness. They don't kid around.
Idk man, we got a swiss dude in the BDO guild. He seems pretty chill.
This was moved from the site suggestions forum:

Animeticklesmytoes said:
Wrong. I'm witnessing a hypocrisy and am addressing it as needed. Your self- destructing comment is as ignorant as Cuda's statement; it isn't that simple. You have chosen to ignore the fact that he started his little piss-ant mud slinging first. If you're going to take the low road with me then buckle up.

Listen, I moderate for two websites and contribute as a full-time writer for them as well. One is a closed military site for SOCOM veterans, and the other is a civilian tactical resource for law enforcement and likeminded others. I also write point papers for various military journals regarding issues of readiness, power-projection and various other evolving standards. I come to Kona as a relief for an otherwise serious daily schedule. I am rarely in a serious mood when I do.

As a moderator, If I had for one second come off with the shit that Cuda spewed with his grow-up statement toward any of my readers I'd be fired as a mod and a writer. Mind you, we're talking about adults here, not people discussing cartoons. If I come across as angry here, it's because I'm faced with the sheer stupidity of a bunch of young people whining that their vaginas were hurt by my comments. I'm not the only one here that is against homosexual content, but I am the one who has stood up to try and explain my stance, only to hear others whine about we horrible bigots. You may want to mind your own business at this point Dummy. Your last comment offers nothing. Now, if you'd like to actually offer something beyond a high school mentality of walking away from a hall scuffle, and would like to understand why my point of view is not only valid, but justified, then you may mail me.
@animeticklesmytoes

I'd like to know where you get your official statistics, saying that 97% of the global population is against homosexuality. I don't remember being asked about this.

Then, I'd also like to point out that the userbase on Konachan is not 97% of the global population, if you asked every single member here about their opinion on homosexuality, I assure you that most of them won't give a damn.

I know that you are a grown up man, you should be able to act like one. This means, walking away from discussions like this before it gets out of hand, or if you must state your point, do so in a civil manner even if other people are not civil towards you. You should know this, especially if you are/was in the navy.

Third; you just told me your opinion on people talking down to the userbase on the websites that you moderate, however, you continue to do exactly that here.

I literally do not know 1 sinlge person in my circle of friends and contacts that are truly against homosexuality, new times are here. We don't hit women and lock them in the kitchen anymore either.

On another note, I literally told you to continue this discussion in another thread, yet you chose to ignore that. This will not happen again.
vf.nightcore said:
@animeticklesmytoes
new times are here. We don't hit women and lock them in the kitchen anymore either.
Stating the current year isn't an argument.
Wait, men still hit women all the time...

Some women hit men too.
But contemporary society spurns such behavior. Such sad times when a Master can't strike his subservient.
You know you're welcome to hit me any time.

Anyway, I ain't got nothin' political to say. I'll see myself out.
Cade said:
Stating the current year isn't an argument.
I didn't :P
Cade said:
But contemporary society spurns such behavior. Such sad times when a Master can't strike his subservient.
Albeit that we not the best we can be, I think that humanity has evolved past the common use of such methods. Using violence is effective, yes, to some extent, however that is only because an action like striking someone is a direct "danger" to their survival in our animal brain. It's slow, but we're growing out of the use of animalistic behavior (metaphorically speaking, biting someone who has wronged you so they know not to do it again) and adapting the use of non-verbal communication to compliment the complexity of our brains and its ability to understand language and formulate rational action. It's only the beginning of what I'd say would be a slow 5000 year development, given the pace of human history, but realizing how smart we're capable of being goes a long way too.

Yeah....
vf.nightcore said:
More pointless drivel.
I never implied that 97% of the population was against homosexuality, I stated that only 3% of the current population was classified as homosexual. A few of you are poor excuses for mods, if you are taking single lines from the context of a statement and then twisting them to make some pro-homosexual point. Which was clearly the case with Cuda. You DON'T attack your user base. He could have acted like an adult and just d-mailed me, but he wanted to try (poorly) to humiliate me in a forum. And, did any of you mod step in about Matt's response before Tommy said something? No, you didn't. And the "times" have nothing to do with anything. This is a website and you nor Cuda own it. Its content are what the users would like it to be, or didn't you know that? Based on your various comments, you could easily infer that you're an illegal drug user; Is that so? Maybe the site's users wouldn't like to be associated with this kind of thing. Who knows, but there are more than just one kind of biased point of view now, aren't there Nightcore?

And as far as your threats go, I'd say the immature comment by Cuda warranted a specific comeback in any thread. Until his child-like comment, I was keeping my comments from insulting anyone directly. He did it first. Yep, I could have walked away, but I'm just following the obvious STANDARD SET BY A MOD. What does my being in the navy have to do with my comments? It's obvious you never served at all, and if you did, you failed to learn anything by it. And if you believe that I'm the only one against homosexual content here, then you need to find a new site to mod. Perhaps your sexual preference is affecting your "official" point of view here, and your job as well. That's not fair to ALL of the users here. As far as beating women and your kitchen remark...That makes about as much sense as Cuda's remark about not going to a portion of a department store. Really? Honestly, I miss the non-biased mods on this site. We all suffer for your twisted point of views, just as some may take offense to mine. Regardless, I'm now done with expressing my point on behalf of myself and the others who don't want to comment. I will abide by the majority vote of the site's users. I appreciate Matt's contributions and would be a hypocrite to take any stand against them, as he contributes far more than I ever have; I was just commenting as others did about a mild increase in male images that could easily be perceived to be homosexual in nature. I would just urge that Mods here not let their sexual preference to override their duties and thus their offhand comments in the forum or comments. I'll do the same.
Am I the only one who thinks that Donald Trump is a lot like Gilgamesh from the Fate Stay Night series? Both in terms of physical appearance and personality. I wonder if that makes Hillary Clinton Saber? Now that would make for a much more entertaining political fight!
Agos said:
Am I the only one who thinks that Donald Trump is a lot like Gilgamesh from the Fate Stay Night series? Both in terms of physical appearance and personality. I wonder if that makes Hillary Clinton Saber? Now that would make for a much more entertaining political fight!
And who would Bernie be?
I have not watched the Fate Stay Night series and know little about the characters - but I still would not insult those characters by equating them to politicians, particularly to US Presidential candidates rant