Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

[Sheb]

According to wikipedia, the vote was a "participation process", because their "non-referendum popular consultation" was blocked by the Spanish Supreme Court.

Of course, the Spanish government has no intentions of letting a real referendum happens.

[Owlbread]

According to wikipedia, the vote was a "participation process", because their "non-referendum popular consultation" was blocked by the Spanish Supreme Court.

Of course, the Spanish government has no intentions of letting a real referendum happens.

Yes. As I said the purpose of the vote is to take the results to the United Nations/EC and seek international support for a real referendum.

[Sheb]

Tough luck with that. It's not like either of those got power to force the Spanish anyway.

[Zangi]

It mostly means that the Spanish will be sweating bullets since it gives weight to the Catalans bid.  At least it would mean they'd have to either concede autonomy and/or demonize the bid for independence with even more might.

[Helgoland]

Dangerous Brinkmanship: Close Military Encounters Between Russia and the West in 2014

[Guardian G.I.]

The source is rather questionable, but anyway: apparently Winston Churchill urged the American government to start a nuclear war against the Soviet Union in 1947, when the USSR had no nuclear weapons of its own.
If it's true, it's a fine example of the West's peaceful intentions towards the Soviet Union and Russia.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

Guardian, you've used nationalists and state propaganda to back your beliefs, and that's one thing, but if you start deploying the Daily Mail you have truly lost your way.

[MonkeyHead]

The source is rather questionable, but anyway: apparently Winston Churchill urged the American government to start a nuclear war against the Soviet Union in 1947, when the USSR had no nuclear weapons of its own.
If it's true, it's a fine example of the West's continuosly peaceful intentions towards the Soviet Union and Russia.

The only thing we can be sure of in a report from the Daily Mail is that it will be biased in some way to "Good Old British Values" - in other words, generally full of half truths and omissions to make sensationalist headlines that its right wing readership will swallow up in a nice display of confirmation bias. Chances are this "report" will feature nowhere else with any kind of reputation for journalistic integrity, save for right wing mouthpieces that cite the Daily Mail directly.

[Guardian G.I.]

Guardian, you've used nationalists and state propaganda to back your beliefs, and that's one thing, but if you start deploying the Daily Mail you have truly lost your way.

As I said before, the source is questionable.
Daily Mail quotes the book by some journalist named Thomas Maier that is currently unreleased. It's not clear if Churchill quotes about how "the only salvation for the civilisation of the world would be if the President of the United States would declare Russia to be imperilling world peace and attack Russia" is genuine or the invention of Daily Mail itself.

[Descan]

Yeah, Winston Churchill was notorious for wanting to go to war with Stalin after Hitler was taken out. Operation Unthinkable and all that. He though the Red Army would attack first, and that the only solution was to impose British and American will over the Soviets. The military leaders didn't go for it though, considered it unfeasible.

Fortunately he was booted out of office, he didn't win the election. (I think it was because Britain was tired of war, and he was a war leader, so they didn't want him leading the peace.)

[USEC_OFFICER]

The source is rather questionable, but anyway: apparently Winston Churchill urged the American government to start a nuclear war against the Soviet Union in 1947, when the USSR had no nuclear weapons of its own.
If it's true, it's a fine example of the West's peaceful intentions towards the Soviet Union and Russia.

Eh, I wouldn't be surprised if it was true. Churchill was fiercely anti-communist after all, and not afraid to say it. Though with that being said, I'm not sure what the point of that article is trying to say. The Cold War was a different time period after all, and the people in charge back then aren't in charge now. We can't take the words of someone 50 years ago as gospel for the policies of the people ruling the country today. It'd be a bit like assuming that since Cato the Elder said 'Carthago delenda est' thousands of years ago, modern-day Italy wants to salt Tunis's fields and wipe them off the map. It's just silly fear mongering or whatever you want to call it.

[Sergarr]

Well it is known that Churchill really hated communism, so him advocating the West to use any advantage possible to defeat it is not surprising.

[smjjames]

Question for you guys out of curiosity, no idea if you have a system that uses districts in the way we do in the House of Representatives here in the US, do you have any problems with gerrymandering, as the term goes?

Edit: could have checked wiki. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerrymandering#National_examples_of_gerrymandering

Still wondering how you deal with it though.

[MonkeyHead]

Most democratic nations have more than 2 parties involved in the law making process, making such a behaviour improbable to carry through the due legal processes.

That said, this makes for some interesting reading on the matter: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerrymandering#National_examples_of_gerrymandering

[10ebbor10]

In addition, not using FPTP voting eliminates the problem almost entirely.