Interesting developments in Italy

[#34fan]

3 hours ago, The_Dude said:

white slaves, can you believe it?!

 

Who wouldn't believe it?

 

Barbary/Ottoman pirates plagued the mediterannean and coastal Europe for hundreds of years. It was largely a separate affair from the Atlantic Slave trade.

[Deranged Rhino]

[TakeYouToTasker]

36 minutes ago, #34fan said:

 

 

What a pair of insufferable, pseudo-intellectual simps!

 

When did I ever deny the role of Africans in the slave-trade?... I just maintained that YOUR account, per usual, is largely incomplete, and devoid of any context. 

One thing I'll give Wa-po is that it accurately established European (Portuguese, British) fingerprints all over the crime scene.

 

Benin, (per your link) at the time was an expanding African kingdom at war with multiple tribes. I'm not sure why someone would think that Empirical expansion would be limited to

European  world powers. Trading enemy captives for things more useful, (like weapons, and metals)  was considered a cleaner and more profitable means of disposal.

However,  state-sponsored slave trading in Benin would not  seamlessly endure. 

 

At the heart of the  Atlantic slave trade was European and colonial demand.   Outside the Kingdom of Benin, the phenomenon of Africans selling other

Africans on an industrial scale was also driven by fear of European reprisals... For many tribal African slave traders the choices were clear.  1)Trade slaves. 2)Be taken as one

yourself. (with your  family)  3) Let the Europeans strike a deal with your rivals, who would gladly enslave, or annihilate you, with the unbelievably deadly

weapons furnished by their new white business partners. 

 

So if you're asking if someone put a gun to some African slaver's head, -The answer would often be yes. Yes they did.

The false narrative that Africans exclusively and ruthlessly sought to undo 'their own kind' is nonsensical, and valid only to those trying to condone by rationalization

a system that resulted in the death, torture, rape, murder, mutilation, and degradation of millions of human beings.

 

 

You lunkheads always pick the same two paths after someone dispels your bunk.

 

The subject is either deemed "too complex" to pursue, or your opponent, too stupid to discuss it with.

 

It's a particularly cowardly form of evasion that suits you both very well.

 

 

What the hell are you reading that this is your understanding of the subject matter?  Just the linked Op-Eds?  I have to assume that's the case, because your limited understanding of the dynamics seems to be not much more than a half-digested regurgitation of those articles, which do little more than work to drive an agenda.

 

There are economic studies spanning decades studying this subject, some more complete than others, most of which agree with nothing you've said.  There are many scholarly, and in places divergent, opinions about the African economy between the years of 1700 and 1850.  The one point they nearly uniformly agree on, is that African nations consciously made the choice to shift their economic imperatives to the purpose of creating slaves because of effective demand and opportunity cost.

 

They chose to create supply in order to satisfy demand.

 

But you don't know any of this, and worse, you refuse to learn it.  So why, then, would anyone waste any time discussing complex subjects with someone who refuses to avail themselves of abundant available research, instead succumbing to bull **** agenda driven un-truth for no other reason other than it prevents them from having to challenge the basic assumptions of their own myopic world view?

 

My answer is that they wouldn't. 

 

And that you're the problem.

 

 

Edited June 7, 2018 by TakeYouToTasker

[#34fan]

1 hour ago, TakeYouToTasker said:

 

What the hell are you reading that this is your understanding of the subject matter?  Just the linked Op-Eds?  I have to assume that's the case, because your limited understanding of the dynamics seems to be not much more than a half-digested regurgitation of those articles, which do little more than work to drive an agenda.

 

There are economic studies spanning decades studying this subject, some more complete than others, most of which agree with nothing you've said.  There are many scholarly, and in places divergent, opinions about the African economy between the years of 1700 and 1850.  The one point they nearly uniformly agree on, is that African nations consciously made the choice to shift their economic imperatives to the purpose of creating slaves because of effective demand and opportunity cost.

 

They chose to create supply in order to satisfy demand.

 

 

Bottom line:  I can link to research and media backing my point of view. You can't do the same for your bunk. 

 

I would argue that these strangely absent 'economic studies' don't take into consideration choices those under threat of annihilation will make that may not be in

 

their long-term best interest... Your failure to acknowledge the violent nature of European/colonial greed, and accept that violence as a means of manipulating militarily

 

inferior cultures proves that the only bullsh_t  agenda here is yours.   I'lll just add this to the pile of bunk you trot-out to back the absurd notion of clean

 

European hands in the Atlantic slave trade . -With this now de-bunked classic.

 

On ‎5‎/‎31‎/‎2018 at 3:49 PM, TakeYouToTasker said:

 Hell, the first slave owner in what is now considered America was black.  Until he won a court case in which he refused to free an indentured servant after his period of servitude had expired, slavery didn't exist here.

 

 -BUNK!

 

2 hours ago, Foxx said:

i guess it depends on who's perspective is viewing a proposed wall. i'm quite positive that GUS doesn't like someone outside of their sanctioning getting their drugs into the US and invading their turf.

 

On the bright side, a dope-sick America might look to big pharma for help.

Edited June 7, 2018 by #34fan

[The_Dude]

2 hours ago, #34fan said:

 

Who wouldn't believe it?

 

Barbary/Ottoman pirates plagued the mediterannean and coastal Europe for hundreds of years. It was largely a separate affair from the Atlantic Slave trade.

 

The f’ing Muslim Barbary pirates...that’s what you swung with? But yes, Muslims LOVE slaves. Still do. Horrible religion. Horrible culture. Horrible people. 

[DC Tom]

39 minutes ago, The_Dude said:

 

The f’ing Muslim Barbary pirates...that’s what you swung with? But yes, Muslims LOVE slaves. Still do. Horrible religion. Horrible culture. Horrible people. 

 

So did Christians.  Jews probably did, too.  Romans, Greeks, Egyptians, Persians, Mongols, Japanese, two millennia of Akkadian speakers.

 

Slavery's arguably the natural order of humanity, the past century or so being an aberration.  And even then not for any moral reason, but because mechanization and industrialization made it obsolescent.

[The_Dude]

2 hours ago, DC Tom said:

 

So did Christians.  Jews probably did, too.  Romans, Greeks, Egyptians, Persians, Mongols, Japanese, two millennia of Akkadian speakers.

 

Slavery's arguably the natural order of humanity, the past century or so being an aberration.  And even then not for any moral reason, but because mechanization and industrialization made it obsolescent.

 

...that’s more or less my point. 

 

But, I’ll argue that once upon a time slavery was the benevolent option. Option b was death. 

[GG]

2 hours ago, DC Tom said:

 

So did Christians.  Jews probably did, too.  Romans, Greeks, Egyptians, Persians, Mongols, Japanese, two millennia of Akkadian speakers.

 

Slavery's arguably the natural order of humanity, the past century or so being an aberration.  And even then not for any moral reason, but because mechanization and industrialization made it obsolescent.

You can remove probably. Geez, you never read the Old Testament

[DC Tom]

1 hour ago, GG said:

You can remove probably. Geez, you never read the Old Testament

 

Not all of it, but I was pretty sure they enslaved the Caananites or Moabites or someone...

[#34fan]

6 hours ago, The_Dude said:

 

The f’ing Muslim Barbary pirates...that’s what you swung with? But yes, Muslims LOVE slaves. Still do. Horrible religion. Horrible culture. Horrible people. 

 

Well,

 

There's 1.6 Billion worldwide... .Turks, Chechens, Kurds, Arabs, Pakistanis, Malays, Indonesian, Palestinian, Kazakh... A bunch of others I can't remember off

 

the top of my head. I'm sure even you would be able to find a friend in there somewhere.

 

Edited June 8, 2018 by #34fan

[The_Dude]

5 hours ago, #34fan said:

 

Well,

 

There's 1.6 Billion worldwide... .Turks, Chechens, Kurds, Arabs, Pakistanis, Malays, Indonesian, Palestinian, Kazakh... A bunch of others I can't remember off

 

the top of my head. I'm sure even you would be able to find a friend in there somewhere.

 

 

Even I have. Yes, yes I have. 

 

I remember when I was a younger lad, I just turned 19, and Baghdad had just fallen by the time I got there with 3/2 ACR. My platoon was tasked with guarding the central bank district in Baghdad. This was right after the fall. My platoon befriended the local imam who’s mosque resides in the area we guarded. He had three kids. He and his 3 kids were Haj, but we befriended them. As soon as we were reassigned that family was killed. Haj hates everything, even Haj. It is a fact. Their religion has no place amongst civilized people. 

[DC Tom]

7 hours ago, The_Dude said:

 

Even I have. Yes, yes I have. 

 

I remember when I was a younger lad, I just turned 19, and Baghdad had just fallen by the time I got there with 3/2 ACR. My platoon was tasked with guarding the central bank district in Baghdad. This was right after the fall. My platoon befriended the local imam who’s mosque resides in the area we guarded. He had three kids. He and his 3 kids were Haj, but we befriended them. As soon as we were reassigned that family was killed. Haj hates everything, even Haj. It is a fact. Their religion has no place amongst civilized people. 

 

You were with an ACR, in Baghdad, immediately after the end of major operations.  Most of - and your strongest - interactions with Muslims were people who wanted to kill you.

 

That is the highest order of confirmation bias.  And I'm not blaming you for it - it's normal.  But that doesn't make it any less confirmation bias.

[The_Dude]

3 hours ago, DC Tom said:

 

You were with an ACR, in Baghdad, immediately after the end of major operations.  Most of - and your strongest - interactions with Muslims were people who wanted to kill you.

 

That is the highest order of confirmation bias.  And I'm not blaming you for it - it's normal.  But that doesn't make it any less confirmation bias.

 

So I got to Baghdad the first time (forgive my memory, it’s been a while) in May 2003 I think. 

 

That was actually the “good times.” Haj liked is then. For a couple months. Then it descended into **** around the time Paul ‘dipshit’ Brimmer fired the Iraqi army because they were Bathists. He fired all the Bathists. What an idiot. Then it went to ****. 

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

5 minutes ago, The_Dude said:

 

So I got to Baghdad the first time (forgive my memory, it’s been a while) in May 2003 I think. 

 

That was actually the “good times.” Haj liked is then. For a couple months. Then it descended into **** around the time Paul ‘dipshit’ Brimmer fired the Iraqi army because they were Bathists. He fired all the Bathists. What an idiot. Then it went to ****. 

 

That was a singularly bad idea.

[The_Dude]

13 minutes ago, joesixpack said:

 

That was a singularly bad idea.

 

The worst. We immediately turned the Iraqi army into mercenaries. Easily added a decade. 

[#34fan]

44 minutes ago, The_Dude said:

 

The worst. We immediately turned the Iraqi army into mercenaries.

 

On the U.S. Payroll?.... -How did so many end up as Islamic state fighters?

[The_Dude]

21 minutes ago, #34fan said:

 

On the U.S. Payroll?.... -How did so many end up as Islamic state fighters?

 

Not on the US payroll. On Iran’s. When you fire a soldier they look for soldier work. So, we killed them. 

[#34fan]

1 hour ago, The_Dude said:

 

Not on the US payroll. On Iran’s. When you fire a soldier they look for soldier work. So, we killed them. 

 

I'll never argue that you don't have a point, or say that you aren't coming from a place with your take on Islam.. I just think Europe, especially France, Germany,

 

and Italy, have little choice now but to adapt.... The Muslim population in Italy has almost tripled since 1999... Going from 520k to 1.4 million in 2016... France

 

has a Muslim population of 6 million, -Germany, 5... Munich alone has received as many as 13,000 Syrian refugees per day!  -I see a very rough time ahead if

 

rules aren't established and vigorously maintained.

Edited June 9, 2018 by #34fan

[The_Dude]

20 minutes ago, #34fan said:

 

I'll never argue that you don't have a point, or say that you aren't coming from a place with your take on Islam.. I just think Europe, especially France, Germany,

 

and Italy, have little choice now but to adapt.... The Muslim population in Italy has almost tripled since 1999... Going from 520k to 1.4 million in 2016... France

 

has a Muslim population of 6 million, -Germany, 5... Munich alone has received as many as 13,000 Syrian refugees per day!  -I see a very rough time ahead if

 

rules aren't established and vigorously maintained.

 

“Where there is a will, there is a way!”

 

-Myanmar

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

http://www.breitbart.com/jerusalem/2018/06/10/erdogan-predicts-war-between-the-cross-and-crescent-over-austria-mosque-closures/

 

I'll just leave this here.