Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?

Comment Re: We all know the reason why (Score 1) 449

And that kind of thinking is exactly why North Korea was allowed to develop nuclear weapons under Clinton, younger Bush and Obama. Most people are so isolated from actual power aspect of geopolitics, they no longer remember how to conduct themselves on this arena. Last US president who had any clue was Bush senior, as shown by his treatment of Russia right after collapse of USSR. And he ultimately applied too much stick or not enough stick, depending on how you look at the situation. But at least his actions demonstrated he understood how power works and how it should be used.

In this regard, Trump has indeed been a first US president in a while to remember how the system actually works. Mostly intuitively too it seems, which is even more surprising. Which is why people like you, utterly ignorant of this aspect, think he's going to start a nuclear war by answering the youngest Kim in the same language that youngest Kim speaks. The language you cannot understand.

Comment Re:Trump's public statements aren't tha to underst (Score 1) 449

You do realize that we're talking about Trump's account here, and not an imaginary one that you pulled out of your ass?

He makes a point of posting in a very specific way, which is clearly designed to push for certain agenda, and obfuscate his actual thoughts. To the point where many of the "oh we're smarter than him and we know we're thinking" types among the journalists keep getting it wrong with remarkable consistency.

Comment Re: We all know the reason why (Score 1) 449

So in your view, political violence is purview of the left only.

As I noted above, I use these things in the actual sense they're used. Not in the way that extremists on either side use them. National socialists are distinctly on the right, just like communists are distinctly on the left.

And both are indeed violent on ideological level.

Comment Re:A perfectly good idea (Score 1) 299

You seem to assume that some of what you listed is not in that category, and that this is just a qualitative difference. It's telling that your core question isn't on principles. It's "which items on my list are propagandistic enough?"

I on the other hand am arguing about the core principle of the issue. Which is why I just call spade a spade here, having been able to read Soviet propaganda in its original language and what it did to its targets, and having the excellent opportunity to compare the two.

Your refusal to engage in any kind of discussion on principles, and merely discussing the "shades of propaganda" is the exact same mindset as those people who voluntarily went in front of the NKVD shooting squads, "because our ideology demands it, and our enemies will win if I don't".

Slashdot Top Deals

I judge a religion as being good or bad based on whether its adherents become better people as a result of practicing it. - Joe Mullally, computer salesman