murdered meat bag
kiwifarms.net
american christians don't acknowledge greek or oriental christians as christians but accept yazidis as christians. usually because "works based christianity" is anti-chrisitanity.
Clashes between Jews and Palestinians in Jerusalem. Israel now invading Gaza according to (Questionable) Reports - If your thoughts are "I don't like either" you don't need to fucking post because it's been said 100 times you fucking dullard
- Thread starter KingCoelacanth
- Start date
Horizontal Horror
kiwifarms.net
Israeli settlers burn hay bales in the Palestinian village of Tuba.
Last edited by a moderator:
biozeminadae1
kiwifarms.net
Only Athens had a democratic constitution and modern ones only slightly resemble it. Modern democracy basically comes from America and post-Napoleon France and both are influenced by feudalism(feudal = federal = ally, i.e - the cities, the vassals, the clergy and the ruler(government)).
Altzek
kiwifarms.net
Athens was the "democracy" of only free male landowners, anyone else could fuck off, to the point of them not even having citizenship.
Likewise, modern democracies are and realistically can only be the democracies of professionals, bankers, corporate executives and other bourgeoise elements - forgive me the Marxese - together with think tankers, philosophers, NGO organizers, journalists etc ideologically propping the whole thing up. We can pretend as much as we want that everyone else's vote or opinion counts, but it only does so marginally at best.
Forget that, democracy was always a bad idea except for the relative minority that actually stands to benefit from it.
You can't have equality in a society of unequals. All societies are at their cores dictatorships of minorities.
The U.S. Constitution is devised to be a republic, that is, a government chosen by the people, but avoid the worst problems of democracy. That's why it contains anti-democratic institutions like the Supreme Court, which gets to say no, you can't do that when the government does specific things the Constitution either doesn't give it the power to do, or actively prohibits it from doing.
Similarly, the Senate deliberately contains anti-democratic principles, such as requiring supermajorities to do things, protecting the interests of the minority.
A republic is designed to allow the public to turn its wishes into policy outcomes (through representative democracy), but subject to safeguards against mob rule (pure democracy).
Also part of why Greek democracy (of the Athenian sort) worked was it was at the city-state level so the public all had at least some shared interests. Part of why it didn't is it allowed the fragmentation of Greek society to the point it couldn't defend itself against the Romans because there was no central military capable of repelling them.
Altzek
kiwifarms.net
You get to choose the legislative, but the strong executive you have in the form of your president is not elected "by the people", but by the states. The United States might be a "republic" (no shit, every state that isn't a monarchy is, and a republic can be democratic or otherwise. "Republic" is a broad term and it isn't mutually exclusive with "democracy"), but it's a federal state that has to take into account the opinions of fifty states, which are democratic republics in which both legislatures and governors are popularly elected.
To make a long story short: the United States is a federal democratic republic.
I'll never understand how you Americans keep playing on the meaning of "republic" and "democracy". I've only seen it from you.
Those are called "checks and balances", every "democracy" has them. Athens also had a constitution.
There was no mob rule in Athens considering that 80% of its population was excluded from the functions of its government. Mob rule is what anyone who has a stake in any sort of government, "democratic" or otherwise, wants to avoid.
It's easy to have shared interests when the same social class (free male landowners, 20% at best of the population) has access to decisionmaking, owns a stake in the state, and in fact essentially owns the state.
The same thing that happens in every state, "democratic" or otherwise, what changes is merely how the power of that minority is exercised.
And your conception of the classical Greek world is all over the place, if you're saying that all of Greece was democratic city-states you couldn't be wronger. Athens fought a war against a monarchy with two kings, leading a coalition of fellow monarchies, and lost.
Sparta's primacy over the patchwork of city-states WITH DIFFERENT GOVERNMENTS that was Greece was succeded by Thebes' oligarchy, and then again by Macedon's monarchy, etc etc, all the way to Rome's conquest, which wasn't necessarily of a military nature.
Greece had city-states and kingdoms, DEMOCRATIC AND OTHERWISE, that were much too attached to their independence to pull up a united front against foreign enemies unless subjugated by the strongest power, like Macedon, and even then subjugation didn't mean losing independence. This was the case everywhere, democracy or not.
Pre-Roman Italy was tribal republics and kingdoms that all at some point entered a treaty of alliance with Rome (and Rome remained in fact a league of multiple Italian polities who only owed it their armed forces all the way up to the Social War), much of Europe was tribes, etc etc.
You're speaking in terms of nation-states when there were none, and not even Rome was one.
That's what I said, minus emphasizing federalism in particular. The Electoral College is actually far more democratic than it was intended to be, when the electors were supposed to make their own decision as to electing the President. Now they're supposed to vote for a specific candidate regardless of what they think.
So the Presidency isn't as anti-democratic as it was intended to be, which is why I didn't go into it in an already giant textwall of dubious relevance to the thread.
I didn't say that anywhere, and only specifically and briefly talked about Athens, the closest analogue to modern democracy. The U.S. even initially had similar restrictions on the franchise, i.e. free land-owning males, although the rules about it varied wildly state to state. For instance, as early as 1790, women could vote in New Jersey. The only limitation on voting was having at least 50 pounds of assets of any sort. However, limitations on the franchise were universal at the outset.
And while Athens did have a constitution, it only barely resembled anything modern.
Last edited:
I wouldn't be too worried about it if their response is "snipers." Shooting down a military drone with a rifle is nearly impossible.
I hope this escales and Israel recalls all jews all over the world to fight for their rightful holy land of kosherdom!
Go go Jews, go back to Israel! Fight for your land (((and leave mine))) .
Go go Jews, go back to Israel! Fight for your land (((and leave mine))) .
Kotol
kiwifarms.net
Nonsense, that's what Americans are for.
This attack on an israeli drone is an attack on americans everywhere
Best bet is some tungsten shotgun shells, but if they want to waste rifle ammo, sure. Think goose hunting. As long as they take out a few of the propellers, drone will go down like nothing.
And falling bullets from idiots shooting in the air may kill some women and children too, which they'll promptly blame on Israel.
Don't call them that! They're undocumented pharmacists and importers.
It's just called "Gaza summer rain" there.
Its not like they care about that, they can be meatshields alive or dead.
When you shoot a goose, it's usually a couple hundred feet off the ground. What's the ceiling for surveillance drones? I think quad copters can do a couple thousand feet where fixed wing drones can probably do up to 10,000. They also move a lot faster than a goose. When you're trying to lead a target in the sky, you don't have a reference point in your sight picture so every shot taken with a traditional projectile is an uneducated guess at best. There's a reason why standard issue rifles don't have aircraft sights on them. Even a slow WWII aircraft flying low is extremely hard to hit. There are instances of people shooting down drones with bird shot, but it's usually a hobby drone that's hovering less than 100ft from the ground. It wouldn't surprised me if bird shot would bounce off most military drones because the velocity lost from shooting up. Now you're fighting atmospheric drag as well as gravity.
@Male Idiot @AnOminous According to an Army study, the terminal velocity for a .30 cal bullet is about 200mph (about 293.3 fps). I believe the average weight of a standard issue 7.62x39 bullet is 122 grains. Punch those numbers into a muzzle energy calculator and a falling AK round is distributing about 23.31 ft/lbs of energy to whatever it hits. That's close to the energy of a horizontally fired paintball (about 51 grains moving at about 300fps for 10.9 ft/lbs of energy.) Firing bullets into the air isn't as fatal of an endeavor as people think it is.
Last edited:
From my experience, smaller quadcopters are practically invisible past 120-150 feet. If they can still see them, they should be able to reach them with goose shot. Something like #7 TSS should be able to wreck the propellor blades pretty easily, even without much energy left.
And yeah, it is harder to gauge distance with various drones than geese, as geese are usually of a constant size.
Edit: For reference, the drones in question are most likely something like this:
Last edited:
Similar threads
The Zionist state is now fighting on four fronts as protestors mass at the Lebanese and Jordanian borders, while it's cities "domestic tranquility" breaks down to mayhem
