The crusades were a sham. The pope and the Roman empire were headquartered in Constantinople and they (Byzantines) were at war with the Seljuk Turks and were being attacked from other sides as well. They had a long history of hiring mercenaries to fight for them. They found a new source of willing mercenaries in nobles of Europe that were promised riches and plunder if they would drive out the Seljuks and others. The rank-and-file were promised a share of the riches and pardon for their sins. The whole thing was about shoring up the Byzantine Empire and the Pope against enemies.

This discussion loops back on itself. Scarcity of resources is directly tied to population growth. Population growth is directly related to keeping young people alive long enough to reproduce. More population equals more bodies to field a standing army, which lets you enter a war, which results in deaths, which affects not only the immediate population, but all of those young people who won't be having kids. There are entire fields of study about how the world has been shaped following a war that kills off the "able-bodied men". Wars also tend to produce great leaps in all manner of technology, especially medicine, which keeps younger people alive longer. Wars also tend to be followed by long periods of peace, which allows societies to focus on living.

However, people tend to throw around numbers without context. During the Civil War, over 1million people died from various things related to the war... 99% Americans. Only about 300,000 of those were combat deaths on the battlefield. A full 600,000 soldiers died of disease. At the time, 1 million people, both soldiers and civilian (about 3% of the population) was a significant amount.

However, consider that in WWII, the USA lost "only" about 420,000 TOTAL in the War... at the time, that amounted to around 0.32% of the population of the country. I think people tend to assume that number is far greater than it actually is.

Consider that the Soviet Union lost almost 30 million in WW2..

democrats love their constituents.

Joe do you find it weird that Andy McCabe admitted to lying to FBI witch hunt investigators, was.confronted about it, but never faced an indictment or serving jailtime like others who did the same; some unintentionally?

No.

https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.mia...95b0895559.png

cool just checking.

He was wrong at the front. Obama was in bed with Iran and liked to hand the over billions of dollars so they could then attack Trump later in his Presidency, so you could find and post this tweet years late.

Remember, Trump fired Bolton. Bolton's life-long dream was war with Iran.



you forgot about this tweet too:

https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.mia...4d6551e950.png

(To be clear, the piece of toast is laughing at you, not with you.)

You don't think Obama was Pro-Iran?

I think that the majority of elected / appointed public officials are pro "whatever provides the greatest benefit to myself and my supporters at any given time."

If there really are sleeper cells in the US that shed blood here, do you still think people will call trump racist for calling to end mass unchecked immigration into the US from enemy states?


Here's a really good read on .



Seems the sleeper cells in Iran are pretty happy about the airstrike:

Yes.


More specifically:

A: If Donald Trump personally developed a means to end world hunger without employing GMOs, cured all diseases without vaccinations or "big pharma," and ushered in an era of global peace and prosperity among all nations, races and religions, a certain segment of people would still find some reason to complain about how that is not only racist, but also misogynistic, paternalistic, homophobic, discriminatory against the mentally handicapped, discriminatory against low-income households, and also a form of rape.

Because, after all, Orange Man Bad.



B: By the same token, if Barack Obama had done the same thing, then people like Braineack would be trying to explain how it was all a part of some deep-state conspiracy and / or part of a false-flag operation.

Because, after all, Liberals Bad.

https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.mia...575a212ddf.jpg

Of course I'm somewhat biased, but I take a view similar to those of Milton Friedman (Reality vs Theory) and Dennis Prager (Left = feel good, Right = do good) which leads me to believe that your option A is much more likely than your option B. The two groups do not respond in the same manner.

DNM

This seems familiar:

https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.mia...cf20305ae2.png


Not a forgery. Here's the original: https://www.nytimes.com/1998/12/17/w...-iraq-air.html

Familiar, but nothing close to the same.

https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.mia...b40a7342ea.png

https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.mia...66a3084d0f.png