I'm fascinated by your continued inability to grasp something that I've tried to explain to you very patiently several times. This was not a foreseeable result three months ago. Projecting the present onto the past like this is utterly meaningless: the absolute apex of confirmation bias.Originally Posted by 2Bad
Beast's Lair: Useful Notes
(Lightweight | PDF)
Updated 01/01/15
If posts are off-topic, trolling, terrible or offensive, please allow me to do my job. Reporting keeps your forum healthy.
Seika moderates: modly clarifications, explanations, Q&A, and the British conspiracy to de-codify BL's constitution.
Democracy on Beast's Lair
A seat with ATL suburbs that Trump won by 1.5% is not 'Deep South' by most stretches of the imagination. This is what I mean by writing accurately.
Suburbs are Republican bread and better just as much as hollers are, you know that perfectly well.
E: I mean isn't the 6th like, 75% white, that's cookie cutter southern suburb
It doesn't fucking matter what was or wasn't forseeable, why are you not getting this? She lost her party majority and is liable to collapse completely within months. She fucked up, the end.
E: I have a host of problems with the Napoleon comparison but if we must run with that: it doesn't matter if he thought he could hit Alexander and create a second Austerlitz if he did so, it only matters that he didn't.
Last edited by 2Bad; June 27th, 2017 at 05:13 PM.
And this doesn't make calling the election wrong. It makes avoiding debate during the election wrong. It makes the tire fire of a manifesto wrong. It makes the Tories' endlessly mocked slogans wrong. But, on the eighteenth of April, May was making a sane and sensible decision.
Beast's Lair: Useful Notes
(Lightweight | PDF)
Updated 01/01/15
If posts are off-topic, trolling, terrible or offensive, please allow me to do my job. Reporting keeps your forum healthy.
Seika moderates: modly clarifications, explanations, Q&A, and the British conspiracy to de-codify BL's constitution.
Democracy on Beast's Lair
Imperium May-us
No, it by definition makes it wrong. She declared war and effectively lost. It would therefore have been better not to declare war.
As an aside though it still probably was better that she didn't go to debates, since between her awful speaking skills and literally 19th century policies that would have mostly been Corbyn beating her with a cricket bat.
Declaring war when all signs point to an overwhelming and total victory is not a dumb move.
It is a largely meaningless risk when you already control the contested territory.
"The Russians" wanted peace. Alexander, on the other hand, didn't, and this greatly angered the nobility. However, as in the reign of Catherine II and again later under Nicholas I, the nobles forgot that they were in an increasingly absolutist state and couldn't do much. Alexander was shrewd with his choices of generals in a time when Russia had an excellent crop of such, and his denial of resources to the French invaders was not only unprecedented, it was also controversial. It was a gamble that cost the lives of a million serfs, not to mention the soldiers lost in battle, but ultimately one that Alexander made bank on. Western leaders loved him, and Russia was definitively brought into the fold of European politics as an equal player - for better or for worse.
Napoleon won a number of important battles, and against other leader perhaps Borodino would have been the nail in the coffin, but Alexander refused to have peace. Russian winter and geography hadn't much to do with the failure of the invasion; Russian territory was trampled on successively by Lithuanians, Poles, and Swedes in their times. By the time the winter had set in, the war had arguably already been decided. He invaded in July, which was the intelligent thing to do as he avoided both the winter and the rasputitsa. Winter is certainly one danger of the Russian landscape, but that can be prepared for; you can't deal with mud in quite the same way.
It wasn't a matter of Napoleon not being 'smart,' but his goal (defeating Britain economically) being too important to give up, the stakes (the promised liberation of Poland, his fragile alliance with Prussia+Austria) being increasingly high, and Alexander showing exceptional tenacity and capacity for sacrifice. If anything, Napoleon's chief failure was diplomatic, not military. He refused to compromise or step back on the issue of Poland, and when terms of peace were given to him - even remarkably favourable ones, at times - he made it clear he would only accept a full victory. Difficult, no doubt, but all ambitious things are so. It's easy to judge with 200 years of distance between then and now, and the modern lens of past events made quite comfortable with the rise of armchair history.
Anyhow, that's off the topic, I just felt like making a point there. I don't feel like joining in with the main debate because talking back and forth with Rodyle is like playing squash.
<NEW FIC!> Revolution #9: Somewhere out there, there's a universe in which your mistakes and failures never happened, and all you wished for is true. How hard would you fight to make that real?
[11:20:46 AM] GlowStiks: lucina is supes attractive
[12:40] Lace: lucina is amazing
[12:40] Neir: lucina is pretty much flawless
ilu2 5
I would make two additions though: on the diplomatic front, Napoleon cost himself a lot by continuing to keep Talleyrand around after repeatedly choosing to not do what Talleyrand said, because then the foremost diplomat in Europe was now telling Alexander, who really WAS tempted by the whole "oh we'll be the twin imperial staves of europe" pitch, not to make peace with Napoleon under any circumstances.
Of course Talleyrand was also one of the ones at Vienna who would rush around trying to pull the rug out of Alexander's feet, along with Metternich of course, because Russia being at the table didn't mean that anyone actually wanted Russia involved in affairs in the West at all. Can't have those Easterners overstepping their bounds.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-40418457
I don't see what the problem with letter grades was
Wouldn't that mean the Democrats should have picked Bernie.
He never sleeps. He never dies.
Battle doesn't need a purpose; the battle is its own purpose. You don't ask why a plague spreads or a field burns. Don't ask why I fight.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-40408576
Survey suggests more Brits supports higher taxes.
The view that it was acceptable to use legal loopholes to pay less tax was most strongly felt among people who were better off
How very British...
"Man hit by bus, only to get up and walk into a pub to order a beer."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017...it-bus-thrown/
"Here's a bangin lil' tune about takin' on The Man!"
(Check out my Super Special Awesome Servant Compendium here)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england...yside-40419819
Police chief during the Hillsborough disaster to face manslaughter charges.
I can't tell from my phone if that story is old news from when old senaturle (I just made that up, plz don't steal!!!) said the exact same thing or if the writer and editor conventiany ignored that he did so two days ago when putting together there list of how this is totes new y'all!
I'll admit I didn't read the story, it's just a very good tweet.
I do love the "If we don't get together, we may have to govern like we were intended to" tone.
Binged All Of Gundam In 4 Years, 1 Week and All I Got Was This Stupid Mask
FF XIV: Walked to the End
Started Legend of the Galactic Heroes (14/07/23), pray for me.
Posting Permissions
