NWO/Illuminati US politics - Pt 3

Remove this Banner Ad

zill said:
Just admit you were wrong about china not being militant.
Click to expand...

No, you list for me the foreign wars, annexations and bombing campaigns China have engaged in over the past 200 years.

I'll then do the same for one of the countries already mentioned above.

Here, I'll help you out seeing as you're probably now realizing just how wrong you are.

Here is a list of the foreign wars China have been involved in since the CCP came to power:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_involving_the_People's_Republic_of_China

There are 10 military campaigns, all of them in China or with China assisting its immediate neighbors. Three of them were civil wars with the ROC, and two of them were helping out a neighbor (North Korea and Vietnam) being invaded by the Americans.

Two of them are minor border skirmishes with India.

Here is the list of every single military campaign involving China for the previous 5,000 years (stretching back to the 26th century BC):

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_and_battles_involving_China

Note how 99 percent of those military campaigns are either civil wars and internal conflicts, or the Chinese repelling foreign invaders (the British, Portuguese, Japanese etc)?

China have never (historically) been militant or expansionist. Especially when compared to European powers (who have literally invaded, colonized, bombed or conquered half the globe, and each other) or the USA or even Australia (both nations the product themselves of European expansionism).

Can I now list countries the UK (or USA, Germany, France or Japan - you can choose) has invaded, annexed, bombed or taken over in the previous 200 years so we can compare?
 
Last edited:
How about Germany? They've only been in existence as a country for just over 100 years (as opposed to Chinas 5 millennia).

In that short amount of time the Germans have invaded or bombed the UK, France, Belgium, Poland, the Netherlands, Greece, Lithuania, Estonia, Latvia, Serbia, Lichtenstein, Ukraine, Yugoslavia, Spain, Italy, Denmark, Norway, Switzerland, Russia (all twice), and most of the Middle East plus Cameroon, Namibia, Rwanda, Tanzania, Togo, and Burundi, New Guinea, the Bismarck Archipelago, the western half of Samoa, the northern half of the Solomon Islands, Nauru, and Micronesia.

I'm probably forgetting a few.

That's just in the last century.
 
Can we do the French next?

Just counting the Napoleonic wars alone, and we have more foreign wars (involving the French invading and bombing other people) in those 2 decades that in the entire history of China.

Japan? Quite literally invaded all of Southeast Asia, including China.

The USA and UK? Where do I even begin with those two. There isnt a country in the world that those two haven't bombed, invaded or annexed over the past 2-3 centuries, including Australia (and of course, China).
 
Last edited:

Log in to remove this ad.

I'm not saying by the way that China not being militant for the past 5 millennia means they're going to stay that way.

But to sit there and call the Chinese historically 'militant' or 'expansionist' (especially contrasted with European powers, or the Anglsophere - itself a product of British expansionism and historical militantism) is just objectively wrong.
 
Some of them are at least starting to work out they got played.

1732521884369.png

1732521968744.png
 
Malifice said:
You think Donald Trump flew - by himself - on a cargo plane?

He goes literally nowhere alone, and he sure as shit isn't flying by cargo plane anywhere.
Click to expand...
Cut the drap Mal. You know that if Trump flew with Epstein on The Lolita Express, the whole world would’ve heard about it and they would’ve strung him up.
 
Lebbo73 said:
He didn’t fly on the Lolita Express. He flew twice on a cargo plane owned by Epstein with no one but the pilots onboard. We’ve been over this. Do you really believe that the MSM would have sat on this story if it had legs?
Click to expand...
Disney were certainly all over it.

1732522185255.png
 
Lebbo73 said:
Cut the drap Mal. You know that if Trump flew with Epstein on The Lolita Express, the whole world would’ve heard about it and they would’ve strung him up.
Click to expand...

We have heard about it, just like we've seen the damn flight records, and heard testimony from one of the girls, and seen the transcript from Giselle's court case, where Trump was personally mentioned several times, and heard the words of Trump himself admitting to being best mates with Epstein and knowing about Epstein liking girls 'on the younger side'.

Trump is as complicit in all this as Prince Andrew, Bill Clinton and a lot of other people.

Why you feel the need to defend him, despite overwhelming evidence he was up to his neck in all of it, is utterly beyond me.
 
A former model who says she met Donald Trump through the late sexual abuser Jeffrey Epstein has accused the former president of groping and sexually touching her in an incident in Trump Tower in 1993, in what she believed was a “twisted game” between the two men.

Stacey Williams, who worked as a professional model in the 1990s, said she first met Trump in 1992 at a Christmas party after being introduced to him by Epstein, who she believed was a good friend of the then New York real estate developer. Williams said Epstein was interested in her and the two casually dated for a period of a few months.

“It became very clear then that [Epstein] and Donald were really, really good friends and spent a lot of time together,” Williams said.
Click to expand...

Epstein literally introduced her to Trump.

Nek minute:

The alleged groping occurred some months later, in the late winter or early spring of 1993, when Epstein suggested during a walk they were on that he and Williams stop by to visit Trump at Trump Tower. Epstein was later convicted on sex offenses and killed himself in prison in 2019.

Moments after they arrived, she alleges, Trump greeted Williams, pulled her toward him and started groping her. She said he put his hands “all over my breasts” as well as her waist and her buttocks. She said she froze because she was “deeply confused” about what was happening. At the same time, she said she believed she saw the two men smiling at each other.
Click to expand...

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/oct/23/donald-trump-accuser-stacey-williams-jeffrey-epstein

I know what you're thinking Lebbo73 .

It's not like Donald Trump to 'grab a woman by the pussy, you don't even have to wait, they let you do anything when you're rich'.

1. Epstein is a sex trafficker who offloads young girls to billionaires.

2. Trump (his best friend) is a billionaire who is into young women.

Are you saying at no stage did Epstein seek to palm a young girl off on Trump? Or that he did try, but that Trump (of all people) said no?

In what world does that even happen?

1732522830582.png
 
Scott Kenneth Homer Bessent (/ˈbɛsənt/ BEH-sənt; born August 1962) is an American hedge fund manager. He was a partner at Soros Fund Management and the founder of Key Square Group, a global macro investment firm.

Bessent and his husband, former New York City prosecutor John Freeman, have two children.

In November 2024, President-elect Trump named Bessent his nominee for Secretary of the Treasury.
Click to expand...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scott_Bessent

Lebbo73 zill

What say you to Soros' right-hand man, married to a New York Prosecutor (who are also apparently at the beck and call of Soros) who also happens to be a bloke, being appointed as Secretary of the Treasury?

More 4D Chess, or have you been ****ing duped by the Great Man?

When will you cookers get it? Trump wasn't going to 'drain the swamp', and he doesnt give a shit about Soros (other than not liking the fact the dude spends a lot of money supporting Democrat causes). He's not there to go after hedge fund billionaires, he's literally appointing them to key posts, so they can earn even more money than they already do, while working class people pay through the nose with tariffs.

He just played the conspiracist violin, and you danced like little obedient monkeys.

You've all identified (correctly) that unelected billionares run the show. Yet you then vote one into power (or cheer him on as the Americans do so) and sit there silently while he appoints his billionaire mates to run the show, with the plan of cutting corporate tax rates (and making it even easier for the wealthy to avoid paying tax) and slugging the average American on low income with a bill for tariffs.

The guy you should have been supporting was Bernie Saunders. He actually would have gone after billionaires.

Instead of opposing Socialism, you cookers should be cheering it on.
 
Last edited:
Malifice said:
I'm not saying by the way that China not being militant for the past 5 millennia means they're going to stay that way.

But to sit there and call the Chinese historically 'militant' or 'expansionist' (especially contrasted with European powers, or the Anglsophere - itself a product of British expansionism and historical militantism) is just objectively wrong.
Click to expand...
By your reasoning if Germany had won WW2 and conquered all of Europe, historians in the future could rightfully claim it was just an internal struggle.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

zill said:
By your reasoning if Germany had won WW2 and conquered all of Europe, historians in the future could rightfully claim it was just an internal struggle.
Click to expand...

You can argue some parts of WW2 were an 'internal struggle'. Anschluss (Austria), the Sudetenland (German majority Czechoslovakia), and 'the Polish corridor' to Danzig, along with Strasbourg and the Ruhr (former German territories, annexed off the Germans by the French) all can be argued as internal conflicts.

In all of those conflicts, there was a sizeable German majority that genuinely wanted re-unification with Germany living in those areas.

Not the case in WW1, and it also doesnt explain or justify German invasions of Scandinavia (done ostensibly so Germany could control the northern ports before the British) or Lichtenstein, Greece, Serbia, the Middle East etc, and it certainly doesnt explain the invasion of Eastern Europe and Russia.

It also doesnt explain the many overseas territorial possessions taken by the Germans either, in Africa and in Asia.

China (historically, and even in recent times) have not cared much for deploying Chinese troops away from China. That's not been how they do business. This is dramatically different from the expansionism and militantism of European nations (and their colonies, including the USA and even Australia).

This is not to say that China will remain this way forever. They're modernizing their military with a 'Blue Water' Navy that is all about force projection.

But you cant sit there and tell me that China has (historically) been militant and expansionist for its history (especially compared to Europe and her former colonies such as the USA). It's just self-evidently not true, and there is not only a lack of evidence to prove it, but also a wealth of evidence to suggest quite the opposite.

If anything, China has been on the receiving end of European and American militantism. The USA bombed it last century, and the British (and Portuguese) literally invaded it and controlled much of it for a while (Hong Kong, the Boxer revolution and Macau).
 
zill said:
Lol if I was to say that you would invoke the protocols of Zion or whatever nonsense and call me a nazi.
Click to expand...

No, only if you said their goal was to 'replace the white race/ impose a woke agenda on us all/ make us all socialist/ eat our children' or whatever.

Then you're (directly) parroting Nazi conspiracies.

Moreso if you mention George Soros, the Rothschilds, and a bunch of Jewish 'banking cabals' as the prime baddies.

Hitler argued (repeatedly) that a 'cabal of wealthy European financiers and banking families in the USA, UK and Europe' (the Jews, he was a lot more explicit about who these 'bankers and financiers' were) were behind a plot to weaken Germany by putting Socialism and Left wing 'woke' values at both its doorstep in Russia and also within Germany (Marx and Lenin were Jews; the Nazis called this plot 'Judeo Bolshevism' - you blokes call it 'Cultural Marxism') while also controlling the Banks and profiteering of German misfortune.

These 'bankers' were also the ones that convinced the USA and UK to oppose Germany, they were the ones who were behind 'decadent woke LGBTI agenda' in Germany (and resulted in those 'woke agenda' books being burnt). They controlled finance and capitalism (which Hitler opposed) and they also controlled Socialism (which Hitler also opposed).

Hiter saw these 'bankers and financiers' behind every plot and misfortune of Germany. Hitler saw the world in a 'clash of the cultures' with the Germanic people (and State) opposed by the 'bankers and financiers' (Jews) as the puppet masters behind everything.

Can you not see how many of the conspiracies you blokes go on about here, are simply echoes of the above?

There is a reason so many of you (now) support Right wing and Far Right-wing political movements (including Trump, and even Putin). Conspiracist spaces are full of Neo Nazis for a reason.

All I've ever done here is post so you blokes at least know the above (and can hopefully take a step back and look at things a bit more critically).
 
Lebbo73 said:
You’d be excused for thinking that Disney would be laying low on such matters considering there tastes for assaulting minors.
Click to expand...
I await a Disney appointment to Trump's cabinet then.
 
Malifice said:
They're not looking to invade Taiwan, they would prefer re-unification to happen via peaceful means.

And Taiwan is largely an internal issue (similar to Tibet, and inner Mongolia).

When I say China is not militant, I refer to the fact in the 3,000 years of their existence, they've almost entirely avoided sending troops overseas or getting involved in foreign wars. They've had plenty of Civil wars, and internal conflicts (and fended off invasions by the British, Japanese and others) but historically they tend not to get involved in overseas invasions, colonialism, or similar.
Click to expand...
Vietnam would beg to differ. Probably a half a dozen invasions recorded, the last, in 1979. Korea has been invaded a few times, two of them pretty substantial attempts by both the Qing and Jin Dynasties. China had a lot of other more minor goes at Korea, too. Folks in Tibet would also strongly disagree, after the annexation by the PRC last century. Currently the PRC are leaching real estate in the north of India and in Bhutan. The PLAN occupying areas of these country does fit into your definition of 'sending troops overseas'. Then there is all the mischief in the South China Sea, just about all the countries there have been bullied, harassed and suffered violence at he hands of PRC maritime assets, often within the countries own territorial water or EEZ. This to could be construed as 'sending troops overseas'.
 
Lebbo73

You've mentioned a few times you believe that Trump is going to 'abolish income tax'.

May I ask you where you heard this, and why you believe it's true?

He's never mentioned it, and his policies are quite the opposite (detailing changes to some elements of income tax such as social security and tips, clearly infers he's keeping income tax).

Where did you here this? What's your source?
 
Malifice said:
Its mainly just alleged sex traffickers, Soros lackeys, Big tech and big Pharma billionaires, a member of the Kennedy family, and Fox news personalities so far isnt it?

Draining the Swamp, 4d Chess style.
Click to expand...
Poor little battlers like born-into-wealth-Trump and anti-union billionaire Elon Musk really really care about the little guy. Honest.

I mean, recently a Trump-appointed judge kindly freed 4 million of them of the crushing burden of getting paid any overtime that they work. Applauded by the party that opposed minimum wage increases.

The sad part is, there are already dozens of stories already showing that many people who voted Trump rely on the ACA, which they oppose as 'Obamacare' not realizing it's the same thing.

They're at 1788 France levels of social inequality and I am concerned about the propensity for violence when millions of people realise they've been swindled by a con man. If this thread proves anything though, the boiling frog principle is alive and well and it will take many of his believers quite a lot of personal hardship to work it out.
 
Malifice said:
Lebbo73

You've mentioned a few times you believe that Trump is going to 'abolish income tax'.

May I ask you where you heard this, and why you believe it's true?

He's never mentioned it, and his policies are quite the opposite (detailing changes to some elements of income tax such as social security and tips, clearly infers he's keeping income tax).

Where did you here this? What's your source?
Click to expand...

Good luck getting a coherent answer on this one.
 
CD Xbow said:
Vietnam would beg to differ. Probably a half a dozen invasions recorded, the last, in 1979. Korea has been invaded a few times, two of them pretty substantial attempts by both the Qing and Jin Dynasties. China had a lot of other more minor goes at Korea, too. Folks in Tibet would also strongly disagree, after the annexation by the PRC last century. Currently the PRC are leaching real estate in the north of India and in Bhutan. The PLAN occupying areas of these country does fit into your definition of 'sending troops overseas'.
Click to expand...

I listed all of them. Most of them are border skirmishes/ disputes (India, Bhutan, Tibet, Korea)

Not the same thing as what the UK, French, American, Japanese or Germans have gotten up to over the last 200 years. All of those countries named have also invaded (literally invaded, with the intent to annex in most cases) some combination of Vietnam, Korea, India, Burma, Tibet (and China) in some capacity themselves over the past 200 years, as well as a heck of a lot more countries in Africa, the Americas and Europe to boot.
 
Last edited:
bourbons said:
rofl. Where do you get this stuff :drunk:

Out of the last 2 presidents only 1 has flown on Epstein's plane and, unsurprisingly, it was dear leader.
Click to expand...

Lebbo's post specifically referred to Epstein's island. You obviously realise he never went there which is why you've mentioned only 'Epstein's plane'. Several times in the 90's he flew between Palm Beach and New York on a plane owned by Epstein and that's it. If you were trying to insinuate anything more than that, it would be quite disingenuous.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

NWO/Illuminati US politics - Pt 3

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top