Stay out the way black folks.

[MMS]

Yes, it absolutely is a "this or that" situation. This is one of those cases where a clear binary exists even within a complex system. There is a stark difference between constrained enforcement with prioritized discretion and civil administration, vs. maximal enforcement, universal removability, and politicized intimidation. Complexity doesn't eliminate choice, it just makes the consequences of those choices harder to ignore.

States don't control ICE's priorities or tactics, the White House does. This only works if you treat federal escalation as inevitable rather than chosen.

no it isnt

you asked me to state my position on it on some sith shyt

i already stated my position proving you are skim reading and/or not reading everything in the thread

all this juelzing is besides the point, what can you actionably do other than vote or contact your representatives?

thats my biggest point and the lie being perpetrated by media (both TV and the myriad "influencers")

These are not true.
1. Germany invaded Poland which triggered a declaration of war by France and Britain. After Poland and Czechoslovakia, he was always going to target the Alsace-Lorraine region because of its rich resources.

2. Petain was a puppet government, just because he was placed into power does not mean they had widespread popular support, they just had the power. France is one of the countries that had the larger resistance movement, spurred by Charles degaulle. Many French who wanted to fight after the country’s surrender went to North Africa.

3. The monarchy was already in the war. A few people in the royal court who were sympathetic does not represent the feelings of the majority. Neville chamberlains decision to allow hitler to take the Czech and Austria-Hungary was very unpopular and led to Churchill replacing him.

Just like in the United States. In the election in 40, you had a lot of non-interventionists/sympathizers like Henry ford and Charles Lindbergh. But fdr still won the election for an unprecedented third term by a folly large margin. While handicapped.

Now what would have been interesting to see was if Germany and Japan concentrated on attacking Russia from two fronts instead of Japan attacking Pearl Harbor. The US might have still stayed out of the war until a later date

history says that vichy france was a thing, and that there were many french nazi sympathizers

you glossed over the fact i distinctly said the "monarcy" the queen of england elizabeth married a german nazi sympathizer. Thats not a joke

when I say they were sympathetic there is more than one reason for that

the lead up to WW1 was banking problems all across europe and anti-jewish sentiment was tied to those banks. In the childrens movie "Robin Hood" it alluded to it with the snake counting prince john's (the lion) money

basically they all thought the jews had siphoned money from the royals and the common people had no say, that sentiment led to movements like Marxism and Socialism. It was much more obvious in Russia because the romanovs notoriously were awful leaders. But noone ever points the finger to the other monarchies. Hitler literally seized the German rothschild bank and never returned the assets

if not for the english language there is a good chance most of europe would still be at odds with eachother

 

[MMS]

Dude is just posting blatant misinformation. Props on taking the time to point it out

how exactly did england and france respond to germany invading poland and czechoslovakia

hitler literally signed a deal with stalin partitioning poland before they BOTH invaded

the US didnt even have a stance until england was getting bombed and selling them arms was no longer enough

we were more invested in the pacific theatre and many veterans will tell you that

 

[chiefdogg]

 

[Pull Up the Roots]

no it isnt

you asked me to state my position on it on some sith shyt

i already stated my position proving you are skim reading and/or not reading everything in the thread

all this juelzing is besides the point, what can you actionably do other than vote or contact your representatives?

thats my biggest point and the lie being perpetrated by media (both TV and the myriad "influencers")

Yes, it is. This doesn't stop being true just because you want it to. Do you understand causality? You tried to claim there was no material difference between Obama/Biden and Trump wrt how ICE is being used, and you are wrong for the reasons I stated, that you ignored.

No one seriously claims that Trump started ICE, that's a strawman. The question isn't whether ICE existed, it's how it was deployed. These institutions don't operate in a vacuum; they're shaped by executive priorities, legal interpretations, enforcement discretion, and internal directives.

Obama and Biden used enforcement prioritization to focus on recent border crossers and people with serious violent convictions. Interior enforcement was constrained through prosecutorial discretion and limits on raids and arrests. Immigration enforcement was treated as a civil, administrative function, not a political weapon.

Trump removed those priorities entirely, made everyone deportable, expanded interior raids, increased courthouse arrests, and openly politicized ICE. He targeted his political enemies, framed enforcement as deterrence and punishment, and deliberately used intimidation and spectacle around what is supposed to be a civil process.

You're trying to collapse power, intent, and enforcement into "both sides," as if state institutions function the same way regardless of who controls them. That's how you miss the authoritarian shift.

Analysis isn't beside the point. Misidentifying how power operates is how you end up and normalizing escalation.

I don't know what "lie" you're talking about with the media.

 

[MMS]

Yes, it is. This doesn't stop being true just because you want it to. Do you understand causality? You tried to claim there was no material difference between Obama/Biden and Trump wrt how ICE is being used, and you are wrong for the reasons I stated, that you ignored.



Analysis isn't beside the point. Misidentifying how power operates is how you end up and normalizing escalation.

I don't know what "lie" you're talking about with the media.

that just talking about the problems outloud or on this forum does anything

unless you vote and/or contact your representative your thoughts will not materialize in the place where change happens

do you understand causality? cause its clear you don't

just cause he expanded the power and funding of a program doesnt mean that that program wasnt doing those things under the other presidents

in fact they definitely were. Maybe my statement of vote/contact representatives seems too simple but thats literally how the consitutional republic is meant to operate

 

[NoMoreWhiteWoman2020]

no it isnt

you asked me to state my position on it on some sith shyt

i already stated my position proving you are skim reading and/or not reading everything in the thread

all this juelzing is besides the point, what can you actionably do other than vote or contact your representatives?

thats my biggest point and the lie being perpetrated by media (both TV and the myriad "influencers")

history says that vichy france was a thing, and that there were many french nazi sympathizers

you glossed over the fact i distinctly said the "monarcy" the queen of england elizabeth married a german nazi sympathizer. Thats not a joke

when I say they were sympathetic there is more than one reason for that

the lead up to WW1 was banking problems all across europe and anti-jewish sentiment was tied to those banks. In the childrens movie "Robin Hood" it alluded to it with the snake counting prince john's (the lion) money

basically they all thought the jews had siphoned money from the royals and the common people had no say, that sentiment led to movements like Marxism and Socialism. It was much more obvious in Russia because the romanovs notoriously were awful leaders. But noone ever points the finger to the other monarchies. Hitler literally seized the German rothschild bank and never returned the assets

if not for the english language there is a good chance most of europe would still be at odds with eachother

Again, that is one person who eventually abdicated his title because of the scandal. And the monarchy hasn’t had much power since that whole constitutional monarchy thing that basically make them symbolic leaders, with parliament and the PM having the brunt of the power?

One of hitlers men actually flew into England thinking he would find asylum and receive a parley but they locked his ass up.

Britain enforced the treaty of Versailles on Germany. They were always going to be in the crosshairs.

Antisemitism has always been prevalent but it was not the reason for ww1. The black hand and Gabriel princip were anarchists, people totally against government. They Jews were blamed for helping to lose the war, and making Germany a weaker state. And during the 20s while Germany was in a depression, they needed someone to blame for their loss.

Remember at this point Germany as a unified country was not even 50 years old yet.

 

[Pull Up the Roots]

that just talking about the problems outloud or on this forum does anything

unless you vote and/or contact your representative your thoughts will not materialize in the place where change happens

do you understand causality? cause its clear you don't

just cause he expanded the power and funding of a program doesnt mean that that program wasnt doing those things under the other presidents

in fact they definitely were. Maybe my statement of vote/contact representatives seems too simple but thats literally how the consitutional republic is meant to operate

You're assuming that discussion replaces action. It doesn't. Analysis is how people develop coherent beliefs that informs those action.

And yes, I understand causality.

You want to say: "The program existed, therefore outcomes are equivalent."

You're treating the existence of the program as sufficient explanation, as if continuity alone makes the outcomes equivalent.

I'm asking a different question: what decisions expanded, constrained, or redirected state power, and who made them?

That's the difference between describing a structure and explaining results.

ICE might have existed before Trump, but different priorities led to different outcomes. We didn't see this under Biden/Obama -- and that's not to downplay what actually happened under their administrations.

If you think this was meaningfully the same under prior administrations, then point to the policies or directives that removed enforcement priorities, set ICE loose to act without oversight and accountability, and treated all undocumented immigrants as equal targets. Otherwise this is just a vibes argument.

 

[MMS]

Again, that is one person who eventually abdicated his title because of the scandal. And the monarchy hasn’t had much power since that whole constitutional monarchy thing that basically make them symbolic leaders, with parliament and the PM having the brunt of the power?

One of hitlers men actually flew into England thinking he would find asylum and receive a parley but they locked his ass up.

Britain enforced the treaty of Versailles on Germany. They were always going to be in the crosshairs.

Antisemitism has always been prevalent but it was not the reason for ww1. The black hand and Gabriel princip were anarchists, people totally against government. They Jews were blamed for helping to lose the war, and making Germany a weaker state. And during the 20s while Germany was in a depression, they needed someone to blame for their loss.

Remember at this point Germany as a unified country was not even 50 years old yet.

to me...the monarchies in the old world are still in power through the financial systems

they collectively realized giving up the ability to dictate routine laws still allowed them to hold their massive land/resource wealth unopposed

thats why the term "british commonwealth" is a thing, they are "free" in the sense they have governance but they are not free from that monarchy money

thats what Gaddafi was against when he championed the african dinar to officially remove colonial financial power from the region

you could argue that britain did not enforce the treaty as hitler just began ignoring it completely

anti-semitism isnt exclusively anti-jewish for the record but its a lie thats most people are not ready to explore.

as far as germany being unified you could argue they have never been a unified country. During the times of the romans and before that they were tribal like the vikings where petty chiefs were common (even to this day via earls/duchies) hitler infamously wanted his historians to hide/destroy ancient german artifacts because they literally lived in caves/mudhuts. So it was they that are mudbloods after all

 

[MMS]

ICE might have existed before Trump, but different priorities led to different outcomes. We didn't see this under Biden/Obama -- and that's not to downplay what actually happened under their administrations.

If you think this was meaningfully the same under prior administrations, then point to the policies or directives that removed enforcement priorities, set ICE loose to act without oversight and accountability, and treated all undocumented immigrants as equal targets. Otherwise this is just a vibes argument.

you're just assuming there is no oversight and accountability

there is, just not the kind you want

to understand what trump has done youd have to compare it to the expansion of the FBI under prohibition. Before prohibition it was a modest sized government department but with the mandate to stop organized crime and the proliferation of imported and homegrown liquor it became a behemoth entity

i know noone else is thinking how i think but...

Spoiler

were they fighting more than liquor?

 

[beenz]

Let them destroy themselves.

negged

 

[Pull Up the Roots]

you're just assuming there is no oversight and accountability

there is, just not the kind you want

to understand what trump has done youd have to compare it to the expansion of the FBI under prohibition. Before prohibition it was a modest sized government department but with the mandate to stop organized crime and the proliferation of imported and homegrown liquor it became a behemoth entity

i know noone else is thinking how i think but...

Spoiler

were they fighting more than liquor?

Okay, now I'm just going to stop trying to be polite. First, you ignore the core of my argument, then you erase parts of it to just argue some vibes-based bullshyt. You're arguing in bad faith and it functionally serves to shield this administration from legitimate criticism. It is very obvious now.

 

[MMS]

Okay, now I'm just going to stop trying to be polite. First, you ignore the core of my argument, then you erase parts of it to just argue some vibes-based bullshyt. You're arguing in bad faith and it functionally serves to shield this administration from legitimate criticism. It is very obvious now.

listen its all love

i get that you dont see it quite how i see it and thats fine

but the point im making is simple, criticism doesnt actionably do anything

the idea of endlessly articulating an idea is more of a religious practice than a political practice (I actually just mentioned this idea on dapcity here)

How Do Y'all Feel About Religion Being In POLITICS?

I think that it's 50/50. An interfaith message isn't necessarily abnormal.

www.dapcity.com

saying that my opinion about the actions of the trump administration is somehow a shield is silly and you should reread what you wrote

noone considered the genie in a bottle thing tho, thats cool. I must be one of the few who played Chrono Trigger. The idea of the "mystics"

in Islam it says God is above mankind and djinnkind....sometimes I wonder if people actually recognized that concept would they deal with people the same way. Egyptians called the canaanites "magic peoples" for a reason. Not to say they are lesser but rather they are moving through the world in a different manner but could "appear" as normal people

 

[NoMoreWhiteWoman2020]

to me...the monarchies in the old world are still in power through the financial systems

they collectively realized giving up the ability to dictate routine laws still allowed them to hold their massive land/resource wealth unopposed

thats why the term "british commonwealth" is a thing, they are "free" in the sense they have governance but they are not free from that monarchy money

thats why Gaddafi was against when he championed the african dinar to officially remove colonial financial power from the region

you could argue that britain did not enforce the treaty as hitler just began ignoring it completely

anti-semitism isnt exclusively anti-jewish for the record but its a lie thats most people are not ready to explore.

as far as germany being unified you could argue they have never been a unified country. During the times of the romans and before that they were tribal like the vikings where petty chiefs were common (even to this day via earls/duchies) hitler infamously wanted his historians to hide/destroy ancient german artifacts because they literally lived in caves/mudhuts. So it was they that are mudbloods after all

The antisemitism in Europe the the Inquisition and the Edict of Nantes drove them into the mercantile/banking sphere because to charge interest on loans was considered un-Christian. Same with people complaining about Hollywood but yet they damn near forced old Jewish people to work certain jobs and vaudeville was a place they could make an imprint.

Commonwealth does not mean that. It means the people are inherently more powerful than the top executive. Massachusetts, Virginia, Kentucky, Puerto Rico and Pennsylvania are also commonwealths. Cities can operate independent of the counties the are located in.

And Britain was definitely getting a bag off that Treaty. How do you think they bounced back and why would they sign it if they didn’t intend get paid off of it?

What’s crazy is think about Italy being Germany’s opps in ww1 and benefitting from that same treaty and then falling under Mussolinis protofascist dictatorship and the mob actually helping the allies that’s why all the shyt came to a head in the 50-60s. Probably promised Luciano free reign in Cuba but Russia got to them

 

[Squirrel from Meteor Man]

Because the majority of black people don't understand the secret societies white folks have built up to support white supremacy.

You are helping them by being manipulated to fight for their political systems and their economic systems.

Why is this dude allowed to post here? Admitted non-black who now feels comfortable enough to tell black people what they do and don’t know.

 

[BlkAxeMan]

revisionist history

if the nazis didnt invade france its arguable that britain, us and france etc would have just let him chill

and even when he invaded france, half the country was for it (see vichy france)

it wasnt until he bombed england that the monarchy said it was too far. In case you didnt know they were sympathetic to his cause in the first place

once again yall gotta take the media talking points out of your mouth and learn to put your own thought forward.

because the secret of WW2 was the rampant use of the occult to push propaganda, which is still going now...all the intelligence agencies got together back then and learned what did and didnt work

Sources?