Why do you think that?

It’s just as implausible as vaccines causing autism. So, I had some fun with it, presuming you’re calling me a “dreamer” and you’re not referring to something called “sci-fi dreamer.”

We need some kind of vaccine to make sure this kind of thing doesn’t happen to people. Maybe we could combine it with a mumps and rubella inoculation?

I mean, it won’t bother me. I’m already neurodiverse. So, vaccines only make me stronger.

I see what you mean, in terms of democracy being a problem capitalism is trying to solve and, also, that the rich and powerful will never allow us to simply vote away their ill-gotten wealth and power.

I don’t think that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t try though or just lament that we were born too late though.

If enough people wanted to, we could change things very quickly. I don’t see why that would mean we would have to have those all of those things, let alone for an extended period. Really, you’re rationalising a status quo bias.

Yes, you are wasting your time with that but not for the reasons you think.

“Britain” didn’t come up with the name “soccer.” You’re anthropomorphising a chunk of land.

A small number of very posh students from Oxford University gave it that, as a nickname. Just for reference, these are the people who also call rugby “rugga.”

Basically, an American heard it and confused it with the actual name of the sport and was stupid enough to convince you all to call it that.

There’s someone in Britain right now who calls it punty kick chase. I can assure you that name is wrong too and you would look silly if you tried to justify you also calling it that by saying “Britain came up with punty kick chase.”

"The whole world calls it football. Are we so out of touch?

No, it’s the rest of the world who are wrong."

In theory: yes. However, what happens when we inevitably burn the wrong person alive?

The problem is how it would work in practice.

Your mad scrambling to not back down over a very silly statement is getting boring now. The fact that you genuinely think that there’s literally nothing Germany could ever do to be rid of American soldiers, if they wanted to, is just bizzare and has no basis in reality.

Why wasn’t West Germany invited until six years later?

Because of WW2. You’ve heard of that one right? Sheer desperation and very little thought going on here.

If they wanted them gone bad enough, they could starve them out. I’m not sure how you’ve convinced yourself that isn’t a possible option for them, if pushed far enough. I’m not saying they will but the idea that they couldn’t is just ridiculous.

Nato was formed in 1949 which was before the korea war and was always about preventing soviet aggression. No amount of pretending otherwise will change that. Britain and America had already occupied Germany after ww2 and that didn’t officially end until 1955. I get it, you don’t like nato but you’re not doing you side any favours here.

I agree that direct confrontation wouldn’t work. However, Germany could just refuse to allow anyone to supply food, power, petrol etc. to American bases and they’ll have to take themselves home sooner or later or declare open war on Germany.

The reason nato was created was the threat of the soviet Russian empire and continues to exist for almost the exact same reason.