Buckle up, we may have a second invasion coming…
(media.greatawakening.win)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (45)
sorted by:
Of course it was condescending. I freely admit it. And I will do you one better. You deserve it.
IF (and that is no typo) I were to go with your explanation that " buckle up" reflects your opinion, then you should have written: I am buckling up. Or, who is buckling up with me.
But no, you wrote the popi: Buckle up. A command, because you need all of us ready for an engagement. ... Yes, sir!
What follows is: may have a second invasion....
That is a call to emotion, not knowledge. It was meant to elicit an emotional response. It was meant to clickbait.
Because the situation of" MAY HAVE an invasion has been going on for quite some time. Actually, since the nationalists fled to Formosa in '49.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chiang_Kai-shek
It is always funny when wiki is telling the truth: nationality: Republic of China. Note, not Chinese. but Republic of China. indicating it is a different nationality, a sovereign State. (hahahaha, the fuckers)
It would have been something, had you discussed the likelihood of several logistical issues connected to an invasion of the Republic of China. AND, also how easy it is to invade the Republic of China .... At least a cursory glance on a map would reveal the dozens of Islands right under the CCP' s nose.
Not to mention the daily invasion of aircraft of CCP origin.
Hence: lack of knowledge and dog whistle.
As I said: you deserved it.
Like I said...Condescending...And after your little rant, add sanctimonious and arrogant for someone who knows jack shit about any of us...
Ah .... stating the obvious, so we are in agreement. I am condescending towards what you wrote, indeed.
Your defense, if one might call it that, will surely appeal to the less salty. Of course, you have to try to project power by trying to diminish me. If what I wrote is a rant to you .... oh boy ... don' t you challenge me to rant, you will run for your snowflake - safe-space. I suspect you actually do not mean to make this impression, but you do so for being butt-hurt on the call-out. But all you succeed to do is projection.
Might I suggest you take a portion of your own medicine? No deflection?
Why? There is only opinion in your statements, and no fact or even supporting argument. I would remind you, you started using the word condescending, sanctimonious en arrogant. I did not. I used something else. Lack of knowledge, which I proved, dog whistle. Which I also proved.
To give you some closure on the words you so strategically used:
con = with
de = no (no now-space authorization due to movement)
scend = climbing
ing = objectivation of a verb = contract.
sanctimonious.
sanctimoni being devout, pi. ous = full off; making a verb into an object.
arrogant.
ar = ad = movement = coloration = not original = no.
roga = rogare
ant - objectivation of a verb. = contract.
There are several ways in which I could approach your use of language.
First, your opinion, is just that. And you are free to hold such. Be happy with it. Second, you have no idea what you are saying.
Condescending is in babbel-talk not a word of a negative persuasion, because it allows for human frailty. You are not suggesting you are without frailty, are you? in essence, to be condescending actually is a good thing, instead of a negative. So, at best, you just used the word totally inappropriately.
Sanctimonious. Really. Where is the irony in what you wrote? O ... I see. By the appeal to the word itself! Of course!
arrogant in babbel-talk means movement towards questions asked. Ah .... however,
On second glance your whole ... eh ... exercise in using Latin-words:
with no climbing contract devout full off no questions contract.
Wow. I am .... as it is called in French: emballé, ready to ship.
ZZzzzzzzz.......
This is like masturbatory condescension, was fun to read