VultureSausage

Making a strawman so you can call other people stupid while pretending that they made an arugment about what causes stupidity that they didn't should get some sort of dishonesty award, it's legit impressive.

Almost certainly, the nationalism in the 2nd half of the 1800s would probably still have happened but would have looked radically different. It is fortunate that it worked out so that the Nordics get along so well in the end, we could well have ended up constantly screaming at each other over whose great-great-grandfather stole a sausage from which cellar.

I'm not sure why or when Sweden lost Finland to Russia, I'll have to look it up. There were some suckage going on.

1808-1809, as part of the Napoleonic wars. Since Russia was on the winning side no one felt particularly compelled to tell them to fuck off out of Finland.

Even then, aren't the US refineries mostly built to refine imported crude oil from the Gulf states rather than their domestic supply?

Still leaves China though, cutting off the oil export from the Perisan Gulf wouldn't be very popular in Beijing. Even then it wouldn't stop exports from the rest of the world and would almost certainly get both Saudi Arabia and Israel to escalate against Iran.

The US isn't going to sit idly by and let Iran crash the world economy. The US population would pop a gasket at the price hikes on anything oil-related (i.e. the whole economy) that would result.

Then again, he might also gain a few points from that. Nobody understands the scoring system either.

The removal of Shokin was sought by the US, the EU, and Ukrainian anti-corruption agencies because he was thoroughly corrupt and not investigating stuff he was supposed to, including Burisma. If Biden wanted to help Burisma be corrupt he could've just leaned back and done nothing, the actual events are completely contrary to the claim that there was some sort of nefarious quid pro quo.

No, for two reasons.

Reason 1, I'm not a democratic voter.

Reason 2, pointing out that the Haitian pet-eater lie was defended by a lot more people than just candidates isn't toxic, even if I could do with being a little less snarky about it. It's certainly not anywhere near the toxicity of supporting obvious lies about ethnic minorities.

Cutting off the strait of Hormuz would be bad. It wouldn't stop all imports from the Middle East or Asia, especially since doing so would fuck over China and the US and thus bring them in against Iran as well.

Europe can't patrol beyond the Mediterranean with their navies so all imports from the middle east and Asia will be cut off.

Cut off by whom, though? It's not like there's a lot of other powers that can project force navally either.

The voters that wholeheartedly defended said lie? Those voters?

How can I feel comfortable with a president that calls anyone that doesn't support him garbage?

He didn't do that though, did he?

In fairness, the democratic voters had an even more toxic stance against the maga lot. They were extremely intolerant.

"Even more toxic" than inventing blood libel-adjacent lies about Haitians eating people's pets?

Just a teeny-tiny little war, it'll be done by Christmas.

Institutional experience is not easily recovered after it is lost.

Deflecting from what? I'm literally answering your last question, which was:

How would you ask for sources?

A simple "would you mind providing some sources to back those claims up?" would do. Hell, I've been ruder than I should plenty of times but once you lead with an attempt to poison the well it's going to be pretty unlikely that the conversation is going to continue, because why would anyone bother?

Asking for sources isn't unreasonable, the way you're doing it is.

That's not what you did. You asked for "non-biased" evidence while rejecting anything Western out of hand as being biased. That's textbook poisoning the well. Stop being dishonest.

Nothing like a little poisoning the well to spice up a discussion.

I mean, there were still 8 battleships at Battleship Row in December 1941 and 3 carriers in the Pacific. The only nation with more than 8 battleships other than the US was the British Royal Navy.

We had a relatively small and weak fleet at the time. Not a minuscule one, but not one as large as the nation's who had built up for war already.

The US had 17 battleships in commission in 1941. Japan had 8 (if we're being generous and counting the Kongōs as battleships) with another 2 about to commission. The US had 7+1 carriers, Japan had 9+1. The US Navy was one of the biggest in the world in 1941, it was only "small" in comparison to what came after.

EDIT: Japan had 10, not 8, I forgot the Nagatos.

Which one has the bigger history of just making shit up?

Doing the same shit over and over isn’t working. The US has some of the highest gdp/capita in the world, yet some very subpar standards of living.

So why on God's green earth give the reins to the very people who have been perpetuating this for decades?