User Controls
"Afghanistan was never conquered."
-
2022-08-16 at 1 PM UTC
-
2022-08-16 at 1:02 PM UTC
-
2022-08-16 at 1:03 PM UTC
-
2022-08-16 at 1:05 PM UTC
-
2022-08-16 at 1:32 PM UTC
Originally posted by Jiggaboo_Johnson As usual your understanding of language and context fail you.
occupy
[ ok-yuh-pahy ]
See synonyms for: occupy / occupied / occupies / occupying on Thesaurus.com
verb (used with object), oc·cu·pied, oc·cu·py·ing.
to take or fill up (space, time, etc.): I occupied my evenings reading novels.
to engage or employ the mind, energy, or attention of: Occupy the children with a game while I prepare dinner.
to be a resident or tenant of; dwell in: <<< This one dummy.oc·cu·py (ŏk′yə-pī′)
tr.v. oc·cu·pied, oc·cu·py·ing, oc·cu·pies
1. To fill up (time or space): a lecture that occupied three hours.
2. To dwell or reside in (an apartment, for example).
3. To hold or fill (an office or position).
4. To seize possession of and maintain control over forcibly or by conquest: The troops occupied the city.
5. To engage or employ the attention or concentration of: occupied the children with coloring books.
seize possession of = taking ownership.
how does it feels like to failed at your own native language. -
2022-08-16 at 1:35 PM UTC
Originally posted by vindicktive vinny
seize possession of = taking ownership.
how does it feels like to failed at your own native language.
Again context dummy
con·text
/ˈkäntekst/
Learn to pronounce
noun
noun: context; plural noun: contexts
the circumstances that form the setting for an event, statement, or idea,
...and again...possession doesn't always mean ownership either...I possess your admiration but don't own it. -
2022-08-16 at 1:38 PM UTCGoverning body of Afghanistan 2001 - The Taliban
Governing body of afghanistan 2022 - The Taliban
Period in between? constant fighting, no defined ownership, fractured country with multiple warlords vying for "ownership".
Stay in school kids. -
2022-08-16 at 1:42 PM UTC
-
2022-08-16 at 1:46 PM UTC
Originally posted by Jiggaboo_Johnson Governing body of Afghanistan 2001 - The Taliban
Governing body of afghanistan 2022 - The Taliban
Period in between? constant fighting, no defined ownership, fractured country with multiple warlords vying for "ownership".
Stay in school kids.
period in between was experimental democracy in progress so technically afghan was owned by the people of afghanistan. -
2022-08-16 at 1:48 PM UTC
Originally posted by vindicktive vinny doesnt always ?
so you do admit that possession do sometimes mean ownership.
Really vinny you need to spend some serious time trying to understand what "Context" is...Context is the reason MOST words have multiple definitions...the one who choose to use the word is the one that defines the context...not the dumb foreign observer who doesn't understand what context is.
None of Afghanistan's invaders were owners they were occupiers, their whole occupation was still engaged in war with the "natives" and they failed to control the whole country and the population... and when they all eventually failed they ran like filthy dogs. -
2022-08-16 at 1:50 PM UTC
Originally posted by vindicktive vinny period in between was experimental democracy in progress so technically afghan was owned by the people of afghanistan.
Period in between was still under battle conditions...the country was never under a singular forces control...only when you control all area/aspects and compliance from the masses can ownership be claimed...until they you are merely occupying certain areas and having to fight to remain doing so.
THEY ALL FAILED TO DO THAT. -
2022-08-16 at 1:53 PM UTC
Originally posted by Jiggaboo_Johnson
Really vinny you need to spend some serious time trying to understand what "Context" is…Context is the reason MOST words have multiple definitions…the one who choose to use the word is the one that defines the context…not the dumb foreign observer who doesn't understand what context is.
None of Afghanistan's invaders were owners they were occupiers, their whole occupation was still engaged in war with the "natives" and they failed to control the whole country and the population… and when they all eventually failed they ran like filthy dogs.
occupational forces have ownership of the things they occupy in the context of warfare, politics and foreign relations. -
2022-08-16 at 1:54 PM UTC
Originally posted by Jiggaboo_Johnson Period in between was still under battle conditions…the country was never under a singular forces control…only when you control all area/aspects and compliance from the masses can ownership be claimed…until they you are merely occupying certain areas and having to fight to remain doing so.
THEY ALL FAILED TO DO THAT.
moot and non sequiteur tho.
afghan belongs to afghanis. period. -
2022-08-16 at 2:20 PM UTC
-
2022-08-16 at 2:42 PM UTC
Originally posted by fuckerofmothersandsuckeroffathers Do you realize that you are rationalizing bigotry?
This website is full of pieces of shit who can't self-reflect. But you seem like one of the few here who can.
You think its fair to hate the people of an entire country?
I bet there are many Afghans who do not give a shit where you're from.
This kind of bigotry always comes from a feeling of persecution, like there is an entire populace, an entire ideology that hates you.
Why do you think there are Afghanis that hate Pakistanis to begin with?
Nationality, in regards to personal identity (not legal identity) is an immutable trait, and should not be discriminated against with blanket statements.
I mean, where does your 'hate' come from? The media?
You think you're acting any different than those who hate 'brown people'?
that's what i said you plagiarizing cunt -
2022-08-16 at 2:44 PM UTC"Do you realize that you are rationalizing bigotry?"
Bigotry...It's been serving man well for thousands of years. -
2022-08-16 at 2:52 PM UTC
Originally posted by Jiggaboo_Johnson "Do you realize that you are rationalizing bigotry?"
Bigotry…It's been serving man well for thousands of years.
First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a socialist.
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for the jedis, and I did not speak out—because I was not a jedi.
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.
—Martin Niemöller -
2022-08-16 at 2:52 PM UTClet me ask, Jigaboo, are you Christian? Do you believe in any gods?
How do you feel about the fact that Texas requires you to believe in a higher power to serve the public? -
2022-08-16 at 2:53 PM UTC
Originally posted by fuckerofmothersandsuckeroffathers First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a socialist.
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for the jedis, and I did not speak out—because I was not a jedi.
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.
—Martin Niemöller
That'll teach him. -
2022-08-16 at 2:53 PM UTC
