Overview

I agree. This is a natural byproduct I think of the Internet. Not that I've studied things but it seems logical that throughout history when there is an invention that brings large groups of people together who, until then, had been separated the difference of cultural norms will cause great friction. The Internet opened most of the world to instant communication as it has evolved. It is easier than ever to find people who agree with you or be influenced by others so that you agree with them. The traditional societal norms are not there to inhibit that behavior as it might have done in the past. Tack on perceived anonymity and certainly the safety of distance between those attacking and being attacked and it sets the stage for the behaviors we see today. Because corporations reflect the desire of the people they pick up on it and it snowballs. So, we have sensationalistic marketing, news, etc. That grows into even worse behaviors and here we are. I just hope there is a shift because the escalation is ramping up exponentially.

Robert Arnold is one of my favorite youtubers. Here’s a couple nuggets worth watching.

Thank you, very much appreciated

I deleted what you posted but I don’t see what you’re worried about.

Remember back in 2019 Trump was thinking about pulling out of NATO and it was b/c of Russia.

I can see someone being held accountable for influencing the actions of another if that person had some type of relationship. There was a girl who got into trouble a while back because she apparently influenced a guy who eventually committed suicide knowing he had feelings for her. Broader examples would be educators, close family, so on. That said, there is a constant bombardment of desensitization on the internet. Even if you don't know the people posting they can influence your perspective when it's the same message over and over. Also add in people gravitate to sources that affirm their existing ideas and the whole thing becomes a loop where people start to feel like the angry/violent thoughts they have are justified. Those groups and people are protected under the First Amendment and censorship is a slippery slope. However, they draw comparisons to the worst in humanity's history to get a prescribed emotional response. They do not want solutions because friction gets them what they really want which is clicks, views, and agitation. In the aftermath of Charlie Kirk's assassination, it's easy to see how jacked up in the head these people are based on what they are putting on social media. Some of them have been fired.

Enough. Take it to PM if you must. You both COULD contribute useful stuff here rather than taking pot shots at each other. I'm tired of it. The continued antagonizing of each other does not need to be carried out in the public forum. Not from continued eyerolls nor the comments about getting the eyerolls. No more warnings.

This would be why it might be helpful to post what your thought on the message in the video was. People aren't going to watch a long video.. or they might if they have some sense of what is in it. Overall, I think wanting harm to anyone is bad. It shouldn't happen. He should be allowed to speak his views and influence those who would listen and believe. But, there is a debatable point I think about when what someone speaks of might influence those who listen to cause harm to others. It's a very slippery slope. Are we to be held responsible for another person's actions because of what we might have said? Should Clark Griswold be held responsible for Cousin Eddy being stupid and kidnapping Clark's boss? (Yes, I use that as a bit tongue in cheek, but I feel the concept is there.) The bottom line to me is that both sides need to stop encouraging people to be so intolerant of those with different views. We should not be talking about violence against a corporate CEO any more than we should be talking about violence against someone for the sexual identification. Sadly we are on the path of escalation. I am hoping there's a shift in direction without there first being a seismic event that triggers it.

To answer the OP question I think it sucks for his wife and kids the most. His kids especially had no idea what he did for a living and only saw him as dad. This kind of stuff is pointless.

Well, that would explain how you completely missed the message he was trying to convey.

I didn't watch the video. His message is just another in a million of others that are on twitter.

Wadr, you seem to have missed the point of the video. Apologies for having wasted your time. 🍺

They did the same when the MInnesota lawmakers were shot and Magorly Crazy Lady posted a picture of her with a rifle. It is politics doing this, they took over social media and run everything that goes into your brain. No need to watch some guys 30 min video.

When the Minnesota lawmakers died, Trump refused to say their names, Trump said he wouldn't call Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, suggesting it would "waste time." So as far as killing someone else over politics that should never happen. You should use your power of voting. Trump organization brings this on themselves by using violence against others and spreading false information to incite more violence. The problem is the Trump administration is trying to take away the power of voting so in the end some will resort to violence.

It's a LONG video (over 23 minutes) and have no idea who this is that's saying it. But he has a very important message. Hope people watch; if not, whatevs. Love ya all.

I’m well acquainted with the ramifications but thanks for the feedback nonetheless. I’m not necessarily advocating for the commitment of our fighting men and women in any theater, let alone this one. We can certainly come to the aid of our allies without sending boots on the ground but given Trump’s previous denouncements of NATO and his reluctance to condemn anything Putin does, I have to wonder if he will honor our commitment, regardless.

Article 4 gets the ball rolling by convening discussions. If Article 5 is enacted it would not mean every member nation has to send armed forces. Essentially it calls for the mutual defense with each member doing so how they see fit. I would be cautious about committing our military forces to that one theatre if it comes to that.

I dont get surprised by the crazy stuff you love to post. Idiotic is a little too strong, don't be calling yourself an idiot over it though.

When push comes to shove in Eastern Europe, (we are already way past pushed) will Trump honor our commitment to the greatest international treaty in history and stand beside our NATO allies or will he continue to assist Putin by bad mouthing our partners and sit on the sidelines? Given his previous proclivity to suck up to Putin and being used as tool for Russian aims, my bet is on the latter. Shame.

This is idiotic. Not surprising, but idiotic.

https://www.wsj.com/world/asia/south-koreans-are-freed-in-georgia-after-hyundai-immigration-raid-6da45736

So you are playing both sides? Rooting for Ukraine while supporting Trump who is friends with Putin and gave him the opportunity by taking away sanctions that were working and allowing Putin to kill people with zero consequence... also helping Putin by trying to make Zelensky the enemy. Must be so hard to support someone who goes against everything you support.

Good for them. I hope European nations band together with Ukraine and fight. Every nation that borders Ukraine and held a realistic belief they might be next should have been in the fight from day one. Russian forces are depleted, there's never been a more opportune time to put an end to the Putin regime. I hope they seize it.

https://apnews.com/article/nato-poland-russia-ukraine-drones-article4-658921ca98eff77e39345041ba0900a3 Poland and the rest of Europe understand their history and won’t wait until Russia is at their borders. Phuck around and find out, Putin.