Don’t you know. When I kill people, it’s called freedom; when someone else kills people, it’s called tyranny.

People who think this don’t deserve an /s.

MOSSAD

It is all wordplay. Furthermore, there’s nothing stopping Cubans from leaving, plenty have left already. Why do they complain? Why do you want to stop a country choosing it’s style of government but not how companies are run? Why interfere in an another country’s internal affairs but keep private power sacrosanct? If private companies are private, other countries are other countries.

You and I both vote. The more time spent on this, the less time sent on actual issues.

Cuba has always been used as a bad faith argument against public services. I want public services. That is my position. What is your position? Privatisation? Same thing with healthcare. Public healthcare is tyranny but private healthcare is freedom. Public transit is tyranny and private cars is freedom. Public education is tyrannical brain washing but private education is school choice freedom.

This has always been an ideological debate, never serious.

What is it about “freedom” that you love so much? The signing of nom-competes, NDAs, Terms and Coditions, rentierism to rent forever? Physical infrastructure here is at least better here than the US (if I was in the US or UK, it’s literally crumbling) but our public services are going down the drain, do you like that? There is no future due the cost of living crisis and cost of housing, do you want to never own a home and always have increasing costs of life? Do you want a high-paying tech job (because a pizza job is not enough) to just leave the country? (https://m.youtube.com/results?sp=mAEA&search_query=leaving+canada)

Oh, well look at that. The same thing. Again, just preferences.

The truckers who left for Mexico and Miami are just as serious as the Cubans who left to Miami.

noun a government, especially an authoritarian one

The Liberal regime froze the bank accounts of the trucker convoy protesters.

Authoritarian is subjective not objective.

It’s solely a matter if reference.

You don’t know Curtis Yarvin (ally of VP Vance) where he rightly points out that tech companies run like dictatorships not democracies. Yet we don’t opose them. Why?

Again a matter of preference.

Ment to down vote the post not comment.

The COVID trucker convoy labeled the Liberal government as a regime. They also say the liberal government suppresses dissent and the freezing of bank accounts as totalitarian. They also say most Canadians oppose the Liberal regime and that Trudeau got fewer votes then the Conservatives.

Many such people emigrated to Mexico saying leaving is better than fighting.

Are you going to say the Liberal government is a regime?

I bet there is at least one Cuban who labels the government as the government.

“Cubans” don’t view their government as a regime. You do, then found a Cuban that agrees with you and then put their quote in bold.

You just proved my point. Government I like is called a government, government someone else likes is called regine.

If you are consistent with “regime” you’d call all governments as regimes.

Don’t you know? When I kill citizens, it’s called freedom. When someone else kills citizens, it’s called tyranny.

Governments I like are called governments, governments someone else likes is called regimes.

Don’t you want to support freedom? Why are western governments so against freedom? Why is Canada playing pussyfoot with oppressive tyrannical communist regimes?

The person who thinks this post is legit doesn’t deserve an /s.

Talking to Iranian expats is like talking to flat earthers.

They believe the Islamic Republic was a CIA coup while the Sha was not, when in fact the opposite is true.

What the expats fail to understand is that, at the time in 1979, the majority of the people (i.e. people outside the cities) wanted the Islamic Republic.

This same dynamic is playing out in Turkey with Erdogoun. His support comes from the countryside. The secular support is in the cities. That’s how he put down the military.

Same thing happened with the Taliban. They were popular in the country. And overtook the country when the US withdrew. But you would be stupid to say the CIA backed the Taliban government.

It’s very difficult for them to understand that their viewpoint was in the minority (at the time). They have to say the government was imposed on the country instead of confronting the reality that it was not.

These governments were not imposed, they were chosen. Negative consequences came as a result, like a lot of ultra conservative movements, but chosen none the less.

The current government fucked up though with killing protesters. The majority is prob against them now.

Please do it

That’s typical (normal) politicians though. Not the unhinged ones yet.

It is unfortunate that measles is coming back

Unfortunately Carney himself said that the international rules-based order is a lie. The strong will do what they want and the weak will suffer what they must.

Yeah no. The same was said about Iraq, Afghanistan (both US and Russia invations).

You just want Russia to pay because you don’t like Russia that’s it.

If you were required to pay something, then magically (look at that?) the laws suddenly change.

Hmmm. Does FAFO apply universally? If it does not, why would it be understood universally?

It is unfortunate that you’re getting down voted into oblivian for stating the obvious.

I’m not a legal expert

You say this because you don’t have a proper response besides “me good, them bad”. I see a lot of “I am not a [educated person] but” is always followed by a incrqedibly wrong self-serving take as if ignorance is a valid excuse to backing something obviously wrong but self-serving.

"I am not a climate expert but… "

“I am not a doctor but…”

“I am not a mathematician but…”

“I am not a legal expert but…”

If you don’t know, that’s fine. But be open to being properly educated instead of spreading bad-faith, self-serving propaganda.

Russia is responsible for this

True

it will have to pay

False.

The word is should not will. You would like Russia to pay but you do not have the ability to say what will or will not happen.

whataboutism is certainly irrelevant

Whataboutism is a falacy to deny the truthfulness of a claim of something happening, not one should interpret it.

In fact whataboutism is the basis of falsification which is important in science.

We know for a fact that Russia invaded a country and did not pay reparations (Afghanistan). Why do you think that when Russia invades another country that it will pay? This is why you’re really saying “should” but use the word “will” instead.

I can say they did not before, there is no expectations that they will do so in the future.

Canada has long been a branch economy. There is nothing new.

OK. But who decides when justice will be applied and when will it not? Will Russia pay reparations to Afghanistan for the invasion in the 1980’s. Will the US pay for Iraq and Afghanistan?

Even just sticking to Russia, why is Ukraine getting paid with Russian assets but Afghanistan did not. Who decides this? Do you see how arbitrary this is?

It’s worse. Corporate tax rates have been going backwards.

Yes. And especially with a new age of austerity, it is an important question.