Changes

Talk:Essay: Why did so many self-declared international relations experts miserably fail concerning their multipolar fantasy? (view source)

Revision as of 07:00, October 17, 2023

1,108 bytes added , 07:00, October 17, 2023

Line 42: Line 42:

::::And as far as your charge of "spirit guides", you are the person who used the crank [[Caitlin Johnstone]] to defend China at [[Talk:Essay: The rising rule of communist idiocracy in China]]. She wrote a book on astrology called ''The Complete Book Of Astrology: Your personal guide to learning, understanding and using Astrology''. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 02:42, October 17, 2023 (EDT)

+

I would also point out that disagreeing with you on various matters is not a jihad or some kind of unpardonable sin. People disagree with me all the time and I certainly don't get upset about it. That is a reasonable attitude to have. The someone disagrees with me on the internet approach is a very unreasonable attitude to have.

+

Stephen Kotkin, who is a very knowledgeable historian, [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9qovJZwIVr0 agrees with me] that the world is not multipolar and the notion that it is multipolar is a lot of nonsense.

+

I also cite: "We are not in a multipolar world." - International Relations and Security Analyst Mark Sleboda on Brian Berlectic's pro-Russia New Atlas YouTube channel.[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pK4SZ5IzeRE&t=7577s]

+

Colonel Douglas MacGregor said about China in the video [https://www.youtube.com/shorts/P7V9JdGs76g Why China's Navy is a JOKE]: "China has huge problems just holding itself together. So I think we should set China aside and understand that." [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 03:00, October 17, 2023 (EDT)

== Feedback ==

Conservative

Irenaeus, Siteadmin, Check users, oversight, Administrators

351,420

edits