To be fair, this mainly seems lika Purra being Purra, or in other words, a lunatic. This is only her proposal for new budget cuts and none of the other government parties have agreed with them so far.

In fact, even the NCP have said this proposal doesn’t seem reasonable and will need a lot of negotiation to even become somewhat feasible. Let’s see this autumn where the negotiations lead us, but I don’t believe most of it will make it into the budget plan.

Translation: “You better wipe the bottom of the ladle against the edge of the pot so that it won’t drip on the table”.

For anyone else who’s still confused, Horton Hears a Who! is a book by Dr. Seuss about a speck of dust that’s also a tiny planet and some elephants that try to destroy it.

“Somewhere”? Time to call in Rainbolt

As far as I understand, it’s still a bit unclear.

Thailand claims Cambodian troops were approaching a Thai border guard station and started firing towards the Thai soldiers, leading to the Thai soldiers firing back.

Cambodia claims the patrol was walking the regular route, and Thai soldiers suddenly opened fire towards them.

Obviously one (or both) is lying, and the situation escalated quickly.

Is this an evolution of the famous KURKKUMOPO!?

“The great London underground, established 1043 CE.”

I don’t quite agree with this. It seems like you’re focusing on the worst types in each scenario.

Competitive debates aren’t (in my opinion) debates at all. They’re rhetorical competitions where you need to know how to talk convincingly/manipulatively, but don’t necessarily need to know anything about debating.

Political debates come in all shapes and forms, but of course the ones that will be focused on and remembered are there worst examples that seem the most silly.

You’re kind of right about internet debates. Especially the “scoring system” can be very biased depending on the community, but if you ignore the scores there can still be valid points to be found in some debates. Of course, being the internet, there will also be overwhelming amounts of spam/trolls that can be hard to ignore.

Conversation is a broader term that includes debates. Debates are conversations, but not all conversations are debates. The issue with the word debate is that it sometimes gets misused (like competitive debate) which makes its meaning a bit unclear. Although all of this is just my opinion, so take it with a huge scoop of salt.

Correct me if I’m wrong here, but I don’t think they “just moved in”. They’ve lived there for a long time as well, but the former country of Palestine was quite divided ethnically, and that caused issues due to extremists (on both sides).

The purpose of splitting Palestine was to get two countries that were at least less divided ethnically, but due to where people lived Israel still remained quite evenly divided between muslims and jews whereas the new Palestine was close to 100% muslims.

Countries have been split all over the world before in somewhat similar manners without causing as big conflicts, showing that this could’ve been done in a peaceful manner. What went wrong here? I don’t know.

Chaotic neutral, then in the fridge. Quick and easy, stays fresh.

They were on the winning side, so they did win the whole war. But as I said, they didn’t do it alone nor would they ever have been able to win without all the help they received from everyone else fighting the Nazis at the same time. I don’t think current events should be a reason to see history differently. The Soviets were a powerful war machine during WWII and their contribution played a huge role in the outcome of that war.

I would like to make one correction. Berlin didn’t fall because the Western forces captured it, but it was in fact the Red Army that got there first. This of course doesn’t change the fact that the Soviets never would have managed it by themselves, but this is the reason why claiming “the Soviets defeated the Nazis” is technically true.

A pot of gold appears at the end of the rainbow in the trapdoor