It’s not a license to engage in historical revisionism. Like the myth of the clean wehrmacht, the notion that Hitler didn’t have the broad support of the majority of German citizens is an attempt to deny the culpability of everyday Germans from the war crimes they were collectively responsible for in WW2.

It’s a bit pedantic to say that Hitler rose to power without the majority because he only received 43.9% of the vote… especially considering that over 17 million people voted for him and the next most popular candidate only received 7 million votes.

That really only makes sense if you are reviewing the election through the lens of someone used to a two party system. If we are going to evaluate it as if it were a two party system and combine the right and left into two coalitions…the Nazi, Centre, DNVP, and BVP would make up nearly 26 million voters while the SPD and kpd would only make up nearly 12 million people.

Even though the Centre party was much more willing to work with the Nazi than the socialist, if we added their votes to the left coalition you’d still have 22m on the right and 16m on the left.

The only way you can really claim that the Nazi didn’t receive the majority of the vote is if you misinterpret The Weimar Republic as a direct democracy and not a Republic.

I think that’s a massive mischaracterization of the elections in 33. Hitler mainly rose to power because the traditional nationalist party and centrist party thought they could control him and use his popularity to ward off a coalition from leftist and unionists. The centrists were among the first parties to vote in favor of the Enabling act, which granted legislative powers to Hitler’s government.

It’s a bit pedantic to say that Hitler rose to power without the majority because he only received 43.9% of the vote… especially considering that over 17 million people voted for him and the next most popular candidate only received 7 million votes.

That really only makes sense if you are reviewing the election through the lens of someone used to a two party system. If we are going to evaluate it as if it were a two party system and combine the right and left into two coalitions…the Nazi, Centre, DNVP, and BVP would make up nearly 26million voters while the SPD and kpd would only make up nearly 12 million people.

Even though the Centre party was much more willing to work with the Nazi than the SPD, if we added their votes to the left coalition you’d still have 22m on the right and 16m on the left.

But I didn’t just say there was a cease fire, I declared it… What don’t they understand about that?

Economics is basically horoscopes for old rich white dudes. They veil their practice in “scientific” language/mathematical models and then have the audacity to make claims like “future consumption should be discounted simply because it takes place in the future and people generally prefer the present to the future (inherent discounting)” or create models on the assumption that growth is forever sustainable in a closed system with inherently limited natural resources.

Really is concerning that society has yet to break free from the influence of sooth sayers. There really isn’t much of a difference between the leaders of states listening to an economics major or listening to a young girl getting high on volcanic fumes at the temple of Delphi.

Let the kids smoke, maybe enough of them will get asthma and will be able to dodge the draft.

I mean I don’t think kids should actually smoke, but I always find it funny that on some things governments are willing to move heaven and earth for the sake of the children…and then turn a blind eye to things like global warming and war. Like these are also bad for the children my dudes.

Lol, what part of her comment was an hominem, how did she infantalize anyone?

His response was inappropriate and completely avoided her points. Telling a woman to watch their tone is about as common as a misogynistic dog whistle as you can find.

Just because he didn’t call her a slur doesn’t mean he wasn’t being an asshole. The substance of his response was more offensive than any ad hominem.

I dont respect anyone defending sexism, so throwing ad hominems at incels is fine with me. I also don’t care about the opinions of misogynist, so please fuck off and go be a disappointment to your mother elsewhere, thanks.

Edit: oh I thought it was some once defending you, you were the fuckface in the original post. Yeah you can go fuck yourself, Lord knows you’re never going to find someone else to do it for you.

Lol, people need to keep their damn hands off the lathe of heaven.

I mean if this is true I can’t imagine the Russians would think this would be a very successful attempt. This would be hilarious as a movie plot. Polish grandpa is a Soviet sleeper agent being pulled out of his retirement home and having a fsb agent attempt to explain to him how to operate a drone.

I guess throwing spaghetti at the wall and seeing what sticks works with assassinations as well?

Biden just followed through with what was negotiated with the Taliban by the former Trump administration. If the US doesn’t follow through we lose credibility in all future negotiations with everyone.

I am skeptical of the claim that we had any credibility to lose in respect to our dealings in Afghanistan. Plus, our negotiations weren’t with the Taliban, they weren’t in control of the country until we extracted. Our dealings were with the former Afghan government who weren’t in favour of the expedited process.

What you’re complaining about is the fact that Trump et all made an agreement to pull out the troops within a certain (completely unreasonable) timeline. They had no idea WTF they were doing and obviously didn’t do due diligence or any sort of logistics planning for such a withdrawal before making the agreement.

And knowing that the Biden administration still rammed through the pull out. It’s not like delaying the pull out of Afghanistan didn’t already have a precedent.

What do you think makes us look worse on the global stage…? A slight and understandable delay in moving our troops out, or completely abandoning our partners to a regime that everyone knew was going to hunt them and their families down in retribution?

You are pretending as if geopolitics is completely devoid of nuance.

you think that sounds like bullshit let me ask you this: Does Trump ever do due diligence on anything? During his first administration nearly all his executive orders got thrown out because they were deemed arbitrary and capricious and during his second administration it looks like we’re getting the same exact situation.

Again, I fail to see how that makes the Biden administration seem competent if they chose to proceed with something they knew was going to be a shit show.

My point was that it was a shit show, and that both administrations are in some way responsible for it.

Not that I’m a fan of any of America’s modern wars, but the way we pulled out of Afghanistan was just above and beyond a shit show. We spent over a decade running around with our dicks in our hands, and when its finally time to end the farce we decide that it has to be done virtually overnight.

I’m not one to normally “both sides” Democrats and Republicans, but imo bidens refusal to change the withdrawal does lend evidence to that argument, at least when it comes to certain foreign policy. We fucked over the country, but worse of all we fucked over the people who actually believed in whatever good will we were selling them on.

I volunteer with an organization that connects healthcare providers like myself with Afghan refugees. When they came over here they didn’t have access to social security numbers, programs like Medicaid or Medicare, or even Tricare. They were basically being brought with what they could carry and then dumped in section 8 housing in some of the roughest neighborhoods in the area.

My friend Mahmud was a translator who had been blown up in an IED attack while serving with our military. I met him because he was trying to find a job without papers, but had a hard time keeping up with his work because he had severe drop foot because he was missing the anterior of his calf muscle.

His wife, himself, and their 6 beautiful children were living in a rundown two bedroom apartment, and even though they had virtually nothing they were gracious host. They basically force fed me tea and what little food they were provided to live off of.

This article is just another example of the government wiping its hand of any responsibility when we decide to make war. Mahmud and his family are doing so much better now, but it’s only because we have a very active Islamic community that has taken the responsibility over caring for these families. Things like this make me embarrassed to be an American citizen.

If you ever have the chance to befriend an person from Afghanistan, I highly recommend it. Be warned, you will basically be kidnapped and forced to eat more food than you can handle, they are an aggressively loving people.

More than the amount of doctors who found direct scientific evidence …

The guy wrote a paper about it and tried to find any evidence to support the new rules, he didn’t find any.

from 2018 says there’s problems with even really short lengths of beard…

You are making claims that weren’t in the article. That studies conclusiion were

“Conclusion: Beard length and areal density negatively influence FF. However, tight-fitting half-face negative-pressure respirator fit tests can achieve adequate fit factor scores even with substantial facial hair in the face seal area.”

Plus your original claim was that razor bumps would negatively impact the fit, not short length beards. You’re moving the goalposts.

You basically admitted to breaking OSHA rules though. So congrats!

Lol, you really have issues with reading comprehension… OSHA doesn’t care as long as it does not impede function of the seal. You determine the fit of the seal by doing a fit test. If you do a fit test and pass, it’s not impeding the seal.

“The Respiratory Protection standard, paragraph 29 CFR 1910.134(g)(1)(i)(A), states that respirators shall not be worn when facial hair comes between the sealing surface of the facepiece and the face or that interferes with valve function. Facial hair is allowed as long as it does not protrude under the respirator seal, or extend far enough to interfere with the device’s valve function. Short mustaches, sideburns, and small goatees that are neatly trimmed so that no hair compromises the seal of the respirator usually do not present a hazard and, therefore, do not violate paragraph 1910.134(g)(1)(i).”

Removed by mod

At this point we’re getting nowhere… When you say shit like “With chemical weapons?”… Yes we’re talking about literal war…

Yes, and in war chemical weapons aren’t exactly known for their deep strike capabilities. Chemicals are hard to disperse accurately and in significant quantities, especially from far away.

This is literally the primary place chemical weapons are used as far as all of known recorded history.

You’re claiming chemical weapons are usually used to attack deep behind enemy lines?..source for that? Again, besides your supposed “service” that made you an expert in respirators.

OSHA, ANSI, all branches of DOD and the study agree with me… You can argue whatever you want, I’m disengaging.

Lol that razor bumps impede the seals on respirators…? hilarious that you haven’t engaged with that rebuttal a single time despite it being my first correction.

Judging by the way you interpreted that last paper, I don’t feel confident you’re really capable of having an educated opinion. So I think it’s best you disengage.

though I think you’re really disengaging because I’m on the money about your time in the military. Still haven’t replied about your mos…

Wouldn’t know. Didn’t try to wear it without being clean shaven (or close enough/stubble).

I meant without… Though I doubt you spent much time in it. What was your mos again…? Never answered that. I’m guessing based on the fact that you’re non Lemmy it wasn’t infantry… I’m guessing you were on a computer most of the time.

out of thousands of soldiers? out of thousands of applications of the mask during an attack? 2% is a large number…

Reduction in effectiveness does not mean failure you dolt.

The sourced document that I provided and clearly you read proved to you that beards will break seals. From the study “Beard length and areal density, but not coarseness, were statistically significant predictors of fit”. If length and density were not relevant to the matter then they would have stated so. But it is. So it is. Poor fit is a bad seal. The study showed no issue for up to 0.063 inches of hair… pull out a caliper and check that length… That is VERY short. I can grow that in probably 2-3 days. Hell even 0.125 is pretty short… and that’s where there’s already fall off and failures in getting seals. You are now arguing that it’s okay for 2% of military members to die during a chemical attack just because they want to have a bit more than stubble… This is a crazy stance to accept.

Lol, again ignoring the part where you claimed that razor bumps affected seals…you aren’t arguing in good faith. You are also making conclur not made by the original source.

Can’t choose what gets attacked… The enemy chooses that.

Lol… With chemical weapons?

didn’t bring it up did I? You did.

My claim was that facial hair has little to do with a good seal, and that facial shape and brand has more to do with it.

Your argument is that it’s facial hair not, so the brand doesn’t do anything to support you argument.

have to assume that this is “not at all” confidence for both scenarios then.

And the argument is about facial hair… Remember? I like how you constantly they to redirect the argument away from your original claim… really helpful.

Honestly though I’m still reeling from you comparing your job of just handling some chemicals to an airborne chemical attack situation that would aerosolise the chemical…

Honestly surprised your arguing with some with a degree in chemistry when your only experience was probably in basic training. You deal with a lot of Sarin attacks in the 4 years of doing IT for the army?

Here

We’re not in a trial case…

If I wanted to be as much of a pain in the ass. None of your claims about being in the service are admissible in nerd court apparently.

Oh boy… you don’t know about military contracts do you?

So your mask didn’t work then…?

You posted quotes with no source. Which is why I ignored it.

you are exhaustingly pedantic…

Cool… one guy says it’s not a problem. Here’s an actual study. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29283316

" Beard length and areal density negatively influence FF. However, tight-fitting half-face negative-pressure respirator fit tests can achieve adequate fit factor scores even with substantial facial hair in the face seal area"

I don’t really think one could really claim that a 2% reduction in effectiveness quantifies as beards break gas mask seals.

agree with him… it is discriminatory.

That’s what the whole argument was about.

when the effect of that discrimination is less potential death on a battlefield…

Again, you haven’t substantiated your claim about bumps effecting seals… You haven’t even substantiated that beards break seals.

So no, you can’t claim it would save lives. Plus, the majority of people serving in the military arent in combat positions.

And as seen above, when research is done… it shows exactly what I said it shows, because I’m basing my opinion on my lived experience and the research that supports that.

I don’t think you read that paper correctly…

Which the military standardized on one specific model of mask… so picking a choosing a brand is kind of out of the question now isn’t it?

That doesn’t have anything to do with your facial hair…does it?

would like to pose a different question for you then… Assuming that you have the 1/4" or longer facial hair now that you claim you wear… Would you be confident that you could run in it for a football field carrying gear and shooting a gun for hours without losing the seal?

I don’t have a beard atm, but I would be just as confident doing that with or without the beard.

Edit: Additionally… the risk of whatever you’re doing in the hospital is much lower than Sarin gas or other wartime gaseous weapons. A bad seal for you might make you a little dizzy or you have to take a break and re-seal/replace your respirator, where a bad seal on the battle field would simply mean death.

Lol, no we have to wear butyl respirators and do monthly fit tests because we work with extremely dangerous chemicals. Some of which do have a NFPA rating of 4, the same as Sarin.