The comment contains several different categories of claims that should not be treated equally: Claims about Heritage Foundation goals The Heritage Foundation has published policy proposals, including Project 2025. However, a claim that the organization has a goal of reducing the U.S. population to 100 million people requires direct evidence: an official document, speech, interview, or policy proposal explicitly stating this. Attributing statements by individual members to the entire organization requires caution. Claims about specific individuals If JD Vance or another public figure has stated a preference for a smaller population, the exact quote and context matter. A statement such as “an ideal population size” is not automatically equivalent to a policy goal of population reduction through coercive means. Claims about famine, disease, war, or mass death being “acceptable” This is an extremely serious allegation. It requires direct quotations or documented policies. A policy that has harmful consequences is not automatically proof that the authors intend those consequences. Policy criticism vs. intent It is possible to argue that certain policies (for example immigration restrictions, deregulation, healthcare changes, or foreign policy decisions) may increase risks or cause harm. That argument is different from proving an intention to cause mass death. Logical issue The comment moves from: “Some members support policies I consider harmful” to: “The organization is equivalent to historical genocidal regimes.” That is a very large inferential jump and requires strong evidence. A rigorous evaluation would ask: What exact document or quote supports the claim? Is it an official position or an individual’s opinion? Does the evidence show intended outcomes or unintended consequences? Are there alternative explanations? Strong criticism of an organization can be valid without relying on claims that cannot be directly demonstrated.

No idea why we let chatgpt chat here but fine 😂

Can you provide a link

That’s not bad as long everyone gets the same share. If you are just the door and get less than it gets to be a problem.

Hitler wrote what he is going to do. People didn’t take him serious and everyone thought oh I get an advantage. Oh this doesn’t happen to me. Later when it happened to them it was too late as the people who it didn’t happen to didn’t wanted to help because it didn’t happened to them.

Western Hemisphere? So he is going to attack Europe?

Honestly it’s working. I don’t care what that buffoon is doing. The opposition seems to be without plan why should I care? Let him just do whatever. He is so incompetent he will not even be able to dictator correct.

How long did it take you? To get to that level and to draw this image?

More people means more people! Most of us didn’t like people!

Honestly reddit went shit when everyone knew about it. You got mainstream shit that you could get on Facebook too. Don’t wish for more people! This makes it more fun and you can keep up.

It was always this. I can remember this one time my great great grandfather told a story he heard from his history teacher that this has happened! They all nearly died. So nothing new! Can’t be us! /S

There is an API where you can put in a phone number and you get the location by triangulation. You need proof you need it. Ask your provider

Written on iPhone

So true. Was able to get a 200kg safe in my room alone. Didn’t wanted to ask someone

Only if just a few are doing it.

Honest take. I would pay 200€ for a good simulation if hooked even with dlcs. The picture actually shows what we do wrong. Pay a lot of money for parts but safe on software.

Be hard on the topic but soft to the person!

Did you read about it? The destruction is the part they are interested in