>Football team dies
>3 (Three) days of national mourning
I get that they love their soccer and that this is a tragic event for anyone involved, but isn't three days national mourning a bit excessive. Aren't hundreds of people killed every day in the favelas?
We live for football, football is our life. You go to any bar, party, classroom or gathering and people will be discussing football and talking about good and bad players.
We live for football, so when one of our idols die, the grief is too strong.
then you don't get that we love our soccer
Official mourning doesn't mean anything in Brazil and, in fact, does not change daily life .. huehue
>Aren't hundreds of people killed every day in the favelas?
>people
>favelas
>favelados
>people
>tfw a gringo thinks he knows something simply because he's posting from a first world country
south americans look up to football players because football is the only escape from our hellish third world latin american lives, football clubs are as important as family or religion to us, and we respect the people who play there
are rich people in brazil really THIS misanthropic?
in pretty much all of the civilised world, hundreds of deaths would be considered a great tragedy by any definition. why do only brazilians have this misanthropic attitude?
It's just some 12yo edgelords thinking they are cool for hating on football players.
Their profession doesn't matter holy shit, 71 people died.
>tfw you'll never as friendly and nice as a Swedish man
No, it depends on what people are used to. You wouldn't care either, if hundreds died every day in Sweden. It's only change from what they are used to they care about. So if hundreds suddenly started dying, you'd care for a while, but then you'd stop caring.
HOW THE FUCK DID YOU LOSE THE ENITRE TEAM?
It wasn't the national team, it was an underdog club, they died on a bong plane crash piloted by a bolivian.
Ahhh Brazil's circus.
Ever seen the size of Brazil? Got any understanding on Brazilian politics and the major gap between north and south?
I can bet you feel a lot of empathy for those Africans and Arabs rageraping your women, in the same way we feel as much empathy for northern Brazilians murdering each, skyrocketing our crime rates and draining off the welfare system.
Ah, that's still rough
good luck and blessings to all the friends and family related to the players
>Aren't hundreds of people killed every day in the favelas
Do Australians really care about Abos?
So it's the same thing.
Rich Brazilians enjoy when favelados die because according to rich Brazilians, favelados ruin Brazil's image and reputation abroad.
I just hate niggers. I feel really sorry for these guys and some of them were black.
I'm not rich and I hate favelados. I wish cops kill almost everyone envolved with crime. Just that.
Favelas have good people too.
2 southern cities are among the 50 most dangerous cities in the world
Brazilian women are qt as fuck. I'm jealous of you favela dwelling fucks.
This. Almost everyone want to kill the rest of Abos in Australia, the same of niggers in America and Native Americans in Northern Canada.
Sweden and Finland hate Sami people. Swedes even castrated them.
I don't think you know what's actually happening here and why.
We're unironically thriving through Brazilian monkey politics in the best way we can.
And I don't think Colombia would last for very long holding this same amount of burden.
>muh south
Caralho, como eu tenho raiva dos postadores sulistas, o país inteiro apoiando a gente e vocês ficam fazendo isso? Vão tomar no cu.
Os paulistas geralmente são os mais cringe, de sulista edgy acho que só tem o caxiense.
>muh non-irony
No, you clearly don't get it how much they love football
Vai tomar no cu, seu excremento humano. Não tá vendo o povo dessas regiões apoiando a gente?
>Palmira and Cali
Damn we are against the wor...
>Caracas, Acapulco and SS
HOLY SHIT NIGGERS
How is Acapulco so unsafe? isn't it supossed to be a touristic city?
Are both of you newfags? People around here can only see what they wish to. If the swedish guy wants to believe that he has a higher sense of life's value then let him be.
>pot calling the kettle black
Just stop you look ridiculous.
hey, colombanon, what's your take on the peace treaty with FARC?
Hey, favelas have lot of good people. Jorge Filho is based as fuck. I just want to cops go there, kill all criminals, leftists and people who support them.
That's it.
Cops ARE the criminals.
T. gommie
Cops and drug lords work together, in case you haven't noticed that yet(or didn't pay attention when you watched Elite Squad 1 and 2 because you were masturbating too hard to Nascimento's speeches).
Honestly, I do care 75 people died, regardless of their profession.
But yeah, people die everyday and almost nobody raises a single eyebrow, so I get what you mean.
Quality post (I'm not trolling). Thank you. But also, I do care about the football team... but I agree with you. I don't know why everybody cries when somebody famous dies, but don't care about kids being killed by cops for being black and poor, people getting killed by criminals everyday, etc.
Ugh.
TL/DR: I liked it before, there were some issues, but it was worthy.. Now everybody fucked up, and idk.
The treaty itself is necesary. Colombia have been in this war with all these guerrillas for ~50 years, but the country have always been engulfed by some violent conflct at some pont. The thing is that most people don't realize it is the same war changing the name but not the identities of the enemies.
The worst part is that these wars "reincarnate" because the decayement of the conflict turn both sides into power hungry machiavelian criminals, who won't respect life or truth to gain greater economical benefits or a better but undeserved public image.
So, a treaty that wasn't just about the end of violence between these rwo parties, but more importantly, covered the original issues that made FARC fight (mostly the problem of land ownership) and gave them popular support back when they had not disgregarded the popular base was great. The best part is that the government side actualized and made realistic the proposals, while recognizing the importance of these problems, while tunning down FARC'S lenninist bs.
The problem was that FARC was not surrending, but negotiating peace; so they wanted some benefits. These benefits were diminished by the gov as much as possible within the margins of what the guerrilla would find acceptable, but even then many colombians had the right to feel that the punishment for the worst crimes should be much greater. This was the greater concern regarding this treaty (and the only legitimate one, imo).
1/2
I voted "yes" in the referendum. While I can understand and agree with the people that feel like FARC commanders and generals should be made accountable for the crimes like massacres or kidnapings, I also felt like this was too musch of a great oportunuity for real positive change in colombian politics, both in economical legislation and a precedence for trust and coexistence. So I felt like giving mild punishment to ~50 people was an acceptable price for such the possibility of a bright future.
But FARC are REALLY unpopular. Also, Santos trying to negotiate peace with them was """political treason""" to his political goodparent, Uribe, who then went on to diffamate the process with all he had. Uribe, his party, and his allies pointed to the legitimate problems with the treaty, but they also made up a bunch of stuff. Just to give an example, they claimed that the treaty pushed what they call "genre ideology" (acceptance of LGBT people). This is bs, but that didn't stop all the ignorant imbeciles who didn't bothered with reading the publicy avaliable treaty to go and vote "No" for the children and against degeneracy. This is just an example, and there was a lot more dissinformation going around at the time. To only add to the mess, Santos went full retard and started promoting "Yes" by shaming people who considered voting for "No". Muricans will tell you how intelligent is to shame voters with legitimate concerns but little trustworthy information.
So No won 51% against 49% (aprox). Uribe got to push himself into the dialogs and FARC soldiers (who are in ceasefire) started getting gunned down. A new version has passed, but I'll admit I had not read it. Apparently the government added many last minute modifications before sending it for aprovation at the congress (no more referendums) thus damaging heavily the already fragile trust of the "No" voters. Uribe is still compplaining because he wanted a one sided surrender from FARC.
2/2
I get what you mean. And I agree. I'd rather give up on some demands if that meant positive changes in the long run. Sad to read tho about the whole Uribe - Santos maneuver. I guess it's just more of what we're used to see here.
A one sided surrender from FARC would be nearly impossible to achieve. The treaty just seems (seemed?) like a one in a lifetime opportunity.
I hope things work out well for Colombia
I want them to kill people like you too. Gommie cancer
>2016
>still caring about dead niggers
Meanwhile our few remaining whites are brutally murdered by savage nigger monkeys.
Based cops, I hope I'll live long enough to experience the total extermination of niggers worldwide.
In the end, the only one getting killed is you and your family. You don't provide any benefit to the multi billion dollar drug business of Brazil.
Thanks BRo. I just reread my reply and realized I made so many typos and used genre instead of gender. Kek.
The feud between Santos and Uribe is just an example of the damage caused by conflicts among political elite representatives who are not really different. Even with these endemic and persistent problems Colombia had managed to do a thing or two, so even when I doubt that anything regarding this step in our history will go smoothly, I think things are really changing for the better.