Youtube comments of Gaza is not Amalek (@Ass_of_Amalek).

  1. 5400
  2. 5300
  3. 3700
  4. 2600
  5. 2500
  6. 2400
  7. 2000
  8. 1900
  9. 1700
  10. 1700
  11. 1600
  12. 1600
  13. 1500
  14. 1300
  15. 1300
  16. 1200
  17. 1200
  18. 1100
  19. 1000
  20. 1000
  21. 1000
  22. 990
  23. 869
  24. 869
  25. 816
  26. 774
  27. 773
  28. 739
  29. 733
  30. 674
  31. 662
  32. 650
  33. 612
  34. 590
  35. 581
  36. 571
  37. 561
  38. 553
  39. 536
  40. 529
  41. 507
  42. 449
  43. 449
  44. 442
  45. 442
  46. 435
  47. 429
  48. 426
  49. 423
  50. 422
  51. 420
  52. 415
  53. 409
  54. 406
  55. 392
  56. 390
  57. 386
  58. 386
  59. 366
  60. 365
  61. 362
  62. 357
  63. 352
  64. 331
  65. 329
  66. 329
  67. 318
  68. 314
  69. 312
  70. 302
  71. 299
  72. 296
  73. 293
  74. 292
  75. 291
  76. 286
  77. 279
  78. 275
  79. 275
  80. 272
  81. 269
  82. 268
  83. 267
  84. 257
  85. 257
  86. 255
  87. 254
  88. 250
  89. 250
  90. 248
  91. 242
  92. 239
  93. 233
  94. 232
  95. 231
  96. 229
  97. 229
  98. 228
  99. 228
  100. 224
  101. 217
  102. 213
  103. 212
  104. 204
  105. 198
  106. 196
  107. 195
  108. 194
  109. 193
  110. 192
  111. 189
  112. 188
  113. 187
  114. 182
  115. 180
  116. 177
  117. 175
  118. 174
  119. 172
  120. 171
  121. 170
  122. 170
  123. 170
  124. 168
  125. 168
  126. 167
  127. 167
  128. 164
  129. 163
  130. 162
  131. 161
  132. 158
  133. 158
  134. 155
  135. 153
  136. 152
  137. 150
  138. 149
  139. 149
  140. 149
  141. 148
  142. 148
  143. 147
  144. 147
  145. 147
  146. 147
  147. 145
  148. 145
  149. 144
  150. 144
  151. 143
  152. 142
  153. 142
  154. 142
  155. 141
  156. 140
  157. 137
  158. 135
  159. 135
  160. 134
  161. 132
  162. 132
  163. 129
  164. 128
  165. 127
  166. 123
  167. 122
  168. 121
  169. 121
  170. 120
  171. 119
  172. 119
  173. 118
  174. 118
  175. 118
  176. 116
  177. 115
  178. 114
  179. 113
  180. 112
  181. 112
  182. 111
  183. 110
  184. 109
  185. 108
  186. 108
  187. 108
  188. 107
  189. 106
  190. 106
  191. 106
  192. 105
  193. 105
  194. 105
  195. 104
  196. 104
  197. 104
  198. 103
  199. 103
  200. 103
  201. 103
  202. 103
  203. 102
  204. 100
  205. 98
  206. 97
  207. 96
  208. 96
  209. 96
  210. 94
  211. 93
  212. 93
  213. 93
  214. 93
  215. 92
  216. 91
  217. 91
  218. 90
  219. 90
  220. 90
  221. 89
  222. 89
  223. 88
  224. 87
  225. 86
  226. 85
  227. 85
  228. 85
  229. 85
  230. 84
  231. 84
  232. 83
  233. could be great, but the video is missing an explanation of what the product actually can and can't do. you talked about very superficial tests about killing bacteria, but people normally clean with the primary intent of removing various types of visible dirt, and you didn't say anything about what this could do there. I know that that primary pineapple enzyme is great at destroying proteins, but that's quite different from the normal soap-based cleaning products that primarily dissolve fats in water. does the pineapple stuff also work for fats? also you called the product a "soap" after they added oils, but you don't get soap by mixing oils with acids, you get soap by mixing oils with bases. edit: read the other comments, feel dumb now for not realising that the stuff is vinegar. sure, vinegar has cleaning applications (though I absolutely despise the smell of normal vinegar used for cleaning), and if this process actually preserves the bromelain enzyme, that could make the pineapple vinegar more effective for some cleaning jobs than normal vinegar, since that stuff is really good at breaking down and dissolving proteins, which I believe are a category of substances that soaps tend to have a little bit of trouble with. but it would certainly not be a replacement for detergents, just a potentially better vinegar. and I don't see how it would be suitable for washing skin or accidental skin contact whatsoever, I don't want vinegar on my skin, and bromelain very noticeable attacks skin and mucous membranes whenever you cut or eat fresh pineapple.
    83
  234. 82
  235. 82
  236. 82
  237. 82
  238. 82
  239. 82
  240. 82
  241. 81
  242. 81
  243. 81
  244. 81
  245. 80
  246. 79
  247. 79
  248. 79
  249. 79
  250. 78
  251. 78
  252. 77
  253. 77
  254. I'm not buying the claim that what they're using is some plant oil mixture that magically works like epoxy resin. as a violin maker, I'm quite familiar with natural resins and oils usable for making varnishes and the like, and I'm not aware of anything like that, other than perhaps urushi sap that could possibly harden with moist coffee grounds, but I believe that would take weeks, not less than four days. urushi hardens with moisture, all other natural resin and oil options either polymerize with oxygen or dry by evaporation, or would need to be melted and mixed hot. what they're showing is relatively quick hardening of a cold mix with no air exposure or heating - only two-component resins like epoxy harden like that, and the sturdiness of the result certainly suggests a synthetic resin, too. coffee grounds are excellent for composting, they actually work great for adding nutrients to otherwise leaf- and wood-based garden, park, or plant farm compost, and worms love them. coffee grounds saturated with epoxy on the other hand are effectively particularly toxic microplastic. the subtractive CNC-cut process these people are using produces a lot of waste (much more waste than glasses frames), and whatever that alleged "plant oil mixture" is will certainly make the waste more environmentally problematic than the coffee grounds were to begin with, even if it was just magically epoxy-like natural oil and resin. in short, the environmentalist branding here is truly absurd, it's absolute hipster BS.
    77
  255. 77
  256. 77
  257. 76
  258. 75
  259. 74
  260. 74
  261. 74
  262. 74
  263. 74
  264. I'm happy to hear that they're finally changing their minds about home growing. legalizing the trade without legalizing home growing is a totally deranged idea, and the current government initially said that that's what they intended to do. it makes sense to require licensing and testing if one grows to sell, but there is absolutely no good reason to not allow people to grow their own weed when they can legally buy weed (it's just a legislative favor done for the cannabis industry, likely to be the result of lobbying from tobacco firms intent on branching out to legal cannabis). there's nothing difficult or dangerous about it that can go wrong. the only possible danger is in smoking moldy weed, but that's an easy mistake to avoid and not a huge responsibility to put on people. restricting the number of plants for private growers is ok, though 3-4 plants per person would be much more reasonable than per household. and really the limit should be slightly higher, since people in germany are likely to grow relatively small plants due to growing mostly indoors and having only a short growing season outdoors. an indoor plant in germany is likely to yield 50-100g, and um to 200g outdoors. in california, which has had a similar plant count limit for a long time (5 or more plants per person I think), the outdoor growing season is so long that plants can grow 3-4m tall and wide and yield a kilo or two each. I would propose a limit of 6 plants per person with plants in the vegetative state (not flowering) counting half. that's still nowhere near a viable commercial growing operation.
    73
  265. 73
  266. 73
  267. 72
  268. 72
  269. 72
  270. 72
  271. 71
  272. 71
  273. 71
  274. 71
  275. 70
  276. 70
  277. 70
  278. 70
  279. 69
  280. 69
  281. 68
  282. 68
  283. 68
  284. 68
  285. 67
  286. 67
  287. 67
  288. 67
  289. 67
  290. 66
  291. 66
  292. 66
  293. 66
  294. 65
  295. 65
  296. 65
  297. 65
  298. 65
  299. 64
  300. 64
  301. 64
  302. 64
  303. 63
  304. 63
  305. 63
  306. 63
  307. 62
  308. 62
  309. 62
  310. 62
  311. 61
  312. 61
  313. 61
  314. 61
  315. 60
  316. 60
  317. 60
  318. 60
  319. 60
  320. 59
  321. 59
  322. 59
  323. 59
  324. 58
  325. 58
  326. 58
  327. 58
  328. 58
  329. 58
  330. 58
  331. 58
  332. 57
  333. 57
  334. 57
  335. 57
  336. 57
  337. 57
  338. 56
  339. 56
  340. 56
  341. 56
  342. 56
  343. 56
  344. 56
  345. 56
  346. 55
  347. 55
  348. 55
  349. 55
  350. 55
  351. 55
  352. 55
  353. 55
  354. 54
  355. 54
  356. 54
  357. 54
  358. 53
  359. 53
  360. 53
  361. 53
  362. 53
  363. 53
  364. 52
  365. 52
  366. 52
  367. 52
  368. 52
  369. 52
  370. 52
  371. 51
  372. 51
  373. 51
  374. 51
  375. 51
  376. 51
  377. 51
  378. 50
  379. 50
  380. 50
  381. 49
  382. 49
  383. 49
  384. 49
  385. 49
  386. 49
  387. 49
  388. 49
  389. 49
  390. 49
  391. 49
  392. 48
  393. 48
  394. 48
  395. 48
  396. 48
  397. 48
  398. 48
  399. 48
  400. 48
  401. 48
  402. 48
  403. 48
  404. 47
  405. 47
  406. 47
  407. 47
  408. 47
  409. 47
  410. 47
  411. 46
  412. 46
  413. 46
  414. 46
  415. 46
  416. 46
  417. 46
  418. 46
  419. 45
  420. 45
  421. 45
  422. 45
  423. 45
  424. 45
  425. 45
  426. 45
  427. 45
  428. 45
  429. 45
  430. 44
  431. 44
  432. 44
  433. 44
  434. 44
  435. 44
  436. 44
  437. note how the painted humans have shaded colours - there is a somewhat popular modern misconception that roman and greek statues that in modernity have been known as white marble or plaster were originally painted in garish bright and flat colours. but this is based on a handful of bad recreations that are the result of inadequate painting skills and an inappropriate limiting of the paint scheme to attempted recreations of the estimated original hues (on some recreations almost certainly overcorrecting for the presence of dark/grey/brown dirt and light-bleaching) of very small point-samples of colour from original antique statues and busts that were at some point in the past deliberately stripped of their colour to make them look neat and uniform after much wear, and then to conform to what people expect them to look like. if you look at antique marble busts and statues, they tend to very obviously show the intent of realism, and very impressive results to that end. to mine, cut, transport, carve and scrape marble into such shapes with antique technology requires time and skill far beyond how most successful artists and artisans work today. the paint on these statues and busts would have correspondingly been an extremely high quality version of the realism-oriented shaded painting style that these very cheap murals represent. even mosaics made of those tiny tile squares generally employ shading for humans and animals and what not. these statues were the ancient equivalent of today's wax statues, and wax statue artists are the ones who would be most qualified to recreate ancient statue paint. those much-shared modern painted recreations that look like they were made with acrylic colours straight from the tube are about as accurate as ecce mono, it's ridiculous that they've been broadly accepted, and the people who made and published them have embarrassed themselves and their profession.
    43
  438. 43
  439. 43
  440. 43
  441. 43
  442. 43
  443. 42
  444. 42
  445. 42
  446. 42
  447. in my opinion, the decision to quit the coup attempt must have been made mostly on the basis of immediate gains for prigozhin, something that's not a promise (like for protection or retention of assets) that could later be broken. such options I can think of are limited to: a) physical transfer of a very large amount of money/gold/gems - this may have been much smaller than what would be necessary to compensate for prigozhin's presumed losses in assets associated with giving up, including wagner's international ressource extraction, but it would be on a similar order of magnitude, billions of dollars, in order to have considerable appeal to prigozhin. b) physical transfer of weaponry - it would hold some definitive value, but I'm inclined to discount this as extremely unlikely. besides being dangerous to putin, it would also be of unreliable benefit to prigozhin, given his very shaky prospects of continued command of a significant portion of wagner forces c) release of hostages, family members of prigozhin or other essential coup leaders captured by putin loyalists - to me, this is likely to be the main reason, though it probably would have been combined with a money transfer. wagner would have made efforts to secure potential hostages, but for operational secrecy, they may have been largely limited to escorting people to safe houses inside russia at the beginning of the uprising instead of getting everybody out of russia days earlier, and this could easily have failed to prevent somebody's capture (through successful government surveillance, or through disloyalty of the personnel tasked with the protection, who could theoretically have been able to extract a fortune from putin as a reward). if the pictures that supposedly show prigozhin's own go-bags containing false passports and tens of millions of dollars in cash and gold supposedly picked up from the saint petersburg wagner headquarters' parking lot are real, that would indicate coup preparation partially shambolic enough to likely involve a partial failure to secure potential hostages, even prigozhin's own family. I don't know where they live or where they were, but he has three children and a wife who owns (owned) a bunch of businesses in saint petersburg, like he does. I would be somewhat surprised if those were inside russia, but it's also not entirely out of the question that putin's people managed to take hostages outside of russia. keeping strong surveillance on family members as leverage would have been an obvious thing to do before this attempt, so hiding them might have been very tricky. I also believe with high confidence that the reported involvement of belarus and lukashenka is a mere misdirection effort. lukashenka had no authority whatsoever to negotiate here - even if he did talk to prigozhin, he would have been putin's messenger, so acknowledging him as an actor in this is nonsense. he has substantial agency in many other matters, but not in regards to a russian coup attempt. lukashenka was inserted into the narrative in order to soften the impression of putin reversing course about everything he vowed to do a few hours earlier. the deal wasn't made with lukashenka, it was made with putin. lukashenka is just a stand-in to do something that putin didn't want attributed to himself.
    42
  448. 42
  449. 42
  450. 42
  451. 42
  452. 42
  453. 42
  454. 42
  455. 41
  456. 41
  457. 41
  458. 41
  459. 41
  460. 41
  461. 41
  462. 41
  463. 40
  464. 40
  465. 40
  466. 40
  467. 40
  468. 40
  469. 40
  470. 40
  471. 40
  472. 39
  473. 39
  474. 39
  475. 39
  476. 39
  477. 39
  478. 39
  479. 39
  480. 39
  481. 39
  482. 39
  483. 39
  484. 38
  485. 38
  486. 38
  487. 38
  488. 38
  489. 38
  490. 38
  491. 38
  492. 38
  493. 38
  494. 38
  495. 38
  496. 38
  497. 38
  498. 38
  499. 38
  500. 38
  501. 38
  502. 38
  503. 38
  504. 37
  505. 37
  506. 37
  507. 37
  508. 37
  509. 37
  510. 37
  511. 37
  512. 37
  513. 37
  514. 37
  515. 37
  516. 37
  517. 37
  518. 37
  519. 36
  520. 36
  521. 36
  522. 36
  523. 36
  524. 36
  525. 36
  526. 36
  527. 35
  528. 35
  529. 35
  530. 35
  531. 35
  532. 35
  533. 35
  534. 35
  535. 35
  536. 34
  537. 34
  538. 34
  539. 34
  540. 34
  541. 34
  542. 34
  543. 34
  544. 34
  545. 34
  546. 34
  547. 33
  548. 33
  549. 33
  550. 33
  551. 33
  552. 33
  553. 33
  554. 33
  555. 33
  556. 33
  557. 32
  558. 32
  559. 32
  560. 32
  561. 32
  562. 32
  563. 32
  564. 32
  565. 32
  566. 32
  567. 32
  568. 32
  569. 32
  570. 32
  571. 32
  572. 32
  573. 31
  574. 31
  575. 31
  576. 31
  577. 31
  578. 31
  579. 31
  580. 31
  581. 31
  582. 31
  583. 31
  584. 31
  585. 31
  586. 31
  587. 31
  588. 31
  589. 31
  590. 31
  591. 31
  592. 31
  593. 31
  594. 31
  595. 31
  596. 31
  597. 31
  598. well, he had already been arab-famous. I will say that piers morgan does platform pro-palestinian advocates more fairly than literally the entire western mainstream media, simply by letting almost all of them speak long enough uninterrupted to deliver complete arguments and responses - which says a lot about the general media coverage. but he has also likely done quite a bit of harm by platforming bad palestine advocates, namely nerdeen kiswani and to a lesser degree rahma zein, who took it as an opportunity to center themselves by grandstanding on not condemning the hamassacre in any way. that was always an idiotic position to take - the correct thing to do was to define whatever nuance you want, such as that you consider it to be a response to worse israeli oppression, that you consider hamas to be legitimate resistance to whatever degree, or that you support their attacking of the military, or that you reject israel's supposed right to bomb or invade or besiege gaza in response, but what was necessary was to acknowledge that the operation largely or primarily targeted civilians, and that the targeted killing and kidnapping of civilians was unjustifiable and civilian hostages ought to be released (technically taking soldiers as hostages also is a war crime, but nobody knows and will ask about that, and it's basically what's done in all wars when parties take prisoners to exchange them, which ends up being a good thing because it creates the option for soldiers to surrender and probably not be executed). particularly promoting that venomous narcissist nerdeen kiswani as aface of palestine was horrible - she was featured opposite to an also horrible pro-israel propagandist, but I bet kiswani did more harm to palestine in that one video than that woman is able to do with a whole year's work. bad advocacy is a very powerful tool for the other side, and that was terrible advocacy. morgan also repeatedly platforms douglas murray, and actively supports him in disseminating vicious lies in support of israel with strong white supremacist undertones.
    31
  599. 31
  600. 31
  601. 30
  602. 30
  603. 30
  604. 30
  605. 30
  606. 30
  607. 30
  608. 30
  609. 30
  610. 30
  611. 30
  612. 30
  613. 30
  614. 30
  615. 30
  616. 30
  617. 30
  618. 30
  619. 30
  620. 30
  621. 30
  622. 29
  623. 29
  624. 29
  625. 29
  626. 29
  627. 29
  628. 29
  629. 29
  630. 29
  631. 29
  632. 29
  633. 29
  634. 29
  635. 29
  636. 29
  637. 29
  638. 29
  639. 29
  640. 29
  641. 29
  642. 29
  643. 28
  644. 28
  645. 28
  646. 28
  647. as a german, I think the way my country's government will handle both a potential provisional measures decision by the ICJ and a potential conviction years later (then likely a differently composed government, but the current actually is the least z°°nist it can get as far as viable parties go, believe it or not) is the most interesting question. on one hand, german politicians, including noteably the green party foreign minister and vice chancellor/economy minister, have been falling over themselves in displaying maximum sycophancy for i-country, without fail outdoing even joe biden. but on the other hand, germany does care much more than the US or britain about upholding the pretense of international law, and respecting UN authority. well, not really in terms of UN resolutions against i-country, but we just pretend that that's not happening, rather than acknowledging it and poo-pooing the UN. and of course our genius leaders, possibly based in a sort of genuine faith in i-country being the good guys (and thus possibly not considering the possibility of the court ruling against them; they may really be that delusional), have in their efforts to outsimp the US and get noticed by bibi-senpai cosigned i-country's ICJ defense, thereby explicitly signing on to gen°°°de denial, and implicitely signing on to the gen°°°de (which in reality they also support with recent weapon shipments)... and if at some point they realize that there is something to the case, and they have signed up germany for both committing and denying gen°°°de, the potential for cognitive dissonance is enormous. I think they have yet to realize how awkward of a position they have put us in, by somehow really believing their own lies. I suppose in practice it will come down to a question of which countries and important people will come out as supporting the allegation. basically germany's leaders have made themselves very vulnerable because they will perceive any individual or institution they respect choosing to support the allegation as a personal attack (and one they can't actually rebuke).
    28
  648. 28
  649. 28
  650. 28
  651. 28
  652. 28
  653. 28
  654. 28
  655. 28
  656. 28
  657. 28
  658. 28
  659. 28
  660. 28
  661. 28
  662. this is incredibly dishonest even by ben's standards. yes, as the question was phrased and clipped out of context here, she should of course have said that calling for g°nocide is not allowed. but what the questioning was actually about was that protesting students had called for "int°fada", which this frothing at the mouth joseph mccarthy reincarnation asking the questions asserted to be a call for gen°cide. the university officials were speaking about the conduct that actually occured, focused on defending their institutions' decision to not take action against students based on what they actually had said, which were calls for "intif°da" or "global in°°fada" (not things I would say, especially not the latter, but clearly not calls for gen°°ide). sadly the university officials came unprepared to rebuke the false assertion that this means gen°cide, and they chose a clumsy way of tacitly implying that they didn't consider that to be a call for geno°°de. they were too scared to actually say it because they weren't sure if they could defend that position, and they tried to just worm their way out of the situation with politician-like non-statements and generalities, not realising that in a situation this politically charged, refusing to make a statement is actually enough to get you crucified - very much like the reflexive and inarticulate refusal from many is°°el critics to condemn the ham°ssacre, which was such an unforced major error. please stop, TYT. stop having ben on to do this, he's not delivering a useful alternative view point with which to have a dialogue, he's delivering alternative facts.
    28
  663. 28
  664. 28
  665. 28
  666. 28
  667. 27
  668. 27
  669. 27
  670. 27
  671. 27
  672. 27
  673. 27
  674. 27
  675. 27
  676. 27
  677. 27
  678. 27
  679. 27
  680. 27
  681. 27
  682. 27
  683. 27
  684. 27
  685. 27
  686. 27
  687. 27
  688. 26
  689. 26
  690. 26
  691. 26
  692. 26
  693. 26
  694. 26
  695. 26
  696. 26
  697. 26
  698. 26
  699. 26
  700. 26
  701. 26
  702. the children's screams are important for judging the police response, since one of the foundations of the lies the cops have told was that they believed (for no specified reason) that there was nobody alive in that room - as they said it, they "judged the situation to be a barricaded gunman instead of an active shooter". though of course it was released early on that they got several 911 calls from inside those two classrooms telling them that there were kids still alive, and the first one of those calls was at least 50 minutes before they finally went in. on a later call from inside the two rooms, gunshots were heard both by the 911 operator and the many cops in the hallway. they also ought to release all the body cam footage. clearly the security camera audio is trash, and I think we should know what the cops were saying to each other and what info about the 911 calls was relayed to them through the radio. I hope the parents sue the cops to release all of this stuff. in which case the cops completely brought it on themselves, because the parents would never have wanted any of that to be released without all the lying. I don't think they would want to watch videos of their children being murdered themselves either. they just want the cops to be truthful and accountable, and they wanted them to do their jobs. imagine how much worse the cops made this for everybody affected, both by their inaction (actually worse than inaction - if no cop had been there, the killer would have died sooner by the gun of one of the parents who rushed to the school and were stopped outside by the cops), and by creating this enormous media ordeal through these many lies and following factual contradictions! if nothing else, I think the cops can probanly be sued for how they're still causing harm now. imagine the disrespect necessary to create these lies about a massacre of children, to tell those lies to the dead kids' parents! remember the original story with the school resource officer who was supposedly present and supposedly heroically exchanged gunfire with the attacker before he even entered the school? remember how they didn't give a timeline, and then at first it was like 20 minutes, and then it got longer and longer? remember the story of the search for the key for the door, even though the door was never locked and they knew it wasn't? how they said they had to wait for equipment, even though every cop has a rifle and a bulletproof vest at least in their car if not on them? remember how long it took the cops to admit that the reason why they didn't enter the room for so long was that they simply made no attempt? try to imagine how that news feed felt for the parents, the back and forth between being lied to by the cops and then told by the media how the cops lied to them again...
    26
  703. 26
  704. 26
  705. 26
  706. 26
  707. 26
  708. 26
  709. 26
  710. 26
  711. 26
  712. 26
  713. 25
  714. 25
  715. 25
  716. 25
  717. 25
  718. 25
  719. another truly der°nged headline from DW, as usual. imagine this was russia, raiding the same hospital for the fifth time, each time ki°°ing, disappearing, and torturing civilians at random, including many healthcare workers, rampaging through the hospital destroying all of the equipment, blowing up or bulldozing random hospital buildings, making staff abandon infants on life support to be found d°°d in their beds weeks later (you know, like kuwait's incubators, but actually happening and video-documented, though this was a different hospital) and now to°°uring and disappearing the gathered journalists and destr°°ing their satellite transmission vans. would DW's headline highlight that russia "warned" people to evacuate while already attacking... even though russia also simultaneously said that evacuations were not necessary, and then s°°t at anyone actually attempting to leave? what do you think, is that what they would write into a headline about russia doing this, for the fifth time to the one hospital, and also raiding in similar fashion all other hospitals on average more than once within a two million people closed gh°°to six months into its liquidation operation? or would the headline perhaps highlight that the leading russian troops stormed the hospital disguised as hospital staff and civilians, thereby adding the w°r cr°me of perfidy to the criminality inherent to att°cking hospitals? oh wait, russia doesn't have any giant gh°°tos and neither does anyone else. I guess that must explain it somehow.
    25
  720. 25
  721. 25
  722. 25
  723. Ganu D there has long been a huge propaganda campaign by infant formula producers such as nestlé in third world countries that's been lying to mothers that formula is better for babies than breastmilk. in some countries nestlé handed out free formula to new mothers in just the right quantity that they would stop lactating and then buy more. worst of all, in many places formula was pushed on people who had no access to clean water, and many babies have gotten sick or died because of toxins and pathogens in the water that their mothers used for their formula, thinking that they were doing what was best for the baby. nestlé got sued big time for that, but stuff like that is still going on. in the 2000s, formula has been pushed hard in china, too, and there was a huge scandal in which big chinese producers of powdered milk that was used for formula illegally added highly toxic melamine to their products so that the usual tests would show a healthy higher protein content. dozens of babies died and thousands got sick, and ultimately supermarkets in many other countries like all over the EU ended up rationing milk powder because chinese people were buying the stuff everywhere to send back home, since nobody trusted the chinese quality controls anymore. that was pretty crazy. if I remember correctly, breastfeeding is seen as a sign of poverty in china, like you would only do it if you can't afford formula. and there is a widespread belief that dairy products in general make kids grow taller, which is supposedly why westerners are usually taller than east asians. I don't think it's much of a mystery where they got those ideas from.
    25
  724. 25
  725. 25
  726. 25
  727. 25
  728. 25
  729. 25
  730. 25
  731. 25
  732. 25
  733. 25
  734. 25
  735. 25
  736. 25
  737. 25
  738. 24
  739. 24
  740. 24
  741. 24
  742. 24
  743. 24
  744. 24
  745. 24
  746. support for putin has risen from about 60% to about 70% since the invasion of ukraine, and the majority of russians believe state popaganda about it. the annexation of crimea shot up support for putin to over 90% at the time. the russian people's support for putin's belligerence throughout his two decade reign has been crucial in getting us where we are today. of course not all russians support putin, but the russian people in general are responsible, much like how the german people shared a collective responsibility for supporting the nazis even though the highest election result the nazi party ever got was a third of the votes (which made them the strongest party in a governing coalition with conservative/nationalist parties). every time putin went to war, the russian people applauded. every time putin took away freedoms and censored and jailed opposition, the russian people defended it. an individual russian citizen is up against an overwhelming force if they want to change something, but nonetheless, the russian people as a whole are responsible for putin. they had plenty of opportunities for free information up until recently. they chose to support, support, support. they chose to be ignorant, they chose to support violence. the russian people have brought us to the brink of a third world war. they have collectively crossed a line, they deserve all the sanctions. we should welcme the ones who want to leave, but I don't care anymore about those who stay and contribute to this state. they have brought worse onto others than they are suffering now.
    24
  747. 24
  748. 24
  749. 24
  750. 24
  751. 24
  752. 24
  753. 24
  754. 24
  755. 24
  756. 24
  757. 24
  758. 24
  759. 24
  760. 24
  761. 24
  762. 24
  763. 24
  764. 24
  765. 24
  766. 23
  767. 23
  768. 23
  769. 23
  770. 23
  771. 23
  772. 23
  773. 23
  774. 23
  775. 23
  776. 23
  777. 23
  778. 23
  779. 23
  780. 23
  781. 23
  782. 23
  783. 23
  784. 23
  785. 23
  786. 23
  787. 23
  788. 23
  789. 23
  790. 23
  791. 23
  792. 22
  793. 22
  794. 22
  795. 22
  796. 22
  797. 22
  798. 22
  799. 22
  800. 22
  801. 22
  802. 22
  803. 22
  804. 22
  805. 22
  806. 22
  807. 22
  808. 22
  809. 22
  810. 22
  811. 22
  812. 22
  813. 22
  814. 22
  815. 22
  816. 22
  817. 22
  818. 22
  819. 22
  820. 22
  821. 22
  822. 22
  823. 22
  824. 22
  825. 22
  826. 22
  827. 22
  828. 22
  829. 22
  830. 21
  831. 21
  832. 21
  833. 21
  834. 21
  835. 21
  836. 21
  837. 21
  838. 21
  839. 21
  840. 21
  841. 21
  842. 21
  843. 21
  844. 21
  845. 21
  846. 21
  847. 21
  848. 21
  849. 21
  850. 21
  851. 21
  852. 21
  853. 21
  854. 21
  855. 21
  856. 21
  857. 21
  858. 21
  859. 21
  860. 21
  861. 21
  862. 21
  863. 20
  864. 20
  865. 20
  866. 20
  867. 20
  868. 20
  869. 20
  870. 20
  871. 20
  872. for example they have refused to let in any tents with tubes for poles because tubes can be used to make pipe b°°bs, despite there being no evidence of w°°pons this crude being used, and obviously tubes are also otherwise available among the rubble, including various more load-bearing and suitable metal utility pipes. they have also absolutely despicably banned scalpels, based on the amazingly stupid claim that they might be used as weapons - as if every household did not have kitchen knives or pocket knives or any number of more suitable w°°pons, while having a supply of new sterile scalpels or scalpel blades really is very important for surgeries. they have even banned water purification tablets, for which I have not heard a reason cited, but it seems clear that it truly can only be that kh°m°s members have the same physical needs for safe drinking water as other humans. I think arguably the cruelest blocking choice has been the not official ban but heavy restriction of importa of anaesthetics, antibiotics and antiseptics. I think among those suffering the worst fate in g°°° must be surgeons and other hospital staff who, on top of having their own families to worry about like most other people, are often forced to operate on conscious patients including many children - or even just change wound dressings and more frequently than normal also debride festering wounds (slice off layers down to still healthy tissue with the best chance of healing) caused by non-availability of antiseptics or delayed hospital arrival. they are basically forced to t°rture children to save their lives, I don't know if I could imagine more horrifying work. and they're also not able tko deliver anywhere near the quality of outcomes they usually would, for example very commonly having to perform otherwise unnecessary amputations because reconstructive surgeries would yield much larger complicated wounds that require antiseptics and antibiotics to have a chance to heal rather than rot.
    20
  873. 20
  874. 20
  875. 20
  876. 20
  877. 20
  878. 20
  879. 20
  880. 20
  881. 20
  882. 20
  883. 20
  884. 20
  885. 20
  886. 20
  887. 20
  888. 20
  889. 20
  890. 20
  891. 20
  892. 20
  893. 20
  894. 20
  895. residents of donbas have known since ferbuary 21st or 22nd that war was coming to their homes, since putin announced the recognition of the donbas republics in the borders of the donetsk and luhansk oblasts and the russian troop deployment into donbas. that was a declared invasion to conquer all of donbas. honestly, for anybody there who is responsible for children and hasn't evacuated them well ahead of the russian advance, my sympathy at this point is outweighed by my disappointment in their lack of responsibility and refusal to accept the reality that THINGS WILL NOT BE FINE! there is plenty of support for refugees in western ukraine and the EU to ensure that evavuating is BY FAR the better option than to sit in a basement with your kids without clean water, electricity, gas, internet, and no reliable food supply while hoping that the bombs and shells don't collapse the house on top of you and either the russians don't come, or when they do, they won't be the raping and murdering kind. this is insanely bad decision-making, these people ought to have left months ago! when russia retreated from kyiv and chernihiv, there was a lull in the fighting and a call by the ukrainian government for ALL CIVILIANS to evacuate the donbas ahead of the annonced russian offensive there. up until that point, very little of the donbas had been conquered, and it was another 4 or 5 weeks after that appeal (after the azovstal surrender) before russia started making serious gains in donbas. I'm fine with adults refusing to evacuate their homes, despite the fact that it hampers ukrainian military operations, but you do NOT get to make that choice with kids! anybody still keeping their kids in ukrainian-controlled territory east of kharkiv, dnipro and zaporizhzhia is out of their mind! they have had plenty of time by now to mentally process the fact that they are in the middle of a war, they don't get to play make-believe with their children's lives!
    20
  896. 20
  897. 20
  898. 20
  899. 20
  900. 20
  901. 20
  902. 20
  903. 20
  904. 20
  905. 20
  906. 20
  907. 19
  908. 19
  909. 19
  910. 19
  911. 19
  912. 19
  913. 19
  914. 19
  915. 19
  916. 19
  917. 19
  918. 19
  919. 19
  920. 19
  921. 19
  922. 19
  923. 19
  924. 19
  925. 19
  926. 19
  927. 19
  928. 19
  929. 19
  930. 19
  931. 19
  932. 19
  933. 19
  934. 19
  935. 19
  936. 19
  937. 19
  938. 19
  939. 19
  940. 19
  941. 19
  942. 19
  943. 19
  944. 19
  945. 19
  946. 19
  947. 19
  948. 18
  949. 18
  950. 18
  951. 18
  952. 18
  953. 18
  954. 18
  955. 18
  956. 18
  957. 18
  958. 18
  959. 18
  960. 18
  961. 18
  962. 18
  963. 18
  964. 18
  965. 18
  966. 18
  967. 18
  968. 18
  969. 18
  970. 18
  971. 18
  972. 18
  973. 18
  974. 18
  975. 18
  976. 18
  977. 18
  978. 18
  979. 18
  980. 18
  981. 18
  982. 18
  983. 18
  984. 18
  985. 18
  986. 18
  987. 18
  988. 18
  989. 18
  990. 18
  991. 18
  992. 18
  993. 18
  994. 18
  995. 1:52 -just hearsay -no report from anyone claiming to have been r°°ed -for some reason she vaguely brings up the abundance of video evidence when the very issue there is that there is NO video evidence of r°°e, unlike the to°°ure, m°°der and k°°napping. the one video I have seen called "evidence of ra°°" is that of the young female soldier (several were taken from that training base outside of the erez crossing out of uniform because it was early in the morning) being transfered between vehicles in g°z° with the bottom of her sweatpants soaked in bl°°d. but that's far too much blood for a r°°e unless you consider the gaddafi treatment to be r°°e. it rather looks like she sat in a puddle of bl°°d from another victim, since others got loaded up while bl°°ding to d°°th. -since when are pelvic fractures in people who were in many cases br°t°lly beat°n to d°°th evidence of ge°°tal pe°°tration? that seems so much more likely to be caused by a kick or fall or vehicular a°°ault, than.... what exactly? vi°lent pelvic thrusts? the first guess for how a pelvis came to be broken is supposed to be being impacted by a second stronger pelvis?? that report sounds very much like someone just chose any injury closest to the g°°itals they could find and pretended that it was evidence of r°°e. great job parroting it. 🤦‍♂️ -the interrogation confession videos published by israel are w°rthless considering that israel to°°ures even innocent detainees. I mean come on, one of those guys was even visibly in agony! and the videos were released like a week after the attack, enough time to get a handful of however many captives to confess to absolutely anything. DW has rehashed 10/7 so many times that now they're dipping into the things that did not happen. 🙄
    18
  996. 17
  997. 17
  998. 17
  999. 17
  1000. 17
  1001. 17
  1002. 17
  1003. 17
  1004. 17
  1005. 17
  1006. 17
  1007. 17
  1008. 17
  1009. 17
  1010. 17
  1011. 17
  1012. 17
  1013. 17
  1014. 17
  1015. 17
  1016. 17
  1017. 17
  1018. 17
  1019. 17
  1020. 17
  1021. 17
  1022. 17
  1023. 17
  1024. 17
  1025. 17
  1026. 17
  1027. 17
  1028. 17
  1029. 17
  1030. 17
  1031. 17
  1032. 17
  1033. 17
  1034. 17
  1035. 17
  1036. 17
  1037. 17
  1038. 17
  1039. 17
  1040. 17
  1041. 17
  1042. 17
  1043. 17
  1044. 17
  1045. 17
  1046. 17
  1047. 17
  1048. 17
  1049. 17
  1050. 16
  1051. 16
  1052. 16
  1053. 16
  1054. 16
  1055. 16
  1056. 16
  1057. 16
  1058. 16
  1059. 16
  1060. 16
  1061. 16
  1062. 16
  1063. 16
  1064. 16
  1065. 16
  1066. 16
  1067. it really sounds to me like this year's heat records are once more an unexpectedly clear piece of evidence of the global climate changing faster than the high end of the common predictions from the UN climate change panel, which already are extremely alarming if you expect the medium prediction, or even the most optimistic version presupposing mitigation efforts that are guaranteed to not happen. this has been the case with most updated iterations of these predictions basically ever since they began. to me, this indicates that there likely is at least one major not yet identified exacerbating factor, which is missing from the predictive models. that would mean that while we currently already recognise that the insufficiency of our efforts to reduce greenhouse emissions (still emitting MORE every year than the last) is creating the worst catastrophe ever, we are still underestimating the severity. at this point, we're in a full-on "don't look up" situation. we know for a fact that climate change is about to become the greatest catastrophe (by total amount of individual suffering) to ever happen to our species - the only unclear thing about that is whether this threshold will be crossed in closer to 10 or closer to 30 years. the current news of the highest ever global surface temperature, highest ever global sea surface temperature, and highest ever local sea temperature, are the most obvious alarm signals possible for this, and while it is difficult to say for a single occurence, I do think that they once again are worse than we feared. I don't think that the importance of this news is getting through to people. this is not a mere weather report, it is and likely will remain the most important news story of the year. we are incredibly screwed!
    16
  1068. 16
  1069. 16
  1070. 16
  1071. 16
  1072. 16
  1073. 16
  1074. 16
  1075. 16
  1076. 16
  1077. 16
  1078. 16
  1079. 16
  1080. 16
  1081. 16
  1082. 16
  1083. 16
  1084. 16
  1085. 16
  1086. 16
  1087. 16
  1088. 16
  1089. 16
  1090. 16
  1091. 16
  1092. 16
  1093. 16
  1094. 16
  1095. 16
  1096. 16
  1097. 16
  1098. 16
  1099. 16
  1100. 16
  1101. 16
  1102. 16
  1103. 16
  1104. and the moral of the story is: when you needhelp from the police, DO NOT rely on the police to inform you what your options are! many cops are not eager to help, and you need to be able to ask for specific services that your local laws make available, because not telling you about things they don't feel like doing is one of those kinds of bad police work that cops are particularly certain to get away with, and thus do all the time. don't let the two cops who showed up when you called or the one cop on the phone decide which rights you should not be entitled to! in this case, the timeline sounds like even just googling for the relevant laws after the initially called cops left would have still sufficed - print the relevant laws, making sure that they're as specific as possible to your location, and on the next day you either call the local non-emergency police line, or show up at the police department that the previously involved cops work for, because that's where your incident is already on file. in short: don't trust the police. they are your only option to get help with some things, but whenever you're involved with police in some important way, you should look up whether what they're doing is a proper implimentation of the law. if you can afford it, a lawyer can of course do this better for you, but it's pretty easy to look up laws online, criminal and public safety laws tend to not be too difficult to understand (as opposed to property/finance/tax law and such), and police VERY often make big enough mistakes or misinterpretations of laws that most laypeople can identify them if they read the relevant laws.
    16
  1105. 16
  1106. 16
  1107. 16
  1108. 16
  1109. 16
  1110. 16
  1111. 16
  1112. 16
  1113. 16
  1114. 15
  1115. 15
  1116. 15
  1117. 15
  1118. 15
  1119. 15
  1120. 15
  1121. 15
  1122. 15
  1123. 15
  1124. 15
  1125. 15
  1126. 15
  1127. 15
  1128. 15
  1129. 15
  1130. 15
  1131. 15
  1132. 15
  1133. 15
  1134.  @planetcaravan2925  no, there is no substantial shia population in syria. the revolt originally started as a democratisation effort against the dictatorship, with the mass murder, imprisonment and torture of peaceful protesters turning the resistance effort onto violent methods. originally, the revolutionaries likely would have agreed on a secular democratic state. today, there are of course still syrians who would like a secular democracy, but except for the kurds and their territory, they are entirely powerless. the only revolutionary forces that remain somewhat powerful are broadly al qaeda-aligned islamists, who wish to create sharia rule over however much of syria they can capture (but they're barely holding on in idlib). turkey also has its own pet syrian opposition militia created primarily to fight the kurds, which occupies kurdish territory together with turkish forces and is pretty much as islamist as the friends of al qaeda in idlib. the most powerful revolutionary force left are the kurdish socialists, who seek independence but have for several years now settled for cooperating rather closely with the syrian government, negotiating away parts of their practical sovereignty in exchange for peace, trade, and protection against the greater evil of turkish extermination efforts. the americans also rather bizarrely occupy not just parts of syria in support of the kurds/SDF, but also the area of al tanf on the iraq/jordan border (containing a very strange US proxy militia force descended from earlier big efforts to support opposition militias), and several oil fields in the east - just blatantly illegal military aggression from the US, there really is no remotely acceptable excuse for it.
    15
  1135. 15
  1136. 15
  1137. 15
  1138. 15
  1139.  @venera13  he was actually living in china with his german wife for 30 years before the invasion, uninterrupted except for a few months in 1919 when china briefly expelled europeans. so he was in china throughout the whole rise of the n°zi party, and throughout WW1, so he barely even experienced the particular foundation of national hatred on which the n°°i party grew. he only joined the party from china in 1934 after hi°°er was made a dictator (which by the party's standards made him a phony member, they were all about seniority), and various statements of his make it obvious that he bought into a highly fictionalized propaganda version of the ideology. he said that he set up the safe zone in part because his understanding of the ideology meant that he should protect his chinese employees. according to rabe's diary, his explanation to a japanese major oka who tried to make him leave was: "I have been living here in China for over 30 years, my kids and grandchildren were born here, and I am happy and successful here. I have always been treated well by the Chinese people, even during the war. If I had spent 30 years in your country and were treated just as well by your people, you can be assured that, in a time of emergency, such as the situation China faces now, I would not leave the side of your people." though I suppose that has a high chance of being a highly paraphrased retelling of events. in reality, I doubt that what he said mattered to the japanese army, I think what mattered was that he and the other safe zone contributors showed strong determination to stay, and did not give in to forceful intimidation attempts that would certainly have been made. and rabe in particular was at that time recognized by the japanese as one of the highest status n°°°s in china, and somehow no officer dared to order the detention and removal of rabe and the other foreign human shields, so they just kept putting off the decision to dissolve the safe zone until eventually the army decided to start honouring the spirit of the emperor's original explicit orders before taking the city to not conduct a ma°°acre in nanjing. the chinese communist party was founded in 1921, you goober. it did not spawn into existence as the government of non-taiwanese china in 1949. but rabe didn't seem to have anything to do with them, he was in very good standing with the imperial state, the nationalist one, and whatever warlords came between. the japanese invasion occurred mostly against nationalist-held territories, including nanjing, the nationalist capital.
    15
  1140. 15
  1141. 15
  1142. 15
  1143. 15
  1144. 15
  1145. 15
  1146. 15
  1147. 15
  1148. 15
  1149. 15
  1150. 15
  1151. 15
  1152. 15
  1153. 15
  1154. 15
  1155. 15
  1156. 15
  1157. 15
  1158. 15
  1159. 15
  1160. 15
  1161. 15
  1162. 15
  1163. 15
  1164. 15
  1165. 15
  1166. 15
  1167. 15
  1168. 15
  1169. 15
  1170. 15
  1171. 15
  1172. 15
  1173. 15
  1174. 15
  1175. 15
  1176. 15
  1177. 14
  1178. 14
  1179. 14
  1180. 14
  1181. 14
  1182. 14
  1183. 14
  1184. 14
  1185. 14
  1186. 14
  1187. 14
  1188. 14
  1189. 14
  1190. 14
  1191. 14
  1192. 14
  1193. I think the way the war has so far played out was estimated by the russians to be so exceedingly unlikely that they didn't need to plan for or consider such details. they expected to win the war in a week or two. if they had, the sanctions would have been far weaker because there no longer would have been the purpose of supporting ukraine for the west to unite over. with the war won and the western will for sanctions smaller, russia also would have gotten more support from china to compensate for the lesser sanctions it would have experienced (and of course india would also have been even more eager). in fact this was almost explicitely publically promised at the olympics, and probably explicitely secretly promised by china with the announcement of the new "no limits partnership" between china and russia. russia based its decision to invade partially on a chinese promise that didn't get redeemed because the west brought too much pressure, which only happened because the war dragged on and russia mostly failed militarily. if russia had won within two weeks as intended, I believe that europe would ultimately have reduced russian energy imports by no more than 20% if at all, and nordstream 2 would probably enter service by the end of the year after everybody stopped giving a shit. I reckon what would still happen and what russia must have expected and accepted is the NATO membership of finland and sweden. so really, keeping NATO from expanding towards russia was always a ridiculous pretext for the invasion, since it was obvious that it would have the opposite effect. the benefit for china would have promarily been another humiliation for the west and likely weakening through disunity as a continuation of how the abandonment of afghanistan played out, which would have contributed a lot to setting the stage for a chinese invasion of taiwan.
    14
  1194. 14
  1195. 14
  1196. 14
  1197. 14
  1198. 14
  1199. 14
  1200. 14
  1201. 14
  1202. 14
  1203. 14
  1204. 14
  1205. 14
  1206. 14
  1207. 14
  1208. 14
  1209. 14
  1210. 14
  1211. 14
  1212. 14
  1213. 14
  1214. 14
  1215. 14
  1216. 14
  1217. 14
  1218. 14
  1219. 14
  1220. 14
  1221. 14
  1222. 14
  1223. 14
  1224. 14
  1225. 14
  1226. 14
  1227. 14
  1228. 14
  1229. 14
  1230. 14
  1231. 14
  1232. 14
  1233. 14
  1234. 14
  1235. 14
  1236. 14
  1237. 14
  1238. 14
  1239. 14
  1240. 14
  1241. 14
  1242. 14
  1243. 14
  1244. 14
  1245. 14
  1246. 14
  1247. 14
  1248. 14
  1249. 14
  1250. 14
  1251. 14
  1252. 14
  1253. 14
  1254. 13
  1255. 13
  1256. 13
  1257. 13
  1258. 13
  1259. 13
  1260. 13
  1261. 13
  1262. 13
  1263. 13
  1264. 13
  1265. 13
  1266. 13
  1267. 13
  1268. 13
  1269. 13
  1270. 13
  1271. 13
  1272. 13
  1273. 13
  1274. 13
  1275. 13
  1276. 13
  1277. 13
  1278. 13
  1279. 13
  1280. 13
  1281. 13
  1282. 13
  1283. 13
  1284. 13
  1285. 13
  1286. 13
  1287. 13
  1288. 13
  1289. 13
  1290. 13
  1291. 13
  1292. 13
  1293. 13
  1294. 13
  1295. 13
  1296. 13
  1297. 13
  1298. 13
  1299. 13
  1300. 13
  1301. 13
  1302. 13
  1303. 13
  1304. 13
  1305. 13
  1306. 13
  1307. 13
  1308. 13
  1309. 13
  1310. 13
  1311. 13
  1312. 13
  1313. 13
  1314. 13
  1315. 13
  1316. 13
  1317. 13
  1318. 13
  1319. 13
  1320. 13
  1321. 13
  1322. 13
  1323. 13
  1324. 13
  1325. 13
  1326. 13
  1327. 13
  1328. 13
  1329. 13
  1330. 13
  1331. 13
  1332. 13
  1333. 13
  1334. 13
  1335. 13
  1336. 13
  1337. 13
  1338. 13
  1339. 13
  1340. 12
  1341. 12
  1342. 12
  1343. 12
  1344. 12
  1345. 12
  1346. 12
  1347. 12
  1348. 12
  1349. 12
  1350. 12
  1351. 12
  1352. 12
  1353. 12
  1354. 12
  1355. 12
  1356. 12
  1357. 12
  1358. 12
  1359. 12
  1360. 12
  1361. 12
  1362. 12
  1363. 12
  1364. 12
  1365. 12
  1366. 12
  1367. 12
  1368. 12
  1369. 12
  1370. 12
  1371. 12
  1372. 12
  1373. 12
  1374. 12
  1375. 12
  1376. the correspondent's claim that russia is thought to be running low on precision strike weapons like iskander is out of date. the current common assessment is that for about the last half year, as the numbers of ballistic and cruise missiles russia deploys have been much smaller (russia mostly uses them in the dozens at once, combined with dozens of more expendable kamikaze drones, but those attacks have gotten less frequent and use fewer missiles for each now), the usage rate has likely been lower than the production rate, and russia has been rebuilding stockpiles. besides the general value in having the ability of using a lot of them to respond to a particular situation or to accompany an offensive operation without running out, one possibility is that russia is planning to again strike ukraine's energy infrastructure in the coming winter. there also was drone footage distributed by russia recently of an iskander missile hitting a ukrainian train during loading with military vehicles 50km or so behind the front line (like this village), which indicated that russia is now organisationally prepared to use iskander for quick tactical strikes against freshly spotted targets, as opposed to the coordinated strikes on stationary targets that we have mostly seen and that are planned days or weeks ahead of time. this makes the use of an iskander against a funeral now much more plausible. russia does have a clearly documented history of specifically targeting crowds of people, like the 1999 grozny market atttack, various market and hospital bombings in syria, or last year's cluster missile attack on the evacuees at kramtorsk train station, which targeted possibly the largest dense crowd of people (outside of bunkers) in ukraine at that moment, since kramatorsk was the big rail hub at the center of a large pocket that was about 270° surrounded by and widely expected to be captured by the russian advances, so A LOT of people were trying to leave. with this particular strike now, I suspect that a russian spotter drone identified the gathering specifically as a soldier's funeral due to a display of ukrainian flags (and perhaps a large picture in uniform, I have seen a lot of those in videos of ukrainian soldiers' funerals). as far as ukrainian civilian crowds go, a soldier's funeral is an ideal target for russia.
    12
  1377. 12
  1378. 12
  1379. 12
  1380. 12
  1381. 12
  1382. 12
  1383. 12
  1384. 12
  1385. 12
  1386. 12
  1387. 12
  1388. 12
  1389. 12
  1390. 12
  1391. 12
  1392. 12
  1393. 12
  1394. 12
  1395. 12
  1396. 12
  1397. 12
  1398. 12
  1399. 12
  1400. 12
  1401. 12
  1402. 12
  1403. 12
  1404. 12
  1405. 12
  1406. 12
  1407. 12
  1408. 12
  1409. 12
  1410. 12
  1411. 12
  1412. 12
  1413. 12
  1414. 12
  1415. 12
  1416. 12
  1417. 12
  1418. 12
  1419. 12
  1420. 12
  1421. 12
  1422. 12
  1423. 12
  1424. 12
  1425. 12
  1426. 12
  1427. 12
  1428. 11
  1429. 11
  1430. 11
  1431. 11
  1432. 11
  1433. 11
  1434. 11
  1435. 11
  1436. 11
  1437. 11
  1438. 11
  1439. 11
  1440. 11
  1441. 11
  1442. 11
  1443. 11
  1444. 11
  1445. 11
  1446. 11
  1447. 11
  1448. 11
  1449. 11
  1450. 11
  1451. 11
  1452. 11
  1453. 11
  1454. 11
  1455. 11
  1456. 11
  1457. 11
  1458. 11
  1459. 11
  1460. 11
  1461. 11
  1462. 11
  1463. 11
  1464. 11
  1465. 11
  1466. 11
  1467. 11
  1468. 11
  1469. 11
  1470. 11
  1471. 11
  1472. 11
  1473. 11
  1474. 11
  1475. 11
  1476. 11
  1477. 11
  1478. 11
  1479. 11
  1480. 11
  1481. 11
  1482. 11
  1483. 11
  1484. 11
  1485. 11
  1486. 11
  1487. 11
  1488. 11
  1489. 11
  1490. 11
  1491. 11
  1492. 11
  1493. 11
  1494. 11
  1495. 11
  1496. 11
  1497. 11
  1498. 11
  1499. 11
  1500. 11
  1501. 11
  1502. 11
  1503. 11
  1504. 11
  1505. 11
  1506. 11
  1507. 11
  1508. 11
  1509. 11
  1510. 11
  1511. 11
  1512. 11
  1513. 11
  1514. 11
  1515. 11
  1516. 11
  1517. 11
  1518. one thing he's clearly talking around and around and is leaving out because the military review told him that the specific numbers are state secrets is the "civilian casualty ratio". one of the most fundamental considerations in planning military strikes, particularly with precision bombing, is a calculation weighing the military value expected to be achieved against the collateral damage, most commonly the expected number of dead civilians. you would probably typically have a table of numerical values for different target types (a basic fighter vs a mid level vs a top level commander, a weapons store of a ton of small arms or heavy weapons, a military transport vehicle or fuel tank etc.). theoretically, logic would dictate that alao on the civilian side, damage to valuable objects is considered, but in gazaat least I very much doubt that this was ever the case - I think the only numbers on the civilian side would be the dead, and possibly the wounded. it's also very possible that there may be a separate category for adult or fighting age males notidentified as targets, whose deaths would count only some defined fraction of those ofqomen and children bqsed on the assertion that statiatically a portion of them will be unidentified combatants. given the sorts of things this guy reports having been told about, he will have also been told various such numbers. in detail, they would be complicated to relay, but the one number in particular that hewould have been told are the relative changes from gaza"war" to gaza "war" both in the cicilian casualty ratio actually achieved, and the civilian casualty ratio set as the limit to confirm a strike plan - how many times higher the civilian casualty ratio is now generally allowed to be.
    11
  1519. 11
  1520. 11
  1521. 11
  1522. 11
  1523. 11
  1524. 11
  1525. 11
  1526. 11
  1527. 11
  1528. 11
  1529. 11
  1530. 11
  1531. 11
  1532. 11
  1533. 11
  1534. 11
  1535. 11
  1536. 11
  1537. 11
  1538. 11
  1539. 11
  1540. 11
  1541. 11
  1542. 11
  1543. 11
  1544. 11
  1545. 11
  1546. 11
  1547. 11
  1548. 11
  1549. 11
  1550. 11
  1551. 11
  1552. 10
  1553. 10
  1554. 10
  1555. 10
  1556. 10
  1557. 10
  1558. 10
  1559. 10
  1560. 10
  1561. 10
  1562. 10
  1563. 10
  1564. 10
  1565. 10
  1566. 10
  1567. 10
  1568. 10
  1569. 10
  1570. 10
  1571. 10
  1572. 10
  1573. 10
  1574. 10
  1575. 10
  1576. 10
  1577. 10
  1578. 10
  1579. 10
  1580. 10
  1581. 10
  1582. 10
  1583. 10
  1584. 10
  1585. 10
  1586. 10
  1587. 10
  1588. 10
  1589. 10
  1590. 10
  1591. 10
  1592. 10
  1593. 10
  1594. 10
  1595. 10
  1596. 10
  1597. 10
  1598. 10
  1599. 10
  1600. 10
  1601. 10
  1602. 10
  1603. 10
  1604. 10
  1605. 10
  1606. 10
  1607. 10
  1608. 10
  1609. 10
  1610. 10
  1611. 10
  1612. 10
  1613. 10
  1614. 10
  1615. pie smuggler al qaeda only started operating in iraq after the US invasion (saddam hussein was generally opposed to them), and then grew pretty big there, into a major anti-american insurgency. al qaeda in iraq became the islamic state in iraq which became ISIS and then fully split from al qaeda and is now a rival organization that makes al qaeda and its affiliates (like al nusra or whatever they call themselves now in syria, or al shabab in somalia) look moderate. currently, al qaeda mostly operates in yemen, and before the US invasion in 2001, they mostly operated out of afghanistan, but the members were almost exclusively saudis and other arabs, not afghans, and they were very much a separate organization from the taliban government of afghanistan. most of the modern sunni islamist militant groups including al qaeda and the taliban have their roots in a cold war US-supported saudi effort to create radical sunni islamist movements in other countries to create more sunni islamist states aligned with saudi arabia against shia iran and (particularly at that time during and around the 80s) the strong relatively secular baathist governments of iraq (under saddam hussein) and syria (under today's assad's dad) that had their own big plan for uniting arab countries (pan-arabism). for the US of course, supporting islamism served primarily as a way to create ideological opposition to the influence of atheistic communism, like with US support for mujahedeen in soviet-occupied afghanistan. the taliban in particular are a collaborative effort of two close US allies, saudi arabia and pakistan. during the soviet occupation of afghanistan, saudi arabia funded and influenced extremist islam schools for afghan refugees in pakistan, and the students of those schools became the taliban, "taliban" meaning "students". after they took over afghanistan for the first time, pakistan was their primary supporter (with pakistan and saudi arabia being the only states recognizing them as the legitimate government of afghanistan), and pakistan had at that time been for a long time a close ally of the US due to pakistan's opposition to india, which was heavily tied to the soviet union. since 9/11, pakistan has continued to take huge support from the US while pretty much straight up working against the US by supporting and sheltering the afghan taliban. pakistan's government and military also totally knew that bin laden was hiding in pakistan and protected him. more or less since the US killed bin laden in pakistan, US support for pakistan has gotten a little too embarrassing because the US was too obviously getting played, so it's been winding down. btw. pakistan also has pretty much an islamist parallel state within the state that's as insane as the taliban, pakistan just has better branding and kinda flies under the radar in terms of international public attention. I recommend reading some wikipedia about the case of asia bibi, shit's wild. pakistan is a nuclear-armed state teetering on the edge of becoming another islamic emirate (or rather a military junta-islamist coalition government). they also committed a genocide in bangladesh with US support I think in the 70s. they had a rape fatwa, the highest muslim clerics in pakistan explicitely endorsing the rape of bengali women by pakistani soldiers. that's how political islam rolls in pakistan.
    10
  1616. 10
  1617. 10
  1618. 10
  1619. 10
  1620. 10
  1621. 10
  1622. 10
  1623. 10
  1624. 10
  1625. 10
  1626. 10
  1627. 10
  1628. 10
  1629. 10
  1630. 10
  1631. 10
  1632. 10
  1633. 10
  1634. 10
  1635. 10
  1636. 10
  1637. 10
  1638. 10
  1639. 10
  1640. 10
  1641. 10
  1642. 10
  1643. 10
  1644. 10
  1645. 10
  1646. 10
  1647. 10
  1648. 10
  1649. 10
  1650. 10
  1651. 10
  1652. 10
  1653. 10
  1654. 10
  1655. 10
  1656. 10
  1657. 10
  1658. 10
  1659. 10
  1660. 10
  1661. 10
  1662. 10
  1663. 10
  1664. 10
  1665. 10
  1666. 10
  1667. 10
  1668. 10
  1669. 10
  1670. 10
  1671. 10
  1672. 10
  1673. 10
  1674. 10
  1675. 10
  1676. 10
  1677. 10
  1678. 10
  1679. 10
  1680. 10
  1681. 10
  1682. 10
  1683. 10
  1684. 10
  1685. 10
  1686. 10
  1687. 10
  1688. 10
  1689. 10
  1690. 10
  1691. 10
  1692. 10
  1693. 10
  1694. 10
  1695. 10
  1696. 10
  1697. 10
  1698. 10
  1699. 10
  1700. 10
  1701. 10
  1702. 10
  1703. 10
  1704. 10
  1705. 10
  1706. 10
  1707. 10
  1708. 9
  1709. 9
  1710. 9
  1711. 9
  1712. 9
  1713. 9
  1714. 9
  1715. 9
  1716. 9
  1717. 9
  1718. 9
  1719. 9
  1720. 9
  1721. 9
  1722. 9
  1723. 9
  1724. 9
  1725. 9
  1726. 9
  1727. 9
  1728. 9
  1729. 9
  1730. 9
  1731. 9
  1732. 9
  1733. 9
  1734. armenia does have some big things going for it in terms of who's the good guy in this conflict today, including that armenia is a new democracy while azerbaijan is a moderately fascistic dictatorship, that azerbaijan and its active ally turkey are rather fond of the historic armenian genocide committed by the turks, and that the power differential hugely favouring azerbaijan makes it abundantly clear that only one side can plausibly by the current aggressor. it is however worth noting that in the 90s, when armenia, with real support from russia, was more powerful than azerbaijan (which had not yet gotten as rich from fossil fuels) committed many more war crimes than azerbaijan, and ethnically cleansed nagorno-karabakh of its azeri minority and territory surrounding nagorno-karabakh larger than nagorno-karabakh of its azeri majority (which was occupied until armenia lost the war few years ago). besides the general horribleness of those crimes against humanity, it is clear in hindsight that armenia laid the groundwork of today's azerbaijani aggression by ruthlessly overexploiting its temporary power advantage in the 90s, when they likely could have instead used the leveragethey held to create a compromise acceptable to azerbaijan. while the history of the conflixt between armenians and azeris goes back longer, practically all of the hatred of armenians held by azerbaijani people alive today stems from the real acts of savagery of armenia in the 90s. azerbaijan committed much of the same atrocities, but on a somewhat smaller scale for lack of ability, and the responsibility to deescalate and lead in establishing conditions for a just peace always lies with the more powerful side of a war (and today it lies with azerbaijan).
    9
  1735. 9
  1736. 9
  1737. 9
  1738. 9
  1739. 9
  1740. 9
  1741. 9
  1742. 9
  1743. 9
  1744. 9
  1745. 9
  1746. 9
  1747. 9
  1748. 9
  1749. 9
  1750. 9
  1751. 9
  1752. 9
  1753. 9
  1754. 9
  1755. 9
  1756. 9
  1757. 9
  1758. 9
  1759. 9
  1760. 9
  1761. 9
  1762. 9
  1763. 9
  1764. 9
  1765. 9
  1766. 9
  1767. 9
  1768. 9
  1769. 9
  1770. 9
  1771. 9
  1772. 9
  1773. 9
  1774. 9
  1775. 9
  1776. they're burying artificial petroleum? that's the goofiest shit I've ever heard! for wood chips in particular, there is a simpler and cheaper option: make charcoal (usually referred to as "biochar") and bury it by mixing it into agricultural soil. charcoal has a lot of potential for soil improvement through its spongy consistency and large surface area that's popular with soil microbes and plant roots, and it remains inert as carbon for hundreds to thousands of years depending on the depth of the layer (it might be decomposed slowly at the surface). integrating charcol into soil was used traditionally by some indigenous farmers in south america, with the result that you can now find the places where they used to live based on the fact that the general area only has humous layers of a few centimeters due to the tropical climate not building much soil (lack of an autumn season does not produce yearly flushes of leaves that would then be notentirely decomposed over the winter in temperate climates) but the old settlements have humous layers up to a few meters thick, and the soil is still great for agriculture. traditionally, that soil also contains pottery shards and a lot of human shit-based compost, but that stuff doesn't have to be copied directly, the interesting part is the way charcoal is very suitable for bulking up highly fertile soil. particularly in places that are short on fertile soil (many tropical regions where farming is done by slash and burn because of the low soil fertility), charcoal soil building could both sequester carbon quite well (more permanently than in trees), and also be directly economically beneficial by producing long term agriculturally usable land.
    9
  1777. 9
  1778. 9
  1779. 9
  1780. 9
  1781. 9
  1782. 9
  1783. 9
  1784. 9
  1785. 9
  1786. 9
  1787. 9
  1788. kulturelle aneignung bezeichnet nicht jede art von kultureller diffusion, sondern speziell die übernahme markanter kulturgüter durch dieser kultur fremde personen wenn diese kulturfremdheit bzw. nichtzugehörigkeit zur ursprünglichen gesellschaftlichen gruppierung wie z.B. eine ethnie für den aneigner besonders nützlich bei der verwendung jenes kulturgutes ist. vor allem bei kommerzieller nutzung die den menschen im ursprünglichen kulturkreis nicht oder weniger zugänglich ist, und wenn durch eine aus der aneignung gewachsene popularisierung der kulturelle ursprung verdeckt wird und das ausgangskulturgut neben den nachahmungen nicht mehr wahrgenommen wird und der "beklaute" kulturkreis und kulturschaffende menschen in diesem kulturkreis deshalb weniger chancen haben, positive aufmerksamkeit zu generieren, dann wird kulturelle aneignung bemängelt. typische amerikanische beispiele sind: -die übernahme des in den 50ern neuen schwarzen musikgenres rock 'n' roll (abspaltung des alten schwarzen genres blues) und sofortige marktdominanz weißer musiker (besonders elvis, und sowohl durch ihn als auch durch andere sehr oft direkte übernahme von songs mit lizensierung von legaler abzocke bis hin zu einfachem klau ohne absprache), da schwarze musiker als nur sehr begrenzt salonfähig behandelt wurden und vergleichsweise überhaupt kein geld verdienen konnten. -das tragen typisch schwarzer frisuren wie dreadlocks und cornrows durch weiße menschen als modeerscheinung ohne negative konsequenzen, während das tragen dieser frisuren durch schwarze oft negativ bewertet wird, als unsittlich, unsauber, unintegriert, fremd, oder "gh°tto" und somit zeichen von armut, kriminalität, oder schlechter bildung. an schulen und arbeitsplätzen mit dress code sind oder waren oft speziell und primär solche schwarzen frisuren verboten. im kontext dessen und teilweise jahrhundertealter nutzung von frisuren als politisches statement (ist mindestens bei dreadlocks der fall) kommt das tragen solcher frisuren durch weiße tendenziell respektlos und ignorant rüber, und in manchen fällen in kombination mit bestimmten kleidungsstücken, nachgeahmten sprechweisen und solariumbräune tun sich auch leute regelrecht als schwarze verkleiden (in den USA wird der begriff besonders weitgreifend verwendet, also man muss bei weitem nicht afrikanisch aussehen). das geht dann aber über den rahmen des begriffes "cultural appropriation" hinaus.
    9
  1789. 9
  1790. 9
  1791. 9
  1792. 9
  1793. 9
  1794. 9
  1795. 9
  1796. 9
  1797. 9
  1798. 9
  1799. 9
  1800. 9
  1801. 9
  1802. 9
  1803. 9
  1804. 9
  1805. 9
  1806. Charles the video consists almost entirely of clips of the guy knowingly doing things to the cat that the cat hates, and both humans laughing about antagonizing the cat and not recognizing that THAT is the problem. that's not negated by the fact that it's not actually a very difficult cat and does occasionally put up with the guy despite his demonstrations of untrustworthiness. if an animal doesn't like you, try to stop doing things to the animal that the animal doesn't like. very simple. by showing respect, you earn trust. these are fundamentals of how to interact with animals, and it's quite embarrassing that they are not universal cultural knowledge when pet ownership is so common. it's shocking even how many dog owners are unaware of how to communicate with their pets and show them respect. I think it might actually be slightly better with cats because a bigger percentage of cats actively enforce their personal apace and communicate clearly enough for ignorant humans to understand when they want to be left alone- which of course idiots interpret as a defect in the animal, when in reality they are treating animals in ways that none should be, and only the most tolerant animals put up with. since you beought up projection: that's what these ignorant people do. they enjoy touching, grabbing and joyfully screeching at animals and project that enjoyment onto the animals, pretending that they like it too instead of trying to understand and respect what the animals really feel.
    9
  1807. 9
  1808. 9
  1809. 9
  1810. 9
  1811. 9
  1812. 9
  1813. 9
  1814. 9
  1815. 9
  1816. 9
  1817. 9
  1818. 9
  1819. 9
  1820. 9
  1821. 9
  1822. 9
  1823. 9
  1824. 9
  1825. 9
  1826. 9
  1827. 9
  1828. 9
  1829. 9
  1830. 9
  1831. 9
  1832. 9
  1833. 9
  1834. 9
  1835. 9
  1836. 9
  1837. 9
  1838. 9
  1839. 9
  1840. 9
  1841. 9
  1842. 9
  1843. 9
  1844. 9
  1845. 9
  1846. 9
  1847. 9
  1848. 9
  1849. 9
  1850. 9
  1851. 9
  1852. 9
  1853. 9
  1854. 9
  1855. 9
  1856. 9
  1857. 9
  1858. 9
  1859. 9
  1860. 9
  1861. 9
  1862. 9
  1863. 9
  1864. 9
  1865. 9
  1866. 9
  1867. 9
  1868. 9
  1869. 9
  1870. 9
  1871. 9
  1872. 9
  1873. 9
  1874. 9
  1875. 9
  1876. 9
  1877. 9
  1878. 9
  1879. 9
  1880. 9
  1881. 9
  1882. 9
  1883. 9
  1884. 9
  1885. 9
  1886. 9
  1887. 9
  1888. 9
  1889. 9
  1890. 9
  1891. 9
  1892. 9
  1893. 9
  1894. 9
  1895. 9
  1896. 9
  1897. 9
  1898. 9
  1899. 9
  1900. 9
  1901. 9
  1902. 9
  1903. 9
  1904. 9
  1905. 9
  1906. 9
  1907. 9
  1908. 9
  1909. 9
  1910. 9
  1911. 9
  1912. 9
  1913. 9
  1914. 9
  1915. 9
  1916. 9
  1917. 9
  1918. 9
  1919. 9
  1920. 9
  1921. 9
  1922. 9
  1923. 9
  1924. 9
  1925. 8
  1926. 8
  1927. 8
  1928. 8
  1929. 8
  1930. 8
  1931. 8
  1932. 8
  1933. 8
  1934. 8
  1935. 8
  1936. 8
  1937. 8
  1938. 8
  1939. 8
  1940. 8
  1941. 8
  1942. 8
  1943. 8
  1944. 8
  1945. 8
  1946. 8
  1947. 8
  1948. 8
  1949. 8
  1950. 8
  1951. 8
  1952. 8
  1953. 8
  1954. 8
  1955. 8
  1956. 8
  1957. 8
  1958. 8
  1959. 8
  1960. 8
  1961. 8
  1962. 8
  1963. 8
  1964. 8
  1965. 8
  1966. 8
  1967. 8
  1968. 8
  1969. 8
  1970. 8
  1971. 8
  1972. 8
  1973. yeah I have heard of prices like that, and as a violin maker with an interest in guitar making (both of which use expensive woods, especially guitars), it seems to me that gun people are getting ripped off BIG TIME with wood prices. nicely coloured walnut is one of the most expensive temperate climate woods, but it is NOT one of the most expensive woods, and even the most expensive woods (maybe nonsense crazy stuff like pink ivory, australian buloke, mauritius ebony, exceptionally large trunks of african blackwood, snakewood) has no reason to cost $5000 for a rifle stock blank. a reasonable price for a straight-grown flawless dark rifle stock of walnut should be in the $50-200 range. even that are specialty wood prices for individual sale, not how a factory would buy wood. curly grain is not that rare and not universally more desirable, it should not cost more than a 100-200% premium. truly exceptional pieces that combine straight or clean curly growth for structural strength in the relevant parts with burl figure or such at the base of the stock might in principle be reasonable to sell for $1000, but really only when those are also seasoned for 10 years to make them ready to use despite their inherently higher tendency to warp and crack. $5000 makes no sense, walnut is just nowhere near rare enough for that due to its extremely widespread commercial cultivation (as opposed to many more expensive tropical hardwoods that have no use other than timber and are a finite resource coming only from primary forests). walnut is a popular wood for many applications due to its colours, and perhaps the best choice for guns due to its favourable combination of extremely low shrinkage/warpage, moderate density, and high toughness, but there is a really strong supply of it that's certainly keeping prices much lower than that outside of gun circles. walnut is somewhat common on guitars, and I know that it's a low to mid price wood on those.
    8
  1974. 8
  1975. 8
  1976. 8
  1977. 8
  1978. 8
  1979. 8
  1980. 8
  1981. 8
  1982. 8
  1983. 8
  1984. 8
  1985. 8
  1986. 8
  1987. 8
  1988. 8
  1989. 8
  1990. 8
  1991. 8
  1992. 8
  1993. 8
  1994. 8
  1995. 8
  1996. 8
  1997. 8
  1998. 8
  1999. 8
  2000. 8
  2001. 8
  2002. 8
  2003. 8
  2004. 8
  2005. 8
  2006. 8
  2007. 8
  2008. 8
  2009. 8
  2010. 8
  2011. 8
  2012. 8
  2013. 8
  2014. 8
  2015. 8
  2016. 8
  2017. 8
  2018. 8
  2019. 8
  2020. 8
  2021. 8
  2022. 8
  2023. 8
  2024. 8
  2025. 8
  2026. 8
  2027. 8
  2028. 8
  2029. 8
  2030. 8
  2031. 8
  2032. 8
  2033. 8
  2034. 8
  2035. 8
  2036. 8
  2037. 8
  2038. 8
  2039. 8
  2040. 8
  2041. 8
  2042. 8
  2043. 8
  2044. 8
  2045. 8
  2046. 8
  2047. 8
  2048. 8
  2049. 8
  2050. 8
  2051. 8
  2052. 8
  2053. 8
  2054. 8
  2055. 8
  2056. 8
  2057. 8
  2058. 8
  2059. 8
  2060. 8
  2061. 8
  2062. 8
  2063. 8
  2064. 8
  2065. 8
  2066. 8
  2067. 8
  2068. 8
  2069. 8
  2070. 8
  2071. 8
  2072. 8
  2073. 8
  2074. 8
  2075. 8
  2076. 8
  2077. 8
  2078. 8
  2079. 8
  2080. 8
  2081. 8
  2082. 8
  2083. 8
  2084. 8
  2085. 8
  2086. 8
  2087. 8
  2088. 8
  2089. 8
  2090. 8
  2091. 8
  2092. 8
  2093. 8
  2094. 8
  2095. 8
  2096. 8
  2097. 8
  2098. 8
  2099. 8
  2100. 8
  2101. 8
  2102. 8
  2103. 8
  2104. 8
  2105. 8
  2106. 8
  2107. 8
  2108. 8
  2109. 8
  2110. 8
  2111. 8
  2112. 8
  2113. 8
  2114. 8
  2115. 8
  2116. 8
  2117. 8
  2118. 8
  2119. 8
  2120. 8
  2121. 8
  2122. 8
  2123. 8
  2124. 8
  2125. 8
  2126. 8
  2127. 8
  2128. 8
  2129. 8
  2130. 8
  2131. 8
  2132. 8
  2133. 8
  2134. 8
  2135. 8
  2136. 8
  2137. 8
  2138. 8
  2139. 8
  2140. 8
  2141. 8
  2142. 8
  2143. 8
  2144. 8
  2145. 8
  2146. 8
  2147. 8
  2148. 8
  2149. 8
  2150. 8
  2151. 8
  2152. 8
  2153. 8
  2154. 8
  2155. 8
  2156. 8
  2157. 8
  2158. 8
  2159. 8
  2160. 8
  2161. 8
  2162. 8
  2163. 8
  2164. 8
  2165. 8
  2166. 8
  2167. 8
  2168. 8
  2169. 8
  2170. 8
  2171. 8
  2172. 8
  2173. 7
  2174. 7
  2175. 7
  2176. 7
  2177. 7
  2178. 7
  2179. 7
  2180. 7
  2181. 7
  2182. 7
  2183. 7
  2184. 7
  2185. 7
  2186. Aya definitely nobody was fired, and I didn't find anything about any cops resigning from their jobs either. the only resignation was that the police chief who was more or less THE guy in command present at the school very reluctantly resigned from his position on the town council a few days ago. no cop lost or gave up their job or their rank. it's also really horrible that none of the cops have been or apparently will be charged with anything. but of course they won't, because that would be the job of the prosecutors, and prosecutors and cops have pretty much the same ideas of playing on the same team as cops do amongst each other. thin blue line shit. vanishingly thin blue line, apparently. american cops value cops' lives FAR higher than anybody else's. what happened in uvalde was just a particularly extreme demonstration of this. those same cops actually had active shooter training earlier this year. what they are told to do and what they trained is that the first cop on scene is supposed to immediately attack the shooter to draw the shooter's attention and gunfire away from helpless civilians who have no body armor, weapons, or combat training (and in this case happened to be 10 year olds). 10 bullets shot at a cop wearing body armor behind cover do much less harm than 10 bullets shot point blank at children. in stark contrast, one of the official excuses of uvalde police was "we did not attempt to enter the room because the suspect had already shot at us". cop priorities! to say that they think that they are better than the rest of us is an understatement. they act as if they believe that they are a different species, like we aren't people to the full extent they are.
    7
  2187. 7
  2188. 7
  2189. 7
  2190. 7
  2191. 7
  2192. 7
  2193. 7
  2194. 7
  2195. 7
  2196. 7
  2197. 7
  2198. 7
  2199. 7
  2200. 7
  2201. 7
  2202. 7
  2203. 7
  2204. 7
  2205. 7
  2206. 7
  2207. 7
  2208. 7
  2209. 7
  2210. 7
  2211. 7
  2212. 7
  2213. 7
  2214. 7
  2215. 7
  2216. the vast majority of these videos are of silly little hipster projects that do little more than provide a few jobs, and sometimes inflated profits through successful deceptive marketing and donation drives. in most of them (not in the case of sargassum), what should be happening instead is state investment in the boring but extremely effective garbage solution that are garbage-burning power plants. it's very important that they use good exhaust filtering systems, but if they do, they enormously reduce the environmental and societal impact of garbage, and they produce plenty of electricity to finance their operation and trash collection and sorting. unlike the US, which still dumps a huge portion of garbage in landfills, most of central europe has managed to ban household waste from landfills (now mostly used for construction waste), by burning everything that can't be recycled (though there has been trickery with labelling stuff as recycleable in order to export it to asian countries where it just ended up in landfills). one of these videos where power plants are particularly obviously the correct solution is the one about the second hand clothes imported by ghana, much of which end up littering what would otherwise be tourist-friendly beaches. almost all clothes, whether cotton, synthetic or animal hair, are perfect fuel for garbage power plants, as they burn well and predictably reasonably cleanly. burning trash is not as marketable as recycling because it'sclear that it's destructive, but it often is the best way to handle the quantity of the problem at all. recycling projects just play around with a tiny portion of the problem, they are mostly incapable of solving anything.
    7
  2217. 7
  2218. 7
  2219. 7
  2220. 7
  2221. 7
  2222. 7
  2223. 7
  2224. 7
  2225. 7
  2226. 7
  2227. 7
  2228. 7
  2229. 7
  2230. 7
  2231. 7
  2232. 7
  2233. 7
  2234. 7
  2235. 7
  2236. 7
  2237. 7
  2238. 7
  2239. 7
  2240. 7
  2241. 7
  2242. 7
  2243. 7
  2244. 7
  2245.  @zammmerjammer  99% of these stories are actually of people who have no clue how to communicate with dogs and who cause violent confrontations with their own dogs because they can't read the dogs' moods and don't respect the dogs' personal space. dogs don't "snap out of nowhere", that's just humans failing to read the signals that come before the bite or growl. my favourite of those stories that I saw in an anti-pitbull "documentary" once was told by a mother whose baby was killed by the two family pit bulls, and who then became an anti-pit bull activist to shift the blame away from herself. the story she told was that the dogs pulled the baby from her arms and mauled it, and she ran away to call the police. I found it EXTREMELY telling of the kind of relationship this woman had with her own dogs that she was too scared of them to try to fight them to save her baby. that is bizarre to me, I can't comprehend why somebody like that would own two pit bulls. and she was completely unaware of this as she told the story. I think most mothers would fight two pit bulls for their babies, even if they had no experience with any dogs. any big dog would be dangerous in those people's hands. pit bulls just happen to also have extra strong jaws for their size. they are far from the most dangerous breeds though - large livestock guardian breeds are the most dangerous (bigger than pit bulls, far less agreeable attitude and more territorial). then there are molosser breeds like cane corso or dogo argentino that are basically scaled-up pit bulls, but again with a worse attitude because they're bred as guard dogs (and descendants of war dogs). and belgian malinois are essentially chihuahuas in german shepherd bodies.
    7
  2246. 7
  2247. 7
  2248. 7
  2249. 7
  2250. 7
  2251. 7
  2252. 7
  2253. 7
  2254. 7
  2255. 7
  2256. 7
  2257. 7
  2258. 7
  2259. 7
  2260. 7
  2261. 7
  2262. 7
  2263. 7
  2264. 7
  2265. 7
  2266. 7
  2267. 7
  2268. 7
  2269. 7
  2270. 7
  2271. 7
  2272. 7
  2273. 7
  2274. 7
  2275. 7
  2276. 7
  2277. 7
  2278. 7
  2279. 7
  2280. 7
  2281. 7
  2282. 7
  2283. 7
  2284. 7
  2285. 7
  2286. 7
  2287. 7
  2288. 7
  2289. 7
  2290. 7
  2291. regarding the uniformed individuals, it's also worth noting that a preexisting problem has greatly expanded along with ben gvir's handout of a°°ault rifles to many settlers after 10/7, which is that armed civilian settlers and members of settler militias are very commonly allowed to wear army uniforms and just pretend to have state authority while refusing to identify whether they actually are with the army or any other state organ. there was an interesting case a few months ago that showed the danger of inept is°°elis with guns, in that case an army reservist. an isr°°li civilian (yuval kestelman) carrying a pistol had intervened in a pale°°°nian attack at a bus stop and killed both armed attackers, and when the next very much not good guy with a gun (a°°ault rifle) came along, he dropped the pistol, knelt on the ground and held his hands up to show clearly that he was no threat, and obviously made an attempt to verbally explain that he had just stopped the attack, not taken part in it. but similar to the three h°°tages with the white flag in g°za, somehow the guy with the rifle felt confident that he was looking at a te°°orist, and they don't arrest those, so he ex°°uted him. and then the government first painted him as a hero,and then tried very hard to ignore it, and it took a ridiculous amount of public outrage for netanyahu etc. to acknowledge the situation broadly correctly, and for the killer to even be mildly criminally charged. and probably none of that would have happened if there hadn't been a video uploaded of that execution.
    7
  2292. 7
  2293. 7
  2294. 7
  2295. 7
  2296. 7
  2297. at some point probably within a year or two, you'll be able to enter most countries with the only covid requirement being a mandatory vaccination like many countries require for other diseases. masks are going to remain way more common than they used to be though, even without mandates, like they had been in east asia before covid due to SARS and a couple of flu pandemics that hit asia hard. right now it's looking very hopeful that omicron is the start of covid being far less dangerous. if omicron infection provides good immunity against more severe variants, and future variants branching off omicron are much like omicron, we're good. for the past month, a lot of media and public health communicators have been clinging to the narrative that we still don't know how mild omicron is really hard (to flatten the curve), but the fact of the matter is that the omicron wave has already passed in multiple countries in ways that suggest that the majority of the population was infected (because not much else could have slowed the spread like it did), and only a very small percentage of infected people needed intensive care or died. pretty much for a moderately well vaccinated person who isn't old or sick, omicron is a lot like the flu or a cold but way more infectious. it still has an annoying chance of long covid, but I think that's reduced both by vaccination and by omicron compared to previous variants. with the new omicron vaccines we may be even better off potentially for years. plus the new covid pills haven't really hit the market yet and will make a big difference, though we absolutely should kill the patents on that stuff because pfizer wants like $700 for one box/treatment course of their magical 90% covid pill. that's extortion, obviously they don't need a high price to get their money back because there is going to be plenty of demand for that covid pill for a long time.
    7
  2298. 7
  2299. 7
  2300. 7
  2301. 7
  2302. 7
  2303. 7
  2304. 7
  2305. 7
  2306. 7
  2307. 7
  2308. 7
  2309. 7
  2310. 7
  2311. 7
  2312. 7
  2313. 7
  2314. 7
  2315. 7
  2316. 7
  2317. 7
  2318. 7
  2319. 7
  2320. 7
  2321. 7
  2322. 7
  2323. 7
  2324. 7
  2325. 7
  2326. 7
  2327. 7
  2328. 7
  2329. 7
  2330. 7
  2331. 7
  2332. 7
  2333.  @GazaHolocaust  it's true that her hi°°°r statement did not declare h° to have been ok, as she was falsely accused of. it was also made within a context that did not mention j°°s at all. she was defending the term "nati°nal°sm" as one to self-identify with, brought up h°°°er as the only example she and her audience would be familiar with, and then within the batsh°° republican talking point of proclaiming h's extraterritorial ambitions to have been "gl°balism" and not at all nati°nal°sm, she briefly circumscribed a not much more accurate positively connotated idea of nati°°alism as "making germany great" without attacking other countries, and proclaimed that that hypothetical h° would have been unobjectionable. so if one wants to be very charitable, one can say that she was talking only about the positive concept she described and not about h° because he wasn't like that, and if one wants to be very uncharitable, one can say that her positive description is irrelevant, and she was endorsing a hypothetical h° only deviating from reality by not aggressing against other states, which would mean endorsing the dicta°°rship, the nuremberg rac° laws, the ex°°°mination of dis°bl°d people, and probably the exp°lsi°n of all j°°s, and ki°°ing, int°rnm°nt or steriliz°tion of all romani and qu°°r people and miscegenators. but even with the least charitable plausible interpretation, that actually was not an endorsement of h° for his ant°°°mitism, but for being a n°z° in general. she was not being ant°°°mitic, just a batsh°° republican. and all of the other accusations against her are weaker than this one. actually the argument that could have been made but I believe was not in the recent controversy context is that in a dogwhistly way she used the term "gl°bal°sm" in the sense it was at the time being somewhat popularly used to refer to a j°°ish w°rld dom°nati°n plot and was being ant°°°itic by referencing the obviously actually existing wingnut claim that h° was a creation of the j°s. but you could have found like... at least a third of republican congresspeople saying the same sort of thing at the time.
    7
  2334. 7
  2335. 7
  2336. 7
  2337. 7
  2338. 7
  2339. 7
  2340. 7
  2341. 7
  2342. 7
  2343. 7
  2344. 7
  2345. 7
  2346. 7
  2347. 7
  2348. 7
  2349. 7
  2350. 7
  2351. 7
  2352. 7
  2353. 7
  2354. 7
  2355. 7
  2356. 7
  2357. 7
  2358. 7
  2359. 7
  2360. 7
  2361. 7
  2362. 7
  2363. 7
  2364. 7
  2365. 7
  2366. 7
  2367. 7
  2368. 7
  2369. 7
  2370. 7
  2371. 7
  2372. 7
  2373. 7
  2374. 7
  2375. 7
  2376. 7
  2377. 7
  2378. 7
  2379. 7
  2380. 7
  2381. 7
  2382. 7
  2383. 7
  2384. 7
  2385. 7
  2386. 7
  2387. 7
  2388. 7
  2389. 7
  2390. 7
  2391. 7
  2392. 7
  2393. 7
  2394. 7
  2395. 7
  2396. 7
  2397. 7
  2398. 7
  2399. 7
  2400. 7
  2401. 7
  2402. 7
  2403. 7
  2404. 7
  2405. 7
  2406. 7
  2407. 7
  2408. 7
  2409. 7
  2410. 7
  2411. 7
  2412. 7
  2413. 7
  2414. 7
  2415. 7
  2416. 7
  2417. 7
  2418. 7
  2419. 7
  2420. 7
  2421. 7
  2422. 7
  2423. 7
  2424. 7
  2425. 7
  2426. 7
  2427. 7
  2428. 7
  2429. 7
  2430. 7
  2431. 7
  2432. 7
  2433. 7
  2434. 7
  2435. 7
  2436. 7
  2437. 7
  2438. 7
  2439. 7
  2440. 7
  2441. 7
  2442. 7
  2443. 7
  2444. 7
  2445. 7
  2446. 7
  2447. 7
  2448. 7
  2449. 7
  2450. 7
  2451. 7
  2452. 7
  2453. 7
  2454. 7
  2455. 7
  2456. 7
  2457. 7
  2458. 7
  2459. 7
  2460. 7
  2461. 7
  2462. 7
  2463. 7
  2464. 7
  2465. 7
  2466. 7
  2467. 7
  2468. 7
  2469. 7
  2470. 7
  2471. 7
  2472. 7
  2473. 7
  2474. 7
  2475. 7
  2476. 7
  2477. 7
  2478. 7
  2479. 7
  2480. 7
  2481. 7
  2482. 7
  2483. 7
  2484. 6
  2485. 6
  2486. 6
  2487. 6
  2488. 6
  2489. 6
  2490. given the difference in power and the difference in the amount of abuses, israel is the side with almost all of the ability and moral duty to deescalate. instead, israel is very very clearly the side that's been escalating for years. the most obvious tip of the iceberg I would suggest looking at are this year's israeli army supported pogrom in huwara, israel's 3 or 4 assaults into the al-aqsa mosque in recent years, the murder of shireen abu-akleh and the israeli attack on her funeral procession (even beating the pallbearers and making them drop the casket), and the evergreens that are israel's indefinite detention without charge of thousands of palestinians including children, and israel's explicit policy of escalated retaliation (any attack on israel is answered by a more severe attack), including the VERY illegal collective punishment of demolishing the homes of "terrorists". also note the recently increasing adoption of the method of killing important enemies in gaza by shooting small guided bombs or missiles into their homes to simply kill them, their wives, usually their children and likely their neighbours in their sleep - israel generally used to design their assassinations in ways that had less than 50% collateral damage, whereas these bombings are fundamentally designed to cause more collateral deaths than target deaths (they seem to average a ratio of 3 or 4 to 1). oh, and take a look at when israel attacked al jazeera and AP by flattening the building holding their offices in gaza, that was fun.
    6
  2491. 6
  2492. 6
  2493. 6
  2494. 6
  2495. 6
  2496. 6
  2497. 6
  2498. 6
  2499. 6
  2500. 6
  2501. 6
  2502. 6
  2503. 6
  2504. 6
  2505. 6
  2506. 6
  2507. 6
  2508. 6
  2509. 6
  2510. 6
  2511. 6
  2512. 6
  2513. 6
  2514. 6
  2515. 6
  2516. 6
  2517. 6
  2518. 6
  2519. 6
  2520. 6
  2521. 6
  2522. 6
  2523. 6
  2524. 6
  2525. 6
  2526. 6
  2527. 6
  2528. 6
  2529. 6
  2530. 6
  2531. 6
  2532. 6
  2533. 6
  2534. 6
  2535. 6
  2536. 6
  2537. 6
  2538. 6
  2539. well, the no more wars thing was always based primarily on much of the world's news not reaching you. unless you're following al jazeera, there is a sort of minimum whiteness and minimum wealth level for people involved below which it's only newsworthy if there are rivers of blood. it's of course a substantially different situation, but as someone who dropped out of highschool with a s°°° diploma because I despised it and decided that I didn't want to get a certificate for performing useless tasks and displays of submission (so I started to only attend half of the time, never do homework, and tell my teachers and argue about it if they asked), I want to encourage you to play along. I only realized years later that my decision to soft-quit school had been based on flawed thinking - because I abdicated the role of arguing in favour of school to other people, and when they failed to convince me, I took that to mean that my position was correct. I neglected to really make an effort to question myself. other people and especially teachers kept trying to argue about the value of the knowledge and skills in the curriculum, when the lane they should have argued with me to convince me to make minimal effort would have been that there objectively is a lot of value in education certificates, despite them often not indicating any noteworthy knowledge or skill. you're unlikely to help anyone if you out yourself in school as subversive. even without any politics involved, almost all my teachers hated me for arguing in effect that there was little value in what they (based on the curriculum they had to follow) were teaching. many of my peers would quite transparently hold a similar view to me, but I was the only one who didn't lie to them about it, and I discovered that they really craved that lie, they would be satisfied with even very weak attempts. for example one friend of mine would do exactly the same thing every time he was asked to present homework he also almost never did: he would bend down mumbling while rifling through his bag, and hold that position to literally duck away from the attention until the teacher either called on another student, or asked again - and it worked almost every time. if he was asked a second time, he would never admit that he didn't do it, just that he couldn't find it (without actually making a claim either way about having done the homework xD). that sort of charade was strongly preferred by the teachers over my choice to just say that I didn't do my homework and had never intended to. to the best of my knowledge, in russia you need to expect at least some teachers and administrators to be keeping a list of subversive students that will end up in a police or FSB database. the more you want to say things that could get you on that list, the more of a reason you have to avoid being added to it. if you really can't stop yourself from challenging one particular issue, it is likely to make a huge difference if you pretend to hold more conformist views, and only voice very narrow disagreement while referencing other ways in which you buy into government narratives. the techers don't really have to believe that you're being honest. but if they see you refusing to play the game, THAT is going to be a problem. you should look up explanations and examples of how people used to express dissent during soviet times. you can probably find instructions that are still very applicable to russian state institutions of specific things you do and ones you do not want to be seen doing in order to give the impression that you are essentially under control.
    6
  2540. 6
  2541. 6
  2542. 6
  2543. 6
  2544. 6
  2545. 6
  2546. 6
  2547. 6
  2548. 6
  2549. they're called nacre sheets. they're the mother of pearl equivalent of how nowadays most wine corks are made from shredded cork that's glued back together, because it's cheaper than cutting large enough single pieces from thick enough high quality cork bark. I'm not entirely sure if they involve a softening process, because nacre is only minimally flexible (I would guess no softening), but the gist of it is that real sea shells are sliced extremely thin and glued together on some sort of black backing material so that the mother of pearl fully covers the black. I would guess that they probably sand down the nacre where it overlaps, which also obscures the more regular shapes it was originally sliced in, which is good because you're not supposed to notice that it's not actually all one shell. working with stacked nacre sheets like this makes for a much faster and cheaper product, because the alternative is to cut each piece of nacre individually instead of a neatly flat stack of 20 or whatever that was, and then you would probably have to inlay the pieces into the wood of the box because you can't sand them thin enough to bend and have their thickness hidden under lacquer like that. or I suppose you could embedd them in a layer of opaque black epoxy, but that's cheating and then it wouldn't look like wood at all anymore. basically nacre sheets are the middle way between more expensive solid nacre that looks more natural if you know what you're looking for, and plastic fake nacre (mother of toilet seat) that looks a lot worse because it only crudely imitates the light refraction of nacre basically by having extremely fine glitter suspended in swirls in transparent plastic.
    6
  2550. 6
  2551. 6
  2552. 6
  2553. 6
  2554. 6
  2555. 6
  2556. 6
  2557. 6
  2558. 6
  2559. 6
  2560. 6
  2561. 6
  2562. 6
  2563. 6
  2564. 6
  2565. 6
  2566. 6
  2567. 6
  2568. 6
  2569. 6
  2570. 6
  2571. 6
  2572. 6
  2573. 6
  2574. 6
  2575. 6
  2576. recycled aluminium and partially recycled plastic? good job mentioning two of the least relevant material sourcing questions! 🙄 what about the lithium, cobalt and rare earths? are those recycled or mined in a regulated way with an eye on environmental conservation, labour rights (child labour), and financing of armed conflicts? cobalt mining in particular is done in the congo on a huge scale with no work safety (cobalt is toxic), much child labour, and often the mines are controlled by terroristic rebel groups. lithium on the other hand is generally mined industrially, but it's done deliberately in countries with little environmental protections because it's extremely destructive and polluting if you want to do it cheaply. same with rare earths. lithium from batteries is principally recyclable, but nobody is doing it because it's more expensive than the barely regulated mining that's dominating the market. on the other hand, the recycling of that tiny amount of plastic is literally 100% irrelevant (and possibly a bad idea because recycled plastic is generally of slightly lower quality, and that small amount of plastic on an object that's supposed to last for years is NOT the right application to trade in durability for marginally better sustainability). aluminium recycling is very common because it's economically competitive against the very energy-intensive production of new aluminium, so it's nothing to brag about. I don't know if this is an error by the BBC, that they chose to announce the wrong recycling points and chose not to report the good ones, or if this is actually the extent of the use of recycled materials in this phone, but it sure does look silly. you also completely neglected to mention repairability and durability, which is really where the environmental advantages of one phone over others would be situated. the least environmentally friendly phones are those that (like many apple devices) are not even built to have their batteries replaced when they die after 2 or 3 years, and for which the manufacturers refuse to sell any spare parts (like apple is legally battling to not have to do all around the world). also, where is this phone even made? presumably if you don't mention it, it's china. hardly a country knows for labour rights or environmentalism.
    6
  2577. 6
  2578. 6
  2579. 6
  2580. 6
  2581. 6
  2582. 6
  2583. 6
  2584. 6
  2585. 6
  2586. 6
  2587. 6
  2588. 6
  2589. 6
  2590. 6
  2591. 6
  2592. 6
  2593. 6
  2594. 6
  2595. 6
  2596. 6
  2597. 6
  2598. 6
  2599. 6
  2600. 6
  2601. 6
  2602. 6
  2603. 6
  2604. 6
  2605. 6
  2606. 6
  2607. 6
  2608. in my opinion, the decision to quit the coup attempt must have been made mostly on the basis of immediate gains for prigozhin, something that's not a promise (like for protection or retention of assets) that could later be broken. such options I can think of are limited to: a) physical transfer of a very large amount of money/gold/gems - this may have been much smaller than what would be necessary to compensate for prigozhin's presumed losses in assets associated with giving up, including wagner's international ressource extraction, but it would be on a similar order of magnitude, billions of dollars, in order to have considerable appeal to prigozhin. b) physical transfer of weaponry - it would hold some definitive value, but I'm inclined to discount this as extremely unlikely. besides being dangerous to putin, it would also be of unreliable benefit to prigozhin, given his very shaky prospects of continued command of a significant portion of wagner forces c) release of hostages, family members of prigozhin or other essential coup leaders captured by putin loyalists - to me, this is likely to be the main reason, though it probably would have been combined with a money transfer. wagner would have made efforts to secure potential hostages,but for operational secrecy, they may have been largely limited to escorting people to safe houses inside russia at the beginning of the uprising, and this could easily have failed to prevent somebody's capture (through successful government surveillance, or through disloyalty of the personnel tasked with the protection, who could theoretically have been able to extract a fortune from putin as a reward). if the pictures that supposedly show prigozhin's own go-bags containing false passports and tens of millions of dollars in cash and gold supposedly picked up from the saint petersburg wagner headquarters' parking lot are real, that would indicate coup preparation partially shambolic enough to likely involve a failure to secure potential hostages, even prigozhin's own family. I don't know where they live or where they were, but he has three children and a wife who owns (owned) a bunch of businesses in saint petersburg, like he does. I would be somewhat surprised if those were inside russia, but it's also not entirely out of the question that putin's people managed to take hostages outside of russia. keeping strong surveillance on family members as leverage would have been an obvious thing to do before this attempt, so hiding them might have been very tricky. I also believe with high confidence that the reported involvement of belarus and lukashenka is a mere misdirection effort. lukashenka had no authority whatsoever to negotiate here - even if he did talk to prigozhin, he would have been putin's messenger, so acknowledging him as an actor in this is nonsense. he has substantial agency in many other matters, but not in regards to a russian coup attempt. lukashenka was inserted into the narrative in order to soften the impression of putin reversing course about everything he vowed to do a few hours earlier. the deal wasn't made with lukashenka, it was made with putin. lukashenka is just a stand-in to do something that putin didn't want attributed to himself.
    6
  2609. 6
  2610. 6
  2611. 6
  2612. 6
  2613. 6
  2614. 6
  2615. 6
  2616. 6
  2617. 6
  2618. 6
  2619. 6
  2620. 6
  2621. 6
  2622. 6
  2623. 6
  2624. 6
  2625. 6
  2626. 6
  2627. 6
  2628. 6
  2629. 6
  2630. 6
  2631. 6
  2632. 6
  2633. 6
  2634. 6
  2635. 6
  2636. 6
  2637. 6
  2638. 6
  2639. 6
  2640. 6
  2641. 6
  2642. 6
  2643. 6
  2644. 6
  2645. 6
  2646. 6
  2647. 6
  2648. 6
  2649. 6
  2650. 6
  2651. please note how obvious of a thing worth reporting on this is, given the open 21st century proclamations made by the highest political and military officials of israel that are quoted in this video - and yet this is probably the first time you are hearing about this, from some low budget youtube production that didn't even use a decent microphone in these older videos and only has 33k views a year and three quarters after being uploaded. meanwhile practically everywhere you look in western media and in the statements of western politicians, spanning almost the entire political spectrum, you are presented very forcefully with exclusively the opposite characterization of the conduct of israel's military, as one the most humane militaries in the world. israel openly has a 100% strict official policy of escalatory retaliation against every single attack on israel: every attack against them is answered with an expressly punitive strike in retaliation that is officially required to be more severe than the attack against israel (and in reality they seem to aim in the ballpark of 10+ times more severe). this is an obvious abuse of their power advantage that prevents their enemies from escalating further. it is an even worse version of the logic behind the cultural practice of familial or tribal blood feuds that is rightfully condemned by most of the world for causing harm all around. if every state started doing this today, we would have a global nuclear exchange by the end of the year. and israel has the gall to call their enemies terrorists, while escalating every engagement and expecting them to deescalate every time, and deliberately causing more harm. even policies that do receive mostly condemnation among israel's allies are practically never mentioned, such as israel's official punitive practice of demolishing the homes of the families of people they deem guilty of committing a terrorist attack against them, or israel keeping something in the ballpark of 20% of their palestinian prisoners in "administrative detention" indefinitely with no charge (like gitmo), including journalists and minors. btw. israel's claim to be trying to deter hamas and PIJ from attacking by causing both militant and civilian palestinian deaths in response fundamentally makes no sense given that palestinian islamists believe that both fighters and civilians who die this way go to premium heaven as martyrs. according to their ideology, martyrdom is a flawless victory in an individual's game of life - so any true believers actually welcome it!
    6
  2652. 6
  2653. 6
  2654. 6
  2655. 6
  2656. 6
  2657. 6
  2658. 6
  2659. 6
  2660. 6
  2661. 6
  2662. 6
  2663. 6
  2664. 6
  2665. 6
  2666. 6
  2667. 6
  2668. 6
  2669. 6
  2670. 6
  2671. 6
  2672. 6
  2673. 6
  2674. 6
  2675. 6
  2676. 6
  2677. 6
  2678. 6
  2679. 6
  2680. 6
  2681. 6
  2682. 6
  2683. 6
  2684. 6
  2685. 6
  2686. 6
  2687. 6
  2688. 6
  2689. 6
  2690. 6
  2691. 6
  2692. 6
  2693. 6
  2694. 6
  2695. 6
  2696. 6
  2697. 6
  2698. 6
  2699. 6
  2700. 6
  2701. 6
  2702. 6
  2703. 6
  2704. 6
  2705. 6
  2706. 6
  2707. 6
  2708. 6
  2709. 6
  2710. 6
  2711. 6
  2712. 6
  2713. 6
  2714. 6
  2715. 6
  2716. 6
  2717. 6
  2718. 6
  2719. 6
  2720. 6
  2721. 6
  2722. 6
  2723. 6
  2724. 6
  2725. 6
  2726. 6
  2727. 6
  2728. 6
  2729. 6
  2730. 6
  2731. 6
  2732. 6
  2733. 6
  2734. 6
  2735. 6
  2736. 6
  2737. 6
  2738. 6
  2739. 6
  2740. 6
  2741. 6
  2742. 6
  2743. 6
  2744. 6
  2745. 6
  2746. 6
  2747. 6
  2748. 6
  2749. 6
  2750. 6
  2751. 6
  2752. 6
  2753. 6
  2754. 6
  2755. 6
  2756. 6
  2757. 6
  2758. 6
  2759. 6
  2760. 6
  2761. 6
  2762. 6
  2763. 6
  2764. 6
  2765. 6
  2766. 6
  2767. 6
  2768. 6
  2769. 6
  2770. 6
  2771. 6
  2772. 6
  2773. 6
  2774. 6
  2775. 6
  2776. 6
  2777. 6
  2778. 6
  2779. 6
  2780. 6
  2781. 6
  2782. 6
  2783. 6
  2784. 6
  2785. 6
  2786. 6
  2787. 6
  2788. 6
  2789. 6
  2790. 6
  2791. 6
  2792. 6
  2793. 6
  2794. 6
  2795. 6
  2796. 6
  2797. 6
  2798. 6
  2799. 6
  2800. 6
  2801. 6
  2802. 6
  2803. 6
  2804. 6
  2805. 6
  2806. 6
  2807. 6
  2808. 6
  2809. 6
  2810. 6
  2811. 6
  2812. 6
  2813. 6
  2814. 6
  2815. 6
  2816. 6
  2817. 6
  2818. 6
  2819. 6
  2820. 6
  2821. 6
  2822. 6
  2823. 6
  2824. 6
  2825. 6
  2826. 6
  2827. 6
  2828. 6
  2829. 6
  2830. 6
  2831. 6
  2832. 6
  2833. 6
  2834. 6
  2835. 6
  2836. 6
  2837. 6
  2838. 6
  2839. 6
  2840. 6
  2841. 6
  2842. 6
  2843. 6
  2844. 6
  2845. 6
  2846. 6
  2847. 6
  2848. 6
  2849. 6
  2850. 6
  2851. 6
  2852. 6
  2853. 6
  2854. 6
  2855. 6
  2856. 6
  2857. 6
  2858. 6
  2859. 6
  2860. 6
  2861. 6
  2862. 6
  2863. 6
  2864. 6
  2865. 6
  2866. 6
  2867. 6
  2868. 6
  2869. 6
  2870. 6
  2871. 6
  2872. 6
  2873. 6
  2874. 6
  2875. 6
  2876. 6
  2877. plus orcas like all cetaceans also talk to one another. dolphins have even been found (and orcas, being giant dolphins, may also be able to do this) to do something well beyond human speech: they combine their vocalisation skill with their auditory processing that enables them to see through echolocation, and they vocally replicate the echo return of physical objects, enabling them to transmit 3D images of objects they're talking about to other dolphins. if orcas are able to do this too, they wouldn"t even need to teach one another to attack particular boats through direct observation, they could show each other their mental image of what those those boats look like as viewed by sonar. I've read about a different atudy about crow behaviour that also suggests complex speech-like communication. in it, researches made an effort to scare some wild crows while wearing conspicuous masks, and the crows' conditioned hatred of masked humans got propagated through the whole crow colony and for years afterwards in such a way that it seemed like the crows must have been telling each other about and describing the scary masked humans. if crows are able to express the concept of a human wearing a mask well enough for other crows to recognise them just from the description, that suggests way more complex communication than just expressions of emotions, which people generally think all non-human animals are limited to (so more like human words than like various expressive human grunting noises).
    6
  2878. 6
  2879. 6
  2880. and yet his plan failed in a really very basic way because he failed to consider that the FBI needed to CONFIRM that the b°°b could safely be moved if they got the code from him, and without a way of confirming that, they wouldn't try to get the code at all. for moving the device, they would have certainly needed to have humans push it, so that necessitated extremely high confidence. if instead the note had suggested a way to dismantle and clearly disarm the device remotely, for example with a shaped charge, which would only work after a code had been entered to disarm a system that would otherwise activate the device, then the FBI would have had a realistic option which they might assess to be safe enough to try and likely enough to work that tge casino owner might decide it was worth paying for the chance. I suppose the main reason the inventor had to set it up the way he did is that he ws very focused on destroying evidence that might be found on the remains of the device, and he wanted it to be dismantled by its main charge in all possible outcomes to destroy as much detail as possible. but the mistake he made in the process was actually remarkably st°pid. I'd say it (as well as his violent crimes against his family) points toward narcissism - he failed because he was incapable of imagining the perspective of the FBI agents and the fact that they qould xonsider their personal safety to be the highest priority, and would never move the thing because he gave them really no way at all to confirm that the pendulum was disarmed and no sneaky redundant system built in. in fact, he could have actually had the best of both worlds if the letter claimed that the device could be disarmed by combining the code with a shaped charge, but that was a lie and it would actually detonate, but they could only findthat outafter paying up, so he would have gotten the cash but still destroyed the evidence. alrhough I auppose they may not have been able to even flip the switches at all to enter a code. probably depends on whether or not they had remote-controlled robots like they do today.
    6
  2881. 6
  2882. 6
  2883. 6
  2884. 6
  2885. 5
  2886. 5
  2887. 5
  2888. 5
  2889. 5
  2890. 5
  2891. 5
  2892. 5
  2893. 5
  2894. 5
  2895. 5
  2896. 5
  2897. 5
  2898. 5
  2899. 5
  2900. 5
  2901. 5
  2902. 5
  2903. 5
  2904. 5
  2905. 5
  2906. 5
  2907. 5
  2908. 5
  2909. 5
  2910. 5
  2911. 5
  2912. 5
  2913. 5
  2914. 5
  2915. 5
  2916. 5
  2917. 5
  2918. 5
  2919. 5
  2920. 5
  2921. 5
  2922. 5
  2923. 5
  2924. 5
  2925. 5
  2926. 5
  2927. 5
  2928. yeah it sucks that ben keeps pushing his arguments into the realm of alternative facts. particularly in terms of israel's earlier history, he is very ignorant. ben blames the palestinians for not accepting the post-WW2 UN offer in which the arab two thirds of the population of palestine would have gotten one third of the land, and the jewish third of the population, mostly first and overwhelmingly first or second generation immigrants, would have gotten not just two thirds of the land, but that land on average was more valuable and included almost all of the coastline. ben says that israel has never massacred and r**ed palestinians like hamas just did. but yes, they have. that, minus the kidnapping, is exactly what the palestinians were fleeing from in 1948. the ethnic cleansing was driven by massacres committed by israeli militia and army, that is the nakba. and until 1956, israel's policy for palestinians attempting to return to the territory claimed by israel, referred to as "infiltration", was to shoot them on sight exactly like saudi arabia does today with african migrants crossing from yemen. they killed thousands and left the bodies to rot for deterrence. slightly less directly but more recently, in 1982 during the lebanese civil war, israel sent its depraved christian fascist militia allies known for prior massacres into the plaestinian refugee camps sabra and shatila, and for two days literally watched from guard towers, prevented everybody from leaving, and illuminated the night with flares while the phalange did nothing but r**e and murder civilians, killing around 2000-3500. ben needs to go on a wikipedia binge (and preferably then some follow-up reading about standout events) to get a more complete general picture of this conflict, as he is clearly relying heavily on propaganda to inform his opinion. for example, the wikipedia directory page "list of massacres in palestine" is a good way to get the general idea.
    5
  2929. 5
  2930. 5
  2931. 5
  2932. 5
  2933. 5
  2934. 5
  2935. 5
  2936. 5
  2937. 5
  2938. 5
  2939. 5
  2940. 5
  2941. 5
  2942. 5
  2943. 5
  2944. 5
  2945. 5
  2946. 5
  2947. 5
  2948. 5
  2949. 5
  2950. 5
  2951. 5
  2952. 5
  2953. 5
  2954. 5
  2955. 5
  2956. 5
  2957. 5
  2958. 5
  2959. 5
  2960. 5
  2961. 5
  2962. 5
  2963. 5
  2964. 5
  2965. 5
  2966. 5
  2967. 5
  2968. 5
  2969. 5
  2970. 5
  2971. 5
  2972. 5
  2973. 5
  2974. 5
  2975. 5
  2976. 5
  2977. 5
  2978. 5
  2979. 5
  2980. 5
  2981. 5
  2982. it's actually very recommendable if you can otherwise prevent breeding to not desex dogs until they're well over a year old (preferably several years), as both spaying and neutering have clear statistically significant negative health impacts that are worse the younger the dog is when it's desexed (both types of sex organs' hormone production has relevance to the healthy development of other body parts). in many cases, desexing young dogs does overall make sense because non-lethal population control takes precedent, but if a young dog is kept apart from other dogs it could breed with by very attentive owners, and isn't wreaking havoc with any behaviours that would best be fixed with desexing (which in many cases could probably be fixed better with more exercise), it often is the better choice to not desex them at all, or not until halfway through their life. although I still do judge anyone who buys a dog as a mere pet instead of adopting one of the many otherwise at risk of being euthanized, and of course in most places, most animal shelters and rescue organisations desex all dogs. but it would be nice if they found a different system to avoid desexing dogs under 1-2 years of age. maybe they could make people pay a deposit in the high hundreds to low thousands of dollars, and when they bring the dig back to be desexed when it's old enough, the, get the money back. of course that would still mean some risk of accidental breeding in the meantime, but if a dog is desexed at 2 years old, that still means that for most of its life it can't breed, so most of that risk is removed. and the deposit for very young dogs could have the positive side effect of making more people adopt older dogs, which really for probably the majority of people is the better option.
    5
  2983. 5
  2984. 5
  2985. 5
  2986. 5
  2987. 5
  2988. 5
  2989. 5
  2990. 5
  2991. 5
  2992. 5
  2993. 5
  2994. 5
  2995. 5
  2996. 5
  2997. 5
  2998. 5
  2999. 5
  3000. 5
  3001. 5
  3002. 5
  3003. 5
  3004. 5
  3005. 5
  3006. 5
  3007. 5
  3008. 5
  3009. 5
  3010. 5
  3011. 5
  3012. 5
  3013. 5
  3014. 5
  3015. 5
  3016. 5
  3017. 5
  3018. 5
  3019. 5
  3020. 5
  3021. 5
  3022. 5
  3023. 5
  3024. 5
  3025. 5
  3026. 5
  3027. 5
  3028. 5
  3029. 5
  3030. 5
  3031. 5
  3032. 5
  3033. 5
  3034. 5
  3035. 5
  3036. 5
  3037. 5
  3038. 5
  3039. 5
  3040. 5
  3041. 5
  3042. 5
  3043. 5
  3044. 5
  3045. 5
  3046. 5
  3047. 5
  3048. 5
  3049. 5
  3050. 5
  3051. 5
  3052. 5
  3053. 5
  3054. 5
  3055. 5
  3056. 5
  3057. 5
  3058. 5
  3059. 5
  3060. 5
  3061. 5
  3062. 5
  3063. 5
  3064. nightclubs and other party venues really must adhere to fire codes. so many mass casualty fires happen at night clubs, or similar places like that wedding venue in iraq last week. places where large and dense crowds of people congregate need to be especially fire-resistant. nightclubs in particular add more dangers: people are likely to be drunk. loud music and flashing lights can delay recognition of a fire a lot and the unaware crowd will impede an initial response. the lighting will be dark by default and is unlikely to be switched to bright in case of a fire, and if the power cuts out, there is no natural light both for lack of windows and becauae it's probably nighttime. and finally, nightclubs tend to put densecrowds of people inrooms with lower ceilings and less ventilation than other vanues (often in basements), which means that a fire will much more quickly poison the air people breathe. particularly because hot smoke from an indoor fire typically only collects at a dangerousconcentration under the ceiling for the first few minutes of a fire, but if that ceiling is just a meter ortwo above people's heads, then the people running and breathing heavily will very quickly mix the air in the room enough to bring down a lot of smoke. by the way in a building fire with relatively stationary air, the thermal layering of the smoke can actually make it a good idea to crawl out in order to avoidbreathing in the much higher smoke concentration at standing head height. smoke inhalation is the critical factor in the vast majority of fire deaths (and many injuries), as it can quite easily directly kill, or with lower exposure can make victims pass out, and later burn to death. smoke from building fires is generally far more toxic than what one may be used to from camp fires and barbecues. besides all sorts of carcinogenicstuff, I think the main difference is probably a likely very high carbon monoxide content, since that is produced by material burning just barely (incompletely).
    5
  3065. 5
  3066. 5
  3067. 5
  3068. 5
  3069. 5
  3070. 5
  3071. 5
  3072. 5
  3073. 5
  3074. 5
  3075. 5
  3076. 5
  3077.  @laszlozoltan5021  I see it as extremely unlikely that NATO would respond with nukes to russia nuking ukraine. in my opinion the maximum response would include NATO aerial bombardment of russia, the medium response would be a NATO no-fly-zone or no-libya-zone over ukraine, and the minimum reaction would be dramatic increases in sanctions amd weapons deliveries, probably including a substantial implementation of punitive actions against countries not participating in sanctions against russia. NATO combat ground forces in ukraine are possible with the medium and maximum response, but seem unlikely (mostly due to lack of public support for such actions). I would expect the very limited use of tactical nukes to produce the minimal response, extensive use of tactical nukes (causing several tens of thousands of deaths, not targeted to cause few deaths and mostly intimidate) to produce the medium response, and american-style use to produce the maximum response. but NATO is not interested in a nuclear exchange, and a NATO conventional force reaction would have good chances to not be answered with nuclear strikes against NATO, which would be the only thing that would initiate a nuclear exchange. though I do think that it's very possible for a NATO attack against russia to be answered by russian attacks, even invasion attempts, on NATO territory, those still would likely not result in a nuclear exchange, since NATO is in a much better position in a non-nuclear war than in a nuclear one. NATO is under no illusion that a wagner nuclear strike would somehow be less russia's doing than one conducted by the official military, that distinction has never been worth much. publicly redefining wagner as enemies of russia could have been used finally to give some credibility to the distinction even in the case of a nuclear strike, but for this to be the case, russia would have to report before the strike happened that wagner has captured nuclear weapons, since that's what they would do if it actually happened precisely to prepare to reject responsibility for their potential use by wagner.
    5
  3078. 5
  3079. 5
  3080. 5
  3081. 5
  3082. 5
  3083. 5
  3084. this video's claim of the yakuza being unique or even rare among major criminal organisations in their efforts to cultivate a sonewhat positive image through good deeds is VERY wrong. just look up pablo escobar's robin hood act for one great example, or the current haitian gang leader called barbecue, or how cartels and gangs throughout latin america took it upon themselves to enforce covid rules and deliver their own food aid in the slums they control! the whole "honour" thing and the successfully cultivated public acceptance also sound extremely similar to italian mafia actually in italy, as opposed to the american offshoots (the difference being that in the US, they never fulfilled many state functions like they used to in parts of italy, and as escobar did, and gangs in latin american slums and in haiti do). the reason why MANY criminal organisations cultivate public acceptance and support by contributing in noticeable ways to the quality of life of (usually especially poor) people is that this translates into substantial increases in security for them - basically it creates a whole lot of civilians who will not provide assistance to the government or other criminal organisations against that respected organisation, and will instead spy for them. though what likely also plays a role is that some portion of crime bosses has some degree of a conscience, and they like to spend small portions of the money they make on helping people in need to compensate for the bad things they do, and imagine themselves to be good guys. this video also downplays the obvious fact that government tolerance towards the yakuza is very simply the product of corrupt control over many individual politicians, not some kind of evidence of a special respectable character of the yakuza. mafia organisations everywhere are infamous for doing this, not least the original mafia in italy. this is the kind of bad script that makes me check the outro for who wrote it to confirm that it wasn't daven because he doesn't write crap like this. I have never been wrong.
    5
  3085. 5
  3086. 5
  3087. 5
  3088. 5
  3089. 5
  3090. 5
  3091. 5
  3092. 5
  3093. 5
  3094. 5
  3095. 5
  3096. 5
  3097. 5
  3098. 5
  3099. 5
  3100. 5
  3101. 5
  3102. 5
  3103.  @Mesopotamian  israelis and their supporters tend to assert an israeli victim role and deny the influence that the power imbalance has on the matter of which side of the conflict can control whether it develops in one direction or the other. in reality, israel's overwhelming advantage in military and economic power and foreign support gives it far more of an ability to unilaterally deescalate, to make a point of not responding with violence to violence, and to still keep its citizens safe (the hamas massacre was only possible because the IDF deployment on and near the gaza border was absolutely bizarrely weak, nowhere near what it should have been as a minimum even without any prior warnings, and army command then took about six hours to even initiate a counterattack, which arrived hours later than various off duty and retired soldiers and officers and civilians who drove across the country on their own initiative after receiving calls for help from relatives). what israel does instead is OFFICIALLY to retaliate againat all attacks with ESCALATION. their abuse of their power advantage inherent in that policy could not be more obvious, since if every country had that policy, we would have a world war in a matter of weeks. they call their enemies terrorists and consider themselves to be good guys while completely officially counting on the enemy to deescalate every armed engagement despite having suffered (much) more damage. 🤨 the israeli narrative meanwhile asserts as an unquestionable presupposition that the root of the conflict is antisemitism, that palestinian militants are just set on removing jews from the census regardless of what israel does, and that any and all violence and oppression against palestinians is intended as a necessary defensive measure - including the continued theft of land in order to ultimately claim all of palestine as an israeli state, having removed all palestinian non-citizens, because it's just intolerably dangerous to have them living there. all that is assumed and not to be questioned, and then they assert that they are proven to be the moral party of the conflict and thus in the right based on examples of smaller scale but undeniable palestinian attacks againat civilians (the recent massacre now functions as the ultimate "proof" of palestinians fundamentally wanting "another shoah" or even literally being nazis) contrasted with cherrypicked aspects of israel's war conduct that make the IDF "the most moral army in the world". most commonly they reference israel's evacuation warnings for people to leave a building they're in immediately because it's about to be bombed - when in reality, that does not as advertised function as a method for reducing collateral damage while striking legitimate targets, but rather it serves as a method for destroying huge numbers of civilian homes, commercial buildings, media offices and other totally illegitimate targets while keeping the number of deaths relatively low, in the knowledge that that is pretty much the only metric that has considerable potential to upset people whose support or indifference the israeli government needs to maintain. the calls they make to gazans about to be bombed are not "you are residing in a hamas base but we don't want to harm you, so please leave", but rather "we are about to destroy your home, please leave to keep your death out of our statistic so we can better pretend that we didn't attack you at all". and of course whoever they do kill were thousands of human shields, israel is not responsible for any harm to civilians that their bombs cause (all going back to the assertion that israel has no control and can't deescalate because fundamentally it's about antisemitism).
    5
  3104. 5
  3105. 5
  3106. 5
  3107. 5
  3108. 5
  3109. 5
  3110. 5
  3111. 5
  3112. 5
  3113. 5
  3114. 5
  3115. 5
  3116. 5
  3117. 5
  3118. 5
  3119. 5
  3120. 5
  3121. 5
  3122. 5
  3123. 5
  3124. 5
  3125. 5
  3126. 5
  3127. 5
  3128. 5
  3129. 5
  3130. 5
  3131. 5
  3132. 5
  3133. 5
  3134. 5
  3135. 5
  3136. 5
  3137. 5
  3138. 5
  3139. 5
  3140. 5
  3141. 5
  3142. 5
  3143. 5
  3144. 5
  3145. 5
  3146. 5
  3147. 5
  3148. 5
  3149. 5
  3150. 5
  3151. 5
  3152. 5
  3153. 5
  3154. 5
  3155. 5
  3156. 5
  3157. 5
  3158. 5
  3159. 5
  3160. 5
  3161. 5
  3162. 5
  3163. 3:58 that smaller boy looks definitely younger than 10. the one behind him looks 11. even if one was to grant the IDF a reason to detain them, it says a lot that they didn't make an exception and let them keep their clothes (as it seems they did with the oldest man in that picture). temperatures in gaza right now range from 10°-20°C/50°F-70°F(looked it up just now), with frequent rain. hardly anyone would go out naked in that weather. it is physically more dangerous for skinny kids to be exposed to cold temperatures, because small bodies have more surface per unit of mass, so they cool out more. and what goes for all those detainees is that the food deprivation they have experienced and are experiencing makes the cold exposure worse, because the cold makes their bodies have to burn more fat and muscle to heat themselves. well, they're also largely deprived of water, which may still kill them faster. this being recorded and in some way released by IDF soldiers reminds me of the first week of this "war", when they accidentally released drone footage that showed them executing two or three unarmed men (barely on the isr°°li side of the broken fence, which they seem to have stupidly just wandered through to take a look) surrendering on their knees with their hands up (they actually complied with orders extremely quickly). they released it together with pictures in which they had planted rifles next to them, but somehow the person compiling the post did not realise and failed to see that the story was fake and the drone footage absolutely clearly contradicted it and was proof of a war crime. I think it's very unlikely, but occasionally I do wonder if they're actually playing 4D chess and repeatedly making mistakes this stupid in order to create a perception of general incompetence that makes it more plausible that they really did not deliberately allow the ham°ssacre to occur (which they 100% did, I see absolutely no remaining reason to doubt that).
    5
  3164. 5
  3165. 5
  3166. 5
  3167. 5
  3168. 5
  3169. 5
  3170. 5
  3171. 5
  3172. 5
  3173. 5
  3174. 5
  3175. 5
  3176. 5
  3177. 5
  3178. 5
  3179. 5
  3180. 5
  3181. 5
  3182. 5
  3183. 5
  3184. 5
  3185. 5
  3186. 5
  3187. 5
  3188. 5
  3189. 5
  3190. 5
  3191. 5
  3192. 5
  3193. 5
  3194. 5
  3195. 5
  3196. 5
  3197. 5
  3198. 5
  3199. 5
  3200. 5
  3201. 5
  3202. 5
  3203. 5
  3204. 5
  3205. 5
  3206. 5
  3207. 5
  3208. 5
  3209. 5
  3210. 5
  3211. that is a super practical idea. you probably need to be very selective with locations for the collection to function this easily (with the bubbles making the stuff drift to the side), but when it works, it likely has a lot of potential to be very economical. the bubbles don't require much electricity to produce, and the whole tube setup probably only needs very infrequent maintenance and can be set up to be maintained easily (a flexible hose would be easy to pull to the surface to clean or raise it above the muck). in terms of the technical system, the only part where durability might be an issue is the air pump, but I don't know how much of an issue it actually is. city canals like in amsterdam and venice are the perfect locations for this due to their very low flow rates, and the high potential for trash due to the many people, while having little value as natural habitats. if you installed something like this in more ecologically important places, the bubble barriers may cause problems for fish species that may be repelled by them (in nature, bubble barriers are used by whales to drive fish swarms together). but in those places, leaving a small gap on one side of the bubble barrier should suffice for fish to find it. fish ladders around dams are generally much harder for fish to find. the basic concept is a very clever response to the fact that most plastic objects that don't already float on the surface have very close to neutral buoyancy, so catching a few bubbles can make them lift, and many of those objects, like bags and hollow containers, can very easily catch enough bubbles. I reckon in other places with more current, good results could be achieved with an active collection system behind the barrier that involves a floating net or sieve that's automatically either raked into a collection container, or slowly rotated like a conveyor belt, emptying into a container on one end. it would then block boats, but I reckon it could still be cheap. well, no variant is ever going to be cheap enough to finance its operation from the bit of burnable trash collected.
    5
  3212. 5
  3213. 5
  3214. 5
  3215. 5
  3216. 5
  3217. 5
  3218. no, they actually have to do that pretty much every day. there seems ro be a trend that more young people (like me xD) don't have primary care doctors, so they go to the emergency room with whatever complaint they want to go to see a doctor for, including stubbed toes and sniffles. such things a probably significantly more rare in maternity wards (though I assume there are mothers who overdo it with check-ups), but it really is difficult for doctors and nurses to interpret how seriously what patients say should be taken, because there is a huge spectrum from people who die without complaining because they don't want to ask for help and want to pretend that they're ok to people who will say anything to skip the line and be treated first, in all sorts of aggressive or manipulative tones, just because they feel that they are the most important people in the building. many people love to complain about bad experiences with doctors not believing them, but they really have no idea how much bullshit and hypochondria doctors and nurses have to deal with from patients. and the people I know personally who I have heard complain about that have tended to be whiny, self-absorbed and untrustworthy by nature, so I could absolutely see how those people in particular would tend to get categorized as hypochondriacs - because they seem just like them. I'm pretty sure this case that the interview is about was really fucked up though, I think I've heard of it before. there is very little potential for excuses for a patient at a high grade well-staffed and well-equipped hospital like that to bleed to death over 12 hours after a c-section.
    5
  3219. he needs to lose his job for that and be glad that he's not going to court! he isnrefusing to resign, and ought to be fired. in fact, sydney prosecutors and police should investigate this as sexual assault despite the lack of a complaint from the player. she seems inclined to retroactively claim consent because she would prefer to have no attention on that incident and to just be celebrated for winning the world cup. her positively claiming consent would certainly make a prosecution tricky, but it could actually be worth pursuing as a precedent for prosecuting sexual crimes in cases where the victim defends the perpetrator, because that is a common problem. the fact that this case would be based on super solid visual evidence would be a good start, and the matter to address then would be whether it is possible to infer with certainty from the nature of the professional and personal relationship of the two people involved, and perhaps also the victim's movements and expressions during the incident, that the kiss was non-consensual, and the victim's contrary claim is a lie due to an expectation of negative consequences. the reason why this won't happen is that such actions from police and prosecutors would be highly politically unwelcome. setting such an extreme example of holding sports officials accountable would make australia less attractive in the future to the people in charge of decisions about whether or not to organise events in australia. because those are people exactly like this guy.
    5
  3220. 5
  3221. 5
  3222. 5
  3223. 5
  3224. 5
  3225. 5
  3226. 5
  3227. 5
  3228. 5
  3229. 5
  3230. 5
  3231. 5
  3232. 5
  3233. 5
  3234. 5
  3235. 5
  3236. 5
  3237. 5
  3238. 5
  3239. 5
  3240. 5
  3241. 5
  3242. 5
  3243. 5
  3244. 5
  3245. 5
  3246. 5
  3247. 5
  3248. 5
  3249. 5
  3250. 5
  3251. 5
  3252. 5
  3253. 5
  3254. 5
  3255. 5
  3256. 5
  3257. 5
  3258. 5
  3259. 5
  3260. 5
  3261. 5
  3262. 5
  3263. 5
  3264. 5
  3265. 5
  3266. 5
  3267. 5
  3268. 5
  3269. 5
  3270. 5
  3271. 5
  3272. 5
  3273. 5
  3274. 5
  3275. 5
  3276. 5
  3277. 5
  3278. 5
  3279. 5
  3280. 5
  3281. 5
  3282. 5
  3283. 5
  3284. 5
  3285. 5
  3286. 5
  3287. 5
  3288. 5
  3289. 5
  3290. 5
  3291. 5
  3292. 5
  3293. 5
  3294. 5
  3295. 5
  3296. 5
  3297. 5
  3298. 5
  3299. 5
  3300. 5
  3301. 5
  3302. 5
  3303. 5
  3304. 5
  3305. 5
  3306. 5
  3307. 5
  3308. 5
  3309. 5
  3310. 5
  3311. 5
  3312. that's every israeli government member interviewed about this extermination operation. interviewing them is just as useless as interviewing russian officials early in 2022 to get both sides of the story. though to be fair, it's equally useless to interview hamas officials, who proclaim to have only taken israeli soldiers hostage and to have harmed no civilians, but have already uploaded various videos of kidnapped children and of beating and murdering civilians, then release elderly americans, and are actually holding over 50 foreign farm workers with only thai citizenship, who would be extremely difficult to confuse with israelis or jews. I would guess that the latter happened because many of the hamas attackers did not think that it was right to kill the thais (with the exception of at least one failed beheading utensil trendsetter), but then figured that they couldd in fact harm israel by setting a precedent that terrorism alao threatens foreign workers in order to deter others from coming to israel to work. I hear it has had that effect at least on thais to some degree, but if the war comes to an end that resembles the prior status quo, then I would expect enougg thai farmers to figure out that the real risk is not big enough to warrant a change in behaviour. well, there is one thing for which interviewing israeli officials is useful: to let them incriminate themselves. because their comfortable expectation of impunity has them being extremely careless in controlling what they say, much more so than russia or hamas. more like W's "holy crusade" declaration, or biden falsely claiming to have been shown pictures of beheaded babies, and then falsely correcting himself to claim he had "had that confirmed" (he didn't actually have any basis for it from official information channel). or those four times biden lied that the US military is pledged to defend taiwan against china.
    5
  3313. 5
  3314. 5
  3315. 5
  3316. 5
  3317. 5
  3318. 5
  3319. 5
  3320. 5
  3321. 5
  3322. 5
  3323. 5
  3324. 5
  3325. 5
  3326. 5
  3327. 5
  3328. 5
  3329. 5
  3330. 5
  3331. 5
  3332. 5
  3333. 5
  3334. come on guys, please keep up with the evidence! I thought otherwise at first too, but israel did not bomb that hospital parking lot. I'm all for ignoring israel's own supposed proof, but undisputed video and photographs of the aftermath, like you're using in the thumbnail here, clearly show only little blast damage and mostly burn damage. all weapons israel is known to be using, except for white phosphorous, which would have been explicitly reported as such, use high explosives to cause almost exclusively blast and shrapnel damage, and little to no burn damage. what would cause mostly burn damage is a failed palestinian rocket (a medium to large model in this case) that fell early in its flight (possibly because it blew out its nozzle), and thus hit the ground with most of its solid propellant unburnt. the propellant would be dispersed by the rather small high explosive warhead, and produce a fireball from the small particles and a lot of incendiary chunks spread all around. I am sceptical of the death count, since the burnt area looks small even if it was packed full, but perhaps people on one side of the parking lot got trapped by the fire, or many died in a crowd crush or stampede or because a bottleneck exit prevented people from leaving fast enough. either way, the nature of the damage the weapon caused to the scene is clear, that wasn't any of israel's normal weapons, and it would match a failed rocket. to still claim that it was israel, you need to claim that they devised an incendiary weapon specifically to imitate a failed rocket. you can make that claim, and it's very technically possible, but that's the claim you need to make to match not israel's "proof", but just the undisputed footage of the aftermath. well, that footage of the impact recorded from a few blocks away that was released early on also fits well, as it shows a hollywood-like rather sustained fireball, not a detonation.
    5
  3335. 5
  3336. 5
  3337. 5
  3338. 5
  3339. 5
  3340. 5
  3341. 5
  3342. 5
  3343. 5
  3344. 5
  3345. 5
  3346. 5
  3347. 5
  3348. 5
  3349. 5
  3350. 5
  3351. 5
  3352. 5
  3353. 5
  3354. 5
  3355. 5
  3356. 5
  3357. 5
  3358. 5
  3359. 5
  3360. 5
  3361. 5
  3362. 5
  3363. 5
  3364. 5
  3365. 5
  3366. 5
  3367. 5
  3368. 5
  3369. 5
  3370. 5
  3371. 5
  3372. 5
  3373. 5
  3374. 5
  3375. 5
  3376. 5
  3377. 5
  3378. 5
  3379. 5
  3380. 5
  3381. 5
  3382. 5
  3383. 5
  3384. 5
  3385. 5
  3386. 5
  3387. 5
  3388. 5
  3389. 5
  3390. 5
  3391. 5
  3392. 5
  3393. 5
  3394. 5
  3395. 5
  3396. 5
  3397. 5
  3398. 5
  3399. 5
  3400. 5
  3401. 5
  3402. 5
  3403. 5
  3404. 5
  3405. 5
  3406. 5
  3407. 5
  3408. 5
  3409. 5
  3410. 5
  3411. 5
  3412. 5
  3413. 5
  3414. 5
  3415. 5
  3416. 5
  3417. 5
  3418. 5
  3419. 5
  3420. 5
  3421. 5
  3422. 5
  3423. 5
  3424. 5
  3425. 5
  3426. 5
  3427. 5
  3428. 5
  3429. 5
  3430. 5
  3431. 5
  3432. 5
  3433. 5
  3434. 5
  3435. 5
  3436. 5
  3437. 5
  3438. 5
  3439. 5
  3440. 4
  3441. 4
  3442. 4
  3443. 4
  3444. 4
  3445. 4
  3446. 4
  3447. 4
  3448. 4
  3449. 4
  3450. 4
  3451. 4
  3452. 4
  3453. 4
  3454. 4
  3455. 4
  3456. 4
  3457. 4
  3458. 4
  3459. 4
  3460. 4
  3461. 4
  3462. 4
  3463. 4
  3464. facts: the gaza division of the IDF ground forces should by definition as a division contain 5000 to >20,000 troops. if all 170,000 active duty troops had merely been spread evenly over the territory of israel and the territories it occupies, then the area invaded by hamas would have had over 2200 IDF soldiers standing in it (largely not ground combat troops, but still). does anybody feel like what we saw was 2200 to 20,000+ soldiers already stationed at and near the border resisting the invasion? I know I don't, I struggle to believe that those were even 1000 already present in the invaded territory. and you know how long it took IDF command to initiate any counteroffensive operation? SIX HOURS! the first small IDF attacks were led by off-duty and retired officers who drove there on their own initiative after receiving private calls for help from as far away as tel aviv, arrived before any IDF response, and gathered up dispersed and terrified conscripts who had no orders. compare this to the anti-terror police responses in britain or france, they're able to deploy hundreds of quasi-soldiers within half an hour, and thousands within an hour anywhere in the country. israel should be BETTER at that, and has extremely short flying distances for troop transport planes and helicopters. truly, the IDF's non-defense was well beyond suspicious - it was obviously intentional. they stepped aside to create a pretext for the second nakba. personally, I'm inclined to suspect primarily defense minister yoav gallant, based on reporting that he then advocated for a "preemptive" attack on lebanon, which netanyahu refused. also, don't you think that if there had been no conspiracy, the normal thing for people like the defense minister and the gaza division commander, if not the prime minister to do would be to resign? none of them have, nobody has. nobody has resigned, how crazy is that?
    4
  3465. 4
  3466. 4
  3467. 4
  3468. 4
  3469. 4
  3470. 4
  3471. 4
  3472. 4
  3473. 4
  3474. 4
  3475. 4
  3476. 4
  3477. 4
  3478. 4
  3479. 4
  3480. that's an interesting question. the occupation started out extremely friendly by comparison in kherson, with the russians allowing protests for weeks. I think kherson has more russian speakers, and it's very close to crimea. by contrast, the russians see kyiv as populated by their real enemies, by nazis who want to kill all russians. bucha, irpin etc. were as close to kyiv as the russians got. in one interview I saw, a resident of bucha also said that the russians were behaving ok for much of the time and only started murdering like crazy in the last 4-5 days. this was probably linked to the point in time when the russians realized that they weren't going to get into kyiv, or perhaps even when the soldiers on the ground heard that they were going to retreat soon and that essentially all their losses in that region had been for nothing. on the other hand, mariupol is largely russian-speaking and basically at the center of the minimum of territory that the russians may settle for taking (land bridge to crimea), and they nonetheless chose to completely destroy the city rather than even remotely trying to leave it intact for the takeover. a similar situation is kharkiv, ukraine's second city and just about the most russian place in ukraine. the only explanation for this that I can see is that the russians prefer to take over the mariupol area with no city and no people to taking it over with a city that contains any ukrainians hostile to them. basically they appear to want to displace everybody by destroying their homes and then resettle the region with russians while more or less rebuilding.
    4
  3481. 4
  3482. 4
  3483. 4
  3484. 4
  3485. 4
  3486. 4
  3487. 4
  3488. 4
  3489. 4
  3490. 4
  3491. 4
  3492. 4
  3493. 4
  3494. I googled about the 2014 g°za war a while back, andI immediately came across an obamna state department statement that not only condemned the d°°ths of a single digit number of civilians in a UN school compound, but fully accused i-country of targeting it deliberately. during thiis sl°°ghter now, the biden administration has not issued a single condemnation of an is°°°li government action, while it has disabled probably 90% of the strip's hospital capacity, ki°°ed hundreds of people inside UN schools, dragged thousands of civilians out of those schools to to°°ure them in con°°°tration camps like that g°°a stadium (including children clearly of primary school age, undressed to their underpants in rather cold weather [10-20°C/50-70°F daily range, now a bit lower, frequent rain]), made a video of a controlled demolition of at least one UN school along with many other civilian buildings, displaced 90% of g°°ans, deprived with explicit announcement the entire population of all basic humanitarian goods fully or mostly for over three months, creating a famine that now has over 80% of the world's starving people in this territory, and ki°°ed over 30,000 people of whom over 40% are minors, and only 30% are adult men, while the share of adult men among the population is just under 25%. assuming that all targeted men are guilty and going by i-country's claim that there are 40,000 "kh°mas te°°orists", they are ki°°ing them at in the ballpark of twice the rate that they would if they were doing it completely randomly. the 10/7 attack targeted primarily civilians, and even that ki°°ed 32% security forces. the percentage of minors among the dead was 3%, compared to i-country's over 40%. the response to 10/7 has killed almost 350 times as many minors as the 10/7 attack. not a single condemnation, absolutely nothing. you can not find any statement of this administration after 10/7 that states something to the effect of 'i-country did this, and what it did was bad'. it's all 'if i-country was to do such things, that would be bad, and we are having very serious conversations, but we see no reason to believe that i-country has done such things'.
    4
  3495. 4
  3496. 4
  3497. 4
  3498. 4
  3499. 4
  3500. 4
  3501. 4
  3502. 4
  3503. 4
  3504. 4
  3505. 4
  3506. 4
  3507. 4
  3508. 4
  3509. 4
  3510. 4
  3511. 4
  3512. 4
  3513. 4
  3514. 4
  3515. 4
  3516. 4
  3517. 4
  3518. 4
  3519. 4
  3520. 4
  3521. 4
  3522. 4
  3523. 4
  3524. 4
  3525. 4
  3526. 4
  3527. 4
  3528. 4
  3529. 4
  3530. 4
  3531. 4
  3532. 4
  3533. 4
  3534. 4
  3535. 4
  3536. 4
  3537. 4
  3538. 4
  3539. 4
  3540. 4
  3541. 4
  3542. 4
  3543. 4
  3544. 4
  3545. 4
  3546. 4
  3547. 4
  3548. 4
  3549. 4
  3550. 4
  3551. 4
  3552. 4
  3553. well, not rebuilding that village next to the launch site would have been the most ethical resettlement the chinese communist government has ever done. the villagers probably had a relatively good chance for compensation too, compared to victims of more or less natural disasters in china. the flatbed trucks with the suspected corpse loads reminds me of the huge flooding a year or so ago in a chinese city where even though the authorities actively opened a dam that then flooded the city (to protect other dams from failing), they didn't even close subways and tunnels, so people ended up drowning in subway cars and particularly in one long road tunnel that was jammed with cars when it filled up completely with water. after the flooding was cleared, the government put up barriers against cameras and onlookers at the tunnel and transported corpses away in several buses with black windows. they also repeatedly threw away flowers that relatives of the dead put outside the barriers because the number of flower bundles at that tunnel alone was bigger than the official death count for the catastrophic flooding across the whole region. china always undercounts deaths from catastrophes. the official infection fatality rate of the latest shanghai covid wave is 0.0006%. influenza normally has a fatality rate around 0.1%, and given the low efficacy of chinese vaccines, many unvaccinated elderly and very low natural immunity, even omicron should have at least a 0.3% fatality rate if all infections were detected.
    4
  3554. 4
  3555. 4
  3556. 4
  3557. 4
  3558. 4
  3559. 4
  3560. 4
  3561. 4
  3562. 4
  3563. 4
  3564. 4
  3565. 4
  3566. 4
  3567. 4
  3568. 4
  3569. 4
  3570. 4
  3571. 4
  3572. 4
  3573. 4
  3574. 4
  3575. 4
  3576. 4
  3577. 4
  3578. 4
  3579. 4
  3580. 4
  3581. 4
  3582. 4
  3583. 4
  3584. 4
  3585. 4
  3586. 4
  3587. 4
  3588. 4
  3589. 4
  3590. 4
  3591. 4
  3592. 4
  3593. 4
  3594. 4
  3595. 4
  3596. 4
  3597. 4
  3598. 4
  3599. 4
  3600. 4
  3601. 4
  3602. 4
  3603. 4
  3604. 4
  3605. 4
  3606. 4
  3607. 4
  3608. eeeeeh this probably doesn't mean more than speculation from anybody else, unless he at least claims to have heard from an active duty soldier of the hannibal directive being used. I wish he would have at least specified if he has reason to believe that the directive has not been revoked as officially claimed, or what it bein grevoked even truly means given the nature or limits of command authority - does it being revoked actually remove the ootion to order it, are soldiers allowed to or supposed to refuse the order if it is issued? of course another aspect worth talking about is that the hannibal directive officially only ever referred to captured aoldiers, not civilians. but I suppose that is a distinction without a difference, as militaries generally do not value the lives of their own civilians over those of their soldiers. I looked up this nof erez to see if he was on active duty that day, or at all past 2016, when the hannibal directive was supposedly revoked. and no, he was not. he finished 20 years of active duty as a fighter pilot 24 years ago, and had since been a reserve colonel (he was dismissed three weeks ago over a different time he made this claim here). I don't know if he was part of the ready reserve receiving regular retraining though. he also was a publicly outspoken participant in this year's reserve pilot strike action in opposition to the efforts of the netanyahu government to legally make the supreme court subservient to the government, in which pilots (and later other reserve troops) declared that they would not answer a mobilisation call unless the plan was abandoned. well, turns out it was all hot air, the whole group immediately declared the strike action over on october 7th, in spite of the fact that there was probably the lowest threat level for israel that could possibly exist in any mobilisation situation, since the combined forces of gaza are israel's weakest potential enemy, so their service was as unnecessary as it could possibly be. 🤦‍♂️ so yeah, those guys are the ones now bombing gaza to dust, I hope they feel good about themselves.
    4
  3609. 4
  3610. 4
  3611. 4
  3612. 4
  3613. 4
  3614. 4
  3615. 4
  3616. 4
  3617. 4
  3618. 4
  3619. 4
  3620. you're forgetting to note that much like the biden administration, CNN also deliberately held off from criticizing israel for a week since they began this heaviest ever bombing campaign against gaza and their "total siege", which is undeniably a war crime that targets almost exclusively civilians because the inhabitants of gaza are almost all civilians. and from the point of view of protecting american hostages, what israel is doing is literally the course of action most likely to result in their deaths. the deprivation of utilities and especially of medical supplies is impacting the hostages, too. israel is not acting in the interest of the hostages whatsoever. it has made precisely the opposite decision to that of the gilad shalit exchange (also done under netanyahu), which released over 1000 prisoners including at least a few dozen actual terrorosts for one hostage, overpaying to a degree that would make even joe "the negotiator" biden blush. back then, the focus was entirely on freeing the hostage, at the expense of inspiring future hostagetakings (you may have noticed hamas and its supporters early on proclaiming that they had taken "enough hostages to free all imprisoned pleatinians" - they were referring to the gilad shalit exchange rate). this time around, the israeli government has decided that rewarding the taking of those hostages in any way is out of the question, so israel will proceed with war against gaza as if the hostages don't exist. this is also demonstrated in the fact that they did not proactively establish and still hold practically no contact with the hostages' families, who are outraged by it. they don't seeeven bother to give them the runaround. the hostages are quite simply written off, they already don't exist to the government. regarding the hostages, I agree with commentary I saw from some israeli or american negotiator now in contact with and previously involved with hostage deals with hamas: the only possible deal is for israel to release all women and minors it imprisons in exchange for the women, children, and wounded and sick among the hostages. for the men, no agreement will be found. nor is it likely that any of them can be rescued, as hamas has demonstrated a degree of conviction and follow-through in this operation which indicates that they would do what all hostage-takers must do if they want to preserve their organisation's ability to leverage hostages: that is to hold them under armed guard in a location that can't be accessed rapidly and unnoticed, and to execute the hostages if a rescue team attacks. getting this done would be much easier than other things hamas has pulled off, especially with the tunnel system under gaza enabling unseen movement of hostages. I believe that the number of hostages that would be freed successfully by force would likely be under 5, quite likely even 0. maybe slightly more, with some survivors shot non-lethally.
    4
  3621. 4
  3622. 4
  3623. 4
  3624. 4
  3625. 4
  3626. 4
  3627. 4
  3628. 4
  3629. 4
  3630. 4
  3631. 4
  3632. 4
  3633. 4
  3634. 4
  3635. 4
  3636. 4
  3637. 4
  3638. 4
  3639. 4
  3640. 4
  3641. 4
  3642. 4
  3643. 4
  3644. 4
  3645. 4
  3646. 4
  3647. 4
  3648. 4
  3649. 4
  3650. 4
  3651. 4
  3652. 4
  3653. 4
  3654. 4
  3655. 4
  3656. 4
  3657. 4
  3658. 4
  3659. 4
  3660. 4
  3661. 4
  3662. 4
  3663. 4
  3664. 4
  3665. 4
  3666. 4
  3667. 4
  3668. 4
  3669. 4
  3670. 4
  3671. 4
  3672. Theeraphat Sunthornwit hydrogen does have current uses and theorized expanded uses for energy storage particulqrly for the intermittent types of renewable energy (wind and solar, it's pretty weird to use hydro for it because hydro is always available on demand), but there are serious drawbacks. like I said, it's very inefficient, I think the losses in converting electricity to hydrogen and back are something in the range 10 times more than with lithium ion batteries (with direct electricity transmission being generally even more efficient). it also has two particularly tricky aspects in handling, the one being that because H2 is such a tiny molecule, it is much better at permeating various materials and leaking through the tiniest gaps than other gases we store pressurized. the other issue with hydrogen is that because it's so eager to react with oxygen, there is an exceptionally large range of hydrogen-air mixtures that can explode, meaning that both air with very little hydrogen and hydrogen with very little air can explode given an ignition source (natural gas for example has a much narrower explosive mixture range). both of these problems can combine to cause pressurized hydrogen tanks to leak, and to form an explosive atmosphere when the tanks are kept in some sort of an enclosed space like a building, container, or vehicle. one serious upside of hydrogen, which is mostly seen as an alternative to lithium ion batteries, is that hydrogen stores many times as much useable energy in an equal weight than such batteries (or any battery). it does however take up significant volume, because there are practical limitations to how hard it can be compressed. if the volume issue and the safety problems are solved, hydrogen could be an attractive aviation fuel due to its very high energy density, with the amazing upside that it releases no CO2 or nitrous oxide when burned (only water vapour), which have a particularly strong climate impact when they're released at high altitude rather than at ground level, making flying regular kerosene one of the most effectively climate-damaging things one can do.
    4
  3673. 4
  3674. 4
  3675. 4
  3676. 4
  3677. 4
  3678. 4
  3679. 4
  3680. 4
  3681. 4
  3682. 4
  3683. 4
  3684. 4
  3685. 4
  3686. 4
  3687. 4
  3688. 4
  3689. also noteable regarding the tunnels and al s°°fa: according to i°, h° used the hospital as human sh°°lds to make their base/main headquarter below more defensible, and the tunnels exist because they and every location featuring tunnel entrances are much harder to defend than above-ground structures. yet the I°F's own claim is that h° evacuated al shifa around a month before their human sh°°lds were removed, and the I°F faced no resistance either while entering the hospital or while entering the tunnels below it (or even any booby traps). they did a hell of a lot of sh°°ting in the process though, considering. furthermore, while i° claimed that five or so specific buildings of the al s°°fa hospital complex contained tunnel entrances in active use, every tunnel entrance located at al s°°fa according to their video evidence was enclosed under concrete floors. and they have provided no footage of those floors and the surrounding buildings before demolishing them that could have indicated whether the concrete capping any of those tunnels was even remotely a new addition. I also generally find it noteworthy that the I°F claims to have captured a lot of territory in g°z° without claiming to have f°ught inside or otherwise cleared out (flooded, g°ss°d) any tunnels. didn't everybody say that tunnel f°°hting was supposed to be a huge part of the ground c°mb°t? if the reason why they don't say anything is that they generally use water or g°s, then they're severely end°ngering the h°st°g°s.
    4
  3690. 4
  3691. 4
  3692. 4
  3693. 4
  3694. 4
  3695. I would say that out of the various terms for types of captivity, calling gaza a mostly closed ghetto would be most accurate. meanwhile west bank palestinian habitation centers form a normally mostly internally open and somewhat externally open ghetto network, while the israeli encroachment between them is just unofficial fully israeli territory partially beyond the walls. palestinian habitation in israel is mostly restricted to segregated neighbourhoods, or what people nowadays call ghettos in america and europe - a historically illiterate and insensitive misapplication of the term, which would be better reserved for situations resembling medieval and third reich jewish ghettos, which form the long original history of the term. concentration camps always have guards within, and prisons almost always do, too - with few exceptions where either successful prison revolts have established something resembling a ghetto system (like the san pedro and palmasola prisons in bolivia), or where prisons have become so horrendously overcrowded with largely already previously extremely violent gang members that guards have withdrawn and keep inmates very much like dangerous animals, doing little more than delivering supplies and removing corpses. by contrast, third reich ghettos always had jewish ghetto police working inside, more or less reliably under nazi command. and I believe medieval ghettos also would have had (probably much more independent) community policing, since mutual distrust and disgust between christians and jews would have made both avoid contact, and made attempted impositions of control within the ghetto impractically difficult. sort of like the difficulties in today's attempts to better integrate into society europe's untouchables, the romani people.
    4
  3696. 4
  3697. 4
  3698. 4
  3699. 4
  3700. 4
  3701. 4
  3702. 4
  3703. 4
  3704. 4
  3705. 4
  3706. 4
  3707. 4
  3708. 4
  3709. 4
  3710. 4
  3711. 4
  3712. 4
  3713. 4
  3714. 4
  3715. 4
  3716. 4
  3717. 4
  3718. 4
  3719. 4
  3720. 4
  3721. 4
  3722. 4
  3723. 4
  3724. 4
  3725. 4
  3726. 4
  3727. 4
  3728. 4
  3729. 4
  3730. 4
  3731. 4
  3732. 4
  3733. 4
  3734. 4
  3735. 4
  3736. 4
  3737. 4
  3738. 4
  3739. 4
  3740. 4
  3741. 4
  3742. 4
  3743. 4
  3744. 4
  3745. 4
  3746. 4
  3747. 4
  3748. 4
  3749. 4
  3750. 4
  3751. 4
  3752. 4
  3753. 4
  3754. 4
  3755. 4
  3756. 4
  3757.  @valoronions  well so far it's just an idea with apparently a couple of people working on it. it can only become a sensation if it's proven to be feasible at scale. there certainly are complex problems to solve, such as how to deposit (maybe bury, but that would balloon the energy requirement) the seaweed in such a way and in the right locations that it ends up staying there basically forever, or most of its carbon content does in some form. it may also be difficult to assess the amount of methane still produced by any anaerobic partial decomposition involved in the process - too much methane production has the potential of making the whole endeavour worse for the climatethanburning thestuff wouldhave been (making and burying biochar instead would then be ideal, as that only releases part of the carbon). but in principle, if much digging is not required, using sargassum sounds like a promising way to dramatically reduce energy requirements relative to most other carbon sequestration methods. it also seems very likely, based on its likely ease of mechanical handling because it's this uniform floating stuff, that it would require little work input to give the sargassum a carbon sequestration rate far greater than that of any fully natural ecosystem - it takes very particular circumstances for ecosystems to heavily sequester carbon by producing biomass that largely fails to decompose, such as fossil coal generation of the carboniferous caused by microorganisms not yet having evolved to digest lignin in wood, or bodies of water that were stagnant with an exceptionally salty layer at the bottom that prevented decomposition of falling biomass, or peat bogs which slowly grow thick layers of dead peat moss that is partially preserved by oxygen exclusion (and humic acid, I think). if the unusually large sargassum growth is the result of human-caused excessive fertilisation of the ocean, then removing the stuff from the nutrient circulation would likely be beneficial for the ocean ecosystem also. the decay of excessive biomas can damage aquatic ecosystems by depleting oxygen.
    4
  3758. 4
  3759. 4
  3760. 4
  3761. 4
  3762. 4
  3763. 4
  3764. 4
  3765. 4
  3766. 4
  3767. 4
  3768. 4
  3769. 4
  3770. 4
  3771. 4
  3772. 4
  3773. 4
  3774. 4
  3775. as a leftist, if I was american, my choice for the coming election would be between voting trump and voting third party. biden is beyond out of the question. first of all, pal°°°ine aside, I believe a trump win will be better for the democrats and for leftist representation in the longer term. I don't think that trump will be able to destroy democracy more effectively than in his first term (considering the incompetence of most peoplehe employs for that, I think people opposing this effort will have learned and grown in strength more than his people, and it will be more difficult for him than the last time). with trump unable to run for a third term, the democrats will have better chances than they would after another biden term. if this election's winner is biden, it seems likely that the republicans will get a new two term president, when instead you could have had a one term clown show followed by likely a more competent democrat, quite possibly also less conservative because you will have sent the DNC the message that gen°°ide joe was not good enough. on pal°°°ne, I believe that nobody aware of how much trump bases his foreign politics on personal appreciation or dislike of foreign leaders, which is based on whether or not strong men flatter him and treat him like he's one of them, can listen to the interview audio excerpt released by some journalist around the end of october, in which trump expresses in clearly very sincere (credibly strange) terms that he has slowly grown to ha°e net°°°ahu because he at some point could no longer suppress his pathological urge to insult and publically disrespect his allies and started to do it to trump. trump at his worst would be as bad on pales°°°e as biden, but he would be inconsistent, so overall better. trump also would be coming out of three years during which his voter base adopted the self-perception that they are the anti-war party due to then three years of war in ukraine. there will be some level of willingness among voters, and awareness thereof among trump staffers, to transfer parts of the same intent to deescalate onto i-country and the middle east, so I consider it not just plausible, but somewhat likely that trump would opt to give deescalation a chance, whereas with biden there is absolutely no way. biden thinks this is every other round, he lacks the capacity to understand that the current situation is unprecedented and extremely serious. I also think that his biden gaffe responding to the al ahli hoapital parking lot explosion as "looking like that was done by the other team" was an expression of biden's true attitude, seeing all this like spectator sports. well, trump does too, but he approaches life in general with that level of seriousness. all in all, I give trump an 85% chance of being better on pales°°°e in his second term (yes, I know he was the worst in his first), a 5% chance of being worse, and 10% the same. probably only marginally better, but hey, lesser evil, you know?
    4
  3776. 4
  3777. 4
  3778. 4
  3779. 4
  3780. 4
  3781. 4
  3782. 4
  3783. yes, and the whole point in him doing this is to get a few lies through unchallenged, because that makes them seem credible. he did a relatively bad job in this segment (usually he scores a few more lies), but one he did get through was the claim that i-country is actually conducting a particularly well-targeted war because it's achieving a 1 to 2 or 1 to 3 combatant to civilian ki°° ratio (he stated it less clearly, but he means more civilians, because i-country itself only claims one third combatants). cenk made other statements that imply that he knows that's not true, but he had a brain fart and just did not react to the claim. could be that his mind glazed over because it sounded like math. the real ratio is almost certainly worse than one to ten, and that's if half of the dead combatants don't get registered as deaths by the g°za health ministry at all, since of the registered dead, 70% are women and minors, >40% are minors, and only 30% are adult men, while the percentage of adult men among the population is just under 25% (elderly included). if one generously assumes that every man targeted was a combatant, and the number of "kh°mas te°°orists" is 40,000 as i-country claims, then they are ki°°ing enemies at a little over two times the rate at which they are ki°°ing everybody else. if you took a complete list of names of g°zans, added the name of every combatant once more, added half of the combatants' names again, and then picked people at random, you would be conducting a more targeted operation than i-country. for comparison: while i-country is ki°°ing in the ballpark of 5% combatants and >40% minors, the 10/7 attack, while being primarily aimed at civilians, ki°°ed 32% security forces and 3% minors. in its response, i-country has ki°°ed 350 times as many minors, to say nothing of the grotesque level of psychological trauma inflicted on every child in pale°°ine.
    4
  3784. 4
  3785. 4
  3786. 4
  3787. 4
  3788. 4
  3789. 4
  3790. 4
  3791. 4
  3792. 4
  3793. 4
  3794. 4
  3795. 4
  3796. 4
  3797. 4
  3798. 4
  3799. 4
  3800. 4
  3801. 4
  3802. 4
  3803. 4
  3804. 4
  3805. 4
  3806. 4
  3807. 4
  3808. 4
  3809. 4
  3810. 4
  3811. 4
  3812. 4
  3813. 4
  3814. 4
  3815. 4
  3816. 4
  3817. 4
  3818. 4
  3819. 4
  3820. 4
  3821. 4
  3822. 4
  3823. 4
  3824. 4
  3825. 4
  3826. 4
  3827. 4
  3828. 4
  3829. 4
  3830. 4
  3831. 4
  3832. 4
  3833. 4
  3834. 4
  3835. 4
  3836. 4
  3837. 4
  3838. 4
  3839. 4
  3840. 4
  3841. 4
  3842. 4
  3843. 4
  3844. 4
  3845. 4
  3846. 4
  3847. 4
  3848. 4
  3849. 4
  3850. 4
  3851. 4
  3852. 4
  3853. 4
  3854. 4
  3855. 4
  3856. 4
  3857. 4
  3858. 4
  3859. 4
  3860. 4
  3861. 4
  3862. 4
  3863. 4
  3864. 4
  3865. 4
  3866. 4
  3867. 4
  3868. 4
  3869. 4
  3870. 4
  3871. 4
  3872. 4
  3873. 4
  3874. 4
  3875. 4
  3876. 4
  3877. 4
  3878. 4
  3879. 4
  3880. 4
  3881. 4
  3882. 4
  3883. 4
  3884. 4
  3885. 4
  3886. 4
  3887. 4
  3888. 4
  3889. 4
  3890. 4
  3891. 4
  3892. 4
  3893. 4
  3894. 4
  3895. 4
  3896. 4
  3897. 4
  3898. 4
  3899. 4
  3900. 4
  3901. 4
  3902. 4
  3903. 4
  3904. 4
  3905. 4
  3906. 4
  3907. 4
  3908. 4
  3909. 4
  3910. 4
  3911. 4
  3912. 4
  3913. 4
  3914. 4
  3915. 4
  3916. 4
  3917. 4
  3918. 4
  3919. 4
  3920. 4
  3921. 4
  3922. 4
  3923. 4
  3924. 4
  3925. 4
  3926. 4
  3927. 4
  3928. 4
  3929. 4
  3930. 4
  3931. 4
  3932. 4
  3933. 4
  3934. 4
  3935. 4
  3936. 4
  3937. 4
  3938. 4
  3939. 4
  3940. 4
  3941. 4
  3942. 4
  3943. 4
  3944. 4
  3945. 4
  3946. 4
  3947. 4
  3948. 4
  3949. 4
  3950. 4
  3951. 4
  3952. 4
  3953. 4
  3954. 4
  3955. 4
  3956. 4
  3957. 4
  3958. 4
  3959. 4
  3960. 4
  3961. 4
  3962. 4
  3963. 4
  3964. 4
  3965. 4
  3966. 4
  3967. 4
  3968. 4
  3969. 4
  3970. 4
  3971. 4
  3972. 4
  3973. 4
  3974. 4
  3975. 4
  3976. 4
  3977. 4
  3978. 4
  3979. 4
  3980. 4
  3981. 4
  3982. 4
  3983. 4
  3984. 4
  3985. 4
  3986. 4
  3987. 4
  3988. 4
  3989. 4
  3990. 4
  3991. 4
  3992. 4
  3993. 4
  3994. 4
  3995. 4
  3996. 4
  3997. 4
  3998. 4
  3999. 4
  4000. 4
  4001. 4
  4002. 4
  4003. 4
  4004. 4
  4005. 4
  4006. 4
  4007. 4
  4008. 4
  4009. 4
  4010. 4
  4011. 4
  4012. 4
  4013. 4
  4014. 4
  4015. 4
  4016. 4
  4017. 4
  4018. 4
  4019. 4
  4020. 4
  4021. 4
  4022. 4
  4023. 4
  4024. 4
  4025. 4
  4026. 4
  4027. 4
  4028. 4
  4029. 4
  4030. 4
  4031. 4
  4032. 4
  4033. 4
  4034. 4
  4035. 4
  4036. 4
  4037. 4
  4038. 4
  4039. 4
  4040. 4
  4041. 4
  4042. 4
  4043. 4
  4044. 4
  4045. 4
  4046. 4
  4047. 4
  4048. 4
  4049. 4
  4050. 4
  4051. 4
  4052. 4
  4053. 4
  4054. 4
  4055. 4
  4056. 4
  4057. 4
  4058. 4
  4059. 4
  4060. 4
  4061. 4
  4062. 4
  4063. 4
  4064. 4
  4065. 4
  4066. 4
  4067. 4
  4068. 4
  4069. 4
  4070. 4
  4071. 4
  4072. 4
  4073. 4
  4074. 4
  4075. 4
  4076. 4
  4077. 4
  4078. 4
  4079. 4
  4080. 4
  4081. 4
  4082. 4
  4083. 4
  4084. 4
  4085. 4
  4086. 4
  4087. 4
  4088. 4
  4089. 4
  4090. 4
  4091. 4
  4092. 4
  4093. 4
  4094. 4
  4095. 4
  4096. 4
  4097. 4
  4098. 4
  4099. 4
  4100. 4
  4101. 4
  4102. 4
  4103. 4
  4104. 4
  4105. 4
  4106. 4
  4107. 4
  4108. 4
  4109. 4
  4110. 4
  4111. 4
  4112. 4
  4113. 4
  4114. 4
  4115. 4
  4116. 4
  4117. 4
  4118. 4
  4119. 4
  4120. 4
  4121. 4
  4122. 4
  4123. 4
  4124. 4
  4125. 4
  4126. 4
  4127. 4
  4128. 4
  4129. 4
  4130. 4
  4131. 4
  4132. 4
  4133. 4
  4134. 4
  4135. 4
  4136. 4
  4137. 4
  4138. 4
  4139. 4
  4140. 4
  4141. 4
  4142. 4
  4143. 4
  4144. 4
  4145. 4
  4146. 4
  4147. 4
  4148. 4
  4149. 4
  4150. 4
  4151. 4
  4152. 4
  4153. 4
  4154. 4
  4155. 4
  4156. 4
  4157. 4
  4158. 4
  4159. 4
  4160. 4
  4161. 4
  4162. 4
  4163. 4
  4164. 4
  4165. 4
  4166. 4
  4167. 4
  4168. 4
  4169. 4
  4170. 4
  4171. 4
  4172. 4
  4173. 4
  4174. 4
  4175. 4
  4176. 4
  4177. 4
  4178.  @Grumpy_Raver  I know that many do, but jordan is the arab state with the friendliest or at least closest relationship with palestinians. you could claim that lebanon is friendlier because it ended up hosting lots of palestinian refugees expelled by jordan, but it did so because lebanon is a disparate mess of hostile or warring ethnic and religious factions, and some of those figured that they could use the many PLO-associated militants among that refugee population as allies (who were the reason for the jordanian expulsion). lebanon keeps all those palestinians and their descendants as refugees unable to gain citizenship in segregated camps/ghettos because they're supposed to return sooner or later to the land israel stole from them. jordan on the other hand occupied and annexed the west bank after 1948 until losing it to israel in 1967, and from soon after the annexation until about two decades after the israeli conquest of the west bank, jordan recognised all west bank palestinians registered with jordanian west bank authorities as jordanian citizens, who were allowed to live anywhere in jordan. west bank palestinians having jordanian citizenship before 1967 was the best political situation for any palestinians since the nakba. egypt on the other hand occupied gaza in squalor without offering citizenship or free movement to palestinians, not unlike what israel later did. jordan did eventually, two decades after losing the west bank, renounce its claim to the west bank as part of its peace deal with israel, and has since endeavoured to rescind jordanian citizenship from portions of the palestinian-jordanian population and diaspora in various ways, which has been most unwelcome. but people descended from post-1948 palestinian refugees makeup 20-50% or jordan's population depending on who you ask, and at least 70% of them are jordanian citizens. jordan is the only arab country to have granted large numbers of palestinian refugees citizenship. if I had to be a palestinian in the middle east, I would want to be in jordan.
    4
  4179. 4
  4180. 4
  4181. 4
  4182. 4
  4183. 4
  4184. 4
  4185. 4
  4186. 4
  4187. 4
  4188. 4
  4189. 4
  4190. 4
  4191. 4
  4192. 4
  4193. 4
  4194. 4
  4195. 4
  4196. 4
  4197. 4
  4198. 4
  4199. 4
  4200. 4
  4201. 4
  4202. 4
  4203. 4
  4204. 4
  4205. 4
  4206. 4
  4207. 4
  4208. 4
  4209. 4
  4210. 4
  4211. 4
  4212. 4
  4213. 4
  4214. 4
  4215. 4
  4216. 4
  4217. 4
  4218. 4
  4219. 4
  4220. 4
  4221. 4
  4222. 4
  4223. 4
  4224. 4
  4225. 4
  4226. 4
  4227. 4
  4228. 4
  4229. 4
  4230. 4
  4231. 4
  4232. 4
  4233. 4
  4234. 4
  4235. 4
  4236. 4
  4237. 4
  4238. 4
  4239. 4
  4240. 4
  4241. 4
  4242. 4
  4243. 4
  4244. 4
  4245. 4
  4246. 4
  4247. 4
  4248. 4
  4249. 4
  4250. 4
  4251. 4
  4252. 4
  4253. 4
  4254. 4
  4255. 4
  4256. 4
  4257. 4
  4258. 4
  4259. 4
  4260. 4
  4261. 4
  4262. 4
  4263. 4
  4264. 4
  4265. 4
  4266. 4
  4267. 4
  4268. 4
  4269. 4
  4270. 4
  4271. 4
  4272. 4
  4273. 4
  4274. 4
  4275. 4
  4276. 4
  4277. 4
  4278. 4
  4279. 4
  4280. 4
  4281. 4
  4282. 4
  4283. 3
  4284. 3
  4285. 3
  4286. 3
  4287. 3
  4288. 3
  4289. 3
  4290. 3
  4291. 3
  4292. 3
  4293. 3
  4294. 3
  4295. 3
  4296. 3
  4297. 3
  4298. 3
  4299. 3
  4300. 3
  4301. 3
  4302. 3
  4303. 3
  4304. 3
  4305. 3
  4306. 3
  4307. 3
  4308. 3
  4309. 3
  4310. 3
  4311. 3
  4312. 3
  4313. 3
  4314. 3
  4315. 3
  4316. 3
  4317. 3
  4318. 3
  4319. 3
  4320. 3
  4321. 3
  4322. 3
  4323. 3
  4324. 3
  4325. 3
  4326. 3
  4327. 3
  4328. 3
  4329. 3
  4330. 3
  4331. 3
  4332. 3
  4333. 3
  4334. 3
  4335. 3
  4336. 3
  4337. 3
  4338. 3
  4339. 3
  4340. 3
  4341. 3
  4342. 3
  4343. 3
  4344. 3
  4345. 3
  4346. 3
  4347. 3
  4348. 3
  4349.  @TheOneManWhoBeatYou  let me give you a roundabout calculation for that. israel's active duty military is in fact extremely large relative to israel's size, since it contains active duty conscripts of both genders serving extremely long mandatory terms (24 months for women, 38 for men, jews and druze except for ultra-orthodox jews who don't want to and are exempt). israel's active duty force is 170.000. I'm sure you would agree that the baseline security situation calls for those troops to be more heavily concentrated at the gaza border, but lets assume that they were spread evenly throughout israel and the occupied territories. I can't find a number claim of area captured, but the maps I'm seeing show hamas having invaded territory roughly equal to the area of the gaza strip (365km²). that is 1.3% of the territory of israel+occupied golan heights+west bank (27.700km2). 1.3% of the active duty IDF personnel are 2210. israel's claim is 2500 qassam brigade infiltrators, but if that even is a count, that seems likely to include many unarmed and/or untrained opportunistic tagalongs. the common claim everybody has made in the ukraine war is that it takes about three times the number of defenders for an average offensive operation to be successful, but defending fortified borders and military bases should favour defenders even more. do you feel like you saw 2200 israeli troops defending against the attack already posted at and near the gaza border? I don't. my impression is that the deployment of IDF to the gaza envelope was not only no higher than the average for all IDF-controlled territories, but actually much, much lower. hamas captured the goddamn headquarters of the gaza division, supposedly five hours into their ground invasion, and I can't find a specific number, but a division is supposed to contain 6000-25.000 troops. do you feel like you saw 6000-25.000 troops stationed around gaza? did you see the hamas video of the first wave of attackers running through the erez crossing death funnel without anyone shooting at them? that is unbelievable, it can not be possible to take out a remotely reasonably sized guard detachment for the erez crossing with a handful of drone drops! the gaza border was practically abandoned, and it took the IDF SIX HOURS to even initiate a counteroffensive operation. hardly any invaded community was reached in less than 8 hours, the last were reached after two days. the first small counteroffensive operations were conducted by off-duty and retired military officers who drove in from as far as tel aviv following private calls for help, and found dispersed conscripts without orders over whom they assumed unofficial command - they were there before the IDF even decided to do anything because they weren't in the chain of command, and as such not waiting for somebody else to tell them to do something, as apparently the whole IDF were. either the entire army command is so absurdly incompetent that their genuine effort looks like a deliberate choice to step aside and let hamas conduct a massacre as a pretext for a second nakba, or it actually was what it looks like.
    3
  4350. 3
  4351. 3
  4352. 3
  4353. 3
  4354. 3
  4355. 3
  4356. 3
  4357. 3
  4358. 3
  4359. 3
  4360. 3
  4361. 3
  4362. 3
  4363. 3
  4364. 3
  4365. 3
  4366. 3
  4367. 3
  4368. 3
  4369. 3
  4370. 3
  4371. 3
  4372. 3
  4373. 3
  4374. 3
  4375. 3
  4376. 3
  4377. 3
  4378. 3
  4379. 3
  4380. 3
  4381. 3
  4382. 3
  4383. 3
  4384. 3
  4385. 3
  4386. 3
  4387. 3
  4388. 3
  4389. 3
  4390. 3
  4391. 3
  4392. 3
  4393. 3
  4394. 3
  4395. 3
  4396. 3
  4397. 3
  4398. 3
  4399. 3
  4400. 3
  4401. 3
  4402. 3
  4403. 0:20 while I do think that he is guilty of that crime, it is false to claim that he "has sexual assault charges" against him in britain, because that would mean that the case has not yet concluded. that case was tried in 2000 or 2001, when top B was 26 himself. he and his ra..st friends were found not guilty, but it is very clear to me from the situation that it was ra.., and the judge calling their behaviour "appalling" basically also means that she thought so, although the evidence did not suffice for a conviction based on the laws at that time - I think britain is one of many countries that have updated their ra.. laws, for example because until very recently and in many countries still today, for it to be legally ra.. requires not merely the absence of consent, but either verbal protest or even physical resistance. but there are many cases in which victims are too scared to protest, and know that they are too weak to succeed with physical resistance. such inadequate older law also tend to not recognise it as ra.. when someone is knocked out with drugs first, because then of course they did not resist or protest during the act. -> I looked it up, britain had its last major change to ra.. law in 2003. while the prior law, which applied in this case, did not require resistance but merely the absence of consent to meet the definition, the main change in 2003 was to move away from determining whether it was ra.. based entirely on whether or not the accused convinces the jury that they believed that they had consent towards now also requiring the jury to decide whether believing that there was consent had been reasonable in the situation.
    3
  4404. 3
  4405. 3
  4406. 3
  4407. 3
  4408. 3
  4409. 3
  4410. 3
  4411. 3
  4412. 3
  4413. 3
  4414. 3
  4415. what do you mean, they wouldn't be able to show it? today's movie magic is easily good enough to depict any aspect of the nuclear attacks. they'd probably want to limit the gore somewhat to not limit the audience appeal, but a lot is still possible there. what I as a german take issue with is the apparently extremely widespread belief among americans that the nuclear attacks were justified. the "we're the good guys" thinking is super strong there. not only do seemingly all americans hold the distorted view that the nuclear bombings were absolutely necessary to force a surrender, when in reality japan was getting very interested in even unfavourable conditional surrender due to the recent declaration of war from the soviet union, but most of all, absolutely nobody has the slightest bit of an excuse for the second nuclear bombing, which happened just three days after the first, which US leadership knew to be an inadequate amount of time for the information of the first bombing to be fully recognised and taken into consideration for evaluating surrender by japan's leadership and emperor. and probably fewer than 5% of americans seem to be aware of there ever having been even the idea of either nuking an uninhabited location as a demonstration, or a military installation instead of two cities filled mostly with women and children. of course there also is very little recognition among americans of the conventional "strategic bombing" by the US and britain being a goddamn diabolical war crime strategy.
    3
  4416. 3
  4417. 3
  4418. 3
  4419. 3
  4420. 3
  4421. 3
  4422. 3
  4423. 3
  4424. 3
  4425. 3
  4426. 3
  4427. 3
  4428. 3
  4429. 3
  4430. 3
  4431. 3
  4432. 3
  4433. 3
  4434. 3
  4435. 3
  4436. 3
  4437. 3
  4438. 3
  4439. 3
  4440. 3
  4441. 3
  4442. 3
  4443. 3
  4444. 3
  4445. 3
  4446. 3
  4447. 3
  4448. 3
  4449. 3
  4450. 3
  4451. 3
  4452. 3
  4453. 3
  4454. 3
  4455. 3
  4456. 3
  4457. 3
  4458. 3
  4459. 3
  4460. 3
  4461. 3
  4462. 3
  4463. 3
  4464. 3
  4465. 3
  4466. 3
  4467. 3
  4468. 3
  4469. 3
  4470. 3
  4471. 3
  4472. 3
  4473. 3
  4474. 3
  4475. 3
  4476. 3
  4477. 3
  4478. 3
  4479. 3
  4480. 3
  4481. 3
  4482. 3
  4483. 3
  4484. 3
  4485. 3
  4486. 3
  4487. 3
  4488. 3
  4489. 3
  4490. 3
  4491. 3
  4492. 3
  4493. 3
  4494. 3
  4495. 3
  4496. 3
  4497. 3
  4498. 3
  4499. 3
  4500. 3
  4501. those polls people are citing that show majority support for putin and the war are not russian government polls, they are levada polls. levada is a "foreign agent". yes, they are skewed in favour of the government, but they are not fake. 80% support and such in those polls DOES mean that a majority of russians support putin and the war. that is a FACT. it's not 80% in reality, but it is well over 50% (probably 70% for putin and 60% for the war would be my guess). and 20.000 arrests of anti-war protesters in a year is VERY LITTLE. the russian opposition is a bad joke, I'm sorry. they just raise their hands one by one to get arrested, they have no clue how to effect anything. you need to realise that the russian people collectively caused this war. every military aggression by putin has been rewarded with massive and enduring spikes in popular approval. the current war would not have happened if that was not the case, if the majority of russians did not love war (as long as they win easily). americans love war, too. the russian people have brought the biggest war in decades to ukraine, and have brought the rest of the world to the brink of a nuclear war. georgia in particular is partially occupied by russia, and the russians killed thousands when they invaded georgia in 2008. you are a citizen of georgia's primary enemy state. the situation has changed somewhat with the fact that most russians in heorgia are there to escape the russian government, but otherwise, it is very understandable for georgians to view the visa-free entry of russians as a policy forced upon georgia by threat of war from the russian occupation, and to see any russian in georgia as an invader because of it. georgia has friendly policies towards russians not because georgia and russia are friends, but because russia is extorting georgia. by travelling to georgia, you are taking advantage of the special treatment for russians that russia extorted from georgia.
    3
  4502. 3
  4503. 3
  4504. 3
  4505. 3
  4506. 3
  4507. 3
  4508. 3
  4509. 3
  4510. 3
  4511. 3
  4512. 3
  4513. 3
  4514. 3
  4515. 3
  4516. 3
  4517. 3
  4518. 3
  4519. 3
  4520. 3
  4521. 3
  4522. 3
  4523. 3
  4524. 3
  4525. 3
  4526. 3
  4527. that ban is useless, not at all fit for purpose. and it will DEFINITELY move several percentage points of votes to the republicans in the next election. this kind of irrational behaviour terribly discredits american gun control advocates and democrats. supreme court or not, it is a settled matter in america that SOME civilians should be allowed to carry guns for self-defense. to attempt to prohibit this skips way past all sorts of reasonable things one could do, and attacks one of the most popularly supported parts of american gun culture. it also does nothing to prevent bystanders being hit by stray gunfire from criminals, who largely already break laws when they carry guns, because they would need to pass a criminal background check for a concealed carry permit, and criminals tend to not go for open carry. the gun ownership issues in new mexico that ought to be changed are that buying, owning, and open carrying require no permit or license, and that there isn't any kind of assault weapons ban or magazine size restriction. in my opinion, owning, operating, and carrying guns should all require a license. in terms of gun type restrictions, a very weak restriction would be banning magazines over some capacity (I think 10 is a common choice, but really if you want the ban to be useful it probably should be more like 6 rounds). the next more intense but highly reasonable option would be to ban all semiautomatic rifles and carbines with detachable magazines (and of course anything belt-fed xD), as there is no legitimate civilian need for them (anything works for hobby shooting, small pistols cover self-defense carry, bolt- and lever action rifles and manually cycled shotguns cover hunting, and all of those together cover home defense). one step further would be to ban all self-loading pistols, or allow only low capacity and small caliber ones because those have the advantage to legitimate civilian self-defense use of more convenient concealed carrying than revolvers. or rather, instead of any of these bans, a second much more restrictive gun license could be required for these weapon types. a difficult debateable issue would be whether to grandfather in weapons to which new restrictions apply, and there my preference would be to do that, but only for the current owner (of course requiring registration before the ban takes effect, or with proof of earlier purchase). and it might be a good idea to restrict the carrying of some of those categories even for legal owners.
    3
  4528. 3
  4529. 3
  4530. 3
  4531. 3
  4532. 3
  4533. 3
  4534. 3
  4535. 3
  4536. 3
  4537. 3
  4538. 3
  4539. 3
  4540. 3
  4541. 3
  4542. 3
  4543. 3
  4544. 3
  4545. 3
  4546. 3
  4547. 3
  4548. 3
  4549. 3
  4550. 3
  4551. 3
  4552. 3
  4553. 3
  4554. 3
  4555. 3
  4556. 3
  4557. 3
  4558. 3
  4559. 3
  4560. 3
  4561. 3
  4562. 3
  4563. 3
  4564. 3
  4565. 3
  4566. 3
  4567. 3
  4568. 3
  4569. 3
  4570. 3
  4571. 3
  4572. 3
  4573. 3
  4574. 3
  4575. 3
  4576. 3
  4577. 3
  4578. 3
  4579. 3
  4580. 3
  4581. 3
  4582. 3
  4583. 3
  4584. 3
  4585. 3
  4586. 3
  4587. 3
  4588. 3
  4589. 3
  4590. 3
  4591. 3
  4592. 3
  4593. 3
  4594. 3
  4595. 3
  4596. 3
  4597. 3
  4598. 3
  4599. 3
  4600. 3
  4601. 3
  4602. 3
  4603. 3
  4604. 3
  4605. 3
  4606. 3
  4607. 3
  4608. 3
  4609. 3
  4610. 3
  4611. 3
  4612. 3
  4613. 3
  4614. 3
  4615. 3
  4616. 3
  4617. 3
  4618. 3
  4619. 3
  4620. 3
  4621. 3
  4622. 3
  4623. 3
  4624. 3
  4625. 3
  4626. 3
  4627. 3
  4628. 3
  4629. 3
  4630. 3
  4631. 3
  4632. 3
  4633. 3
  4634. I knew 3-5 days into the "war" that this would definitively push biden over the edge and make him unelectable. I see basically three levels of severe failure: 1) biden supports israel and almost everything about the pre-hamassacre status quo of oppression. 2) biden is too much of a believer in israeli indoctrination and too old to be capable of understanding the reality of the situation - that this "war" is aimed at the palestinian people with hamas as an excuse, specifically the aim is to depopulate and eventually annex the gaza strip. biden can not grasp that there truly is a fundamental change in the palestine conflict. for reference, remember his administration's denial during the afghanistan handover: biden said that a taliban takeover was "not inevitable" exactly seven days before kabul fell, a day when around 90% of territory was held by the taliban, and they captured seven more provincial capitals, to bring the total to 75% of provincial capitals captured in the span of 10 days. this is the sort of capacity to recognise when a war is not what he wants it to be that we should expect from biden. and I do think that it's in large part biden personally, I think many other people around him are somewhat more capable of seeing the current reality, but they know that they have very little power to change his mind because his ideological faith in israel's goodness produces a powerful willful blindness, as it does with many people. this blindness generally and specifically is actually something he's worse on than trump - besides the fact that trump today as president would almost certainly be less supportive of israel, based on the fact that he very credibly claimed in the interview excerpt released a month ago that he grew to hate netanyahu due to his strange compulsive disrespect and began to like abbas because he stroked trump's ego in a warm and fatherly way, which is the sort of thing trump bases america's international relations on. 3) adding to the bad actual position taken, the biden admin also chose a terrible communication strategy. they could have chosen the same level of actual support without going so far as to over and over again in effect say "we support absolutely everything israel does, we support israel committing war crimes if it so chooses, we support israel doing however much damage and continuing however long it sees fit". it would have genuinely made a difference to the publicly perceived responsibility if they had started out with the messaging that they adopted after a month or so - to profess support for israel while just paying general lip service to the laws of war. even most israeli spokespeople would have chosen that sort of messaging while making these policy proclamations to a world audience. biden went all in, and now he owns to a much higher degree than he would have had to everything israel does in gaza - which is a huge ethnic cleansing and very different from what he thought he was declaring absolute support for.
    3
  4635. 3
  4636. 3
  4637. 3
  4638. 3
  4639. 3
  4640. 3
  4641. 3
  4642. 3
  4643. 3
  4644. 3
  4645. 3
  4646. 3
  4647. 3
  4648. 3
  4649. 3
  4650. 3
  4651. 3
  4652. 3
  4653. 3
  4654. 3
  4655. 3
  4656. 3
  4657. 3
  4658. 3
  4659. 3
  4660. 3
  4661. 3
  4662. 3
  4663. 3
  4664. 3
  4665. 3
  4666. 3
  4667. 3
  4668. 3
  4669. 3
  4670. 3
  4671. 3
  4672. 3
  4673. 3
  4674. 3
  4675. 3
  4676. 3
  4677. 3
  4678. 3
  4679. 3
  4680. 3
  4681. 3
  4682. 3
  4683. 3
  4684. 3
  4685. 3
  4686. 3
  4687. 3
  4688. 3
  4689. 3
  4690. 3
  4691. 3
  4692. 3
  4693. 3
  4694. 3
  4695. 3
  4696. 3
  4697. 3
  4698. 3
  4699. 3
  4700. 3
  4701. 3
  4702. 3
  4703. 3
  4704. 3
  4705. 3
  4706. 3
  4707. 3
  4708. 3
  4709. 3
  4710. 3
  4711. 3
  4712. 3
  4713. 3
  4714. 3
  4715. 3
  4716. 3
  4717. 3
  4718. 3
  4719. 3
  4720. 3
  4721. 3
  4722. 3
  4723. 3
  4724. 3
  4725. 3
  4726. 3
  4727. 3
  4728. 3
  4729. 3
  4730. 3
  4731. 3
  4732. 3
  4733. 3
  4734. 3
  4735. 3
  4736. 3
  4737. 3
  4738. 3
  4739. 3
  4740. 3
  4741. 3
  4742. 3
  4743. 3
  4744. 3
  4745. 3
  4746. 3
  4747. the glue is a lesser issue than the waterproofing, that requires a much larger quantity of synthetic material. I would guess something polyurethane-based as is used for car paint, and a different polyurethane composition for the wood glue, since polyurethane wood glues are the most wateeproof common wood glues. though you still want to protect the wood from water intrusion very well anyways and possibly even install a drying system inside the hollow parts, because wood warps when exposed to moisture changes (and if it gets and stays properly wet, it gets heavy and soft, and eventually very soft as it rots). but if the moisture problem can be avoided, wood can probably replace the bulk of the fiberglass composit, and is more manageable as waste at the end of its lifespan even with glue and highly weather-proof coatings (because all that sh°° burns just fine, which fiberglass does not). edit: nevermind, I commented before watching... I can't believe they're using plywood for a tower structure when they're supposedly trying to be environmental, and the tower only needs strong load bearing in one direction - just like trees. they should use long beams, not imitate the structure of the metal tower just with incredibly thick plywood. that does use a ridiculous amount of glue. and look how compact the sections are (veneer cutting process can only produce a limited length along the grain depending on the width of the blade), those joints between them are going to be weak points requiring heavy reinforcements. a structure made mostly of tall beams could be built much lighter, not just with less glue but with less wood. and cheaper, because good quality plywood like that costs as much as relatively highly prized hardwoods, whereas for structural stability from beams, spruce would be a very suitable wood and is the cheapest. I bet the internal structure of the tower in a beam construction could be built for a tenth of the price, plus another tenth of the price for a skin. these people don't know sh°° about working with wood, they are imitating a metal design with wood.
    3
  4748. 3
  4749. 3
  4750. 3
  4751. 3
  4752. 3
  4753. 3
  4754. 3
  4755. 3
  4756. 3
  4757. 3
  4758. 3
  4759. 3
  4760. 3
  4761. 3
  4762. 3
  4763. 3
  4764. 3
  4765. 3
  4766. 3
  4767. 3
  4768. 3
  4769. 3
  4770. 3
  4771. 3
  4772. 3
  4773. 3
  4774. 3
  4775. 3
  4776. 3
  4777. 3
  4778. 3
  4779. 3
  4780. if I was an american single issue pro-palestine voter in 2024, I already know that would vote for trump over biden. biden has proven himself since the hamassacre to be consistently the worse version of the inconsistency that one could expect from trump. and an interview audio excerpt was released a few weeks ago from some time back that has trump very clearly expressing that he approached netanyahu with a very positive friendly attitude, and slowly grew to feel disrespected to the point of betrayal by him. which makes a lot of sense, since that's pretty much how netanyahu openly treats everybody. on the other hand, trump got a very positive impression from abbas, describing him as warm and fatherly. which is weird, but trump means well. xD he says that he expected the opposite but learned that it's the israelis who are deliberately preventing peace, implying that he steongly disapproves of that, and saying that they "are impossible". we know that trump bases his administration's foreign engagement in large part on personal sympathy created by people he respects going out of their way to stroke his narcissistic ego. so while it is possible for trump to change his mind about things completely, I would, based on that interview, rate it as highly likely that a trump presidency would be better for palestine than a biden presidency. I mean it could hardly be worse - not only are obamna administration comments about israel like night and day compared to what biden is doing now, but even the bush junior administration was nowhere near this bad! the trump administration was, but trump only started hating netanyahu towards the end of his term, so that's not a reliable indication of what his future attitude would be. meanwhile biden can be expected to not change his mind about anything until the day he dies.
    3
  4781. 3
  4782. 3
  4783. 3
  4784. 3
  4785. 3
  4786. 3
  4787. 3
  4788. 3
  4789. 3
  4790. 3
  4791. 3
  4792. 3
  4793. 3
  4794. 3
  4795. 3
  4796. 3
  4797. 3
  4798. 3
  4799. 3
  4800. 3
  4801. 3
  4802. 3
  4803. 3
  4804. 3
  4805. 3
  4806. 3
  4807. 3
  4808. 3
  4809. 3
  4810. 3
  4811. 3
  4812. 3
  4813. 3
  4814. 3
  4815. 3
  4816. 3
  4817. 3
  4818. 3
  4819. 3
  4820. 3
  4821. 3
  4822. 3
  4823. 3
  4824. 3
  4825. 3
  4826. 3
  4827. 3
  4828. 3
  4829. 3
  4830. 3
  4831. 3
  4832. 3
  4833. 3
  4834. 3
  4835. I'm german and have barely ever seen a gun, but if I ran a gay club in america, I would want trusted people with guns there, because those are dangerous places to be (same as synagogues and mosques). I'm sure they have doormen, those need to be armed. and they should do a program in which trusted friends and regulars of the club can do some sort of gun training course (plus whatever the state laws require) and be put on a list to either be allowed to bring guns, or get access to a gun safe in the club (I imagine other than concealed carrying of small pistols where it's legal, few people would want to bring a gun to a club if they want ro dance or be in a dense crowd). it's possible that it would be a bad idea for guests to carry due to risk of the guns being stolen or lost (like lots of things at clubs), so perhaps access to gun safe would be better. some other employees should be armed too, particularly for bartenders it's quite practical. oh, and employees peobably would generally be more suitable than guests because employees can reasonably be expected to be more or less sober (maybe you could only qualify guests who are mostly straight edge). it would be fair to incentivise employees and perhaps guests to qualify for gun access with higher pay or reduced admission price. I know there are risks associated with adding more people shooting among a crowd, and police potentially seeing multiple gunmen with only one being the bad guy, but I think with decent training and protocols, it would likely be overall beneficial. even though it would be much more challenging to do this in a club than in a mosque or synagogue, where people could just open carry and have very little risk of theft or misplacement of guns, and there would be better lighting to identify and shoot attackers.
    3
  4836. 3
  4837. 3
  4838. 3
  4839. 3
  4840. 3
  4841. 3
  4842. 3
  4843. 3
  4844. 3
  4845. 3
  4846. 3
  4847. 3
  4848. 3
  4849. 3
  4850. 3
  4851. 3
  4852. 3
  4853. 3
  4854. 3
  4855. 3
  4856. 3
  4857. 3
  4858. 3
  4859. 3
  4860. 3
  4861. 3
  4862. 3
  4863. 3
  4864. 3
  4865. 3
  4866. 3
  4867. 3
  4868. 3
  4869. 3
  4870. 3
  4871. 3
  4872. 3
  4873. 3
  4874. 3
  4875. 3
  4876. 3
  4877. 3
  4878. 3
  4879. your afghanistan coverage is getting ever so slightly better, but the defensiveness about biden's catastrophe is still at a ridiculous level. it really is sad to see how little perception of the reality of the suffering of the afghan people you have because you're so focused on US party politics. and your as yet, as far as I have seen, unbroken commitment to not mention any afghan progressive activists who were protected and enabled to gradually improve afghan society at least in the cities by the NATO military presence continues to show how spineless and dishonest your progressive convictions truly are. I realized years ago how selfish and nationalistic the american left's support for afghanistan withdrawal was, but two weeks ago, I did not expect to be so disgusted by the american left. the world isn't going to stop bringing up this betrayal, you know? this selfish americafirst withdrawal is burning the afghanistan war into US history similar to how my lai, abu ghraib and guantanamo and other war crimes have tainted your country (as a german I know a thing or two about that). except this time, it reeks of weakness. the ones who lost this war through bad morale are not the afghan security forces who have died for their country at a rate of 10 a day for 20 years. it is the american people who no longer wanted the minor inconvenience that this embarrassing failure of a war was to you, and you willingly accepted that it would cause a catastrophe for afghanistan, because you, including the supposed humanitarians of your left, do not care in any way about afghans. #AfghanLivesMatter I'm not happy to see this fall of america because US imperialism has been good to us here and I expect the new chinese world empire to be much worse. but the way america is acting now is just not going to cut it.
    3
  4880. 3
  4881. 3
  4882. 3
  4883. 3
  4884. 3
  4885. 3
  4886. 3
  4887. 3
  4888. 3
  4889. 3
  4890. 3
  4891. 3
  4892. 3
  4893. 3
  4894. 3
  4895. 3
  4896. 3
  4897. 3
  4898. 3
  4899. 3
  4900. 3
  4901. 3
  4902. 3
  4903. 3
  4904. 3
  4905. 3
  4906. 3
  4907. 3
  4908. 3
  4909. 3
  4910. 3
  4911. 3
  4912. 3
  4913. 3
  4914. 3
  4915. 3
  4916. 3
  4917. 3
  4918. 3
  4919. 3
  4920. 3
  4921. 3
  4922. 3
  4923. 3
  4924. 3
  4925. 3
  4926. 3
  4927. 3
  4928. 3
  4929. 3
  4930. William Tobin you didn't ask me, but reagent testing for drugs is commonly done by more careful drug users to try to reduce the likelihood of taking other drugs than what they thought they bought. there are all sorts of kits made for drug testing that you can buy that contain small amounts of chemical reagents, typically liquids or I think also test strips, which contain very specific chemicals that react with specific drugs or substance groups that various drugs belong to and change colours when mixed with those particular drugs. if you want to be super thorough with several reagents and you're lucky, you may be able to identify that the product you bought contains the drug you wanted, and does not contain a dozen or so other drugs that would have shown reactions with the reagents you used. it's basically the same principle as a covid or pregnancy test, but for specific drugs. the most common and useful test nowadays is probably for fentanyl, because that stuff and its analogues are showing up in everything due to its cheap price, strong uplifting effect, very high addictiveness and extremely high potency that makes it possible to hide it in absolutely anything, even LSD blotters or microdots (odd choice but possible). its extreme potency and central nervous system depressant effect as an opioid, which makes it cause people to pass out and then just stop breathing when overdosed, is making it the deadliest drug these days. the biggest danger is when crackheads like the one in the video mix drugs with crude methods like that, because if you add pure or highly potent fentanyl to that mix , it's very likely that you'll end up with tiny clumps of it (the size of a salt or sugar grain is sufficient) that are big enough to overdose on one bump or one pill or even a little piece of a pill that contains the clump, making the product impossible to dose safely due to its highly uneven potency.
    3
  4931. 3
  4932. 3
  4933. 3
  4934. 3
  4935. 3
  4936. 3
  4937. 3
  4938. 3
  4939. 3
  4940. 3
  4941. 3
  4942. 3
  4943. 3
  4944. 3
  4945. 3
  4946. 3
  4947. 3
  4948. 3
  4949. 3
  4950. 3
  4951. 3
  4952. 3
  4953. 3
  4954. 3
  4955. 3
  4956. 3
  4957. 3
  4958. 3
  4959. 3
  4960. 3
  4961. no, that is not what they're saying. I have heard ne°°°yahu say it in english, and now this guy using the same words: "areas north of r°fah". not "northern g°za". when people have been talking about northern and southern g°za in this whole thing, that has been under the simplifying pretense that the length of the strip and its coastline are oriented along a south to north axis, but that's actually a south-west to north-east direction. directly north of raf°h, and what is meant by "areas north of r°fah", is the al mawasi "safe zone". it's the tiny area by the coast containing only a few roads among dunes, and now a huge tent city. around two months ago, i-country clarified its "move south to be safer" order, and they designated three types of zones (none of which they have actually stuck to to a high degree of course, but they have corresponded somewhat to b°°bing intensity): 1) immediate evacuation areas, will be b°°bed without warning 2) temporary safe zones that will be warned to evacuate before it's their turn to be b°°bed (this seems to have pretty much stopped entirely) 3) al mawasi, the only place in the strip that will not be b°°bed at all. surprise surprise, though it has been very sparse indeed by comparison, al mawasi has also been b°°bed, because "h°m°s was using the safe zone as a hu°°n shi°ld, how could you expect us not to b°°b?" what's currently most relevant besides the more severe overcrowding and far more severe lack of infrastructure if raf°h is evacuated to mawasi is the fact that r°fah contains the one crossing to egypt that's supplying all of the aid (i-country's kerem shalom crossing operated shortly, but is now shut down by azerbaijani-style "protesters" - they're astroturfing gen°°ide). mawasi as defined on the map is deliberately cut off from even touching the border. they are about to cut off the only supply route and escape route out of the strip to those with powerful passports, connections, or bribe money.
    3
  4962. 3
  4963. 7:35 those 69 trucks in perspective: gaza used to get 500 daily trucks of aid on top of commercial imports, while also receiving is°°eli tapwater. the 69 trucks are practically the only material coming in, except for allegedly some water from israel possibly reaching a small portion of the population in the south right at the border (apparently g°°a would need fuel to pump it, as far as pipes are still intact, which is certainly not far). 100 trucks for 2.3m people would be one truck of goods per day for every 23,000 people, 69 trucks are one truck for 33,333 people - you couldn't even fit enough of the most calory-dense food on there, much less medicine, hospital supplies, bottled water, and fuel. if you supplied 10l of bottled water per person to drink, cook and wash, because that's the only way to get clean water, that would be 23,000 tons. if you only supplied bottled water to drink and cook with a tiny bit to spare, a reasonable absolute minimum would be 3l per day (common recommendation for only drinking, not counting water intake through food, is 2l), which would be 4600 tons of water delivered to g°°a daily. from the pictures I've seen, what counts as one truck there generally are 8-wheelers, those have a cargo capacity around 15 tons, and that makes 307 truck loads per day just to deliver 3 liters of water to each ga°°n. based on the first week of the "w°r", when those numbers were officially released, the 1035 tons of aid that those trucks may have carried was equal to the daily mass of aviation b°mbs delivered to g°za, on top of unspecified amounts of ar°°llery and t°nk shells and m°ss°les.
    3
  4964. 3
  4965. 3
  4966. 3
  4967. 3
  4968. 3
  4969. I'm pretty sure that most farmers could tell you that you can't switch fields and plantations in use from conventional fertilizers and pesticides over to organic from one day to the next even if sufficient supplies were available, which I'm guessing was not the case in sti lanka (they probably had immediate shortages and absurd prices of the legal alternatives). synthetic/mineral fertilizers supply plants' nutrient needs directly, whereas organic fertilizers feed microorganisms in the soil that then excrete plant-absorbable nutrients. conventional farming practices often harm the soil's capacity to support those microorganisms, so even if you suddenly do supply them with organic fertilizers, they won't be active enough to support strong plant growth. organic fertilization also needs to be applied completely differently, with the main difference being that farmers generally have to apply it long before problems arise (months or years) for the fertilizer to then slowly break down, whereas with synthetic fertilizer it's usually possible to attentively watch plants for signs of deficiencies and then immediately solve them by applying the necessary feetilizers, which work instantly because they don't need to be processed by microorganisms first. organic pest control is perhaps even harder, since synthetic herbicides, fungicides and insecticides are extremely effective and there's a solution for everyhing, whereas organic farming conventions only allow very few mostly plant-based pesticides that are far less effective and may require a bigger number of different methods as opposed to using one or teo kinds of highly capable synthetic poisons to do everything. organic farming also heavily relies on more manual labor instead of pesticides, such as by manually removing weeds instead of using herbicides, since there are no organic herbicides. organic farming has big upsides. one for example in sri lanka would be that with the current conventional farming techniques, tea plantation workers are suffering massive rates of illness from the pesticides they use (though this could also be improved by banning particular pesticides and regulating better work safety practices like protective equipment). but switching to organic farming takes a lot of retraining, not to mention that it requires the production or import of supplies that are more expensive and harder to get (the reason why humanity invented synthetic fertilizers and pesticided in the first place), and the sales side of the business also requires big changes to market products at the higher prices that the higher production costs dictate. I would imagine that even if the farming works, this would likely be a huge problem for poor people relying on domestically produced food, who suddenly have to pay extra for organic produce.
    3
  4970. 3
  4971. 3
  4972. 3
  4973. 3
  4974. 3
  4975. 3
  4976. 3
  4977. 3
  4978. 3
  4979. 3
  4980. 3
  4981. 3
  4982. 3
  4983. 3
  4984. 3
  4985. 3
  4986. 3
  4987. 3
  4988. 3
  4989. 3
  4990. 3
  4991. 3
  4992. 3
  4993. 3
  4994. 3
  4995. 3
  4996. 3
  4997. 3
  4998. 3
  4999. 3
  5000. 3
  5001. 3
  5002. 3
  5003. 3
  5004. 3
  5005. 3
  5006. 3
  5007. 3
  5008. 3
  5009. 3
  5010. 3
  5011. 3
  5012. 3
  5013. 3
  5014. 3
  5015. 3
  5016. 3
  5017. 3
  5018. 3
  5019. 3
  5020. 3
  5021. 3
  5022. 3
  5023. 3
  5024. 3
  5025. 3
  5026. 3
  5027. 3
  5028. LOL it's been obvious ever since last winter that this was going to happen. I KNEW there would be a variant before the end of the yearthat would spread through largely unaffected vaccinated people and be more deadly to unvaccinated people than previous variants, because it has evolved to be tough enough to overcome the vaccines and a side effect of that is that it has worse symptoms. the only thing about this that surprises me is that that's already the delta variant, because I was thinking the reports about it so far had pretty much described the extent of how bad it is (I think they were saying something like 2-3 times more infectious than the original covid and twice as much severe illness and death, though many news outlets have kept falsely reporting that illness is no more severe). is this finally the point when you guys at TYT stop talking about "after the pandemic"? there will be no end to the pandemic by way of vaccines in any country that doesn't have a highly effective mandatory vaccination program PLUS targeted lockdown measures, or that alternatively uses very quick targeted lockdowns and government-administered hotel quarantine for all arrivals like new zealand or the asian countries that have been much more successful in covid management. in fact, taiwan and vietnam have sadly demonstrated that even these previously highly effective methods are easily overcome by the delta variant. and DO NOT assume that the delta variant will be the worst of it! it is an epidemiological near certainty that the high infection rates in partially vaccinated countries like great brexit are continuing to breed worse and worse strains of covid because of the evolutionary pressure on the virus to evolve to spread through vaccinated people, which is likely to go hand in hand with worse and worse symptoms especially in unvaccinated people. there even is an actually good "think of the children" argument to be made, because kids are much slower to get vaccinated (none under 12 anywhere), face a large potential for infection when they go to school/kindergarten, and the delta variant for example shows a particularly big increase in symptoms in young people, including long covid that is affecting more kids than people are generally aware of. there are people with long covid from the start of the pandemic (from a much less dangerous virus variant!) that still hasn't gone away, it appears to be a potentially permanent disability that is legit derailing careers and making people unable to work either manual or mental jobs. so no, covid spread is not ok as long as you just have room in hospitals. the only correct way to handle covid, even with very high vaccination rates, is to constantly push infections as close to zero as possible, containing every outbreak immediately from the first detected case.
    3
  5029. 3
  5030. 3
  5031. 3
  5032. 3
  5033. 3
  5034. 3
  5035. 3
  5036. 3
  5037. 3
  5038. 3
  5039. 3
  5040. 3
  5041. 3
  5042. 3
  5043. 3
  5044. 3
  5045. 3
  5046. 3
  5047. 3
  5048. 3
  5049. 3
  5050. 3
  5051. 3
  5052. 3
  5053. 3
  5054. 3
  5055. 3
  5056. 3
  5057. 3
  5058. 3
  5059. 3
  5060. 3
  5061. 3
  5062. 3
  5063. 3
  5064. 3
  5065. 3
  5066. 3
  5067. 3
  5068. 3
  5069. 3
  5070. 3
  5071. 3
  5072. 3
  5073. 3
  5074. 3
  5075. 3
  5076. 3
  5077. 3
  5078. 3
  5079. 3
  5080. 3
  5081. 3
  5082. 3
  5083. 3
  5084. 3
  5085. 3
  5086. 3
  5087. 3
  5088. 3
  5089. 3
  5090. 3
  5091. 3
  5092. 3
  5093. 3
  5094. 3
  5095. 3
  5096. 3
  5097. 3
  5098. 3
  5099. 3
  5100. 3
  5101. 3
  5102. 3
  5103. 3
  5104. 3
  5105. 3
  5106. 3
  5107. 3
  5108. 3
  5109. 3
  5110. 3
  5111. 3
  5112. 3
  5113. 3
  5114. 3
  5115. 3
  5116. 3
  5117. 3
  5118. 3
  5119. 3
  5120. 3
  5121. 3
  5122. 3
  5123. 3
  5124. 3
  5125. 3
  5126. 3
  5127. 3
  5128. 3
  5129. 3
  5130. 3
  5131. 3
  5132. 3
  5133. 3
  5134. 3
  5135. 3
  5136. 3
  5137. 3
  5138. 3
  5139. 3
  5140. 3
  5141. 3
  5142. 3
  5143. 3
  5144. 3
  5145. 3
  5146. 3
  5147. 3
  5148. 3
  5149. 3
  5150. 3
  5151. 3
  5152. 3
  5153. 3
  5154. 3
  5155. 3
  5156. 3
  5157. 3
  5158. 3
  5159. 3
  5160. 3
  5161. 3
  5162. 3
  5163. 3
  5164. unless that was based on the expectation that she was covered by whatever corruption baldwin had going on that originally had the prosecutor drop his case (a new one was started I think around 6-12 months later, nobody seems terribly interested in explaining either event), it was extremely ill-advised for this armorer to plead not guilty, her defense should have instead aimed for downgrading the charge. her guilt was the most obvious part of this case, ahead of even the alao obvious fact that baldwin pulled the trigger. the trial even revealed another huge mistake, on top of her having handed an actor a loaded gun with the very clear understanding or even direct claim that the gun was fully inert, so she clearly did not examine the supposed inert rounds inthe cylinder, despite knowing that that same gun was occasionally being used to shoot live ammunition on set outside of working hours. no, she did not only commit just about the worst act of negligence at that moment, but she was even the one who had brought that after hours live ammunition to the set! she brought to a western movie production that was not going to use live ammo for anything live ammunition, purely for amusement, fitting at least one of the guns used for filming with blank and dummy cartridges, and then proceded to manage the weapons badly and evidently not even focusing appropriately for a moment before handing over the gun that day, which could have so easily undone her prior mistakes in terms of everyone surviving that day. but beyond the moment, when distractions may have played a role, it is absurdly reckless to bring live ammo to a film set for the guns there and make it available to other crew members to use in the prop guns. the handling of guns during filming is very different from their handling for other uses, namely because it is routine in filming that they're pointed at people and the trigger gets pullet, either dry-firing or if the "target" is far enough away also firing blanks. having a gun accidentally loaded with live ammunition on a film set is surely orders of magnitude more likely to get somebody k°°led than at home or at a gun range, because outside of acting, people rarely pretend to sh°°t one another!
    3
  5165. 3
  5166. 3
  5167. 3
  5168. 3
  5169. 3
  5170. auch halbautomatik ist automatik, und vollautomatik führt in den meisten händen eher nur zum schnelleren aufbrauchen der munition. wenn man tatsächlich die effektivität bei amokläufen der in den USA zu habenden waffen - vollautomatische typischerwiese nur als vorverbotsexemplare besitz- aber auch handelbar, sind aber glaub ich in manchen bundesstaaten nur per lizenz oder kaum zu bekommen, dagegen sind halbautomatische waffen so ziemlich jeder art bis kaliber 0.50 oder inapp darüber meist frei und sogar ohne waffenschein erhältlich - dann müssten in erster linie wegen der einfacheren handhabung bei größerer feuerkraft als pistolen halbautomatische gewehre generell beschränkt werden, oder als sehr schwavhe option kann man nur kleine magazine erlauben, oder als wesentlich effektivere option könnte man gewehrzugang beschränken auf nur gewehre mit integriertem magazin, oder gar keine automatik sondern nur repetierer. auch prinzipiell sinnvoll wäre beschränkung von selbstladepistolen mit wechselbaren magazinen, wobei eine ausnahme zu machen wäre für selbstladepistolen in kleinen kalibern mit relativ kleinen magazinen, da diese durch die flachere form wesentlich praktischer in so ziemlich jede art von tasche oder holster passen als ein revolver, und irgendeine schusswaffe will der ami ja definitiv mit sich herumtragen dürfen. auch wenn in vielen bundesstaaten nur "open carry", also sichtbares tragen im holster allgemein erlaubt ist und in vielen gesellschaftlichen kreisen wohl sehr ungern gesehen würde, und "concealed carry" einer lizenz bedarf. das soll vielleicht einen gewissen abschreckungseffekt bilden, sodass leichtkriminelle, die durch ihr führungszeugnis keine lizenz bekommen können aber noch nicht von waffenbesitz allgemein ausgeschlossen sind, eher dazu neigen, keine waffen zu tragen.
    3
  5171. 3
  5172. 3
  5173. 3
  5174. 3
  5175. 3
  5176. 3
  5177. 3
  5178. 3
  5179. 3
  5180. 3
  5181. 3
  5182. 3
  5183. 3
  5184. 3
  5185. 3
  5186. 3
  5187. 3
  5188. 3
  5189. 3
  5190. 3
  5191. 3
  5192. 3
  5193. 3
  5194. 3
  5195. 3
  5196. auf ein massaker mit einem völkermord antworten, und dann solidarität fordern? nein danke. hamassaker war gestern, zweite nakba ist heute. israel entvölkert den gazastreifen. das ist keine selbstverteidigung, das war vom ersten tag an keine selbstverteidigung. und mit der befreihung der geiseln hat es nichts zu tun, das ist die tödlichste option überhaupt für die: nicht nur können bomben keine geiseln befreihen, sondern es ist auch sehr im interesse der hamas, um die verhandlungsposition bei zukünftigen erpressungen zu verbessern, dass man die geiseln ermordet falls israelische truppen zu nahe kommen. und die verwahrung der geiseln so zu organisieren, dass die möglichkeit dazu garantiert wird, ist viel einfacher als andere militärische operationen, die die hamas offensichtlich durchführen kann. selbstverteidigung wäre gewesen, die grenze mit einer halbwegs vernünftigen anzahl an soldaten zu verteidigen. wenn israel seine soldaten im aktiven dienst gleichmäßig über israelische und israelisch besetzte gebiete verteilt hätte, dann hätten im von der hamas betretenen gebiet (ausgehend von den kleineren ausdehnungsvarianten auf karten, wo diese gebiet etwa der fläche des gazastreifens entspricht, andere karten zeigen eher 1,5x die fläche, oder mehr) über 2200 soldaten gestanden. in realität haben israel's bodentruppen eine zuständige gaza-division, die per definition als division 5000-20.000+ truppen enthalten sollte. kann irgendjemand ernsthaft behaupten, dass dem angriff so viele israelische soldaten entgegenstanden, also schon da waren? was ich an gegenwehr gesehen habe, können wohl kaum mehr als 1000 gewesen sein! und wie lang hat das militär gebraucht um einen gegenangriff einzuleiten? SECHS STUNDEN! WO WAR DIE IDF??? rhetorische frage, ich weiß, dass die im besetzten westjordanland waren, um apartheid zu verwalten und pogrome zu schützen. also was ich eigentlich meine ist: wer hat den truppenabzug von der gaza-grenze befohlen? und warum so tief runter auf so ein absurd niedriges level, als sei die grenze zu gaza ein weniger gefährlicher ort als der durchschnitt aus westjordanland, golanhöhen, und tel aviv? und sechs stunden, wirklich? was war da los? und warum klärt man das nicht, bevor man gaza in hamburg 1945 verwandelt?
    3
  5197. 3
  5198. 3
  5199. 3
  5200. 3
  5201. 3
  5202. 3
  5203. 3
  5204. 3
  5205. 3
  5206. 3
  5207. 3
  5208. 3
  5209. 3
  5210. 3
  5211. 3
  5212. 3
  5213. 3
  5214. 3
  5215. 3
  5216. 3
  5217. 3
  5218. 3
  5219. 3
  5220. 3
  5221. 3
  5222. 3
  5223. 3
  5224. 3
  5225. 3
  5226. 3
  5227. 3
  5228. 3
  5229. 3
  5230. 3
  5231. 3
  5232. 3
  5233. 3
  5234. 3
  5235. 3
  5236. 3
  5237. 3
  5238. 3
  5239. 3
  5240. what DW won't publish: from the committee to protect journalists: October 13, 2023 Issam Abdallah Abdallah, a Beirut-based videographer for the Reuters news agency, was killed near the Lebanon border by shelling coming from the direction of Israel. Abdallah and several other journalists were covering the back-and-forth shelling near Alma Al-Shaab in southern Lebanon between Israeli forces and Lebanon’s militant Hezbollah group. November 21, 2023 Farah Omar Omar, a Lebanese reporter for the Hezbollah-affiliated Al-Mayadeen TV channel, was killed by an Israeli strike in the Tayr Harfa area in southern Lebanon, close to the border with Israel, according to Al-Mayadeen, Al-Jazeera, and the Beirut-based press freedom group SKeyes. She was reporting on escalating hostilities across the Lebanese-Israeli border and gave a live update an hour before her death. Rabih Al Maamari Al Maamari, a Lebanese cameraperson for the Hezbollah-affiliated Al-Mayadeen TV channel, was killed by an Israeli strike in the Tayr Harfa area in southern Lebanon, close to the border with Israel, along with his colleague Farah Omar, according to Al-Mayadeen, Al-Jazeera, and the Beirut-based press freedom group SKeyes. reuters report: "PARIS, Oct 29 (Reuters) - Reuters visuals journalist Issam Abdallah was killed on Oct. 13 in southern Lebanon by a "targeted" strike from the direction of the Israeli border, Reporters Without Borders (RSF) said on Sunday, based on preliminary findings of its investigation. "According to the ballistic analysis carried out by RSF, the shots came from the east of where the journalists were standing; from the direction of the Israeli border," RSF said. "Two strikes in the same place in such a short space of time (just over 30 seconds), from the same direction, clearly indicate precise targeting." [...] Abdallah was killed on Oct. 13 while working with six other journalists near the village of Alma al-Shaab, close to the Israeli border, where the Israeli military and Lebanese militia Hezbollah have been trading fire. RSF said its preliminary findings were based on what it described as a "thorough analysis of eyewitness accounts, video footage and ballistics expertise". Its investigation continues, the report added. "It is unlikely that the journalists were mistaken for combatants, especially as they were not hiding: in order to have a clear field of vision, they had been in the open for more than an hour, on the top of a hill," the report said. "They were wearing helmets and bullet-proof waistcoats marked 'press'."
    3
  5241. 3
  5242. 3
  5243. 3
  5244. 3
  5245. 3
  5246. 3
  5247. 3
  5248. 3
  5249. 3
  5250. 3
  5251. 3
  5252. 3
  5253. 3
  5254. 3
  5255. 3
  5256. 3
  5257. 3
  5258. 3
  5259. 3
  5260. 3
  5261. 3
  5262. 3
  5263. 3
  5264. 3
  5265. 3
  5266. 3
  5267. 3
  5268. 3
  5269. 3
  5270. 3
  5271. 3
  5272. 3
  5273. 3
  5274. 3
  5275. 3
  5276. 3
  5277. 3
  5278. 3
  5279. 3
  5280. 3
  5281. 3
  5282. 3
  5283. 3
  5284. 3
  5285. 3
  5286. 3
  5287. 3
  5288. 3
  5289. 3
  5290. 3
  5291. 3
  5292. 3
  5293. 3
  5294. 3
  5295. 3
  5296. 3
  5297. 3
  5298. 3
  5299. 3
  5300. 3
  5301. 3
  5302. 3
  5303. 3
  5304. 3
  5305. 3
  5306. 3
  5307. 3
  5308. 3
  5309. 3
  5310. 3
  5311. 3
  5312. 3
  5313. 3
  5314. 3
  5315. 3
  5316. 3
  5317. 3
  5318. 3
  5319. 3
  5320. 3
  5321. 3
  5322. 3
  5323. 3
  5324. 3
  5325. 3
  5326. 3
  5327. 3
  5328. 3
  5329. 3
  5330. 3
  5331. 3
  5332. 3
  5333. 3
  5334. 3
  5335. 3
  5336. 3
  5337. 3
  5338. 3
  5339. 3
  5340. 3
  5341. 3
  5342. 3
  5343. 3
  5344. 3
  5345. 3
  5346. 3
  5347. 3
  5348. 3
  5349. 3
  5350. 3
  5351. 3
  5352. 3
  5353. 3
  5354. 3
  5355. 3
  5356. 3
  5357. 3
  5358. 3
  5359. 3
  5360. 3
  5361. 3
  5362. 3
  5363. 3
  5364. 3
  5365. 3
  5366. 3
  5367. 3
  5368. 3
  5369. 3
  5370. 3
  5371. 3
  5372. 3
  5373. 3
  5374. 3
  5375. 3
  5376. 3
  5377. 3
  5378. I think if thattiktok public reaction as you describe it was real, then it is reasonable to blame part of it on the bad informational environment of american education and media that those kids have been living in. currently with the gaza "war" more extremely than at most other times*, the dominant american media omit many things worth saying in favour of their political agenda, and that creates conditions in which aomebody can comealong and say some obvious but censored things, and use the credit earned that way, and the idiocracy-like perception that they are some kind of genius who knows everything, to push their own unreasonable agenda. * off the top of my head, some examples from the ukraine war include: 1) how western media pretended not to know who kept shelling close to the russian-occupied zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant, after ukraine had complained about russian military building a base there, for the whole one ortwo months it was going on - most western media claimed that it was unknowable whether the ukrainian military was shelling the russian military, or the russians were shelling themselves, and some took ukraine's word for it and reported that the russians were shelling themselves, and none said that it was the ukrainians or more plausible/likely that it was them. 2) not reporting for about half a year that last autumn ukraine launched at least one major special forces assault (~600 troops) across the dnipro river directly against the russian troops stationed at that nuclear plant, in an apparent attempt to uno reverse card the russians by capturing the plant and using it to shield a bridgehead for an expanded cross-river offensive 3) not reporting or not highlighting that the first kerch bridge bombing was, however militarily impactful it may have been, certainly a war crime due to its horrifying method of attack, which made a russian civilian truck driver into an unwitting su°°°de bomber (and that's not speculation, the guy is known by name)
    3
  5379.  @Leftiticus_Maximus_III    I interpret it as the tyts essentially seeing this as a matter of foreign politics because it's in the g°za "war" context, and they just have very little interest in anything notamerican, as is typical for americans. at least for sharon reed I'm pretty sure that's the case here. with david shuster I'm not sure, but it sounded more like he actually hadn't seen any more of the hearing. ben gleib has been very deliberately pushing hasb°ra every time he's been on TYT since 10/7, he seems to see it as his mission here to build as much support for is°°el as possible (in this case by propping up j°ws as hum°n shi°lds and pushing the narrative of an anti°°mitism crisis that's meant to justify crackd°wns and smears against pal°°tine supporters). he seems very immersed in the discourse, I'm sure he at least saw a few minutes more of the hearing covering the entirety of that particular line of questioning, and I would guess that he is the one who cut that clip so short at the front end, where it would have clarified that the event in question was about "int°fada". he probably approves of equating that with gen°cide, but preferred to not be on record saying that. I feel like you can tell from his demeanor that he is engaged in conscious deception, probably mostly from the camera stare and the dramatizing slow and pausing speech. I get pretty strong narc°°sist vibes, to be honest. which would fit perfectly with is°°el's fas°°stic behaviour of using a vic°°mhood narrative to justify ab°se, of course that would appeal to a narc°°sist.
    3
  5380. 3
  5381. 3
  5382. 3
  5383. 3
  5384. 3
  5385. 3
  5386. 3
  5387. 3
  5388. 3
  5389. 3
  5390. 3
  5391. 3
  5392. 3
  5393. 3
  5394. 3
  5395. 3
  5396. 3
  5397. 3
  5398. 3
  5399. 3
  5400. 3
  5401. 3
  5402. 3
  5403. 3
  5404. 3
  5405. 3
  5406. 3
  5407. 3
  5408. 3
  5409. 3
  5410. 3
  5411. 3
  5412. 3
  5413. 3
  5414. 3
  5415. 3
  5416. 3
  5417. 3
  5418. 3
  5419. 3
  5420. 3
  5421. 3
  5422. 3
  5423. 3
  5424. 3
  5425. 3
  5426. 3
  5427. 3
  5428. 3
  5429. there is no rift, there only is a public pretense. biden has decided to completely support whatever netanyahu wants to do. at least concerning g°za - where the plan has from the 7th of october, if not longer, been total dep°°ulation, anything else are just lies to maintain international support. there may be very very soft disagreement regarding the west b°nk and expanding the "war" across the region to involve iran, or occupy part of lebanon. but the only indications of such disagreement are: -the US sanctions against individual settlers (not including government ministers and officials), which may well have been negotiated with i-country to be a publicity action that really doesn't bother them at all. -the withdrawal of one of the two aircraft carrier fleets that were moved to i-country from outside of the mediterranean to threaten he°°ollah and iran. that's the only measure that's sure to actually bother i-country. for this entire time since 10/7, the US government has not condemned a single action taken by i-country. I don't think that even the trump administration was or would have been this committed to sycophancy, and no previous US administration was even remotely like that. in 2014, obama's state department reacted to single digit d°°th counts from bombing within UN schools by not just condemning it, but accusing i-country of deliberate targeting of those places. in 1982, reagan was able to make i-country's then-prime minister (and former head of the te°°orist organization irgun personally responsible for the king david hotel bombing) menachem begin to immediately order a stop to the bombing campaign against beirut, with a phone call in which reagan called it a "holoc°°st". not only would today's US presidents not dare to say that for fear of getting cancelled, they probably really could be.
    3
  5430. 3
  5431. 3
  5432. 3
  5433. 3
  5434. 3
  5435. 3
  5436. 3
  5437. 3
  5438. 3
  5439. 3
  5440. 3
  5441. 3
  5442. 3
  5443. 3
  5444. 3
  5445. 3
  5446. 3
  5447. 3
  5448. 3
  5449. 3
  5450. 3
  5451. 3
  5452. 3
  5453. 3
  5454. 3
  5455. 3
  5456. 3
  5457. 3
  5458. 3
  5459. 3
  5460. 3
  5461. 3
  5462. 3
  5463. 3
  5464. 3
  5465. 3
  5466. 3
  5467. 3
  5468. 3
  5469. 3
  5470. 3
  5471. 3
  5472. 3
  5473. 3
  5474. 3
  5475. 3
  5476. 3
  5477. 3
  5478. 3
  5479. 3
  5480. 3
  5481. 3
  5482. 3
  5483. 3
  5484. 3
  5485. 3
  5486. 3
  5487. 3
  5488. 3
  5489. 3
  5490. 3
  5491. 3
  5492. 3
  5493. 3
  5494. 3
  5495. 3
  5496. 3
  5497. 3
  5498. 3
  5499. 3
  5500. 3
  5501. 3
  5502. 3
  5503. 3
  5504. 3
  5505. 3
  5506. 3
  5507. 3
  5508. 3
  5509. 3
  5510. 3
  5511. 3
  5512. 3
  5513. 3
  5514. 3
  5515. 3
  5516. 3
  5517. 3
  5518. 3
  5519. 3
  5520. 3
  5521. 3
  5522. 3
  5523. 3
  5524. 3
  5525. 3
  5526. 3
  5527. 3
  5528. 3
  5529. 3
  5530. 3
  5531. 3
  5532. 3
  5533. 3
  5534. 3
  5535. 3
  5536. 3
  5537. 3
  5538. 3
  5539. 3
  5540. 3
  5541. 3
  5542. 3
  5543. 3
  5544. 3
  5545. 3
  5546. 3
  5547. 3
  5548. 3
  5549. 3
  5550. 3
  5551. 3
  5552. 3
  5553. 3
  5554. 3
  5555. 3
  5556. this guy is not THAT rich (I think he's in the mid tens of millions, saw it mentioned somewhere). but, to phrase it in a way to hopefully bypass the comment filter, it is my opinion that "people" is a category that does not include billionaires. they are the human form of legendary gold-hoarding dragons - they're monsters. and of course those kinds of dragon stories were made to represent them in the first place (not "billionaires" back in the day, but nobles and high clergy such as bishops). it is not morally neutral to be rich. the choice to hoard a billion dollars in a world where the lack of $2-5 a day per child is causing hundreds of millions of children to be sent to work instead of school, or starve, or die of or be maimed by preventable or curable diseases is reprehensible. it's not just immoral to get rich in bad ways, it is immoral to have a billion dollars and keep it. of course the principle also applies to anybody else who is just relatively well-off compared to those who have nothing, but the culpability scales directly with the sum of one's property. and at the level of a billionaire, it's so disgusting that it makes me sick. I don't even think it's dehumanizing to say that they're not people, I think they dehumanize themselves by setting themselves apart from the poor with their lack of solidarity. I don't recognize anybody's right to have that much property, I think it should be superseded by everybody's right to life and basic quality of life. if somehow it was possible to implement globally, I would as a first step have tax authorities confiscate all personal property past $100m, make having more a crime, and eventually seek to lower the cap much further. nobody anywhere can even remotely claim to have a need for more than $100m. if someone gives ten billion to charity and keeps one billion, they are still a m°°ster for keeping the one billion, and I will never recognize their property rights - to the extent that they allow billionaires to exist, those are immoral laws.
    3
  5557. 3
  5558. 3
  5559. 3
  5560. 3
  5561. 3
  5562. 3
  5563. 3
  5564. 3
  5565. 3
  5566. 3
  5567. 3
  5568. 3
  5569. 3
  5570. 3
  5571. 3
  5572. 3
  5573. 3
  5574. 3
  5575. 3
  5576. 3
  5577. 3
  5578. 3
  5579. 3
  5580. 3
  5581. 3
  5582. 3
  5583. 3
  5584. 3
  5585. 3
  5586. 3
  5587. 3
  5588. I feel like it should be possible to establish learned crowd behaviour that stops crowd crushes. what would be needed are widespread awareness of crowd crushes as a deadly threat, understanding that this is what is meant by phrases like "crowd crush", "crush", and "people being crushed", and understanding that the problem can be solved if the entire crowd moves back a few steps, which can be achieved if everybody passes a crush warning from the front of the crowd all the way to the back of they crowd - somewhere in the back, people have plenty of room to step back, and once they do, the people in front of them can step back, and so on. it would most likely make sense for those relaying message verbally to also push backwards and gesture to prevent the message getting lost. I'm sure that in every crowd crush, people near the crush already try to do exactly this, and apparently it often fails to work. I believe what is lacking and what can be improved with education at events is a preexisting awareness of some sizeable portion of people of this practice of passing along that warning. they need to expect the potential of having to relay the message, and need to understand that the issue is important enough to warrant the effort of active participation. the practice needs to be recognised as a collective effort to save people's lives, and a sort of civic duty. I believe this could be achieved through efforts such as stage performers making a habit of frequently telling their audiences about this at some opportune moment during their time on stage when they have the crowd's attention. even better, if you have stage performers do it during live performances, then for a performer willing to really commit to the bit, an especially high uptake of the information could be achieved by getting the audience to give ot a try and step back. doing this following inatructions from the stage would of course not be the same thing, but it would probably still require some audience members to tell others to move. and for stage events, having the crowd decompression achieved by instruction from the performer could also often be a workable solution, the effectiveness of which will also vary depending on prior education about the issue. I think it should be possible to convince many stage performers to make a habit of telling audiences about this, since if they can gain the right sort of attention from the crowd, it should only take two minutes or so, and it would surely be good for a performer's public image to be known for doing this often to keep their fans safe.
    3
  5589. 3
  5590. 3
  5591. 3
  5592. 3
  5593. 3
  5594. 3
  5595. 3
  5596. 3
  5597. 3
  5598. 3
  5599. 3
  5600. 3
  5601. 3
  5602. 3
  5603. 3
  5604. 3
  5605. 3
  5606. 3
  5607. 3
  5608. 3
  5609. 3
  5610. 3
  5611. 3
  5612. 3
  5613. 3
  5614. 3
  5615. 3
  5616. 3
  5617. 3
  5618. 3
  5619. 3
  5620. 3
  5621. 3
  5622. 3
  5623. 3
  5624. 3
  5625. 3
  5626. 3
  5627. 3
  5628. 3
  5629. 3
  5630. 3
  5631. 3
  5632. 3
  5633. 3
  5634. 3
  5635. 3
  5636. 3
  5637. 3
  5638. 3
  5639. 3
  5640. 3
  5641. 3
  5642. 3
  5643. 3
  5644. 3
  5645. 3
  5646. 3
  5647. 3
  5648. 3
  5649. 3
  5650. 3
  5651. 3
  5652. 3
  5653. 3
  5654. 3
  5655. 3
  5656. 3
  5657. 3
  5658. 3
  5659. 3
  5660. 3
  5661. 3
  5662. 3
  5663. 3
  5664. 3
  5665. 3
  5666. 3
  5667. 3
  5668. 3
  5669. 3
  5670. 3
  5671. 3
  5672. 3
  5673. 3
  5674. 3
  5675. 3
  5676. 3
  5677. 3
  5678. 3
  5679. 3
  5680. 3
  5681. 2
  5682. 2
  5683. 2
  5684. 2
  5685. 2
  5686. 2
  5687. 2
  5688. 2
  5689. 2
  5690. 2
  5691. 2
  5692. 2
  5693. 2
  5694. 2
  5695. 2
  5696. 2
  5697. 2
  5698. 2
  5699. 2
  5700. 2
  5701. 2
  5702. 2
  5703. 2
  5704. 2
  5705. 2
  5706. 2
  5707. 2
  5708. 2
  5709. 2
  5710. 2
  5711. 2
  5712. 2
  5713. 2
  5714. 2
  5715. 2
  5716. 2
  5717. 2
  5718. 2
  5719. 2
  5720. 2
  5721. 2
  5722. 2
  5723. 2
  5724. 2
  5725. 2
  5726. 2
  5727. 2
  5728. 2
  5729. 2
  5730. 2
  5731. 2
  5732. 2
  5733. 2
  5734. 2
  5735. 2
  5736. 2
  5737. 2
  5738. using olive oil price increase as the example of agricultural goods costing more due to climate change is either ignorant or dishonest. olives have become probably europe's most threatened agricultural produce since the mid-2010s due to a plant disease epidemic, by now spread through all european olive regions, which is a bacterium called xylella fastidiosa that is spread by sap-sucking insects. it infects many dozens of plant species, but in olives in particular, it weakens almost all trees incurably to such a high degree that they seize to produce any marketable olives. not only are all affected olive trees cut down because there's nothing to save economically except for the very expensive wood (of which there now is a time-limited glut like there was around the 70s with elm wood due to dutch elm disease, before it became very rare), but in many places, whole groves or entire towns' olive trees have been cut down. producing olive trees typically are in the high tens of years in age, while many olive trees in less modern production (not using machine harvesters that require relatively uniform tree shapes and neat rows) are in the mid hundredsnof years in age (olive trees can get much older than lmost any other . some mediterranean regions have lost over 80% of their olive trees, and thus the same if not a larger (due to partial weakening of remaining trees) portion of their olive production, which will take at least something like 30 years to regrow. a small minority of trees are proving resistant, so there are pretty good hopes for replanting. but for now and the next few decades to come, europe's olive industry is ruined. droughts do weaken plants and make all sorts of infections worse, but the situation with europe's olives is that the primary threat is x. fastidiosa. drought rather is a lesser contributing factor.
    2
  5739. 2
  5740. 2
  5741. 2
  5742. 2
  5743. 2
  5744. 2
  5745. 2
  5746. 2
  5747. 2
  5748. 2
  5749. 2
  5750. 2
  5751. 2
  5752. 2
  5753. 2
  5754. 2
  5755. 2
  5756. 2
  5757. 2
  5758. 2
  5759. 2
  5760. 2
  5761. 2
  5762. 2
  5763. 2
  5764. 2
  5765. 2
  5766. 2
  5767. 2
  5768. 2
  5769. 2
  5770. 2
  5771. 2
  5772. 2
  5773. 2
  5774. 2
  5775. 2
  5776. 2
  5777. 2
  5778. 2
  5779. 2
  5780. yup, pakistan is a failed state in denial. pakistan has had a taliban-equivalent islamist state within the state for a long time, you can read about it if you look up the asia bibi blasphemy case and its associated assassinations. on the other hand, pakistan is almost as much a country owned by an army as egypt is (maybe more like thailand). pakistan is enormously dependent on american aid money, while functioning as a neutral country in the war on terror if you want to be very generous, or a two-faced US enemy if you don't want to be generous (either way, it has always been and never stopped being the main state supporter of the afghan taliban, even ahead of saudi arabia). sooner or later, pakistan's islamists and army will develop a power-sharing arrangement and conduct a coalition coup. together, they hold 70-85% of the power. and the history of army-islamist collaboration in pakistan includes the bangladesh genocide with its infamous rape fatwa. what the west ought to do, or already have done, is to prepare thorough first strike plans to completely destroy pakistan's nuclear weapons and nuclear weapons production facilities in a preventative strike as soon as this coup happens. doesn't matter if it's a first aggression that kills hundreds of troops, these people are our enemies either way. a nuclear-armed army/islamist coalition junta pakistan would make iran's president raisi look like gorbachov, these people are f**ing nuts. I'm no fan of the BJP fascists in india, but they have a point with their pakistan fearmongering. to call that country a powder keg is an understatement, it's an armed nuclear bomb.
    2
  5781. 2
  5782. 2
  5783. 2
  5784. 2
  5785. 2
  5786. 2
  5787. 2
  5788. 2
  5789. 2
  5790. 2
  5791. 2
  5792. 2
  5793. 2
  5794. 2
  5795. 2
  5796. 2
  5797. 2
  5798. 2
  5799. 2
  5800. 2
  5801. 2
  5802. 2
  5803. 2
  5804. 2
  5805. 2
  5806. 2
  5807. 2
  5808. 2
  5809. 2
  5810. 2
  5811. 2
  5812. 2
  5813. 2
  5814. 2
  5815. 2
  5816. 2
  5817. 2
  5818. 2
  5819. 2
  5820. 2
  5821. 2
  5822. 2
  5823. 2
  5824. 2
  5825. 2
  5826. 2
  5827. 2
  5828. 2
  5829. 2
  5830. 2
  5831. 2
  5832. 2
  5833. 2
  5834. 2
  5835. 2
  5836. 2
  5837. 2
  5838. 2
  5839. 2
  5840. 2
  5841. 2
  5842. 2
  5843. 2
  5844. 2
  5845. to be fair, I think this company is certainly buying CITES-certified wood at a premium price, and it is possible that the overall rather small amount of wood they are using genuinely does come from particular places that practice somewhat sustainable forestry. that's just not at all what's generally happening with african blackwood, this wood is clearly being cut and exported at shockingly cheap prices and in large volumes, given how commonly it is used on very cheap chinese products in spite of the fact that by quality, rarity, and low growth speed, it is supposed to be one of the absolute most expensive woods. its hardness is nearly unrivaled (harder than ebony, about equal to snakewood), it has a very dark colour with often very attractive figure, it's arguably prettier than ebony because it's very reflective and ebony is not, and it has an exceptionally resonant sound which makes it a great wood for many kinds of instruments, like woodwinds, guitars, or xylophones. the way the chinese are using it even on garbage instruments (like 100-200$ violins) suggests that they are buying it even cheaper than they could get the much more common and faster growing macassar ebony from indonesia, or that weird spotted soft ebony from india or the brown ebony they use in vietnam. even normal african ebony should be cheaper than african blackwood, but that's clearly more expensive in china, as it's hardly ever used on cheap instruments. the chinese can't even be paying 10% of what african blackwood is worth!
    2
  5846. 2
  5847. 2
  5848. 2
  5849. 2
  5850. 2
  5851. 2
  5852. 2
  5853. 2
  5854. 2
  5855. 2
  5856. 2
  5857. 2
  5858. 2
  5859. 2
  5860. 2
  5861. 2
  5862. 2
  5863. 2
  5864. 2
  5865. 2
  5866. 2
  5867. 2
  5868. 2
  5869. 2
  5870. 2
  5871. 2
  5872. 2
  5873. 2
  5874. 2
  5875. 2
  5876. 2
  5877. 2
  5878. 2
  5879. 2
  5880. 2
  5881. 2
  5882. 2
  5883. 2
  5884. 2
  5885. 2
  5886. 2
  5887. 2
  5888. 2
  5889. 2
  5890. 2
  5891. 2
  5892. 2
  5893. 2
  5894. 2
  5895. 2
  5896. 2
  5897. 2
  5898. 2
  5899. 2
  5900. 2
  5901. 2
  5902. 2
  5903. 2
  5904. 2
  5905. 2
  5906. 2
  5907. 2
  5908. 2
  5909. 2
  5910. 2
  5911. 2
  5912. 2
  5913. 2
  5914. 2
  5915. 2
  5916. 2
  5917. 2
  5918. 2
  5919. 2
  5920. 2
  5921. 2
  5922. 2
  5923. 2
  5924. 2
  5925. 2
  5926. 2
  5927. 2
  5928. 2
  5929. 2
  5930. 2
  5931. 2
  5932. 2
  5933. 2
  5934. 2
  5935. 2
  5936. 2
  5937. 2
  5938. 2
  5939. 2
  5940. 2
  5941. 2
  5942. 2
  5943. 2
  5944. 2
  5945. 2
  5946. 2
  5947. 2
  5948. 2
  5949. 2
  5950. 2
  5951. 2
  5952. 2
  5953. 2
  5954. 2
  5955. 2
  5956. 2
  5957. 2
  5958. 2
  5959. 2
  5960. 2
  5961. 2
  5962. 2
  5963. 2
  5964. 2
  5965. 2
  5966. 2
  5967. 2
  5968. 2
  5969. 2
  5970. 2
  5971. 2
  5972. 2
  5973. 2
  5974. 2
  5975. 2
  5976. 2
  5977. 2
  5978. 2
  5979. 2
  5980. 2
  5981. 2
  5982. 2
  5983. 2
  5984. 2
  5985. 2
  5986. let's be real, ukraine will never get back crimea because the annexation of crimea specifically is too popular in russia for putin to be able to let go of it (this whole war is driven by the deluded wishes of the russian people), so that's the one territory over which nukes are somewhat likely to be used. but that absolutely does not make it appropriate to call for negotiations now, and ana is ENTIRELY wrong when she pushes the pro-russian talking point that "military aid to ukraine prevents negotiations". ukraine's military success and capabilities are the only foundation for ukraine to negotiate anything. the war will eventually have to end in negotiations, because both parties will still exist, but the size and degree of independence of ukraine after the war will be dictated by ukraine's military success and ongoing military potential. less military aid to ukraine does not mean more peace, it means more ukrainian land and people occupied by russia, and more russian control over what remains of ukraine. THAT and nothing else is what leftists are promoting when they oppose military aid to ukraine: a smaller and weaker ukraine, and a larger, stronger russia rewarded for extreme brutality. not to mention that putin has repeatedly said, even in writing, that ukraine is just the first step in rolling back all post-cold-war NATO expansion and reestablishing the russian sphere of influence, and the next european countries on that plan are the baltic states and poland, which are NATO countries and would trigger an actual world war if attacked by russia, so it is absurd to think that appeasing putin in ukraine would produce a more peaceful world.
    2
  5987. 2
  5988. 2
  5989. 2
  5990. 2
  5991. 2
  5992. 2
  5993. 2
  5994. 2
  5995. 2
  5996. 2
  5997. 2
  5998. 2
  5999. 2
  6000. 2
  6001. 2
  6002. 2
  6003. 2
  6004. 2
  6005. 2
  6006. 2
  6007. 2
  6008. 2
  6009. 2
  6010. 2
  6011. 2
  6012. 2
  6013. 2
  6014. 2
  6015. 2
  6016. 2
  6017. 2
  6018. 2
  6019. 2
  6020. 2
  6021. 2
  6022. 2
  6023. 2
  6024. 2
  6025. 2
  6026. 2
  6027. 2
  6028. 2
  6029. 2
  6030. 2
  6031. 2
  6032. 2
  6033. 2
  6034. 2
  6035. 2
  6036. 2
  6037. 2
  6038. 2
  6039. 2
  6040. 2
  6041. 2
  6042. 2
  6043. 2
  6044. 2
  6045. 2
  6046. 2
  6047. 2
  6048. 2
  6049. 2
  6050. 2
  6051. 2
  6052. 2
  6053. 2
  6054. 2
  6055. 2
  6056. 2
  6057. 2
  6058. 2
  6059. 2
  6060. 2
  6061. 2
  6062. 2
  6063. 2
  6064. 2
  6065. 2
  6066. Plane Drifter I'm not denying a conspiracy. the virus accidentally escaped from the wuhan institute of virology and there was a massive coverup by the chinese government with the assistance of the WHO and possibly some complicity of the US national instutute of health that was involved with coronavirus research in wuhan. that doesn't change that this is a very dangerous pandemic that is mutating and becoming more dangerous. the officially advocated and mandated prevention measures are very reasonsble and very effective, including lockdowns, contact reduction, face masks, and vaccines. all these things have very good risk-benefit ratios, including all of the common vaccines except perhaps the chinese ones. there is no problem of too strict government control measures, the problem is that they are not strict enough. the most reasonable way to handle covid is to push the infections down to zero, put all international travellers in government-administered hotel quarantine, and jump on every single covid case like an autistic person with OCD. the positive examples are mostly asian nations and primarily new zealand, taiwan, vietnam and china (after january 2020 xD), and to some extent singapore, south korea and japan, even though all of them except so far for NZ are now struggling against the delta variant because it necessitates good access to effective vaccines in combination with their previously effective measures, which none of them have had. new zealand locking down right now after a single case of presumed delta covid following six infection free months is a perfect example of correct covid management. the strictest control measures provide the population with the greatest freedoms and economic prosperity combined with nobody dying or living in fear.
    2
  6067. 2
  6068. 2
  6069. 2
  6070. 2
  6071. 2
  6072. 2
  6073. 2
  6074. 2
  6075. 2
  6076. 2
  6077. 2
  6078. 2
  6079. 2
  6080. 2
  6081. 2
  6082. 2
  6083. 2
  6084. 2
  6085. 2
  6086. 2
  6087. 2
  6088. 2
  6089. 2
  6090. 2
  6091. 2
  6092. 2
  6093. 2
  6094. 2
  6095. 2
  6096. 2
  6097. 2
  6098. 2
  6099. 2
  6100. 2
  6101. 2
  6102. 2
  6103. 2
  6104. 2
  6105. 2
  6106. 2
  6107. 2
  6108. 2
  6109. pumping up groundwater for livestock and crops in remoteplaces like that would be a great application for solar power. using ponds or tanks for water storage would make batteries unnecessary, as the pump could just run whenever the sun is shining until the tank or pump is full. thewater storage could also be equipped with a float switch to only connect the pump and solar panels when the water level is lower than desired, but that qould probably find little use except apecifically for herders, who unlike farmers would have more use for a watering pond farther away from home. but they'd probably only do that in particularly secure regions, as the aolar panels and pumps would be very attractive to thieves. plus having the setup in the village has thepractical benefit of mounting the solar panels on roofs awy from animals. and if you do give such villagers at least a wmall battery setup, that can be highly beneficial in enabling amall electronics use. some villages with no utilities connection do actually have some level of cellphone connectivity, and combining that with solar charge can provide the only option for (slow) internet access. in those cases, preferably combined with a laptop, getting any level of internet connectivity can also be very helpful for children's education. and yes, many of these people an afford to buy some cheaper options of electronic devices such as smartphones. particularly the herders, as each head of cattle even in such poor countries is worth something in the ballpark of the high hundreds to low thousands of dollars.
    2
  6110. 2
  6111. 2
  6112. 2
  6113. 2
  6114. 2
  6115. 2
  6116. 2
  6117. 2
  6118. 2
  6119. 2
  6120. 2
  6121. 2
  6122. 2
  6123. 2
  6124. 2
  6125. 2
  6126. 2
  6127. 2
  6128. 2
  6129. 2
  6130. 2
  6131. 2
  6132. 2
  6133. 2
  6134. 2
  6135. 2
  6136. 2
  6137. 2
  6138. 2
  6139. 2
  6140. 2
  6141. 2
  6142. 2
  6143. 2
  6144. 2
  6145. 2
  6146. 2
  6147. 2
  6148. 2
  6149. 2
  6150. 2
  6151. 2
  6152. 2
  6153. 2
  6154. 2
  6155. 2
  6156. 2
  6157. 2
  6158. 2
  6159. 2
  6160. 2
  6161. 2
  6162. 2
  6163. 2
  6164. 2
  6165. 2
  6166. 2
  6167. 2
  6168. 2
  6169. 2
  6170. 2
  6171. 2
  6172. 2
  6173. 2
  6174. 2
  6175. 2
  6176. 2
  6177. 2
  6178. geno°°°e is not a lesser evil. biden is providing truly the maximum of support to i-country that any president could. he has broken the law multiple times to supply weapons not just without congressional approval but without informing congress about the content of the shipments, which is only permissable in the name of an urgent US national security need - and US national security is clearly impacted negatively, and one could not possibly make an argument for it being impacted positively. he has also conducted hundreds of strikes against ir°nian allies in ir°q, sy°°a and y°°en, stoking war against ir°n without congressional approval for the US to go to war. with a reasonable congress actually applying the constitution, there is no question that biden would be removed by impeachment for this. besides the net benefit of, if trump wins, likely having one inept republican presidential term and then two somewhat less conservative democratic terms (because the DNC will have been shown that biden was not good enough), as opposed to having one inept conservative democratic term followed by likely two more competent republican terms if biden wins this year, I also believe it is extremely likely that trump would be at least a little BETTER for pal°°°ine than biden. during his first term, trump was arguably worse, but where biden is a true believer, trump bases his international engagement on personal sympathies, and he has grown to really really dislike ne°°°yahu because of his pathological disrespect. that interview audio released in october revealed it very clearly, that was trump expressing very sincere views. trump requires strong men he respects to flatter him and treat him like one of them, and ne°°°yahu failed to keep up that act because pretending to be respectful goes against his nature. at the same time, abbas did it so well that trump spoke in exceptionally positive terms of him, calling him warm and fatherly (very weird, but that's trump). I believe trump would broadly follow republican politics as usual, but unlike biden, his support would be unreliable, and he would not be able to stop himself from occasionally lashing out at the many gestures of disrespect produced by i-country. and that already would be better than what biden is doing.
    2
  6179. 2
  6180. 2
  6181. 2
  6182. 2
  6183. 2
  6184. 2
  6185. 2
  6186. fun fact: part of the long history of haitian migrants being treated distinctly worse by america than all others is that the original version of the prison within the guantanamo bay US military base was created in the 90s as a concentration camp specifically for haitian migrants outside of US jurisdiction in order to deny them any asylum processing and access to a legal system. it took american NGOs swveral years of lawsuits to get the first lawyers in, and a few more years for the practice to become untenable for the US government. nowadays, most noteably australia does the same thing within a more solid legal framework: any migrant arriving in australia illegally by boat gets officially banned from entering australia for life, and are given the choice to either "voluntarily" return to their home countries, or be indefinitely locked up in migrant concentration camps mostly located outside of australia via treaties with australian satellite states like nauru and formerly papua new guinea, which agree to deny the detainees any human rights that the australian governmenttells them to deny. there are no exceptions for children or anyone, in fact australia's governments have been extremely strict in never letting anyone so banned from australianoff the hook in order to avoid setting any precedent. in global comparison, it's one of the most severe violations, as far as official policies go, of the refugee conventions that australia is supposedly committed to. but as far as national laws are concerned, it works, so whatever. it's one of the ways in which, unnoticed by most people, australia still has the most severe institutional racism among first world white-majority countries, despite the white australia policy officially being no longer in force. it's not for nothing that most white south africans in pursuit of the good old days move to australia.
    2
  6187. 2
  6188. 2
  6189. 2
  6190. 2
  6191. 2
  6192. 2
  6193. 2
  6194. 2
  6195. 2
  6196. 2
  6197. 2
  6198. 2
  6199. 2
  6200. 2
  6201. 2
  6202. 2
  6203. 2
  6204. 2
  6205. 2
  6206. 2
  6207. 2
  6208. 2
  6209. 2
  6210. 2
  6211. 2
  6212. 2
  6213. 2
  6214. 2
  6215. 2
  6216. 2
  6217. 2
  6218. 2
  6219. 2
  6220. 2
  6221. 2
  6222. 2
  6223. 2
  6224. 2
  6225. 2
  6226. 2
  6227. 2
  6228. 2
  6229. 2
  6230. 2
  6231. 2
  6232. typical is°°el-allied state TV. why do I even bother to watch this? it's so uninformative it's practically disinformation. 🙄 every honest and attentive observer by now knows that there was a planned and deliberate act of the isr°°li army command to step back to let the ham°ssacre occur to create a pretext for the gaza ghetto liquidation. it took them six hours to mount a counterattack - that can NOT be explained by the failure of a local observation system! they have drones flying out of bases that were not affected, and they had plenty of radio communications left. they knew exactly what was happening, and there was no excuse for not acting at all for six hours. you did not ask the one question that has been at the forefront of every survivor's mind, what they were all already asking on october 7th: where was the army? how could there be so few soldiers at and near the border, and just how few were there? the fact that you left the "we will investigate after the war" unchallenged is ridiculous. what, are the same people who would do the investigating all so busy right now that it can't be done? or does the army command PERHAPS know that an investigation would likely uncover the obvious fact that they deliberately let this happen as a pretext, and that fact would invalidate the exvuse for their ongoing genocide? 15:16 this guy for one knows that it was a setup, his pokerface is sh°°. he says the border wasn't built to withstand an "army" - which again you left unchallenged. no, of course it was built to withstand h°mas. they knew that this group has tens of thousands of fighters. the fence was built to function UNDER GUARD! of course it wasn't supposed to withstand all attacks with practically no troops there, it was set up like any military fortification, to assist soldiers in defence! WHERE WERE THE SOLDIERS, HOW MANY WERE THERE, WHO ORDERED THEM AWAY, AND WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE DELAY?!
    2
  6233. 2
  6234. 2
  6235. 2
  6236. 2
  6237. 2
  6238. 2
  6239. 2
  6240. 2
  6241. 2
  6242. 2
  6243. 2
  6244. 2
  6245. 2
  6246. 2
  6247. 2
  6248. 2
  6249. 2
  6250. 2
  6251. 2
  6252. 2
  6253. 2
  6254. 2
  6255. 2
  6256. 2
  6257. 2
  6258. 2
  6259. 2
  6260. 2
  6261. 2
  6262. 2
  6263. 2
  6264. 2
  6265. 2
  6266. 2
  6267. 2
  6268. 2
  6269. 2
  6270. 2
  6271. 2
  6272. 2
  6273. 2
  6274. 2
  6275. 2
  6276. 2
  6277. 2
  6278. 2
  6279. 2
  6280. 2
  6281. 2
  6282. 2
  6283. 2
  6284. 2
  6285. 2
  6286. 2
  6287. 2
  6288. 2
  6289. 2
  6290. 2
  6291. 2
  6292. 2
  6293. 2
  6294. 2
  6295. 2
  6296. 2
  6297. 2
  6298. 2
  6299. 2
  6300. 2
  6301. 2
  6302. 2
  6303. 2
  6304. 2
  6305. 2
  6306. 2
  6307. 2
  6308. 2
  6309. 2
  6310. 2
  6311. 2
  6312. 2
  6313. 2
  6314. 2
  6315. 2
  6316. 2
  6317. 2
  6318. 2
  6319. 2
  6320. 2
  6321. 2
  6322. 2
  6323. 2
  6324. 2
  6325. 2
  6326. 2
  6327. 2
  6328. 2
  6329. 2
  6330. 2
  6331. 2
  6332. 2
  6333. 2
  6334. 2
  6335. 2
  6336. 2
  6337. 2
  6338. 2
  6339. 2
  6340. 2
  6341. 2
  6342. 2
  6343. 2
  6344. 2
  6345. 2
  6346. 2
  6347. 2
  6348. 2
  6349. 2
  6350. 2
  6351. 2
  6352. 2
  6353. 2
  6354. 2
  6355. 2
  6356. 2
  6357. 2
  6358. 2
  6359. 2
  6360. 2
  6361. 2
  6362. 2
  6363. 2
  6364. 2
  6365. 2
  6366. 2
  6367. 2
  6368. 2
  6369. 2
  6370. 2
  6371. 2
  6372. 2
  6373. 2
  6374. 2
  6375. 2
  6376. 2
  6377. 2
  6378. 2
  6379. 2
  6380. 2
  6381. 2
  6382. 2
  6383. 2
  6384. 2
  6385. 2
  6386. 2
  6387. 2
  6388. 2
  6389. 2
  6390. 2
  6391. 2
  6392. 2
  6393. 2
  6394. 2
  6395. 2
  6396. 2
  6397. 2
  6398. 2
  6399. the term "minors" is not dehumanising, it is the only normal term in actual language use to refer to all non-adults. the term "children" refers to all non-adults only in legalese and in news reports that misleadingly adopt legalese to refer to minors affected by wars or other condemned political matters. it's also commonly done in grandstanding or hatemongering references to sexual crimes (though there at least the connection to the legalese is more direct). otherwise, in non-condemnatory contexts, nobody refers to all minors as children, instead the age cutoff is around 12-14. legalese: children: 0-18 adults: 18+ nornally used language: minors: 0-18 children: 0-12/14 teenagers: 13-19 youths:13/15-20/25 toddlers: 2-4 infants/babies: 0-2 ("babies" is also commonly used as an expression of enotionality to refer to older or much older minors - as a rule of thumb, if the kid can say "I'm not a baby", it isn't) officially, israel's occupation military court system is not supposed to lock up kids under 12. objective terminology and phrasing that would make sense for news reporting would for example be "minors, including children under [15/14/13, depending on where you're inclined to draw the line]". for older minors, referring to them as "minors" would generally he considered accurate enough. if one wants to use one term for actual children and one for older minors that don't overlap, the most sensible categories to adopt and consistently use are "children under 13" and "teenage minors".
    2
  6400. 2
  6401. 2
  6402. 2
  6403. 2
  6404. 2
  6405. 2
  6406. 2
  6407. 2
  6408. 2
  6409. 2
  6410. 2
  6411. 2
  6412. 2
  6413. 2
  6414. 2
  6415. 2
  6416. 2
  6417. 2
  6418. 2
  6419. 2
  6420. 2
  6421. 2
  6422. 2
  6423. 2
  6424. 2
  6425. 2
  6426. 2
  6427. 2
  6428. 2
  6429. 2
  6430. 2
  6431. 2
  6432. 2
  6433. 2
  6434. 2
  6435. 2
  6436. 2
  6437. 2
  6438. 2
  6439. 2
  6440. 2
  6441. 2
  6442. 2
  6443. 2
  6444. 2
  6445. 2
  6446. 2
  6447. 2
  6448. 2
  6449. 2
  6450. 2
  6451. 2
  6452. 2
  6453. 2
  6454. 2
  6455. 2
  6456. 2
  6457. 2
  6458. 2
  6459. 2
  6460. 2
  6461. 2
  6462. 2
  6463. 2
  6464. 2
  6465. 2
  6466. 2
  6467. 2
  6468. 2
  6469. 2
  6470. 2
  6471. 2
  6472. 2
  6473. 2
  6474. 2
  6475. 2
  6476. 2
  6477. 2
  6478. 2
  6479. 2
  6480. 2
  6481. 2
  6482. 2
  6483. 2
  6484. 2
  6485. 2
  6486. 2
  6487. 2
  6488. 2
  6489. 2
  6490. 2
  6491. 2
  6492. 2
  6493. this particular big war is and will be unpopular with russians, but russians absolutely share responsibility for the whole thing happening because they have been supportive of military aggression all throughout putin's reign. in recent weeks before the invasion, putin's approval has been rising considerably to 70%. immediately after the annexation of crimea, it was much higher at 90% or so (until the sanctions brought it down lower than it was before crimea). the russian people wanted aggressive posturing to extort concessions, and perhaps annexation of the donbass. they did not want a full invasion of ukraine, but they supported the buildup to it. they did not take the situation nearly as seriously as they should have. western sanctions have been VERY weak (like the US only sanctioning separatist territories after the russian independence recognition and donbass invasion announcement) and this weakness probably contributed to the ultimate go-ahead of the full invasion. there have to be much tougher sanctions now, and the russian people should have considered that there was real risk to their own economic standing, too. they just expected to win the extortion game and considered neither the other side's well-being nor the possibility of this escalation. at this point, they deserve worse sanctions than what's likely to happen, given the western backpedaling on SWIFT. putin has been calling the west on what so far appears to have been a bluff when they threatened the worst sanctions ever.
    2
  6494. 2
  6495. 2
  6496. 2
  6497. 2
  6498. 2
  6499. 2
  6500. 2
  6501. 2
  6502. 2
  6503. 2
  6504. 2
  6505. 2
  6506. 2
  6507. 2
  6508. 2
  6509. 2
  6510. 2
  6511. 2
  6512. 2
  6513. 2
  6514. 2
  6515. 2
  6516. 2
  6517. 2
  6518. 2
  6519. 2
  6520. 2
  6521. 2
  6522. 2
  6523. 2
  6524. 2
  6525. 2
  6526. 2
  6527. 2
  6528. 2
  6529. 2
  6530. 2
  6531. 2
  6532. 2
  6533. 2
  6534. 2
  6535. 2
  6536. 2
  6537. 2
  6538. 2
  6539. 2
  6540. 2
  6541. 2
  6542.  @aycc-nbh7289  yes, the geneva conventions apply in palestine because the palestinian authority ratified them, and partially also because parts are considered universal customary law. jurisdiction is defined in relation to territory, not to the enemy one claims to be fighting against. the military value of a target must be high in proportion to the civilian collateral damage to justify striking it, regardless of whether those civilians are actively used as human shields. and there is zero military value to israel's ground forces shutting down al shifa by kicking everybody out days after invading it. at that point they had plenty of ability to distinguish, and had the obligation and the ability to restart operations of al shifa and other hospitals under its control. the IDF itself says that it faced no resistance while entering al shifa - yet they were firing tank shells and bullets at hospital buildings all around, and inside they tossed and tore open equipment and breached doors and walls with explosives. well, they're also known for avoiding open streets during parts of their raids by blasting their way through the walls of occupied homes one by one - which by the way, besides disproportionately harming civilians, also is deliberate human shielding. the same goes for israel's ubiquitously common practice of invading any palestinian home in the west bank that happens to be in an opportune location, blast open walls as needed, and make those homes into firing positions while detaining the inhabitants inside. though in gaza today, I suppose they are more likely to just murder them.
    2
  6543. 2
  6544. 2
  6545. 2
  6546. 2
  6547. 2
  6548. 2
  6549. 2
  6550. 2
  6551. 2
  6552. 2
  6553. 2
  6554. 2
  6555. 2
  6556. 2
  6557. 2
  6558. 2
  6559. 2
  6560. 2
  6561. 2
  6562. 2
  6563. 2
  6564. 2
  6565. 2
  6566. 2
  6567. 2
  6568. 2
  6569. 2
  6570. 2
  6571. 2
  6572. 2
  6573. 2
  6574. 2
  6575. 2
  6576. 2
  6577. 2
  6578. 2
  6579. 2
  6580. 2
  6581. 2
  6582. 2
  6583. 2
  6584. 2
  6585. 2
  6586. 2
  6587. 2
  6588. 2
  6589. 2
  6590. 2
  6591. 2
  6592. 2
  6593. 2
  6594. 2
  6595. 2
  6596. 2
  6597. 2
  6598. 2
  6599. 2
  6600. 2
  6601. 2
  6602. 2
  6603. 2
  6604. 2
  6605. 2
  6606. 2
  6607. 2
  6608. 2
  6609. 2
  6610. 2
  6611. 2
  6612. 2
  6613. 2
  6614. 2
  6615. 2
  6616. 2
  6617. 2
  6618. 2
  6619. 2
  6620. 2
  6621. 2
  6622. 2
  6623. 2
  6624. 2
  6625. 2
  6626. 2
  6627. 2
  6628. 2
  6629. 2
  6630. 2
  6631. that's because you were not listening whatsoever. this segment is actually very densely packed with information compared to the usual covid coverage. what I got from this video alone: twice AZ or pfizer vaccinated people can get delta covid and get dangerously sick from it, but are still much less likely to get it than the unvaccinated and less likely to get very sick if they do get it. vaccinated people that DO get infected very notably have equivalent viral loads to unvaccinated people in their upper respiratory system, suggesting that they are likely equally infectious as non-vaccinated infected people. this is a stark difference to the previously prevalent alpha variant, with which vaccinated people had very low chances of infecting others. immunity after just one shot of either one of the vaccines is much lower for delta than for previous variants, making second shots more cucial. the moderna vaccine is somewhat of an outlier, providing better protection after just one shot than just one shot of the other vaccines. immunity levels develop differently over time after vaccination depending on the vaccine type. AZ immunity does not decrease with time but starts lower, pfizer starts higher but decreases over time and provides equal protection to AZ after about 5 months. due to the decreasing immunity, pfizer vaccine recipients may be considered more reasonable candidates for third doses at some point. meanwhile you watched this video and you heard... nothing? that's on you, buddy. that's very much on you.
    2
  6632. 2
  6633. 2
  6634. 2
  6635. 2
  6636. 2
  6637. 2
  6638. 2
  6639. 2
  6640. 2
  6641. 2
  6642. 2
  6643. 2
  6644. 2
  6645. 2
  6646. 2
  6647. 2
  6648. 2
  6649. 2
  6650. 2
  6651. 2
  6652. 2
  6653. 2
  6654. 2
  6655. 2
  6656. 2
  6657. 2
  6658. 2
  6659. 2
  6660. 2
  6661. 2
  6662. 2
  6663. 2
  6664. 2
  6665. 2
  6666. 2
  6667. 2
  6668. 2
  6669. 2
  6670. 2
  6671. 2
  6672. 2
  6673. 2
  6674. 2
  6675. 2
  6676. 2
  6677. 2
  6678. 2
  6679. 2
  6680. 2
  6681. 2
  6682. 2
  6683. 2
  6684. 2
  6685. 2
  6686. 2
  6687. 2
  6688. 2
  6689. 2
  6690. 2
  6691. 2
  6692. 2
  6693. 2
  6694. 2
  6695. 2
  6696. 2
  6697. 2
  6698. 2
  6699. 2
  6700. 2
  6701. 2
  6702. 2
  6703. 2
  6704. 2
  6705. die anmahnung von völkerrecht und menschenrechten als besserwisserei darzustellen ist echt ein starkes brett. der beste zeitpunk dafür ist JEDER zeitpunkt, zu dem diese gebrochen werden. kriegsverbrechen passieren nicht in gemütlichen friedenszeiten und unter freunden, wenn alle entspannt miteinander reden können. dass die israelische blockade jetzt wasser, nahrung, strom, treibstoff, medizin, wirklich alles umfasst ist ein glasklarer angriff auf primär die zivilbevölkerung in gaza, denn die allermeisten leute da sind ja zivilisten. das bombardement ist wahrscheinlich das schwerste, das den gazastreifen je getroffen hat (ist auch so angesagt). vor drei tagen meldete die IDF, tausend tonnen fliegerbomben abgeworfen zu haben, also raketen und artilleriegeschosse nicht mitgezählt. seitdem ist das bombardement nur noch stärker geworden, und damit ist die gesamtmasse mitlerweile wohl mindestens dreimal so hoch, also dreitausend tonnen fliegerbomben plus artillerie und raketen. zum vergleich: die bombenmasse, die die briten in der operation gomorrah auf hamburg abwarfen, war pro nacht maximal 2300 tonnen. im hafen von beirut lagerten zwar offiziell 2700 tonnen ammoniumnitrat (mMn wahrscheinlich viel weniger weil die hisbollah sich das unter den nagel gerissen hat, und das war auch der grund weshalb es im sehr korrupten hafen von beirut bleiben musste), die tatsächliche detonation entsprach aber laut expertenmeinungen nur etwa 500-1000 tonnen. eine einzige explosion richtet aber sehr viel weniger schaden an, als wenn man bomben einzeln in oder unter gebäuden platziert, das ist auch das prinzip der streumunition und der merhfachsprengköpfe an atomraketen. wer glaubt, dass israel für so viel sprengkraft in fünf tagen einzelne legitime ziele gefunden hat, der glaubt wohl auch noch an den weihnachtsmann. ein legitimes ziel ist für israel übrigens zum beispiel offiziell wenn in einem wohnblock ein hamas-mitglied wohnt, oder eine sonstige in ihrer art oder größe nicht weiter erläuterte und niemals mit veröffentlichten beweisen belegte präsenz der hamas festgestellt wird. dann müssen halt hunderte menschen ihr zuhause und alles hab und gut verlieren. weil israel die moralischste armee der welt ist, sagt man den bewohnern bescheid. kleine bombe aufs dach, bewohner anrufen: "knock knock" - "who's there?" - "hier spricht israel, in einer stunde machen wir ihr haus platt, bitte verlassen sie es zum schutz unserer statistik!" im aktuellen krieg sinds auch gerne mal 20 minuten. wenn jemand gerade nicht zuhause ist und noch gern papiere, geld oder haustiere rausgeholt hätte, pech gehabt. das durch netanjahu erklärte kriegsziel ist explizit genozidal: ganz gaza in schutt und asche legen und komplett entvölkern (zu einer "verlassenen insel" zu machen). besserwisser würden sagen, dass das, und völkermord überhaupt, gegen das verbot von kollektivstrafen und das verhältnismäßigkeitsprinzip verstößt. aber besserwisserei ist ja nicht deutsche staatsräson, also lassen wir das lieber. dann sollen sie halt den gazastraifen verlassen wie israel sagt - israel lässt sie zwar nicht über land raus und sperrt die küste, und nach ägypten gehts nur mit einzelantrag, aber hey, das mittelmeer ist doch bestimmt noch schön warm zu dieser jahreszeit! ich würd mal sagen: es gab nie einen besseren zeitpunkt, um schwimmen zu lernen. falls sich ägypten doch überzeugen lässt, den leuten aus gaza die umwandlung des todes zur vertreibung anzubieten, dann kennt man zwar von israel, dass es nach massenvetreibungen die palästinenser nicht zurückkehren lässt. aber palästina ist halt kein ponyhof. warum leben diese meschuggene leute auch im kriegsgebiet?
    2
  6706. 2
  6707. 2
  6708. 2
  6709. 2
  6710. 2
  6711. 2
  6712. 2
  6713. 2
  6714. 2
  6715. 2
  6716. 2
  6717. 2
  6718. 2
  6719. 2
  6720. 2
  6721. 2
  6722. 2
  6723. 2
  6724. 2
  6725. 2
  6726. 2
  6727. 2
  6728. 2
  6729. 2
  6730. 2
  6731. 2
  6732. 2
  6733. jon stewart's latest pal°°°ine segment was straight up disinformation, pushing all the old cycle of violence, religion as the caus complicated history, history doesn't matter just look forward, no partner for peace pr°°aganda points. he repeatedly misrepresented the p°°°stinian position and that of h°m°s as far less willing to compromise than they actually are while pretending that on the other side, the extreme hatred is just a fringe opinion of the right, and then he brought on a j°°ish american and a pal°°°inian american journalist do somehow supposedly provide fair representation, but really it was just three american supporters of i-country's statehood presenting different flavours of the same message of americanism. the closest thing to challenging anything presented that the pa°°°inian american guy did was to point out that they're all american, without actually calling out the false presentation of balance. he said almost nothing and his eyes just glazed over while listening to all of the z°°nist tropes that were already weak when jon stewart was put in the time capsule 9 years ago. maybe it's the same as jon stewart's coverage of this topic has always been, but I would argue that it sticks out more now because the situation is very different. either way, that latest show was worse than useless, it was actively and deliberately harmful. jon stewart just can not help himself, he has to carve out a way to present i-country as potentially the good guys or the morally equivalent guys, so he paints the standard western pro-i-country picture without even a trace of acknowledgement of the colonial nature of the state. really, the main point of that show was to present an enlightened centrist position for people to imitate, which asserts without evidence that i-country can do better and be great again, and acknowledges in the vaguest of terms that it is committing atrocities, but demands hardly anything beyond a return to the status quo with no particular urgency beyond reestablishing the supply of goods to g°z° to meet the ground level of the people's hierarchy of needs. basically to restore living conditions to a level that would be considered humane for livestock - and then i-country will be good again.
    2
  6734. 2
  6735. 2
  6736. 2
  6737. 2
  6738. 2
  6739. 2
  6740. 2
  6741. 2
  6742. 2
  6743. 2
  6744. 2
  6745. 2
  6746. 2
  6747. 2
  6748. 2
  6749. 2
  6750. 2
  6751. 2
  6752. 2
  6753. 2
  6754. I'm german, and I'm hoping for a good english language report from aljazeera or the like covering the german media environment and political discourse around this, specifically how absurdly germany's traditions of hol°°°ust remembrance are being twisted, practically inverted, by seemingly absolutely everyone invoking them - the real core of it is supposed to be, in the name of honouring the victims of n°°i crimes, to oppose institutional rac°°m and gen°°ide and promote awareness and prevention explicitly regardless of who is the victim and who is the perpetrator ('it could happen here/it could happen anywhere', that sort of thing), and to reject the common and counterproductive division of the world into inherently bad guys (them) and inherently good guys (us) who would never do such a thing. there has not been a single time that I have seen this be presented correctly in german media or political discourse since the ham°sscre. instead it is universally supplanted with the assertion that germany's historical obligation (and, as merkel introduced, "reason of state") is to support is°°el, and that's it, no further elaboration. but not, as you would have found written in any sober mention thereof, to support is°°°l in its intended function as a safe haven for j°°s, but instead to back whatever the current i°°°eli government chooses to do. even though most germans and particularly most in the current centrist/green/liberal governing coalition would otherwise say that waging w°° on isla°°st t°°ror groups tends to backfire due to collateral damage causing more resistance, and this at levels of collateral damage at least an order of magnitude smaller than what is happening in g°°a. almost everybody here on paper should be intellectually equipped to understand that is°°°l's actions are making is°°°l and j°°s around the world LESS safe. but this thought seems to be taboo, because it goes against the misrepresented german historical obligation, which functions as a third rail of antis°°°tism, so people block out the thought and profess support for isr°°° instead. the concept of differentiating between anti°°°itism and criticism of i°°ael is also itself routinely explicitly or implicitly branded as anti°°°itism, by claiming that anti°°°ites use it as a cover - which is again an inversion of the genuine position of opposing anti°°°itism, which recognises that the antis°°°tic or harmful thing to do is to blame j°°s abroad for the actions of i°°°el, or invite this blame by promoting the association in order to employ j°°°s as human shields for i°°°°°, to divert discussions of i°°°el into discussions about the safety of german j°°s, whivh is done by various media many times every day at the moment. [°°° done for youtube f°°ter, not a german custom xD]
    2
  6755.  @hozenT.  neither, but one grandfather and great-grandmother were interned as half je°°sh and j°°ish respectively, can you beat that? 🙄 I'm certainly familiar with multigenerational holo°°°st trauma and the j°°ish/zi°°ist victimhood complex. I grew up damn near thinking I was j°°ish because of the obsessive self-identification with that part of my family and with victimisation by the third reich that my mother instilled in me at least as early as first grade, which she had developed out of her attempts to feel connected to her father, who had died in his 50s when she was 6, according to her from the long term physical health impacts of his still relatively lucky 3/4 year internment (both he and his mother only got caught in mid-1944) - for which he was denied state compensation for being damaged goods to begin with because he had a pre-war record of psychiatric treatment. I am much more f°°king familiar with holo°°°st remembrance than 95% of germans and I hold it in high regard despite my version of it involving frequent childhood nightmares of conce°°°ation camps and pogr°ms. by the same logic according to which remembrance for the purpose of prevention is the best way to honour the dead, I am sickened by the current inversion of the practice into a method of deception and defamation employed in support of an ongoing gen°°ide. I had not previously realised that the general public's education on the matter was so fundamentally inadequate that it would allow for this distortion to occur unchallenged. I knew that too many were unable to argue against the standard rightoid misrepresentation of the tradition as hereditary guilt, but what's happening now is more bizarre and ought to be obvious to most.
    2
  6756. 2
  6757. 2
  6758. 2
  6759. 2
  6760. 2
  6761. 2
  6762. 2
  6763. 2
  6764. 2
  6765. 2
  6766. 2
  6767. 2
  6768. 2
  6769. 2
  6770. 2
  6771. 2
  6772. 2
  6773. 2
  6774. 2
  6775. 2
  6776. 2
  6777. 2
  6778. 2
  6779. 2
  6780. 2
  6781. 2
  6782. 2
  6783. 2
  6784. 2
  6785. 2
  6786. 2
  6787. 2
  6788. 2
  6789. 2
  6790. 2
  6791. 2
  6792. 2
  6793. 2
  6794. 2
  6795. you were kind of unreasonably judgmental of and hostile towards soldiers here, and you set up the more cautious interviewees to decide to not say anything critical. while war normalising violence and murder and leaving soldiers more open to that after the war is a big part of the problem, the main issue (as some of the interviewees pointed out more or less) are not the veterans' continued violent behaviour, but the mental illnesses resulting from their trauma, such as PTSD. that's what made those veterans unattractive as employees and likely to commit suicide, not that they were violent. you should have brought that up first in the interviews to give a better impression that you were trying to be fair, not to make a video equating most russian soldiers to gangsters, which is highly illegal, and as such not a project one should participate in. and in terms of veterans being violent, the main problem is not that a small portion of them become gangsters, but that a very large portion of them commit acts of domestic violence. more than before, I mean. basically the PTSD makes them more russian - they become more emotionally dysregulated, drink more, and beat their wives and kids more. with the afghan war, I bet a lot of them also brought back opium and heroin habits (and hash habits, but whatever), like the americans did from vietnam. using illegal drugs back home was probably a very common way they came in contact with organised crime, and most likely some soldiers set up their own smuggling networks from afghanistan because they saw that many of their comrades were going to need a supply in russia, and the shared war experience made it very easy to form sufficiently trusting relationships to commit crimes with.
    2
  6796. 2
  6797. 2
  6798. 2
  6799. 2
  6800. 2
  6801. 2
  6802. 2
  6803. 2
  6804. 2
  6805. 2
  6806. 2
  6807. 2
  6808. 2
  6809. 2
  6810. 2
  6811. 2
  6812. 2
  6813. 2
  6814. 2
  6815. 2
  6816. 2
  6817. 2
  6818. 2
  6819. 2
  6820. 2
  6821. 2
  6822. 2
  6823. 2
  6824. 2
  6825. 2
  6826. 2
  6827. 2
  6828. 2
  6829. 2
  6830. 2
  6831. 2
  6832. 2
  6833. 2
  6834. 2
  6835. 2
  6836. 2
  6837. 2
  6838. 2
  6839. 2
  6840. 2
  6841. 2
  6842. 2
  6843. 2
  6844. 2
  6845. 2
  6846. 2
  6847. 2
  6848. 2
  6849. 2
  6850. 2
  6851. 2
  6852. 2
  6853. 2
  6854. 2
  6855. 2
  6856. 2
  6857. 2
  6858. 2
  6859. 2
  6860. 2
  6861. 2
  6862. 2
  6863. 2
  6864. 2
  6865. 2
  6866. 2
  6867. 2
  6868. 2
  6869. 2
  6870. 2
  6871. 2
  6872. 2
  6873. 2
  6874. 2
  6875. 2
  6876. 2
  6877. 2
  6878. 2
  6879. 2
  6880. 2
  6881. 2
  6882. 2
  6883. 2
  6884. 2
  6885. 2
  6886. 2
  6887. 2
  6888. 2
  6889. 2
  6890. 2
  6891. 2
  6892. 2
  6893. 2
  6894. 2
  6895. 2
  6896. 2
  6897. 2
  6898. 2
  6899. 2
  6900. 2
  6901. 2
  6902. 2
  6903. 2
  6904. 2
  6905. 2
  6906. 2
  6907. 2
  6908. 2
  6909. 2
  6910. 2
  6911. 2
  6912. 2
  6913. 2
  6914. 2
  6915. 2
  6916. 2
  6917. 2
  6918. 2
  6919. 2
  6920. 2
  6921. 2
  6922. 2
  6923. 2
  6924. 2
  6925. 2
  6926. 2
  6927. 2
  6928. 2
  6929. 2
  6930. 2
  6931. 2
  6932. 2
  6933. 2
  6934. 2
  6935. 2
  6936. 2
  6937. 2
  6938. 2
  6939. 2
  6940. 2
  6941. 2
  6942. 2
  6943. 2
  6944. 2
  6945. 2
  6946. 2
  6947. 2
  6948. 2
  6949. 2
  6950. 2
  6951. 2
  6952. 2
  6953. 2
  6954. 2
  6955. 2
  6956. 2
  6957. 2
  6958. 2
  6959. 2
  6960. 2
  6961. 2
  6962. 2
  6963. 2
  6964. 2
  6965. 2
  6966. 2
  6967. Kris R the cure for stupidity like trumpism or putinism is decades of non-terrible education, so america is doomed. ironically the US was probably the driving force in the quite successful denazification of germany. german education isn't great either, but at least the prominent featuring of nazi history throughout several school years does communicate quite well that being the good guys or the bad guys is more complicated than "we're the good guys, those who oppose us are bad", and that anyone can be deceived into joining the bad guys. germans and other europeans have been making fun of the US for that we're-the-good-guys attitude long before trump, our perception of america is basically the movie team america - world police. well, we're now finally realizing that we've been overdoing it with the pacifism (which I guess I was a bit ahead of the curve with, since I thought it was a disastrous and disgusting betrayal to abandon afghanistan). russian propaganda does find willing audiences both on the far left and the far right in germany - somewhat like in the US. it might be a little more prominent in the european left than in the american left because with the european left, russia has somewhat kept its historical ties (the primary leftist party in germany is partially a reformed successor of the east german governing party), whereas the american left generally just seems to fall for russian propaganda because they do this incredibly americabrained anti-americanism (exemplified in the pre-invasion ukraine coverage of TYT and such) that makes them believe anybody who whines about american aggression because, being americans, they know absolutely nothing about the lands of notamerica, so they can't tell that they're being bullshitted. meanwhile the far right in germany is just really fond of conspiracy theories like trumpists, so they're basically the standard audience of russian media. well, not so much anymore, since RT and sputnik got banned in the EU. I know that the russian government is making wild claims about biological or chemical weapon programs in ukraine in an apparent attempt to prepare for conducting a chemical or biological attack against ukrainians and blame it on the other side. the russian troll said bio-lab though, not bioweapon lab, and I am in fact quite convinced that covid was an accidental lab leak, so that's one thing I won't argue against...
    2
  6968. 2
  6969. 2
  6970. 2
  6971. 2
  6972. 2
  6973. 2
  6974. 2
  6975. 2
  6976. 2
  6977. 2
  6978. 2
  6979. 2
  6980. 2
  6981. 2
  6982. 2
  6983. 2
  6984. 2
  6985. 2
  6986. 2
  6987. 2
  6988. 2
  6989.  @noahnelson6385  thanks. I have some practice, since I've been either bringing that up or otherwise shitting on the egyptian government at almost every opportunity I've gotten since that coup. xD I also often mention the fact that the whole egyptian revolution, from the moment the army decided to not attack protesters and sometimes opposed riot police to garner popular approval, was a trap set by the army to lull revolutionary forces into a false sense of security and then take them out. the army strategically insured a muslim brotherhood election win in order to receive western support for crushing egyptian democracy by organising the post-mubarak elections in too short a time frame for the secular political forces to organise a unity program and candidate to rival the preexisting unified movement of the muslim brotherhood. the army's fake support for the democratic revolution is what I'm calling the situation in sudan plagiarism of the egyptian coup for - the military there also solidified its power by temporarily pretending to cooperate with the democracy movement. the democratization period and military dictatorship snap-back in myanmar was also similar (though more drawn-out), but since it happened partially before the arab spring and egyptian coup, and since the military probably was not expecting any favourable treatment from the west, I think the inspiration they may have taken from egypt is probably rather limited. I think it's greater in thailand because even though that's just one in a series of many coups throughout thai history, that junta certainly was counting on continued good western relations (and was proven right), and egypt demonstrated the west's current day willingness to still tolerate coups. with turkey, of course nobody wants to admit it after it failed, but the coup plotters strongly signaled that they would take a more pro-western stance than erdogan, who was and is very unpopular with his NATO allies, so that coup attempt certainly did count on western recognition. I think all the african coups just counted on the west not actually caring about democracy in africa and being quite happy to cooperate with any stable military government, but they would have been emboldened by the principal willingness the west demonstrated in egypt to accept not just any coup against a democratically elected government, but one that solidified its grip on power with the worst massacre of unarmed protesters since at least beijing 1989. the west had a particular reason to support the egyptian coup, but the severity of human rights abuses it barely seemed to mind said a lot about the flexibility of its pretense of humanitarian principles.
    2
  6990. 2
  6991. 2
  6992. 2
  6993. 2
  6994. 2
  6995. 2
  6996. 2
  6997. 2
  6998. 2
  6999. 2
  7000. 2
  7001. 2
  7002. 2
  7003. 2
  7004. 2
  7005. 2
  7006. 2
  7007. 2
  7008. 2
  7009. 2
  7010. 2
  7011. 2
  7012. 2
  7013. 2
  7014. 2
  7015. 2
  7016. 2
  7017. 2
  7018. 2
  7019. 2
  7020. 2
  7021. 2
  7022. 2
  7023. 2
  7024. 2
  7025. 2
  7026. 2
  7027. 2
  7028. 2
  7029. 2
  7030. 2
  7031. 2
  7032. 2
  7033. 2
  7034. 2
  7035. 2
  7036. 2
  7037. 2
  7038. 2
  7039. 2
  7040. 2
  7041. 2
  7042. 2
  7043. 2
  7044. 2
  7045. 2
  7046. 2
  7047. 2
  7048. 2
  7049. 2
  7050. 2
  7051. 2
  7052. 2
  7053. 2
  7054. 2
  7055. 2
  7056. 2
  7057. 2
  7058. 2
  7059. 2
  7060. 2
  7061. 2
  7062. 2
  7063. 2
  7064. 2
  7065. 2
  7066. 2
  7067. 2
  7068. 2
  7069. 2
  7070. 2
  7071. 2
  7072. 2
  7073. 2
  7074. 2
  7075. 2
  7076. 2
  7077. 2
  7078. 2
  7079. 2
  7080. 2
  7081. 2
  7082. 2
  7083. 2
  7084. 2
  7085. 2
  7086. 2
  7087. 2
  7088. there are few things that still manage to catch me off guard about covidiots, but one of them is how in so many of the covid denier hospital bed interviews, they STILL do not feel like they are or have been stupid. this guy for example is just like "yeah I didn't take it seriously at all, I totally ignored it, but I think it's serious now", and he doesn't even seem to feel that there is any need for explanation or excuses or shame there, as if he had been acting reasonably all along and he couldn't have known because he hadn't personally gotten sick yet. if I was one of those healthcare workers, I would definitely not feel so sympathetic. I would feel severely disrespected by these people for putting hospital workers in this horrible position again instead of taking them seriously enough to a) believe at least what the local health professionals are saying about covid and b) do your part in reducing their work load by getting vaccinated and/or taking other effective measures to protect yourself and others from infection. even if the pandemic is going to wind down for good some time soon in the more vaccinated countries, this personnell burnout it going to leave a lasting mark on healthcare. being this overworked and exposed to death and hopeless situations for months or years is not what these people signed up for. they are put in situations that are too hard to handle, but they feel like they can't quit because they are desperately needed, and if they were to quit, both significant numbers of patients would suffer more or die preventably, and their colleagues would have to work even harder. this is making healthcare workers work insane hours and push through more stress than they can take for months at a time, or however long a particular covid wave lasts. these people are being overworked and traumatized, and the stress is probably taking years off their life expectancy.
    2
  7089. 2
  7090. 2
  7091. 2
  7092. 2
  7093. 2
  7094. 2
  7095. 2
  7096. 2
  7097. 2
  7098. 2
  7099. 2
  7100. 2
  7101. 2
  7102. 2
  7103. 2
  7104. 2
  7105. 2
  7106. 2
  7107. 2
  7108. 2
  7109. 2
  7110. 2
  7111. 2
  7112. 2
  7113. 2
  7114. 2
  7115. 2
  7116. 2
  7117. 2
  7118. 2
  7119. 2
  7120. 2
  7121. 2
  7122. 2
  7123. 2
  7124. 2
  7125. 2
  7126. 2
  7127. 2
  7128. 2
  7129. 2
  7130. 2
  7131. 2
  7132. 2
  7133. 2
  7134. 2
  7135. 2
  7136. 2
  7137. 2
  7138. 2
  7139. 2
  7140. this isn't very good stuff to disprove the russian narrative though. what more clearly disproves it are drone videos of destroyed cities like mariupol and kharkiv. individual kids being killed doesn't prove targeting of civilians as well as videos of tens of thousands of destroyed homes. if russians see videos of dozens of burnt-out tower blocks, they will understand the scale of devastation because they know how many people live in those. I don't know if there are landmarks in ukrainian cities that russians would recognize, perhaps there would be in kyiv or odessa and there may be in kharkiv (basically the capital of russian-speaking ukraine), but it probably already wouldn't be too difficult to convince russians that those videos are from ukraine and not syria for example because they would recognize typical soviet architecture, and there hasn't been any other place as much like russia as ukraine getting bombed like this recently (the chechen wars were before modern camera drones and georgia wasn't this bad). the only counter could be that it's videos of destruction from ukrainian bombing in donbass. for that, landmarks would be useful, though in case russian TV isn't itself showing those images and claiming that they're from donbass, you could then argue that russian TV would do that if it was so, and the fact that the images are not on russian TV and the whole thing is being portrayed as not even a real war proves that the images are not from donbass and not caused by ukrainian bombs, because then russian media wouldn't hide them. it's not like russians don't know that state media can lie, they're just trying to pretend that it doesn't.
    2
  7141. 2
  7142. 2
  7143. 2
  7144. 2
  7145. 2
  7146. 2
  7147. 2
  7148. 2
  7149. 2
  7150. 2
  7151. 2
  7152. 2
  7153. 2
  7154. 2
  7155. 2
  7156. 2
  7157. 2
  7158. 2
  7159. 2
  7160. 2
  7161. 2
  7162. 2
  7163. 2
  7164. 2
  7165. 2
  7166. 2
  7167. 2
  7168. 2
  7169. 2
  7170. 2
  7171. 2
  7172. 2
  7173. 2
  7174. 2
  7175. 2
  7176. 2
  7177. 2
  7178. 2
  7179. 2
  7180. 2
  7181. 2
  7182. 2
  7183. 2
  7184. 2
  7185. 2
  7186. 2
  7187. 2
  7188. 2
  7189. 2
  7190. 2
  7191. 2
  7192. 2
  7193. 2
  7194. 2
  7195. 2
  7196. 2
  7197. 2
  7198. 2
  7199. 2
  7200. the coup that kicked off the last 10 years of many coups in africa (and some in asia) was the 2013 western-supported military coup against egypt's first democratically elected government - because the west, and israel in particular, much prefer a renewed egyptian military dicatorship to a muslim brotherhood democratic government. note that hamas is an offshoot of the muslim brotherhood. after the coup, the egyptian military cleared about a million protesters from the streets by conducting the biggest massacre of protesters since at least beijing 1989, killing around a thousand in one night. one year and one fake election later, field marshal sisi's junta was demonstratively recognised as legitimate through a presidential visit in berlin to meet merkel, and in the following years, egypt surpassed saudi arabia and the UAE to become germany's biggest customer of weaponry. currently, the junta is focused on building nay pyi taw in the desert, a new center of government and garrison city outside of cairo in order to make it impossible for future popular uprisings to threaten the government - any crowd trying to reach the administrative capital can simply be bombed on the road out of cairo. most directly, egypt's coup has been copied by sudan. the special thing about egypt's coup, which sudan's military imitated, is that it was pre-planned as a trap from the last days of mubarak's presidency. the army made a point of pretending to be friendly towards the people by refusing to attack protesters, sometimes even blocking police attacks on protesters. after mubarak's resignation, the military pushed for an election timetable that was too short for the more secular democratic forces to network and present strong electable options, so that inevitably the muslim brotherhood would come out on top because it was already long established as a large organisation. the military knew they would have broad western approval for a coup against a muslim brotherhood government, and they used their period of pretending to support democratisation to observe and record all sorts of activists, politicians and journalists who revealed themselves because they thought they were living in a new kind of egypt - most of those people have now been either murdered, imprisoned, or individually threatened in order to remove the threat they might pose to the regime. the reestablished dictatorship is even more tyrannical than mubarak's, and its grip on power is secured by its combination of large-scale individually targeted repression of more politically relevant people, and its extraordinarily boundless violence that it demonstrated during the rabaa massacre.
    2
  7201. 2
  7202. 2
  7203. 2
  7204. 2
  7205. 2
  7206. 2
  7207. 2
  7208. 2
  7209. 2
  7210. 2
  7211. 2
  7212. 2
  7213. 2
  7214. 2
  7215. 2
  7216. 2
  7217. 2
  7218. 2
  7219. 2
  7220. 2
  7221. 2
  7222. 2
  7223. 2
  7224. 2
  7225. 2
  7226. 2
  7227. 2
  7228. 2
  7229. 2
  7230. 2
  7231. 2
  7232. 2
  7233. 2
  7234. 2
  7235. 2
  7236. 2
  7237. 2
  7238. 2
  7239. 2
  7240. 2
  7241. 2
  7242. 2
  7243. 2
  7244. 2
  7245. 2
  7246. 2
  7247. 2
  7248. 2
  7249. sugar is not a drug, but it's true that it's more commonly more harmful than cannabis (by being very commonly heavily overconsumed). as far as I'm aware, the only noteworthy negative effect of cannabis that's holding up well to scientific scrutiny is the strong correlation and common temporal relation indicative of causation between cannabis use and psychoses in people under ~25 years of age. I believe the evidence for that has only gotten stronger in recent years. statistically irrelevant, but I've seen it myself too - the guy I shared my first joint with later got a drug induced psychosis diagnosis, another guy I knew well probably also had that or would have been diagnosable as such (similarly bizarre behaviour and had antipsychotic medication so he musthave had a related diagnosis). I don't think it got that badfor me,but thereason for me to quit also was that over the years, the effect shifted more towards very uncomfortable neuroticism. I haven't checked recently, but as far as I'm aware, there even is a remarkable lack of evidence for lung diseases including cancer stemming from smoking cannabis, starkly contrasting with tobacco. it's been theorized that the negative effects one would expect from inhaling much of any plant's smoke (the carcinogens in tar aren't exclusive to tobacco) are cancelled out by the anti-inflammatory and anti-cancer effects that cannabinoids show in in vitro experiments. I'm probably too lazy now to look it up, but I wonder if there's been a sufficient effort to investigate if this apparent lung cancer protection of smoked cannabis is also evident in the many people who always smoke it with tobacco (standard in europe), or even in those who also smoke cigarettes. in my experience, even stoners here in europe who don't smoke cigarettes mostly smoke more tobacco than cannabis. I always stuck out a bit by limiting tobacco to 25-50% and often using none, and many cheap b***ards here smoke 15-25% weed joints. there also are places like france where most cannabis use is a light sprinkling of hash on tobacco... though I suppose taking the greenery of the cannabis out of the equation would not change much if it's the cannabinoids themselves doing the cancer prevention, as those are mostly in the trichomes that go into the hashish.
    2
  7250. 2
  7251. 2
  7252. 2
  7253. 2
  7254. 2
  7255. 2
  7256. 2
  7257. 2
  7258. 2
  7259. 2
  7260.  @jackbauer9623  danke für die sachliche antwort, die immerhin der erklärung, nach der ich fragte, nahekommt (geht halt nicht um die gleiche gruppe). ich habs durchgerechnet, und deine zahlen unterstützen stark meinen zweifel. ich habe von der von dir gelieferten gesamtzahl an personen die sozialversichert beschäftigten abgezogen, weil ausreisepflichtige soweit ich weiß keine arbeitserlaubnis haben (für die von dir genannten afghanischen asylanten sind also die pro-kopf-kosten deutlich geringer, vor allem wenn man eine vermutete gesamtmenge an eingezahlten sozialversicherungsbeiträgen durch die 24% beitragspflichtig beschäftigte mit einberechnet). die von dir genannten kosten geteilt durch die zahl der leistungsbeziehenden personen ergibt (minimal gerundet) 6870€ kosten pro nase pro jahr. in hamburg als relativ teuer zu bewohnende großstadt vermute ich, dass die kosten pro nase über dem bundesdurchschnitt liegen. OP's behauptung, die ich anzweifel, ist 28.300€ pro nasenjahr. da ist doch eine gewisse diskrepanz festzustellen, oder? edit: ich hab aus jux die rechnung nochmal komplett für deine afghanen in hamburg gemacht. davon ausgehend, dass die sozialversichert beschäftigten alle für mindestlohn vollzeit in steuerklasse 1 arbeiten, ergibt ein abziehen der durch diesen teil der personengruppe eingezahlten sozialversicherungsbeiträge plus lohnsteuer für die gesamte gruppe afghanischer asylanten in hamburg nasenjahreskosten von 2560€. die tatsächlichen kosten könnten etwas höher liegen, aber wohl nicht viel, da ich vermute, dass der anteil der beschäftigten, die durch kinder oder ehe in eine günstigere steuerklasse fallen wahrscheinlich relativ kurz nach der ankunft in deutschland höher ist als der anteil, der mehr als mindestlohn bezahlt bekommt. ich hab mit dem aktuellen mindestlohn gerechnet, aber das macht den kohl ja nicht fett. auffallend ist dabei, dass schon ein mindestlohn-vollbeschäftigungsgrad in richtung 35%, unter berücksichtigung der damit einhergehenden geringeren leistungsansprüche, die kosten der gesamten personengruppe decken würde. bei dem altersdurchschnitt dieser leute dürfte das sehr leicht machbar sein (in deinem bespiel ist die beschäftigungsquote wegen der vielen neu angekommenen afghanen sehr gering). kosten für schulen müssten auch noch gedeckt werden, aber bei so viel raum nach oben in sachen erwerbsfähigkeit sollte das kaum ein problem darstellen.
    2
  7261. 2
  7262. 2
  7263. 2
  7264. 2
  7265. 2
  7266. 2
  7267. 2
  7268. 2
  7269. 2
  7270. 2
  7271. 2
  7272. 2
  7273. 2
  7274. 2
  7275. 2
  7276. 2
  7277. 2
  7278. 2
  7279. 2
  7280. 2
  7281. 2
  7282. 2
  7283. 2
  7284. 2
  7285. 2
  7286. 2
  7287. 2
  7288. 2
  7289. 2
  7290. 2
  7291. 2
  7292. 2
  7293. 2
  7294. 2
  7295. 2
  7296. 2
  7297. 2
  7298. 2
  7299. 2
  7300. 2
  7301. 2
  7302. 2
  7303. 2
  7304. 2
  7305. 2
  7306. 2
  7307. 2
  7308. 2
  7309. 2
  7310. 2
  7311. 2
  7312. 2
  7313. 2
  7314. 2
  7315. 2
  7316. 2
  7317. 2
  7318. 2
  7319. 2
  7320. 2
  7321. 2
  7322. 2
  7323. 2
  7324. 2
  7325. 2
  7326. 2
  7327. 2
  7328. 2
  7329. 2
  7330. 2
  7331. 2
  7332. 2
  7333. 2
  7334. 2
  7335. 2
  7336. 2
  7337. 2
  7338. 2
  7339. 2
  7340. 2
  7341. 2
  7342. 2
  7343. 2
  7344. 2
  7345. 2
  7346. 2
  7347. 2
  7348. 2
  7349. 2
  7350. 2
  7351. 2
  7352. 2
  7353. 2
  7354. 2
  7355. 2
  7356. 2
  7357. 2
  7358. 2
  7359. 2
  7360. 2
  7361. 2
  7362. 2
  7363. 2
  7364. 2
  7365. 2
  7366. 2
  7367. 2
  7368. 2
  7369. 2
  7370. 2
  7371. 2
  7372. 2
  7373. 2
  7374. 2
  7375. 2
  7376. 2
  7377. 2
  7378. 2
  7379. 2
  7380. 2
  7381. 2
  7382. 2
  7383. 2
  7384. this airplane is at the very small end of the passenger plane size range. increasing the size of an object including a plane or ship increases surface area as a square function of the length increase, but increases volume and mass as a cube function of the length increase. therefor larger planes have less surface area per unit of volume or unit of mass, and having less surface area reduces their drag and increases efficiency of flight and increases the range achievable with alimited energy supply. they're developing small planes first because those are cheaper to build and tinker with, larger planes built the same way would already have significantly longer ranges. whether these really are reasonable vehicles to use for passenger or cargo transport given the big environmental impact of the mining of battery materials and that the batteries may especially in aviation have a very short lifespan and may ultimately not be recycled is another question. there also is the inherent inefficiency of lifting a lot of battery weight with every flight that will always leave battery-electric planes with a smaller carrying capacity in proportion to their maximum takeoff weight, and combustion planes often limit the amount of fuel carried to the minimum plus safety margin needed for a given flight and can land on shorter runways after using up most of their fuel, whereas a battery plane is likely toalways fly with its complete battery set even on the shortest routes. and there is the matter of fire danger - although that is an issue mostly occurring in cheaply made lithium battery products, at least for the next ten years, lithium battery planes will certainly be less safe to fly than combustion planes not made by boeing.
    2
  7385. 2
  7386. 2
  7387. 2
  7388. 2
  7389. 2
  7390. 2
  7391. 2
  7392. 2
  7393. 2
  7394. 2
  7395. 2
  7396. 2
  7397. 2
  7398. 2
  7399. 2
  7400. 2
  7401. 2
  7402. 2
  7403. 2
  7404. 2
  7405. 2
  7406. 2
  7407. 2
  7408. 2
  7409. 2
  7410. 2
  7411. 2
  7412. 2
  7413. 2
  7414. 2
  7415. 2
  7416. 2
  7417. 2
  7418. 2
  7419. 2
  7420. 2
  7421. 2
  7422. 2
  7423. 2
  7424. 2
  7425. 2
  7426. 2
  7427. 2
  7428. 2
  7429. 2
  7430. 2
  7431. 2
  7432. 2
  7433. 2
  7434. 2
  7435. 2
  7436. 2
  7437. 2
  7438. 2
  7439. 2
  7440. 2
  7441. 2
  7442. 2
  7443. 2
  7444. 2
  7445. 2
  7446. 2
  7447. 2
  7448. 2
  7449. 2
  7450. 2
  7451. 2
  7452. 2
  7453. 2
  7454. 2
  7455. 2
  7456. 2
  7457. 2
  7458. 2
  7459. 2
  7460. 2
  7461. 2
  7462. 2
  7463. 2
  7464. 2
  7465. 2
  7466. 2
  7467. 2
  7468. 2
  7469. 2
  7470. 2
  7471. 2
  7472. 2
  7473. 2
  7474. 2
  7475. 2
  7476. 2
  7477. 2
  7478. 2
  7479. 2
  7480. 2
  7481. 2
  7482. 2
  7483.  @IdaIda-ur8vx  doesn't matter, trump will say anything. he bases his foreign policy engagement on personal sympathies, which are (because of his narc°ssistic very very smooth a-brain) formed by powerful respected men flattering him and making him feel like he's one of them. it's extremely obvious, but netanyahu has an extraordinary record of publically expressing disrespect of and insulting his allies. netanyahu f°°°ed up the handling of trump's ego massively, go listen to the interview, it's very clear. it is impossible that trump would not be better for pale°°ine than biden after having ever held these personal views about netanyahu and abbas. I don't mean that he would be pro-pale°°ine and anti-i°°ael, but he would be inconsistent, and he would take jabs at netanyahu. biddn is very consistent, he is committed to maximum support and couldn't even be more committed if he was dead. well, come to think of it, thattrp assessment is almost entirely dependant on netanyahu remaining in office (him liking abbas or having developed some recognition of the pale°°iniannstruggle are mostly irrelevant, him hating netanyahu matters more than anything else). netanyahu staying into 2025 and beyond does seem a bit on the unlikely side. though if is°°elis stick to the opinion that apparently their media consensus-served to them immediately after 10/7, that netanyahu should stay in office as long as the "war" continues, it seems quite likely that he serves out his regular term, which I believe is another three years. that's a transparent setup for him to officially continue the 'war' indefinitely - which apparently isr°°lis are so thoroughly unworried and rather positively excited by that it makes them not even want to acknowledge the fact that they are being tricked to support him staying when they actually overwhelmingly want him to leave. nor do they acknowledge that much of the reason why they now acutely want him out actually is an unreliability in military matters that also applies to the "war" in gaza and should really make them want to NOT keep him around to lead them through the "war". the "war" is like a gift to them that pacifies their desire to remove netanyahu. not unlike democrats all rallying to support bush and his wars after 9/11, I suppose.
    2
  7484. 2
  7485. 2
  7486. 2
  7487. 2
  7488. 2
  7489. 2
  7490. 2
  7491. 2
  7492. 2
  7493. 2
  7494. 2
  7495. 2
  7496. 2
  7497. 2
  7498. your dog is not a foodie, your dog is obese because you are overfeeding him. it's a serious problem, you are taking years off his life and decreasing his quality of life dramatically, more so when he gets older and his joints will be very painful and the cardiovascular diseases will hit. you have to put your dog on a diet (talk to a vet for information on what and how much to feed), cut out almost all the starbucks, and subtract the treats from the measured meals. it's not the dog's fault that he wants to eat too much, it's your fault for feeding him too much and the wrong things. you think it's all fun and games now that the dog is young to have an obese dog that's just "lazy" and "a foodie", but what you're doing is making a healthy dog into a heavily disabled dog. dogs are supposed to get much of their enjoyment in life from physical activity, you are depriving yourdog of that. you already see him failing to socialise because he's barely able to move. he would like to run if it didn't hurt and wasn't exhausting. he doesn't do it because it would doirreversible damage to his joints, and he feels it. more and more, even walking and standing will hurt him. his joints will hurt even when he's not moving, and if it gets warm in the summer, he will overheat because he's too compact and his mouth and tongue are too small to evaporate enough water to cool his body mass. it's not funny or cute for dogs to be round and "lazy", it's sad. if you keep doing what you've been doing, your dog will get even more obese. ifyou keep him at that weight, his joints will get much worse. you have to put him on a diet to reduce his weight!
    2
  7499. 2
  7500. 2
  7501. 2
  7502. 2
  7503. 2
  7504. 2
  7505. 2
  7506. 2
  7507. 2
  7508. 2
  7509. 2
  7510. 2
  7511. 2
  7512. 2
  7513. 2
  7514. 2
  7515. 2
  7516. 2
  7517. 2
  7518. 2
  7519. 2
  7520. 2
  7521. 2
  7522. 2
  7523. 2
  7524. 2
  7525. 2
  7526. 2
  7527. 2
  7528. 2
  7529. 2
  7530. 2
  7531. 2
  7532. 2
  7533. 2
  7534. 2
  7535. 2
  7536. 2
  7537. 2
  7538. 2
  7539. 2
  7540. 2
  7541. 2
  7542. 2
  7543. 2
  7544. 2
  7545. 2
  7546. 2
  7547. 2
  7548. 2
  7549. 2
  7550. 2
  7551. 2
  7552. 2
  7553. 2
  7554. 2
  7555. 2
  7556. 2
  7557. 2
  7558. 2
  7559. 2
  7560. 2
  7561. 2
  7562. 2
  7563. 2
  7564. 2
  7565. 2
  7566. 2
  7567. 2
  7568. 2
  7569. 2
  7570. 2
  7571. 13:12 how many more times is kyle going to manage to falsely cite that number without remembering that 20% of is°°°li citizens are pal°°°inians, and it's nowhere near plausible that the only israelis wanting less bombing are fewer than 10% of the israeli palestinians? that number is a percentage of the jewish population. 🤦‍♂️ speaking of kyle citing wrong numbers, does anybody know where that other favourite number of his comes from, that 10/7 isr°°li d°°ths were 55% or so soldiers? it's clearly wrong, basically everyone has been individually identifIed and the real number is around 30%. I have just never seen anything resembling that claim kyle keeps repeating, so from where did he get it? I suppose it could be the result of reservists being counted? but almost every jewish isr°°li between 25 and idk probably 50 is a reservist of one sort or another, so in that case, I would expect the number to be even higher. maybe it could be a count including only some sort of ready reserve, but that would be idiotic. or perhaps it's a count that includes police and militia or kibbutz guards? police are considered to be civilians and by default are not legitimate military targets, but I believe it is widely adjudicated as a common occurence that cops can individually choose to become lawful combattants by defending against a foreign military invasion. butI hve seen numbers that liated police separately, and adding them to the soldiers would still have resulted in fewer than 55%.
    2
  7572. 2
  7573. 2
  7574. 2
  7575. 2
  7576. 2
  7577. 2
  7578. 2
  7579. 2
  7580. 2
  7581. 2
  7582. 2
  7583. 2
  7584. 2
  7585. 2
  7586. 2
  7587. 2
  7588. 2
  7589. 2
  7590. 2
  7591. 2
  7592. 2
  7593. 2
  7594. 2
  7595. 2
  7596. 2
  7597. 2
  7598. 2
  7599. 2
  7600. 2
  7601. 2
  7602. 2
  7603. 2
  7604. 2
  7605. 2
  7606. 2
  7607. 2
  7608. 2
  7609. 2
  7610. 2
  7611. 2
  7612. 2
  7613. 2
  7614. 2
  7615. 2
  7616. 2
  7617. 2
  7618. 2
  7619. 2
  7620. 2
  7621. 2
  7622. 2
  7623. 2
  7624. 2
  7625. 2
  7626. 2
  7627. 2
  7628. 2
  7629. 2
  7630. 2
  7631. 2
  7632. 2
  7633. 2
  7634. 2
  7635. 2
  7636. 2
  7637. 2
  7638. 2
  7639. 2
  7640. 2
  7641. 2
  7642. 2
  7643. 2
  7644. 2
  7645. 2
  7646. 2
  7647. 2
  7648. 2
  7649. 2
  7650. 2
  7651. 2
  7652. 2
  7653. 2
  7654. the deputy defense minister just acknowledged ukrainian responsibility for the kerch bridge bombing? sheesh.... every once in a while, ukraine does really stupid things! I'm quite convinced that that explosion was indeed a truck bomb, as that seems more plausible than a delivery vehicle in the water managing to sneak many tons of explosives past the russian navy. if so, not only did that attack turn out to kill five civilians, but it was designed to kill at least one, which was the russian truck driver who had no clue what he was hauling. they made a civilian into an unwitting suicide bomber! one can argue about the proportionality of the military value of that bridge and the collateral damage in civilian lives, but it is as clear-cut a war crime as they come. one could also discuss potential merits of the option for ukraine to claim responsibility in the first place, but certainly there is no benefit to it now. that does nothing but discredit the ukrainian authorities for lying, and embarrasses anybody who carried water for them by defending ukraine's lie as truth. another good example is the pointless and embarrassingly non-credible claim that the russian volunteer battalion and freedom of russia legion are not under the command of and functioning as parts of the ukrainian armed forces (despite having acknowledged the opposite for the non-neonazi one in the past). can we expect this deputy defense minister to also soon acknowledge ukrainian responsibility for shelling near and on the grounds of the zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant many times last year, which at the time ukraine insisted was the russian military false-flag shelling itself? how about the fact that ukraine unsuccessfully attempted at least one major amphibious assault involving 600 troops directly against that power plant in order to establish a bridgehead at the plant that would have used the nuclear danger as a shield against russian bombardment? does deputy defense minister maliar have a history of such attention-seeking behaviour? I looked her up. turns out, she very ironically used to teach the subject of war crimes at the ukrainian national school of judges. 😂🤦
    2
  7655. 2
  7656. 2
  7657. 2
  7658. 2
  7659. 2
  7660. 2
  7661. 2
  7662. 2
  7663. 2
  7664. 2
  7665. 2
  7666. 2
  7667. 2
  7668. 2
  7669. 2
  7670. 2
  7671. 2
  7672. 2
  7673. 2
  7674. 2
  7675. 2
  7676. 2
  7677. 2
  7678. 2
  7679. 2
  7680. 2
  7681. 2
  7682. 2
  7683. 2
  7684. 2
  7685. 2
  7686. 2
  7687. 2
  7688. 2
  7689. 2
  7690. 2
  7691. 2
  7692. 2
  7693. 2
  7694. 2
  7695. 2
  7696. 2
  7697. 2
  7698. 2
  7699. 2
  7700. 2
  7701. 2
  7702. 2
  7703. 2
  7704. 2
  7705. 2
  7706. 2
  7707. 2
  7708. 2
  7709. 2
  7710. 2
  7711. 2
  7712. 2
  7713. 2
  7714. 2
  7715. 2
  7716. 2
  7717. 2
  7718. 2
  7719. 2
  7720. 2
  7721. 2
  7722. 2
  7723. 2
  7724. 2
  7725. 2
  7726. 2
  7727. 2
  7728. 2
  7729. 2
  7730. 2
  7731. 2
  7732. 2
  7733. 2
  7734. 2
  7735. 2
  7736. 2
  7737. 2
  7738. 2
  7739. 2
  7740. 2
  7741. 2
  7742. 2
  7743. 2
  7744. 2
  7745. 2
  7746. 2
  7747. 2
  7748. 2
  7749. 2
  7750. 2
  7751. 2
  7752. 2
  7753. 2
  7754. 2
  7755. 2
  7756. 2
  7757. 2
  7758. 2
  7759. 2
  7760. 2
  7761. 2
  7762. 2
  7763. 2
  7764. 2
  7765. 2
  7766. 2
  7767. 2
  7768. 2
  7769. 2
  7770. 2
  7771. 2
  7772. 2
  7773. 2
  7774. 2
  7775. 2
  7776. 2
  7777. 2
  7778. 2
  7779. 2
  7780. 2
  7781. 2
  7782. 2
  7783. 2
  7784. 2
  7785. 2
  7786. 2
  7787. 2
  7788. 2
  7789. 2
  7790. 2
  7791. 2
  7792. 2
  7793. 2
  7794. 2
  7795. 2
  7796. 2
  7797. 2
  7798. 2
  7799. 2
  7800. 2
  7801. 2
  7802. 2
  7803. 2
  7804. 2
  7805. 2
  7806. 2
  7807. 2
  7808. 2
  7809. 2
  7810. 2
  7811. 2
  7812. 2
  7813. 2
  7814. 2
  7815. 2
  7816. 2
  7817. 2
  7818. 2
  7819. 2
  7820. 2
  7821. 2
  7822. 2
  7823. 2
  7824. 2
  7825. 2
  7826. 2
  7827. 2
  7828. 2
  7829. 2
  7830. 2
  7831. 2
  7832. 2
  7833. 2
  7834. 2
  7835. 2
  7836. 2
  7837. 2
  7838. 2
  7839. 2
  7840. 2050 as the date when china will have a military about as powerful as the US military seems like an extremely long estimate. it seems to me like 2035 is much more realistic. alao yeah,if the US and china fight, the US will attack the mainland. why wouldn't they, itmakes no sense to make that a safe zone for chinese military assets so close to the fighting. however, the US and china will not fight any time soon. the reason for this is that contrary to biden's lies, the US absolutely will not fight for taiwan. all the reasons for the US and its allies to not fight russia over ukraine (nuclear deterrence, economic dependencies) apply to china as much or more, it's absurd to think that the US would act so differently there. the treaty situation is very clear: the US is only committed to attempting to supply taiwan with "defensive weapons" in case of a chinese attack (good luck with doing that through the blockade). the current treaty was designed to not guarantee taiwan sufficient defensive support to give taiwan the confidence to declare independence and risk a chinese attack. also, china will avoid US intervention by only partially invading taiwan at first. they will do a trial run of taking only the kinmen islands, and then wait a year or more before invading taiwan, as taiwan loses confidence in its allies because the allies did not intervene. the US' tentative support for taiwanese territorial integrity even explicitly excludes the kinmen islands since they're geographically almost part of mainland china. seeing the weakness of its international support will bring new life to taiwanese public support for a diplomatic integration into the PRC. nobody will even economically decouple from china, not even taiwan itself!
    2
  7841. 2
  7842. 2
  7843. 2
  7844. 2
  7845. 2
  7846. 2
  7847. 2
  7848. 2
  7849. 2
  7850. 2
  7851. 2
  7852. 2
  7853. 2
  7854. 2
  7855. 2
  7856. 2
  7857. 2
  7858. 2
  7859. 2
  7860. 2
  7861. 2
  7862. 2
  7863. 2
  7864. 2
  7865. 2
  7866. 2
  7867. 2
  7868. 2
  7869. 2
  7870. 2
  7871. 2
  7872. 2
  7873. 2
  7874. 2
  7875.  @UnfollowYourDreams  you can only compare casualty counts between gaza "wars" because those were counted by the same thorough methodology (vast majority of dead brought to hospitals or morgues sooner or later, which all work very closely with the health ministry that does the counting). anyone comparing confirmed death counts between wars in different countries is being absolutely ridiculous. for example: no party to the ukraine war releases trustworthy data, but the low end of third party estimates for combined military casualties is around 300,000 dead. meanwhile, the confirmed civilian death counts both of the ukrainian government and of the UN are around 10,000. anyone who thinks that a ratio of 30 dead soldiers to one dead civilian is plausible for the ukraine war must be seeing war casualty numbers for the first time (because that's not plausible for literally any modern war at all). civilian death estimates on the other hand range from 25,000 to >75,000 for mariupol alone. and those would have all occurred during the first 2-3 months of the '22 invasion, and been far from the majority of civilian deaths during that period - though civilian casualty rates quickly fell much lower than during the first weeks, as in the very beginning, the russians advanced too fast for people to escape over huge areas, and also used up all sorts of heavy munitions at rates calculated for a war so short that it would barely put a dent in their soviet-inherited stockpiles. another particularly bizarre claim I have seen news outlets implicitly make by sharing a chart made up of confirmed casualties from different wars is that already more "children" (misapplied legalese for all minors) have died just now in gaza than have died due to the war in yemen. I guess the common refrain "nobody is paying attention to yemen" was even truer than I realised. 🤦‍♂️ and speaking of wars nobody cares about, the tigray war probably removed more people and certainly more civilians from the census than the ukraine war, from 2020 to 2022. not only have, contrary to popular comparisons of confirmed counts, certainly more minors been killed in the tigray war alone than in gaza, but more than that number also have been ra°°d. and the confirmed counts on that are so inadequate that they may as well be 0.
    2
  7876. 2
  7877. 2
  7878. 2
  7879. 2
  7880. 2
  7881. 2
  7882. 2
  7883. 2
  7884. 2
  7885. 2
  7886. 2
  7887. 2
  7888. 2
  7889. 2
  7890. 2
  7891. 2
  7892. 2
  7893. 2
  7894. 2
  7895. 2
  7896. ​ @LasseEklof I also think that threats from putin's people, probably via hostages, are likely to have been more important than any pay-off offer. though with a pay-off, you need to consider that by giving up on the rebellion, prigozhin has surrendered a huge portion of his and his family's wealth, probably much more than half (at least if you assume that any assets in russia are gone, though they may have been promised to remain in prigozhin's possession, for whatever that's worth). money in russian bank accounts and investments could be gone, both prigozhin and his wife own dozens of businesses in russia (mostly in saint petersburg) that would be gone, and likely most valuable of all is the likely total loss of the income streams generated by wagner's foreign deployments (mining and oil drilling concessions). even if prigozhin retained command authority over wagner, wagner has very little ability to enforce its claims on the resources granted to them now that russia not only does not support their claims, but opposes them (again assuming that continuing this was not promised in the withdrawal agreement, since the promise would not be reliable enough to make it worth considering). in weaker countries like the central african republic or mali, wagner may have some very limited ability to violently enforce its claims, but then they would be in a very different sort of business (at that point, it might make more sense to depose governments instead). in syria, wagner has no chance of keeping anything that putin doesn't want them to have. and really anywhere else, putin has plenty of leverage to make any contractual partner of wagner turn against wagner. without russian government support giving it access to all necessary military equipment and recruitment of personnel, wagner can no longer deliver on its security guarantees anyways. so basically, besides the possibility of hostages, prigozhin would have gotten a buy-out from putin calculated as surpassing the value of most of his possessions multiplied by the percentage chance of success if he continued the rebellion. if he actually did it for the money, with no hostages involved, then the payment must have been enormous (really not the sort of money that would normally change hands in physical form). wagner's holdings include stuff like ownership of a gold mine in the CAR that was projected to yield $3bn in 8 years of operation when they got it ~3 years ago, and a 25% profit cut on oil installations that wagner recaptured for the syrian government. prigozhin may also have a lot of money safe outside of russia and not tied to continued russian support for wagner, but wagner's holdings certainly are gone, unless putin promised that prigozhin could keep them and actually delivers on that promise. my guess would be that there was a payment, but much less than would compensate for the lost chance of prigozhin keeping his property, and the main part of the deal were hostages. not necessarily prigozhin's own family, family members of other essential coup perpetrators could also suffice to kill the coup. but if the russian authorities really did find that personal go-bag of prigozhin with the money, gold and false passports at the wagner HQ in saint petersburg, that speaks for rather shoddy planning that could also have included failure to secure prigozhin's own family. and there is the problem that trying to get all close family members of prigozhin and other important coup plotters out of russia in preparation would have been suspicious and would have posed a risk of information leakage. so perhaps they instead went with sending wagner personnel to those family members immediately before the operation to hide them in safe houses in russia, and perhaps that plan failed for some of them. if by "not without a parachute" you mean that any deal would have required security for prigozhin: money is the only security he could have gotten, besides weapons for his troops.
    2
  7897. 2
  7898. 2
  7899. 2
  7900. 2
  7901. 2
  7902. 2
  7903. 2
  7904. 2
  7905. 2
  7906. 2
  7907. 2
  7908. 2
  7909. 2
  7910. 2
  7911. 2
  7912. 2
  7913. 2
  7914. 2
  7915. 2
  7916. 2
  7917. 2
  7918. 2
  7919. 2
  7920. 2
  7921. 2
  7922. 2
  7923. 2
  7924. 2
  7925. 2
  7926. 2
  7927. 2
  7928. 2
  7929. 2
  7930. 2
  7931. 2
  7932. 2
  7933. 2
  7934. 2
  7935. 2
  7936. 2
  7937. 2
  7938. 2
  7939. 2
  7940. 2
  7941. 2
  7942. 2
  7943. 2
  7944. 2
  7945. 2
  7946. 2
  7947. 2
  7948. 2
  7949. 2
  7950. 2
  7951. 2
  7952. 2
  7953. 2
  7954. 2
  7955. 2
  7956. 2
  7957. 2
  7958. 2
  7959. 2
  7960. 2
  7961. 2
  7962. 2
  7963. 2
  7964. 2
  7965. 2
  7966. 2
  7967. 2
  7968. 2
  7969. 2
  7970. 2
  7971. 2
  7972. 2
  7973. 2
  7974. 2
  7975.  @sojrnrr8368  dude, you can not be serious. there were live streams. footage is geolocated. and what other time would there have been when arabs wearing body cams last ma°°acred isr°°°is? and ALL survivor testimonies agree that the organized main invasion force (I have heard competing claims but the more credible seems to me to be that the other smaller militant groups besides h°mas were not involved in a coordinated way) did commit many deliberate murders, they very clearly came with the intent to ki°° many civilians and burn homes, while also kidnapping others. I do not recall seeing evidence or a still credible-seeming claim of either t°rture of civilians or individual targeting of children. the fighters' conduct seems to have varied quite widely depending on individual character, with some very eager to m°rder, some showing no interest in that and focusing instead on kidn°pping, spme kidn°ppers taking whole families or what remained of them regardless of age and gender, while others only wanted to take men, or wanted to k°ll or capture only soldiers, or attempting to make civilians identify who among them were reservists in order to only take those. I would say that the condition of captured aoldiers in the videos is likely evidence of t°°ture in a broad sense, but the footage and reports of civilian captives indicate a prevailing attitude of recognizing value worth preserving in the captives' lives - it would be logically in h°°as' interest to k°°l all h°°tages whose rescue or escape cannot be prevented otherwise, because implementing this well would remove is°°el's hostage rescue option, and if release deals are fully the only way to get them out, then higher prices can be demanded. but I haven't credibly heard of that actually being done, and have instead heard of and seen footage of f°ghters (still in the kibb°tzim) being att°°ked and k°°°ed seemingly not considering this course of action at all. that one masked h°mas spokesman early on made a threat that if the "war" continued, there would be ex°°ution videos, but clearly that was a bluff, and it looks like they have no intentions to k°°l any of the hostages.
    2
  7976. 2
  7977. 2
  7978. 2
  7979. sturm/storm is the germanic origin word for the french/latin origin word "assault". it's used in that function in some cases in english, like referring to the historical event as the storming of the bastille, which also could be very accurately called assault on the bastille. in german, no other word than "sturm" exists for it. it's also rather goofy to refer to german historical sturmtruppen as storm troopers, the german term just directly means assault troops. that seems to be an enduring leftover within the english language of the world wars that english speakers fought against germans, in which using german or adapted german words instead of simple translations/direct equivalents was apparently a common way to highlight a supposed qualitative otherness of germans. another example that comes to mind is english speakers calling german tanks "panzer", when in german that is just the word used for all tanks - and, confusingly for english speakers who see germans seemingly calling any random military vehicle a tank, it's also commonly used as a part of compound words, in which it can mean either an actually looser defined noun "tank" when used with qualifiers like schützenpanzer/infantry tank/IFV or flugabwehrpanzer/air defence tank/self-propelled anti-aircraft gun, or"panzer" in a compound word can be the adjective "gepanzert" meaning "armoured", which gets shortened when used in compound words. that of course is a term applicable to many more vehicles than just tanks (for example the term panzerhaubitze does not also call that vehicle a type of tank, but rather an armoured howitzer), and non-vehicle items in military and even some in non-military use, and to some animals. the semi-extinct use of "herr" and "frau" by english speakers referring to germans also seems to follow the same othering principle, but more obviously so as most uses of it I have seen seemed to have been made in acknowledgement of this function.
    2
  7980. 2
  7981. 2
  7982. 2
  7983. 2
  7984. 2
  7985. 2
  7986. 2
  7987. 2
  7988. 2
  7989. liar! you can't claim to have a history of having a problem with israel's treatment of palestinians, and then support the biggest crime that israel has committed against the palestinian people in your lifetime, which is the total blockade of gaza and the unprecedated severity of bombing, with the expressly genocidal intent, according to netanyahu, of fully depopulating the gaza strip. israel is telling gazans to leave, but there is no way for them to leave. none can get into israel, israel blocks sea access, egypt requires entry permits to allow a trickle to leave, and israel even closed the one crossing into egypt for a day by bombing the immediate vicinity of the crossing. israelis complain about a palestinian intent to "drive the jews into the sea", but that is, absolutely literally, what israel is currently doing to all gazans. while at the same time depriving them of water, food, fuel, medicine, and everything else they need. the way israel is killing is less personal than the grotesque depravity of hamas' massacre, but through its scale it has already far surpassed hamas in total harm done, and it is no less clearly criminal in the eyes of international law, by violating the prohibition of collective punishment and the principle of proportionality. no massacre can ever justify a genocide. and this has nothing to do with the hostages, since what israel is doing is the course of action most likely to result in the deaths of all hostages. israel will probably cause most of their deaths directly with its bombing. for comparison: three days ago, the IDF reported having already dropped a thousand tons of bombs. by now, as bombing has increased in severity, that number will have more than doubled, probably tripled. the beirut port blast was calculated as having had the force of 500 tons of TNT, and spreading out explosions directly into or under buildings increases total damage severalfold compared to one explosion (same principle as cluster munitions; and the beirut warehouse was supposed to contain 2700 tons of AN, but much less detonated, in my opinion most likely because hezbollah had been stealing/selling the stuff, which fits with its later intense open effort to prevent an investigation).
    2
  7990. 2
  7991. 2
  7992. 2
  7993. 2
  7994. 2
  7995. 2
  7996. 2
  7997. 2
  7998. 2
  7999. 2
  8000. 2
  8001. 2
  8002. 2
  8003. 2
  8004. 2
  8005. 2
  8006. 2
  8007. 2
  8008. 2
  8009. 2
  8010. 2
  8011. 2
  8012. 2
  8013. 2
  8014. 2
  8015. 2
  8016. 2
  8017. 2
  8018. 2
  8019. 2
  8020. 2
  8021. 2
  8022. 2
  8023. 2
  8024. 2
  8025. 2
  8026. 2
  8027. 2
  8028. 2
  8029. themossad guy at the end is lying. not negotiating is not a different and better way to focus on the current hostages. it is a decision to abandon the current hostages in favour of not inspiring future hostagetakings. yes, overpaying for gilad shalit to a degree that would make even joe thenegotiator biden blush was an amazingly stupid mistake, a decision based on emotion overcoming all reason. everybody in their right mind knew that establishing a precedent for a 1000 to 1 exchange rate (including many far higher profile people than gilad shalit, a low-ranking soldier kidnapped in his early 20s) was certain to directly cause many more than one israeli to be abducted in the future. it was not merely a decision to accept the costof 1000 released priaoners, but the decision to buy the release of one israeli soldier whom the wholecountry knew at the expense ofcertainly multiple israelis being captured in thefuture - but nobody knew them, so they had no emptional attachment. well, here they are, now you know them, now you care. except now the netanyahu government recognises it f*ed the last time, and has decided notto care at all about these people. which are around 200-25 already killed by israeli bombs at this point, including dozens of dual citizens of israeli allies like the US and germany. we have all seen that hamas has serious operational capabilities and its fighters have extremely high levels of conviction and are happy to murder israelis. one indisputable fact about this hostage situation is that it is an extremely high priority of hamas in order to keep maximum leverage in future hostagetakings to prevent any hostage rescue by killing them all if no other option to prevent the rescue remains. by using unseen transport through their tunnel system, keeping the hostages in places accessible only through delaying obstacles that can't be overcome by an assault team without being noticed with time to spare, and posting fanatics with execution orders with the hostages or even rigging the hostages with explosives, the act of preventing the rescue will be far easier for hamas than many other parts of their attack a week and a half ago were. realistically, israel is not capable of rescuing any hostages. if they are extremely lucky, they get 5. what iarael is doing is the deadliest course of action for them. they simply been written off. which (unlike many other things israel is doing) is not an unreasonable calculation, it just would have been a thousand times more reasonable with gilad shalit, and it won't suffice to fully undo that precedent. regarding the hostages, I agree with different hostage negotiator (american, I think), whose commentary was featured on some news channel: the deal that ahould be made, and the only one that probably can be made, is an exchange of all wounded/sick, minors, and women in hamas captivity for the release of all women and minors in israeli captivity (adding sick ones also wouldn't hurt, though it would be difficult to define for such a much larger population). the remaining men should be allowed to send back letters and wills, and pre-recorded viseo messages (communication that is not read by hamas or uses a live connection would be a security risk). what would increase the survival chances of unexchangeable hostages, and is the opposite of what iarael is doing, is to peolong their captivity. unless hamas is dilligent about changing guards (and letting more members know hostage locations could risk treason), the guards will slowly start to see the hostages as individual people. if they didn't release them first, they will see parents protecting their children and trying to cheer them up (holding kids and parents is actually a huge added risk factor in that regard). especially as a consequence of taking action to care for them, by bringing them food or medical care, clothes, baby supplies, possibly toys and games, they will subconsciously let them slip into the same conceptual category of normal people whose lives count for something. they may even start seeing them as victims of the situation as it appears that they have been abandoned by israel. and when such a point was reached, probably a few months from now, if israel conducted an assault to rescue the hostages then, the survival rate would be many times higher, as the guards would hesitate, aim badly, shoot slow, or fail to shoot the hostages at all.
    2
  8030. 2
  8031. 2
  8032. 2
  8033. 2
  8034. 2
  8035. 2
  8036. 2
  8037. 2
  8038. 2
  8039. 2
  8040. 2
  8041. 2
  8042. 2
  8043. 2
  8044. 2
  8045. 2
  8046. 2
  8047. 2
  8048. 2
  8049. 2
  8050. 2
  8051. 2
  8052. 2
  8053. 2
  8054. 2
  8055. 2
  8056. 2
  8057. 2
  8058.  @NegativeOpposite  my view as an anti-islamist is that regardless of the moral value of the original NATO invasion of afghanistan, our countries assumed responsibility for the people of afghanistan when we occupied their country. absolutely contrary to later ubiquitous denials from american politicians, we intended and advertised the occupation to be a project to build a more or less liberal democratic afghan state, which was supposed to respect human rights and women's rights in particular, and of course lift the people out of poverty and ignorance. because it is my view that afghan lives matter, and I feel a basic bit of solidarity with the minority of afghan anti-islamists, afghan women, and the rest of the population that is now poorer due to sanctions, it is my opinion that we ought to have continued the occupation, which would have been worth it even just to hold the status quo. the country's administration was half-assed and botched, and the combat conduct of both the occupation forces and the central government's forces produced more resistance than it defeated through most of those 20 years (the logic flaw already apparent in the term "war on terror"). the scandals and the lack of glory in failing to win the war defeated the occupation by way of defeating the american people's morale. since almost nobody in america actually cares about afghans, two successive american administrations decided to give up to please their voters, effectively forfeiting the war unilaterally on behalf of the afghan government and the NATO allies (european countries still involved were more interested in continuing since afghan refugees come to europe, not america). a few ways the US behaved deplorably, from pretty damn clear to undeniable: -breaking of promises of nation building to the afghan people, and denial that they were ever made -negotiating a handover of afghanistan bilaterally with the taliban that only addressed US concerns, not those of NATO allies -demonstratively abandoning and thereby sealing the fate of the afghan government by allowing the taliban to dictate its exclusion from the handover talks -handing over afghanistan to the taliban with literally no demands regarding their conduct towards afghans, such as limits on territorial ambitions, human rights, or retribution against occupation collaborators (the only demands the taliban agreed to are that they will not attack the US, nor will they again allow others to do so from afghan territory) -dramatically increasing the suffering of afghans through severe sanctions imposed because of taliban governance, in spite of the fact that the US chose this taliban governance for afghanistan -seizure of all $7bn in foreign reserves of the afghan national bank held in the US, and biden announcement of intent to take half for 9/11 victims' families - this is the world's richest country stealing from the people of one of the poorest countries, to whom it holds a protection duty that it just abandoned. there is no remotely credible way to see this as anything other than theft, and it is theft from the afghan people, not just the taliban.
    2
  8059. 2
  8060. 2
  8061. 2
  8062. 2
  8063. 2
  8064. 2
  8065. 2
  8066. 2
  8067. 2
  8068. 2
  8069. 2
  8070. 2
  8071. 2
  8072. 2
  8073. 2
  8074. 2
  8075. 2
  8076. 2
  8077. 2
  8078. 2
  8079. 2
  8080. 2
  8081. 2
  8082. 2
  8083. 2
  8084. 2
  8085. 2
  8086. 2
  8087. 2
  8088. 2
  8089. 2
  8090. 2
  8091. 2
  8092. 2
  8093. 2
  8094. 2
  8095. 2
  8096. 2
  8097. 2
  8098. 2
  8099. 2
  8100. 2
  8101. 2
  8102. 2
  8103. 2
  8104. 2
  8105. 2
  8106. 2
  8107. 2
  8108. 2
  8109. 2
  8110. 2
  8111. 2
  8112. 2
  8113. 2
  8114. 2
  8115. 2
  8116. 2
  8117. 2
  8118. 2
  8119. 2
  8120. 2
  8121. 2
  8122. 2
  8123. 2
  8124. 2
  8125. 2
  8126. 2
  8127. 2
  8128. 2
  8129. 2
  8130. 2
  8131. 2
  8132. 2
  8133. 2
  8134. 2
  8135. 2
  8136. 2
  8137. 2
  8138. 2
  8139. 2
  8140. 2
  8141. 2
  8142. 2
  8143. 2
  8144. 2
  8145. 2
  8146. 2
  8147. 2
  8148. 2
  8149. 2
  8150. 2
  8151. 2
  8152. 2
  8153. 2
  8154. 2
  8155. 2
  8156. 2
  8157. 2
  8158. 2
  8159. 2
  8160. 2
  8161. 2
  8162. 2
  8163. 2
  8164. 2
  8165. 2
  8166. 2
  8167. 2
  8168. 2
  8169. 2
  8170. 2
  8171. 2
  8172. 2
  8173. 2
  8174. 2
  8175. 2
  8176. 2
  8177. 2
  8178. 2
  8179. 2
  8180. 2
  8181. 2
  8182. 2
  8183. 2
  8184. 2
  8185. 2
  8186. 2
  8187. 2
  8188. 2
  8189. 2
  8190. 2
  8191. 2
  8192. 2
  8193. 2
  8194. 2
  8195. 2
  8196. 2
  8197. 2
  8198. 2
  8199. 2
  8200. 2
  8201. 2
  8202. 2
  8203. 2
  8204. 2
  8205. 2
  8206. 2
  8207. 2
  8208. 2
  8209. 2
  8210. 2
  8211. 2
  8212. 2
  8213. 2
  8214. 2
  8215. 2
  8216. 2
  8217. 2
  8218. 2
  8219. 2
  8220. 2
  8221. 2
  8222. 2
  8223. 2
  8224. from abandoning afghanistan to stalling ukraine military aid to now supporting israel's genocide across government and media as strongly as biden, CNN or FOX, I keep being more and more disgusted by the callous lack of solidarity displayed here in germany in recent years, and especially from the government - most disappointingly in this case from the coalition member green party, who were marginally better on afghanistan and good on ukraine, but are completely in line with the right on israel. not only is there a constantly promoted conflation of criticism of israel and this "war" itself with antisemitism, and the often implicit and sometimes explicit claim that even attempting to differentiate between these things is itself antisemitism - a strategy that ironically uses jews around the world as human shields for israel. but even more despicably to me as partially a descendant of holocaust survivors, the core tenets of germany's cultural and state tradition of holocaust remembrance are practically universally being misrepresented, and the misrepresentation used towards ends that are diametrically opposed to the real intent! the point is supposed to be that the way we pay our respects to the victims of nazi crimes is an effort to recognise and oppose institutional racism and genocide very explicitly regardless of who the victims and who the perpetrators are ("it could happen anywhere" and all that). a second aspect is supposed to be a german state commitment to supporting israel in its intended function as a safe haven for jews. what everybody is instead demanding is uncritical support for the current government of israel, ignoring the facts that the highest political and military leaders including the prime minister, president, and defense minister have declared their intent of ethnic cleansing and genocide many times and are evidently doing it to some degree. but not only does supporting israel's actions violate the first goal of remembrance, it also violates the second, as any remotely clear-thinking person can see, not least in the events of the hamassacre, that israel's horrendous exploitation of its power advanta inge is making both israelis and jews in germany and elsewhere LESS safe, not more! nobody here genuinely believes that israel will defeat islamist terrorism or palestinian resistance with what it's doing - when israel is not involved, it's practically a consensus view to acknowledge that disproportionate force and reckless or intentional harming of civilians in combat against islamists, which germany took part in in afghanistan for 20 years, is futile or counterproductive because it creates more resistance than it extinguishes. and that's even with forms of war conduct that are nowhere near as indiscriminate as what's happening now. one can pretend to believe that israel has been identifying a thousand or more legitimate targets every day, but if we assume that 95% of gazans are civilians, then the "total siege" undeniably is aimed to 95% at civilians! or even more, as hamas will have prepared stockpiles and supply methods for food, water, fuel, and medicine that other gazans don't have. hamas also is more protected from most of the bombing by sheltering deep underground. the "total siege" is clearly a crime, and clearly going to make israel and jews less safe. SO WHY ARE WE SUPPORTING THIS? TO WHAT END???
    2
  8225. 2
  8226. 2
  8227. 2
  8228. 2
  8229. 2
  8230. 2
  8231. 2
  8232. 2
  8233. 2
  8234. 2
  8235. 2
  8236. 2
  8237. 2
  8238. 2
  8239. 2
  8240. 2
  8241. 2
  8242. 2
  8243. 2
  8244. 2
  8245. 2
  8246. 2
  8247. 2
  8248. 2
  8249. 2
  8250. 2
  8251. 2
  8252. 2
  8253. 2
  8254. 2
  8255. 2
  8256. 2
  8257. 2
  8258. 2
  8259. 2
  8260. 2
  8261. 2
  8262. 2
  8263. 2
  8264. 2
  8265. 2
  8266. 2
  8267. 2
  8268. 2
  8269. 2
  8270. 2
  8271. 2
  8272. 2
  8273. 2
  8274. 2
  8275. 2
  8276. 2
  8277. 2
  8278. 2
  8279. 2
  8280. 2
  8281. 2
  8282. 2
  8283. 2
  8284. 2
  8285. 2
  8286. 2
  8287. 2
  8288. 2
  8289. 2
  8290. 2
  8291. 2
  8292. 2
  8293. 2
  8294. 2
  8295. 2
  8296. 2
  8297. 2
  8298. 2
  8299. 2
  8300. 2
  8301. 2
  8302. 2
  8303. 2
  8304. 2
  8305. 2
  8306. 2
  8307. 2
  8308. 2
  8309. 2
  8310. 2
  8311. 2
  8312. 2
  8313. 2
  8314. 2
  8315. 2
  8316. 2
  8317. 2
  8318. 2
  8319. 2
  8320. 2
  8321. 2
  8322. 2
  8323. 2
  8324. 2
  8325. 2
  8326. 2
  8327. 2
  8328. 2
  8329. 2
  8330. 2
  8331. 2
  8332. 2
  8333. 2
  8334. 2
  8335. 2
  8336.  @B_Bodziak  I know. the trump administration withdrawal deal with the taliban was entirely a handover of the country to the taliban over the heads of the kabul government. the only condition for the withdrawal was that neither the taliban nor anybody else in afghanistan is allowed to attack the US now. the deal made no demands whatsoever regarding territorial ambitions, military aggression, human rights etc. from the taliban. and the deal was made at a time when the taliban were already winning even despite substantial NATO efforts, so at a point like that to tell the taliban "we're leaving if you just leave us alone, you can do whatever here in your country" obviously had to result in a taliban takeover, particularly after the kabul government was banned from the talks by the taliban as an open gesture of total disrespect (they said the reason was that the government had no legitimacy), and the US accepted that. I'm just somebody paying attention to news and I already knew that it was a handover as the deal was being worked out, so I find it really bizarre when people who should be international politics experts act like it wasn't clear, like the afghan republic could have had a chance. and I found it really disgusting when biden claimed that the taliban takeover happened because afghans opposing them weren't willing to fight, after afghan security forces had been getting killed at an average rate of 10 per day for the duration of the NATO occupation (70.000 in 20 years from a total population of 40 million, equivalent to california). the americans put the writing on the wall, and ultimately various people in power in afghanistan made deals with the taliban to not be on the obviously losing side (that's how most of the big cities fell without much fighting). the afghan security forces also had terrible supply levels (many units getting neither food nor ammunition or pay), and the fact that biden kept repeating that claim that there were 300.000 of them was just bizarre, since anybody who knew anything was saying that the real number was more like 100.000 or less, and that biden was mostly counting ghost soldiers that only ever existed on paper so that their superior officers could steal their fake salaries from the government. ultimately the US government said essentially "we expected the taliban takeover, just not this fast" - well guess what, everybody in afghanistan saw it coming too, and that's why it happened so fast, because many people prefer not to die for a lost cause! and the americans are the ones who decided that it was a lost cause, basically everybody else just took their work for it!
    2
  8337. 2
  8338. 2
  8339. 2
  8340. 2
  8341. 2
  8342. 2
  8343. 2
  8344. 2
  8345. 2
  8346. 2
  8347. 2
  8348. 2
  8349. 2
  8350. 2
  8351. 2
  8352. 2
  8353. 2
  8354. 2
  8355. 2
  8356. 2
  8357. 2
  8358. 2
  8359. 2
  8360. 2
  8361. 2
  8362. 2
  8363. 2
  8364. 2
  8365. 2
  8366. 2
  8367. 2
  8368. 2
  8369. 2
  8370. 2
  8371. 2
  8372. 2
  8373. 2
  8374. 2
  8375. 2
  8376. 2
  8377. 2
  8378. 2
  8379. 2
  8380. 2
  8381. 2
  8382. 2
  8383. 2
  8384. 2
  8385. 2
  8386. 2
  8387. 2
  8388. 2
  8389. 2
  8390. 2
  8391. 2
  8392. 2
  8393. 2
  8394. 2
  8395. 2
  8396. 2
  8397. 2
  8398. 2
  8399. 2
  8400. 2
  8401. 2
  8402. 2
  8403. 2
  8404. 2
  8405. 2
  8406. 2
  8407. 2
  8408. 2
  8409. 2
  8410. 2
  8411. 2
  8412. 2
  8413. 2
  8414. 2
  8415. 2
  8416. 2
  8417. 2
  8418. 2
  8419. 2
  8420. 2
  8421. 2
  8422. 2
  8423. 2
  8424. 2
  8425. 2
  8426. 2
  8427. 2
  8428. 2
  8429. 2
  8430. 2
  8431. 2
  8432. 2
  8433. 2
  8434. 2
  8435. 2
  8436. 2
  8437. 2
  8438. 2
  8439. 2
  8440. 2
  8441. 2
  8442. 2
  8443. 2
  8444. 2
  8445. 2
  8446. 2
  8447. 2
  8448. 2
  8449. 2
  8450. 2
  8451. 2
  8452. 2
  8453. 2
  8454. 2
  8455. 2
  8456. 2
  8457. 2
  8458. 2
  8459. 2
  8460. 2
  8461. 2
  8462. 2
  8463. 2
  8464. 2
  8465. 2
  8466. 2
  8467. 2
  8468. 2
  8469. 2
  8470. 2
  8471. 2
  8472. 2
  8473. 2
  8474. 2
  8475. 2
  8476. 2
  8477. 2
  8478. 2
  8479.  @IceclawFirebolt  what are you basing the claim that captive eels don't try to escape their containment on? I would guess that they do. that might not get much attention though, since many fish do, and with eels in particular, it could in any case also be an attempt to just find a new pond rather than the ocean. eels living at least 25 years and then migrating to reproduce is much less likely to be related to local ressource scarcity than many other animals' migrations, since that ressource scarcity has no reason to correlate with good conditions along the path of migration, good spawning conditions, or good chances to encounter many potential mates at the destination. ressource scarcity (or overcrowding) probably is what makes eels migrate to find new bodies of freshwater. but I don't see why it would be linked to triggering the spawning journey, I actually think it's much more likely that one precondition for that is the eel being well-fed to enable it to move much without necessarily eating much (since that's how it is with salmon and many migratory birds for example). another precondition clearly is a very strangely long aging process. I would say that what's missing then to trigger the spawning journey is probably along the lines of a particular time of year being sensed by the daylight period, a high water level (if the eel lives in stagnant water, suggesting the need to travel over land) due to much recent rainfall that suggests short distances towards as many other bodies of water as possible, and possibly recognition of a particularly favourable weather pattern with rains ahead, sensed through changes in atmospheric pressure (where I live, we have a misgurnus loach colloquially known as weather fish because they get rowdy when pressure drops ahead of thunderstorms, so some fish can sense that). I think european eels spawn every year though, so it doesn't seem to be complexly synchronised like it is for some other animals such as cicadas. some species of which, off topic but amazing, have actually evolved to spawn in prime number intervals of years (13 and 17 for two american species), because that gives predators the lowest chance of evolving life cycles synchronised to prey on them, as no year-based interval of a predator's life cycle shorter than that prime number can frequently line up with the cicada spawning and provide a major evolutionary advantage. I also know that beech trees produce few beech nuts in most years and many more in some years, and probably synchronise this with nearby beech trees, in order to not support beech-nut-eating animal populations of exactly the right size to eat up all the nuts every year, but as far as I know, they don't use prime numbers or even regular intervals (just environmental conditions of a given year plus airborne chemical transmitters to signal between trees to reach a sort of consensus).
    2
  8480. 2
  8481. 2
  8482. 2
  8483. 2
  8484. 2
  8485. can somebody tell me if there is another equivalently democratic country besides the US that has an average age among its highest officials as old as the US? it seems to me that such severe gerontocracy is normally reserved for autocratic countries, where the leaders cling to power and keep their trusted cronies in power in order to continue to corruptly generate personal wealth, and to prevent a new leadership from forming that may then come after them. the american discourse around gerontocracy is bizarre. everybody knows that most jobs, including non-physical ones, have commonly practiced or even mandated retirement ages in the 60s for good reason. but when it comes to politicians, americans love to pretend to have never heard of such a thing, and they make it out to be a terribly offensive suggestion. no, what's offensive is the suggestion that people in their mid to late 80s should work the world's most impactful jobs. nevermind biden, look how absurdly democrats and supporting US media have been dragging out the denials that diane feinstein has been too old to be a senator for years! the woman is about to turn 90 this month, couldn't attend the senate and thus could not do her job for the last 3 or 4 months, almost died of shingles, ramsay hunt syndrome, and encephalitis, immediately upon returning to senate and public attention she displayed her confusion by denying that ahe had been sick and that she had not attended her job. if you put her in a nursing home now, she would be one of the worse-off 90 year olds there. and this still appears to be insufficient to make even half of the democratic politicians quit their denials! P.S.: lifetime appointments to the supreme court are a supremely idiotic idea!
    2
  8486. 2
  8487. 2
  8488. 2
  8489. 2
  8490. 2
  8491. 2
  8492. 2
  8493. 2
  8494. 2
  8495. 2
  8496. 2
  8497. 2
  8498. 2
  8499. 2
  8500. 2
  8501. 2
  8502. 2
  8503. 2
  8504. 2
  8505. 2
  8506. 2
  8507. 2
  8508. 2
  8509. 2
  8510. 2
  8511. 2
  8512. 2
  8513. 2
  8514. 2
  8515. 2
  8516. 2
  8517. 2
  8518. 2
  8519. 2
  8520. 2
  8521. 2
  8522. 2
  8523. 2
  8524. 2
  8525. 2
  8526. 2
  8527. 2
  8528. 2
  8529. 2
  8530. 2
  8531. 2
  8532. 2
  8533. 2
  8534. 2
  8535. 2
  8536. 2
  8537. 2
  8538. 2
  8539. 2
  8540. 2
  8541. 2
  8542. 2
  8543. 2
  8544. 2
  8545. 2
  8546. 2
  8547. 2
  8548. 2
  8549. 2
  8550. 2
  8551. 2
  8552. 2
  8553. 2
  8554. 2
  8555. 2
  8556. 2
  8557. 2
  8558. 2
  8559. 2
  8560. 2
  8561. 2
  8562. 2
  8563. 2
  8564. 2
  8565. 2
  8566. 2
  8567. 2
  8568. 2
  8569. 2
  8570. 2
  8571. 2
  8572. 2
  8573. 2
  8574. 2
  8575. 2
  8576. 2
  8577. 2
  8578. 2
  8579. 2
  8580. 2
  8581. 2
  8582. 2
  8583. 2
  8584. 2
  8585. 2
  8586. in many countries, the idea of the main military command together with some portion of the government and intelligence services hatching and executing and for at least two months getting away with a plot to step aside and let an invading horde kill ~1500 of their countrymen could be dismissed as ludicrous. but in the country whose military invented, widely trained for and is known to have used the hannibal directive, that is much more plausible than that israel accidentally stationed a number of troops so small on the gazan border that the invaded territory probably would have contained more israeli troops capable of more resistance if all active duty personnel had been distributed evenly over all of israel and its occupied territories - calculated based on maps showing an area equal to or larger than the gaza strip, over 2200 IDF troops would have stood in hamas' way. of course a very large portion of those would not have been combat troops or not have been ground forces, but I reckon the vast majority have had pretty extensive basic training (israeli mandatory service is extremely long, 32 months for men and 24 for women). and of course literally anybody who has ever heard of israel and gaza could have correctly assessed that that border warranted a much higher than average troop concentration, even without any warning. I haven't seen specific numbers, but the ground forces section principally responsible for the gaza area is the gaza division, which by definition as a division should contain 5000-20,000+ soldiers. I'm highly confident that I have seen enough footage and reports of that day to assess that the number of israeli soldiers already standing in the way of the invasion was below 2200. I feel like it's generous to grant them that it may have been 1000. 500 should have been able to achieve more. and of course the 5-6 hour delay before IDF command initiated any counterattack is completely outside of what can plausibly be explained with incompetence. if one assumes the successful incursion, israel should have managed to helicopter-deploy hundreds of special forces troops into the various kibbutzim within 30-40 minutes for comparison, countries like france and britain have in recent years proved capable of deploying anti-terror police in the high tens to low hundreds range at least this quickly - and israel should be BETTER at this because they have a lot of practice. and within two hours, israel should have crossed the 10,000 mark even if most had to be flown the very short plane ride from the northern end of the country, and should have aimed for and successfully implemented probably within 5-8 hours a redeployment along the border to cut off the invaders from supplies, reinforcements, and the ability to take away hostages and captured equipment. instead, it took israel about two whole days to capture all kibbutzim, and three whole days to gain and declare control over the whole border. speaking of regaining control of the border, that reminds me of one particularly morbidly funny israeli propaganda fail - the one where they shot twoorthree gazan men in some dunes just outside the gaza fence, and then somebody putting together the propaganda releases paid so little attention that they did not notice that the declared story and the picture showing the dead men with planted rifles was contradicted by the main release, which was drone footage of the incident that very clearly showed them unarmed, immediately complying with IDF ground forces' orders, and then executed at close range (being approached by the soldiers with no precautions, clearly recognising that they were no threat) on their knees with their hands up. 🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️
    2
  8587. 2
  8588. 2
  8589. 2
  8590. 2
  8591. 2
  8592. 2
  8593. 2
  8594. 2
  8595. 2
  8596. 2
  8597. 2
  8598. 2
  8599. 2
  8600. 2
  8601. 2
  8602. 2
  8603. 2
  8604. 2
  8605. 2
  8606. 2
  8607. 2
  8608. 2
  8609. 2
  8610. 2
  8611. 2
  8612. 2
  8613. 2
  8614. 2
  8615. 2
  8616. 2
  8617. 2
  8618. 2
  8619. 2
  8620. 2
  8621. 2
  8622. 2
  8623. 2
  8624. 2
  8625. 2
  8626. 2
  8627. 2
  8628. 2
  8629. 2
  8630. 2
  8631. 2
  8632. 2
  8633. 2
  8634. 2
  8635. 2
  8636. 2
  8637. 2
  8638. 2
  8639. 2
  8640. 2
  8641. 2
  8642. 2
  8643. 2
  8644. 2
  8645. 2
  8646. 2
  8647. 2
  8648. 2
  8649. 2
  8650. 2
  8651. 2
  8652. 2
  8653. 2
  8654. 2
  8655. 2
  8656. 2
  8657. 2
  8658. 2
  8659. 2
  8660. 2
  8661. 2
  8662. 2
  8663. 2
  8664. 2
  8665. 2
  8666. 2
  8667. 2
  8668. 2
  8669. 2
  8670. 2
  8671. 2
  8672. 2
  8673. 2
  8674. 2
  8675. 2
  8676. 2
  8677. 2
  8678. 2
  8679. 2
  8680. 2
  8681. 2
  8682. 2
  8683. 2
  8684. 2
  8685. 2
  8686. 2
  8687. 2
  8688. 2
  8689. 2
  8690. 2
  8691. 2
  8692. 2
  8693. 2
  8694. 2
  8695. 2
  8696. 2
  8697. 2
  8698. 2
  8699. 2
  8700. 2
  8701. 2
  8702. 2
  8703. 2
  8704. 2
  8705. 2
  8706. 2
  8707. 2
  8708. 2
  8709. 2
  8710. 2
  8711. 2
  8712. 2
  8713. 2
  8714. 2
  8715. 2
  8716. 2
  8717. 2
  8718. 2
  8719. 2
  8720. 2
  8721. 2
  8722. 2
  8723. 2
  8724. 2
  8725. 2
  8726. 2
  8727. 2
  8728. 2
  8729. 2
  8730. 2
  8731. 2
  8732. 2
  8733. 2
  8734. 2
  8735. 2
  8736. 2
  8737. 2
  8738. 2
  8739. 2
  8740. 2
  8741. 2
  8742. 2
  8743. 2
  8744. 2
  8745. 2
  8746. 2
  8747. 2
  8748. 2
  8749. 2
  8750. 2
  8751. 2
  8752. 2
  8753. 2
  8754. 2
  8755. 2
  8756. 2
  8757. 2
  8758. 2
  8759. 2
  8760. 2
  8761. 2
  8762. 2
  8763. 2
  8764. 2
  8765. 2
  8766. 2
  8767. 2
  8768. 2
  8769. 2
  8770. 2
  8771. 2
  8772. 2
  8773. 2
  8774. 2
  8775. 2
  8776. 2
  8777. 2
  8778. 2
  8779. 2
  8780. 2
  8781. 2
  8782. 2
  8783. 2
  8784. 2
  8785. 2
  8786. 2
  8787. 2
  8788. 2
  8789. 2
  8790. 2
  8791. 2
  8792. 2
  8793. 2
  8794. 2
  8795. 2
  8796. 2
  8797. 2
  8798. 2
  8799. 2
  8800. 2
  8801. 2
  8802. 2
  8803. 2
  8804. 2
  8805. 2
  8806. 2
  8807. 2
  8808. 2
  8809. 2
  8810. 2
  8811. 2
  8812. 2
  8813. 2
  8814. 2
  8815. 2
  8816. 2
  8817. 2
  8818. 2
  8819. 2
  8820. 2
  8821. 2
  8822. 2
  8823. 2
  8824. 2
  8825. 2
  8826. 2
  8827. 2
  8828. 2
  8829. 2
  8830. 2
  8831. 2
  8832. 2
  8833. 2
  8834. 2
  8835. 2
  8836. 2
  8837. 2
  8838. 2
  8839. 2
  8840. 2
  8841. 2
  8842. 2
  8843. 2
  8844. 2
  8845. 2
  8846. 2
  8847. 2
  8848. 2
  8849. 2
  8850. 2
  8851. 2
  8852. 2
  8853. 2
  8854. 2
  8855. 2
  8856. 2
  8857. 2
  8858. 2
  8859. 2
  8860. 2
  8861. 2
  8862. 2
  8863. 2
  8864. 2
  8865. 2
  8866. 2
  8867. 2
  8868. 2
  8869. 2
  8870. 2
  8871. 2
  8872. 2
  8873. 2
  8874. 2
  8875. 2
  8876. 2
  8877. 2
  8878. 2
  8879. 2
  8880. 2
  8881. 2
  8882. 2
  8883. 2
  8884. 2
  8885. 2
  8886. 2
  8887. 2
  8888. 2
  8889. 2
  8890. 2
  8891. 2
  8892. 2
  8893. 2
  8894. 2
  8895. 2
  8896. 2
  8897. 2
  8898. 2
  8899. 2
  8900. 2
  8901. 2
  8902. 2
  8903. we have arrived at a point in the study and real time observation of climate change where naming even the most obvious facts about the climate of the near future sounds like alarmism. within the next 20-40 years, climate change will have become the biggest catastrophe in human history. this is a great interview, but to a less informed listener, it's a little misleading in how much it highlights death by overheating, as if that was the primary issue in our future. that's not what's going to happen, because people react and attempt to save themselves. what is going to happen is a migration wave orders of magnitude greater than any that have happened before - I consider it to be a conservative guess that the number of concurrent international climate migrants will grow to a billion within the next 40-70 years (or for an upper end estimate by 2100, 3 billion). a very large portion of humanity lives in places that will become uninhabitable, either in coadtal or estuary cities around the globe or coastal lowlands like the netherlands and bangladesh that will flood, in arid and drying regions like the southern and south-western US, or in various locations in the tropics and subtropics that will, besides more severe storms, face increasingly deadly heatwaves. agriculture will alwo need to shift in methods and in locations, and will certainly become more difficult. the resulting food scarcity will be compounded by the likely collapse of most ocean fishing, though this will be more due to overfishing and pollution, with climate change only being a lesser factor (temperature increases are killing whole coral landscapes, and increased CO2 content in water lowers pH and damages calcified shells of animals such as molluscs and crustaceans). in theory, perhaps earth won't lose habitability to a high enough degree to stop being able to support the human population (though the average human will live in a much worse environment), since there is land mostly in canada and ruasia that will become more habitable and arable. but those of us living in the liveable places absolutely will not want to allow hundreds of millions of destitute brown people to come live here. one expectation that I have in this regard is that the EU outer border and US southern border will be defended with deadly force within the next 20 years - likely with autonomous weapons.
    2
  8904. 2
  8905. 2
  8906. 2
  8907. 2
  8908. 2
  8909. 2
  8910. 2
  8911. 2
  8912. 2
  8913. 2
  8914. 2
  8915. 2
  8916. 2
  8917. 2
  8918. 2
  8919. 2
  8920. 2
  8921. 2
  8922. 2
  8923. 2
  8924. 2
  8925. 2
  8926. 2
  8927. 2
  8928. 2
  8929. 2
  8930. 2
  8931. 2
  8932. 2
  8933. 2
  8934. 2
  8935. 2
  8936. 2
  8937. 2
  8938. 2
  8939. 2
  8940. 2
  8941. 2
  8942. 2
  8943. 2
  8944. 2
  8945. 2
  8946. 2
  8947. 2
  8948. 2
  8949. 2
  8950. 2
  8951. 2
  8952. 1
  8953. 1
  8954. 1
  8955. 1
  8956. 1
  8957. 1
  8958. 1
  8959. 1
  8960. 1
  8961. 1
  8962. 1
  8963. 1
  8964. 1
  8965. 1
  8966. 1
  8967. 1
  8968. 1
  8969. 1
  8970. 1
  8971. 1
  8972. 1
  8973. 1
  8974. 1
  8975. 1
  8976. 1
  8977. 1
  8978. ​ @nighttrain1236 deescalate, not escalate. as we expect from everybody else. israel can easily prevent such attacks by simply manning the gazan border to a remotely reasonable degree. and israel's iron dome supply is entirely gifted by america as needed. hamas can do almost nothing to israel if they're not actively permitted. one might want to ask netanyahu, and the head of the israeli armed forces, and the commander of the gaza division (none of which have resigned) why there appears to have been hardly any troop presence, and why it took six hours to even initiate a major counterattack. if you take the number of active duty israeli military personnel, spread all those troops out evenly over israel and its occupied territories, and go with the smaller end of the variations of maps showing territory invaded by hamas (about equal to the territory of gaza), then the number of troops hamas would have run into is around 2200. now, many of them are not combat troops, or not ground forces, but I'm sure you would agree that the gazan border was already understood to warrant a more concentrated troop deployment than the average location in israel, would you not? I haven't found a more specific claim for that unit size or for the IDF's unit sizes, but the section of the IDF ground forces responsible for gaza is called the gaza division, and apparently divisions by definition range from 5000 to >20,000 soldiers. do you feel like what you saw on the day of the hamassacre was hamas running into 2200, 5000, or 20,000 soldiers who were already there? I know I didn't.
    1
  8979. 1
  8980. 1
  8981. 1
  8982. 11:04 wow. ich kann den lanz nicht leiden, aber das ist endlich mal ein guter punkt gut angesprochen von ihm! über die selektionsfunktion unserer sogenannten flüchtlingspolitik, die den leuten verbietet, normal hierher zu reisen, unddann diehier bleiben lässt, die es mit hilfe von mafia- und terrorgruppen unter höchster lebensgefahr und von uns bezahlten folter- und mordkommandos trotzdem hierher schaffen, wird viel zu wenig geredet. und die lösung ist offensichtlich: wir müssen asylprozesse in großem stil im ausland zugängig machen, in form einer kombination von optionaler kontaktaufnahme per internet, und verpflichtendem besuch einer botschaft oder eines konsulates, am besten schon in herkunftaländern, oder mindestens in nachbarländern. wenn wir so den leuten ohne odyssee ein angebot machen, für die EU flüchtlingsstatua und auch reguläre einreisegenwhmigung für einen flug hierher zu erlangen, dann können wir auch wesentlich konsequentere abschiebungen derer, die auf die bisher übliche weise hierher kommen, rechtfertigen - denn die versuchen ja dann das korrekte anzragssystem zu umgehen, was vermuten lässt, dass sie nicht erwarten, hier als legitime flüchtlinge anerkannt zu werden. im moment ist die illegale einreise mit hilfe von schleusern die offiziell korrekteste option für diese leute, bei uns asyl zu beantragen, alao kann man es ihnen nichtzum vorwurf machen, und sämtliche legitimen flüchtlinge geben den wirtschaftsmigranten deckung. das ist doch wirklich nicht schwer zu erkennen, oder? da kommt mir schon stark der verdacht, dass es ein von der EU gewolltes system ist, um leistungsschwache echte flüchtlinge zu einem möglichst großen anteil durchgesunde junge männer für den europäischen niedriglohnsektor auszutauschen.
    1
  8983. 1
  8984. 1
  8985. 1
  8986. 1
  8987. 1
  8988. 1
  8989. 1
  8990. 1
  8991. 1
  8992. 1
  8993. 1
  8994. 1
  8995. 1
  8996. 1
  8997. 1
  8998. 1
  8999. 1
  9000. 1
  9001. 1
  9002. 1
  9003.  @bendlor  one part where it looks to me like hamas got very lucky is where they managed to destroy the one tank directly at the border with the first drone drop out of the blue (I've seen it convincingly claimed that what happened was a fuel fire from hitting the engine that's located at the front in merkavas). I may be mistaken (haven't watched very much footage), but I think that's the same tank out of which a soldier gets pulled in a later video. in that case, I would think that the tank was fully crewed and combat-ready, as it seems very odd to put fewer soldiers than a full crew in a tank on standby. merkava tanks use an active protection system that is supposed to be able to fire in any direction including straight up. that would mean that any prior warning long enough for the crew of that tank to engage the tank's combat systems including the active protection system should have made the tank invulnerable to later drone drops. and a general order for heightened combat readiness also would have, since they could have simply had the APS running. to me, that also contradicts the claims made in this video here, about the fence guard towers and sensors being the first targets - for that tank to have been destroyed like it was, that lucky hit must have been the first drop, or practically synchronised with other first drops, and the drone must have flown right over the still intact border fortifications. of course the real big questions are how there could have been so few soldiers at and near the border, how it could take so many hours to even begin a noteworthy counterattack, and how it could have taken three whole days to fully close the border, when the sort of performance one would have expected would have been for israel to advance along the border to cut off the invaders from gaza and prevent further hostage and supplies transport within 3-6 hours. the sorts of response times I have heard of (around 6 hours for the IDF to begin offensively engaging hamas on the ground, two days to reach some settlements) could have been achieved or . the quality of the IDF's border defense and counterattack seems to have been closer to south african police or uvalde than it was to entebbe, at least in terms of command.
    1
  9004. 1
  9005. 1
  9006. 1
  9007. 1
  9008. 1
  9009. 1
  9010. 1
  9011. 1
  9012. 1
  9013. 1
  9014. 1
  9015. 1
  9016. 1
  9017. 1
  9018. 1
  9019. 1
  9020. 1
  9021. 1
  9022. 1
  9023. 1
  9024. 1
  9025. 1
  9026. 1
  9027. 1
  9028. 1
  9029. 1
  9030. 1
  9031. 1
  9032. 1
  9033. 1
  9034. 1
  9035. 1
  9036. 1
  9037. 1
  9038. 1
  9039. 1
  9040. 1
  9041. 1
  9042. 1
  9043. 1
  9044. 1
  9045. 1
  9046. 1
  9047. 1
  9048. 1
  9049. 1
  9050. 1
  9051. 1
  9052. 1
  9053. 1
  9054. 1
  9055. 1
  9056. 1
  9057. 1
  9058. 1
  9059. 1
  9060. 1
  9061. 1
  9062. 1
  9063. 1
  9064. 1
  9065. 1
  9066. 1
  9067. I'm very confused by AJ still operating in i-coubtry, didn't it get banned? so I wouldn't actually shake the boat there now, but in general, I think the use of the term "settlement" ought to be more restricted, and "settlement expansion" should more aptly be called land theft. because that's what they're doing, they're claiming land by building on it, and at some point in the future, the "settlements" almost inevitably get formalized and become more and more i-country. the term "settlement expansion" really does not sound like that, it completely avoids the land ownership situation and is really in itself a false framing, because the initial buildings are not the issue, the taking of the land and excluding of the native population is. I'm speaking from experience as an (as far as this topic goes) ex-brainwashed german. I heard of settlements being built for years before I understood that it was land theft, because the term used as a title just names the construction of homes, which is a positive thing. heck, the term doesn't even give an indication (although news stories normally do, briefly) that these are not homes for a sort of normal open housing market, more homes for the locals to live in, and some people are just upset about i-country acting as an occ°°ation administration that gets to decide where to turn empty land apparently belonging tp noone into towns or villages, or upset about i°°°eli investors or the state financing and owning the buildings. after all, "settlement" just is an umbrella term encompassing any village, town, or city. "settlement expansion" is so uninformative that it's almost disinformation, because people tend to assume that what they're getting is a representative overall picture, not deliberate omission of information.
    1
  9068. 1
  9069. 1
  9070. 1
  9071. 1
  9072. 1
  9073. 1
  9074. 1
  9075. 1
  9076. 1
  9077. 1
  9078. 1
  9079. 1
  9080. 1
  9081. 1
  9082. 1
  9083. 1
  9084. 1
  9085. 1
  9086. 1
  9087. 1
  9088. 1
  9089. 1
  9090. 1
  9091. 1
  9092. 1
  9093. 1
  9094. 1
  9095. 1
  9096. 1
  9097. 1
  9098. 1
  9099. 1
  9100. 1
  9101. 1
  9102. 1
  9103. 1
  9104. 1
  9105. 1
  9106. 1
  9107. 1
  9108. 1
  9109. 1
  9110. 1
  9111. 1
  9112. 1
  9113. 1
  9114. 1
  9115. 1
  9116. 1
  9117. 1
  9118. 1
  9119. 1
  9120. 1
  9121. 1
  9122. 1
  9123. 1
  9124. 1
  9125. 1
  9126. 1
  9127. 1
  9128. 1
  9129. 1
  9130. 1
  9131. 1
  9132. 1
  9133. 1
  9134. 1
  9135. 1
  9136. 1
  9137. 1
  9138. 1
  9139. 1
  9140. 1
  9141. 1
  9142. 1
  9143. 1
  9144. 1
  9145. 1
  9146. Morris Rulin it's the medical consensus about execution methods, based on observations of executions and theoretical analyses of the way they cause death, the pain level likely associated with it, and the duration of the process of dying and the executed person's level of consciousness during that period. the electric chair is generally assumed to cause much more pain than a firing squad through extrapolation from how painful other strong electric shocks are, and it has a big risk of taking much longer to kill than a volley of bullets to the heart. lethal injections as they are traditionally done in the US are easily the most cruel of the american execution methods, taking longer to kill on a good day, and way way longer on a bad day. the condemnes is injected with a paralytic that's intended solely to keep his body from showing signs that he is in agony, and even that sometimes fails and people have been known to writhe and moan for over half an hour after the poison injection wven in 21st century american executions. o e common problem is that medical professionals are barred from executing people by medical ethics, and the people doing the injections sometimes have trouble finding veins, which sometimws results in one or multiple of the three injections (sedative, paralytic, deadly poison) being injected into flesh from where it is then absorbed into the bloodstream several times slower than intended. lethal injection as practised in the US has been throughly demonstrated to be unviable as a humane execution method (though madsive opioid overdose or opioid+benzodiazepine overdose in my opinion would be a very good option), and the electric chair is just absurd.
    1
  9147. 1
  9148. 1
  9149. 1
  9150. 1
  9151. 1
  9152. 1
  9153. 1
  9154. 1
  9155. 1
  9156. 1
  9157. 1
  9158. 1
  9159. 1
  9160. 1
  9161. 1
  9162. 1
  9163. 1
  9164. 1
  9165. 1
  9166. 1
  9167. 1
  9168. 1
  9169. 1
  9170. 1
  9171. 1
  9172. 1
  9173. 1
  9174. 1
  9175. 1
  9176. 1
  9177. 1
  9178. 1
  9179. 1
  9180. 1
  9181. 1
  9182. 1
  9183. 1
  9184. 1
  9185. 1
  9186. 1
  9187. 1
  9188. 1
  9189. 1
  9190. 1
  9191. 1
  9192. 1
  9193. 1
  9194. 1
  9195. 1
  9196. 1
  9197. 1
  9198. 1
  9199. 1
  9200. 1
  9201. 1
  9202. 1
  9203. 1
  9204. 1
  9205. 1
  9206. 1
  9207. 1
  9208. 1
  9209. 1
  9210. 1
  9211. 1
  9212. 1
  9213. 1
  9214. 1
  9215. 1
  9216. 1
  9217. 1
  9218. 1
  9219. 1
  9220. 1
  9221. 1
  9222. 1
  9223. 1
  9224. 1
  9225. 1
  9226. 1
  9227. 1
  9228. 1
  9229. 1
  9230. 1
  9231. 1
  9232. 1
  9233. 1
  9234. 1
  9235. 1
  9236. 1
  9237. 1
  9238. 1
  9239. 1
  9240. 1
  9241. 1
  9242. 1
  9243. 1
  9244. 1
  9245. 1
  9246. 1
  9247. 1
  9248. 1
  9249. 1
  9250. 1
  9251. 1
  9252. 1
  9253. 1
  9254. 1
  9255. 1
  9256. 1
  9257. 1
  9258. 1
  9259. 1
  9260. 1
  9261. 1
  9262. 1
  9263. 1
  9264. 1
  9265. 1
  9266. 1
  9267. 1
  9268. 1
  9269. 1
  9270. 1
  9271. 1
  9272. 1
  9273. 1
  9274. 1
  9275. 1
  9276. 1
  9277. 1
  9278. 1
  9279. 1
  9280. 1
  9281. 1
  9282. 1
  9283. 1
  9284. 1
  9285. 1
  9286. 1
  9287. 1
  9288. 1
  9289. 1
  9290. 1
  9291. 1
  9292. 1
  9293. 1
  9294. 1
  9295. 1
  9296. 1
  9297. 1
  9298. 1
  9299. 1
  9300. 1
  9301. 1
  9302. 1
  9303. 1
  9304. 1
  9305. 1
  9306. 1
  9307. 1
  9308. 1
  9309. 1
  9310. 1
  9311. 1
  9312. 1
  9313. 1
  9314. 1
  9315. 1
  9316. 1
  9317. 1
  9318. 1
  9319. 1
  9320. 1
  9321. 1
  9322. 1
  9323. 1
  9324. 1
  9325. 1
  9326. 1
  9327. 1
  9328. 1
  9329. 1
  9330. 1
  9331. 1
  9332. 1
  9333. 1
  9334. 1
  9335. 1
  9336. 1
  9337. 1
  9338. 1
  9339. 1
  9340. 1
  9341. 1
  9342. 1
  9343. 1
  9344. 1
  9345. 1
  9346. 1
  9347. 1
  9348. 1
  9349. 1
  9350. 1
  9351. 1
  9352. 1
  9353. 1
  9354. 1
  9355. 1
  9356. 1
  9357. 1
  9358. 1
  9359. 1
  9360. 1
  9361. 1
  9362. 1
  9363. 1
  9364. 1
  9365. 1
  9366. 1
  9367. 1
  9368. 1
  9369. 1
  9370. 1
  9371. 1
  9372. 1
  9373. 1
  9374. the most dangerous thing is when such a nation, of whom almost every citizen alive today has been raised on the same continuous victimhood narrative, is provided with a huge terrorist attack like the hamassacre to serve as evidence. practically all of these people have spent their entire lives grasping or listening to their media grasp at straws to use as evidence of their unique victimhood and as justification to oppress millions of palestinians and kill or imprison hundreds of thousands. by the standard of proportionality they have always seen their society broadly accept, in which practically no evil done to palestinians can be too high of a price for "security" for jews, the hamassacre has done away with palestinian rights including the right to life entirely. israelis deliberately choose not to recognize the fact that the hamassacre was only possible either due to the most unbelievable incompetence of primarily the military command and secondarily the intelligence agencies and government, or due to a treason plot to allow the hamassacre as a pretext for annihilating palestine (as erdogan likely did with the turkish failed coup). they choose to instead pretend that this is now the benchmark for the threat that israel faces, as if it could not have been almost entirely prevented by simply manning the border very normally, and not having the military command wait six hours to even initiate a response. currently, the dictated and broadly accepted position is apparently that the people no longer trust netanyahu to keep them safe because he failed at that, but they trust him to restore their safety by killing gaza, and then when the "war" is over, that's the right time for him to step down and for israel to start trying to understand what went wrong... or rather to start asking netanyahu's national security apparatus about the version of events that they will have then been given months or years to prepare. and of course after almost the whole country has then made themselves complicit in killing gaza, there will be very little appetite for proving that there had been something fishy about the pretext of the operation.
    1
  9375. 1
  9376. 1
  9377. 1
  9378. 1
  9379. 1
  9380. 1
  9381. 1
  9382. 1
  9383. 1
  9384. 1
  9385. 1
  9386. 1
  9387. 1
  9388. 1
  9389. 1
  9390. 1
  9391. 1
  9392. 1
  9393. 1
  9394. 1
  9395. 1
  9396. 1
  9397. 1
  9398. 1
  9399. 1
  9400. 1
  9401. 1
  9402. 1
  9403. 1
  9404. 1
  9405. 1
  9406. 1
  9407. 1
  9408. 1
  9409. 1
  9410. 1
  9411. 1
  9412. 1
  9413. 1
  9414. 1
  9415. 1
  9416. 1
  9417. 1
  9418. 1
  9419. 1
  9420. 1
  9421. 1
  9422. 1
  9423. 1
  9424. 1
  9425. 1
  9426. 1
  9427. 1
  9428. 1
  9429. 1
  9430. 1
  9431. 1
  9432. 1
  9433. 1
  9434. 1
  9435. 1
  9436. 1
  9437. 1
  9438. 1
  9439. 1
  9440. 1
  9441. 1
  9442. 1
  9443. 1
  9444. 1
  9445. 1
  9446. 1
  9447. 1
  9448. 1
  9449. 1
  9450. 1
  9451. 1
  9452. 1
  9453. 1
  9454. 1
  9455. 1
  9456. 1
  9457. 1
  9458. 1
  9459. 1
  9460. 1
  9461. 1
  9462. 1
  9463. 1
  9464. 1
  9465. 1
  9466. 1
  9467. 1
  9468. 1
  9469. 1
  9470. 1
  9471. 1
  9472. 1
  9473. 1
  9474. 1
  9475. 1
  9476. 1
  9477. 1
  9478. 1
  9479. 1
  9480. 1
  9481. 1
  9482. 1
  9483. 1
  9484. 1
  9485. 1
  9486. 1
  9487. 1
  9488. 1
  9489. 1
  9490. 1
  9491. 1
  9492. 1
  9493. 1
  9494. 1
  9495. 1
  9496. 1
  9497. 1
  9498. 1
  9499. 1
  9500. 1
  9501. 1
  9502. 1
  9503. 1
  9504. 1
  9505. 1
  9506. 1
  9507. 1
  9508. 1
  9509. 1
  9510. 1
  9511. 1
  9512. 1
  9513. 1
  9514. 1
  9515. 1
  9516. 1
  9517. 1
  9518. 1
  9519. 1
  9520. 1
  9521. 1
  9522. 1
  9523. 1
  9524. 1
  9525. 1
  9526. 1
  9527. 1
  9528. 1
  9529. 1
  9530. 1
  9531. 1
  9532. 1
  9533. 1
  9534. 1
  9535. 1
  9536. 1
  9537. 1
  9538. 1
  9539. 1
  9540. 1
  9541. 1
  9542. 1
  9543. 1
  9544. 1
  9545. 1
  9546. 1
  9547. 1
  9548. 1
  9549. 1
  9550. 1
  9551. 1
  9552. 1
  9553. 1
  9554. 1
  9555. 1
  9556. 1
  9557. 1
  9558. 1
  9559. 1
  9560. 1
  9561. 1
  9562. 1
  9563. 1
  9564. 1
  9565. 1
  9566. 1
  9567. 1
  9568. 1
  9569. 1
  9570. 1
  9571. 1
  9572. 1
  9573. 1
  9574. 1
  9575. 1
  9576. 1
  9577. 1
  9578. 1
  9579. 1
  9580. 1
  9581. 1
  9582. 1
  9583. 1
  9584. 1
  9585. 1
  9586. 1
  9587. 1
  9588. 1
  9589. 1
  9590. 1
  9591. 1
  9592. 1
  9593. 1
  9594. 1
  9595. 1
  9596. 1
  9597. 1
  9598. 1
  9599. 1
  9600. 1
  9601. 1
  9602. 1
  9603.  @sevinbamuels6560  from wikipedia: "Nervous laughter is laughter provoked from an audience's expression of alarm, embarrassment, discomfort or confusion, rather than amusement. Nervous laughter is usually less robust in expression than "a good belly laugh", and may be combined with confused glances or awkward silence on the part of others in the audience. Nervous laughter is considered analogous to a courtesy laugh, which may be rendered by more of a conscious effort in an attempt to move a situation along more quickly, especially when the comedian is pausing for laughter. Nervous laughter is a physical reaction to stress, tension, confusion, or anxiety. Neuroscientist Vilayanur S. Ramachandran states "We have nervous laughter because we want to make ourselves think what horrible thing we encountered isn't really as horrible as it appears, something we want to believe." Psychologist and neuroscientist Robert Provine, from the University of Maryland, studied over 1,200 "laughter episodes" and determined that 80% of laughter isn't a response to an intentional joke.[1] Unhealthy or "nervous" laughter comes from the throat. This nervous laughter is not true laughter, but an expression of tension and anxiety. Instead of relaxing a person, nervous laughter tightens them up even further. Much of this nervous laughter is produced in times of high emotional stress, especially during times where an individual is afraid they might harm another person in various ways, such as a person's feelings or even physically.[2] People laugh when they need to project dignity and control during times of stress and anxiety. In these situations, people usually laugh in an unconscious attempt to reduce stress and calm down, however, it often works otherwise. Nervous laughter is often considered fake laughter and even heightens the awkwardness of the situation.[3] People may laugh nervously when exposed to stress due to witnessing others' pain. For instance, in Stanley Milgram's obedience experiment, subjects ("teachers") were told to shock "learners" every time the learners answered a question incorrectly. Although the "learners" were not actually shocked, the subjects believed they were. As they were going through the study, many of the "subjects showed signs of extreme tension and conflict".[4] Milgram observed some subjects laughing nervously when they heard the "learners'" false screams of pain. In A Brief Tour of Human Consciousness, neuroscientist V.S. Ramachandran suggests that laughter is used as a defense mechanism used to guard against overwhelming anxiety. Laughter often diminishes the suffering associated with a traumatic event.[2]"
    1
  9604. 1
  9605. 1
  9606. 1
  9607. 1
  9608. 1
  9609. 1
  9610. 1
  9611. 1
  9612. 1
  9613. 1
  9614. 1
  9615. 1
  9616. 1
  9617. Person Person the russians weren't trying to make it to kyiv from rostov. their ground vehicles were trying to make it to kyiv the short way (I think like 100-150km) from belarus near/through the chernobyl exclusion zone, and they landed a rather large contingent of airborne troops (mentioned in the video) at hostomel airport just outside of kyiv with that big swarm of transport helicopters that we saw one of the earliest videos of, where they presumably assumed that they would be able to fly in more troops and equipment by plane quickly. of course one of their false assumptions was that they would be able to immediately eliminate any noteworthy threats from the ukrainian airforce and ukrainian air defenses. I would guess that with the speed of armoured vehicles, the actual time it would take just to drive COMPLETELY unimpeded and unsecured from belarus to kyiv would be in the 5-10 hour range. but even if they didn't expect any organized resistance, they would have known that there were ukrainian armed forces positioned along the way as if to defend against such an invasion, and they would not have been able to discount the possibility of individual ukrainian units fighting even without orders, so they would have needed to move carefully to protect themselves against the possibility, and given that fact, there is no way they could have made it in 12 hours. heck, if the ukrainian state had fallen apart, the russians would have been impeded by civilians trying to escape on the roads instead!
    1
  9618. 1
  9619. 1
  9620. 1
  9621. 1
  9622. 1
  9623. 1
  9624. 1
  9625. 1
  9626. 1
  9627. 1
  9628. 1
  9629. 1
  9630. 1
  9631. 1
  9632. 1
  9633. 1
  9634.  @ryri51  good point. and it's not just the border wall and fence, if you look at a satellite picture you can easily see the ~1km wide strip of land on the gazan side of the border where israel bulldozed all buildings, and compensated nobody because obviously it's their fault if their houses get in the way of israeli national security. officially, israel allows farming on most of that land, but that's rarely been practiced as written, with farmers being shot at whenever the army was angry about something. journeyman pictures just uploaded an old gonzo documentary from 2003 that makes for an interesting look back in time and features the demolition of those buildings. with those crazy armed and armoured bulldozers that probably only israel has because of their fondness of conducting home demolitions as routine military operations that are not supposed to be combat, so it's preferable to avoid explosions. truly, israel loves demolitions. today they still have their official policy of tearing down the homes of families of west bank residents who conduct attacks, during the nakba the core of the official orders regarding palestinian communities was to destroy all the buildings (officially the troops were usually supposed to let the residents leave, but typically there was quite a lot of killing if the residents had not already fled), and israel even demolished almost everything in those settlements in gaza and sinai that it abandoned (in gaza they left some greenhouses intact, but not as much of them as had been agreed).
    1
  9635. 1
  9636. 1
  9637. 1
  9638. 1
  9639. 1
  9640. 1
  9641. 1
  9642. 1
  9643. 1
  9644. 1
  9645. 1
  9646. 1
  9647. 1
  9648. 1
  9649. 1
  9650. 1
  9651. 1
  9652. 1
  9653. 1
  9654. 1
  9655. 1
  9656. 1
  9657. 1
  9658. 1
  9659. 1
  9660. 1
  9661. 1
  9662. 1
  9663. 1
  9664. 1
  9665. 1
  9666. 1
  9667. 1
  9668. 1
  9669. 1
  9670. 1
  9671. 1
  9672. 1
  9673. 1
  9674. 1
  9675. 1
  9676. 1
  9677. 1
  9678. 1
  9679.  @colorbugoriginals4457  that I can agree with, though I would say that the realistic way to go is to mostly adapt to dog "language" rather than expecting dogs to learn human language, and that's where a huge portion of dog owners go completely ridiculously wrong. humans are supposed tobe the smarter ones with the reasoning skills, and the ways dogs express themselves are almost always very clear and honest, and dogs appear to be pre-programmed probably through their 30,000 years of domestication to view humans similarly as members of their own species, which includes that they understand human imitations of dog body language as equivalent (though of course there are various limitations derived from the different posture and lack of moveable ears and tails on humans). and they do adapt to humans quite substantially too, for example I'm pretty sure that pet dogs typically read smiles correctly, despite the closest dog signal, the baring of teeth, is a severe threat pose. from what I've heard, non-human primates for example, being non-domesticated, stay more uneasy about human smiles even when kept captive with quite a lot of human contact. anyways, I find it absolutely bizarre how modern dog owning culture more often than not has owners maintain such ineptitude in communicating with their dogs and forming a genuine bond of mutual understanding rather than the owner projecting their own feelings onto the dog. there's this disrespectful failure to recognise them as individuals, they're approached much like toys.
    1
  9680. 1
  9681. 1
  9682. 1
  9683. 1
  9684. 1
  9685. 1
  9686. 1
  9687. 1
  9688. 1
  9689. 1
  9690. 1
  9691. 1
  9692. 1
  9693. 1
  9694. 1
  9695. 1
  9696. 1
  9697. 1
  9698. 1
  9699. 1
  9700. 1
  9701. 1
  9702. 1
  9703. 1
  9704. 1
  9705. 1
  9706. 1
  9707. 1
  9708. 1
  9709. 1
  9710. 1
  9711. 1
  9712. 1
  9713. 1
  9714. 1
  9715. 1
  9716. 1
  9717. 1
  9718. 1
  9719.  @maoritrustee-io3hw  if i°°ael was to use hyp°rsonic we°pons, it would use them against targets in syr°a or ir°n, or maybe in ir°q or yem°n, where there would be interception systems to overcome or at least the flight distances necessary to even accelerate a miss°le to hyp°rsonic speed and test flight characteristics. most of all, hyp°rsonic we°pons are extremely expensive, and if they were to be used at all against g°za, then only once or twice directly as an alternative to tests that would otherwise have used up a miss°le anyways. and even then, it would likely make more sense to use them against a defended target where it would test the we°pon's ability to penetrate the defenses, unless they're worried about wreckage being recovered and studied by ir°n and r°ssia. the only exception, something that could be tested well in g°za, would be a dedicated bunk°er-bust°r or more specifically ground-penetrating hyp°rsonic miss°le, something designed to compete with the most deeply penetrating airdropped b°mbs like the GBU-28 or GBU-57A/B. that is if we believe the claim that some tunnels in g°za are 70m deep, which I have come to doubt very much since I see hardly any sign of the "g°za metro" playing a role or even being treated as relevant by is°°el - they keep claiming to have captured this and that territory, yet the only instance of them claiming to have captured any tunnel that I have seen was under shifa hospital, which they themselves said was taken without a fight, and it appears to have been a small self-contained sub-basement not connected to a greater tunnel network, while also having its one entrance into a tiny building within the hospital complex sealed under a concrete floor.
    1
  9720. 1
  9721. 1
  9722. 1
  9723. 1
  9724. 1
  9725. 1
  9726. 1
  9727. 1
  9728. 1
  9729. 1
  9730. 1
  9731. 1
  9732. 1
  9733. 1
  9734. 1
  9735. 1
  9736. 1
  9737. 1
  9738. 1
  9739. 1
  9740. 1
  9741. 1
  9742. 1
  9743. 1
  9744. 1
  9745. 1
  9746. 1
  9747. 1
  9748. 1
  9749. 1
  9750. 1
  9751. 1
  9752. 1
  9753. 1
  9754.  @thepolarphantasm2319  biden's 'the other team" gaffe while in israel was worse. biden claiming to have seen pictures of decapitated babies, seeming to catch himself right after he said it, and then not retracting but vaguely amending/correcting that as "having that confirmed" was worse (his staff later said that he neither saw such pictures nor had the occurrence confirmed). my personal favourite absurdity is how biden has I believe four times as president proclaimed that the US' commitment to taiwan in case of a chinese attack is that the US military will defend taiwan (US goes to war against china), only for his staff every single time having to awkwardly tell the press in a roundabout way to ignore what he says entirely because he either doesn't understand what he'ss sgjaying, or doesn't ubderstand the policy, or is lying - because the US' commitment to taiwan remains unchanged since the 1970s taiwan relations act, which is the so called "strategic albiguity" express non-commitment designed to leave taiwan too unsure of US support to declare ita sovereignty as a nation seperate from china, which would "provoke" a chinese attack. the US' commitment to taiwan explicitly is only to supply taiwan with defensive weapons (so about equivalent to western support for ukraine early in the invasion, except the US would not be able to do it because china would blockade taiwan). and excluded from all US commitments are several taiwanese islands like the kinmen islands that are close enough to be visible from a chinese city, and are likely to be the site of china's trial invasion (population 130k). four times biden's staff had to say that no, biden has not announced a policy change, and no, biden has not stated what the existing policy is, he's just like...... saying things, please move on, there's nothing to see here!
    1
  9755. 1
  9756. 1
  9757. 1
  9758. 1
  9759. 1
  9760. 1
  9761.  @moka8697  passiver widerstand ist widerstand, keine neutralität. neutralität in einem krieg ist, wenn ein land an den kampfhandlungen nicht teilnimmt und wirtschaftlich alle kriegsparteien gleich sanktioniert, oder auch nicht (wobei man wohl diskutieren könnte, ob unterschiedliche sanktionen auf basis unterschiedlicher schuldeinschätzung nach internationalem recht schon in jedem fall parteiergreifung sind). z.B. war die schweiz in beiden weltkriegen wie schon seit napoleons zeiten oder so neutral, und hat allgemein mit allen kriegsparteien frei gehandelt. darum das nazigold. um ihre neutralität zu halten, hat die schweiz traditional heftigst in defensive kriegsvorbereitung investiert, denn wenn man neutral ist, muss man damit rechnen, sich ohne hilfe zu verteidigen. im ukrainekrieg dagegen hat die schweiz sensationell mit ihrer tradition gebrochen, und nicht stark aber doch eindeutig gegen russland stellung bezogen, durch übernahme diverse sanktionen, und nach ~1,5 jahren dann soweit ich weiß auch durch bewilligung mancher munitionsweitervergabeanfragen (z.B. für gepardkanone) - wurde jedenfalls so beschlossen, ich meine per volksentscheid. die türkei ist entgegen weit verbreiteter wahnvorstellungen nicht neutral, sondern unterstützt die ukraine durch waffenlieferung und gemeinsame produktion schon seit einigen jahren (und macht zwar auch mit russland waffendels wie S-400, steht aber in praktisch allen stellvertreterkriegen auf entgegengesetzter seite zu russland, teilweise auch sehr direkt, z.B. mit türkischem militär gegen wagner in libyen [mit den französischen kolonialspaßvögeln auf seiten russlands, gegen so ziemlich den ganzen westen und UN-mehrheit]) - die türkei hat nur keinen bock auf die sanktionen, und profitiert an sanktionsausweichmaßnahmen (z.B. sind massenhaft russische yachten da gelandet, und das tourismusgeschäft mit russen boomt). neutral ist derweil der absolut einseitig geliebte allerbeste freund deutschlands und amerikas - israel. selbst marokko hat wohl dutzende T-72 der ukraine geschenkt, aber von is°°el gab es nüschd. die verkaufen übrigens auch waffen an russland und china.
    1
  9762. 1
  9763. 1
  9764. 1
  9765. 1
  9766. 1
  9767. 1
  9768. 1
  9769. 1
  9770. 1
  9771. 1
  9772. 1
  9773. 1
  9774. 1
  9775.  @joz534  yes and no - that's known to be much less reliable because many farmers use them at later points before harvest than the usage framework deemed safe permits, and the regulatory mechanisms in even the more regulated countries are fundamentally unsafe because from a standpoint of safety, they're backwards: new agricultural poisons don't need to be proven safe for their use to be permitted, everything is permitted until its use proves it to be unsafe and it gets banned. producers are, to varying degrees in different jurisdictions, incentivised to not market dangerous products to not be sued by the public eventually, but it's often very difficult to prove in court that some health issue was caused by a specific product (except for those caused immediately by contact mostly during use, so those issues do get eliminated by company testing before a product gets sold). fundamentally, the regulatory system having no requirement to prove safety before bringing a new product to market like medications do means that the public is experimented on. and because of the lack of control for other factors impacting people's health, only rather severe impacts can ever be traced back to one agricultural poison, whereas smaller negative impacts of various poisons people are exposed to accumulate without attribution. also safety of fruit normally eaten without the peel is determined without it, and I believe that does include citrus fruit despite the peel (zest) being used somewhat commonly. of course in places with good regulation like the EU, you can get certified organic produce that's not allowed to have any agricultural poisons on it, or only a small selection of them.
    1
  9776. 1
  9777. 1
  9778. 1
  9779. 1
  9780. 1
  9781. 1
  9782. 1
  9783. 1
  9784. 1
  9785. 1
  9786. 1
  9787. 1
  9788. 1
  9789. 1
  9790. 1
  9791. 1
  9792. 1
  9793. 1
  9794. 1
  9795. 1
  9796. 1
  9797. 1
  9798. 1
  9799. 1
  9800. 1
  9801. 1
  9802. 1
  9803. 1
  9804. 1
  9805. 1
  9806. 1
  9807. 1
  9808. 1
  9809. 1
  9810. 1
  9811. 1
  9812. 1
  9813. 1
  9814. 1
  9815. 1
  9816. 1
  9817. 1
  9818. 1
  9819. 1
  9820. 1
  9821. 1
  9822. 1
  9823. 1
  9824. 1
  9825. 1
  9826. 1
  9827. 1
  9828. 1
  9829. 1
  9830. 1
  9831. 1
  9832. 1
  9833. 1
  9834. 1
  9835. 1
  9836. 1
  9837. 1
  9838. 1
  9839. 1
  9840. 1
  9841. 1
  9842. 1
  9843. 1
  9844. 1
  9845. 1
  9846. 1
  9847. 1
  9848. 1
  9849. 1
  9850. 1
  9851. 1
  9852. 1
  9853. 1
  9854. 1
  9855. 1
  9856. 1
  9857. 1
  9858. 1
  9859. 1
  9860. 1
  9861. 1
  9862. 1
  9863. 1
  9864. 1
  9865. 1
  9866. 1
  9867. 1
  9868. 1
  9869. 1
  9870. 1
  9871. 1
  9872. 1
  9873. 1
  9874. 1
  9875. 1
  9876. 1
  9877. 1
  9878. 1
  9879. 1
  9880. 1
  9881. 1
  9882. 1
  9883. 1
  9884. 1
  9885. 1
  9886. 1
  9887. 1
  9888. 1
  9889. 1
  9890. 1
  9891. 1
  9892. 1
  9893. 1
  9894. 1
  9895. 1
  9896. 1
  9897. 1
  9898. 1
  9899. 1
  9900. 1
  9901. 1
  9902. 1
  9903. 1
  9904. 1
  9905. 1
  9906. 1
  9907. 1
  9908. 1
  9909. 1
  9910. 1
  9911. 1
  9912. 1
  9913. 1
  9914. 1
  9915. 1
  9916. 1
  9917. 1
  9918. 1
  9919. 1
  9920. 1
  9921. 1
  9922. 1
  9923. 1
  9924. 1
  9925. 1
  9926. 1
  9927. 1
  9928. 1
  9929. 1
  9930. 1
  9931. 1
  9932. 1
  9933. 1
  9934. 1
  9935. 1
  9936. 1
  9937. 1
  9938. 1
  9939. 1
  9940. 1
  9941. 1
  9942. 1
  9943. 1
  9944. 1
  9945. 1
  9946. 1
  9947. 1
  9948. 1
  9949. 1
  9950. 1
  9951. 1
  9952. 1
  9953. 1
  9954. 1
  9955. wow, this is terrible. I only just found your channel, and through 5-10 videos already subbed and unsubbed because it became apparent that you constantly engage in very severe oversimplification, and characterisations based not at all in reality but instead just asserting things to be a certain way because that's what supports the political message you intend to push - which as an anti-religious leftist I'm likely to agree with, but this level of dishonesty is repulsive, and more importantly, the realisation of how unreliable your representations of reality are makes your videos pretty much worthless because I can't believe anything you say. in short, you're copying second thought, right? basically leftist pragerU. cool, the world totally needed that. I watched your previous falun gong video after this one because you say at the end here that that deals with the repression, but no, it absolutely does not. you saw fit to cover the entire CCP-falun gong issue about 80% as deliberations about how "deranged" the latter is. the remaining 20% are almost exclusively spent on falun gong's supposedly provocative actions against the CCP (essentially acting too much like one would in a free country), and 100% of the minute little bit of attention (except for the one contradictory disclaimer at the end here) that you give to the CCP side of things is framed as them having "no choice" and being "forced to respond" with repressive actions, of which you detail almost nothing. didn't even mention organ harvesting, I guess that would have been too awkward to downplay. this is nowhere near a reasonable coverage of the issue. the real problem is that the CCP has enacted a policy of extermination against falun gong, while falun gong's misdeeds that you spent 80% of your coverage on are standard religious BS and really very little beyond thought crimes. people identified as falun gong members in china can expect an automatic unofficial life sentence with no judicial procedings and no public record (officially they just cease to exist, the government claims to know nothing of their whereabouts). then at the prison/labour camp, they undergo medical tests to identify their suitability and campatibility criteria for organ donation, and at any point in time after that, they may be matched to some random person seeking an organ transplant, and be sent off to their execution by organ removal without warning. this practice has been the source of most transplant organs in china since about the year 2000. in recent years, falun gong members may have stopped being the majority of organ "donors", but only because the program was extended to uyghurs. there is no doubt that the number of falun gong members murdered for their organs is in the hundreds of thousands, and it could be as high as a million. I know this sounds unbelievable, but look it up, that is what is happening. the party decided that they all should die, and they have stuck to that. the unbelievablenatire of it is all the more reason to talk about THAT, rather than about how falun gong beliefs are weird scientology-like conspiracy nut stuff. the only reason why the repression of falun gong does not qualify as a genocide is that it is not an ethnic group. in every other way including the scale, it would qualify. and then the way YOU cover it is 'their thought crimes do be crazy tho', and claiming that the CCP's actions are falun gong's fault because they gave them "no choice" and "forced" them to "respond"??? dude, what in marx' beard's name is wrong with you? I know that the reason why you do this is that your americabrained perception as an american leftist sees falun gong as an extension of the republican party (because that's the strongest ally against the CCP that they found), and you view the CCP through rose-coloured glasses because hating them is a republican thing. but that is nowhere near a good reason to engage in what would be genocide apologia if only the victims were an ethnic group. man, the american ignorance required to live with yourself must be truly blissful. TL;DR: you disgust me.
    1
  9956. 1
  9957. 1
  9958. 1
  9959. 1
  9960. 1
  9961. 1
  9962. 1
  9963. 1
  9964.  @CassieAngelica  oh wow, you read books? couldn't be me. I'm just a news and educational video junkie - my entry into caring about politics at all was watching the amazing AJE live coverage of the egyptian revolution. that's why egypt's current government is, as I have been known to say, my personal least favourite dictatorship. sure, any of those other commentators provide more informed commentary on a more relevant selection of topics... and without the hatefulness. fausch has talent for making engaging streaming content (for example destiny is incredibly boring by comparison), but besides him being a total a-hole, the core problem of his content is that he has very little interest in politics and important world news, so he covers that by skimming news pages or wikipedia articles live and interjecting super ignorant commentary (ignorant because he doesn't and never has paid attention off stream due to his lack of interest) to give even more ignorant viewers the impression that he knows things. his political interest is almost entirely limited to american electoral political drama and twitter drama. he used to have a little more interest in politics years ago when he was even more deranged, but he very obviously got bored with it a few years ago already. he's just continuing to superficially engage with news and politics because that functions as a content niche by way of frequently creating strong reactions to his content that he can then milk. plus he enjoys how associating himself with politics makes him feel important or heroic. things he's actually interested in are video games and anime, but if he dropped politics and only made content about entertainment media, likely much of the direct engagement with his content would be lost, and certainly all of the drama engagement would be. he could try to stir s*** up with bad media takes, but I think he would be much more easily ignored in that, and get only a small fraction of the engagement he used to. some of fausch's biggest hits of ignorance that come to mind are his upload about the 2021 popular uprising in kazakhstan, and the smaller but more hilarious time 5 months ago when he misinterpreted a badly worded tory plan to end the non-deportation policy for undocumented victims of human trafficking in britain to instead be an open government plan to legalise the enslavement of undocumented immigrants, explicitly using the term "slavery". and on that video, I was the only one in the comment section who understood the real issue, or even that fausch made a mistake. xD
    1
  9965. 1
  9966. 1
  9967. 1
  9968. 1
  9969. 1
  9970. 1
  9971. 1
  9972. 1
  9973. 1
  9974. 1
  9975. 1
  9976. 1
  9977. 1
  9978. 1
  9979. 1
  9980. 1
  9981. 1
  9982. 1
  9983. 1
  9984. 1
  9985. 1
  9986. 1
  9987. 1
  9988. 1
  9989. 1
  9990. 1
  9991. 1
  9992. 1
  9993. 1
  9994. 1
  9995. 1
  9996. 1
  9997. 1
  9998. 1
  9999. 1
  10000. 1
  10001. 1
  10002. 1
  10003. 1
  10004. 1
  10005. 1
  10006. 1
  10007. 1
  10008. 1
  10009. 1
  10010. 1
  10011. 1
  10012. 1
  10013. 1
  10014. 1
  10015. 1
  10016. 1
  10017. 1
  10018. 1
  10019. 1
  10020. 1
  10021. 1
  10022. 1
  10023. 1
  10024. 1
  10025. 1
  10026. 1
  10027. 1
  10028. 1
  10029. 1
  10030. 1
  10031. 1
  10032. 1
  10033. 1
  10034. 1
  10035. 1
  10036. 1
  10037. 1
  10038. 1
  10039. 1
  10040. 1
  10041. 1
  10042. 1
  10043.  @michelleisaacson6069  based on what is ukraine doing damn good? you definitely can't claim steategic genius when their original strategy of armoured breakthroughs failed completely and cost them dozens of vehicles at no gain. given the situation thus demonstrated, strategic genius would mean not trying that in the first place. even without detailed knowledge of the battlefield, I think it's very telling of how little ukraine has to show for its efforts that ukraine's government and supporters start chanting "breakthrough, breakthrough!" every time they pass another one or two percent of russian defenses towards melitopol. at this rate, they wiuld literally never get there. not only is the advance so slow that russia could build additional trench lines in front of ukraine faster than ukraine captures them, but neither ukraine's manpower and stocks nor ukraine's foreign support can take that much attrition. and it's not like melitopol is victory, it's just a waystation to enable a recapture of the zaporizhzhia and kherson oblasts, and hypothetically then attack crimea, which is looking absurdly unrealistic as that would be ten times more costly than melitopol, and look at how that is going! of course the russian army getting routed again can't be discounted as a possibility, but I think that seeing their extensive defensive network in zaporizhzhia holding as well as it does is giving them quite a lot of confidence in not being overrun, unlike the situation in kharkiv and luhansk a year ago.
    1
  10044. 1
  10045. 1
  10046. 1
  10047. 1
  10048. 1
  10049. 1
  10050. 1
  10051. 1
  10052. 1
  10053. 1
  10054. 1
  10055. 1
  10056. 1
  10057. 1
  10058. 1
  10059. 1
  10060. 1
  10061. 1
  10062. 1
  10063. 1
  10064. 1
  10065. 1
  10066. 1
  10067. 1
  10068. 1
  10069. 1
  10070. 1
  10071. 1
  10072. 1
  10073. 1
  10074. 1
  10075. 1
  10076. 1
  10077. 1
  10078. 1
  10079. 1
  10080. 1
  10081. 1
  10082. 1
  10083. 1
  10084. 1
  10085. 1
  10086. 1
  10087. 1
  10088. 1
  10089. 1
  10090. 1
  10091. 1
  10092. 1
  10093. 1
  10094. 1
  10095. 1
  10096. 1
  10097. 1
  10098. 1
  10099. 1
  10100. 1
  10101. 1
  10102. 1
  10103.  @TresMar-n1u  no, free food for the poor is made of the cheapest kinds of ingredients in all countries including ones richer than argentina. the reason is that practically everywhere, such programs are ao limited in their financing that they struggle to even serve enough food. upgrading to more expensive ingredients would only happen after the program is sufficiently funded to feed everybody as often as they're willing to come. argentina is one of relatively few countries (I think australia and new zealand still partially are like that, parts of brazil are much like argentina, and parts of the US used to be more so than today) where a large portion of food calories are produced not in the form of food crops or animala raised on locally harvested or imported feed, but instead in the form of grass-fed livestock on huge ranches. it requires a lot of land in a reasonably moist and preferably temperate climate (in south america mostly land that has been deforested more or less for this purpose in the 20th and 21st century) and is not a terribly productive land use, so it tends tobe reserved for land where the soil is lacking in fertility (tropical and subtropical soils mostly are, except for volcanic soil, as what has built deep humous layers elaewhere in temperate regions is the seasonal glut of dead vegetation in the fall that then does not get broken down as completely). the status of meat as expensive food alao ismuch weaker in rich countries using efficient factory farming methods than it is in poorcountries where much of the meat is produced on amall farms. but you're still hardly ever going to see food that meaty in a soup kitchen outside of a ranching country. I'm still a little surprised to see it in argentina, but I guess in part it also is a matter of argentinian culture probably being very big on meat (beef), much like how texans and other US southerners are about barbecue and steak.
    1
  10104. 1
  10105. 1
  10106. 1
  10107. 1
  10108. 1
  10109. 1
  10110. 1
  10111. 1
  10112. 1
  10113. 1
  10114. 1
  10115. 1
  10116. 1
  10117. 1
  10118. 1
  10119. 1
  10120. 1
  10121. 1
  10122. 1
  10123. 1
  10124. 1
  10125. 1
  10126. 1
  10127. 1
  10128. 1
  10129. 1
  10130. 1
  10131. if those 20 years had been spent continuously weeding out corruption and incompetence in the government and state institutions, ensuring true democracy and effective public services, and building an army of women, the taliban would have had no chance. the government had too little popular support and wasn't even reliably paying its troops. when NATO left, or really already years ago when the US negotiated with the taliban with the total exclusion of the afghan government and its concerns, it became clear that the taliban would take over most or all of afghanistan before 2022, and the existence of the central government became more of a philosophical question while the future taliban government became a certainty. the taliban conquered some of the least taliban-friendly cities early on in their last push (after easily taking over almost all rural areas that the government had never really held anyways) and made secret deals with all sorts of military, tribal and local political leaders, and with each surrender, the government troops in the whole rest of the country became more certain that the defeat of the government was already decided. the troops also were often stationed far away from their families and tribes that they might want to defend, and they evidently were quite ambivalent about islamism vs. liberalism, which I presume is related to how military members in most countries tend to be more conservative than the average person, and low-ranking soldiers particularly in poor countries are largely from poor and rural families, which also makes them more conservative. police are more conservative, too. that's why I say that what they needed was an army of women (like 20% of the armed forces), because those women would have by the nature of being female soldiers been ideologically opposed to the taliban and very motivated to fight. their presence around their male comrades would have brought the ideals they were supposed to be fighting for closer, too - there would of course have been a lot of resistance to such female empowerment, but 20 years should have sufficed. but NATO didn't know what they were doing, half the time they didn't even know who they were shooting at. they didn't just turn incompetent with the way they did the withdrawal.
    1
  10132. 1
  10133. 1
  10134. 1
  10135. 1
  10136. 1
  10137. 1
  10138. 1
  10139. 1
  10140. 1
  10141. 1
  10142. 1
  10143. 1
  10144. 1
  10145. 1
  10146. 1
  10147. 1
  10148. 1
  10149. 1
  10150. 1
  10151. 1
  10152. 1
  10153. 1
  10154. 1
  10155. 1
  10156. 1
  10157. 1
  10158. 1
  10159. 1
  10160. 1
  10161. 1
  10162. 1
  10163. 1
  10164. 1
  10165. 1
  10166. 1
  10167. 1
  10168. 1
  10169. 1
  10170. 1
  10171. 1
  10172. 1
  10173. 1
  10174. 1
  10175. 1
  10176. 1
  10177. 1
  10178. 1
  10179. 1
  10180. 1
  10181. 1
  10182. 1
  10183. 1
  10184. 1
  10185. 1
  10186. 1
  10187. 1
  10188. 1
  10189. 1
  10190. 1
  10191. 1
  10192. 1
  10193. 1
  10194. 1
  10195. 1
  10196. 1
  10197. 1
  10198. 1
  10199. 1
  10200. 1
  10201. 1
  10202. 1
  10203. 1
  10204. 1
  10205. 1
  10206. 1
  10207. 1
  10208. 1
  10209. 1
  10210. 1
  10211. 1
  10212. 1
  10213. 1
  10214. 1
  10215. 1
  10216. 1
  10217. 1
  10218. 1
  10219. 1
  10220. 1
  10221. 1
  10222. 1
  10223. 1
  10224. 1
  10225. 1
  10226. 1
  10227. 1
  10228. 1
  10229. 1
  10230. 1
  10231. 1
  10232. 1
  10233. 1
  10234. 1
  10235. 1
  10236. 1
  10237. 1
  10238. 1
  10239. 1
  10240. 1
  10241. 1
  10242. 1
  10243. 1
  10244. 1
  10245. 1
  10246. 1
  10247. 1
  10248. 1
  10249. 1
  10250. 1
  10251. 1
  10252. 1
  10253. 1
  10254. 1
  10255. 1
  10256. 1
  10257. 1
  10258. 1
  10259. 1
  10260. 1
  10261. 1
  10262. 1
  10263. 1
  10264. 1
  10265. 1
  10266. 1
  10267. 1
  10268. 1
  10269. 1
  10270. 1
  10271. 1
  10272. 1
  10273. 1
  10274. 1
  10275. 1
  10276. 1
  10277. 1
  10278. 1
  10279. 1
  10280. 1
  10281. 1
  10282. 1
  10283. 1
  10284. 1
  10285. 1
  10286. 1
  10287. 1
  10288. 1
  10289. 1
  10290. 1
  10291. 1
  10292. 1
  10293. 1
  10294. 1
  10295. 1
  10296. 1
  10297. 1
  10298. 1
  10299. 1
  10300. 1
  10301. 1
  10302. 1
  10303. 1
  10304. 1
  10305. 1
  10306. 1
  10307. 1
  10308. 1
  10309. 1
  10310. 1
  10311. 1
  10312. 1
  10313. 1
  10314. 1
  10315. 1
  10316. 1
  10317. 1
  10318. 1
  10319.  @svenhagstrom2388  lol was bist du denn für ein witzbold? du versuchst hier sachen zu leugnen, die nicht mal das russische militär leugnet. aufnahmen der ukrainischen jets werden im allgemeinen nicht im zusammenhang mit storm shadow-einsätzen veröffentlicht, weil die 200km+ vom ziel entfernt bleiben (und ansonsten halten sich ukrainische jets von der russischen luftabwehr fern und kommen deshalb sehr wenig zum einsatz). generell sind von kampfjets selten videoaufnahmen zu erwarten, auf denen die nationalität der jets oder die art des einsatzes erkennbar, oder auch nur ort und datum identifizierbar sind. es gibt aber absolut eindeutige direkte beweise für den einsatz von storm shadow in mehreren fällen, in form von videoaufnahmen im flug, auf denen die eindeutig identifizierbar sind, sowohl von handy- und überwachungskameras als auch durch die zielvisiere russischer luftabwehrsysteme, sowie eindeutig identifizierbare überbleibsel der waffe am zielort. außerdem sind die meisten storm shadow-einsätze eindeutig dieser waffe zuzuordnen, weil die ukrainer keine andere präzisionswaffe mit so langer reichweite haben, die an der russischen luftwabwehr so gut vorbeikommt (storm shadow hat radar-stealth und fliegt sehr tief und schnell, kaum vergleichbar mit z.B. ukrainischen biber-drohnen, während tochka oder S-200 im boden-boden-einsatz viel ungenauer sind). ich verfolg das nicht so total genau, aber soweit ich es mitbekommen habe, gibt es in ~5 oder mehr fällen durch videos oder munitionsteile direkte beweise für storm shadow-einsätze, und in ~15 oder mehr fällen keine andere waffe, die den schaden plausibel erklären würde. und alle kriegsparteien sind sich offen einig, dass das storm shadow/SCALP-EG ist. wenn die ukraine andere waffen mit ähnlicher reichweite bekommen hätte, wie z.B. ATACMS, dann hätte russland dafür schon beweise geliefert und riesig groß herumgejammert. haben sie aber nicht.
    1
  10320. 1
  10321. 1
  10322. 1
  10323. 1
  10324. 1
  10325. 1
  10326. 1
  10327. 1
  10328. 1
  10329. 1
  10330. 1
  10331. 1
  10332. 1
  10333. 1
  10334. 1
  10335. 1
  10336. 1
  10337. 1
  10338. for postapocalyptic survival, an electric car would be a strange choice. one could make the argument that it's much more practical to properly autonomously operate an array of solar cells than it is to drill for and distill your own fuel - ready-made fuel is known to degrade over time, becoming unusable after several months to two years or so, gasoline faster than diesel, ethanol gasoline much faster, so you can't just buy and store many years' worth of fuel either. though in regions with active easy to operate oil wells producing high quality oil, if you have at least groups of hundreds of people still surviving like in the walking dead, it seems likely that they would continue to produce (possibly relatively crude) motor fuels, whether by continued use of existing refineries, or construction of primitive refineries like they've had in syrian rebel/IS territories for a couple of years. continued fuel production would be incredibly valuable, and it would likely be distributed quite widely. usingsolar cells and an EV would be much more autonomous, but realistically, you would be very limited in the amount of power you can produce with however many solar cells you have, so you'd want to use a vehicle that's built for low power consumption first. and if you did need a relatively powerful vehicle, that would not be an SUV-pickup, but a tractor. I looked it up, there already are electric tractors! :o they just better not have firmware to prevent unauthorised maintenance ... speaking of which, don't teslas have that sort of thing? how dependent exactly is the cybertruck on tesla support continuing to exist? xD
    1
  10339. 1
  10340. 1
  10341. 1
  10342. 1
  10343. 1
  10344. 1
  10345. 1
  10346. 1
  10347. 1
  10348. 1
  10349. 1
  10350. 1
  10351. 1
  10352. 1
  10353. 1
  10354. 1
  10355. 1
  10356. 1
  10357. 1
  10358. 1
  10359. 1
  10360. 1
  10361. 1
  10362. 1
  10363. 1
  10364. 1
  10365. 1
  10366. 1
  10367. 1
  10368. 1
  10369. 1
  10370. 1
  10371. 1
  10372. 1
  10373. 1
  10374. 1
  10375. 1
  10376. 1
  10377. 1
  10378. 1
  10379. 1
  10380. 1
  10381. 1
  10382. 1
  10383. 1
  10384. 1
  10385. 1
  10386. 1
  10387. 1
  10388. 1
  10389. 1
  10390. 1
  10391. 1
  10392. 1
  10393. 1
  10394. 1
  10395. 1
  10396. 1
  10397. 1
  10398. 1
  10399. 1
  10400. 1
  10401. 1
  10402. 1
  10403. 1
  10404. 1
  10405. 1
  10406. 1
  10407. 1
  10408. 1
  10409. 1
  10410. 1
  10411. 1
  10412. 1
  10413. 1
  10414. 1
  10415. 1
  10416. 1
  10417. 1
  10418. 1
  10419. 1
  10420. 1
  10421. 1
  10422. 1
  10423. 1
  10424. 1
  10425. 1
  10426. 1
  10427. 1
  10428. honestly, if that's your situation, and you can't get anything equivalent legally, you should research which opioids available on the black market make sense for this, by being roughly equivalent to what you've been getting in strength and usually associated addiction potential (as a rule of thumb, the opioids providing the strongest and pain relief also are the most addictive, for example fentanyl over heroin over morphine over codeine). I'm sure you can find discussions online of others in the same situation. I've never bought stuff on the darkweb (I find the potential to fall for spoofed marketplaces a bit intimidating), but that's probably what you'll need to do to find a broad selection. there also may be clearnet vendors for not yet illegal synthetic drugs ("research chemicals"), but it's rather likely nowadays that your jurisdiction has caught up enough to have banned all opioids. many such vendors do illegally ship products to places where they are not legal, but I don't know how much US states differ in terms of the RC ban whack-a-mole, and you generally don't want to order drugs through potential customs checks. besides, practically all RCs are inferior to the more established banned drugs they replace, they only exist to bypass bans, and their much shorter usage record makes their risk profiles much less clear, so finding a good source of one of the better banned drugs would be better. low to medium-powered opioids are niche products on the black market (because it mostly supplies addicts), but darknet marketplaces should offer all sorts of niche products. if you do that, the way to manage it would be to imitate your prior prescription use by settling on a specific dose taken a specific number of times a day, and using some method such as filling gel capsules to unitise enough doses for many days to come (in case you need to cut the stuff to increase volume to make the intended dose fit a capsule, you need to be EXTREMELY thorough about the mixing to avoid dangerously inconsistent dosages), because what you don't want to be doing is to measure out each dose before you take it, and succumb to the temptation to add just a bit more each time.
    1
  10429. 1
  10430. 1
  10431. 1
  10432. 1
  10433. 1
  10434. 1
  10435. 1
  10436. 1
  10437. 1
  10438. 1
  10439. 1
  10440. 1
  10441. 1
  10442. 1
  10443. 1
  10444. 1
  10445. 1
  10446. 1
  10447. 1
  10448. 1
  10449. 1
  10450. 1
  10451. 1
  10452. 1
  10453. 1
  10454. 1
  10455. 1
  10456. 1
  10457. 1
  10458. 1
  10459. 1
  10460. 1
  10461. 1
  10462. 1
  10463. 1
  10464. 1
  10465.  @marcosolo6491  if israel's 170,000 active duty soldiers had been spread evenly across israel and all its occupied territories, then there would have been over 2000 soldiers (not all combat troops, but still) already stationed in the area hamas invaded. and I'm sure you would agree that the gaza border very obviously warranted a much higher troop concentration than the average location in israel. do you feel like what you saw that day showed 2000 troops opposing the invasion because they were already there? I know that's not what I saw. I wasn't able to find a more specific claim about the size of IDF divisions or that one in particular, but the army section in charge of gazan border security, whose headquarter hamas captured, is the gaza division. in general, a division is supposed to consist of 500-20,000+ troops. well, those would have been convenient to have at hand, don't you think? by the way the commander of the gaza division, like everybody else, did not see fit to resign. do you know how long the IDF took to even initiate any counteroffensive operations? six hours, I kid you not. the last kibbutz was recaptured after two days, the border was announced closed after three days, most trapped people were reached after 8-12 hours. everybody talking about "intelligence failure" is a distraction. not only were there warnings, but the baseline performance of the IDF on the most normal day ought to have been ten times more effective - the incredible failure lies not with the intelligence agencies, but with the military command! there's one video in particular that speaks a thousand words, and that's the one of the first wave of hamas fighters running through the erez crossing death funnel without getting shot at. absolutely ludicrous! the hamassacre was allowed to happen to justify the second nakba, like turkey's coup attempt was allowed to happen to justify the following political purge. all that makes it even more pathetic how israelis have committed to this demented bloodthirsty rage, thus totally losing sight of anything potentially productive.
    1
  10466. 1
  10467. 1
  10468. 1
  10469. 1
  10470. 1
  10471. 1
  10472. 1
  10473. 1
  10474. 1
  10475. 1
  10476. 1
  10477. 1
  10478. 1
  10479. 1
  10480. 1
  10481. 1
  10482. 1
  10483. 1
  10484. 1
  10485. 1
  10486. 1
  10487. 1
  10488. 1
  10489. 1
  10490. 1
  10491. 1
  10492. 1
  10493. 1
  10494. 1
  10495. 1
  10496. 1
  10497. 1
  10498.  @GarethMurphy40k  peacekeeping missions are established by the security council. it may be possible for the general assembly to establish one after it failed in the security council (there is a provision giving the general assembly vague authority in security matters when security council actions are vetoed), but that seems not to have happened yet. the way I would characterise the actions of the security council is that it generally works in such a way that propositions favouring the west are considered, and if both russia and china can be convinced that an action is good or neutral for them also, and the deal probably gets sweetened with some unofficial rewards, that's pretty much the only sortof situation in which the UNSC takes action. most actions are positove for the west and neutral for russia and china, some maybe positive for russia ans/or china also, and none are ever positive for russia and china and neutral for the west. and I have honestly never heard of the 10 rotating member seats on the UNSC being discussed as relevant at all, it seems like the way the UNSC functions, as opposed to the way the rules make it sound in which the order of things is that there is an open vote that may or may not get vetoed by a permanent member, is actually that the five permanent members talk amongst themselves, and if they can come to an agreement, it is essentially impossible that a big enough majority of the non-permanent members dare to vote against the wishes of the permanent members, because those countries are too powerful in real world affairs outside of the council. for enough countries willing to oppose the permanent members' decision on a particular issue to happen to be assembled as the temporary UNSC members would be a rare freak event.
    1
  10499. 1
  10500. 1
  10501. 1
  10502. 1
  10503. 1
  10504. 1
  10505. 1
  10506. 1
  10507. 1
  10508. 1
  10509. 1
  10510. 1
  10511. 1
  10512. 1
  10513. 1
  10514. 1
  10515.  @razdan1902  the video script says "dozens". pictures that I have seen show something like 70-150 captives in one location at one time. that actually is within the range that is reasonable to call "dozens". though of course if you expected them to do actual journalism and investigate how many such captives there really are, the word would be "thousands". many news organisations, and especially BBC, do have a habit however of using excessively low vague number descriptors like this. not as much with "dozens", I think they stop using that relatively correctly around 200, and then say "hundreds". however, from then onward, and especially with much higher numbers, they often very severely understate numbers, most commonly crowd numbers at protests, probably through a combination of wanting to keep the claim technically correct (although to apply that excuse you actually need to diverge from normal language use, which definitively cuts off for example the top of "hundreds" at 2000, where "thousands" begins; you can't just call all larger counts "hundreds" because they are comprised of many hundreds), not risk overstating, and also deliberately understating because the editorial line politically opposes whatever reporting the high number would do (for example BBC is opposed to most protests in countries on good terms with britain, as BBC wants to preserve the status quo). "hundreds" gets stretched to 5000 or more, "tens of thousands" gets rarely used as "thousands" is stretched to 100,000 and beyond, and then "hundreds of thousands" stretches probably to two million or more (but those numbers are rarely relevant to head counts, more so to finances). come to think of it, they appear to be especially fond of "thousands", that covers the biggest range. it takes a lot to get out of the top of the "thousands" range.
    1
  10516. 1
  10517. 1
  10518. 1
  10519. 1
  10520. 1
  10521. 1
  10522. 1
  10523. 1
  10524. 1
  10525. 1
  10526. 1
  10527. 1
  10528. 1
  10529. 1
  10530. 1
  10531. 1
  10532. 1
  10533. 1
  10534. 1
  10535. 1
  10536.  @DirtyCiv  during WW2, the US was committing gen°°ide against native americans, arguably black americans, and germans and japanese. one does not get to claim to be opposed to geno°°de for being opposed to some geno°°des and committing others. besides, WW2 was in no way fought to stop geno°°des. the US and britain turned back j°wish ref°gee ships - at times when their eventual return because no country allowed them in already meant immediate internment. the allies as early as 1943 had extremely credible and detailed reports of de°th factories including those of polish military intelligence and resistance officer witold pilecki who deliberately got himself interned at ausch°itz to investigate the incredible reports of the operation of the camps, and organise a resistance movement on the inside. he escaped in a successful plot of his resistance group after the camp administration began a crackdown against them, fought in the warsaw uprising in 1944, got interned by the germans again after its defeat, and was exe°uted in 1948 by the soviets for being a threat to the soviet domination of poland. he was not recognised for his deeds until the 1970s, and only officially by the polish state in the 90s. anyways, the allies also had aerial photography including of the ausch°itz, but they never bombed either g°s chamber-crematoria, despite identifying exactly what they were, or rail lines leading to any camps, only adjacent factories using sl°ve labour. nor did they attempt any as°ault missions specifically to liberate camps, or drop weapons into camps like pilecki requested (they did fly many missions dropping weapons to unincarcerated resistance groups in occupied europe). as early as the summer of 1942, the first news report was published claiming 700,000 polish j°ws mu°dered. a NYT article from march 1942 had reported a de°th rate of 10,000 for polish j°ws "fearing extinction". a radio broadcast of winston churchill in 1941, which chose not to mention j°ws, included this passage: “Whole districts are being ext°°minated. Scores of thousands – literally scores of thousands – of e°°utions in cold blood are being perpetrated by the German police-troops upon the Russian patriots who defend their native soil. Since the Mongol invasions of Europe in the sixteenth century, there has never been methodical, merc°less b°tchery on such a scale, or approaching such a scale.” - and “We are in the presence of a crime without a name.” until the point when camps began to be captured by the western allies, they chose to not prop°gandise the n°zi gen°cides because they thought that making the w°r about saving the j°ws would decrease public support. and btw. britain by explicit orders from churchill was committing gen°cide by fam°ne against the people of india, while up to 2.5 million were concurrently fighting for britain. that number is around the lower range of the fam°ne de°th count estimates.
    1
  10537. 1
  10538. 1
  10539. 1
  10540. 1
  10541. 1
  10542. 1
  10543. 1
  10544. 1
  10545.  @juelasejdo1706  they're not anybody's shields, they are humans living in their own homes. israel claims that every single civilian they kill in gaza was a human shield simply because gaza is densely populated and nobody can disprove tha thamas was nearby (israel literally NEVER provides proof of its claims of target legitimacy, they avoid setting any precedent for evidence to be expected). does that somehow seem right to you, that all gazans can bebombed anywhere at any time and it's fine because they must have been shielding hamas, especially considering that gazans can not leave gaza, and there is nowhere for them to go inside gaza where israel is not bombing them? israel has put out maps vaguely designating evacution destinations, and has since bombed most of those places that people crammed into. what kind of precision bombardment is that when you destroy or damage half of the homes in the gaza strip in 3.5 weeks, with over a thousand aviation bombsa day plus artillery and missiles, combining to roughly the explosive force of one little boy, but spread throughout gaza directly into buildings (mostly residential) and their foundations so that it does more damage than said little boy? you think israel has been continuously locating actual military targets at a rate of a thousand a day?, and how about the starvation siege? if we assume that 95% of gazans are civilians, the siege targets 95% civilians. that is straight up as clearly a war crime as the hamassacre, and a quantitatively worse one. speaking of worse, how come israel insists (as decades-old official policy) on retaliating against every attack with a more severe attack, it's 100% on the enemy to deescalate every single time... and then somehow the ones deescalating every time are the terrorists, and the ones abusing their extreme power advantage and completely officially doing more harm are the good guys? if all other countries fighting remotely equal opponents instead of doing the euivalent of beating a cat because it scratched you, we would have a global nuclear exchange before the end of the year! israel's retaliation policy is an even worse version of thebarbaric practice of blood feuds! normal people: "an eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind" israel: "an eye for an eye leaves us unsatisfied, how about 10-100 eyes for an eye?"
    1
  10546. 1
  10547. 1
  10548. 1
  10549. 1
  10550. 1
  10551. 1
  10552. 1
  10553. 1
  10554. 1
  10555. 1
  10556. 1
  10557. 1
  10558. 1
  10559. 1
  10560. 1
  10561. 1
  10562. 1
  10563. 1
  10564. 1
  10565. 1
  10566. 1
  10567. 1
  10568. 1
  10569. 1
  10570. 1
  10571. 1
  10572. 1
  10573. 1
  10574. 1
  10575. 1
  10576. 1
  10577. 1
  10578. 1
  10579. 1
  10580. 1
  10581. 1
  10582. 1
  10583. 1
  10584. 1
  10585. 1
  10586. 1
  10587. 1
  10588. 1
  10589. 1
  10590. 1
  10591. 1
  10592. 1
  10593. 1
  10594. 1
  10595. 1
  10596. 1
  10597. 1
  10598. 1
  10599. 1
  10600. 1
  10601. 1
  10602. 1
  10603. 1
  10604. 1
  10605. 1
  10606. 1
  10607. 1
  10608. 1
  10609. 1
  10610. 1
  10611.  @bigwombat7286  you know what's costing a lot of money? germany's current economic collapse caused by building massive reliance on russian gas for germany's economy-dominating industrial sector, and that gas supply then being lost entirely in the span of one year, and replaced by frantically bought-up alternative gas supplies in an undersupplied european market, with much of the deficit filled with very expensive LNG. what's going to be expensive is germany over the next 5 years losing half of its automotive and most of its chemical industries because they no longer have an energy source that enables production here to be globally competitive. building nuclear power plants is expensive, but germany has shut off like a dozen working nuclear power plants that supplied 22% of our electricity in 2010. already built nuclear plants produce competitively priced electricity, and they would have even without the current energy crisis making them even more competitive. what's also expensive is climate change, and germany emitting 10 times more CO2 per kilowatthour of electricity than france due to france being powered overwhelmingly by f**king ancient nuclear power plants that look like medieval ruins compared to many of the ones we shut off here in germany because there was a freakishly large tsunami in japan, and some of japan's artisanally crafted smoothest brains built a nuclear powerplant LITERALLY ON THE BEACH in the pacific ring of fire! and it's no coincidence that this decision to shut down nuclear energy was made by the same government that made the nordstream 2 deal in its entirety AFTER russia's annexation of crimea and creation of the war in the donbas.
    1
  10612. 1
  10613. 1
  10614. 1
  10615. 1
  10616. 1
  10617. 1
  10618. 1
  10619. 1
  10620. 1
  10621. 1
  10622. 1
  10623. 1
  10624. 1
  10625. 1
  10626. 1
  10627. 1
  10628. 1
  10629. 1
  10630. @Leslie other than the rare possibility to elect third party or independent congresspeople, voting third party simply is throwing your vote away, that is a fact. for the presidency, it definitely is. in many other countries it isn't, but in the US it is. for example here in germany we have a better system that does still have a substantial and somewhat unpopular barrier to entry (to avoid repeats of the chaos of overly splintered parliaments that we had in the weimar republic) in that with few exceptions, parties can only enter state or national parliaments by gaining more than 5% of the votes, but this system has resulted in the viable choices being generally limited not to two parties, but to 5-6 parties, so we have much better chances of finding one that somewhat represents what we want. we have a <10 year old anti-immigrant protofascist party (which is generally failing to achieve anything because even the conservatives categorically refuse to work with them), we have a "christian democrat" moderate right party (they're not actually big on religion and not all christians), we have a libertarian "free democrat" party, we have a centrist party that's called the social democrat party but has completely abandoned leftism (yeah I can't tell you why people still vote for them), we have a moderate left to proper left green party (kinda the real social democrats plus an environmentalist bent), and we currently still have a democratic socialist party, but they're in the process of dying. we used to have an exceptionally boring coalition for 12 or 16 years between the conservatives and the centrists (christian democrats and so-called social democrats), but since last year, we finally have a new coalition government that's unusually heterogenous, but does find more common ground on some progressive issues like climate protection, which consists of the centrist socdems, the greens, and the libertarians.
    1
  10631. 1
  10632. 1
  10633. 1
  10634. 1
  10635. 1
  10636. 1
  10637. 1
  10638. 1
  10639. 1
  10640. 1
  10641. 1
  10642. 1
  10643. 1
  10644. 1
  10645. 1
  10646. 1
  10647. 1
  10648. 1
  10649. 1
  10650. 1
  10651. 1
  10652. 1
  10653. 1
  10654. 1
  10655. 1
  10656. 1
  10657. 1
  10658. 1
  10659. 1
  10660. 1
  10661. 1
  10662. 1
  10663. 1
  10664. 1
  10665. 1
  10666. 1
  10667. 1
  10668.  @ZackTheGreat  I know that suicide bombings can be a particularly effective type of attack against military targets (especially car bombs), but the taliban also committed plenty against civilian targets that they culturally disapproved of in the name of god's perfect warlord 🤡pbuh. as america's most illustrious war criminal put it: the conventional army loses if it does not win. the gurilla qins if he does not lose. the taliban won the war by defeating the american public's morale. the american public got bored and annoyed with the ambiguity and lack of glory of that occupation many years ago, and did not give a damn about afghans (american leftists in particular turned out to truly be as lacking in international solidarity as one would expect from a country that believes labour day to be in autumn). so eventually, two successive US presidential administrations unilaterally, without input from the allied afghan government or other involved NATO countries, decided to break all of america's promises to the afghan people, claim that there never were any promises made, and betray all afghans who had embraced a lifestyle contrary to taliban ideology. they also damned all afghans to live in a sanctioned pariah state, because despite agreeing to hand over afghanistan to the taliban, they then sanctioned the country because the taliban are in charge. and then to add mass murder to negligent homicide, the world's richest country stole almost all foreign currency reserves of one of the world's poorest countries.
    1
  10669. 1
  10670. 1
  10671. 1
  10672. 1
  10673. 1
  10674. 1
  10675. 1
  10676. 1
  10677. 1
  10678. 1
  10679. 1
  10680. 1
  10681. 1
  10682. 1
  10683. 1
  10684. 1
  10685. 1
  10686. 1
  10687. 1
  10688. 1
  10689. 1
  10690. 1
  10691. 1
  10692. 1
  10693. 1
  10694. 1
  10695. 1
  10696. 1
  10697. 1
  10698. 1
  10699. 1
  10700. 1
  10701. 1
  10702. 1
  10703. 1
  10704. 1
  10705. 1
  10706. 1
  10707. 1
  10708. 1
  10709.  @kennybachman35  75 years of genocide? hmmm 1947 palestinian arab population: 1.3 million current global palestinian arab population: 14.3 million of which -in palestinian territories: 5.4 million -in israel (mostly citizens): 2 million I guess palestinians are lucky that israelis are incredibly bad at genocide. 🙄 stick to facts, my guy. you people routinely lose arguments by overshooting the target, and especially with this disrespectful utter idiocy of the nazi comparisons. here's a quick guide: genocide - no, Israel has never committed genocide ethnic cleansing - yes, israel conducted a huge ethnic cleansing campaign in 1948, and has committed many acts of gradual displacement and replacement of palestinians ever since that amount to ethnic cleansing at a snail's pace. illegal occupation - yes apartheid - yes, the gradual development towards a full annexation of the west bank in all but name has progressed far enough that it's unreasonable to deny that the palestinians there effectively live in israel without citizenship and with extremely limited rights including very little freedom of movement and no political representation. since 2020, HRW, amnesty, b'tselem and UN human rights authorities have assessed israel's occupation regime to meet the definition of the crime of apartheid. fascists/nazis - the latter term is much more specific and not applicable, but the former is a not entirely but largely apt word to describe much of how the state operates. though it generally has developed into a fascist state democratically, through a decades-long collaborative effort of the political right and the security forces to stoke violence in order to justify more authoritarianism, investment in security forces, and oppression of palestinians.
    1
  10710. 1
  10711. 1
  10712. 1
  10713. 1
  10714. 1
  10715. 1
  10716. 1
  10717. 1
  10718. 1
  10719. 1
  10720. 1
  10721. 1
  10722. 1
  10723. these drug bust prices are always calculated using a perhaps or perhaps not realistic estimate of a typical price for the smallest available unit of a drug as sold by overpriced street dealers - so that 1.2 ton shipment was calculated as if it had been broken up into individually sold units of half a gram or less. the wholesale price in australia for the whole shipment would probably be something like 5-10% of that nominal value, and the price in the country of origin more like 1% of the nominal australian retail value. australia is one of the most expensive markets for cocaine, probably only beaten by some asian countries like japan (which get less supply due to smaller demand and more severe punishments and enforcement). australia and new zealand traditionally almost exclusively have domestically grown and synthesised drugs on their black markets. and no one seems to grow coca outside of larin america - which actually seems like a niche worth exploding in my opinion. in terms of climate, remoteness, government corruption, and low labour costs, there should be many tropical and subtropical places in africa and asia suitable for profitable coca growing. particularly in asia, that could put new production close to several of the most underserved and most overpriced markets, like australia, japan, korea and china. some areas in asia, especially the golden triangle in and around myanmar, are already big opium producers. those same criminal organisations could branch out into growing coca in probably the same regions, or nearby.
    1
  10724. 1
  10725. 1
  10726. 1
  10727. Brian Dominguez "terrorist" is just a meaningless buzzword for any violent enemy. it has a meaning (something about achieving political goals by causing fear in the population), but it is literally never used correctly. the taliban are islamo-fascists who want to rule afghanistan tyrannically and enslave all women. the majority of afghans hate them and don't want to be governed by them, and most afghans who think they might not be so bad only think that way because the alternative afghan state the US created is one of the most corrupt in the world. they literally gave the highest offices from the presidency down to the country's biggest drug lords to begin with, and it hasn't gotten much better since. if NATO had built a representative democratic government that weeded out corruption in those 20 years, and recruited an army of women, the taliban would have had no chance of such a resurgence. as things are now, it's not so much a matter of insurgent forces vs government forces as it is a matter of likely future government forces vs. the troops of a government whose existence is a sort of philosophical question (as are military supply and soldiers' salary in many cases). it's a pretty hard choice for afghan soldiers to stand and fight against the taliban right now, which is why the one guy in the video mentioned afghans on the streets of those provincial capitals trying to raise the soldiers' fighting spirits. it's not because many government troops sympathize with or want to be governed by the taliban, it's because they see the writing on the wall.
    1
  10728. 1
  10729. 1
  10730. 1
  10731. 1
  10732. 1
  10733. 1
  10734. 1
  10735. 1
  10736. 1
  10737. 1
  10738. 1
  10739. 1
  10740. 1
  10741. 1
  10742. 1
  10743. 1
  10744. 1
  10745. 1
  10746. 1
  10747. 1
  10748. 1
  10749. 1
  10750. 1
  10751. 1
  10752. 1
  10753. 1
  10754. 1
  10755. 1
  10756. 1
  10757. 1
  10758. 1
  10759. 1
  10760. 1
  10761. 1
  10762. 1
  10763. 1
  10764.  @caav56  can't find much on that, it's drowned out by search results about ukraine destroying a tu-22m "backfire" bomber with a drone attack xD I only see very vague claims about it being an attack drone, no specification that it isn't a kamikaze drone. and the short promo video looks to me like a demonstration of bad flight characteristics, or specifically low maneuverability, which would need to be pretty good for a dive-bomber drone. that one looks more like it's designed as a surveillance drone. I saw very general mention of "automation", but if that dtone does have an automated drop function, I think it's likely to be a basic GPS coordinate drop in level flight, which will be less accurate than the more common manual or GPS-automated multicopter drops. to get high accuracy out of an automated drop of a dumb bomb, the drone would need to dive while tracking and aiming for a manually designated or automatically recognised target. I suspect that if there is any niche for a sophisticated dive-bomb drone, it would probably be to fly out pretty far, potentially automated beyond radio transmission range and past jammers, and automatically identify vehicles including tanks, much like the submunitions of smart-155 or bonus anti-tank artillery shells do, and to then automatically attack a vehicle with a sufficiently powerful shaped charge bomb to penetrate a tank's top armour. though that role may also be served well by automated kamikaze drones capable of returning to be recovered if they find no target.
    1
  10765. 1
  10766. 1
  10767. 1
  10768. 1
  10769. 1
  10770. 1
  10771. 1
  10772. 1
  10773. 1
  10774. 1
  10775. 1
  10776. 1
  10777. 1
  10778. 1
  10779. 1
  10780. 1
  10781. 1
  10782. 1
  10783. 1
  10784. 1
  10785. 1
  10786. 1
  10787. 1
  10788. 1
  10789. 1
  10790. 1
  10791. 1
  10792. 1
  10793. 1
  10794. 1
  10795. 1
  10796. 1
  10797. 1
  10798. 1
  10799. 1
  10800. 1
  10801. 1
  10802. 1
  10803. 1
  10804. 1
  10805. 1
  10806. 1
  10807. 1
  10808. 1
  10809. 1
  10810. @michael-muller I don't buy your numbers, but yeah, the comparison I heard, because part of the nordstream leak was in danish waters, was that the leak's climate impact was equivalent to a year's worth of danish emissions (though I don't recall if this claim was CO2-based only, which could make a big difference given denmark's large pork industry). what really annoyed, but I suppose did not surprise me with that incident, was how that gas took like a week to bubble away, and despite the climate impact being publically discussed, no official of the surrounding countries with any direct or indirect command authority over the navies and coast guards that were observing the release (or any politician that I heard of) showed enough concern and initiative for the climate to order those bubble spots to be ignited. with missiles or incendiary or explosive naval gun fire, drones, or simply towing a floating fire or flare between two boats, towing a drogue from a plane or dropping flares or incendiary bombs from a plane, that could absolutely have been done from a safe distance, it would have had no chance whatsoever to burn below the water surface due to oxygen exclusion (so it would have posed no threat at all of damaging evidence at the blast sites), it would have decreased, not increased, any hypothetical risk to shipping (sailing into invisible methane clouds would be very dangerous, lighting a big fire makes for a very visible and easily avoided danger), and it could even have been slightly beneficial to regional ecology to get rid of the potentially toxic methane pollution. the climate impact of methane vs methane combustion products is such that unburnt methane has a 10 times greater climate impact than its combustion products viewed over a 100 year period, and even more over a shorter period (because methane gets broken down into less bad stuff extremely slowly in the atmosphere). thus they could have prevented 90% of the climate impact going forward from the time of ignition. I think practically, they could have prevented 50+% of the total climate impact by getting to it 2-3 days after the sabotage event, that would no doubt have been doable. the amount of effort and personal initiative required to make this choice and have it urgently evaluated for feasibility and done would have been miniscule in relation to the benefit. it's really upsetting that everyone sat on their hands there. that's an interestingsuggwstion about this year's extreme weather that I had not thought of, but like I said, there is a previous pattern of the climate change prediction ranges being surpassed quite consistently. perhaps natural gas leaks are a good candidate to explain that too - at least I have seen the claim that it is highly unclear how much gas is leaking unburnt in our natural gas production and distribution, which is commonly pointed out in opposition to claims about gas electricity generation being climate-friendly if they replace coal, based on the incomplete calculation that gas (due to its atomic hydrogen content that burns to water vapour) produces less of a climate impact per unit of heat than coal (supposedly half).
    1
  10811. 1
  10812. 1
  10813. 1
  10814. 1
  10815. 1
  10816. 1
  10817. 1
  10818. 1
  10819. 1
  10820. 1
  10821. 1
  10822. 1
  10823. 1
  10824. 1
  10825. 1
  10826. 1
  10827. 1
  10828. 1
  10829. 1
  10830. 1
  10831. 1
  10832. 1
  10833. 1
  10834. 1
  10835. 1
  10836. 1
  10837. 1
  10838. 1
  10839. 1
  10840. 1
  10841. 1
  10842. 1
  10843. 1
  10844. 1
  10845. 1
  10846. 1
  10847. 1
  10848. 1
  10849. 1
  10850. 1
  10851. 1
  10852. 1
  10853. 1
  10854. 1
  10855. 1
  10856. 1
  10857. 1
  10858. 1
  10859. 1
  10860. 1
  10861. 1
  10862. 1
  10863. 1
  10864. 1
  10865. 1
  10866. 1
  10867. 1
  10868. 1
  10869. 1
  10870. 1
  10871. 1
  10872. 1
  10873. 1
  10874. 1
  10875. 1
  10876. 1
  10877. 1
  10878. 1
  10879. 1
  10880. 1
  10881. 1
  10882. 1
  10883. 1
  10884. 1
  10885. 1
  10886. 1
  10887. 1
  10888. 1
  10889. 1
  10890. 1
  10891. 1
  10892. 1
  10893. 1
  10894. 1
  10895. 1
  10896. 1
  10897. 1
  10898. 1
  10899. 1
  10900. 1
  10901. 1
  10902. 1
  10903. 1
  10904. 1
  10905. 1
  10906. 1
  10907. 1
  10908. 1
  10909. 1
  10910. 1
  10911. 1
  10912. 1
  10913. 1
  10914. 1
  10915. 1
  10916. 1
  10917. 1
  10918. 1
  10919. 1
  10920. 1
  10921. 1
  10922. Rakitha Peiriz rising? bangladesh is quite literally sinking. bangladesh is projected to have one of the biggest climate refugee problems of any country in the coming decades because most of bangladesh is very low in elevation and close to the coast or river estuaries and very prone to flooding. a huge percentage of the population lives on land that will be under water in 20-50 years. bangladesh is fucked in the medium to long term. I think sri lanka's land is mostly quite elevated, isn't it? that's going to be a big advantage in the not so distant future. I don't know though how well sri lanka is going to fare with climate change in terms of heat waves, I always hear of them being insane in india but I'm not sure about sri lanka (maybe the proximity to the cooling effect of the relative proximity to the sea prevents the worst, but on the other hand it's even closer to the equator). and it's quite a bad region for cyclones, isn't it? I think storms are pretty much projected to worsen everywhere. I reckon if sri lanka had a competent government right now, they could play india and china against each other to get help from both. I know china is very interested in sri lanka, and india is very worried about that interest. they could even get the US, EU or IMF in on it as a third competitor for influence, since the west isn't too happy with india right now due to india's friendly attitude towards russia, and they obviously want to oppose the spread of chinese influence. japan and some other american-aligned countries in asia might want to join that effort, too. though of course nobody wants to throw away their money, it would actually have to turn sri lanka around.
    1
  10923. 1
  10924. 1
  10925. 1
  10926. 1
  10927. 1
  10928. 1
  10929. 1
  10930. 1
  10931. 1
  10932. 1
  10933. 1
  10934. 1
  10935. 1
  10936. 1
  10937. 1
  10938. 1
  10939. 1
  10940. 1
  10941. 1
  10942. 1
  10943. 1
  10944. 1
  10945. 1
  10946. 1
  10947. 1
  10948. 1
  10949. 1
  10950. 1
  10951. 1
  10952. 1
  10953. 1
  10954. 1
  10955. 1
  10956. 1
  10957. 1
  10958. 1
  10959. 1
  10960. 1
  10961. 1
  10962. 1
  10963. 1
  10964. 1
  10965. 1
  10966. 1
  10967. 1
  10968. 1
  10969. 0:22 either they were really trying to save wood and use the veneers most efficiently with little work, or they fucked up. for durability, laminated wood like that should be glued with the fibres not all parallel, but ideally alternatingly slightly diagonal to the adjacent layers to make the resulting board incapable of breaking longitudinally without a significant area of glue joints needing to fail and/or a lot of wood fibers being broken (wood has a strong longitudinal fiber structure with the fibers only weakly stuck together so that it's easy to break parallel to the fibers and hard to break across the fibers). I don't know the specific process of making these stocks, and I would imagine that the normal efficient method would have been to glue together big boards and cut several stocks out of each, but one way to make better stocks with diagonally crossing fibers (while probably not wasting more material, but probably requiring a bit more work) would have been to glue each stock individually from veneer sheets cut into sort of triangular/trapezoidal shapes with the fiber running parallel to one long side of the triangle, and the veneers flipped alternatingly so that the parallel fiber edge would be on the left, then on the right, then on the left etc.. that would result in a stock that's still primarily strong longitudinally, unlike normal 90 degree cross-glued plywood, to primarily insure that the stock won't snap off sideways, but is also peobably something like 10 times harder to crack longitudinally than a fully parallel-glued stock like the one in that picture. well, for the FG-42 a triangle drawn around that short stock would probably result in too aggressive an alternating angle on the veneers, the resulting angle would be better on some of the guns with normal full rifle stocks that the germans also made from this laminated beechwood at that time. a 15-20 degree angle between the fibers would probably be ideal.
    1
  10970. 1
  10971. 1
  10972.  @ishikawagoemon4397  the vietnamese and chinese communists both had very substantial foreign support. I think the cuban communists did to a lesser degree, but still more than the burmese rebels now (I seem to recall that much of the cuban communists' alignment with the soviets happened after the revolution out of their need for protection against the US, but the soviets broadly supported various kinds of radical leftist movements, not just communists, so they probably provided substantial support well before the revolution). all those are cold war examples, at that time, there was much more government effort being put into overthrowing other governments for their alignment with either side of the cold war. although today, there is a strong expectation of a new cold war with china, I don't see the possibility that the US would decide that the burmese rebels have good enough chances to justify a supporting them. and given the fact that myanmar borders china, one would have to expect that an american operation to support the overthrow of the chinese-allies burmese junta would produce a reaction of even greater support from china for the junta. given the fact that the US would not invade myanmar, I believe an escalated result could likely be that myanmar becomes the country that kicks off the inevitable future development of china deploying its military abroad, to challenge america's status as the global empire in the coming decades - the burmese junta would, given a sufficiently serious threat, invite chinese military support in order to preserve their governance, and china would appreciate the opportunity to make myanmar more indebted to china. all that would be worse for the US than the current status quo and projected future of myanmar. it only isn't happening because the junta does not feel sufficiently threatened to hand over part of their power to china for security. any scenario for US support of the overthrow of the burmese junta would have to function very rapidly, it would need to be a highly effective coup rather than an insurgency, in order to thoroughly destroy the military's government too quickly for that government to request and receive assistance from china. and I see no indications of this at all, that probably would have had to happen years ago - an obvious point in time that would have been better than now was during the main drive of ethnic cleansing of rohingya 5 years or so ago, because that would have provided some cover for the coup, the burmese military would have been acutely internationally unpopular and supporting it would have looked particularly bad, and also the country was partially run by aung san su kyi and other civilian democrats, so there was a lot of administrative structure in place that could have much more easily filled the power vacuum left by a dethroned military. the western roman empire had already declined to barely more than a glorified city state by the time the city of rome started getting raided by germanic peoples. the only real empire of rome remaining was the eastern one. what brought about both the division of the western and eastern empire, and the decline of the western one, was primarily that the large military deployments for occupying or conquering the edges of the empire kept producing generals with personal control over large enough armies to make them decide that a coup or civil war was a good idea.
    1
  10973.  @ishikawagoemon4397  the second cold war is already happening, and it has the same reason of nuclear weapons to remain a cold war plus the additional reason of economic interdependence (btw the same goes for the pending invasion of taiwan in comparison to the invasion of ukraine, I am baffled by the stupidity of people who think that the US would go to war for taiwan when in reality the reasons not to do that are far greater than with the ukraine war). the first cold war wasn't about democracy vs communism, it was capitalism vs. communism. for much of the cold war in much of the world, the capitalist cronies were not one bit more democratic than the communist ones, in fact they often (generally in the poorer countries) were less democratic, because leftism can organically garner popular support based on its promise of redistribution, whereas capitalism mostly appealed to rich people who would need to impose political control from the top down. there were big grass-roots communist movements all over the third world. grass-roots capitalist movements are nearly impossible. what's the new cold war about? certainly not communism, the chinese communist party has been capitalist in all but name since deng xiaoping. it's simply a power struggle. america has global hegemony and intends to keep it, and china intends to replace america. ultimately, it comes down to both china and the US being controlled by a few hundred politicians and oligarchs who have gained and sustain their positions of power due to the habits of exploitation and grandiose greed produced by their psychopathy, narcissism, and upbringing and socialisation among people so inhumanly rich that they think of themselves like gods in relation to average humans. they don't have genuine ideological convictions, it's just machiavellianism with different branding. their disagreement is that each one says that they want to be the one who gets all the power, and they don't want the others taking it away from them. the fundamental problem is that the world is set up to concentrate more and more wealth in the hands of the richest people (the share of total wealth that they hold continues to rise sharply, it's the worst it's been at least since the enlightenment), and the sort of person that is required to outcompete everybody else in such a system, who were born to drive on roads paved with children and live in towers made of bones, are psychopaths and narcissists. we are led by monsters, because to be human is a weakness. putin's decision to start this war in ukraine is one of countless good examples in history of the nature of people who rise to the top of societies. the lack of proportionality between any justification of the invasion one could come up with, based on the at least decently accurate comprehension he surely has, and the amount of harm he decided to cause to other people, is incomprehensible. they would have the streets cleared with poison gas if it was necessary to order a pizza.
    1
  10974. 1
  10975. 1
  10976. 1
  10977. 1
  10978. 1
  10979. 1
  10980. 1
  10981. 1
  10982. 1
  10983. 1
  10984. 1
  10985. 1
  10986. 1
  10987. 1
  10988. 1
  10989. 1
  10990. 1
  10991. 1
  10992. 1
  10993. 1
  10994. 1
  10995. 1
  10996. 1
  10997. 1
  10998. 1
  10999. 1
  11000. 1
  11001. 1
  11002. 1
  11003. 1
  11004. 1
  11005. sadly even AJ seems to have decided not to touch that, but I'm about 95% convinced of this. there are SEVERAL separate points reported by separate sources at which the intelligence services knew in great detail, as printed plans, a year earlier, then months before, they started hearing nervous reports from the observation troops at the border, who got told to shutup several times under threat of disciplinary action and started joking in their group chat about who were going to be the unlucky ones on shift when the big attack would happen, then a week before, the trusted source of egyptian intelligence warned of h-crew being currently in the process of implimenting a huge attack unlike any that came before, and on the friday evening before, the intelligenceagencies' heads all met to discuss that there was an attack unfolding, including that it posed a threat to the nova festival. throughout all of this, several actio s were taken to reduce troop numbers, including in the days before, and to disarm the kib°°°zim, and no threat level was raised or dtate of readiness for a response ordered. it took 4-5 hours before two helicopters arrived with no targeting information (they were just eventually given an area description as a free-fire zone), and six hours until a ground counteroffensive was even ordered, 8-9 hours until they arrived at the festival site, and over two days to recapture the border. if active duty troops had been spread evenly throughout the country and its occupied territories, about 3000 would have stopd on land that got invaded - I don't get thefeeling that there even were 1000, and it's not like even without any alerts, everybody didn't know that this border necessitated much more troop deployment than the beaches of tel aviv. for reference, the response time for france or beitain to get hundreds of anti-te°°or police deployed seems to be in the half hour range. on 91,100, the first small counterattacks on the ground were led by retired officers including a general who assumed unofficial command of dispersed conscripts after privately driving in from as far away as tel aviv - just because they did not sit in a chain of command in which evidently everybody was ordered to wait for orders. it is far less plausible to explain even the publically known obvious or leaked set of facts and crediblw reports as incompetence rather than intentionality.
    1
  11006. 1
  11007. 1
  11008. 1
  11009. 1
  11010. 1
  11011. 1
  11012. 1
  11013. 1
  11014. 1
  11015. 1
  11016. 1
  11017. 1
  11018. 1
  11019. 1
  11020. 1
  11021. 1
  11022. 1
  11023. 1
  11024. 1
  11025. 1
  11026. 1
  11027. 1
  11028. 1
  11029. 1
  11030. 1
  11031. 1
  11032. 1
  11033. 1
  11034. 1
  11035. 1
  11036. 1
  11037. 1
  11038. 1
  11039. 1
  11040. 1
  11041. 1
  11042. 1
  11043. 1
  11044. 1
  11045. 1
  11046. 1
  11047. 1
  11048. 1
  11049. 1
  11050. 1
  11051. 1
  11052. 1
  11053. 1
  11054. 1
  11055. 1
  11056. 1
  11057. 1
  11058. 1
  11059. 1
  11060. 1
  11061. 1
  11062. 1
  11063. 1
  11064. 1
  11065. 1
  11066. 1
  11067. 1
  11068. 1
  11069. 1
  11070. 1
  11071. 1
  11072. 1
  11073. 1
  11074. 1
  11075. 1
  11076. 1
  11077. 1
  11078. 1
  11079. 1
  11080. 1
  11081. 1
  11082. 1
  11083. 1
  11084. 1
  11085. 1
  11086. 1
  11087. 1
  11088. 1
  11089. 1
  11090. 1
  11091. 1
  11092. 1
  11093. 1
  11094. 1
  11095. 1
  11096.  @1984isnotamanual  the only way for a war to be "legal" according to the set of treaties known as international law is by a use of force authorization from the UN security council. otherwise, the only legal kinds of war effort are self-defence and the collective defence of another state against unauthorized attacks. the 1990 gulf war was authorized, the 2003 iraq war was not. you're espousing a truly deranged imperialist world view. nobody's presence in the middle east, probably not even that of the settler colony of isr°°l, is less justifiable or more destructive than that of the USA. the division and war across the middle east today are the deliberate creation of the US and its western allies as a divide and rule strategy, it's the macrocosm to the microcosm of the territory formerly known as libya, which america and france with some broader western support (and UNSC authorization for a no fly zone, which they far exceeded) turned from a dictatorship with the highest general standard of living in africa into two failed states indistinguishable from the ones in the sahel. are you even aware that the international sunni islamist movements that brought you practically all of the 21st century's ironic "te°°orist attacks" are a creation of the US together with saudi arabia designed to expand saudi influence and weaken opposition to royal saudi control of mecca at the expense of anti-religious communism, secular baathism, and shia islamism? that program created al qaeda, saddam hussein completely prevented al qaeda from operating in iraq, then it entered iraq after the US invasion and formed a sunni insurgent movement against the US occupation called the islamic state of iraq, and that became ISIS. the US and saudi arabia created the modern salafist movement underlying ISIS, and the power vacuum and tyranny of the occupation of iraq created the room for it to grow. today's shia militias of iraq grew out of the necessity to defend their own people against the ISIS m°°der cult, which consisted primarily of a combination of foreign fighters (from europe and central asia) and former baathist military dissolved by the US occupation. the shia militias are regional self-defence forces supported by the neighbouring state of iran, while the US is a country fully on the other side of the globe that asserts a right to rule the whole world as its empire, and particularly in the middle east does so by stoking wars to prevent the region from unifying to fully leverage its control over fossil fuel production levels!
    1
  11097. 1
  11098. 1
  11099. 1
  11100. 1
  11101. 1
  11102. 1
  11103. 1
  11104. 1
  11105. 1
  11106. 1
  11107. 1
  11108. 1
  11109. 1
  11110. 1
  11111. 1
  11112. 1
  11113. 1
  11114. 1
  11115. 1
  11116. 1
  11117. 1
  11118. 1
  11119. 1
  11120. 1
  11121. 1
  11122. 1
  11123. 1
  11124. 1
  11125. 1
  11126. 1
  11127. 1
  11128. 1
  11129. 1
  11130. 1
  11131. 1
  11132. 1
  11133. 1
  11134. 1
  11135. 1
  11136. 1
  11137. 1
  11138. 1
  11139. 1
  11140. 1
  11141. 1
  11142. 1
  11143. 1
  11144. 1
  11145. 1
  11146. 1
  11147. 1
  11148. 1
  11149. 1
  11150. 1
  11151. 1
  11152. 1
  11153. 1
  11154. 1
  11155. 1
  11156. 1
  11157. 1
  11158. 1
  11159. 1
  11160. 1
  11161. 1
  11162. 1
  11163. 1
  11164. 1
  11165. 1
  11166. 1
  11167. 1
  11168. 1
  11169. 1
  11170. 1
  11171. 1
  11172. 1
  11173. 1
  11174. 1
  11175. 1
  11176. 1
  11177. 1
  11178. 1
  11179. 1
  11180. 1
  11181. 1
  11182. 1
  11183. 1
  11184. 1
  11185. 1
  11186. 1
  11187. 1
  11188. 1
  11189. 1
  11190. 1
  11191. 1
  11192. 1
  11193. 1
  11194. 1
  11195. 1
  11196. 1
  11197. 1
  11198. 1
  11199. 1
  11200. 1
  11201. 1
  11202. 1
  11203. 1
  11204. 1
  11205. 1
  11206. 1
  11207. 1
  11208. 1
  11209. 1
  11210. 1
  11211. 1
  11212. 1
  11213. 1
  11214. 1
  11215. 1
  11216. 1
  11217. 1
  11218. 1
  11219. 1
  11220. 1
  11221. 1
  11222. 1
  11223. 1
  11224. 1
  11225. 1
  11226. 1
  11227. 1
  11228. 1
  11229. 1
  11230. 1
  11231. 1
  11232. 1
  11233. 1
  11234. 1
  11235. well, western media and politicians love to play up the closeness of turkey and russia, but really, it's only been partial cooperation this whole time, and if you look at any proxy wars going on, turkey and russia are generally on opposing sides. between the US and russia, turkey is like 80% on america's side. in "libya", turkish troops and russia/wagner have even deployed combat troops on opposing sides, and in syria, one of russia's closest allies and the country of russia's biggest war effort before 2022, turkey has invaded and currently occupies parts of the country in collaboration with syrian islamist militias (and there also is that thing we don't talk about, which is that turkey was ISIS' most important supporter before that became a losing fight). it's not that turkey and russia have friendly relations, it's more like a consensual dominance-submission thing, with turkey having provided a large portion of russia's biggest embarrassments in recent years, and putin seemingly liking erdogan not in spite of, but because of this. turkey had some drama with it deciding to buy S-400 air defense systems from russia instead of america's patriot, and getting kicked out of the F-35 program as punishment (which now looks extremely stupidy given the demonstrated relative capabilities of ukraine's patriots shooting down kinzhals, whereas russian air defenses including many S-400 systems have proven largely incapable of even defending against strizh attacks). but even before 2022, turkey's military-industrial cooperation with ukraine was bigger than that with russia, or the cooperation between many other NATO countries and ukraine, including setting up baykar drone production in ukraine. perhaps it's also that putin is so desperate for any friendly gestures from NATO countries that he's very appreciative of the few that turkey provides, since that's more than russia is grtting from any other NATO country. and of course turkey doesn't just have that kind of relationship with russia, but also partially with the US, as demonstrated when turkey invaded syria to attack the mostly kurdish SDF, the US' only major remaining ally in the country, and the US' reaction was a hasty withdrawal abandoning america's allies to be overrun by turkey, and america even pretended like nothing happened when tuekey shelled an american military base still containing US military personnel because they felt like they weren't running away fast enough. of course the US wasn't a fan of turkey's support for the islamic state either, but publically pretended like it wasn't happening, and by the looks of it, turkey didn't cease its support until the US had more or less defeated ISIS.
    1
  11236. 1
  11237. 1
  11238. 1
  11239. 1
  11240. 1
  11241. 1
  11242. 1
  11243. 1
  11244. 1
  11245. 1
  11246. 1
  11247. 1
  11248. 1
  11249. 1
  11250. 1
  11251. 1
  11252. 1
  11253. 1
  11254. 1
  11255. 1
  11256. 1
  11257. 1
  11258. 1
  11259. 1
  11260. 1
  11261. 1
  11262. 1
  11263. 1
  11264. 1
  11265. 1
  11266. 1
  11267. 1
  11268. 1
  11269. 1
  11270. 1
  11271. 1
  11272. 1
  11273. 1
  11274. 1
  11275. 1
  11276. 1
  11277. 1
  11278. 1
  11279. 1
  11280. 1
  11281. 1
  11282. 1
  11283. 1
  11284. 1
  11285. 1
  11286. 1
  11287. 1
  11288. 1
  11289. 1
  11290. 1
  11291. 1
  11292. 1
  11293. 1
  11294. 1
  11295. 1
  11296. 1
  11297. 1
  11298. 1
  11299. 1
  11300. 1
  11301. 1
  11302. 1
  11303. it's quite obvious- now israel has largely stopped warning people before bombing their homes (they mostly used to do it with the big towers that would contain hundreds of people). according to the israeli narrative, since they dropped leaflets warnung that anyone remaining in the north aould be considered a hamas supporter, they are now free to kill anyone without warning, and any number at once. but really, if you rationally consider how many homes and other civilian buildings israel flattened earlier in this war and also in prior wars over the last two decades, it is obvious that the point was not to hit etherial hamas targets that israel somehow knew to be all over the place in buildings whose residents did not,but rather the pount was to destroy people's homes and all their possessions and quality of life, and to do this to very large numbers of people while keeping the death count relatively low, because they knew that this was the only metric that could cause them problems - it's practically the only one that ever gets reported. speaking of which, a different metric: in 3.5 weeks, israel has destroyed or damaged half of the homes in gaza. and it's now november. even if israel stopped and withdrew today, and hokked up the utilities again, how would gazans even get everybody housed and the dwellings heated, given that no doubt underground gas lines are broken in thousands of places? I reckon israel's plan is to destroy gaza to such an umliveable degree that they can then lean back in a month or two and say "it's not us, it's the cold. look how cold it is egypt, don't you think you should open the border?"
    1
  11304. 1
  11305. 1
  11306. 1
  11307. 1
  11308. 1
  11309. 1
  11310. 1
  11311. 1
  11312. 1
  11313. 1
  11314. 1
  11315. 1
  11316. 1
  11317. 1
  11318. 1
  11319. 1
  11320. 1
  11321. 1
  11322. 1
  11323. 1
  11324. 1
  11325. 1
  11326. 1
  11327. 1
  11328. 1
  11329. 1
  11330. 1
  11331. 1
  11332. 1
  11333. 1
  11334. 1
  11335. 1
  11336. 1
  11337. 1
  11338. 1
  11339. 1
  11340. 1
  11341. 1
  11342. 1
  11343. 1
  11344. 1
  11345. 1
  11346. 1
  11347. 1
  11348. 1
  11349. 1
  11350. 1
  11351. 1
  11352. 1
  11353. 1
  11354. 1
  11355. 1
  11356. 1
  11357. 1
  11358. 1
  11359. 1
  11360. 1
  11361. 1
  11362. 1
  11363. 1
  11364. 1
  11365. 1
  11366. 1
  11367. 1
  11368. 1
  11369. 1
  11370. 1
  11371. Armando Problemas 9/11 was 20.5 years ago, not 19. or are you referring to the iraq war? that would be dumb, that was a much smaller geopolitical event. in fact 9/11 and the war on terror are very likely to have been smaller than the consequences of this war now. no, it's not a possibility that a new iron curtain forms. it's a certainty unless putin is removed, for the most part it's already happened. what's coming now is a steady ratcheting up of repression and disconnection, and potentially a lot more war over where the iron curtain will be. what's certain is that russia will become like belarus or even like china in terms of repression. russia has even been building its own internet infrastructure for the last 3-5 years or so with the express purpose to be able to disconnect russia from the global internet and only give citizens access to a russian intranet. this would be beyond even what china does with its great firewall, which is principally bypassable by VPN (though illegal and more and more difficult). as far as I'm aware, ONLY north korea has an intranet like what russia has been preparing to implement. what's also near certain is that russia will impose heavy reatrictions on exiting the country like what the soviet union and warsaw pact had and north korea has. unless putin is removed, things will only get worse. they will continue getting worse in the coming months, and if putin stays, they will remain terrible for decades. this is the KGB reasserting its power, it's a more controlled version of what the coup of '92 was trying to do. and it has massive public support in russia, certainly more support than opposition. it's been in deliberate preparation for about a decade, with the gradual destruction of political opposition and journalism, and the indoctrination of the russian people into a renewed war/cold war mindset. the russian military is an absolute embarrassment in ukraine, but the internal control is extremely effective. there appears to be next to no risk of the people turning against the government, change could only happen by putin's removal by other powerful men and replacement by hopefully somebody less insane. it's really interesting and concerning how even young russians critical of putin and open to the west like natasha or nfkrz seem to have real trouble comprehending that the russian people despite the authoritarianism/developing dictatorship DO have a collective responsibility for their government's actions. they appear to be very deeply programmed for apathy and just letting the government do whatever they want. it's like they view the idea of the russian people controlling their government in some way like an absurd fairy tale. it seems that almost nobody in russia believes that it's possible to resist the government, and of course when that sentiment is so wide-spread, it is self-fulfilling, which is the point. the government knows it's not getting everybody to believe the party line, instead they have found causing doubt about what is real and the perception of the people being powerless to be highly effective for pacifying that portion of the population who don't actively support the government. russians are dupposed to either support, or tune out, and they almost all do.
    1
  11372.  @heatherhinde6544  every party in every conflict is responsible for its own actions. behind every action is a choice, and every choice must be morally justifiable. due to the power differential in this highly one-sided colonial conflict, is°°el has much more practical ability to deescalate without having to fear consequences from volunteering to assume a weaker position to show good will. but they have at least for several decades done exactly the opposite: they have an official policy to retaliate against every attack with a more severe attack. this is objectively a worse version of the otherwise universally condemned practice of blood feuds in some "primitive" cultures, and by design ensures that is°°el always is clearly more evil. they believe it is right to te°°orize the enemy into backing down, forcing them to be the one to deescalate literally every single engagement with no exception, often and sometimes officially (in home demolitions) by way of collective punishment of the family or community of an attacker. the same logic of the war crime of collective punishment is otherwise perhaps best known from the WW2 german occupation of eastern europe, where the germans implemented a policy of rounding up and exec°ting 50 local civilians for every german occupier wounded by insurgent attacks, and 100 for each that was killed. no, even that did not work, resistance was still quite heavy. and though at most times prior to october 7th, is°°eli retribution was less severe than this, it similarly did, along with many other similarly abusive policies, serve to create a reality in which armed resistance was eminently justified. is°°el's argument for why their enemies should give up and submit to their domination is that it is strong and evil. you know, the same thing that characterizes the big bad of every hero story.
    1
  11373. 1
  11374. 1
  11375. 5:13 can somebody please get kyle to stop repeating those numbers? no, they're not i-country's own, they're not anybody's numbers. the percentage of security forces among the deaths of israelis and non-palestinian foreigners during the 10/7 attack was 32%. that's something like 25% army, 5% police included in the count, and a handful of intelligence agents. I haven't seen a count for kibbutz guards and such, which apparently count as armed civilians, but I don't think those eould make up another 20%. however i-country's targeting is much worsethan that - only 30% of the people they kill are even adult men (I think that was around 75% for h°mas and friends), and that's out of apopulation that is 25% adult men. that auggests tome that 5% is the ballpark of the percentage among the g°zan dead who were combatants. and the starkest difference: 10/7 had 3% minors among the dead victims. in g°za, 40% of the dead are minors. i-country's response has ki°°ed a total of 350 times as many minors as 10/7. i-country claims to have been invaded by at least a thousand rotally unhinged monsters, and there indeed is video footage of them murd°°ing civilians (the individual morals varied greatly between attackers, some reportedly spoke to civilians in a friendly manner and said they were looking only for soldiers to capture (seemingly referring at least in part to reservists among the civilians) - but almost none of them mu°°ered any minors, because the total count including at least a few ki°°ed by i-country's own less discriminating tanks and helicopters is 36. so at worst, if i-country's total is to be believed, something like one in every hundred attackers each ki°°ed one minor.
    1
  11376. 1
  11377. 1
  11378. 1
  11379. 1
  11380. 1
  11381. 1
  11382. 1
  11383. 1
  11384. 1
  11385. 1
  11386. 1
  11387. 1
  11388. 1
  11389. 1
  11390. 1
  11391. 1
  11392. 1
  11393. 1
  11394. 1
  11395. 1
  11396. 1
  11397. 1
  11398.  @dsdgdsfegfeg  that is a total simpleton's understanding of those african coups. russia was not involved in a major way in most or even all of them. there merely is a trend of african juntas trying out the wagner group as an alternative to western military support for the purpose of cementing their regime security. in terms of public messaging, russia has become a meme in africa particularly since the beginning of the ukraine war. when those africans wave russian flags or use the term "wagner", more often than not they're really just expressing opposition to the west (and often they were individually paid, it's not like they bring those russian flags from home). it's "the enemy of my enemy is my friend". the general populace lives in a low information environment to the point that the messaging that is reaching them about the ukraine war is a vague and abstract idea of russia taking an epic stand against the west. russia can also easily utilise a genuinely deserved lasting good reputation of the soviet union in many african countries - in terms of the actions of the first and second world towards the third world during the cold war, the communists were the good guys in general, but this was most true in africa. so far as the atrocities they commit, and the insanely large rewards in resource extraction concessions they receive, can be covered up, most citizens of those junta-led african countries see the wagner group as some kind of mythical force of anti-colonial freedom fighters. or specifically an anti-france army. ironically, in terms of the exploitative intent they rightly criticize france for (it has the most colonial foreign policy among european countries by a huge margin), russia's interest in the sahel is about as similar to france as the two countries' flags are to each other. the CAR government really is politically very close to russia (but did not gain power through a coup; it was a counter-coup civil war bordering on a two-way genocide only joined by the wagner group in its final phase). some of the other african juntas, I believe most notably those burkinabe losers larping as sankara, also are quite strongly russia-aligned. russia also is very supportive of the RSF and its uprising in sudan, and its longest-running and one of its largest military/mercenary deployments is in the region formerly known as libya, in support of general haftar (who is the other party providing major material support to the RSF). bizarrely, france is an extreme outlier among western countries in also supporting haftar. but the latest coup in niger for the most part has been credibly opposed by russia, same as by china, and wagner involvement seems to have barely grown past the rumour stage even now. russia appears to be more concerned than excited about that particular coup. but it does have at least one very big benefit for russia, which is that niger will no longer do the EU's dirty work by murdering migrants in the sahara to deter them from travelling to europe. niger and chad were the two most important sahel "security partners" of the EU in this endeavour. chad is still looking generally cooperative, but with transit through niger into libya open again, I think going through chad would be a longer way round for most trans-saharan migrants anyways (I think a larger number come from west africa rather than central and east africa). russia and belarus already demonstrated the principle of using migrants as a weapon against the EU in 2021. we're already seeing a ver, substantial increase in migrants crossing the mediterranean caused by moat sahel countries having become more easily traversed, and some even more precarious countries also getting less hospitable and thus producing emigrants (such as sudan as of late, for which the russian-backed RSF are responsible).
    1
  11399. 1
  11400.  @dsdgdsfegfeg  "a military ranked soldier"? my dude, I know that there is one guy heading the junta. he was the head of the presidential guard. the presidential guard was the core of the coup plotters, and it took the outside military officers involved about a day longer to accumulate enough professed support among the military brass to sway the head of the armed forces and entire rest of the military leadership to support the coup (during which time nobody made any attempt to fight for the constitutional order, which is somewhat atypical). of course the nigerien people did not conduct the military coup - that would be a public uprising, not a coup. neither did one guy, there is no such thing as a one guy coup or uprising, no one guy has ever toppled and replaced a government (unless you count ones that already held an official position very close to theo e they assume, like in the self-coup of tunisia's president palpatine). military coups have that name because the way they function is that the majority of the military, most commonly the entire military, chooses to overthrow the government. the amount of say soldiers have in this is dictated by their rank, but it typically requires at least a dozen officers including some of the highest ranking to be actively involved from the planning stage, and to have put out feelers to confirm that they have hundreds or thousands of troops under their command who trust them enough to be part of the first wave of the coup. the role of the majority of military units and commanders in any given successful military coup is that they are immediately convinced to wait and see instead of fighting against the coup, and then once they confirm that that's what everybody is doing, they consider the matter decided and announce that they're joining the coup. at this point, niger is led by a junta, not by one guy holding all the power. this is very common after military coups, and relatively likely to remain this way due to the fact that that guy was the head of the presidential guard, essentially a special forces branch, which gives him less personal command authority than the head of the army, or probably even multiple generals. he holds his position as top dog at the pleasure of multiple other military officers, a collection of a few men who each are believed by the rest to be capable of commanding a challenge to the junta, essentially to initiate a civil war. the state monopoly on violence is formed by the power sharing agreement of those officers - that's what a junta is. ignorance is one thing, but it speaks to an underlying lack of intelligence that you are not able to recognise that our disagreement here about your claims of "russia did everything" and "just one officer overthrew the government" is based on me knowing more than you, rather than the other way around. my profile picture is a ukrainian flag, and it together with the name is a reference to an anti-russia meme. not very smart of you to assume that I am russian, but we have established that.
    1
  11401. 1
  11402. 1
  11403. 1
  11404. 1
  11405. 1
  11406. 1
  11407. 1
  11408. 1
  11409. 1
  11410. 1
  11411. 1
  11412. 1
  11413. 1
  11414. 1
  11415. 1
  11416. 1
  11417. 1
  11418. 1
  11419. 1
  11420. 1
  11421. 1
  11422. 1
  11423. 1
  11424. 1
  11425. 1
  11426. 1
  11427. 1
  11428. 1
  11429. 1
  11430. 1
  11431. 1
  11432. 1
  11433. 1
  11434. 1
  11435. 1
  11436. 1
  11437. 1
  11438. 1
  11439. 1
  11440. 1
  11441. 1
  11442. 1
  11443. 1
  11444. 1
  11445. 1
  11446. 1
  11447. 1
  11448. 1
  11449. 1
  11450. 1
  11451. 1
  11452. 1
  11453. 1
  11454. 1
  11455. 1
  11456. 1
  11457. 1
  11458. 1
  11459. 1
  11460. 1
  11461. 1
  11462. 1
  11463. 1
  11464. 1
  11465. 1
  11466. 1
  11467. 1
  11468. 1
  11469. 1
  11470. 1
  11471. ​ @Humannondancer  really? shani louk on the truck bed was one of the most commonly broadcast uncensored videos. what it shows is her looking non-definitively dead. she lies face-down, motionless and certainly unconscious, with her hair caked in an amount of blood that does not look like a lethal injury (head wounds generally bleed very heavily) and the rest of her body showing no lethal-looking injuries but arguably a dead-looking grey skin tone. the gruesome part (besides her state of undress) is that one leg is certainly broken and twisted horribly, and one arm may also be, but those would not be immediately fatal injuries - but I reckon they were serious enough to have required urgent medical care to avoid death of an intensity that she is unlikely to have received. the family's claims of proof of life seem overly optimistic/grasping at straws. they first mentioned that her credit card was "used" in gaza, but as far as I'm aware did not specify if it was just a logged attempt or a successful use with the correct PIN - and if the user did have the PIN, this could simply be because shani was forced to reveal it before being killed, or even because she wrote it down somewhere in her wallet (I hear some people do that). a few days later, the family claimed to have gotten word from someone they trust of shani being treated in a specific hospital in gaza very close to the location where the credit card was used. but they did not give a reason for why they take the claim to be credible, so it could well be a scam, and I don't know if they previously specified the location of the credit card use. if they had not, it could still be a scam conducted by someone connected to the credit card use, who heard of the family finding out about the credit card use, and concocted the story about the hospital that happened to be closest. personally, I don't find the claim that a hostage would be held in a hospital to be plausible, as that would mean having many witnesses and a very uncontrollable risk of an israeli rescue raid. I would expect hamas to rather bring medical workers into the hideouts (probably transported blindfolded). and given so many hostages, they probably generally did not make medical treatment efforts as big as what shani louk would have needed if she still was alive on that truckbed. they mostly would have just avoided confirming any hostage deaths. they even loaded up already dead corpses and brought them to gaza presumably to pretend they were taken alive, and have not made any attempt to provide proof of life beyond a handful of hostages. a large number of them are dead and they're deliberately keeping it ambiguous. as long as they stick to mostly not providing proof of life, the unconfirmed dead are about as useful as the actual living hostages. however one could speculate that given the international attention, they likely would have provided proof of shani being alive by now if she was, as it would serve their purpose of increasing the hope for other wounded to have been kept alive (like the first proof of life video they did release of a different wounded young woman - using shani for that would have been an obvious choice if it had been possible). I give her a 10% chance of being alive. and really I don't think that anyone but her friends and family trying to be hopeful saw that video and did not get the impression that she was dead.
    1
  11472. 1
  11473. 1
  11474.  @aminamangera4871  YT has at least three categories of comment enforcement severity for different accounts, you get vastly different degrees of censorship depending on your track record. and I haven't seen proof of it applying to comments, but among youtubers posting videos, YT has definitely had different enforcement categories depending on political allegiance since at least the ukraine war. I think a bunch of channels had their undeclared special privileges removed around half a year ago, but before then, pro-ukrainian channels got the same pass usually reserved for recognized news media, which are allowed to post more graphic or controversial content without having their monetization or algorithmic standing harmed or videos removed. conversely, I have never seen youtube enforcement anywhere near as strong as the suppression of al jazeera english since the event. YT has officially had a function that automatically filters uploads from channels you subscribe to and only puts a selection in your subscription box for 10 years or so (obviously absolutely nobody asked for that, and you can't deactivate it). but that's supposed to be based on providing you with what you're likely to click, and for the first couple of weeks I was watching practically every AJE upload, but only 5% or so were in my subscription box. YT also about 4-6 weeks in decided to remove channel 4's protected news status for reporting too honestly (which also around that time got internally reigned in by someone in c4 management, there was a huge drop in quality and quantity of g°z° reporting in november). although the videos were still in the sub box, suddenly among the daily updates the rate of age-gating (which comes with algorithmic delisting) jumped from maybe 5% to around 90%.
    1
  11475. 1
  11476. 1
  11477. 1
  11478. 1
  11479. 1
  11480. 1
  11481. 1
  11482. 1
  11483. 1
  11484. 1
  11485. 1
  11486. 1
  11487. 1
  11488. 1
  11489. 1
  11490. 1
  11491. 1
  11492. 1
  11493. 1
  11494. 1
  11495.  @Fink02  to what AS occurrences are you referring? the thing is that the biggest current day authorities on what AS is have all unironically conspired to include most or all of what one might call ant°z°°°ism, because almost all °°wish organizations and all AS-focused hate-monitoring groups are run by z°°°ists who believe that the most important thing for °°°ish security is i-country, and who are willing to bend the truth to provide support. the most relevant definition, officially adopted by the US, UK, germany and several other countries in recent years, known as the IHRA definition (international h°°°°aust rem°mbrance association) includes among other ways to target i-country critics the very straight-forward claim that "delegitimizing" i-country is AS. but the perceived legitimacy of this country is founded on ignorance of its history and continuing criminality, as a c°l°nial aparth°°d state that was founded on the exp°lsi°n of 750,000 nat°ve people - 80% of those then living in today's commonly recognized territory, without the lat%er added east jer°s°lem and the syr°°n gol°n heights, where btw. they exp°lled 95% of the 100,000 inhabitants, that's why there is little trouble in the g°lan today). the g°°° strip has been a gh°°to filled since its creation in '48 with ref°g°°s from what is i-country, and it's been a closed gh°°to under siege for almost 20 years. thr w°st b°nk is de facto ann°xed, i-country citizens can freely live there under the exact same laws as in the official territory, but the nat°ve non-citizens who can't vote live in an open gh°°to network under a separate set of laws administered by military tribunals. they'renot even allowed to use many of the roads. do you think those facts delegitimize i-country? if so, according to the IHRA definition, those are ant°°°°°°ic facts. personally I think it's wrong and extremely dangerous to °°°s to define AS to include facts, but that is what i-country demands - because z°°°ism and AS are two sides of the same coin. more AS means more legitimacy for the state, which means allied support for more land theft and oppr°ssion/exp°lsions, and it means more °°°s from around the world move there.
    1
  11496. no food has been trucked into gaza yet. gaza used to receive over 400 truckloads of goods a day, while also receiving water from the israeli grid that would now need to be trucked in, and electricity that would now need to be replaced with generator fuel at least for hospitals. 14 days of no goods entering make a deficit of 5600 truckloads. gaza has now received 38 truckloads in two days, less than 5% of its normal supply rate, so the deficit in supplies has hardly been alleviated at all. all goods so far have been medical supplies, no food or water. israel is insistibg on blocking fuel, despite fuel being necessary for the hospital generators and for pumping the water supply that israel claims to have reconnected to southern gaza. israel has no right to displace gazans, and it ordered half of the population, now recently under threat of considering all gazans remaining in the north "supporters of hamas" (one more war crime) to move into the other half of the strip, despite that area being under the same "total siege" and the same bombardment, and offering no shelter room to spare. israel's evacuation orders include many threats and warning attacks with amall munitions against all hospitals in northern gaza, which are morethan half if gaza's hospitals. there is zero capacity to treat any of those patients in southern gaza, israel is ordering the abandonment of all patients in those hospitals. israel has made no real attempt to make southern gaza more survivable than northern gaza.
    1
  11497. 1
  11498. 1
  11499. 1
  11500. 1
  11501. 1
  11502. 1
  11503. 1
  11504. 1
  11505.  hiooxkrmagkis9323  wow, you must have really been paying NO attention. early in its conquest, ISIS was still part of al qaeda. after it split from al qaeda, the second biggest syrian rebel group besides the regionally limited SDF, which cooperatively networked with almost all rebel parties, was the al nusra front, also known by various other names that it cycled through, aka al qaeda in syria. lineages of islamiat rebel groups in syria are complexly interwoven by dissolutions, mergers, rebrandings, and personnel transfers between groups (including from the dying islamic state into the now still existing independent friends of al qaeda club in idlib, and turkey's anti-kurdish pet jihadists). to whatever degree they descend from al nusra (which officially dissolved in 2017, but was succeeded by at least one other organisation called al qaeda in syria, among other names), the rebel authorities in idlib impose the sharia the same way al nusra did in the territories it controlled - though it never was particularly big on holding continuous territories, it was more about networking with and holding partial influence over most territories nominally held by other jihadist factions with the exception of ISIS, which became expressly a rival organisation to al qaeda when it announced its split from it. I don't know what you've been told about al qaeda having been defeated long ago, but al qaeda was a really big deal in the syrian civil war. and it has largely outlived ISIS, with ISIS being much more thoroughly defeated in its original central territory of the levant, and its still active associated groups elsewhere like in libya, afghanistan and west africa functioning more as independent regionally contained groups - really the central authority they pledged allegiance to doesn't exist anymore, whereas al qaeda continues to successfully replace a central leadership when the americans kill them.
    1
  11506. 1
  11507. 1
  11508. 1
  11509. 1
  11510. 1
  11511. 1
  11512. 1
  11513. 1
  11514. 1
  11515. 1
  11516. 1
  11517. 1
  11518. 1
  11519. 1
  11520. 1
  11521. 1
  11522. 1
  11523. 1
  11524. 1
  11525. 1
  11526. 1
  11527. 1
  11528. 1
  11529. 1
  11530. 1
  11531. 1
  11532. 1
  11533. 1
  11534. 1
  11535. 1
  11536. 1
  11537. 1
  11538. 1
  11539.  @Chaotic_Pixie  the sawdust is cut quite fine and very uniform, it's probably sifted. and it's wet, so not very hard, much softer than pumice. I'm not into skincare, haven't heard of nut shell granulate being used like that, but that too would be harder than the sawdust (the outer layer of walnut and hazelnut shells is much harder than almost all woods). pumice might abrade dirt better due to sharper grains, but it definitely has one (aesthetic) disadvantage compared to sawdust and perhaps also nuts - pumice is hard enough to abrade fingernails, so if you rub around those, you'll scuff them. wet wood dust is much softer than fingernails, almost all wood even is softer when dry. in terms of wastewater treatment, with any of those versions of paste, the more problematic parts will be the soaps and oils. sand and pumice would settle out at the wastewater treatment plant, or even untreated would be harmless, and the sawdust would decompose very quickly in any case, and only consume little oxygen since the amount is very small. if released untreated, my guess would be that the citrus oil is the most toxic to water organisms. essential oils tend to be quite toxic, that's what they're made for, and being dissolved in water by soap could make them even more potent. in a water treatment plant though, it should be no problem at all. I think the big issue there are toxic elements and other similarly persistent toxins. soaps are of course one of the main things they're set up to handle, and I'm sure that dishwasher and washing machine soaps are worse.
    1
  11540. 1
  11541. 1
  11542. it sounds to me like with the higher pesticide use, the no-burn sugar is likely to be a slightly inferior product. however air pollution including the kinds one may imagine to be harmless produced by burning fields or forests has been in recent years and decades, to my knowledge, strongly statistically linked to really severe public health impacts, so burning fields from a public health perspective is a huge no-no. aso that sugar cane leaf looks like GREAT mulch, and certainly in any region in need of more water retention on fields, that is a massively beneficial thing. ethanol was not originally introduced to vehicle fuels as a bioofueln in any modern sense though. it was originally introduced because it mixes in with gasoline at various concentrations, and adding somethjng like 5% makes the fuel more detonation-resistant (anti-knocking agent), and it replces the previously used cheaper option of a much smaller percentage addition of tetraethyllead (a fittingly swast°ka-shaped molecule), which was poisoning people through vehicle fumes in a genuine public health catastrophe (it was a totally deranged idea from the start, it was known that it would be very toxic). that's what "unleased" fuels are, they contain ethanol (and probably trace amounts of other additives) instead of tetraethyllead. nowadays, a lot of cars run on fuel with higher ethanol content like E15, because due to rising oil prices and improved ethanol production as well as government subsidies, the price of ethanol has gotten much closer to the price of gasoline rhan it was decades ago. they still use the old lead stuff in the standard aviation fuels though...
    1
  11543. 1
  11544. 1
  11545. 1
  11546. 1
  11547. 1
  11548. 1
  11549. 1
  11550. 1
  11551. 1
  11552. 1
  11553. 1
  11554. 1
  11555. 1
  11556. 1
  11557. 1
  11558. 1
  11559.  @underarmbowlingincidentof1981    are you referring to the 1960s chicken war, the ongoing 1990s spectre of the chlorinated chicken, or something else? ^^ american food regulation is trash, to the point that even many americans are instantly convinced of the superiority of foreign versions of processed foods if they get to try them. for example, america has cut production costs on the quintessential american diabetes beverage so much that today there is, or so I hear, quite a large volume of coca cola being imported from mexico, because it's widely perceived as tasting better - the difference is that mexican coke is made with the more traditional cane sugar, whereas in today's america,the cheapest sugar is corn syrup, so that is used instead. other examples of americans being ripped off by the food industry having established inferior products as the norm include that american liquorice is generally made with anise replacing most or all of the more expensive liquorice root, in spite of the fact that this results in a very large portion of americans hating liquorice (which is a phenomenon I have never heard of in europe, salmiak notwithstanding) because anise is much more bitter and adstringent than liquorice root. and american milk chocolate has a ridiculous legal minimum cocoa solids content of only 10%, which actually does get followed closely (in the EU it's 25%, but I don't know any below 30%). and to compensate for the fact that the very small cocoa content is overpowered by the sugar, they add butyric acid, otherwise best known from stink bombs, separately or by allowing partial spoilage of the milk (as hershey's does to its 11% milk chocolate, with the benefit of being able to claim technically truthfully that they don't add butyric acid), resulting in a taste some call "tart" and others call "pukey". and american chocolate producers call it a 65% reduction in the need for their most expensive ingredient. xD
    1
  11560. 1
  11561. 1
  11562. 1
  11563. 1
  11564. 1
  11565. 1
  11566. 1
  11567. 1
  11568. 1
  11569. 1
  11570. 1
  11571. 1
  11572. 1
  11573. 1
  11574. 1
  11575. 1
  11576. 1
  11577. 1
  11578. 1
  11579. 1
  11580. 1
  11581. 1
  11582. 1
  11583. 1
  11584. 1
  11585. 1
  11586. 1
  11587. 1
  11588. 1
  11589. 1
  11590. 1
  11591. 1
  11592. 1
  11593. 1
  11594. 1
  11595. 1
  11596. 1
  11597. 1
  11598. 1
  11599. 1
  11600. 1
  11601. 1
  11602. 1
  11603. 1
  11604. 1
  11605. 1
  11606. 1
  11607. 1
  11608. 1
  11609. 1
  11610. 1
  11611. 1
  11612. 1
  11613. 1
  11614. 1
  11615. 1
  11616. 1
  11617. 1
  11618. 1
  11619. 1
  11620. 1
  11621. 1
  11622. 1
  11623. 1
  11624. 1
  11625. 1
  11626. 1
  11627. 1
  11628. 1
  11629. 1
  11630. 1
  11631. 1
  11632. 1
  11633. 1
  11634. 1
  11635. 1
  11636. 1
  11637. 1
  11638. 1
  11639. 1
  11640. 1
  11641. 1
  11642. 1
  11643. 1
  11644. 1
  11645. 1
  11646. 1
  11647. 1
  11648. 1
  11649. 1
  11650. 1
  11651. 1
  11652. 1
  11653. 1
  11654. 1
  11655. 1
  11656. 1
  11657. 1
  11658. 1
  11659. 1
  11660. 1
  11661. 1
  11662.  @zerj2024  egypt has been my personal least favourite dictatorship since the gulf arab/US/israel-supported counterrevolutionary coup and the rabaa massacre in 2013, the deadliest attack on peaceful protesters since at least beijing 1989 (it cleared a million people off the streets in one night by killing probably a thousand or more). but at the moment, egypt is just an extremely ugly red herring, since it's functioning as israel's enforcer. or like a violently depressurized deep sea fish like a blobfish, or one of those anglerfish with the long needle teeth, like a really rotten one with multiple different species of maggots and flies on it, with the kind of smell that makes you freeze in indecisiveness about the need to get rid of it and the aversion to getting close enough to do that. plus it has a very amusing reputation as one of the worst countries to visit as a tourist, because you get constantly harassed or terrorised by the world's rudest and scummiest unreasonable demands for money (I found that out when I once googled a bit about whether I'm alone in my hatred for egypt). xD egypt has been the arab state with the friendliest relations with israel since it became the first one to recognise its statehood. by far the biggest internal enemy of egypt's military dictatorship is the muslim brotherhood, hamas is the palestinian branch of the muslim brotherhood, and egypt's government is correspondingly opposed to supporting hamas or allowing gazans to enter egypt and bring with them a new wave of islamist insurgency in the sinai. and egypt is receiving, as part of its quasi-alliance arrangement with israel, huge amounts of both gifted and sold weapons from western states like the US and germany (germany's biggest arms buyer ahead of saudi arabia and the UAE for several of the years since universal recognition of the junta in 2014 after their "election"). oh, and israel still had to bomb the vicinity of the rafah crossing as warning shots multiple times to make egypt close it initially during the current israeli assault.
    1
  11663. 1
  11664. 1
  11665. 1
  11666. 1
  11667. 1
  11668. 1
  11669. 1
  11670. 1
  11671. 1
  11672. 1
  11673. 1
  11674. 1
  11675. 1
  11676. 1
  11677. 1
  11678. 1
  11679. 1
  11680. 1
  11681. 1
  11682. 1
  11683. 1
  11684. 1
  11685. 1
  11686. 1
  11687. 1
  11688. 1
  11689. 1
  11690. 1
  11691. 1
  11692. 1
  11693. 1
  11694. 1
  11695. 1
  11696. 1
  11697. 1
  11698. 1
  11699. 1
  11700. 1
  11701. 1
  11702. 1
  11703. 1
  11704. 1
  11705. 1
  11706. 1
  11707. 1
  11708. 1
  11709. 1
  11710. 1
  11711. 1
  11712. 1
  11713. 1
  11714. 1
  11715. 1
  11716. 1
  11717. 1
  11718. 1
  11719. 1
  11720. 1
  11721. 1
  11722. 1
  11723. 1
  11724. 1
  11725. 1
  11726. 1
  11727. 1
  11728. 1
  11729. 1
  11730. 1
  11731. 1
  11732. 1
  11733. 1
  11734. 1
  11735. 1
  11736. 1
  11737. 1
  11738. 1
  11739. 1
  11740. 1
  11741. 1
  11742. 1
  11743. 1
  11744. 1
  11745. 1
  11746. 1
  11747. 1
  11748. 1
  11749. 1
  11750. 1
  11751. 1
  11752. 1
  11753. 1
  11754. 1
  11755. 1
  11756. 1
  11757. 1
  11758. 1
  11759. 1
  11760. 1
  11761. 1
  11762. 1
  11763. 1
  11764. 1
  11765. 1
  11766. 1
  11767. 1
  11768. 1
  11769. 1
  11770. 1
  11771. 1
  11772. 1
  11773. 1
  11774. 1
  11775. 1
  11776. 1
  11777. 1
  11778. 1
  11779. 1
  11780. 1
  11781. 1
  11782. 1
  11783. 1
  11784. 1
  11785. 1
  11786. 1
  11787. 1
  11788. 1
  11789. 1
  11790. 1
  11791. 1
  11792. 1
  11793. 1
  11794. 1
  11795. 1
  11796. 1
  11797. 1
  11798. 1
  11799. 1
  11800. 1
  11801. 1
  11802. 1
  11803. 1
  11804. 1
  11805. 1
  11806. 1
  11807. 1
  11808. 1
  11809. 1
  11810. 1
  11811. 1
  11812. 1
  11813. 1
  11814. 1
  11815. 1
  11816. 1
  11817. 1
  11818. 1
  11819. 1
  11820. 1
  11821. 1
  11822. 1
  11823. 1
  11824. 1
  11825. 1
  11826. 1
  11827. 1
  11828. 1
  11829. 1
  11830. 1
  11831. 1
  11832. 1
  11833. 1
  11834. 1
  11835. 1
  11836. 1
  11837. 1
  11838. 1
  11839. 1
  11840. 1
  11841. 1
  11842. 1
  11843. 1
  11844. 1
  11845. 1
  11846. 1
  11847. 1
  11848. 1
  11849. 1
  11850. 1
  11851. 1
  11852. 1
  11853. 1
  11854. 1
  11855. 1
  11856. 1
  11857. 1
  11858. 1
  11859. there were two drone strikes linked to that, the revenge one being outside of kabul somewhere and so far not clarified/contested by anybody as far as I know. the info we have on that is just the US military claim that ISK members were targeted and killed. the other drone strike in kabul was not supposed to be revenge, it was intended to be a prevention of another imminent attack on the airport. they misidentified an aid worker's vehicle for an ISK vehicle for unspecified reasons and took the water he loaded to be explosives. ultimately they shot a missile at him when he got home, and they killed him plus nine other members of his family, including seven children. one aspect that they have not commented on is why, after keeping the drone on his car for something like eight hours as he drove through the city picking up and dropping off things for his aid work, they chose to target him at his home in a residential neighbourhood. the weaponry they used is easily capable of hitting a moving car, it's not like they had to wait until he stopped. another detail I haven't seen reporting on since the concession of the US military is the fact that the military initially claimed in a first time official acknowledgement of this weapon that they had used a rare non-explosive bladed version of the hellfire missile popularly called "the ninja bomb", which would have meant that the explosion was caused by explosives in the car. there were no explosives in the car, but therewas an explosion that killed 10 people, so clearly the military lied and did in fact use a regular explosive hellfire missile instead of the bladed type that's designed to prevent collateral damage.
    1
  11860. 1
  11861. 1
  11862. 1
  11863. 1
  11864. 1
  11865. 1
  11866. 1
  11867. 1
  11868. 1
  11869. 1
  11870. 1
  11871. 1
  11872. 1
  11873. 1
  11874. 1
  11875. 1
  11876. 1
  11877. 1
  11878. 1
  11879. 1
  11880. 1
  11881. 1
  11882. 1
  11883. 1
  11884. 1
  11885. 1
  11886. 1
  11887. 1
  11888. 1
  11889. 1
  11890. 1
  11891. 1
  11892. 1
  11893. spaceishigh well, if you find xanax that's in an appropriate sealed pill bottle or better yet those plastic-aluminium foil blister pill sheets, it's unlikely to be fake. I think it's probably very rare for black market producers to have the supplies and machines necessary to make that. though I guess what's still relatively possible is that some shady factory in china makes plastic pill bottles with the proper printing and sells them open and empty (I think a lot of them are made to be easily closed once, and then to open them again you have to break the seal). but those would be highly troublesome to smuggle as they're very bulky, not worth that much, and extremely suspicious to any customs officer. the benefit of the extremely potent RC drugs, which I think are probably still being primarily produced in china, though now much less legally than 10 years ago, is that you can hide them in anything (traditional smuggling methods for example for far less potent and thus not even as easy to smuggle cocaine include for example dissolving very large amounts of it in a liquid masquerading as some inconspicuous product), and you're smuggling incredibly large amounts of value with little effort. you can make an almost unlimited amount of fake xanax bars from only 100g of smuggled material and otherwise freely available supplies with a freely available cheap pill press. making a convincing packaging would take far more effort than making the product itself, and would be difficult to monetize by charging proportionally many times the price of the loose pills, so it's probably extremely uncommon.
    1
  11894. 1
  11895. 1
  11896. 1
  11897. 1
  11898. 1
  11899. 1
  11900. 1
  11901. 1
  11902. 1
  11903. 1
  11904. 1
  11905. 1
  11906. 1
  11907. 1
  11908. 1
  11909. 1
  11910. 1
  11911. 1
  11912. 1
  11913. 1
  11914. 1
  11915. 1
  11916. 1
  11917. 1
  11918. 1
  11919. 1
  11920. 1
  11921. 1
  11922. 1
  11923. 1
  11924. 1
  11925. 1
  11926. 1
  11927. 1
  11928. 1
  11929. 1
  11930. 1
  11931. 1
  11932. 1
  11933. 1
  11934. 1
  11935. 1
  11936. 1
  11937. 1
  11938. 1
  11939. 1
  11940. 1
  11941. 1
  11942. 1
  11943. 1
  11944. 1
  11945. 1
  11946. 1
  11947. 1
  11948. 1
  11949. 1
  11950. 1
  11951. 1
  11952. 1
  11953. 1
  11954. 1
  11955. 1
  11956. 1
  11957. 1
  11958. 1
  11959. 1
  11960. 1
  11961. 1
  11962. 1
  11963. 1
  11964. 1
  11965. 1
  11966. 1
  11967. 1
  11968. 1
  11969. wer soll das sein? nur ein solcher angriff auf die ganze ukraine wurde für unwahrscheinlich gehalten, wenn auch absolut nicht für eine leere drohung (meine persönliche einschätzung war 10% wahrscheinlichkeit zu dem zeitpunkt). die amerikanischen geheimdienste haben schon 1-2 monate vor der invasion von vorliegenden plänen einer gesamtinvasion berichtet. mehrere wochen vor der invasion wurde in bild oder welt oder so eine geleakte invasionskarte veröffentlicht, die deckungsgleich mit dem späteren tatsächlichen einmarsch und der karte vor der lukashenko später gefilmt wurde war (die mit dem gewitzten heimlichen pfeil nach moldawien xD). 3 oder 4 tage vor der komplettinvasion als putin die donbassrepubliken anerkannt hat, hat er technisch gesehen klar einen krieg erklärt, denn er hat am selben abend öffentlich den einmarsch in den donbass befohlen, der dann auch geschah. ab da (und wegen der evakuierung und mobilmachung in den separatistengebieten) war jedem vernünftigen menschen klar, dass es zu einem neuen eroberungsversuch mindestens bis zu den grenzen des donbass kommen würde (denn das war so angekündigt, aufgrund der russischen anerkennung der gesamten donbass-region als gebiet der zwei volksrepubliken), und strategisch gesehen dabei höchst wahrscheinlich auch die landbrücke zur krim auf dem plan steht (weil das mehr gewinn für russland ist, ohne mehr reaktion des westens herbeizuführen als nur den donbass zu erobern). daraufhin sind diverse botschaften aus kiew abgezogen, weil die amis sagten, eine komplettinvasion sei bereits beschlossen und stände unmittelbar bevor. am 23. hat keine sau geglaubt, dass es zu keiner invasion käme, denn die invasion im donbass hatte schon 2-3 tage zuvor begonnen. es gab nur deshalb große zweifel an der komplettinvasion, weil die amerikanischen und britischen geheimdienste aufgrund vergangener lügen nicht als vertrauenswürdig gelten, und weil diese invasion so offensichtlich eine extrem schlechte idee war. für unmöglich haben sie allerdings schon monate zuvor viele nicht gehalten, denn die invasion der krim war auch schon so eine schlechte idee, und dabei hat putin demonstriert, dass er nicht zuverlässig rational agiert. unmittelbar vor der invasion waren den amis die pläne so klar bekannt, dass die ukraine mit den infos diverse mobile ziele für die ersten russischen präzisionsraketen und marschflugkörper (luftabwehr, flugzeuge etc) exakt vor kriegsbeginn von den russischen zielkoordinaten wegbewegen konnten. russlands logik war und ist ausgesprochen rätselhaft und deshalb gab es viel zweifel, aber die pläne waren ausgesprochen gut bekannt.
    1
  11970. 1
  11971. 1
  11972. 1
  11973. 1
  11974. 1
  11975. 1
  11976. 1
  11977. 1
  11978. 1
  11979. 1
  11980. 1
  11981. 1
  11982. 1
  11983. 1
  11984. 1
  11985. 1
  11986. 1
  11987. 1
  11988. 1
  11989. 1
  11990. 1
  11991. 1
  11992. 1
  11993. 1
  11994. 1
  11995. 1
  11996. 1
  11997. 1
  11998. 1
  11999. 1
  12000. 1
  12001. 1
  12002. 1
  12003. 1
  12004. 1
  12005. 1
  12006. 1
  12007. 1
  12008. 1
  12009. 1
  12010. 1
  12011. 1
  12012. 1
  12013. 1
  12014. 1
  12015. 1
  12016. 1
  12017. 1
  12018. 1
  12019. 1
  12020. 1
  12021. 1
  12022. 1
  12023. 1
  12024. 1
  12025. 1
  12026. 1
  12027. 1
  12028. 1
  12029. 1
  12030. 1
  12031. 1
  12032. 1
  12033. 1
  12034. 1
  12035. 1
  12036. 1
  12037. 1
  12038. 1
  12039. 1
  12040. 1
  12041. 1
  12042. 1
  12043. 1
  12044. 1
  12045. 1
  12046. 1
  12047. 1
  12048. 1
  12049. 1
  12050. 1
  12051. 1
  12052. 1
  12053. 1
  12054. 1
  12055. 1
  12056. 1
  12057. 1
  12058. 1
  12059. 1
  12060. 1
  12061. 1
  12062. 1
  12063. 1
  12064. 1
  12065. 1
  12066. 1
  12067. 1
  12068. 1
  12069. Dino Oldman no, those figures are in the ballpark of reality in relation to the wuhan strain or the alpha variant, but the relative efficacy of the vaccines is false. for the delta variant, the numbers are significantly too high, and the sputnik omicron numbers may well be correct, but would make sputnik one of the most effective vaccines against omicron because most other reported efficacy numbers against omicron are even lower. the last line-up of efficacy before omicron, so mostly against the delta variant, was 1. moderna+sputnik V at something like 85% prevention of serious illness or death, 2. pfizer at about 75%, 3. astrazeneca around 60-70%, 5. J&J at 50%, 6. sinopharm and sinovac 15-40% - weaker than natural immunity. there is a more rare russian vaccine that is widely reported to have near 0 efficacy, but that has nothing to do with sputnik. efficacy numbers of individual vaccines compared between different countries have always varied A LOT, but that order of efficacy was quite clear. and no, that's not by the russian numbers for sputnik V, that's based on numbers from south america and elsewhere because sputnik V has been very widely exported. sputnik light, just the first dose, also is MUCH more effective than J&J, its equivalent to two shots of AZ. I didn't believe in sputnik V at all until about fall 2021, but the success is undeniable. it is getting much better results than most vaccines. yes, there are outliers of countries reporting 30% less efficacy than others, but that's actually the case for all the vaccines including pfizer and moderna. I think it has a reputation for heavy side effects and I wouldn't put much trust in its safety profile gompared to the western vaccines, but moderna hits pretty hard too, and I'm hlad I got that before germany stopped using it on U30s due to it causing more myocarditis in young people than covid (yes, really). buddy, I have ACTUALLY been paying attention to thid pandemic. that's why I can tell that those numbers are wrong even though they are close to reality. they're not close enough for my very large abrain that china respects very much.
    1
  12070. 1
  12071. 1
  12072. 1
  12073. 1
  12074. 1
  12075. 1
  12076. 1
  12077. 1
  12078. 1
  12079. 1
  12080. 1
  12081. 1
  12082. 1
  12083. 1
  12084. 1
  12085. 1
  12086. 1
  12087. 1
  12088. 1
  12089. 1
  12090. 1
  12091. 1
  12092. 1
  12093. 1
  12094. 1
  12095. 1
  12096. 1
  12097. 1
  12098. 1
  12099. 1
  12100. 1
  12101. 1
  12102. 1
  12103. 1
  12104. 1
  12105. 1
  12106. 1
  12107. 1
  12108. 1
  12109. 1
  12110. 1
  12111. 1
  12112. 1
  12113. 1
  12114. 1
  12115. 1
  12116. 1
  12117. 1
  12118. 1
  12119. 1
  12120. 1
  12121. 1
  12122. 1
  12123. 1
  12124. 1
  12125. 1
  12126. 1
  12127. 1
  12128. 1
  12129. 1
  12130. 1
  12131. 1
  12132. 1
  12133. 1
  12134. 1
  12135. 1
  12136. 1
  12137. 1
  12138. 1
  12139. 1
  12140. 1
  12141. 1
  12142. 1
  12143. 1
  12144. 1
  12145. 1
  12146. 1
  12147. 1
  12148. 1
  12149. 1
  12150. 1
  12151. 1
  12152. 1
  12153. 1
  12154. 1
  12155. 1
  12156. 1
  12157. 1
  12158. 1
  12159. 1
  12160. 1
  12161. 1
  12162. 1
  12163. 1
  12164. 1
  12165. 1
  12166. 1
  12167. 1
  12168. 1
  12169. 1
  12170. 1
  12171. 1
  12172. 1
  12173. 1
  12174. 1
  12175. 1
  12176. 1
  12177. 1
  12178. 1
  12179. 1
  12180. 1
  12181. 1
  12182. 1
  12183. 1
  12184. 1
  12185. 1
  12186. 1
  12187. 1
  12188. 1
  12189. 1
  12190. 1
  12191. 1
  12192. 1
  12193. 1
  12194. 1
  12195. 1
  12196. 1
  12197. 1
  12198. 1
  12199. 1
  12200. 1
  12201.  @Aksarallah  islam is the fastest BREEDING religion in the world, because reproductive rates are almost perfectly inversely proportional to education, wealth, and quality of life. muslims have many children because most are uneducated, poor, and live in s**t countries with no social safety net, so they need to produce children to take care of them when they're old. the descriptions of reality prescribed as undoubtable truth in the quran are for the most part thoroughly disproven not just by the more obscure details of modern scientific knowledge, but even by the most basic common knowledge most people learn in kindergarten or primary school. it is very obviously a book originated in the minds of 7th century desert-dwellers who did not even possess a high level of education by the standards of the time. it is not the product of an all-knowing god. also your perfect example of a man was a genocide advocate, slaver, and serial child r**ist. his favourite wife aisha, whom he married when he was around 50 and she was 6, after seeing her and being so smitten that he canceled her betrothal to another man, was first r**ed by him when she was 9. which contrary to his own rule supposedly applying to all muslims was before her first period. he also had twice as many wives as were supposed to be allowed, and one of them was his ex-slave adopted son's wife, whose marriage he annulled to take her for himself in spite of the fact that he had previously decreed that a man must not marry his son's former wife (among other relations), which he then fixed by also annulling the adoption and banning adoption. aisha was 18 when he died, and was never allowed to marry again because he made a unique rule that banned anyone from marrying the prophet's widows after his death. by the way he also decreed that a man must treat his wives equally, yet he himself was very open about how his 6-18 year old child bride was his favourite.
    1
  12202. 1
  12203.  @Bullcutter  I'm german, I find international news interesting. I learned about the prison killings because that was mentioned in reporting I saw when raisi got elected. iran is generally very interesting - it looks particularly clearly on a trajectory to drastically liberalise in the coming years (could be another 15 I guess, but no more, or as little as 2), with younger adults and kids being overwhelmingly opposed to and dodging compliance with iran's oppressive laws. I don't know of another dictatorship that had so many very large flare-ups of protest in the last decade or two. it would be nice if the protesters had more success, but the fact that they keep coming back anyways sends a big message. iran just doesn't run out of protesters,they can't arrest enough people to make it stop - they could consider doing an egypt and escalating violence, but they probably choose not to do that because they figure that an even bigger portion of the population would turn against them. it's a very stark contrast to russia for example, where practically noone protests anymore, where everybody thinks that politics are just not their department (for example I have seen a very annoying trend among putin-opponents to adamantly deny that the russian people are responsible for the war, they reject responsibility by rejecting the idea that the russian people could influence russian governance at all). in short, among all countries with comparably autocratic conservative governments, iran is probably the one with the most liberal population. that makes for interesting politics. and of course iran is an important regional power, if only by way of having a powerful military, a major arms industry, and various very active proxy militias abroad. oh, and it was F*ing scary how close trump got to starting a war with iran by killing general soleimani
    1
  12204. 1
  12205. 1
  12206. 1
  12207. 1
  12208. 1
  12209. 1
  12210. 1
  12211. I'm no american and if I was, I wouldn'tbe a single issue voter, butif I was a single issue palestine-support voter in america, then I 100% would vote for the fascist trump over biden in the next presidential election. becauae trump at his worst is as bad as biden, but trump is inconsistent. and more than that, trump guides foreign relations based on which foreign leaders pump up his ego and which insult him, and that excerpt of an older interview recording of trump that was released a few weeks ago makes it very clear that trump grew to hate netanyahu towards the end of his term in office, and to likeabbas, because netanyahu openly disrespects everybody and did that even to trump (it seems downright compulsive, like george santos' pathological lying). trump says he learned that it's the israelis who don't want peace and "are impossible", whereas he described abbas as very warm and fatherly - which is weird because trump is a weirdo, but he clearly meant it in a very positive way. so as far as only palestine is concerned, I would give it a 40% chance that trump would be as bad as biden, a 60% chance that trump would be better, and a 0% chance that he would be worse. yes, trump i itiated a rather dramatic shift against palestine, but that was before he grew to hate netanyahu, and if you listen to that intsrview and are familiar with how trump sounds, it is very clear that he is being sincere there. alao not least because what he says is radically opposed to what the republican party and the rest of the political establishment would want him to say, and so clearly that even trump must have been aware of that when he said it. trump could change his mind back, but him feeling personally insulted is the most solid foundation for trump to base any political view on... other than substantial financial benefit, I suppose.
    1
  12212. 1
  12213. 1
  12214. 1
  12215. 1
  12216. 1
  12217. 1
  12218. 1
  12219. 1
  12220. 1
  12221. 1
  12222. 1
  12223. 1
  12224. 1
  12225. 1
  12226. 1
  12227. 1
  12228. 1
  12229. 1
  12230. 1
  12231. 1
  12232. 1
  12233. 1
  12234. 1
  12235. 1
  12236. 1
  12237. 1
  12238. 1
  12239. 1
  12240. 1
  12241. 1
  12242. 1
  12243. 1
  12244. 1
  12245. 1
  12246. 1
  12247. 1
  12248. 1
  12249. 1
  12250. 1
  12251. 1
  12252. 1
  12253. 1
  12254. 1
  12255. 1
  12256. 1
  12257. 1
  12258. 1
  12259. 1
  12260. 1
  12261. 1
  12262. 1
  12263. 1
  12264. 1
  12265. 1
  12266. 1
  12267. 1
  12268. 1
  12269. 1
  12270. 1
  12271. 1
  12272. 1
  12273. 1
  12274. 1
  12275. 1
  12276. 1
  12277. 1
  12278. 1
  12279. 1
  12280. 1
  12281. 1
  12282. 1
  12283. 1
  12284. 1
  12285. 1
  12286. 1
  12287. 1
  12288. 1
  12289. 1
  12290. 1
  12291. 1
  12292. 1
  12293. 1
  12294. 1
  12295. 1
  12296. 1
  12297. 1
  12298. 1
  12299. 1
  12300. 1
  12301. 1
  12302. 1
  12303. 1
  12304. 1
  12305. 1
  12306. 1
  12307. 1
  12308. 1
  12309. 1
  12310. 1
  12311. 1
  12312. 1
  12313. 1
  12314. 1
  12315. 1
  12316. 1
  12317. 1
  12318. 1
  12319. 1
  12320. 1
  12321. 1
  12322. 1
  12323. 1
  12324. 1
  12325. 1
  12326. 1
  12327. 1
  12328. 1
  12329. 1
  12330. 1
  12331. 1
  12332. 1
  12333. 1
  12334. 1
  12335. 1
  12336. 1
  12337. 1
  12338. 1
  12339. 1
  12340. 1
  12341. 1
  12342. 1
  12343. 1
  12344. 1
  12345. 1
  12346. 1
  12347. 1
  12348. 1
  12349. 1
  12350. 1
  12351. 1
  12352. 1
  12353. 1
  12354. 1
  12355. 1
  12356. 1
  12357. 1
  12358. 1
  12359. 1
  12360. 1
  12361. 1
  12362. I watched a majority report video the other day and finally realised probably the main reason why I never do. it's because sam seder is so hard to listen to. I can't think of anybody else who speaks into a microphone for a living who talks so heavily interrupted by pauses and "uhm" and "uuhhhhhh" and such. and he sounds so incredibly unconcerned about it. he is far beyond the line to actual speech pathology, the guy is genuinely in dire need of speech therapy. I think he spends less than half of his speaking time with actual productive speech. it is beyond me how he has been successful like this. but then again, I have also otherwise noticed a trend in recent years of newer talkingyoutubechannels being very successful despite reading scripts really really badly - in most cases by way of being too lazy to repeat long takes, plan ahead and sort of map out how to say each paragraph with a cohesive tonal dynamic, and instead reading every single sentence end as if it was a paragraph end, repeating the same pattern of tone and emphasis in almost every sentence, and for many channels even adding in many unnatural pauses that sound like full stops in places within a sentence where only a comma or nothing at all resembling a pause belongs, purely because the sentence was too long and the speaker was too lazy to read even the one sentence in one go (and I don't mean sentences as long as this one xD). it is no exaggeration that there are certainly dozens, more likely hundreds of english language script-reading youtube channels alone successful enough to function as at least one person's full time job on which the speaker talks much more unnaturally than current or even 2-3 year old generative AI robot voices. I know one special case that deserves a mention for being funny. the channel is called dark skies (I think there are others from the same guy) and talks about military aircraft. that guy got wildly successful while doing something he has now very slowly managed to quit, which was that he bizarrely tried to spice up and add dramatic tone to his narration primarily through frequent really extreme fluctuations in tempo - he would say part of a sentence very slowly, and then another part with probably three times the frequency of syllables, switching back and forth every three seconds or so. and not only did he talk fast, but he pushed past the tempo that his mouth could actually manage, and went all mumbly, and kinda sounded like he had a lot of spit in his mouth all the time. he would get tons and tons of comments complaining about him talking "too fast", but I think it took like a year for him to improve that enough to be noticeable. I really don't understand why youtube audiences have so high of a tolerance level for bad speech. as soon as the robot voices lose the little cracks that still give them away, they are going to overrun youtube. because the only thing keeping them from meeting the low audience standards is the ick factor of identifying them as robot voices.
    1
  12363. 1
  12364. 1
  12365. 1
  12366. 1
  12367. 1
  12368. 1
  12369. 1
  12370. 1
  12371. 1
  12372. 1
  12373. 1
  12374. 1
  12375. 1
  12376. 1
  12377. 1
  12378. 1
  12379. 1
  12380. 1
  12381. 1
  12382. 1
  12383. 1
  12384. 1
  12385. 1
  12386. 1
  12387. 1
  12388. 1
  12389. 1
  12390. 1
  12391. 1
  12392. 1
  12393. 1
  12394. 1
  12395. 1
  12396. 1
  12397. 1
  12398. 1
  12399. 1
  12400. 1
  12401. 1
  12402. 1
  12403. 1
  12404. 1
  12405. 1
  12406. 1
  12407. 1
  12408. 1
  12409. 1
  12410. 1
  12411. 1
  12412. 1
  12413. 1
  12414. 1
  12415. 1
  12416. 1
  12417. 1
  12418. 1
  12419. 1
  12420. 1
  12421. 1
  12422. 1
  12423. 1
  12424. 1
  12425.  @think7299  condemning hamas' massacre does not preclude a context. nobody in this comment section has justified the massacre. nor has the UN secretary general, very explicitly so. condemning and explaining context is not justifying, it's condemning. just like when I condemn israel's current campaign of genocide against the people of gaza, I can still acknowledge that hamas' actions on the 7th are fundamentally unjustifiable because what they did would not be right to do in any context. neither would what israel is currently doing, in any context, and what israel is doing is objectively far worse than what hamas did. not only has israel killed far more people already, including at least as many civilians in attacks deliberately targeting civilians, but they are starving, traumatising, dehousing and depriving of their possessions the entire 2 million population of the gaza strip with the netanyahu-declared aim of depopulating the gaza strip. each party of the conflict is responsible for their actions. hamas can't justify their massacre of civilians by evoking the occupation, blockade and apartheid (but a hamas attack on only the israeli military would indeed have been justified by those, as is the throwing of stones at soldiers and colonizers by palestinian kids in the west bank, whom israel sees fit to murder or indefinitely detain for that). and israel can't justify its genocide of gazans, or indeed its occupation, apartheid, annexations and ethnic cleansings, by evoking hamas' massacre. there isn't one good guy and one bad guy in every war, and everything the good guy does is then justified.
    1
  12426. 1
  12427. 1
  12428. 1
  12429. 1
  12430. 1
  12431. 1
  12432. 1
  12433. 1
  12434. 1
  12435. 1
  12436. 1
  12437. 1
  12438. 1
  12439. 1
  12440. 1
  12441. 1
  12442. 1
  12443. 1
  12444. 1
  12445. 1
  12446. 1
  12447. 1
  12448. 1
  12449. 1
  12450. 1
  12451. 1
  12452. 1
  12453. 1
  12454. 1
  12455. 1
  12456. 1
  12457. 1
  12458. 1
  12459. 1
  12460. 1
  12461. 1
  12462. 1
  12463. 1
  12464. 1
  12465. 1
  12466. 1
  12467. 1
  12468. 1
  12469. 1
  12470. 1
  12471. 1
  12472. 1
  12473. 1
  12474. 1
  12475. 1
  12476. 1
  12477. 1
  12478. 1
  12479. 1
  12480. 1
  12481. 1
  12482. 1
  12483. 1
  12484. 1
  12485. 1
  12486. 1
  12487. 1
  12488. 1
  12489. 1
  12490. 1
  12491. 1
  12492. 1
  12493. 1
  12494. 1
  12495. 1
  12496. 1
  12497. 1
  12498. 1
  12499.  @carlinkag2525  it's very uncommon for dogs to harm humans because they see the humans as prey (pretty much only happens with small children and unusual dogs). the normal way is for dogs to see humans as a threat or competition, and fight either due to aggression, or, perhaps more commonly, because the dog feels threatened by the human being too close - which can be 50m or it can be that you stick your face into a dog's face because, like you, you have no understanding of the fact that dogs ARE dangerous animals, which is how most bad dog bite injuries happen to children (dogs often bite children's faces, causing disfigurements and loss of eyes). you're being quite silly in acting like dogs are not dangerous predators of substantial size and bite strength, in many cases bred for guarding, fighting, or hunting, and compared to many other species very fond of threat displays whose point it is to cause fear. and the practical reason to recognise dogs as potentially dangerous is in large part that a huge portion of dog owners suck and pretty much do not train and do not understand their dogs. according to the WHO: "In the United States of America for example, approximately 4.5 million people are bitten by dogs every year. Of these, nearly 885 000 seek medical care; 30 000 have reconstructive procedures; 3–18% develop infections and between 10 and 20 fatalities occur. Other high-income countries such as Australia, Canada and France have comparable incidence and fatality rates. Low- and middle-income country data are more fragmented, however some studies reveal that dogs account for 76–94% of animal bite injuries." you don't understand how it's even possible to see dogs as dangerous? I don't understand how ignorant you need to be to not know that they ARE dangerous. for the record again, dogs are my favourite animals, but they are animals, not plushies. and people failing to realise this are what's causing much of the danger with dogs.
    1
  12500. 1
  12501. 1
  12502. 1
  12503. 1
  12504. 1
  12505. 1
  12506. 1
  12507. 1
  12508. 1
  12509. 1
  12510. 1
  12511. 1
  12512. 1
  12513. 1
  12514. 1
  12515. 1
  12516. 1
  12517. 1
  12518. 1
  12519. 1
  12520. 1
  12521. 1
  12522. 1
  12523. 1
  12524. 1
  12525. 1
  12526. 1
  12527. 1
  12528. 1
  12529. 1
  12530. 1
  12531. 1
  12532. 1
  12533. 1
  12534. 1
  12535. 1
  12536. 1
  12537. 1
  12538. 1
  12539. 1
  12540. 1
  12541. 1
  12542. 1
  12543. 1
  12544. 1
  12545. 1
  12546. 1
  12547. 1
  12548. 1
  12549. 1
  12550. 1
  12551. 1
  12552. 1
  12553. 1
  12554. 1
  12555. 1
  12556. 1
  12557. 1
  12558. 1
  12559. 1
  12560. 1
  12561. 1
  12562. 1
  12563. 1
  12564. 1
  12565. 1
  12566. 1
  12567. 1
  12568. 1
  12569. 1
  12570. 1
  12571. 1
  12572. 1
  12573. 1
  12574. 1
  12575. 1
  12576. 1
  12577. 1
  12578. 1
  12579. 1
  12580. 1
  12581. 1
  12582. 1
  12583. 1
  12584. 1
  12585. 1
  12586. 1
  12587. 1
  12588. 1
  12589. 1
  12590. 1
  12591. 1
  12592. 1
  12593. 1
  12594. 1
  12595. 1
  12596. 1
  12597. 1
  12598. 1
  12599. 1
  12600. 1
  12601. 1
  12602. 1
  12603. 1
  12604. 1
  12605. 1
  12606. 1
  12607. 1
  12608. 1
  12609. 1
  12610. 1
  12611. 1
  12612. 1
  12613. 1
  12614. 1
  12615. 1
  12616. 1
  12617. 1
  12618. 1
  12619. 1
  12620. 1
  12621. 1
  12622. 1
  12623. 1
  12624. 1
  12625. 1
  12626. 1
  12627. 1
  12628. 1
  12629. 1
  12630. 1
  12631. 1
  12632. 1
  12633. 1
  12634. 1
  12635. 1
  12636. 1
  12637. 1
  12638. 1
  12639. 1
  12640. 1
  12641. 1
  12642. 1
  12643. 1
  12644. 1
  12645. 1
  12646. 1
  12647. 1
  12648. 1
  12649. 1
  12650. 1
  12651. 1
  12652. 1
  12653. 1
  12654. 1
  12655. 1
  12656. 1
  12657. 1
  12658. 1
  12659. 1
  12660. 1
  12661. 1
  12662. 1
  12663. 1
  12664. 1
  12665. 1
  12666. 1
  12667. 1
  12668. 1
  12669. 1
  12670. 1
  12671. 1
  12672. 1
  12673. 1
  12674. 1
  12675. 1
  12676. 1
  12677. 1
  12678. 1
  12679. 1
  12680. 1
  12681. 1
  12682. 1
  12683. 1
  12684. 1
  12685. 1
  12686. 1
  12687. 1
  12688. 1
  12689. 1
  12690. 1
  12691. 1
  12692. 1
  12693. 1
  12694. 1
  12695. 1
  12696. 1
  12697. 1
  12698. 1
  12699. 1
  12700. 1
  12701. 1
  12702. 1
  12703. 1
  12704. 1
  12705. 1
  12706. 1
  12707. 1
  12708. 1
  12709. 1
  12710. 1
  12711. 1
  12712. 1
  12713. 1
  12714. 1
  12715. 1
  12716. 1
  12717. 1
  12718. 1
  12719. 1
  12720. 1
  12721. 1
  12722. 1
  12723. 1
  12724. 1
  12725. 1
  12726. 1
  12727. 1
  12728. 1
  12729. 1
  12730. 1
  12731. 1
  12732. 1
  12733. 1
  12734. 1
  12735. 1
  12736. 1
  12737. 1
  12738. 1
  12739. 1
  12740. 1
  12741. 1
  12742. 1
  12743. 1
  12744. 1
  12745. 1
  12746. 1
  12747. 1
  12748. 1
  12749. 1
  12750. 1
  12751. 1
  12752. 1
  12753. 1
  12754. 1
  12755. 1
  12756. 1
  12757. 1
  12758. 1
  12759. 1
  12760. 1
  12761. 1
  12762. 1
  12763. 1
  12764. 1
  12765. 1
  12766. 1
  12767. 1
  12768. 1
  12769. 1
  12770. 1
  12771. 1
  12772. 1
  12773. 1
  12774. 1
  12775. 1
  12776. 1
  12777. 1
  12778. 1
  12779. 1
  12780. 1
  12781. 1
  12782. 1
  12783. 1
  12784. 1
  12785. 1
  12786. 1
  12787. 1
  12788. 1
  12789. 1
  12790. 1
  12791. 1
  12792. 1
  12793. 1
  12794. 1
  12795. 1
  12796. 1
  12797. 1
  12798. 1
  12799. 1
  12800. 1
  12801. 1
  12802. 1
  12803. 1
  12804. 1
  12805. 1
  12806. 1
  12807. 1
  12808. 1
  12809. 1
  12810. 1
  12811. 1
  12812. 1
  12813. 1
  12814. 1
  12815. 1
  12816. 1
  12817. 1
  12818. 1
  12819. 1
  12820. 1
  12821. 1
  12822. 1
  12823. 1
  12824. 1
  12825. 1
  12826. 1
  12827. 1
  12828. 1
  12829. 1
  12830. 1
  12831. 1
  12832. 1
  12833. 1
  12834. 1
  12835. 1
  12836. 1
  12837. 1
  12838. 1
  12839. 1
  12840. 1
  12841. 1
  12842. 1
  12843. 1
  12844. 1
  12845. 1
  12846. 1
  12847. 1
  12848. 1
  12849. 1
  12850. 1
  12851. 1
  12852. 1
  12853. 1
  12854. 1
  12855. 1
  12856. 1
  12857. 1
  12858. 1
  12859. 1
  12860. 1
  12861. 1
  12862. 1
  12863. 1
  12864. 1
  12865. 1
  12866. 1
  12867. 1
  12868. 1
  12869. 1
  12870. 1
  12871. 1
  12872. 1
  12873. 1
  12874. 1
  12875. 1
  12876. 1
  12877. 1
  12878. 1
  12879. 1
  12880. 1
  12881. 1
  12882. 1
  12883. 1
  12884. 1
  12885. 1
  12886. 1
  12887. 1
  12888. 1
  12889. 1
  12890. 1
  12891. 1
  12892. 1
  12893. 1
  12894. 1
  12895. 1
  12896. 1
  12897. 1
  12898. 1
  12899. 1
  12900. 1
  12901. 1
  12902. 1
  12903. 1
  12904. 1
  12905. 1
  12906. 1
  12907. 1
  12908. 1
  12909. 1
  12910. 1
  12911. 1
  12912. 1
  12913. 1
  12914. 1
  12915. 1
  12916. 1
  12917. 1
  12918. 1
  12919. 1
  12920. 1
  12921. 1
  12922. 1
  12923. 1
  12924. 1
  12925. 1
  12926. 1
  12927. 1
  12928. 1
  12929. 1
  12930. 1
  12931. 1
  12932. 1
  12933. 1
  12934. 1
  12935. 1
  12936. 1
  12937. 1
  12938. 1
  12939. 1
  12940. 1
  12941. 1
  12942. 1
  12943. 1
  12944. 1
  12945. 1
  12946. 1
  12947. 1
  12948. 1
  12949. 1
  12950. 1
  12951. 1
  12952. 1
  12953. 1
  12954. 1
  12955. 1
  12956. 1
  12957. 1
  12958. 1
  12959. 1
  12960. 1
  12961. 1
  12962. 1
  12963. 1
  12964. 1
  12965. 1
  12966. 1
  12967. 1
  12968. 1
  12969. 1
  12970. 1
  12971. 1
  12972. 1
  12973. 1
  12974. 1
  12975. 1
  12976. 1
  12977. 1
  12978.  @mane4209  also wenn wikipedia für die wortwahl der redaktion spalten für "negative konnotation" hat, dann ist was schief gelaufen: "Bereits Mitte des 17. Jahrhunderts setzte sich der indische Mogul-Prinz Dara Shikoh in seinem Werk Das mächtigste Elixier mit der dogmatischen Verengung der Religionsausübung seitens „der Mullas“ kritisch auseinander, und um 1900 wurde Mohammed Abdullah Hassan im Englischen als „mad mullah“ bezeichnet. 1979, mit der islamischen Revolution und dem Umsturz im Iran, neuerdings verstärkt durch das Iranische Atomprogramm, wird in den westlichen Medien der Ausdruck „verrückte Mullahs“ oder „Mullah-Regime“ für das politische System des Iran genannt.[7] Die Anzahl der Mullahs jedoch, die im Regierungssystem des Iran tätig sind, ist relativ gering.[8] Auch im Iran wird das Wort Mullah von säkular eingestellten Iranern als eine Abwertung Geistlicher verwendet.[9] Im Volksmund wird auch der Ausdruck Achund (persisch آخوند, DMG āḫūnd, zu deutsch Gelehrter Herr) statt Mullah gebraucht.[10]" ___ "In der gemeinsprachlichen Verwendung des Terminus bezeichnet ‚Regime‘ eine diktatorische oder eine nicht demokratisch legitimierte Form der Herrschaftsausübung ohne scharfe Abgrenzung von der klar institutionalisierten Regierung mit einem Regierungschef an der Spitze.[11] Dabei handelt es sich um ein totum pro parte gegenüber der ursprünglichen Bedeutung (jede Art konkreter Herrschaftsübung überhaupt oder jede verwirklichte Staats- und Herrschaftsform). Die Bezeichnung hat im Deutschen einen negativen Bedeutungswandel durchlaufen und ist vor allem in der Alltags- oder Gemeinsprache, teils aber auch in der Fachwelt oftmals negativ konnotiert[12] (während in der englischsprachigen Transitionsforschung der Begriff „Regime“ deutlich eine neutrale Bedeutung besitzt und dort „verschiedene politische Herrschaftstypen“, worunter ebenso demokratische Regime fallen, bezeichnet).[13] Werden Dissidenten oder Aufständische als Regimekritiker bzw. Regimegegner bezeichnet, so verleiht ihnen das explizit eine Legitimation und hebt sie damit ausdrücklich von Randalierern, Störern oder gar Terroristen ab. Im allgemeinen Sprachgebrauch ist die Abgrenzung zu individuellen Regierungen unscharf. So hat sich der Ausdruck ‚Regime‘ für bestimmte historische Fälle eingebürgert, beispielsweise für Ancien Régime, NS-Regime, Franco-Regime, Vichy-Regime. "
    1
  12979. 1
  12980. 1
  12981. 1
  12982. 1
  12983. 1
  12984. 1
  12985. 1
  12986. 1
  12987. 1
  12988. 1
  12989. 1
  12990. 1
  12991. 1
  12992. 1
  12993. 1
  12994. 1
  12995. 1
  12996. 1
  12997. 1
  12998. 1
  12999. 1
  13000. 1
  13001. 1
  13002. 1
  13003. 1
  13004. 1
  13005. 1
  13006. 1
  13007. 1
  13008. 1
  13009. 1
  13010. 1
  13011. 1
  13012. 1
  13013. 1
  13014. 1
  13015. 1
  13016. 1
  13017. 1
  13018. 1
  13019. 1
  13020. 1
  13021. 1
  13022. 1
  13023. 1
  13024. 1
  13025. 1
  13026. 1
  13027. 1
  13028. 1
  13029. 1
  13030. 1
  13031. 1
  13032. 1
  13033. 1
  13034. 1
  13035. 1
  13036. 1
  13037. 1
  13038. 1
  13039. 1
  13040. 1
  13041. 1
  13042. 1
  13043. 1
  13044. 1
  13045. 1
  13046. 1
  13047. 1
  13048. 1
  13049. 1
  13050. 1
  13051. 1
  13052. 1
  13053. 1
  13054. 1
  13055. 1
  13056. 1
  13057. 1
  13058. 1
  13059. 1
  13060. 1
  13061. 1
  13062. 1
  13063. 1
  13064. 1
  13065. 1
  13066. 1
  13067. 1
  13068. 1
  13069. 1
  13070. 1
  13071. 1
  13072. 1
  13073. 1
  13074. 1
  13075. 1
  13076. 1
  13077. 1
  13078. 1
  13079. 1
  13080. 1
  13081. 1
  13082. 1
  13083. 1
  13084. 1
  13085. 1
  13086. 1
  13087. 1
  13088. 1
  13089. 1
  13090. 1
  13091. 1
  13092. 1
  13093. 1
  13094. 1
  13095. 1
  13096. 1
  13097. 1
  13098. 1
  13099. 1
  13100. 1
  13101. 1
  13102. 1
  13103. 1
  13104. 1
  13105. 1
  13106. 1
  13107. 1
  13108. 1
  13109. 1
  13110. 1
  13111. 1
  13112. 1
  13113. 1
  13114. 1
  13115. 1
  13116. 1
  13117. 1
  13118. 1
  13119. 1
  13120. 1
  13121. 1
  13122. 1
  13123. 1
  13124. 1
  13125. 1
  13126. 1
  13127. 1
  13128. 1
  13129. 1
  13130. 1
  13131. 1
  13132. 1
  13133. 1
  13134. 1
  13135. 1
  13136. 1
  13137. 1
  13138. 1
  13139. 1
  13140. 1
  13141. 1
  13142. 1
  13143. 1
  13144. 1
  13145. 1
  13146. 1
  13147. 1
  13148. 1
  13149. 1
  13150. 1
  13151. 1
  13152. 1
  13153. 1
  13154. 1
  13155. 1
  13156. 1
  13157. 1
  13158. 1
  13159. 1
  13160. 1
  13161. 1
  13162. 1
  13163. 1
  13164. 1
  13165. 1
  13166. 1
  13167. 1
  13168. 1
  13169. 1
  13170. 1
  13171. 1
  13172. 1
  13173. 1
  13174. 1
  13175. 1
  13176. 1
  13177. 1
  13178. 1
  13179. 1
  13180. 1
  13181. 1
  13182. 1
  13183. 1
  13184. 1
  13185. 1
  13186. 1
  13187. 1
  13188. 1
  13189. 1
  13190. 1
  13191. 1
  13192. 1
  13193. 1
  13194. 1
  13195. 1
  13196. 1
  13197. 1
  13198. 1
  13199. 1
  13200. 1
  13201. 1
  13202. 1
  13203. 1
  13204. 1
  13205. 1
  13206. 1
  13207. 1
  13208. 1
  13209. 1
  13210. 1
  13211. 1
  13212. 1
  13213. 1
  13214. 1
  13215. 1
  13216. we took responsibility for afghans when we occupied their country. we made promises and not only did we break them, the US insists it never made them (biden and everybody else claims that it was never "nation-building" when biden and everybody else originally explicitely said that it was). the withdrawal decision was purely american selfishness (not even remotely a good idea for the european allies). it was a political decision to please the american electorate who wanted "the troops home" and didn't care about anything else. america chose to rid itself of a minor inconvenience, knowing it would cause a catastrophe for afghans. NOBODY believed that the kabul government would hold. trump made the withdrawal deal at a time when the taliban were resurging and winning against the central government even with NATO support. at a time like that, the americans made a deal with the taliban to quit the fight that included ZERO demands for how the taliban would behave in afghanistan, only that there would be no attacks against america by the taliban or from afghan soil. as a gesture of disrespect, thr taliban barred the afghan government from the talks, and the US went along with it. anti-taliban afghan interests were completely unrepresented. both the trump and the biden administrations did a hell of a job demoralizing the afghan government and army, and then they had the gall to blame them for not fighting hard enough for an obviously lost cause. biden even kept preaching the absolutely ridiculous claim that there was an overwhelming force of 300.000 afghan security forces, when the reality wasn't even half of that, and a lot of them were unpaid and unsupplied. for the 20 years of occupation, afghan security forces died at an average rate of 10 per day, and now biden says that the afghans weren't willing to fight. it was obvious since 2017 or whenever it was that the trump admin was making the withdrawal deal as the taliban were winning that the taliban would retake the country. the way the US acted painted it as a foregone conclusion, they showed every afghan soldier and cop that theirs was a losing fight. the occupation could have been done better, gradual reform could have been accelerated, but even just holding the intensely flawed status quo would have been worth continuing the occupation for - IF AFGHAN LIFE, LIBERTY AND THE PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS COUNTED FOR SOMETHING!
    1
  13217. 1
  13218. 1
  13219. 1
  13220. Hilton Palma Lima afghan security forces did like 95% of the dying in the fight against the taliban. many millions of afghans have risked their lives in fighting and reforming against islamists. you're deluding yourself into blaming afghans for the current catastrophe (I'm guessing because you're american), when really it happened due to primarily american mismanagement fostering corruption both in the afghan institutions and among the foreign contractors. american stupidity caused the war and the reforms to stall, and the collapse of the morale of the american people caused the defeat when finally the US leadership implemented the people's desire to quit and pretend that they never meant to do what they failed to do anyways, because as we all know, america never loses a war. ;) I wouldn't say that invading afghanistan was a good idea in the first place, and certainly trying to defeat islamist terrorism that way was a notably smoothbrained idea even by american standards. but in recent years, when we were already there, we absolutely should have stayed, simply because it was obvious that abandoning afghanistan would make life this much worse for afghans, and the suffering that the american decision to give up caused is way bigger than america's and NATO's savings from quitting this occupation. it was a completely disgusting americafirst decision, and for me as a german millennial the german government going along with abandoning afghanistan (unhappily) was probably the most shameful thing my government has done in my life. well, its pro-business appeasement strategy with putin has been a contender for that spot, too. but at least they finally changed course on that.
    1
  13221. 1
  13222. 1
  13223. 1
  13224. 1
  13225. 1
  13226. 1
  13227. 1
  13228. 1
  13229. 1
  13230. 1
  13231. 1
  13232. 1
  13233. 1
  13234. 1
  13235. 1
  13236. 1
  13237. 1
  13238. 1
  13239. 1
  13240. 1
  13241. 1
  13242. 1
  13243. 1
  13244. 1
  13245. 1
  13246. 1
  13247. 1
  13248. 1
  13249. 1
  13250. 1
  13251. 1
  13252. 1
  13253. 1
  13254. 1
  13255. 1
  13256. 1
  13257. 1
  13258. 1
  13259. 1
  13260. 1
  13261. 1
  13262. 1
  13263. 1
  13264. 1
  13265. 1
  13266. 1
  13267. 1
  13268. 1
  13269. 1
  13270. 1
  13271. 1
  13272. 1
  13273. 1
  13274. 1
  13275. 1
  13276. 1
  13277. 1
  13278. 1
  13279. 1
  13280. 1
  13281. 1
  13282. 1
  13283. 1
  13284.  @tallish87  they shot the door below the window. the windows are clearly normal or close to normal thickness, they don't resemble actually bulletproof car windows at all. those have like an inch or more of several layers of glass and plastic. the breaking of the original windows showed that it was indeed technically armoured glass, meaning it had at least one layer of plastic holding the broken glass together. but that just means that they made the side windows the same as everybody else makes their windscreens. the normal thing to do is that windscreens are made tough because they are expected to have a role in protecting the people in the car against flying objects relatively often, and the other windows of the car are instead made of tempered glass, which breaks in such a way (due to in-built tension) that any break causes the whole window to shatter into cubes. the reason is that being able to easily remove the glass with relatively harmless shards (all breaks at roughly right angles, nothing big and knife-like) enables crash victims to more easily escape or be rescued out of their vehicles, while the absence of large shards during the crash also reduces injury potential. if you want to instead remove armoured glass to create an escape opening, you are dealing with a tough plastic foil covered in large glass shards. I believe windscreens are generally built with a fixture that's supposed to make it relatively easy to push off a broken windscreen outwards, but the deeper set of side windows would certainly make this much more difficult on the cybertruck, and I would have no confidence in tesla even doing it right on the windscreen or rear window (if that's even high enough to crawl through, I don't know). but of course as someone who would never buy this vehicle even if I had the money, I am far more concerned about the clearly extreme injury risk that its front poses to other people in accidents. other cars bumper areas and hoods are built of much more plastic or of steel panels that are bent at the edges and less stiff, and most are shaped very rounded (which also is aerodynamically far superior; the cybertruck has terrible aerodynamics). the stainless steel sheets of the cybertruck would amput°te b°dy p°rts extremely easily as soon as they separate in a crash. and at much lower speed impacts than that, the top edge and top corners of the frunk area look as if they were designed to br°°k the sk°lls and n°°ks of children. my uncle was hit by a car when he was around 6 reportedly at barely more than walking speed. he had to have a piece of his brain removed, had to relearn to walk and talk, and suffered from severe epilepsy and violent aggression that took decades to both gradually improve. and he is permanently blind on one side of the normal field of vision and sort of generally unaware of things in that direction. I don't mean blind one eye, his brain only processes half of the image while also hiding the fact that there's something missing similar to how everybody's vision covers each eye's blind spot with pseudo-vision - though I think he might also be blind in one eye, certainly only one fully points where he looks. anyways, the point is that being hit by cars is particularly dangerous to children, and I am disgusted by the disregard for this that is evident in the cybertruck's design. all SUVs already are super dangerous due to their high hoods and high ground clearance (they impact heads and necks rather than legs, hips or chests, and then the person ends up underneath the car and potentially under the wheels rather than on the hood). but the cybertruck has to be the worst.
    1
  13285. 1
  13286. 1
  13287. 1
  13288. 1
  13289. 1
  13290. 1
  13291. 1
  13292. 1
  13293. @@lizzyinthecut3617 I'm not. my point is that there are different circumstances to consider to determine whether a breakup of a state is a net benefit. namely the differences between russia on one hand and ethiopia and yugoslavia on the other hand include the capacity and desire of the russian state and the russian people for imperialist aggression, which make a continued existence of russia dangerous to many of its eurasian neighbours. this can not be reasonably expected to be solved by a mere overthrow of putin, or even the establishment of a liberal democracy - that sort of national reprogramming against supremacist ideology tends to require a major defeat and the forcible control of governance and education by the enemies of the former power structure, as in germany, japan, or rwanda. and that's not going to happen to russia. or, as far as nations can reform themselves, the russian people are not at all hopeful candidates for this, since the russian government and its ideology are aupported bx a majority of russians,.while the majority of the rest very thoroughly buy into the alternative government-promoted belief system that declares the people to have no power and thus no culpability for their country's actions, and to be fundamentally incapable of knowing what's true and what isn't. the major downside is that it is difficult to imagine a breakup of russia that would not yield catastrophic consequences in the transfer of control over russia's giant and widely distributed nuclear arsenal, which makes a breakup of russia quite unappealing. but the cost-benefit ratio still depends on the likelihood of a continued unified russia using those nukes - if the chance is sufficiently high, then the greater harm they could do with a unified arsenal would make the breakup option the less bad one. also, for the purpose of such considerations, russia achieving success with nuclear threats is to be considered a use of nuclear weapons. either way, nukes are a substantial difference to ethiopia and yugoslavia.
    1
  13294. 1
  13295. 1
  13296. 1
  13297. 1
  13298. 1
  13299. 1
  13300. 1
  13301. 1
  13302. 1
  13303. 1
  13304. 1
  13305. 1
  13306. 1
  13307. 1
  13308. 1
  13309. 1
  13310. 1
  13311. 1
  13312. 1
  13313. 1
  13314. 1
  13315. 1
  13316. 1
  13317. 1
  13318. 1
  13319. 1
  13320. 1
  13321. 1
  13322. 1
  13323. 1
  13324. 1
  13325. 1
  13326. 1
  13327. 1
  13328. 1
  13329. 1
  13330. 1
  13331. 1
  13332. 1
  13333. 1
  13334. 1
  13335. 1
  13336. 1
  13337. 1
  13338. 1
  13339. 1
  13340. 1
  13341. 1
  13342. 1
  13343. 1
  13344. 1
  13345. 1
  13346. 1
  13347. 1
  13348. 1
  13349. 1
  13350. 1
  13351. 1
  13352. 1
  13353. 1
  13354. 1
  13355. 1
  13356. 1
  13357. 1
  13358. well, for such an everyday tool to spontaneously reemerge instead of being taught from generation to generation for however long, you would first need very young children to be orphaned and then still survive somehow. that's extremely unlikely. the bird comparison is interesting, but birds generally don't seem to teach nest bzilding. I think there probably is some imitation involved in many species, but probably not in some more solitary ones that are just not that likely to watch other members of their species (like eagles). the handax shape was developed and then remained because it works. one end is round for gripping and hitting, one end is pointy enough for piercing but blunt enough to not break, and the whole thing is flattened to make it cut as a blade. the common symmetry is interesting and probably based on aesthetics, but it also makes sense for some uses where you would hit stuff directly with the tip, like for digging through a big piece of wood or a bone or perhaps the ground. then you would get cutting action from two blades, and the symmetry would make both sides of the tool equally capable of withstanding force. one thing you forgot to mention is that a reason other than impressing the ladies to knap more handaxes than you need would have been to trade them. they would have had very widely recognized value, and somebody who was particularly good at making them could have made a lot relatively easily while sparing others the trouble and providing them with better tools. they could have even been traded to regions that didn't have suitable rocks. now if within a larger group, handaxes really were only made by one or few people, that could genuinely provide social and sexual status because of their importance to the group.
    1
  13359. 1
  13360. 1
  13361. 1
  13362. 1
  13363. 1
  13364. 1
  13365. 1
  13366. 1
  13367. 1
  13368. 1
  13369. 1
  13370. 1
  13371. 1
  13372. 1
  13373. 1
  13374. Buddy Rojek they don't need money to evacuate or to survive on the evacuation routes. they just need the will and courage to go. there are dangers, but there also is help all along the way. I know they have to leave almost everything they own behind, they don't know if they will be able to return and it's very scary, but they have children to protect. the people refusing to evacuate from the donbas are not hoping for the ukrainian army to push back the russians, they are hoping to wake up peacefully in russia tomorrow. they are choosing to stay because they believe too much in russian propaganda to trust that they will be treated well in western ukraine or the EU, and they're not crazy enough to try to evacuate east into russian-controlled territory through the front lines. what they REALLY want is for their home towns to be handed over to russia in a negotiated settlement, and then to receive russian citizenship. the people who trust the ukrainian authorities have already left, not least because those ukrainian authorities told them to leave and told them that they will be taken care of. I understand people who refuse to accept that either side of this war has the right to make them leave their homes in order to make their home towns into battlefields. that's not right. but for those who have children, the equation is different. their right to keep their homes and property is secondary to their duty to protect their children. any competent parent's judgment ought to be good enough that not keeping their kids in ukrainian-controlled donbas is the obvious correct choice. only the dumbest and most irresponsible parents are refusing to evacuate their kids. they are deluded from russian propaganda and probably mostly intellectually damaged from alcoholism. they are unfit parents. they don't deserve to be victims of this war either, but they are contributing to the victimization of their children.
    1
  13375. 1
  13376. 1
  13377. 1
  13378. 1
  13379. 1
  13380. 1
  13381.  @forickgrimaldus8301  the soviet union wasn't the only other superpower. britain and france were superpowers until WW2 or perhaps some point in the 50s or 60s for britain, and nazi germany and imperial japan for a roughly equally short while were also superpowers. much earlier during colonial times, you can scrap the US, keep britain and france, certainly add spain and the netherlands, and maybe add portugal if you're very generous (but I think portugal's high status largely depended on its extremely long-standing alliance with the british). one may be inclined to add china during and before early colonial times, but I'd say it was probably too lacking in power projection. probably the same for mughal india. going back farther in history, one obvious choice are the mongols, probably not the huns, I would probably count one or two caliphates, probably the byzantine empire for a while, absolutely the catholic church, obviously the original undivided roman empire (but never the divided western empire, that sh** was whack), maybe carthage, and I guess probably assyria (halfway for just being very aggressive)? obviously I'm scaling back the total power requirement earlier in history, since it makes more sense to apply the term "superpower" farther back than you can expect the biggest empires to be able to handle being attacked by current day tanks and aircraft carriers. I am very sure of calling china a superpower today since it is more powerful than britain and france generally were in the early 20th century, at which time I believe they are still widely counted as superpowers. I would say that china crossed that threshold at some point in the last 20 years, and it ma be the first time they have, unless you count kublai khan as china rather than a mongol occupation. china hasn't yet made the switch to conducting military operations abroad to copy and replace the american world empire, but it is clear that they are preparing for it, and china's already credible military options to threaten is in itself also a form of power projection.
    1
  13382. 1
  13383. 1
  13384. 1
  13385. 1
  13386. 1
  13387. 1
  13388. 1
  13389. 1
  13390. 1
  13391. 1
  13392. 1
  13393. 1
  13394. 1
  13395. 1
  13396. 1
  13397. 1
  13398. 1
  13399. 1
  13400. 1
  13401. 1
  13402. 1
  13403. 1
  13404. 1
  13405. 1
  13406. 1
  13407. 1
  13408. 1
  13409. 1
  13410. 1
  13411. 1
  13412. 1
  13413. 1
  13414. 1
  13415. Kiya Alex my bed isn't fancy, I'm poor. xD I haven't seen a single piece of positive reporting about the TPLF. nobody likes them, nobody supports them, you're just falling for ethiopian government propaganda that claims that there is a huge conspiracy. the UAE are heavily supporting the ethiopian government with drone strikes, do you think the UAE are opposing what the west wants? the UAE military are an extension of the US military with plausible deniability. what people are criticizing is that the ethiopian government has decided to wage war against all tigrayans, thereby forcing all tigrayans to consider joining the TPLF to fight back. people have expectations of ethical behaviour from the ethiopian government BECAUSE it is the side of the conflict that everybody favors. the TPLF are a militaristic formerly marxist-leninist anti-democratic ethnic nationalist group, they in no way fit the bill of an organization that westerners may want to support. if anything, they should be getting along with russia and china, and china has shown support for the government, and I don't know what russia's position is, but if russia did support the TPLF I would expect to see some discussion from russian media about them not actually being bad, and I've seen none of it. NOBODY likes the TPLF, you are deluded by war propaganda! the only atates that can plausibly be assumed to support the TPLF are egypt and sudan based on the nile water dispute, and on the nile water dispute, the west is generally on ethiopia's side also.
    1
  13416. 1
  13417. 1
  13418. 1
  13419. 1
  13420. 1
  13421. 1
  13422. 1
  13423. 1
  13424. 1
  13425. 1
  13426. 1
  13427. 1
  13428. 1
  13429. 1
  13430. 1
  13431. 1
  13432. 1
  13433. 1
  13434. 1
  13435. 1
  13436. 1
  13437. 1
  13438. 1
  13439. 1
  13440. 1
  13441. 1
  13442. 1
  13443. 1
  13444. 1
  13445. 1
  13446. 1
  13447. 1
  13448. 1
  13449. 1
  13450. 1
  13451. 1
  13452. 1
  13453. 1
  13454. 1
  13455. 1
  13456. 1
  13457. 1
  13458. 1
  13459. 1
  13460. 1
  13461. 1
  13462. 1
  13463. 1
  13464. 1
  13465. 1
  13466. 1
  13467. 1
  13468. 1
  13469. 1
  13470. 1
  13471. 1
  13472. 1
  13473. russia's population is 3.6 times as large as ukraine's. ukraine has been running out of its best people faster than russia. russia is unlikely to be able to call up a similarly high percentage of its population, and the big european cities are somewhat off limits, but there is no indication that russia is running out of any kind of recruit, as there is with ukraine. russian prisoners dying in ukraine is something the russian government wants, what they don't want and can't allow in large numbers is for the convicts to actually make it back to russia as free men but now with particularly horrible war experience. it's been a long time since russia had its last conscription drive big enough for people to take issue, and apparently they still get good numbers of volunteers from russia's poorest regions where fighting in ukraine now pays more than working as a doctor (at least officially, before the superiors steal from you). meanwhile ukraine has essentially run out of volunteers and is now heavily relying on conscription, which impacts both public and military morale badly. animosity has grown towards draft dodgers as many soldiers already wounded, even amputated, return to the front and their families can't convince them that it's someone else's turn because there aren't enough of those. ukraine also is certainly demoralised substantially now due to the failure of the prematurely celebrated spring summer counteroffensive. to us, it's looked mostly like nothing happening, but to ukrainians, it's been soldiers dying like mayflies for no gain. and now they're about to face russia's second winter of destroying energy infrastructure, for which russia has been saving up lots of missiles. speaking of, it's worth noting that arms production is very difficult for ukraine to do and not get it blown up, and the west has damn near refused to increase production volumes (with some exceptions in weapon systems, they remain closer to peacetime levels than to the expanded production potential that many facilities are contracted to plan and prepare for in case a war makes demand skyrocket). but russia is running a proper war economy and seemingly outproducing the west in some respects, which is farcical considering that russia's peacetime GDP was a third of the size of california's, and ukraine is supposed to have the US, EU, britain, canada and more fully backing it. but that backing is a f°°king trickle, while ukrainian troops die at an unsustainable rate.
    1
  13474. 1
  13475. 1
  13476. 1
  13477. 1
  13478. 1
  13479. 1
  13480. 1
  13481. 1
  13482. 1
  13483. 1
  13484. 1
  13485. 1
  13486. 1
  13487. 1
  13488. 1
  13489. 1
  13490. 1
  13491. 1
  13492. 1
  13493. 1
  13494. 1
  13495. 1
  13496. 1
  13497. 1
  13498. 1
  13499. 1
  13500. 1
  13501. 1
  13502. 1
  13503. 1
  13504. 1
  13505. 1
  13506. 1
  13507. 1
  13508. 1
  13509. 1
  13510. 1
  13511. 1
  13512. 1
  13513. 1
  13514. 1
  13515. 1
  13516. 1
  13517. 1
  13518. 1
  13519. 1
  13520. 1
  13521. 1
  13522. 1
  13523. 1
  13524. 1
  13525. 1
  13526. 1
  13527. 1
  13528. 1
  13529. 1
  13530. 1
  13531. 1
  13532. 1
  13533. 1
  13534. 1
  13535. 1
  13536. 1
  13537. 1
  13538. 1
  13539. 1
  13540. 1
  13541. 1
  13542. 1
  13543. 1
  13544. 1
  13545. 1
  13546. 1
  13547. 1
  13548. 1
  13549. 1
  13550. 1
  13551. 1
  13552. 1
  13553. 1
  13554. 1
  13555. 1
  13556. 1
  13557. 1
  13558. 1
  13559. 1
  13560. 1
  13561. 1
  13562. 1
  13563. 1
  13564. 1
  13565. 1
  13566. 1
  13567. 1
  13568. 1
  13569. 1
  13570. 1
  13571. 1
  13572. 1
  13573. 1
  13574. 1
  13575. 1
  13576. 1
  13577. 1
  13578. 1
  13579. 1
  13580. 1
  13581. 1
  13582. 1
  13583. 1
  13584. 1
  13585. 1
  13586. 1
  13587. 1
  13588. 1
  13589. 1
  13590. 1
  13591. 1
  13592. 1
  13593. 1
  13594. 1
  13595. 1
  13596. 1
  13597. 1
  13598. 1
  13599. 1
  13600. 1
  13601. 1
  13602. 1
  13603. 1
  13604. 1
  13605. 1
  13606. 1
  13607. 1
  13608. 1
  13609. 1
  13610. 1
  13611. 1
  13612. 1
  13613. 1
  13614. 1
  13615. 1
  13616. 1
  13617. 1
  13618. 1
  13619. 1
  13620. 1
  13621. 1
  13622. 1
  13623. 1
  13624. 1
  13625. 1
  13626. 1
  13627. 1
  13628. 1
  13629. 1
  13630. 1
  13631. MaNdaba wakwaNdaba they've covered the usual stuff about exploitation and abuse of migrant workers in construction generally, the world cup infrastructure construction specifically, and I'm pretty sure also migrants as domestic servants (being endlaved, raped, murdered and such). I think some of the world cup corruption stuff has been covered as well. aljazeera does also do less important fluff pieces for qatar, but all more or less national media made for foreign consumption do that (like voice of america or deutsche welle). aljazeera does have the underlying purpose of raising qatar's international profile, and has been highly successful, but in my opinion AJE at least has significantly higher journalistic standards than the vast majority of serious news organizations! of course covering qatar critically is a touchy topic for them because of the way they're funded, but they certainly don't shy away from negative coverage entirely. they pretty much just make sure that qatar looks better than the UAE, and that's good enough. ;) I'm aware that AJ arabic programming is quite different, and I probably wouldn't like that as much (less leftist, more anti-israel and such, I think). what AJ does much better than other news outlets is the selection of stories, which includes a lot more actually rrlevant stories that concern people in poorer countries whom western media like to ignore in favor of covering harry and meghan and such. AJ's coverage of third world political turmoil is also much more detailed, enough to gradually develop much more of a general understanding of those parts of the world than what people who only consume western news know. their arab spring coverage obviously was second to none.
    1
  13632. 1
  13633. 1
  13634. 1
  13635. 1
  13636. 1
  13637. 1
  13638. 1
  13639. 1
  13640. 1
  13641. 1
  13642. 1
  13643. 1
  13644. 1
  13645. 1
  13646. 1
  13647. 1
  13648. 1
  13649. 1
  13650. 1
  13651. 1
  13652. 1
  13653. 1
  13654. 1
  13655. 1
  13656. 1
  13657. 1
  13658. 1
  13659. 1
  13660. 1
  13661. 1
  13662. 1
  13663. 1
  13664. 1
  13665. 1
  13666. 1
  13667. 1
  13668. 1
  13669. 1
  13670. 1
  13671. 1
  13672. 1
  13673. 1
  13674. 1
  13675. 1
  13676. 1
  13677. 1
  13678. 1
  13679. 1
  13680. 1
  13681. 1
  13682. 1
  13683. 1
  13684. 1
  13685. 1
  13686. 1
  13687. 1
  13688. 1
  13689. 1
  13690. 1
  13691. 1
  13692. 1
  13693. 1
  13694. 1
  13695. 1
  13696. 1
  13697. 1
  13698. 1
  13699. 1
  13700. 1
  13701. 1
  13702. 1
  13703. 1
  13704. 1
  13705. 1
  13706. 1
  13707. 1
  13708. 1
  13709. 1
  13710. 1
  13711. 1
  13712. 1
  13713. 1
  13714. 1
  13715. 1
  13716. 1
  13717. 1
  13718. 1
  13719. 1
  13720. 1
  13721. 1
  13722. 1
  13723. 1
  13724. 1
  13725. 1
  13726. 1
  13727. 1
  13728.  @Caernarfon  what plane? the 2001 incident had practically nothing to do with the tal°b°n. if you read it as things most openly appear, it was a saudi intelligence or rogue saudi intelligence operation with quite a bit of US "te°°orist" training. if you consider the bulk of suspicious circumstances, it had covert US operational support that was protected by major complicit elements of the national security state and possibly top level political leaders (though most support for a coverup likely would have been acquired after the fact). and if you choose to put much weight on a relatively small handful of suspicious bizarre events, and you assert that whoever had much to win and fits the profile of sufficiently derang°d behaviour is relatively likely to have in fact played an active role, then a prime suspect if america's west asian c°l°ny, aiming to incite american and broader western hostility towards m°°lims and ar°bs in order to tolerate more ab°sive behaviour of this state against mus°°ms and ar°bs, and to move towards the american w°rs against this state's enemies that would in fact follow - successfully in iraq and libya, and unsuccessfully in syria. what's very clear is that iraq had NOTHING to do with it, whereas the tal°b°n can at most be accused of allowing al q°°da to operate training bases in the country. but that's pretty rich when those bases were typically operating as either direct US projects, or one or two degrees removed from the US through the US collaboration with saudi and pakistan to create militant f°°cistoid international sunni isl°°ist movements (against the soviets, iran, and iraq/panar°bists).
    1
  13729. 1
  13730. 1
  13731. 1
  13732. 1
  13733. 1
  13734. 1
  13735. 1
  13736. 1
  13737. 1
  13738. 1
  13739. 1
  13740. 1
  13741. sur gigi I have never claimed to speak for afghans, you've been claiming to speak for afghans the whole time here. that is the problem. next time, please be honest and say that you're afghan-american instead of implying that you live in afghanistan by speaking for afghan women! your views are unnuanced, entirely unproductive and overly conspiratorial. no, neither the afghan government nor the US have at any point since 2001 supported or intentionally spared the taliban in any major way (I'm sure local cooperation happens). this claim is absurd and destructive. the reason I know you haven't lived in afghanistan for a long time (you left as a child if you were even born there) is that you don't appreciate the value of the lesser evil that was the NATO occupation. to put it in american terms for you to understand: wanting to keep NATO troops in afghanistan is like voting for joe biden or hillary clinton over trump, even though they too were bad candidates. you know, I really could have embarrassed myself here if I had been wrong about my guess that you don't live in afghanistan. luckily arguing with you turned out somewhat like fighting a toddler. you keep making more silly claims that without me even doing anything show how clueless you are. why is believing germany to be the most racist country not an afghan perspective? because afghans don't care about WW2 history, they know germany as the best country to apply for asylum in, not just because germany is rich with an ok social safety net, but also because germans are less racist than the people in most other european countries. if you lived in afghanistan, you would know this because you would have at least heard people talking about this. yes, I know that the EU has gotten much more hostile to migrants since 2016 and I don't like that at all. but this is what people in afghanistan know germany for. and maybe they also know the german military deployment in afghanistan to have been particularly useless. xD
    1
  13742. 1
  13743. 1
  13744. 1
  13745. 1
  13746. 1
  13747. 1
  13748. 1
  13749. 1
  13750. 1
  13751. 1
  13752. 1
  13753. 1
  13754. 1
  13755. 1
  13756. 1
  13757. 1
  13758. 1
  13759. 1
  13760. 1
  13761. 1
  13762. 1
  13763. 1
  13764. 1
  13765. 1
  13766. 1
  13767. 1
  13768. 1
  13769. 1
  13770. 1
  13771. 1
  13772. 1
  13773. 1
  13774. Spring Bloom there's no way ukraine is test firing any of these missiles. they are the most precise missiles they have, and there are plenty of russian targets to shoot them at. I don't think they've even test fired any ATGMs. I've thought a bit more about it though, and it could be that ukraine has more or less dedicated air defense systems to cover the HIMARS launchers against aerial attack, aerial radar and aerial visual surveillance, and are aware that perhaps russia doesn't have good enough ground radars around to properly determine the missile launch location (possibly because they used those very missiles to blow up those radars, and western intelligence services are telling them exactly what they do or don't have to worry about). it's possible that ukraine is really only moving the launchers enough to avoid detection and targeting through russian surveillance satellites, and NATO intelligence services could help A LOT with that. basically the orbits of all spy satellites are known (they have limited maneuverability due to fuel limitations, but are also normally tracked if they move), and countries have computer programs that can give you flyover times and open windows when there is no enemy satellite in position to see what's going on. the HIMSRS drivers probably have time tables for when they need to hide their launchers under canopy or a roof or bridge. reportedly, western intel being shared about that was very helpful at the very beginning of the war, because it reportedly enabled ukraine to move away many of the targets of the first russian missile barrage. the americans reportedly also did that early in 2020 before iran's retaliatory missile strike on a US base in iraq in response to the US drone strike on iran's favourite general qassem soleimani. they waited for the relevant satellite to pass and then immediately moved their planes and sent the troops to a bunker (though that bunker didn't work as well as initially reported, they tried to hide a whole bunch of traumatic brain injuries in order to deescalate).
    1
  13775. 1
  13776. 1
  13777. 1
  13778. 1
  13779. 1
  13780. 1
  13781. 1
  13782. 1
  13783. 1
  13784. 1
  13785. 1
  13786. 1
  13787. 1
  13788. 1
  13789. 1
  13790. 1
  13791. 1
  13792. 1
  13793. 1
  13794. 1
  13795. 1
  13796. 1
  13797. 1
  13798. 1
  13799. 1
  13800. 1
  13801. 1
  13802. 1
  13803. 1
  13804. 1
  13805. 1
  13806. 1
  13807. 1
  13808. 1
  13809. 1
  13810.  @DestroyerofBubbles  it's not with actionable certainty their individual fault, but everything putin does, and especially the fact that he started this war, is collectively the russian people's fault - because as a collective, they support putin and support wars of aggression and conquest, and the invasion of ukraine would never have happened without the fact that all the other wars putin has started, and the annexation of crimea, had gained him massive spikes in popularity. the only things about this war that the majority of russian people disapprove of are the fact that they have not won yet, and the facts that many russian soldiers are dying, much russian money is being spent, and sanctions are impacting the lives of the russian public. it's unreasonable to blame every russian individually for the war, but what is reasonable is to expect every individual russian to acknowledge the russian people's collective guilt, and to negatively judge those russians who do not, which based on what I have seen from russian youtubers and from interviews of russian people include the majority of russians who proclaim a disapproval of putin and the war. I don't know how many times since the invasion I have heard various russians say something to the effect of "it's bad, but russians outside of the political elite are not responsible, and foreigners collectively blaming russians are being unfair/prejudiced/discriminatory/racist". the russian people havingnno control over and thus no culpability for their government's actions seems to be seen as a truism in russia, and any foreign suggestion of collective responsibility is dismissed as "foreigners don't know how it is, only russians understand russia, and all russians know that the government acts absolutely independent and is immune to the will of the people". I'd like to ask those russians what they think about collective responsibility of the german people for the world wars and the holocaust, I bet it would be real easy to reveal some cognitive dissonance.
    1
  13811. 1
  13812. 1
  13813. 1
  13814. 1
  13815. 1
  13816. 1
  13817. 1
  13818. 1
  13819. 1
  13820. 1
  13821. 1
  13822. 1
  13823. 1
  13824. 1
  13825. 1
  13826. 1
  13827. 1
  13828. 1
  13829. 1
  13830. 1
  13831. 1
  13832. 1
  13833. 1
  13834. 1
  13835. 1
  13836. 1
  13837. 1
  13838. 1
  13839. 1
  13840. 1
  13841. 1
  13842. 1
  13843. 1
  13844. 1
  13845. 1
  13846. 1
  13847. 1
  13848. 1
  13849. 1
  13850. 1
  13851. 1
  13852. 1
  13853. 1
  13854. 1
  13855. 1
  13856. 1
  13857. 1
  13858. 1
  13859. 1
  13860. 1
  13861. 1
  13862. 1
  13863. 1
  13864. 1
  13865.  @houseplant1016  what you're referencing is actually a one time program this year in germany for ONLY 18 year olds (born in 2005 to be precise) to sign up on an app that gives them 200€ of government money to spend on only entertainment/event/art offerings that are signed up with that one time government program. it's one in a series of gimmick projects created by the current german government to promote their intended image as an innovative "progress coalition" (innovation, technology and appealing to youth is the overlap between the green and liberal party brands, and they just drag the terminally centrist socdems along). it hardly if at all concerns visual artists like this video here, it's an attempt to revitalise parts of the economy that were almost destroyed by covid, and the money is going to end up almost entirely paying for music festival and cinema tickets. I think the france thing you're referencing is you confusing this german project with a different joint german-french project to celebrate an anniversary of some german-french agreement to build friendly relations post-WW2, which is a lottery that grants a set number of some tens of thousands of german and french youth under 28 each a one month free pass for all public transport of the other country. there are big government subsidies for art/culture in many countries, particularly in europe, but those go to big long-term projects like orchestras, museums and art galleries, you don't get money from them by just independently registering yourself as an artist.
    1
  13866. 1
  13867. 1
  13868. 1
  13869. 1
  13870. 1
  13871. 1
  13872. 1
  13873. 1
  13874. 1
  13875. 1
  13876. 1
  13877. 1
  13878. 1
  13879. 1
  13880. 1
  13881. 1
  13882. 1
  13883. 1
  13884. 1
  13885. 1
  13886. 1
  13887. 1
  13888. 1
  13889.  @hgv1883  uhm no. xD both very serious injuries to soldiers inhaling uranium dust on battlefields where the shells are fired or the removal of vehicle wrecks hit by uranium munitions, and dramatic increases of cancers and birth defects in the local population from uranium exposure through water and agricultural produce after uranium munitions use are well-documented. the risk to soldiers has even been acknowledged and warned about by the US military for decades (while the permanent poisoningis denied because the US doesn't want to stop using the stuff). uranium contamination is extremely long-lasting, since it can only be diluted and washed out by rainfall, there is no practical way to clear it. that's why DU munitions are less reasonable to use on one's own territory, and in a country with a very important agricultural industry at that, than mines or cluster munitions. chernobyl was already contaminated by the chernobyl disaster, but it was actually quite lucky in terms of wind direction, and severe contamination occurred mostly to chernobyl's west in a largely swampy and forested region of less agricultural importance. belarus and even parts of russia were hit much worse than ukraine, except for the immediate surroundings of the power plant of course. things would have been MUCH worse if the winds throughout the weeks the plant burned had blown south the short way to kyiv. almost all of the territory where ukraine will use DU saw hardly any contamination, less than austria and large parts of sweden, norway, and finland, and those normally are among ukraine's highly productive regions of agriculture. and the fundamental difference between DU munitions and reactor fallout is that the reactor fallout was made up mostly of radioisotopes with half-lives measured in days to decades, so most of the danger from it has already dissipated, and what remains will continue to get substantiallyless harmful in the coming decades. DU contamination is an eternal problem, it's a permanent poisoning of the land. the reason why ukraine is getting DU munitions is that DU is essentially free. it's an abundant waste product with no other use, and would otherwise cost money to dispose of as high-grade radioactive waste. tungsten is just as good, but since that is a material with many other uses that needs to be mined deliberately, tungsten munitions are many times more expensive than uranium munitions, and the amounts that exist are a fraction of those of DU munitions. they have been produced in large quantities by countries like the US and russia which fight many wars on foreign soil, which they are willing to poison.
    1
  13890. 1
  13891. 1
  13892. 1
  13893. 1
  13894. 1
  13895. 1
  13896. 1
  13897. 1
  13898. 1
  13899. 1
  13900. 1
  13901. 1
  13902. 1
  13903. 1
  13904. 1
  13905. 1
  13906. 1
  13907. 1
  13908. 1
  13909. 1
  13910. 1
  13911. 1
  13912. 1
  13913. 1
  13914. 1
  13915. 1
  13916. 1
  13917. 1
  13918. 1
  13919. 1
  13920. 1
  13921. 1
  13922. 1
  13923. 1
  13924. 1
  13925. 1
  13926. 1
  13927. 1
  13928. 1
  13929. 1
  13930. 1
  13931. 1
  13932. 1
  13933. 1
  13934. 1
  13935. 1
  13936. 1
  13937. 1
  13938. 1
  13939. 1
  13940. 1
  13941. 1
  13942. 1
  13943. 1
  13944. 1
  13945. 1
  13946. 1
  13947. 1
  13948. 1
  13949. 1
  13950. 1
  13951. 1
  13952. 1
  13953. 1
  13954. 1
  13955. 1
  13956. 1
  13957. 1
  13958. 1
  13959. 1
  13960. 1
  13961. 1
  13962. 1
  13963. 1
  13964. 1
  13965. 1
  13966. 1
  13967. 1
  13968. 1
  13969. 1
  13970. 1
  13971. 1
  13972. 1
  13973. 1
  13974. 1
  13975. 1
  13976. 1
  13977. 1
  13978. 1
  13979. 1
  13980. 1
  13981. 1
  13982. 1
  13983. 1
  13984. 1
  13985. 1
  13986. 1
  13987. 1
  13988. 1
  13989.  @Lubu-xy2ig  it's the title. it is in no way a question of ability, biden could stop the war and increase the aid tenfold with a phone call by declaring a withholding of support. the issue is that biden does not want to do that in the slightest. the ONLY thing america has done to signal marginal disapproval of is°°°l's aggression, or rather exclusively for its expansion of the "war" into leb°°on, has been the recent withdrawal of one of the two aircraft carrier fleets that were sent in from outside the mediterranean to threaten ir°n and hezb°ll°h into not retaliating against is°°°li at°°cks. everything else have been meaningless general statements to the media, not a single demand made of i°°°el, explicitly NO conditions set, which directly means permission to conduct war cr°mes and to expand the "w°r", and not a single acknowledgement and condemnation of an is°°eli action (plenty of statements misreported as such, but they all were "if x has occurred, that would be a bad thing", followed by a clarification that x is assessed to not have occurred whenever media cared enough to press the issue). is°°el does nothing that the biden admin says to the press that it supposedly wants, constantly even expresses open disrespect for those expectations and for all its allies, and then it still gets the most special of special treatments that america has on offer in terms of huge arms shipments by presidential decree that are not only not clarified to the public and not approved by congress as normal (in the name of US national security, which is clearly not served but rather severely endangered by this), but congress is not even informed of the contents of the shipments. biden is objectively ab°sing his authority to provide 110% support and has not actually expressed any disapproval of is°°°l's actions, merely feigned displeasure at the non-attributed resulting situation. the biden admin claims to be concerned with the famine (or "the continuing food situation", as blinken just put it), but they have literally not a single time attributed it to the isr°°°i decision to restrict the shipment of goods, or their b°°bing and bulldozing of various food production facilities. they have not condemned A N Y T H I N G. not a single action of the state, absolutely nothing.
    1
  13990. 1
  13991. 1
  13992. 1
  13993. 1
  13994. 1
  13995. 1
  13996. 1
  13997. 1
  13998. 1
  13999. 1
  14000. 1
  14001. 1
  14002. 1
  14003. 1
  14004. 1
  14005. 1
  14006. 1
  14007. 1
  14008. 1
  14009. 1
  14010. 1
  14011. 1
  14012. 1
  14013. 1
  14014. 1
  14015. 1
  14016. 1
  14017. 1
  14018. 1
  14019. 1
  14020. 1
  14021.  @helios7212  the real time count of individually identified d°°ths is probably unprecedented, but that's because g°za due to its small size, close centralized organization of the health system that counts the dead, and lots of very unwelcome experience of counting "war" casualties, is extremely good at counting. what is comparable are g^za "wars" between one another, but you can't validly compare confirmed d°°ths in g°za with confirmed d°°ths in other w°rs, where they are counted through totally different methodologies. it's been quite disappointing to see so many otherwise relatively high quality news outlets publish these invalid and patently absurd comparisons. some aspects of the numbers that have been badly compared that particularly stuck out to me: the current g°za d°°th count of minors (all the statistics use the legalese "children" in reference to anyone under 18) surpassed that of the yemen w°r within 6 to 8 weeks or so. absolute hogwash to anyone who has taken any note of how children have fared in yemen. in ukraine meanwhile, which probably shouldn't even be particularly bad at counting, neither w°r party releases credible official military casualty figures, but outside estimates both from NGOs and foreign governments are in the ballpark of 200,000-300,000+ combined dead soldiers. and yet the individually confirmed civilian death toll according to ukraine and UN counts is only around 10,000-11,000. a civilian to soldier death ratio of one to 20 or 30 would probably make it the most humane war in human history! and basically everyone agrees that in the ballpark of 2-10 times that many civilians died in the mariupol pocket alone. the normal range of ratios between civilian and military d°°ths in w°rs seems to be between three to one one way and three to one the other way, or thereabout. because many got caught up in rapid russian advances and widespread bombardment, civilian deaths were much higher early on than later. my impression is that the first three months probably had a ratio between one to one and three civilians per soldier, but this later inverted and by now the total muat be bwtween one and three dead soldiers per civilian. but certainly nothing like 20 or 30 to 1.
    1
  14022. 1
  14023. 1
  14024. 1
  14025. 1
  14026. 1
  14027. 1
  14028. 1
  14029. 1
  14030. 1
  14031. 1
  14032. 1
  14033. 1
  14034. 1
  14035. 1
  14036. 1
  14037. 1
  14038. 1
  14039. 1
  14040. 1
  14041. 1
  14042. 1
  14043. 1
  14044. 1
  14045. 1
  14046. 1
  14047. 1
  14048. 1
  14049. 1
  14050. 1
  14051. 1
  14052. 1
  14053. 1
  14054. es wird nicht die ganze welt unbewohnbar, aber die bewohnbaren gebiete und die landwirtschaftlich nutzbaren gebiete verschieben sich sehr stark, und demensprechend stehen wir am anfang einer absolut gigantischen migrationswelle. sehr viele städte sind sehr niedrig an küsten oder an flussmündungen gelegen und werden durch überschwemmung unbewohnbar werden, während beaonders in tropischen und subtropischen gebieten manche regionen schlicht zu heiß oder zu trocken werden, oder immer schwerer durch zyklone belastet werden. viele dieser equatornahen gebiete sind sehr dicht bewohnt, und die einwohner sind sehr arm und ihre regierungen zu arm und zu inkompetent um gegen die verschlechterung der lage effektiv vorzugehen - z.B. kann sich kaum ein anderer ort leisten, das steigende meer physisch auszusperren, wie holland das tut oder new york es tun wird. bangladeah allein hat eine sehrschnell wachstende einwohnerzahl von 170 millionen, und fast alle davon werden im laufe dieses jahrhunderts auswandern müssen. nahrungsmittelproduktion anzupassen und mengenmäßig aufrechtzuerhalten wird schon nicht einfach werden- (besonders schwierig zu kompensieren kann z.B. auch ein kollaps der meeresfischbestände werden, wobei der aber wohl nur nachrangig durch klimawandel verursacht sein dürfte, und mehr durch überfischen und verschmutzung. aber das hauptproblem, riesig und unausweichlich, wird die massenmigration. ich tippe auf eine milliarde internationale klimamigranten bis 2100, wahrscheinlich schon bis 2070. bewohnbarer werden große gebiete wohl nur in russland und kanada, aber die einwohner dort werden wenig begeistert sein von der aussicht, pro bürgernase zehn arme, ungebildete, weitgehend muslimische, dunkelbraune ausländer einwandern zu lassen, und die einzelnen migranten werden eh lieber versuchen wollen, premium-plätze in bereits komplett gebauten ländern zu ergattern. in 15-25 jahren wird die EU-außengrenze grundsätzlich mit tödlicher gewalt verteidigt werden (höchstwahrscheinlich in weiten teilen durch autonome waffensysteme durchgesetzt). es ist durchaus ironisch, das gerade die, die besonders wenig bock auf migranten haben, am wenigsten gegen den klimawandel tun wollen. der klimawandel wird einen migrationstsunami erzwingen, der bisherige migrations"krisen" wie ein kinderspiel aussehen lassen wird.
    1
  14055. 1
  14056. 1
  14057. 1
  14058.  @Guy-Lewis  yeah I don't like it either. for some reason, they decided to deliberately make an extreme version of this hostile interview thing (it's clearly intentional since they named the show "conflict zone" for its hostility). but they generally don't manage to really substantively interrogate the people they interview with well thought out questions of importance. they just ask normal questions and posture antagonistically, and maybe repeat questions and point out when someone isn't answering. quite often, the substance of the challenge is so crude that it's easy for the interviewees to avoid accountability, and then the antagonistic aesthetic of the show ends up making the interviewee look better than they would have in a more sober interview, because it gives the false impression that the interviewee was seriously challenged and proved exceptionally capable of holding their ground. really, any performative antagonism from and interviewer can only help the interviewee. I suppose the upside to that format is that it's so appealing to politicians who recognise this as an exploitable platform that it probably draws higher profile politicians who otherwise would not have agreed to do an interview, and who draw relatively high view counts. and the hostility could perhaps make it less boring for some viewers, or in particular it may provoke more viewer engagement such as posting youtube comments, or replies and shares on social media, since content that makes people angry is well known for propagating very effectively this way (which breeds overall hostility in online political discourse). of course this has very little to do with good journalism...😒
    1
  14059. 1
  14060. 1
  14061. 1
  14062. 1
  14063. 1
  14064. 1
  14065. 1
  14066. 1
  14067. 1
  14068. 1
  14069. 1
  14070. 1
  14071. 1
  14072. 1
  14073. 1
  14074. 1
  14075. 1
  14076. 1
  14077. 1
  14078. 1
  14079. 1
  14080. 1
  14081. 1
  14082. 1
  14083. 1
  14084. 1
  14085. 1
  14086. 1
  14087. 1
  14088. 1
  14089. 1
  14090. 1
  14091. 1
  14092. 1
  14093. 1
  14094. 1
  14095. 1
  14096. 1
  14097. 1
  14098. 1
  14099. 1
  14100. 1
  14101. 1
  14102. 1
  14103. 1
  14104. 1
  14105. 1
  14106. 1
  14107. 1
  14108. 1
  14109. 1
  14110. 1
  14111. 1
  14112. 1
  14113. 1
  14114. 1
  14115. 1
  14116. 1
  14117. 1
  14118. 1
  14119. 1
  14120. 1
  14121. 1
  14122. 1
  14123. 1
  14124. not a bad speech, except for the partial dumb exaggeration. but the guy delivering it and his associates have zero credibility. they are selling out mali's natural riches with far more exploitative deals to the wagner group in exchange for little more than security guarantees for the junta. they also haven't got s**t to do with the socialist dictator thomas sankara whom they imitate, who proverbially died a hero because he was killed before he would inevitably become a villain (like gaddhafi or mugabe did). well, he too was a coup leader, so there is that. almost all of these coups have brought their countries nothing but more poverty through sanctions, and more political repression. this one in niger has most acutely noticeably cost the country 70% of its electricity supply, because that's how much nigeria provided. and unlike the coup-friendly US, europe has suspended all its state aid to niger (not the humanitarian aid), and recognised the coup as a coup. the US refusing to recognise a coup as such echoes the western-supported coup that inspired this whole wave of african coups (and probably somewhat those in myanmar and thailand), by having such great success in securing power and universal foreign recognition even from the most human-rights-touting countries, which happened back in 2013 - that was the counter-arab-spring coup in egypt, which reestablished a now much more brutal variation of the old egyptian military rule. the junta asserted power through extraordinarily unrestrained violence, by conductingby far the largest massacre of unarmed protesters since at least beijing 1989. they cleared hundreds of thousands of protesters off the streets and they haven't been back since. credibly conservativeestimates of the covered up death toll of just one night of mass murder are around 1000, while the opposition claims 2600. oneyear and one fake election later, president, junta leader and field marshal sisi was gifted a public demonstration of recognition of legitimacy in theform of astate visit in berlin, meetingangela merkel. in the years since, egypt rapidly overtook saudi arabia and the UAE as germany's biggest arms buyer, in an apparent quid-pro-quo exchange that could hardly get more disgusting. at home, the junta has mostly focused on building a naypyidaw in the desert, a new administrative capital and garrison city outside of cairo, designed primarily to separate the military rulers from the revolutionary potential of the people. by having it a few dozen kilometers out into the desert near cairo, if ever a mob attempts to reach the new capital, they will simply be bombed on the road in the desert.
    1
  14125. 1
  14126. 1
  14127. 1
  14128. 1
  14129. 1
  14130. 1
  14131. 1
  14132. 1
  14133. 1
  14134. 1
  14135. 1
  14136. 1
  14137. 1
  14138. 1
  14139. 1
  14140. 1
  14141. 1
  14142. 1
  14143. 1
  14144. 1
  14145. 1
  14146. 1
  14147. 1
  14148. 1
  14149. 1
  14150. 1
  14151. 1
  14152. 1
  14153. 1
  14154. 1
  14155. 1
  14156. 1
  14157. 1
  14158. 1
  14159. 1
  14160. 1
  14161. 1
  14162. 1
  14163. 1
  14164. 1
  14165. 1
  14166. 1
  14167. 1
  14168. 1
  14169. 1
  14170. 1
  14171. 1
  14172. 1
  14173. 1
  14174. 1
  14175. 1
  14176. 1
  14177. 1
  14178. 1
  14179. 1
  14180. 1
  14181. 1
  14182. 1
  14183. 1
  14184. 1
  14185. 1
  14186. 1
  14187. 1
  14188. 1
  14189. 1
  14190. 1
  14191. 1
  14192. 1
  14193. 1
  14194. 1
  14195. 1
  14196. 1
  14197. 1
  14198. 1
  14199. 1
  14200. 1
  14201. 1
  14202. 1
  14203. 1
  14204. 1
  14205. 1
  14206. 1
  14207. 1
  14208. 1
  14209. 1
  14210. 1
  14211. 1
  14212. 1
  14213. 1
  14214. yeah that's how they do it here in germany, it's a trick (I'll call it that because it does actually work in germany) derived from the big H denial prohibition through a series of leaps in logic. -denying big H is banned. so far so defensible, though having seen the definitional expansion and loss of face for the idea supposedly being defended that banning any opinions invites, I would 100% support abolishing this. -actually downplaying, denying scale or intent or whatever are legally recognised as forms of denial. also still logical, but now get ready to jump! 🐇- comparing any other event to the big H is big H denial because it was uniquely incomparably bad. not equating, comparing. if you say big H was worse than other thing, you are comparing and liable for selective shaming. this is undeniably harmful to the professed intent to learn from history and recognise if things repeat themselves. curious, who would want to prevent that? also this hits very differently after you've heard mr. shmuley pilfer this 1 to 1 to declare the 79th anniversary of the birk°n°u sond°rk°mmando uprising to have been the new "darkest day in human history" and incomparably worse than anything else including the big H. 🦘 - although the j-people (same as i-people) don't have a complete monopoly on defining gen°°°de, the unique quantum-magical aura of historical importance of the big H means that talking about g°°°°ide in any way connected to them must be assumed to be primarily an invocation of the big H, not the broader concept. 🐸 - the accused is both comparing to the big H by implicitly invoking it at all, AND by using the g-word, which in this context is defined as the big H, to refer to something less bad than that, the accused is denying the big H. obviously this could only be intended to taunt and degrade the j/i-people, so the accused has been very bad indeed.
    1
  14215. 1
  14216. 1
  14217. 1
  14218. 1
  14219. 1
  14220. 1
  14221. 1
  14222. 1
  14223. 1
  14224. 1
  14225. 1
  14226. 1
  14227. 1
  14228. 1
  14229. 1
  14230. 1
  14231. 1
  14232. 1
  14233. 1
  14234. 1
  14235. 1
  14236. 1
  14237. 1
  14238. 1
  14239. 1
  14240. 1
  14241. 1
  14242. 1
  14243. 1
  14244. 1
  14245. 1
  14246. 1
  14247. 1
  14248. 1
  14249. 1
  14250. 1
  14251. 1
  14252. 1
  14253. 1
  14254. 1
  14255. 1
  14256. 1
  14257. 1
  14258. 1
  14259. 1
  14260. 1
  14261. 1
  14262. 1
  14263. 1
  14264. 1
  14265. 1
  14266. 1
  14267. 1
  14268. 1
  14269. 1
  14270. 1
  14271. 1
  14272. 1
  14273. 1
  14274. 1
  14275. 1
  14276. 1
  14277. 1
  14278. 1
  14279. 1
  14280. 1
  14281. 1
  14282. 1
  14283. 1
  14284. 1
  14285. 1
  14286. 1
  14287. 1
  14288. 1
  14289. 1
  14290. 1
  14291. 1
  14292. 1
  14293. 1
  14294. 1
  14295. 1
  14296. 1
  14297. 1
  14298. 1
  14299. 1
  14300. 1
  14301. 1
  14302. 1
  14303. 1
  14304. 1
  14305. 1
  14306. 1
  14307. 1
  14308. 1
  14309. 1
  14310. 1
  14311. 1
  14312. 1
  14313. 1
  14314. 1
  14315. 1
  14316. 1
  14317. 1
  14318. 1
  14319. 1
  14320. 1
  14321. 1
  14322. 1
  14323. 1
  14324. 1
  14325. 1
  14326. 1
  14327. 1
  14328. 1
  14329. 1
  14330. 1
  14331. 1
  14332. 1
  14333. 1
  14334. 1
  14335. 1
  14336. 1
  14337. 1
  14338. 1
  14339. 1
  14340. 1
  14341. 1
  14342. 1
  14343. 1
  14344. 1
  14345. 1
  14346. 1
  14347. 1
  14348. 1
  14349. 1
  14350. 1
  14351. 1
  14352. 1
  14353. 1
  14354. 1
  14355. 1
  14356. 1
  14357. 1
  14358. 1
  14359. 1
  14360. 1
  14361. 1
  14362. 1
  14363. 1
  14364. 1
  14365. 1
  14366. 1
  14367. 1
  14368. 1
  14369. 1
  14370. 1
  14371. 1
  14372. 1
  14373. 1
  14374. 1
  14375. 1
  14376. 1
  14377. 1
  14378. 1
  14379. 1
  14380. 1
  14381. 1
  14382. 1
  14383. 1
  14384. 1
  14385. 1
  14386. 1
  14387. 1
  14388. 1
  14389. 1
  14390. 1
  14391. 1
  14392. 1
  14393. 1
  14394. 1
  14395. 1
  14396. 1
  14397. 1
  14398. 1
  14399. 1
  14400. 1
  14401. 1
  14402. 1
  14403. 1
  14404. 1
  14405. 1
  14406. 1
  14407. 1
  14408. 1
  14409. 1
  14410. 1
  14411. 1
  14412. 1
  14413. 1
  14414. 1
  14415. 1
  14416. 1
  14417. 1
  14418. 1
  14419. 1
  14420. 1
  14421. 1
  14422. 1
  14423. 1
  14424. 1
  14425. 1
  14426. 1
  14427. 1
  14428. 1
  14429. 1
  14430. 1
  14431. 1
  14432. 1
  14433. 1
  14434. 1
  14435. 1
  14436. 1
  14437. 1
  14438. 1
  14439. 1
  14440. 1
  14441. 1
  14442. 1
  14443. 1
  14444. 1
  14445. 1
  14446. 1
  14447. 1
  14448. 1
  14449. 1
  14450. 1
  14451. 1
  14452. 1
  14453. 1
  14454. 1
  14455. 1
  14456. 1
  14457. 1
  14458. 1
  14459. 1
  14460.  @caronadams4486  I know. a hugeportion of humanity lives on coasts or on rivers within the tidal reach. the netherlands and new york city may get elevated and walled off sufficiently to last until the end of the century, but there won't be enough money to do that fornew orleans, perhaps not even for miami, and certainly not for any place in the caribbean or asia. everybody knows that various small pacific island nations will cease to exist (the ones that can afford it actually are buying up land elsewhere to relocate the whole nation), but really, there's nothing to svabethe philippines or much of indonesia either. 170 million people live in bangladesh, and practically the entire country will be under water or flooded too reequently to warrant an attempt to stay there. and like in bangladesh, many regions that will see the worst effects of combined sea level rise and lethally hot temperatures and likely worsening cyclones are extremely densely inhabited, particularly by very poor people with low education levels, so they have very little going for them in trying to build new lives elsewhere. while much of the most inhabited places will become less hospitable, few regions will become more hospitable - prettymuch only parts of russia and canada, where retreating permafrost (while releasing catastrophic volumes of methane to accelerate climate change) will leave vast areas of still cold but farmable climate with fertile soil. but I do not expect either russians or canadians to be enthusiastic about the prospect of having 10 times as many people as their national populations move in, and those being destitute uneducated brown people from the tropics and subtropics, of whom about half might be muslims (also many christians and some hindus). and of course those people from hot climates don't want to skip past the temperate regions and move to the cold either. they'll want to move to the US and europe, but there won't be that amount of room to spare there, or any willingness to welcome them. in my opinion, in about 15-25 years from now, the US southern border and EU outer borders including the mediterranean sea will be guarded against migrants by lethal autonomous weapon systems.
    1
  14461. 1
  14462. 1
  14463. 1
  14464. 1
  14465. 1
  14466. 1
  14467. 1
  14468. 1
  14469. 1
  14470. 1
  14471. 1
  14472. 1
  14473. 1
  14474. 1
  14475. 1
  14476. 1
  14477. 1
  14478. 1
  14479. 1
  14480. 1
  14481. 1
  14482. 1
  14483. 1
  14484. 1
  14485. 1
  14486. 1
  14487. 1
  14488. 1
  14489. 1
  14490. 1
  14491. 1
  14492. 1
  14493. 1
  14494. 1
  14495. 1
  14496. 1
  14497. 1
  14498. 1
  14499. 1
  14500. 1
  14501. 1
  14502. 1
  14503. 1
  14504. 1
  14505. 1
  14506. 1
  14507. 1
  14508. 1
  14509. 1
  14510. 1
  14511. 1
  14512. 1
  14513. 1
  14514. 1
  14515. 1
  14516. 1
  14517. 1
  14518. 1
  14519. 1
  14520. 1
  14521. 1
  14522. 1
  14523. 1
  14524. 1
  14525. 1
  14526. 1
  14527. 1
  14528. 1
  14529. 1
  14530. 1
  14531. 1
  14532. 1
  14533. 1
  14534. 1
  14535. 1
  14536. 1
  14537. 1
  14538. 1
  14539. 1
  14540. 1
  14541. 1
  14542. 1
  14543. 1
  14544. 1
  14545. 1
  14546. 1
  14547. 1
  14548. 1
  14549. 1
  14550. 1
  14551. 1
  14552. 1
  14553. 1
  14554. 1
  14555. 1
  14556. 1
  14557. 1
  14558. 1
  14559. 1
  14560. 1
  14561. 1
  14562. 1
  14563. 1
  14564. 1
  14565. 1
  14566. 1
  14567. 1
  14568. 1
  14569. 1
  14570. 1
  14571. 1
  14572. 1
  14573. 1
  14574. 1
  14575. 1
  14576. 1
  14577. 1
  14578. 1
  14579. 1
  14580. 1
  14581. Shots fired Man LOL I hate düsseldorf, it feels dead inside. I almost mentioned it as the specific example of a terrible looking city. admittedly I haven't seen many cities and I have seen little of düsseldorf's düsseldorf duisburg, but only düsseldorf ever creeped me out like that. I went on a walk through a park there and it was nothing but trees and grass, I didn't even find a dandelion. there's something wrong with that city! xD I went to frankfurt once and expected it to resemble düsseldorf's soullessness because of all the banking ghouls, but even frankfurt seemed much nicer. an overwhelming majority of damage to german cities in WW2 was caused by british and american aerial bombardment. I think berlin was probably the only one that got destroyed mostly by artillery and tanks, since it had strong air defenses (those giant flak towers still stand mostly because they're too hard to demolish) and a good distance from the western allies' airfields, and in the end it was one of not very many cities that carried out hitler's orders to keep fighting until nothing was left of germany. but artillery really can't rival the destruction that the air raids with thousands of bombers loaded with incendiary bombs could do. the battle of berlin was much longer than the time it took to burn down dresden. of course after the war, rebuilding efforts differed a lot between the soviet sector and the others, because america had a huge amount of money and material to spend on the marshall plan and such, whereas the soviet union was barely in a better state than germany.
    1
  14582. 1
  14583. 1
  14584. 1
  14585. 1
  14586. 1
  14587. 1
  14588. 1
  14589. 1
  14590. 1
  14591. 1
  14592. 1
  14593. 1
  14594. 1
  14595. 1
  14596. 1
  14597. 1
  14598. 1
  14599. 1
  14600. 1
  14601. 1
  14602. 1
  14603. 1
  14604. 1
  14605. 1
  14606. 1
  14607. 1
  14608. 1
  14609. 1
  14610. 1
  14611. 1
  14612. 1
  14613. 1
  14614. 1
  14615. 1
  14616. 1
  14617. 1
  14618. 1
  14619. 1
  14620. 1
  14621. 1
  14622. 1
  14623. 1
  14624. 1
  14625. 1
  14626. 1
  14627. 1
  14628. 1
  14629. 1
  14630. 1
  14631. 1
  14632. 1
  14633. 1
  14634. 1
  14635. 1
  14636. 1
  14637. 1:10 "relations with the west have deteriorated since [general sisi's fake election]" no they absolutely have not, I don't know what could have possibly given you that idea. sisi is the west's guy. he came to power in a western-supported coup, his presidency was legitimized with a state visit with merkel in berlin just over a year after his forces conducted the biggest ma°°acre of unarmed protesters since at least beijing 1989 (2013 rabaa ma°°acre, 1000+ dead in one night), and egypt has been the biggest buyer of german weapons since. one of the last things the outgoing merkel government did was to authorize germany largest ever arms sale, making that year the one with the biggest sale volume of any year, to egypt. if you are the biggest buyer of german weapons, you are as much an ally of the west as it is possible to be. egypt also is a close ally (in a semi-unofficial way for political reasons because the people don't support it) of the country you're hypothetically pitting it against here. it already was under mubarak, but it's even more so now under sisi, since sisi owes his position to western support, and he has instituted far more draconian governance so he is less concerned with following public opinion. I have not seen reporting on this country being itself involved in sisi's coup, but it certainly was a huge reason for the western eupport for it (certainly the primary reason for the german support), because they saw it as a huge problem that the g-strip temporarily bordered an egypt governed by friends of h°m°s.
    1
  14638. 1
  14639. 1
  14640. 1
  14641. 1
  14642. 1
  14643. 1
  14644. 1
  14645. 1
  14646. 1
  14647. 1
  14648. 1
  14649. 1
  14650. 1
  14651. 1
  14652. 1
  14653. 1
  14654. 1
  14655. 1
  14656. 1
  14657. 1
  14658. 1
  14659. 1
  14660. 1
  14661. 1
  14662. 1
  14663. 1
  14664. 1
  14665. 1
  14666. 1
  14667. 1
  14668. 1
  14669. 1
  14670. 1
  14671. 1
  14672. 1
  14673. 1
  14674. 1
  14675. 1
  14676. 1
  14677. 1
  14678. 1
  14679. 1
  14680. 1
  14681. 1
  14682. 1
  14683. 1
  14684. 1
  14685. 1
  14686. 1
  14687. 1
  14688. 1
  14689. 1
  14690. 1
  14691. 1
  14692. 1
  14693. 1
  14694. 1
  14695. 1
  14696. 1
  14697. 1
  14698. 1
  14699. 1
  14700. 1
  14701. 1
  14702. 1
  14703. 1
  14704. 1
  14705. 1
  14706. 1
  14707. 1
  14708. 1
  14709. 1
  14710. 1
  14711. 1
  14712. 1
  14713. 1
  14714. 1
  14715. 1
  14716. 1
  14717. 1
  14718. 1
  14719. 1
  14720. 1
  14721. 1
  14722. 1
  14723. 1
  14724. 1
  14725. 1
  14726. 1
  14727. 1
  14728. 1
  14729. 1
  14730. 1
  14731. 1
  14732. 1
  14733. 1
  14734. 1
  14735. 1
  14736. 1
  14737. 1
  14738. 1
  14739. 1
  14740. 1
  14741. 1
  14742. 1
  14743. 1
  14744. 1
  14745. 1
  14746. 1
  14747. 1
  14748. 1
  14749. 1
  14750. 1
  14751. 1
  14752. 1
  14753. 1
  14754. 1
  14755. 1
  14756. 1
  14757. 1
  14758. 1
  14759. 1
  14760. 1
  14761. 1
  14762. 1
  14763. 1
  14764. 1
  14765. 1
  14766. 1
  14767. 1
  14768. 1
  14769. 1
  14770. 1
  14771. 1
  14772. 1
  14773. 1
  14774. 1
  14775. 1
  14776. 1
  14777. 1
  14778. 1
  14779. no, the closest thing to nazi concentration camps today most likely are prison camps in north korea, and in china the ones not made for uyghur reeducation (though that is part of a genocide, which meets the definition chiefly due to the extremely statistically evident forced birth control), but rather those camps holding prisoners of conscience condemned to death through an extralegal process such as falun gong followers and actually activism-associated uyghurs, who undergo elaborate medical testing upon entering the camps and are then kept indefinitely to be killed on demand once they are matched to somebody seeking an organ transplant (this is the main source of organ transplants in china). not as bad in condition, but particularly accurately meeting the definition of concentration camps are the australian reject-migrant camps in third world countries like nauru and papua new guinea. other migrant camps in probably many other countries also fit the definition, including those operated on behalf of the EU by various northern and western african autocracies. another especially notable example are those camps in rojava holding assumed ISIS members, particularly the tens of thousands of women and children in al hol camp. the situation of palestine before this "war" would be most fittingly characterised as gaza being a very large and populous closed ghetto, and the west bank being an internally mostly open and externally partially open ghetto network. most palestinians in other arab countries (except for jordan, where most are citizens) live in open ghettos, in that their so-called "refugee camp" neighbourhoods are the only places where they are allowed to live, but they are largely allowed to travel and work outside.
    1
  14780. 1
  14781. 1
  14782. 1
  14783. 1
  14784. 1
  14785. 1
  14786. 1
  14787. 1
  14788. 1
  14789. 1
  14790. 1
  14791. 1
  14792. 1
  14793. 1
  14794. 1
  14795. 1
  14796. 1
  14797. 1
  14798. 1
  14799. 1
  14800. 1
  14801. 1
  14802. 1
  14803. 1
  14804. 1
  14805. 1
  14806. 1
  14807. 1
  14808. 1
  14809. 1
  14810. 1
  14811. 1
  14812. 1
  14813. 1
  14814. 1
  14815. 1
  14816. 1
  14817. 1
  14818. 1
  14819. 1
  14820. 1
  14821. 1
  14822. 1
  14823. 1
  14824. 1
  14825. 1
  14826. 1
  14827. 1
  14828. 1
  14829. 1
  14830. 1
  14831. 1
  14832. 1
  14833. 1
  14834. 1
  14835. 1
  14836. 1
  14837. 1
  14838. 1
  14839. 1
  14840. 1
  14841. 1
  14842. 1
  14843. 1
  14844. 1
  14845. 1
  14846. 1
  14847. 1
  14848. 1
  14849. 1
  14850. 1
  14851. 1
  14852. 1
  14853. 1
  14854. 1
  14855. 1
  14856. 1
  14857. h°mas holds most of the h°stages, and they have been able to count how many they have. so they wouldn't just let i-country pretend if they had none. and we also have videos of five or six recently surviving. however the 10/7 attackers also deliberately collected corpses in order to hold them as h°stages - it's visible in one early released video from a traffic camera, where a corpse of a civilian man ki°°ed in the road earlier is loaded onto a vehicle and driven away, and we also have known since a skull fragment found in i-country was DNA-matched to her that shani louk had been shot in the head in i-country before being brought to g°za, which very stronglysuggests that her body on the pickup truck was as dead as her grey complexion hinted at. matching the corpsenapping tactic, we have then seen h°°as, and seemingly PIJ and any others hypothesized to hold some captives, to go against common ransoming practice and deliberately not release proof of life, with few public exceptions (I think they've shown about 20 living captives, some of which are now free). in short, h°°°s had planned from the start to pad out the h°°°age count with corpses, and they have preserved this by not releasing proofnof life for most of the likely alive captives. now what definitely does function similar to what you describe is that netan°°hu and the like do not want the h°°°ages to be released, in fact they likely view the number still captive as somewhat critically low already. the continued captivity functions as an excuse to continue the sl°°ghter. few things would be worse for their plans than for all living and dead hostages to be returned right now. btw. is°°el has also held corpses for months or years to collectively punish relatives, or disposed of them, and of course a big storynow are the 16+ graveyards in g°za that have been partially or fully bulldozed (as have been any agricultural fields in the ground invasion area, including citrus, cactus and olive groves that would take decades to functionally regrow.
    1
  14858. 1
  14859. 1
  14860. 1
  14861. 1
  14862. 1
  14863. 1
  14864. 1
  14865. 1
  14866. 1
  14867. there was nowhere to transport weapons to or from, these ambulances are operating entirely inside gaza. and the particular attack described is sniper fire against a dismounted medic, not the targeting of the ambulance. look at those outfits, it is completely impossible for a sniper to mistake the medics for anything else. that is guaranteed to be intentional. and of course it's far from the first time - shireen avu-akleh's murder for example was just as intentional. air- and drone strikes on ambulances are intentional too, with just a tad more plauaible deniability by way of israel claiming that there were or could have been militants in the ambulance. israel has been using that blanket claim with no evidence released ever to justify all its airstrikes. they even consider non-specified alleged hamas presence to be a good enough to level gaza's biggest reaidential buildings, where even with their version of events, they are destroying the homes and possessions of hundreds of innocent civilians because one flat was inhabited by a hamas member or used for meetings or for weapons storage. and at times when they're not using the big bombs, israel in recent years has increasingly used smaller glide bombs and drone bombs that don't collapse a building but merely destroy a few rooms throughout three levels, and they have been using them in strikes designed to certainly kill militant leaders and their wives in their sleep, kill or wound their children, and severely threaten the lives of their neighbours. the military leader of hamas for example has survived five airstrikes specifically targeting him since 1995, he's lost an arm and an eye and had a spinal injury, and in 2014 one such strike designed to kill him and his family was survived by him, but killed his wife and both of their children. I don't mean to suggest that it even begins to justify the ultimate depravity of hamas' recent massacre, but I find it to be an interesting fact worth knowing that hamas' fighters are led by a man partially driven by a desire for revenge for israel inflicting on him one of the worst possible personal tragedies.
    1
  14868. 1
  14869. 1
  14870. 1
  14871. 1
  14872. 1
  14873. 1
  14874. 1
  14875. 1
  14876. 1
  14877. 1
  14878. 1
  14879. 1
  14880. 1
  14881. 1
  14882. 1
  14883. 1
  14884. 1
  14885. 1
  14886. 1
  14887. 1
  14888. 1
  14889. 1
  14890. 1
  14891. 1
  14892. 1
  14893. 1
  14894. 1
  14895. 1
  14896. 1
  14897. 1
  14898. 1
  14899. 1
  14900. 1
  14901. 1
  14902. 1
  14903. 1
  14904. 1
  14905. 1
  14906. 1
  14907. 1
  14908. 1
  14909. 1
  14910. 1
  14911. 1
  14912. 1
  14913. 1
  14914. 1
  14915. 1
  14916. 1
  14917. 1
  14918. 1
  14919. 1
  14920. 1
  14921. 1
  14922. 1
  14923. 1
  14924. 1
  14925. 1
  14926. 1
  14927. 1
  14928. 1
  14929. 1
  14930. 1
  14931. 1
  14932. 1
  14933. 1
  14934. 1
  14935. 1
  14936. 1
  14937. 1
  14938. 1
  14939. 1
  14940. 1
  14941. 1
  14942. 1
  14943. 1
  14944. 1
  14945. 1
  14946. 1
  14947. 1
  14948. 1
  14949. 1
  14950. 1
  14951. 1
  14952. 1
  14953. 1
  14954. 1
  14955. 1
  14956. 1
  14957. 1
  14958. 1
  14959. 1
  14960. 1
  14961. 1
  14962. 1
  14963. 1