@Iconochasm's banner p

Iconochasm

All post-temple whore technology is gay.

3 followers   follows 10 users  
joined 2022 September 05 00:44:49 UTC

				

User ID: 314

Iconochasm

All post-temple whore technology is gay.

3 followers   follows 10 users   joined 2022 September 05 00:44:49 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 314

What supplement brands (vitamins, minerals, creatine, pre-workout, etc) do you trust and use? How did you make that determination?

because what other sources are there at the moment, really?

None. Even "independent" news are required to toe the Iranian party line as a condition on being allowed into the country.

Hang it in the Louve next to the "pretending not to understand things" tweet.

But do tell me: in what sense are Americans not (or ever) "civilized"? Non-rhetorically. Step up. What do those words mean?

I actually found myself nodding along with him. America has never been fully settled, such that it's occupants are forced to turn viciously on each other in red status games. Americans have always had PVE as an outlet, as a way to foster trust and self-regulation and prosocial behavior. We're built for PVE, and we're so good at it and it's so rewarding that when we try our hand at guild war PVP, we roflstomp.

Compare that to a "late stage" civilization like China or India or Persia where the only way to get ahead is to screw over someone else. There's only so many spots in the civil service, so every Chinese kid who makes the cut necessarily means another doesn't. This creates an environment where being good or competent in an objective sense is less important than outperforming peers. To them, we look like little kids who haven't internalized tiger mom knife-fighting.

To us, they look like savages stabbing themselves for pitiful loot because they don't grok "trust".

Or at least, that's the rough sketch of an idea that's been kicking around in my head for a few weeks.

"And have you stopped lynching the black people?" the genocidal tyrant asked smugly, as he washed in his daily bloodbath squeezed from more victims than the entire history of the KKK.

And the current paradigm is that if your goal is something other than "killing enemies" then you should use a different tool than the "enemy killing organization". Using the Enemy Killing Organization for non-Enemy Killing purposes is often ineffective and inefficient, and degrades the ability of the Enemy Killing Organization to kill enemies.

I'm confused. How many people in the US would be actually surprised/outraged if we got into a hot war and someone bombed a military base, which also had a school on it?

Plenty of people. It's just that there's very little overlap with the set of people who are upset about the bombing of this school.

Because your take is pure Arguments as Soldiers. When I saw the NYT article on the topic, clawing at implication and carefully phrased vagaries to push a narrative as hard as they could with extremely limited facts and knowledge, it just made me recall the old line "They're not anti-war. They're just on the other side." Remember, the only source we even have for the casualty count is the Iranian government. How much do you trust them? The US has hit Iran with thousands of bombs and the general level of precision is terrifying sci-fi absurdity. There's Iranian doctors purportedly reporting that literally every single casualty they've seen is non-civilian. Meanwhile, Iran responded by flinging missiles willy-nilly all over the region, including a bunch of civilian targets that no one cares about because it's just brown people failing at killing brown people.

Focusing all your attention on the single incident that might possibly have been the US hitting a civilian target is so obviously bad faith that it requires years of brainwashing and hyper-selective framing to take your performative outrage seriously.

"The US fired 3000 bombs and only a single one was possibly a misidentified target or misfired. That means the US has less shit happen during war than any other army in the combined history of humanity. Maybe that should make them much more comfortable going to war than any other polity that has ever existed on the face of the earth."

Christ.

Depends on when and how. If you join a club, guys do it into their 80's. If you're trying to hunt on your own, well, how much awkward, ungainly carcass can you personally haul through a mile of woods?

Random tangent: I remember when I was a kid at the hunting club, hearing a pair of adults talk about a third guy who couldn't make Deer Week that season for some reason. And one of the guys says "Damn, you only get 60 or 70 deer seasons in a lifetime."

Just one of those lines that's always stuck with me. There are only so many opportunities.

Do you know what time it is?

That's fine and fair. I more think this is a ripe scenario for thought experiments and teasing the outlines of things, than I am, say, calling for twitter posters to be jailed.

Imagine you were a juror in a case involving this sort of thing. What kind of evidence would you want to see to conclude that a person was an actively bad actor trying to sabotage their own nation? Or do you think idiocy is a fully general defense?

That's the blurry edge. What's the difference between a gullible idiot and someone just explicitly rooting for the other side?

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.

If the claims are literally true, then there would be reasonable value in propagating them beyond being a partisan for the other side. If the claims are not true, and you reasonable ought to have known that (as in, you had to have an AI generate the footage you're purporting to supply as "news" because it just doesn't exist), then your actions are a much cleaner, likely entirely indefensible, fit for "giving them Aid and Comfort".

What about lying about the state of the war to help Iranian propaganda efforts? Say, creating AI videos that purport to show Iran winning military victories against the US and presenting them as real news?

Treason would be literally aiding and abetting the enemy, which despite many people's attempts to claim it is so during every conflict, does not include "Speaking out against the war."

Eh, there's a point where colloquial usage is fair. I would say that if an opposition Senator gave information to the Iranian regime, that ought to count enough for "slander" purposes, even without a formal declaration.

But Trump has a short attention span and no conviction.

Trump has been talking about fucking up Iran since the 80s.

Worth noting that teenagers are a notoriously low propensity voting block. So even if a large chunk of 19 year olds are groypers... how many of them were going to make it to the polls anyway? It's not a Trump vote switching to the Dems, it's a guy playing video games on gummies staying the same.

She was an excellent SoS - she used the position to funnel so much money and influence into the Clinton Foundation. That's what secretary level positions are for, right?

Immigration restriction, sure (although he still refuses to do the one thing that would actually work, which is go after employers who hire illegals).

This gets cited constantly, and it always strikes me as "Please don't throw me into that briar patch" situation. "Oh Mr. Trump, please don't score a massive own goal and shoot yourself in the foot by aggressively disrupting multiple industries that will have clearly seen and felt impacts on regular Americans, I say, I say, please don't do that for sure!"

As an immigration hawk, I'm actually pretty fine with the current strategy of "deport a ton of people (headlining bad optics criminals) while closing the border and squeezing even more out, in a way that gradually and inexorably shrinks the illegal labor base while giving the relevant industries plenty of advance warning that things are changing". That actually seems a lot more sensible and less disruptive, and less likely to allow Certain People to spend the mid-term campaigns screaming at the top of their lungs that some random fruit is experiencing shortages.

For the Groypers to exert political influence, they need to make it costly for politicians to ignore their interests.

How many groypers are voters, and how many are teenagers, or from the third world?

No, it's actually insane schitzo shit.

This is still black and white thinking. You don't have to devote a ton of effort to a problem to acknowledge it exists. You also don't have to openly ally with people who are like a comic book villain exagerration of your hated domestic foes.

Like, if labor organizers were openly throwing protests to support the slavers, then it would be quite fair to question their commitment to the principles of workers rights. Whereas it would be much more reasonable for them to say "Yes, slavery is terrible, but it very far away and not my problem. I wish the slaves the best of luck though."

(well, except for the highway scene that takes forever).

Eh, this feels like a later conclusion. None of my friends complained about it at the time. It was actually quite popular.

After the third, I think a lot of good will and rose tinting was stripped off.

What are they going to do? We got Muslim nations on board against Iran at home.

I saw Reloaded three times in theatres. The action sequences were just sublime for that era.

2003 also had The Last Samurai, Pirates of the Caribbean, 28 Days Later, Kill Bill, Master and Commander, and X2 (which I also went to see three times).

Why be charitable? I've been told my entire life to take responsibility for things other white people did a thousand miles away from my ancestors a hundred and fifty years ago. If she wants to claim to be an American (and represent us in Congress!) then she can publicly flagellate herself for the purported sins of America. If not, then her whining means nothing and she can emigrate back to Palestine.