@JarJarJedi's banner p

JarJarJedi


				

				

				
1 follower   follows 1 user  
joined 2022 September 10 21:39:37 UTC

Streamlined derailments and counteridea reeducation


				

User ID: 1118

JarJarJedi


				
				
				

				
1 follower   follows 1 user   joined 2022 September 10 21:39:37 UTC

					

Streamlined derailments and counteridea reeducation


					

User ID: 1118

Not really, it just needs to have the same set of vulnerabilities as legitimate governments, or at least a sizeable subset of them.

I don't think there will be something that looks like full-blown war, because there doesn't seem to be any western targets there for Houthis to strike beyond ships, and the US wouldn't go into a full scale invasion there, especially not in an election year. Some bombings would be enough to show Biden still has some cojones left, and I don't think it would go beyond that. More likely, there would be a repeat loop of what is already happening - Houthis attack some ships, the West does a dozen of warnings, then bombs something, rinse, repeat.

That is an obvious lie, Israel spent a lot of effort, lives and diplomacy to implement a separation solution. There would be absolutely no reason to do all that - from Oslo agreement to Gaza evacuation to creating Palestinian Authority to other measures - if Israel indeed wanted to eliminate Palestinian presence. All these measures - which constitute Israeli policies for three decades now - are completely contrary to that goal. You basically ignoring everything that actually happened in service of your insane hatred.

Israel is a genocidal project by definition

The definition of Israel is a state of Jewish people. There's absolutely nothing "genocidal" in it, you lie again.

Israel isn't going full auschwitz solely

That's a libelous statement by itself - Israel is not going not only "full auschwitz", but neither 1% or 0.001% of it. There are no camps designed for massacring any Arab population, there are no official program of eliminating Arab population, there is nothing of the sort. There is a war, truly, and a war among dense built area where the other side doesn't bother with conventional things like uniforms or military identification (a war crime by itself, but Hamas is committing every war crime in a book, none excluded, so of course they do this too) and using schools, mosques and hospitals as military outposts - of course it will bring some casualities, and given that, as I mentioned, the only figures are coming from Hamas, and they don't bother with formalities, everybody except senior leaders which are officially known as Hamas are called "civilians". Hamas membership is not exclusive - it's like being a communist. You can be a doctor and a communist, a journalist and a communist, a truck driver and a communist. Only with Hamas, you can be a doctor in the morning and keep Israeli hostages in the evening. You can be a "journalist" in the morning and a drone operator in the afternoon. You can be a farmer and one of you farms would host rocket launchers shelling Ashdod and Tel-Aviv. That's all "civilian" population and that's what the IDF is dealing with now.

Any honest assessment of sympathy for goy/Palestinian civilian life in the greater Jewish/Israeli public results in basically nothing.

If by "honest" you mean "completely false and libelous". Nothing can be further from the truth - a lot of people in Israeli society are bothered with Palestinians, and presenting Jews as some kind of genetics-obsessed community that treats everybody with wrong genes below animals (there's an active animal rights community in Israel too) is an utter bullshit. The level of blood libel bullshit. You obviously know absolutely nothing about Israeli society and what the dominating opinions there are. Yes, Israel population supports war with Hamas. No, nobody in Israel talks in the terms you are implying.

That said, if we call the Armenian Genocide a genocide I don't see what is so different about Gaza.

Everything. Armenians did not attack Turks and did not gruesomely rape and murder thousands of them, Hamas did. Turks did put as their goal destroying Armenian population, Israel does not. Pretty much every aspect of what is happening in Gaza, bar none, is different.

But even with Jewish subversion of the American government

Oh, you are one of those people....Basically, everything you ascribe to the evil Jews, you'd see in a mirror - it's you who are obsessed with racist genetics and view everything through the lens of the ethnic conflict. And of course, you are possessed with irrational, but flaming hate of Jews. I am sorry I just noticed it now. I am done spending time on you.

Some people have their own facts, and denying the existence of Israel is, unfortunately, only a small part of a myriad of falsities from which their worldview is composed. Pretty much everything they know and say about Israel is false, but they can't help themselves and reveal it by denying even the most obvious of facts - such as the very existence of the state of Israel. It is actually a good thing - it clearly indicates people that are not going to be open to reasonable argument.

Israel is aggressively preventing any kind of aid from going into the region

This is obviously false, there are numerous photos and videos of hundreds of aid trucks rolling into Gaza (and Hamas taking over them and shooting at residents trying to get to them before Hamas does), and there are Jordanians doing air supply drops (obviously with Israel approval). It is true that Israel limits the amount of supplies and the kind of supplies, because they know (and it is true) that Hamas is going to control and benefit from them, but it is absolutely false that Israel is preventing "any kind of aid" from going into Gaza.

The official goal is dismantling Hamas infrastructure and destroying their military capacity. The second official goal is freeing the hostages, though nobody actually knows how to achieve that. The former though is simpler - just divide Gaza into squares, go square by square, find anything that looks like it belongs to Hamas, destroy it, find anybody who is holding weapons, destroy them if they don't drop the weapons quickly enough, otherwise rope them in as prisoner. The north of Gaza is pretty much captured and being cleaned up, the middle is pretty much captured too, the south is still in progress. There's a lot of stuff to be done there, so it'll likely take time. Nobody really knows what to do after IDF will establish military control over the whole Gaza - which will likely happen soon, finds all Hamas caches they could find (which will also happen soon) and captures or kills all Hamas members that are stupid enough to keep actively resisting. Since it's probably still months away, the official position is "we'll think of something by then".

For all practical purposes attacking the Houthis is like going to war with an actual country.

If anything, that seems to be rather good than bad for prosecuting the war. For somebody like the West, it's much better to have a war with an actual proper country than a bunch of vaguely defined rebels. It's much easier to pressure the country into making some kind of a deal - after hitting their soft points, which any country has aplenty - than hunting down every single last cave dweller in the desert, without even knowing if there are more or where they are. If they are like a country, they have offices, stores, ports, materials, etc. - all this can be hit and destroyed. The bigger the target, the easier it should be to strike it, not? And then, the carrot can be presented - if you stop the stupid shit, maybe we'll let you have your country and run it as you please.

No European leader wants to get one of their cruisers murked with hypersonic missiles

Not even Russia is dumb enough to give those guys something like that, and also it's not a magic wand - it needs to be used properly to strike a warship, and the likelihood of anybody there knowing how to do stuff like that is null. Russian "advisors" probably could pull it off but Russia has enough trouble to be actively involved in another war right now. They are buying weapons from places like Iran and North Korea, not selling them.

The interesting twist here is that the haste with which Iran propaganda blamed Israel for that forced them then to claim that ISIS is actually working for Israel and the US, which is beyond hilarious.

That's an obvious lie, neither Israel (as an official policy goes) wants it nor it's doing it. With overwhelming power superiority Israel has, if they wanted to massacre a million people in Gaza, or West Bank, that would have already happened. There's literally nothing that could prevent Israel from doing that, militarily. But Israel does not want to do it, and didn't.

And please, spare me out-of-context quotes from early 90-s where some Israeli politician said something like "I'd be happy if all Palestinians went to hell". It's not policy, and if you think it has anything to do with the official policy, you are not qualified to have any opinion on any Middle East policy at all.

Biden reportedly has no intention of firing Austin, with officials stating that they will "learn from the experience."

Yeah, the Secretary of Defense is definitely one of those "learn on the job" positions, where competence is not to be expected, at least not immediately.

It is clear to me that the Feds/Deep State (pretty much the same thing by now) executed a brilliant (surprisingly brilliant, given their routine incompetence when it doesn't concern their survival) operation of surfacing, isolating and utterly destroying the passionate part of the right that was ready to fight against the left's long march through the institutions and against total alienation of power from any possibility of democratic control on the federal level. That operation was an overwhelming success, the right were easily provoked, totally unprepared and easily routed and utterly defeated, while the "mainstream" politicians either stayed away from the fray, or, like Pence, actively helped to destroy them. Was a specific person an employee of the Feds, an asset or just a fool easily manipulated by them - is not very important, though I do believe Epps had if not direct than at least once-removed contact with the Feds, and there were probably many provocateurs and instigators in the crowd beyond him. But again, the important part is not who they personally were, but the crushing defeat that the right suffered, from which they still did not recover and largely did not even realize what happened. This does not portent well for them for 2024 - even if Trump manages to gather enough votes to overcome the Dem machine efforts - which, given how actively he is promoted by Democrats, is not out of the realm of possible. That I can testify to myself - a year ago, I was very reluctant to the idea of voting for Trump, given his previous record and present behavior. Now, I am thinking I may not have any other choice. Not that my vote would mean anything, living in a deep red state. But the bad news is even if Trump is elected, his election would not be recognized by the left, and he will spend another 4 years fighting trench warfare against the Deep State, collecting more impeachments that any president ever lived, and achieving absolutely nothing. Maybe he'd appoint some good judges. Maybe.

If by taking over the world you mean make someone a lot of money by catering to the needs of a number of people who for various reasons prefer masturbation to the real thing, or are forced to resort to masturbation for the lack of access to the real thing - then yes, that is definitely going to happen, and probably soon. If you mean it'll meaningfully replace real human relationships - not likely. For some people, maybe, but not nearly for all people.

I'm not sure they aimed exactly at that at the start, but they certainly tried to paint Trump as criminally complicit - I mean, they impeached him for that (though failed to convict, as expected). But a near-term strategy has been to delegitimize and suppress any right-wing popular protest, and scare away any legit right-wing politicians from supporting any populist movements or anything at all that has to do with the electoral system. Which has been executed very successfully. Removing Trump from the ballots is the later addition to the strategy and reeks of desperation a bit, since they can't really prohibit the GOP from nominating Trump, and they can't meaningfully influence his electoral college numbers that way - he is not going to get deep blue states anyway. But they can make a platform for refusing to recognize the election result in the event he wins - in the words of one Peter Strzok, an insurance policy. I am sure it's not the only one that is being brewed up right now.

Your country is not founded on the sole primacy of might.

The founding of the country was a long time ago, and the current powers on the Left consider the founders to be irredeemably evil racists, whose legacy should be wiped out. So I don't see how you can expect them to operate within the same ethical framework as the Founders did. In fact, we know they aren't - a lot of heinous crimes are easily justified by the Left as part of "decolonization" and "resistance"- why you expect they would make any exceptions for their ideological enemies? You can consult your modern history textbooks to see what the Left does to their ideological enemies when they get to power. None of the dead old white patriarchal male chauvinist pigs and none of the old parchments would stop them from doing the same. They openly and explicitly rejected this framework already.

I'm not sure what "even Jerusalem Post" adds here. JP does not have any sources besides Hamas' reports. Nobody does. They discount it in certain way, but it's just baseless and unverifiable assumptions, I don't see why it should be given more weight that anybody else's. Are you able to find any substantiation to these figures that ultimately doesn't converge on believing Hamas' word?

I don't have any independent sources either, I just do a rough estimate based on what I learned about how much they are willing to lie. Like, if Israel attacks a building and they say 10000 people died, nobody is going to believe that - too much. But if 5 people died and they say 50 - there's a chance that goes through. Saying something like 7 would be pointless - too little added, saying something like 500 would strain the credibility too much, probably - the real multiplier is somewhere within those bounds. Of course, I have no means to accurately estimate it either beyond that.

I don't think it's "stupid". I think it's a power move - showing that in fact those who want the monuments to stay are not "fellow citizens", but a disgusting basket of deplorables, and moreover, that the opposite side is feeling so strong they do not need to hide their sentiment anymore, neither out of respect nor out of practical necessity.

then they should have been permitted to leave and set up their own nation

But why would they be permitted anything? That would require considering them equals and peers, entitled to the same rights and freedoms as everybody else. But they are not, they are a disgusting basket of deplorables. They are not permitted anything except to shut up and be thankful they are not being sent to reeducation camps. At least not yet.

Because if you go the "we won, bitches, bend over and take it" route, then you are setting up for more civil wars

The Left feels they own pretty much every institution in the nation, and the right owns what? A bunch of rednecks with guns in their basements? They spoke openly and repeatedly at how they consider it to be laughable against the power of the government. And they are not entirely wrong in that. The Left has been willing to apply both chaotic power (antifa, BLM, now Hamas support gangs) and the lawful power (look what happened to Proud Boys and Jan 6 protestors) very forcefully and successfully, and the Right, with all their bragging about how many guns they have, has not been able to do jack about it. So no wonder they are very confident about pressing further, and are totally unafraid of any escalation. They feel they can handle anything, and easily.

I wonder why places where people live are called "towns" in Lebanon but "settlements" in Israel.

insisting that Hezbollah withdraw thirty miles away from the border.

Actually I think this is a mistake here - 30 km or 18 miles. This is not a random number - that's where the Litani river is - and by UN Security Council Resolution 1701, Hezbollah is not supposed to have any military presence south of Litani. Of course, Hezbollah has been blatantly ignoring it all the way since 2006, but now Israel is insisting on finally implementing this decision.

20k in Gaza

It is important to note here that the only source for this data is Hamas, these numbers are not verifiable outside Hamas, and people giving those numbers are the same people that told us there were over 500 casualties from an Islamic Jihad rocket falling on Al Ahli hospital (they said it was Israeli attack) which was a complete fabrication. Moreover, they declared the number within less than a day (which would be utterly impossible if they actually counted anything). Given that absolutely no identity information is disclosed about any of the supposedly deceased (except Hamas terrorists high profile enough to deserve official acknowledgment when they are eliminated) - not that, again, it'd be possible to verify that information outside Hamas - a smart person would consider these numbers with enormous amount of skepticism. The real number is probably around 10x less.

No, it's not. It's actually full of lies. Palestine part being just chock full of it - in no way it happened like it's described there, that the Arabs just peacefully sat there and were unprovokedly attacked. And phrases like "The British handed over Palestine, with your help and your support, to the Jews" can't cause anything but a bitter laugh from anybody that knows the actual history of the question - the Jews had to fight the British bitterly to just get the partition agreement (which was basically "the Arabs get all that they managed to capture by now and the rest goes halfsies", except even less fair) - which Arabs soundly rejected and went on genocidal offensive against the Jews, because they thought why share anything if we can just murder them all and take everything? By the time, btw, they had several massacres of the Jews under their belts. I am not implying they may not have some legit complaints - in a multi-century conflict, everybody has something to complain about - but presenting it as "they just attacked peaceful us" is a humongous lie. And anybody who believes it does not understand anything in the history of Middle East and is not qualified to have their own opinion about current or future events there.

Of course, his ethnographical and anthropological exercises are pure ideological bullshit too, but that's expected. What's unexpected is that anybody on the West - who actually have access to the wealth of historic sources - can buy it. But I guess since "education" now means learning each other's pronouns, I should't be too surprised.

The next fallacy is "you steal our oil". The actual picture is exactly the opposite - if not for oil, nobody would care even a tiniest bit what Arabs think or what happens to them. If not for Western glut for oil, none of the rich Arab states - and none of the personal riches of his own family - would exist, and none of them would have even the tiniest bit of influence on the world's events that they have now. The only underlying reason why any of it is possible is because the West is sending torrents of money and resources towards the oil-extracting nations. Now, it is true that most of these nations are shitholes in a myriad of ways, and the torrents of riches are distributed among a limited number of powerful people (Bin Laden family soundly in the middle of it) while the rest of the people are kept miserable and oppressed. But it's not the West who oppresses them - the West gives them, collectively, way more than enough resources to make a good living. It's their own political system that does it to them.

Then there's a magnificent switch - while the West gives us money, which are stolen by our own leaders, it's not any of our fault, it's the West's. However, we on the other hand are entitled to murder anybody on the West, because unlike us, who are not responsible for absolutely anything that happens in our shitholes, everybody in the West is responsible for what happens to us. You can't have any more self-serving and psychotic world view - and yet somehow it's "reasonable argument"? Not in a world where "reasonable" still means anything.

Interesting is the mention of Sharon there. As some of us know, Arabs are very salty about Sharon because one Arab faction killed a lot of Arabs from another Arab faction in Lebanon (which is a pretty routine occurrence, but this time there was a way to blame a Jew for that, so it goes into history book as an unique and singular atrocity that the likes of it never happened before). He is also the guy who evacuated Jews from Gaza and gave it to Arab self-government, who promptly elected Hamas to manage it. You can witness how it worked out in real-time now. All this bullshit about "if you just leave us alone with our Sharia we'll be peaceful" was tested by Sharon himself - and as everybody but the idiots expected, it turned out to be a horrendous lie, which cost Israel over a thousand lives, unspeakable suffering and continues to extract its cost, and will cost more lives and suffering inevitably. Of course, Sharon had an excuse that he may have not known that it's what would happen. We do not have this excuse. And yet, some people still call it "reasonable".

I admit I have to skip a lot of drivel about how we're supposed to be good people and then maybe the warriors of Islam won't murder us (lie: they would anyway), but did I miss any other "reasonale" argument? I don't think so, but you are more then welcome to formulate it and point it out to me.

I was distracted lately by other events and did not follow Karabach matters that much, but do I understand it right that there wasn't a major fallout from this beyond Armenian population moving to the mainland Armenia? No mass casualties, no genocide attempts, the casualty numbers are relatively low. Pashinyan seems to be OK with taking the L and putting the matter to rest, and despite some protests, his position seems to be shared by the majority in Armenia - even if they are understandably not happy about it, they are willing, at least for now, to let it go. And if Aliev is content to not escalate it further, e.g. by cutting through Armenian territory to Nakhichivan, the matter could actually get settled?

To assume that groups like "all Jews" or "all capitalists" have a lot of common interests and their intersection is substantial and brings them to concerted action is quite contrary to observed evidence. Jews are notoriously disagreeing on pretty much everything - thus the saying "two Jews - three opinions", including such things as if Israel existing is a good thing (there are Jews that think it isn't, as we unfortunately just recently confirmed) and a myriad other lesser issues. Same for capitalists - judging by the donations and public expressions, there is a capitalist behind pretty much every ideological stance (including, mind-bogglingly, one that declares capitalists should be shot and their wealth should be taken away). In this situation believing in such concerted action requires going against a lot of evidence and experience.

However, if we take the government bureaucracy, evidence suggests they frequently act in concert, these actions are frequently not in the interest of those who they nominally serve, and these actions are frequently aimed at increasing their power and almost never aimed at the reverse. In this situation, believing that they are "deep state" requires dismissing no evidence and embracing all of it. There's the difference.

But it's not "something else entirely". The only change is that a) it's not secretive and b) there's no explicit plotting as designated activity, otherwise the claim is the same, the result is the same. And I would claim most "conspiracy theorists" would agree with me that this is an acceptable description of what they claim is true about the deep state. If you ask any of them "if we assume all you say about deep state is true, except for the secret plotting part - there's actually no any documents called "plot" and all the actions are taken in the open - would you say it confirms what you thought or overthrows it completely?" - I think nearly every one would say "confirms".

It is obviously false that there's an organised secretive organisation embedded in the government bureaucracy that's plotting to subvert democracy and implement their own nefarious and evil agenda.

If you remove "secretive" and replace "embedded in" with "which is", and also replace "plotting" with "acts as" - why it is obviously false? Especially if we assume their own agenda is to grab as much power as they possibly could and never let it go and never allow any restriction and reduction of their size and their influence? It's not obvious to me at all that this is false. It certainly looks consistent with the empirical data.

For one InBev that kinda sorta noticed there are Nike, Target, Disney and many others that keep being relentlessly woke.