JarJarJedi
Streamlined derailments and counteridea reeducation
User ID: 1118
JarJarJedi
9mo ago
Poland must be “reminded” its western territories were “gift from Stalin”, says Putin
Lukashenko claims Poland is trying to annex Ukraine, Wagner troops want to invade
Just a reminder where Putin's eyes are looking at when/if he's done with Ukraine. We've been through this scenario before, where Putin prepared the invasion of Ukraine for 8 years, absolutely in public, never hiding his intentions, always claiming Ukraine is a fake state, ruled by illegitimate regime and must be liberated - and yet everybody was so surprised when the invasion actually happened. And yet, lots of people are lecturing me all the time about how Putin didn't actually want to do any of that and was forced to do it by "Western meddling". I don't expect many people to change any of their conclusions from this round of saber-rattling, and I don't also expect Putin to invade Poland tomorrow (or this year, or anytime before Ukraine situation has resolved one way or another), but the time may come to be oh so surprised again, because literally nothing pointed to this next move by Putin. And I am sure if that happen, the "meddling" will be blamed again. I certainly don't want to see this happening, but as things are going now, I am afraid I might.
JarJarJedi
10mo ago
US military offers immigrants fast track to citizenship in effort to boost recruiting
I have some thoughts about this.
First, this looks suspiciously like textbook "How to lose your empire in five easy steps" guide:
-
Have your citizens grow fat, lazy and unwilling to risk their lives, especially in far away wars that they see no benefit from anyway
-
Hire strong and hungry barbarians to serve in the imperial military
-
Have the barbarians realize they are now doing most of the work holding up the empire together, while not getting commensurate benefits, which go to the fat and lazy citizens instead
-
Have the barbarians take over the reigns of power
-
The empire suffers bouts of "bad luck"
-
The historians write "Decline and fall of the $EMPIRE"
(Side note: since we live in the clown world, I feel compelled to add a disclaimer that the word "barbarian" is used in purely descriptive, not pejorative, meaning - as "somebody who is not part of the imperial culture" - and, in fact, for the purposes of this definition, I am a barbarian myself and many of my friends are Barbarian-Americans)
Second, we have been actively sold the notion that DIE efforts in the military are vital if we want to keep the recruiting targets and the strength of the military. I do not see this idea being empirically confirmed, and what is even worse - I am not seeing anybody even interested in empirically confirming or disproving it. I expect that from the left - you don't seek an empirical confirmation of your religion, you already know it's the true faith. But I would expect people on the right - and I mean all those talking heads, think tanks and high-flying politicians - be interested in figuring out whether DIE actually makes the army stronger - and if not, pushing that fact hard. I don't think I am seeing this. For the most of the 20th century, The Right sleep-walked into giving up almost every major societal institution to The Left's takeover, but I'd expect at least they'd put up some fight for the military. Doesn't seem to be the case. Is it that the only thing that can get people really caring nowdays is when a piss water manufacturer offends them? I'd say the military going woke is a bigger deal than piss water going woke, but I don't see the red tribe treating it this way.
As a Hegelian synthesis of the above, the third thought is that the barbarians should be, at least at the start, the least woke part of the society. Thus, them joining the army in large numbers (provided that indeed happens) should constitute at least a temporary impediment to the further assimilation of the military into the woke collective. However, again, I see very little interest - at least where I could observe it, maybe I'm not looking in correct places? - in the red-tribe thought to exploring this opportunity and building some kind of "welcome wagon" track to ensure these people will join the Right Side and vote accordingly once they become citizens. I am not sure how it should look like, but that's what these "think tanks" are for, aren't they? Do the thinking thing and figure it out. Or at least try - I don't see the trying, really. Am I wrong here?
JarJarJedi
11mo ago
Something I've seen today:
US Navy Used Drag Queen Influencer To Attract A ‘Wide Range’ Of New Troops As Recruitment Plummets
So, admittedly, I do not know much about the recruiting to the Navy (or any other military branch) and as a first generation immigrant, may misunderstand some larger things. But does it really make any sense to anybody else? I mean, sure, there are people that choose to lead this lifestyle, and I personally have no problem with that. But I always thought the intersection between them and the people that go to the military - and also the people that the military actually wants - is if not zero then small enough. And yet, this is what is happening, and I am struggling to make sense of any of it.
As I see it, the military is probably the last place that would be under pressure to go woke - the Left hates it unconditionally and passionately anyway, it is impossible to "cancel" it in any meaningful way, you can not really orchestrate an ideological boycott against the military (they have trillions of dollars, and most businesses would give an arm and a leg to be a military supplier, as I understand... maybe Google can afford to choose, but even they at the end are glad to be friends) and the advancement system does not really depend on the SJWs in any way up to the very top where only the very few get the chance to be anyway.
So, I see only these possible explanations:
-
Army recruiting is stunningly incompetent and literally has no idea what they are doing and why, they literally are desperate to try absolutely anything, on the tiny chance it may work, because they are completely out of ideas and can not think of anything that would attract the youth to join the military anymore, so they are just running through the options, however bizzarre, because it couldn't be any worse than it already is. Are things really this bad?
-
It is part of some kind of 4D chess complex strategy that I fail to understand because I am too dumb. Please ELI5 it to me then.
-
I am stunningly ignorant and there's actually a huge untapped reserve of drag queens that dream about joining the Navy (and the Army, and the Marines) as long as their penchant for womanface performances ceases to be a barrier. This is so significant audience that the need to address it absolutely overrides any negative effects that can be caused by such outreach effort to traditional macho-man audience which has been the traditional target of the military recruting efforts before. Is that the case? Any data I could see that supports it?
Any other explanations?
JarJarJedi
11mo ago
A bit different angle of culture (and maybe culture war?)
This guy has all the money. He could have built pretty much any house people can build. He chose to build that. Do you think it's beautiful? Would you dream, if you became wealthy beyond your wildest dreams, one day live in a house like that? If you don't think it's beautiful (I must admit I don't) - is this example for all of us that material possessions are not that important and you can spend a wild amount of money, get an ugly house and still be happy with it?
JarJarJedi
11mo ago
2023 World Science Fiction Convention is scheduled to happen in Chengdu, China - as I understand the first in-person Worldcon since the pandemic. The reason why it's in CW topic is because one of the guests of honor is Sergey Lukianenko, who, besides being a mid-grade SciFi writer (his early works are decent, his late stuff is IMO garbage), is an active supporter and propagandist for the Russian war in Ukraine, hating Ukraine so much that he prohibited translating his books into Ukrainian (I am sure Ukrainian-speaking culture is doomed now). If one needs somebody to embody a militant Ukraine hater, who denies the nation's right to exist, claims the whole national claim is fake, the language is broken Russian, Ukrainian government are Nazis, puppeteered by the West, the whole nine yards - he's the man.
Predictably, this did not sit well with everybody. Somebody, representing "Polish fandom", even started a petition to rescind the invitation. However, given as it is unlikely the Chinese organizers didn't know who Lukianenko is and what his views - which he is actively and loudly voicing - are, and general stance of China towards Russia, I do not think anything would happen.
I wonder how would this play out. I used to hold Hugo's in high regard a while ago, but given the wokeisation and politization of everything lately, I don't really care anymore. But I heard WSFS are pretty woke, and so I wonder how it would sit with some of them to appear on the same scene with an actual fascist for once. I am not sure what is the function of the "guest of honor", but obviously the distinguished position alone, in any other setting, for an US person of similar views, would trigger them immediately. And, for various reasons, being Ukraine-friendly is in fashion with the wokes for now. But, the wokes appear to be very deferential to China in general, and maybe they could just pretend nothing is happening. After all, Disney literally filmed a movie with the concentration camps as the background, and everybody pretty much just shrugged. The various Puppies have also a chance to point at this as an exposure of the hypocrisy of the wokes (as if we were short of examples otherwise?) - would they use it?
The other guests of honor are Cixin Liu (who earned the honor, I think, and being Chinese, probably is appropriate figure to appear in this position) and Robert J. Sawyer, a Canadian writer of whom I know virtually nothing, except watching Flashforward (did not read, but liked the idea), and praise by Orson Scott Card, which I value very highly (so maybe I should check more into him?). I wonder if he has had any thoughts on the matter either?
JarJarJedi
11mo ago
Something I am still struggling with - shouldn't a Marine know how to hold/disable somebody without killing him? I know next to nothing on Marine training, but I imagine there are situations where you want to capture the enemy soldier (e.g. to interrogate him later) and there must be ways to hold somebody relatively safely to oneself without choking them to death. Am I wrong? Also, being a Marine, he should have known what a long chokehold would do to a person. Did he mean to kill the guy? If yes, did he not foresee killing a guy in public in this fashion - after he is clearly subdued already and not presenting clear and present danger - would end up in serious charges, especially in New York? How did he expect this would end up?
JarJarJedi
10mo ago
Those in favor argue that any non-violent offender would be offered a lenient deal.
Is that true? Would a random citizen from Sticks, IA get a "diversion program" if he violated firearms laws, while on drugs, didn't pay taxes for several years and also has been involved in a million-sized international bribery scheme, and there were actual multiple witnesses and documents confirming it? Or would he been sent to jail for many years? "Non-violent" alone doesn't cut it - Bernie Madoff didn't hurt a fly, violently, as far as we know it. If the answer is the latter, then we have a problem. We have a two-tier justice system, which is extremely hardcore and unforgiving for plebes and soft and gentle for patricians.
the other side argues that since the facts of the cases do not map 100% perfectly to this one
No two cases ever map 100%. Still, a competent and experienced person would be able to estimate what the prosecution usually requests in similar cases - and, in fact, there are multiple guidelines and procedures about establishing the punishment for such cases. There's certain wiggle room when it comes to plea bargaining, but these things are not arbitrary.
Was this action fair, in an ethical sense?
Absolutely not. Biden got a sweatheart deal, and he got it explicitly and brazenly, to show us all - again and again - that the elites are above the law, and that even is the case where the crimes are known, well documented and undeniable, the Deep State would protect their own and ensure there's no consequences for anything, and they wouldn't even hide it too much, because what we're gonna do? Tweet harder about it? Produce more memes? Note that the main scandal - the bribery schemes - aren't even touched. We had multi-year multi-million hyper-hyped investigation of Trump over much flimsier evidence. Here all the efforts of the law enforcement so far have been directed to burying the case (and insinuating those that want to investigate are foreign agents, and getting them silenced) rather than investigating it. It's not even in the same universe with "ethical" or "fair".
Was this action within precedent
Mostly, yes. There is a long history of political favoritism and elites getting away with all sorts of criminal behavior. We like to pretend we try to do better, usually, but in this case all pretenses are being dropped and the corruption is shoved in our faces with all its naked ugliness. Half of the country is cheering it, because it's their team is getting away with it, so they "owned" the other side. The other half is seething helplessly, suffering what they must and being unable to change anything. This is a completely routine thing for many countries and times, and happened in the US before. It's not a healthy state for the society, it's not where any ethical person wants the society to be, it's likely to end badly and cost us a lot, but yes, it's "within precedent", just as crime and corruption are within precedent - Bidens did not invent either.
Do you think the choice to offer pretrial diversion was politically motivated?
There's an Arab (supposedly) parable: One asked a camel: "Why your neck is so crooked?" and the camel answered: "What in me isn't crooked?"
Of course it's politically motivated. Everything around Bidens is politically motivated. The question is what policy it reflects. The current development reflects the policy of "the elites are above the law". It could reflect the policy of "there are things that are too much even for a prince" (not likely, but could happen in theory) or even "the law applies equally to everybody" (rrrrriiiiight...) but it obviously didn't happen.
JarJarJedi
10mo ago
It probably bar them from explicitly instituting a policy that mentions race. But it won't ban something like "if you come from a community that previously experienced hardship and bigotry, and is under-represented in higher education, you get +100 points", while the determination of the "community" is such that nobody white or Asian would ever qualify.
JarJarJedi
11mo ago
You could frame the whole Renaissance as basically recycling the Greek/Roman culture, if you wanted to. Recycling is not bad by itself. I don't mind somebody making another Sherlock Holmes movie or a remake of Herbert Wells stories. Or even Hamlet, for that matter. Yes, it's not original, but it doesn't mean it's necessarily worthless.
But I think the decline in originality may be because the production is now controlled by a limited set of big corporations, and they would necessarily favor safe, data-driven approach. Can you prove, with data in your hands, that your new original crazy idea would make more money than Superheroes 28, take 17? Probably not. Superheroes it is.
It doesn't mean the new thing can't happen now and then, on shoestring budget just through the power of it's own creativity. Possible. But on the volume, it would be one such thing per several years, while 99% is the safe, data-driven shlock. And once that new thing comes up, it will be milked for the next two decades, turning it inevitably to the shlock too.
JarJarJedi
11mo ago
Some data about how oppressed the struggling worker masses are (https://variety.com/2023/biz/news/wga-contract-inflation-minimums-1235564920/):
The current guild minimum for a TV writer-producer is $7,412 per week. On a network show, the median writer-producer works between 35-40 weeks, for a total of $259,420 to $296,480, if that writer is paid minimum. Most experienced writers can negotiate something above that through their agents — and for showrunners and executive producers, it’s well above that.
Schedules are shorter on streaming shows, which produce fewer episodes, according to data released earlier this month by the guild. The median writer-producer on those shows works 20-24 weeks, for a minimum salary range of $148,240 to $177,888.
Staff writers — the lowest-level writers — do not get script fees, and they also earn significantly lower weekly minimums. The median staff writer on a network show works 29 weeks for a wage of $131,834, while the median staff writer on a streaming show works 20 weeks for $90,920.
In other words, their minimum wages are about 1.5x to 3x country's median wages for essentially half-time work.
I don't think it is bad for anyone to earn a lot of money, but given that the number of decent quality shows has been extremely low for many years now, and most of those that had decent quality have been based on existing literary work, what it seems to be there is extremely overpaid bunch of people producing a very low-quality product. Still, I am sure eventually they'd get what they want - this time - because AIs aren't ready to produce scripts yet. But in 5-10 years. given the immense savings it promises? I can totally see it.
JarJarJedi
10mo ago
I think the academia has been preparing for this for years, moving from "objective metrics with AA bias on top" (like SAT scores, but the passing score is different for different races) to "plausible deniable 'holistic' judgements" - where one can't really prove any bias at all. Yes, if you measure by any objective merit criteria, the bias is apparent, but you see, we're not using these criteria, we are using "holistic view", which does not explicitly name race as a factor, good luck proving in court we're using it heavily. They'll just start being more careful about that and develop a newspeak that ensures discrimination is called something else. If academia is consistently good at anything it is at producing impenetrable jargon.
JarJarJedi
11mo ago
I'm not sure what is the problem here, 100% of current US Presidents are exactly the group you feel "represents" you. So you should feel much more "represented" by it then "under-represented" by White House stuff, which mostly don't take any important decisions. Like, if the US President "represents" you but a janitor "represents" the filthy Jews, why you're feeling bad?
Of course, to some this approach seems utterly insane, as I don't see why any random Jew would "represent" me just because he's also a member of 10-million ethnic group, or why any random White person would "represent" any other random White person, just because they are both have pale skin and not happen to be Jews (I guess anybody with pale skin who is not a Jew is qualified as "founding population", right?). But I guess to some people it makes sense somehow?
JarJarJedi
11mo ago
Marines are trained to kill though
Yes, that's one of the things they are trained to do. But I really hope that's not the only thing they are trained to do. Knowing when it is appropriate and not appropriate to kill should have been part of it too.
but in a way that maximizes your safety and doesn't really take into account that you'll be fighting some drug ridden mentally ill lowlife but an actual enemy combattant.
How does it make any difference? I'm sure if you choke an enemy combatant for 15 minutes he'd die just as well as a mentally ill lowlife. Anybody would. That's what I don't understand - he knew what would happen and he must have had other options. Why did he choose this one?
JarJarJedi
6mo ago
I feel like moon landing or flat earth is a kinda weak conspiracy theory examples. For the method to be powerful it needs to be tested on something real and strong, not some fringe lizardman conspiracy theory that is proclaimed more for lulz than anything else. Let's go to Wikipedia and get some fresh, pungent conspiracy theories and see how many you can knock out with OCH. Note for the purposes of this experiment I trust that anything that Wikipedia would call a conspiracy theory actually is. Full disclosure: I personally believe some of these are proven facts, some of them are very likely to be facts but can't be proven, at least for now, some I have no slightest idea whether they are true or false, and for some I am convinced they are false, and only a kook could believe in them. I am not going to disclose which are which.
So, in no particular order, which of these could you knock out:
- There is a concerted sustained multi-generational effort from the leftists in academia, entertainment and other institutions to subvert and transform Western society to undermine traditional Western values and make the society accept Marxist values instead. Identity politics, political correctness, and other culture war phenomena are part of this effort.
- Obama have been born outside the US and his birth certificate was faked, and this fakery is supported by government officials for partisan political reasons
- North Steam gas pipeline has been blown up by Ukrainians or the CIA (or both in collusion)
- JFK was assassinated by the CIA, either controlling Lee Harwey Oslwald or murdering him by other means and framing LHO.
- DNC emails were leaked by somebody from inside of DNC and not stolen by Russians, but Russia was blamed in service of the political narrative.
- Epstein did not kill himself
- George Floyd died of drug overdose, but for political and ideological reasons his death was presented otherwise, and the following legal proceedings were heavily influenced by political pressure to produce necessary convictions.
- COVID originated from Wuhan Virology Institute, where it has been either engineered as bioweapon or modified for research and has inadvertently leaked out.
- Biden family had extensive corrupt business in Ukraine, China and/or other foreign countries, and Joe Biden has been personally aware and participated in it.
- 2020 election has had sufficient cases of electoral fraud to meaningfully influence the results
- Bin Laden was not actually killed but the whole operation was staged to benefit Obama politically.
- The federal government is purposefully sabotaging immigration enforcement in order to change the demographic composition of the country
- White farmers in South Africa are systematically targeted and attacked, to drive them out from their land
- COVID mRNA vaccines have dangerous side effects well beyond recognized by current medical establishment consensus, and the reason for this lack of recognition is political or financial
- Global warming is not as big of a threat as presented by most climate scientists, and its threat is being exaggerated for political and ideological reasons, while any research suggesting otherwise is being actively suppressed.
- Vaccines have meaningful casual connection to development of autism but the medical establishment is concealing this fact, for either pecuniary or other reasons.
- Accusation about Trump being in collusion with Russia has been fabricated by Clinton campaign with no evidence, and has been supported by the intelligence community for partisan political reasons.
- COVID deaths were systematically overcounted to create the atmosphere of panic and enable drastic measures the politicians wanted to take
- There exists a phenomenon called "deep state", where most of top federal government officials do not represent the will of the electorate and do not serve the interests of the people and the good governance, and are largely out of control of elected nominal leadership, but instead are concerned with extending their power and their political influence, and perpetuating and enhancing their control over every aspect of the society. The "deep state" is generally aligned with Democratic party and largely hostile to the Republican party policies.
- Antifa is an organized violent leftist movement with cohesive political goals, organizational structure, financing, recruiting and support networks, membership, goals, and not a vague idea of "opposing fascism" that anybody could use - and routinely does - as a mask.
- Violent leftist movements are funded by certain very rich people (such as George Soros, but not exclusively) in order to affect massive political transformation in the US.
- There exists a massive pedophile network encompassing large number of members of the political elite, which use pizza symbols to communicate and are involved in child sex trafficking. Discussion if this fact is forcefully suppressed by the members of the elite.
- On January 6, there was a large number of FBI (or other law enforcement) agents in the crowd, which played significant role in instigating the violence and provoking the protestors into lawless actions.
- US or some powers within US (e.g. CIA) purposefully provoked Russia to instigate Ukraine invasion and begin a large war, in order to profit from it and increase its political influence.
- UFOs - or at least some of them - are of extra-terrestrial origin, and certain officials in the government are in possession of the conclusive evidence of that fact but are hiding it, for selfish or political reasons.
- There exist governmental projects for clandestinely implanting RFID chips or similar technology into humans, without their consent, for purposes of tracking, identification or others.
JarJarJedi
9mo ago
But I think it’s beyond clear that Poland couldn’t be conquored by Russia
Whole Poland? Probably not, at least not in the near future. But some borderline territories, for starters? Say, the corridor leading to Königsberg, now known as Kaliningrad? Why not. Do you imagine President Ocasio-Cortez sending the best US troops into the harm's way to defend places with names like Szypliszki and Stańczyki, which no CNN commentator could even pronounce - especially if it comes with the risk of global nuclear war? I think a lot of people would object to that.
JarJarJedi
10mo ago
Unfortunately, yes, some of the right-wingers have the right instincts but are profoundly ignorant about the actual facts and events, especially about places like Russian and Ukraine. So they choose on the basis of "if Biden says Putin is bad, then Putin must be awesome based dude, let's worship him". And "if Biden says there's war in Ukraine, it's all fake and there's no war at all". It is a very sad reality. I hope these stupid guys are a minority, because otherwise the US politics would be completely depressing sight for a foreseeable future.
JarJarJedi
10mo ago
I wonder how the disclosure of Covid origins information became right-coded.
The Left committed early to the "bat soup" theory and declared anybody who doubts it racist, and instituted a censorship blockade of any opposition (or even critical discussion) to this. While they were forced to roll it back a little because dissent went high and wide enough in scientific circles that it wasn't possible any more to block, the initial commitment still weights heavily on the topic, and was not acknowledged as wrong even at "mistakes were made" level, and this colors every critique of this position as attacking the Party Line.
JarJarJedi
11mo ago
Because an army of mindless psychopathic murderers is a bad way to conduct wars. And releasing them into society when they're done service would be even worse.
JarJarJedi
11mo ago
why I’m a grown man who let myself be treated like a pathetic plaything by individuals who are my social and biological inferiors in every imaginable way
This part sounds bad. I am not sure whether you intended it or not, but it sounds like you'd be ok if you were humiliated by you social or biological superiors (wtf is that anyway? More Aryan? More muscular? Longer dick?), but the fact that wrong people assaulted you is upsetting. I don't think it is a very good position.
JarJarJedi
7mo ago
If you are in some city away from home, and you have a free afternoon and want some entertainment, what do you usually do?
Due to certain circumstances, I have been traveling a bit lately, and sometimes I have some free time that I wanted to occupy by e.g. seeing some performances or listening to live music or something like that. So far what I did has been occasionally successful (seen a good play) and occasionally failed (couldn't find anything worthy). Complicating condition I don't want to see (or, consequently, help with my money) anything related to agenda-pushing or wokeness. Several times just opening the site for some local theaters was basically a huge turn-off because it was so full with woke jargon that I couldn't trust them enough to go for anything. Other cases, I am not sure how to evaluate e.g. local bands - there are a lot of them and I have no idea if any of them would interest me. I would like to improve my search quality if possible.
So, what would you do in such situation (beyond the obvious like google, reddit, etc. searches)?
JarJarJedi
10mo ago
that were far more explicitly formulated on a racial or ethnic basis
Were they really? As far as I know, Romans didn't have the racial hangups Americans do, and in general most empires were quite tolerant to who they include. That's kinda the point of the empire - to assimilate as much of the other people and territory, and it's easier to do if you don't have weird hangups about skin colors. Of course, xenophobia and kinship existed since forever, but in somewhat different form than now - scientific racism with all its theories is quite recent invention and couldn't exist before the modern era.
It is true that in some empires, there were limitations (including ethnic) on who could be in the topmost levels of power - e.g. among Mongols, only a direct descendant of Temujin could be a ruler - but I think if you go down the pyramid a bit, it was much less restrictive.
But let's not pretend that this is some "clown world" shit, and that everyone in a "saner" world would understand that you weren't trying to insult those who are the "barbarians" here.
So, after I explicitly told you I am not trying to insult, you are saying "no, I know better than you, you actually are!". Of course, you are much better expert on my intentions and thoughts than I am, so I must defer to you. For you personally - please feel free to be as insulted as you like. This post is not for you anyway - you already know what I think, and intend to ignore my actual words about it, so it is a waste of time for you to actually consider anything I say, you can move on directly to being insulted and not bother to actually try to understand what I meant. Too much work, I understand completely.
JarJarJedi
11mo ago
Training them back into being normal citizens is something I'm not sure to even be possible.
Why not? They are not killing any person they encounter at random. They are killing who they are ordered, when they are ordered, and in a manner they are ordered. Otherwise they're not an army, they are a horde of psychos. Why would it be impossible to order them not to kill civilians?
but fucking with him is a deadly business and likely always will be
As I understand, the wacko in question did not even pose an imminent danger - certainly not to the Marine, but also not to anybody else. He disturbed the peace, was stirring shit up and was running his mouth, but he was not actively trying to murder anyone, and especially not Penny. So it's hardly "fucking with him".
JarJarJedi
11mo ago
I think it's neither. Bud Light was a special case where significant percentage of consumers were in the anti-audience for the message, and the alternatives were readily available. For most products, either the first (like the movies, for example) or the second (like the sports - you can't just switch to another NBA on the next shelf really) is not true. So, it kinda was a perfect situation for a successful strike, but this kind of situation wouldn't present itself too often, and so far most of other woke megacorps are as woke as ever. So it's a tactical win in a skirmish with favorable conditions, which says little about the outcome of the war. It's surely nice to get a win once in a while, but don't order the champagne just yet.
JarJarJedi
11mo ago
A lot. There are different ways to hold people. Source: 15 years of martial arts training. I don't claim I would have done better in this situation (one reason I moved from California is to reduce the chance to ever find myself in such a situation) but I know there are other ways than chocking the daylights out of a person. That's why I am wondering why he decided to do what he did.
Given how hard the US right is now pulling for "1. feed Ukraine to Putin 2. ???? 3. PROFIT!" - it's hard to blame Zelensky for betting on the other side. He has people's lives at stake. If sucking up to whatever Western weirdo is what helps to get weapons to save a thousand of Ukrainian lives - worth it thousand times over. I mean, the US red tribe can't be both "fuck all those guys over the border" and then be wondering "why those guys over the border suck up to Democrats?!" Because that's their only option, if the right says upfront they want nothing to do with it. Ukraine is toast without Western help, they just don't have the resources to fight Putin alone, especially given they can't afford to get a million of their own killed people like Putin can. So yes, sometimes it would look stupid. Sometimes it will be stupid - desperate people don't always look very attractive.
More options
Context Copy link