Lurker > videospirit

ssjevot posted...

The UN has never been concerned about democracy and the security council was established to prevent a war between the major powers. Also China claims to be a democracy and a dictatorship at the same time:
Article 1 The Peoples Republic of China is a socialist state under the peoples democratic dictatorship led by the working class and based on the alliance of workers and peasants.

The socialist system is the basic system of the Peoples Republic of China. Disruption of the socialist system by any organization or individual is prohibited.

Promoting self determination is one of the UN's core agendas. It's why they've gone so hard on decolonization among other things and why appearing democratic is important for nations of the world today.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


Is this just training for them or what?

Dark_Arbron posted...

It hasnt really been true since, what, 1942?

Off the top of my head, the American navy docked in pearl harbor got wrecked in December 1941.

divot1338 posted...

lol a Russian survey

Yeah, even when foreigners are the ones conducting the survey, I'd be suspicious about the accuracy.

You see it when people show videos where they interview Russians on the streets. They get nervous and paranoid. A lot of them are just going to say whatever they think Putin would want them to say.

Humble_Novice posted...

https://twitter.com/LuxintN7/status/1718746944250466629

I mean, it's different if the state supports the protest or not.

The guns are only 1 factor among many, they're all problems.

The two state solution's problem is that it expects joint governance over some places like Jerusalem.

Two states that don't have to work together in harmony would be a hell of a lot easier to implement.

Take it to arbitration, put forth a two state solution, if the Arabs don't agree, give Israel full control of the jointly governed territory. If the Arabs agree but Israeli's don't, give the Arabs full control of the jointly governed territory. Boom done, problem downgraded from unsolvable clusterfuck to two hostile states.

FlyEaglesFly24 posted...

I would like to counter with a couple of points. If we are going to get bogged down into particulars, technically no one has a legal claim to their own land. International recognition is a convenient lie created after World War II where basically the world decided that mankind had seen enough imperialism. So its like that famous line in Kingdom of Heaven. No one has claim, all have claim.

That's true of any law. But while the law isn't always enforced, when legal action is taken against someone it's in line with the law more often than not. That "convenient lie" is convenient indeed as well. It controls the narrative, greatly reduces conflict. Scares countries into doing jank stuff like regime change instead of outright trying to annex other countries into themselves like they used to. This "Convienient lie" has real power, even if only because we give it that power ourselves.

I would also like to point out that international law only exists when the P5 of the UN Security Council wants it to. There are literally hundreds of examples of situations where if international law were enforced consistently by the UN without a respect to national sovereignty that leaders of major countries would be prosecuted by the ICJ for war crimes, including every US President since the formation of the UN.

If Israel came up to the UN and said "This Palestine business is a mess. Please arbitrate what Israel's borders are so we can settle the issue. We don't care what the Arabs do with their land or how many states they carve out of it." The UN would oblige. Palestine's approval doesn't even matter. The simple truth is, Israel wants this conflict to continue, because they're likely to lose land if they ever go that route.

So I still think its reeks of hypocrisy that any of the P5 think they are in any position to impose a peace deal on anyone. The fact that Hamas is leaning on Russia and China for support while Israel is hiding behind the US is proof of that.

If the P5 worked together the issue would be solved even without Israel's cooperation, but that's no solution because you can't magically make the P5 work together for world peace and I can't bring myself to blame them. Israel on the other hand bears full responsibility for their refusal to seek arbitration. The Palestinians aren't in any position to do so, and aren't currently occupying any territory that they'd need to cede if an arbitration did happen regardless.

ssjevot posted...

I am not staying he shouldn't have been allowed to tell the story. I am saying she told the reporter about the doxxing and harassment. Him (or more accurately the people defending him) say it was her own fault she got doxxed. He provides part of some e-mails and talks about using the actors for Netflix (while avoiding talking about the earlier real photo from the actual article). It's weird that we know he is providing a one sided and biased narrative, but we just assume it must all he true and she brought this onto herself without hearing her half. Unless she goes out to speak about this herself, we won't know, but I think it's really weird we just assume his account is fully accurate. Not to say I think the journalist was fully accurate, we all know how they can be selective about or even falsify information. I don't think he should be cancelled and I don't care if he makes up stories for comedy. I just feel bad for the woman who got doxxed and don't think this video is the slam dunk he did nothing wrong evidence people are making it out to be.

It's definitely the slam dunk "The new yorker article is not in any way credible" he's making it out to be. Which is all he was going for with his video

Whether or not he's completely innocent is another matter, but he's made a good enough case that we should doubt every single thing the New Yorker article wrote, and we definitely can't believe anything the new yorker article merely implied.

And really, you don't need to prove you were innocent, you just need to prove that someone else hasn't proven you're guilty, so your complaint is a distinction without a difference.

I mean, we haven't even really heard "Bethany's" side of the story. We've heard a tiny few snippits of what Malone says is "Bethany's" side of the story without source, and we've seen what Hasan has said is "Bethany's" side of the story with source, but "Bethany" likely doesn't even want to put her face out there and talk about this so I wouldn't expect her to take a stance directly.

I'll just say that I trust the New Yorker's presentation of "Bethany's side of the story" as much as I trust their presentation of Hasan's side of the story, which is, not at all. The New Yorker is not a credible source. I'd be interested in their transcript(redacted to remove identifying personal information) of their interview with "Bethany" though, since their article itself can't be trusted at all.

ssjevot posted...

You originally said you didn't think anyone was doxxed at all. I only feel bad for the woman who got doxxed. I don't care about the journalist or the comedian.

Yeah, it's a bit unfortunate that she got doxed from one of her own tweets, but I'm not sure how much I blame Hasan for that. He seems to have been pretty sporting about it. Should he not have used this true incident at all in his comedy act? Would it have been fine only if he didn't lie about it being the day of rather than a couple days prior to the night of the prom(I'm pretty sure any criticism "Bethany" has received has almost nothing to do with that distinction)?

ssjevot posted...

The dox situation was that she was doxxed. And he has provided no information suggesting he had permission to use the photo. Why do we have to assume her story is false and his is true?

Investigating the situation the best I could. It sounds like she got doxed in 2014 because of a tweet from reddit posts I could find referencing it, had nothing to do with the photo. Which also explains why he showed evidence of him warning her about some of her tweets and her thanking him since as someone close to her he actually knows the circumstances of her getting doxxed.

Also, wtf do you even mean "Her story is false and his is true"? Are you talking about Clare Malone the shitty journalist who wrote the hit article about Hasan? She's not even claiming that the evidence Hasan has presented is false.

And nobody asked him whether he had permission to use the photo or not and using the photo isn't what he was getting criticized for, but seems strange to imagine he didn't have permission by default.

ssjevot posted...

It's in the original New Yorker article. She says she was doxxed and harassed. In his response video here he says he used an actor for the Netflix series. That's a key point. Because it was never claimed she was doxxed from that. It was from his standup where he used an actual picture of her (with her face blurred).

I copied the relevant part:
The woman also said that she and her family had faced online threats and doxing for years because Minhaj had insufficiently disguised her identity, including the fact that she was engaged to an Indian American man. A source with knowledge of the production said that, during the shows Off Broadway run, Minhaj had used a real picture of the woman and her partner, with their faces blurred, projected behind him as he told the story.

I mean, we already know that the new yorker article is written in a way to cause people to make false assumptions, so whether that real picture had anything to do with her getting doxxed is completely unknown because the new yorker article did not say that's how she was doxxed, and the new yorker article didn't explain it either.

If he didn't get her permission before using that photo, even blurred, that's a problem, but if he did get permission I see no issue with using it. Still not sure what the dox situation is.

ssjevot posted...

I don't think he should have a used a real picture of a woman he didn't date. People doxxed her. The worst part were claims of racism when she's married to an Indian.

It's okay to tell stories as part of a comedy set, but using a real person, and misrepresenting them, is not a good idea.

Can you source that? I'm having trouble figuring out if a woman was doxxed at all and how it happened if so. He has provided evidence that he's taken efforts to protect her identity, but didn't discuss if she was doxxed in the end at all.

Also your comment is confusing, did a completely different woman get doxxed who he chose to act the part or something?

FlyEaglesFly24 posted...

Peace that is forced upon people never lasts. There is no chance in hell that this has a chance to solve the problem. You still have two peoples that live side by side that hate each other. Good luck with that.

All you are asking for is dead peace keeping troops and more terrorism.

Hard to call neighboring countries "side by side". And while I seriously doubt it ends tensions in the area, it at least improves the situation to the point there are actually sides that can negotiate a peace and there are international laws that can be used as a guideline to structure said peace. Currently Israel only exists on paper. It has no legal claim to any territory, same with Palestine only it's even less of a state than Israel. These people hate each other too much to resolve this willingly, so a resolution needs to be forced. At that point defying that resolution is defying international law and we know how to handle that defiance. If Palestine wants to be a rogue state once they become a state they can be treated like a rogue state. Even a second North Korea would be an improvement over Israeli occupied former protectorate of Palestine.

willythemailboy posted...

You have a very interesting take on history. It's not at all reflective of reality but it's definitely an interesting head canon.

In reality, Arab and Jewish Palestinians have been fighting since before Israel was officially a country.

Certainly weren't firing rockets at Israelis to start with. There was a civil war in the former protectorate of Palestine after the British pulled out and put in an anarchy. The Israelis came out the more advantageous of the two factions, than the Israelis occupied the rest of the former protectorate of Palestine in a later war, and have continued to occupy that land ever since. There was no formal acknowledgement of a state of Israel. Israel arguably doesn't even have a single piece of de jure territory. The Palestinians definitely didn't start the Israeli occupation.

So until that initial oversight is corrected, trying to solve the rest of the conflict is pointless, because we can't treat it as two belligerent states in conflict with each other until 2 states exist.

thronedfire2 posted...

...you're kinda leaving out the parts where Canada got 4 other countries to go to war with the US

You say that like you believe the Palestinians convinced 4 countries to invade and occupy Palestine.

willythemailboy posted...

If Canada had a history of launching rockets into the US with the intent of killing American citizens, the US would absolutely be justified in destroying the ability to manufacture and launch those rockets, including blockading any imports to Canada to prevent rocket components from getting in.

Now say, Canada did not have a history of launching rockets into the US, they just ruffled the US feathers with some statements without action and the US invaded and occupied Canada and started settling Canadian land with american citizens and pushing Canadians farther and farther north . Would Canadians be justified launching rockets into the US to try and drive them out of Canada for their unprovoked invasion?

Because that's the situation you've got in Israel/Palestine

willythemailboy posted...

The stated goal of Hamas - supported by a majority of the populace as per polling data - is that they want to expel the occupiers of Palestine and turn it into an Islamist state. They conveniently give their proposed borders for their version of Palestine which just so happens to be Israel-shaped. Go figure.

Distinction without a difference. Israel is already justified in returning fire.

And what is your point? If Canada suddenly put out a statement that they believe the United States should be made part of Canada, would the United States be justified in occupying and annexing Canada?

The Palestinians opinion of Israel is irrelevant. All that matters is whether they're obeying international law or not, and defending themselves from a foreign occupation is perfectly legal. Their desire to conquer said foreigners is irrelevant and hardly actionable for them without consequence. You can't use your predictions of their future course of action to justify Israel's wrongdoings.

willythemailboy posted...

It's not that there are Palestinians who refuse to be part of Israel, it's that there are a majority of Palestinians (in Gaza, anyway) who refuse to accept that anyone be allowed to be "part of Israel". They have made it quite clear - the general populace, not Hamas - that the only acceptable borders are "all of it" and that it is to be an officially Islamic state.

A distinction without a difference. What does it matter what Chile thinks about who is allowed to be part of America? What does it matter what Palestinians think about who is allowed to be part of Israel? The only thing that matters to this conflict is that those Palestinians themselves are not willing to be part of Israel. What they feel about other people is irrelevant to finding a solution beyond "A joint government with both of them being in charge of holy sites is impossible"

Nothing would change in that "solution" other than who is enforcing the border. The terror attacks would remain because now the entire international community would be part of "the Zionist conspiracy".

Except it would be a completely different kind of conflict. If, once they've been given a state of their own, they want to go to war with Israel, Israel would be completely justified in returning fire. The current conflict is a resistance movement against an apartheid state. The end goal desired by that resistance movement is hard to empathize with, but a resistance movement is completely justified.

willythemailboy posted...

Israel is about 20% Palestinian and they exist peacefully enough in the same territory. Some even serve in the IDF.

The terror threat isn't coming from the Palestinians living in Israel. The threat is coming from the Palestinian population that never accepted Israel's right to exist.

Yeah, which is why Israel should not be in charge of people who hate them and think they should not exist. The Palestinians who refuse to be part of Israel need to be given their own state, and Israel is not qualified to determine what their borders will be unilaterally. The Palestinians also refuse to accept any kind of deal.

So the only solution is to have the international community force arbitration on them and have the international community decide what the borders are unilaterally.

willythemailboy posted...

Your best solution is something you know one side will never accept? Or are you so ignorant that you think they will accept it if rammed down their throats hard enough?

Both sides only need to accept it if you want them to work together peacefully. If you give the two states their own distinct borders that aren't shared governance it frames the conflict in a manner that can eventually lead to peace and the international community knows how to deal with making it no different from any other territorial dispute.

Honestly neither side particularly needs to accept it either, you can ram it down both their throats.

The only reason this conflict is so complicated is because neither Palestine nor Israel have borders and are forced to exist in the same territory.

Yeah, a milder peanut allergy for 500k I might do(I eat peanut butter quite often and my favourite candy is peanut butter cups so I might not even for that price since it still means I stop deliberately eating peanut products), but that's not enough money to compensate for a severe peanut allergy imo.

Form an international commission to determine what the borders of Israel are than sanction Israel if they don't withdraw from foreign territory and station international peacekeeping forces along the border for 10 years on the Palestine side.

TheDurinator posted...

The combination of proportional delegates+superdelegates exists to make sure your vote doesn't matter and party bosses always pick the candidate but people keep lapping that shit up.

Said as if superdelegates have ever mattered.

I wonder if there's some degree of "People see stuff written by ChatGPT, and emulate the style" going on too.

UnfairRepresent posted...

In an unexpected move, the Pentagon is diverting a sizable cache of 155mm artillery shells, originally meant for Ukraine, to Israel.

That's a weird way of phrasing "US Decides to leave Artillery shells already in Israel in Israel instead of transferring them to Ukraine amid tensions."

It's kind of funny that Russia thinks the west is so adhd that a conflict in Israel would make them forget Ukraine exists. It's not like the situation in Israel is really anything new either.

And it certainly won't distract Ukraine itself.

Humble_Novice posted...

I take it this means Poland will continue to support Ukraine with donations and funds?

https://twitter.com/BrexitBin/status/1713638242229043345

Those don't look like final results but assuming the exit polls match final results probably.

Questionmarktarius posted...

If someone is playing with coke and grenades on a plane, it's not really all that important exactly who.

How the fuck would Putin even know if they were doing that. There's no witnesses to tell him what was going on on that plane. "They were fucking around with hand grenades while snorting cocaine" is quite the leap. Even if that had been the case, how could you claim that with any level of confidence?

But I suppose it shouldn't be surprising that Mr. "He fell out of a window and landed on a bullet" is bad at making plausible cover stories.

Gobstoppers12 posted...

Nobody said it would happen in weeks, but Russia is absolutely feeling the burn of all the sanctions.

I mean, if every country in the world shut Russia off instead of just the pro western ones Russia would be pretty fucked.

Russia's military industry has been hamstrung though for sure.

ROBANN_88 posted...

A correction on an article i shared here previously

https://www.reddit.com/r/UkrainianConflict/comments/16coh19/correction_10yearold_ukrainian_boy_thrown_off/

Didn't that kid have a whole bunch of his friends back his story up? hardcore effort to get out of punishment for playing in the mud if so.

streamofthesky posted...

Hmm...

So Ukraine shot them down, and they were close enough to the border that parts of the drones landed there?

s0nicfan posted...

With regard to Russian defensive lines, it's probably worth pointing out that some analysts have highlighted how Russia's mine laying approach is a double-edged sword. Because they dump mines indiscriminately and don't keep accurate maps, it makes it extremely difficult to advance, but also extremely difficult to maneuver in defense.

Basically, in an active desperation prior to the start of the Ukrainian offense Russia basically made it impossible for them to move forward from their defensive positions... But also in between any layer of defense that has mines in the middle. The trade-off is a much slower offensive than people were expecting out of Ukraine as they're forced to probe every inch of land they want to take because mines could be anywhere.

Yeah it sounds like the mines are slowing Ukraine to a crawl and not much else is slowing them down other than walls of bodies.

Has Russia had success anywhere since Wagner took Bakhmut? All we hear about lately is them losing battles bit by bit.

Questionmarktarius posted...

That works?
Are the mines giving off residual heat, or just react funky to infrared?

Even for five minutes, the video is still cursed by youtube meandering.

It's a similar principle as water temperature is different from air temperature when you want to go to a beach so you need to check what temperature the water will be rather than just looking at a basic weather report. The mines absorb heat more easily than the ground does, so they show up clearly on infrared on hot days.

TheHorus posted...

The minefields the Russian forces made may be backfiring on them.
https://twitter.com/randymot4/status/1693947661425004893
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/russia-s-desperate-mine-defenses-may-backfire/ar-AA1fBn3o

Maybe not backfiring, but minefields certainly are less effective when your enemies can easily map you retreating through them and copy your route.

Is there no one else they can hire to replace spaceX?

Sahel posted...

https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/a44737062/spider-boots-may-save-ukraine-from-russia-mine-warfare/

So those are exclusively used by their sappers? They can't just outfit a team of infantry with them and march through an active minefield.

Not that you'd want to step on a mine even with those on your feet.

Sir_Will posted...

Windows and radiation are out. Putin's all out of ideas.

Hey, No reason he can't get some Polonium tea in prison.

SgtBash posted...

How hard would it be to put electronic jamming devices onto a drone?

Like so they could get as close to their target and unleash a lethal payload?

I'm no expert, but wouldn't that interfere with the pilots ability to command the drones?

If someone was legitimately pro-life, fullstop, no hypocrisy, I'd accept that.

Any kind of exception without being at least somewhat pro-choice(Basically, if you have no restrictions on abortion before the point of viability that is pro-choice enough) and you're almost certainly a horrible person.

s0nicfan posted...

I misunderstood your point. I thought you were talking about russian troll farms for social media. The ones that tend to go into high gear whenever something bad just happened to Russia. Not the serious political commentators.

Aren't a lot of the troll farms foreigners anyway? I thought they set up in the balkans and the like?

Yeah, hadn't factored in the number of people fleeing Russia, but the claim I was skeptical of was Russian war Commentators getting dumber because the smarter ones were theoretically all getting drafted.

Somehow that demographic doesn't seem like the type to flee the country though.

The casualties on Russia's side can't be having that big of an impact on a societal scale can it? I'd think it would take at least a million casualties to have a massive societal impact in a nation with like 160 million people unless the people they're targeting with their draft have an outsize influence on society.

Xenogears15 posted...

You may be thinking of a bunch of spies and intelligence assets of the US that got disappeared in China. Happened before Trump and was due to a turncoat agent.

He's probably thinking of
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/05/us/politics/cia-informants-killed-captured.html

ROBANN_88 posted...

I've been suspended from r/AskaRussian like 3 times now.
This is the first time i've been banned from the whole site

All i did was mention that submarine commander that just got shot on his morning jog, and suggest it should be repeated more, in response to someone asking what Russians who are pro-Ukraine should be doing.
Somehow they took that as a threath.

At the very least it's calling for violence.

Although not sure that restriction should apply in a freaking war.

Georgia does have access to the black sea and from there the Atlantic so there's no reason they couldn't join NATO.

streamofthesky posted...

Damn, Toblerone is my favorite chocolate
Farewell...

I think Oreo is a bigger concern for me since I've only had Toblerone like once in my life.

I don't consume Oreo stuff that often either mind, but cookies and cream is my favorite kind of ice cream, and the generics have pretty much been completely eliminated by Oreo ice cream in most stores. But if I do get an ice cream craving my second favorite strawberry is common as fuck so even that is no big loss, and I've never personally bought the actual straight up Oreo cookies, only eaten them when other people buy and share. Maple cookies, or the ones with fruit jelly in the middle are what I buy if I ever have a cookie craving.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


I mean, part of that is western governments fault for pressuring ukraine to only attack targets inside their own borders.

Debateable. Putting an outright cap on wealth would have side effects on the economy that we can't really predict because we don't have any data on that scenario.

That said, we can definitely make it harder to get super rich, and that is easily proven to be good for the economy, but making it literally impossible is sketchy.