Coming from my perspective a little. Iran is a part of BRICS now and Lula has defended Iran in latest interviews. Let's see how things develop and if Iran representatives will come to Rio (for the BRICS Summit). This is troubling.
So... Once Iranian government falls. Who's going to prevent the terrorists from going into Iran spread there? The new government is probably too weak, Israel probably don't care anymore and will focus on clearing off Palestine. So the US probably got handed off this hot potato because, if no western countries is doing it, China or Russia will come in and cause chaos later.
So the US probably got handed off this hot potato because, if no western countries is doing it, China or Russia will come in and cause chaos later.
Is this a joke? Western imperialist states entering would create chaos, while China and/or Russia entering would be stabilizing. Iran, China, and Russia are major BRICS partners, and have shared regional security interests.
Who do you think organizes, funds, trains, and equips the various groups of Salafi jihadist terrorist groups that wreak havoc in Western and Central Asia? The United States, with some assistance from Israel and probably the UK. The US has wanted regime change in Iran ever since the puppet regime they installed in the US-orchestrated 1953 coup was overthrown in the 1978 revolution. The US has wanted to regain its imperialist control of Iran for the last 47 years.
[H]ere’s the step-by-step process summarized: 1. A strategic country is selected as a target. 2. Stories start being fed to the media about human rights abuses or just concerning developments (lack of democracy, dwindling economy, etc). 3. To help lay the basis, the government may make official reports the media can then use. They might also use humanitarian NGOs (Amnesty, HRW…) or outright CIA outfits (World Uyghur Congress, Radio Free Europe…). 4. Stories start coming out more and more often. The volume of coverage regarding the target country becomes much bigger than before the campaign. 5. At the same time, groups and individuals in the target country, that have been funded by the imperialist country, are being put in the spotlight. They have been groomed for years, laying somewhat dormant until it’s time to activate them. 6. Stories about these groups call them champions of democracy, freedom fighters, etc. A clear limit is drawn: they are good people, and the government that’s preventing them from achieving their policies are the bad guys. This is the basis of a color revolution. 7. Slowly, public opinion starts to shift. We don’t necessarily act on this opinion yet though, we plant the seeds to make later consent easier. Each seed makes the next one easier to plant and grow. 8. The imperialist country continues the campaign but also starts small, probing actions to see what it can get away with. It might enact sanctions or query the UN for intervention. It will also call these acts “moral” and underline that they are meant to sanction the country until it becomes a democracy again, further digging the good vs. evil line. 9. Meanwhile, everything the target country does to prove its innocence and lawful conduct is not published or gets blocked (e.g. request for a UN delegation visit). Their point of view is never printed in the media or if it is, only when they can spin it in a good way. 10. Slowly, regime change is brought up. Subconsciously at first (e.g. “China would be free if it wasn’t for the communist party”, which implies destroying it and the system it built). Later, it can be more overt (e.g. Iran). 11. Finally, consent has been manufactured and public opinion has completely shifted on the target country. People come to see invasion as the only solution, and they will happily support it once it happens. It may not happen for several years though, as material reasons might not make invasion possible. Sometimes, a color revolution (which is mostly carried by nationals of the country in question but funded and trained by the imperialist country) is the best thing we can do.
. If the operation succeeds:
If the operation succeeds, a pro-US dictator will be ‘elected’ or seize power. The election will be called fair and democratic, as was the case in Ukraine 2014. This president will be paraded around in the West and become a media figure that everyone comes to know. This is what happened to Zelensky, but also to Pinochet in his time and Juan Guaido.
Inside the country, everything gets privatized and sold to US and European companies under the directives of the dictator. This is rarely talked about or if it is, it’s presented as banal — e.g., “Ford to open factory in Argentina”. Quality of life plummets, actual humanitarian crises start, etc.
The media still publishes stories on the country, but always in a good light, and not as many as during the operation. They might sometimes call to unrest in the country but always as a distant, abstract phenomenon.
As long as the dictator plays by our rules, the country keeps being talked about positively. As soon as he starts to become too independent, we will use the chaotic post-coup situation to repeat the process with a new President.
The reason that our media have incessantly repeated Iran-backed this, Iran-controlled that for decades is to convince us that Iran is the big bad guy behind the small bad guys terrorizing good guy Israel.
By now it should be obvious that Israel never was the good guy. Israel is a US-backed genocidal, fascist, settler-colonial state seeking Lebensraum for a Greater Israel. And the supposed “bad guys” have just been trying to survive under threat the of the small imperialist state, Israel, a state which only exists thanks to significant, continued support from the big imperialist state, the US.
General Wesley Clark 📺
That is why Iran accurately, metaphorically calls the US the “Great Satan” and Israel the “Small Satan”.
Profitez des vidéos et de la musique que vous aimez, mettez en ligne des contenus originaux, et partagez-les avec vos amis, vos proches et le monde entier.
Sometimes I say "libs think imperialism is when any country does anything outside of their border except for western ones" and think I'm being ridiculously hyperbolic but god damn if there ain't a lot of y'all who do think like that
Last time USA attached Iraq, the instability generated in the region boosted ISIS and created terrorist attacks waves in Europe, killing hundreds (on top of all the dead people directly impacted in the country attacked of course).
So cool, here we go again thanks to the US people who are not fucking able to use their brain when voting.
Researchers are developing a living material that actively extracts carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. Photosynthetic cyanobacteria grow inside it, forming biomass and solid minerals and thus binding CO2 in two different manners.
From my understanding, websites can access both the timezone of my browser (without using javascript) and the timezone of my local machine (using javascript). my question being - If a website has access to my local machine's timezone, does it mean it has access to other information on/about my local machine? - According to Privacy - How can I hide my "timezone" from sniffing sites? - Super User, we must disable JavaScript to block timezone access. However disabling javascript is not really feasible as it breaks most of websites. Is there a workaround that allows us to block JavaScript from running specific commands? - Maybe my understanding of JavaScript is incorrect, but if a website has the privilege of running any program on my computer through the web browser, it can retrieve all the information it needs. If I don't disable JavaScript while using the browser, I don't see the point in resisting fingerprinting, like spoofing my device info.
Firefox has a fingerprint resistance setting that sets the clock to UTC. It messes up a lot of sites. There's 10 million people in my timezone so I just leave it.
is it possible to - disable permission for a software running on local machine from attaining local timezone and other information? (like firewall or something similar) - disable permission for a website from attaining local timezone information passed to the browser inside browser using browser extension?
I believe Librewolf and Mullvad Browser change your timezone, either to UTC or to Atlantic/Reyjavik (for some reason; probably a bug on my end). Tor Browser likely does the same, but I'm not sure.
Browsers (except for Tor) doing this in the name of privacy is so dumb. Our timezones are already apparent due to our IP addresses. Not only does this not hide the timezone but also makes the user more fingerprintable. Now I'm the dumbass from Ohio who's browser reports UTC timezone for some reason.
In this video I discuss the viewpoints of the Green Party on several different topics. We first look at an overview of the fundamental views of the party itself, including their 4 Pillars. Then we talk about their stances in the following areas:
Profitez des vidéos et de la musique que vous aimez, mettez en ligne des contenus originaux, et partagez-les avec vos amis, vos proches et le monde entier.
It would be hilarious if Trump's, Israel's and Iran's actions end up triggering significant climate action out of the sheer cost of continuing to burn oil. The last fuel crisis in the 70s actually caused significant amounts of research into alternatives and some interesting electric vehicles were actually released during that time
Hate to be that guy but -> "Total global Civilizational Collapse by 2050" is being tossed around. And going by the past absolute fuckery of prediction skills, that means we got at best till 2040.. No history or historians, just slow climate death and extinction for all.
Doubt it. Climate change is already happening, but we can mitigate its effects the earlier we tackle it. Plus, no idea who is floating the collapse idea around.
PNAC gets its way in the end, despite at least 40% of Trump's rise to political prominence being due to him being one of the few Republicans to criticize... you know, all the pointless meddling and wars in the ME.
... And Trump is almost single handedly responsible for all of this.
He tore up the nuke deal Obama made. He massively mismanaged every element of the Israeli/Palestine situation. Fucking stepson Kushner's gonna figure it out, don't worry.
Oh yeah lets piss off everyone and move the embassy to Jerusalem.
Beyond contemptible.
The man is a demon.
Kefka?
Is Trump Kefka, or is that an insult to Kefka?
Fucking childish demon clown that just wants to blow up the whole world so he can feel special.
It's the perfect crime. They bombed nuclear sites, which means there are going to be radiation spikes regardless of what kind of bombs they dropped, which means they could drop small nukes and probably get away with it.
The Fordow site is simply under too big of a fucking mountain for even our largest conventional penetrator bombs to actually significantly fuck up... unless you basically were able to pull off multiples of those bombs hitting the exact same point from nearly the same angle...
GPS guided bombs are accurate, but not that accurate... you'd have to throw like 20% to 40% of the entire US stockpile of these fuckoff huge conventional penetrator bombs to literally dig a hole through the mountain.
... Or, you drop one tactical nuke.
fucking not good
...
like this is what those air radar images were showing from 24/48 hrs ago.
That was probably the US's entire fucking B2 Bomber Fleet deploying.
...
EDIT:
Yep 24 to 48 hrs later and...
Apparently around a dozen 30,000 lb, GBU57s were used, there are at least 3 distinct impact sites visible from Sat Imagery...
And oh hey well, a whole bunch of people are now claiming that... did these do damage?
Sure yes.
Did they 'utterly obliterate' the entire site?
Not according to Israel, and a good number of others.
So... 1) thank God they did not actually use a tac. nuke.
2) Yep, they threw roughly 1/3 of our entire GBU 57 inventory at Fordow alone, and also the bombs were not accurate enough to inflict repeated, concise hits.
JDAM is supposed to have a circular error probable of 5m and it's an upgrade kit from 25 years ago. I can definitely believe that a much newer purpose-built weapon can do better than that. The idea of hitting the same spot with multiple bombs might not actually be that unlikely
That's not how it works. You can tell the difference between radiation from a nuclear weapon and a conventional bomb used on radioactive materials. If they used nukes they won't be able to cover it up for very long.
There's different isotopes in the fallout, different radio spectrometry or whatever, but I think they could lie and say that the reason it looks like a conventional nuclear weapon is because Iran was hiding a nuke and they blew it up.
Because nuclear detonations are very different to conventional ones, and every major power has satellites monitoring for them. They can’t be hidden. Hell, any university or weather service within 3,000 miles would be able to detect it.
Yes. Only in fantasy land. As Logi above said, nuclear detonation is an extremely precise, controlled process that has very specific conditions to achieve successfully. Even an actual fission bomb only manages to consume a fraction of the radioactive material.
The only thing someone would achieve by denotating a conventional explosive near a reactor or nuclear stockpile is spreading highly radioactive dust around. That does not nor will ever look like uncontrolled nuclear fission, let alone a detonation from a thermonuclear warhead.
The US doesn't have small enough nuclear penetrators to even try hiding something anyway, they can use tactical warheads as bunker busters but they can't be meaningfully hidden. Meanwhile all these Iranian installations have been built with conventional bunker busters in mind so the existing American GBUs that must have been used may not have caused much real damage after all even if they double tapped the exact same spot.
A nuclear detonation is a very delicate and precisely controlled process. It doesn't just happen because a bomb goes off near the nuke. So sure, they can say anything, but there will be obvious evidence.
Speaking of saying anything, I'm going to look for reliable confirmation that this even happened. I'm not taking Trump's fucking tweet for it.
Yeah but we have bombs that can do about what a small one would do without using radioactive materials. If they want to nuke them with Trump they'd go for something big and spectacular, like when he dropped the massive moab
If you are talking about conventional bombs that are comparable to a small nuke in a ground burst or air burst scenario, yes.
But not for ground penetration, no.
A conventional explosive displaces, creates a pressure wave that fractures and shatters things, but that pressure wave behaves differently when applied to different materials.
A nuke creates a ball of plasma that is so hot that it evaporates everything inside the primary blast radius, and then also a pressure wave when that miniature sun displaces things and wants to expand outward in every direction.
A 20 kt nuke will make an all incinerating fireball approximately 200m in diameter... so that means everything in a 100m radius from the point of impact, is now plasma... and then on top of that you get the massive pressure wave extending damage further beyond that.
Nukes are considerably more effective as deep pemetrator weapons than conventional explosives are.
The GBU 57 MOP, going off publically available info, can destroy earth (meaning soil) 60m under its point of impact... but only about 18m under reinforced concrete.
A mountain, with a reinforced bunker complex under it, is going to be a lot closer to reinforced concrete than it is to soil in some dry lakebed testing range.
And Fordow is roughly 80m, possibly more, underground.
So... the tactical nuke can basically guaranteed do that mission in one accurate hit, whereas with GBU 57s, you'd need a number of them, and you would have to basically drill a bore hole by dropping successive bombs into the same hole.
And uh, last note, the MOAB is just shy of 22,000 lbs, has a blast rating of about 11 tons of TNT. Its not a ground penetrator though, it is thermobaric, a fuel air bomb.
The GBU 57 MOP is a 30,000 lb bomb, and... rough math works out to about... maybe 1 kiloton, max, probably less?
I guess we'll have to wait for Warthunder to add the B2 and GBU 57 and then eventually someone will leak the real specs.
Hitting nuclear facilities with conventional weapons is just dirty bombs with extra steps. These attacks are a number of international high crimes, including the nonproliferation treaty.
Trump is not single handedly responsible for jack shit. Get the fick outta here with this great man theory nonsense. Almost every single democrat has been in lock step supporting this shit.
Hear hear. Great man theory is absurd. If Kamala was at the helm I guarantee it wouldn't be any different, only libs wouldn't protest because slay kween we came we saw he died
It is the superstructure, it is the machine of capitalism that needs to feed. Watch oil futures on Monday and remind me who is the greatest producer of crude and LNG today?
Yes, a lot of Democrats went along with the revocation of the agreement, and then failed to get a new agreement in place during the Biden admin, after Trump and the Reps also failed to get a new deal in Trump's first term, despite that being one of Trump's campaign promises.
But Trump, as the head of state, signed an executive memorandum that cancelled it.
Which is a thing that a US President can actually do unilaterally, whereas drafting or accepting a new deal, an international treaty, has to go through Congress.
Its... kind of a massive flaw in the US Consitutional framework, that a President effectively has an incredible veto power when it comes to international agreements.
Could/Should the Dems have reformed this, threw a massive shit fit about this?
Absolutely yes.
But in this particular instance... the whole scenario really actually does hinge on the President being singly able to do something extreme, with no real, effective, balanced check on that power.
I do not need to invoke or subscribe to Great Man Theory to point all this out.
Trump is a symptom of many greater, unchecked sicknesses and decay and corruption in American politics and society... he is simply the fraudulent idiot man-child r*pist that the masses of frustrated, hateful, intolerant, anti-intellectual bigots projected their yearning for spite and revenge onto, and empowered.
Can President Trump unilaterally withdraw the United States from any and all international agreements to which the United States is a party? This Essay argues that constitutional, functional, and comparative-law considerations dictate that the answer…
Its... kind of a massive flaw in the US Consitutional framework, that a President effectively has an incredible veto power when it comes to international agreements.
While the masses that supported the regime change in Libya that Obama and Hillary were pushing with straight up KKK level propaganda ("Gaddafi handing out viagra for mass rapes" + "Gaddafi recruiting mercenaries from sub-Saharan Africa" = real migrant workers from Chad were getting hanged from bridges by the "rebels for democracy") and is currently a slave market are what? Unfrustrated, tolerant, intellectual, classy liberals?
The entire US middle class on both sides turns to a cheerleader for the military industrial complex with only slightly different narratives to support it each time. The presidents are puppets of economic forces, snap out of it.
We need to figure out mathematically the human Swarm size needed (5million?) to converge at the White House and Congress and literally tear these monsters apart limb from limb. Enough of a crashing wave of pure manswarm to overwhelm these traitorous pieces of Nazi fucking trash! This needs to happen in every state. Burn this shit down, fuck society if it's going to be some half-assed stolen AI version of 1984 and dystopian insanity.
I love your solution-oriented mindset, but just feel the need to clarify one point. This is what the US has always stood for, it's always been a wretched hell-empire run by rich ghouls willing to drown the world in blood. Those of us who want to get along and not kill everybody, we're the traitors, just factually speaking. And that's a good thing
It's what allowed Bush, then Obama, then Trump, and then Biden, and now Trump again, to use the military as they see fit for performing military operations against basically any state and group in the middle east.
We've launched an unprovoked and unwarranted attack Upon A Sovereign Nation. Now's the Time For Peace. It's an amazing sentiment. It's like a school bullies who hits you and then says you can't hit me back.
Tell me you learned nothing from the Iraq War without telling me you learned nothing from the Iraq War.
Chris Hedges: War Deja Vu | The lies told to ignite the war with Iraq have been resurrected to ignite a war with Iran. The assessments of intelligence agencies and international bodies are dismissed, replaced by hallucinations.
Forget the intelligence community’s Annual Threat Assessment that “Iran is not building a nuclear weapon and Supreme leader Khomeini has not authorized the nuclear weapons program that he suspended in 2003,”
Weirdly enough that assessment says
In the past year, we've seen an erosion of a decades long taboo in Iran on discussing nuclear weapons in public likely emboldening nuclear weapons advocates within Iran's decision-making apparatus. Iran's enriched uranium stockpile is at its highest levels and is unprecedented for a state without nuclear weapons
Iran’s stockpile is still within the bounds allowed under the nonproliferation treaty that Iran, the US, and all but five UN states are party to. And given what the US and Israel have been up to in West & Central Asia over the last 23 years, why wouldn’t that public taboo have been broken?
Profitez des vidéos et de la musique que vous aimez, mettez en ligne des contenus originaux, et partagez-les avec vos amis, vos proches et le monde entier.
sigh, that settles that then. More blood will be spilt before any of this comes to an end. Shame, shame on all of us for allowing this to pass. May God have mercy on us all.
Its obvious our entire socio/political system is corrupted by money. The idea that a group of sociopaths who behave as if their socio economic status grants them impunity to act as though they have divine provenance to manipulate whatever they please for some reason view the us democratic system as too sacred for them to touch is foolishly naive.
There is the election fraud case in rockwell county new york that is moving forward. And besides that i like to call attention to Germany the supreme court of which decided that electronic voting is unconstitutional as it is impossible to determine the difference between fraudulent results and legitimate ones for lay people or anyone who is not a cybersecurity/ IT expert.
This coupled with the corporate media’s narrative manipulation and successful attempts to shift the Overton window as far right as possible in the last 5 decades as well as such insidious techno fascist tactics such as Israel’s consortium of tech contractors called Team Jorge in operation since st least 2015 which engage in hacking, and social media narrative manipulation through sophisticated bot farming it paints a picture that the American electorate is ultimately powerless and being insidiously controlled by a group of disgusting power hungry fascists that are engaged in a class war with us.
Anyone directly responsible for the current state of the USA and gloval affairs involving Israel deserve no mercy whatsoever. Including the overly audible minority of conservatives who have been lead to believe they are the majority and the world is their oyster to shit on and step on freely with complete impunity.
But the majority of us are good people who dont want this. Especially the millennials and gen z. The Democratic party has shifted so far right to appease it’s corporatist(fascist) masters and education standards have been gutted so most people dont even understand how we are being victimized. Maybe my faith in humanity is misplaced considering how igly things are but leftism has always been popular especially among educated people and this is why the right has destroyed education standards. As nixon and reagan advisor roger freeman said “we are on the verge of having a highly educated proletariat, this is dynamite! We have to be more selective of who we allow through higher education. At the time he said this before the Reagan administration some public universities especially federal Land grant universities has free tuition and many others that were not free were $50 per semester. Even yale was $700 per semester for tuition before the 1970’s now you need yo go into massive debt to get a degree that might gaurantee you a wage of $25-30 after you graduate with a debt of 50-100K at least if not 4-10 times that.
They want dumb complacent obedient workers who will not object to being looted so they can live in opulence at our expense while simultaneously funding their forever wars to further their imperialist agenda and profit motives.
You honestly believe that there is a peacefull path left at this point? The system is rigged by design, and you are not going to restore democracy in the courtroom.
Quit playing Martin and start playing Malcolm. Pick up a gun and kill your fascist leaders before they kill all of us.
'They' have been planning this strike in earnest at least since the early 00's, and war with Iran was always part of the plan to fully colonize West Asia. Israel is America's way to conduct proxy wars in the region, with a degree of autonomy like the Houthis and Iran, but still entirely dependent on their masters. Nothing was going to stop this expected geopolitical move, and don't think a Democrat would've done this any differently... didn't Biden say we would have to invent Israel if it didn't exist? (double lol on that one) The mechanics of the empire continue regardless of how things are managed inside...
Honestly in the time Trump went for those sites, it would've been the perfect time for Iran to conduct the most damaging attacks they have against Israel; like, just go all out and empty out their stocks. Trump's going to be too busy gloating about what he's done and will be expecting the news to be singing praises of him to allow anything Iran does to overshadow it.
Palantir, Meta, Microsoft are all going to control the world's armies. They're trying to remove the working class. The Rich are doing their own genocide of the working class.
Executives from high-tech firms Meta, OpenAI and Palantir are joining the Army Reserve at the rank of lieutenant colonel to serve in Detachment 201, a new “Executive Innovation Corps,” the service announced Friday.
I think we can expect Iran to just keep on fighting back, but who I'm REALLY looking at now is Pakistan. They said that if anyone attacked Iran besides Israel, they would enter the war on the side of Iran. Even if America's participation in the war stopped here (not fucking likely) if Pakistan follows through with their threat then this escalation really, honest to God, could be the start of WW3.
Because here's the thing: India has been trying to goad Pakistan into their own war for a few months now. So here's my prediction, although be warned it gets a little crazy after the first 5 points:
Pakistan attacks Israel as an ally of Iran
India attacks Pakistan as an ally of Israel
Afghanistan supports Pakistan with supplies and possibly troops, out of fear of India
Israel continues to pressure Trump, who supports Israel the way the USA (used to) support Ukraine. But direct action is possible, as seen today.
European support for Israel disintegrates, and they focus on Ukraine.
Russia declares support for Israel. Now Afghanistan has aggressors to the North (Russia) and India (South) albeit with a buffer country in both directions. They're highly motivated to support both buffer countries, but also wary of the USA coming after them (again).
Europe can no longer simply ignore Israel as it has become a second front in the war for Ukraine.
Kazakhstan declares allyship with Afghanistan because they understand that Russia has to go through them to get to Afghanistan and they really really don't want that.
Russian allies (Turkey, Belarús, Hungary) hamper the EU response.
Trump takes advantage and makes a play for Greenland and Panama.
NATO invokes Article 5 against the USA, uses this to justify attacking Russia (who is now aligned with the USA via Israel) directly IF they didn't decide to focus on America first (likely).
Canada is part of NATO, talks Mexico into joining against the USA because it's the only way they stand a chance.
China grasps at the opportunity to seize Taiwan and cement its claim to South China Sea.
Japan, South Korea, and most is Southeast Asia and the South Pacific band together against China to drive them out of the South China Sea and Taiwan.
Egypt and neighboring countries take strict control of the Red Sea, denying passage to ships belonging to Israel/Russia/China/et allies.
Ultimately, the two sides:
THE AGGRESSORS * Israel * Russia * India * America * Hungary * Turkey * Belarús * North Korea * China
THE RESPONSE * Iran * Pakistan * Afghanistan * The EU (and the UK) * Egypt and neighbors * Canada * Mexico * Japan * South Korea * Most/all of Southeast Asia and the South Pacific * South Africa
Oddly I see Australia sitting this one out, as their politics are far enough right to not want to go to war with their traditional allies (eg, the USA) but not left enough to support the response in any meaningful way. Something would have to force their involvement.
As for Central and South America, it's a mixed bag. Obviously some countries like El Salvador will support Trump, but I think most of them will defend Panama if they get involved at all. I certainly can't see Argentina and Chile being ok with just letting anybody pass Cape Horn.
Africa I just have no fucking clue. China has been involved in a lot of African countries in very big ways that the African countries aren't entirely happy about. They could take advantage of the circumstances to seize and nationalize Chinese assets within their borders, which puts them at odds with China/Russia/Israel/et allies and I think they would be pretty ok with that. South Africa in particular I think may take a more active role against the aggressors, given their position controlling the Cape of Good Hope.
Tldr if this plays out anything even remotely like what I've written here, and I really REALLY how it doesn't, we're all VERY FUCKED.
(This is a work of total conjecture, I'm probably wrong, so don't waste your breath telling me I'm wrong. That said some of my logic may not be obvious, so I'm happy to answer questions to clarify my thoughts)
Yeah and I just saw (after writing all that!) that Russia and China had warned the USA to not attack Iran, so I could absolutely be way off base there.
Edit: the logic had more to do with Russia's ambitions to reform their lost empire. Afaik it's widely believed that after Ukraine, Russia will go for Kazakhstan and possibly Afghanistan. It's less that I see Russia siding with the USA and Israel, and more that I think Russia will be opportunistic in its military expansion.
You're psychologizing. Russia as a nation does not have a psychological need to reestablish it's former Tsarist empire. It's entire aim militarily is to prevent encirclement by the US.
My logic was exactly what I said it was. I never claimed it was good logic. And I never claimed to be psychic and magically understand what other people's logic is despite them plainly saying their logic is something else. But if that's what makes you feel superior enough to get through the day then you do you.
I don’t think Russia currently has an interest in expansion. I already linked above to the reasons for Russia’s invasion, and they weren’t revanchism or Lebensraum, as Western governments & media claim.
It’s also often said that Russia is imperialist. I think that if Russia could be imperialist it would be, but since it presently can’t, it presently isn’t. Putin tried to join NATO once, to join the imperialism club, but the US rejected Russia, because the US wanted (and still wants) Russia Balkanized and re-plundered instead. Russia has figured out that it’s better off allying with Global South countries than attempting imperialist adventures upon them. And this war has accelerated that allyship.
It's not just conjecture, it's complete delusion. Pakistan never committed to put feet on the ground for Iran. It would be beyond idiotic considering the state the country is already in.
And even if all logic died and Pakistan somehow sent military support, Israel and the US are more than capable enough to handle it themselves. They don't need India's support and India, being the world's poster child for non-alignment, won't give it even if asked anyway.
It might be hard to understand but India has unironically been friendly with both Iran and Israel at the same time.
Now would be the time for you Americans to get your sacred guns out and eliminate your tyrannical goverment. Please act quickly before the fascist cunts get us all killed.
Iranies are not orange pigs posing as gods. If they promised it, they will stick to it, unless something truly convenient for them all is in the horizon.
I hope that Iran will make Project 2025's backers find out. Our bastard leadership think there are no consequences for doing evil and stupid things, and are in severe need of an attitude readjustment.
Iran would be perfectly within their rights to assassinate various US government officials. After all, that's exactly what the US and Israel have been doing in Iran.
Considering some rando nearly got Trump, and how the MAGATs have dismantled their intelligence apparatus and completely lack an interest in risk assessment...Iran actually has a decent shot. Literally and figuratively. After all, you don't have to ID yourself if you claim to be a member of ICE. Just wear a mask, don't use license plates, and carry weapons, you will look like every other random gravy seal.
It's obscene that the resistance forces need to keep appealing to international law in order to maintain credibility while isrl and the empire enact such wild and open terror and war crimes.
People fighting to liberate themselves from fucking nazis having to justify themselves to nazi sympathizers.
I know you meant that this could escalate to a long war that your child may eventually be drafted into, but my initial mental image was a battalion of toddlers each carrying a Fisher Price branded "Baby's First Assault Rifle".
I can't remember the exact context, but I made a comment to a friend that voted for Trump (now former friend) back in 2016/7 just after the election along the lines of 'if the country isn't a smoking crater by the next election'. I thought I was being hyperbolic.
What it costed Israel to make you do it and also announce it? A promised land of gazan golf courses or another Trump Tower there? I can't get how he is still breathing with everything that he did in his life.
Henry was clever and sneaky in his malice, like today's Thiel. The cheeto guy though pulls all the levers but dodges shit like he had 10 LUCK or something.
Please also make it wild as well, I really liked west world and that animation where Johnny depp is a chameleon in case you want some examples of what I'd vote for.
All US Marshalls will be androids, so you feel ok shooting them while living as an outlaw.
You will need a Bachelor's in some liberal arts degree to qualify for the outlaw profession. Outlaws pay taxes only every other year, and are categorized as "self-employed" so you have to track your own taxes.
Then, you're expected to topple your government, as much as you expect Iranians to bring down theirs. You're no better, expect you are on the dropping side of the bombs (and, sorry for the image, on the receiving side of Israel's dick).
Once you've done that and stop killing abroad, then you'll have some respect from the rest of the world. For the time being, no wonder airplanes inbound the US will stay half empty.
I think you're confused, I'm a communist, I despise the US Empirevand condemn the war. Further, Israel doesn't control the US, the US supports Israel because Israel is like a giant millitary base for the US to terrorize its geopolitical adversaries.
It'll be burger brained riots when gas prices skyrocket, that will probably be enough of a shock to break the regime and start a crisis. I joke, mostly.
When Bush got the US into a war in the middle east, he at least did it after a terrorist attack on the US (which had nothing to do with Iraq, but he was able to fudge that part), and as a result of the stupidity of Americans, he had a 60+% approval rating at the time.
Trump didn't even manage a false flag or anything, as a result, a lot of conservatives are pissed off about this. Probably not enough to crack the MAGA coalition, but every little bit chipped away from it helps. With margins in the senate and house so close, it's actually possible that he could be stopped by congress and the US doesn't become a failed state, instead merely becoming an illiberal democracy.
But, what I wonder is if this will actually win him any converts from the Democratic side. I bet there are ultra pro-Israel people who were formerly Democrats who actually think this is a good idea, and will now start supporting Trump. Still, I think he's going to lose 90 MAGAs for every 10 Democrats he gains.
The whole reason they're not doing anything is that the democrats (who might do something) are in the minority in both the house and senate, so what they can do (without breaking rules and norms) is very limited. The Republicans either don't want to do something because they support what Trump is doing, or they're scared to go against him.
If you get a dozen Republicans who are willing to go against Trump, suddenly the anti-Trump side has a majority, which gives them a massive amount of power to do something.
It was 90%. Only 10% of Americans were capable of resisting the massive propaganda apparatus that manufactures consent at the start of every war of aggression. Vietnam was also very popular at the start.
But you are right that he's doing this without a strong justification. From what I've seen, mainstream media is still on his side, they love war, great for business. Whether enough Americans have learned anything from the disaster of the War on Terror to make any sort of lasting dent in the number capable of resisting propaganda remains to be seen, you'd think Vietnam would have but it's always "different this time," and people are frequently "anti-war, except the current one."
I don't think the media is necessarily "on his side". When the media sticks to just reporting the facts, people interpret it as the media taking the other side.
Also, his approval rating never got up to 90%. It was in the 80s in the days after 9/11 (which was sickening) but it dropped pretty quickly, and by the time the Iraq war began it was back down to almost 50%. It briefly went up after the war started, but then kept going down and down until he finally left office.
Overview: Bush and Public Opinion As George W. Bush prepares to leave the White House, the United States is in many ways dramatically different from when
Your source says a peak of 86%, Gallup got 90% but either way it was an overwhelming majority.
The media told all sorts of lies to justify the war in Iraq, more recently, the New York Times published a false story about Hamas committing mass rape, if you want to go further back they lied to get us into Vietnam, and in every case it takes time for the lies to be exposed and by the time they are, fewer people see the retractions and it's usually too late to do anything about it anyway. Even when they aren't lying, they're using biased language and framing to push their agenda, and their agenda is, as I said, always pro-war, because war sells papers and if they're hostile to the White House (especially with Trump in there) then they'll get press passes revoked and won't be privy to information they would otherwise receive. Never in my life have I seen widespread media condemnation of any military action (unless you count the withdrawal from Afghanistan), and I believe you'll see the same thing if you look in the past, in conflicts like Vietnam. When Trump launched an unprovoked missile strike on Syria, during his first term, these people jumped over each other to praise him, to say that "that was the moment he became presidential," even publications that had been very critical of him before.
None of the media people (just like none of the politicians) were ever held accountable in any way for lying the public into a war, which set a clear precedent that they can do so freely going forward. Worse yet, it's often the very same people in similar positions of power. If you think that they're trustworthy and not biased, then I've got a bridge to sell you.
The media told all sorts of lies to justify the war in Iraq
A lie is something they were aware was not true and published it anyhow. What sources do you have that the media was publishing stories it knew weren't true about Iraq? What examples do you have?
more recently, the New York Times published a false story about Hamas committing mass rape
What story are you talking about, and what specific allegations do you think it got wrong?
if you want to go further back they lied to get us into Vietnam
You're saying the media knowingly made up stories because they wanted to trick the US into going to war in Vietnam? What specific examples do you have of that? Again, if this is your claim, it isn't enough to show that they got some reports wrong. It's not even enough to show that they printed some things that in hindsight they should have known were wrong. Your bar is to prove that they knew ahead of time that they were publishing things they knew were untrue and did it for the express purpose of trying to get the US into war in Vietnam.
I see what you're saying here: if the media prints lies from a government it's not the media lying, it's the government. If Israel says Hamas beheaded 40 babies and that's found out to be a lie, it wasn't the media lying about Hamas beheading 40 babies and so the media is entirely innocent of printing the lies fed to it by a government like Israel.
Here's the thing: if a government lies all the fucking time and the media keeps printing what the government claims anyway, then that makes them complicit in spreading the government's lies. We all know Israel's government spreads lies, so printing the lies it spread about Hamas is just doing the government's work for them. The media doesn't get to wash its hands of the things it prints just because it puts "Israel says" before the headline.
I see what you're saying here: if the media prints lies from a government it's not the media lying, it's the government
If the government manages to fool the media, yeah. If the government says to the media "the truth is X, but we're going to pretend that it's Y, so you print Y, ok?" and then the media goes along with it, then you can blame the media. In many cases, the media isn't able to fact check the things the government tells them. But, relaying what the government is saying is still important. Similarly, even though the media can't independently fact check the numbers that the Gaza Health Ministry reports, it's still valuable to have those numbers released too.
If the media is lazy about their fact checking you can call them lazy, but you can't call them liars, because lying requires knowing the truth and intentionally saying something untrue.
Here's the thing: if a government lies all the fucking time and the media keeps printing what the government claims anyway, then that makes them complicit in spreading the government's lies.
If the government says "the truth is X" and then the media says "X is true" then sure, you're right. But, if the media says "the government said that the truth is X", then it's up to readers / viewers to understand that the media isn't endorsing what the government said as being true, the media is simply telling you what was said.
The media doesn't get to wash its hands of the things it prints just because it puts "Israel says" before the headline.
Why should it need to wash its hands? That is exactly what Israel said. Because Israel has a complete ban on reporters in Gaza, for example, there's no way to corroborate or refute what Israel said. It's newsworthy to repeat what Israel said, but you can't blame the media when someone reads that and assumes that the government is telling the truth. As you said yourself, the government lies all the time, so why would you assume that "the government said X happened" means that "X happened".
Because Israel has a complete ban on reporters in Gaza, for example, there’s no way to corroborate or refute what Israel said. It’s newsworthy to repeat what Israel said, but you can’t blame the media when someone reads that and assumes that the government is telling the truth
If there's no way to corroborate or refute what Israel said, don't print what Israel said. Lies aren't newsworthy, except as a way to report on the lies themselves for the purpose of debunking them.
Remember when Israel first started bombing hospitals and blamed Islamic Jihad for it? They still don't claim responsibility for Al-Ahli Arab Hospital, but after a year of targeting hospitals and doctors it's ridiculous to deny it at this point.
Yet there were few retractions or corrections. As far as CNN and The Guardian are concerned, Israel didn't bomb that hospital. What a joke.
As you said yourself, the government lies all the time, so why would you assume that “the government said X happened” means that “X happened”.
I don't think people make that assumption anymore, but that's because people stopped trusting the media. They published and promoted so many government lies that they've destroyed their own credibility.
People expect the media to investigate government claims and to publish the truth, not just parrot the lies they're fed. When the media doesn't do that, when all the major news outlets become court stenographers, people lose faith in the media.
Maybe people are expecting too much, but that's what people have been taught to expect. They were taught that journalists find the truth and report on it. They're finding out that journalists basically just print what their sources say and they can't just trust things because they're in the news anymore.
If there's no way to corroborate or refute what Israel said, don't print what Israel said.
Why? What they said is newsworthy.
"Israel bombed this building"
"Why?"
"Dunno, didn't ask."
Even if you don't believe the answer, getting an answer is still newsworthy. Everyone should be aware that it's not necessarily the truth, but it's newsworthy as the justification they're using. If it comes out later that the building was an orphanage, you can't use that to challenge the government's justification that it was a command and control center if you never got them on the record saying they bombed it because it was a command and control center.
President Biden claimed former President Trump was "exaggerating" and "lying" about the crisis at the southern border during the first presidential debate.
Do you think they're so incompetent as to leave evidence laying around that they had advance knowledge? I wonder, if that's the bar you set for US media, do you also set the bar there for, say, Chinese media? If Chinese state media publishes something that's untrue, would you dispute someone calling it a lie if you didn't have access to some official document openly confessing to advance knowledge? Even if such records did exist, it's not as if I, a private citizen, could get a warrant to raid their offices for it. You're setting the standard unreasonably high, you're just trying to shut down reasonable skepticism and legitimate criticism in favor of blind trust. I mean, what kind of idiot would write down "I know this story is false but I want you to publish it anyway," and then leave it lying around where someone could find it, when there's absolutely no reason to?
Here is an Intercept article about the fake news story published by the NYT to justify Israeli aggression in Gaza.
You’re saying the media knowingly made up stories because they wanted to trick the US into going to war in Vietnam? What specific examples do you have of that?
That's not what I said at all. The US government wanted to go to war with Vietnam, the media simply wanted to win favor with the government and sell papers.
Were you aware that, in the aftermath of the Kent State Massacre, the vast majority of Americans placed more blame on the students for getting shot than on the National Guard for shooting them? Were you aware that, leading up to the shooting, there were all kinds of fake news stories on TV about how, for example, the protesters were putting LSD into the water supply? Stories that they conveniently retracted, after the moment had passed and the chance for a backlash was gone?
Anyway, the fact that they lie frequently isn't even the main point. The main currency of propaganda is not lies, it's emphasis. Biased framing and leading language are perfectly capable of shaping public opinion towards their agenda. Historical events that would justify or explain hostile actions of other countries are very rarely deemed relevant, and the same with internal politics that might show that only certain factions supported it. Our own crimes and acts of aggression are downplayed or ignored, so that when the other side retaliates, it seems to come out of nowhere.
For example, the 1953 coup in Iran, which was conducted by the CIA and successfully covered up for decades, demonstrates that even if Iran had a peaceful, democratic government, it would still likely be subject to US aggression so long as they tried to assert control over their own oil. The breakdown of relations in the 1979 revolution occurred when the revolutionaries took hostages at the US embassy, but what provoked that action was the US granting refuge to the deposed shah - the very same man who they had previously installed as a dictator in 1953. I think both of those events are very important to understanding US-Iranian relations, but you won't hear the news mention them, the hostage crisis is always presented as this unprovoked act of aggression.
This is just basic media literacy, really. You should always be skeptical and aware of bias and conflicts of interests with anything you read. Unfortunately, there's a tendency some people have to put certain sources on a pedestal as if critical thinking and skepticism isn't necessary when reading them.
I don't know, but it definitely seems like it. OTOH, it seems like journalists really care about the truth and bend over backwards to fact check things.
So, are you admitting you can't actually find a single lie told by the press?
So, are you admitting you can't actually find a single lie told by Vladimir Putin?
Where are you getting this, "seems like" he lies and "seems like" journalists care about truth and fact checking? Exactly the same number of "lies" have been produced for each in this conversation. I mean, I did link to a fake news story from the NYT but that doesn't count because I didn't break into their offices and find a signed confession.
You set an impossibly high standard for proof in the one case, but "seems like" is enough in the other, you're operating off pure vibes, or more accurately, your own bias and preconceptions, with zero critical thought.
But sure, I stand corrected, they didn't "lie" in those cases (since basically nobody ever lies, by your absurd standard), they just published blatant falsehoods at just the right time to advance their interests, then suddenly realized their "mistakes" as soon as what they wanted to happen happened.
~~Jesus loves me~~ The media is reliable, this I know, for the ~~Bible~~ media tells me so. Blind faith rivaling any Bible-thumper.
I have. I just can't meet an impossible standard of evidence that you're obviously selectively applying in order to exclude evidence that you want to pretend doesn't exist.
An impossible standard of evidence? You think proving someone lied is impossible? And yet, despite knowing you can't prove it, you want to throw around accusations that someone lied.
In that case, you're a liar. I don't need to prove it, because proving someone lied is impossible. I can just say you lied and then call it done.
And there's the double standard, plain as day. To call me a liar, you would need to prove not only that I said something false, but also that I had knowledge and intent that it was false. Short of a signed confession, you cannot call me a liar, because it's impossible for you to read my mind. Perhaps I thought there was proof when there wasn't. Isn't that what you're saying is true of the media, for example, with the fake news story the NYT put out? If anyone's a liar here, it's you, for accusing me of lying when you can't meet your own standard of evidence for making that claim.
There's no point in reasoning with you any more than there is in reasoning with any other religious fanatic operating on blind faith and refusing to apply reason, skepticism, and critical thinking. You've simply chosen a worse God to worship.
And there's the double standard, plain as day. To call me a liar, you would need to prove not only that I said something false
No, your new standard is "vibes". You have "vibes" that the media lies, so you get to call them liars. I'm appyling the same logic to what you say, liar.
No, I presented plenty of evidence. The problem is that you consider anything short of 100% to mean 0% (only when it comes to the media, ofc). Like, you're expecting me to be able to prove it in a court of law, but obviously there are a lot of things that are true where the evidence doesn't meet that standard. Even in a court setting, there are situations where they'd be concerned with standards like "more likely than not" or "reasonable cause to believe" rather than the standard you're applying of, "beyond any reasonable doubt," for example, if I shot someone in self defense, I wouldn't have to prove "beyond any reasonable doubt" that they were trying to kill me, only that I had probable cause to believe that was the case. "Beyond any reasonable doubt" is only the standard for a conviction because the state's monopoly on violence creates a special danger for abuse, and because the state has special abilities and privileges that allow it to conduct investigations, beyond what a private citizen could. To hold private citizens to that standard as a requirement for their beliefs to be considered rational is completely and utterly insane.
I definitely have good reason to believe that the media lies, and I have presented plenty of evidence and arguments to that effect. What I can't do is present evidence like a signed confession, which obviously would never exist regardless of whether they're lying or not. If you want to come back down to earth, stop having blind faith in the media, and actually engage with the evidence I have presented, then we can have a discussion. I highly doubt that you have any interest in doing so, in fact, I'm sure that if I had presented the signed confession you're demanding, you'd dismiss it, move the goalposts, and say it was just an isolated incident. Because you prefer the comfort of your faith over facing the reality the evidence shows.
You didn't present evidence of lying, you presented evidence that what they reported ended up being untrue. That's part of lying, and I don't dispute that part. The key part is that they knew that what they were reporting was untrue and they reported it anyway. You've presented no evidence to support that.
So, based on your rules, I can say you're a liar, because you've said some things that are not true, so I'm just going to assume that you know they're untrue and you're lying.
That's so obviously a double standard. Apply my rules to both cases, and the media is lying, which means I'm telling the truth. Apply your rules in both cases, and the media isn't lying, and neither am I. The only possible way you can get to me being a liar is if you apply a more favorable standard to the media, and switch to a more unfavorable standard with me. It's literally the textbook definition of a double standard.
Your bias is so obvious, and it's also really fucking stupid. These people are not your friends. You're no different from people who go around stanning billionaires, against all sense and reason.
The dems have been supporting genocide for a long time. They've always been with Trump when it comes to anti-arab racism. Just look at their track record. Dems have constantly attacked Palestine, Syria, Iran, etc.
A Growing Crisis: The Impact of Sanctions and Regime Policies on Iranians’ Economic and Social Rights Crippling Sanctions US President Obama signed the most consequential component of the sanctions into law on December 31, 2011.
I am going to put certain WORDS in CAPS to accentuate them for REASONS that no one can really understand. Then I'm going to SPOUT bullshit about the traitors flying high miles away from any DANGER but I'll laughingly call them HEROIC and PATRIOTIC. Then I'll touch my little mushroom peepee and do a nazi salute to MYSELF in the MIRROR. Thank you for your attention to my EGO!!!
Send tweet.
Right, where the little kiddies at? I'm feeling super viagra masculine today!! Shit, how do I delete this. No, stop. Don't send. Everyone IGNORE that last bit about the kiddies!! Phew, got away with that! Hegseth. HEGSETH. change me, I've shit myself again. Get right in there and clean the folds."
Do you know any social advanced, free and human rights respecting Theocracy? The problem with Trump is, apart of the religion, that he is an ignorant and stupid nazi asshole.
No, economic factors matter far more. Religion is often used as an excuse, or plays some role, but the real drive is access to trade or resources or labor in the vast majority of cases.
greed first. its religion AND capital. cherry-picked fairy tales used to oppress and control, making the privileged more powerful and less empathetic, brainwashing the ignorant and leading to so much pointless hate-- religion is a sword and greed is the hand holding it. maybe im wrong but religion wouldnt exist if people didnt want more and more and more. more power, more superiority, more land (bc saying the land is holy and promised to you means its ok to take it by force), even the audacity to believe death isnt the end, they can have more life and shit? you cant own death. mankind evolved with so much creativity and abstract capabilities and this is where we are, dumb as hell.
I agree this seems wrong. Could be referring to the historical bases like Pepperrell, Argentia, Goose Bay etc. but they were closed by the 1960s. NORAD bases do have US personnel on them, so do some Navy bases but by that count it would be far more than 3.
Soldiers attached to units are common practice. Canada does the same with other countries. Some are specific liaison position and others are one time exposure and training jobs. It’s very similar to colleges sending students to other countries for a semester. Both are very different than full blown bases or complete units.
Profitez des vidéos et de la musique que vous aimez, mettez en ligne des contenus originaux, et partagez-les avec vos amis, vos proches et le monde entier.
Indeed. WW2 was a massive slow-walk into the full war. Everyone saw it coming from a mile away and nobody did anything to stop it. Similar to now where everyone can see that this is going to open more fronts.
At one point all the fronts might band together with more and more suddenly joining each side, and boom you have WW3.
Lots of people tried to stop it but the material conditions of austerity on Germany post WW1 plus the banks smelling blood in the water kind of made it inevitable from a materialist perspective
I can just imagine him writing it, hunched over, peck-hunting for the keys. He starts typing bombs. No, he thinks. Slowly backspaces. Starts giggling to himself as he presses the caps lock key. "This will show them how serious I am about my bombs!"
peck peck peck "B-O-M-B-S"
Probably sits back in his chair admiring it for a moment. "Perfect. Very strong. Very powerful bombs."
Then immediately starts typing about peace in the same shouty caps because why not? Everything deserves caps lock! BOMBS! PEACE! WHATEVER!
Then ends it with "Thank you for your attention to this matter" like he just sent out a memo about updating the office dress code instead of announcing he bombed another country.
It's such a weirdly formal, corporate sign-off after the most unhinged announcement possible. As if bombing other countries is just another agenda item he's keeping us informed about. Very considerate of him to loop us in on World War III via Twitter memo.
Just going add early now since no one is talking about it yet, this is why nuclear isn't the way over renewables. Because as soon as any country wants a domestic nuclear energy program, the US will have a freebie wildcard to bomb them.
This is what happens after a failure of a parade and being laughed at enough to leave the g7 early. This was his ego boost he needed. Oh. And oil or something.
Yes, as uus presidents usually do since WW2. But don't worry, I'm sure they'll tell you "THATS NOT US", and it's just Trump and definitely not a systemic problem.
The POTUS has the discretionary power to send troops and launch a military action without Congress approval in case of emergency alone. There wasn't any emergency.
The "emergency" was Netanyahoo starting the bombing of Iran, soon after someone said "Trump Always Chickens Out", so Don bravely joined in dropping bombs at no danger to himself.
The worst part is, international laws and conventions are basically means nothing at this point. US actions simply incentivizes more countries to get mass-destruction weapons.
Does US call you as 51. state? Get a nuke.
Does US want to invade your island? Get a nuke.
Does US want to airstrike your country? Get a nuke.
Does US government officials breach your constitutional rights? Maybe consider owning a mini-nuke.
Thanks to these maniacs, Kim Jong Un now seems to be wisest person on the earth...
ConkSat | 11,396 followers on LinkedIn. Bringing space down to Earth. At high speed. | We're a leading defense contractor focused on providing innovative solutions to tough problems. Count on us to deliver high performance at minimal cost of life.
This statement from Trump is unsurprisingly disinformation. Most people interpret "nuclear sites" as nuclear bombs instead of completely legal power stations for civilian infrastructure.
Please don't recite this disinformation uncritically. That's just recycling propaganda.
Instead it's worth emphasizing that the zio regime actually has rogue nukes and is using them to threaten the planet with a nuclear holocaust. That's the actual problem.
To be fair, Iran wants a nuke down the line, and civilian uranium enrichment is a huge stepping stone. There’s lots of technical alternatives they could pursue if they really just want civilian power.
…And that’s kinda understandable. They have a neighbor that randomly bombs their civilians.
Fuck it, let them have one.
Heck, they should get a tiny bit of old Soviet+US stock in some kind of international deal, so they have credible deterrence with the guaranteed stability+security mechanisms (and oversight?) of their weapons.
(To be more specific, Cold War nukes typically have elaborate tiggers and failsafes meant to stop unauthorized parties from detonating them with any nuclear yield, and the old school Soviet and US systems are pretty good. Better for them to have that than an “insecure” home cooked design they waste money on, like the North Koreans allegedly have, IMO. On top of that, they’d have “known” detonation signatures, so if they ever go off everyone would know it’s Iran (defeating the fear of them “losing” a nuke to another party, or a false flag op against Iran)).
Yes, and that was a cruel, stupid move on the US’s part.
…But even if cooperation continued, it still would have given Iran expertise. Further enrichment is not a huge step, especially behind the cover of real civilian power programs, and given the rhetoric the state broadcasts and their neighbor’s hostility, it seems likely.
And that’s fine IMO.
I’m hugely afraid of proliferation, but going to these lengths to worry about it while the rest of the world burns seems ridiculous.
I've watched an hour long video on uranium enrichment once (one of the many times Satanyahoo cried wolf on Iran almost having nukes). It is most definitely a huge step and there are many other factors. It's really complicated matter. I wish for them it wasn't and that they get one.
I mean, most of it is enriching, by the sound of it, and they've been doing that far beyond any civilian application. As a negotiating tactic, to date, per America's own intelligence.
"Highly enriched uranium (HEU) is anything enriched above 20% and weapon-grade uranium is commonly considered to have been enriched above 90% U-235. However, some research reactors use 90% enriched U-235 to produce medical isotopes, so there are civilian applications for this fuel too."
Centrifuge technology is at the heart of the enrichment process, and the line between its uses for civilian and military purposes is hard to distinguish.
I stand corrected. It's less clear which ones definitely need it, exactly. Wikipedia mentions that even Tc-99m generator designs can use low-enriched uranium. You don't need large quantities in that case, either, since a little radioisotope goes a long way and there's only so many people that need treatment.
Meanwhile the voice of the opposition Chuck Schumer: “If TACO Trump is already folding on Iran, the American people need to know about it. No side deals,”
This community is in trouble. America bombed and colonized my country. But I said it’s time America gets to feel war at home, instead of just dropping bombings on brown countries and i got my comments removed, like this one probably will be.
If you can criticize Israel, Iran, Russia, but not the U.S, you know this community is screwed. Im indigenous/Latino and I’m getting banned for saying the U.S deserves what’s coming
What? Who's saying you can't say that? The US is the world's biggest bully and has been for decades, it definitely deserves whatever it gets in return for it's atrocities, and I don't think that's an unreasonable or unpopular opinion on Lemmy!
There are theories online that say it was a symbolic attack and that they even warned Iran where and when they would strike.
First some technical stuff and facts: There is much doubt even bunker busters would do significant dammage to Iranian facilities. At an estimated 90 -120 meters depth they are well below the range of their capabilities (60 meters). And they are heavily protected by various layers and nobody knows where they are exactly. Only the entrance and building on the surface is visible. The US have only used them once against Yemen and claim they could go deeper by doing double taps. This has obviously never been tested.
Now some speculation: The Americans knew they only had a small chance of success (despite the reported mission success propaganda) and 100% certainty of committing an act of war. Then why would they do it? Fact is the genocide state is getting hit harder and harder, as Iran announced they would. There is huge devastation and the situation is untenable. They realise they have bitten off more than they can chew and already showed signs of weakness.
The US 'taking out' the imaginary threat and casus belli would solve that problem and give the genociders a way out of the war without losing face. As the Iranians said they would stop attacking if they did.
For Trump it would OC be a huge media victory showing how powerful they are and how they saved the poor genociders.
Too soon to tell what is true for now. We'll have to see what the actual dammage is, if Iran strikes back and if the war ends.
Reports are that there is no increase in radioactivity at the bombed sites, so there either was no radioactive material, it was stored somewhere else, or it remained contained.
I believe they removed everything of value and movable. They also filled the entrances with truckloads of sand. They were prepared. Also no noticable seismic activity apparently on IRIS (didn't check), which is strange since they work by creating a mini earthquake.
The Navy has promised to alter the design of one of the buildings on site, which from above clearly resembles a Nazi swastika pitched at the correct 45-degree angle the Nazis used. A report by SFGATE suggests that top officials in the Navy knew what the design of the building would look like prior to the installation.[8][9]
Funny thing is, in the past 4 years or so, I've been using those cookies to my advantage.
As far as Google knows, I've been at the same location for the past 4 years. I have other private devices when I'm out and about that have never signed into Google nor had location services activated.
I walk both sides of the fence, just to confuse the system..
Return to past conversations with Duck.ai’s Recent Chats feature, which stores chats locally on your device – not on DuckDuckGo or other remote servers. Recent chats can be deleted individually or with a click of the Fire Button. You can add or remove the Duck.ai button in your DuckDuckGo browser from browser settings, and hide the Duck.ai buttons on the search results page from search settings.
All the browser settings are also stored there, too. I turned all the AI stuff off, then the next time I booted up my PC the AI was back. Turned it off again. Same thing the next time I logged back on...
I finally looked into it and it was because I had firefox set to clear the cache on shutdown.
Fucking DuckDuckGo having an X account and having their official community on Reddit. They have gone to shit with their crap Ai now. They don’t even have a contract me or email on their website to send complaints. Fuck corporations.
IndexedDB is a low-level API for client-side storage of significant amounts of structured data, including files/blobs. This API uses indexes to enable high-performance searches of this data.
The localStorage read-only property of the window interface allows you to access a Storage object for the Document's origin; the stored data is saved across browser sessions.
KUALA LUMPUR: The Palestine Embassy in Malaysia has condemned the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF), describing the aid distribution initiative as a veiled operation that further endangered innocent aid seekers in the enclave.
Just east of the Icefields Parkway in Alberta this great trail opposite the beautiful Abraham Lake (N. Saskatchewan River). Gaining 2800 ft to get to the top of Allstones ridge includes a long exposed section of loose rock well worth the effort before heading down to the smaller Allstones lake. There is some amazing camping all along Abraham lake, requires the $30 annual Public Land Use Zone permit (what a great bargain). Hiked 5/20/25
The glacial waters of Abraham lake seem below the rocky peak of Allstones ridge. Snowy Kista peak is off in the distance.
Downhill from the summit of Allstones ridge, three hikers may be seen talking. Allstones lake is partially frozen below with Infinite Stones peak looming over it.
Looking out from the hillside, a rain/snow shower falls on Abraham lake below. Kista peak and Mt Michener can be seen in the background. This is the slope for the majority f the loose rock section, it gets steeper but with more defined footing at the top.
Abraham mountain and Allstones peak on the other side of a forested valley. Black and White.
I don’t think that’s a completely fair comparison. They are both state tools for establishing power through narratives. They are both heavily biased.
But RT is Orwellian in that it just makes shit up and has no respect for even appearing credible. While RFE/RFL tends to be biased towards publishing pro-western stories, but they don’t tend to make shit up from scratch.
Of course, who knows what the fuck is happening there right now, my analysis is pre-Trump 2024.
Surely there are better sources of information than the Donald Trump administration's state media. Unless they think DOGE installed sycophants everywhere but there.
In response to a decree by Putin, Russian schoolchildren are now learning to build and fly drones. It is a strong indication of how they see the future of war.
At least 140 people were killed in Israeli attacks in Gaza over the past 24 hours as the confrontation between Israel and Iran teetered on the precipice of an even more dangerous conflagration.
Among those killed were people attempting to access aid being brought in by UN trucks in central Gaza.
Around 400 people have been killed while attempting to reach aid since the so-called Gaza Humanitarian Foundation began distributing food on 27 May, and more than 3,000 injured, according to authorities in Gaza.
More than 55,600 people have been killed in Gaza and nearly 130,000 injured since Israel’s military assault began in October 2023, according to the Palestinian health ministry in the territory. More than 5,330 people have been killed and nearly 18,000 injured since Israel broke a two-month-old ceasefire on 18 March.
The UN human rights office called on the Israeli military “to immediately cease its use of lethal force around food distribution points in Gaza, following repeated instances of shooting and killing of Palestinians seeking to access food there.”
Spain’s prime minister, Pedro Sánchez, has broken ranks with other NATO leaders as he refused to commit to spending 5 percent of GDP on defense. It’s a welcome move, and a rare voice of dissent from Europe’s rush to remilitarize.
Jacobin not wanting EU to have increased military spending, checks out. Surely it has nothing to do with an increasing threat Europe is facing on the east
Hi there, We removed Dark and Darker from sale on the Epic Games Store on March 5 in consideration of a court decision in Korea between Nexon and the game's publisher, IRONMACE. On November 1, 2025, we will be removing Dark and Darker from your library, at which point it will no longer be playable via the Epic Games Store.
Effective immediately, players can no longer purchase Redstone Shards or the Legendary Status upgrades via the Epic Games Store. Players can continue to use the Redstone Shards that they have previously purchased until November 1, 2025.
We will issue a refund to all players who have purchased the Legendary Status upgrade. Refunds will be issued to the player’s original payment method, and where that’s not possible, players will receive a refund to their Epic account balance. We are unable to provide refunds on Redstone Shards.
If you have not received a refund by July 1, please contact player support.
That is not universally true. On GOG for example you can download all your games, so things like this could not happen there. Sure, you still technically purchase a license and do not actually buy the games, but for all intents and purposes this is still the closest you get to actually owning the games.
Sure you get a DRM-free license on GOG, but for many games you are still dependent on online servers for authentication, which can be shut down at any time rendering your access null and void. The only recourse is technically "hacking" a game a creating local servers which is both against terms of service and against the law in some countries.
I am not aware of any game on GOG that requires an online server for authentication. I'm not saying no such thing exists - I don't own every single game on GOG, but that would go against the whole DRM free thing. Care to name a few games that do this? I don't mean games that have an online mode that require a server, but games that just require authentication against an online server to be able to play the game.
You are talking about always-on DRM, I was talking about dependence on the servers for connecting to the multiplayer. Most of GOG games lose partial funtionality when servers get shut down as GOG doesn't use/host their own servers.
You specifically said "online servers for authentication". That's what I understood as just that - a server required to be able to play the game, not a server required to use an actual online feature of a game. Don't get me wrong, I very much prefer when games allow multiplayer games without requiring a server run by the publisher. All that is very different from what the posts title is about, though.
By the way, there are still games on GOG that let you run local servers for multi player gaming.
You specifically said "online servers for authentication".
And then continued in the next sentence. In context it makes sense, without it I can understand your confusion.
And I'm not trying to attack GOG, just highlighting the reality of online "onwership" in general. GOG and Itch.io are the best we can get without real regulations.
There are some great open source games (like !bar@discuss.tchncs.de), but it's still very rare.
You do not own physical games either. It’s just harder for the publisher to revoke a license for a physical game but legally there is little difference.
No, when you own a game, you can make copies and sell them. That is because owning the game means you own the copyright to the game.
If you are not the owner of the IP (which you aren’t, unless you own the company that made the game), then the only way to legally play the game is for the actual owner to provide you with some kind of license. If you don’t have a license then the default copyright rules apply which means you aren’t legally allowed to have or play a copy.
Your license is also limited and doesn’t allow you to ‘do whatever you want’. Try selling copies and see how quickly you get sued. You can’t even do what you want with your single copy. Go buy a bunch of physical games and start a game rental business. Or buy a bunch of physical games and open a game cafe where people can play ‘your’ games. Your license doesn’t allow you to do that.
There are limitations of what you can do with your copy that you own, but the laws that apply to them are different than those of digital games. By design all the protections physical goods had were removed for digital goods by the same companies. That's why ownership is dead.
By law I can trade or sell my copy of a physical game to anyone I want because I own it. Read en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First-sa…
First sale doctrine gives you some rights, but it doesn’t give all the same rights you would have for any other physical object that doesn’t include copyrighted work.
If I buy 100 chairs, I’m free to start a chair rental business. If I buy 100 copies of a game, I cannot start renting them out without permission from the actual owner of the game.
The fact that the law entitles you to a slightly broader license doesn’t take away from the fact that it’s still just a license and not ownership. The only thing you own is the physical media (e.g. the plastic disc) not the contents of that disc.
It's false equivalency. Do you own a chair design or just a physical chair? Do you own a physical painting you bought (protected by the same laws as physical games)?
This week, we’re moving in next to anacondas, so watch your back and lock the henhouse. Then, parenthood tips from wild baboons, the “cognitive debt” of ChatGPT, a spaceflight symphony, and a bizarre galaxy that is finally coming into view.
Anacondas are one of the most spectacular animals in South America, inspiring countless myths and legends. But these iconic boas, which can grow to lengths of 30 feet, are also a pest to local populations in the Amazon basin, where they prey on livestock.
To better understand these nuanced perceptions of anacondas, researchers interviewed more than 200 residents of communities in the várzea regions of the lower Amazon River about their experiences with the animals. The resulting study is packed with amazing stories and insights about the snakes, which are widely reviled as thieves and feared for their predatory prowess.
“Fear of the anaconda (identified in 44.5% of the reports) is related to the belief that it is a treacherous and sly animal,” said co-authors led by Beatriz Nunes Cosendey of the Mamirauá Sustainable Development Reserve and Juarez Carlos Brito Pezzuti of the Federal University of Pará.
“The interviewees convey that the anaconda is a silent creature that arrives without making any noise, causing them to feel uneasy and always vigilant during fishing…with the fear of having their canoe flooded in case of an attack,” the team added. “Some dwellers even reported being more afraid of an anaconda than of a crocodile because the latter warns when it is about to attack.”
One of the Amazonian riverine communities where the research was conducted. Image: Beatriz Cosendey.
But while anacondas are eerily stealthy, they also have their derpy moments. The snakes often break into chicken coops to feast on the poultry, but then get trapped because their engorged bodies are too big to escape through the same gaps they used to enter.
“Dwellers expressed frustration at having to invest time and money in raising chickens, and then lose part of their flock overnight,” the team said. “One interviewee even mentioned retrieving a chicken from inside an anaconda’s belly, as it had just been swallowed and was still fresh.”
Overall, the new study presents a captivating portrait of anaconda-human relations, and concludes that “the anaconda has lost its traditional role in folklore as a spiritual and mythological entity, now being perceived in a pragmatic way, primarily as an obstacle to free-range poultry farming.”
Coming off of Father’s Day, here is a story about the positive role that dads can play for their daughters—for baboons, as well as humans. A team tracked the lifespans of 216 wild female baboons in Amboseli, Kenya, and found that subjects who received more paternal care had significantly better outcomes than their peers.
Male baboon with infant in the Amboseli ecosystem, Kenya. Image: Elizabeth Archie, professor at Notre Dame.
“We found that juvenile female baboons who had stronger paternal relationships, or who resided longer with their fathers, led adult lives that were 2–4 years longer than females with weak or short paternal relationships,” said researchers led by David Jansen of the Midwest Center of Excellence for Vector-Borne Disease. “Because survival predicts female fitness, fathers and their daughters may experience selection to engage socially and stay close in daughters’ early lives.”
This all reminds me of that old episode of The Simpsons where . While Homer was clearly hurt, it turns out that baboons might not be the worst animal-based insult for a daughter to throw at her dad.
ChatGPT may hinder creativity and learning skills in students who use it to write essays, relative to those who didn’t, according to an exhaustive new preprint study posted on arXiv. This research has yet not been peer-reviewed, and has a relatively small sample size of 54 subjects, but it still contributes to rising concerns about the cognitive toll of AI assistants.
Researchers led by Nataliya Kosmya of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology divided the subjects — all between 18 and 39 years old — into three groups wrote SAT essays using OpenAI’s ChatGPT (LLM group), Google’s search engine, or with no assistance (dubbed “Brain-only”).
“As demonstrated over the course of 4 months, the LLM group's participants performed worse than their counterparts in the Brain-only group at all levels: neural, linguistic, scoring,” the team said. “The LLM group also fell behind in their ability to quote from the essays they wrote just minutes prior.”
When I asked ChatGPT for its thoughts on the study, it commented that “these results are both interesting and plausible, though they should be interpreted cautiously given the early stage of the research and its limitations.” It later suggested that “cognitive offloading is not always bad.”
Even scientists can’t resist evocative language now and then—we’re all only human. Case in point: A new study likens the history of Asia’s space industry to “a musical concert” and then really runs with the metaphor.
“The region comprises a diverse patchwork of nations, each contributing different instruments to the regional space development orchestra,” said researchers led by Maximilien Berthet of the University of Tokyo. “Its history consists of three successive movements” starting with “the US and former USSR setting the tone for the global space exploration symphony” and culminating with modern Asian spaceflight as “a fast crescendo in multiple areas of the region driven in part by private initiative.”
Talk about a space opera. The rest of the study provides a comprehensive review of Asian space history, but I cannot wait for the musical adaptation.
In 2001, astronomer Bärbel Koribalski spotted a tiny galaxy peeking out from behind a bright foreground star that had obscured it for decades, earning it the nickname the “Peekaboo Galaxy.” Situated about 22 million light-years from the Milky Way, this strange galaxy is extremely young and metal-poor, resembling the universe’s earliest galaxies.
The Peekaboo galaxy to the right of the star TYC 7215-199-1. Image: NASA, ESA, Igor Karachentsev (SAO RAS); Image Processing: Alyssa Pagan (STScI)
A new study confirms Peekaboo as “the lowest-metallicity dwarf in the Local Volume,” a group of roughly 500 galaxies within 36 million light-years of Earth.
“This makes the Peekaboo dwarf one of the most intriguing galaxies in the Local Volume,” said co-authors Alexei Kniazev of the South African Astronomical Observatory and Simon Pustilnik of the Special Astrophysical Observatory of the Russian Academy of the Sciences. “It deserves intensive, multi-method study and is expected to significantly advance our understanding of the early universe’s first building blocks.”
Thanks for reading! See you next week.
Update: The original headline for this piece was "Is ChatGPT Rotting Our Brains? New Study Suggests It Does." We've updated the headline to "ChatGPT May Create 'Cognitive Debt,' New Study Finds" to match the terminology used by the researchers.
So for Friday night, myself and my friends got rather board. And as the resident "Things collector" i got 2 Maxtor touch sense 2 external hardrives. However those who were alive in 2000's know Maxtor went bankrupt and haven't made hardrives for a very long time. One of these drive i got BRAND NEW, in box at a flea market. sadly time got to the platters first, i spent a few hours trying to reformat or partition them and all i got was write errors. I tried different utility's with no avail and decided to cut my losses, so i asked the boys what we should do with them? Immediately my friend had an idea, to bring out his 9mm and see how a hardrive would fair! We all took turns and they were pretty hard to hit (we made the mistake of drink soda before hand). We eventually landed some shots on the center of the drives and MAN it actually stopped 2 bullets!!! going into this we all expected the disk to be unreadable after the fact, but didnt think the hardrives would stop a 9mm bullet!!
We then took the hdd's apart after are volley of bullets, and alot of the chips were damaged and all the platters were bent. But when we took off the top case, it looked so freakin cool i had to keep it
This proposed tax only applies to the ultra ultra ultra rich. Like it only applies to about 2000 people in the entirety of switzerland, which is a billionaire haven.
Both chambers of Swiss parliament plus the executive branch rejected it by large margins (unsurprisingly, parliament has a bourgeois majority).
(Also this financial times article is ludicrously biased, but it’s the financial times so no suprises there…)
<-- Current historical moment
One of the Amazonian riverine communities where the research was conducted. Image: Beatriz Cosendey.
Male baboon with infant in the Amboseli ecosystem, Kenya. Image: Elizabeth Archie, professor at Notre Dame.
The Peekaboo galaxy to the right of the star TYC 7215-199-1. Image: NASA, ESA, Igor Karachentsev (SAO RAS); Image Processing: Alyssa Pagan (STScI)
DioramaOfShit
in reply to errer • • •lacaio da inquisição
in reply to errer • • •rxbudian
in reply to errer • • •The new government is probably too weak, Israel probably don't care anymore and will focus on clearing off Palestine.
So the US probably got handed off this hot potato because, if no western countries is doing it, China or Russia will come in and cause chaos later.
davel
in reply to rxbudian • • •I wouldn’t take that as a given.
Is this a joke? Western imperialist states entering would create chaos, while China and/or Russia entering would be stabilizing. Iran, China, and Russia are major BRICS partners, and have shared regional security interests.
Who do you think organizes, funds, trains, and equips the various groups of Salafi jihadist terrorist groups that wreak havoc in Western and Central Asia? The United States, with some assistance from Israel and probably the UK. The US has wanted regime change in Iran ever since the puppet regime they installed in the US-orchestrated 1953 coup was overthrown in the 1978 revolution. The US has wanted to regain its imperialist control of Iran for the last 47 years.
Edit to add a primer: The blueprint of regime change operations How regime change happens in the 21st century with your consent
The blueprint of regime change operations
CriticalResist (Crit) (Critical Stack)flandish
in reply to rxbudian • • •don’t forget, the US is the terrorist here.
ohulancutash
in reply to flandish • • •davel
in reply to ohulancutash • • •ohulancutash
in reply to davel • • •davel
in reply to ohulancutash • • •The reason that our media have incessantly repeated Iran-backed this, Iran-controlled that for decades is to convince us that Iran is the big bad guy behind the small bad guys terrorizing good guy Israel.
By now it should be obvious that Israel never was the good guy. Israel is a US-backed genocidal, fascist, settler-colonial state seeking Lebensraum for a Greater Israel. And the supposed “bad guys” have just been trying to survive under threat the of the small imperialist state, Israel, a state which only exists thanks to significant, continued support from the big imperialist state, the US.
General Wesley Clark 📺
That is why Iran accurately, metaphorically calls the US the “Great Satan” and Israel the “Small Satan”.
- YouTube
www.youtube.comlike this
themadcodger likes this.
Grapho
in reply to ohulancutash • • •m532
in reply to ohulancutash • • •小莱卡
in reply to ohulancutash • • •Enoril
in reply to rxbudian • • •Last time USA attached Iraq, the instability generated in the region boosted ISIS and created terrorist attacks waves in Europe, killing hundreds (on top of all the dead people directly impacted in the country attacked of course).
So cool, here we go again thanks to the US people who are not fucking able to use their brain when voting.