Speaking as someone who has already been called a Russia-appeaser several times, I don't really give a damn. You either have principles, or you don't; sacrificing them in the name of "winning" the political game is just your ticket to becoming another useful idiot for the establishment.It is also true that cutting aid or support for Ukraine at this point is not going to happen without those doing so or advocating for it getting called Russia-appeasers. More than one thing can be true at the same time, and it feels like many parts of the Right don't get that supporting Ukraine does not necessarily mean supporting Biden or his admin.
I take that as you heard about the gaffe?It's not 10:30 am yet (as of this post). The day is still young.
I take that as you heard about the gaffe?
Umm, yes nuclear powers have a large advantage over non nuclear ones. Do you think France would not launch it's nukes against Germany or Russia if they were able to somehow beat their conventional armies and take Alasce Lorraine? If Ukraine beat Russia so bad and decided to march to Moscow and their conventional army couldn't stop, do you think they would just let it happen? Well the same applies to more than just the capitol Alsace is not Paris. Yet France is still willing to use canned sunshine to keep it French, how do we know the Russians won't do the same to these provinces?And? Does that mean everyone should automatically recognize territorial claims made by nuclear powers?
Nice try Xi.
Again nukes count as force. Let's pretend the Chinese were actually much superior conventionally to us and they destroyed our entire navy, and took over Hawaii and Alaska. Do you think America in that case won't use nukes? Even if Washington D.C. is left alone? Again nukes are a game changer, nukes prevent a nation from ever facing occupation. The only way a nuclear nations government can be out of power is if it is taken down internally. And letting territory be taken just leads to salami slice tactics, that's why what Putin is doing now is so dangerous and stupid.Putin can say all he wants. Few will actually listen. And if Ukraine can take it back by force then what he says means nothing if he can't back it up. The Ukrainian counter offensive these past weeks has shattered the myth of Russia as a competitive super power state. I'm not even sure they're in a position to hold on to what they have now. Time will tell.
To this point we are talking of the "normal" defensive nuclear weapon use. A nation state is invaded and uses tactical nuclear weapons to defend what's at least widely recognized to be its territory, since ages immemorial.Umm, yes nuclear powers have a large advantage over non nuclear ones. Do you think France would not launch it's nukes against Germany or Russia if they were able to somehow beat their conventional armies and take Alasce Lorraine? If Ukraine beat Russia so bad and decided to march to Moscow and their conventional army couldn't stop, do you think they would just let it happen?
What happens if Macron wakes up in a bad mood one day and decides that Algeria is still French territory whether it likes it or not and France will defend it by any means necessary?Well the same applies to more than just the capitol Alsace is not Paris. Yet France is still willing to use canned sunshine to keep it French, how do we know the Russians won't do the same to these provinces?
Putin has stuck his nose into it very much intentionally, considering the timing. He can't claim that he has no choice, he has just made the choice, except absolutely no one important recognizes his annexation.Again nukes count as force. Let's pretend the Chinese were actually much superior conventionally to us and they destroyed our entire navy, and took over Hawaii and Alaska. Do you think America in that case won't use nukes? Even if Washington D.C. is left alone? Again nukes are a game changer, nukes prevent a nation from ever facing occupation. The only way a nuclear nations government can be out of power is if it is taken down internally. And letting territory be taken just leads to salami slice tactics, that's why what Putin is doing now is so dangerous and stupid.
Was Alsace considered part of France since Time immemorial? I'm sure there are people that remember when it was German. lol.To this point we are talking of the "normal" defensive nuclear weapon use. A nation state is invaded and uses tactical nuclear weapons to defend what's at least widely recognized to be its territory, since ages immemorial.
Well Algeria can't do anything because it's not a nuclear power. The only protection against a nuclear power is either having your own nukes, OR having an offical alliance with another nuclear power. I don't think Algeria has either of those. But if France did this you can bet we'd sanction the hell out of them. But yes strong nations have the ability to do what they want like America with Iraq. It's not morally right, but the consequences for anyone interfering are too grave.What happens if Macron wakes up in a bad mood one day and decides that Algeria is still French territory whether it likes it or not and France will defend it by any means necessary?
Well many people here would laugh as then the two big rivals to the western nations would destroy themselves. Notice how Russia and China are nuclear powers. They can't move on each others territory any more. After 1945 borders remained static ESPECIALLY among nuclear powrers.What happens if one day Xi wakes up in a bad mood and decrees that Vladivostok is a Chinese city, and China will defend it by any means necessary?
Yes? Again nukes allow that, the only protection our your own, or an alliance with a nuclear power who is willing to intervene on your behalf.Then we aren't talking about defensive use of nuclear weapons anymore, we are talking of childish shenanigans trying to hide offensive use of nuclear weapons in a war of conquest behind the former.
If the US decided to use nukes in Korea, or Vietnam they might have very well won those wars and those nations would not have been communist, of course then the Soviets would have used nukes on Afghanistan. It would have meant that nations are only truly safe in NATO or Warsaw Pact.Putin has stuck his nose into it very much intentionally, considering the timing. He can't claim that he has no choice, he has just made the choice, except absolutely no one important recognizes his annexation.
His legal shenanigans have no validity outside of Russia, and if he decided to use nuclear weapons or not, everyone will see that in own context, not as mere defense of vital territories, as no one is recognizing his legal shenanigans.
Are you trying to imply that all it would take for USA to decisively win the Vietnam War would be to declare South Vietnam a US state?
It's not like nuclear powers never lose border territories without resorting of nukes. Like the abovementioned France. Nevermind the constant minor changes on India's borders with China and Pakistan, and the fall of Soviet Union itself.
These controversies about recognition of territories can get extremely complicated and long lasting, with Taiwan as the example - and that's with the economic and military behemoth of China on the side of claimant, not Russia with it's resource economy and rapidly waning international influence.
Considering the shit that went down in South Korea with the feminist misandrist (but I repeat myself) cult, I wouldn't be surprised if he had opinions on women that the ancient greeks would've nodded and agreed with.
You could argue that with the western nuclear powers... But places like India or China (imagine how many nice island colonies China could get nearby, some not even closely allied to any nuclear power) couldn't care less about western sensibilities, and they don't do it either. Even Vietnam didn't get itself nuked back when they had a war. It's because the foreign policy consequences of that move would be at least expected to be pretty damn serious, which is also the only reason why Putin is not rushing to such measures.@Marduk
The reason we haven't done that brutality is because we are much more moral in general than Russia. But we don't go to war just because someone is immoral.
Close enough. Centuries, then 47 years under Germany after conquest in Franco-Prussian war of 1870.Was Alsace considered part of France since Time immemorial? I'm sure there are people that remember when it was German. lol.
What nuclear power is protecting the Taliban, the Palestinians, Syria and Vietnam?Well Algeria can't do anything because it's not a nuclear power. The only protection against a nuclear power is either having your own nukes, OR having an offical alliance with another nuclear power.
Except America didn't do it alone. America has put a lot of effort into justifying this stuff to its international partners, got a whole lot of countries, some quite important, to actively support these efforts, and that's a ME shithole we are talking about (what goes on in third world stays in third world?), not part of Europe.I don't think Algeria has either of those. But if France did this you can bet we'd sanction the hell out of them. But yes strong nations have the ability to do what they want like America with Iraq. It's not morally right, but the consequences for anyone interfering are too grave.
Go tell that to Pakistan and India.Well many people here would laugh as then the two big rivals to the western nations would destroy themselves. Notice how Russia and China are nuclear powers. They can't move on each others territory any more. After 1945 borders remained static ESPECIALLY among nuclear powrers.
Nukes aren't the be all end all of even war, nevermind international politics.Yes? Again nukes allow that, the only protection our your own, or an alliance with a nuclear power who is willing to intervene on your behalf.
Which demonstrates clearly that your idea of the place of nuclear weapons in international politics does not track at all with the historical use of them.If the US decided to use nukes in Korea, or Vietnam they might have very well won those wars and those nations would not have been communist, of course then the Soviets would have used nukes on Afghanistan. It would have meant that nations are only truly safe in NATO or Warsaw Pact.
These links should answer most questions:I'm out of the loop, what's this about a feminist cult in south korea?
I'm out of the loop, what's this about a feminist cult in south korea?
These links should answer most questions:
In summary, the then-president of South Korea, Park Geun-hye, and her colleagues were revealed to have been influenced and outright controlled by the daughter of a cult-leader called Choi Tae-min. She was basically the figure behind the throne. People were furious; and since the reputation of feminism in South Korea was already down, it went even further into the dumpster.
Many south korean men now believe (and are probably correct) that this cult was responsible for the various radical feminist parties enjoying the tacit approval and protection of the South Korean government. Needless to say, there's now plenty of hostilty between the femnoids and the men who are sick and tired of their maltreatment.
Beyond what @Urabrask Revealed and @Pocky Balboa noted, you can look up Megalia and Womad, two prominent Korean Feminist sites that stirred up a lot of controversies. I'm not linking because they get... pretty extreme. One fairly famous meme came from Womad that had a picture of a cat being strangled. There were also cases of posters boasting that they'd murdered men in various ways, and in one other famous case, a Womand member boasting that she'd raped a boy in Australia. Megalia is slightly less extreme than Womad but still has really nasty NSFW stuff posted on it regularly involving femdom pedophilia, castration, and the like.I'm out of the loop, what's this about a feminist cult in south korea?
And that's a good thing imo because it makes turning the clock back easier.This kind of behavior has kinda poisoned the well as far as feminism in Korea.
And that's a good thing imo because it makes turning the clock back easier.
The cult was the Church of Eternal Life, New Mindset, or the Church of the Spirit World depending on the translation and which year you go with. There are probably a few more names in there too since the cult constantly rotated names to keep ahead of bad press and authorities. It was a group that essentially combined Buddhism, Presbyterianism, and certain traditional Korean Shaman teachings together. Choi Tae-min himself called himself "Future Buddha" which... actually is a pretty awesome name. He claimed to have various supernatural powers such as speaking to the dead, being able to sever other shamans from the spirit world, and divination.So what was that South Korean cult? Like what made them a cult, wikipedia did not have much. Like I can look up the beliefs of Mormonism and see what they are about I can't even find this cults name.
Politicians and whores are exactly the same except for one thing--power. I mean whores will do anything for money but politicians will do anything for money and power. -Davood GhalajouriThe Mexican trans deputy Maria Clemente sows controversy by uploading porn videos to her Twitter account | Rival Times
Maria Clemente became last year the first transsexual deputy in the history of the Mexican Congress. She and her partner Salma Liebano were chosen asrivaltimes.com
Very stunning and brave of them but how's that going to do government work?