Maturin [any]

Just like all satires of this ghoulish system, the settler culture will unironically and enthusiastically buy right in. See also Starship Troopers [movie]

“Working tirelessly every day for a ceasefire”

Yet another example of Zionism as the new antisemitism. Calling this Kristallnacht is straight-up holocaust denial.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burn_pit

Sorry for the natopedia link but it is a reference to an actual US/NATO environmental atrocity of throwing all refuse into pits and burning them. Unlike “burn ward” where you heal people of their burns, the burn pit is a place where you actually burn what you want to get rid of but the burning of such refuse is also poisoning the one who burns it. So it also acknowledges the latent toxicity that I think forms part of the reason of this current proposal.

c/the_burn_ward

I’m making a second appeal for c/the_burn_pit

starts slow clap

Vaxxed?

She shouldn’t have been executed no matter what is in that file

Yeah, he could, but that would be seen as a “failure” which is why he won’t do it.

Of course he does. Otherwise the inevitable “failure” happens on his watch.

Did he bring that from home?

You are aware that Dick Cheney and 200 other Republican representatives of the billionaire class have openly supported Harris, right?

Edit: https://fortune.com/2024/10/23/billioniares-back-harris-more-than-trump-musk-cuban/

Yeah, subsurface helium would probably have been a better example for this

I haven’t been following him too closely recently and maybe something has changed but I don’t think his analysis of either Russia or Israel tracks with that. He says supporting Israel and Ukraine in this way is against US interests because the US loses its ability to have overwhelming control in these places and destroys the strategic positions the US has accumulated for decades. He straight up said that from a US realist perspective, supporting Israel in this way is destroying americas control over west Asia and the oil and trade resources it provides.

I agree the his perspective is always that of the US state department because he sees himself as a continuation of the intellectual circles that support a country’s strategic policy and his team is the US (there is a reason the map in his office still has the USSR on it - he is nostalgic for a time when us strategic planners actually acknowledged that their opponents were powerful and sophisticated and it took sophisticated planning to counter them).

But to argue that the man who wrote the book on how AIPAC has systematically pulled the US into making choice after choice that is against its strategic interest up to and including the point at which the US loses the strangle hold it has had on the west Asian petroleum complex is the same as the US administrations who continue to do the things he says is destructive does not really hold water.

I think John would disagree that they are as realist as him, at least when it comes to Russia (and Palestine) since they are doing the opposite of what he’s been saying to do on Russia for at least 20-35 years and he is one of the most vocal critics of the US role in Israel. Realism isn’t just “attack everyone”. It also includes looking at the situation from the other sides perspective from a realist analysis and trying to most effectively play one’s cards to systematically advantage the larger strategic picture. And his major criticism of us policy with respect to Russia is that they refuse to treat Russia as a legitimate power with its own legitimate interests. Instead, he would say, that the US are just crusaders who feel like they have a right to possess everything and destroy everyone and will pursue that goal even though it leads to their own self destruction, which is what’s happening in Russia and in Palestine which is why, despite his faults and frustrating takes, John has been saying US policy in both of those spheres has been completely wrong.

It’s basically a fucking crusade at this point.

Wait until you read the part where Abraham comes down from the mountain and goes back to the city but does not have Isaac with him anymore (because he actually did sacrifice him in at least one of the biblical sources).

To the first question I answer “yes” and to the second I choose “why not?”

Change the name to Derrylondon