top 94 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 282 points 8 months ago (17 children)

They're gonna go kill brown people to get the focus off of the richest ruling elite in the world (including their own commander in chief) trafficking, raping, and murdering children.

  • source
  • hideshow 17 child comments
  • [–] 23 points 8 months ago (3 children)
  • [–] 20 points 8 months ago

    Seriously? It'll definitely work for more people than one dares to believe. It's not about it working in the way you mean on us, the people that nothing will work on, it's about everyone else. And for us that have functional empathy, conscience, intelligence etc. it will work in another way, we see the horrors about to happen. We see the people it's going to happen to as actual people and anyone can only handle so much. It's the classic "do or confess bad thing to make other bad thing seem less relevant", and that works on everyone, just in different ways.
    I can absolutely see even here on lemmy being filled with news about this and less about what they're doing this to take attention away from. It'll work on me, no matter how much I don't want it to, because I feel for the people who will suffer and die from this. And It'll work on others in other ways.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 8 months ago

    Remember when DOGE shut down USAID? There's an epidemiologist from Boston university who's been making models to estimate the human cost of it, so far they're showing more than half a million dead children: https://www.impactcounter.com/dashboard?view=table&sort=interval_minutes&order=asc

    No one's paying attention to it. The whole matter has been forgotten, because the whole zone has been so thoroughly flooded.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 8 points 8 months ago (10 children)
  • [–] 17 points 8 months ago (2 children)

    They don't think so, or they don't care.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 8 months ago* (1 child)

    It's not about white or brown. It's easier for them to get support to abuse the brown people, it doesn't mean white people are safe, or they won't be working to hurt them. In fact everything they are doing is getting license to hurt white people en masse in the united states proper, while they steal elections, and throw protesters in camps, with courts unable to issue nationwide injunctions now.

    That said, the Iranians are basically white, without the head gear they would fit right in, Iran means Aryan by the way. From being settled by horse tribes from the steppes of Asia around 1,500 bc,

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 10 points 8 months ago (4 children)

    It was never about skin colour though, was it?

    disclaimer for people who don't like to interpret internet comments charitably(even if it was, that wouldn't make racism acceptable ofc)

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 8 months ago (3 children)

    I love that disclaimer. I feel like I need to put it on everything. People seem quite incapable of separating descriptive and normative statements on here.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 8 months ago (2 children)

    Sometimes I feel like people have misinterpreted all my social critiques as advocacy for the things I was critiquing.

    Like I'll point something out, say "Society tends to do such-and-such," implying, "and that's wrong," but what people hear instead is "as it should."

    Like, I could explicitly state "and that's wrong" all the time, but sometimes that would get a "no shit" reaction, or possibly come off as performative.

    Sometimes there's just no winning...

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 8 months ago* (1 child)

    Small minds, they are not used to braining. They think making a statement means promoting that thing. They think criticizing an argument automatically means you disagree with it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 0 points 8 months ago

    Both true statements.

    Social justice topics are particularly sticky to navigate, especially as someone who isn't visibly a minority. Like if I say "[such-and-such] minorities aren't oppressed," they'll say "how dare you say that, yes they are!" But if I say "[such-and-such] minorities are oppressed," they'll say "how dare you say that, that's so patronizing!" And if I don't say anything, they'll say "how dare you remain silent about the plight of so many people!" Again, there's no winning.

    They think criticizing an argument automatically means you disagree with it.

    Yeah, I'm far more likely to criticize an argument that I agree with in essence but disagree in substance or method. Like, if someone is completely wrong about something and has no inclination of being convinced otherwise, usually I won't waste my time. I don't argue with right-wingers online anymore because there's no fucking point, I don't have the time and energy for that, and I don't even visit the same spaces of the internet as them. The most I'll do when I see them in the wild is ridicule them and move on.

    If I see a leftist arguing poorly, however, I'll usually chip in my ten cents as to how they could improve their argument. Whether the focus should be slightly different, or there's a better way to argue the same thing, or the premises could be more factual, or the logic more structurally valid. If I disagree about the nuances of their argument, I'll present a nuanced argument of my own.

    But some people seem to think that if I'm arguing with leftists, then I must be a right-winger. That's incorrect. If I was a right-winger, I would be spending more time in right-wing spaces and less in leftist spaces. I wouldn't bother arguing with people who's perspectives and worldviews are so categorically different from my own. If I wasn't a leftist, I wouldn't care if leftists online could be making better arguments.

    Also, more and more these days I find myself treating tankies like I treat right-wingers. They're equally as deluded, irrational, heavyhanded, and authoritarian. They don't listen to reason or facts and evidence. It's all ideology, propaganda, DARVO, gaslighting, insults, and accusations with them.

    But I do still argue with them, because they're so pervasive in left-wing spaces, and I don't want them dominating the narrative. I want other leftists, less extreme leftists, rational and empathetic leftists, to have spaces where they feel comfortable having intelligent discussions without it turning into a tankie circlejerk.

    Example:When I was still on reddit, a few years ago the democratic socialists sub was overrun with tankies. Like, they already had all the other leftist subs, couldn't they just leave this one that's supposed to be the least extreme and most inclusive of diverse opinions? So I started arguing with them about why authoritarian behavior shouldn't be tolerated there, that it's a democratic socialist sub and should be treated as such. It caught on, and other peoplw picked up the argument. Eventually the mods had a vote on whether to ban ML harassment. It passed, and now MLs are still allowed there, but if they attack people for disagreement then they get banned.

    But tankies don't actually engage with my arguments in good faith, they just call me a fascist because I refuse to kowtow to their moral pedestal-standing and ideological purism. And in effect, they water down the meaning of the word 'fascist' and make it harder to be taken seriously when I point to actual examples of fascism.

  • source
  • parent
  • My dad who served in Vietnam looked at this tweet and went silent. My mom is now really upset. I am so tired.

  • source
  • [–] 142 points 8 months ago (1 child)
  • [–] 52 points 8 months ago (2 children)

    Does it count as stopping the most wars when you started them all?

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 50 points 8 months ago (2 children)
  • [–] 97 points 8 months ago (13 children)

    Olympics end today so it's showtime for the military industrial complex.

  • source
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] 22 points 8 months ago (9 children)

    It’s also a few days into Ramadan, a holiday where Muslims fast while the sun is up. (It lasts approximately from fat Tuesday to Easter.)
    So, you know, if you want to fuck up someone’s day, make ‘em work extra hard while hangry.

    (Which is not necessarily true. IIRC, much of the religious understanding and forgiveness in Islam is about intent. They might be cool with breaking a fast when facing an existential threat. But it’s Iran, sooo…)

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 8 months ago* (5 children)

    It can be a bit variable with Islam, but depending on what you follow there's maybe an exemption from having to fast during Ramadan if your well-being is just generally at risk from doing so. There are also several groups that are exempted (Sick, Pregnant, too young, too old, etc), but don't think any of them apply here.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 8 months ago (4 children)

    Makes me think of those stupid assholes who sell ammo with pig lard in it. As if God would be mad that you touched pig because some guy shot you with it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago (2 children)

    That doesn't even make sense. How do you make ammo with pig lard in it?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 134 points 8 months ago (15 children)

    @ickplant Putting soldiers in harms way to distract from the epstein files should get the fat fuck the death sentence.

  • source
  • hideshow 15 child comments
  • [–] [S] 31 points 8 months ago (4 children)

    💯

    But instead it will probably get him more adoration from his base.

    Who am I kidding? It’s not probably, it’s definitely.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 8 months ago (3 children)

    For now, foreign wars are a slow burn on popularity, for now he will be popular, before too long people will hate him for it, he will be gone soon anyway though he already doesn't know what is going on, or he wouldn't be betraying his america first bullshit.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 8 months ago (2 children)

    And they'll just latch on to the next toad creature that comes along, they always do, they won't all suddenly un-fascist themselves.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    Oh yeah, the party's base is radicalized, and the establishment are all in on fascist dictatorship time. It's just a matter of who wins the succession fight, and if they can hold it, and steal it if need be, with their new leader during the fight. Vance won't get it, someone will take it from him.

    The project 2025 people, the religious right, their business dickheads, and their assorted partizans are all in on it, anyone with loyalty to country, and elections, over the party, has been purged after they gave themselves away in 2020, and none of them were purged, not in government and bureaucracy, after 2020 either because Biden let them all get away with it, so noble to let captured agencies fail in their statutory duties in the most basic of their missions, preventing the republic from being killed in all but name with elections fixed, but I digress.

    The only way out is popular reform by a strong opposition leader that organizes the opposition, and knows how to build and run a political machine, and we won't seemingly have that, so Republicans get to carry on their shit show it appears.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 38 points 8 months ago (7 children)

    Nixon and Reagan both conspired with hostile foreign governments to win elections and we let both of those guys off the hook. Why would this be different?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 21 points 8 months ago (2 children)

    Because we've had enough? Because we've learned our lesson?

    Or maybe we haven't?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    I don't see a whole lot of lesson-learning going on. Except by those who have been taught that when they break laws there isn't punishment

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 8 months ago

    The POLITICIANS don't seem to have learned anything, at least the MAGA comedy act of Schmuck & Jeffries haven't. They might as well be working for them.

    But the Citizens have. We know that the Dems have done nearly nothing to protect us from the MAGA scourge, and we are likely to have to do it ourselves.

    But some are awake, and others are waking. We may yet be able to force the Dems to do their jobs, and fight for us. How the Dems respond to the inevitable MAGA screaming when they get crushed in the Midterms will tell the tale. If Schmuck & Jeffries let them get away with stealing this election, too, like they did with 2024, them we'll have to take matters into our own hands.

    And for their fecklessness, our elected Dems will find themselves nearly as big an enemy as MAGA.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 10 points 8 months ago (3 children)

    Different?

    Yeah. The ruling class, and the oligarchs who own them, have made it abundantly clear they will burn the whole system down rather than allow one of their own to be held accountable.

    See also: Biden 2020/AG Garland

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 8 months ago

    If we read of one man robbed, or murdered, or killed by accident, or one house burned, or one vessel wrecked, or one steamboat blown up, or one cow run over on the Western Railroad, or one mad dog killed, or one lot of grasshoppers in the winter, - we need never read of another. One is enough. If you are acquainted with the principle, what do you care for a myriad instances and applications?

    -Thoreau, Walden

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    They need the current system in place way more than we do. They benefit greatly by this system, we don't. They may THREATEN to burn it down, but they won't. They worked too hard, and they benefit too much by it, to let it go.

    Before they'll destroy the system that has made them wealthy, and will continue to make them wealthy, they'll surrender, and live to fight another day.

    They'll kill MAGA before they'll kill the THEIR economy.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago

    They are using the dissolution of the USSR as their model.

    The current system transfers wealth upwards, but they will be happy to dismantle it if it means they can seize control of all the national infrastructure, resources, and the machinery of State directly and permanently.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 20 points 8 months ago

    Pedos or not there is no way the USA would stay out of waging new wars either way, it's literally its bread and butter and can't exist without it. The machine is getting itchy, it needs blood, that simple.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 42 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (8 children)

    I'm not saying this isn't a sign of something, but Surf and Turf nights are fairly common at overseas bases. Sometimes once a week.

    EDIT: Pie is pretty much nightly anywhere with real kitchen.

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 8 months ago (6 children)

    And well it is 18 hours after your comment now, which came a day after this was posted, and this OP shows a tweet which is… how old? Another day?

    Are we at war and I missed the news?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 child)

    In light of everything else that's going on it's a distinct possibility.

    But I commented because the tweet and title of this post seemed to imply that good food for troops can only mean war. That's simply not the case. There are a number of reasons you'd want to improve morale with a (comparatively) nice meal. War is only one of them.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [+] -2 points 8 months ago (2 children)
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 child)

    They said they are “in a war” with those countries, but it sounded like more of a description of fact than a proclamation.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 84 points 8 months ago (5 children)

    Imagine fighting and risking your life in a foreign country on behalf of a pedophile.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago (1 child)

    People are doing it for money, that is why it is so important to help the poor. When people are poor, they can do whatever a rich guy says

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 8 months ago

    I agree that it's important to help the poor to make them less susceptible to financial coercion. After all, that is what capitalism does to quantitive measurements of debt, turns it from debt forgiveness to debt peonage. The second part isn't necessarily true, there are plenty of poor people that don't do what rich people tell them to, and plenty of rich people who happily do what rich people tell them to do.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 68 points 8 months ago (5 children)
  • [–] 32 points 8 months ago* (4 children)

    Approximately 45% of the available combat ready aircraft are in position at various air bases, which include carriers. One does not deploy and concentrate air assets like that unless you want the shit to hit the fan. Wasting billions for nothing.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 22 points 8 months ago (3 children)

    This is Trump's MO, I think he was hoping for a lot more coverage from the media on this to drown out the Epstein stuff. I guess he thinks if he does order a strike, it will help take the pedo-heat off him, but it'd be the most foolish decision he's ever made, Iran are not to be fucked with militarily.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago

    He's not very good at controlling the narrative. Of course it helps to not actually commit crimes that everyone will hate you for.

    The media aren't going to report that Trump has moved carriers into position because what's the story "Trump has moved carriers into position they haven't done anything though". Nah, it's either big explosions or they will go after the actual juicy story.

    Of course internationally the media get way more views for dunking on Trump than anything else, so they're not going to drop the Epstein story until Trump is either convicted or he's dead.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 62 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    Being sent to fertilise Iranian fields?

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 56 points 8 months ago

    A pedophile wants to create a distraction so he asks his genocidal friend how he does it so they start a war together. Imagine dying so a pedophile doesn't have to face justice. MAGA: they'll do it.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 22 points 8 months ago (4 children)

    Is there an actual source for this?

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] [S] 36 points 8 months ago* (3 children)

    No actual source, hence posting in memes rather than news.

    Edit: I found this but I still wouldn’t call this properly confirmed in any way: https://www.wionews.com/world/-last-meal-before-strikes-on-iran-why-us-military-s-lobster-steak-feast-might-be-bad-for-khamenei-1771662894540

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 44 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    Isn't this the 3rd time during the Epstein presidency that soldiers have been served their penultimate meal?

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›