This just reads like a strawman argument. This has nothing to do with woke takes.
A post like that is intended to ruffle feathers and cause you to disregard any nuanced geopolitical discussion regarding the treatment of Cuba. So I guess you can focus on that instead and and conflate it with "woke" because some sportsball player that was discriminated against wore a tshirt once.
--- Double Post Merged, , Original Post Date: ---
Do you not see how vapid all of this is? What is even being discussed here that is of any consequence? I'm waiting
I prefer liberals over insane liberals. Same thing with one less word. You are bound to find an "insane" liberal with all that radicalization. Like the one saying to eat ****** to fight climate change.
I prefer liberals over insane liberals. Same thing with one less word. You are bound to find an "insane" liberal with all that radicalization. Like the one saying to eat ****** to fight climate change.
Sub in conservative or any other political ideology in front of insane and you'd get the same results. The only thing that matters is what "team" your on. I don't get the significance of this at all, or how it addresses anything I've said. I ask for what the woke ideology is, you refer me to 50k fucking random, uncontextualized twitter search results. What am I supposed to do with that?
Sub in conservative or any other political ideology in front of insane and you'd get the same results. The only thing that matters is what "team" your on. I don't get the significance of this at all, or how it addresses anything I've said. I ask for what the woke ideology is, you refer me to 50k fucking random, uncontextualized twitter search results. What am I supposed to do with that?
If you wanted to know what the woke narrative was, posts from those search results, might explain better than I can.
What is there to know about it? Its divisive and divides people. It unnecessarily makes everything about race. Its regressive and sets society back decades. It encourages people to believe that being 100 pounds overweight is healthy. Its full of contradictory and illogical ideology which most will reject on sight.
Its directed and funded by "american oligarchs" who have their own motives and agendas. If people don't trust billionaires, why would they trust woke campaigns funded by billionaires.
Historically, democrats have been the biggest supporters of gas taxes and many other objectionable trends.
Democrats are currently alienating people with their opposition to cryptocurrencies and bitcoin.
Supporting things the majority object to appears to be a constant for them. As the things they support run contrary to the self interests of all.
And so exposure to them should alienate everyone eventually.
Its like.. can democrats recall a single thing they've been right about, out of the millions of positive claims they've made about Trump, ukraine or the US economy? I don't think any of them can.
If they can't remember a single thing they've been right about, how can they have credibility? The short and simple answer may be, they can't. And the closer in proximity people are to this, the more destructive it is to the democrat party.
If you wanted to know what the woke narrative was, posts from those search results, might explain better than I can.
What is there to know about it? Its divisive and divides people. It unnecessarily makes everything about race. Its regressive and sets society back decades. It encourages people to believe that being 100 pounds overweight is healthy. Its full of contradictory and illogical ideology which most will reject on sight.
Its directed and funded by "american oligarchs" who have their own motives and agendas. If people don't trust billionaires, why would they trust woke campaigns funded by billionaires.
Something being "divisive" isn't really a criticism, nor is it a starting point for one either.
Talking about race and the societal implications of race isn't "regressive", nor does it send society back decades. Unless you mean we can avoid this regression by acting like it doesn't exist?
Discussions about weight or body image are not an excuse to lie about metabolism, it's about not dehumanizing people based on that.
Who "funds" it doesn't really say anything about the substance does it? It only would raise questions for the motivation for doing so. That kind of answer is always too benign for your tastes though probably?
Historically, democrats have been the biggest supporters of gas taxes and many other objectionable trends.
Democrats are currently alienating people with their opposition to cryptocurrencies and bitcoin.
Supporting things the majority object to appears to be a constant for them. As the things they support run contrary to the self interests of all.
And so exposure to them should alienate everyone eventually.
Its like.. can democrats recall a single thing they've been right about, out of the millions of positive claims they've made about Trump, ukraine or the US economy? I don't think any of them can.
If they can't remember a single thing they've been right about, how can they have credibility? The short and simple answer may be, they can't. And the closer in proximity people are to this, the more destructive it is to the democrat party.
The average person doesn't even know what crypto is. Why would any government with a centralized banking system support crypto? The only reason Dems might be more outspoken about it now is because it isn't adversarial enough to the current power structure for the GOP to denounce it. The moment that happens, it's curtains. The majority of people are in fact not anarcho-capitalists.
What do Democrats support that the majority objects to? Aside from the 'ole reliable taxes? Inconvenient EPA rules?
Democrats have been right about every major social issue in modern times, for one.
Biden also told China that they should not interfere and it seems like China won't. This is looking grimmer by the day for Russia (and sadly, for Ukrainian civilians too).
ah, that article has quite a few interesting details. most important, for me at least, that Russia was planning to take the puppet government path. in any case with this it's probably a safe bet that putin is already defeated. human misery aside, laughably at that. he just... can't take ukraine if the population will reject russia at every step. russia might conquer ukraine but the war is already lost.
ukraine will reject russia every step of the way, eventually it will likely rebuild with plenty of foreign aid. meanwhile putin will have to face the consequences of one of the most ill conceived plans executed by his evidently weak army (by actual superpower standards).
The conservative however only wants to conserve and keep modernity which can only be pretty much one thing enabling them to agree upon one another which is why they do so well compared to democrats.
Wow, where'd you get this false info from? Conservatives don't want modernity, they reject modernity and prefer to keep racism, homophobia, misogyny, and all that other shit alive. They agree for the most part because majority of them don't have different thoughts or views. There's not as much diversity there as there is amongst the left of center. I know the right lack self awareness the most out of all the groups, but I didn't know it was this severe.
Oh, and let's not forget that they actually do well because they pull shit like gerrymandering and trying to prevent minorities from voting.
man, the irony here. You seem to have almost no knowledge about anything, nor have you said anything that's even remotely smart. I don't know if you're trolling or not, but I can't remember a time where you were even remotely accurate or knowledgeable about anything. You aren't in a position to say anything like this.
ah, that article has quite a few interesting details. most important, for me at least, that Russia was planning to take the puppet government path. in any case with this it's probably a safe bet that putin is already defeated. human misery aside, laughably at that. he just... can't take ukraine if the population will reject russia at every step. russia might conquer ukraine but the war is already lost.
ukraine will reject russia every step of the way, eventually it will likely rebuild with plenty of foreign aid. meanwhile putin will have to face the consequences of one of the most ill conceived plans executed by his evidently weak army (by actual superpower standards).
Yes, he cannot get out of here unscathed. Even in his best case scenario (retain some regions, get most sanctions lifted, have ukraine not be in nato), which seems very unlikely, the writing is on the wall.
The west is going to move away from russian energy and Russia will be a Pariah for the coming decades as long as Putin is there. Even if they get back into swift and somewhat normal trading relations continue, the war and the sanctions were already so costly that russia is probably going to wake up in the 90s once everything is said and done.
If the west, right now, decides to deliver serious military aid to ukraine (so they can defeat russian aircrafts more effectively), Ukraine can take the lost cities back. And my personal view is that we should do it.
I think that the reason many western states are reluctant is, tragically, that they don't want a complete defeat for russia but a diplomatic solution in which russia can save some face, so it does not become revanchist. I think that is misguided, we should ensure Russia takes a complete defeat here as a lesson learned, both for Russia but also for other Dictatorships.
Yes, he cannot get out of here unscathed. Even in his best case scenario (retain some regions, get most sanctions lifted, have ukraine not be in nato), which seems very unlikely, the writing is on the wall.
The west is going to move away from russian energy and Russia will be a Pariah for the coming decades as long as Putin is there. Even if they get back into swift and somewhat normal trading relations continue, the war and the sanctions were already so costly that russia is probably going to wake up in the 90s once everything is said and done.
If the west, right now, decides to deliver serious military aid to ukraine (so they can defeat russian aircrafts more effectively), Ukraine can take the lost cities back. And my personal view is that we should do it.
I think that the reason many western states are reluctant is, tragically, that they don't want a complete defeat for russia but a diplomatic solution in which russia can save some face, so it does not become revanchist. I think that is misguided, we should ensure Russia takes a complete defeat here as a lesson learned, both for Russia but also for other Dictatorships.
Not even that is in the cards... Ukraine was never joining nato anyways. It didn't meet the requirements for it and Zelensky even offered it before russia invaded. As for the sanctions... I suppose russia could negotiate retreating from ukraine in exchange for lifting those but how long would that take? weeks? Can russia even keep the war going for that long? This sort of thing is usually not immediate. Let alone that while this would give putin an out so to speak.. it's still a pretty big defeat. Once this is over putin is also looking at the political consequences of this at the motherland.
That said... putin still has nukes. I am all for sending as much help as possible without there being a threat of nukes. Under normal circumstances I don't think this would be on the cards but comments from the past few weeks seem increasingly unhinged...
Haven't thought about the bit about the west wanting russia to save some face. My first guess would be that it's not something anyone would care about. First because this is something putin sort of did to himself. Europe is not a place where putin will find sympathy. That said, russia retreating in exchange of removing sanctions is definitely a more humane alternative that should be the priority. Since that would stop deaths in ukraine and allow it to start rebuilding while at least prevent further damage to the russian economy. The scenario where no one gives in and russia digs a deeper hole in ukraine is cool and all but it comes at the cost of actual human lives. Unfortunately it's up to putin at this point...
Zelenskyy has already implied that Nato wasn't happening. There's no way out of this conflict where that's still on the table IMO unless the situation in Russia changes.
There's too fine of a line to walk here where it makes sense to substantially upgrade the kind of support Ukraine is receiving. At least Biden is aware of that and has ignored the way too common and absolutely eschatological calls for No Fly Zones just because Ukraine is asking for it. Even Zelenskyy knows such a thing could never happen.
So how will Europe reduce its dependence on Russian gas? Norway and Qatar don't have enough production in this regard.
Also, there was a problem with the Norwegian gas fields recently.
Qatar has gas deals with China and Japan, although Biden tries to reach an agreement with Qatar and asks Qatar to supply more gas to Europe. (As far as I heard)
I see in the news that the USA is taking normalization steps regarding Iran. I don't know if it's true, but the USA seems to be trying everything possible in this regard.
Yeah, that is a whole different "ballpark" to genuinely support Brandon, is way different from being a democrat. The modern democrats {((who have moved far more left relatively speaking and generally speaking(statistically proven))} only get their way when they manipulate and brainwash. They are obviously very good at doing it through gaslighting and virtue signaling. Ignorance is bliss though, and quite a few of democrats are happy despite being statistically proven to have higher rates of ****** *******. Unrelated... The villains in a universe always have the strong powers to make up for their initial weakness/disadvantage, viruses or parasites for example just take over their host and use them to spread their information. The modern democrats use the power of the mind though.
--- Double Post Merged, , Original Post Date: ---
that laptop story is crazy, can't say I am surprised, it's just now coming into the light.
Not even that is in the cards... Ukraine was never joining nato anyways. It didn't meet the requirements for it and Zelensky even offered it before russia invaded. As for the sanctions... I suppose russia could negotiate retreating from ukraine in exchange for lifting those but how long would that take? weeks? Can russia even keep the war going for that long? This sort of thing is usually not immediate. Let alone that while this would give putin an out so to speak.. it's still a pretty big defeat. Once this is over putin is also looking at the political consequences of this at the motherland.
That said... putin still has nukes. I am all for sending as much help as possible without there being a threat of nukes. Under normal circumstances I don't think this would be on the cards but comments from the past few weeks seem increasingly unhinged...
Haven't thought about the bit about the west wanting russia to save some face. My first guess would be that it's not something anyone would care about. First because this is something putin sort of did to himself. Europe is not a place where putin will find sympathy. That said, russia retreating in exchange of removing sanctions is definitely a more humane alternative that should be the priority. Since that would stop deaths in ukraine and allow it to start rebuilding while at least prevent further damage to the russian economy. The scenario where no one gives in and russia digs a deeper hole in ukraine is cool and all but it comes at the cost of actual human lives. Unfortunately it's up to putin at this point...
I think the idea is not that they want to play nice with putin, but that they think a complete defeat for him would trigger even more desperate action, while a way out with the chance to keep power could happen with less bloodshed.
Personally, I am against it. Russia has to be outright defeated and go out as loser. That does not mean I want revanchist actions on Russia. If Russia leaves completely, including Crimea, but demands the sanctions to stop in exchange for it, of course I would do it. But not if retreating just means gathering new power and trying it again (for example by leaving footholds inside Ukraine that they claim are independent).
After this, there need to be UN Peacekeepers in Ukraine, including in the regions that Russia occupies and no single Russian soldier.
So how will Europe reduce its dependence on Russian gas? Norway and Qatar don't have enough production in this regard.
Also, there was a problem with the Norwegian gas fields recently.
Qatar has gas deals with China and Japan, although Biden tries to reach an agreement with Qatar and asks Qatar to supply more gas to Europe. (As far as I heard)
I see in the news that the USA is taking normalization steps regarding Iran. I don't know if it's true, but the USA seems to be trying everything possible in this regard.
The only real solution is going green. Until then, there are different scenarios.
The most dire scenario is a full stop of russian gas. Oil and Coal can be replaced, Gas cannot easily be replaced. If Russia cuts the gasline (which it won't, it would be suicide, unless it is at the brink of the end of Putin anyway), that would mean Europe will have to ration gas. As in, production cannot run on full force and some inhabitants will have to ration heating, too. It would also further the explosion of prizes for food and so on.
So the idea is to quickly get LNG gas from different countries (including the US) while investing a lot more money into green technology (solar, wind) to become less energy dependent.
It is going to be really hard to do this while maintaining a healthy economical momentum, but at the end of the day, the longer Europe waits, the harder it gets.
WE needed to turn green yesterday, so at least lets do it today.
--- Double Post Merged, , Original Post Date: ---
_____________
A dimension that is often overlooked is the refugee crisis that is unfolding and has links to Syria.
There are about 1 million Syrian refugees still in the EU, and we can expect about more than 4 million Ukrainian refugees (there are 3.3. million refugees outside of Ukraine by now).
After covid and with the explosion of energy and housing prices, it will be a challenge to get every refugee a proper rooftop, education for their children and ideally psychological and social help in case of trauma.
I am very happy that europeans, at least so far, seem to be willing to give shelter. Without the voluntary effort of civilians, for example in poland, it would not be possible to handle the situation. At all. The governments were not ready for this, without people just giving a room or even a bed to people coming to trainstations, there would be a lot of mothers and children homeless somewhere between moldova and poland.
thank you for proving my point. But, this seems to fit the right and Trump supporters far more than it does Biden supporters. Though, one Biden supporter I think this would fit well would be shio.
