ComradeSalad @ ComradeSalad @lemmygrad.ml

Posts

7

Comments

439

Joined

3 yr. ago

I will say that the Wikipedia article is incomplete and not really reliable, as it normally is for current events. I assume that’s where you got this information, since that’s the only place I’ve seen those countries listed in that way, and Wikipedias source seem to be that those are the countries out of the total 34 that have made public statements regarding their involvement.

I can only hope that you’re right.

Oh come on. There’s no need to be dishonest. I’m responding in kind to your screeching tone.

So you’re calling me a liar to my face? That’s a wonderful plan, and I’m sure you’re coming at this in good faith.

Why would I bother responding to you at this point if you assume that everything I’m saying is a lie, because what? Am I a fed? A supporter of the US military? Am I a sock account for Joe Biden? I want to know, what’s your reasoning? You’ve just been hostile and gone in guns blazing for no reason.

You’re entire argument is, “You’re lying, it’s all in your head and your interpretation, and you’re triggered”? The hell is wrong with you?

I was just giving an example of how spare information is. I know Wikipedia isn’t a good source.

Further, China has far more then three ships in the region, three ships is actually the confirmed American contribution to the task force. The rest of the composition is unknown.

doesn’t mean we have to take part in military operations.

Because they are considered UN assets requisitioned for anti piracy duty, unless China withdrawals diplomatically from the operations in the Red Sea and Indian Ocean, they cannot willing ignore orders from the task force unless the orders violate international law. The ships aren’t “Chinese” when they are participating, they’re UN, hence the international officers corp leading the task force and ships.

China is part of the operations in those waters willingly and have been for decades, hence their very own port, military base, and airport in Djibouti that were built for them.

Which is not at all very often at all.

Which is precisely the point of war propaganda. That’s why this “empathy” seems jarring and out of place. It was always there; Americans aren’t some sort of bloodthirsty boogeymen and the true beliefs and actions of the bourgeoisie disgust them. But when you have been lied to and told the same lies over the course of your life, that is all you can believe.

Yes.

Which is precisely the reason we are here. We must never stop explaining, just as Sankara stated.

The poll you are replying to literally demonstrates that is not the case when people are exposed to and fully aware of the actions that the US military and its allies engage in. The bourgeoise will always attempt to control the narrative and bend public will, that is the entire point of war propaganda. However, the public can understand the truth behind why this is all happening and see through the lies. Most are ignorant, and simply follow what they are told.

I'm just giving context, there's no need to be passive aggressive or hostile. Do you think I'm defending the US or Israel? Where did I ever state that this is some righteous cause?

Its not just the "war" designation. The way they describe it in the Tweet harkens images of the Invasion of Iraq, Vietnam, Somalia, or countless other bloody conflicts in which millions died at the hands of combined offensives. Not the UN dispatching 4 destroyers to escort merchant ships in a story that is barely a footnote in the news. This is needless sensationalism and looks like crying wolf.

What "actions"? You make it sound as if the US is using the UN as pretext to annex Yemen, which if that was the case, do you think that the other members on the Security Council might have some objections and would have used their veto power? Do you think China would allow the US to use the naval assets they requisitioned for this operation, and are currently under the command of a US Navy officer, to aggressively strike the Houthis?

Granted, not much is known about the operation and unlike what we've come to expect from Western militaries that like to show their full hand, information remains limited. The Wikipedia page is sparse and relatively unsourced, and military public affairs have been tight lipped. Chinese involvement would be more or less guaranteed though, firstly as they signed off on the Operation despite their Security Council veto power, and along with the US and France, they operate the largest UN air and naval force in Djibouti.

Your understanding about what the Houthis have been doing is correct, and while it is a good cause, it is still in violation of international law, while simultaneously threatening the economies of a vast number of nations. That puts it a bit into perspective about why China and Russia haven't taken to kindly to the strikes, and why international opinion is particularly cold, even from Pro-Palestine nations. It is allying with the Western world, but I doubt Chinese officials would take to kindly to a major threat to one of the worlds largest maritime logistics points, especially as they are an exporter nation and rely on their goods making it cheaply and quickly to their target nations.

The name is definitely goofy though lol. I swear they just have some intern putting all these names into a random generator at this point.

I agree, but this is not increasing the presence of Western assets. Those assets were already there for a purpose dictated by the UN and not under Western control. Unless you consider Chinese and Russian naval officers to be "Western control".

It hasn't even broken the news in the US, so I doubt that really meets the criteria of preparing for war. Along with the fact that China and Russia both signed off on this despite their veto power. Not to mention that what the Houthis are doing is still international piracy, and while myself and most of Lemmygrad agrees with it, it is still in violation of international law, so this move is a logical next step.

Very little. There has been no news or push for any sort of offensive action. Instead, the US has called upon the Security Council which just created a small taskforce out of UN anti-piracy units stationed in Djibouti, whose sole purpose will be escorting ships through the Red Sea.

This is misinformation and rage bait, as much as the US military would probably froth at the mouth to start more wars, this is simply deliberately untrue. The only declaration from the US about Yemen thus far been that UN naval assets (Chinese, American, British, French ships so far) will be mobilized to closely escort shipping through the strait and Red Sea, and that those assets have authorization to fire upon inbound pirates, missiles, and drones. The operation is titled Operation Prosperity Guardian if anyone is curious.

This was decided upon at the UN Security Council, and composes 38 different nations, this is not simply a US military decision. The directive simply creates a dedicated task force from assets originally assigned to patrol in the Indian Ocean, and along the Somali coast, into dedicated escort units. The taskforce itself is also simply a redeployment of a taskforce that was headed by the Egyptian Navy until earlier this year when the Egypt ceded leadership of that particular task force.

The US military is a force of evil, but if we mindlessly sensationalize and lie about the reality of situations, then no one will believe us when it will be most important.

It might be a "fun bad" movie that's good for some liberal doublethink, western exceptionalism, and pro-America propaganda.

Unholy alliance lmao

Weird capitalism circlejerk.

Basically just centrism.

“Please maintain the status quo” 🥺

: (

It’ll probably take a path of “republicans and democrats unite against fascism”, I doubt they will touch on race relations.

: (

Have to go out like Lenin I guess. It's only appropriate.

I wouldn't say fascist, the Parks and Rec character was more like the strange libertarian guy some people have in their lives that actually believes in libertarianism and isn't just a Nazi using libertarianism as a cover-ideology. This president character is probably full blown fascist though.

The Last of Us character was pretty realistic though. He just seemed to be a sad, lonely recluse who wanted to be left alone because he was closeted and felt shunned by society as a LGBT person in the early 2000's, when gay marriage wasn't even a thought and being openly gay was still extremely dangerous in the US.

Just like Harry Star Wars Potter Voldemort Putler Slava Zelensky!

I had a stroke writing that.