OHCHR estimates that between mid-April 2014 and 31 May 2016, at least 9,404
people, of which up to 2,000 are civilians, have been killed as a result of the conflict. The
vast majority of civilian casualties, recorded on the territories controlled by the Government
of Ukraine and on those controlled by armed groups, were caused by the indiscriminate
shelling of residential areas, in violation of the international humanitarian law principle of
distinction.
Na better believe Prigozhin, that guy never told a lie or said anything that was totally wrong.
So it's not racist to say Russia is still in a barbaric mindset, because they are bombing apartment buildings in Ukraine? Is that it? Even though the way it was phrased implies that barbarism is typical of Russia and its history, and also falsely implies NATO isn't barbaric and isn't doing the same thing, and it's a well-known racist trope?
This person's comment exhibits the common double standard of the good civilized nations vs. the uncivilized primitives bullshit, which is about the oldest racist narrative there is.
The Bavarian purity laws defined beer in that part of the world as something that can only have hops, water and wheat.
Hops, water and barley. I think not using wheat was kind of the point actually, since wheat can be made into bread, and you wouldn't want a bread shortage, would you? Banning others from brewing wheat beers, and then giving a monopoly to your own court brewery to corner the market, is also a baller business move.
Russia is still using barbaric tactics, according to the person I replied to. This implies that this is typical (and backwards) of Russia, like that racist trope about barbaric Mongol hordes. It also implies that someone else (presumably NATO, which they mention) isn't using barbaric tactics, which is blatantly untrue.
I don't understand how what you wrote is a addressing my post? What's your point?
It has also taught NATO that Russia is still in the barbaric tactics mindset.
Oh those backwards Russians, still stuck in the past, where they were just a bunch of barbarian hordes. I assume the West, by contrast, has developed a civilized kind of warfare, as befitting their superior civilized culture? That's what you're saying, right?
The civilized West would never... oh yeah they would and they did, repeatedly, and it was worse actually in e.g. Iraq. So all this "barbarism" shit is just racism with no basis in reality.
Yeah it actually says that in the text on that root password screen. But nobody ever reads that, me included. Literally everybody I have told this to was surprised when they hear about it. It's a total UI failure.
Use the net installer. Leave the root password empty if you want sudo installed. There is probably no need for you to read the official installation manual, but maybe do so if you run into any trouble.
There are wiki pages for the most common things you might want to setup, like how to install steam, nvidia driver, enable backports (good way to get (some) newer packages without breakage), and enable flatpak. Just google "debian wiki nvidia" etc.
No it isn't. The whole premise of that movie is incorrect. Mike Judge should be ashamed of having played into the fucked up worldview of classism and biological essentialism of your average redditor elitist bigot.
For decades, schools have taught children the strategies of struggling readers, using a theory about reading that cognitive scientists have repeatedly debunked. And many teachers and parents don't know there's anything wrong with it.
The netinstall is the recommended installer, why do people want the big iso? It's not going to save you any time. You'll be downloading less overall if you use the net installer.
No he hasn't. The management of the old x.com (the one that got bought by paypal) threatened to walk if Elon wasn't removed from the office. He was always this incompetent.
I mean at this point it doesn't look like Russia wants to give anything back, but who knows. They need to start with a ceasefire and maybe over time they can figure out the rest.
They should have taken the deal from April last year, where Russia had reportedly agreed to go back to the pre-Feb-22 borders. And before that, they should have implemented Minsk actually. The most important things Russia wanted was for Ukraine to be neutral, and to stop attacking the Donbas.
Ukraine's negotiating position just keeps getting worse.
U.S. officials reject criticisms that F-16 fighter jets or longer-range missile systems such as ATACMS would have resulted in a different outcome. “The problem remains piercing Russia’s main defensive line, and there’s no evidence these systems would’ve been a panacea,” a senior administration official said.
You want to send even more conscripts into these defense lines while risking some other country getting bombed? You do realize that this will not magically fix the artillery and ammo shortage, and that Russia can mobilize even more troops as well?
There was plenty of evidence that this was the likely outcome of this offensive months before it even started. Why tf did they go ahead with it anyway?
I remember discussing the Russian advantage on reddit back in January, including them building defensive lines and the general imbalance in equipment, especially artillery and ammo, as well as the fact that Russia had caught up in troop numbers by that point. I had western sources for these numbers.
You wouldn't believe the level of hate and name-calling I received for pointing this out and saying they should negotiate. But apparently I was the one spewing propaganda.
No communist thinks that Russia is still communist. The critical support for Russia among some communists (me included) has to do with them fighting western imperial expansion/domination, and that Russia winning (or rather: not losing) would weaken the US empire and give breathing room to socialist and anti-colonial movements worldwide, since the US empire is the no. 1 threat to those movements. If US/EU supremacy on the international stage were broken, the US would have a much harder time isolating, toppling, or sanctioning socialist or anti-imperialist governments. If Russia loses and gets broken up or economically ruined, that would be proof of imperial power and scare other countries into caving to western demands. These countries would also lose Russia as a potential ally and trade partner.
The other major interpretation among Marxists (and there's been a lot of debate about this) is that both sides are imperialist, and the correct stance in this conflict is revolutionary defeatism (as Lenin preached in Czarist Russia, or Rosa Luxembourg did in Germany during WW1). In this logic everybody need to fight and overthrow their own bourgeois governments and stop the war (i.e. Russian workers should undermine the Russian government, while Americans need to fight the US government), since the working classes of those countries shouldn't fight each other, but rather fight the capitalists in their own countries. Slogan: No war but class war.
https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/Documents/Countries/UA/OHCHRThematicReportUkraineJan2014-May2016_EN.pdf
Na better believe Prigozhin, that guy never told a lie or said anything that was totally wrong.