Both? 17.8 billion dollars to murder children with seems pretty pointlessly cruel to me. All jokes aside, are you not seeing these in the blue states? They don't have these in New York? Or are you saying conservatives are sneaking in and building these when the democrats aren't watching?
At my previous job, we had a "Devops" team. We even outsourced some ops to a third party in the worst possible way (I'm talking "oh you want to set up an alert for something related to your service? Send us an email and we'll look into it" and so on). All the pre-devops pain magnified by an order of magnitude. Sometimes devs would do their own ops (I know, big shock!), and they would call it "shadow devops". Nearly fell off my chair when I first heard it. Kinda glad I'm not with them anymore.
What makes you think the IC is in Putin's pocket? Is it because they've assessed that Iran hasn't been building nuclear weapons for the past 22 years? Does that mean the IAEA is also in Putin's pocket?
Don’t care if yanks go get blown up in the Middle East. It’s all in service of enriching Halliburton and the military industrial complex. Yawn. It is 2003 again?
The last time they did this, a million Iraqis died.
Ukraine gave up their nukes, look what happened to them. Libya gave their nuclear weapons program up, and look at them today. North Korea didn't, and they're still standing, for better or for worse. Iraq was accused of having nukes, but didn't have them, and got destroyed. Seems that if you want any semblance of sovereignty outside of NATO, you better have some nukes.
So for any nations reading along I'll summarize the basic conclusions:
Get nukes
If you have nukes, do not give them up
If you're accused of having nukes, drop everything and get nukes asap
Do you think Israel would be bombing Iran if they had nukes?
There is broad support in Israeli society for the ongoing genocide in Gaza. There are polls showing as much (I think one of them showed a rate of 82%). This is not one man's whim, this is not the will of some small shady elite, this is a consequence of material conditions in Israel. If you don't take those away, some other face will lead the charge.
Plus I'm not convinced that an assassination of Netanyahu would lead to a different party taking charge. I can't imagine their system of governance is set up this way. But this is entirely beside the point. The point is that one man's death doesn't change history. The allies didn't win WWII because Hitler killed himself, Hitler killed himself because the allies won WWII.
Fair, taking it off the list. It just comes up naturally when I list the horrible things the US has done bc of the highway of death. Still an example of the US military not defending the US, but definitely not an invasion of Kuwait. Thanks for the correction, I was sloppy!
Great man theory nonsense. Was Netanyahu in power during the Sabra and Shatila massacre? During the Nakba? During the June 1967 war? Was Trump president when the US invaded Iraq? Was he president when the US sent billions of dollars in military aid to Israel to commit their genocide with? It's the countries, not the leaders. They're just the personification of a system. You could shoot each of these men in the head today, and nothing would change.
When has the US military defended the nation? I got the impression that they're mostly used for invading foreign countries for financial gain, cf Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Somalia, Yemen, Yugoslavia, Sudan, Panama, Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, Cuba, Guatemala, Korea.
Isreal is committing a genocide right now, and has been maintaining an apartheid state for decades. In this analogy, they're the white South Africans. They're the nazis.
If I have to be completely honest with you, and this is an indictment of their research, it seems heavily dependent on what the protest is for or against.
This refers to Chenoweth's research, and I'm somewhat familiar with their work. I think it's good to clarify what non-violent means to them, as it's non-obvious. For example, are economic boycotts violence? They harm businesses and keep food of the tables of workers. I don't think that's violence, but some people do, and what really matters here is what Chenoweth thinks violence is, and what they mean when they say "nonviolent tactics are more effective".
At the end of "civil resistance: what everyone needs to know", Chenoweth lists a number of campaigns which they've marked as violent/nonviolent and successful/unsuccessful. Let's look at them and the tactics employed tonfigure out what exactly Chenoweth is advocating for. Please do not read this as a condemnation of their work, or of the protests that follow. This is just an investigation into what "nonviolence" means to Chenoweth.
Euromaidan: successful, nonviolent. In these protests, protestors threw molotov cocktails and bricks and at the police. I remember seeing a video of an apc getting absolutely melted by 10 or so molotovs cocktails.
The anti-Pinochet campaign: successful, nonviolent. This involved at least one attempt on Pinochet's life.
Gwangju uprising in South Korea: unsuccessful, nonviolent. Car plowed into police officers, 4 dead.
Anti-Duvalier campaign in Haiti: successful, nonviolent. Destruction of government offices.
To summarize, here's some means that are included in Chenoweth's research:
throwing bricks at the police
throwing molotov cocktails at the police
assassination attempts
driving a car into police officers
destroying government offices
The point here is not that these protests were wrong, they weren't. The point is that they employed violent tactics in the face of state violence. Self-defense is not violence, and this article completely ignores this context, and heavily and knowingly implies that sitting in a circle and singing kumbaya is the way to beat oppression. It isn't.
Both? 17.8 billion dollars to murder children with seems pretty pointlessly cruel to me. All jokes aside, are you not seeing these in the blue states? They don't have these in New York? Or are you saying conservatives are sneaking in and building these when the democrats aren't watching?