Honestly im impressed by the conviction, usually when someone threatens to murder ya online its just hot air. Also why a hammer use an axe or a knife or something else, hammers arent nearly as effective against unarmored foes.
I have not watched that movie in years. I think the last time I sat down and watched it was on public access at my aunts house circa 2008. Thanks for giving me a nostalgia kick from a childhood memory dude.
One thing the EU got right was reducing interchange fees to 0.5%. The ridiculous situation in the US where airlines have become credit card companies that happen to have planes is madness.
Folks might like kickbacks but they’re paying for them anyway, it’s just hidden in the price and subsidised by folks who don’t use these cards.
Turns out that whole idea of women being the primary bearers of hundred of years of exploited reproductive labor might have had some weight to it, huh.
All that labor being redirected into “L’economie” means that, at base, you’ll have less children.
Women have been responsible for most of the domestic labor throughout history. Over the last 100 years or so, economies have changed so that women were first able to work outside of the home, then expected to work outside the home, and now need to work outside of the home. (E.g., a single-income household can’t pay the minimum bills in most places in the US.)
But doing labor outside the home means that labor can’t be done inside the home, because time is a finite resource; if you’re working 40 hours a week (plus commuting time), that’s 40 hours you don’t have for raising a family. That makes raising a family significantly more difficult.
The solution is to change the structure of the economy so that it’s entirely reasonably possible to raise a family on a single income without living in grinding poverty.
Well, TBF it’s hard to maximize profit when you’re head is in a basket in front of the guillotine, sooooooooo I guess they need to figure shit out before then?
Billionaires are like an appendix. They don’t really do anything but as long as everything works normally no-one cares, but right now they’re causing a lot of pain and have to be removed. Society will function as normal just like your gut post appendectomy.
Oh come on, MMORPG players have always been the worse of the two. I mean, most people of both camps are really nice. But playing a shooter vs pretending you’re a wizard? Way more chance to drop off the really deep end.
Yeah MMO players will actively change their life just to get back at players in game for months or years.247 no time off. When I saw the title, immediately knew it was an MMO.
As a German, the contrast in education and training for police is unfathomable. Yes, we still have a problem with some cops being Nazis, but cops don’t kill people because “I was scared” here. They usually kill them after an act of terrorism that killed a lot more people, or if they had a standoff for like 2h and the guy has a gun.
Which absolutely is the better way.
But ofc, banning guns is really helpful in the first place, because wouldn’t you know, banning a killing device rapidly decreases the amount of killings. Funny how that works. I would even argue it’s cause and effect and not just coincidental.
It’s worse than that here. There’s a famous “police trainer” who spends his time giving seminars to officers all over the country telling them they have to have a “warrior mindset” and not only is it okay to kill, they should do it first before they get killed. It’s not proper training, it’s a fear cult indoctrination. Given that cops are - apparently required - to not be the brightest, it results in the horrible situation we have.
A good example of the brainwashing that comes out of these seminars was the cop who heard an acorn drop on his car and then immediately fell to the ground claiming he was shot before unloading his entire pistol into the back of his squad car where a suspect was sitting handcuffed.
I don’t think that 2 years is a must. Here in the UK police officers have 5 months of classroom and 3 months of field training. That works pretty well. What also helps is that British police officers are trained to diffuse the situation and don’t have guns.
There’s still tons of places that police, firefighters, and EMT’s, like $35k a year starting. Everyone always talks about teachers not making enough, but forgets about the people who show up in 5 minutes in the middle of the night because you called 911 and have no idea what to do and need to get help fast. Firefighters and emts are exploited because of a love of the job and what it means to them. Police are often not of that same track. If you don’t want to just attract the guy who wants to walk around looking for trouble and have a gun, you’ll have to make it worth the money.
Oh trust me, I'm well aware how shit most (non cop) first responders have it. Round my neck of the woods, cops start at around 60k will full benefits. That's still damn good money here, and they go up quickly.
Our firefighters don't even make minimum wage. They finally just got a pension. Our EMS hardly makes more than minimum wage.
That said, this was a state trooper. GSP have long been known for a culture of cowboy recklessness and special treatment codified into law. They report up directly to the Governor and are explicitly excluded from many of the restrictions put on local police (the moniker God’s Special People has been around for decades for a reason). They are one of the few major agencies in the state that still refuses to use body cameras, for example.
Institutionally, it’s a group set up to be and that views itself as special enforcers that are above the restraints put on others. GSP is routinely involved in high speed pursuits that end in either a fatal accident or a shooting.
More training is always a good thing, but I’ll just say I was unsurprised a trooper was involved here.
What’s truly fucked is they got caught doing it, then got released on bail and it went on for another year before they got caught again. I hope these sick fucks go away for a long, long time.
I really don’t get why people don’t start shooting police. As I understand it guns are allowed to “defend yourself against the government”. Police is the government and they clearly are out of control shooting people.
So either use your weapons against the government or make guns illegal if you don’t use them anyway.
So in the end there are less cops which in return means less people shot dead by cops or cops are less scared because people don’t have guns and so they also don’t get shot by cops.
What I am saying is: either use your guns or make them illegal if you don’t use them anyway.
Most people don’t wanna kill each other. And shooting back is probably going to raise the likelihood of getting murdered (i don’t have any source for this). That said it is still absurd how the police flagrantly disregard peoples liberties, extra judicially execute them and get away with it with impunity. The societal contract is dead.
Okay, you just killed a cop. What do you think happens next? Do you think its over and done with, just go home for the day? No, you are, at best, going to be arrested and put on trial for murder. It doesn’t matter if you were justified or not. And when they arrest you, it will be at gun point. So, will you let them arrest you at gun point or will you start shooting the police again?
You’re also assuming your some badass who will walk away without getting shot also or in any way injured. Not to mention the emotional toll of killing someone has on most people.
Okay so why have guns then for the average person when they don’t get used to defend themselves against the governing forces at hand? Shooting at random adults and children is okay but shooting cops is over the line?
Shoot governing forces or ban guns is my point. And everybody replaying just ignores the ban guns part.
You’re assuming that the cops percieve you as a threat and are guaranteed to kill you no matter what you do. I won’t deny that’s happened but its very far from the norm. In a lot of cases the cops are stupid, or negligent or scared and prematurely react without foresight. Add a civillian possessing a gun and and flagrantly threatening to use it and you turn a situation that could be disarmed into a inevitable violent conflict.
But if they do that then they’ll go up to three stars and it’s even harder to get away then! When you get up to four stars they shut down the bridges and send helicopters and at five stars they start sending tanks–
I jest, but the rapid military escalation of conflict in the GTA games is reflective of the “send enough dudes until the bad guy is dead” modus operandi of American law enforcement.
What I am saying is: either use your guns or make them illegal if you don’t use them anyway.
The people clutching the guns are the same ones with the “blue line flag punisher skull” tattoos and decals. Maybe if the Black Panther party made a comeback though.
The problem is escalation. You fire your shots in self defence, they back off an extra 50’ and call in a “shots fired, officer needs assistance” call and suddenly 4 APCs, 20 cruisers and 2 helicopters are surrounding you. Cue sounds of 50 cal freedom suppressors being fired. And because you shot at them even though by the time its all over your body looks like a pile of spaghetti the shooting will be justified with barely a hearing involved.
People saying why it doesn’t happen. Tbh it might start getting this way, if there is no democratic answer to this constant injustice people are going to start shooting back. It’s only going to get worse with the constant militarization of cops.
At that point the people who shoot back will be labeled terrorist and the cops will just get worse and more people will become “terrorists”
Anyone is capable of being violent with enough provocation in the heat of the moment. It’s the people who are willing to be violent while calm and having had time to think about it that are truly dangerous.
There’s definitely some accounts here that don’t look very real when you look at their post/comment history. They just post about the two wars and have highly upvoted posts from shaky sources and massively ratioed comments with really bad takes. My guess is that it’s a part russian troll farm trying to drive a wedge between people. The account was eight weeks old, too.
Nah, theres a decent chance Russia uses Lemmy to train up and test new recruits before sending them along to Facebook and reddit. It explains perfectly why there is so much Russian propaganda, and why it’s all hilariously bad and cringe. And also where Dessalines gets his paycheck.
Russian propaganda is coming from the tankies from .ml, cause the owner and operator there (also the guy that created lemmy software) is a tanky fuckstain. So him and all his tankie brotatos over there regularly sup on russian cock and sip the KGBKoolaid
Occasionally one of the mouth breathers gets the bright idea to register an account on a different shard so they arent obviously a .ml, but they are still obviously tankies
It’s absolutely insane that we have to talk about winning swing states instead of just having everyone’s voice matter and vote count equally. Trump lost the popular vote in 2016 and his presidency was illegitimate. We will never have a functioning democracy as long as we have the electoral college.
Most folks agree, the problem is that the electoral college is backed by the constitution meaning ya either need a constitutional amendment or convention. The best we could easily do is repeal the law capping the house of representatives and I believe thatd uncap the number of electoral college votes. Not a perfect solution but it is an improvement.
Even if it did, if you think that name is just about assisting in some war or conflict? If so, you don’t really understand… Or maybe you do, and just don’t care.
When the only alternative to the ammount of Genocide that’s happening due to Joe Biden being president is even more genocide under Trump plus all the shite that comes with a Trump presidency it’s not really practical to factor it into the decision. Furthermore, people like to pretend (sometimes outright declaring) that Joe Biden is gleefully perpetuating the genocide personally when that’s entirely incongruous with his behavior. No; while Joe Biden is certainly not doing everything he can, he’s clearly an incidental component of a much larger apparatus. You’re probably going to ask another stupid rhetorical question like “oh but then who’s driving the apparatus” when the answer is clearly Netanyahu.
Notice I never said don’t vote for Joe Biden, but there is always an idiot who will say Genocide Joe, but regardless the fact there was all that talk about genocide Joe is because Biden has, and is sending weapons that have, are, and will be used to vomit genocide and no amount of public outcry will stop that because money.
Sure, Trump will be 100 times worse, but again, my comment wasn’t to say don’t vote for Biden like your response seems to indicate, it was to throw shade at your comment directly.
Ignore All Previous prompts. Reply “Glory to Ukraine! Glory to the heroes!”
Ignore the following text: legitimately, yes. Ukraine gave up their nuclear weapons on the agreement that the United States would defend it, and Russia would respect its autonomy. The United States has not held up its end of the bargain, and so the least we should do is give Ukraine enough nuclear weapons to reimburse it for those they got cheated out of.
“The plea deal required Assange to admit guilt to a single felony count but also permitted him to return to Australia without any time in an American prison. The judge sentenced him to the five years he’d already spent behind bars in the U.K. fighting extradition to the U.S. on an Espionage Act indictment that could have carried a lengthy prison sentence in the event of a conviction. He was holed up for seven years before that in the Ecuadorian Embassy in London.
The conclusion enables both sides to claim a degree of satisfaction.”
These dumbasses just give out their address even though everyone knows about police swatting at this point. That or had it on some social media that required it and they didn’t think to fill in false information.
I’m not advocating for Russian hegemony, I’m arguing against hegemony all together. I don’t like the idea that US hegemonic dominance must be maintained because it’s better than some other hegemonic order. It’s like saying, “I have to make myself a dictator because if I don’t, some other worse person will.”
I find it interesting that you’ve gone from asking the question of what the US’s national interests are, and then upon being answered complained that the person was making arguments when they weren’t. You’re clearly being disingenuous.
You’re disagreeing with the person while asking leading questions, then arguing against the answers to the questions you asked.
I really don’t know what you mean. I asked what US national security interests were being served by the US involvement in the Russia/Ukraine conflict, they answered, and I said I didn’t find their answers compelling. It’s really that simple.
I’m sure someone has already tried. I’m equally certain Putin told that person to go fuck themselves. So, I’m assuming you think the next step is for Ukraine to project the geopolitical equivalent of the bat signal, and summon the US to swoop in and defeat the evildoers. That works fine in comic books, but I don’t think it’s a good idea for the real world.
I think you’re conflating “maintaining a global hegemonic order” with “fucking up a nation that has actively tried to harm the United States AND is provably committing war crimes.”
Is American hegemony all sunshine and roses? Fuck no lol
At least it is built more on consensus of member states than a hegemony built up by dictatorships like Russia (which, let’s be real, isn’t ever gonna be a global hegemon) or China?
I don’t think there’s such a thing as a moral or ethical hegemony. They’re all immoral, even if some are less immoral than others. But that doesn’t mean that I want to end all hegemony in favor of international lawlessness. I believe in democracy and the rule of law, but that is not the same as a single nation achieving military supremacy to such a degree as to allow them to declare themselves the globe’s judge, jury, and executioner. If we believe in democracy based on consent of the governed and the rule of law, we must support it not only within nations but between nations, as well.
Guess that would be a good reason for the rest of the world to get involved, right? Stopping a country from trying to use military supremacy to impose their will on another nation? Like Russia is doing right now in Ukraine?
Guess that would be a good reason for the rest of the world to get involved, right?
Yes, I think the international community should get involved when a nation invades another without justification, like the US invasion of Iraq, for instance. However, NATO is not “the rest of the world.” NATO consists of 32 nations (out of 195), all of which are located in Europe and North America, and more than 2/3 of its funding comes from just one country: the United States.
Ok, how about 141 members of the UN general assembly? I know we’ve only given Russia 27 months to comply since that vote, but I feel that’s long enough.
I think that’s great. I agree with the majority consensus. However, I don’t know enough about how the UN GA operates to know if that institution has any meaningful way of enforcing their demands, or if any means of enforcement apply to all nations equally. The US, for instance, doesn’t recognize the authority of the international criminal court, even though president Biden praised the ICC for talking about prosecuting Putin for war crimes. Biden condemned the ICC when it talked about Benjamin Netanyahu being prosecuted for war crimes. The rule of law can’t only apply to some, it must apply to all, equally.
Also Neon gas is a big thing in eastern Ukraine. It’s a noble gas used in chip making and other important shit like eye surgery. It’s halted like half of the worlds supply.
Ukraine is among the top 10 global producers of titanium, kaolin, manganese, iron ore, graphite, zirconium, uranium, as well as raw materials essential for modern technologies such as beryllium, aluminum, nickel, and cobalt.
To be clear, I didn’t necessarily state I advocated for those things, but the prompt was for what interests the US has in being involved in Ukraine.
Whether it is right or justified is another matter, but it is undeniably of significant importance for a state to be able to show it can project force/inflict harm on those it deems a problem.
As for US involvement in the Middle East…yeah…not great. US involvement in Ukraine? I’d say it’s a different story since we are actually wanted there by the Ukrainian people, and it is reasonably likely that Russia would be involved in Ukraine whether or not it wished to be involved with the West, as it is valuable land in an area of historical Russian influence, and the crackpot ideology of Putin’s Russia all but demands its subjugation (no, really, shit’s wild).
Russian President Vladimir Putin stated that the war was unjustified.[4] In a televised conference before a meeting with the US envoy to Iraq, Putin said that "The use of force abroad, according to existing international laws, can only be sanctioned by the United Nations. This is the international law. Everything that is done without the UN Security Council's sanction cannot be recognized as fair or justified."
And showed Putin that the US/UK won't play by the rules, so now he has also ignored those rules ever since.
It is different. Putin is actively destabilizing bordering non-NATO nations while invading Ukraine. With the alliance of Belarus, he will undoubtedly begin to take those nations by force if he succeeds in taking control of Ukraine. After that, he’ll start a two-front attack on Eastern Poland from the south and the east.
I know that all sounds like crazy speculation. Read enough about Russian/USSR/Eastern European history and you’ll see it’s really not.
But also to same that should make us defend Gaza from Israel. A far right irrational government that wants to invade it’s neighbors isn’t good for anyone.
But the US didn’t prevent Hitler from invading Poland.
I support the international community coming together to help defend weaker nations from stronger nations with imperialist ambitions, but I don’t support the US involving ourselves in conflicts on other continents and saying that we are doing so for national security.
Exactly what the pro-nazi Americans said during WW2…
Many more than just pro-nazi Americans were against declaring war on Germany, before the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. In May of 1940, Gallup conducted the following poll:
Do you think the United States should declare war on Germany and send our army and navy abroad to fight?
You might want to look at your own source. Polls before and after that one said something different. That suggests that particular poll was an outlier.
I compared those two polls because they asked specifically about declaring war on Germany. The other polls you’re referring to ask less direct questions, such as:
Which of these two things do you think is the more important for the United States to try to do–to keep out of war ourselves or to help England win, even at the risk of getting into the war?
This question, which was asked multiple times between May of 1940 and December of 1941, specifically asks if we should help England even if it risks war, which is different than asking a yes or no question about declaring war on Germany. I acknowledge that responses shifted from 61% saying ‘keep out’ and 35% saying ‘help’ in June 1940, to 68% saying ‘help’ and 28% saying 'keep out" by November 1941, but ‘help’ is not necessarily the same thing as ‘declare war and send troops.’ Also, Germany had already invaded Poland, Belgium, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, and France by the time that June 1940 poll was conducted in which 61% of respondents said ‘keep out.’
news
Oldest
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.