MultigrainCerealista [he/him, comrade/them]

Yea the Diada that’s today

The un-independence day

I would like to extend my best wishes to all, even the haters and losers, on this special date, September 11th.

BAKE UP WEEDPLE

I’m not supposed to laugh at 9/11 but I’m allowed to hijack a jet in GTA who is the real monster

Jet memes don’t smelt 9/11 dreams

The people who died didn’t deserve to die but America deserved 9/11 does this make sense?

Can we please stop celebrating on this awful day, the diada of Catalonia when they lost their independence and became part of Spain you awful fucks

I think as a broadly applicable rule, the slower this conflict burns the better it is for Russia.

That’s not the same as saying the longer it burns since I think Russia has more interest in a permanent settlement than a continued war, but the slower it burns means cheaper for Russia in terms of western support fading away and Russian advantages in manufacturing of munitions being maximized.

I don’t see any reason for Putin to engage in a risky big arrow push at any stage of this war. He tried it at the beginning and got burned, since then it’s been favorable attrition warfare. Why would this strategy change?

3 favorites 😂

I don’t think what you’re saying is wrong, it’s more that I think it’s too convoluted.

Something like 75% of the worlds oil is in the Caspian basin and this explains most of the past 30 years of US war.

I think Iraq, Georgia, Ukraine, Crimea, Syria, it’s about that oil and the countries in proximity to it.

This stuff about “finance capital vs industrial capital” I dunno, it’s not wrong I just think it’s a bit too abstract high concept.

The wunderwaffe is a moving goal post. It’s always the next weapon that will change everything. The weapon that hasn’t yet been delivered is the secret ingredient that will change everything.

Currently this is the F-16.

The reasoning NAFO types engage in is that western weapons are exceptional and remarkable such that only a small number of them can counter much larger Russian forces.

“Wunderwaffen” is the term for this reasoning.

The more cynical view, our side of things basically, is that the west is only providing enough to keep Ukraine in the fight but not enough to win because the west benefits more from this conflict dragging out than it benefits from any peace settlement.

Ukrainian victory is not plausible without western forces actually deploying, and since the west is not actually willing to bleed for Ukraine, the objective of the west is to prolong this conflict for as long as possible in order to make Russia bleed as much as possible.

The mask slips pretty frequently as US senators or EU presidents boast about how “cheap” this war is because “it’s not US soldiers dying.”

The concept is known as a bleeding sore. The west wants to engage Russia in as expensive a conflict as possible in order to force Russia to expend blood and treasure in Ukraine, with the rationale being this makes Russia weaker in the medium term future.

Secondarily and specifically for the benefit of the USA, it forced europe to cut economic ties with Russia and broke apart the growing links between Germany and Russia which ensures Europe remains firmly under US vassalage. The loss of very cheap energy imports from Russia also dramatically undermines European manufacturing which rather directly benefits US manufacturing since the US is also pushing the EU into a trade war with China.

Edit: not an important argument

Critical support to the worst person in the world

your comment reduces to “it was of minor scientific value but a propaganda win” which is exactly what I’m saying.

And if it was important why did we stop?

Like it’s cool in a “I’d like to take a submarine to visit the titanic” dare devil sense but why was it important?

How did it improve the world?

Yeah people were “psyched” about it but when they stopped being psyched and stopped watching - when they lost the tv ratings - the Apolo mission was canned.

How is what you said even vaguely a rebuttal of the idea it was showy propaganda with minimal scientific value?

Playing golf on the moon actually wasn’t an important thing to do. It’s cool, I’d like to do it… but it’s really pretty superficial. It’s a vanity propaganda piece and nothing else that’s why we didn’t go back because it doesn’t matter.

Why?

Why even is getting a man on the moon important?

And if it was important why did we stop?

The value of manned missions was propaganda which is why the Apolo mission was cancelled when it stopped getting TV ratings. Because getting humans on the moon didn’t actually deliver anything of much importance except those TV ratings.

“First game of golf on the moon” good job USA you did it meanwhile the USSR landed on Venus.

In the early 1950s they were peers of the west in computing. I’m the late 1960s they were beginning to pull ahead in the personal computing space. In the early 70s Kennedy is reported to have been concerned that the USSR might start some AI driven production program that would destroy the west.

But the west was well ahead in terms of super computers. The Soviets were killing it in terms of small readily available chips and has they kept this up for 10 more years then the personal computing revolution would have validated their approach. But the western lead in “supercomputers” and the then prevalent belief that the future of computing would be dumb terminals connecting to super computing mainframes made the Soviets believe they were losing the battle when actually at this point they were really starting to win it.

So in the 1970s a decision was made to pirate IBM supercomputer chips and focus on cloning the superior western super computing chips instead of developing original IP focused on personal computing chips, which was a huge mistake.

Ironically East Germany was one of the highest quality manufacturers faux IBM chips that they were cloning and western companies would try to evade western IP law to get these clones so the capability was there but the program to develop original IP was killed.

Basically in the 1960s and 1970s people thought in terms of Asimov and the “multivac” mainframe system, which actually is pretty similar to the modern internet so it’s not entirely wrong, but the futurists of the era weren’t seeing the potential of personal computing because they didn’t anticipate how quickly the cost of chips would go down.

I wrote a longer rely to op but I think it’s when the rights and liberties of the individual are made supreme to the point of overriding the rights of the community, that’s when it’s just crypto-libertarianism masquerading as anarchism.