Objection

joined 1 year ago
[–] Objection@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago) (1 children)

You're acting like North Korea and South Korea existed as separate, established entities prior to the Korean War. That's nonsense. It's projecting the modern state of affairs back into the past. The Korean War is when those entities were established as such. The were communists and anti-communists distributed throughout the whole of Korea, and neither side was interested in setting up a partition that would carve the country in two, until a compromise was negotiated effectively ending the war.

The Republic of Korea had governed the whole of the country, and the leadership was made up of compradors who had been propped up by fascist Japanese invaders and who had switched teams to being running dogs of the US as soon as it became convenient. The revolutionaries rose up against them, first attacking in the north and establishing a foothold before moving south. At this point, the US, seeking to assert dominance over a country thousands of miles away, intervened with one of the deadliest bombing campaigns in history, with an extremely high ratio of civilian deaths, many killed by biological and chemical weapons.

Even if the US hadn't been so brutal towards Korean civilians, it still had no business getting involved. This whole argument of "defensive" wars thousands of miles away is nonsense. It's the same argument the fucking Roman Empire used to justify conquering Europe:

There was no corner of the known world where some interest was not alleged to be in danger or under actual attack. If the interests were not Roman, they were those of Rome's allies; and if Rome had no allies, then allies would be invented. When it was utterly impossible to contrive such an interest—why, then it was the national honor that had been insulted. The fight was always invested with an aura of legality. Rome was always being attacked by evil-minded neighbors, always fighting for a breathing space. The whole world was pervaded by a host of enemies, and it was manifestly Rome's duty to guard against their indubitably aggressive designs. They were enemies who only waited to fall on the Roman people.

-Joseph Schumpeter

[–] Objection@lemmy.ml 3 points 6 hours ago (2 children)

Yes, I'd say it's very obvious that you prefer to spew bullshit everywhere, thank you for admitting it.

I don't "consume" your bullshit tho, I reject and refute it, despite your attempts to smear it everywhere.

[–] Objection@lemmy.ml 3 points 6 hours ago (4 children)

Maybe you shouldn't hang your bullshit so low, then.

[–] Objection@lemmy.ml 1 points 6 hours ago (3 children)

Yes, and the American Revolutionary War could have been avoided had the colonists simply accepted British rule.

[–] Objection@lemmy.ml 4 points 8 hours ago (6 children)

I already did. The part where you took offense and accused someone of "bootlicking" for identifying lies and propaganda.

[–] Objection@lemmy.ml 4 points 9 hours ago (8 children)

Again, sorry there are people here who disrupt your 5 minutes hate of circulating lies and propaganda about the people we're told to hate. Seethe.

[–] Objection@lemmy.ml 4 points 9 hours ago (10 children)

You could post, "you've been running around like a chicken with its head cut off" while calling the other sides argument a "word salad" in response to literally anything. Instantly win any argument, no matter who said what or what it's about.

[–] Objection@lemmy.ml 2 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago) (5 children)

Sure, the North attacked the South. In fact, the North also attacked the North. That's generally how revolutions work, after all.

None of this really pertains to foreigners coming in and levelling the country and dropping chemical weapons everywhere and slaughtering a ton of civilians.

The campaign was Confederate General Robert E. Lee’s first invasion of the North.

From the Confederacy's perspective, the Union was a separate country.

[–] Objection@lemmy.ml 4 points 9 hours ago (12 children)

Yes, I don't have to go through your comment history, I can just cite the part where you accused the person in this thread of "bootlicking," despite just refuting misinformation. Already did cite that, in fact.

[–] Objection@lemmy.ml 4 points 9 hours ago (14 children)

I'm sorry people push back against propaganda on here, must be rough for you 😔

[–] Objection@lemmy.ml 3 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago) (17 children)

This is like an antivaxxer trying to be generous by saying that maybe pro-vaccine people are only "accidentally falling into the trap" of supporting Bill Gates' demon army or whatever.

I've already established that you included the person you responded to as being part of this group of North Korea defenders for simply refuting misinformation. Rather than saying that people like that "accidentally falling into a trap," how about considering the possibility that they're right and have good reason for saying what they do?

Now you're even backpedaling, like "maybe" they're accidentally falling for a trap, maybe they're outright foreign agents, which we can tell because they had the audacity to refute misinformation. I ask again, "what fucking trap?"

[–] Objection@lemmy.ml 4 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago)

I'm just going off what has happened historically every time you people have tried this shit. What happened when y'all tried to "liberate" Vietnam? What happened when y'all tried to "liberate" Afghanistan?

I hope you suffer as those who seek freedom from that shithole do. Shame on you.

I hope you get exactly what you want and get to experience foreigners coming to "liberate" you through mass bombing campaigns. Maybe you'll even get a front row seat to Agent Orange from your "liberators." Shame on you.

 

This remains relevant as Ukraine has never apologized for these atrocities, continues to reject that these attacks constituted "genocide," and has criticized Poland for establishing July 11 as a day for commemorating the victims. And of course, it still uses the same slogans ("Slava Ukraini"), the same symbols (such as the red and black flag), and reveres Stepan Bandera (who was the head of the OUN, which in turn founded the UPA which carried out these attacks).

 

cross-posted from: https://hexbear.net/post/5524375

Context 1 2

Many abolitionists have complained to me that, as a traveling performer, I have not spoken to my audiences on the issue of slavery. I have received many angry letters attacking me based on assumptions about what my silence means.

Allow me to make my position clear: I oppose the institution of slavery. In the words of Thomas Jefferson, I believe it is a "moral depravity." I feel that way about other things as well.

After the raid on Harper's Ferry, the mood among Southern leaders was an existential panic and unstoppable lust for revenge. It reminded me of the Alamo. There was no reasoning with those leaders, nor could action be taken by congress. It would have required replacing most of congress and overturning decades of bipartisan negotiation and compromises. Even in the best case, it would have taken years.

But even worse, the abolitionist, pro-Negro movement quickly decided that their primary goal was not merely opposition to the reprisals or specifically cruel owners, but opposition to the entire institution of slavery, that is, opposition to the entire way of life of Southern plantation owners. And here they decided to draw the line between decent people and oppressive tyrants, which had the following consequences:

It shrunk the coalition. Most southerners support slavery. Anyone who supports the solution of having slave states and free states supports slavery.

It was politically infeasible. What is the pathway that takes us from the present situation to the abolition of slavery as an institution? I do not see how it could happen without a total collapse of the union. As usual, these Jacobins have championed a doomed cause.

The abolitionists have been distributing hundreds of pamphlets about the horrid conditions of slaves. The main effect of this has been to create a population of people in a constant state of bloodboiling rage with no consequential political outlet.

I fear this may be worse than useless. Yes, there are disingenuous proponents of slavery dismissing and censoring all criticism of slavery on the pretext of "states' rights." But there's also valid fear of historical government overreach and that fear gives power to pro-slavery leaders who say that only they can protect Southern culture.

Does this mean slavery should not be criticized? Absolutely not. But it's something I do not wish to contribute to unless if not outweighed by tangible benefits.

Many abolitionists have been single-mindedly focused on slavery, and the willingness of the Republicans to compromise on the issue, and that focus has had the following effects:

Not a single slave was freed by their efforts. Not one fewer lash was delivered by the owners.

It may have slightly contributed to the election of James Buchanan, ensuring that nothing can be done to stop the expansion of slavery into new states. Buchanan also does not support giving women like me the right to vote. A perfectly enlightened being would feel no bitterness about this, but I do.

None of this is the fault of slaves, of course, who are overwhelmingly the victims here.

But if women like me are ever going to get anywhere in this country, we need a broad movement that stands up for the rights of ALL women, REGARDLESS of their views on slavery.

 

"By your logic, you could justify a foreign armed insurgency against the US government" smuglord

link

 

Wait shit, I gotta come up with a different bit. Germans are already a thing.

 
 
 

Post criticizes Trump for lifting sanctions on Syria and calls Julani "a known terrorist" linked to "the deaths and injuries of dozens of American troops."

If this isn’t enough to flex your second amendment rights, kiss your fucking country good bye. We’ll be building a wall on the 49th

Yeah, you know, I was fine with all this other stuff, but "lifting sanctions on Syria" is my red line, that's the thing I'm really gonna fight and die for.

Doing Business with LITERAL TERRORISTS is a BIG BRAIN BUSINESS MOVE that will HELP the US!

Kill all the Americans you want as long as you bribe the toddler-in-chief…

It's so easy to get these people to hate foreigners. Literally just a random post from a random guy, they know nothing about the situation or the history and don't care to look into it before just agreeing with whatever.

How can any US friendly leader feel safe when Americans are insane chauvinists who are so fickle and uninformed, so ready to turn on them at the drop of a hat? Bribing/appeasing the ruling class is their only shot.

 

Maryland Sen. Chris Van Hollen says he has met with Kilmar Abrego Garcia, who immigration officials say was deported by error, in El Salvador on Thursday.

The senator shared a photo with Abrego Garcia at what appears to be a restaurant.

"I said my main goal of this trip was to meet with Kilmar," Sen. Van Hollen said. "Tonight I had that chance. I have called his wife, Jennifer, to pass along his message of love. I look forward to providing a full update upon my return."

 
 

https://lemmy.ml/post/28111691/17749466

This is actually insane. Another user was criticizing the New Deal era and brought up a bunch of points, I commented refuting a bunch of their points but describing two of of them, Japanese Internment and the Red Scare, simply as "legitimate criticism."

@Decoy321@lemmy.world responded "No they’re not. Those two things were caused by far greater international factors. Like, you know, the 2nd World War."

I cited a commission that found that internment was not caused by a legitimate threat posed by the Japanese but was rather caused by racism and hysteria, and that even Reagan agreed with that conclusion and signed a bill paying reparations to the victims.

Well then the mod responded that I was jumping to "inflammatory conclusions" and "personal attacks" because I assumed that when they said that criticism of internment is not legitimate it meant that they were defending internment. They continued to refuse to explain how else I was possibly supposed to interpret such a claim. I still have no idea. Apparently their stance is, "It's not legitimate to criticize the thing I oppose." If anyone can make sense of that, please enlighten me.

Since they refused to explain, I took a guess that maybe the misunderstanding was that they were interpreting "legitimate criticism" as "damning criticism," like that because a bad thing happened during that era, nothing good came of it at all. I made it clear that this was speculation and that any criticism of interpreting it that way only applied if that's what was happening.

The mod responded by permabanning me, removing all of my comments so they don't show in the modlog, and adding this:

Edit: the other commenter essentially proved that they were just baiting people into inflammatory discussion. They kept resorting to personal attacks and flip-flopped on their position solely to continue arguing. This behavior is not tolerated here. Please report such trolls in the future.

At literally no point did I "flip-flop" my position of "internment was bad, actually." Nor did I "bait" them, unless "criticizing internment is legitimate," is somehow "baiting" someone into saying "no it isn't." By far the most "inflammatory" thing that was said was when they said that criticism of internment was "not legitimate." The "personal attacks" I made were stating the fact that the position they had expressed was to the right of Reagan on the issue, and also making a quip about a .world mod defending the Red scare and Joseph McCarthy.

This seems to be a case of a clear case of PTB, the mod apparently misspoke but because they're a mod they can just ban people for calling them out instead of owning up to it.

Edit: My comments are still visible on kbin.earth (thank you @Skua@kbin.earth) so I can provide screenshots:

:::spoiler screenshots

 

context

transcript

DISRUPT INTERNATIONAL SHIPPING NOW!!

OGEY

Niche ocean carrier Atlantic Container Line is warning the fines the U.S. government is considering hitting Chinese-built freight vessels with would force it to leave the United States and throw the global supply chain out of balance, potentially fueling freight rates not seen since Covid.

“This hits American exporters and importers worse than anybody else,” said Andrew Abbott, CEO of ACL. “If this happens, we’re out of business and we’re going to have to shut down.”

[...] U.S. is no position to win an economic war that places ocean carriers using Chinese-made vessels in the middle. Soon, Chinese-made vessels will represents 98% of the trade ships on the world’s oceans.

Hey, Abdul-Malik Badr Al-Din Al-Houthi, how'd I do?

Thank you Mr. President, that's exactly what I meant. But why-

Another day, another banger

 

Then why did the blockade stop and start at the same time ceasefire started and ended

LITERALLY specifically to fool low-information people like you.

Some of the comments are actually decent, only like half are frothing reactionaries braying for blood.

Enjoy your slop.

view more: next ›