Yessssssssss this photo is everything gonna go out and get some too
Imagine a fatter longer lighter churro
This is not the best the bourgeoisie has. These are the useful idiots they send to distract and entertain while the competent extract all the wealth behind the scenes.
That makes so much sense. Fuck
Has anyone noticed a slight uptick in women - usually in male-dominated spaces - calling themselves females? I find it so jarring when I encounter it. Like. Internalised misogyny is such a bitch ):
Where’s the astrology girl when you need her
Yea, loved the show generally though.
A friend of mine got married in Derry a while ago in the
spoiler
Hall where they all go to vote at the end
Awesome city with awesome people. Also obligatory
I’m pretty sure there’s a material difference between how you have to treat enemy soldiers and enemy combatants (non state actors). Because the US had two sets of rules between Afghanistan (combatants) and Iraq (state actors), in Afghanistan it was only the Army handbook or whatever that they were legally obliged to follow whereas Geneva applied in Iraq.
Of course all international law is basically just unenforceable bs anyway, especially if you’re America
Perhaps we should consider that both things can be true: she intended the compliment of “I am sexually AND emotionally to you to such a great degree that I want nothing less than marriage”; and his reaction was valid because he perceived the meaning as “I’m settling for you”.
We don’t know how this miscommunication happened. She could have phrased it poorly or said it in a weird tone. He could have misheard. He could have a ton of pre-existing conditioning and pressures that led him to place her comment in a social context that she doesn’t share.
Neither of them have to be in the wrong here. Both of them should do the work and try to understand each other better.
It’s been a while since I studied it so memory could be wrong but basically the rules are different when you’re fighting as a state actor vs when you’re just an “armed combatant”.
The Geneva conventions govern the behaviour of state actors in armed conflict with other state actors which matters mostly for stuff like prisoners of war and the such. Also you are obliged to wear a uniform of some sort if you’re a state actor. Armed combatants aren’t protected to the same degree.
I would guess that what you’re remembering is that Hamas is technically not a state actor or signatory to the Geneva conventions and therefore allowed to not wear uniforms.
Replies to top comment: “Are some of them doing double duty?” “So there’s another two guys getting paid for doing nothing?”
Reply to bottom comment: “Historically the Americans have tried something similar, but failed for a simple reason - too little support from the ordinary people”