Direct Translation via Google Translate. Edited. by Alexander Dugin
[RIA] The South Caucasus poses a serious problem for Russia. However, like all neighboring countries, with the exception of Belarus. Only with Minsk are relations fundamental and reliable. Everything else is highly problematic.
It's all about the lack of a clear strategy. Over the past 30 years, Russia has been moving simultaneously in three directions:
sought to integrate into the Western-centric global world (at first on any terms, then, under Putin, subject to maintaining independence);
strengthened its own sovereignty (both in the face of the West and in the face of neighboring states);
tried to play a leading role in the post-Soviet (imperial) space and partially contribute (unsystematically, fragmentarily and inconsistently) to Eurasian integration.
All three vectors pulled the country in different directions and required mutually exclusive strategies. As a result, we found ourselves where we found ourselves after the start of the Northern Military District: in direct confrontation with the West over the post-Soviet space.
However, we still hesitate to publicly declare the goals of the North Military District in their geopolitical dimension. But it would be necessary to calmly and calmly admit that we will fight until the complete capitulation of the Nazi regime in Kiev and the establishment of direct military-political control (and this is the only meaning of demilitarization and denazification) over the entire territory of the former Ukraine.
And we are ready to fight exactly as long as it takes for Victory. This would be clarity, which would immediately affect our entire strategy in the near abroad: Russia will not tolerate Russophobic regimes and tendencies on this territory anywhere and under any circumstances.
For all our inconsistency and unsystematic nature, geopolitics itself has demonstrated one very important law in recent decades. The territorial integrity of any post-Soviet state can only be guaranteed by positive or neutral relations with Russia. An attempt to go directly to the side of the enemy (and the West is the enemy, and this is an axiom of geopolitics; anyone who doubts it is apparently an ignoramus or a foreign agent) jeopardizes the territorial integrity of the country that decides to take such a step.
This started back in the 90s - Transnistria, Nagorno-Karabakh (at that time there was a Russophobic globalist Popular Front government in Azerbaijan ), South Ossetia and Abkhazia.
Transnistria is still frozen. South Ossetia and Abkhazia are torn off from Georgia in response to Saakashvili’s act of aggression, urged on by Soros and globalist forces (in particular, Henri-Bernard Levy). Armenia under Pashinyan challenged Russia, and Baku , on the contrary, acted skillfully and friendly - as a result, Nagorno-Karabakh became Azerbaijani from Armenian. While Kiev was multi-vector, it had Crimea, Donbass , Kherson region, and Zaporozhye . Then territory after territory began to emerge from it, and since Russophobia did not subside and turned into a real war with the Russian world, Ukraine will no longer exist at all.
The West cannot guarantee territorial integrity to anyone on the territory of Eurasia ; all its promises are a bluff. Yes, the West is still capable of causing serious harm to Russia - at the cost of destroying an entire country (as is now the case with Ukraine). But to save, protect, build, create, organize something... This is not for them.
But let's return to Transcaucasia.
If we want true integration of the Eurasian space, we must have a consistent plan, and not just a series of reactive, albeit sometimes effective, steps. We must act proactively. After all, in fact, the West itself never believes in its promises to those countries neighboring Russia that take the path of direct geopolitical Russophobia.
Whatever they come up with, the West only needs to start a conflict, and if as a result the ally is torn apart, dismembered and destroyed, it does not bother him. For Russia, they are something much more. Even without the pathos of friendship between peoples, this is simply our common, united land. And these are peoples united with us in their historical destiny. No matter how the treacherous elites paid by the West convinced them otherwise.
If the West now wants to open a second front in the South Caucasus, especially in light of the failure of the Ukrainian counteroffensive, it will be quite easy for it to do so.
Pashinyan, who heads Armenia, still allied with Russia, is completely under Western control. He surrendered Karabakh and did not lift a finger to protect the Armenians. He led the country to destruction, and the West was obviously ready for this and contributed to this in every possible way.
But the Pashinyans come and disappear, but the people remain. Will it be moral for us, Russians, to calmly watch as Armenia turns into bloody chaos - following the path of Libya , Iraq , Syria , Ukraine?
Sitting and waiting until the awakened Armenians themselves realize that such a ruler is destructive for Armenia is unproductive. They don’t wake up and don’t wake up, only at our embassy they shout slogans prepared by Soros and burn Russian passports. This is only one - the most obvious - point of probable arson in the Caucasus.
Many fear that Turkey , which considers itself a full partner in Azerbaijan’s victory in Nagorno-Karabakh, will also begin to take a more active position in a manner unfriendly to Russia in the South Caucasus.
Most often, these fears are exaggerated, since Turkey's priorities are to strengthen and maintain influence in the Eastern Mediterranean, in the zone of the former Ottoman Empire.
And only then - and then mainly under pressure from NATO and the United States - does Ankara make plans for the Caucasus or the Turkic world of Eurasia. Turkey is not a direct antagonist of Russia, but if the South Caucasus flares up, then it will be every man for himself.
Be that as it may, we find ourselves in a difficult situation in the South Caucasus. In fact, the West can blow it up at any moment if it decides to open a second front. And all we have to do is react. Yes, we sometimes do this quite well - all the enemy’s calculations collapse and have the opposite effect. It happens. But not always.
Therefore, it is worthwhile, without wasting time, to begin full-fledged and decisive strategic planning: what do we want to see in the South Caucasus and how to bring this picture to life? And at the same time, make a final decision regarding the entire post-Soviet space. If we want to see it as friendly and allied, or even neutral, then we must make it exactly that way. By itself, it will not become so or will completely cease to be.
It's time for Russia to go on the offensive. In Ukraine, in the South Caucasus, in Eurasia as a whole. We need offensive realism. Plans, cold and sober analysis and effective, strictly targeted actions.
[Boston Herald] What is the Biden administration’s latest "existential" threat to humanity today?
Is it the weather?
Or is it tradesmen in F-150 pickup trucks wearing red MAGA hats?
Is it gas stoves, or the genocidal decision by the Supreme Court to force deadbeat hippies to start repaying their student loans?
Or is it "traditional" Catholics going to a Latin Mass? Or the refusal of some Americans to follow CDC orders to wear a mask out in public?
Or is the greatest crisis facing the planet this news cycle angry parents complaining to their local school committees about transgender recruiting of kindergarten kids in the public schools?
These are some of the non-issues that the Democrats have been trying to gin up their shiftless base with since January 2021, while simultaneously funneling billions of dollars in armaments and cash to Muslim terrorist states since ousting Donald J. Trump from the White House.
Elections have consequences, and stolen elections....
The audacity of this mob of appeasers and fellow travelers is astounding.
All the Democrats and their fellow travelers holding up swastikas in midtown Manhattan and chanting "Gas the Jews!" in Sydney and issuing snide statements in Harvard Square have been calling us "Nazis."
These are the same people who put up the banners screaming Black Lives Matter everywhere from wooden churches to Fenway Park.
Black Lives Matter. But apparently not Jewish lives.
#1
Folks are holding up swastika's and Antifa sympathizes with them instead of attacking them proving the right was correct that Antifa were just brownshirts working for left.
[BEE] TOKYO — After a devastating and tragic surprise attack on Pearl Harbor, Japanese Emperor Hirohito has called for a ceasefire.
"The loss of life on both sides is a tragedy," Hirohito said in a speech requesting an end to hostilities. "Now that we have pulverized the American naval fleet, we respectfully request that the United States look for ways to promote peace and not take any steps to retaliate until we attack you again. Thank you."
American leaders had already begun talks to enter the war against the Axis Powers but were now bombarded with calls to engage in peace talks instead. "The timing of Japan's request does seem a little suspicious," said Captain Mike Rotunda, a United States Navy spokesman. "I mean, they literally asked for a ceasefire immediately after attacking us. It puts us in a weird position because that's not really how ceasefires work."
Segments of the American public pleaded with leaders to hold back on planning a counterattack and instead listen to Japanese calls for peace. "It would be immoral to strike back at Japan," said one Congressman. "Yes, they just bombed America's naval base. Yes, they seriously crippled our fleet. Yes, they killed over 2,000 Americans. But now they want peace, so we should totally believe them. It's not like they would do anything sneaky."
At publishing time, U.S. officials had tentatively agreed to a ceasefire in good faith despite new reports that more Japanese planes laden with bombs were on their way to Hawaii.
Direct Translation via Google Translate. Edited. by Petr Akopov
[REGNUM] “They are just animals and do not deserve humane treatment” - this is what Israeli leaders and many Israelis now say about Hamas, whose fighters, during the attack on Israel, took hostages, killed civilians and mocked the bodies of the dead.
In response, the Palestinians recall decades of Israeli occupation, torture in prisons, the destruction of the families of those whom Israel considers “terrorists” - in general, both sides are actively engaged in dehumanizing the enemy. This is not news, it was the same in the recent Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict over Nagorno-Karabakh, and, alas, it is the same in our civil war in Ukraine, which is going on in the form of a war between two states.
The sublimation of mutual hatred is the law of war, but many are quite sincerely perplexed: is it really impossible to do without extremes, without unnecessary cruelty, without atrocities? Or even this: what should civilized people do when faced with atrocities? They are against such cruelty, but how can they respond to savages who do not observe the “laws of war”? An eye for an eye, an atrocity for an atrocity?
As a rule, discussions immediately follow about civilization and barbarism, about highly moral and developed societies and savages prone to cruelty. This is what they say in Israel not even about Hamas, but about the Palestinian Arabs as a whole, “a nation of terrorists,” and they have no doubt about their right to respond in the form of a total shutdown of the Gaza Strip and massive bombings that will lead to the death of thousands of civilians.
So do civilized people have the right to such actions?
If you're expecting a "no" answer, you're wrong. The problem is different. It is that there is no opposition between civilization and barbarism in the form in which it is presented. Cruelty, atrocities, and violence are not inherent only in “simple” societies, not to mention the fact that the very criteria for dividing into highly developed, civilized, progressive and backward, primitive and reactionary are more than conditional.
From the point of view of the average modern Western person (conditional, of course), the atheistic atomized consumer European society is civilized and progressive, and from the point of view of a believing Arab Muslim, it is not just at the lowest stage of development, but on the path to its own destruction.
The cruelty of some Sharia laws - such as stoning or cutting off a hand - causes horror among Europeans, but they are practically no longer used in the modern Islamic world. But euthanasia or sex reassignment operations, increasingly practiced in the West, cause shock among Muslims or Orthodox Christians as completely contrary to their idea of good and evil.
There are different civilizations in the world, moreover, each of them has its own age, that is, now both very old and very young civilizations live in the world at the same time. Does this mean that the old are necessarily more humane, and the young are prone to violence and cruelty? Of course not. And how can one accurately measure the age of a civilization? Is Arab younger than European?
But what about the Middle Ages, when it was the highly developed Islamic civilization that was not only an order of magnitude superior to Western European civilization, but actually preserved the ancient philosophical and scientific heritage for future “developed Europeans”? Or did not the highly developed German civilization, the core of the European one, demonstrate in the middle of the 20th century the heights of organized not even cruelty, but inhumanity? Like her Anglo-Saxon cousin throughout the 17th–20th centuries in relation to various “subhumans”:
Yes, cruelty was also characteristic of these peoples, both in relation to each other and in relation to Europeans. But only the European white man not only placed himself at the highest level of development, but also denied other races and civilizations even the right to be called people. Is this not the case now? Yes, but it is precisely the direction of development of Western civilization that will more than likely lead it to a new division of people: into a higher, genetically modified type and ordinary, ordinary people. And we can only guess in what form the atrocity of the former will manifest itself in relation to the latter: after all, for them they will be at the same level as domestic animals are now for humans. Will they feed and care for you? Or sterilize?
Is it possible to wean humanity away from cruelty? No, because human nature itself is sinful, and no society will be free from violence in one form or another (and often the most terrible thing is not the most open and brutal). Of course, it is possible to limit the brutal nature in a person as much as possible if everyone strives for the salvation of the soul and for living according to the commandments. But there are no guarantees here either - even very religious societies can be phenomenally cruel to strangers, to those whom they do not consider human. And this is not about today's Jews or Palestinians, but about all of us.
You can, of course, try to forcibly wean people away from violence - drive everyone into barracks (it is not necessary to build them on the ground, virtual ones will do even better) and instill in them the spirit of peace and love for all living things. This, however, will not end well, because the salvation of the soul is always the result of individual choice and will, and only the person himself can fight the demons in his soul. God created us free, including to fight our cruelty.
But, renouncing the devil-beast, defeating him in our spiritual warfare, we should not think that others are now worse than us, we should not demonize others (and alien civilizations), we should not dehumanize them. Because this is the sure path to destruction - both of one’s own soul and of one’s own civilization.
#7
Yea, well, these ethical arguments are wonderful, Petr. But there is only one law relevant to the current case "הבא להורגך השכם להורגו" These who come to kill you, kill them first.
#16
Sanction Iran. Those who do not are enablers. Gaza needs to be taken Fallujah style. Let the women and children out. Graham is just looking for more MIC cash.
Posted by: Super Hose ||
10/11/2023 12:25 Comments ||
Top||
#17
Going back about 500,000 years, when animals attack humans/proto-humans, the humans would respond and kill the animals back. If the animals did not stop, they were wiped out. At least those animals were a potential source of nourishment. Can't say that about the current crop of CHUDs but wipe them out we must in order to reestablish civilization.
Posted by: Rex Mundi ||
10/11/2023 12:47 Comments ||
Top||
#18
There is a reason people remember "Vlad the Impaler".
#19
We can't use nukes on Gaza - too close to our own cities.
Normal kinetic bombs will do an adequate job of killing people and turning buildings into rubble there, though it might take a bit longer. Save the nukes for the sites in Iran listed in the truckloads of files Mossad wandered off with, the last time Bibi was prime minister.
#22
General Sherman's comments are as apt today as they were 160 years ago:
https://cwnc.omeka.chass.ncsu.edu/items/show/23
Posted by: Tom ||
10/11/2023 14:14 Comments ||
Top||
#23
A Moab would be better than a nuke anyway.
I suspect Netanyahu is already considering strikes on Iran while the world is still stunned and everyone knows Iran provided massive assistance.
[HotAir] I bet they were. In fact, we hardly need the Gazan testimony today to know that they fully supported Hamas’ launch of war against Israeli civilians in mass attacks around Gaza’s borderlands. In video after video promulgated by the Gazans and Hamas terrorists themselves, we saw them dancing in the streets as they dragged bodies and hostages into Gaza from Israel, and mocking and terrorizing children hostages as part of their celebration.
As Haaretz reports today, though, it has begun to dawn on Gazans that they seriously miscalculated how Israel and its allies would respond to this war. "At first we were ecstatic," one Gazan tells their reporter, celebrating it as a "historic day." Now they are finding out just how historic it might be, as it might send Palestinian Gaza into the history books:
"None of us believed the videos we saw on Saturday morning. Hamas fighters inside Israeli territory and fighting with all their might," Maha, a 34-year-old woman from Gaza City said in a call with Haaretz. "Who would have thought this would happen?" She called October 7 "a historic day for the Palestinian people."
Maha is not alone in defining the Hamas invasion of Israeli territory as a historic day. Most Palestinians from Gaza who spoke to Haaretz described the first hours as the beginning of the "liberation of Palestine."
"We were ecstatic. It’s like a dream that is hard to wake up from," Maha adds. "But as the picture became clearer, and I saw that there were Israeli prisoners, I realized that we were in a nightmare, in hell."
First off, let’s parse out "fighting with all their might." Hamas terrorists paraglided into a concert to slaughter at least 260 unarmed civilians, a number of them foreigners. That’s not "might" — that’s gutless terrorism against defenseless people, the most cowardly attack of all. The fact that this made Gazans "ecstatic" tells us plenty about not just their culture but also their complete embrace of Hamas as their leadership.
But of course, it was much worse than that, as i24’s report today makes clear. The same "heroic" Hamas "fighters" were decapitating babies too:
This is what made Gazans "ecstatic." Reports and video showing Hamas raping women and killing children didn’t bother them a bit. Only after they considered the potential consequences of the hostaging did their enthusiasm dim somewhat.
Let this serve as a reminder to those who argue that we should separate Gazans from the Hamas government they elected in 2006 and which they have fully supported ever since. Hamas launched this war in part to make Gazans ecstatic, and they succeeded. And Gazans are clear on the objective, which isn’t more fully autonomous control of Gaza: Reminds me of the stories from my maternal uncle who was in Germany with Soviet army: every single German he spoke to "I'm not a Nazi. I always opposed the Nazis." He didn't say so, but I think he whacked one who said "I always liked Jews.
...They want Jerusalem back, and Israel pushed back to its 1948 borders — as a start. Their real mission is clear from the Palestinian protest chant From the river to the sea — the eradication of Israel entirely. That very much includes making everyone they see as settlers into legitimate targets of violence, children and babies included. Raping and pillaging are embraced as well by the Gazans.
So why should anyone object when Israel responds by defeating and subjugating Gaza in the barbaric war their government launched and they cheered?
What becomes clear in this piece from the far-Left Haaretz is the dawning realization that Gazans made a fatal miscalculation by launching this war. They cheered when Hamas terrorists dragged hostages back because they assumed that the Israelis would play by the old rules: some retaliatory attacks and then generous terms for hostage swaps. They likely assumed that Israel’s allies in the West would pressure them, as usual, to use only "proportional" force in precision-targeted strikes.
Instead, the attacks forced Israel to confront a hard reality: there is no peaceful coexistence with Hamas or any other Iranian proxy on its borders. Having tolerated the missile attacks for eighteen years, Israel had hardened its defenses in the calculation that settling the Gaza question would be far more costly than simply isolating it and controlling its borders to keep arms from getting in. This Hamas attack exposed the folly of that approach, as well as the miscalculation of containment of Iran’s ambition to annihilate Israel.
They now have no choice but to uproot and destroy Hamas’ footprint in Gaza and ensure it never returns — and that likely means the end of Gaza as a Palestinian settlement. That should please Egypt, even if they won’t admit it, as Hamas was a malevolent branch of the Muslim Brotherhood, the enemy of the al-Sisi regime there. It would remove the Palestinian issue from their border and make it into a West Bank/Jordan problem. Whatever other issues this creates for al-Sisi, removing that headache and putting Israel in control of Gaza may well be worth it.
For that matter, it might simplify things for Mahmoud Abbas, although he won’t admit it either. It will eliminate his main rival for power and the complication of Gaza in any future negotiations. Abbas and his Fatah regime are less connected to Iran than they are the Sunni states, at least traditionally, and furthermore they have to rely on the nearby Sunni states for both diplomatic and economic support, especially Jordan. This certainly serves as an object lesson about the end of Israeli tolerance for intifada and sets a precedent for the consequences that could follow, a precedent that will become more firm if Israel really presses this to its strategic end.
And if they do, this will likely be a serious miscalculation for Tehran, too. Their lines of communication to the West Bank are much more difficult than they are to Gaza, for obvious reasons. It was far easier to foment jihad in Gaza through their Hamas proxy as a way to wear down Israel and the West. The mullahs in Tehran must have also assumed that the result of the Hamas war would be a huge morale boost that would cause the West Bank to rise up, join Hezbollah, and overrun a confused and reeling Israel at its moment of crisis. Instead, Iran appears to be on the brink of losing its only real footprint in Israel and perhaps just days away from a massive refugee crisis, as Egypt and other Sunni states will almost certainly refuse to grant the Iranian-allied Gazans to remain for long once they are ejected from Gaza. I believe this was planned by Iran as mass hostages taking, not mass massacre. Quite possible that IRGC who trained Hamas "fighters" reported to their superiors that there's no controlling these animals, but were ignored.
Posted by: Grom the Reflective ||
10/11/2023 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[10 views]
Top|| File under: Govt of Iran Proxies
#1
That should please Egypt
Hardly likely as they'll have to absorb Gazans - and Egypt didn't want them even with the territory.
On the other hand Egypt is in serious financial troubles and is kept afloat by Saudi donations.
It should be possible to work into Saudia/USA/Israel deal that Egypt gets some Saudi money for taking the Gazuks. (also add a sweetener: USA stops harassing Egypt over "human rights" - we talking a fight against Muslim Bruderbund here)
#2
What changed everything from this from other raids of the recent past was the ease of anyone, including anyone on a motorbike being able to post cell phone videos on the World Wide Web instantly and how in a matter of hours everyone sees the savagery from citizen to president or chancellor.
#3
I talked with a fellow german sub sailor. We exchanged depth charge and other stories. I asked him why hitler's party was brought in and he said it was either hitler or the communists.
Posted by: Old Salty ||
10/11/2023 9:36 Comments ||
Top||
#4
/\ We've now brought in a 'Hitler-Communist' hybrid.
Oy. All the conspiracy theories mashed together, including Ukraine.
[Simplicius] The irruption in Israel caught many of us off guard. But to some extents it was a long-expected flashpoint escalation meant to begin the denouement of the Ukrainian conflict, by taking heat off from it.
There are many circulating accounts of all the things that seem “off” about Hamas’ attack, so I won’t recount every single point here as most of you have likely read them in multiple places; things like the very implausible breach of Israel’s high tech gates and defenses, to the unprecedented failures of Mossad and Shin Bet, to Netanyahu’s eerily scripted invocation of ‘Pearl Harbor’, which is very telling considering that Pearl Harbor was also a falseflag attack with the purpose of bringing the U.S. into WW2.
#3
The Israelites were fighting about politics and the military took their eyes off Gaza. If a country is fighting internally it cannot take care of external problems. Something we should consider.
Posted by: Old Salty ||
10/11/2023 9:40 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Yeah, get those "threatened judges" out on the front lines.
Otherwise, they may not have jobs at all.
Posted by: M. Murcek ||
10/11/2023 10:04 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Certainly, Hamas does nothing without OK of their Iranian paymasters, who are currently flush with cash. There are plenty of folks with connections to Iran. The entities that facilitated this slaughter will not be treated kindly by history if they are exposed eventually.
Posted by: Super Hose ||
10/11/2023 12:20 Comments ||
Top||
[REGNUM] Sergey Khudiev: Orthodox publicist, author of a number of books on Christian apologetics [Google Translate]
These days, against the backdrop of terrible and tragic messages, some wonderful examples of documentary black humor are flashing, for example:
"Playboy has terminated its relationship with porn actress Mia Khalifa due to her posts supporting Hamas and Palestine. Her channel and all content have been removed from the platform."
Mia's ardent love for Hamas is interesting given the fact that Sharia (Islamic law) provides for the death penalty by stoning for adultery .
True, the rules of legal proceedings are such that this measure is rarely used - the fact of adultery must be attested to by at least four credible Muslim witnesses, and a quorum is usually not reached.
...Alas, porn actresses, by virtue of their very occupation, provide enough evidence against themselves.
So, if a porn star were to face the court of those whom she so ardently supports, her fate would be sealed.
Another example of the same phenomenon is the slogan Queers for Palestine (people with sexual confusion for Palestine), which has been flashing at various manifestations for years . The fate of these queers, if they had fallen into the hands of Palestinian freedom fighters, would also have been sad.
The strangeness of what is happening (one of the meanings of the word queer is precisely "strange") cannot but amaze. People express their warmest support not just for those whose ideological preferences are opposed to their own - but for those who would put them to a brutal death.
We could already see something vaguely similar - people who were decidedly liberal, but at the same time ardently sympathized with some of the Central and Eastern European movements of the Second World War, which not only were much far from liberalism, but would immediately put their admirers in execution ditches, if they somehow happened to cross paths in the real world.
But here the admirers and the adored are separated by at least decades, which makes it possible to create a completely different story and certainly not be afraid of a real meeting.
Hamas, on the contrary, is alive and well; with a certain amount of bad luck, its left-wing radical fans may well cross paths with it, and it is hardly possible to gloss over the story, given that it is happening right now and is posting on the Internet a huge amount of photo and video evidence, including those filmed by militants themselves.
There is no need to describe in detail their nauseating content, it is already well known.
Perhaps, if there was any rationality to be seen in such behavior, it was necessary to induce Israel to retaliate with cruelty against the residents of Gaza (which, alas, was quite successful) and to provoke the intervention of other countries. It is possible, however, that there was no cunning plan behind this and Hamas simply does not know any other way.
One way or another, Hamas did absolutely everything that could be done to cause the most acute disgust in the whole world. But this, as we see, did not overcome the love of the left radicals - so the poor fool runs after a dangerous psychopath, and it is his danger that seems especially attractive to her.
One can understand politicians who pursue the interests of their powers - and for this they need to shake hands, including the bloodiest ones. International politics does not imply moral disgust.
But for left-wing radicals this is not a chilled Realpolitik, but a heartfelt affection. How is this possible?
If I were a psychoanalyst, I would talk about thanatos, the will to death, corruption, decay, which is acutely felt behind the entire left-liberal agenda, with its hatred of the family, childbirth and, in general, all normality and health. Here it’s somehow natural to call on murderers.
Or that the fight against "toxic masculinity," which refers to normal, healthy and natural masculinity, turns into a craving for the "hypertoxic" masculinity of rapists and thugs.
But I am not a psychoanalyst and therefore I will pay attention to something else.
Any ideological movement chooses its archenemy: for the Nazis these are Jews, for the Bolsheviks - capitalists, for extremists like Hamas - "Zionists and crusaders". For the radical left, this enemy is Christian civilization.
Dark Christian fundamentalists who don't accept same-sex marriage or pregnant men and cause oppressed minorities great mental suffering.
Carriers of conservative hatred that drives poor minorities to suicide.
Of course, we can ask the question - how does disagreement with radical leftist ideology become so much worse than actual murders?
But this is how ideology works - the enemy is primary, and claims against him are made only later. And against this enemy, any allies are welcome - including those whose views and actions you have to diligently turn a blind eye to.
However, love for the enemy of my enemy is universal, and we have people who are ready to love Hamas against the backdrop of an acute conflict with the West. A nod in direction of "anti-zionist" hysterics in Russian press
The trouble is that Hamas will not appreciate this - when militants attacked a music festival dedicated to Arab-Israeli friendship, it was probably full of people of the most left-wing persuasions, angrily condemning the Zionist military.
But the militants were not at all interested in the citizenship, nationality, much less the political sympathies of their victims.
They didn’t even ask which of the captured girls was a porn star and which was an ideological virgin. Their fate was equally terrible.
Therefore, looking at extremists with loving eyes is in any case a great strangeness.
Posted by: Grom the Reflective ||
10/11/2023 05:43 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[24 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
It's always been this way.
Posted by: Rex Mundi ||
10/11/2023 12:53 Comments ||
Top||
#1
We have been in the end times for a few thousand years. No reason why this prophesy can’t be true now and then be proved again down the road. History echoes.
Posted by: Super Hose ||
10/11/2023 12:28 Comments ||
Top||
#2
I've found that it's crows. Crows, and the sounds they make combined with the wind as you pick over the still warm ruins. To this day I can't stand crows.
Posted by: Rex Mundi ||
10/11/2023 12:50 Comments ||
Top||
[Ynet] There cannot be a more dramatic warning to Iran and Hezbollah than the one voiced by U.S. President Joe Biden in his address on Tuesday. The political and historical ramifications of his moving words would be discussed later but they were directed to the ears of Hassan Nasrallah, the leader of the Iran-backed terror group who has been provoking the IDF on the Lebanon border and has not yet determined if to open a second front in the war.
Biden in effect, made a direct threat. If Hezbollah attacks, the U.S. will intervene with its aircraft carrier, heading to the region. From there, the ball moved to Beirut and mostly Tehran's court.
The decision to enter a war against Israel and the U.S., would not be Nasrallah's to make alone although since the elimination of Qasem Soleimani, then commander of the Iranian Revolutionary Gard Crops, by the U.S. in 2020, the Hezbollah chief is considered second in the pecking order of that Shi'ite alliance.
While most of the focus is on the fighting in the south, On Tuesday, a senior commander and two of his men were killed in a gunfight with terrorists who cut through the Lebanon border fence. They were members of a Palestinian group but were operating in a region under Hezbollah's total control, where nothing moves without Nasrallah's consent.
He launched 15 rockets at Israel during the day, four of which were intercepted by the Iron Dome missile defense system, which indicates their target was civilian centers and not open areas. Two mortars were also fired, targeting IDF vehicles. No injuries were reported in those incidents.
..."We will free our hostages when we can," a senior official said. Gaza is under siege. Its residents are moving south to the Egyptian border and there their crossing is limited to 2,000 only.
The IDF has recouped and is on the offensive. Its commanders and the political leadership understand that this war is for Israel's very existence, no less. "Without deterrence, we will not survive."
...The estimation in Israel is that Nasrallah knew about the general plan [of Hamas] but was not informed when it would an attack would be launched. While the IDF is watching the northern frontier closely, its commanders currently believe he will think hard before joining the fight, while U.S. naval vessels and planes are en route, although his provocations would continue. But we've learned the hard way how wrong conceptions can be.
Posted by: Grom the Reflective ||
10/11/2023 05:28 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[19 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Why leave the getaway driver unaddressed after you have dispatched the burglars?
Posted by: Super Hose ||
10/11/2023 12:30 Comments ||
Top||
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
