#I fully support NATO

[kazhanko-art]

for the record, every dead Ukrainian, every act of genocide by Russia, every home destroyed, every inch of soil lost, will be a stain on the US, and I hope no one forgets how the US repeatedly failed to back up the Budapest memorandum, and whatever happens under Trump

[hussyknee]

I was today years old when I found out that the Iraq war wasn't actually about oil.

I don't know why this feels so much more evil than if they did it for some kind of material gain. They honestly just wanted terrorise the whole world to establish that they're the top dog and always will be. And they chose the most isolated, vulnerable countries to do it.

That would mean that the West's support for the Palestinian genocide is nothing other than they want to show how big and tough they are and that Israel is an extension of themselves and always will be, so Iran, Lebanon, Yemen and Syria had better watch themselves.

[qqueenofhades]

I really really REALLY need to see more people makimg the connection between trump and his russian handlers tbh.......like i know we've somehow gone through the looking glass of putin apologia but that piece abt the NYT you just posted, the bots, the interference: in the bag for trump? Yes. But i dont believe its due to his or even republican power or popularity or forcefulness.......this is a man with so much debt and kompromat thats only getting worse!! Not to sound kwazy BUT WE ARE BEING FULLY INFLITRATED and at the risk of conspiracizing i think the russians are ALSO behind the Times's demise along with so many other information centers etc. Like i KNOW these leftists love him but like. Wouldnt they care a LITTLE abt being manipulated like this???

Trump is 100% an active, willing, and eager Russian agent. That's not even paranoid conspiracy theory, that's just the only reasonable interpretation of the facts:

NOT TO MENTION that in the next two years after the Helsinki conference where Trump kowtowed to Putin in every way, the CIA admitted to losing huge and unusually high numbers of classified informants around the world (not CIA agents, but people secretly working for the American government in often-hostile countries):

Once again, this all happened when Trump was in office, when he was actively handing over CIA intel to the Kremlin against the wishes of the entire national security establishment, and which other experts have suggested was directly as a result of Trump handing over the identities of American informants to Russia, including those stationed in Russia itself:

Now, I could go on, but you get the point. Not to mention that Trump just lost a major UK-based lawsuit against Christopher Steele, the former MI6 agent who was the first to provide documents linking Trump to Russia in the controversial "Steele dossier":

And now: Trump is deeply in hock for hundreds of millions in legal fees and punitive judgments that are only increasing by the day, he somehow just came up with $90 million to appeal the judgment against E. Jean Carroll (nobody knows where he got this money either), and Russian state TV spends all their time openly salivating for Trump's return to the presidency (so he can hand over Ukraine and the rest of NATO and, as he literally said, "let Russia do whatever the hell they want.") I know we're largely numb to all the awful treasonous shit that Trump does, but like. This isn't a conspiracy theory, this is just what's going on in plain sight, and while the Online Leftists have recently become so stupid that I honestly can't tell if it's just terminal brainworms or active Russian psyops, it's strongly indicated that it is in fact a mix of both:

So, like. Just some food for thought.

[bookshelfdreams]

not a fucking day goes by without an american on this hellsite pondering whether they can justify voting for Biden, despite omg! he's supporting Israel!!!!11!

as if Trump didn't literally say just last week that he would not defend America's Nato partners and would in fact encourage Putin/Russia to "do whatever the hell they wanna do"

as if he hadn't been open about his disdain for Nato and his unwillingness to actually adhere to the treaty in case of aggression

as if Russia weren't currently waging a war of territorial expansion fueled by imperialistic delusions of grandeur the likes of which haven't been seen since fucking WWII

Putin has put out an arrest warrant against the Estonian head of state, as if she were a russian citizen. He recently said of course he wouldn't attack Poland unless they attack Russia first - hmm, I wonder if that could be an allusion to a historic precedent? Has anyone ever faked a polish attack on their territory to kick off a massive war???

Putin has all but explicitly stated that he does not want to stop after Ukraine. Now add to this a US president who would encourage - not just stand by, actively encourage - further russian aggression. The campaign for presidential election hasn't even fully kicked off yet, I shudder to imagine what Trump would do or say if he actually held office again.

Of course the situation in Gaza is horrible. Of course we need deescalation (and hey, if you weren't getting your news exclusively from ragebait you'd know that even its closest allies are criticizing Israel, that they will become isolated if they continue on like this. Support for Israel isn't nearly as unwavering and unanimous as you may think).

Please. I'm begging you. Another Trump term could be catastrophic in ways that can't be fully anticipated. Already his party has backed him on (or tried to downplay) his latest attempt to undermine Nato.

We are dealing with an very delicate and dangerous geopolitical situation right now. China observes Russia very carefully with one eye, and looks at Taiwan with the other. And they're far from the only global player with imperialist ambitions.

The US government unfortunately has a huge effect on the whole world, and making your vote hinge on a single issue (when that issue won't even be solved in a way you'd like by literally any imaginable US government! No US president will completely cease supporting Israel, like come on)

making your vote hinge on a single issue like that is incredibly irresponsible

[tamamita]

How come so many shias support hezbollah even though it has syrian blood on its hands? Im shia and i never got it. Like i saw a post from a bosnian (who talks a lot about genocide in general and palestine) a while ago saying that its ok to have different feelings over naserallah's death because of different things (i.e. hezbollah helped bosnia during the genocide they were going through, but it also has syrian blood on its hands from interviewing with the revolution). Same thing for the houthis, ive heard for years from feminist spaces over people going in prison in yemen because of the houthis, and its not even anything serious. Is the end goal supporting palestine, and maybe after isreal's death, we start dissecting our own politics and groups in the region?

If Hezbollah wasn't in Syria, then Syria would've been overrun by ISIS and there would have been a genocide of religious and ethnical minorities, this is a fact that can not be denied. After all, don't ever forget what happened in Speicher. The opposition were more than willing to defect over ISIS as they were claiming land, given the overlapping ideology between the various Salafist elements, it was easier for them to adapt to the ideology of ISIS. The only difference between HTS and ISIS were its goals, they otherwise held the same belief. Why do you think Al-Baghdadi (la) and Al-Jolani (la) were negotiating between each other throughout the war? These people were in cahoots with each other, but westerners and libs fully embraced this tyrant just like they did with Osama, because the Syrians are free, I mean, maybe for the Sunnis in Syria, bnut not the rest. The Shi'a Muslims had every right to defend the Lebanese-Syria border and eliminate a threat to religious minorities. Furthermore, had the Axis not intervened, the war would ultimately give leeway for the revisionists Zionists and its imperialist benefector to secure more land and eliminate the Axis.

Materialistically, whether Hezbollah had blood in its hand or not, critical support is always important regardless of what you think. Assad was by no means good, even S Nasrallah (r.a) said that he acknowledged the war crimes that Assad committed, but that the alternative was no better, hence why Hezbollah had to secure the Lebanese border and intervene within Syria to prevent a spillover of Salafist Jihadist into various parts of Southwest Asia.

But now that Assad is gone, we are seeing the persecution of religious minorities, the elimination of secular institutions, the Settler state destroying and taking more of Syria, barbarians and executioners being appointed as ministers and Turkey using the opportunity to send its cannonfodder to attack the Kurds. It's only a matter of time until the consititution is completely rewritten and you'll have yourself a Sunni theocracy. The Syrian people did not win this war, the Turks, the Israelis, the US and the rest of NATO did.

[justinspoliticalcorner]

Jason Wilson at The Guardian:

Pete Hegseth, Trump’s nominee for secretary of defense, has attacked several key US alliances such as Nato, allied countries such as Turkey and international institutions such as the United Nations in two recent books, as well as saying US troops should not be bound by the Geneva conventions. At the same time, the man who would head America’s gigantic military has tied US foreign policy almost entirely to the priority of Israel, a country of which he says: “If you love America, you should love Israel.” Elsewhere, Hegseth appears to argue that the US military should ignore the Geneva conventions and any international laws governing the conduct of war, and instead “unleash them” to become a “ruthless”, “uncompromising” and “overwhelmingly lethal” force geared to “winning our wars according to our own rules”. Hegseth’s policy preferences may raise concerns about the future of Nato, the escalation of tensions with Israel’s arch-foe Iran, and impunity for US war criminals, such as those who Hegseth persuaded Trump to pardon in his first term. [...]

‘Europe has already allowed itself to be invaded’

While in the more distant past Hegseth was a foreign policy hawk aligned with neoconservatism, since what he has called his “Trump conversion”, he has written scathingly of multilateral institutions. In American Crusade (AC), published in 2020, Hegseth asks bluntly: “Why do we fund the anti-American UN? Why is Islamist Turkey a member of Nato?” Elsewhere in that book, Hegseth disparages the International Security Assistance Force, the UN security council’s peacekeeping force sent to Afghanistan in 2006, with claims based on his own service in Afghanistan: “On my camouflage uniform, I wore an American flag on one shoulder and an Isaf patch on the other,” he writes, adding: “The running joke of US troops in Afghanistan was that the Isaf patch actually stood for ‘I Saw Americans Fighting’.” Like Trump, Hegseth characterizes Nato allies as not paying their way: “Nato is not an alliance; it’s a defense arrangement for Europe, paid for and underwritten by the United States.”

He also embeds criticisms of Nato in apocalyptic, “Great Replacement”-style narratives of European immigration. Hegseth writes at one point in AC: “Europe has already allowed itself to be invaded. It chose not to rebuild its militaries, happily suckling off the teat of America’s willingness to actually fight and win wars.” Hegseth is particularly incensed by the inclusion of Turkey in Nato. He argues that the Turkish president, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, “openly dreams of restoring the Ottoman empire” and is “an Islamist with Islamist visions for the Middle East”.

“The defense of Europe is not our problem; been there, done that, twice,” Hegseth writes, adding: “Nato is a relic and should be scrapped and remade in order for freedom to be truly defended. “This is what Trump is fighting for,” he concludes. The UN, meanwhile, he calls “a fully globalist organization that aggressively advances an anti-American, anti-Israel, and anti-freedom agenda. Here’s one set of rules for the United States and Israel, another for everyone else.” On Hegseth’s characterization of Turkey as Islamist – the same descriptor he uses for militant non-state actors such as Isis – Hill said: “It’s extremist rhetoric that’s trying to paint literal treaty allies as illegitimate actors.”

‘If you love America, you should love Israel’

Hegseth’s belief in the UN’s bias against Israel mirrors his deepest apparent commitments: that any vision of international cooperation is rooted in his support of Israel, which at times he couches in religious terms. In a striking passage in AC he presents his support for Israel against as a renewal of medieval crusades. “Our present moment is much like the 11th century,” he writes in AC, adding: “We don’t want to fight, but, like our fellow Christians a thousand years ago, we must. We need an American crusade.” He adds: “We Christians – alongside our Jewish friends and their remarkable army in Israel – need to pick up the sword of unapologetic Americanism and defend ourselves.” Hegseth continues: “For us as American crusaders, Israel embodies the soul of our American crusade – the ‘why’ to our ‘what’.” Hegseth concludes: “Faith, family, freedom, and free enterprise; if you love those, learn to love the state of Israel. And then find an arena in which to fight for her.”

[...]

‘We will rip your arms off and feed them to hogs’

In 2024’s The War on Warriors, Hegseth argues at length that US forces should ignore the Geneva conventions and other elements of international law governing the conduct of war. In the book, Hegseth asks: “The key question of our generation – of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan – is way more complicated: what do you do if your enemy does not honor the Geneva conventions? “We never got an answer. Only more war. More casualties. And no victory.” Hegseth’s answer is that the conventions should be ignored. “What if we treated the enemy the way they treated us?” he asks. “Would that not be an incentive for the other side to reconsider their barbarism? Hey, Al Qaeda: if you surrender, we might spare your life. If you do not, we will rip your arms off and feed them to hogs.” He then writes: “We are just fighting with one hand behind our back – and the enemy knows it … If our warriors are forced to follow rules arbitrarily and asked to sacrifice more lives so that international tribunals feel better about themselves, aren’t we just better off winning our wars according to our own rules?!”

He continues: “Who cares what other countries think?” Hill said Hegseth’s rhetoric blamed “liberal ideas” for military defeat in a way that resembled the narratives far-right movements have historically used to scapegoat their political opponents for military defeats.

The Guardian reports on potential Trump Misadministration II Defense Secretary nominee Pete Hegseth wrote in two different books that the US should ignore the Geneva Conventions, launches childish criticisms against NATO, and unapologetically defends Israel’s Apartheid by whining about “anti-Israel” bias against the UN.

[deadpresidents]

Random question, but something I've wondered for the last few years: concerning Afghanistan, should the US have considered leaving a few thousand troops in Kabul indefinitely while withdrawing troops from the rest of the country?

It seems like the capital city would've been relatively easy for American troops to defend, and their presence there could have blocked the Taliban from fully returning to power. A singular focus on protecting Kabul might've been one way to prevent the worst possible outcome.

When President Trump left office and President Biden was inaugurated in January 2021, there were only 2,500 American troops left in Afghanistan. The Trump Administration had made a deal with the Taliban to withdraw all American troops by May 2021, and Biden pushed that back by a few months, but if the U.S. wanted to defend Kabul we almost certainly would have had to commit to another surge of American troops and that simply wasn't going to happen. It would have required a bigger fight against the Taliban because we would have been pulling out of the deal that the Trump Administration negotiated and the Taliban was already in the process of rapidly regaining control of the country by that time.

Even when he was Vice President, Joe Biden strongly believed that the United States needed to get out of Afghanistan because the only other option was to be there forever. Twenty years of training and equipping Afghan troops still hadn't resulted in a national force that could stand on its own, so Biden had argued against troop surges since the earliest days of the Obama Administration. There was no way that Biden was going to surge the number of troops once he became President, and Trump was so determined to withdraw all the troops from Afghanistan before the end of his term that his Defense Department had to beg him to pump the brakes.

Just to defend Kabul would have required much more than those 2,500 American troops left in the country on the day Biden was inaugurated. And the Afghan government of Ashraf Ghani was an unreliable partner that was corrupt and often seemed oblivious to what was actually happening throughout the country. You used the word "indefinitely" and that's exactly what Biden (and Trump, to be fair) wanted to avoid. We had already been in Afghanistan for 20 years, and things weren't heading in the right direction.

I certainly don't agree that we should have been there indefinitely. I think we probably should have bolstered the American forces in Kabul for a short and specific amount of time in order to ensure that the withdrawal was less chaotic. But it was always going to be an ugly end. There was never going to be a victory in Afghanistan, and I supported the decision to withdraw American troops. I wish we would have done a far better job at protecting the Afghan people who worked for ISAF/NATO and ended up left behind to fend for themselves as the Taliban took over once again. It's a tragedy that those final days were such a mess, but one of our leaders was going to have to make the difficult decision to definitively end the neverending war that we were never going to win, and I think history will eventually see President Biden's decisive action in a different light, much like President Ford's pardon of Richard Nixon is understood differently today.

[mariacallous]

TBILISI – Mikheil Saakashvili, the former Georgian president, has issued an urgent warning to the West that Russia is preparing to seize his country after this weekend’s election with the help of a billionaire oligarch who made his money in Moscow.

He believes the Kremlin aims to reimpose its authority over this key Western ally by falsifying results, cracking down on protests,and banning opposition parties to crush its fledgling democracy and send a signal to other former Soviet states.

“Russia is planning to seize another European country,” he said, in a warning passed to me in seven pages of handwritten notes from behind bars. “If Georgia is lost that would signify a huge loss for the West, its values and geopolitical interests.”

His ousting after nine years in office was by Georgian Dream, a party set up a few months earlier by the country’s richest man Bidzina Ivanishvili. The 2012 election marked the country’s first democratic transition of power.

Mr Saakashvili’s warning comes amid growing domestic and diplomatic fears that Mr Ivanishvili is stealthily steering this fiercely pro-European country back into Russian hands.

“When I warned the West about the threat to Georgia they thought I was provoking and rather crazy. Then my worst fears materialised and Russia militarily attacked my country,” wrote Mr Saakashvili, who also served as governor of Odessa in Ukraine.

“After I warned loudly about an imminent attack on Ukraine, even my friends in the West considered I was saying this because I was bitter about the attack on Georgia.

“When I warned the West that Ivanishvili was not just like any other politician but rather he was a direct Russian agent, they thought I was just trying to stay in power, which was never the case.”

Georgia’s 3.7 million people go to polls on Saturday in a vote that is widely seen as a referendum to determine their future: whether to continue with moves to join the European Union and Nato or slide back into Moscow’s control under Mr Ivanishvili.

The mysterious billionaire – who made a fortune in banking and commodities during Russia’s “gangster capitalism” period after the Soviet Union’s collapse – has been attacking the “global war party” that supposedly dominates the West while claiming his party will protect Georgia from the fate suffered by Ukraine.

Georgian Dream rejected sanctions on Russia after Ukraine’s full-scale invasion, to the fury of Kyiv, openly says it will ban rival parties, and earlier this year passed laws that mimic Vladimir Putin’s measures targeting LGBT citizens and silencing dissent.

Its controversial “Russia law” – which labels organisation with more than 20 per cent funding from abroad as “foreign agents” – sparked weeks of mass protests met with beatings and tear gas. Washington condemned it as a “Kremlin-inspired” law.

Mr Saakashvili believes Mr Putin is actively supporting Mr Ivanishvili to “fully return Georgia to Russia as a historical crown jewel of their empire” while shutting off the West from key energy and transportation corridors to Central Asia and Azerbaijan.

“It would also carry a huge symbolic meaning since Georgia was regarded as a bulwark of the Western influence in our region and a role model for reforms and success. Ending it would send a powerful signal to other potential Western allies.”

The former president says Georgian Dream plans to falsify election results, crack down hard on subsequent protests and then go on “a rampage” of banning rival parties, mass arrests and shutting down dissenting voices in the media and NGOs.

He also fears Mr Ivanishvili – who last month suggested Georgia should apologise for the 2008 war that led to seizure of its South Ossetia region, about 850 deaths and forcibly displaced 192,000 people – will carry out threats to put him and other leading members of his party on trial for resisting Russia’s invasion.

Mr Saakashvili wants to see the West urgently impose the sanctions being threatened against Ivanishvili and his close circle. “It is important to act now while it is not too late,” he said.

Mr Saakashvili’s concerns over election rigging and a subsequent crackdown are shared by opposition parties, think tanks and Western diplomats in Tbilisi. Russia’s foreign ministry is fuelling the tensions with suggestions that the US is preparing a coup.

Even Mr Ivanishvili’s ex-ministers and aides endorsed the fears. “Bidzina [Ivanishvili] ‘s primary concern has always been his own safety and wellbeing,” said Gia Khukhashvili, a former friend and adviser. “He made fatal mistakes that left him as Putin’s hostage.”

The economist believes that the billionaire, spooked by Russia’s attack on Ukraine, offered clandestine backing to the Kremlin. “When you declare loyalty to an empire, it sees it as a sign of weakness and Russia demanded guarantees of that loyalty,” Mr Khukhashvili said.

“If Georgian Dream stays in power, Russia will accelerate Georgia’s reintegration into the Russian Empire. Like Belarus, this process will intensify.”

He sees the election as a test for Moscow’s ability to take back lost nations while grabbing a crucial crossroads between East and West. “By controlling Georgia, Russia solves the problem of re-establishing the Soviet Union’s influence in the south,” he said.

The election is complicated by Mr Saakashvili’s legacy, however, since he remains a polarising figure in Georgia due to the rapid pace of his modernisation programmes and alleged human rights abuses in later years of office after Russia’s attack.

His appeal over his sentence was rejected in May by the European Court of Human Rights. There has, however, been concern over his health after hunger strikes and due to the lack of proper medical care. His mother now prepares all food for him in prison after claims that he suffered a poisoning attempt.

The former president told me that he was being deprived of his most basic rights. “I have no right to make phone calls or to meet members of parliament. I haven’t seen sun and have not been exposed to fresh air for more than three years.”

Tina Bokuchava, the chair of his United National Movement and leading opposition figure, hailed him as their country’s greatest visionary who “dared to imagine a brighter future for Georgian and dared to make it a reality”.

She said there was no longer any ambiguity over Georgian Dream’s pro-Russia stance and that their European future was at stake in this weekend’s election after success in shedding their “Soviet debris” and emerging as a democratic nation.

“Putin does not like democracies, especially successful democracies, on his doorstep. It represents a threat to his rule and undermines his authority.”

Georgian Dream claims it can advance into Europe while keeping Mr Putin at bay. Yet, even one party activist told me she was dismayed by its backsliding on Europe and pro-Russian rhetoric but feared speaking out due to concern over reprisals.

“I’m not going to vote for them,” she said, adding that she was scared their stance might lead to another war following post-election turmoil. “People will be killed senselessly and those in power will still look after their own interests.”

Georgian Dream denied it is subverting their nation’s future in Europe, rejected concerns over vote-rigging and insisted it would win the election easily – although its polls backing such claims are not widely viewed as credible.

This is just another election where people should decide whether they want peace and economic growth, said Nikoloz Samkharadze, a senior MP with the party, who said it was “complete nonsense” to accuse them of following Putin’s path.

“There is no evidence that in the last 12 years of Georgian Dream’s government, Georgia has done anything that would serve the interests of Russia in this country or in this region.”

Yet, this contrasts with the message sent to me from his jail cell by Mr Saakashvili ahead of this vital election. “The West should be aware and ready,” he concluded.

i has attempted to contact Mr Ivanishvili for comment.

[barblaz-arts]

Seen your post about Israel/Palestine which is very good to care about, but I'm not sure everyone in the world are aware how fucked up the whole situation is. People think it's either this or that, but they should support the actual people, not Israel, not Hamas.

People from both sides got hurt, but the ones who were hurting longer in short term historical perspective, are Palestineans, if we take the long term (which only maniacs and fanatics actually care about) those are of course Jews, but it's more of a religion/ideology thing than some actual suffering.

The problem of this lack of knowledge, in my opinion, is that both sides, politically are shit bcs they use people and their feelings as pawns. Hamas has their military bases near civilian objects in Gaza, and at the same time Israel doesn't give more than two fucks about the civilian population, because they state that terrorists are hiding within the population, and Israel just makes attempts to swipe it under the rug a but by allegedly telling people to evacuate. If they wanted peace they should have started this whole bullshit conflict of interests half century ago. But I really have doubts that for them, being a very much newly established country, it was a fully uninfluenced decision. It was a way for the USA and Nato to weed their way into the Middle East and be able to control the situation. They have been getting ready for war for decades, hense females in regular military service, which isn't a thing in countries that don't really wait and want for any war happening, or have a stable way to enlist their immigrants into their military. But that's another topic. I made this example only as a means to explain why it was obvious Israel was getting ready for war. You can hide the actual point under the feminism and such, but it's not about feminism if it's not your right but your responsibility to serve the country. I don't really mind of course, but the militarization of society usually shows what is it going to be in the future. Especially if such militarization isn't sporadic, but been happening gradually over the years.

Back to history, The whole thing with Israel been festering previous decades, and first UK and after that USA allowed it to fester. It was the Osman empire region first (and I don't really like those slavers on principle, because they've been torturing my country with slave trader's raids on religious principle, for couple of centuries which prompted several huge wars to stop it from happening). After the dissolution of the Osman, as far as I remember, UK swooped in and basically did the colonising of sorts, they usually did, with no respect for local population and thinking they're the ruling caste while being unable assimilate the people into their culture because a) you can't make people want what they don't understand b) any more or less peaceful assimilation is when they actually want to be with you as allies and understand why exactly.

After that they synthetically made a country for jews, which is idiotic on its own merit and on everyone's merit. Like, their thing is that you had to be jew BY BLOOD to settle in the country, which is the beginnings of ultra nationalism, that's what I'm thinking. Not that many societies aren't nationalistic, but the sheer level of it is very odd. And the forefathers of the Israel aren't some lgbt activists who shine with rainbows and shit with butterflies, they are orthodox zionists. Which means, that their religion makes them free to kill people of other, opposing religion.

But it doesn't make the Hamas, as in the organisation, in any way clean and clear. They are terrorists, and they don't enjoy anything but sharia law, or their own charter, which states basically Jihad and jew killing. That is a very dangerous thing to support, because it's a very obvious thing - in this kind of tribalistic society that spurs from lack of education and all other good things in life, people with guns and moxie will rule the people who can actually make the whole thing better by promoting cooperation. You literally cannot negotiate with people who say that they will kill you if you're this or that, killing is bad, period. There's no way out of it, and I think we all need to step back and actually look at the reasons of conflict that go way back, not just the today's situation. It may lead us to the fact that, yes, Israel could've existed peacefully if it wasn't being militaristic, but only - only if they were no political powers in surrounding countries that made their goal the cleansing of Palestine from Jews. And why the Jews even started to get there? Not because they came on their own, no, it was a fucking plan by the actual colonisers, when they were more toothy and bold with their actions.

On a side note, that's partially why Russia/Ukraine situation is drastically different, they have deep ties to each other and speak the same language, had ability to talk to each other all these decades while being torn apart and pit against each other by lies about Russian colonisation of them, and lies of how it would be better if they join the EU. All the while, Ukraine was the best in agriculture in Europe before the whole EU and fracturing from the Russian orbit shebang, and now the industry was in shambles, even before the russian invasion. The same goes for their trading fleet - the whole Ussr built Ukraine the trading fleet and most of it was left there after the dissolution. What they did, they sold it out even if they couldve used it and by the 2018 they had about 5 big ships of their own. And that's how it was with all the economy - thieving it all out and then blaming it on Moscow.

In 2018 polls there were about 20 percent of Ukrainians who said they knew official Ukrainian, and 80 who spoke Russian and the eastern dialect mix of Ukrainian and Russian. You can make your own opinion out of this, ofc. That's not the same with Israel /Palestine situation, those nations are literally alien to each other in many things.

Yes, Ukraine was the synthetic country as well, but instead of being monogenous like both Israel and Palestine, they weren't, and had a very best economy in the Ussr, which made the whole notion of "Russia was is and will be bad" take lots of time in taking root in most of the people who weren't nationalistic, all the while Ukrainians were welcomed into Russia and not discriminated against in any way. Which is totally different to what was happening between Israel and Palestine, they had no actual ties, nothing except the USA military support for Israel so it stays on top, all the economic support to Gaza being settled in the pockets of all the middle men, and that's actually it.

But please, let's not forget, that the radical islamists are actually dangerous, and it's not a reaction to the USA involvement, or the reaction to anything at all but Quran. If there's someone who reads Quran and finds some Jihad mentions, there will be blood spilled over it. The whole, it's these guys fault or those guys fault doesn't really work when it's about politics, domestic or international. For things to work, there should be no radicals in the upper echelons of power. Which is not true in Israel / Palestine war from both sides. It's a very bad situation that may cause all kinds of tensions in all the world, because people aren't being well informed about the whole history of the conflict, without this or that side pushing their narrative.

At first, my knee jerk reaction was reading it as you thinking I support Hamas in any way. Which i dont. I must reiterate i DONT. I decided to revisit this later and calm down a bit and give you the benefit of the doubt here and assume that you're talking about other people, as I have myself seen say they support Hamas because history has often called rebellion groups of oppressed people terrorists and it's... Frankly terrifying to see.

Hamas specifically is a complicated situation that I have not yet dived deep enough into to talk about in detail, which is why I dont much talk much about them. I need to know more, I dont wanna talk outta my ass. But I do understand that radical Islamists are no good. I live in the Philippines. We have that too.

But the fact of the matter will always be that Hamas never mattered when it comes to what Israel is doing now and what they've been doing for decades. We must always remember this.

And while I'm on that topic, the "long term" suffering of Jews does not matter here either, because Palestinians didn't do that to them. A lot of zionists use it as an excuse and I am sick of it.

I'm not sure if you're saying one must be neutral about this. You're either hard to read, or I'm too sleep deprived and exhausted for reading comprehension. I think you are, but ai could be wrong. And I completely agree that it's the radicals in power that are to blame. In all my responses it is always the leaders I condemn most.

In any case, I'm just going to take this opportunity to say staying neutral isn't an option either because of the sheer power imbalance. Israel would be counting on the world looking away so they can erase all Palestinians. For this cycle of violence to be over on BOTH sides, Israel has to be the one to back off, as they are and always have been the ones with more power.

[operation-priority]

SCP AMTF Nu-7 Cosplay - Hazardous Environment Level II

Depicted here is the typical loadout of a conventional Nu-7 light fighter in a Level II rated hazardous environment. Each level, ranging from I to IV, has a typical hazardous environment protection requirement that outlines the necessary support that a task force member needs to complete their objectives within the working area. Showcased here is an example of a Nu-7 operative working within a Level II Hazardous Environment. Required protection when working in this environment is a standalone gas mask with a filter rated for riot agents. The standard issue gas mask of Nu-7 forces is the Avon Protection C50. This is a variant of the famous M50 which uses standard NATO 40 mm thread filters. In addition, the Avon C50 and M50 series gas masks are designed to be worn under a ballistic helmet.

The primary use case of Level II Hazardous Environment equipment is when the element is operating within an area that has an elevated risk of hazardous particles in the air or riot control agents and tear gases including CS, CN, and OC pepper spray present. Such a location would be none other than a Foundation facility or other subterranean structure. This operative carries his Avon C50 in a gas mask bag slung bandolier style over the right shoulder.

All Nu-7 fighters must be tactically proficient in sub-t operations doctrine as foundation sites primarily consist of large underground sections. Additionally, many anomalies take the form of caverns and other fully enclosed environments. To this end the standard Nu-7 fitment during a sub-t operation may vary in specialization, however in this display we can see the operative is in Level II Hazardous Environment status with night vision equipment. A respiratory device and night vision equipment is necessary when working within subterranean operations as there can potentially be zero ambient light within sections of the workspace and contaminants do not disperse quickly and tend to settle in place if there is no flowing air. Such an environment is not hazardous to direct body contact to warrant the use of a full CBRN (Chemical, Biological, Radiological and Nuclear) suit, but hazardous to the operative's respiratory system. In this situation a simple gas mask with a CTCF50 Riot Agent Filter would suffice.

The Nu-7 unit may have to breach certain entry points while on mission. For this task they may be equipped with large breaching tools like the Stanley FuBar and Halligan equivalents. Smaller tools such as a jimmy prybar, wire cutters, and wearable specialized breaching tools like the Gerber Downrange Tomahawk could also be seen. Other breaching tools can include large prybars, bolt cutters, rams, saws, and other mechanical, explosive, ballistic, vehicular, or thermal options.

Full Resolution Available Here.

[darkmaga-returns]

by Ted Snider Posted on January 27, 2025

Russia’s now unstoppable advance across eastern Ukraine ushers in the inevitability that Ukraine has lost, and the war will end. The election of Donald Trump ushers in the inevitability that the war will end with a negotiated settlement. Two things are now clear about that settlement: Ukraine will not be in NATO, and Russia will be in Ukraine.

Ukraine will not be in NATO because Russia will continue the war if NATO membership is on the agenda in the negotiations. But Ukraine will also not be in NATO because Trump has made it clear that he will not support NATO membership for Ukraine.

Russia will be in Ukraine because Russia will not return Crimea or, at least part of, the Donbas. But Russia will also be in Ukraine because Ukraine has now accepted that de facto reality. Though he refuses to legally acknowledge it, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has conceded that Crimea and the Donbas are lost to Ukraine. “De facto,” he said, “these territories are now controlled by the Russians. We don’t have the strength to bring them back.”

That leaves security guarantees for the remaining sovereign Ukraine as the key issue in the coming negotiations. Zelensky seems to now recognize that. In a January 22 Bloomberg interview, Zelensky said, “The only question is what security guarantees and honestly I want to have understanding before the talks. If [Trump] can guarantee this strong and irreversible security for Ukraine, we will move along this diplomatic path.”

Though Zelensky has said that “the only guarantee, currently or in the future, is NATO,” he will have to settle for his second choice. That second choice is a large European peace keeping force with the fully committed support of U.S. troops.

[beardedmrbean]

Latvia and Romania, two member countries of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), said Russian drones violated their airspace over the weekend in a move that could stoke boiling-hot tensions between Moscow and the military alliance. 

Latvia’s government said Sunday a Russian drone had fallen over the east of the country the previous day, likely crossing in from Belarus. 

Separately, on Sunday, Romania’s foreign ministry said "criminal" Russian airborne drones encroached on its airspace while targeting Ukraine’s civilian infrastructure. 

Mircea Geoana, the outgoing deputy secretary general of NATO and Romania’s former top diplomat, said the military alliance condemned Russia’s violation of Romanian airspace.

"While we have no information indicating an intentional attack by Russia against allies, these acts are irresponsible and potentially dangerous," he wrote on X, formerly Twitter. 

Article 5 of NATO stipulates that if a NATO country is attacked, all member nations will come to its defense. 

"The one I would be more concerned about is Latvia," Andrew D’Anieri, resident fellow at the Atlantic Council’s Eurasia Center, told Fox News Digital. "It’s a country away from Ukraine. You have to go through all of Belarus to get to Latvia from Ukraine."

"If you were going to try to test NATO's Article 5, you do it by sending a fully strapped drone essentially, and having it kind of just veer into Latvian airspace and see what the reaction is as kind of a low-risk move by the Russians."

Latvia’s military also said there were no indications that Moscow or Minsk purposely directed a drone into the country. 

"There's certainly a chance it was intentional," claimed D'Anieri. "I think the Latvians want to kind of manage their response. If you say, ‘Oh, the Russians tried to hit us with a drone,’ then that demands a much greater response. So I think cooler heads right now are prevailing, but there could be more info that comes out, or we could certainly see this again over the next several months."

Romania’s defense ministry said Russia attacked Ukraine close to its border in the early hours of Sunday, and two Romanian F-16s took off from an airbase to "monitor the situation" around 2:30 a.m. local time. 

Fragments from the drone were found in a Romanian village near the Danube River, and officials are conducting searches in a second area where fragments may have fallen.

While incidents such as this would have been "unthinkable" three years ago, they "are now treated as routine," Lithuanian foreign minister Gabrielius Landsbergis wrote in a post to X on Sunday.

"Nothing should be landing on Ukraine, or Latvia, or anywhere on NATO territory, but this is the new reality our inaction has allowed to emerge. Lithuania will, of course, be supporting a strong allied response."

Ukraine's new foreign minister, Andrii Sybiha‎, said the incidents served as a ​​"stark reminder that Russia's aggressive actions extend beyond Ukraine."

The war has intensified in recent weeks as Russia has launched large-scale strikes on Ukraine’s critical infrastructure and closed in on the capture of Pokrovsk, a key transportation hub that could lock up its control of the Donetsk region. 

The Russians are advancing on Ukraine’s frontlines in the east in an effort to take control of the whole of the Donbas region. 

Ukraine, meanwhile, has been stepping up its long-range strikes inside Russia and urging its western allies to lift restrictions on using the weapons they provide to strike deep into Russia. 

[usafphantom2]

USAF completes new round of missile tests on the F-35

Fernando Valduga By Fernando Valduga 11/17/2023 - 08:00am Military

The Conjugated Operational Test Team (UOTT) completed eight real missile firing tests in support of the F-35's Continuous Capacity Development and Delivery (C2D2) program.

UOTT collaborated with Navy Air Test and Evaluation Squadron 9 (VX-9) at Edwards Air Base, California; the 422º Air Force Test and Assessment Squadron at Nellis Air Base, Nevada; and the 83º Fighter Arms Squadron (FWS) at Tyndall Air Base to perform operationally realistic real-firing tests.

“This was the biggest real shooting event in UOTT history,” said Joshua Herrera, UOTT leader for the event. "I am very proud of the team and the hard work they have done in the last months leading up to the event. We look forward to deepening the data in the coming weeks."

The team employed four types of missiles, the AIM-120D, AIM-120D3, AIM-9X and AIM-9X-3, against advanced targets provided by the 83º FWS Weapon Systems Assessment Program. The tests verified the effectiveness of several new capabilities and advanced tactics and met the Congressional supervision requirements for F-35 operational testing. The team also collaborated with the Royal Australian Air Force Nº 2 Squadron, which operates the E-7A Wedgetail, to evaluate the effectiveness of advanced coalition tactics.

This event was the first time that an F-35 fired the new AIM-120D3. The AIM-120D3 features modernized hardware, compared to the AIM-120D, and is prepared to receive continuous and agile software updates in the coming years to further refine its capabilities. The missile was released from one of the VX-9's F-35C.

“MRAAM has been a basic element of the air-to-air arsenals of the United States and our allies for decades,” said LCDR Wes Holt, a VX-9 pilot. “This new AIM-120D3 had an exceptionally good performance. I am excited to see how your performance will continue to advance in the coming years with your software improvement program."

The actual firing tests were conducted with F-35 loaded with 30R08.051 software, which is the latest release of Lockheed Martin development software as part of the C2D2 program.

“UOTT has several mission effectiveness tests planned in the coming months to fully characterize the performance of the F-35,” said Lieutenant Colonel Brent Carroll, UOTT's chief operating test director. “We are also planning several additional real-fising tests to ensure that this software is robust and capable when delivered to the U.S. Air Force combat fleet.”

Tags: Military AviationF-35 Lightning IIUSAF - United States Air Force / U.S. Air Force

Sharing

tweet

Fernando Valduga

Fernando Valduga

Aviation photographer and pilot since 1992, has participated in several events and air operations, such as Cruzex, AirVenture, Dayton Airshow and FIDAE. He has work published in specialized aviation magazines in Brazil and abroad. Uses Canon equipment during his photographic work in the world of aviation.

Related news

MILITARY

IMAGES: USAF retires the last E-8C JSTARS aircraft

16/11/2023 - 21:37

Czech Air Force Gripen during Tiger Meet 2023. (Photo: Giovanni Colla)

MILITARY

IMAGES: Gripen Fighters at NATO's Tiger Meet 2023

16/11/2023 - 18:46

MILITARY

Commercial tanker refueled USAF fighters that were going to exercise in Singapore

16/11/2023 - 16:00

HELICOPTERS

Ukraine will receive a Black Hawk helicopter through crowdfunding

16/11/2023 - 12:30

AERONAUTICAL ACCIDENTS

Accident with two Indonesian Air Force Super Tucanos

16/11/2023 - 09:29

MILITARY

USAF leader reveals that secret X-plane program paved the way for NGAD

16/11/2023 - 08:47

[workersolidarity]

Something about the Liberal mind is broken by Ukraine, Vladimir Putin and Trump.

Trump is right when he says we need to bring this war to an end. It's not about winning or losing, it's about bringing an end to the bloodshed.

Something Liberals and their Neocon allies don't seem to be able to comprehend: you get rid of Putin, and you're virtually certain to bring a bigger hardliner to power on Ukraine and NATO than Putin ever was.

Has anyone been listening to some of the shit Medvedev has been saying??? About Nukes?

The idea that Liberals would think it's okay to try to take out Putin and this is somehow magically going to mean a Ukrainian victory marching into Crimea.

It's a complete fucking fantasy!

What you're more likely to get is the rise to power of a Medvedev, chomping at the bit to let loose the Russian military on NATO assets they know are just sitting on the other side of the border with Ukraine in Poland.

I mean, let's be clear. When we're talking about overthrowing Putin, we're talking about the unleashing of what will likely be a series of events that lead straight to WWIII and Nuclear Holocaust.

And some of the people openly discussing these kind of ideas, ideas we know will lead to disaster, are people with major influence in the halls of power. People in organizations like the Atlantic Council, the Council on Foreign Relations, and the Brookings Institute, all openly calling for the US to do MORE for Ukraine, and NOT to find a way to end the bloodshed.

These people are quick to call you a Putin apologist, a Russian puppet, all these cliché gotcha names that allow Liberals and other supporters of the Ukraine Proxy-war to completely ignore facts about the war and dismiss any news they don't like (such as pointing out the very obvious heavy losses Ukraine is sustaining, and their inability to continue to suffer losses at these rates for much longer) as Putin's propaganda.

While these internet "soldiers" enjoy the moral high ground (or so they imagine) online, and truly the largely Western online audiences applaud them and cheer them on, rewarding them with likes and shares and pats on the back.(Good work!)

Meanwhile Ukraine is suffering unimaginable loss: hundreds upon hundreds of casualties every day, expending far more manpower and ammunition than is capable of being replaced by Ukraine and the West. And the Ukrainian economy is barely treading water despite Billions in Western aid, the US even going so far as to fully fund Ukraine's Public Pension system. (Even while our own citizens remain homeless by the tens of thousands and most Americans are struggling without the benefit of a public pension system.)

But point any of this out, easily provable information if you're willing to spend a little while sifting through the propaganda... and you're a Putin puppet, because apparently Americans cannot think beyond the Democrat talking points being spoon-fed to them on CNN, MSNBC, CBS, and in the pages of the NY Times and Washington Post.

What exactly are all these Liberals and Neocons going to do when Trump wins the election and Ukraine collapses??? I mean, this is looking more and more likely to happen in less than two years.

I mean, how do you reckon with all the Russiagate garbage, the censorship, the Jan 6th obsession, the lies to make it look like Ukraine ever had even the slimmest of chances against the Russian Federation, the absolutely UNBELIEVABLE turnaround in the media on the existence of Nazi paramilitary forces in Ukraine, all the fake investigations and nonsense around Trump over the last too many years, as though any of it was going to stop him from running for, and winning, the next Presidential election, it's all going to collapse like a ton of bricks in their faces.

But the saddest part of it all is that hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians and Russians will have to die because of the sheer HUBRIS of Liberals and Neocons in the US and Europe.

And THAT is a War Crime that should always be remembered.

[mightyflamethrower]

Nearly eleven months ago, in August 2023, the New York Times reported that U.S. officials had estimated that some 500,000 Russians and Ukrainians had been killed, wounded, or missing in the then 18-month Ukrainian War.

Both Russia and Ukraine underreport their losses. Hundreds of thousands of additional casualties have followed in the 28 months of fighting.

In the West, the mere mention of a negotiated settlement is considered a dangerous appeasement of Russia’s flagrant aggression. In Russia, anything short of victory would be seen as synonymous with the collapse of the Putin regime.

Yet as the war nears two and a half years this summer, some facts are no longer much in dispute.

Controversy still arises over the circumstances of the 2014 overthrow of Ukraine’s pro-Russian President Viktor Yanukovych.

Russia charges that the West engineered the “Revolution of Dignity”—an effort to westernize the former Soviet republic, to expand the borders of Europe right to the doorstep of Russia, and eventually to fully arm Ukraine as a member of NATO. Westerners counter that most Ukrainians wished to be part of Europe and independent from Russian bullying—and they had a perfect right to ask to join either NATO or the EU or both despite anticipated escalating tensions.

After the heroic Ukrainian defeat of the 2022 Russian bid to take Kyiv, there have been few significant territorial gains by either side.

Like the seesaw bloodbath on the Western Front of World War I, neither side has developed the momentum to force the other to negotiate or grant concessions.

As nuclear Russian threats against Europe mount, NATO is seeking to regain deterrence capabilities by boosting defense budgets, incorporating robust frontline nations Sweden and Finland, and uniting over shared concerns about Russian aggression.

Many in the U.S. cheer on the conflict as a necessary proxy war to check Russian aggression and bolster NATO’s resistance.

But unlike third-party wars during the Cold War, now the Western client, Ukraine, is fighting directly against the chief antagonist of European NATO members.

Arming a proxy in a war waged against the homeland of a nuclear adversary is a new and dangerous phenomenon.

The West counts on supplying Ukraine with more and better weapons than a richer, larger, and more populous Russia.

But Ukraine’s problem is not so much weapons as manpower. Nearly a fourth of Ukraine’s population has fled the country.

Ukraine may have suffered some 300,000 causalities. The average age of its soldiers is over 40 years. It already lacks sufficient forces to replay the failed 2023 counter-offensive. The Russian plan of attrition is to wear down and bleed out the Ukrainian people.

(The death tally for this war now exceeds the number of British and American deaths in WWII)

In a geostrategic sense, the new alignment of Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea is starting to gain opportunistic support from illiberal Middle East regimes, Turkey, and the Islamic world in general.

The Biden administration’s respective approaches to the Ukraine and Gaza wars continue to be utterly incoherent.

It lectures our strongest ally Israel on the need for a ceasefire, proportionality, a coalition wartime cabinet, and the avoidance of collateral damage. The administration considers the terrorist Hamas almost a legitimate state.

However, Biden and the American diplomatic establishment urge Ukraine to keep fighting without negotiations. They urge Kyiv to seek critical disproportionality through superior weaponry, including hitting strategic targets inside Russia.

The U.S. has overlooked the cancellation of Ukrainian political parties and elections by the Zelensky administration. America does not seem to care about Ukrainian collateral damage to the borderlands. And it considers the Russian government a near-terrorist state.

No one in the West, at least prior to the Russian February 2022 invasion—neither the prior Obama, Trump, and current Biden administrations or the Ukrainian government itself—had considered it even possible to regain by force the Crimea and the Donbass absorbed by the Russian invasion of 2014.

Add up all these realities, and the only practicable way to avoid another near-one million dead and wounded would be a settlement, however unpopular.

It would entail the formalization of the 2014 Russian absorption of Crimea and Donbass.

Russia would then agree to withdraw all its forces to its pre-2022 borders. Ukraine would be fully armed but without NATO membership.

Both sides would agree to a demilitarized zone on both sides of the Russian-Ukrainian border. Russia would brag that it prevented its former province from joining NATO while finally institutionalizing its prior incorporation of the Donbass and Crimea.

Ukraine would be proud that, like heroic 1940 Finland, it miraculously stopped Russian aggression. It would remain far better armed than at any time in its history and soon enjoy a status similar to that of non-NATO Austria or Switzerland.

The deal would anger all parties. But it would make public what most concede privately—and stop the ongoing destruction of Ukraine and the further slaughter of an entire generation of Ukrainian and Russian youth.

All that the trillion American Taxpayers dollars has accomplished is prolonging the conflict and doubling the death toll. This war could literally go on forever. How can that be anything but immoral??

[attheexactlyrighttimeandplace]

I am so angry and tired of people on Twitter claiming that the dismantling of the zionist war cabinet means victory for Hamas, allegedly because the resistance outlasted the war cabinet that was formed after October 7 to end the armed group.

The eradication of Hamas remains one of the main war objectives of the zionists whether the ceasefire plan fails or not. The war cabinet was dissolved because some of its members, including some ministers, resigned at the request of the US. One of Netanyahu's main opponents, Benny Gantz, supported by the families of the hostages and soldiers and fully controlled by the State Department, issued an ultimatum to the government that ended on June 8. He was supposed to represent the “moderates” branch of the regime. After his departure, the “warmongering” zionist leaders took total control of the occupation government, and the only way out of the conflict is military now.

How can this be a victory when Palestinian civilians will pay the price? This means that Rafah will suffer what the rest of Gaza suffered: total extermination. What we have seen so far is nothing compared to what is to come.

Netanyahu is tiptoeing around this situation because he fears what will happen to him once he ends the genocide in Gaza. Will the United States replace him with a military, capable leader with the tactical expertise and strategic vision needed to fight a regional war?

Considering that the extension of the conflict is confirmed by all, and that its scale will concern all the armed groups included in the Axis of Resistance (Hamas, Hezbollah, Iraqi Resistance, AnsarAllah + Syria and possibly Iran) and oppose them to almost all Gulf Arab countries + the Kurdish people + ISIS and its affiliated groups who are now mercenaries controlled by the United States; he has reason to fear that his time is over even though there is very little chance that he will end up in the cells of the International Criminal Court.

It is true that the United States acts in a very unpredictable and harsher manner. Biden told a jewish reporter at a White House party in april that he had made it clear to Netanyahu what he wanted, and that if Netanyahu doesn't do what he's been told, something will happen.

Obviously, the only reason why the president of the first military power in the world, who leads a military alliance of 32 countries (NATO), not counting their partners, and who has enough nuclear weapons to wipe out the entire planet, made such a vague statement, is because the threat he made was very serious, politically deadly for Netanyahu but perhaps also for the zionist entity, not the kind you can publicly disclose if you intend to violate any agreements you have signed.

There is no doubt that Biden pressured the zionist politicians to commit and take full responsibility for the genocide they wanted to do anyway, motivated them to stay focused and energetic when they were overwhelmed by the number of victims among their soldiers, the opposition of the families of the hostages and soldiers, and the fact that they have become a pariah state within the international community, with a growing minority of international opinion wishing to dismantle Israel to make a way for a Palestinian state, despite the zionist propaganda that wants to make Hamas a terrorist group.

Even the pathetic failure of their communication to cover up their crimes, I mean the unconvincing denial of the American authorities of all the violations committed by the zionist army as reported by their own Human Rights departments, international NGOs, UN institutions, journalists, ICJ lawyers, judicial institutions, which illustrates in a spectacular way that they have really lost control of the narrative as Blinken said, does not change the military reality: Hamas cannot stop the famine, and even the extension of the conflict will not be able to protect Palestinian civilians from a continuation and amplification of the genocide.

I also had illusions about Biden's ceasefire plan as to his willingness to favor a negotiated political solution, but it is obvious, at this point where US officials have responded coldly to Hamas' counter-offers, that the United States feels in such a dominant position that it does not feel the need to make any effort and believes it has shown enough patience. They really didn't mean it when they said that, in their plans, negotiations would be an important tool to find a solution.

If they fail to achieve the full surrender they want, they will kill every human being in Gaza and order the zionists to annex the entire West Bank.