Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

You Know What I Hate MK I

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • HorizonParty, that is an immensely hostile post. It also breaks a LOT of rules. So many so its hard to begin, so I'm deleting it and asking you to leave this thread. I'm also going to ask you to take some time off to get some perspective.


    Author of Cthulhu Armageddon, I was a Teenage Weredeer, Straight Outta Fangton, Lucifer's Star, and the Supervillainy Saga.

    Forum Terms of Use
    the Contact Us link.

    Comment


    • China is again (and still) attempting cultural appropriation and invasion on every East Asian culture, with the cowardly exception of Japan. Sigh.


      MtAw Homebrew:
      Even more Legacies, updated to 2E
      New 2E Legacies, expanded

      Comment


      • Originally posted by 21C Hermit View Post
        China is again (and still) attempting cultural appropriation and invasion on every East Asian culture, with the cowardly exception of Japan. Sigh.
        Hardly their only abusive action in the world, but what happened this time?


        #NothingAboutUsWithoutUs
        #AutismPride
        She/her pronouns

        Comment


        • Originally posted by monteparnas View Post
          Hardly their only abusive action in the world, but what happened this time?
          Disguising Korean cultural items (especially Hanbok) as that of Joseon-jok (an ethnic minority within China descended from Joseon) in the current Olympics, to lay ground for claiming that Koreans are nothing but a nation-less minority group fit to be assimilated.

          It’s about as logical as the USA trying to claim Ireland as its new State because Irish immigrants happen to live in America.

          Fuckers.
          Last edited by 21C Hermit; 02-08-2022, 07:50 PM. Reason: Talking about the Olympics here; though this is hardly the start


          MtAw Homebrew:
          Even more Legacies, updated to 2E
          New 2E Legacies, expanded

          Comment


          • Originally posted by 21C Hermit View Post
            Disguising Korean cultural items (especially Hanbok) as that of Joseon-jok (an ethnic minority within China descended from Joseon) in the current Olympics, to lay ground for claiming that Koreans are nothing but a nation-less minority group fit to be assimilated.

            It’s about as logical as the USA trying to claim Ireland as its new State because Irish immigrants happen to live in America.

            Fuckers.
            Well, there is the possibility that they're just representing the ethnic Koreans in China. Not that I believe that, but it is still a sound interpretation.

            For now they're doing worse elsewhere. Like how they're committing genocide against the Uyghurs, or the debt bondage of several African states, or the military occupation and annexation of the Indian Ocean over economic relevant seas for other countries, or the old Tibet problem and Taiwan and Hong Kong...


            #NothingAboutUsWithoutUs
            #AutismPride
            She/her pronouns

            Comment


            • Originally posted by monteparnas View Post
              Well, there is the possibility that they're just representing the ethnic Koreans in China. Not that I believe that, but it is still a sound interpretation.
              That is indeed the official party line for now, but the CCP has consistently practiced cultural imperialism/invasion/appropriation around surrounding ethnicities for its totalitarian One China vision, so every non-Chinese (and some Chinese) folks in Asia already dropped the ‘sound’ from ‘sound interpretation’ long, long time ago.

              For now they're doing worse elsewhere. Like how they're committing genocide against the Uyghurs, or the debt bondage of several African states, or the military occupation and annexation of the Indian Ocean over economic relevant seas for other countries, or the old Tibet problem and Taiwan and Hong Kong...
              Indeed. Unless we get thrust into some dystopian future, China will be remembered as… well, I probably shouldn’t spit out any more profanities here


              MtAw Homebrew:
              Even more Legacies, updated to 2E
              New 2E Legacies, expanded

              Comment


              • To be honest I think there are a lot of sore points of international hypocrisy that are greatly harming things and, true to this thread, pissing me off.

                We're about to have violence in Ukraine because Nato nations use the fact that Putin is irredeemably evil to pretend it isn't them being unrelenting in expanding their missile bases this time. And that is far from the only US international blunder in course with approval from whomever sits in the presidential chair.


                #NothingAboutUsWithoutUs
                #AutismPride
                She/her pronouns

                Comment


                • Countries bordering on Russia have excellent historical reasons to be worried about Russian aggression, especially the Ukraine which had part of the country get carved off by Russia just a few years ago, and is watching Russian forces aiding and abetting ongoing strife in an attempt to carve off the Donbas region. Ultimately I think that while Russia will blame NATO's existence for its own aggressive behaviors, the reality is that if NATO didn't exist, Russia would be far more aggressive and more willing to move in and take control of its neighbors. In many respects NATO is the only thing allowing Russia's neighbors to have some semblance of self-determination and I think Russia's neighboring countries are all very aware of that, which is why many of them tend to be more positively inclined towards NATO than towards Russia.

                  *EDIT* Of course, Russia feels threatened by NATO. The NATO alliance was founded for the purpose of serving as a bulwark against Soviet (Russian) aggression. That said, counties weren't exactly clamoring to join. There are some onerous requirements and obligations. But with Russia's taking of Georgia and Crimea and then it's military buildup, now even counties like Sweden and Finland are seeing discussions pop up about joining NATO (it won't happen but it's investing to see that discussion pop up). And I just don't think it's NATO's fault that Russia's neighbors are afraid for their existence to the point that they are considering joining a military alliance.
                  Last edited by AnubisXy; 02-12-2022, 09:45 AM.

                  Comment


                  • This is all true, but that's not my point.

                    As I said, they're using the fact that Putin is evil to pretend they don't have a hand on it. Put in another way, they use the fact that Putin would do it anyways if they're not there to pretend the context doesn't matter, but it does.

                    We are frequently told that Putin refuses time and again the negotiations put at the table, but the thing is that the negotiations are just stopping at a single point every time, where no side wavers: Putin wants a guarantee that Ukraine won't join NATO, and NATO don't want to give a single inch in this direction.

                    I'm not saying this is Putin being completely in the right. He wants to retake every previous Soviet or Imperial territory, period, and will crush local populations if needed, that does includes Ukraine. But opening negotiation to try to not fix this with NATO right now would have a chance of successfully avoiding a conflict that will cost Ukrainian lives.

                    No side here has Ukraine's independence in mind. Both want it as a military strategic base. And both are willing to sacrifice civilian lives to achieve that all the while pretending to make decisions only out of humanitarian duties.


                    #NothingAboutUsWithoutUs
                    #AutismPride
                    She/her pronouns

                    Comment


                    • Article 10 of NATO's founding charter is that any European country that wants to join will be given consideration (not that they'll be allowed in, just that their membership will be considered). NATO has made it clear for decades that removing Article 10 is a non-starter for any negotiations. That's not some new stance or anything, it's been that way since before Putin was born.

                      Also keep in mind that from the collapse of the USSR right up until Russia invaded and took the Crimea in 2014, the Ukraine's position was always that it had no interest in joining NATO and that it preferred maintaining a position of neutrality between Russia and Europe/American like Finland. Ukraine's opinions on NATO membership only changed after Russia carved off part of the country and it became clear that neutrality with Russia was not possible. So if Russia is upset that Ukraine is now considering joining NATO it has nobody to blame but itself.

                      The reality is though, that as long as Russia maintains the Crimea and refuses to give it up, NATO wouldn't allow Ukraine membership into the organization anyway. It would cause too many problems to let the Ukraine join when Russia has boots on the ground in the country, since NATO would suddenly be obligated to use military force to drive Russia out of Crimea. And nobody in NATO wants to see that happen. Further Putin knows full well that Ukraine won't be joining NATO. He's just making impossible demands he knows NATO will never agree to, so he can use NATO's automatic refusal as justification for an invasion or as a way to churn the propaganda machine at home.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by monteparnas View Post
                        No side here has Ukraine's independence in mind. Both want it as a military strategic base. And both are willing to sacrifice civilian lives to achieve that all the while pretending to make decisions only out of humanitarian duties.
                        NATO is an agreement of mutual defense made by a bunch of countries whose fractured and independent nature made them vulnerable during World War 2. Their tools are politics and assorted military. They aren't Starfleet, they were never a federation of humanitarians. It's been about security since the beginning.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by nofather View Post
                          NATO is an agreement of mutual defense made by a bunch of countries whose fractured and independent nature made them vulnerable during World War 2. Their tools are politics and assorted military. They aren't Starfleet, they were never a federation of humanitarians. It's been about security since the beginning.
                          I get the part about Article 10 AnubisXy explained. But this here isn't an excuse.

                          Not being a humanitarian organization does not excuse them of the consequences of their actions, and the fact that they're not bound to humanitarian or larger international scrutiny is precisely the problem, because they're always using the discourse of being the defenders of democracy and whatnot to justify their decisions.

                          The problem is that they're a military organization that operates outside the scrutiny of the UN or any other larger international board and their decisions directly impact millions of civilian lives outside their club, like what happened in Kosovo and Afghanistan. I don't like NATO, I don't trust NATO, and I don't think it is the best solution for the problems it purports to address, just the solution that best serves US military interests more than anyone else's.


                          #NothingAboutUsWithoutUs
                          #AutismPride
                          She/her pronouns

                          Comment


                          • NATO does exist apart from the UN, that was the point. It was designed to be a military alliance for a group of countries in the event that diplomatic measures in the UN failed (which is what had happened to cause the League of Nations to implode drastically). That is, for example, why NATO got involved in Kosovo - after the UN passed several resolutions demanding a ceasefire and end to the ongoing ethnic cleansing, but those resolutions were ignored and Serbia continued to engage in war crimes, NATO stepped in and forced a ceasefire.

                            But good on you, you shouldn't blindly trust NATO nor like NATO, they're a military organization, not a humanitarian one, and they've never purported to be one. Their primary goal is the defense of their own respective countries. Their interest in countries outside of the alliance mostly boils down to how those countries will impact the alliance. But that's true for most military organizations - their primary concern is their own nation and worries about others outside their country or organization are tertiary. And even when it comes to their own nations, what the military cares about and what citizens care about might be pretty different.

                            Overall though, I think NATO has generally had a positive impact and helped to reduce conflict in the world. One of the most important elements is Article 5 (an attack on one member is an attack on all members) coupled with Article 8 which ensures that members can't go to war with one another. If any member fought another (say Germany invaded France) Germany would immediately be expelled from NATO, and find itself at war with all of the members of NATO. This was one of the founding purposes of NATO, not just to protect Europe of Russia, but to help make sure that European countries would not start engaging in a third World War. And in that respect, I think it's worked pretty well.

                            But please don't think I'm sitting here waving the American flag and singing the Star Spangled Banner. NATO has a number of fuckups to its name and has pointlessly massacred a lot of people. Afghanistan was a horrific debacle and I don't think it should be forgotten or swept under the rug. NATO is an organization created for the purpose of washing war and killing people. At the end of the day though, I think that both NATO as a whole and NATO's plans plans for the Ukraine are very much the "lesser of two evils" when compared to Russia and Russia's plans for the Ukraine.
                            Last edited by AnubisXy; 02-13-2022, 10:53 AM.

                            Comment


                            • Well, I mostly agree, that's actually part of why I hate it. A lesser evil is still an evil, and being unable to get rid of it because it is currently necessary is by itself infuriating.

                              Part of the problem is how the UN Security Council works, as basically some of the most dangerous warmongers in the world have veto powers there and get to do whatever they want without worries. And I'm aware this was a necessary provision to have those people agreeing to the UN in the first place, but again that's infuriating.

                              In the end this is the best case scenario, but still a scenario where warmongers of questionable ethics are toying with other people lives.


                              #NothingAboutUsWithoutUs
                              #AutismPride
                              She/her pronouns

                              Comment


                              • I think treating NATO as the US isn't helping your point here. NATO isn't a US puppet (the US gets into plenty of military conflicts without NATO getting involved, even if some of the other NATO members get involved on their own too). How much influence the US has in NATO has been a contentious issue for decades because the US is the largest military in the alliance; a status that justifies increased say in how those resources get used, and causes push back by all the countries that don't think that should give the US undue control. The US's willingness to engage in unilateral actions pisses off other NATO nations, but they can't afford to kick the US out over it.

                                The NATO member nations are by no means innocents, but in the end - not to dissimilar from the UN security council - the US's influence is more in the negative as the US refuses to back NATO initiatives, than in a positive influence to make NATO policy. Calling NATO warmongers considering how few conflicts NATO has actually gotten involved in doesn't really feel honest. It's not like the US is constantly dragging NATO into its shit, or that NATO is joining in on everything the US does.

                                By all means, rail against the US's shitty interventionist policies. But I'm saying this as a US citizen... NATO doesn't deserve to be treated as our puppet.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X