Do you lecture people about how your country is a democracy and whatever enemy country is a dictatorship?

Just the fact that the USA can credibly threaten to use nukes means it’s completely rational and normal for everyone else to want nukes of their own. Liberals say Kim Jong-Un is insane specifically because he uses this justification for why the DPRK’s possession and testing of nukes is legitimate, and the western press insists the premise is flawed: That the USA would never ever consider using nukes.

That’s stupid. They literally already have. And that’s why this threat feels credible too. If the threat is credible (and that’s up to your own interpretation here), then the basis for calling Kim Jong-Un insane is invalid.

Btw, I had finally got my permaban on Reddit by stating that it is time for a retaliation on Israel’s logistics railway.

What did the mod-message say? Seems extra nakedly hypocritical with all the genocidal screenshots I’ve seen off there.

Ew. The UK wasn’t enough backwardness?

deleted by creator

(The USA is an) imperfect system (striving for equality)

(China, Russia, North Korea, are) formal(ly) (unequal) (…) corrupt system(s).

Could you explain to me why among these, only the USA one meets your par?

https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Constitution_of_the_People's_Republic_of_China
https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Constitution_of_Russia
https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Socialist_Constitution_of_the_Democratic_People's_Republic_of_Korea_(2016)
https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Constitution_of_the_United_States_of_America

You can use AI to summarise them. Or talk about individual articles. Really any sort of justification for why anyone could read these and think the USA one is the best one, never mind in a league of it’s own, is extremely fascinating.

deleted by creator

Do you have even one bit of anecdotal evidence that he has fixed or improved anything? Or maybe a plan where there would be a dip and then a projected growth and we’re in the dip-phase per his proposed timeline?

Says Israel.

I disagree with it being a defense for Mamdani. Mamdani is not unknown, and his rhetoric is getting less radical as he’s increasing in fame-derived protection. Rather you should take what Truly said to mean that he was vetted as this type of person before he was allowed to become influential.

In the USA, liberal democracy was legitimised on a framework apartheid, following public lynchings, following a genocide and cattle slavery. The optics in the USA have always been vile, and yet their PR is able to dictate the narrative. Even right now they have more political prisoners than anywhere else, yet the average liberal wouldn’t label the governance as “oppressive”.

There has been a period of fewer political assassinations in the USA. (Or they’re better at hiding them). We can safely presume they found lower risk and higher return strategies, but that doesn’t mean we can infer the risk was ever high.

There isn’t that much risk to killing someone relatively obscure. People die in the USA every day. Either from murders or from accidents. Point a might have been true in the past, but the modern NSA can distinguish rising internet celebrities with unwanted politics early.

In a scenario where he’s completely truthful, that means that the USA delivered their conditions. Iran accepted those conditions. And then the USA withdrew from their own proposal, and now Iran is doing what? Calling every 5 minutes with new concessions? Is it a 150-point treaty now?

Pretty sure this is called using human shields. Random hotel guests are now unknowingly sleeping in military command centres.

In case it’s too small to see, the third country that voted against is Israel.

that’s literally what Zionism is

Not really, most zionists aren’t Jewish

Zionism isn’t apartheid favouring Zionists. Then you could just say you support it and get all the privileges. It’s apartheid favouring Jews. At least on paper, since they exclude non-white Jews.

Labour can be shit without being “controlled” by Zionists.

Labour is clearly controlled by Zionists. Zionists doesn’t mean Israelis, it means Zionist. Keir Starmer is the current leader of labour. So it’s “controlled” by him. I can’t actually visit this page to see if the quote is real, but supposedly “He told Jewish News:”

I do support Zionism… I absolutely support the right of Israel to exist as a homeland…. I said it loud and clear – and meant it – that I support Zionism without qualification.

(Page I found the quote on: https://dearscotland.substack.com/p/starmers-zionism-explained)

Even if you aren’t convinced from all his Zionist actions, surely this signals a Zionist ideology.

And this only accounts for 0% of their launching capability! Imagine how many missiles they’d be launching if the Epsteineers hadn’t destroyed 100% of their military.

Being completely passive and cold and ignoring the suffering of those around you is still better than actively inflicting suffering.

Because our countries aren’t sovereign. Capitalism is a system where capitalists dictate politics. But capitalists aren’t loyal to their home countries, they’re loyal to their the capitalist class. So they have no incentive to dictate politics in the benefit of the countries they rule. The USA as an institution is their main instrument and army. So of course they’ll protect the USA.

If you doubt me, you can try to verify it. Pick a small handful of capitalists in a EU country, and check where their money is. If they own more stocks in USA companies than they do EU companies, then assuredly they’ll prioritise the USA’s economy over the EUs economies.

Would London have fewer missiles it would need to defend against if the UK didn’t help bomb Iran? 🤔