NoneOfUrBusiness

Nobody is silent about this what the fuck are you even talking about?

Y’all getting the latter, definitely.

I mean if anything Israel should be really freaking out about Trump. US soft power is the only thing keeping Israel from being eaten alive—or at least left out to dry—by its neighbors. I know they’re not freaking out, but they really should be.

The buses were blown up while empty in a parking lot, which isn’t likely to be a coincidence.

This is the kind of resistance I can 100% get behind. Blowing up civilians is generally not good, but absolutely blow up their shit.

There’s an Arabic saying that roughly translated goes something like this: Sins are wide and good deeds are narrow. The meaning is that when a large part of a group of people is sinful, just not being implicated in sin doesn’t protect you; you have to work to stop or you have no business trying to be excused from whatever punishment will come. In other words, you gotta work to stop the evil being done or you’re well within the moral blast radius. So… That’s what’s going on here; with this framework more than 99% of America is guilty.

A significant fraction? Yes. Almost all? Nope.

Does Spain?

I mean yes. Spain has one of the biggest weapons industries in the world IIRC.

Race and people are different things though.

I know calling the GOP on their hypocrisy is a low hanging fruit, but still: the party of law and order.

None of that is a problem for Trump.

معلش.

Imagine being so bad on women’s rights that even the Taliban oppose you.

arguing that even if girls’ education wasn’t a religious obligation, it was at least permissible.

Islam is pretty clear that Muslim leaders must act in the best interests of their people, so… uh… it is, in fact, a religious obligation. Not that these idiots care, but still.

The actual reforms brought by the French revolution happened mostly during the nonviolent part before the Terror.

The nonviolent part that had people checks notes storming the Bastille? That aside the actual revolution part of the French revolution ended up mostly nonviolent because the Ancien Regime capitulated nonviolently; had they dug in their heels the whole thing would’ve been a lot more violent.

Comparable reforms in the UK for example happened throughout the 18th and 19th century with hardly any violence.

Okay but those reforms happened after the royalists were beaten into submission. The English Civil War and other events happened in the 17th century and were the basis of later democratic reforms in Britain. They were nonviolent because the prerequisite violence necessary to keep reactionary royalist forces from messing everything up had already happened.

No? The Civil Rights Movement obviously didn’t involve anybody but the US, and before the Irish war of independence Ireland was part of Britain. The Troubles were also within the bounds of the post-Irish independence UK, also known as the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. North Ireland in particular is still until now British territory. So, back to my question: Where do these conflicts fall within your framework?

Where do the Civil Rights Movement or the Troubles fall within that framework? What about the Irish war of independence?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_Civil_War

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eighty_Years'_War

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II

You’ve got a civil war for Britain, a war of independence for the Netherlands and a foreign occupation after a bloody war for Germany.

The mass spilling of blood was unnecessary, caused by impatient mobs who just could not wait for those reforms to bear fruit, and who had other unproductive agendas such as vengeance. What is certain is that 200 years later many European countries have achieved the same level of economic development and social justice as France (some of them even more so) without any need for a violent revolution.

Okay you gotta be kidding me. Can you give me the names of those countries? Because the examples that come to mind (Britain, Germany, the Netherlands) were very much violent.

This is hilarious.

“I doubt the Americans are going to lift sanctions on Syria any time soon,” Yazigi said. “I think they might use them as a pressure card on the Syrians.”

Yazigi recalls the case of Sudan, where the US only lifted its “state sponsor of terrorism” designation after it recognised Israel in 2020.

How to push new states into your geopolitical enemies’ camp 101.