He didn't, he was referring to Russia.
It sounded like the three bidens episode of e1
biden was referring to russian losses. i mean that's idiotic, but that's what he was saying
Hm maybe ukraine does belong in nato after all
Not everyone wants to deal with the bullshit associated with ownership. Owning a business is not the same as doing the labour that makes the business money - there's a bunch of other crap like dealing with taxes, licensing, insurance, marketing, and liability. It's great that OP is willing to offer an ownership stake but not everyone wants it. In one small business I'm aware of, I know an offer like this was made and the person/employee declined because they didn't want all the additional stress of work required for the business to legally exist and function and instead wanted to stay on the tools so to speak. They found it was better for their health/mental health limitations. Now that person is well paid and has a senior role, but isn't an owner.
There is a non trivial amount of labor that goes along with owning a business that is necessary for a business to function. It is not so much labour that small business tyrants should be exploiting labour like they do, but it is work and it is almost always different in nature than the type of work that the business does that actually makes revenue. Paying someone super well and respecting their opinion for decision making purposes without an ownership stake is a respectful option for OP.
Or prigo style, just wait til these idiots get in a small plane
the boomers were worse than the generations before and after them
This is part of the pattern that has been going on for all of recorded human history also
What's the matter with kids today is a sentiment that has been posted about and whined about for as far back as humanity has written records. It's not different just because we do it on phones
One would think. Freeland is supposed to be the heir apparent, but if she's inheriting a party that's in the absolute toilet then that's one strike against her. Further, her principal policy has been project ukraine, which has been a real failure. What is she going to do, brag about how great the sanctions she designed worked against Russia?
This is a pretty sharp way for them to have a legal reason to crack down on and deport migrants from the MENA region. "because you're brown" is not as palatable a reason as "because you haven't grappled with Germany's history and become a Zionist"
In Canada news, the Liberals got rinsed here in what was a safe seat. Trudeau reacting with bodies and spaces language is classic.
Ah, but have you considered all the totally real ways that the upcoming labour government will differ from the tories in terms of actual policy? It's going to be totally different when kid starver is at the helm
I look forward to 2027 when we are told that we must go to war with China to prevent them from invading the Philippines' territorial waters and it turns out to be ocean within a few miles of this ridiculous scow turned artificial island.
Yes it's really good. Eating mujadara really feels healthy, like your body knows it's getting balanced nutrients without a bunch of crap.
I really enjoy mujadara, the contrast of rice, lentil onion and pomegranate syrup is 
I really like that contrast of flavours. What other vegan dishes should I make that use pomegranate syrup?
Also, what are common kid foods in Lebanon? I mean, it seems like in every culture there are dishes that kids always love, like what grandparents make as a treat. Like maple syrup, apple pie, cheese in canada. What are things like that in Lebanon? Are there things you are really looking forward to sharing with your son to be because you enjoyed them as a kid?
This is a good overview of Taiwan's recent history as RoC vs PRC, as well as the American influence there. Start brushing up on history now to prep for war with China 
https://warwickpowell.substack.com/p/dire-straits
spoiler
This essay aims to unpack this pivot and how it relates to US ‘grand strategy’ ambitions, historically and in the present. To summarise the key points and arguments:
Taiwan island in and of itself has no sovereignty status as a nation state. The island is part of a single Chinese sovereign territory. This is the position embedded in the Constitution of the Republic of China (ROC), the Constitution of the People’s Republic of China (PRC), resolutions of the United Nations, and positions of the United States Government as articulated in various communiques and official documents. It’s also a position accepted by the overwhelming majority of countries around the world.
This status matters, because attempts to alter this status is one of the root causes of current frictions. Taiwan island remains subject to administrative dispute between two competing Chinese administrations. This stems from a not fully resolved civil war, dating back to the 1930s and 1940s. The status of the island can only be understood in the context of this unfinished civil war.
The US has long harboured ambitions to occupy and control the island for its own strategic purposes. This has seen the island positioned as a potential launchpad to prosecute either a geopolitical or at times a “spiritual war” against mainland (Communist) China; and at other times, the island has been a bulwark protecting America’s Lake - namely the greater Pacific Ocean.
Today, the US is fanning regional instability in Asia through the application of strategies employed in recent times in Europe. Taiwan island is at the epicentre of this destabilisation. The ‘rinse and repeat’ approach increases the risk that the US is seeking to lead Asia down the same Primrose Path that has seen the progressive destruction of Ukraine.
Resolving the Chinese civil war is a necessary condition for regional stability. It’s a civil war demanding resolution from the warring parties. The question is, will it be resolved peacefully or not; and what are the conditions of such a resolution?
Yeah it's fucking wild how much he puts on Trump for causing these problems, with a smaller chunk of blame on Biden. What the fuck were you in particular doing during the Obama regime years buddy? On the three issues mentioned specifically, Obama oversaw euromaidan, minsk2 and arming of ukrainian nazis. He supported the Saudi war on Yemen, which hardened ansarallah into the force it is today. He supported the Israelis during his whole span, including operation protective edge in 2014. He "pivoted to Asia" and encouraged the buildup of proxy forces in the area, tensions in the south China sea.
Further, at best, he did nothing for rapproachment with the dprk. Not to mention the brutality of Libya, the continuation of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, maintaining Guantanamo, and lord knows what exactly his bloodless nerds were doing in Syria.
THANKS FOR THE INPUT BEN RHODES, GO FUCK YOURSELF TO DEATH
These fucking monsters just want to set themselves up for whatever bullshit think tank position where they scratch their chins wondering if doing the same fucking things over and over will solve the problems they spent their careers causing
Ben Rhodes, the Obama guy, on grappling with reality
Second, the old rules-based international order doesn’t really exist anymore. As the old order unravels, these overlapping blocs (BRICS, CSTO) are competing over what will replace it.
If Biden does win a second term, he should use it to build on those of his policies that have accounted for shifting global realities, while pivoting away from the political considerations, maximalism, and Western-centric view that have caused his administration to make some of the same mistakes as its predecessors.
If Washington allows foreign policy to be driven by zero-sum maximalist demands, it risks a choice between open-ended conflict and embarrassment.
On the one hand, encouraging to see an establishment liberal pumping the brakes on unipolarity, on the other hand, disappointing because both the Biden and Trump regimes have been full of maximalist neoconservatives as far as foreign policy.
Definitely liberal brainworms on display still, like this passage:
American rhetoric about the rules-based international order has been seen around the world on a split screen of hypocrisy, as Washington has supplied the Israeli government with weapons used to bombard Palestinian civilians with impunity. The war has created a policy challenge for an administration that criticizes Russia for the same indiscriminate tactics that Israel has used in Gaza.
NO THEY FUCKING HAVEN'T FUCK YOU BEN
In Ukraine, the United States and Europe should focus on protecting and investing in the territory controlled by the Ukrainian government—drawing Ukraine into European institutions, sustaining its economy, and fortifying it for lengthy negotiations with Moscow so that time works in Kyiv’s favor.
Rofl what does this mean? How is this different from what's happening now? Time will never work in kyiv's favour - that's the problem with attrition war. Every 6 months ukraine is in a worse position than it was previously.
In the Middle East, Washington should join with Arab and European partners to work directly with Palestinians on the development of new leadership and toward the recognition of a Palestinian state, while supporting Israel’s security. Regional de-escalation with Iran should, as it did during the Obama administration, begin with negotiated restrictions on its nuclear program.
So we're still talking about getting rid of hamas. And it is too bad that Biden didn't pursue restart of the jcpoa, but he chose to continue trump's policy over Obama because he didn't want to give the Israelis a tummy ache. He's a staunch Zionist. Note, no prescription for relations with Hezbollah or ansarallah there, just an assumption that resolving things with Iran will improve relations elsewhere. In other words, misunderstanding of the relationships of the axis of resistance.
In Taiwan, the United States should try to preserve the status quo by investing in Taiwanese military capabilities while avoiding saber rattling, by structuring engagement with Beijing to avoid miscalculation, and by mobilizing international support for a negotiated, peaceful resolution to Taiwan’s status.
America's strategy in Taiwan should be to have its cake while eating it too
Overall, not a terrible framing of the article, but truly written by a speechwriter lapdog. It follows the familiar Obama-technocrat style of describing a problem somewhat correctly while offering no material change in approach, without recognizing the true cost of failure. Still, maybe worth a share to the libs in our lives because of Ben's pedigree.
Look at the sleight of hand in this bullshit
> French Election Becomes ‘Nightmare’ for Nation’s Jews
> The place of Jews in French society has emerged as a prominent theme in the election because the once-antisemitic National Rally party of Marine Le Pen, whose anti-immigrant position lies at the core of its fast-growing popularity, has been one of the most emphatic supporters of Israel and French Jews since the Hamas-led terrorist attack of Oct. 7 on Israel.
Huh weird that the ethnonationalists are on the same sids as israel
> Mr. Mélenchon’s France Unbowed, by contrast, has been vehement in its denunciation of Israel’s military operation in Gaza as “genocide.”
> The confrontation of an abruptly pro-Israeli National Rally, whose antisemitic founder, Jean-Marie Le Pen, described the Holocaust as “a detail” of history, with a far left that Mr. Macron described last week as “guilty of antisemitism” has confronted French Jews and others with an agonizing choice.
The choice being, do I side with the group that minimizes the Holocaust and supports the current genocide, or the side that doesn't? Hmm damn what a choice
> Can they really bring themselves to vote for Ms. Le Pen’s party, given its history of antisemitism and its xenophobic determination to seek a ban on the public use of the Muslim head scarf if elected, out of loathing for Mr. Mélenchon’s France Unbowed?
> He argued that the campaign of France Unbowed had been based on “hatred of Israel” and cited Aymeric Caron, a lawmaker who is a member of the New Popular Front coalition that left-wing parties have formed, as suggesting Jews were inhuman.
Damn suggesting Jews are inhuman, that sounds really bad, let's read on
> On May 27, Mr. Caron said on the social platform X, “It is evident that Gaza has shown that, no, we do not belong to the same human species.” He was referring to supporters of the Israeli military campaign in Gaza.
Oh, he's saying that supporters of this genocide are inhuman
Supporters of the Israeli genocide
!is-this is this Jewishness?
Some dragonriders just want to watch the world Pern.
Shut it down boys, prepping has gone woke
The Onion brings you all of the latest news, stories, photos, videos and more from America's finest news source.
tag yourself, I'm the living room labeled "america's living room"
This interview between the NYT and the author of 'how to blow up a pipeline' includes discussion of the social acceptability of political violence. Unsurprisingly, the NYT person flips out at the idea of property destruction and seems to bounce between 'political violence is never acceptable' and calling David Malm a hypocrite for not blowing up a pipeline during the interview. Evidently this is the kind of political violence the NYT doesn't support, in contrast to the kind of political violence they love (i.e. political violence used by the american state against property and humanity both foreign and domestic).
This is my favourite part of the interview in the spoilers.
spoiler
NYT: We live in representative democracies where certain liberties are respected. We vote for the policies and the people we want to represent us. And if we don’t get the things we want, it doesn’t give us license to then say, “We’re now engaging in destructive behavior.” Right? Either we’re against political violence or not. We can’t say we’re for it when it’s something we care about and against it when it’s something we think is wrong.
Malm: Of course we can. Why not?
NYT: That is moral hypocrisy.
Malm: I disagree.
NYT: Why?
Malm: The idea that if you object to your enemy’s use of a method, you therefore also have to reject your own use of this method would lead to absurd conclusions. The far right is very good at running electoral campaigns. Should we thereby conclude that we shouldn’t run electoral campaigns? This goes for political violence too, unless you’re a pacifist and you reject every form of political violence — that’s a reasonably coherent philosophical position. Slavery was a system of violence. The Haitian revolution was the violent overthrow of that system. It is never the case that you defeat an enemy by renouncing every kind of method that enemy is using.
NYT: But I’m specifically thinking about our liberal democracy, however debased it may be. How do you rationalize advocacy for violence within what are supposed to be the ideals of our system?
Malm: Imagine you have a Trump victory in the next election — doesn’t seem unimaginable — and you get a climate denialist back in charge of the White House and he rolls back whatever good things President Biden has done. What should the climate movement do then? Should it accept this as the outcome of a democratic election and protest in the mildest of forms? Or should it radicalize and consider something like property destruction? I admit that this is a difficult question, but I imagine that a measured response to it would need to take into account how democracy works in a country like the United States and whether allowing fossil-fuel companies to wreck the planet because they profit from it can count as a form of democracy and should therefore be respected.
NYT: Could you give me a reason to live?
Malm: What do you mean?
NYT: Your work is crushing. But I have optimism about the human project.
Malm: I’m not an optimist about the human project.
You could go for the classic chrome look with big hoop steps, or you could snag these bad boys instead.
Warning: polonium grade tech bro !bazinga, retvrn to trvdition marble statue humping and fascist eugenics in this one. Cringe levels so high that even NYT is dunking on them.
Worth the read in full for all you dunkheads on the comm. Here's a taste:
> Internal Praxis documents outline three “persona groups” who will populate the Praxis city. They are “warriors,” who are “muscular” and “clean” and protect society from threats; “priests,” who are “very thin,” and “define the values and beliefs of society”; and “merchants,” who are “portly” and “bearded,” and include venture capitalists and cryptocurrency professionals.
ABANDON GOOD VIBES ALL YE WHO ENTER HERE
This recipe is inspired by mujadara, a simple combination of lentils, rice, and onions that exists in various forms across the Middle East. It's comforting but not too rich, and it's fresh and vegetarian without relying on many perishable ingredients. In other words, it's the perfect meal for the ni...
Lentils, rice, onion, lemon, fuck yeah. I love having a bit of pomegranate molasses or pomegranate pips with it too. The mix of spices + lemon really makes the flavour pop, and nutritionwise it combines the heartiness of lentils with the carbs of rice. Cooked raisins are really good too.
The link was just some random recipe so there'd be a photo. Please share mujadara protips if you've got them
Unproven hypothesis seeks to explain ChatGPT's seemingly new reluctance to do hard work.
or is it just bean counters optimizing enshittification and monetization of a previously free product? oh its certainly the former !bazinga
> Unproven hypothesis seeks to explain ChatGPT's seemingly new reluctance to do hard work.
> In late November, some ChatGPT users began to notice that ChatGPT-4 was becoming more "lazy," reportedly refusing to do some tasks or returning simplified results. Since then, OpenAI has admitted that it's an issue, but the company isn't sure why. The answer may be what some are calling "winter break hypothesis." While unproven, the fact that AI researchers are taking it seriously shows how weird the world of AI language models has become.
> On Monday, a developer named Rob Lynch announced on X that he had tested GPT-4 Turbo through the API over the weekend and found shorter completions when the model is fed a December date (4,086 characters) than when fed a May date (4,298 characters). Lynch claimed the results were statistically significant.
“This used to be such a nice neighborhood,” said Fedranix, a high templar who organized the rally.
I'm part of leadership of a small community group for our part of town. I am seeking advice on how to smuggle !gold-communist principles into a group that is not explicitly communist or anticapitalist but nevertheless is receptive to the concepts.
So far the group is focused on community resiliency in the face of climate change, sustainability, food/skill sharing, social inclusivity (i.e. age, class, LGBT, ethnicity, nationality), and is generally meant to be an alternative to the chud heavy block watch groups on Facebook that just fear monger about teens after dark and property values. The group's politics are not explicitly leftist/anticapitalist but the most active members think naomi klein is great. If it was 2016 I would bet on the group being Bernard brothers. This is a heavily propagandized part of the west so actual political theory is thin on the ground. The membership of the group is likely to grow significantly over time so it is not realistic to put up a hammer and sickle, but nevertheless I want to lay foundational principles that align with anticapitalist/communist values.
For municipal politics reasons, we will open this group up to members from the neighborhood catchment to stake our claim as official reps of this part of town. We are writing our constitution and bylaws now and I want to bake in some antichud deterrents into these documents so it isn't appealing for chuds. In addition I want to frame all our future events and projects with left language, falling short of dictatorship of the proletariat or !mao-aggro-shining.
Help me chapo you're my only hope
My child wanted to watch an animated green lantern series recently so we checked it out. Of course the main character who is the human green lantern is a fighter pilot who does a bunch of sweet fighter pilot flight maneuvers in the opening sequence. I told my child that shows like this often show the military being cool and doing cool stuff, but that in real life what fighter pilots actually do is drop bombs on children. I'm only human, I also enjoy (some) military action movies, but I know it's cotton candy brain poison too.
I hate how many children's shows have pro military pro cop propaganda. How do others talk to their kids about it to inoculate them against brainworms? I usually describe the military and the cops as being like a gang of bullies - they do things to make themselves look cool but really they just exist to hurt people and take their shit.
On my phone I autofill my username/pw, it shows a green 'logged in' bot, but it doesn't actually log in. Desktop is fine
edit: I touched grass and it was not to my liking