For years, the American center-left has been casting these threats as illegitimate. Gravy seals, yall queda, meal team six, etc.
And now since they have successfully downplayed this threat, we are woefully unprepared. People need to get armed, now.
Not trying to add FUD, but have there ever been cases of Spotify banning people for using their paid license to run homebrew versions of Spotify?
You’re out of your depth here… Those reasons for affordable solar cells on earth in no way directly translate to applications in completely different environments (planets or moons)
… why tho
Just ask NASA or ESA
https://www.ans.org/news/article-5894/nations-envision-nuclear-reactors-on-the-moon/
This idea of “well earth has solar, so solar must work just as well on the moon!” doesn’t take into account natural lunar resources (solar needs rare earth metals) , atmospheric conditions, thermal conditions, material transport, etc… Sure, a well-functioning moon settlement would probably have a combination of thermo, solar, and nuclear power, but it is strange how you’re writing off one of the most promising forms of energy that excites and interests space scientists most.
These issues you’re having just sound like cope due to the fact that the US is now lagging in space science.
Why do any space exploration?
While the west sells off space to billionaires and the private sector, we need players doing actual science.
Nope. Docker doesn’t do that. That’s something else.
Their villainous gunmen versus our trained soldiers.
dies
They are really laying it on thick with the passive voice.
Regulatory agencies have been captured, scotus is corrupt, women’s rights have been taken, the largest industries are enriching a miniscule handful of Americans, fascism is increasingly coming into style and our noble democrats have only just started a new grand strategy of… name calling?
Forget about getting people fed, using the new immunity ruling, stacking courts, or any serious material change for Americans. We are fucked.
Bruh, you literally just linked to a paragraph that makes the claim that the idea of a three-day conquest came purely out of American and Ukrainian speculation. This is exactly what I’m saying, save for that one Lukashenko quote.
I’m not going to get into the weeds with you about the invasion, but I am going to call you out for sheisty implied quotes. Any reasonable and adequately uninformed person would read your “three day war” comment in response to a comment chain about putin and assume you were talking about putin. You deserve to get called out for that. It’s misleading and disingenuous.
Oh my bad, for some strange reason I had assumed you were talking about Putin in a comment chain devoted to talking about Putin.
Show me where Putin claimed he’d take Kyiv in 3 days.
What kind of thinking is this? That it’s better to lose as long as you have the moral high ground? Maybe that thinking works for little league, but not when healthcare, women’s rights, and climate are on the line.
“Sure the fascist uprising happened in record time, but at least we put it on the record that the fascists have occasional issues with intellectual honesty!”
Only in the liberal mindset does intellectual honesty come with more primacy than physically protecting people who are actually vulnerable.
The fact that it appears we are 1 or 2 years away from door-to-door gestapo visits, and liberals are still circle jerking about their epic, pragmatic, civil, patriotic, “play by the rules” mindset, means we are most likely doomed.
Bruh, why are you getting excited about the idea of crusty old genocidal American beaurocrats who inevitably sell out? No US senator is a friend of mine.
Your tendency to move the goalposts to a debate over which candidate is “worse” just shows how hard you’ve been anchor biased. Leftists have no interest in deliberating over which of the two bourgeois candidates are “worse”
This only logical conclusion to this naive utilitarianism is reaching a point 30 years from now when liberals will be frothing at the mouths in support of the dem candidate who wants 5 genocides as opposed to the republican who wants 10.
There is a legend about a certain species of caterpillar that can only cross the threshold of metamorphosis by seeing its future butterfly. Proletarian subjectivity does not evolve by incremental steps but requires non-linear leaps, especially moral self-recognition through solidarity with the struggle of a distant people, even when this contradicts short-term self-interest, as in the famous cases of Lancashire cotton workers’ enthusiasm for Lincoln and later for Gandhi. Socialism, in other words, requires non-utilitarian actors, whose ultimate motivations and values arise from structures of feeling that others would deem spiritual. Marx rightly scourged romantic humanism in the abstract, but his personal pantheon—Prometheus and Spartacus, Homer, Cervantes, and Shakespeare—affirmed a heroic vision of human possibility that no longer seems to have any purchase in our fallen world.
Mike Davis
If, 30 years from now, the choice is between a democrat who wants 5 genocides and a republican who wants 10, will you still cling to American electoralism as hard as you are now? Will you still be militantly democrat?
This logic isn’t sustainable.
“Not getting gold ring on the first try” -> “uninhibited genocide”
New genocide euphamism just dropped.
This logic isn’t sustainable.
30 years from now you’ll still be arguing against leftists for not voting for 99% hitler as opposed to 100% hitler.
I swear, liberals will still be screeching about “if you don’t vote for the candidate who wants 3 genocides as opposed to the one who wants 5, you are a Russian bot!”
Lesser evilism is what got us here. The American experiment has run its course and we have a duty to dismantle it.
/s ?