Earlier quoted context omitted.
MSNBC is far left? Next you'll tell me Joe Biden is a Maoist.
I suspect they're a bot, fwiw.
[dead]
U.S. sanctions against the A/I Collective
581–590 of 817 posts
Re: U.S. sanctions against the A/I Collective
#582Earlier quoted context omitted.
Did the government force AWS to shut them off or just ask nicely? Hard to say. Any message from the government comes with implied threats . We'd only find it which was the case, if AWS had refused and the government had either punished AWS or not. Can you see how it's different from an explicit sanction or an arrest?
In some ways (not all, of course) an implicit demand from the government is worse than an explicit one. An explicit one at least puts all the cards on the table.
It's impossible to know if the government intended a threat. Do you see the difference between a government worker using the report button on twitter, and the police arresting someone?
Re: U.S. sanctions against the A/I Collective
#583Earlier quoted context omitted.
So it's trivial that if you are the government and you want to arrest someone for speech, you first call them a terrorist organisation and then you can arrest them for speech? Ridiculous.
I don’t know much about this, but are you considering “material support or resources” the same thing as speech?
The government is saying that hosting someone's speech is material support, so yes, they are.
Re: U.S. sanctions against the A/I Collective
#584Earlier quoted context omitted.
we've seen several websites that do not break US law get evicted by registrars, ISPs, DDoS protection services, and other Internet landlords. 4chan miraculously survived multiple mass hysteria periods of the past decade without (iirc) any major disruptions. same as Russian 2ch -- miraculously untouched by Russia's rapid North Koreaization even though its /pol/ is overwhelmingly anti-regime.
The pirate bay is still up despite being taken down, is this now also a honeypot?
The Pirate Bay has had legal issues, been raided and taken down in the past. Has 4chan has any issues like this?
Re: U.S. sanctions against the A/I Collective
#585Re: U.S. sanctions against the A/I Collective
#586Earlier quoted context omitted.
> To be hosted on our servers you have to share our principles of anti-fascism, anti-racism, anti-sexism, anti-homophobia, anti-transphobia, and anti-militarism. Those stated beliefs are shockingly close to far-leftism. So I'm guessing the same radical exclusionary zeal is also being applied here. Also, for clarity, I'm not taking those definitions literally, but rather as dog whistles for a very specific group of pe…
>I'm not taking those definitions literally Given that fascism had quite the bloodied history in Italy (see: Mussolini), and we're talking about a group literally based in Italy, why wouldn't you? Is it because you were unaware of said history in Italy and never experienced fascism first-hand, yourself?
Why did you pick one thing on the list and ignore all of the others?
Re: U.S. sanctions against the A/I Collective
#587Earlier quoted context omitted.
Note that the UK would be committing war crimes in this case, since you are not allowed to murder unarmed soldiers, you are supposed to capture them and put them in POW camps. Which is typically called „arresting“ when a government does it to their own citizens…
PA was armed. > you are not allowed to murder unarmed soldiers, That's also false, you can absolutely kill unarmed combatants so long as they remain combatants. Eg you can bomb an artillery crew even if they don't have sidearms. To be eligible for capture, a combatant must generally surrender. > typically called „arresting“ when a government does it to their own citizens I encourage you to read up on POW camps. There…
An artillery crew is armed with the cannon.
POWs don’t have attorneys, but they do have rights. Limiting food and medical aid is a war crime.
Of course, everybody routinely violates the rights of POWs, and only the losers ever get prosecuted.
Re: U.S. sanctions against the A/I Collective
#588Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Lmao you've literally went in there because of your blind anti-communist behaviour after coup-ing your own "allies" of South Vietnam Anti-communism was and still is highly important and critical. Comintern was aiming to conquer the Earth with global communism. It was an open objective and part of what caused World War 2. The Soviet Union has caused more death on this planet as a result of its communist expansion th…
> Anti-communism was and still is highly important and critical. McCarthyism was the pinnacle of the anti-communism movement. How did that turn out, again? > It was an open objective and part of what caused World War 2 I'm pretty sure Germany invading other countries was the cause of World War 2. I don't see how you can lump "dang commies were spreading, so we had to go fight 'em" in as a justification, when there wa…
> McCarthyism was the pinnacle of the anti-communism movement. How did that turn out, again?
It worked out fine?
> I'm pretty sure Germany invading other countries was the cause of World War 2. I don't see how you can lump "dang commies were spreading, so we had to go fight 'em" in as a justification, when there was only a non-aggression pact between Germany and the former-USSR. "Those dang commies were spreading without shooting a single bullet, so we had to stop 'em! Yeehaw!"
Many communists were armed and had guns, aiming to take over every country on Earth. The US, Japan and Germany were fighting back against them in China, Spain and Germany.
> How do you figure? If they weren't/aren't as deadly, why did the US waste the billions to research and produce them? The technology of the time had no qualitative equal.
I figure objectively. Far more Japanese were killed by fire bombings, which could be done extensively, at scale, with impunity. Nukes were important and consequential, but if the goal was simply to kill Japanese or destroy strategic targets then we already had that problem well solved.
Japan had thoroughly spread propaganda of racial superiority and being divinely chosen. One of the benefits of dropping a nuke compared to fire bombing, is that it immediately leaves a humbling impression.
> Where are you getting this revision of history from? The Western Union was created, first, by European countries and it became NATO a few years later. The US didn't form anything, it came to an already existing table.
The US created the League of Nations, which was the first known collective security organization like that to prevent a repeat of World War 1. Ironically, the idea came from a German. World War 2 demonstrated that Europeans weren't prepared to defend each other.
The Western Union was mostly an attempt to demonstrate to the US that European countries were now ready to defend each other, rather than failing. This is relevant right now, because there are concerns that Putin wants to test NATO to see if their resolve collapses the same way it did during World War 2 under the League of Nations. In order for NATO to be formed, the US had to be convinced that European countries could be active participants rather than passive consumers of defense guarantees, which is also again relevant since we've been pushing harder for European countries to meet their defense spending commitments.
> Isn't actually the inverse? It's preventing all of it's former close allies from just dumping the bonds because Dorito wants to antagonise all of your allies? Didn't the 2008 crash demonstrate it can destabilise in a major shock, just as well?
People actually traded in other currencies for USD rather than ditching it after 2008.
Re: U.S. sanctions against the A/I Collective
#589Re: U.S. sanctions against the A/I Collective
#590Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
Ridiculous. I am anti fascist, and I have never heard of any of what you are talking about. I oppose fascism. That does not magically infuse into my brain mysterious connections to groups of people, nor instantaneous knowledge and mastery of tactics from nazi groups... That would be actually kind of cool, but no, sorry to disappoint you.
[dead]