Karmadhi

Member
 View profile  See their activity

  • Content count

    2,203

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Karmadhi

  1. Posted · Edited by Karmadhi

    2 hours ago, Nivsch said:

    hamas always try to kill civilians directly.

     

     

    2 hours ago, Nivsch said:

    DF try to kill terrorists and to maintain an order and stability in both areas, while in its way to do so it, in some cases, acts a bit too loose on the weapon when faces operational chaos,

    How come if Hamas is so much prone to killing civilians the ratio between civilians and soldiers killed is quite similar.

    Hamas killed 2x civilians than soldiers, you claim IDF is similar.

    You also called such a ratio 'acceptable in war".

    If Hamas cared about killing civilians so much, wouldnt the ratio be like 10x more civilians than soldiers?

    Also dont you think some of the civilians dead, got caught in the crossfire? I mean IDF killed 3 Israeli hostages in Gaza  because on the heat of the moment people make mistakes and stuff happens.

    Perhaps some of those 800 confirmed civilians died during the fighting between IDF and Hamas? 

    If IDF did such mistakes in Gaza, why not here too?

    We still lack proof of how many were massacred without restraint compared to how many died in crossfires.

    I am not denying some civilians were intentionally targeted and massacred, but we lack the concrete number.

    Perhaps it is 300? 100? 500? Who knows...

     

     

     

  2. Posted · Edited by Karmadhi

    1 hour ago, BlueOak said:

    Correct.

    *With the stipulation, it's an ethnic cleansing. Which isn't much better for anyone involved, but if you are quoting me I need to be specific. Ditto Russia in the east of Ukraine. Ditto China in Tibet, I was going to post East Turkistan too but that's a genocid

    Gaza is close to 15.000 kids. I did not see such numbers anywhere else. So number wise and proportion wise it is much worse. The only war that comes close recent times is Syrian war and especially the Chechen war (in terms of proportions).

    It is not just ethnic cleansing in Gaza. Close to 2% of the ENTIRE population of Gaza has died.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraqi_Turkmen_genocide#:~:text=The Iraqi Turkmen genocide refers,of their land in Iraq.

    It is genocide this one in Turkemnistan. Did not know. Thanks for sharing.

    Also time matters, Gaza is 6 months. The other conflicts are years long.

    Ukraine is 2 plus years, Turkmenistan happened in 3 years and Tibet has been going on for decades. So time lenght matters do.

    I think Ukraine and Tibet are indeed ethnic cleansings. But Gaza to me is now more on genocide than ethnic cleansing. Especially with the man made famine happening. Same for Rohinyga (indeed genocide).

    Note: I am not discounting that all these conflicts were horrible and should stop. But they are in different leagues of brutality and overall carnage, that is all I meant.

  3. Posted

    21 hours ago, Chadders said:

    What is going on in Gaza is terrible. It’s genocide or at least ethnic cleansing. The west’s position to generally stand by Isreal no matter what really does put us to shame and goes in complete contrast to our civic values. Germany has their bollocks in a twist over the issue because of the holocaust so can’t be seen to criticise Isreal. Ultimately a lot of the support from the west for Isreal is because of this outdated moral obligation. Isreal can stand on its own two feet and should be judged like any other nation. It’s wrong that we give them special treatment 

    Saying this neither the atrocities committed by Russia or Isreal invalidates one or the other. They are both equally barbaric. It’s just Ukraine has some means to defend itself. It’s not a competition 

    Totally agree with you.

     

  5. Posted

    3 hours ago, BlueOak said:

    will repeat my answer in a shorter form: Right-wing governments require an opponent, they require an enemy. They need to think of themselves as heroes. They cannot accept or process the opposite of this because it breaks their worldview, and their ability to remain in power. 

    All the countries you just named have right-wing governments:

    Joe Biden, Macron and Schultz are right wing? Ok got it. Because they are the genocide supporters I see here.

     

  7. Posted

    17 hours ago, BlueOak said:

    War is hell, and the people who want it and use it to further their ends are deeply rooted in fear or a form of psychosis. They inflict generational trauma that we all have to live with and reincarnate into. Apply that to everything you just said, and you can understand why I criticize Iran, Israel,  China, America, my own UK government, and Russia. It doesn't help, because morality is useless in survival scenarios, even explaining the cycle or fallout from the international order is useless. People are in fear and are more reactionary than I've ever seen them. They are hell-bent on ripping the international order down, then give me a surprised face at the consequences. 

    15 years ago, I predicted all these wars, when the entire world started to shift to the far right, and nobody wanted to hear it. Still, nobody wants to hear it. All the far-right government of each country wants to do is find an enemy and call them the bad guys, that's the logic they operate on. They require an enemy to sustain their far-right ideologies, and their leaders use war and violence to stay in power. - This is the macro reason for all these wars, alongside money and ego.

    As more of Europe's far-right realize they can make BRICS and Russia out to be their opponent, gaining political capital, things will get worse. As Russia does to Europe to maintain power, and BRICS do to America generally to gain political capital. That's all that's needed for a wider war. - It will be hastened by people calling them weak.

    I am talking about the hypocrisy of not calling out war crimes when specific countries do it. Not about BRICS or anything like that.

    Countless Western governments are not right governments and still they do not call out Israel's crimes.

    USA, Netherlands, Germany, France being prime examples. Right now none of these countries have right wing governments yet they did what I wrote above.

    So I will repeat my question: Why the mass graves and massacres committed by Israel against Palestinians are not condemned by the non right wing Western governments (France, Germany, USA, Netherlands) like the massacres committed by Russians against Ukrainians.

  8. Posted · Edited by Karmadhi

    On 23/04/2024 at 0:30 PM, Leo Gura said:

    Don't over-generalize. Most Green people can appreciate the value of masculinity and femininity without making them some rigid, exclusive, traditional roles.

    Can does not mean they do in real life.

    On 23/04/2024 at 0:30 PM, Leo Gura said:

    If you consume too much online politics then you will get a skewed picture of this situation. Politics and culture wars on social media are not an accurate representation of how people feel about this issue.

    I am only referring to discussions I had in real life. I never take online stuff into account. Purely in person talks with people I met in real life.

    Keep in mind we are different generations, I am 25 year old and most people I interact with are 28 and younger. Hence they tend to skew into more radical green. I am sure people that are 30+ may be more reasonable. But with people my age, I had the type of conversations that we had.

    Also sometimes they will agree on some gender differences but discount others.

    Like they might say that "Men are more risk takers" but then will discount the fact that "Men are more visual than women".

    It is somewhat random.

    I literally had a 18 year old girl (I was like 20 at the time): "The only difference between us is that you have a penis and I have a vagina". But to be honest she was quite extreme.

    This is what I am dealing with in my everyday life.

    The most common is agreeing on some specific gender differences but discounting most of the others. This I notice a TON.

    And I interacted with dozens and dozens of girls that identify as liberals which I met in every day life (I do not go to feminist rallies or anything). Most were from university and expats.

    It is a pretty decent pool size. Not 5 people. I live in a pretty Green European Western city, not in the US. Just for clarification.

    :D

     

  10. Posted

    @BlueOak I saw that when Russians did a massacre in Bucha (killing around 100 to 200 people) it got worldwide condemnation and the West was super angry and sad about it.

    I also saw some days ago in Gaza they found a mass graves consisting of hundreds of Palestininas, many had their hands tied meaning they were excecuted. How come no condemnation and Bucha treatment?

    Similar acts, similar death toll, one nobody hears about in terms of condemnation and the other the whole West says is horrible.

    Why?

    You seem pro Western so how can you explain this to me?

     

  11. Posted

    @BlueOak @Bobby_2021 One question you need to answer is this; "If NATO made it clear that they WILL NOT accept Ukraine and Ukraine kept a neutral government, a non anti Russian one, would have Russia still invaded Ukraine"?

    That is the core question here.

    If they actually want Ukraine and all the NATO expansion is an alibi, the answer is yes. They would have invaded Ukraine anyway because it is not about NATO but it is about getting that land into Russian territory.

    If the answer is no, so we would not have had a war. Then the war is about NATO expansion and Ukraine being a pro Western country, opposite of a pro Russian one.

    So what do you two think?

    Lets get to the core here.

  12. Posted · Edited by Karmadhi

    9 minutes ago, BlueOak said:

    The video agreed with me, that NATO might not launch nukes to defend one country. I think it's probable. Think of the calculation: do we end the planet, or send in conventional forces? Even more likely with Trump in office, and his desire to pull out of NATO.

    Slovakia even said they would not send troops to defend another NATO country under attack, and Bulgaria is unlikely to. There will be countries that simply do not, especially without American support. You overestimate a NATO response to defend Poland or the Baltics. Especially more nationalist governments. Thankfully these eastern regions, and some others are preparing themselves for this pattern of events.

    So why Russia would? You seem to make Putin seem like a crazy guy.

    Putin is very smart and calculating, he will not do anything that will end the planet.

    All Europe has to do is show strong will and he will back off.

    It is irrelevant what Bulgaria or Slovakia want. They are not the ones with Nukes or strong military. UK for example has a strong army and nuclear weapons. You said yourself they have a strong will to fight. That is what matters. Not weak countries. Poland is ready to fight too. Not to mention France.

    If Putin takes Ukraine and Moldova, I doubt he will invade any more in Europe.

    Also considering it will take Russia years to military recover and prepare and he is already quite old.

    We can give those non Nato members aid for sure, but sending troops is risking a war that can be avoided.

    I would rather play it safe.

    But that is just my opinion, I am not an expert.

  13. Posted · Edited by Karmadhi

    23 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

    It's not so hard.

    David Deida's books explain the masculine/feminine dynamic very well. You can treat the topic as a social science and a kind of applied psychology. Similar to sex-ed.

    It's not hard to turn masculine and feminine into a course. It's easier to understand than algebra. And it doesn't take 10 years of classes to get it.

    Good luck getting the liberal green people to accept these courses.

    I live in a liberal green city and just saying that "men tend to prefer more technical fields like engineering" will get you labeled as a sexist and patriarchal.

    It happened to me countless, countless times until I gave up.

     I have read "Way of the Superior Man". it is amaizing book.

    But it is too radical to be taught to a green audience.

    Such book would work way better to a blue or orange audience.

    Most green people tend to demonize gender differences to the point where they downright ignore they even exist.

     

  14. Posted · Edited by Karmadhi

    @Nivsch Mass murdering childreen and torturing men does take a toll on you for sure.

    Nazis also often resulted to alcoholism and depression after carrying out their atrocities during WW2.

    Dehumanization and hatred of the other will only carry you so far.

    When you see a mass grave filled with kids it will destroy you even if you see those kids as "vermin" (language used by Israel towards Palestinian kids).

  15. Posted · Edited by Karmadhi

    What if we threaten Russia to nuke their forces if they move in NATO and do not intervene if non NATO countries get attacked (just give them aid).

    Russia is not stupid to attack NATO.

    I understand the legal concerns of them annexing other countries but it is not worth risk WW3 imo.

    If Russia moves in on NATO then we can easily use tactical nukes against their forces (not cities). 

    It should cripple them harshly.

    Issue is when they they attack countries without nuclear weapons but luckily NATO has them and in the thousands.

    The idea of NATO troops dying to defend a non NATO country is insane to me. What is the point of NATO then if everyone can be protected? Aid is one thing but putting troops is basically heavy provocation.

    To me that should only be done for NATO members.

    @BlueOak Thoughts?

  16. Posted

    On 20/04/2024 at 7:53 PM, BlueOak said:

    You said any country next to Russia is its bitch, and any country next to America is the same. What about Europe? Is their influence not there? That was why I brought up not considering Europe when you wrote it. Is Ukraine not Europe's bitch too in this analogy?

    Europe is definitely USA's bitch :) 

    Look at how scared they are of Israel just because USA is strong ally with it.

    If they had a truly independent foreign policy they would have cut out ties with Israel by now and called out their consistent war crimes. 

    On 20/04/2024 at 7:53 PM, BlueOak said:

    Putin is not a hard man to understand

    He is more complex than "Putler" or "crazy dictator" as CNN or Piers Morgan portrays him.

    I do not like him per say but he is complex character worthy of studying. Leo has sent some good videos on his blog for this.

    On 20/04/2024 at 7:53 PM, BlueOak said:

    More European countries are talking about sending troops to Ukraine, Estonia, France, the UK, etc, which is why I am happy to talk about Europe here, as it lets us understand and focus on what's going on. So again, thanks for that and the discussion. Its not the Americans who will suffer the consequences of the war, or ultimately choose to fight a European war if it happens. So it is important to focus on where it's occurring. 

    Europeans are weak and lack resolve. All their money is useless without resolve. We saw it with France during WW2. They surrendered after 6 weeks even though they had a strong army. They preferred to give up Paris (the fucking capital), rather than risk it turning into a battleground. If they had fought like the Soviets did, perhaps WW2 would have ended much earlier (we can just speculate). 

    Also, if the Soviets gave up as easily as France did, Axis would have won WW2. 

    So resolve is super important and Europeans tend to lack it.

    It is the result (imo) of decaying nationalism and comfortable lives. Wars require a degree of nationalism to be fought which is currently missing, especially in Western Europe.

    Poland would be exception.

     

  17. Posted · Edited by Karmadhi

    1 hour ago, BlueOak said:

    We'll we've discussed the strategy to death. Hold Russia in Ukraine so they can't advance further until Putin is dead and his KGB stooges have grown old and passed on. Russia is crippling itself here, and China is buying it up. I know you don't agree with the analysis, so you can't agree with the strategy, and that's fine. 

    Practically?
    60% of Russia's USSR armor stockpiles are gone.
    70-80% of its professional fighting force.

    You are conveniently ignoring one very important detail.

    Russia has 4 times the population of Ukraine, meaning it is much better at absorbing human looses.

    From all the research I have done the ratio is around 50% more Russians killed, Ukraine needs a 400% ratio to even break even.

    It is similar to WW2 eastern front. Nazis killed on average 2 times more Soviets soldiers than they lost soldiers but because of the population difference, they were over ran in the end. Even though the production up to 1944 was very high for Germany (mostly due to slave labor properly used by Albert Speer) what happened is that all the new planes, tanks etc had nobody to use them. 

    Ukraine, even if they can hold 2-3 years more war, will be totally destroyed from a human capital point of view. 

    They have lost like 50.000 young people or something that have fled Ukraine.

    Russia has yet to do a proper mobilization. 

    Meanwhile Ukraine snatches people from the street.

    If they want to fight it is their right but "lets continue the war until Putin dies 5 years from now" is super selfish and basically you expect the Ukranian youth to do all the dying for you.

    1 hour ago, BlueOak said:

    61 billion more dollars in aid buys a lot of things. It could buy a break in the Russian line because they've used much of their current manpower on repeated human wave attacks, at the minimum, it will buy holding the line against Russia.

    They tried in 2023 and it failed. Russian defenses were really good. What this aid will do is just allow them not to be pushed anymore but liberating territory is another matter. They managed to do it in 2022 because Russia was over extended (their whole invasion force was very small) and lack of proper defenses. Also their tactics have improved in time. In 2023 they tried and it failed with massive looses from Ukraine. And Ukraine already had like 50 billion military aid from USA. So I am not optimistic this will happen this time. Russia has seriously stepped up production and is also getting weapons from its allies. Europe production is falling flat on what is needed. 

    However the aid will definetly allow Ukraine to fight without collapsing. But liberating the country seems not feasible to me. We agreed that defending is easier and attacking requires superior numbers which Ukraine seems to lack. 

     

    What do you think?

  19. Posted · Edited by Karmadhi

    @Vrubel So why was Israel made on such a barbaric and violate part of the world as you call it.

    Considering it was the Europeans that treated Jews horribly for millenia, it is their job to give them land.

    THEIR land.

    I think if Israel was made somewhere in Europe, this whole bullshit would have been avoided.

    There were many candidates to make Israel and they choose arguably the part of the world that had treated Jews the softest.

    This is why I fundamentally find it so unfair.

    It is not that I am against an Israeli state per say, but I would be much more in favor of it being at the expense of countries that hurt Jews like Germany, Austria, Italy, Hungary etc instead of countries that were relatively nice to Jews.

    What do you think?

    Also USA could have been an option but USA was never involved in Jews massacres so that would also feel somewhat unfair imo.

    Personally if Israel was made in one of the German lands like Bavaria (Hitler's origin), I would probably be much more supportive of Israel.

    Seems to me like Europe wanted to apologize to Jews for what it did to them but not give them their own land, so they just put them in the Middle East which they controlled at the time. So I feel like they are the victims here, forced to pay for someone else crimes.

     

  20. Posted · Edited by Karmadhi

    6 minutes ago, Vrubel said:

    If you're a minority in the Middle East your life is beyond volatile. Can you imagine still having Jews in Yemen, Iraq or Syria. Those people would get massacred by extremists or riff-raff mobs. As soon as you do something that upsets the sunni majority they will go after you. This is no joke.

    So in countries like UAE Qatar Saudi etc it is like that? Not war torn countries please. Those are bad whether you are Jew or not. It is not a function of you being a jew, it is a function of the country being in chaos. It is not safe for Muslims too.

    6 minutes ago, Vrubel said:

    You cannot blame on Israel that in Iraq for example they had horrendous massacres of Jews and expelled them. Ironically this expulsion of Jews by Arabs ended up the best thing that ever happened to Israel because Israel took them in. 

    I saw this happened in 1948 after the Nakba. I am talking about the period before 1900 when Zionism did not exist. Were there massacres large scale often for hundreds of years against jews? If yes, can you send me some sources. Like polgrom style. Skirmishes can always happen, it happened even within Sunnis. So my fundamental question is, was your life as a Jews much worse than a Muslim in the Middle East before 1900?

     

    6 minutes ago, Vrubel said:

    Israeli Arabs are fine with Israel. 

    But the benefits of Zionism is immeasurable. I mean have you seen Israel? Middle Eastern cuisine, Western norms and world class economy. A society of Jews but insanely diverse with all kinds of minorities and a decent amount of hot Russian women.

    Sounds to me like a mob boss killing dozens and building a manson there where his family lives in luxury. Sure, life is good for them there. But that good life is built on others blood and oppression of millions that already happens. If 9 million Jews live good lives at the expense of life for 7 million Palestinians being far worse because of it, to me that is not a win. It is super biased. 

    But ok, you made your point. Life for Jews is better in Israel. Thanks for your reponse.

    To me Zionism seems like a response of European oppression of Jews which was indeed a horrible thing, not of Arab oppression. Basically it feels like Arab Muslims are paying the price of the crimes commited by the Europeans towards Jews for a long time. Which is why if the world wanted to be truly fair, they would have created Israel in Germany and kick out the Germans in that piece of land. Much more fitting. But just my opinion.

  21. Posted · Edited by Karmadhi

    7 minutes ago, Vrubel said:

    You can criticize aspects and expressions of Zionism but non-Zionism is not a viable option for the Jewish people given context and stark reality. Jews have to fight for their right to exist a little harder than most peoples. That's why I am a Zionist. I also say it to take the word back so to speak because it has become a darling word of anti-semites and far-left extremists. 

    Pardon my ignorance but what I have seen there were many jews in the region before Israel and there were little to no skirmishes. They started in late 18th century when Zionism was first invented. Before, for centuries, Jews were treated in Middle East FAR better than anywhere else. They lived side by side for centuries in relative peace and harmony.

    Now they are hated like hell. How did Zionism exactly benefit the Jew/Arab/Muslim relationship?

     

  22. Posted · Edited by Karmadhi

    4 hours ago, Heaven said:

    s that Hamas was targeting everyone they could

    So did Israel with their indiscrimiate bombing of Gaza.

     

    4 hours ago, Heaven said:

    Hamas activity is protected by civilians and they die as a result.

    Israeli government activities are protected by the Israeli people that elect those politicians (Hey they are a democracy)  and they died by Palestinian attacks as a result.

    See how ugly your logic seems when I turn it against you.

     

  23. Posted · Edited by Karmadhi

    3 hours ago, Merkabah Star said:

    The way the hostages have been dealt with in this conflict is appalling. It’s like BIbi just has let them all die. Those families must be so distraught. A ceasefire worked the first hostage release, it should have been followed by another ceasefire and hostage release. It didn’t need to be like it is. Hostage release should have been the top priority. 

    It has been wiledely reported that many civilians on October were killed by IDF crossfire. They have this thing called the Hannibal directive which is extremely cynical and cruel. Hannibal Directive - Wikipedia

    So lets not act like they really give a shit. If they cared they would have done a second permanent ceasefire and freed all the hostages. For Israel destroying Rafah is more important the the hostages. It is comical to think they are invaded Rafah for the hostages, if they cared they would have gotten back all of them and then permanently withdraw from Gaza. 

    By "they" I am referring strictly to the top leadership here, not the common population. To avoid confusions. The average Israeli cares a lot about the hostages.

    Also considering that many of the firstly released hostages were reported to have lived at houses of random Gazans during their time there, it shows total lack of care to bomb Gaza so harshly. There is no telling whether you are killing some of your hostages when you bomb everything.

    No wonder Israelis are mad, their government really gives no shit about the hostages.

     

  24. Posted · Edited by Karmadhi

    @Vrubel I do. Also most of the IDF and Israeli need to be hanged for crimes against humanity.

    No partial justice.

    I do not hold the IDF more highly than Hamas at this point. It is like comparing Hitler and Stalin to me.

    Trash vs garbage.

    3 minutes ago, Vrubel said:

    You are an absolute fool to be proud of that.

    I can say the same of you being proud of Israel genocide and mass murder.

     

    3 minutes ago, Vrubel said:

    Dude… I dont care about your cutesy emphatizing with Hamas

    Then do not expect us to empathize with Israel. Why should we? For some reason you consider the Israeli cause for "self defense" more legitimate than Palestinian cause for end of occupation.