randomquery

Can you explain to me your disappointment? To me, at least for now, this seems like a neutral or slightly positive outcome given the last few weeks. Isreal (in agreement with the USA) tried to perform a surprise decapitating strike to Iran hoping to lead to regime change. Iran was able to absorb and consolidate and responded by bombing Israel. Iran didn't attack Israel to stop the genocide but only to defend its sovereignty. I understand for people to wish that Iran continues to bomb Israel until the genocide stops, but this was not the reason they started bombing to begin with.

Of course the final analysis depends on what happens to Iran's nuclear program, and what will happen to the resistance in the future but a stop in the aggression between Iran and Israel doesn't give us information about this. For now, Iran managed to withstand an attempt to overthrow its government, and persuaded the USA not to start a bombing campaign of its own.

I understand that you are from the region, have family there, and I would genuinely like to understand your perspective here.

For once I would be happy with the nothing ever happens gank getting a W here.

I think their criticism is based on idealism. They claim (unsure whether sincerely or not) that we categorically consider western powers as uniquely evil (or that we axiomatically consider that). They fail to see that we recognize the western powers as uniquely evil in the particular historical context of actual existing capitalism, colonialism, and imperialism.

In the comment I reply to, you say:

We literally have Trump on the brink of pulling the trigger. The nightmare scenario that has haunted me since before the election is already happening.

If you agree that Harris would pull the trigger without hesitation what is the nightmare scenario here? That Trump wouldn't pull the trigger? I doubt there is is even a chance the US will not go through with this war. Trump is not the one making the calls, Trump is just making the show. The unfortunate reality is that it's a possibility that Trump's instincts are at times less genocidal than the calculations of the US establishment.

Harris would have pulled the trigger with 0 hesitation. Once October 7 happened, the war with Iran was already extremely likely and with how things developed it was becoming certain. Harris said in her campaign that Iran is the greatest adversary of the USA and that "preventing Iran form acquiring a nuclear weapon" was her "top priority". Trump is senile so the people actually in power (led by Rubio probably here, very much like Blinken was with Biden) have to coax him to press the button. The foreign policy of the American empire, especially when it comes to matters of war, is not affected by whatever clown they put at the head. Democrats and Republics are in perfect unison. Schumer was the one who castigated Trump on being too soft to Iran.

"Axios": Trump wants to ensure that the attack on Iran is "necessary" and that it will not lead to the United States being drawn into a prolonged war in the region

https://xcancel.com/ME_Observer_/status/1935474379409731979

In this article I gave that introduces this metric, it has some explanations as to why they think this is a reasonable metric, though I don't think that it directly corresponds to "net resources". I think the point is that having a larger population to take care of requires more resources, hence making it more difficult to project global power, when comparing 2 countries with similar resources.

As far as I understand, It is the GDP (of a country) times the GDP of that country per capita, and then normalized. For example ChinaGDP * ChinaGDP/Chinapopulation is 10 times smaller than USGDP * USGDP/ USpopulation. This paper argues this is a better predictor of power projection.

Definitely in the Netherlands. It's called something like "individual choice model". It also works the other way around: You can reduce your holiday to get some more salary, or other kind of benefits (this depends on the employer I think). I know some let you use it to buy a bike if you promise to use the bike to go to work (the point being that if it's not direct income it doesn't get taxed).

The news mega in Hexbear is not going to persuade Xi Jinping to change his course of action no matter how many times we complain. As I said I also get frustrated with China sometimes, and I express it but from a point onward this becomes counterproductive. I am not saying to have faith. I am saying we should do what we can, with what resources we have, to push things to the direction we think is best (and I am saying the Chinese are probably doing the same). This doesn't mean that we should not be critical of the CPC or that we should not try to work with comrades around the world (and in China) and cooperate. But I think dooming about an ongoing struggle to this degree is counter-productive.

I also feel many times frustrated with the way China chooses to conduct itself, and that it could lead to its own demise. I have two criticisms: Sometimes I feel (also for myself) that part of the western left, in order to overcome emotionally how bad things are for the left at home, use the CPC as psychotherapy, projecting to it expectations and hopes that are unreasonable. China is not going to save us from the upcoming fascism at home, regardless. This is on us. Secondly, I doubt that the government of China is completely blind to something we can see as possibilities. I think the Chinese also understand that the trajectory of the USA leads to a hot war with China. Maybe they are preparing in a way they see fit. Maybe they have wishful thinking that it can be avoided. History will judge the CPC with how their fight against fascism goes, but for now it's still ongoing.

To all the doomerism especially regarding the involvement of China and Russia:

The USSR had a non-aggression pact with Nazi Germany and only officially started fighting the Wermarcht when operation Barbarossa began. Stalin almost entirely refused to provide any help to Korea and said he was prepared for the peninsula to be occupied by the US. Soviet soldiers didn't fight in Vietnam, soviet soldiers didn't fight in Angola, soviet soldiers didn't fight in Cuba. I understand that it is difficult and frustrating to see the escalation against Iran and the inaction from Russia and China while we feel powerless in this conflict, but the doom and gloom in this space is not helping anyone.

Speaking of hesitation, the US waited 15 years of sanctions against Syria to get their win, with many hesitations and flip-flops (Obama first considered treating Syria like Libya but then changed his mind). The same applies to Iran. The sanctions, isolation, and infiltration goes back for decades. This bizarre idea that "we need to be bold like the fascists" is disconnected from reality. Stop idealizing the fascists as omnipotent and omniscient. The USA is at its weakest position since at least 100 years.

Putin is not an anti-imperialist hero, history dragged him in this camp, he is simply in this coalition because of his own interests. China is a country that would prefer their people live in peace and prosperity and not get dragged into a hot war that could literally kill hundreds of millions of them. Especially for people in the west: Neither China nor Russia are here to fix the western left's failures. It's western governments funding the genocidal fascist regime. What are we doing here to stop that?

History will not end until humanity ends, the high capital experienced from the "end of history" and the "victory" against communism, a struggle that capital, imperialism, and fascism fought while at its peak for 70 long years with endless genocide and destruction, didn't even last 20 years as the 2008 crisis already started the struggle that is reaching a violent peak today. Humans will continue to fight, against setbacks or from positions of strength.

We should do what we can however insignificant to help in this struggle and be ready to fight for our side.