erin (she/her)

If true, this would in fact be a huge step toward quantum computing at scale, which would revolutionize computing. However, they’ve claimed this before, and have offered no evidence yet of their supposed discovery.

Both parties can be immoral, except in this particular case it’s very clear that western backed fascist regime is the only immoral party.

Right this conversation isn’t worth having lol

I’m not trying to argue that it’s okay. I’m not a military expert or analyst. However, people that are those things don’t make this argument and so I’m not willing to unless I’m provided evidence of a viable alternative. A better example might be the Ba’athist defense of Iraq during the unjustified 2003 invasion (not that the Ba’athist regime wasn’t a nightmare for the Iraqi people, it just wasn’t the US’s place to involve themselves on false pretenses). Iraqi cities are being invaded, they simply don’t have the military infrastructure to have their forces entirely separate from civilian targets, and so civilians end up getting hurt by airstrikes and artillery because of their proximity to military targets. Of course, party extremists also used extreme violence to prevent civilian retreat, but I’ve seen no evidence of this in Ukraine. Convention is all well and good until said conventions would require surrendering territory to avoid conflict in civilian areas. Governments will take any action they deem necessary to survive a conflict. Both parties in a conflict can be immoral.

The human shield argument has never really passed the smell test for me, especially when used as condemnation against Palestinians. It’s very difficult to defend against the invasion of a civilian area without occupying said civilian area. Existing military infrastructure typically doesn’t exist at the scale a frontline needs in invaded territory. Strikes targeted specifically against civilians are obviously unacceptable and immoral regardless of perpetrator.

Regardless of the truth of that statement, do you contradict the many, many Russian drone and missile attacks against Ukrainian civilian targets? I’m curious if the condemnation for violence against non-combatants goes both ways.

This doesn’t pass the smell test, as someone that has followed the Greens for years. If you thought his actions were “tone policing” then I’m immediately questioning your actions, since all I’ve seen is a standup guy and educator. I’m happy to be corrected with a link, but I’m not seeing what you’re talking about.

University of Minnesota

usdakotawar.org

The 38 hangings were far from the worst of the Dakota genocide. Lincoln’s role was one of reducing cruelty while still punishing those guilty of massacres of civilians. Originally, hundreds of men were going to be hanged, but Lincoln commuted the sentences of all but the worst offenders. Unfortunately, two of the hanged men were innocent, and it’s unclear how the mistake was made. Far worse was the banning of Dakota people from Minnesota and the internment in camps, leading to widespread death by disease, though these were the actions of the Minnesota government.

There are very legitimate criticism to be had of Lincoln, like being the sitting president as one of the states committed genocide, or the appeasement tactics to slaveowners before civil war became inevitable. I do not think this one makes sense to be top of the list, as by all accounts Lincoln was attempting to reduce cruelty where possible and yet still punish mass murderers.

For a bit of additional background, the Dakota war, during the Dakota genocide, was an uprising of some Dakota, attacking anyone of white or “mixed-blood” descent. The state of Minnesota had broken numerous treaties and continued to seize land from the Dakota people, leading some to fight back. However, the massacring of civilians and anyone of non-pure blood is evil, and many Dakota who did not join the rebellion rescued hostages and helped resist wholesale slaughter. The Minnesota government is absolutely at fault for the conditions leading to and the execution of the Dakota genocide, but the rebels chose to commit racially motivated massacres of non-military targets. This does not make the later retaliation justified, but it does explain the hangings.

As for number two, I cannot speak to the other commenter’s beliefs or intentions, though I do not believe women were combatants in the Dakota war.

Note: Some historians object to the term Dakota war, as only a small faction joined the conflict, while a much greater number did not. I’m using the term as the consensus name for the conflict, not out of belief that it is accurate.

I’ve used a variant of melatonin for my online handle in various spaces, your name threw me off for a second. Was like, I’m pretty damn sure I’m not melatonin here.

My tongue is exactly the same with the “D” in “dentist” and “dog.”

Low draw means low power and penetration. For speed shooting or distracting/stunning a target, that would be helpful, but you’re not gonna kill someone unless it’s a very lucky shot. There’s a reason war bows were such high draw weight, and it wasn’t for piercing plate. More power means more energy retained over distance and more energy delivered to the target. If you’re needing to speed shoot in close quarters in a self defense scenario, you’re probably better off using the bow as a club or stabbing them with an arrow directly. Archers usually carried other weapons for that reason.

How does debate about women’s sports (in my opinion, an overblown and distracting issue to cover for more serious anti-trans sentiment and legislation, when it affects a handful of people) and children’s medicine (a non-issue, trans children cannot transition and puberty blockers are proven to be safe and effective, frequently used by cis children going through early puberty, and non-damaging long term if a child later decides to resume the natural course of surgery, whereas allowing puberty to continue IS permanently damaging) come into conflict with feminism? What do you even think feminism is? TERF isn’t a derogatory term, it’s a self-assigned label that has come into hot water more recently for being bigoted. I’m not pretending that debate on those subjects is silly. It’s very serious. These subjects are frequently used as excuses to pass further and further restrictions on people living entirely outside the scope of said subjects. What I’m asking you is where feminism comes into play?

Seriously. You can’t just state feminism as the opposite side of the debate against trans people. That’s insane. Feminists support equality of all genders. Feminists believe trans women are women, and their rights should be protected. Go to any feminist rally, and see how many trans flags are there. You’re conflating the belief in gender equality with the belief in “protecting women from trans women.” I’m not stifling discussion. I’m questioning the appropriation of progressive ideals to turn progressives against each other, which, whether intentional or not, you’re contributing to. It’s like saying you see both sides of the issue between immigrants and crime victims.

As a feminist, who participates in local organizations, and reads theory, don’t appropriate the ideas of gender equality to oppose those that most need its support.

Other than weirdo, can you specify? I don’t think saying feminists and trans people are on the same team is a very controversial statement, at least for non-TERFs.

Your phrasing makes it appear as if trans people and feminists are on opposite sides of an issue, which they aren’t. Only a small subset of feminism-appropriating weirdoes call themselves anti-trans feminists.

The laser is for drones or missiles. Missiles are used for ships, which outrange battleships by a large margin, hence why they’ve been phased out of service. One jet can sink a ship hundreds of miles from its carrier.

This is not the case. Trans people are being denied passports of either gender marker as officials “wait for clarification” on the new rules. Furthermore, passports are being confiscated.

Lmao

Oh, true. He also wrote the first known usage of the popular phrase “lick my ass” though. Fun fact.

Whatever man. I tried, but you’re not interested in listening. I commented for your benefit, not mine, and it makes no difference to me.

Educate yourself. Numerous cultures don’t cover the female breast. Not my job.

That’s definitely not true. Many cultures around the world don’t see breasts sexually at all.