You forget their mastery of necromancy.

Who the hell benefits from this other than his fanatics? I wouldn't be surprised if this turned out to be staged, and I'd be even less surprised if his supporters didn't care it wasn't real.

EDIT: I concede it was almost certainly a real attack, and probably by someone convinced they could save the country by killing him. I just wasn't going to be surprised if it turned out to be staged. I wish it had been; this is going to get the fanatics frothing at the mouth. They're already saying he was saved by God to stop the "leftists".

Reminds me of Prohibition and how violent it got all because Americans couldn't get booze. To this day, I don't doubt there'd be an uprising if they ever tried that again here. We're dependent on bread and circuses, and we project like no other.

They're irrelevant because the Ghost of Kyiv is single handedly trashing Russia's air force. /s

Having talked to a few South Koreans who live or frequent the US, the general consensus I've gotten is that they think the conflict is caused by external countries trying to manipulate them (US, Japan, and China), and that if they were left to their own devices, they'd reunify in time. Of course, they also think North Koreans worship the Kims as gods.

This is a really small number of people I've talked to, I've talked to them in the US where I assume they spend most of their time, but it seems to align with the takes I've seen in South Korean media that's critical about South Korea: disenchantment and even contempt for the ROK government and US occupation, but also a view that the DPRK is cultish and China is just another US. This is purely anecdotal, so take it with a heap of salt.

Got in an argument with an anarchist who was pro-Zapatista and called me a redfash tankie. I doubt this will sway him in the slightest.

Mad respect to my comrades taking the time to try to engage and educate the liberals who literally refuse to have a positive thought about China. I've never seen one of them actually read an article or respond to the best points; usually they just find what they perceive is the weakest or most controversial argument and focus on that. Anything to deny the fact that sinophobic bias and believing propaganda is 90% of their reasoning for their shit takes. Still, I'm proud of the people in the community that still actively try to educate. I wish I had that patience anymore.

If the US goes to war with a Chinese-supporting Mexico, I think it's time I put my money where my mouth is and defect...

It's even wilder when you consider that the gap between the "left" and "right" in the US is closing despite partisanship being fiercer than ever. Both sides are virtually identical at this point, probably more so than any other point in history. Democrats may spout lip service to progressive causes, but don't lift a finger and consistently aid Republican causes. Both parties constantly claim election tampering and the democracy being corrupt, they just disagree on who's responsible. Both support war and corporate power. I'm sure historically the "progressive" party has always been a weak, lying power, but now it feels so bald-faced that I'm amazed anyone can still delude themselves.

The question is, is the US finally going to cross the line and just admit to what they are in some fascist coup, or will the "progressives" accomplish some meager win for human rights at the end and draw millions back into the illusion? I can't tell if it's always been like this and I'm just seeing it for the first time, or if it really is becoming more and more obvious, more unwieldy, closer to collapse.

I always find it telling how authors have to walk on eggshells to even suggest something against the popular narrative, even when it's become so obvious that anyone who bothers to look into it can see the reality. The way this article starts with setting the scene as sort of relaxed, and how the title reads like "We're obviously super great and everything, but is it possible that maybe just this once we're wrong?"

It's the same with the Ukraine conflict. It wasn't until the catastrophic failure of a counterattack that people even began suggesting that it might have been a disaster, or that Ukraine is flawed - at least in more public media - and even then, the earlier stuff starts off so... "Well obviously the Ukrainians are in the right and totally could win, but maybe this was a bad idea".

I don't know, I just find it pretty telling in our freedom-loving society, which values Free Press and Free Speech, that every mainstream journalist acts like they'll get executed if they report something that displeases their masters. I mean, getting fired and blacklisted from a major media outlet would probably serve the same purpose anyway, so...

I've been under the impression Ukraine was an explicit trap for Russia, to draw them into a quagmire war they couldn't really avoid, and that the West intends to draw it out for as long as possible to tie up Russian resources and possibly even break them through attrition.

Ukraine's current regime has become aggressive towards its Western paymasters, hyped up on their own fascist rhetoric if their politicians are anything to go by, and they're losing bad, proving they're an unreliable and dangerous ally. However, I don't think they'll be thrown under the bus quite yet. I suspect, if NATO's puppet regime can't win, they'll just turn the region into a terrorist state. Whatever government Russia sets up there will need constant Russian military support, and this will be used as propaganda of how Russia "conquered" Ukraine. Fascist resistance, heavily armed, will be trained, supplied, and directed by NATO for years to come, shown as "freedom fighters", while every action Russia takes to keep its borders secure - or even to help Ukraine against fascist terrorism - will be skewed and displayed as tyranny.

In other words, the US will do what it does in every country it fails to install its puppets. At least, that's my prediction. But who can say?

I'm sure racism is a component, but to me it reads more like the arrogant self-righteousness the West engages in, mixed with falling for their own propaganda. Americans, at least, still think the stories from the beginning of the war of massive Russian losses and Ukrainian farmers taking out battalions of tanks are still true. When you try so hard to create this image of the invincible underdog, you shouldn't be surprised when your own side plans for that kind of impossible prowess. Everyone in the West was stirred up into a frenzy about the righteousness of the Ukrainian cause, the tenacity of the Ukrainian people, and the miraculous heroics they allegedly pulled off. I'm not surprised that, at some point, someone actually fell for their own lies. They're paying for it. Or rather, the Ukrainian people are paying for it, sadly.