BruceVC

https://www.dailymaverick.co.za/article/2024-09-24-south-africa-is-in-a-new-era-an-era-of-great-promise-ramaphosa-tells-un-general-assembly/?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=first_thing Its the 79th session of UNGS and as usual most world leaders demonstrate the annoying habit of inconsistency around outrage and what advice they have for the UN Our president used the opportunity to specifically mention " “International law cannot be applied selectively, no one state is more equal than any other,” he declared. " in regards to the current Israeli vs Palestinian conflict but predictably left out the same vociferous condemnation of Russia and how it has violated International law with its invasion of Ukraine Another unconvincing clarion call is this view that the UNSC (United Nation Security Council ) needs " structural reforms so it becomes more effective " and when you ask activists what they want they suggest its objectives like an African country should become a permanent member of the UNSC or they abandon the veto of the UNSC permanent members Neither of those ideas makes sense or is likely to be implemented. The African continent is rife with wars, conflicts and military coups so why would any African country becoming a permanent member of the UNSC ensure the world will have less wars and less conflict ? If the African Union fails to do anything about conflict in its own area of responsibility how is it going to make any meaningful difference at the UN as a permanent member? And then the 5 permanent members will never agree to abandon the UNSC veto because the veto actually ensures we dont have additional geopolitical tension where the superpowers are expected to act because the UNSC has voted on action through a majority vote on any resolution So the UNSC veto despite being frustrating at times helps prevent greater wars and tension between the superpowers of the world For me the UNSC works fine, it has its limits and shortfalls but it passes more resolutions that it fails to pass And the UN outside of the UNSC does more good work globally than bad especially around humanitarian work during famines and natural disasters . The world would be much worse off without the UN and particularly countries that arent first world But Im interested if you think what changes the UNSC should undergo, maybe you think the entire UN should be abandoned?

I wish I had your DIY skills, it must be so nice to be able to fix certain things yourself or do certain mechanical work I am completely dependant on service providers but I have started paying attention to things they do How did you learn your basic DIY skills, did your Dad teach you or are you self taught because you enjoy it?

I have heard mostly good things about this game, I have it on Steam but Im waiting for final release which should be April-July 2025 https://steamcommunity.com/app/1466060/allnews/?

Sorry but Im not sure what you saying? I sure it was @Zoraptor who clarified in the Ukraine thread that an energy grid is a legitimate target in war. Thats why the Russians target the Ukraine grid And then the second part of my post is Israel's allies wont really comment in a critical way in the same way Russia's allies have said nothing about the deliberate targeting of the Ukrainian energy grid So if Israel and Hezbollah go to war Im sure the Lebanese energy grid will be targeted because thats a typical target in war ?

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/eu-provide-ukraine-with-loan-worth-up-35-bln-euros-von-der-leyen-2024-09-20/ The EU will be providing Ukraine with $40 billion, this money will be used in the war and with other expenses " We will spend the money, these 35 billion, primarily on energy, on defence, as well as on bomb shelters for children in schools, nurseries and universities - this is a big deficit for us," Zelenskiy said in front of the Ukrainian and EU flags. "And on weapons, primarily those produced domestically, drones, missiles. Today, our long-range drones strike the enemy and they are cheaper than those (made by) our partners." Whats also interesting about this money is some of it will be the interest earned from the Russian frozen assets, so you use the Russian money to help Ukraine. And that makes sense on every level. You dont utilize the Russian sanctioned assets because then its gone, just its earned interest. Its a creative way of funding Ukraine " She said on Thursday that the sum of 160 million euros from the proceeds of frozen Russian assets would be allocated to meet Ukraine's urgent humanitarian needs for this winter."

How many BRICS countries or Russian allies have publicly criticized Russia for the years of specifically targeting Ukraine's energy grid? Thats the answer to your question. I doubt any of Israel's allies will really question this strategy outside of a possible broad statement Thats the world we live in, selective and inconsistent outrage is all about who you like and who you allied with But no one is consistent with the level of outrage, nothing really interesting or unusual about it when its expected and normalized

Agreed, I have lots of questions around how they pulled it off And I doubt the US was involved, the WH would never agree to this type of strategy One thing thats guaranteed is how comprised Hezbollah must be around Israeli operatives

The pagers apparently came from Hungary, I doubt Orban would have knowingly allowed Israel to alter them. So Im not sure if the state is involved? https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13864459/Pictured-British-educated-boss-Hungarian-firm-accused-making-pagers-exploded-wounding-hundreds-Hezbollah-fighters-denies-producing-gadgets-insists-just-intermediary.html

Thats some seriously impressive asymmetric warfare Never underestimate Mossad

I was wondering about that because my initial view was " but these pagers could be used by civilians " and now you possibly hurting or killing civilians But it seems they were specific to Hezbollah members so the Israeli's will use that as a justification I never thought about anti-terrorism laws and what any company can or cant do around these laws But I agree, overall its a bad precedent to do this type of thing

https://edition.cnn.com/world/live-news/lebanon-pagers-attack-hezbollah/index.html Very sophisticated Mossad attack on Hezbollah, James Bond type strategy that rigged pagers Hezbollah operatives are using

Sometimes yes, it depends how its used But in this case its something that is getting raised on the likes of CNN which is a centralist media house with more left leanings but they try to be in the middle of the political US spectrum. And they raising " tone down the rhetoric from both sides " I do agree that the words " but both sides are doing it" can be counterproductive and is abused, its about the context

Ostensibly that might not be a controversial statement based on the examples you have given. You make some valid points here But I am assuming you dont think he should be assassinated because of what he has said or done? Do you think Trump getting killed would somehow be better for US Democracy? Some people do believe that but they would never act on it Because thats the point Im making, when presidential candidates publicly say those things that can influence mentally unbalanced people in a country where gun violence and mass shootings are common Its fine if you and I say that on the Internet because we dont have any real influence I just think both candidates need to tone down the rhetoric

It doesnt really require much effort or mental gymnastics when " both sides " are guilty of something. But they not always doing the same thing so you need to look at each allegation or concern separately and be specific So in this case its easy to understand and see where both candidates are exaggerating to gain votes and support around what the other candidate wants to achieve and what will happen to the US if the candidate wins. And they basically saying this Harris : Trump will destroy US democracy, he is the greatest threat to our Democracy and freedoms we have ever seen Trump: Harris is a Communist\Socialist. She will destroy our country with her liberal and progressive policies

No it doesnt get tiresome when we talking about a reality in the US You not going to solve gun violence in US during this election period but both candidates can control what they say and how they say it knowing there could be consequence around mass shootings caused by mental illness

Unfortunately both sides are guilty of this. And even though I support the idea of " deescalating the rhetoric " that ship sailed a long time ago and its now part of the established campaigning and slogans from both candidates But I dont find it funny because the US has a reality with gun violence, access to guns and untreated mental illness And you can find numerous examples of a small number of mentally unbalanced people believing " candidate x is going to destroy the US if they win" and then they act on it and often with tragic consequence

But its a precursor to the original 1982 Thing, its about the Norwegian team so its a different narrative?

Apparently Badlands is going to be set in the future, Im very excited

I finally got round to watching Prey and Dune 2 ( the second part of the latest remake ) Prey: I really enjoyed it and I consider it a worthy part of the overall Predator franchise. I always ignore criticism around any book, movie or game until I have experienced it myself and Prey had lots of negative opinions about it being woke and the most exasperating part of this criticism was this was before the movie had been released But I found Naru to be a very believable character and how she adopted a combat strategy, yes there were some unrealistic scenes but within the boundaries of artistic license. She used the environment, her agility and the Predators own tools to defeat it. Basically brain over brawn I loved the whole French trappers battle scene and how the Predator used his shield and speed to defeat the larger force Very entertaining movie and recommended, I see Hulu should be making the next one set in modern times with Arnold coming back Dune 2 : Absolutely brilliant and better than the original, not much to say apart from that and I see they making a third part

And I appreciate you engaging and sharing your opinion It wouldn't be a debate if we didnt have different opinions

https://euromaidanpress.com/2024/09/14/frontline-report-russian-forces-finally-sacrifice-pokrovsk-offensive-to-defend-kursk/ If true this is another and clear reason why the Kursk offensive was implemented and it made sense Its now taking Russians off the frontline

A really strange Russian army recruitment advert, strange for a country that discriminates against LGBT to recognize it as a reality within Russia

Its common in most Democracies to find celebrities endorsing a candidate or a celebrity saying who they will vote for In South Africa its common to find artists saying who they like, I dont have an issue with that because I see it as freedom of speech But I find it very strange that anyone should be influenced to vote for any candidate because a celebrity is voting for them This is an example of the unhealthy celebrity worship culture You should vote for a candidate because of what you believe around policies, not what someone else believes

Im not sure I understand your point. If it was Ukrainians operating the missiles then its not act of war? Iran and NK are supplying missiles to Russia which are being used to attack Ukraine sovereign territory but these missiles are operated by Russians and Ukraine has not said "we now at war with Iran and NK" So that logic would apply to Ukraine, NATO could supply long range missiles to Ukraine but if they operate them then its just part of the normal war between Russia and Ukraine? Another inconsistency exposed with Russian propaganda that Vatniks have peddled since the war started is "Russia is actually at war with NATO " but Putin is only now suggesting NATO would be at war with Russia if it gives permission. Of course no serious analyst would ever suggest this war is anything but a war between Russia and Ukraine with various countries supplying military aid to both sides https://www.cbsnews.com/news/putin-nato-ukraine-war-us-long-range-missiles/ " Russian President Vladimir Putin warned Thursday that a decision by the U.S. or its NATO allies to allow Ukraine to use Western-supplied long-range missiles to hit targets deep inside Russia would be viewed as NATO's direct participation in the war, which he said would significantly change "the very nature of the conflict."

I doubt that would be the definition of victory? I have no doubt NATO would defeat the Russian military but forcing Putin to somehow step down is unlikely