zazen

Of course the West has also done good things, great things in fact. Credit where due - but accountability also where due. It’s natural to focus on the Wests crimes because they’re ongoing and global in their effects, and many of us are from the West. It’s possible to build hospitals and bomb them at the same time. Never mind causing the instability and blood shed that makes people need to attend them. Never mind that sanctions cripple healthcare systems and supplies - collectively punishing 150 million people (Iran, Cuba, Venezuela, Syria). Collective punishment seems to be something Israel and the US enjoy, just like India threatening water flow to 250million people in Pakistan - no wonder the three are aligned. The West didn’t “invent” or come up with human rights - they simply codified them after the most horrific display of violence was committed in 2 world wars which started in the West, but which had global effects making them “worldly”. Western civilization at the height of its rationality, science, and Enlightenment ideals produced mechanized death, racial extermination, and global exploitation. Naturally then, when it wrote the UDHR it focused on preventing atrocity - “freedom from” horrors it had just inflicted. The drafts for the declaration of human rights were made alongside China India and Lebanon who rounded things out to not be so individualistic. Rather than solely having negative centric freedoms from oppression (survival based), they introduced positive freedoms to live with dignity (thriving based) - which were actually resisted by the Western delegates. It’s the civilizations that had long histories of moral philosophy, spiritual depth, and ethics of communal and social harmony that brought the aspirational rights to education, social safety nets, culture, rest and leisure - which the Western delegates resisted because “socialism” or “state obligation” ie capital being held accountable to benefit the many over the few. Those rights have been erased in blood as fast as they were inked on paper, and continue to do so - from Vietnam to Gaza. Being charitable and helping isn’t some value the West “brought online” - that’s how Wilber frames values in Spiral Dynamics. As if African tribes haven’t had their own systems of communal sharing or the following never existed: Hindu Dharma, Confucian benevolence, or Islamic the zakat / waqf system from 1’400 years ago. Historical amnesia caused by Western exceptionalism. Pakistan’s Edhi Foundation operates the largest free ambulance service funded ground up by donations - as someone shared on another thread just yesterday. The Shaukat Khanum Cancer Hospital is also there for free cancer treatment - which is admirable in a relatively poorer nation. Meanwhile most Americans are drowning in medical debt. The largest NGO is BRAC from Bangladesh, which now serves over 100 million people in Asia and Africa. The most generous country voted for 7 consecutive years is Indonesia. What’s notable about those three examples is that they’re not wealthy nations but developing, and are majority Muslim - which counters the narrative of “Islamic” cultures not being able to offer anything positive or do any good. Though, fundamentalist Islam is definitely an issue. The bottom line is that the West nor anyone else has a monopoly on goodness - but the West in particular have monopolised the narrative around it. If it isn’t due to Western exceptionalism then it’s simply ignorance of the wider world, in particular with Americans being more isolated from it.

@PurpleTree @Twentyfirst Every nation has its history and has done bad, genocides included. The difference is that the West continue to back and have full complicity in one today - its not history, but the current story. The unique thing about the West is its consistency in behaving badly, where other nations behave so occasionally and contextually for various geopolitical or national security reasons (wars etc). The current US admin are trying to mainline that there’s a genocide of white farmers in South Africa but can’t see the very obvious one going on in Gaza. This is why the world is angry at the West and why the West is being constantly critiqued - they got way more to be critiqued about. The largest imperial offenders just moved the baton from the British Empire over to the US. The common rebuttal is that the West just have the technological means and power to ravage entire regions - and that any other ''civilization'' or peoples with equivalent power would do the same. Its a hypothetical, but even that hypothetical doesn’t hold up because today there is a comparable power which is China - and they aren't carpet bombing and regime changing nations. People still assume China is a rising power vs a risen power on par with the West. So they will further say China just isn't strong enough. But the evidence of their risen status and power will become increasingly evident with one deep seek moment after another, and across domains. Westerners will struggle to accommodate this new reality into their ''spiral dynamic'' frameworks which assumes that the West is more ''developed'' but that reality will continually counter. The abuse of power is typical, but the West's abuse is unique in some ways. They pose as being post-ideological whilst very much being ideological: liberal individualism, secularism, capitalism, and Western exceptionalism - all packaged as neutral “universal values.” And their expansion came with a cultural and racial dimension. For example whilst Islam also expanded, they kept local cultures intact and within a broader Islamic civilization - which is why you had Muslim Africans, Arabs, Persian, Turks and Asians. They also didn't have a racial supremacist bent to it whilst the West uniquely baked racial hierarchy into their imperial ideology.

It’s “low” terrorism when it wears sandals but “higher” when it wears a suit and tie. It’s low when a non state actor does it but high when a state does it - still bad, but not as low, whatever that means. It’s like saying when an establishment candidate wins its democracy, but when a non-establishment candidate wins its populism. Even though democracy is functionally a popularity contest - the most popular is voted into office. Saying Israel does “some degree” of terrorism is like saying apartheid South Africa did “some degree of racism.” It’s foundational - not incidental. Terrorism is foundational not only in how Israel was created, but in how it maintains itself: through systematic violence and coercion aimed at a civilian population to achieve political goals - textbook definition. Being an occupying power which requires violence to sustain itself, whilst being an apartheid state - is just a “degree” of terrorism.

Western values have a right to defend themself. The US started on genocide and it’s primacy is ending in one too - along with the Wests place on the world stage.

“Two staff members from the Israeli embassy were shot dead outside a Jewish museum in Washington DC “ https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c9vgrkdje1ro.amp Some are saying it’s a false flag to garner support for war against Iran or to take attention off of what Israel is doing as the world rushes to condemn and take action against them. Regardless, its quite a tense moment right now.. Apparently if no deal goes through with US Iran, then Israel vows to attack nuclear sites. That would inevitably start a hot war and draw the US in - which is the psychotic line of logic Bibi / Israel is running on. What Israel is calling for crosses Irans red line, what Iran deems is their right as a sovereign crosses Israel’s.. Brother Bolsen just uploaded on this shooting: Give it a listen. One of his shorter videos of 7 min for those with short attention spans lol

Seems like more than just 10% are radical, unless withholding aid isn’t considered radical to Zionists.

What you wrote “bill comes due” reminded me of a vide going into the backdrop to all this: As far as the solution goes, here’s vid on strategic self sufficiency which is the name of the game going forward. Although it’s directed at global south countries the concepts can be applied within the West. A way to think about it is that capital and vulture funds were born in the West but have outgrown it to become transnational. They dictate to the nest they outgrew from, and view it as a hunting ground rather than a home. Capital is untethered from principle and long time horizons - which is why things are done which aren’t in the nations interest. So Westerners themselves have to wrestle with this Frankenstein the same way foreign nations do. Some solutions revolving around localism with a Islamic bent, though insightful:

What a journalist:

It’s a shame that Hindutva India chooses to emulate the most psychotic country in the world - Israel. Denial of investigation, collective punishment, vile comments, viewing Muslims as invaders to their land, terrorist rhetoric projected to an entire group, media echo chambering and troll armies online. Many Israeli twitter accounts spewing Zionist talking points have been busted for being Indian lol They also have a hubris stemming from some sort of complex - and can’t assess what’s rationally in their own countries interest. Not being in good relations with al your neighbours and focusing too much on pleasing the US is dumb. It’s misaligned to geographic reality. This is a large account with a comment mocking collective punishment: Similar levels of psychopathy as Zionists. @Ajay This guy has some of the best analysis on geopolitics especially in the military domain: The threshold for war has been lowered to a dangerous level ie every time a terrorist attack happens India can just strike Pakistan. But a terrorist attack can happen independently of the Pakistani state / even if it could have origins or operated from there by non-state actors, that can’t justify two nations at a state level coming head to head. Tick tock ..

Could just be words to insulate them from the fallout:

Think Nivsch means the documentaries focus on the radical 5% of the population but that 10% do think Israel should settle Gaza which represents the extreme interpretation of Zionism. Hard to pinpoint what percentage of Israel is radical and what constitutes radical. Going by some polls it seems there is a sizeable problem. Even it were a minority, the issue is they control the state apparatus committing the wrongs.

Who gives a fuck about Eurovision when Israel’s firstly not even in the EU or Europe, and is committing a genocide which now main stream Western outlets are on the edge of calling it out on - because they don’t want to be the last ones standing who didn’t. Operation Gideon Chariot is under way as what seems to be the final solution. Not even a peep on the forum but talks of veganism and Eurovision. The level of tone deafness is honestly insane. F**ck Israel, the US and the West (not in their entirety). Even the Israel / Palestine thread is quiet these days because people are morally / emotionally exhausted and not shocked from what’s occurring. It or they just can’t figure out how to accommodate what their “civilization” is doing within spiral a dynamics framework. “Development”

@Nivsch Yes and segments of the West, in particular the US and UK.

The same delusion rhetoric after attacking a hospital, another today. Everything is simply “Hamas fault”. The world shouldn’t buy the narrative of simply scapegoating “Bibi”. All the IDF soldiers we have seen making a mockery of their war crimes, all the spokespeople doing mental gymnastics to justify this genocidal level of behaviour etc. F**ck Israel (not all the people of course)

@Twentyfirst Spot on. This is the only way to make sense of what’s occurring. Basically the Military Industrial complex (MIC) has exhausted its profits via war because the only remaining countries in West Asia are too strong to go to war with (Iran, Turkey). Like snowden said, they profit from forever wars, not world ending ones. They (global elite) need friction but not a complete fracturing of the same globalized economy they are plugged into. The MIC is just one project of the global elite to milk money from, represented by the neocons and what we consider “establishment” (which Biden comes under) Think “old money” and neocon boomers vs “new money” represented by BlackRock. The new game in town now is that peace and stability are more profitable than chaos. The MIC helped crack open access to these markets, where now they’re financial industrial complex and consumer industrial complex can plug into and profit from. This is the deal making we are seeing happening. MBS from Saudi has been working with BlackRock for some time - so when MBS says the Middle East is going to be the new Europe - he’s speaking their language. That explains: Larry Fink alongside Trump in Saudi, sanctions lifted from Syria, talks of Iran along with its “historic” adversaries Saudi-UAE speaking of a joint nuclear consortium in return for sanctions being lifted off Iran. That’s why the narrative shift on Israel which is now seen as a liability - and the establishment of a Palestinian state being necessary for peace in the region. ——- Israel’s gone rogue in the way that it’s still playing by the rules of the old game ie the neocon paradigm. The neocon faction are more nationalistic than the new money Blackrock faction who are a-national, trans-national or globalist. Bibi is ramping up things before the lights go out for the neocon empire. This is the death of the neocon empire and the birth of the shark empire which are borderless, value-hunting elites that outgrew the nest they were born in - the US empire. They are now circling nations selling to privatize their future. The more sovereign states like China leading BRICS and the GCC are not allies to them but prey and partners, depending on how strong their immune systems are to negotiate with such sharks. From Trumps speech in Riyadh on Tuesday: “The so-called nation builders wrecked far more nations than they built, and the interventionists were intervening in complex societies that they did not even understand themselves,” Thats the new money Blackrock faction speaking, and saying farewell to the primacy of the neocon game. They’ll still make money for the MIC but it’ll most likely not be from actual war but just the mere threat of it in a multi-polar world where each pole races the other in arms to maintain deterrence.

@integration journey looking up and up for the Middle East. Gulf money and Turkish muscle are stabilising the region. Now that Israel is internally fractured and economically fragile along with the US - the rising regional powers have stepped in to take control. Shifting centres of power. This isn’t because the Western elite grew a conscience as much as it is adapting to a new reality. They exhausted their military industrial complex and will now attempt to fit into the multipolar world where they can rather profit more from stability and new markets in the global south.

That's an issue if the objective is tackling terrorism. It's very hard to bomb our way out of terrorism, because for every kill and collateral civilian hit alongside that kill - those grievances recruit more to the fight. Like Elon Musk said was the issue with Israels strategy. Especially if your targeting a foreign sovereign territory - those 'terrorists' now have the ammo to rally new recruits around a external threat. USA had a massive drone program targeting terrorists in Pakistan, with local Pakistan intelligence intel - and every think tank said their efforts didn't bare much fruit. Because terrorism stems from some grievance not being taken care of, and more killing only causes more grievances. Like I said above: ''When there's demographic suppression and engineering taking place in Kashmir, why is it implausible for there to be local resistance to that, including backlash from Kashmiris themselves, even to the level of terrorism. Just like whats occurred in Palestine. Even if Pakistan were to dissappear tomororw as I've seen seen BJP supporters fever dream - the underlying cause is still there of Kashmir. Local Kashmiri's would still resist and violently so - there's also still sympathetic Muslims within India - almost the same size in number as Pakistan itself who could radicalize and cause an insurgency.'' https://www.statista.com/chart/31605/rank-of-misinformation-disinformation-among-selected-countries/ Both seem to suffer from propaganda, India being first unfortunately. The media blasted out that they had blown Karachi port and others cities were destroyed - utterly credibility destroying.

Agree that Pakistan is effectively a military dictatorship. The military has been highly unpopular especially since taking down Imran Khan, but on the contrary their standing has greatly increased in the country since this episode with India. They largely view it as a tactical win, with the world not buying much of the Indian narrative and global military circles talking about the jets being downed which upends Western military supremacy - this was the Deepseek moment for China in the military domain, with their equipment being being showcased in battle for the first time. Hard to argue any side won in a brief flare up but I do think Pakistan established enough deterrence to make India think twice about carrying on - which they would have if they thought they really had the upper hand. But that just isn't that clear. - The estimated 4-5 jets downed in the first night alone, including a Rafael and Su-30 which are the most advanced, shifts the psychological balance. That was with 0 losses PK side. Imagine this went on for 30 days, that air attrition rate would be unsustainable for India. Pakistan have the edge in BVR (beyond visual range) - meaning they can see first, lock on first, and strike first. In modern air combat, 90% of kills happen before the enemy is even seen with the naked eye. This is why Indian jets didn't enter Pakistani air space but Pakistani jets briefly entered India's to chase down Indian jets on their return to the airbase. - The possibility to lock onto S-400 and intercept Brahmos missiles using electronic warfare is another point. Those are India's crown jewels in defense and attack. The many projectiles that were intercepted aren't talked about - just the few that inevitably got through and damaged some roofs or made holes in the ground here and there, but that's far from taking any bases or military installations out of operation. In general - who rules the skies rules the war. Because if you own the sky, that means you can protect your on the ground defense systems, target the other sides air defense systems, and strike at jets or launchpads from which missiles are launched into your own territory. India has the geographic depth that Pakistan doesn't, but most of India's economic centres are in the North and along the coast - all within reach of Pakistans jets and missiles. That's why I say that no one has the clear upper hand in this and its dangerous for the political elite of either country to echo chamber their own people into believing so, and war rally them into fighting the other side. Think of China-Pakistan like US backing Israel. Except China-Pakistan have geographic proximity, and are tied together at a much higher level - at a operational level. China is the worlds leader in tech-manufacturing - they can give Pakistan a asymmetric technological edge and mass produce missiles as if a Cuban rolling up cigars for a friend. in a war of attrition this could bleed out India. A few shorts that are valuable: A top Indian military analyst on China-Pakistan collaboration: On Kashmir: When there's demographic suppression and engineering taking place in Kashmir, why is it implausible for there to be local resistance to that, including backlash from Kashmiris themselves, even to the level of terrorism. Just like whats occurred in Palestine. Even if Pakistan were to dissappear tomororw as I've seen seen BJP supporters fever dream - the underlying cause is still there of Kashmir. Local Kashmiri's would still resist and violently so - there's also still sympathetic Muslims within India - almost the same size in number as Pakistan itself who could radicalize and cause an insurgency. Finally on the point about India beating Pakistan before therefore thinking its easy to do it again - those weren't decisive victories and today Pakistan has nuclear parity and a superpowers backing. The 3 main wars: - 1947: Both grabbed what they reached first in Kashmir and defended it - the UN froze it and established the line of control which till this day hasn't shifted. - 1965: Stale mate with losses on both sides. - 1971: Pakistan lost in a civil war - India helped midwife Bangladesh but didn't conquer Pakistan proper in terms of its core territory. The breakup of Pakistan was already in motion and inevitable simply due to its unnatural geography. East Pakistan was home to tens of millions and had its own language, culture, and identity. No other modern nation has had a split territory with two massive wings separated by another country. It's one thing to have a small integrated island remain a part of a nation - like Spain has Mallorca or France has Corsica - but not a large enough island or land with millions of people who could have their own autonomy. Was never going to last.

@Harikrishnan Already debunked as fake due to many spelling mistakes. ''During toutine maintainence'' and ''Pollowing initial containment'' and the last line ''for queries contact lirector'' lol. Lots of propaganda out there on both sides we gotta be careful of. Modi stood in front of S400 launchers (tubes) but without the other components like the radar which is the brain of the S400. In the PK briefing they showed a satellite image of it being identified and that they targeted it - not destroyed it. Targeting and lock on is enough to jam the radar or spoof it which creates false signals confusing the targeting system - meaning its rendered un-operational. Its essentially just empty tubes with or without rockets that can't be guided properly. If true, which is plausible (due to China's capabilities) it's unsettling to know IND's most advanced defense system can be breached. That's the point being missed from the Indian side in underestimating PK, which is highly dangerous. Pakistan alone wouldn't manage against India simply due to scale, power and geography. But China in the equation compensates with its modern warfare capabilities. They can assist PK with electronic warfare, cyber intervention and intelligence sharing without leaving footprints. In modern warfare its about who can be seen first. Tech trumps number of troops today.

There’s lots of speculation about it, but nothing verified and I don’t think we’d ever find out due to national security. Same reasoning behind the S-400 defence system being hit in India. India wouldn’t want to let them know as it shatters there deterrence and narrative of dominance. Both incidents allows both parties to strategise for around their weaknesses for any future adventure. The more I listen to both sides on X the less I feel I know lol. Cant fully trust the biased takes. It seems pretty conclusive that 1 Rafael was downed - without it even entering Pakistani airspace. That’s sent reverberations around military circles for sure. Sharp kid: Just like with Israel, I don’t see how either side can come to compromise on something that for each side poses a literal national security risk. For Israel it’s that if a Palestinian state exists in West Bank - they have a vantage point looking down into Israel. Israel basically becomes a fish in a bowl to be targeted. With Kashmir, Pakistan depends enormously on the water from there - thus it can’t allow India that territory as they can weaponise it - which they already are. With a massive trust deficit in both situations, neither side will risk compromising their national security.

Yeah, there's only been a de-escalation on the military front but the water issue still stands - what does that say about India? They say they wanna target the terrorists but then expel Pakistani diplomats, ban Pakistani media / actors etc, censor over 8'000 twitter accounts, and the most egregious of all is abandon the Indus Water Treaty - that's more of a broader agenda against Pakistan and damn right genocidal if they go ahead with starving the country. They still haven't got the 4 terrorists in the most militarized zone on the planet. The world debated how October 7th happened in Israel which is so heavily militarized, Kashmir is even more so. They are pissed at Kashmir becoming internationalized including their ''ally'' the US wanting to intervene and bring about a solution. Because they know the solution will fall under an already established UN resolution that needs to be upheld. What many Hindu nationalists don't understand is that majority of Pakistanis don't hate India - they aren't gleeful about these terror attacks or prior ones. Pakistan has been a historic enabler of these terror groups yes, and is now a victim of them just as much as India. The US created the mujaheddin factory to bleed the Soviets, then abandoned the region. Pakistan was left with the fallout of radicalized militias, fragmented networks, and blowback that now haunts the Pakistani state itself. To think every action taken by these groups can't be taken independently of Pakistan isn't a correct read on the situation. And that sets a dangerous precedent which Modi's doctrine is now setting. That if any terrorist attack happens it means you can unilaterally breach sovereign borders to go after them - imagine if that were normalised and the world acted that way. Whats stopping a country from engineering false flags galore and using that as a pretext to enter country x to carry out ulterior motives. Pakistan has suffered 4x more deaths (80k) from terrorism, in a country 6x smaller in population size, across the entirety of the country. India has suffered 20k death from terrorism, majority of which (15k) have been in the disputed region of Kashmir. Both suffer, and are dealing with it. The Indian narrative hasn't caught up with the new reality and think they are still dealing with the Pakistan of old who enabled such groups post soviet collapse. In fact, whenever Pakistan and India try to mend relations a terrorist incident coincides to derail such efforts. There is a minority of extremists that need to be dealt with - but that doesn't mean at a state level not working together. Even General Musharraf from the military tried making peace with India and cooperating on anti-terror efforts - until extremists sabotaged it. So the excuse that the military are behind it if it isn't the civilian government also doesn't hold weight today.

So Pakistan retaliated, and a ceasefire came a day later. Pakistanis are celebrating the ceasefire whilst many BJP supporting Indians are seething that they had the upper hand and should have continued onwards towards a “final solution” similar to Israel - ending Pakistan, even de-nuclearizing it. They love to be spoken about in the same sentence as Israel - but can’t see that most of the world sees Israel not with admiration but with disgust. And the world is beginning to see them the same. They are annoyed that no “allies” backed them unequivocally - whilst Pakistan has China and Turkey on its side. We just went through the episode of Israel, who became a pariah rogue nation on the world stage. They burnt up the Wests legitimacy and standing, which the West is now in damage control - just observe the narrative shift taking place. Do they really think the West were going to have another turbulent marriage with a spouse like India behaving in the same manner? Collectively punishing 250million people or threatening to do so by cutting water, declining neutral investigation, escalating aggressively, and being a belligerent? Lol.