You must log in or register to comment.
Here’s a possibly-controversial take, but joining the army isn’t really even close to the best analogy for a male-dominated industry where you “sell your body”.
Being a labourer is. Working in industries like construction, but not as a skilled tradesman. It doesn’t carry the same moral weight riley was going for though.
True, but it’s not just about labor.
To join the US military you have to literally sign over your bodily autonomy to join. Once you do then they can pump you full of experimental drugs, or run whatever other ungodly experiments, all they want. I know someone who considered joining then backed out when this allegedly happened.
Anyway, never heard of Riley before but seems nice. Hope she supports our troops and offers military discount for her OnlyFans.
Wait, what?
I’m gonna need a source on that one my guy.
By ungodly experiments, he means your typical round of vaccinations.
Also, there’s a waiver for just about anything in the military. If there’s an actual medical concern with vaccinations, then you can apply for a waiver. The problem is when people confuse an actual medical condition with a conspiracy theory they read on the internet.
By ungodly experiments, he means your typical round of vaccinations
I doubt that; more likely they were thinking along the lines of agent orange
I was thinking more along the lines of the Bikini Atoll tests which included tens of thousands of people in the Navy but yeah.
I assume this is what they’re talking about: “Under the Defense Authorization Act, the President is authorized to waive the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act’s (the act) informed consent requirements in military operations if the President finds that obtaining consent is infeasible or contrary to the best interests of recipients and on an additional ground that obtaining consent is contrary to national security interests.”
US Soldiers are given many vaccines to prepare them for various diseases abroad or weaponized. Historically, refusing could result in sever penalties. I also think it’s been normally questioned whether some vaccines given were experimental or rushed, but could find no explicit proof that’s happened before.
Military personnel sue for use in experimental agent testing.
Experimental drugs given to soldiers during the Gulf war
See also the Burn pits, Agent Orange, CTE and other effects from prolonged exposure to crew weapons use, and the working conditions inside AC-130s and related health effects
I don’t mean this to sound rude, but it’s fairly common knowledge
To join the US military you have to literally sign over your bodily autonomy to join. Once you do then they can pump you full of experimental drugs, or run whatever other ungodly experiments, all they want.
Doesn’t that just come with being a US citizen. Or being any other citizen
Labourers sell their labour, but they effectively have bodily autonomy, they get to walk away if they want to. That’s largely not true for hired murderers.
tell that to my chronic pain
deleted by creator
Depends on your definition of mortal danger and how OSHA compliant your work site is.
deleted by creator
I get what you’re going for, but having worked in construction in Ohio I can say that yes, sometimes people do take potshots at you/around you.
i’m still going to choose popcorn lung over being blown the fuck up
True, you’re far more likely to die working menial laborer jobs than you are in the military.
Laborers are providing direct goods to the people they supply too. The military is far more intangible with prevention being the key factor for it’s expense.
In the United States, there were far more occupational injury deaths among men than women. In 2020, there were 4,377 male occupational injury deaths in the United States, compared to 387 deaths among women.
9 military people die from hostile action in 2020. 317/1017 in accidents. 190 illness. 406 suicide.
https://dcas.dmdc.osd.mil/dcas/app/summaryData/deaths/byYearManner
I highly doubt they consider suicide for occupational hazards too which is strange in hindsight considering the military accounts for it now. One of the few things they do ahead of the woke curve lol. First responders as well.
So in reality you’d need to remove both suicide and illness from the military’s numbers to equal laborers.
363 died in the military then vs 4,774.
Even hostile deaths… 9 in hostile action and 37 homicides… Meanwhile there were 392 workplace homicides. 37,060 nonfatal intentional injuries.
Right, but you’re also not in mortal danger when you’re fitting pipes in Nebraska vs. Baghdad.
Oh man, this is wrong.
In. 2022, there were 500k plumbers in the US, I don’t have exact numbers for how many pipe fitters there were, but it’s a position that’s always in high demand, safe to say that very few of that 500k number are pipe fitters, less than a quarter. So let’s say 100k pipe fitters which is honestly, probably generous.
There were 70 fatal accidents involving pipe fitters. Not injuries, fatal accidents only. That is a ratio of .0006.
The US military boasted 1.3 million members that year, and 270 fatal accidents, and 0 to enemy action. A ratio of .0002.
You are 2/3rd less likely to die in the armed forces then you are pipe fitting.
That’s interesting, but it would be perhaps more interesting to compare the yearly average accross a longer time frame. Also didn’t a bunch of people get lung cancer and die as a result of burn pits? I’m sure people died years later from exposure to other hazards too, not to mention how many people commit suicide after.
Also this isn’t to say pipe fitting isn’t a dangerous job, I am just interested how the statistics would look over a longer time frame and with consideration of deaths that occur after service, but still as a result.
So there’s a few things happening here that are causing industrial numbers to surpass American military rates of injury.
We are not actively in conflict with any other nation, so being in the military is no more dangerous than any industrial occupation because of conflict.
The military is, generally, safer than any one occupation, but the military is also a monolith. Saying it’s safer in the military is kind of like saying office jobs in the US are more dangerous than pipe fitting. You’re essentially comparing numerous disparate positions to one type of work, and that skews your results. It would be more accurate to compare rates of incidents in say, front line infantrymen to any particular other field.
It’s also worth pointing out that the military has it’s own plumbers, and they do their own pipe fitting. Statistics on the rates of injury there are a little harder to come by.
But more to the specific points you mentioned: yes, and that’s not the first time the military has accidently killed or seriously injured it’s own people. These incidents happen in civilian world too and arguably, more frequently. The US industrial labor pool is 10 times the size of the military, and negligent safety hazards come up every year. Rates of suicide are also lower in the military than in the general population, and a variety of factors contribute to that.
deleted by creator
First of all, KIA MIA for 2022 is 0, I did add them.
People who later die due to injury is also included, for both metrics. That’s why these numbers are almost 2 years old.
What specifically was excluded were those who died to illness or self inflicted wounds.
deleted by creator
I picked the most recent year for which information is available, I gathered the summary information from statistics that others had already done.
These reports are prepared yearly, I’m not sure what you expect. It’s literally how statistics are done. It’s an industrial standard. Do you expect that people only work for 1 year out of their lives while everyone in the military is stuck there for 8?
I dunno man it sounds like you’re just being dense on purpose because you’ve run out of room to argue.
I mean the joke in the military is literally you can’t kill yourself because it’s destruction of government property.
I agree with the point but you can tell your boss to fuck off and stop being a laborer whereas your ass gets thrown in prison if you decide you don’t want somebody else fully in control of what you eat when you sleep where you live and who you kill.
Both are selling your body but one of them you can’t decide to stop selling it.
Any form of physical labour is selling your body sex work is selling your right to refuse sexual consent. I think that makes it a worse situation for the person doing the sex work than other work
If you are doing only fans or similar how are you not consenting? It’s fully on your terms.
I doubt most people in the military would consent to getting their dick blown off by a mine if given the opportunity.
If you are doing only fans or similar how are you not consenting? It’s fully on your terms.
Issue is you don’t know what’s going on behind the scenes. That woman on OnlyFans could be in horrible debt or have a manipulative boyfriend or some other social factor pressuring her into it when she actually hates it. But part of the appeal of OnlyFans is that its “more ethical” than regular porn so they have to keep up the façade of “loving their job”.
Now are there women who genuinely like doing it and are just in it long enough to pay their way through med school or whatever? Yeah probably, and I kinda doubt the women who have two blogs and a podcast about how much they love doing sex work are faking it cuz that’d be A LOT of effort just to sell people on your OnlyFans. Truth is thought under capitalism there is not 100% sure fire way to know if the woman is doing this 100% consensually. Heck you probably wouldn’t ever have that under socialism, but the likelihood would at least be higher.
There’s a reason why people who join the U.S. military are disproportionately poor.
You’re describing a problem that is common across “industries” as if it were unique to sex work, when it’s not.
It’s unreasonable to posit that somehow Onlyfans models have less bodily autonomy or more coercion than members of the U.S. (and probably any other) military.
I encourage you to take some time to interrogate why you were so easily able to make this leap of logic, because to me it seems (consciously or not) motivated by moralized “disgust” of sex work rather than rational consideration.
There’s a reason why people who join the U.S. military are disproportionately poor
This isn’t true, theyre wealthier on average.
You’re describing a problem that is common across “industries” as if it were unique to sex work, when it’s not.
Yes, which is why I’m a socialist.
Thing is we humans usually understand that sex ads a different dimension too things, since it is one of the most physically and emotionally intense things humans do. Sex crimes are consider more heinous than non-sex crimes, porn is considered more graphic than a regular romance film. Hence I don’t think we can pull this “muh sex work is just like coal mining” Schtick, everyone knows it’s kinda bullshit, people just have a hard time articulating why. Also, there’s important infrastructure that relies on coal, you can’t really boycott coal completely, you don’t really NEED to watch a video of a woman using a dildo on herself as fun as it may be.
You keep on making points that I know you must know don’t apply to capitalism in practice.
There are so many jobs that don’t NEED to exist, and yet they do. And chances are that you’ll be coerced into doing at least one of those jobs in your life, especially if you’re poor.
I guess I am also coming at things from the practical perspective of:
There will always be sex workers. What can we do in practice to keep them safe?
“Solutions” based on moralizing sex work as inherently “bad” end up being things like:
Making directly providing sexual services illegal, which is “intended” to stop “sex trafficking” and punish “pimps” but in reality forces transactions underground and in the dark, facilitating sex trafficking and leading to victims being harassed and prosecuted far more than perpetrators.
Sex workers of all kinds want sexual services decriminalized because they understand that criminalization makes everyone less safe:
Providers of sexual services need to advertise on shady websites and meet in non-public spaces, rather than openly using Craigslist on their own terms. Is Craigslist a good example of a safety-focused platform for sexual services? Absolutely not! But providers of sexual services were much safer before Craigslist cracked down than they are, by far. Police regularly harass street workers, very much including sexual assault.
Clients risk getting arrested, and are similarly forced into more dangerous situations.
All people, especially poor and marginalized women, are less safe. The large underground market for sex work makes it much easier for humans to be trafficked. Children sexually abused (child sexual abuse absolutely must be criminalized, and CSAM a long with it). Undocumented immigrants trafficked for sex work, as well as non-sex work.
I believe that the moralization and criminalization of sex work is absolutely fundamental to institutions like the Catholic Church being able to facilitate the sexual abuse / rape of so many children, for so long. And it’s not like its over, especially in fundamentalist Christian churches but also in all major institutions and parts of our society.
So, I mostly care about the unique moralization and criminalization of sex work because I regularly listen to sex workers themselves talking about what needs to change to make them, and everyone else, safer.
And they regularly use analogies to other physical and emotional labor.
I’m not sure that I can defend that notion to you articulately, but I also very much don’t care.
I support listening to and learning from marginalized people. I support the notion that marginalized people generally know what is best for them better than the random old white dudes that declare themselves to be experts without any real connection to, or respect for, those communities.
I know that policies decisions led by those that are most vulnerable almost always end up helping everyone else too.
At no point did I advocate for the criminalization of sex work, I was arguing about the morality of consuming the content or using the services of sex workers.
Making directly providing sexual services illegal, which is “intended” to stop “sex trafficking” and punish “pimps” but in reality forces transactions underground and in the dark, facilitating sex trafficking and leading to victims being harassed and prosecuted far more than perpetrators.
This gets said a lot but I think it’s actually questionable how true it is. I’ll try and dig it up when I’m not at work but there was a study done in the Netherlands that found legalizing sex work actually increased human trafficking since it created semi-legal loop holes that traffickers could exploit to conduct their trade in a legal gray area. Also, pedophiles still exist under a legal sex work system so there’d still be a market for trafficking children.
Personally I support the Nordic model, but not fully criminalization.
Sex workers of all kinds want sexual services decriminalized
Independently employed adult sex workers who enjoy being in the industry say this. And their opinions are valid. But they are a minority in the global sex trade. Most women being coerced into sex work would prefer it if the part of the industry they are in were to be completely abolished and I think it’s debatable if making legal sex work easier would actually be a boon to that cause or not.
There are so many jobs that don’t NEED to exist, and yet they do
Yes but a lot of those jobs utilize skills that society does need in order to function and ideally a socialist society could redirect those labors in a more socially healthy way. Nobody should work at fucking McDonalds but we will always need food prep workers until Star Trek replicators become a thing. That doesn’t really apply to most sex work though.
If you genuinely enjoy doing it, go for it, no shame there, but if we’re discussing the morality of consuming the content it’s always going to be morally dubious cuz there’s no way to 100% confirm the person providing it is doing so totally consensually unless you have mind reading powers, or at least know a lot of intimate details about their personal life.
it’s not fully on your terms because if you refuse to provide sexual content for the only fans subscribers you stop getting paid which means that with the coercion of the market you stop having full and uncoerced control over your ability to refuse to give sexual consent to sharing provocative images of yourself
In the same vein are you not selling your right to consent of your bodily autonomy by being a laborer?
yes but your right to refuse to consent type out emails, or stack boxes is less intimate and personal than your control over your sexual consent
it is for example perfectly socially acceptable to pressurize and even insist that people do various chores which would be deeply immoral in the case of sexual consent. For example your roommate could insist that as a condition of your living arrangement you have to clean the house (which is a bodily autonomy sacrifice as you have to use your body to work potentially against what you want) but they would be out of bounds if they insisted you do sexual favours for them
Onlyfans models generally have the option to apply for a job at McDonald’s instead.*
People working for the military generally do not.
* Ok, there’s actually more nuance here because a large percentage of sex workers are disabled, and lack of accessibility and general ableism prevents them from working most other jobs. But while that’s important to understand, it’s a different discussion.
While this is currently true, there isn’t any logic in one of these activities being treated significantly differently than the other, except where risks are concerned. If the sexual favors entail no additional risk (for instance, if they do not involve bodily contact, but merely putting in a show) then although society treats them differently, I would argue it shouldn’t.
This is why we are socialists and want to disconnect labor from work
No different than any other job at that point.
I think if you look at it that way, you could also say working for the military is selling your right to a safe workplace. Like, a lot of other jobs (including sex work) can be dangerous, and often are due to a lack of care from those in power. But the military is necessarily dangerous by its very nature.
yeah which is why I wouldn’t join the army and would advise anyone not to
although sex workers are far more likely to experience PTSD than soldiers
also sex workers are substantially more likely to be killed in a violent attack than soldiers are at 112-225 per 100,000 for sex workers and 51 out of 100,000 for the branch of the army with the highest mortality rate so being a sex worker is more than twice as dangerous as being a soldier
Yeah those sorts of facts are unsurprising to me, and they’re why I brought up the fact that other jobs often are dangerous in practice.
you still have consent during sex work.
I’d also add that even desk jobs are selling your body. All labor is. The brain and fingers are part of the body.
Doing “unskilled labor” is at the very least creating something. Even if that thing is socially useless like a Starbucks location that’s across the street from another Starbucks location, that’s a better outcome than bombing or shooting something.
I wasn’t interested in making any value judgments. Simply in coming up with what job is the purest expression of “selling your body”.
Being a laborer is about selling your labor value. Not selling access to your body
I would never compare, being a sex worker is obviously incredibly more honorable
But…saying that something is more honorable than something else is comparing them?
EDIT: to be clear, her point is absolutely valid. This isn’t (to misquote a replier) “But I must find way for sex lady be dumb”. Her actual point is spot-on. This particular linguistic evolution just feels weird to me - feels like the new “literally”.
They don’t mean "I’m not making a comparison, but “There is no comparison to be made, one of these things is clearly better”
But I must find way for sex lady be dumb
“equate” is the correct word but we still knew what they meant.
Just being a pedant, but equating two things is still a comparison.
It means to make a connection, not a comparison. Your connecting the concept of comparison to the concept of equating is equating however.
Image, like me in your mom, failed to load.
That’s a very “I use an app on a phone to access Lemmy” problem.
I posted it and it won’t load on my end haha.
It’s a slow clap.
Besides it being a joke, fuck the troops. Fuck the troops. Fuck the troops. Fuck the troops.
That’s all that matters about what they said
fuck the troops
fuck the troops’ spouses- fuck the troops fuck the troops’ spouses
deleted by creator
Its called an analogy bud. It doesn’t mean the two things are identical, it means they share similarities. Usually, a specific one. In this case, “selling your body”.
What I hate with this is that is defines that the army itself is good or bad. But in reality it is what it is used for. If its actually used for defence, then it’s very honorable. When it’s used as a tool to exploit resources to the rich, (aka generally being the aggressor), it’s not.
joining the army in the Imperial core will always be bad and make the troop/vet complicit in the countless deaths and destruction
Wtf is the “imperial core”
Thanks this helped
It should, considering that you’re being willfully ignorant at this point.
Many would rate the USSR as an imperial core country, while I guess you and I maybe won’t. Stop assuming privilege of those you talk to and demean them with willful ignorance. There is always something more that may be learned about an issue and people should not be vilified if their attempts to learn more are genuine (and I think you can not determine it was not from this interaction, comrade).
https://hexbear.net/comment/4158598
No, that person is just a piece of shit and you’re either concern trolling for them or maybe even their alt.
Countries that are doing the marxist definition of imperialism basically.
You best start believing in Imperial cores… you’re in one!
It’s always the same map.
Can you explain why some of the nordic countries, i.e. Norway, Sweden, Denmark are part of the imperial core while Finland, Iceland, Greenland are not? I can put color on a white map too, doesn’t mean it portrays a real issue adequately. Also wtf, why is Portugal not part of the imperial core?
The map is a reference to the one you see whenever just about any international issue comes up and the same crew are all in agreement, I’m not actually positive what specific issue this map was taken from.
The website has a more serious explainer (with a couple versions of the map) but I’m with you, Iceland and Portugal and Finland are core countries probably. The real answer is that it’s fluid and historically contingent, not set in stone. It’s a question of how your economy develops and how it relates to ‘peripheral’ countries that are primarily extracted from, not a literal list pulled off an emoji.
I looked through that article and found it somewhat problematic. Especially the description of core countries as:
They have strong state institutions, a powerful military and powerful global political alliances.
For example, Iceland does not even have a military, but can still be part of capitalist neo-colonialism as part of the “imperial core”. Even so, one should also keep in mind that Iceland historically had been under Denmark’s dominion and it is wrong to say that it has been a primary benefactor of classic colonialism leading to the rise of western powers in modern history. On the other hand, Portugal has been a strong colonial power historically. Still, the development index of Iceland is way higher and I would argue there are lots of factors in play as to why, and one cannot say that there is a direct equivalence between development index and imperialism. Both Norway, Iceland and Finland gained independence in the 20th century, never had proper colonies and are part of the economic elite. Norway is still in large an economy based around export of natural resources, which is atypical for being an imperial core member. I often feel that many facts like these are overlooked in discussions of imperial cores in favor of simplistic ideas such as equivocating HDI and imperialism. Can we not have better discussions around the mechanics of modern imperialism than throwing around a map and calling out people for not being intimate with the idea of an imperial core, an idea whose simplicity makes itself highly flawed?
I agree that I gave a simplistic answer, you can read literal books about it. But Iceland, as an example, does actually have a history of being closely tied to the military of the US and the UK voluntarily, I think Greenland is actually a better candidate for peripheral than Iceland. And realistically it’s going to be more of a spectrum than a binary, you’re usually going to fall somewhere in the middle rather than being on the extreme end like the US and Israel.
And even then you might have internal dynamics that complicate it. Parts of the US (Appalachia, “Indian Country”) are clearly peripheral within the US economy and subject to exploitation that other areas are not. So agreed, it’s complicated.
Dialectics as a method warns us against assumptions that “the state of things” is static, these things are always changing. But I think there’s value in the basic observation that world economic systems work in tension, where opposed interests are not equally met in a mutually beneficial exchange a la neoliberal dogma. Even if you have to acknowledge that it is much more complicated than “it’s the same map every time” I think the concept is useful.
What would you say is a better way of talking about this sort of thing?
High HDI gang
Unironically yes. The development in the imperial core came at the expense of the rest of the world, that’s what the term is referring to, the part of the world economy that is accumulating through imperialism the wealth and resources of the whole planet.
Nothing ironic about my post to begin with
K tankie
deleted by creator
Nah facts let’s see it
So authoritative. Tankie
deleted by creator
Nah, most people i disagree with are just people I disagree with.
The people who want to try and tell me what to do like they have authority to do so are Tankies.
Y’know that term for authoritarians who want to force people to do things regardless of what the ordinary person wants to do.
So… You, you tankie McTankerson.
Everyone I dont like is a:
jew
communist
marxist
maga troll
shill
tankie
NPC \deleted by creator
Also I have no problems with jews or communists.
Only authoritarians like the rest of that list except shill.
Because you get to a communist society with thoughts and prayers…
This is you… “Oh no dont infiltrate and dismantle our preferred system of production with the forces of reaction… or ill have to write a strongly worded letter as I wouldn’t want tobe authoritarian.”
Hey, im not trying to be rude or anything I just wanna quickly say that honor is a fiction typically used by the rich and powerful to manipulate the young and well-meaning into becoming fucked up stormtroopers for capital.
Well obviously.
In modern context, sure. In a wider anthropological historic context, no. My understanding of honor as a social concept, though I do not have proper academic sources to back this, is that it works in lieu of a central force of government enforcing laws and common rule. I.e. non centralized governance such as that of say the Norse people of old, had very strong etiquette of honor, the lack of which implied social status that would be worse to the one living than them dying. That meant weird things like a story of a man who robbed a house, realized they were doing something dishonorable (read illegal), went back and challenged the man who owned the house, killed them in combat and then stole their stuff. Just like laws it imposes rules on people, in this weird case murder in combat is better than theft, but still a rule. I would argue this notion of honor has existed across different societies for a long time, due to general absence of centralized governance, and has in modern times, relatively speaking on an anthropological timeline, been adopted and exploited by centralized powers to further control the populace, in the very real way you talk about.
Even simpler than that. People trying to slot sex work/army/any job into “good/bad” columns aren’t worth your attention.
Except for health insurance CEOs, those definitely bad.
The only thing that can stop a bad health insurance CEO is a good health insurance CEO.
Cops and troops are bad. You might even say All of them AB
All Cops Are Bad
But war means more than sacrificing your body or personal reputation. War is giving up your whole personal conscience to fight for what the group believes is the most direct action in response to an event
Yeah peaceful militaries like Korea’s or China’s or Cuba’s are ok. Anyone joining the US military though if just in it for the war crimes.
I feel your answer lacks any sort of nuance. People join the military for financial reasons as well. Broke as fuck and need somewhere to stay, get food and possibly get an education or career? Military. Almost doesn’t matter your background, you can probably get in and stay as much as you like. The US system makes the military a good back up option for the poor. I don’t like how the US uses our military, but i also understand that those in there aren’t necessarily happy with their options either. If there existed a alternative system like the military (work, pay, food, housing, education, career), people would probably join that over risking dying or having to kill people.
That is the issue with hating the
troopsproles doing the fighting. Sometimes they might commit war crimes, but usually there is someone of a higher social strata coercing them into the role, which although doesn’t relieve them of responsibility, is important context.
peaceful militaries
Korea’s or China’s or Cuba’s
Not sure if joking or not
What’s the joke?
Calling them peaceful militaries obviously
Peaceful compared to what?
OK I can see how you can twist reality to call China or the DPRK’s militaries nonpeaceful even though you’d be wrong, but Cuba’s? Really?
you’d be wrong
I bet. Especially if you don’t count saber rattling, threats and border skirmishes. If you don’t count those then I’m wrong and they’re very peaceful.
Cuba’s? Really?
Cuba got quite a reputation during the Cold War. It’s pretty interesting https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_interventions_by_Cuba
and border skirmishes.
find me three chinese border skirmishes where the most advanced weapon used wasn’t a stick or a rock.
Compared to, say, the US military, which I assume the OP is talking about?
I wouldn’t call North Korea firing missiles over other sovereign countries very peaceful. As well as China doing troop exercises that obviously prepare for the invasion of Taiwan. I’m sure there are more examples.
The DPRK had literally never been to war outside its territory; it’s not a dove but at least it hasn’t invaded multiple sovereign countries like its southern cousin.
China does troop exercises like every single other country in the world.
I mean as long as you consider South Korea part of their territory, sure. There was though the Korean War, where North Korea invaded South Korea. Of course it’s not on the same level as South Korea, but I would imagine that’s more because they literally can’t, they have no resources for it, not because they’re amazingly peaceful people.
The north didn’t invade the south though, no Koreans agreed that the US supported parallel was a permanent division of the country, both North and South fully intended to create a united Korea. Tens of thousands of Koreans were already dead from purges and suppression of uprisings in the south when the operation started. It was literally an ongoing civil war that had momentarily frozen.
I’m not sure on what information you base this claim, but as far as I know the 38th parallel was agreed upon because both the udssr and the US wanted total occupation of Korea for themselves, but they both wanted to potentially avoid an armed conflict so tried a compromise.
Then the north korean part, supported by China and unofficially by the soviet union, invaded the south to establish total control.
No North Korea claims descend from the People’s Republic of Korea and like in Germany, the US and UDSSR agreed upon an eventual neutral zone. The North invaded the South after the US sponsored regime began killing socialist uprisings, essentially protecting its citizens.
Almost like the US and the USSR aren’t Korea
It literally is, it harms no one and acts as deterrent from the US having another imperialist adventure where they kill 20 percent of Koreans.
it harms no one
well, pollution, but libs aren’t ready for that conversation
Fair enough
Are you talking about that time they launched a missile over the least populated possible part of Japan as part of a test? What are they supposed to do, just not advance their tech? They’re surrounded, they’ve got to launch them over somebody and they did it the safest way they could.
So boot camp, as it is full of military exercises, would count as not peaceful?
No, obviously perfectly fine. They are literally doing exercises for a potential invasion to Taiwan though, which is a difference.
You can’t invade your own territory. By Chinese and Taiwanese law, internationally recognized by the UN (and even the US, as asserted by Blinken the last time he was in China to pretend to be sorry), Taiwan is Chinese territory.
China’s military just routinely ethnically cleanses its own people.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shadian_incident?wprov=sfti1
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_killings_under_communist_regimes?wprov=sfti1
Jfc.
Y’all have such a hard on for Wikipedia
deleted by creator
The people rescued from concentration camps would probably disagree.
deleted by creator
Point 2 on your source: American forces liberated concentration camps including Buchenwald, Dora-Mittelbau, Flossenbürg, Dachau, and Mauthausen.
They all helped. Your comment doesn’t invalidate mine.
deleted by creator
In that case I might respectfully suggest looking into an introductory course to logic if you’re at all interested. http://intrologic.stanford.edu/chapters/chapter_01.html
In that case I might respectfully suggest looking into an introductory course to logic
Can you congratulate yourself any harder, Shapiro?
deleted by creator
They’d probably disagree with giving the Americans any credit for it.
Well they’d be wrong. The other person even posted a source for that.
Oh I know.
Lol can’t think of a single western country that’s had an “honorable” war post 1945. The US army is unequivocally bad
In general I think you are right, but I was also under the impression that the NATO intervention in Bosnia helped prevent ethnic cleansing, which if true is a honorable thing.
It was a general statement.
I mean, even for defence. Your settling, an argument, the rich and powerful people above you are having. You’re settling it with your life.
If you think your side is right and you’re ready to die fighting then who is anyone else to say that you, the tool, is wrong?
See, that’s an easy question to answer: Did you, or whoever, join the military while the US, or your country, was being attacked?
If you wait til you are attacked, you may not be trained or ready enough to actually defend your country from the attack. You can still join in times of peace with intentions of defense for the future, helping with disaster relief, and providing international aid.
Joining to support the aggressor makes you the aggressor.
How much Kool aid do you need to drink to think a soldiers job is “saving people”? Except for medics that’s pretty much the opposite of the point.
I thought all American soldiers died far away from home so Americans can bake apple pie and sleep on red white and blue bed sheets.
According to former US president Donald Trump, the soldiers that died abroad are all losers and suckers because a good soldier doesn’t die.
One thing he was right about
Accidentally correct Trump until that last part
Red, white and blue bedsheets made by our worst enemy, China. How’s that for Murrica.
I don’t sell my body because nobody wants it.
No, don’t say that. Everybody has parts that are desirable!
- organ traders
Just saw this post, very relevant
Nicko Avocado has an OF, so don’t sell yourself short.
Just try renting it out then.
in this economy?
Think about how much you could get if you rented your armpit to a family of four!
Then the wolves came
Same, but that also goes for nightfill at the local grocery store and dishwashing. :(
You fucked hearted the guy saying ‘fighting for your country’ equals saving people?! If you’re killing people for profit, you are just a murderer. Even if it’s someone else’s profit.
“Wow these bananas are so cheap!”
Yea even the most doughy eyed liberal would have a hard time arguing that anybody in the military is “saving” anyone.
They even normally stop at something about defending the homeland (from goat farmers who have never left their province half a world away)
I once had someone argue that soldiers in ww1 died for my freedom. Freedom from what? Losing African colonies to Germany?
Found out my work is getting a new chemical. The chemical is so volatile that if it splashes on you, it will potentially burn you into nothing.
I am fodder for the machines of industry.
In which manufactorum do you serve the emperor, citizen of the empire?
Do you have to pipette it by mouth as well?
thank you for your service 🤝
Thank you for your
servicecervix.deleted by creator
saw this one recently, old school shamers have no chance these days, just pack it up bro
Tbf the bros probably knew what she was up to and just all took the win
Makes me think of Always Sunny and how Dee thought he was really showing those guys by having sex with them and rating them poorly lol
Exactly my thought too “hey are you the whore who bangs everybody?”
everyone playing each other
Grabs popcorn, sorts by top, scrolls to bottom.
No controversial sort sadge
What platform/app are you using that lets you sort by top? I’m on Sync and don’t think it’s possible
You can sort by top in sync. Tap the icon next to the 3 dot menu in the top right and select your sort option.
I’m on Jerboa. It gives you almost all the same sorting options for coments as it does for posts.
I’m on Connect and sort by top works
braver than the troopsI hope she makes tons of money.
If you work for a living, you’re a prostitute - you’re selling your physical and mental health just to survive no different than sex workers.
The term prostitute literally translates to “to offer up for sale” - and, guess what, that pretty much describes the entire working class.
Sex workers are the original social workers.
According to my ex, who prides herself to be a social worker and a conflict solver, relationships are built solely on sex, not on interpersonal connections. But then again, she also thinks that you shouldn’t ever apologize because it shows a lack of self-esteem, called the police on her best friend because she was jealous of her hooking up while she didn’t and regularly posts “memes” about how terrible everyone else is on Facebook. Maybe she’s just a nutcase.
That may just be her, and I kinda feel bad for her. That sounds like a lot of maladjustment and projection. My friends say they had some regulars who’d start the sessions telling them about their lives and showing them pictures of their kids. Touch and validation can be a form of medicine. Everyone needs to feel wanted. We are social creatures. Incels are one example of those starved from such things.
Maybe she’s just a nutcase.
Maybe. Yes.
Oh look at me I’m so smart I have a microscope emoji in my name
Sometimes I like to pack my sentences with the Webster dictionary word of the day
Oh and I got tattoos!!1!1! Aren’t I cool fellow kids?!?!1?1!1!??
That is a very tryhard avatar pic.
