133arc585

Horseshoe "blood" is blue, and it's not actually blood it's hemolymph. It is blue crab blood. Blue blood from a crab.

No point lying. If you check the modlog plenty of his comments get removed. You can check for yourself.

I'll just summarize my point: if you think you have educational value in your comments, that value is nil if the comment gets removed.

As someone who largely agrees with the content of what you have to say, your delivery is absolutely disgusting. You litter every comment with personal attacks, insults, and are needlessly offensive. I genuinely don't know if you think that aggression helps get your point across, but it doesn't. And, considering how many of your comments get removed by mods for that insult and disrespect, you should realize that even if you personally think it's constructive, the mods don't. If you think the content of your comments is valuable, don't you think it'd have more value if it is left up for others to see, instead of having it removed where nobody can learn from it? If you resort to this namecalling and aggression so much, and the comments get removed, they're of no value. As an outside observer, by reading your comments, I'm less likely to trust what you have to say, and instead would assume you have a set agenda that you won't stray from. Your behavior detracts from your trustworthiness.

• Chinese Communist Party
• Revolutionary Committee of the Chinese Kuomintang
• China Democratic League
• China National Democratic Construction Association
• China Association for Promoting Democracy
• Chinese Peasants' and Workers' Democratic Party
• China Zhi Gong Party
• Jiusan Society
• Taiwan Democratic Self-Government League

Thank you, I'll look at that. It might be my misunderstanding of a technical term, but I don't see the logical sequence that makes it apparent that socialist countries can't engage in imperialism/colonialism.

I don't think you're doing a very good job of attempting to answer the very direct confusion I'm having. You're doing a lot to make sure it's obvious how capitalism can and does result in imperialism, which frankly I'm mostly in agreement with. My issue is that you're asserting that socialism can't lead to imperialism. You've still given no reason that this is to be the case except for this attempt:

Socialism’s goal is to provide for its people by moving past a society based on exploitation. This is why it wouldn’t engage in colonialism.

And I agree that, by definition, it's a society based on the betterment of its people. Stress should be applied there to its people. I'm not justifying imperialism at all, but it's a pretty obvious argument that by subjugating other nations/peoples and exploiting them, you can make the lives of your people better. Perhaps you're trying to say that the type of leadership and ideology that creates and maintains socialism would also be ideologically against imperialism, but that seems more pragmatic than theoretic. You're saying socialism can't engage in imperialism by definition but the most I'd give is that it doesn't engage in imperialism in practice.

I don't see how that follows.

Because you need to get to imperialism via capitalism.

Socialism's goal is to provide for its people; in theory, why can't it engage in colonialism to bring in resources to benefit its people?

There is definitely no other way.

Its obvious how capitalism leads to imperialism, but it's definitely not obvious how that would be the only way to arrive there.

Any elaboration you can provide would be great because you're acting as if it should be obvious why what you're saying is true but it absolutely is not.

You didn't answer what I asked.

You said that capitalism by definition leads to imperialism. I asked how socialism by definition precludes imperialism.

China is a socialist state so by definition cannot be

Can you elaborate on that? I agree that China is not imperialist, but I don't see how socialism by definition precludes that possibility.

If you truly think this is a display of Russian aggression I genuinely doubt that you have any historic view on the geopolitics of the region. The conflict did not appear out of thin air in 2022. The situation is more complex than "Russian aggression"; in fact that's not even a part of the picture. Russia is responding to requests for assistance after Ukraine began bombing its own people in 2014. Many of these people voted to join Russia after this disgusting display by Ukraine. Before 2022 most of the combatants against Ukraine were regular people fighting for their homes and families. These people realize that Ukraine wants to bomb their homes and Russia is offering to fight alongside them. On the weekend before the SMO began, there were 2000 ceasefire violations in the Donbass. Between 2014 and 2022, 1 million Ukrainians immigrated to Russia because of the abuse by the Ukrainian government. And since the operation began in 2022, another 1.3 million immigrated. The people in these territories that Ukraine has zero regard for view the support they are receiving from Russia positively: they invited Russia in to assist them, and they are somewhat reliant on Russia to protect them from Ukraine.

I know life is a lot easier when you don't muddy things with context. I know that it's a lot easier to be righteous in your condemnation of a world power because they're "evil" and an "aggressor" than it is to acknowledge that the situation is more complex. I know that it's a lot easier to go along with what Western media says than to be informed and hold your own opinions. I know it feels nice to rally with everyone against a perceived enemy. I know it feels nice to feel that your country (and military) is finally doing something good for once. But you can't let wanting to feel good stand in the way of reality. The Western media has done a hell of a job propagandizing this war, attempting to remove any historical and geopolitical context, in order to gather and maintain support. Think honestly: how much historical and geopolitical context have you seen, especially from popular media sources? How much more effort is spent on raging about current "evil deeds" than understanding the desires of the people in the actual territories that have asked Russia for help?

Please read, and inform yourself. Life is less black-and-white than "Russia evil".

So what's the conclusion as to what's happening?

As I wrote about in a thread a couple weeks back (here, here, and here), this should have been fine, and was fine on paper.

According to official statements it was going to be diluted, before release, to a level that was even lower than what Fukushima NPP put out while operational. Then it was going to be released at a rate that maintained this concentration.

Did Japan lie? Did it not dilute how it said it would? Was it a technical failure and dilution did not occur at the level they said it would, or was it released too fast at the dilution level they set? Was there not testing at release time/site?