Israel trying to pass the hospital bombing off as Palestine doing it is utterly disgusting and guarantees Netanyahu a spot in the deepest pit of Hell for all eternity, obviously, but do not forget that

a) the only reason why Westerners will believe it is because they want to believe it - they are not being brainwashed and this is not some masterful propaganda being weaved around us to turn kind-hearted people into monsters,

b) no Westerner opinions matter at all. In most Western countries there is no real anti-Israel option to vote for even if they did realize that Israel was a giant factory for crimes against humanity, and Westerners protesting against things in general almost never achieves anything (tens of millions protested for BLM in 2020 and not only did the situation not change, it got worse), and

c) the people whose opinions do matter (both the people in the region, and the leaders who aren't already Zionist compradors) already know that Israel is full of shit and that they just murdered nearly a thousand civilians in a single bomb attack.

It is despair-inducing to think that the genocidal Zionist entity is so brazenly, so smugly getting away with bullshitting this away into a cloud of confusion, as they release their metaphorical squid ink just like they did with the stupid babies story, but the propaganda and the media narrative that they are creating isn't what matters. It cannot address the fundamental contradictions ripping the country, the region, and the world apart any more than masterfully-applied makeup can fix a stab wound. It can merely obfuscate.


If you have evidence of Israeli crimes and atrocities that you wish to preserve, there is a thread here in which to do so.


Sources on the fighting in Palestine against Israel. In general, CW for footage of battles, explosions, dead people, and so on:

UNRWA daily-ish reports on Israel's destruction and siege of Gaza and the West Bank.

English-language Palestinian Marxist-Leninist twitter account. Alt here.
English-language twitter account that collates news (and has automated posting when the person running it goes to sleep).
Arab-language twitter account with videos and images of fighting.
English-language (with some Arab retweets) Twitter account based in Lebanon.
English-language Palestinian Twitter account which reports on news from the Resistance Axis.

English-language PalestineResist telegram channel.

Various sources that are covering the Ukraine conflict are also covering the one in Palestine, like Rybar.


The Country of the Week is still Palestine! Feel free to chime in with books, essays, longform articles, even stories and anecdotes or rants.


Here is the map of the Ukraine conflict, courtesy of Wikipedia.

The weekly update isn't coming because I'm sick and too focussed on the collapse of the Zionist entity.

Links and Stuff

The bulletins site is down.

Examples of Ukrainian Nazis and fascists

Examples of racism/euro-centrism during the Russia-Ukraine conflict

Add to the above list if you can.


Resources For Understanding The War


Defense Politics Asia's youtube channel and their map. Their youtube channel has substantially diminished in quality but the map is still useful.

Moon of Alabama, which tends to have interesting analysis. Avoid the comment section.

Understanding War and the Saker: reactionary sources that have occasional insights on the war.

Alexander Mercouris, who does daily videos on the conflict. While he is a reactionary and surrounds himself with likeminded people, his daily update videos are relatively brainworm-free and good if you don't want to follow Russian telegram channels to get news. He also co-hosts The Duran, which is more explicitly conservative, racist, sexist, transphobic, anti-communist, etc when guests are invited on, but is just about tolerable when it's just the two of them if you want a little more analysis.

On the ground: Patrick Lancaster, an independent and very good journalist reporting in the warzone on the separatists' side.

Unedited videos of Russian/Ukrainian press conferences and speeches.


Telegram Channels

Again, CW for anti-LGBT and racist, sexist, etc speech, as well as combat footage.

Pro-Russian

https://t.me/aleksandr_skif ~ DPR's former Defense Minister and Colonel in the DPR's forces. Russian language.

https://t.me/Slavyangrad ~ A few different pro-Russian people gather frequent content for this channel (~100 posts per day), some socialist, but all socially reactionary. If you can only tolerate using one Russian telegram channel, I would recommend this one.

https://t.me/s/levigodman ~ Does daily update posts.

https://t.me/patricklancasternewstoday ~ Patrick Lancaster's telegram channel.

https://t.me/gonzowarr ~ A big Russian commentator.

https://t.me/rybar ~ One of, if not the, biggest Russian telegram channels focussing on the war out there. Actually quite balanced, maybe even pessimistic about Russia. Produces interesting and useful maps.

https://t.me/epoddubny ~ Russian language.

https://t.me/boris_rozhin ~ Russian language.

https://t.me/mod_russia_en ~ Russian Ministry of Defense. Does daily, if rather bland updates on the number of Ukrainians killed, etc. The figures appear to be approximately accurate; if you want, reduce all numbers by 25% as a 'propaganda tax', if you don't believe them. Does not cover everything, for obvious reasons, and virtually never details Russian losses.

https://t.me/UkraineHumanRightsAbuses ~ Pro-Russian, documents abuses that Ukraine commits.

Pro-Ukraine

Almost every Western media outlet.

https://discord.gg/projectowl ~ Pro-Ukrainian OSINT Discord.

https://t.me/ice_inii ~ Alleged Ukrainian account with a rather cynical take on the entire thing.


Last week's discussion post.


  • Tervell [he/him]
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    interesting article I came across in view of some recent discussions about carriers and their continued relevancy (archived)

    Now, the take here is maybe a bit too hard against carriers, but there's still some interesting points

    But, in my judgment, these battles also illustrated the fact that the aircraft carrier, for all its advantages, was acutely vulnerable to airstrikes. Subsequent US success in the War in the Pacific was largely due to its extraordinary capability to produce carriers (and all other types of ships) in historically unprecedented numbers, and to keep them manned with well-trained air crews. After the Battle of Midway, the Japanese were never able to match the Americans in either respect.

    That said, the vulnerability of the aircraft carrier to airstrikes never diminished, and even as the Japanese navy shriveled away to a faint shadow of its former self in late 1944, the susceptibility of all surface ships to attacks from the air became more and more apparent.

    The most interesting part was the idea that we've actually already seen how a fleet can be damaged by precision-guided missiles - all the way back in WW2, it's just that the "missiles" in this case were actual planes flown by human pilots in kamikaze attacks.

    The so-called kamikaze attacks reached their zenith in the spring 1945 Battle of Okinawa, where ~1500 pilots and aircraft were expended, and inflicted substantial damage on large numbers of US warships. According to a 1999 US Air Force analysis, by the end of the war ~3000 kamikaze sorties resulted in the sinking of 34 US warships and damaged 368 others, with a “hit” ratio of almost 20%. In my estimation, this is a rather extraordinary success rate when one considers the pronounced disadvantages they faced:

    • Kamikaze planes were flown by woefully undertrained Japanese pilots (a great many of them only teenagers) flying what were, by then, even more woefully obsolete aircraft.
    • The aircraft typically carried less than about 500 lbs. of munitions, often in the form of two 200 kg bombs which lacked the explosive punch necessary to do serious damage to a large warship – therefore multiple strikes on the same ship were required.
    • The US Navy moved heaven and earth in a substantially inefficacious attempt to prevent the strikes, including massive numbers of aircraft flying combat air patrol out to maximum distances, and many scores of smaller warships deployed in vast arrays of screening ships.

    The simple fact was that, despite the highly focused effort to interdict them, US defenses were frequently overwhelmed by large and determined “salvos” of this first generation of precision-guided anti-ship missiles. ... Nevertheless, the kamikaze demonstrated incontrovertibly that warships in general, and aircraft carriers in particular, were – and would continue to be – extremely vulnerable to large salvos of precision-guided munitions. That vulnerability not only persists to the present day, but is unquestionably more acute than ever before due to the fact that anti-ship missile technologies have advanced much further in the post-World War II era than has the capability of the targeted ships to defeat them.

    Altogether, the fleet arrayed off the shores of Okinawa consisted of over 600 ships! Nothing even remotely approximating this huge fleet had ever been seen, and quite likely never will be again. The configuration of current US carrier strike groups consists of a single carrier, 1 guided-missile cruiser, and 3 – 4 destroyers and/or frigates. So, in a potential battle today between a US carrier strike group and a peer or near-peer adversary, a mere half-dozen ships with an extremely limited number of defenses will face massed salvos of hundreds of cruise missiles, ballistic missiles, supersonic and hypersonic anti-ship missiles, and dozens of submarines with many hundreds of torpedoes – all of which deploy large modern warheads capable of inflicting a mortal blow against any of the ships in the group.

    US naval power apologists may argue that the array of defenses on these ships is much more capable than in World War II. But it simply does not matter. It won’t be enough. Regardless of how one attempts to crunch the numbers, a putative engagement between a carrier strike group and the PLA Navy in the South China Sea would entail simultaneous massed attacks of precision-guided anti-ship missiles zooming in from all points of the compass.

    • Awoo [she/her]
      ·
      1 year ago

      The carrier functions as a mobile base.

      It's less vulnerable than a base because of the sheer quantity of firepower they surround it with, but as it's essentially a mobile base it has just about all the same weaknesses. It also has new ones on top because submarines.

      Bases are all vulnerable to being obliterated by long range missiles. Carriers are equally vulnerable when their location is known.

      Simple as that really.

      • the_kid
        ·
        1 year ago

        that's incredible

        • Frank [he/him, he/him]
          ·
          1 year ago

          Even US carriers are an example of this. Their job is to carry small strike craft within range of their targets, rather than do the fighting themselves. The battleships were teh big-gun ships of the navy and they're all long gone. The US has been trying to put together a "littoral navy", small warships that can operate in shallow water, up rivers, and in deltas, for a long time now and I don't know if they've actually made any progress. The US has also pumped an enormous amount of cash and research hours in to defending the carriers from small boat attacks.

          The US is in a double-bind. It needs the carriers to terrorize the world, but hte carriers are inherently and unavoidably vulnerable in the face of rapidly advancing long range missile technology.

    • star_wraith [he/him]
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      That’s a fascinating analysis. It seems to me that the only time in history that the aircraft carrier was seriously tested as a weapon in peer conflict was the Pacific Theater in WW2. But even before I read this, that war was now over 80 years ago which is so long in the past that it really can’t tell us much meaningfully IMO. But this highlights some reasons why it’s even less applicable as a modern point of comparison (EDIT: it’s applicable in highlighting how fucked modern aircraft carriers are, I mean less applicable in justifying the existence of carriers). Had never thought of the productive capacity angle, that’s something that’s so radically different now for the US than during WW2.

    • WoofWoof91 [comrade/them]
      ·
      1 year ago

      american carriers also have very large crews
      one carrier sinking with all hands takes a couple thousand trained personnel out of the pool

      • Frank [he/him, he/him]
        ·
        1 year ago

        Unfortunately all the Dolphins in the south-china sea are greater Saxony6 Revanchists, for reasons that no one has been able to decipher.

    • zephyreks [none/use name]
      ·
      1 year ago

      Inherently, you're pitting the force that you can fit on a single carrier against the force that you can fit on land. Carrier doctrine is doomed from that alone.

    • Frank [he/him, he/him]
      ·
      1 year ago

      Lines up with my armchair analysis. In any serious fight any US adversary is going to try to swarm the US carrier groups with cheap anti-shipping missiles fired from cheap small boats and I guess drones now. Only one missile has to get through to destroy the runway and neutralize most of the carrier's offensive and defensive capabilities for a good while. And all those gee-whiz radar guided point defense weapons are really cool but the ship only has so many of them, and missiles are pretty cheap these days.