Image is a frame taken from this video of Iranian missiles raining down on Israel without interception due to a weak and depleted air defense system after a year of war and genocide.

Mao, 1956:

Now U.S. imperialism is quite powerful, but in reality it isn't. It is very weak politically because it is divorced from the masses of the people and is disliked by everybody and by the American people too. In appearance it is very powerful but in reality it is nothing to be afraid of, it is a paper tiger. Outwardly a tiger, it is made of paper, unable to withstand the wind and the rain. I believe the United States is nothing but a paper tiger.

When we say U.S. imperialism is a paper tiger, we are speaking in terms of strategy. Regarding it as a whole, we must despise it. But regarding each part, we must take it seriously. It has claws and fangs. We have to destroy it piecemeal. For instance, if it has ten fangs, knock off one the first time, and there will be nine left, knock off another, and there will be eight left. When all the fangs are gone, it will still have claws. If we deal with it step by step and in earnest, we will certainly succeed in the end.

Strategically, we must utterly despise U.S. imperialism. Tactically, we must take it seriously. In struggling against it, we must take each battle, each encounter, seriously. At present, the United States is powerful, but when looked at in a broader perspective, as a whole and from a long-term viewpoint, it has no popular support, its policies are disliked by the people, because it oppresses and exploits them. For this reason, the tiger is doomed. Therefore, it is nothing to be afraid of and can be despised. But today the United States still has strength, turning out more than 100 million tons of steel a year and hitting out everywhere. That is why we must continue to wage struggles against it, fight it with all our might and wrest one position after another from it. And that takes time.

Please check out the HexAtlas!

The bulletins site is here!
The RSS feed is here.
Last week's thread is here.

Israel-Palestine Conflict

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 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.
Arab-language twitter account with videos and images of fighting.
English-language (with some Arab retweets) Twitter account based in Lebanon. - Telegram is @IbnRiad.
English-language Palestinian Twitter account which reports on news from the Resistance Axis. - Telegram is @EyesOnSouth.
English-language Twitter account in the same group as the previous two. - Telegram here.

English-language PalestineResist telegram channel.
More telegram channels here for those interested.

Russia-Ukraine Conflict

Examples of Ukrainian Nazis and fascists
Examples of racism/euro-centrism during the Russia-Ukraine conflict

Sources:

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.
Simplicius, who publishes on Substack. Like others, his political analysis should be soundly ignored, but his knowledge of weaponry and military strategy is generally quite good.
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.

Pro-Russian Telegram Channels:

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

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 Telegram Channels:

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.

  • rainn [they/them, she/her]
    ·
    4 hours ago

    @RomCom1989@hexbear.net I'm posting a reply as a separate post as it's easier for me to respond to all of your points.

    This might be a controversial take,but I'm frankly pro the west winning on this one

    Moldova is basically owned by the US embassy, see: https://thegrayzone.com/2023/05/18/leaked-recordings-state-corruption-moldova/

    Moldova getting integrated into the imperial structures even more will be a disaster for its population. Moldova is already embargoing Pridnistrovie (Transnistria is the name proposed by the Romanian invaders when they conquered the region.) which makes it incredibly hard for the people living there in that small enclave. Moldova needs to "fix" it's "problem" in Pridnistrovie to join NATO and EU which means to destroy it passively or actively. Even if the pro EU cucks are in charge which want Romania to annex Moldova, majority of the population is opposed even with their 24/7 propaganda about Russian influence and how Moldova needs to "unite" with Romania.

    Now, obviously I don't support the EU or western interests expanding,but,and this may be chauvinist brainworms,I do believe Moldova's future

    Moldova was never "romanian" this is Great Romania chauvinist brainworms indeed. Moldova was its own thing dating back to the 1400s or earlier, even sources adopted by Romanian historiographers admit this.

    Either us or Russia

    Romania had a committee for the romanianization and colonization of Moldova:

    Show

    Translation: Directorate of Romanianization, Colonization and Inventory

    If you are interested you can see how badly Moldovans were treated after the "unification" of 1918 here https://moldovapentrumoldoveni.wordpress.com/2012/07/30/documente-din-vremea-anexarii-de-la-1918/. Keep in mind it it isn't a Marxist source, just pro-Moldovan historiography which is hard to find already.

    Again,this is the only point where I believe Romania's interests should align with the west

    The same rhetoric was used in WW2 that Romania was to ally with Nazi germany to "gain back Moldova". We saw where the Great Romania rhetoric has lead.

    If the EU project can limp along enough for us to practically reunite before it dies,I'd see that as a win.

    The EU wants to Romania to "unite" with Moldova so it can exploit Moldova through the Romanian state apparatus this is not something you should be praising.

    Moldova is sacked by the western imperialists already and the president must push out constant propaganda to make the people not rebel against her and by promising hopes and dreams of a better future via the EU when it will result in mass privatizations and brain drain and etc even worse than now.

    it'll probably become a Romanian appendage, which I'm not opposed to

    Why are you wishing for capitalist Romania to annex a sovreign nation in the name of "unity"? This is all Great Country brainworms.

    The video you have linked is produced by a pro EU shitlib rag:

    Ziarul de Gardă also won the Delegation of the European Union in the "Media against disinformation disinformation'. Fact proved - investigations journalistic investigations are the best cure against corruption and disinformation. Throughout the year, ZdG has deconstructed and uncovered falsehoods and myths who and how much they spend on disinformation and encouraged the community readers to think critically

    It is LITERALLY sponsored by the NED/CIA and USAID and the US embassy:

    Show

    Please stop spreading "Moldova is Romania" talking points that only fascists use, especially to people not familiar with the history of the region.

    edit:

    Basically what you're saying already happened,so they wouldn't see a drop in quality of life,like then, because they are already gutted

    Yes it would see a drop in quality of life due to EU pillaging and NATO occupation and turn it against BRICS/Russia even more so it becomes ingrained with Europe.

    "Moldova got already sacked by the West so it won't get any worse if they join western power structures!"

    • Anarcho-Bolshevik@lemmygrad.ml
      ·
      2 hours ago

      Another important finding concerned the number of passport Moldovans who named Romanian as their ethnic identity when they were given a choice. As already mentioned, this number was very low—in fact no more than twelve individuals of a total sample of 762 claimed to be Romanian (and Romanian only). These figures seem to undermine the claim of Popular Front activists (as well as many Moldova experts in the West) that the Moldovans are “really” Romanians.

      (Source.)

    • FuckyWucky [none/use name]
      ·
      3 hours ago

      yea, what will likely happen if Moldova joins EU is they will fix their currency against the Euro (before meeting the criteria for Eurozone) and lose all control over their monetary & fiscal policy (whatever remains of it). either they fix it with 100% reserves like Bulgaria does, which is basically the same as adopting the Euro but with even less control or they'll leverage the Euros they receive in which case sudden capital flight will result in them begging for Euro loans.

      all that said I can somewhat understand why people there are so desperate to join the EU.

    • Chickpeas [none/use name]
      ·
      3 hours ago

      What about Gaugazia? Siding with the EU will lead to martial law in areas they already control, not to mention conquering Transnistria.

      • RomCom1989 [he/him, any]
        ·
        3 hours ago

        I don't think Pridniestrovie will ever be Moldovan,nor should it be

        Gagauzia too,for that matter,but they'd have a considerably harder time being independent,so again,we come back to either Romania or Russia taking over because these are not viable states

        Personally,if they feel Russia would align more with their interests,let them join

        I seriously doubt anything like Kosovo would happen,but then again,this is the west we're talking about,but our azovs are still woefully disorganized and frankly a joke

          • RomCom1989 [he/him, any]
            ·
            3 hours ago

            That would mean taking territory from Ukraine,also Pridniestrovie was never a part of that, seeing as it's on the other side of the Dniester

            • Chickpeas [none/use name]
              ·
              3 hours ago

              It's just a name, you know what I mean. Basically there is no reason for Gaugazia and Transnistria to not form a confederation and annex a bit of Ukrainian territory if Russia achieves a bigger victory.

    • RomCom1989 [he/him, any]
      ·
      3 hours ago

      Ok,I will say that I did put the disclaimer that that "outlet" was western owned, basically I wanted to show people what the western narrative is.

      Second,I disagree that Moldova is a "colony" of Romania. They are definitely distinct in their identity,but to classify them as a different people is quite frankly ridiculous. However,you are correct when you say that Romania practically colonized Transnistria during WW2 and that it has no legitimate claim to the area.

      I just can't see how the "parent" nation of modern day Moldova,the Principality of Moldavia,and which is part of official Moldovan national history,is somehow not connected also to Romania,which it practically is a founding member of. I don't deny that Moldova has its own history or culture,but I just can't square the circle that they're not at all connected to Romania (which has more Moldova than actual Moldova now).

      Also,people not familiar with the history of the region?I live next to the point where Romania,Moldova and Ukraine meet,I admit, Romanian education on our national history is a bag filled with shit spreading nonsense propaganda,but to say that Moldova,who literally speaks the same language,but with more Russian loanwords and an accent is not connected to Romanian is frankly hilariously ahistorical. Again,I will fully admit that this is my one China realpolitik take,by which I mean cozying up with the west is beneficial to Romanian national interests,I don't want the immiseration of Moldovans,far from it,but the idea that they'd be doing worse than small towns and villages in Romania already are I think is overblown.

      Also,you can't sit there with a straight face and tell me Moldova has a future as an independent state.Either we get it or Russia does,and frankly I'm with my country's interest on this one.Not like the whole modus opperandi of the region wasn't shifting allegiances from way back to the Ottoman times.We take what we can from the west and then when they start looking less and less attractive as an option we go to the next power,which will most likely be Russia.

      Again, let me reiterate,I do not condone the west's actions,but if Romania was not captured by the West,id be saying the same thing if it would engage in a tug of war with Russia over Moldova. I don't agree with the Soviet efforts to distance the Moldovan identify from the Romanian one,but it was done to liberate the territory from the Nazi aligned government,so it was ultimately beneficial.

      Now,the USSR is gone and a capitalist Russia remains, so I'm not too inclined to attach a territory that is mostly populated by people way more culturally similar to Romania to the RF,just because we're in the pocket of the West for now.

      Of course,if Moldova wants to take a chance at independence,let them,but they have no economic potential.

      I'm really curious as to how this is any different from Belarus and Russia?Belarus is culturally distinct and yet it seems to be more and more integrated into Russia by the day. That's not a bad thing,is it? I agree that us being under the boot of the West will make this messy and cause a lot of pain,but you can't tell me Moldova is viable as a state.

      What would you prefer?A "Moldovan federation" where Gagauzia and Pridniestrovie get to boss over Chisinau and Balti? That'd just be annexation by Russia in a different manner. I don't believe Russia taking over would necessarily be a bad thing,hell,if they do something with the region, godspeed to them,but I'd prefer it if we reunite as we are brotherly peoples.

      Ok,let's say Romania wasn't under NATO,and Moldova wasn't under the thumb of the US. Would you be against unification if say,Dej's Romania unified with Moldova?

      Also,I'm not campaigning or anything,I'm not cheering this on, basically I'm saying I wouldn't complain if they just happened to unite with us

      I want my take on this one issue to be challenged,so I appreciate your comment,this is just my perspective and I will fully admit it most likely is deeply ingrained chauvinist brainworms,but I think this one is the hardest to budge on

      • rainn [they/them, she/her]
        ·
        3 hours ago

        Ok,I will say that I did put the disclaimer that that "outlet" was western owned, basically I wanted to show people what the western narrative is.

        The western narrative which conveniently aligns with yours, and like every fascist and liberal ever.

        Second,I disagree that Moldova is a "colony" of Romania. They are definitely distinct in their identity,but to classify them as a different people is quite frankly ridiculous

        Romanians and Moldovans are similar, yes, I'm not denying that, but Moldovans do not consider themselves Romanian. Polls continously show even after Chisinau changed the official language to Romanian that people identify as Moldovan and as speaking Moldovan. Even older Moldovan sources, Grigore Ureche, say Moldova is not Wallachia.

        However,you are correct when you say that Romania practically colonized Transnistria during WW2 and that it has no legitimate claim to the area.

        Romania has no legitimate claim to Moldova. The "reunification" of 1918 was done to counter a Soviet Moldova. Romanian troops went in to protect the Moldovan boyars in 1918, there was no peaceful reunification, it was annexation like the Soviets have insisted for so long.

        Also, for example, in WW2, the Romanian army had over 60.000 Bessarabian defectors. Moldovans didn't want to fight on the side of Romania. There was widespread celebration and happiness as Romanians got kicked out of Moldova with the Soviet arrival

        I just can't square the circle that they're not at all connected to Romania (which has more Moldova than actual Moldova now).

        I haven't stated Romania and Moldova are not connected, of course the countries are next to each other and influence each other. The problem is that even if Romania and Moldova are similar that does not give Romania a right to annex Moldova under the pretense of gathering all Romanians from everywhere.

        Also,people not familiar with the history of the region?I live next to the point where Romania,Moldova and Ukraine meet,

        I wasn't referring to you, I was referring to other Hexbear users.

        but to say that Moldova,who literally speaks the same language,but with more Russian loanwords and an accent is frankly hilariously ahistorical

        I agree that Moldovan and Romanian are 95% similar, yet people insist they speak Moldovan. I doubt Romanians know better than what the Moldovan people themselves say in numerous surveys

        In the 2004 census, 16.5% (558,508) of the 3,383,332 people living in Moldova declared Romanian as their native language, whereas 60% declared Moldovan

        In a survey conducted in four villages near the border with Romania, when asked about their native language the interviewees identified the following: Moldovan 53%, Romanian 44%, and Russian 3%.

        Taken from fedipedia

        Yes they are similar. No that doesn't mean they are the same. Even if you understand everything being spoken that doesn't override the autonomy of those people. Language is a highly political thing and saying Moldovans speak Romanian only furthers Romanian interests in the region, in this case taking over Moldova via "reunification".

        I mean cozying up with the west is beneficial to Romanian national interests

        Sigh, what the fuck? Can you stop with the whole "letting them pillage the whole country is actually beneficial cause we can get the land muh soviets stole from us" that the fascists also did in WW2?

        but the idea that they'd be doing worse than small towns and villages in Romania already are I think is overblown

        Small villages and towns are dirt poor and getting depopulated and actively brain drained. EU and Schengen would further the brain exports.

        and frankly I'm with my country's interest on this one

        Identifying with liberal US compradors that would send you to the frontlines to fight for NATO?

        We take what we can from the west and then when they start looking less and less attractive as an option we go to the next power

        NATO is building one of the biggest bases in Romania. NATO is occupying Romania, you cant just go to the next power.

        so I'm not too inclined to attach a territory that is mostly populated by people way more culturally similar to Romania to the RF

        I have never stated this. You seem keen to integrate Moldova in either Romania or Russia. By this standard many countries of the world shouldn't exist.

        Of course,if Moldova wants to take a chance at independence,let them,but they have no economic potential.

        Moldova is being hollowed out by the literal US embassy. Joining Romania would make that worse as the plunder will happen by the national comprador burgeois and by the EU way easier due to reduced tarrifs and being in the same country etc.

        Belarus is culturally distinct and yet it seems to be more and more integrated into Russia by the day

        Belarus has the Union State with Russia, they are neighbors and are integrating due to NATO aggression.

        That's not a bad thing,is it? I agree that us being under the boot of the West will make this messy and cause a lot of pain,but you can't tell me Moldova is viable as a state.

        This is totally different from Belarus and Russia cause Russia isn't trying to literally annex Belarus into itself, the union state isnt that. Also look again at what you are advocating for.

        A "Moldovan federation" where Gagauzia and Pridniestrovie get to boss over Chisinau and Balti?

        Suddenly the minorities in Moldova boss around the majority, come on.

        Ok,let's say Romania wasn't under NATO,and Moldova wasn't under the thumb of the US. Would you be against unification if say,Dej's Romania unified with Moldova?

        That would be up for Moldova to decide on. The current liberal narrative is that bad Stalin made up a whole language and culture just to shit on Romania, which is absurd. I can link to more pro-Moldovan historiography if you wish.

        • RomCom1989 [he/him, any]
          ·
          2 hours ago

          Btw should I delete my post then? Or just redirect to yours instead? I'm looking back and I said some real stupid shit,out here sounding like the average Eastern European NAFOid

        • RomCom1989 [he/him, any]
          ·
          2 hours ago

          I will concede that my wording is crude and my opinions maximalist

          Basically I'd ideally want something like the Union State with Moldova

          I'm thinking now that my insistence on unification is the result of impulsiveness and not thinking through about my replies

          I agree with your sentiment,and I'm gonna say that my support basically boils down to passively saying that if it were to happen I wouldn't complain,just as I wouldn't complain if Moldova didn't join the EU,but you are right,I'm looking over my wording and it worryingly sounds like Simion or god forbid Ferdinand the first

          Also I would like to put a disclaimer,these were personal opinions and should in no way be treated as fact, please do not adopt a pro west stance on this issue as a result of my posts,I was just throwing my opinion out there to see what people would think,I am very much fallible and even though I'm form the region,that doesn't mean I am an unbiased source of information

          I appreciate the educational rebuttals offered and I would advise people to look at both perspectives but give more credence to the ones who utilized actual historical sources,which wasn't mine

        • RomCom1989 [he/him, any]
          ·
          1 hour ago

          Oh,I almost forgot

          I would like to explain my "Russia or Romania" stance

          You are correct,I do believe many countries in the world today should not exist,either because they are colonial constructs or because they just aren't viable as states

          Basically,let's take for example the Caribbean islands

          There are many nations there,but they basically exist as puppets of the US,sans Cuba, wouldn't it make more sense for them to unite into a federation to be able to become stronger together and combat US influence? The other example I have in my mind is Nasser's UAR. To me it just makes more sense for countries to band together into larger entities to combat US influence. You have made a valuable point when you pointed out that as it stands,it would be more like an annexation of Moldova than a true unification. But I personally do think that the European microstates shouldn't exist,not should the Gulf States,or Singapore,with the latter two being products of colonialism and the other ones pointless anachronisms.