u/Lingonberryabnormal

My reason for making this post is another I saw 2 days ago and a comment today, I realized that they have a dangerous level of ignorance regarding how occupied Palestine was established

Many of them think Jews immigrated to Palestine and legally bought land from the eye rabs, but the eye rabs wanted sha-ria law so they attacked occupied Palestine in 1948 and lost because they are bad goys while the west are shabbat goyim

This is dangerous one because it's false, the way Jews acquired land in Palestine is through armed expulsion, after the establishment of the mandate of Palestine a Jewish commissioner was appointed to set up for the colonial project by teaching Hebrew making it the official language and most importantly **arming Jewish terrorist organisations like haganah and irgun**

These two were mostly responsible for how Jews expanded into Palestine as they took land by force, Palestinians led multiple rebellions in 1921 28 and 36 and a main reason for all of them was the expulsion of Palestinians from their homes

Also this is where equating anti Zionism and anti septicism comes from, here they do a little thing where they are ignorant on purpose and try to twist words and be disingenuous by stating the goal (a Jewish state) and not the path to achieve that (ethnic cleansing, so when someone opposes the first he is anti symmetric or something)

And also the reason we lost in 1948 wasn't because we wanted to establish sha-ria law and stone women who hate American freedom and don't wear the hee-jab, many of the Jews who immigrated fought in ww2 they had combat experience especially from the Eastern front, also the occupied Palestine defense forces are made of the terror organisations irgun and haganah who were being smuggled weapons from Europe

We had lack of weapons and multiple ceasefires that stopped the momentum and allied occupied Palestine to organise and recover, also many Arab countries did not care about Palestine like Egypt and Jordan who after losing instead of establishing a Palestinian state and helping them arm up they decided to occupy these territories

That's all I have to say, so thoughts?

In far cry 2 the two factions are UFLL and the APR, they look identical to each other, they seem to have mere checkpoint guards no offensive cabilities, and no communication like at all.

My question is how, other than it's a game what's the lore explanation, how do they distinguish between their own and the enemy without uniforms or something, how is their command hierarchy beyond addi and tambossa, what's their communication and finally what is their structure? Do we know if they have units or just border guards and patrol

Maybe lore wizard sees this, I always wondered, for example the APR or UFLL launch an offensive into the Northern territory taking it completely but with what exactly? The patrol and checkpoint guards?

In the recent days or weeks Israeli media and officials have been very hostile towards Turkiye advocating for war and calling them the new Iran, this caused a lot of panick and fearmongering that Israel will directly attack them the same way they are attacking Iran currently, and like a post about it on this sub every single day.

But I think this is wrong, Israel will not attack Turkiye the same way or at all actually, this is due to multiple reasons:

• Israel can not afford a war with Turkiye, even their current war with Hezbollah and Iran and the genocide in Gaza (which has been toned down a little because of the ceasefire) cost a lot of money and bring NO gain (dismantling Hezbollah will take years and billions of dollars, which is why they are trying to push this onto Syria).
• Israel can not attack a NATO ally, I do understand NATO is a useless organization that might not defend Turkiye (because they are Muslim they only run to them when Russia is threatening Europe) but that also means Israel will have to go alone in the war, in the war with Iran the USA is doing the majority of the work for them whether it is the bombing or the negotiations (which they did not like the outcome of) so this will cause even more damage to them.
• Turkiye is not Iran, Iran relies on their missile program and the threat of nuclear weapons to survive (and the strait as of recently, i do not think they knew it was that powerful before the war) their Airforce and anti air are very primitive and were not made to compete with the USA (and it worked anyway, they took a lot of damage but survived in the end and might leave even better than they were before the war), Turkiye is planning to strengthen their Navy and Airforce to match Israel's (they can possibly challenge the F35 with the new KAAN fighter jets, they do not need to shoot them down just deter them), also they are planning a huge steel dome project to protect their airspace that might be completed in the next few years, Israel might not win even if they tried

So, what do I think will happen?

they will almost certainly just be in a proxy war in Syria, Israel is already trying to reduce Turkish influence there by supporting the druze cartels and airstriking any attempt to bring in heavy powerful weapons into the country, they will keep fighting in that area.

What do you think? if I got something wrong tell me in the comments that is all i have to say.

This article and many others claim that cable was disrupted, the Syrian telecom claims is an act of sabotage

can someone verify this?

I did notice heavy degradation of the internet quality and some services don't work for a long period of time but kind of come back (I'm not sure if this is related to it. you can tell me if it's an independent issue that has no relation to our topic)

Despite trump's efforts to end this war and save face Israel continues to sabotage and attack Lebanon freely without any consequences

If the us controlled them they wouldn't be allowed to just do that, the us would have kept them in check

What this proves is the us is a huge Israeli province who has no control over them and they'd bend over and just take it like a good boy, in what world the strongest country would allow themselves to be sabotaged by a country heavily dependent on them if they're not a huge satellite state of that country

I believe the US has lost the Iraq war due to failing multiple objectives, the objectives were toppling the Saddam led government (this was successful, but this isn't the entire war this is just the invasion in 2003 which they obviously won) and establish a stable democratic pro west government

first of all Iraq after the war was anything but stable, when the US announced cession of combat operations in 2011 the Shia led government led by PM Maliki began sidelining and even destroying the Sunni Muslim representation due to hatred and long history i wont talk about, but this action had heavy consequences as the Muslims were pushed directly towards the Islamic state which was the most powerful militant organization at the time and this caused the war to drag for 6 more years before the Islamic state was finally defeated in Iraq

The Iraqi government was not stable, it has to this day a lot of corruption, back then there were around 50 thousand ghost soldiers within the Iraqi army which caused that disaster in Mosul, pouring money into the country made them out of touch and a lot of it probably went back to their pockets.

Iraq was and still is hostile to the West and the US, during the invasion in 2003 the Shias who were discriminated against supported the invasion to get rid of Saddam Hussein, however after that there was a huge surge in in militancy, while they mostly targeted Muslims and did demographic changes they still were hostile to the US, today the Iraqi government is Iranian aligned same with the population due to shared religion and sentiment.

So, change my view on how the US won the war in Iraq, not the invasion.

Edit: i forgot to mention that the economic reasons might not count, i mean sorry this sounds like im coping but even if the us has access to iraqi oil and can freeze their assets thats still what? its still 2-3

I was following the situation in January when the Arab tribes and the SAA took control of the majority of the PKK's territory in the northeast, after that I kind of lost interest as the situation is over, last I heard was that 1 month long ceasefire or integration deal

Now I'm not completely in the dark, I do hear stuff from time to time like the brigade and internal security force sizes, or when they elected that mayor

But I don't think I quite understand, whats the situation and how does Ahmad plan to dissolve the PKK in Syria?

Also how much control do they have in the areas they didn't militarily retake

In far cry 2 the Jackal goes through a huge shift in ideology throughout the game, at first he's introduced as a nihilistic gun runner who only cares about profit not morality, and he believes only power decides who's right and wrong quoting Nietzsche.

This can also be found in the interview tapes with the Jackal, for example Ruben asks him why he specifically chose Africa to do this and the jackal tells him it's just business, maybe I am taking this too literally but he does try justifying it like in another tape he thinks by arming both sides with cheap weapons he's doing them a favour that they can control their destiny and tries to compare himself to a tax payer in the west

But later in the game this whole ideology collapses, he completely abandoned it and decided he was going to stop the war by cutting the head of the snake, getting the civilians out and letting the remaining mercs ufll apr to kill each other (which actually fails, the war continues as of 2014, 2018 but I'm not sure as I haven't finished far cry 5, 2021 if you count far cry 2 as canon to 6)

I can actually see some signs, for example there's a tape where he described seeing a child soldier who killed someone to steal their boots describing how horrible he looks and a kid his age should definitely not look like that

That's all I personally found, what do you think?