u/Thebunkerparodie

Some narrative on him and hatschepsut portray tuthmose as seeking revenge against her and I often see the claim being repeated online too but reading john romer third volume, he does put it in question because o ne has to answer the question of why did tuthmose III waited so long after her death if he actually wanted revenge.

Looking back at the footage, the ambassador was clearly not having a good time and rubio attitude did not indicated him being in on this (he was sinking in the couch pretty much), trump and vance kept berraating zelensky for no reason and focused on the suit when it's not something important or disrespectful and zelensky thanked the us plenty of time for its support so here, trump and vance are making the us look like backstabbers and I don't get what vance has against ukraine, at best he's acting like a putin useful idiot , same goes for trump, even if not paid, bieng a putin useful idiot is not a good look.

I don't think he'd automatically disreguard her advices or be disrespectful toward her, and since he's actually a business man with plenty of experience, they could work better together than with louie, who while he got experience in scheme, he's not cut out to be in charge of mc duck enterprise yet (+scrooge is also more hard work than louie so this might make things easier for owlson too). Scrooge might be cheap but I still think he'd be someone better to work with for her than glomgold or louie.

I think that could have been a better course of action since beakley kept telling her she'd not lie , it'd honor that promess (+beakley know how hurt webby is by being lied to by her) and the familly could've handled it if they can get back together after the spear (+scrooge would prefer beakley tell the truth rather than repeating his mistake with the spear, wich actually shows progress on his part beside him treating her like a actual friend). Beakley probably thought she was protecting webby by not telling her she came from fowl but her discovering she's been lied to with fake parents would still end hurting her.

Beside a bunch probably being bot once they start repeating the kremlin rhetoric, I do'nt get the human one that do because one can be critical of nato without acting like nato made putin do it or that aall countries will act like russia if a small neighbor join another alliance(no, not all leaders are like putin and this kind of thinking also justify imperialism) ,and why do people bleieve that some politician criticizing nato expansion are right when the quote can also ahve been made ina pretty different context (I don't see the point of using quote from the 90' because putin wasn't in charge yet and the context was pretty different too) and politician can also still be putin useful idiots even if not paid by russia. To me, being a realist or realpolitik doesn't mean one has to repeat russian gov rhetoric.

Rewatching prince of egypt and reading the third volume of john romer on ancient egypt make me wonder that, I also noticed some did wanted to link places in ancient egypt with the exodus

Per example, many realist will argue that realpolitik is thaat nato enlargement threaten russia so russia had to invade while never mentionning putin own imperialism or him denying ukraine is sovereign in its choices (russia is not entitled to a sphere of influence)

It is a pretty long show compare to other shows talking baout disasters so I wonder what make it popular enough to keep going for a quarter of a century, is it the show format and how it explain the crashes?

This is something I noticed whenever the war in ukraie is framed as "nato made russia do it", way too often, it feel to me like the person is denying eastern european countries that border russia agencies and too often put russia security concerns over those of the countries who want to join nato , I'm unsure why they do that because even if those neighbors are less powerful, that doesn't mean they can only be russia puppet states or that they can't choose their alliances. In a way, the "nato made or baited russia in invading ukraine" also does get rid of russia agency when putin still had the choice to not invade his neighbors.

But instead, the guy decided to be both petty and a troll , especially toward mario. If wario was smarter, he coudl've understood the tablet could've given him infinite money and make him rich , in a way it's kinda like lord hater not killing wander when he had the chance.

Especially given how much trump has been using them for his power and against his opponents, obama I reccall was criticized over his use of the executive orders, I feel like there should be more to keep in check the president or held them accountable when they mess up or are corrupted.

Even the scrooge part could still be seen as found familly in a way since scrooge clearly saw webby as a part of it not knowing they were related (I'd say already in S1 he saw her as familly, what he said in the last crash is the trauma getting out and him being angry), scrooge and webby also clearly have a familly like bond with scrooge placing a bunch of trust in her (we see it in the santa episode even if in the end, webby get mad at scrooge since scrooge was in the wrong there or in the podcast about the library). I find some of the discourse on the found familly part of the show odd because I feel it's contradicted by on screen stuff (the beakley story coudl also be seen as found familly to me).

While they are victims of krypton since from what I got, kryptonian turned the refugees in brainiacs, they still aren't good, they'd still rather superman be a warrior/conqueror and think the only thing is weak and strong, nothing else. I originally thought the og brainiac took over but it seems how he acted was already a thing in the non corrupted one

I noticed people love to make the claim the dems are far left or too progressive (tho I don't see what's so too much about letting people express different gender or lgbtq+ having equal right) and that they need to ditch the progressive side to win but to me, this is a bad take (and also seemingly foeget it is pretty hard to shaken a trump voter view, especially the msot radical one).

And that's why he apologized despite doofus bad action, I don't think doofus really wanted a lifelong rivalry either since he tookthe excuse, tho the classic villains were not interested in changing, even when scrooge was guenine and the villains got the choice to redeem (tho I do'nt see those 3 doing it, magica hate the mcduck too much to stop her feud and she was already a villain before meeting scrooge, ma and glomgold would still do their things, the duke still had schemes similar to the glomgold personna).

Or worst,some defend it for some reason despite how obviously evil it's depicted in star wars media since the first movie (they litteraly blow up a planet and are depicted as an oppresive dictatorship who commit plenty of crimes and can go against those loyal to it too, just look at crosshair for an example), I do feel some view the empire as way more competent than it really is because to me, the style of command the empire use is the kind that is going to get unqualified people in charge of things because it'll prioritize yes men and kill or discard those who make reports that aren't pleasing those above them , the sith order also feel self destructive to me because the rule of 2 garantee backstabing between mutiple sith to the point they can end taking each other out. The empire is also pretty overconfident in its abilities, letting weaknesses slip through its weapon or ship designs that can be exploited by those who oppose them.

Maybe I'm weird but while I'm fine with people disliking discord, I also find the getting away scott free take weird, usually when he mess there's going to be a character calling him out, even in a matter of principal twilight called him out over the fake quest and for the grogar stuff, his due was the trio backstabing him, him not having power and he still had to make up by helping the other escape. I find some discourses on discord pretty odd , even disliking/hating him don't justify some takes I've seen on him for me.

I think it's entirely ok to dislike a character but I'll start having issues with someone discourse if the person display double standard depending on wether they like the character or not. The way discord action can be portrayed by those who bash him can feel like that at times, especially when they're willing to have the mane 6 redeem the evil trio and give them a chance (but not discord, discord doesn't deserve that even after he helped the other escape without his powers) or give the evil trio more of a pass for their bad action when, while yes discord messed up by bringing them together, at the same time they still did things behind his back when they could choose not to and those things can be pinned on the trio itself. The show itself also didn't let discord get away scott free to me, he still ended being backstabbed and had to make up by helping the other escape.

I'll also find it weird when people critcize a character they don't like behavior when if the character they like does it, it's fine (the odd take about scrooge putting a life jacket on webby implying he'd be a bad dad while the same person give a pass to donald doing it) or some of the dipper and mabel discourse.

Again, it is fine to dislike characters but I tend to be against bashing as it can easily lead to misunderstand that character action or the story.

Maybe it's me but I find those kind of claims sus because they are way too often paired with a blood and soil rhetoric to justify russia ilelgaly annexing chunks of it (and also why specifically mention ukraine when all langage are made up and evolved over time , my own did per example).