They're the butt of a lot of jokes: everything from poor chain of command, infighting, lack of equipment, corruption, dishonesty leading to a failure to accurately asses the situation, franken vehicles, and bizarre orders like digging trenches near Chernobyl or fortifying against beach landings. My personal favorite is a Ukrainian soldier talking on russian comms and telling them to just surrender. They tell him to shut up and continue communicating tactical plans. A real facepalm moment.
To expand on why Aunt Jemima was racist for those that don't know: She was a stereotype of a servant caretaker, a caricature and not a person. Uncle Ben was the male servant version.
Both were designed to be acceptable to southerners who still think black people should be servants even if they are no longer slaves. It was intentional, not accidental.
Hmm. I'm unsure of the "self-identifying" part, as I've mostly heard corrections coming from Romani people themselves. Secondly, the joke seems a slippery slope toward apologist antics.
Romani are spread throughout the world and have different preferences based on how slurs are used and whether they want to cede certain terms to racists or keep them. Some still identify as gypsy for personal reasons and should be respected for that while not using the term by default. Treat it like the word queer for LGBTQ+ folks, only use it if that is their preference.
Also, there are other nomadic people that. Romani, and the usage as a slur includes using one term for all groups instead of recognizing the diversity.
We're on NCD so I try to make this sound like overblown russian copium. Denying what happened and the "minor damage" is part of the joke that it is "completely destroyed" because Russia lies and makes subsequent attacks just as unexpected as the first, a reference to the shock factor of Himars strikes.
I've only ever been a government contractor, never military myself, but you quickly learn that some acronyms were destined to be enunciated as-is, rather than spelt out.
He's assuming that because that's what he would do in this situation, because he has the critical thinking skills of a spanner. He thinks every other politician is like him, he doesn't get that most of them are basically just constantly playing in a personality contest, which is something he's never had to do.
There's basically flat support for the war at the moment, there isn't really any interest in removing support and there isn't really any interest in granting additional support (actual military intervention, WMDs). As long as Europeans are not adversely affected by the existence of this war, the support isn't going to go anywhere.
If somebody were to turn up with some actual evidence that say we could have built 30,000 houses but instead we sent Ukraine 20 missiles, or whatever, then maybe that would turn the tide, but I don't think anybody has that data because in most countries military spending is pre-allocated.
You do realize that the vast majority of the dollars from various countries' Ukrainian war support programs doesn't actually leave the domestic economy, right? Take the US for example; America says it'll send 50 billion USD of defense equipment, America sends that amount of equipment from it's current sites, it then buys new stuff from domestic manufacturers to replace what is now absent.
This is what is happening across Europe, as well. Ukraine gets stuff that's old, but still good enough to embarrass Russia's weapons platforms, while the donating country gets to outfit it's forces in even newer shit.
I'm 100% for giving Ukraine weapons to defend their country and European freedom indirectly. That our old weapons are better that current russian weapons is an unexpected delight
It's Western lies. Ukraine never had ATACMs. The minor damage to 8 helicopters, an ammo depot, and more was caused by tactical Ukranian gypsy witches.
(ai)
Why is that optic 6 inches off the top of that AK?
Don't question the witches' ways.
Maybe they've got a sensitive neck?
Ergonomics
Common Uklannian L
Rifle is fine
One on the left has a bipod wider than her height
Skyscraper mounts are optimal passive engagement biomechanics, as Garand Thumb's dad would say
AI is going to doom us all, I swear
nine helis
Baba Yaga, baba ganoush I'll take either
Houses with chicken legs are surprisingly stealthy.
Isn't "gypsy" a racist slur?
Generally it is used that way by anyone not self identifying.
Here it is used in hyperbole that seems to me as mocking the stereotype due to context and Russia being the obvious butt of the joke.
They're the butt of a lot of jokes: everything from poor chain of command, infighting, lack of equipment, corruption, dishonesty leading to a failure to accurately asses the situation, franken vehicles, and bizarre orders like digging trenches near Chernobyl or fortifying against beach landings. My personal favorite is a Ukrainian soldier talking on russian comms and telling them to just surrender. They tell him to shut up and continue communicating tactical plans. A real facepalm moment.
It's also used as the name of a sauce over where I live
Yeah, and here in the States we used to have Aunt Jemima. Didn't make it any less racist AF. π
To expand on why Aunt Jemima was racist for those that don't know: She was a stereotype of a servant caretaker, a caricature and not a person. Uncle Ben was the male servant version.
Both were designed to be acceptable to southerners who still think black people should be servants even if they are no longer slaves. It was intentional, not accidental.
100%
Mmmm. Moth juice.
Hmm. I'm unsure of the "self-identifying" part, as I've mostly heard corrections coming from Romani people themselves. Secondly, the joke seems a slippery slope toward apologist antics.
Romani are spread throughout the world and have different preferences based on how slurs are used and whether they want to cede certain terms to racists or keep them. Some still identify as gypsy for personal reasons and should be respected for that while not using the term by default. Treat it like the word queer for LGBTQ+ folks, only use it if that is their preference.
Also, there are other nomadic people that. Romani, and the usage as a slur includes using one term for all groups instead of recognizing the diversity.
I completely agree, and thanks for clarifying!
We're on NCD so I try to make this sound like overblown russian copium. Denying what happened and the "minor damage" is part of the joke that it is "completely destroyed" because Russia lies and makes subsequent attacks just as unexpected as the first, a reference to the shock factor of Himars strikes.
I apologize for any offense.
I hear ya, and no offense taken at all!
If there was any offense, it was russian offense, so it happened but it wonβt go anywhere.
They really named the missiles "attack 'ems" huh
Well they said we couldn't call them Fuck 'ems anymore
Fully Knowledgeable Missile System.
You know, because it knows where it is.
Precisely because it knows where it isn't!
We need to start development on the FNDOUT missile sytem.
I've only ever been a government contractor, never military myself, but you quickly learn that some acronyms were destined to be enunciated as-is, rather than spelt out.
"ATACMS" was just so natural
Losses aren't real. Russian air force aren't real.
strike on Berdyansk took out 9 helis, SAM site, ammo depot and some other things, and we don't know anything about strike in Luhansk
so yeah, soon
#Ruzzia has to be running out of #copium by now.
I think they assume that Ukraine support will wane over time, that the West will get distracted and stubborness alone will turn the tide.
He's assuming that because that's what he would do in this situation, because he has the critical thinking skills of a spanner. He thinks every other politician is like him, he doesn't get that most of them are basically just constantly playing in a personality contest, which is something he's never had to do.
There's basically flat support for the war at the moment, there isn't really any interest in removing support and there isn't really any interest in granting additional support (actual military intervention, WMDs). As long as Europeans are not adversely affected by the existence of this war, the support isn't going to go anywhere.
If somebody were to turn up with some actual evidence that say we could have built 30,000 houses but instead we sent Ukraine 20 missiles, or whatever, then maybe that would turn the tide, but I don't think anybody has that data because in most countries military spending is pre-allocated.
You could build a whole lot of houses instead of funding a war. But the houses will become someone else's.
You do realize that the vast majority of the dollars from various countries' Ukrainian war support programs doesn't actually leave the domestic economy, right? Take the US for example; America says it'll send 50 billion USD of defense equipment, America sends that amount of equipment from it's current sites, it then buys new stuff from domestic manufacturers to replace what is now absent.
This is what is happening across Europe, as well. Ukraine gets stuff that's old, but still good enough to embarrass Russia's weapons platforms, while the donating country gets to outfit it's forces in even newer shit.
I'm 100% for giving Ukraine weapons to defend their country and European freedom indirectly. That our old weapons are better that current russian weapons is an unexpected delight
Building housing is usually not a money issue, but a zoning issue.
peskov already cried that there's no point in supplying ATACMS if russia is losing. k we'll make sure it's losing harder
I'm assuming that, in this case, Russian air force history started in the 1990s
There where no Russia as it is today before December 1991, no matter what soveebs try to imply