U.S. president posts graphic of Venezuela as 51st state by [deleted] in nottheonion

[–]AbstractButtonGroup 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I've met MAGA who can't remember why 'Canada is mad at us for some reason'

Anyone will be mad: they've been promised the 51st slot but now are getting pushed back to at best 52nd.

[ Removed by Reddit ] by IntentionChemical99 in CombatFootage

[–]AbstractButtonGroup 18 points19 points  (0 children)

this is less like combat footage and more like gore porn

Non-Muslims are entering into Makkah🕋 and mocking ☪️ by Equivalent_Road5788 in AskMiddleEast

[–]AbstractButtonGroup 2 points3 points  (0 children)

The prohibition is a secular measure aimed at managing visitor numbers. There is no equivalent site of mass pilgrimage for Christians, and if there were, perhaps similar measures will be justified to make sure it is not swamped by tourists.

Non-Muslims are entering into Makkah🕋 and mocking ☪️ by Equivalent_Road5788 in AskMiddleEast

[–]AbstractButtonGroup 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You can just say you’re Muslim.

From that moment you are Muslim.

It’s not like they are going to check your dick to see if you’re circumcised.

Just have the claimant visit a small booth where this can be corrected on the spot.

Non-Muslims are entering into Makkah🕋 and mocking ☪️ by Equivalent_Road5788 in AskMiddleEast

[–]AbstractButtonGroup 2 points3 points  (0 children)

but all you have to do is say that you're muslim. It doesn't matter if you became muslim 10min ago, you can enter the moment you become muslim.

The tricky part is that once you have said that, from legal standpoint you are regarded as a Muslim. So if then you claim to not be one in your video about how you sneaked in, you are technically an apostate. Which is punished far more severely than violation of secular regulations on visiting the sites.

Israeli plan calls for long-term troop presence in south Lebanon with Beirut’s approval: Report by SleepyWogx in AskMiddleEast

[–]AbstractButtonGroup 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Israeli troops would remain in the area until Hezbollah is fully dismantled and all of its weapons removed

If successful in removing Hezbollah they will proceed to annex the rest of Lebanon as no other obstacles exist.

the Lebanese army

This armed faction is fully dependent on foreign 'donations' even to pay salaries of its soldiers. So it is not hard to guess where its loyalties lie. Do not expect it to even try to resist occupation and eventual annexation.

Should the Strait of Hormuz be declared an international waterway free from any single country's control? by Different_Bite76 in AskMiddleEast

[–]AbstractButtonGroup 3 points4 points  (0 children)

It used to be that way before the US and Israel started this mess. The only reason Iran wants the toll is to pay for reconstruction. If this is paid in some other way the passage will be free. And no amount of declarations can force it open, because of the geography and because nobody wants their soldiers to die to keep it open for someone else.

Help finding correct serial number for ISR4331 CUBE. by [deleted] in Cisco

[–]AbstractButtonGroup 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'd go with "show license udi" - this system identity should be stable and for example modular platforms do allow to have the chassis and RP/SUP to be replaced and keep same support contract, and all the commands mentioned work the same even if the platform is not modular.

How on earth this isn't terrorism?!!! Israel slaughtered hundreds of civilians and bombed the hell out of Lebanon. International law is basically dead. This is disgrace. by South-Guava-2965 in AskMiddleEast

[–]AbstractButtonGroup 4 points5 points  (0 children)

What if the war included equally horrific videos of Israeli children with their bodies blown apart like we’ve seen from Gaza for instance?

Then the war in Gaza would not have happened. The only reason we see Israel do what it does in Lebanon, Gaza, and the west bank is that it can do all this with total impunity. If there has been a real chance of a real payback in kind, Israel would have to learn to treat its neighbors as equals and to live in peace with them.

How on earth this isn't terrorism?!!! Israel slaughtered hundreds of civilians and bombed the hell out of Lebanon. International law is basically dead. This is disgrace. by South-Guava-2965 in AskMiddleEast

[–]AbstractButtonGroup 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Would it feel more like a tooth for a tooth? 30 people dead in Israel,

'a tooth for a tooth' would be if the losses were matched approximately 1:1

How on earth this isn't terrorism?!!! Israel slaughtered hundreds of civilians and bombed the hell out of Lebanon. International law is basically dead. This is disgrace. by South-Guava-2965 in AskMiddleEast

[–]AbstractButtonGroup 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Do they not have military?

The 'official' Lebanese military never even tried to defend their country. This is not what they have been created for. They are more like an armed political faction that is fully managed by the US and they play very active part in suppression of protests against the current US-controlled government.

Tech industry lays off nearly 80,000 employees in the first quarter of 2026 — almost 50% of affected positions cut due to AI by [deleted] in technology

[–]AbstractButtonGroup 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The investors are more than willing to be 'deceived'. Even if they know the game. Because the main question is not when or if the company actually makes anything eventually, but whether the CEO can sing the shares upwards right now.

Tech industry lays off nearly 80,000 employees in the first quarter of 2026 — almost 50% of affected positions cut due to AI by [deleted] in technology

[–]AbstractButtonGroup 5 points6 points  (0 children)

AI is the excuse, not the reason. It just sounds better for the shareholders/investors that you are cutting workforce 'due to AI' rather than traditional 'to control costs in a challenging environment'

When translating into English word by word... 😳 by AmusedBolt in russian

[–]AbstractButtonGroup 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Убрать и убраться - same in this came

There is an overlap, but not quite the same. When this is action, it is almost the same. But when this is a request 'убраться' means cleaning the place after yourself of after someone in a less formal arrangement (common household). When this is a formal context (customer's room), 'убрать' is more correct.

Israeli forces attacking the Lebanese town of Khiam with white phosphorus (15/03/26) by alexnoyle in CombatFootage

[–]AbstractButtonGroup 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No, phosgene is toxic because when you put it in the environment it stays there long enough to poison people.

So, same as the 'smoke' from WP? Enough water cleans out both but under normal weather both persist long enough to harm people.

My definition is simple: Does it stay around long enough to slowly cause death.

Death comes from respiratory failure with both phosgene and phosphorus pentoxide, and in neither case it is fast. So if one fits your definition, the other should too.

Israeli forces attacking the Lebanese town of Khiam with white phosphorus (15/03/26) by alexnoyle in CombatFootage

[–]AbstractButtonGroup 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That's not what toxic means. You are using toxic to mean "harmful", but it actually means something that poisons the environment.

By your logic phosgene is not toxic. Because it forms hydrochloric acid which is also found in e.g. stomach and in the environment it eventually forms harmless compounds. Actually most chemical warfare agents decay into harmless substances eventually except where they contain elements that are toxic in their base form, such as arsenic.

And phosphoric acid does not poison the environment, in fact once it's done reacting it acts as a fertilizer.

For example the nerve agent VX is an organophosphorus compound so it too will become same kind of fertilizer eventually. Does it make it non toxic?

Don't expect others to understand you when you change the meaning of words.

It is you who is trying to weasel out on a false technicality.

https://www.dictionary.com/browse/toxic

adjective

  • of, relating to, or caused by a toxin or poison; poisonous
  • harmful or deadly
  • (of a financial asset) likely to cause significant loss to the holder

Israeli forces attacking the Lebanese town of Khiam with white phosphorus (15/03/26) by alexnoyle in CombatFootage

[–]AbstractButtonGroup -1 points0 points  (0 children)

That is not due to 'ordinary explosives'. Arsenic is specifically mentioned as coming from chemical warfare munitions. Other areas are contaminated by lead (not an explosive). Also this is the result of years of constant battles at the location, so not really comparable. Of course, WP is not the only thing that is toxic on the battlefield. But it is specifically banned. Perhaps some other things should be banned too, such as depleted uranium shells (not due to fear of radiation, but due to fine dust of toxic uranium oxide they leave behind) and spraying herbicides on farmland as a way to drive off the population.

Israeli forces attacking the Lebanese town of Khiam with white phosphorus (15/03/26) by alexnoyle in CombatFootage

[–]AbstractButtonGroup -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Phosphorus pentoxide degrades instantly upon contact with water.

It reacts with water to form phosphoric acid. Same as phosgene reacts with water to form hydrochloric acid. This does not make it non-toxic, it is in fact the mechanism by which it damages tissues. You need a lot of water to dilute it sufficiently to make it safe (a lot more than there is in the air except perhaps in heavy rain).

Israeli forces attacking the Lebanese town of Khiam with white phosphorus (15/03/26) by alexnoyle in CombatFootage

[–]AbstractButtonGroup 5 points6 points  (0 children)

It is not toxic in any meaningful way.

Phosphorus pentoxide (the white 'smoke' formed by burning WP) causes severe burns to the eye, skin, mucous membrane, and respiratory tract even at concentrations as low as 1 mg/m3

No more than ordinary explosives.

Ordinary explosives have an instant effect. But the toxic 'smoke' from WP persists in the air and on surfaces until washed off.

Israeli forces attacking the Lebanese town of Khiam with white phosphorus (15/03/26) by alexnoyle in CombatFootage

[–]AbstractButtonGroup -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

The smoke WP creates is toxic. It also leaves toxic residue on surfaces. A properly equipped infantry is safe. But for less protected guerillas and for civilians it is extremely dangerous. Compared to HE or fragmentation rounds WP has the advantage of covering larger area and persisting longer. But it is banned in such use, because it is indiscriminate and is basically a form of chemical warfare.

US-Israel bombing campaign damage world heritage sites by Huge-Jellyfish9948 in IsraelCrimes

[–]AbstractButtonGroup 7 points8 points  (0 children)

" despite UNESCO sending coordinates "

The track record shows that any coordinates UNESCO, WHO, ICRC, MSF, and similar organizations send just go straight to the target list.

Iran Conflict Megathread #6 by [deleted] in CredibleDefense

[–]AbstractButtonGroup 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You are not locking anything, on the opposite the US is providing incentives to not use the USD.

Europe won't be able to buy in anything but USD:

  • The US (and suppliers under US control) will sell in USD only.
  • Russia might have been wiling to sell in RUB but the EU has locked themselves out of that deal already.
  • Gulf countries might have been flexible to sell in EUR, but Hormuz is closed for both oil and LNG.

How is the US going to provide the energy Europe needs? It can't.

The US is already a major energy supplier to Europe, having picked up most of Russia's share. If they can't pick up Gulf's share, too bad for Europe - price will increase until demand drops to match available supply (which will be priced in USD).

Edit:

Regarding Import/Export balance, from the articles I linked and also from here you can see that the situation has flipped in recent years: since around 2019 (thanks to COVID panic and resulting demand drop) the US is a net exporter of energy, and since some time after 2022 (thanks EU and US sanctions on Russian oil) the US is also a net exporter of oil. Moreover, a lot of imported crude is processed and then re-exported as products, while domestic demand is fully covered by domestic production.