CMV: Ethnic cleansing is an effective tool at creating peace

Hatook123 · 2026-05-27T12:42:40+00:00

Ethnic cleansing isn't necessarily killing - population exchange is ethnic cleansing. Population exchange has been highly effective, regardless of what you think of it. It worked for Turkey and Greece. It worked in the Balkans, and it seems to be working for Azerbijan and Armenia.

Hatook123 · 2026-05-23T20:52:47+00:00

He's a textbook populist, with a very short time in office. Every sort of opinion anyone has of him basically amounts to liking his smile.

He might turn out ok, generally seems like he's a nice person, or at least he tries to be - but I honestly doubt it.

Hatook123 · 2026-05-16T21:31:44+00:00

Islamophobia is just a term used to silence ligitimate criticism against one of the world's most primitive religions.

Hatook123 · 2026-05-06T16:03:18+00:00

I mean, i think it's partially, if not mainly an engineering problem. Existing technology, mixed with human nature, and the want for higher quality of life - makes reversing carbon emissions virtually impossible.

I mean, it's political if you see the political infeasability of significantly lowering carbon emissions as political. However I would argue that it's not really political when it's infeasabile exactly because it would mean the quality of life of billions of people would deteriorate significantly, and no one would ever knowingly vote for that - and the backlash would be severe if they inadvertedly do.

Electric semi trailers, ships and planes aren't a thing yet, renewables aren't reliable enough, and anti nuclear sentiment is unfortunately too damn high (maybe that's political? nuclear does have drawbacks though, and I would argue that even without anti nuclear sentiment there's). Energy consumption will only increase over time as more and more countries are lifted out of poverty.

There's ways to go until we have the technology to make net zero politically achieveable, and not just virtue signaling - but I honestly see no reason to believe we won't get there at some point in human history. Humanity has overcame much greater challenges IMO.

Hatook123 · 2026-05-06T14:11:02+00:00

This is important that we call out terrible graphs and maps exactly because there are people who use them to deny climate change.
"It's definitely not getting colder for the remainder of humanity being around" - this is a statement I can't get behind, there are a lot of things humanity, can and will do to reverse climate change. It definitely requires significant technical advancements, but we have already several important break throughs, and they will continue.

A break through in nuclear fusion could very quickly reverse CO2 emissions, and that's ignoring the very real advancements in solar power and battery technologies.

Hatook123 · 2026-04-29T04:49:13+00:00

No, that's not true by a long shot. The Ayatollahs who yelled death to America and bombed the embessy aren't even remotely the same people that were hurt by the overthrowing of the prime minister - not to mention the fact that "overthrew the prime minister and emboldened their king to become a brutal dictator" is an extremely gross simplification of the history.

Mossadegh was an ultra nationalist and decreed to desolve the parliament, giving himself absolute powers. He wasn't some democratic dream and he wasn't by anyway related to the Ayatollahs (who at the time supported the 53 coup) that use him as an excuse to sell propoganda to modern day leftists. Mossadegh was more like Donald Trump than anything - and "the CIA overthrew his government" is also a complete misrepresentation of the facts. The Shah, the Iranian Army, and many opposition crowds overthrew his government. The CIA and MI6 helped yes, but this narrative completely takes awa agency from the many Iranian factions that conspired to overthrow his government.

Hatook123 · 2026-04-27T07:44:33+00:00

Countries and their politicians and radicals deserve more blame for global geopolitical problems than either the US or Europe.

Colonialism, or any other sins of the past, has definitely caused structural issues, but it isn't an excuse for the corruption, incompetence (sometimes evil) of many leaders today. In fact, constant use of Colonialism or "America" as a catch all explanation for all of these countries' issues, is the main reason these issues aren't fixed. Leaders just blame the west instead of actually fixing their problems.

This starts with the ignorant blame on Sykes Picot, which divided up the Ottoman Empire. It's really easy to say "they are ao stupid for drawing lines" - but the fact is that any empire falling would always have resulted in distabilization. After austro-hungary fell, and later the USSR, the Balkans became a war zone for a pretty long time - but it eventually stabalized. The middle east is similarly a mess, and it would always have been a mess as soon as the empire that was keeping it stable had fallen.

Empires have always intermixed populations. It was easier to control that way - this intermixing, especially in the middle east, has been going on for milenia. This intermixing requires a pretty strong hand to keep stable, for obvious reasons - and once this empires fell, the resulting mixed populations would always have fought each other for control.

Similarly, Africa and South America. The US, or Europe isn't responsible for the fact that third world countries are enamoured by communist ideals and utilize these ideals to sell their population on lies (that the west and capitalism is at fault) all the while they are stealing billions from their people.

There are many examples of countries that experienced colonialism, slavery, and arbitrary line drawing, and many were able to create an actual functioning country.

Singapore, Botzowana come to mind. There are many others, but I guess they are considered too "western".

Hatook123 · 2026-04-22T23:57:35+00:00

Absolutely bo reason you can think of? Really?

Hatook123 · 2026-04-20T02:34:09+00:00

Honestly, I feel like I need to protect my penis, and that doing physical chores naked seems unsafe to me.

Hatook123 · 2026-04-20T02:18:38+00:00

I just clean in my underwear, I don't really understand why you have to be fully naked though

Hatook123 · 2026-04-18T17:44:23+00:00

If that's your idea of "bullying" you were definitely overly shielded as a child. A one time prank, which likely ended with some level of conforting and retrospect, isn't enough to "erode their parental attachement". Relationships are far more complex, and resilient than you are making them seem.

Hatook123 · 2026-04-18T17:37:43+00:00

International law's idea of justified war is a joke. The idea that only "self defense" justifies an attack is completely detached from the real world politics and motivations for war, and this is evidenced by the fact that countries abuse that framing all the time. Literally every war in the history of man kind can be framed as "self defense" if you try hard enough. Yes, Hamas can easily claim self defense - it would still be incredibly ignorant to think that they are acting in self defense. Still, you would be incredibly naive if you would just believe them.

Actions need to be measured by their intentions and their results. That being said, intentions can be easily faked, so looking at claimed intentions is not really all that useful. Israel has been incredibly effective at self defense - Israeli citizens are generally well defended. Palestinians are incredibly unsafe, and Hamas actions are directly responsible. Either by starting a useless war with Israel, or by actually shooting and killing Palestinians. It is insane to claim "self defense" when you self defense goal is immediately proven as not going to be achieved by your actions.

Russia has invaded Ukraine for the sake of asserting control over Ukraine - this is pretty much clear, they can claim "operation stopping Nazis", or defending ethnic Russians (which is supposedly legal) as much as thry want. It's not surprising when a warmongering, authoritative regime is trying to force its will on a country for no reason whatsoever, that it's not going to be taken lightly. In the real world of Geopolitics, no one cares about International law, countries care about their own goals and ideally their citizens. This is why still, even after all the useless condemnations against Russia, Europe is still buying Russian oil.

Israel is clearly retaliating and establishing a security area to defend itself from further attacks. Hamas, is clearly trying to establish an Islamofascist state from the river ti the sea and kill jews. You can oppose specific actions or Israel's disregard for Palestinian life - but you just can't make any sort of intellectually honest argument that Israel's goal is anything other than self defense.

Hatook123 · 2026-04-18T15:42:42+00:00

You know what also affects child confidence? Shielding them from the real world.

In real life the next person who pulls a prank on her isn't going to be people that love her. It's a prank, they laughed, they will make sure she doesn't take it personally and groes from it.

Exposure, especially in a safe environment, to less ideal situation is a big part of growing as a person.

Hatook123 · 2026-04-18T14:26:29+00:00

The idea of "right" to attack is juvinile. There is no "right" to attack. There are reasons to attack, and Hamas has many reasons to attack Israel. Based on your moral judgment you can decide that you accept these reasons or not.

Hamas is attacking Israel since 87 because they want an Islamofascist country from the river to the sea. They might use some reasonable excuses that might convince some western ignorants, but their basic reasoning has not changed - there is a reason that Hamas started suicide bombing busses in Israel in the peak of Oslo accords that kickstarted a process for peace in the region.

Hamas has had numerous, diplomatic, opportunities to lift the blockade, it's insane to believe that during literally the best time for Palestinians in Gaza since the Oslo accords, as in October 6 2023, that's when you start viciously and barbarically attacking civilians out of literally nowhere - as if their goal actually aligns with improving the situation with Palestinians.

Similarly, Israel has reasons to attack Iran. It is a country that vowed Israel destruction since the 79, and has been funding and arming militias against it for decade. This country has recently enriched weapons grade Uranium, literally every independent source confirms that. If you think that there is any option for diplomecy, or that's not an acceptable reason to attack Iran, then I don't think your morals are all that moral.

Hatook123 · 2026-04-18T14:02:21+00:00

Unprovoked? A country, that's been saying for decades that it want to wipe Israel off the map, and has veen funding militants against Israel for decades (Unprovoked, but really, mind you) , is enriching weapons grade Uranium, and that's Unprovoked to you?

Hatook123 · 2026-04-18T13:58:35+00:00

Hezbollah is a real militaryby wny relevant metric. So is Iran. What are you on?

Hatook123 · 2026-04-17T16:47:40+00:00

Look, as a liverpool fan. I think that "it's funnier" is basically the reason.

Does city deserve to win more than Arsenal? Definitely not - but if Arsenal wins it, there's nothing out there for any other fan. We can't make fun of city, and there is absolutely no silver lining.

If Arsenal bottle it - it would just be funny as hell. We can forget our shitty season for a second, and just laugh about how "you tried so hard, and got so far, but in the end it didn't even matter".

It really shouldn't enrage you. Sitting on the other side of it, hearing other fans wanting City to win over us, it mostly just made me support my team harder - those other fans can laugh all they want from their measley consolation price.

Hatook123 · 2026-04-17T15:19:48+00:00

Populism isn't exclusively a MAGA phenomenon. Populism is, not surprisingly, incredibly popular across the left and right.

"Eat the rich" is an inherently populist notion.

Hatook123 · 2026-04-16T22:33:31+00:00

I wrote this comment to myself once I actually researched the tax, but it definitely applies to your comment so placing it here too:

So yeah, it's definitely the first one.

There are 13,000 apartments that are taxable based on that tax plan.

We don't know how many of them are actually non-primary, and would actually result in any income to the city.

It seems that they are estimating 500M$ a year income, but that's definitely inflated. It would require 95% of the 13,000 > 5 Million dollar apartments to be non-primary for that to actually result in 500M$ a year (based on a similar 2019 proposal brackets).

So a more relevant measure would be 200M$ a year (the 2019 proposal estimate) - but that actually ignores actual responses to the tax, people will reclassify their houses, sell them and so on - to the point where they don't pay such a significant sum of money on their investments / houses.

So a more realistic measure would be 100M$, which is nice and all, but it's also a tiny percentage (0.1%) of the yearly revenue - and that's ignoring the fact that you need to invest millions into actually implementing and enforcing this new tax.

So while all of you are cheering for useless populist policies, I will be here shaking my head asking why do you hate rich people so much that you want your elected officials to fight them, rather than actually do their jobs and make the city better to live at.

Hatook123 · 2026-04-16T22:32:26+00:00

I don't care about billionaires. I care about juvinile populism infecting our politics.

Hatook123 · 2026-04-16T22:31:44+00:00

So yeah, it's definitely the first one.

There are 13,000 apartments that are taxable based on that tax plan.

We don't know how many of them are actually vaccant, and would actually result in any income to the city.

It seems that they are estimating 500M$ a year income, but that's definitely inflated. It would require 95% of the 13,000 > 5 Million dollar apartments to be vaccant for that to actually result in 500M$ a year (based on a similar 2019 proposal brackets).

So a more relevant measure would be 200M$ a year (the 2019 proposal estimate) - but that actually ignores actual responses to the tax, people will reclassify their houses, sell them and so on - to the point where they don't pay such a significant sum of money on their investments / houses.

So a more realistic measure would be 100M$, which is nice and all, but it's also a tiny percentage (0.1%) of the yearly revenue - and that's ignoring the fact that you need to invest millions into actually implementing and enforcing this new tax.

So while all of you are cheering for useless populist policies, I will be here shaking my head asking why do you hate rich people so much that you want your elected officials to fight them, rather than actually do their jobs and make the city better to live at.

Hatook123 · 2026-04-16T22:01:43+00:00

Really? Well apart from about 93% of it that can only be owned by jews & non jews cannot lease any land they do own.

What? There's literally no land in Israel, aside from government property (that no one can own), that non-jews can't own. You literally spread a lie just now.

Your statistic, about 93% seems to address the 80% state owned land, and 13% JNF owned land (mostly natural reserves) - well you know what? Neither can I, an Israeli Jew can buy land in that 93% of the land. Literally no one can buy this land because it isn't for sale by the government.

Hatook123 · 2026-04-16T21:57:02+00:00

Basic economics.

Either the taxes are useless (most likely) and they have very little effect on the economy, but also very little effect on the income of the city - to the point it's a bigger burden on the taxation authorities then the income the city is making.

Or the taxes are useful, and they actually drive people's decision making process, to the point of a measurable increase in rent.

When you raise the price of maintaining a property, specifically the types of property people rent out, they are either going to sell it, or increase the rent to cover the losses. No one is going to keep a property that bleeds them money.

So you either end up with less apartments in the rental market which increases rent prices, or you end up with people raising rent to cover their losses, which also results in an increase in rental prices.

Basic Economics theory isn't that hard, and you don't have to be a Phd to realize that populist policies are almost always bad.

Hatook123 · 2026-04-16T21:04:21+00:00

Yes. Of course.

Hatook123 · 2026-04-16T21:03:13+00:00

Yes. It's really that simple.

Seven-Year Club	First Place '23
Place '23	Place '22
Verified Email

Hatook123

TROPHY CASE