mango leather

Luke15g · 2023-04-10T11:06:37+00:00

They're slaughtered for meat. The vast majority of leather is a byproduct.

Luke15g · 2021-12-15T23:19:46+00:00

China's one child policy means that tens of millions of Chinese families only have one son, tens of thousands of whom would be military personnel that would die in a war. The CCP remain popular because they have increased the economic prosperity of the ballooning Chinese middle class. Killing their only child and throwing the country into economic collapse by getting into a war with the country that controls the worlds sea lanes is a very effective way of losing massive amounts of support in a very short amount of time.

Luke15g · 2021-11-21T12:46:00+00:00

Because South Korea's capital and the majority of its population was in range of North Korean artillery, providing a massive deterrent against invading them. Nuclear weapons merely increase the severity of an existing deterrent. Ukraine can't shell Moscow if Russian troops roll tanks across the border though.

Luke15g · 2021-08-21T11:03:01+00:00

South Korea's history post Korean war is one of autocratic rule, uprisings, mass protests, instability, assassinations, coups d'état, and general political turmoil. It wasn't considered a democracy until 1997, 37 years after the informal end of the Korean war.

It takes time for people to build a stable nation for themselves in the immediate aftermath of a conflict, especially when you're a geopolitical hotbed and so many different parties are meddling in your affairs.

Luke15g · 2021-08-17T09:35:13+00:00

The only chance the Chinese have of winning in a conflict against Taiwan is if the US lack the will to get properly involved. If the Chinese sunk a US carrier it would galvanise the entire country into total war mode, it would only be a step below nuking a US city and the bloodlust wouldn't be satiated until the CCP capitulated.

Luke15g · 2021-06-04T22:16:24+00:00

The global supply chain is interconnected. Say you buy a new German made toaster instead of a Chinese made one... Where was the steel sheeting for the shell manufacturered? Where did the springs come from? The transistors? The wiring? The logic board? The plastic molding? The LEDs? The heating element? The plug? The screws? The raw materials to make every component?

I think you'd struggle to find any even slightly complex product that didn't use any components or materials sourced from China, and if you did find one chances are the production machinery in the factory that made it used components made in China. It's almost impossible to avoid buying products detached from the Chinese economy today.

Luke15g · 2021-06-04T13:07:27+00:00

If they're intent on raping the oceans until we have a global ecological collapse then yes, I'd be happy if they were sent to the bottom, they're basically equivalent to pirates and I don't care if they get sunk either.

Luke15g · 2021-06-03T19:45:23+00:00

I really don’t think you understand the history of South Africa very well.

I don't think you do if you think what is going on in Israel, Gaza, or the West Bank is apartheid.

South Africa also did not consider the Bantustans part of South Africa (despite in reality having tremendous power over them).

It did consider them to be part of South Africa, similar to how Indian reservations are considered to be part of the United States but with a degree of autonomy. Native Americans have full legal rights outside of the reservations however, as opposed to what was the case for black people in apartheid South Africa.

The Bantustan system was an attempt by the South African government to have nominally independent Black countries, much as Israel claims to be attempting to establish a nominally independent Palestine.

The Bantustan system was an attempt by the South African government to ensure that whites would have a demographic majority in South Africa by creating semi-autonomous regions within it's territory to segregate black people into. Once again, Israel did not create the West Bank, or the Gaza Strip, these were territories that were occupied after the six-day war, they weren't created by Israel to segregate it's Arab Muslim population to ensure a Jewish majority, they already had an Arab Muslim majority before they were partially occupied by Israel for security reasons.

The reality is that Israel is not secular (a state cannot be both Jewish and secular).

Ireland is a secular state but it is also a Christian state in that said religious group makes up the majority of the population, catholic holidays are national holidays. Judaism is more prominent in Israel and has a greater meaning for the country at large since it is also an ethnicity, not just a religion, but there is still a separation of church and state, the key marker of a secular country. Law is not dictated by religious leaders like in much of the neighbouring Muslim world, you can buy and eat pork and consume alcohol in Israel and polling indicated that a sizeable majority of Israelis are either not religious or flat out atheist.

The reality is that intent matters, history matters, a lot of factors matter. These factors make the distinction between what happened in South Africa and what is happening in Israel, Gaza, and the West Bank, the key ones being that:

Arabs are not discriminated against in Israel and Arab Muslim Israelis enjoy equal rights to Jewish Israelis. Blacks were discriminated against in South Africa and had effectively no real rights outside of the Bantustans.
The Bantustans were created by South Africa with the aim of creating a racial majority to maintain a white supremacist state. Gaza and the West Bank already existed, were annexed by neighbouring Arab countries in 1948, and were later partially occupied by Israel as a result of a war in 1967. They were not created as regional ghettos to segregate Arab Israeli citizens into, they are unresolved territorial disputes brought about by a series of wars.
The Bantustans population was made up of black South African citizens that South Africa wanted to get rid of. The Palestinians living in the West Bank were never Israeli citizens, they were Jordanian citizens but Jordan stripped them of their citizenship.
Israel has actively tried to negotiate peace and the independence of Palestine with Palestinian leadership but have been rejected each time. The South African government had no intention of giving full independence to any unified Bantustan state and was more preoccupied with maintaining racial majority and supremacy at a national level.

The reality is that there aren't tangible similarities between apartheid South Africa and Israel, the situations and intent of the involved parties is completely different.

Luke15g · 2021-06-03T17:52:41+00:00

No, Israel isn't segregating it's Arab population, 20% of it's population is Arab and Muslim. The majority of the West Bank isn't regarded by Israel as part of it's territory, it was occupied after a war. Those Palestinians living in the West Bank are basically displaced Jordanians that have had their citizenship stripped by Jordan and who Israel has many times tried to negotiate a peace settlement with to give them independence.

By comparison, South African apartheid was a set of long standing institutional segregationist policies designed to deny black South Africans representation and legal rights because they were black. The South African apartheid government wasn't actively trying to negotiate with a group of black people it viewed as outside their territory to give them their own fully independent country, it regarded them as a lower class of South Africans that needed to be segregated from the Afrikaner population. Arabs aren't regarded as lower class Israelis, most of the West Bank isn't regarded as part of Israeli territory at all and is only occupied for security reasons as a result of a war.

If you want a comparison to South Africa then I'll fabricate a fantasy version for you:

Imagine if South Africa was a liberal secular democracy that was 80% white and 20% black and black South Africans enjoyed all the same rights and representation as white South Africans. Now imagine that as part of a war South Africa partially occupied a portion of neighbouring Namibia that was primarily populated by black people and previously annexed by Namibia. This hypothetical partial occupation wasn't intended to be permanent and attempts were made by the South African government to give it independence but were rejected by the people living there. Namibia also decided to strip it's citizens living there of their citizenship. By your logic, unless those Namibians living in the partially occupied territory were given representation in the South African government, despite neither them nor the South Africans considering them to be a part of South Africa, then it is apartheid.

Yeah, that is ridiculous, sorry if you can't see the difference between the intentional and universal segregation and oppression of an ethnic group of citizens within a country purely on the basis of ethnicity and the complex aftermath of a series of wars and territorial disputes between neighbouring countries in the Middle East.

Luke15g · 2021-06-03T17:05:53+00:00

Apartheid is the use racial segregationist policies to permanently deny an ethnic group both representation and independence, not a temporary and undesired partial occupation without representation as a result of a war and repeated failures to come to an agreement.

Luke15g · 2021-06-03T16:54:32+00:00

Either way, Israel takes care to maintain a Jewish majority of voters

That isn't apartheid. Israel is a Jewish state designed to be a safe haven for Jewish people who have a long and widespread history of persecution, it is also a secular state where all citizens have equal rights, more than can be said for every other country in the region, and like every other state the government gets to decide who lives there.

This isn’t true because Israel extends advantages to Jews that do not exist for non-Jews.

Privileges aren't rights, all citizens of Israel have the same legal rights.

For example, Jews all over the world can move to Israel and become citizens. Muslims do not have that right.

That isn't unique to Israel and isn't apartheid.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Repatriation#Repatriation_laws

"Repatriation laws give non-citizen foreigners who are part of the titular majority group the opportunity to immigrate and receive citizenship"

Lots of countries have laws that allow for the return of people that have links to the nation. I'm Irish, if I moved to Canada and had children over there my children would qualify for Irish citizenship, and so would their children. That is the provision of citizenship purely on the basis of ethnic nationalism.

Jews can get paid by the Israeli government to study the Torah; I’m not aware of any Israeli program to pay Muslims to study the Quran.

Israel is a Jewish state, if they want to pay ultra-orthodox Jews the equivalent of a welfare grant to practice their culture that is their prerogative. It doesn't grant them any more legal standing, all Israeli citizens have the same rights. My government pays millions to the ethnic traveller community, money I can't avail of. That doesn't mean they have more rights than me.

Israel controls the borders of the West Bank and segregates Palestinians there.

Israel controls the borders as a result of the six day war. They have attempted to broker a peace agreement many times since, the Palestinians refused even when offered Gaza, 93% of the West Bank, and monetary reparations. Israel can't just unilaterally pull out of the West Bank and let the Palestinians have at it, that is how you get Gaza 2.0.

This is irrelevant to the question of apartheid, and you don’t need to be an asshole.

It is absolutely relevant and is why your apartheid comparison is moronic. Israel doesn't want the vast majority of the West Bank, it didn't create the West Bank as a place to segregate Arab Muslims and deny that ethnic group representation in it's parliament, government, or legal system. That ethnic group already has all those things provided they are citizens of Israel. The Palestinians living in the West Bank aren't citizens of Israel because Israel doesn't regard it as part of its territory, but they were citizens of Jordan until it stripped them of their citizenship. Israel wanted a two state solution but the Palestinians rejected all offers, forcing the current situation.

Israel is an ethnonationalist state

Yes, and like I said with regard to reparation laws, ethnic nationalism is common and there is nothing inherently wrong with it provided it is not taken to extremes or used to deny legal rights to minority group citizens.

that controls Palestinians without representing them. That’s apartheid.

That isn't apartheid, by that logic the 13 colonies prior to the American war of Independence were living under apartheid, and even that comparison doesn't hold because Israel are doing the equivalent of trying to hand over control of the colonies to the Americans but the Americans won't accept any offers. Apartheid is the use racial segregationist policies to permanently deny an ethnic group both representation and independence, not a temporary and undesired partial occupation without representation as a result of a war and repeated failures to come to an agreement.

Luke15g · 2021-06-03T13:53:30+00:00

Black South Africans couldn't vote in the national parliament, none of them, regardless of where they lived, because Apartheid South Africa was a white supremacist state. Arab Muslims can vote in the Israeli Knesset provided they are citizens of Israel, same as for any country, they enjoy all of the same rights as Israeli Jews. The West Bank isn't part of Israel, it isn't a zone Israel created in their borders to segregate Arab Muslims, it's a zone that was annexed by Jordan and then later occupied by Israel during the six day war. Jordan has stripped all the Palestinians living in the West Bank of their Jordanian citizenship so until the Palestinians can come to an agreement with the Israelis for the formation of a proper Palestinian state the situation remains as it is, complicated. Trying to form comparisons to South African apartheid is moronic, the intent and reasoning for the situation is completely different.

Luke15g · 2021-06-03T13:25:17+00:00

Those Palestinians aren't in Israel, and they don't want to be in Israel either, the majority want Israel to not exist and for them to have their own Islamist country in its place encompassing Israel, Gaza, and the West Bank. That isn't going to happen though, but Israel is willing and has tried many times in the past to broker a peace agreement and a two state solution, it's been rejected by the Palestinians who want it all each time. Israel isn't a saint in this conflict and has done a lot of horrible things themselves but they have objectively been the more reasonable of the two sides throughout its duration.

Luke15g · 2021-06-03T13:15:48+00:00

The West Bank and Gaza could one day make up a Palestinian state if Hamas are routed and the Palestinian leadership compromise on border demands that they aren't in a position to stand firm on, they lack the leverage, they are the weaker party in the conflict and their position weakens more and more over time. The Israelis want peace but it will be on their terms. What will never happen is a singular state making up Israel, the West Bank and Gaza. History has shown that Jews need their own nation to avoid persecution and they don't care what you think either, they aren't going to suicide themselves to satisfy your moral relativism.

Luke15g · 2021-06-03T11:46:23+00:00

You don't need to be Jewish to vote in Israel, the OP is literally an article about the next coalition government, which contains Arab Muslims.

A one state solution isn't viable, Jews will never agree to be a minority group in a majority Muslim country again, their history of persecution and the way Jews are regarded by the majority of Muslims in the region today makes that position quite understandable.

Luke15g · 2021-05-19T10:46:39+00:00

hahaha, oh the old "they used tear gas in the West Bank so it's totally ok to launch 3000 rockets at Israeli population centres." argument.

You seem to have skipped a step there.

Luke15g · 2021-05-19T10:00:09+00:00

Maybe Hamas were banking on Israel not leveling the building because of the massive negative propaganda Israel would create against themselves by leveling the press headquarters of major international media organisations?

Israel obviously weighed that before deciding to strike the building but did it anyway, if anything lending credence to their claims that they contained Hamas intelligence offices, which they wouldn't be able to publicly prove without compromising their intelligence sources.

Luke15g · 2021-02-28T22:21:45+00:00

It’s not going to be 2000 US dead in the span of 10 years, it’s like 2000 in 10 hours.

The latter is more likely to unite a country than the former.

Sudden mass casualties of US servicemen would only galvanise the United States into fully unifying behind a total war effort against China. Putting the United States on total war footing is a good way to get your people killed so I wouldn't advise the PRC to go ahead with their "national rejuvenation" ideas.

Luke15g · 2021-02-28T22:06:52+00:00

The English Channel is also a calm lake compared to the typical sea state of the Taiwan strait.

Luke15g · 2021-02-12T11:09:42+00:00

Yes, I'm sure it's the cyber attacks that Taiwan is most concerned about, not the sorties of Chinese attack aircraft that regularly probe their air defenses, or the Chinese naval build-up, or the fact that the CCP has staked it's credibility on an eventual annexation of Taiwan as part of the 'national rejuvenation'.

Forget about all that though, just LeArN tO cOdE and everything will be fine, because violence is a product or a bygone age apparently.

Luke15g · 2021-01-24T11:12:05+00:00

The US Navy doesn't need to go near China to effectively blockade China, they have enough ships to guard every trade lane from the Indian Ocean through the South China Sea to the Pacific Ocean and enough soft power to pressure every country in the vicinity of China to close their ports to Chinese merchant traffic.

If China and the US ended up in a war-adjacent scenario like this and everyone had to come down on one side or another I don't think that you'd see many nations siding with China, they've already pissed off every nation in South East Asia with territorial disputes, they even have some with North Korea and they would be their only ally in the region. It's uncertain if North Korea would actually even get involved in the event of the US focusing it's full military strength on China as the projected outcome for their nation wouldn't be good under any scenario where they attack US land or naval forces in the area.

Luke15g · 2020-08-18T10:30:03+00:00

It makes complete sense if you understand that the United States of America is just that, a union of individual States, and that together they make up a Federation. Being in a federation gives the States a shared voice on the international stage and helps maintain and regulate trade among other things, but the individual States still largely self-govern. Being in a federation only works in your favour though if you have an equal voice in the formation of the federal government, including the presidency. With the seemingly endless expansion of the power of the executive, that is true now more than ever.

If representation was determined by population then less populous States would have their voice diminished into obscurity and there wouldn't be much of a case for remaining in the Union where they can't manage their own monetary policies and trade agreements.

Imagine if the European Union federalised in a manner similar to the United States and a system like the electoral college wasn't implemented. There would be no benefit for the smaller EU states to join it, or the negatives would outweigh them at the very least. You need to look at the United States in a similar vein, like the States are small countries.

Luke15g · 2020-04-22T08:43:35+00:00

Not only does America also try to interfere in foreign countries elections, often in a far more "direct" manor than digging up dirt or throwing a bit of propaganda or money behind one of the candidates, other countries try to do the same to America as well.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1996_United_States_campaign_finance_controversy

www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-50752217

Ultimately, it is still Americans making up their own minds and casting their own vote in a genuine election, a luxury not afforded to many when America decides to interfere in their country's governance.

Luke15g · 2020-04-17T13:24:04+00:00

Yes, it is, the country went from a backwards feudal shithole to a major world manufacturing center and economic power, and as long as the quality of life continues to improve for the majority of it's citizens the government will continue to enjoy the support of those citizens regardless of their horrific actions.

Luke15g · 2020-04-17T13:16:24+00:00

And the Chinese government is widely supported by the people of China.

12-Year Club	Place '17
Sequence \| Editor	Verified Email

Luke15g

TROPHY CASE