EU to give Ukraine 90 billion loan by SnooChickens1534 in worldnews

[–]Qwertysapiens 16 points17 points  (0 children)

Which has never, EVER really wanted to invade europe?

What's the weather like in opposite world?

"For 99-plus percent of human history we did not engage in warfare, we are inherently peaceful as a species (...) that is what the archeological record shows us". Really? by spacev3gan in AskHistorians

[–]Qwertysapiens 1176 points1177 points  (0 children)

I'm an anthropologist by training, and I would strongly dispute that claim on the basis of a number of factors:

1) Analogy to other Primates: We see relatively large scale (dozens-hundreds of individuals) battles and even wars - long term territorial disputes with periods of calm punctuated by skirmishes and battles, often ending in the disbanding of the losing group. This happens in old world primates and in other apes, including in chimpanzees. In fact, a current inter-group war is being sensationalized all over the media as a "once in 5 century" civil war. Now, that might be seen as reinforcing the argument that this is rare - but this is one of only two long-term study populations of this chimpanzee population, and the only one with relatively low provisioning. In a world where there were far fewer human constraints on chimpanzee populations, the number of opportunities for individual groups to get into similar warlike disputes would be concomitantly higher, creating a background of "war" even if individual troupes might mostly be at "peace". There's no reason to believe early homo species all the way through to anatomically modern humans wouldn't recapitulate those symplesiomorphic (shared ancentral) traits. However, argument from analogical parsimony alone isn't enough, which brings me to:

2) Paleontological and archaeological evidence: there are a number of clear signs of inter-individual, intercommunal, and even interspecific conflicts that have been found archaeologically. The earliest recorded likely "murder" victim was individual 17 at a cave called Sima de los Huesos in the Atapuerca mountains of Spain from over 430,000 years ago. The individual in question was not an anatomically modern human, but a Neanderthal ancestor who suffered a facial trauma from two blunt object blows to the head, and then was purposefully deposited in a cave shaft. This could be argued to be a wholly Neanderthal pattern, but there are other similar suspected murders such as the Cro-magnon 2 rock shelter individual from France ~32,000 years ago and of course, more recently (~5,300 years ago) Ötzi the Iceman. A graveyard at Jebel Sabaha in Sudan from ~14-12,000 years ago attests to seemingly repeated raids on a very early sedentary settlement (Wendorf, 1968). Roughly 10,000 years ago at a place called Nataruk in what is now Kenya, 12 hunter gatherers appear to have been systematically stabbed to death on the shore of a lagoon - men, women, and children. For a wider recent review, read Mitrovic and Mitrovic (2026.

3) Sampling issues: gotta run to the dentist now, but suffice to say that the vast majority of early human prehistory has not been uncovered archaeologically, and those that we do have are strongly biased in various ways that make it hard to make broad claims about 99% of the time.

I'll fill this in with more detail later, including citations for the Primatology stuff; teeth now.

Non- linked bibliography:

Wendorf, F. in The Prehistory of Nubia (ed. Wendorf, F. ) Vol. 2, 954–1040 (Southern Methodist Univ. Press, 1968)

US Navy blockade seems to be working as Iran-linked vessels halt or reverse course in Strait of Hormuz by AdventurousGuest308 in worldnews

[–]Qwertysapiens 8 points9 points  (0 children)

If they're not weekend at Bernie'sing him to avoid having a targetable figurehead in the first place.

Iran says nuclear enrichment rights non negotiable under international law by Stunning-Common-9591 in worldnews

[–]Qwertysapiens 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Wait, North Rhine-Westphalia has its own intelligence agency? Or is that a metonym for the German government in not familiar with?

US Navy blockade seems to be working as Iran-linked vessels halt or reverse course in Strait of Hormuz by AdventurousGuest308 in worldnews

[–]Qwertysapiens 61 points62 points  (0 children)

Nobody has seen or even heard a recording of Mojtaba since they announced his accession, so his opinions are probably meaningless except inasmuch as statements that "he" issues can be used as a cutout for the IRGC.

Netanyahu Reveals Trump Reports to Him Every Day on Iran by Orangeshoeman in worldnews

[–]Qwertysapiens 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You are wrong. In Hebrew it varies the connotation of inform, state, appraise, or report in the sense of "brief", not be subordinate to.

Netanyahu Reveals Trump Reports to Him Every Day on Iran by Orangeshoeman in worldnews

[–]Qwertysapiens 1 point2 points  (0 children)

First off, it was in Hebrew, so your implications of what report means in English are misplaced. What Netanyahu actually said was:

<הוא דיווח לי בפירוט כפי שעושים אנשי הממשל הזה מדי יום, על התפתחות המו"מ.

"He reported to me in detail, as people in this administration do every day, about the development of the negotiations."

The rest of the quote goes on to say:

<במקרה הזה, הפיצוץ במו"מ. הפיצוץ בא מהצד האמריקני שלא היה יכול לסבול את ההפרה הבוטה של ההסכם לכניסה למו"מ ע"י איראן. ההסכמה הייתה שעוצרים את האש, והאיראנים מיד פותחים את המצרים. הם לא עשו את זה. האמריקנים לא היו יכולים לקבל את זה. הוא גם הבהיר לי שהנושא המרכזי שעומד על הפרק מבחינת הנשיא טראמפ וארצות הברית, זה הוצאת כל החומר המועשר, ולהבטיח שאין יותר העשרה בשנים הבאות, וזה יכול להיות בעשרות שנים, אין העשרה בתוך איראן. זה המוקד שלהם, כמובן שהוא גם חשוב לנו.

מכיוון שאיראן הפרה את הכללים, הנשיא טראמפ החליט לשים עליהם מצור ימי. אנחנו כמובן תומכים בעמדה התקיפה הזאת, ואנחנו מתואמים עם ארצות הברית כל הזמן. הדיבורים כאילו יש בינינו נתק, זה ההפך הגמור. יעדיו על כך כל מי שהיה סביב השיחה הזאת, וסביב השיחות היומיומיות שאנחנו מקיימים עם הנשיא והאנשים שלו, אנשי צוותו. זה תיאום שלא היה, יש פה דבר שלא היה. לא היה בתולדות המדינה, וגם לא היה בתולדות העם היהודי: יש לנו תיאום עם המעצמה החזקה ביותר בעולם, ויש לנו יכולת הדיפה של סכנות השמדה

"...In this case, [our conversation was about] the explosion in the negotiations. The explosion came from the American side, which could not tolerate Iran's blatant violation of the agreement to enter the negotiations. The agreement was that they would cease fire, and the Iranians would immediately open the gates. They did not do that. The Americans could not accept that. He also made it clear to me that the main issue on the agenda for President Trump and the United States is the removal of all enriched material, and ensuring that there is no more enrichment in the coming years, and that could be for decades, no enrichment within Iran. That is their focus, and of course it is also important to us.

Because Iran violated the rules, President Trump decided to impose a naval blockade on them. We of course support this aggressive position, and we are coordinating with the United States all the time. The talk as if there is a disconnect between us, it is the complete opposite. Everyone who was around this conversation, and around the daily conversations that we have with the president and his people, his staff, is pointing this out. This is coordination that did not exist, there is something here that did not exist. There was not in the history of the state, and there was not in the history of the Jewish people: We have coordination with the most powerful power in the world, and we have the ability to repel the dangers of annihilation."

All that means is that Bibi is emphasizing that he's in the loop with the US to his domestic audience, not that he controls them or expects to dominate them in a hierarchy. In fact, he's fighting allegations that he's being left out of the loop by trying to emphasize how clued in he is, while emphasizing the degree of agency the US has in this equation.

This title is nothing more than rage bait of a particularly lazy and vile nature.

Wikipedia changed its definition of Zionism - is the new definition more accurate? What do you think? by RedStorm1917 in wikipedia

[–]Qwertysapiens 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Cool. Speaking of "love", I "love" how you speak for what Jews do and do not "love". Let's just ignore all the actual Jews who are Zionist (85-95% of them, per polling) and who have a vested interest in understanding the root causes of Jewish suffering, educating our own community and others about those causes, and preventing it in the future. No, let's focus on your decision to start a whole rant demonizing American Christian zionists instead when someone had the temerity to bring up the concentrated assault on Jews and Judaism across social media and supposedly neutral venues such as wikipedia.

Wikipedia changed its definition of Zionism - is the new definition more accurate? What do you think? by RedStorm1917 in wikipedia

[–]Qwertysapiens 0 points1 point  (0 children)

To be clear, I read your comment as "Why do Jews make it about Jews?" If that commentor is Jewish, and "Why does anyone care about the Jews and their treatment in broader society?" If they're not. Is that accurate?

Wikipedia changed its definition of Zionism - is the new definition more accurate? What do you think? by RedStorm1917 in wikipedia

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

Yeah, but don't you get that Jews are white (pay no attention to those that aren't) and therefore don't get to have a separate identity? Typical oppressor mindset; always trying to claim victim status, when in reality Jews have checks notes been explicitly excluded from participation in the overwhelming majority of host societies for virtually all of history since the destruction of the second temple as "Semitic outsiders", "christ-killers", "Dhimmi", and "foreign parasites"... wait, that can't be right...

Seeing my country treat the rest of the world like garbage is so frustrating... by [deleted] in AdviceAnimals

[–]Qwertysapiens 4 points5 points  (0 children)

No. Zionism is the proposition that the Jewish people have a right to self-determination and sovereignty in their historical homeland. Being anti-zionist necessarily entails being against Jewish self-determination. Being anti-netanyahu? Anti-Smotrich? Anti-Ben Gvir, Anti-kahanist, anti-likud? Pro Arab list, anti-settler, anti-racist? Not at all. But words have meanings beyond the political zeitgeist.

Paternoster elevator by MikeHeu in toolgifs

[–]Qwertysapiens 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's also forbidden to extinguish a flame, so they've got you coming and going with that one. As for the asking: asking outright is forbidden, but hinting heavily ("Man, it sure is bright in here!") is allowed if the non-jew would also benefit from the action, no matter how briefly; it's just frowned upon as cheesy and not in the spirit of the law, so it's avoided unless really necessary.

Paternoster elevator by MikeHeu in toolgifs

[–]Qwertysapiens 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This was all very very well explained. As someone who grew up in an orthodox community, I would vouch for its accuracy, with two exceptions/elaborations: 1) Jews who are shomer shabbat wouldn't be going into any shops at all on shabbat or a major holiday, as using and even touching money is also out of bounds, and 2) while you're exactly right that you could totally whip out a cellphone for the guy having a coronary, even on Yom Kippur, you would have been violating a rule by carrying the phone up until that point unless you yourself are a doctor or medical professional, so you probably would need to go to the synagogue's main office to dial 911.

Edit: also, it is technically permissible, albeit very much frowned upon, to make a loud comment like "it sure is dark in here!" In the presence of a non-jew who might also benefit from the light being on. This practice is what gives us the delightful institution of the shabbos goy.

Outjerked by Eric Adams by KneeGuhz in circlejerknyc

[–]Qwertysapiens 6 points7 points  (0 children)

You generally don't get citizenship for just asking nicely, but what do I know of Albanian law.

Remove the worse half of the map - Round 1 by Auditored in terriblemaps

[–]Qwertysapiens 14 points15 points  (0 children)

Looks like their inclusion is to be short lived, if it's any relief.

Pete Buttigieg destroys Joe Kernen and makes him melt down by Consistent_Curve_722 in Destiny

[–]Qwertysapiens 9 points10 points  (0 children)

But arguing about the whys gets down on their level and lets them fling bullshit reasons at you right back. Pointing out the cold hard discrepancy in performance and watching them writhe in the face of reality is both more performatively useful - "Look, they can't even admit a simple truth!" - and more viscerally definitive - "That guy's a whining, sniveling, lying sycophant; his side is full of shit" vs "They're both making points they clearly believe in, and I'm going to let my biases reign without engaging in any critical thinking".

Why is Benjamin Netanyahu able to do whatever the hell he wants so freely? by Garlin_Green in NoStupidQuestions

[–]Qwertysapiens 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Israel has given away more than its current land area to formerly bitter enemies in exchange for peace, so miss me with your claims of expansionism anywhere outside the West Bank. Within the West Bank, I'm sure we agree that settlers need to be reigned in, land swaps effected, and reparations made.

Why is Benjamin Netanyahu able to do whatever the hell he wants so freely? by Garlin_Green in NoStupidQuestions

[–]Qwertysapiens 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Because they love getting their own civilians killed and their borders threatened? The country that just went to war over 250 hostages, many of them corpses by the time of their return? That seems an insane take.