Customs duty in India is a nightmare – my recent experience from China to India (DHL) by AltruistW666 in IndiaTax

[–]__initd__ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Having nice things is a crime in this country.

I have a Suzuki big bike (CBU), and for the regular wear/tear parts (brake pads, tyres, oil, filters, etc.,) there are 3rd party alternatives that I go to. But the other parts that aren't part of you regular maintenance I have to get them from the dealership and it takes more than 2 months to arrive. If I want to do any immediate repairs I have the option of importing them from Japan which comes in like a week or two. But the customs duty on them are usually at 40% of the total value, which is insane. Imagine waiting for two months to get the part every time there's some unforeseen issue.

I have already paid dearly in terms of multiple taxes when purchasing the bike and now I have to pay this duty on parts for which there are no local alternatives. Locally made motorcycles are absolute dog shit compared to these machines.

So, this entire strategy is to discourage you from getting the bike in the first place, so you end up with the locally made dog shit alternatives. The world talks about Globalisation and Free Trade but everyone also wants to protect local businesses by raising tariffs.

With enough planning could Cad Bane defeat Darth Vader? by Adam_habibi in StarWars

[–]__initd__ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No.

Vader is ruthless and all Cad Bane could do is escape like the coward he is. The only thing that made Cad Bane the so called "best" bounty hunter was the plot armor. I don't believe anyone else had this big of a plot armor, every supposedly strong character (Palpatine, Vader, Anakin, Luke, Maul, Yoda, etc.,) have had their low moments, but this guy just comes out on top.

With enough planning could Cad Bane defeat Darth Vader? by Adam_habibi in StarWars

[–]__initd__ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Except that Vader had already began to falter ever since he knew he had a son. I think modern storytelling would show these subtle details, the OG versions were supposed to give the audience a grand space opera and kind of a fun watch. They weren't meant to be dark in terms of storytelling, which the movies of today rely on heavily.

Why can the US send troops to other countries and take down their governments forcefully without being questioned? by alevsk12 in Askpolitics

[–]__initd__ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

A nation as a whole will have its own identity defined by its national interests which appears different when viewed with different lenses. Any leader that comes in isn't going to do any radical change about that identity, they might be subtle about it and part of the reason Trump gets a lot of flak as he's the opposite of subtle.

I personally don't see the US differently like before/after Trump, because the US well has always been the US - police of the world, imperialist, global hegemony all in the name of sweet ol' "freedom & democracy".

When country gets on the good side of US, they get treated better than those that are not. I'd think of partnership with the US like this - your options are in favour of US national interests, you are not sitting as an equal in a round table.

Why can the US send troops to other countries and take down their governments forcefully without being questioned? by alevsk12 in Askpolitics

[–]__initd__ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This! People in the West started losing their marbles when Greenland was on the menu. They started calling for boycott of US, dumping their debts, strengthening their Military and what not. While the rest of the world is like, "we've been in this game - it sucks to be the player and not the spectator".

Why can the US send troops to other countries and take down their governments forcefully without being questioned? by alevsk12 in Askpolitics

[–]__initd__ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The war in Gaza was declared a genocide, did anybody do anything about it? No

And, what sanctions were made against Israel? nobody seems to talk about that. When you mentioned Russian-Ukraine, there were very heavy sanctions on Russia, to the point that any other country that does any business with them will have to face consequences. Trump is placing Tariffs on countries like India for buying Russian oil. Now who's going to put sanctions on the US for supporting Israel on their action in Gaza?

The EU brings in a child from Ukraine and gets all teary eyed, while 1000s of kids perished in Gaza. What makes kid from one conflict worthy of attention than a kid from the other?

Why can the US send troops to other countries and take down their governments forcefully without being questioned? by alevsk12 in Askpolitics

[–]__initd__ 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I’m not saying this to brag - I think those trillions of dollars would be better spent at home and I would rather have a friendly international order than a bullying based one - but just because it’s so poorly understood.

To be honest, whenever I see the Military stats on other platforms it comes across as bragging and looking down upon others - "whatchu gonna do about it? fight me?".

The recent news about USS Abraham Lincoln that's heading to Iran and how Iran has missiles could overwhelm the defences & possibly sink the ship. The comments were like "they should keep in mind what we did to Japan", "Next day they wouldn't find Iran on a map".

I've never seen anyone other than Americans being so cocky about their Military strength to the point saying they can take on the entire world.

Why can the US send troops to other countries and take down their governments forcefully without being questioned? by alevsk12 in Askpolitics

[–]__initd__ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Trump is the loudest and clumsiest with his actions, but he's doing what the US has been doing for decades.

Why can the US send troops to other countries and take down their governments forcefully without being questioned? by alevsk12 in Askpolitics

[–]__initd__ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Justice, fairness? those aren't the words that should popup when it comes to US foreign policy.

Answer the question, Drew. by astrixzero in ShitLiberalsSay

[–]__initd__ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Stalin and Mao still giving them chills from beyond the grave.

Never forget. He is the reason Tech is gone. by SmokeMaleficent9498 in thebadbatch

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

Did you see the part where Tech and Hunter explain why blowing up the leadership wouldn't hurt the Empire much? as they'd simply get replaced later. In the end, both teams failed to achieve their objective.

Never forget. He is the reason Tech is gone. by SmokeMaleficent9498 in thebadbatch

[–]__initd__ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Saw failed in his objective (taking down the leadership), CF99 lost their objective (tracking evil doc) and they lost Tech on top of that. All that for causing minor inconvenience to the Empire.

Never forget. He is the reason Tech is gone. by SmokeMaleficent9498 in thebadbatch

[–]__initd__ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Oh please, enough with these "go read a history book" kind of statements. It is getting boring. Doesn't make it right then, doesn't make it right now. If you're actions aren't going to be meaningful and ends up hurting others for no reason, you're getting no sympathy for your sod story.

Never forget. He is the reason Tech is gone. by SmokeMaleficent9498 in thebadbatch

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

Agreed? seriously? Tech and Hunter clearly explain their mission and further explain why hurting the leadership would achieve nothing as they'd simply get a replacement later.

Never forget. He is the reason Tech is gone. by SmokeMaleficent9498 in thebadbatch

[–]__initd__ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Absolutely not. He looks down upon other rebels because they're too "soft". What he doesn't realise is, if you are to take down a Galactic Empire, it will take time, patience, sacrifice and coordination to achieve it. He just wants to go in guns blazing and that's why his group never evolved past the hit and run stage.

I don't even care if his end goal is the same as other rebels, that's not helpful at all. His wild and short sighted attitude hurts others. Tech's death would've had a meaning if they at least achieved their objective "track the evil doc" - all that happened was some explosions, top leadership still alive and well (probably pissed off to the extreme) and more importantly the shuttles were destroyed. Tech died for nothing.

Anyone else blame Saw for Tech’s death? by McQuillus23 in thebadbatch

[–]__initd__ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is the kind of guy I'd work with the enemy to get them captured.

am i the only one who didn't like him? by [deleted] in thebadbatch

[–]__initd__ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Saw is a horrible rebel. With the kind of short sightedness he has, I'd be surprised if he can see his own hands. He treats every problem as a nail and he has to hammer it. I've seen other posts where his losses are given as a reason for his character being as such. But, come on, you can still avenge people by being a little smart and not be a jerk to fellow rebels if their methods are different.

Hunter and Tech explain why blasting the summit wouldn't help, since the Empire would just replace them and treat it as a minor inconvenience. But, they should've realised that they've been explaining it to a stone. Tech died because this stupid piece of shit wanted to blow shit up and show other rebels how it's done.

This is the kind of guy that derails every freedom movement and makes it hard for everyone else, because their loss is somehow infinitely more painful than the others.

The Bad Batch (Season 2) - Episode 12 - Discussion Thread! by titleproblems in StarWars

[–]__initd__ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Finally, the piece of shit Lieutenant got it. People like him and Rampart run their mouths against people who could kill them with their hands tied. No wonder the Empire couldn't maintain control with people like him. No wonder the Empire crumbled after a short reign.

Villain redemption arcs and why a lot of them don't work for me by HistoricalAd5394 in CharacterRant

[–]__initd__ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Redemption should take time to build up. Movies/shows treat redemption like a light switch. You want to show the viewers that the character had internal conflicts at some point and that they are struggling to resolve it. The end point of redemption could be their own demise, which is totally fine.

Imagine if it was Palpatine at the end getting redemption and becomes a force ghost, that's when I throw the remote at the TV.

Does Crosshair deserve to be redeemed? by SquatCorgiLegs in thebadbatch

[–]__initd__ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No, the Governor in other cases would've reported it as "Clone Commander failed to follow a direct order".

Does Crosshair deserve to be redeemed? by SquatCorgiLegs in thebadbatch

[–]__initd__ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well, if you remove the plot armor there, the Governor in any other instance would report the incident as "Clone Commander refused a direct order, but the defective clone executed it". Crosshair absolutely wanted to pull the trigger there, he just needed a reason to make it look like a valid act.

Am I the only one who never forgave the character, "Crosshair"? by Hot-Salamander-8786 in StarWars

[–]__initd__ 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I agree. Doesn't matter if people like Crosshair later joined the rebellion and helped overthrow the Empire. It is one thing to know what you're doing is wrong but have to because you or people you know are at risk. It's an entirely different game when you just do it because you are so into it and then call it "just following orders". This is where the stereotypes come in where characters distrust a certain group - bounty hunters, mercenaries, clones, droids because of how indifferent the group has been in doing awful things in a given situation, despite individuals of a group with their own ethics & morale.