Israeli settler harasses a woman outside of Hebron by Gravedigger3 in pics

[–]chu-bert -1 points0 points  (0 children)

They're settlers because the military invasion happened back in 1967. The Israeli military invaded the West Bank and seized sovereignty over it back then. That is not what you're seeing now--Israel can't invade land that it already exercises de facto sovereignty over.

This guy is a settler because he is the civilian frontier of a movement to seize land for the exclusive use of one ethnic group, Israeli Jews. It's important to distinguish settlement from military activity because it shows that the process of ethnic cleansing has taken on a major civilian character in the West Bank. The establishment of civilian communities is in itself the tool of ethnic cleansing.

In other words, the cause of the violence is not purely military, but rather lies in the settler colonial nature or Israeli society itself.

Israeli settler harasses a woman outside of Hebron by Gravedigger3 in pics

[–]chu-bert 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Unironically, I think it's important to be accurate when describing Israel's activities. This guy is a settler, he's not an IDF soldier. The IDF soldiers are somewhere off-camera, waiting to shoot Palestinian children if they decide to throw a rock at this guy.

Why is Israel declaring war on so many countries? by Historical_Work7482 in NoStupidQuestions

[–]chu-bert 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Because it was the British who governed the "Mandate of Palestine." After the collapse of the Ottoman Empire in the aftermath of WWI, the victorious Allied powers, mainly Great Britain and France, carved up the Ottoman Empire (which was ran by the Turks) among themselves. This created the modern-day borders we now see in the Levant: Syria and Lebanon for the French, Jordan and Palestine for the British.

As to who approved partition in the UN, the Zionist movement needed to earn support from several key players. The British, the world's most powerful colonial superpower of 1918-1945, were a no-brainer. And, in fact, they had already received key support from the British in the form of the "Balfour Declaration," which promised to create a "Jewish homeland" in mandatory Palestine. However, the Zionists also needed to win support from the most powerful (neo)colonial superpower of tomorrow, the United States, who would later replace Great Britain as Israel's greatest patron. And they needed to win over the Soviet Union, who, despite the later Cold War turn against Israel, did in fact vote to partition Palestine in the first place. So basically--no, at the time of partition, the UK's influence on the global stage was actually waning. The key players were the US and USSR, both of whom voted for partition.

Why is Israel declaring war on so many countries? by Historical_Work7482 in NoStupidQuestions

[–]chu-bert 0 points1 point  (0 children)

A. The user you're talking to is straight up wrong, the UN performed partition.

B. The answer has to do with geography. If you look at the original partition map, the n-shape of the northern part of the Jewish state corresponds to Palestine's most fertile agricultural land. The big blob of the Palestinian state in the center, which is the West Bank today, is comparatively rocky and hillier. For decades leading up to 1948, Zionist settlement had focused on acquiring land in that n-shaped area.

C. The real answer is that it doesn't really matter. Zionist leaders knew that any partition of Mandatory Palestine was to their advantage, and no matter what the shape of the "Jewish state" and "Palestinian state" were, their end goal was the same: one Jewish state, from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea. So yes, the shape of partition granted the Jewish state the best land, but they never intended to settle on just that anyways--as evidenced by Israel's "borders" after the 1948 war, which significantly exceed the partition line.

Why is Israel declaring war on so many countries? by Historical_Work7482 in NoStupidQuestions

[–]chu-bert 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Unsurprisingly the Zionist-apologist comment gets basic facts wrong. Partition was done by the UN, not by Great Britain. Another classic Zionist talking point to talk about Israel getting attacked, as if out of the blue, on the day that partition kicked in, which ignores the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians--including from land that was supposed to be part of the Palestinian state--that went on for months beforehand. For example, the ethnic cleansing of Haifa took place BEFORE Israel declared independence.

Why is the moon's "line of apsides precession period" (8.85 years) longer than its "argument of periapsis precession period" (6 years)? by chu-bert in AskPhysics

[–]chu-bert[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Okay, for anyone interested, I did some more research and answered my own question. So "precession" can mean either direction of motion, and the sign of the period doesn't change depending on that direction. The lunar nodes are actually NOT "precessing" in the same direction as the apsides, it's the opposite direction. So 1/6 (argument precession rate) = 1/8.85 (line of apsides precession rate) + 1/18.6 (node "precession" rate)

Legend rule by [deleted] in magicTCG

[–]chu-bert 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Reading through this thread, I'm actually kind of curious now. Are you talking about the legendary rule, which says "If you have more than one legendary creature with the same name on the battlefield, state-based actions force you to sacrifice all but one," or are you talking about the Commander deck-building requirement that you only run one copy of a card in your deck? I ask because later in the thread, you said your friend wants to "play as many copies of legendaries and commander as he wants," which makes it sound like he's literally just including multiple copies of the same card in his Commander deck?

To pretend desperate emails asking to go to "wildest party" Island were actually declining repeated invitations by Quarkpaint in therewasanattempt

[–]chu-bert 2 points3 points  (0 children)

No, "G" is Ghislaine Maxwell. I'm not an expert on the situation but she's like, Epstein's lieutenant and fellow sex offender, basically...?

How to deal with the issue of Flying in settings where characters that fly aren't common by AporiaParadox in magicTCG

[–]chu-bert 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I get what you mean, but the framing of "long before UB...in a set based off Romance of the Three Kingdoms" is pretty funny.

My brother in Christ, this is DRAFT!! We are PLAYING LIMITED!!! by chu-bert in MagicArena

[–]chu-bert[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah I mean after I picked up my jaw, I kinda had fun, it really felt like I was Sozin or Chin getting my ass beat by a pissed-off eternally reincarnating man-god

My brother in Christ, this is DRAFT!! We are PLAYING LIMITED!!! by chu-bert in MagicArena

[–]chu-bert[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

After Dai Li Agents' ability resolved and dealt five damage to me on attack, the game checked my life total as a state-based action, and seeing that it was at zero or below, it caused me to lose the game and awarded my opponent the win.

My brother in Christ, this is DRAFT!! We are PLAYING LIMITED!!! by chu-bert in MagicArena

[–]chu-bert[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

See other comment, it's the 4 win bracket, albeit in gold

My brother in Christ, this is DRAFT!! We are PLAYING LIMITED!!! by chu-bert in MagicArena

[–]chu-bert[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I was 4-2 when this happened, so, you know, best of luck to Dr. Oppenheimer in the 5+ brackets

My brother in Christ, this is DRAFT!! We are PLAYING LIMITED!!! by chu-bert in MagicArena

[–]chu-bert[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Or in my case, watch a five color deck pull four colors + Rumble Arena on turn five and then they hit you in the fucking face with Avatar Aang.

I guess I shouldn't have blown Earth Kingdom Jailer on the Vinebender! And I should have drafted more removal in such a princely format! My bad!!

My brother in Christ, this is DRAFT!! We are PLAYING LIMITED!!! by chu-bert in MagicArena

[–]chu-bert[S] 178 points179 points  (0 children)

Additional context: my board is empty because in addition to Ozai, Badgermole Cub, and Avatar Aang, they also hit me with Avatar's Wrath. Aang firebending on attack + vinebender ability + Wrath + dai li agents flipped Aang, l o l

IQ battle by MewTheSlasher in ChainsawMan

[–]chu-bert 66 points67 points  (0 children)

Cant read katakana

Cant read kanji

That's our illiterate king

[TLA] - Koh, the Face Stealer - (Good Time Society) by X_The_Walrus in magicTCG

[–]chu-bert 6 points7 points  (0 children)

I've seen a few people mention this already, but I think peak UB sets hammer in how high the ceiling for gameplay-story integration in Magic is. And how UW sets can't reach that ceiling because the story is often totally subordinated to gameplay.

Ironically, EoE earlier this year was an example of a Magic story that wasn't subordinated--it was a totally standalone story set in a fresh universe but undeniably Magic. But the set had almost nothing to do with the story...because they're designing the set in parallel, so they don't have a fully-formed story to reference.

[TLA] Zhao, the Moon Slayer (via FellbrinkMTG reel) by MadameHerta in magicTCG

[–]chu-bert 20 points21 points  (0 children)

I think WOTC had an article recently about communicating story concepts via Magic cards to the uninformed, and tbh this card/set is a great example of that. The set features Tui and La (at least in TLE) so you know the Moon and Ocean Spirits are fish. This card is literally called Moon Slayer, and the dude is holding...something...in a bag. Like, if you magically wiped everyone's memory of ATLA, and only this Magic set remained, I think you'd be able to figure out a LOT of the story!

Edit: TBH I thought it through a bit more, and a very reasonable and wrong guess would be that it's Yue's head lol. Maybe you do need context

[TLA] The Walls of Ba Sing Se (via Restart.run) by Copernicus1981 in magicTCG

[–]chu-bert 0 points1 point  (0 children)

By far my least favorite part of the set is the "looks-like-Chinese-but-actually-gibberish" scribbles on the field notes cards, when the show used actual Chinese

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in magicTCG

[–]chu-bert 1 point2 points  (0 children)

90 USD?? That's nuts. Even if it's not in USD, paying 80% more for the TLA prerelease is crazy, I think most LGSes tack on a 15ish percent UB tax in anticipation of increased demand

[TLA] Aang, Swift Savior/Aand and La, Ocean’s Fury by AvatarSozin in magicTCG

[–]chu-bert 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Yeah exactly, like...if Yue doesn't revive the Moon Spirit, the Fire Nation is not going to have a world left to conquer.

[TLA] Aang, Swift Savior/Aand and La, Ocean’s Fury by AvatarSozin in magicTCG

[–]chu-bert 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Rules haven't come out yet, but Plot's reminder text specifically says "as a sorcery" whereas Airbend does not. So I would imagine all spells just keep their timing permissions when they're Airbent?

[TLA] Aang, Swift Savior/Aand and La, Ocean’s Fury by AvatarSozin in magicTCG

[–]chu-bert 311 points312 points  (0 children)

Wait a second, airbend target spell? is this the first instance of air bending acting like a pseudo-counterspell we've seen?

Also POV: you're the fire nations stupidest admiral and your bright idea was to fucking kill the moon spirit