The first one is terrible; each of the following ones is worse than the last.
Let’s start with a woman whose head is deep in her ass, delightedly smelling the source of her own farts.
This one is equally narcissistic, but somehow its bland opportunism is more appalling than the Tweet from Ms. Apocalyptic vibes above.
This one, what can I say? CW: Rape.
.
.
.
Yipes.
H/T — I found these, like the screenshot in the last post, in the IAmATotalPieceOfShit subreddit, which is a something of a gold mine of awful.
Follow me on Mastodon.
Send tips to dfutrelle at gmail dot com.
We Hunted the Mammoth relies on support from you, its readers, to survive. So please donate here if you can, or at David-Futrelle-1 on Venmo.
@Contrapangloss
They really don’t know. Artillery never see their targets – they’re set up 20 or 30 km away and all they have is co-ordinates, distance and the firing pattern to be used as information. They know they’re hitting something, but not what unless they’re specifically told. After the firing pattern they break down the guns fast and move away quickly before someone jams a few rockets down their throats.
Whew, so much to absorb, much of it very depressing, but thanks for the updates, and especially for the custom molotov bottles and signs. (Even if the latter might be ‘shopped. Here’s hoping they become reality!)
@Contrapangloss
*scribbling notes* Oh, so that’s what I did wrong… (Joking, of course. Although I do have my share of wild stories, from both sides of the situation.)
@Snowberry
Wait, can she actually do that? You know, as opposed to Donny Douchebag “I’m actually the real president and the election was stolen!!!!1sad” and his idiocy?
ooof, the first two were bad, that third one is appallingly vile.
@Queen of the Harpies: Legally? I did some checking, and it appears that the only way to remove the president is 2/3 vote by both houses of the National Assembly, and I couldn’t find how replacement is determined. I would seriously doubt that however they do it, it automatically goes to the second-place candidate in the previous election, though.
In practice, the National Assembly is full of Lukashenko loyalists and is barely relevant to governing the country anyway, so really not happening. She appears to be testing the waters as to whether people would rally around her and engage in a revolution against the current government.
@ QOTH & Snowberry
This all reminds me of WW2 and the issues around who was the legitimate French government during the Vichy days. Ultimately I guess it’s just down to whom the International community recognises.
But gives me an excuse to post about how Claridges Hotel in London was once part of Yugoslavia.
Although that’s probably a myth…
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-36569675
Putin, like most politicians, seems to have his ego involved here, and is willing to go to extreme lengths to get his way. He will lose face if he backs down.
With that in mind, the best way out of this I see, and also somewhat realistic, is that Putin “retires” in some fashion. Whatever works. Retirement to a fancy villa somewhere with a pile of money, imprisonment, the obvious thing everyone is thinking here, whatever.
Then whoever steps in can say “Well, that was a big mistake. Water under the bridge now, new leadership, let bygones be bygones”, without feeling like they are are the bad guys or weak for doing so. They are just fixing a mistake made by a predecessor. Not their fault, not their mess, everything will be better now, time to lift those sanctions and get back to the previous status quo.
Basically egos got us into it, look to egos to get out.
@ .45
A lot of time in diplomatic negotiations, achieving an underlying agreement is the easy bit. It’s formulating a press release that both sides can share with their respective constituents that’s the hard part. All about face.
Hence formulae like “We recognise X’s legitimate grievances…”
Then X can say “See, they accept we were in the right.” and the other side can say “We would of course recognise any legitimate grievance; even though the ones this time were bollocks.”
I do a lot of negotiations. The standard introduction is “A good result today will be if both sides leave equally pissed off.” I suspect that also applies in diplomacy.
Of course, this again assumes Putin is a rationale actor. Fingers crossed he’s not just out to ‘secure his legacy’ whatever the cost.
Personally, I (and a fair number of other anarchists and anarchist-leaning individual) are rather torn about what to do now.
On the one hand, Ukraine has been a hotbed for Neo-nazis and their kin for years and they’ve grown more entrenched with time, especially due to their ties with Ukrainian nationalism. On the other hand, Russia’s actions are the textbook definition of a power grab and the history of the Makhnovist movement illustrates very clearly how dangerous it is to try and use one adversary to defeat another. And of course saying that it’s just two groups of authoritarians squabbling with each other shows a complete disregard for ordinary Ukrainians and erodes the already limited influence anarchism has in the region by making anarchists look like they care more for ideological purity than about human lives.
Really, it opens up a whole bunch of very difficult questions. How do you oppose Russian imperialism without playing into the hands of American interests? Is there a way to resist fascist elements within Ukraine without providing justification for the Russian conquest? And more importantly, how do you stay away from taking the side of one state or another without dooming yourself to irrelevance?
You could say the same about my home state (a blue state, at that) but swap in American nationalism.
It’s funny how that “hotbed for neo-nazis” has a Jewish president.
@ Moggie
I haven’t much clue about neo-nazis in Ukraine, but a few years back we had a Black president in the US and we still had plenty of white supremacists.
(I am not defending Putin’s claims Russia needs to invade because of that, just saying a Jewish president doesn’t mean Ukraine doesn’t have a nazi problem.)
Everywhere has a nazi problem. Including Russia.
Hope this works (I’m trying use Twitter now; to be down with the kids)
https://twitter.com/RosieisaHolt/status/1498220013920137217
I do quite enjoy reading the business and financial press…
https://www.businessinsider.com/ukraines-tax-office-captured-russian-tanks-not-personal-taxable-income-2022-3
I found this quite informative.
@Alan
LOL! Oh goodness.
I’m not really up to date on everything, but it’s emotionally taxing to keep up with war news. Last thing I heard was Russia decided to try to “nuke” Ukraine the unconventional way, by hitting a nuclear power plant(?) (I’m getting this info secondhand because I just don’t have the strength for all this right now.) I was afraid something like that might happen when I heard about Chernobyl’s actual location.
@ QOTH
Yes. They had been shelling around Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant. That caused fires in some of the buildings.
Whilst that is clearly reckless, the Ukraine engineers have said there is no immediate danger. They were able to shut down the reactors and put the plant in safe mode. The IAEC though have asked Russia to allow unimpeded access for emergency services and international experts.
I think though the attack was less about spreading contamination and more about depriving the civilian population of electricity. The plant powers about a third of the country. But this is all part of Russia’s new siege strategy now that the military assault has failed so badly. Basically freeze and starve Ukraine into surrender.
Needless to say, this is all in breach of the Conventions.
Article 56 of the 1977 Additional Protocol I provides:
1. Works and installations containing dangerous forces, namely dams, dykes and nuclear electrical generating stations, shall not be made the object of attack, even where these objects are military objectives, if such attack may cause the release of dangerous forces and consequent severe losses among the civilian population. Other military objectives located at or in the vicinity of these works or installations shall not be made the object of attack if such attack may cause the release of dangerous forces from the works or installations and consequent severe losses among the civilian population.
2. The special protection against attack provided for in paragraph 1 shall cease:
(a) for a dam or a dyke only if it is used for other than its normal function and in regular, significant and direct support of military operations and if such attack is the only feasible way to terminate such support;
(b) for a nuclear electrical generating station only if it provides electric power in regular, significant and direct support of military operations and if such attack is the only feasible way to terminate such support;
(c) for other military objectives located at or in the vicinity of these works or installations only if they are used in regular, significant and direct support of military operations and if such attack is the only feasible way to terminate such support.
3. In all cases, the civilian population and individual civilians shall remain entitled to all the protection accorded them by international law, including the protection of the precautionary measures provided for in Article 57. If the protection ceases and any of the works, installations or military objectives mentioned in paragraph 1 is attacked, all practical precautions shall be taken to avoid the release of the dangerous forces.
…
4. The High Contracting Parties and the Parties to the conflict are urged to conclude further agreements among themselves to provide additional protection for objects containing dangerous forces
This even goes against Russia’s own interpretation of the rules.
The Russian Federation’s Regulations on the Application of IHL (2001) states:
especially dangerous objects are nuclear power stations, dykes, dams whose destruction may release dangerous destructive factors and consequent severe losses among the civilian population. These objects shall not become the object of attack even when they are military objectives if attacking them may result in the above-mentioned consequences.
An especially dangerous object shall lose its immunity (status) if it provides regular, significant and direct support for the enemy military operations (for dams and dykes, it is only possible if they are used for other than their normal functions), moreover, if such an attack is the only feasible way to terminate such support
With regard to internal armed conflict, the Regulations states:
Especially dangerous objects shall not be made the object of attack, even where these objects are military objectives, if such attack may cause the release of dangerous forces and consequent severe losses among the civilian population
@Alan
Thank goodness.
As for those rules… That’s all well and good, but who is actually going to enforce that?
@ QOTH
Indeed.
Theoretically organisations like the ICRC, or even the UN, have the power to monitor and seek compliance. But in practice, if the offender refuses to comply, what can you do about it?
There is talk of the ICC getting involved post facto; or setting up an ad hoc tribunal. The feasibility of that will very much depend on what happens in Moscow though. Putin seems very secure for the moment; but then again, so have a lot of Russian leaders throughout history.
I’m reminded a bit of how things transpired post Balkans conflict.
Funnily enough I know the chap who prosecuted Slobodan Milošević. Five years work and then the defendant snuffs it before anyone can find out if you’d have won or not. Jammy sod.
Czar of Russia … Defense against the Dark Arts instructor … Amity Beach lifeguard … Asset Containment at Jurassic Park … security officer on the Enterprise … Trump cabinet member … let’s just say these careers offer more opportunities for downward mobility than up. Fairly often, six-feet-downward.
This is interesting. It’s purportedly from an FSB insider. Normally I’d be sceptical about unverified sources. Especially in what is very much an information war. It does however have a certain ring of credibility to it; and it is consistent with information we now know has been verified.
I would summarise it; but it’s pretty much a summary in itself.
https://yorkshirebylines.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/FSB-Insider-Translated-for-original-Russian.pdf
Russia is apparently considering nationalising Aeroflot’s fleet. The reason for that is two thirds of their aircraft are leased from an Irish company; and now the sanctions mean they can’t supply them.
Of course, this illustrates the practical difficulties of enforcing sanctions.
However, aeroplanes need a lot of maintenance, and Russia doesn’t have any domestic capacity for producing high temperature/high wear engine parts.
Also Aeroflot’s maintenance facilities are in Germany.
I wouldn’t want to catch a flight in Russia from a couple of weeks time.
So Russia is a paper tiger, about to fold? And thanks to that huge real estate bubble, perhaps China also is? While the US remains riven by disunity and rancor unprecedented since the Civil War.
That’s all three major hegemons who won’t be able to fulfill the role. Who steps up to the plate after the dust settles, assuming anyone is left to do so? India? Pakistan? Canada?
One thing is certain. We are living in interesting times. Very interesting times indeed.
@ surplus
China will probably do ok in 2027 when all those bonds that Trump issued for his tax cuts mature. The good news there is that China won’t have any military designs on the US. Why strangle your golden goose?
As for the new world order (in the non conspiracy sense) one thing that has really backfired for Putin is his divide and conquer strategy. The world community has now realised that unity works better than isolationism. So I suspect a much larger and stronger NATO/OTAN and EU will arise. Maybe we can sneak back into the EU as Ukraine’s plus one.
NATO will also see the military opportunity here. Supply Ukraine with kit and let them take out Russia’s ground and air forces; and with sanctions, no opportunity to re-arm.
But as to your last point, as someone who was around in the 80s I’m not unduly bothered by the global threat. Got the T shirt. I must confess though, I much preferred reading about interesting times than living in them. I suffer no real hardship; but too many people do. I was hoping we were working towards putting that behind us. End of history and all that.
It is kind of weird to see people freaking out about the possibility of WWIII and feeling like “eh, we were closer to nuclear annihilation than this when I was a kid.”
Does that make me rational or jaded?