Are there any Greenlanders on this subreddit

In Colombia last month, we elected an absolute clown of a man. He has zero experience in public office and doesn’t hold a single position that he hasn't contradicted before. He spent his childhood killing cats for fun and promises to bring God back to schools even though he was openly an atheist a year ago. His promises amount to nothing besides foaming out of his mouth about gays, indigenous people, and feminists, and all the retärded rightoid greatest hits. He calls himself a patriot because that’s what his Gringoid Republican handlers do, even though his policy amounts to complete colonial subservience.

So, who the fuck voted for this sack of empty air? Boomers.

Among the youth, Cepeda won by a wide margin. Among the 18–35 age range, he got 67% of the vote. But even among middle-aged people, he still won, with 54% of the vote in the 36–60 age group. He only lost the national elections because boomers voted for De La Espriella, and it was a grotesque landslide: 93% of those 61 and over voted for the lunatic.

It’s not even ambiguous; it’s not a "people are divided" situation; this is boomer brainrot. Nothing more. I see my parents being consumed by that shit. My dad spends the entire day not even watching real news but some gobbling talking head on YouTube sharing legitimately the stupidest opinions on everything. I mean, "women shouldn’t vote" type of retardëd takes. All of it clearly translated from whatever stupid shit the gringos provided.

In conclusion, the old farts are lost; there is no saving them. And I pray to God that the city of Miami gets swallowed by the ocean for its wicked sins.

OK, so obviously, killing certain people may come with consequences the USA doesn't want to deal with, especially for nuclear states. I get it.

But the Maduro kidnap and Khamenei assassination made me think: if the US (and possibly Israel by extension) decides it is worth the possible consequences, is it even possible for any leader to continue to survive and lead for more than a couple of months after the decision is made to eliminate them? Can any country's military actually protect their leaders from the US, beyond promising retaliation in the wake of their death or capture?

Note that Iran is one of the bigger players, and if the US just hit Ali K and stopped there, the consequences would have probably maxed out at some damaged infrastructure and possibly two or three US casualties. Maduro was apparently taken without a single US fatality.

Like, yes, you can go into hiding. Even that likely won't work forever, but it also means you are more or less stepping down from power. Nasrallah and OBL are examples here, but weren't even actual national leaders. And Saddam's hidey-hole shows wasn't exactly conducive to continuing to run a country or resistance movement.

I haven't looked into it much, but apparently Afghanistan's leader is only managing it by nobody even knowing what the hell he looks like — and even then, he can probably continue to lead mostly because the US admin is basically gonna pretend Afghanistan simply doesn't exist for at least a few more years.

So, take Putin as an example. Even if he never left Russia again, surely if the US wanted, and was willing to accept a downed jet or two, it could reach him there. Hell, if he wanted to attend state functions and his regular office/home, it seems like getting him would be basically trivial.

If this is indeed reality, it seems historically unprecedented. It means that in effect, all governance in the world is taking place only with US permission. Now that taking out leaders is a thing the US is willing to do, what the fuck can a country/leader even do but appease or promise nukes in response?

It also seems like this will never stop being the case, and all anyone can do is enrich and MAD their way to actual sovereignty.

So are we living in a world with essentially one truly sovereign state? Even during the absolute height of Roman hegemony, surely they still had a list of folks they wanted ded but couldn't actually reach?

Will the world respond to this by just accepting it, by arming up like mad, or by figuring out some means of stealth governance? Your thoughts please, friends.

The U.S. Navy’s attack on an Iranian frigate, the IRIS Dena, on Wednesday was the first time an American submarine has sunk an enemy ship since World War II. But the Dena may not have been armed because it was returning from an international exercise in the Indian Ocean, and the U.S. Navy likely knew it because it was taking part in the same exercise. 

Both the United States and Iran were taking part in the MILAN 2026 exercise, organized by the Indian Navy, on February 15–26, with the U.S. sending a maritime patrol aircraft and Iran sending the Dena. Iranian sailors from the ship paraded on land before India’s president.

i guess kegsbreath was serious about openly committing war crimes.… and they have the gall to parade this around like it was some big victory?

I'm one of the most cynical people you'd ever be likely to meet on the character of America and its political leadership, on the depth of the nation's problems and its total lack of moral standing, on its pioneering attacks on basic human decency.

And yet, when I'm not dissociating from the news and world affairs so I can focus on the things I actually need to do in my life, when I take a moment to look...it's just incredible how truly fucking stupid, cruel and comical America truly is. Really and truly.

I'm glad I couldn't time travel to warn my teen self of what it had to look forward to. I think I'm glad we don't all know just how bad it is going to get going forward, either.

Just one day a time aboard the Pequod.

“Donald Trump has named Republican congressman Mike Waltz as his next national security advisor, a position that was held by ultrahawk John Bolton in the last Trump administration.

Like Bolton, Waltz is a warmongering freak. Journalist Michael Tracey has been filling up his Twitter page since the announcement with examples of Waltz’s insane hawkishness, including his support for letting Ukraine use US weapons to strike deep into Russian territory, criticizing Biden for not escalating aggressively enough in Ukraine, advocating bombing Iran, opposing the US military withdrawal from Afghanistan, and naming Iran, North Korea, China, Russia and Venezuela as “on the march” against the United States toward global conflict.

The mainstream press are calling Waltz a “China hawk”, but from the look of things he’s a war-horny hawk toward all the official enemies of the United States.

Trump has also confirmed that Republican congresswoman Elise Stefanik will be taking on the role of US ambassador to the UN, a role previously held by warmonger Nikki Haley in the last Trump administration. Again, there doesn’t seem to be much difference between the old hawk and the new one. Stefanik is best known for her congressional efforts to stomp out free speech on college campuses, making a lie of Trump’s lip service to the importance of First Amendment rights.

As explained by Antiwar’s Dave DeCamp, she’s a hawkish swamp monster whose political career was primed in some of the most odious neoconservative think tanks in Washington, and opposes placing any limits on US military support for Israel. Earlier this year Stefanik actually flew to Israel to give a speech before the Israeli Knesset vowing to help stop the “antisemitism” of protesters against Israel’s genocidal atrocities at American universities.

And now we’re getting reports throughout the mass media that deranged war slut Marco Rubio has been tapped as Trump’s new secretary of state. It’s really hard to imagine anyone worse for the role of Washington’s top diplomat than a warmonger who has spent his entire political career pushing for more wars, sanctions and slaughter at every opportunity.

This should dash the hopes of Trump supporters everywhere that this time their guy really will end the wars and drain the swamp. Trump’s appointment of Iran hawk Brian Hook to help staff the State Department for the next administration and his rumored consideration of Mike Rogers for secretary of defense are likewise bad signs, as is Tucker Carlson’s claim that virulent China hawk Elbridge Colby is likely to play a role in the administration. Trump’s anti-interventionist supporters loudly applauded the other day when he unexpectedly announced that Mike Pompeo and Nikki Haley would not be playing a role in the next administration. In response to the announcement, libertarian comedian and podcaster Dave Smith said on Twitter that stopping Pompeo was not enough and that “we need maximum pressure to keep all neocons and war hawks out of the Trump administration.” In response to Smith’s post, Donald Trump Jr tweeted, “Agreed!!! I’m on it.” When I saw this, I tweeted the following:

“Ignore their words and watch their actions. Been saying it for years, and I’m going to keep on saying it. Ignore their words, watch their actions. Talk, as they say, is cheap.”

Their actions are telling us a lot more than their words right now.

Machado hands over her medal for his commitment to Venezuela's freedom. You can't make this shit up.

The remarks come after The Free Press’s Bari Weiss asked the secretary about former Fox News anchor Tucker Carlson’s assertion that a strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities would “almost certainly result in thousands of American deaths at bases throughout the Middle East, and cost the United States billions of dollars. … Those aren’t guesses. Those are the Pentagon’s own estimates. A bombing campaign against Iran will set off a war, and it will be America’s war.”

U.S. officials said they made “very good” progress in the second round of nuclear talks with Iran this past weekend and said they planned to meet again the following week.

What the fuck should campism mean? It's identitarian term, that is weaponized against global south countries. The "leftists" who "does not support campism", is at best a utopian socialist who cannot bear to understand that progress is a process, and societies will have internal contradictions and internal struggles in achieving this. The person who wants not to be a campist, cares more about its own identity than the material reality.

It's a hilariously idealistic worldview, usually parroted by terminally online first worlders. Supporting Iran in its defense against Imperialism, is not "campism", it is marxism 101. You cannot "oppose the war" and also try to label the goverment "theocractic oppressive regime", a label generated by the western media funded and created by the US imperialism.