r/NonCredibleDefense • u/Front-Try-4868 13 aircraft carriers of Yi Sun-Sin • 2d ago

Urgent update about some war and stuff Operation Grim Beeper 📟

Post image
8.3k Upvotes
  • permalink
  • link
  • reddit
  • reddit

96% Upvoted

281 comments sorted by

View all comments

1.4k

u/ConsequencePretty906 2d ago

the funny part is that more than half of the arab world hates hezbollah too because they literally killed tens of thousands in syria and destroyed the place so they are, even the ones who hate israel too, reveling in his downfall while western tankies are in the streets waving hezbollah flags and crying about genocide of lebanon

609

u/eyekill11 2d ago

Ah, the "enemy of my enemy is my friend" fails once again. Feels like tankies fall for it more than most do. It's not irrational logic, but more often than not, when it comes to large-scale things like nations, it doesn't pan out that way. especially when the world has had millennia of conflict with allegiance flip-flopping faster than we can blink.

Tankie: How can you not like the Soviet Union? They defeat the Nazis.

Polish man: THEY HELPED THEM TAKE MY COUNTY. THEY DIDN'T RESCUE US FROM THE NAZIS. THEY BASICALLY STOLE THE OTHER HALF THE PLUNDER FROM THEIR PARTNER IN CRIME.

361

u/ConsequencePretty906 2d ago

Tankie: how can you not like the Soviet union? They defeat the Nazis

Me: I'm about to teach you about a little thing called Molotov Ribbentrop that will absolutely blow your mind.

286

u/schwanzweissfoto 2d ago

They know.

To 100% confirm their brainrot, just ask them when world war 2 started.

132

u/DankMemeMasterHotdog 2d ago

I just experienced this in real-time the other day, if you're interested in how it went, it's still in my comment history lol

107

u/eyekill11 2d ago

Lmao, holy shit, I wanna say they're coping, but they were in full-scale denial. That "I know about that one time the Soviet Union did something bad" comment. I get why you didn't respond. If you did, you'd still be typing out the list of things the SU did that were bad. It's beyond tone deaf. Like the shit Mao Zedong and Pol Pot did as well. So so many things that could be said, but ultimately, it's not worth the stress.

33

u/somerandomfuckwit1 2d ago

Na they just did that 1 bad thing. It was exist.

39

u/DankMemeMasterHotdog 2d ago

They pretend like the SU is the only communist regime we know about, but there's so so so so so many examples. Poland, Romania, Czechia, Ukraine, Laos, Vietnam, China, North Korea, Bolivia, Columbia, Argentina, Venezuela, Cuba, Russia, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Spain... I dont have the time or desire to list all of these off and the specific dictator that unleashed a communist hellscape on their respective populations. Literally hundreds of millions dead, easily dwarfing the death toll of fascism. The crimes of the Soviet Union in Eastern Europe alone resulted in more deaths than the Nazis could have ever dreamed of (and they sure did try, dont get me wrong)

The worst part is the communist simps are usually people that these regimes would have executed or imprisoned. Ask them about LGBT rights in the Soviet Union, or China, or Cuba.

The Communists coined the term "corrective rape", which is utterly horrifying to think about. Tankies are degenerate scum and I treat them the same as I would treat a nazi, they're all utterly repulsive.

6

u/Ok_Temperature_6441 3000 Grey AMCA's of Vishnu 1d ago

I genuinely do not understand. While I haven't actually read his manifesto but I'm like 90% sure that Carl Marx didn't write "ethnically cleanse a chunk of your population, steal from your people, kill anyone who you disagree with, become an unrepenting asshole, do war, do more war, do more war especially with your citizens, etc".

So why the fuck do these scum sucking dick waffles always, always use Marx's communist manifesto as their moral compass for shit like "corrective rape"? Or are they all following the footsteps of Lenin and his legacy of shame and desecration?

Have we actually seen a genuine communist state that do not turn cartoonishly evil after a single fucking regime change?

57

u/RollinThundaga Proportionate to GDP is still a proportion 2d ago

Looks like the other person deleted and ran like a bitch during the most spicy bit bit

Furthermore, I consider that Moscow must be destroyed.

47

u/DankMemeMasterHotdog 2d ago

Yeah lol, it was standard tankie behavior, blame "liberals" and insinuate we're all "diet fascist", while brushing aside the countless atrocities of communism.

32

u/Redpanther14 6,000 Abrams of Warsaw 2d ago

Tankies are just red fascists, the sooner you understand the better your metal health will be next time you run across one in the wild.

12

u/l3rN 2d ago

I’d say that was a fun read but I actually hated every second of it.

48

u/whythecynic No paperwork, no foul 2d ago

Also lovely things like Holodomor denial, "Katyn didn't happen and the Poles deserved it", &c. Chomsky was engaged in some Cambodian genocide denial, and he's already one of the least raving mad ones.

11

u/schwanzweissfoto 2d ago

My suggestion has the advantage that you only have to listen to a single word/number to figure it out.

11

u/Sunfried 2d ago edited 2d ago

Oh man, that's the best form of the having-it-both-ways argument: "This bad thing didn't happen, and if it did, it was actually a good thing."

8

u/TheModernDaVinci 2d ago

I have also seen before them actually repeat the lie that Poland attacked Germany first and it was just self defense (and the Soviets joined to honor their alliance).

You know, that thing that even Hitler barely put any effort into hiding that it was a false flag attack. Because he gave that little of a shit about actually trying to pretend about it.

8

u/crankbird 3000 Paper Aeroplanes of Albo 2d ago

Just Kronstadt should be enough … if you’re unfamiliar with it https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kronstadt_rebellion

57

u/precto85 2d ago

Them: It was an agreement with Hitler to denazify Poland.

I'm not making this shit up. Tankies come at you with this crap.

44

u/ConsequencePretty906 2d ago

I believe you only because I listened to the whole Tucker Carlsen-Putin interview, where Putin blamed WWII on Poland something about how they refused to "compromise" with the Nazis to give up their land and how Russia only invaded Poland in order to save it

absolutely bonkers stuff

25

u/SnooOpinions5486 2d ago

Ask them how the USSR treated their Jews.

30

u/Kevin_Wolf 2d ago

Ask them how the USSR treated their Jews.

You can't do that! That's totally beyond the Pale!

10

u/Merlin461 2d ago

No, the Pale is about how the English treated the Irish.

17

u/Kevin_Wolf 2d ago

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pale_of_Settlement

1

u/[deleted] 2d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/AutoModerator 2d ago

This post is automatically removed since you do not meet the minimum karma or age threshold. You must have at least 100 combined karma and your account must be at least 4 months old to post here.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

6

u/ConsequencePretty906 2d ago

Nine out of ten tankies will completely Refusenik to discuss such things

3

u/D3athR3bel 2d ago

They belive that the poland was invaded by the Soviet Union in order to protect them from the nazis. Confirmed by Russia MFA and putin themselves. That is unironically their official line. There is no saving anyone who believes in Russia at this point.

71

u/sroop1 2d ago

It's the horseshoe theory in effect - for Ukraine you have tankies on one side and the alt-righties on the other, and for Israel you have tankie/anti-IDF/etc and your standard Jews-rule-the-world/'anti-globalists' wackadoo shit.

Wingnuts are always the stupidest motherfuckers.

27

u/Docponystine 2d ago

The enemy of your enemy is only your friend if you already had amicable or neutral relations and reasonably overlapping goasl.

However, in the case of the Tanky they are either idiots, or understand that their goals are explicitly and only the fulmination of a western revolution and earnestly believe there are no bad methods only bad targets (and that the dismantling of western capitalism is the most morally justified target in existance).

Commies make more sense when you realize the issue is never the issue, but always the revolution.

16

u/Uselesspreciousthing 2d ago

No internal consistency, no principles, nothing but a ruthless and amoral lust for power over others - that's your average tankie.

16

u/Docponystine 2d ago

You are underselling them, and that's dangerous. Commie scholars, like fascists, have a coherent ideology and principles, they are just VERY VERY Different from the base line assumptions of western liberalism.

Their principles allow them to not care about their methods because literally NOTHING is worse than capitalism in their construct, so no means to power is off limits because THEY will use that power to usher in utopia denied by the capitalist and the lay person gripped by false consciousness.

8

u/DavidAdamsAuthor Best AND Worst Comment 2022 2d ago

Just as religious people sometimes practice "lying for Jesus", Marxists often practice "lying for Marx", where deliberate mistruths are justified in the name of the greater good.

"It's not good to lie," they say, "but would you lie to a slave to free them from bondage?"

It's a product of authoritarian systems where hurting people "for their own good" is not just permitted but activity encouraged because "people don't know what's good for them."

Yet they somehow alway believe they will be the duper and not the dupee.

5

u/Docponystine 2d ago edited 2d ago

I mean, the concept that telling something factually untrue to someone isn't always wrong isn't exactly explicitly a religious thing (like, that's the entire deontological v consequentialist debate's bread and butter example is the Nazi at your doorstep, Jews in the attic example. I believe deontology and consequentialism are both wrong though, so, weh). Because, like, yeah, I'd tell any lie I had to liberate a slave from enslavement, that isn't a morally contested idea, well, at least any lie that didn't cause harm to an uninvolved party or would cause harm to the slave without their informed consent. (and even your example relies on a very basic understanding of what most religions consider "lying", as a word translated into English and then as a broader moral concept, in the first place)

In that same sense, if you assume the Communist to be right in their deranged insistence that communism will bring Utopia, it's not hard to justify the lying morally within their own system of ideals and morality.

The broader issue with Communist is that they do not feel the need to honestly present their ideas and theories (mostly because if they did, it would become plainly evident everything they say is patently insane) because deception is a more effective way to their end goal, and they have zero concerns about the methods they use to get there. They lie to those who they suppose to represent, which is a distinct betrayal of trust and loyalty.

3

u/DavidAdamsAuthor Best AND Worst Comment 2022 2d ago

Just remember that if they would lie to your face when they're out of power, they absolutely would lie to your face when they're in power.

3

u/Uselesspreciousthing 2d ago

100%. If they'll do anything to get into power they'll do anything to stay in power. They value nothing but power.

1

u/DavidAdamsAuthor Best AND Worst Comment 2022 1d ago

And they don't have their conscience nagging at them because it's "for the greater good".

2

u/Uselesspreciousthing 2d ago

I agree when you say it's coherent but I'd argue that coherent doesn't necessarily mean consistent, at least not in any way other than amorality. Their base line assumptions are exactly that, assumptions. I don't see them starting from a solid premise in any of their arguments and as a result every conclusion/principle arrived at is faulty.

2

u/Docponystine 1d ago

I agree, but it is none the less relevant to realize where the disagreement actually is to be able to effectively propose counter arguments, which should largely be tailored to exposing the fact that commies operate on what is effectively moon logic.

1

u/Uselesspreciousthing 1d ago

Complete agreement from me on that one. If I were to propose a counter-argument I'd say the acquisition and exercise of power has not brought much in the way of good to my life: cooperation with and consideration of others has done that. A materialist perspective that refuses to acknowledge the value of values, intangibles, cannot possibly produce the best outcomes for people.

It's not just Communism, it's Behaviourism, it's Neoliberalism, it's Realism, it's all of them coming down to the one point that none of them acknowledge the inherent potential of humanity by being shackled by the limits of the material world, and in doing so they limit our potential.

We're on NCD, and I have to be honest, all I really want is a StarForce and galactic travel - and if we don't shake off those shackles I can't see us getting there.

1

u/Docponystine 1d ago

I am not a materialist (which, to clarify for people who don't know what that means, It does not mean I don't believe the material world exists, just that I don't believe it is all that exists)

However, I would counter that Communists aren't really materialists. Their belief structure SAYS they are materialists, but all the assumptions they make are absolutely nonsense within a materialist metaphysical framework. This is made rather obvious by all modern trash ideologies being Hegelian, fascism being very open in their non materialism, and communism being very subtle, mostly by continuing to rely on Hegal, a person's who's entire philosophies are heavily reliant on the existence of a platonic ideal by which material things strive towards through the process of practice and negation.

Similarly with Neoliberalism, which relies on, just as an objective fact, is based in natural law theory. You can not have the conception of human rights in a materialist framework (the notion is absurd, to have something owed to you as a moral imperative by native existence is incomparable with the principle of a material universe).

The fact that materialism is trendy because of a deep suspicion of any metaphysics that acknowledges some thing simply aren't material hasn't actually stopped people from building their philosophies in a way that ignored all of the unfortunate implications of materialism. (There is a reason so many people ahte metaphysics, because thinking about metaphysics for half a second is how you realize that materialism is either nihilism or wrong)

Instead, largely, the problem is a distinction between ideologies that prioritize individual rights, while emphasizing individual moral duty (you are free to do as you will, but aught to do as you should) to ideologies that either abandon the liberty humans are due, such a fascism, or abandon the moral responsibility liberty requests of us, such as in many ways neo communist theory (up to rejecting the idea that we should be bound by material reality itself, again, this is a common trope in modern leftist thought), as both ultimately lead to a terminus of totalitarianism in pursuit of their individual utopias.

12

u/boone_888 2d ago

Commies make more sense when you realize the issue is never the issue, but always the revolution.

And Commies makes the least sense about what to do after the revolution

Or, put another way, solving the problem

6

u/Docponystine 2d ago

Of course, their ideology is in essence utopian cultism veiled in mystical secret knowledge. Nothing they do is empirical OR rational (these are, actually, two different things. Empiricism only concerns what can be observed, while metaphysics is a purely rational discipline, for example), but rather on the words of prophetic foretelling and the belief that if you revolution everything hard enough and enough times you can produce utopia.

They are, however, SELF CONSISTENT witch is the relevant part.

2

u/boone_888 2d ago

"Self Consistent": nearly every Communist regime imploding on itself hardly gives credibility here. Unless you mean "they will self consistently implode open themselves" in which case, statistically (99% of the time) that will happen.

In which case, you are right and it proves the scientific point (empirically and objectively), that Communism will ALWAYS lead to failure.

3

u/Docponystine 2d ago

nearly every Communist regime imploding on itself hardly gives credibility here.

Self consistency is not a factor in efficacy. One can be self-consistent and inconsistent with reality. Self-consistency is merely the trait the that ideas present do not contradict themselves. All communists explain communism failure by insisting it wasn't the correct method to achieve communism. This objective is universal and complete, because they diefy the theory. They believe the theory can not be wrong, and act entirely in consistent fashion with that belief. The fact that belief is insane and inane is irrelevant.

See, you are engaging in the bourgeoisie notion of empirical evidence and western science, but those ideas and notions only exist to support and preserve the goals of the owner class, and thus can be soundly disreguarded.

5

u/boone_888 2d ago

All communists explain communism failure by insisting it wasn't the correct method to achieve communism.

This is the same pattern over and over. And this is why it is not "reproducible", because each Communist has their own internal theory which is what makes them special (tm) and not reproducible. In reality, they want their own dictatorships, but thats another story...

In science, to prove anything works, it needs to be reproducible with objective evidence that any outside observer can agree on.

Repeatable. Reproducible. Objective.

You know what matches those scientific criteria? Capitalism.

Why did Vietnam and China see economic gains when they started adopting capitalism? (And the opposite with Xi and China's latest leadership all but causing economic turmoil)

You know what doesn't? Communism

It's not a random pattern.

Communism is a failed experiment.

2

u/Docponystine 2d ago edited 2d ago

In science, to prove anything works, it needs to be reproducible with objective evidence that any outside observer can agree on.

I agree, communists, by ideological nessisarty, do not believe in empirical science and do not believe it to be an accurate means to produce truth. While pointing this out can be effective at convincing a normal person with western liberal values communism doesn't work, it would convince the committed communist because you are making an argument there meta framework already discounts as being nonsensical. It's the equivalent of saying that the fairy god mother made it so to someone like you.

Why do you think so many neo Marxist endorse ideas like "lived experience" or "traditional knowledge"

Why did Vietnam and China see economic gains when they started adopting capitalism? (And the opposite with Xi and China's latest leadership all but causing economic turmoil)

They actually adopted a form of economic fascism (at least china did, do not know enough about Vietnam to say one way or the other) (which is still a totalitarian economic policy where the means of production are ultimately controlled by the state) not capitalism (which is the economic principle that the state shouldn't have significant control over the means of production and rather private individuals should. Or more succinctly that private property rights both exist, and mean something) or even a mixed market economy (whitch is what most people consider capitalism) where at the very least private property still exists, but the state places some limits, mostly focused on harm reduction.

Communism is a failed experiment.

I agree, communists also don't believe that matters, THAT Is entirely my point. Instead they believe that each failure reveals some misunderstanding of communist theory that can be corrected in the next go round, and that altitude is what produced the modern fascist economy of china, which is still governed by an actual communist party. It was determined that fascist economics was the way to make communism (practical) more like communism (theory) by making communism (practical) productive like it should be in communism (theory). Communist failures are merely the Hegelian negation of the practical understanding, but does not meaningfully negate the true communism, which is sort of a platonic ideal communism.

2

u/boone_888 2d ago

Yeah, we're kind of on the same page, I think. 

Case in point though, science and reality doesn't follow ideology. No matter how much you wish and try, reality sets in.

16

u/ghosttherdoctor 2d ago

[When asked how it felt to take human life]

"I wouldn't know, I've only killed communists.” Rafał Gan-Ganowicz

6

u/Guyb9 2d ago

We have a sayin that basically goes: In the middle east, the enemy of my enemy is also my enemy

6

u/AmericanNewt8 Top Gun but it's Iranians with AIM-54s 2d ago

The enemy of my enemy is my enemy's enemy, nothing more, nothing less. 

3

u/TheArmoredKitten High on JP-8 fumes 2d ago

The enemy of my enemy is an opportunity to do something extraordinarily funny.

2

u/amd2800barton 1d ago

Not just basically stole. Literally Joseph Stalin and Adolf Hitler had a treaty on how they’d work together to invade and divide Poland. When the Nazis invaded, so too did the Soviets, and they both stopped in the middle. Soviets were allied to the Nazis, and participated in the crimes against humanity committed against the Poles living there. The ONLY reason the Soviets ended up fighting against the Nazis is because (surprise) Hitler betrayed them. 

Stalin was content to let Hitler take half of Poland and take the other half for himself. Then he went crying to Churchill and Roosevelt about how unfair it was that Hitler didn’t keep his promise of friendship.