boyi

@boyi@lemmy.sdf.org

This profile is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.

boyi,

This means they lose all negotiation ‘material’ (could not find a better word, apologies).

maybe leverage or bargaining chip

boyi,

Very low probability. You don’t target head of country, that’s very ungentlemanly in diplomatic world which can result in very severe repercussion.

boyi,

I don’t think I have to bold the word ‘diplomatic’ for you to understand the context.

boyi,

that’s a deliberate geopolitical move to gain direct involvement of the US into the conflict by inciting retaliation from Iran. So they were expecting the repercussion.

It is a dick move but not as severe as attacking the head of the country. Just imagine during the WW2 the Allied assassinate the Japanese Emperor. It was a no go.

Man, If you hate someone, find a rational reasons for them to be hated. Not every wrongs can be linked to them. Use your head, not emotion.

boyi,

And don’t forget the tragic ending suffered by the Dr (can’t remember his name) that first brought out the covid issue, and his phone messages were leaked to the public if I am not mistaken. He was left dead with no proper care by the authority.

boyi,

Nah. You’re on lemmy.world. You won’t find many of them here.

boyi,

Yeah, it could be. May be the sentiment during that time made me think otherwise.

Anyway to quote NYT,

We found no evidence his medical care was compromised. But these documents, along with Dr. B’s account and experts’ analysis, reveal important new details about his illness and treatment.

and…

The experts said that based on the records, the treatment Dr. Li received, in general, followed the norms of that time for managing the symptoms of coronavirus patients

bur…

By the morning of Feb. 6, doctors wrote in the progress notes that Dr. Li was at risk of multiple organ failure. Several physicians we spoke to said that Dr. Li’s condition was so serious that his medical team should have at this point, or before it, considered intubating him and placed him on a ventilator — a higher level of oxygen support.

The records indicate that Dr. Li had earlier been given oxygen through a nasal tube and then an additional oxygen mask. His medical team also tried to use a noninvasive ventilator on Jan. 19, but wrote that “the patient could not tolerate.”

It is unclear why Dr. Li was not intubated. Some doctors are more reluctant to intubate young patients; sometimes the patients themselves refuse it. To this day, there is no consensus on when invasive ventilators should be used on Covid-19 patients.

and…

According to Dr. B, who arrived at Dr. Li’s intensive care ward around 9 p.m., about two hours after Dr. Li entered cardiac arrest, the hospital’s leadership pushed the medical team to use ECMO because it wanted to show the public that no effort had been spared.

But several doctors in the room argued that by that point it was too late for it to have been of any use, an assessment that six physicians we talked to agreed with. Dr. B also said putting Dr. Li on ECMO, given its invasive nature, would have been an “insult to his body.”

boyi,

nothing’s really a genocide as long as ur the victor u get to write history.

As much as I don’t like like this statement, that’s indeed the facts - The powerful writes the history. They even can keep a blind on the genocidal parties and bring them o assimilate into their society as long as it is to their advantage. At least that’s what happened to Nazis luminaries that happened to move to the other side of Atlantic and behind the iron curtain.

boyi,

Something to consider but not for anyone: if youre thinking of using latex, why don’t just learn how to use raw latex packages. Download the packages and use your own editor and PDF viewer. It you’re using Linux, maybe something like [(neo)vim+vimtex]+zathura. Anyway you can still use LyX to easily create math formula by copy pasting. And for backup, you can use github (plus Dropbox) etc.

boyi,

Surprisingly the title is not: Germany ditched coal and did went back to it.

boyi,

any Idea what stuff can they trade on?

boyi,

Surely you have more in mind considering how this can influence the ongoing conflict in Gaza.

boyi,

this is better posted at Facebook.

boyi,

you don’t understand, do you? This kind of post is out of place, has ‘attention seeker’ vibe - those that we rarely come across on Lemmy but usually found on Facebook.

boyi,

In geopolitics it’s called National Interest. Anything against it is a threat to the country. Anyway, suffice to say Israel learns from its mentor, the US itself.

boyi,

I tried to switch to heliboard using multiple languages but its predictions is simply out of league compared to SwiftKey. Reluctantly, I switched back.

Israel must take steps to allow more food and water into Gaza, UN top court orders (www.cbc.ca)

In its legally binding order, the court told Israel to take “all necessary and effective measures to ensure, without delay, in full co-operation with the United Nations, the unhindered provision at scale by all concerned of urgently needed basic services and humanitarian assistance” including food, water, fuel and medical...

boyi,

What’s your intention, really? Please correct me if I am wrong as I am not a native speaker - what I get from your writing - you find it more appropriate to attack/trivialise the UN court ad hominem rather than to consider the real issues of fulfilling the urging humanitarian concerns and the pressing needs of civilians?

boyi,

Could be Chechen fringe separatist group. or Ingushetia.

Russia and China Veto U.S.-Led Cease-Fire Resolution at U.N. (www.nytimes.com)

Edit: It looks like the argument here is that the US is not calling for an instant ceasefire, but instead saying that one is very important to have. China and Russia say it should be immediate. The US also tied it to hostage talks....

boyi,

treating the hostages as merely bargaining chips ignores that they are innocent civilians caught in this idiotic conflict through no fault of their own.

The way I see it if we look at Hamas side - That’s the only bargaining chips that Hamas has. They’ve got nothing else, nil. Hamas is very dependent on the hostages and they know they would receive greater retaliation from the Israeli after the Oct 7 attack if they didn’t have any hostages. During the attack, the strategy is basically two prongs - get rid of the soldiers, and get as many hostages alive so we can still survive (yes, some hostages did get killed during the real due to some reasons such as miscommunication during the execution of their operations by separate fringe parties). For that very reason, they try to keep the hostages alive because the moment they lost their hostages without any meaningful peace deal, they are basically done.

boyi,

Sadly that’s the way things are done when their own survival are at stake. Emotion and moral are not much considered in (their) strategic decision making. People are just pawns on the chessboard.

boyi,

On what ground? is there any UN article that will legitimate it?

boyi, (edited )

At last somebody who engages intellectually with an answer, although I don’t see the truth of it. Do you have any any resources supporting your statement? At least according Article 23 of UN charter, it’s stated clearly of the five permanent members.

The Security Council shall consist of eleven Members of the United Nations. The Republic of China, France, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and the United States of America shall be permanent members of the Security Council. The General Assembly shall elect six other Members of the United Nations to be non-permanent members of the Security Council, due regard being specially paid, in the first instance to the contribution of Members of the ​United Nations to the maintenance of international peace and security and to the other purposes of the Organization, and also to equitable geographical distribution.

It’s official for the five countries, not given but acquired.

EDIT: I am interested in the real knowledge and fact, and I am never interested in bias and one-sided answer just to support one’s view. That not healthy academically.

boyi,

please provide references for your earlier statement. I think it is blatantly wrong. Please prove to me otherwise.

boyi,

Because Russia is the sole continuation to USSR according to Alma-Ata Protocol in 1991?

From Just Security and for the subsequent quotes.

“The States of the Commonwealth support Russia’s continuance of the membership of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics in the United Nations, including permanent membership of the Security Council, and other international organizations.”

And during those days the members didn’t want to bring it up because that was the way they wanted it to happened and now suddenly we question their legitimacy because they have turned to be direct threats to us?

The main factor that influenced how the issue was handled in the UN was the basic policy decision of the other P4 (China, France, the United Kingdom and the United States), including first and foremost the US government, which was that it was in everyone’s interest that the USSR be dissolved peacefully and orderly, which could be accomplished if the other republics agreed among themselves on various matters including the former USSR seat and the veto. The republics of the former USSR, including Ukraine, agreed to Russia maintaining the seat of the USSR including in the Security Council. If they agreed, who would object? On what grounds would anyone have objected to Russia continuing the seat of the USSR in 1991? Maybe to get rid of a veto? If so, it was up to a Member to speak up and make the case.

Members were notified that Russia claimed it was not a “successor State” but a “continuing State” with the support of the former republics of the USSR, and there was no opposition

On Christmas Eve 1991 the Soviet Permanent Representative Yuli Vorontsov came to the UN Secretariat with a box in his hand with a new flag of something called the “Russian Federation” and a letter to the Secretary-General signed by Boris Yeltsin, “President Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic” (RSFSR). It said “ the membership of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics in the United Nations, including the Security Council and all other organs and organizations of the United Nations system, is being continued by the Russian Federation (RSFSR), with the support of the countries of the Commonwealth of Independent States, by the Russian Federation.” Note it says “continued” not succession. In the law of succession, he was claiming that parts of the territory of his country had separated, leaving behind the rump which continued the international legal personality of the former larger State, whose name happened to change as well. Same country, just smaller, different borders and a new name and flag. The Russian Federation was the “continuing State” whereas all the bits that spun off were “successor States”—except for, ironically, Ukraine and Belarus which had been deemed as founding members of the Organization in 1945 for reasons not dealt with here. The letter also asked the Secretariat to change the name of the country from “the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics” to “Russian Federation” wherever it appeared.

and…

Members said nothing at the first meetings at which “the change” was reflected.

Although no objections or questions about the claim came in writing, the first time UN bodies met after “the name change” would offer an opportunity to raise the matter in a meeting. Any delegate could raise a point of order from the floor asking “What is that sign ‘Russian Federation’ and who is sitting behind it?” — and thus open up the issue for debate and discussion. The first meetings scheduled after the “change” were not in the General Assembly but rather in the Council. On Dec. 31, the Security Council met for the first time after the “change.” But it was the last day of the month which had heretofore been presided over that month by Ambassador Vorontsov as the USSR representative. On the 31st, however, he presided behind the “Russian Federation” nameplate. The meeting lasted 5 minutes at which a resolution on Western Sahara was adopted unanimously. The President gave a statement at the end thanking the retiring members of the Council. Not one word came from him or any member of the Council about “the change.” The members of the Council who could have mentioned it were Austria, Belgium, China, Cote d’Ivoire, Cuba, Ecuador, France, India, Romania, the United Kingdom, the United States, Yemen, Zaire and Zimbabwe. They all knew and could see there was a change but no words were spoken on the matter. There must have been a clear understanding among members behind the scenes that the Soviet representative would “see out” his presidency for the month as the Russian representative, regardless of “skipping” the alphabetical rotation rule for that one day (S/PV.3025).

Anyway, you can read the whole linked article. It is a good read for those who are interested in geopolitics and the non-bias.

boyi,

Israel has a strong backing from the US. It is part of their Modus op since early 1900s which is to get a strong backer. Earlier, British was their patron and that’s how they get their foots in Palestine. Sometimes in 1930s or 40s (if I am not mistaken), they managed to get close support from the US, that became their new patron, and they reduced their dependence to the British at that point and even committed terror campaigned against them so that the British wouldn’t be in their way to gain Palestinian territories.

So, why would they care about international pressure/support when the US is with them. It’s not necessary, as the international community won’t be able to do much as long as some powerful body is always be behind them.

boyi,

Yes I got it wrong. Instead of Israel, It should have written Zionism, the foundation of Israel that we see today. Zionism continues through modern Israel, and Israel doesn’t exist under thin air.

Anyway, I don’t see anything wrong with my statements of British and US backing. They reduced their reliance on the British after WW2.

boyi,

Not big surprise, new zealanders tend to be incredibly xenophobic and racist.

Okay?

You are doing a lot of mental gymnastics to avoid admitting that New Zealand’s government is representative of their people.

You mean, tbeir government is racist too?

It’s not like they have a dictatorship, lol.

Shut it. If only socio-politics is that simple.

edit: wow, it’s not that I care. But this person won’t waste a second to downvote every comment that doesn’t agree with them.

boyi,

There is strong chance of some countries going to war to save Taiwan, I am afraid. Most definitely an alliance this time and for sure Australia will be in it. Not exactly because they they want to save Taiwan, but because they want to maintain their hegemonic status quo on the region. They can’t afford to lose their influence there, as East Asian region is too important in securing their domestic (economic) and national interest.

China is buying time. China knows they will lose their gound if they get in now as they are not ready militarily. But, one day they will strike.

boyi,

if I claim the Grand Canyon is mine, does it make it the Disputed Canyon?

Yes, you absolutely can lay claim on it - If you have power to do that. You power is the law, sad but true.

boyi,

If you think of only Russia and China, you might want to reread the history books. Anyway, in this modern time, the UN has no power simply because it’s a tool of the superpowers.

boyi, (edited )

Not sure why you only include annexation after the cold war. We don’t even touch specifically on the Europe issues. It If that’s so, why do you include China into the equation?

Anyway, I thought the post is about Disputed Territory. That’s a whole different matter with regards to annexation if you consider geopolitical perspective.

By the way let say I go along with your train of thought: if we simplify the timeline to after the UN has been founded, the post you link does not only discuss about annexation by Israel but also Morocco, Russia, Eritrea, China, Indonesia, India and some other countries - if you even read the article. So yes not just Russia and China.

Anyway, there’s one topic that you might want to read more in addition to world history: It is called confirmation bias. Have fun.

-edited typos and for clarity-

boyi,

What is your motive when posting this?

boyi,

because I think you have bad intentions. Like you will post this to show that Israel are ready for ceasefire but Hamas is the the one that doesn’t want to compromise. I might be wrong. Anyway, that’s why I asked you.

boyi,

At Sultanah Maliha Hospital in Langkawi, an island in the north of Malaysia.

boyi,

[…] used to be perceived as a place of beauty and spirituality […]

boyi,

They still support Ukraine. But to bring Ukraine’s grain into the country is a no go for them. Domestically Poland have to deal with the farmers, constitutes a large demographic chuck of their voters, who can’t compete with the cheaper Ukraine’s grain and ended up suffer financially.

edit: a news article on this matter

boyi,

Not surprisingly, you will find many of those from Asia countries which are no longer aligned with the western narrative.

boyi,

I think they are conveying the sentiment in their country, Bangladesh. It’s not their problem in the first place.

I will stop using Linux / PC for 10 months. What do you think will happen in that period?

Long story short, this year is my exam preparation year and due to my nature I will take extreme measures to prevent distraction and focus on studying. I will decommision my PC, stop browsing Linux & tech related websites and leave this beautiful place called Lemmy. To make things clear, I am not influenced by anyone for doing...

boyi,

how do you even do your assignments without a pc/notebook?

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • fightinggames
  • All magazines