Recent comments in /f/worldnews

GeebyYu t1_je3zsvn wrote

Reply to Police using ‘excessive force’ at France protests, rights groups say by rein_deer7

Doesn't surprise me in the slightest.

I went to the Euros in Paris a few years back, and a bunch of fans from different countries were gathered in the dedicated fanzone having a singalong. Genuinely having a great time. Probably around 150 of us. English, Portuguese, Polish, German etc. all getting along.

The French police didn't like that for whatever reason. Out came the riot vans, batons and riot shields. They surrounded us in a circle, forcibly removed us from the fan zone, and literally shoved us down the metro - as in, folks were being pushed down flights of stairs. Plenty of injuries and blood.

Still not entirely sure what we'd even done. The police just seemed desperate for fight.

65

0utlook t1_je3zn63 wrote

Reply to comment by ArmChairAnalyst86 in Russia starts exercises with Yars intercontinental ballistic missiles by Quantum_II

They nuke half a continent on the other side of the globe and still lose the war. There is no victory for anyone post nuclear war. Those not blessed by the quick death of the exchange itself will be left poisoned on a dying Earth.

Flee to the southern hemisphere all ya want. You'll still die with the oceans.

3

[deleted] t1_je3xzix wrote

Reply to comment by 5dmt in Made-in-India iPhone shipments jump 162% by Sxzym

I take meaningful objection to this. I really do. And this isn't meant as satire, and I'm not trying to minimize the situation either.

Western corporations absolutely do swoop in, take advantage of loose regulation, advantageous access to leaders, cheap labor and the rest to get the best deal they can get. And they do calculate about where to go for it. There was a paper I read years ago by western corporate interests discussing where to migrate their production now that coastal chinese labor had gotten too expensive.

But the majority of the environmental damage that goes on (or that went on in China, for example) isn't like coming out of an Intel Corp. factory pipe into the water table. It's a lack of government regulation and it's domestic businesses - willing to cut corners to make a buck with the new opportunities that western companies represent - doing it themselves. There are criticisms to levy at the west for that; they're putting a bunch of money and technology that people don't understand into the hands of people who see a chance for advantage and they're ruining their own environment. It's terrible and we should worry about it - but it isn't some nebulous plot by the west to go in and pollute a lake, etc.

13

qtpnd t1_je3xyum wrote

Reply to comment by flappers87 in Police using ‘excessive force’ at France protests, rights groups say by rein_deer7

That is not what is happening, so I don't see why I'd have to consider that situation. The only burning things are trashes and public furnitures with no one and no one's stuff inside.

And as someone whose house already burnt by accident and almost died in it, thank you for making me relive those memories...

−1

Embarrassed-Writer61 t1_je3xwqk wrote

Reply to comment by Schrodingers_tombola in Italy wages war on lab-grown food in drive to protect tradition by BlueZybez

'Good. Italian meats and cheeses are too delicious to be threatened by tech crap.'

Logical fallacy number 1. Appeal to nature. You assume that natural things (Italian meats and cheeses) are inherently better than artificial things (tech crap, lab-grown stuff).

Logical fallacy 2. Slippery slope: You claim that lab-grown food will lead to a series of negative consequences (harm profit, reduce quality, create inequality) without providing any evidence or explanation for how this will happen.

Logical fallacy 3. False dilemma: You only suggest only two options (real quality ingredients or simulacra of a burger) and ignore any other possible alternatives or middle grounds.

26

flappers87 t1_je3wyfl wrote

Reply to comment by MayaMiaMe in Police using ‘excessive force’ at France protests, rights groups say by rein_deer7

Destroying other people's property because you're angry at the government is NOT the way to go about it.

I mean, I support the protests. But I don't support setting buildings, cars on fire... attacking people and the general violence. It solves nothing.

What good does setting your neighbours car on fire do? How does that help the message that you're trying to send?

At the end of the day, there are the actual people protesting... and then there are people who are taking advantage of the situation by damaging property and being incredibly violent.

Yes, the government is trying to take 2 years away from the people (while still being one of the lowest retirement ages in Europe...). But these people are taking away - in some cases - more than 2 years of savings from others by destroying their property that they spent years on acquiring.

Why are you supporting violence against people and people's property?

Would you still be happy if a protester set your house on fire? Would you still be making such a nonsensical comment?

No you wouldn't. And I wouldn't believe you if you said otherwise.

This is a classic "I'm not affected by this, so I support it". Yeah... just wait till there's a violent protest in your neighbourhood and your shit gets set on fire.

There should be no violence from EITHER side. Violence never solves anything.

2