1 minute ago, duda said:

je li Ormuz zatvoren ?

Juče je iranska garda objavila da jeste, danas ide info da nije, osim za američke brodove. Tankeri se gomilaju sa obje strane, bacili sidra i čekaju. Tri su probala da prođu, pa su pogođeni nečim odnekud.

Tramp je jučr rekao da je jedan od ciljeva uništenje iranske mornarice, pa za koji dan Teheran neće imati čime da provodi blokadu.

Pakao je tamo. IL i USA su prošle godine su opipali puls iranske vojske i mapirali pozicije i mogućnosti, juče su uništili PVO, sad je skoro kao i Gazi - lete i bombarduju iz blizine kad hoće i koliko hoće.

Ovo što Iran gađa po regionu nema nikakav vojni značaj, samo gase turizam/privredu (i to je nekakva osveta), nema nikakvog strašnog oružja niti preokreta.

12 minutes ago, Zaboravan said:

Baš krvnički lupaju po Teheranu.

Udario je Iran slicno po Jerusalimu danas

Iran je udarao po brojim zapadnim bazama po Zalivu-americke, francusku i italijansku

3 minutes ago, Emerald said:

Udario je Iran slicno po Jerusalimu danas

Pa onda barem Bibi da ne poziva Irance na ulicu™ nije baš da motiviše...

Acemoglu.

Daron Acemoglu

@DAcemogluMIT

On Iran and Anthropic: Robert Mugabe, Zimbabwe’s dictatorial president since 1987, won the big prize in the country’s lottery in 2000. Why did he go out of his way to concoct such a charade? A surface-level answer: Because he could. Once you destroy institutions constraining your power and behavior, you can act in largely unrestricted fashion, whether it is for personal enrichment, personal aggrandizement, or simply projecting even greater power. But there is a deeper, more problematic answer as well: What better way to further decimate institutional checks on your power than showing how much of a farce the existing system of rules is. It is not just a coincidence that such behavior can do damage to norms, institutions and security and stability of the country. It is part of the design. Mugabe’s lottery win echoes in two fateful decisions by the Trump administration, which will have long-lasting and troubling implications, are just. Trump and his allies are pursuing these actions because they can and because these actions are consistent with their agenda of upending all rules and constraints on their future behavior. The first problematic action is the US-Israeli attack on Iran and the killing of the country’s supreme leader Ayatollah Khamenei. Leave aside the loss of life and the immediate chaos, it should be obvious that such a move will trigger a long period of instability in the Middle East. There should be no doubt that the Iranian regime was repressive, murderous and bad news for its own people’s economic and social well-being. The supreme leader, leading Iranian elites and the country’s feared Revolutionary Guard had blood in their hands and the repression had intensified lately. But none of this justifies the United States and Israel initiating a war in the Middle East, without support from international allies or from the public in the United States (still considered a democracy where people’s views should in principle matter). But even worse, this act violates the sovereignty of another nation and risks plunging the entire region into carnage. And however awful Ayatollah Khamenei’s track record may be, he’s no Nicolas Maduro (who had only a few diehard supporters even in the Venezuelan military). By virtue of his religious role, Khamenei enjoyed respect and authority among the Shiites and even the broader Muslim mission community, and his killing risks turning him into a martyr, which is the last thing that Iran or the region needs. The second is the Department of Defense (it is still painful to call it the Department of War even if recent actions confirm that this change of name wasn’t just for optics) designating the AI company Anthropic a supply-chain risk. The official designation is typically used for companies from foreign adversaries, such as China’s Huawei. It bars federal contractors using the Anthropic’s models and heralds major restrictions on what the company can do in the future. The Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth announced “Effective immediately, no contractor, supplier, or partner that does business with the United States military may conduct any commercial activity with Anthropic.” The reason? Because Anthropic wanted safeguards against its models being used for mass surveillance of Americans and autonomous weapon systems. Neither of these two provisions would have put meaningful restrictions on the DoD in practice. Mass surveillance is illegal under US law and autonomous weapon systems are a not near-term possibility. Yet, it is the showdown that matters, just like Mugabe’s lottery winning. This action will also have major consequences, perhaps more far-reaching than the attack on Iran. Regardless of what one might think of current AI capabilities, there is little doubt that who controls AI will have momentous implications for democracy, business, communication and privacy. This designation can be interpreted by many in the industry that it will be the US government, not the private sector, that controls AI. Even more far-reaching are the broader implications of this action: this administration, and perhaps future administrations, can now bring hugely disproportionate penalties on any contractor they disagree with. Security of private property rights, which has been a mainstay of American state-business relations for centuries, is now looking much shakier. It also sends exactly the wrong signal to the world that Pentagon is intent on mass surveillance and the development of autonomous weapon systems (why else bother about these two ineffective provisions in the contract?). The absurdity of both actions is what harkens back to Mugabe’s lottery win. Trump came to power promising no foreign adventures, and now has spearheaded a potentially riskier one than the Iraq war, with even flimsier justification. There would have been no bite to the provisions that Anthropic wanted in the contract, since current AI systems are nowhere near reliable to be used in autonomous weapon systems and the US government has plenty of other tools that can be (and sometimes are) used for mass surveillance. The shock value and the norm breaking are part of the intent. Mugabe’s lessons continue.

Jel se javio Putin da osudi napade?

Hihiha,kako je otišla reputacija u zadnjih par meseci.

Edited March 1Mar 1 by Bogotac

Pa ne, samo je spustio zastavu na pola koplja. To je najviše što je mogao da uradi.

Edited March 1Mar 1 by Marcus Wulffings

5 minutes ago, Bogotac said:

Jel se javio Putin da osudi napade?

Hihiha,kako je otišla reputacija u zadnjih par meseci.

Otisla je jer je sad ta faza. Sa prismotrama, dronovima, soshl akountima, pracenjem, zivot kakav poznajemo menjace se pred nasim ocima. Planeta gde niko ne mora ni da se pretvara da je good guy samo znaci da se eskalira na eskalirano.

The war in Iran has once again highlighted the process of “Israelization” of the law of armed conflict: the phenomenon by which the rules governing what is not allowed in war are reduced to the bare minimum. Yesterday, the United States carried out a surprise attack in the middle of negotiations; it was also a strike squarely aimed at the civilian political leadership. In 1986, Reagan had to deny that the attack on Tripoli was intended to kill Gaddafi. At the time, it was considered too barbaric to target the leader of a country, even if he was accused of sponsoring terrorist attacks. In 1999, the option of killing Serbia’s leader, Milošević, was explicitly ruled out by the coalition, because the head of a state, it was argued then, was by definition a non-combatant. Today, the goalposts have been pushed much further. If you can get away with it, political assassinations - even when carried out while diplomats are still talking - have effectively become an accepted tool of foreign policy.

Tramp nudio Iranu odmah primirje ali je Iran odbio

28 minutes ago, Svemir Zeka said:

Evo ja ću preventivno da se deklarišem kao nemoralna osoba u odnosu na moralne veličine koje ne vrednuju neposlove i budalaštine koje neki ljudi priuštavaju u životu kao niže bitne.

I to bez naslađivanja već uz najobičnije poređenje Gaze, na koju smo navikli kao mesto koje se konstantno dimi i gde su leševi normalizovana slika, pa onda: Iran. Pa onda: i ovaj Jerusalim, pa onda: i Tel Aviv nedavno, pa onda: i ovaj Bahrein, i sve te besmislene smrti ljudi koji su se do juče nečemu radovali, negde težili. Posle svega toga ugledamo bizaran izveštaj iz Abu Dabija i kao nemoj slučajno da si bednik i ići ćeš u pakao ako se nasmeješ - boli me kurac ako me takav pakao sačeka. Slobodno.

I onda zamisliš da je umesto one jadnice taj izveštaj snimio i šerovao neko tebi poznat i blizak, npr.rođak, prijatelj ili kuma. Jel bi i onda bilo smešno?

1 minute ago, Filozof manijak said:

I onda zamisliš da je umesto one jadnice taj izveštaj snimio i šerovao neko tebi poznat i blizak, npr.rođak, prijatelj ili kuma. Jel bi i onda bilo smešno?

Ono što vidim na snimku sam i sama prošla, tako da....ne u Dubaiju, u Beogradu.

U kontekstu svega što se trenutno dešava ili se dešavalo tokom prethodne godine, i ako tamo nema mrtvih (jel ima?), nije smešno ali brate nije ni za reakciju ovih razmera

Just now, Svemir Zeka said:

Ono što vidim na snimku sam i sama prošla, tako da....ne u Dubaiju, u Beogradu.

U kontekstu svega što se trenutno dešava ili se dešavalo tokom prethodne godine, i ako tamo nema mrtvih (jel ima?), nije smešno ali brate nije ni za reakciju ovih razmera

Sad zamisli nekog tamo ko je sve to prošao ovde, pa sad prolazi ponovo. Sa decom, u improvizovanom skloništu. Naravno da nije uporedivo sa smrću desetina hiljada dece u Gazi, samo je sve drugačije kad je lično.

Edited March 1Mar 1 by Dsnake