4w ago

Hexbear is back? What's the lore?

I am seeing posts from https://hexbear.net/ once again. Anyone know what happened since they lost their domain name? How did they get it back?

You're viewing part of a thread.

Show Context

105 comments

The biggest factor is that most Ukrainians do not want to continue the war, and the US is beginning to pull out what little support there was, as Russia steadily makes territory gains. If the situation doesn't appear to be able to be changed, it is in Ukraine's interest to surrender earlier, rather than wait until they have no more bargaining power at all.
The situation is indeed fucked up, would've been better had Euromaidan never happened and NATO let Russia into it back when Putin first gained power, or NATO dissolved, but that didn't happen. Even better would have been the USSR never dissolving.
As for sabotage, it was early in the war, and Ukraine was willing to talk. The US and the UK said no. Pretty clearly a violation of Ukraine's rights in the conflict to begin with, it's always been a proxy war using Ukrainian lives instead of the US. Its a free war.
If blowing up hospitals is wrong, then you're also anti-Ukraine, I guess. The however wasn't a justification, but pointing that both Ukraine and Russia have targeted civilian infrastructure, so you should be against both, and in favor of a peace deal, like I have been saying from the start.
If you don't want to know what Marxists think, why start this convo in the first place?
- The biggest factor is that most Ukrainians do not want to continue the war
  Absolutely correct
  the US is beginning to pull out what little support there was
  Absolutely correct
  as Russia steadily makes territory gains
  Any day now lol. Since 2014, they've progressed 200 km inside the border. At that rate, they'll be in Kyiv by the year 2069, and they'll manage to reach the western border around the year 2100. Those territory gains sure add up, boy howdy.
  Progress in this kind of thing isn't linear, obviously a manpower collapse on the Ukrainian side or an explicit team-switch by the US would be catastrophic. But trumpeting "territory gains" as the measure of Russia's progress just highlights how you're trying to cheerlead for them while pretending to be "objective" and "leftist."
  Like I said, this whole conversation is stupid. You are not a leftist. You are a Russian cheerleader wrapping up your propaganda in a thin veneer of wise practicality and "dialectic" mumbo-jumbo.
  If blowing up hospitals is wrong, then you’re also anti-Ukraine, I guess. The however wasn’t a justification, but pointing that both Ukraine and Russia have targeted civilian infrastructure, so you should be against both, and in favor of a peace deal, like I have been saying from the start.
  Which hospital did Ukraine blow up? You know what, I don't care. Ukraine wasn't even allowed to strike inside Russia until five minutes ago relatively speaking.
  If you don’t want to know what Marxists think, why start this convo in the first place?
  Lol you're not a Marxist. You're making excuses for gangster capitalism and playing "both sides have been fighting you know" when the whole goddamned war is happening inside Ukraine's house. I don't actually believe they blew up any hospitals, but even entertaining that conversation is silly.
  Okay, actually, let's do this: Tell me why it doesn't count that Russia blew up a bunch of stuff they specifically peace-agreed that they wouldn't blow up, like just now within the last few days. Tell me which hospitals Ukraine blew up. Let's start just with those two things.
  Why is the USSR the model to emulate, when the USSR couldn't keep itself together and collapsed into gangster capitalism. Why is that the model to emulate? What should future USSR-aspirer states do differently to avoid suffering the same fate, while they are solving famine and imperialism?
  
  So if Ukrainians do not want to continue, and Russians are making gains, then you want them to continue to fight a war they aren't in support of so you can gain? If I'm supposedly a Russian cheerleader, are you just getting off on Ukrainians dying in a war they don't want to fight?
  As for Ukraine, it has regularly attacked civilain populations, even shelling the Donetsk and Luhanks areas where there are ethnic Russian majorities for years even before the war. Ukraine is not innocent, though not evil either, the correct stance is a peace deal ASAP. I never said anything "didn't count," I am telling you that the best outcome for everyone is a peace deal immediately, and you're trying to twist that into me loving Russia.
  Either way, there's a lot we can learn about the USSR, and its faults have largely been learned from. You can see in modern Socialist states that have learned the dangers of privitizing key industries and large industries will do from the USSR, and have kept their key industries and large firms public while privatizing the smaller industries. This is a return to more classical Marxism. The Soviets already solved famine and Imperialism, they fought against Imperialism and ended famine.
  
  So if Ukrainians do not want to continue, and Russians are making gains, then you want them to continue to fight a war they aren’t in support of so you can gain? If I’m supposedly a Russian cheerleader, are you just getting off on Ukrainians dying in a war they don’t want to fight?
  Actually, this part I should give some kind of genuine response to. Maybe. I don't think you deserve it, but whatever, at least to clarify my own position on it:
  Obviously I want peace, as do the Ukrainians, as should any Russia conscripts who are sometimes equally victimized by the whole situation. The reason I'm reacting with derision to this idea of blaming the US or anyone other than the Russians for Russia invading Ukraine and killing all those people is that at the end of the day, they're ones who invaded Ukraine and killed all those people.
  They could go home tomorrow. Since they're not doing that, but instead hanging around on Ukrainian land and blowing up Ukrainians, is the only reason I say the path to real security is to keep blowing them up instead. Again, if someone comes into your house and is killing family members, it ceases to be relevant why they feel they had a good reason for it, or how they were provoked, or whether or not you apparently squandered your chance to make peace with them before they decided they had to do that, or anything else. What matters is to defend yourself. I don't think Ukraine squandered any chance for peace in that fashion, I think Russia is lying about how much they want peace. Why do I think that? Because they're on Ukrainian land, killing Ukrainians.
  Them violating the terms of their own cease-fire more or less immediately is a pretty strong demonstration of that. To me. The fact that Ukrainians obviously "don't want to fight," which is accurate, they'd rather not be in the war, doesn't mean they're not on board for defending themselves against a hostile power which is blowing up their country. They seem far more on board for that than the rest of the West as a whole seems on board for supporting them in it.
  
  Russia has repeatedly stated that they went to war to demillitarize Ukraine. They will not stop until they have that, either through peace deals, or force. Them leaving has no support domestically, while continuing the war does.
  
  Yeah, okay. So kill them to the last soldier. Then they'll stop. Sounds pretty straightforward. They can always change their mind about what they "will not stop" until they accomplish.
  Like I said, your mask of Marxism is slipping and showing the Russian cheerleader beneath. I think you should go back to some pretense of "practicality" about the conflict, and how unfortunate it is that this whole situation spiraled out of control, and of course you don't want killing or justification for same.
  
  No, you have been entirely dishonest this entire time, to try to get me to say "Russia is good" or "Russia is correct." I won't, because that's not my stance, even if you want to make a quick MWoG post for your-right wing friends.
  Russia has consistently stated that NATO on its doorstep is a no-go. Russia will not leave unless this is accomplished, and since they aren't "good guys," they will continie until this goal is met. A peace deal is what Ukrainians want, and a peace deal now saves more lives. I am anti-war.
  You keep saying I'm a fake Marxist, but haven't been able to explain why. You call me a Russian cheerleader despite not taking Russia's side, and instead taking an anti-US stance. Go on, make your drama post.
  
  Russia has consistently stated that NATO on its doorstep is a no-go. Russia will not leave unless this is accomplished, and since they aren’t “good guys,” they will continie until this goal is met.
  Or until consenting or not they lose the war. That happens sometimes. Actually quite often, to large dysfunctional empires trying to attack someone else's homeland and facing stiff resistance. It seems like it's been happening so far to Russia. Personally, I think shooting the invaders until they leave sounds great. I would much rather they leave sooner than later, obviously, but that's really only up to them how long they want to stay around getting shot.
  That's leaving aside the whole question of "you joining an alliance so you'll be able to defend yourself if I attack you is a red line for me." Ukraine was not in NATO, that wasn't really on the table in any serious sense, and invading them and killing thousands of people is if anything going to make them much more in favor of being in NATO, to keep themselves safe. Plenty of other little republics that were nowhere near joining NATO have been attacked and absorbed to Russia over the last little while.
  This whole thing "well they said they'd be violent if they didn't get their way, so let's sure for peace so they don't have to be violent." is abuser-enabler-logic. Fuck 'em up. That's the answer. For a domestic abuser, for Israel, for Russia, for whoever else. If you want to speak force-language, sure, we can speak force-language.
  
  You'd have to do the legwork to show that Russia actually stands to lose, which it doesn't appear to be. Again, US support, even thin, is waning, and the EU can't supply Ukraine, nor are there enough people willing to fight in Ukraine. A peace deal ends the bloodshed.
  Again, you're not going to get me to say Russia are the good guys, no matter how you try to squeeze it out. I think if you were interested in an honest conversatiom, we'd actually agree more than disagree, but you're fishing for drama to post, it seems.
  Edit: oh, looks like you made a post anyways, taking issue with the fact that the USSR and PRC ended famines and Imperialism. It's factual, though, the PRC is food secure and wasn't when it was under the Nationalists, and Tsarist Russia had regular famines until the Soviets industrialized. Both the PRC and USSR had the last famines either country has seen, as they industrialized.
  
  Cool cool.
  Hey, quick question:
  What's that dip in "World" and "Asia" there?
  Follow-up question. This one's a fill in the blank. The British Empire at its peak was 35 million square km. If you don't count pre-20th-century historical empires, what's the second one, and how big was its total land area?
  It's not the Spanish or the second French... we could include the Mongol empire (24 million sq km) and the pre-revolutionary Russian empire (22.8 sq km) if you wanted. If you included those, what's the fourth largest?
  
  Socialism doubled the life expectancy in Russia and in China. Both did so by working towards ending famine and improving industrialization. Both had famines in their early years during Socialism, but these were the last famines in a long history of them. Seeing as how you already made a post, I don't think you really care about being honest, though.
  Secondly, land size is not what defines an "Empire." It's an economic relation, not a land relation. I genuinely don't see how this is a gotcha.
  
  Oh, also: Is it sabotage of a peace deal to blow up a bunch of energy infrastructure the same day that you agreed you wouldn’t attack each other’s energy infrastructure? I’m really not trying to “squeeze out” some kind of statement of approval from you by asking that. I am, in fact, asking for you to show disapproval, since anyone with a functioning brain can see that that is sabotage of the peace deal. I’m honestly not sure why you seem to be having trouble saying that, although I have a theory.
  
  My theory is that you don't actually care what I say, and are permanently and deliberatley trying to take the least charitable interpretation of what I say. I'd say sabotaging peace deals and violating agreements is a bad thing, sure. If Russia did that, then that's bad. I have no problem with saying that, Russia is a brutal Capitalist regime that has fallen far from it's Soviet roots.
  At the same time, I can also say that if you actually cared to have an honest conversation, you wouldn't be trying to take the worst possible interpretation of what I say on purpose.
  
  Which hospital did Ukraine blow up?
  The other part, let me phrase as a question: Would you describe attacking energy infrastructure the same day you agreed to a cease-fire on each other's energy infrastructure as "sabotage" of the peace deal? Why or why not?
  Which modern socialist state should be the model, if the USSR is
  The Soviets already solved famine and Imperialism, they fought against Imperialism and ended famine.
  Dude. Fucking never mind lol. I'm posting this to meanwhileongrad and moving on with my day. You can answer my direct questions above, or not, up to you.
  
  Ukraine has been shelling Donetsk and Luhansk for decades, killing children and civilians.
  Either way, the PRC is good. Feel free to post on that anticommunist drama comm.
  
  Which hospital did they blow up?
  You sent me a story from half a generation ago, about one shell from one side or another that fell and killed some civilians during an active close conflict.
  When did the Ukrainians blow up a hospital? Or did they not do that?
  
  You're being a debate pervert, I showed you an article about ongoing violence against Donetsk and Luhansk where Ukraine bombed a school, and because it isn't a hospital, bombing children is okay, I guess? Either way, here you go, Ukrainian forces bombing hospitals.
  
  You might have missed it, but it doesn't look like the BBC story you showed indicated which side had shelled the school. Simply that, as part of some Moscow-backed fighting in an urban area, one side or another dropped shells on a school near where the separatists were besieging the airport.
  Also, that source is hilarious lol.
  MOSCOW, March 31 - RIA Novosti. After the sentencing of Marine Le Pen, the leader of the right-wing National Unification party faction in the French parliament, Dmitry Medvedev, Deputy Chairman of the Russian Security Council, suggested that the French think about establishing a "Sixth Republic" or recall the time when tsarist Russia "brought democracy to France on bayonets."
  Commenting on Le Pen's verdict, the deputy head of the Russian Security Council noted on his page on the VKontakte social network that "by adopting the path of simple, odious politicking, the Fifth French Republic has completely discredited itself."
  "The people of this country, apparently, should think about establishing a Sixth Republic," Medvedev wrote, ironically noting that he was "not hinting at anything."
  What is this source? I'm not real sold by their repost of what they found on Telegram. What were they saying around the time of Feburary 2022? I tried to look in the Wayback machine but I couldn't find anything, and their archives aren't exactly easy to navigate. They appear to post one new story every minute, so it's kind of hard to trace back all that far just by simple means.
  
  Of course BBC isn't going to report on which side dropped the bomb if it was an ally of the UK, it's just going to be vague. You can watch a documentary, read an article from Human Rights Watch,, or even watch it on CNN.
  
  Sounds good. What is this source you sent me? What were they saying about the news from Ukraine in Feb 2022?
  
  I'm not even sure what you're trying to do here anymore, I have given you everything from pro-Russian sources to anti-Russian sources, and seemingly none of them satisfy you. What's the point? I have stated that I want a peace deal ASAP, which is what Ukrainian people want as well. What is it that you want?
  
  Oh, actually, you said "hospitals" plural. Which hospitals did Ukraine blow up?

105 comments