|
Mark Ames is a pedophile he bragged a bunch about loving underage Russian prostitutes and getting them pregnant when he ran exiled
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2017 06:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 14:30 |
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:Sheeit I didn't know she had a podcast. It's fairly miserable.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2017 06:22
|
|
|
Vincent Van Goatse posted:Mark Ames is a pedophile 
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2017 10:12
|
|
|
I think he's right tho Doesn't make him wrong about politics just lame
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2017 10:16
|
|
|
Yossarian-22 posted:I think he's right tho Vincent van Goatse is both.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2017 10:28
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:Vincent van Goatse is both. He should go back to the KSA/ISIS jacking off thread
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2017 12:19
|
|
|
Vincent Van Goatse posted:war nerd is bad and dumb if you actually know anything about warfare 
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2017 12:32
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:I really hope they make the Sci-Fi & Fascism episode free some time, because it's by far the most interesting episode for non-war buffs. Just finished this ep. That was really good. Any other specific eps I should check out?
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2017 17:04
|
|
|
I didn't really like Dolan until he started doing the show, but the show is great
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2017 17:51
|
|
|
Even if you're some joyless contrarian idiot who doesn't really like Dolan's editorial voice / gimmick as the War Nerd, considers Mark Ames a perverted hack and doesn't buy the War Nerd's specific analysis of X or Y military situation this show is still a treasure for 1) having a consistent line up of really interesting guests like Patrick Cockburn and Kelly Vlahos and Rania Khalek and 2) giving good historical overviews of conflicts that rarely get any attention in English language media such as the Nagorno-Karabakh war, Ethiopia vs. Eritrea or Iran vs. Iraq.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2017 18:53
|
|
|
cool podcast I like it a lot thanks for the heads up, im a podcast guy now so this is great
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2017 21:35
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/MarkAmesExiled/status/831267537216208896 What's Mark's problem with The Intercept?
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2017 02:08
|
|
|
Fidel Cuckstro posted:https://twitter.com/MarkAmesExiled/status/831267537216208896 Pierre Omidyar. I think The Intercept is better than most other pubs, but it's still ultimately an extension of a creepy billionaire's interests.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2017 02:42
|
|
|
Scent of Worf posted:Just finished this ep. That was really good. Any other specific eps I should check out? All of them. I'm looking through the backlog to see which ones were especially noteworthy. A lot of them get dated because the early episodes were a lot more topical, and only an hour long. Episode 10 is interesting, because that was the episode when War Nerd commented on Amnesty International's report about YPG/J ethnic cleansing of Arab villages, and AI wrote back saying they weren't doing any of that. Episode 14 was around the time of the Oregon Militia standoff, so they did a bit about the Mormons' history of warfare with Midwest Protestants & the Federal government. Episode 18 was the Patrick Cockburn interview on the rise of ISIS. Episode 20 was the Tim Shorrock interview on Korea, and the history of conflict with the North. As I'm writing this I'm realizing that my War Nerd fandom is gonna lead me into recommending too much so I'm gonna try and recommend the essentials. I'm just going to bold all the key words. Episode 30 was the Opium Wars episode. Episode 39 is about the Cold War counterinsurgencies around the world, with a special feature on Eduard Lansdale - the CIA sociopath who was the inspiration for The Quiet American. Episode 44: the Nukes episode with physicist Dr. Sunil Sanais. It was recommended earlier ITT and it's a good one. Episode 47: the North Carolina Civil War episode with David Forbes (prequel to the Sci-Fi & Fascism ep). Episode 48: I know I'm recommending too much anyway, but this is a top-tier episode about The Italian Front of WW1, and poet, national hero, and raging rear end in a top hat Gabriele d'Annunzio. Episode 49: is the second Patrick Cockburn interview. Pretty much everything past this point has been definitely worth listening too, but I'd especially highlight episode 56: The Sikhs. And of course, Episode 64: The Sci-Fi & Fascism episode is the god tier.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2017 02:53
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:All of them. thanks so much, i just moved out and didnt bring a tv because i thought i didnt need one but the silence is brutal. episode 56 it is
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2017 02:55
|
|
|
rudatron posted:I feel like this is your opportunity to explain why, instead of being a dick I've only some of his stuff quite a few years ago but if I remember correctly War Nerd believes that the USA using aircraft carriers as one of the primary ways we enforce our military dominion wherever we please is doomed to failure not by socieo-econimic or political means but that aircraft carriers are in fact just giant extremely vulnerable money and manpower traps that can be easily neutralized by just about anyone using whatever form of equipment they have available. Which is a really weird stance when you consider that the United States use aircraft carriers to put aircraft where they need them and that they don't just sit a few feet off the coast of whatever their operational target is and always have sizable escort groups. He may have some good insight into other subjects or matured and grown his knowledge of nerdy war stuff since he wrote his carrier stuff so I dunno.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2017 12:35
|
|
|
I feel like that's just an untested assumption. It may legitimately turn out that carriers are actually really vulnerable if ever used against a sufficiently powerful enemy. Submarines have come a long way, surface to surface missiles have come a long way, maybe if you shoot 20+ anti ship missiles at a carrier, it'll just go up in smoke no problems. But you don't really know either way for sure unless it happens.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2017 13:24
|
|
|
If you join the Patreon do you get access to War Nerd's previous newsletters?
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2017 13:29
|
|
|
rudatron posted:I feel like that's just an untested assumption. It may legitimately turn out that carriers are actually really vulnerable if ever used against a sufficiently powerful enemy. Submarines have come a long way, surface to surface missiles have come a long way, maybe if you shoot 20+ anti ship missiles at a carrier, it'll just go up in smoke no problems. But you don't really know either way for sure unless it happens. Its more that he fundamentally misunderstands the purpose and function of a naval carrier group. I'm not arguing that the carriers themselves are not vulnerable because they are, every major power since WW2 has dedicated lot's of time and money to build their own and/or develop technology to gently caress them over. I mean they are gigantic nuclear powered floating cities that can't go all that fast but their purpose is not to fight it's to sit in the water and refuel and re-arm combat aircraft. It's similar to saying well tanks are useless now because they can be destroyed at range by infantry with modern anti tank systems or that aircraft are now worthless because of modern air defenses. Everything committed to a fight is vulnerable to be knocked out but that is not a sufficient case by itself against using them.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2017 13:44
|
|
|
snoremac posted:If you join the Patreon do you get access to War Nerd's previous newsletters? Doesn't seem like it. I checked the newsletters and there's no link to an archive, and I've checked the patreon and there's no links there. Comrade Merf posted:I've only some of his stuff quite a few years ago but if I remember correctly War Nerd believes that the USA using aircraft carriers as one of the primary ways we enforce our military dominion wherever we please is doomed to failure not by socieo-econimic or political means but that aircraft carriers are in fact just giant extremely vulnerable money and manpower traps that can be easily neutralized by just about anyone using whatever form of equipment they have available. Which is a really weird stance when you consider that the United States use aircraft carriers to put aircraft where they need them and that they don't just sit a few feet off the coast of whatever their operational target is and always have sizable escort groups. The United States hasn't fought a country with a real navy since World War 2. CAGs are completely untested against an enemy with large numbers of anti-ship missiles and/or a decent submarine fleet, like the Iranians, Chinese, or North Koreans have. Hypothetically all they're good for is projecting power against third rate powers who can't defend themselves against the air or the sea.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2017 13:53
|
|
|
Fidel Cuckstro posted:https://twitter.com/MarkAmesExiled/status/831267537216208896 His entire purpose for existence is to beef with other journalists
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2017 15:43
|
|
|
Fidel Cuckstro posted:https://twitter.com/MarkAmesExiled/status/831267537216208896 he's been mad salty towards greenwald ever since the snowden leaks made greenwald the internationally famous investigative journalist while he continues to labor in relative obscurity at his own tech billionaire-owned operation
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2017 15:46
|
|
|
Comrade Merf posted:Its more that he fundamentally misunderstands the purpose and function of a naval carrier group. I'm not arguing that the carriers themselves are not vulnerable because they are, every major power since WW2 has dedicated lot's of time and money to build their own and/or develop technology to gently caress them over. I mean they are gigantic nuclear powered floating cities that can't go all that fast but their purpose is not to fight it's to sit in the water and refuel and re-arm combat aircraft. It's similar to saying well tanks are useless now because they can be destroyed at range by infantry with modern anti tank systems or that aircraft are now worthless because of modern air defenses. Everything committed to a fight is vulnerable to be knocked out but that is not a sufficient case by itself against using them. - post ww2 submarines are substantially different to ww2 and pre-ww2 submarines, to the point where it's wrong to treat them as the same kind of vessel. - intelligence gathering has increased dramatically, even ww2 radars were limited by the curvature of the earth to the horizon. That's changed with over-the-horizon radar systems in the 70s, as well as high altitude reconnaissance, satellites and now drone craft. - cruise missiles are now a thing All that's not to say that the ~War Nerd~ is right, who knows, maybe he's wrong. Maybe all of those changes don't count for poo poo. But we don't really know for sure, so it's not a totally absurd position to take, that maybe carriers are kind of a doomed category, like battleships before them.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2017 15:54
|
|
|
Comrade Merf posted:He may have some good insight into other subjects or matured and grown his knowledge of nerdy war stuff since he wrote his carrier stuff so I dunno. I used to like the War Nerd when I read it a few years ago (think it went behind a paywall or something?) however much of his work suffers from the same kind of problems, or as Rudatron put it he often presents "untested assumptions" as if they were fact. His articles are entertaining in the same way a buzzfeed 10 most bloodiest historical battles piece is, and can be good for introducing yourself to a topic. However whenever he covers subjects which I have read about myself I often notice a marked sloppiness in his choice of evidence, with everything that supports his position given credit and anything that runs counter to his narrative downplayed or simply omitted. He likes to present simple stories, which again are entertaining but can sometimes fall apart under close scrutiny. I don't have any examples as the exile is now under a paywall but I vaguely remember taking issue with several of his points on the War of the Triple Alliance with which I am familiar, among other examples. Saying American carriers are floating deathtraps is provocative and makes you think, but it is hard to say how much truth is in it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2017 18:33
|
|
|
zeal posted:he's been mad salty towards greenwald ever since the snowden leaks made greenwald the internationally famous investigative journalist while he continues to labor in relative obscurity at his own tech billionaire-owned operation It's because Greenwald is a libertarian.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2017 19:25
|
|
|
Comrade Merf posted:I mean they are gigantic nuclear powered floating cities that can't go all that fast but their purpose is not to fight it's to sit in the water and refuel and re-arm combat aircraft. Nuclear powered carriers are supposedly some of, if not the fastest naval ships afloat. Those nuclear power plants provide a lot of power.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2017 20:28
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:All of them. Good poo poo, thank you
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2017 08:22
|
|
|
Mark Ames is a complete piece of poo poo, war nerd is a fun listen just don't expect anything close to historical accuracy.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2017 08:44
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:It's because Greenwald is a libertarian.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 00:01
|
|
|
the intercept does good work on my country because of greenwald's boyfriend so i'm fine with him
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 01:15
|
|
|
I like the work the Intercept does, and Greenwald has been doing good reporting on Brazil and the United States lately, but that doesn't mean I have to trust them.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 02:29
|
|
|
Got a reply back from the man himself on the newsletter backlogs.quote:Gary Brecher They're thinking about it. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 15:56
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:I like the work the Intercept does, and Greenwald has been doing good reporting on Brazil and the United States lately, but that doesn't mean I have to trust them. Why is bring owned by Omidyar different from Thiel tho
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2017 00:30
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:Got a reply back from the man himself on the newsletter backlogs. Ah cool, thanks for asking.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2017 01:03
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:All of them. Thank you! I think this podcast is excellent and I loved the new one about Bosnia.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 05:47
|
|
|
Thug Lessons posted:His entire purpose for existence is to beef with other journalists i like both. beefing is good keeps everyone on their toes
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2017 03:43
|
|
|
tekz posted:i like both. beefing is good keeps everyone on their toes It's definitely cool to see them beefing with Charles Lister and Michael Weiss but grudgematching at Omidyar or Glenn Greenwald is a pathetic snoozefest
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2017 04:03
|
|
|
Exiled was one of the few places that flagrantly danced on Breitbart's grave when his heart exploded, and I'll always love them for it.quote:http://exiledonline.com/mark-ames-1-andrew-breitbart-0-exiled-editor-does-dirty-chicken-dance-on-breitbarts-grave/
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2017 06:53
|
|
|
I really enjoy these podcasts. Long-time fan of the Exile here. I actually got to have some exchanges with Ames (was a source for some stuff he wanted to do regarding Brazil that never panned out) Taibbi (by complete accident, as he was looking into going to the hospital I was working at for his back problems, because traveling overseas to be treated at a high-end hospital is way less expensive than doing some procedures in the US thanks to hosed-up healthcare) and Dolan. So happy that Dolan is finally getting some steady income and doing what he likes. Guy really paid a price for his antiwar columns, which is hilariously tragic if you consider how many actual monsters not only skated free but grew richer and more influential for supporting it. I and the other guys at Pando were the ones who urged him to set up a Patreon rather than bounce between crappy overseas teaching jobs where your superiors are ever eager to shitcan you to please some Saudi-fellating investor. Of course, the irony is that now I'm too poor to actually get onto said Patreon and get my fill. Thankfully he opens some posts now and then, but Im still itching to listen to the one about Italy in WW1 (great-grandfather was taken prisoner there) and a few others.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2017 16:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 14:30 |
|
|
Sephyr posted:I really enjoy these podcasts. Long-time fan of the Exile here. I actually got to have some exchanges with Ames (was a source for some stuff he wanted to do regarding Brazil that never panned out) Taibbi (by complete accident, as he was looking into going to the hospital I was working at for his back problems, because traveling overseas to be treated at a high-end hospital is way less expensive than doing some procedures in the US thanks to hosed-up healthcare) and Dolan. You worked at Pando? Incidentally, I checked out the BBC documentary that Mark & John recommended in the Bosnia episode, and it's really drat good. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M_PzsfXbyAw It's six parts and 4 1/2 hours long, but it's definitely worth watching. I had to keep taking breaks from it because the entire affair was all too stupid. Vulgar nationalisms undid a working multi-ethnic state, and everyone who tried to prevent it ended up being sidelined as traitors.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2017 19:59
|
|