heybruce

"So maybe keeping his mouth shut would have been the most diplomatic course of action?" Why? As I stated, some people can't grasp the obvious. What benefit is there in allowing them to speculate about something that isn't going to happen? "Some people just can't help themselves I guess." That's obvious from reading some of the posts here.

Source? Did Ukraine use this stock before or after Russia started using theirs? Did Ukraine use its stock against civilian targets?

You assume he must be a good guy because he said stuff you want to believe. Or do you have evidence no one else has that shows Luft is a reliable patriot?

It has been accepted since the end of World War II that if one side uses an illegal tactic or weapon during war that the other side can respond in kind. Germany's bombing of civilian targets in England legitimized the allied bombing of civilian targets in Germany. It's ugly but that's how war is. Russia gave the green light for Ukraine to use cluster bombs when Russia used cluster bombs on Ukraine, frequently against civilian targets. The US held off on providing them as long as possible but it now appears that a shortage of artillery shells is holding up the Ukrainian offensive. At least Ukraine will use these bombs on legitimate military targets. Unexploded ordnance does present a threat to civilians, but the threat from the US supplied cluster bombs will be minuscule compared to the threat from the Russian cluster bombs and the mines Russia has scattered over vast areas of Ukraine. It's ugly, but to beat Russia you have to fight almost as nasty as Russia.

Geez.... President Biden stated the obvious for the benefit of those who haven't grasped the obvious. No member of NATO would have gone along with accepting Ukraine as a member while it is at war with Russia.

"The complaint cites studies published by the National Bureau of Economic Research, a think tank, that shows nearly 70% of legacy and donor-related applicants are white, and that such students are six to seven times more likely to be admitted to Harvard than non-legacy applicants." "It goes on to state that these preferences are "conferred without regard to the applicant's credentials or merits"..." Perhaps it's that second part that upsets people.

"Yes there was corruption but in compare to Thaksin times you would need to search for watches on Prawits hand....Bad enough but minor cases...." Nonsense. In the absence of investigations the preferred corruption metric is the Transparency International Corruption Perception index. It shows corruption increasing when the military took over in 2006, https://www.transparency.org/en/cpi/2006 and more or less holding steady after the 2014 coup. https://www.transparency.org/en/cpi/2022/index/tha

DeSantis is getting desperate.

Modern times like the 21st century? That's the only time in the last 200 or so years in which China had the economic power and political unity to be aggressive outside its own borders. During that time China has declared the South China Sea its own personal lake and started building military facilities on islands clearly within other countries territorial waters.

It does appear that Erdogan has detected a change in the winds and is signaling an openness to work with others. Potentially a good thing, but always remember what kind of player Erdogan is.

I'm curious, how far back did you research Chinese history before posting the above?

Wow, major proof-read oversight. I meant to post: For those who didn't catch the sarcasm, it is the opposite on cost and outcomes. Sorry.

Let's not forget his restrictions on protests and use of government to punish businesses that disagree with him.

For those who didn't catch the opposite, it is the opposite on cost and outcomes.

Where in this report is there any mention of leaks? It says: "Giuliani sat down with investigators for a voluntary interview about a range of topics"

Or "learn" in a war zone.

Many nations do regard use of cluster bombs a war crime. However there is a long established precedent that if one side is using tactics or weapons that are against the laws of war the other side is allowed to respond in kind. Russia has used cluster bombs against civilian targets: "The cluster munition attack with the highest known civilian casualties occurred on April 8, 2022, when Russia launched a Tochka-U ballistic missile equipped with a cluster munition warhead at a crowded train station in the eastern city of Kramatorsk as hundreds of people were trying to leave the area. A detailed Human Rights Watch investigation found that the attack killed at least 58 civilians and injured over 100 others." https://www.hrw.org/news/2023/05/29/cluster-munition-use-russia-ukraine-war I trust Ukraine will use the weapons against legitimate military targets.

"The December 14 date is of particular interest to prosecutors, sources told CNN. On that day, slates of alternate Republican electors in seven battleground states signed certificates falsely asserting Trump had won. Also that day, members of the Electoral College met in all 50 states to officially cast their ballots, declaring Joe Biden the winner with 306 electoral votes to Trump’s 232. " "Alternate" (fake) electors who signed certificates falsely asserting that Trump had won. Obviously these people are screwed, but what about the leader of this attempt to subvert democracy?

I give you a source no less than the great orange one: "“It is not ‘freedom of the press’ when newspapers and others are allowed to say and write whatever they want even if it is completely false!” Donald Trump tweeted on Sunday." https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/08/does-the-first-amendment-protect-deliberate-lies/496004/ In this case I agree with Trump, it's not free speech when someone is disseminating information that they know, or should know, is false.

So you can't answer either question. Not surprising, I'm sure your "original" post was an unoriginal talking point you found at a pro-gun site.

What gun laws are not being enforced? How would you suggest enforcing them?

Restricting the dissemination of misinformation and disinformation is fascist? Adolf Hitler promoted many lies about Jewish people, and the Nazi party produced a film comparing Jewish people to rats. Would it have been fascist to restrict their views?

Naval stations is a broad term.

I don't think AI is a conscious entity that will seek to dominate humanity, but I do think a lot of people will happily surrender the power to think for themselves to AI. I no longer memorize phone numbers because my phone does that for me, college bound high school graduates no longer know the multiplication tables and workers at cash registers are confounded by simple arithmetic because they have calculators that do that for them, and I'm sure that the number of people who can read and navigate using a map is declining rapidly because of navigation apps. People don't learn or think unless they have to, and AI will relieve us of the need to do a great deal of learning and thinking. Why should I research an issue if AI will do that for me (I'll just assume the answer is correct even though AI has been found to invent convincing false information) and why should I agonize over choices (where to eat, what movie to see, who to vote for) when AI will tell me what to do?

Definitely an exception. There is a legal agreement in place regarding Guantanamo, one which the current Cuban government wants to void. Considering that government's hosting of intelligence collection stations for the USSR, China and Russia, and its willingness to allow USSR ballistic missiles to be stationed there during the cold war, the US wants to maintain the agreement. "Agreement Between the United States and Cuba for the Lease of Lands for Coaling and Naval stations; February 23, 1903" "ARTICLE I The Republic of Cuba hereby leases to the United States, for the time required for the purposes of coaling and naval stations, the following described areas of land and water situated in the Island of Cuba..."https://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/dip_cuba002.asp Spain also wants Gibraltar back, but since it was ceded to England in 1713 after it was captured in the war of Spanish succession, the UK is reluctant to return it.