You don't get it, the US government could have been bad or good but that wasn't the concern when it comes to America. America was a separate thing from the folks in Washington, some politicians and might have done very bad things or the military industrial complex might have pushed the politicians to start wars but this wasn't what America stands for. Americans used to be the good guys, even when bombing kindergartens in the Middle East because whoever was responsible for that would have had paid for it in front of the American legal system or American people.
> By June 17, 2008, six defendants had their cases dropped and a seventh was found not guilty.[5] The only one of the eight charged to face punishment was Staff Sergeant Frank Wuterich. On October 3, 2007, the Article 32 hearing investigating officer recommended that charges of murder be dropped and Wuterich be tried for negligent homicide in the deaths of two women and five children.[6] Further charges of assault and manslaughter were ultimately dropped. Wuterich pled guilty to the only remaining charge, one count of negligent dereliction of duty, and was convicted on January 24, 2012.[7][8]
It doesn't matter, that was the perception and the expectation. Americans themselves were used to seen as blameless, since those things were against what US stands for.
Dude, seriously, what are you smoking?
Some nutcases literally flew a plane into civillian buildings as a response to the works of these Washington minority.
I think you need to read more carefully, you are arguing against things you imagine I said. Write down what you believe you are objecting to, try to find that in the things I wrote.
What do you think that means exactly? Please consider to use words instead of dots. I am sure that those dots have some concrete meaning but that is in your head, we are different people and I am not able to read what you constructed in your imagination.
It's really hard to distinguish this from satire, because it's so much detached from reality. I deduce it's not satire from the other posts here.
Labeling 300+ million people as "the good guys" grouping then by nation (I assume with "Americans" you mean US American citizen and not, for example, Mexicans?) but then trying to detach a nation from its politics is wild and the notion of "they are the good guys even when they do terrible things" is some weird circular or contradicting argument (depending on how I've wants to play that).
American soldiers trained their weapons on those Americans to halt the killing.
America has always contained multitudes, but chose to see the best in itself and the world saw it reflected in that light.
One of the most shocking things to me was visiting Vietnam and going to the Museum of American War Crimes in Ho Chi Minh City and almost the first thing you see walking in is the words of the US Declaration of Independence in enormous letters, printed across an entire wall: "We hold these truths to be self-evident..."
They are throwing America's own principles back in its face, castigating America for behaving in a way that is un-American. The world believed in what America claims it believes.
The constitution is a piece of paper written by dead white men.
Principles have never been about that. The world has never been about that. It's never been something anyone who wasn't "that kind of nerd" could believe in. Not even up for debate.
You say that, but pieces of paper written by dead white men have remade the world for good and for ill. All of 20th century history stands in the shadow of Das Kapital.
It used to be that when the US did something bad, people would point to the constitution and the American ideals and say "this isn't living up to our promise".
Now instead when people point to the constitution and American ideals people say "those were written by dead white men" as if to justify cynically discarding them in favor of something heinous.
Slavery has been abolished in the US for over 150 years, which is more time than it was between the founding of the US and when it was abolished. There hasn't been a slave owner or slave in generations.
Meanwhile abandoning freedom of speech or due process because of the skin color of the persons who penned the original documents can only be described as some kind of wackadoodle nonsense and evokes suspicions of arguing in bad faith.
Slavery is practiced today in this country. Every generation is born in whiteness and will never be free of the stain. Fuck your "freeze peach." Fuck what you think you're due. Sit! Back! DOWN!
Five score years ago, a great American, in whose symbolic shadow we stand today, signed the Emancipation Proclamation. This momentous decree came as a great beacon light of hope to millions of Negro slaves who had been seared in the flames of withering injustice. It came as a joyous daybreak to end the long night of their captivity.
But 100 years later, the Negro still is not free. One hundred years later, the life of the Negro is still sadly crippled by the manacles of segregation and the chains of discrimination. One hundred years later, the Negro lives on a lonely island of poverty in the midst of a vast ocean of material prosperity. One hundred years later the Negro is still languished in the corners of American society and finds himself in exile in his own land. And so we've come here today to dramatize a shameful condition. In a sense we've come to our nation's capital to cash a check.
When the architects of our republic wrote the magnificent words of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, they were signing a promissory note to which every American was to fall heir. This note was a promise that all men — yes, Black men as well as white men — would be guaranteed the unalienable rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
It is obvious today that America has defaulted on this promissory note insofar as her citizens of color are concerned. Instead of honoring this sacred obligation, America has given the Negro people a bad check, a check which has come back marked insufficient funds.
But we refuse to believe that the bank of justice is bankrupt.
We refuse to believe that there are insufficient funds in the great vaults of opportunity of this nation. And so we've come to cash this check, a check that will give us upon demand the riches of freedom and the security of justice.
You think another dead white man quoting King is anything the world hasn't heard before? What rock have you been hiding under these last fifteen years? Dorks and losers all you tech bros.
Electric engines are already very efficient (particularly compared to internal combustion). If you go from 90% to 95% efficiency, you don't save much in terms of battery.
ETA: Internal combustion engines half a century ago had an efficiency of 20%, now they're at 40%. That cuts the fuel you need to carry in half. Electric engines are near 100%, and as I said, going from 90% to 95% efficiency cuts required battery by a bit more than 5%, so peanuts.
But the motor is not the only thing that needs to be cooled. It’s mainly the battery, which has a narrow operating range. The power electronics that convert AC to DC also need to be cooled.
So you’re halving the cooling needs of the motor, which is nice but small compared to the other two. And even then, total cooling doesn’t impact range that much compared to warming the battery in cold climates.
If we halve waste-heat generation for a practical widget enough times, then we won't need liquid cooling for that widget at all. If the trend continues and gets good enough, then maybe we can get all the way to a complete passive-cooling snoozefest.
That's pretty boring, but boring is good. The systems we use every day without a thought because they boringly Just Work are, perhaps, our greatest successes.
Feature A exists for years. New feature B enters. If you want to opt out of feature B, you now need to opt out of feature A as well, which you probably liked much more.
I don't know a better term than blackmail to describe this. Thesaurus seems to imply blackmail is for money, but so is extortion, and it doesn't give me good suggestions.
EDIT: Coercion is more correct, but it's way too mild in my perception.
yes but it's also the other way around, no?
_businesses pages_ bring hundreds of thousands of eyes to _facebook/instagram_ that otherwise would not see FB/IG.
it took significant research efforts to just understand how these models learn how to multiply two numbers. The fact that we know how they operate doesn't mean we understand it.
I have no idea if he's involved in this at all (does seem fairly unrelated) but Mark Rutte is indeed an extremely dodgy bloke.
Not sure exactly who he represents but his actions as NATO secretary have been genuinely a bit concerning for me, he seems determined to start a war with Russia
"...Above and beyond the role of chair, the Secretary General has the authority to propose items for discussion and use their good offices in case of disputes between member states....
...In order to facilitate this process, the Secretary General maintains direct contact with Heads of State and Government, and Foreign and Defence Ministers in NATO and partner countries...."
And Mark Rutte has been shaping the domestic fiscal debate inside the Netherlands [2]: "...Mark Rutte said the Netherlands must significantly boost defence spending and pointed to Dutch spending on pensions, healthcare and social security, saying only a small fraction of those allocations would strengthen defence..."
Dutch and belgian citizens are being misled over and over again. The more you'd dig into it, the less it all makes sense.
All we get are documents with nearly everything censored except for very benign things. Only time will tell what's going on, but I doubt I'll live the day
Their sentiment is that Trump intervenes by whining to Mark Rutte, who seems to be the only European Trump is actually willing to listen to, at the expense of course of giving up all his dignity in calling Trump, literally, Daddy [1].
And I would not put it past Trump to do that... I mean, that's what he already did regarding Tiktok.
With Trump nothing is impossible any more, especially if he or someone in his circle stands to make or lose money. And that's the greatest danger in the US turning into a full blown banana republic.
So what do you expect the outcome to be if Trump complains to Rutte, who will then do... what exactly? Ask the current PM to do him a favor because of "reasons"? An overwhelming majority of people in the Netherlands oppose selling this company to the US, an overwhelming majority of political parties voted to block the sale and now the secretary of state in charge of this particular department indeed blocked it.
It seems to me that there is no way that Trump could overturn this decision via Rutte that Trump couldn't accomplish on his own by just threatening the Netherlands directly.
reply