the no kings movement draws a line between no kings in the USA, and leaving other countries to pursue the same.
didn't Donald Trump campaign on no more foreign wars? doesn't America First mean not starting some forever war?
and if there is a good case for intervention: then make it! what are the objectives? Regime change? we killed most of their leadership, and they are still running the show. We killed Osama... and then fled Afghanistan decades later. why is there such a short memory in this case? these dudes HATE US: their recruiting propaganda gets more effective with every bomb we drop on them.
and if regime change is so important, than surely we will invade North Korea next right? and Russia? what about them? how about Venezuela? ohhh, yeah we left the regime in place, with no change for the people living under it.
perhaps was controlling oil the key objective? well... we stopped sanctioning the Iranian regime, and they are still in a position to stop traffic in Hormuz: the current terms they are asking gives them more control over the strait, rather than less?
so what the hell is our objective? can we just admit that we have no idea what we're doing, because we have no strategy?
Be an apologist for something that isn't truly riddled with internal inconsistency.
but not universally. oil refineries were causing asthma and environmental degradation.
them moving to another state is a regulatory failure (they shouldn't have another jurisdiction to move to, they should just operate without imposing negative externalities on others, spelling of the refineries).
what value is clean air? what is the value of a human life? how much is your attention worth?
these are questions that capitalism should not answer, but will nevertheless try to.
Socialist economies are much more environmentally destructive, because they are so inefficient they cannot afford the luxury of being environmentally cleaner.
Yes. Not interacting with neighbors is something that can happen naturally, but working hard to not is an entirely different thing.
Knowing your neighbors is a good thing. Even if it's just a friendly hi. You don't have to hang out, but if there's ever something you need like "did I leave the sprinkler on" or "did I leave the stove on" or "borrow a cup of sugar", it helps being on speaking terms with a neighbor rather than your first interaction with them is because you need something.
Caveat being that you live next door to Epstein or similar where not knowing them will be beneficial when the police come asking questions.
that's a good way to frame it, but it boils down to: what is it that these entities or individuals do that is valuable and how do you replicate parts or the whole of it.
which is essentially the direction that were heading in: we're sequentially and iteratively building improvements.
what the logistics company did pre computers and even pre trucks was not all that different in many aspects.
I chalk it up to poorly designed software from a company where software isn't the core competency, rather than blaming the basic concept of putting software in a vehicle.
"Bad software is bad" doesn't have the same ring though...
I think in this case the point being made is "bad software makes the whole product bad", not just "bad software is bad".
Its similar to how bad brakes or a roof prone to leaking makes the whole car a bad car. The "weakest link" undermines the whole system.
> software isn't the core competency
Software is a essential part of modern cars, remove the software and they don't function (or in some cases are not allowed on the road). The car manufacturers "core competency" is making cars so I would argue that software is definitely a "core competency" of a modern car manufacturer.
i thought Sinners was so overhyped. mediocre performances (great music!) and a terrible plot (why were the vampires forced to ask for permission to enter, and then able to storm the building a few scenes later? was there no better way to resolve that then just forget about it)
loved OBAA (incredible pacing!) but had its flaws too
People who complain about aspects about movies they didn't like should all be as forthright as GP in explaining why exactly they didn't like that aspect, so I can decide whether to entirely disregard the opinion.
you mean like when we invaded Iraq and Afghanistan? So many great examples of successful intervention to refer to!
you mean like Libya, right? or North Korea? should we fix them again too?
how... how do you hold this position without reading even just 20 years of history?
reply