Last time I looked, CBS wasn't an Iranian network. Still, given that the US was never all too hesitant to fly spy missions over other countries when sure that they could get away with it (remember shot spy plane in USSR or over 900 diplomatic warnings that came from China due to violation of their airspace), I do tend to believe that the drone went down during a spy mission be it because of takeover or because of a malfunction rather than an elaborate plot of evil Iranians to cast shadow on freedom-loving USA.
And have many interesting pieces of equipment, including friend/foo stuff. But it is still better politically than dealing with a dead or, even worse, captured pilot.
Well, it's their airspace, they can do whatever they like to objects in it.
Besides, I overheard a report on CBS that this drone is a part of a spy drone fleet which was routinely flying over Iran and collecting information for years. If the goal is really to stop foreign spy planes flying over your land, it might be more beneficial to down the plane and showing it to the hole world instead of shooting it down.
It is indeed impossible to measure the impact of radiation after Chernobyl. Life of those who lived around and/or has been exposed to radiation has shortened dramatically, but that trend has happened all across the former Soviet Union after the downfall and the economic meltdown (you are not wrong if you call it total collapse of then existed society), even without radiation.
In SSD/HDD combos there is always the SSD cache. But is there any model where you have separate SSD partition which you can use e.g. for system files or ReadyBoost for those who still use Windows?
If you can't understand an analogy, then you should just shoot yourself and put us out of your misery.
Did excessive drug use made you aggressive and humor-impaired? I have no problem putting a smiley after each joke, just tell me that you need it.
Oh, and my point is that you have no constitutional right to live, just like you have no constitutional right to smoke pot. They are the same, constitutionally speaking, so why do you assert one exists and the other doesn't?
Actually, I do. It's right there in the Article 2 of the Constitution "Every person shall have the right to life and physical integrity." You may not have such a right though: different countries have different Basic Laws, you know.
I think we'll agree to disagree on the topic whether it'll be a negative or a positive number. I do think that if cocaine consumption reaches even a quarter the level of tobacco, the society will have an array of additional grave problems. And it has all the potential to reach even higher levels because at some point corporations will take over. Then we'll have alcohol, tobacco, fast food (which some studies show to be addictive too) AND cocaine. As for reduced law enforcement costs: the Netherlands have most liberal drug laws in Europe yet they also spend more for drug control (in % of GDP) than any other country in EU.
Hmm, gotta need to read the Constitution and the Bill of Human Rights again... How could I possibly miss the right to be high or/and drunk?! Besides, what exactly is "the profit of the government" you refer to? The money which is spent on social services, roads, schools etc. instead of providing additional services and facilities to deal with the aftermath of excessive tobacco or alcohol consume? Then I truly wish that the government will maximize their profits. Seriously, a society which is held permanently drunk or high is much easier to control by the government since the people tend to think less and to doubt less. Sure, there is no denying that a man can't be forbidden to wish such things, but it's still giving away the essential freedoms for temporary happiness while damaging the society you live in. Will deserve neither and lose both;-)
The GGP must be proposing lifting those restrictions for cocaine as well, otherwise there will be a black market anyway. Besides, is there any statistical data whether the tax revenue from alcohol or tobacco is enough to pay off for all the medical issues they create? I recall hearing a tv report that it's not the case in Germany, by a very large margin. Ah, found it: in Germany the yearly tax revenue from alcohol taxes is 3,5 billions EUR, but estimated 24,4 billions EUR are spent due to alcohol-related damage to the economy (medical services, accidents, insurances etc.). About 1 billion EUR is spent on alcohol advertisement each year. Similar situation is estimated for tobacco. So the two major legal drugs create more damage to the economy than the state could possibly repair through taxes. Why should it be different with cocaine?
The government is also interested in cutting spending. And it is not prone to corruption as well. However, as far as damage responce goes, the government can be more effective than private entities.
I don't think so, after the "Bagration" offensive operation the communication lines of the Red Army were overstretched, it needed time to regroup in order to be able to continue the push on the Germans. The vanguard could not force crossing the Vistula on its own. Besides, the Germans have started counter-attacks trying to make use of that situation. As for the Poles that were allegedly turned down -- just two days before the uprising began a polish representative met with Stavka officers but failed to mention what was about to start. You have to read the correspondence between Churchill and Stalin, it confirms as well that the Stavka has not been even informed about the uprising, only when the Poles got in serious trouble Churchill began to persistently ask Stalin to intervene.
The intrigues of British government and Polish exile government in London combined with an overestimation of their own strength have lead to this venture. The uprisers were heroes who were gambled by British and their own excile leaders for questionable political gains. It is just too easy to blame the bad Soviets in order to cover own actions.
So you neglect the fierce resistance of partisans and underground in Belarus which have lost almost a *third* of its population during the war (unlike Holocaust that tragedy remains relatively unknown) and praise Norway which faired pretty well under German rule with most population going on with their daily lives (you can't really compare several thousands Norwegian causalities with a few millions dead Belarusian people)? It did not help Germans that they have slaughtered entire villages in Belarus and Ukraine, the resistance got stronger instead which lead to even more slaughtering. I've been talking to many old people who have survive that time, many of them have joined the partisans *because* they've seen German troops slaughtering Jews wherever they could find any (and there were many Jewish settlements and communities in Belarus back then).
German did two wars back then -- the "civilized" one in Western and Nothern Europe and the total war against Soviet Union, where millions of captured soldiers have died in German concentration camps (another forgotten tragedy, no one really cared about conventions, they were "commies" after all) and many more civilians.
As for Warsaw uprising -- I tend to believe Churchill when he said that the uprising was started prematurely and with no coordination with the Red Army. The famous Polish pride, I guess.
I strongly disagree, having been lived in a dictatorship myself. A dictator may have the majority of votes on election, but to call it the will of majority would be a gross overstatement. Any dictator creates an artificial environment where no strong opponent may ever become strong enough to oppose him. The govenment usually consists of weak officials chosen by their absolute loyalty instead of their abilities and skills. Any opposition leader who is becoming too strong in the eye of a dictator will be oppressed, put in jail, forced to leave the country and above all discreditated almost non-stop via the state controlled media with no opportunity to answer even the most insolent lie. The police deals fairly brutally with any forms of protests which are downplayed by the monopolistic state-owned media as well. The Internet is a bit of a game-changer, but as most dictatorship are doing pretty bad economically with government officials that are selected by loyalty and inevitable rampant corruption, only a minority could afford it. Sure, with obligatory pre-election pensions and salaries rise, with excessive propaganda prior to the election, no real alternative due to the above-mentioned reasons and other tricks a dictator *may* get above 50% of the votes, but such election is by no means fair, don't you agree? But, as we've seen lately, most dictators just falsify the election to about 80-90% to claim the unanimous support of the people. Both in Tunisia and Egypt the number of people who *actively* went to the streets has easily surpassed the alleged number of people who officially voted against the president. And how many of unhappy were simply afraid? Fear is dictators weapon of choice, after all. Not everyone who is against the dictatorship is willing to risk his job, freedom and even life. So 3-5 Mio. of protesters in Egypt is a sign that there were very few people in the country who have *approved* the regime. The diminutive pro-president demonstrations consisting of mostly police agents kind of prove my point.
Well, the CIA-funded Al Qaeda is a direct result of US' involvement in the Middle East. It was spawned to help fight off the bad Soviets in Afghanistan, remember? So yeah, 9/11 is completely unrelated to US military personell in the Middle East... not.
It does. Making a copy of a product does not forbid selling another copy. That's the beauty of digital artworks. Even more, it resulst in more sales, as the study shows, similar to public libraries (the adversaries of which were using virtually the same arguments as *AAs today) boosting book sales. Your "copyright infringement" is a price which a creator has to pay in order to be able to create infinite number of identical copies of the original work at virtually no cost. A fair price, which I as a software developer am willing to pay gladly.
Just out of curiosity: if these homes are mobile so they can move away, say, in case of hurricane, why didn't they? Not enough time since the warning, traffic jams because everyone was leaving, the hope that it won't strike hard this time or a combination of the above?
He is a man of his time an really a product of a social pendulum swung back from Yeltsins anarchy to a firm state control. Said pendulum will swing back eventually, I already see some positive signs amongst the negative ones. The question is how far and how soon, not if.
Slashdot Mirror
Last time I looked, CBS wasn't an Iranian network.
Still, given that the US was never all too hesitant to fly spy missions over other countries when sure that they could get away with it (remember shot spy plane in USSR or over 900 diplomatic warnings that came from China due to violation of their airspace), I do tend to believe that the drone went down during a spy mission be it because of takeover or because of a malfunction rather than an elaborate plot of evil Iranians to cast shadow on freedom-loving USA.
And have many interesting pieces of equipment, including friend/foo stuff. But it is still better politically than dealing with a dead or, even worse, captured pilot.
The chassis is covered by flags, I think it and the bottom side of the plane got damaged during the landing.
Well, it's their airspace, they can do whatever they like to objects in it.
Besides, I overheard a report on CBS that this drone is a part of a spy drone fleet which was routinely flying over Iran and collecting information for years. If the goal is really to stop foreign spy planes flying over your land, it might be more beneficial to down the plane and showing it to the hole world instead of shooting it down.
It is indeed impossible to measure the impact of radiation after Chernobyl. Life of those who lived around and/or has been exposed to radiation has shortened dramatically, but that trend has happened all across the former Soviet Union after the downfall and the economic meltdown (you are not wrong if you call it total collapse of then existed society), even without radiation.
Overall food supply, you mean? Many agricultural crops worldwide are pollinated by bees.
So, a supervillain is plausible.
Well played...
In SSD/HDD combos there is always the SSD cache. But is there any model where you have separate SSD partition which you can use e.g. for system files or ReadyBoost for those who still use Windows?
How do you give them 40 hours shifts if a day has only 24 hours?
How about Humble indie bundle?
If you can't understand an analogy, then you should just shoot yourself and put us out of your misery.
Did excessive drug use made you aggressive and humor-impaired? I have no problem putting a smiley after each joke, just tell me that you need it.
Oh, and my point is that you have no constitutional right to live, just like you have no constitutional right to smoke pot. They are the same, constitutionally speaking, so why do you assert one exists and the other doesn't?
Actually, I do. It's right there in the Article 2 of the Constitution "Every person shall have the right to life and physical integrity." You may not have such a right though: different countries have different Basic Laws, you know.
I think we'll agree to disagree on the topic whether it'll be a negative or a positive number. I do think that if cocaine consumption reaches even a quarter the level of tobacco, the society will have an array of additional grave problems. And it has all the potential to reach even higher levels because at some point corporations will take over. Then we'll have alcohol, tobacco, fast food (which some studies show to be addictive too) AND cocaine.
As for reduced law enforcement costs: the Netherlands have most liberal drug laws in Europe yet they also spend more for drug control (in % of GDP) than any other country in EU.
If you equal pot smoking to breathing then you should seek medical assistance to help you with your addiction.
And, oh yes, the government can't outlaw breathing, it would contradict my constitutional right to live, you know.
Hmm, gotta need to read the Constitution and the Bill of Human Rights again... How could I possibly miss the right to be high or/and drunk?! ;-)
Besides, what exactly is "the profit of the government" you refer to? The money which is spent on social services, roads, schools etc. instead of providing additional services and facilities to deal with the aftermath of excessive tobacco or alcohol consume? Then I truly wish that the government will maximize their profits.
Seriously, a society which is held permanently drunk or high is much easier to control by the government since the people tend to think less and to doubt less. Sure, there is no denying that a man can't be forbidden to wish such things, but it's still giving away the essential freedoms for temporary happiness while damaging the society you live in. Will deserve neither and lose both
The GGP must be proposing lifting those restrictions for cocaine as well, otherwise there will be a black market anyway. Besides, is there any statistical data whether the tax revenue from alcohol or tobacco is enough to pay off for all the medical issues they create? I recall hearing a tv report that it's not the case in Germany, by a very large margin.
Ah, found it: in Germany the yearly tax revenue from alcohol taxes is 3,5 billions EUR, but estimated 24,4 billions EUR are spent due to alcohol-related damage to the economy (medical services, accidents, insurances etc.). About 1 billion EUR is spent on alcohol advertisement each year. Similar situation is estimated for tobacco. So the two major legal drugs create more damage to the economy than the state could possibly repair through taxes. Why should it be different with cocaine?
Hammertime!
The government is also interested in cutting spending. And it is not prone to corruption as well. However, as far as damage responce goes, the government can be more effective than private entities.
Given that their CEO is nowhere to be found, he probably already has.
I don't think so, after the "Bagration" offensive operation the communication lines of the Red Army were overstretched, it needed time to regroup in order to be able to continue the push on the Germans. The vanguard could not force crossing the Vistula on its own. Besides, the Germans have started counter-attacks trying to make use of that situation.
As for the Poles that were allegedly turned down -- just two days before the uprising began a polish representative met with Stavka officers but failed to mention what was about to start.
You have to read the correspondence between Churchill and Stalin, it confirms as well that the Stavka has not been even informed about the uprising, only when the Poles got in serious trouble Churchill began to persistently ask Stalin to intervene.
The intrigues of British government and Polish exile government in London combined with an overestimation of their own strength have lead to this venture. The uprisers were heroes who were gambled by British and their own excile leaders for questionable political gains. It is just too easy to blame the bad Soviets in order to cover own actions.
So you neglect the fierce resistance of partisans and underground in Belarus which have lost almost a *third* of its population during the war (unlike Holocaust that tragedy remains relatively unknown) and praise Norway which faired pretty well under German rule with most population going on with their daily lives (you can't really compare several thousands Norwegian causalities with a few millions dead Belarusian people)?
It did not help Germans that they have slaughtered entire villages in Belarus and Ukraine, the resistance got stronger instead which lead to even more slaughtering. I've been talking to many old people who have survive that time, many of them have joined the partisans *because* they've seen German troops slaughtering Jews wherever they could find any (and there were many Jewish settlements and communities in Belarus back then).
German did two wars back then -- the "civilized" one in Western and Nothern Europe and the total war against Soviet Union, where millions of captured soldiers have died in German concentration camps (another forgotten tragedy, no one really cared about conventions, they were "commies" after all) and many more civilians.
As for Warsaw uprising -- I tend to believe Churchill when he said that the uprising was started prematurely and with no coordination with the Red Army. The famous Polish pride, I guess.
I strongly disagree, having been lived in a dictatorship myself. A dictator may have the majority of votes on election, but to call it the will of majority would be a gross overstatement.
Any dictator creates an artificial environment where no strong opponent may ever become strong enough to oppose him. The govenment usually consists of weak officials chosen by their absolute loyalty instead of their abilities and skills. Any opposition leader who is becoming too strong in the eye of a dictator will be oppressed, put in jail, forced to leave the country and above all discreditated almost non-stop via the state controlled media with no opportunity to answer even the most insolent lie. The police deals fairly brutally with any forms of protests which are downplayed by the monopolistic state-owned media as well.
The Internet is a bit of a game-changer, but as most dictatorship are doing pretty bad economically with government officials that are selected by loyalty and inevitable rampant corruption, only a minority could afford it.
Sure, with obligatory pre-election pensions and salaries rise, with excessive propaganda prior to the election, no real alternative due to the above-mentioned reasons and other tricks a dictator *may* get above 50% of the votes, but such election is by no means fair, don't you agree?
But, as we've seen lately, most dictators just falsify the election to about 80-90% to claim the unanimous support of the people. Both in Tunisia and Egypt the number of people who *actively* went to the streets has easily surpassed the alleged number of people who officially voted against the president. And how many of unhappy were simply afraid? Fear is dictators weapon of choice, after all. Not everyone who is against the dictatorship is willing to risk his job, freedom and even life. So 3-5 Mio. of protesters in Egypt is a sign that there were very few people in the country who have *approved* the regime. The diminutive pro-president demonstrations consisting of mostly police agents kind of prove my point.
Well, the CIA-funded Al Qaeda is a direct result of US' involvement in the Middle East. It was spawned to help fight off the bad Soviets in Afghanistan, remember? So yeah, 9/11 is completely unrelated to US military personell in the Middle East... not.
It does. Making a copy of a product does not forbid selling another copy. That's the beauty of digital artworks.
Even more, it resulst in more sales, as the study shows, similar to public libraries (the adversaries of which were using virtually the same arguments as *AAs today) boosting book sales.
Your "copyright infringement" is a price which a creator has to pay in order to be able to create infinite number of identical copies of the original work at virtually no cost. A fair price, which I as a software developer am willing to pay gladly.
Just out of curiosity: if these homes are mobile so they can move away, say, in case of hurricane, why didn't they? Not enough time since the warning, traffic jams because everyone was leaving, the hope that it won't strike hard this time or a combination of the above?
He is a man of his time an really a product of a social pendulum swung back from Yeltsins anarchy to a firm state control.
Said pendulum will swing back eventually, I already see some positive signs amongst the negative ones. The question is how far and how soon, not if.