No, the problem comes when NK immediately reduces Seoul to rubble with conventional artillery, because they actually have the capacity to do that. An actual invasion wouldn't be as big of an issue - the military can repel NK's troops fairly well - but there's not a lot you can do about artillery strikes when there's that much artillery pointed at you.
As long as you live outside of NK, yes. But I'd argue that the constant, horrifying human rights abuses that go on there should probably be stopped, ideally sooner rather than later. Unfortunately, there's no clear good way to do that.
Can we assume one day the US will attack something ?
Yes.
Whom did North Korea attack in the last 50 years ?
South Korea, in several raids and "accidents". And kidnappings, both from South Korea and Japan, of course.
NK is many things, one it is not is that of being a belligerent state considering there is no peace treaty between it, South Korea and the US.
It absolutely is a belligerent state, it just doesn't have the capability to do more than swagger and make threats at this point. China doesn't want them to attack because they don't want a unified free Korea (and make no mistake, the South would not lose the war if it really becomes hot again). And why would there be a peace treaty between NK and the US? Those two countries were never officially at war. The US was just leading the UN forces.
We are still talking about American politics, right? There are no good choices, just less bad ones. I mean hell, even Bernie Sanders bought a $600k beach house (his third house) after giving up his campaign. Rubio was one of the better GOP candidates, and personally I think he'd better than Trump, even if I don't like him all that much.
The UK is actually more obese than America, thank you very much. Also, the proportion of people living in poverty is only slightly higher in the US than in the UK. Prisons, sure, that's something America really needs to work on. And yes, the gun homicide rate is much higher in the US than it is in the UK. But the total *murder* rate is only 4x higher in the US, and more than half of that is gangs killing other gangs, which isn't representative of what the average citizen faces.
This is incorrect. Giving aid or comfort to enemies of America is still treason, and you don't have to be at war to have enemies. It might be harder to convict someone of treason without being at war, but that also really depends on what they did.
Yes, but only because that's a special day to Americans; flipping the order makes it stand out more (and is more formal). Normally in English the way the AC said it is right.
I disagree, personally. I find knowing where in the year (i.e., month) coming first is more useful for me. I can understand why you'd want it to go in order of unit size, but I don't think it's actually any better.
I disagree about the rest of the Republicans; Rubio and Kasich were relatively reasonable. Both were willing to compromise to get things done, which automatically makes them better than most of the House.
How would the UK have fixed it? Moreover, the referendum was non-binding. They haven't invoked Article 50, so if they could fix Article 50, there's still time.
The fact that the EU insists on open borders and completely free movement being a condition of free trade is ludicrous. You shouldn't have to grant an entire country's population the right to live in your country just to trade with them, and you shouldn't have to let people in that other countries with more lax (or different) immigration policies have.
Multiculturalism can be great, no question. But there has to be some level of shared values between those cultures, and immigrants have to integrate at least somewhat. The rise of cultural enclaves in many parts of Europe is a bad thing, and does not help. Completely open borders are a bad idea when you have a welfare state.
On the contrary; both those countries have reason to want to weaken the US. If the US is weaker, it might be willing to make more favorable trade deals, or not be able to restrain China from expanding its sphere of influence as much. They don't want to see the US collapse by any means, but a slight to moderate decrease in the US's power would work out nicely for them.
Yes, there is a big difference between being wrong and lying. Hillary lied when she said there was never any classified information on her server, and she lied when she said she turned over all work-related emails. That's not just being wrong.
I hate having to defend Trump, but... He didn't call most Mexicans rapists and criminals. He said that about illegal immigrants from Mexico, not all Mexicans. That's a pretty big difference, even if his statement is still wrong.
Moreover, there's a sizeable faction of the KKK that supports Hillary, and Saudi Arabia (which is arguably worse than Russia with regards to human rights abuses) supports her. There's plenty to dislike about both candidates. You're cherry-picking.
I think most governments overstep their authority, but I have to disagree with your opinion. One of the best examples of something worthwhile national governments did was eradicating smallpox, and the near-eradication of polio. Besides that, in the US, the NIH and NASA are worthwhile. They're far from perfect, but the US, and arguably the world, are better off with them.
Besides that, while all governments are corrupt, incompetent, and unjust, they are each of those things to different degrees. Even with the bad things the US government does, it's better than the Iranian or Mexican governments. Some governments are better than others, and we should be working to make all governments better, not just giving up on them.
The US Government does enough all by itself for people to not trust the process or the candidates. I don't think the Russians actually need to do anything.
Some emails were classified when they were on the server. Some emails were not marked as classified, but still contained classified information. It's not much ado about nothing; she definitely mishandled classified information, and did so on a large scale.
Alcohol isn't a social sickness, and alcohol-related deaths are down. Most college students aren't drinking themselves to death. You're just being hysterical.
If your goal was to reduce binge drinking, I don't think that would help, for a number of reasons. One: people would move the drinking to off-campus, like fraternity or sorority houses. Two, with a penalty as harsh as automatic expulsion, reporting would be really low - your RA isn't going to want to get you expelled, and the school doesn't want to lose that much money by kicking people out.
Slashdot Mirror
Very thoughtful breakdown, thank you.
No, the problem comes when NK immediately reduces Seoul to rubble with conventional artillery, because they actually have the capacity to do that. An actual invasion wouldn't be as big of an issue - the military can repel NK's troops fairly well - but there's not a lot you can do about artillery strikes when there's that much artillery pointed at you.
As long as you live outside of NK, yes. But I'd argue that the constant, horrifying human rights abuses that go on there should probably be stopped, ideally sooner rather than later. Unfortunately, there's no clear good way to do that.
Can we assume one day the US will attack something ?
Yes.
Whom did North Korea attack in the last 50 years ?
South Korea, in several raids and "accidents". And kidnappings, both from South Korea and Japan, of course.
NK is many things, one it is not is that of being a belligerent state considering there is no peace treaty between it, South Korea and the US.
It absolutely is a belligerent state, it just doesn't have the capability to do more than swagger and make threats at this point. China doesn't want them to attack because they don't want a unified free Korea (and make no mistake, the South would not lose the war if it really becomes hot again). And why would there be a peace treaty between NK and the US? Those two countries were never officially at war. The US was just leading the UN forces.
The AC was saying that both mass and volume would be a cubed effect, not cubed for volume and squared for mass.
We are still talking about American politics, right? There are no good choices, just less bad ones. I mean hell, even Bernie Sanders bought a $600k beach house (his third house) after giving up his campaign. Rubio was one of the better GOP candidates, and personally I think he'd better than Trump, even if I don't like him all that much.
There's this neat thing called the East Coast.
The UK is actually more obese than America, thank you very much. Also, the proportion of people living in poverty is only slightly higher in the US than in the UK. Prisons, sure, that's something America really needs to work on. And yes, the gun homicide rate is much higher in the US than it is in the UK. But the total *murder* rate is only 4x higher in the US, and more than half of that is gangs killing other gangs, which isn't representative of what the average citizen faces.
This is incorrect. Giving aid or comfort to enemies of America is still treason, and you don't have to be at war to have enemies. It might be harder to convict someone of treason without being at war, but that also really depends on what they did.
Yes, but only because that's a special day to Americans; flipping the order makes it stand out more (and is more formal). Normally in English the way the AC said it is right.
I disagree, personally. I find knowing where in the year (i.e., month) coming first is more useful for me. I can understand why you'd want it to go in order of unit size, but I don't think it's actually any better.
I disagree about the rest of the Republicans; Rubio and Kasich were relatively reasonable. Both were willing to compromise to get things done, which automatically makes them better than most of the House.
It's not racist to be surprised at seeing lots of people who aren't white. It's almost certainly racist if seeing that offends you.
How would the UK have fixed it? Moreover, the referendum was non-binding. They haven't invoked Article 50, so if they could fix Article 50, there's still time.
The fact that the EU insists on open borders and completely free movement being a condition of free trade is ludicrous. You shouldn't have to grant an entire country's population the right to live in your country just to trade with them, and you shouldn't have to let people in that other countries with more lax (or different) immigration policies have.
Multiculturalism can be great, no question. But there has to be some level of shared values between those cultures, and immigrants have to integrate at least somewhat. The rise of cultural enclaves in many parts of Europe is a bad thing, and does not help. Completely open borders are a bad idea when you have a welfare state.
That's a downside?
On the contrary; both those countries have reason to want to weaken the US. If the US is weaker, it might be willing to make more favorable trade deals, or not be able to restrain China from expanding its sphere of influence as much. They don't want to see the US collapse by any means, but a slight to moderate decrease in the US's power would work out nicely for them.
Yes, there is a big difference between being wrong and lying. Hillary lied when she said there was never any classified information on her server, and she lied when she said she turned over all work-related emails. That's not just being wrong.
I hate having to defend Trump, but... He didn't call most Mexicans rapists and criminals. He said that about illegal immigrants from Mexico, not all Mexicans. That's a pretty big difference, even if his statement is still wrong.
Moreover, there's a sizeable faction of the KKK that supports Hillary, and Saudi Arabia (which is arguably worse than Russia with regards to human rights abuses) supports her. There's plenty to dislike about both candidates. You're cherry-picking.
I think most governments overstep their authority, but I have to disagree with your opinion. One of the best examples of something worthwhile national governments did was eradicating smallpox, and the near-eradication of polio. Besides that, in the US, the NIH and NASA are worthwhile. They're far from perfect, but the US, and arguably the world, are better off with them.
Besides that, while all governments are corrupt, incompetent, and unjust, they are each of those things to different degrees. Even with the bad things the US government does, it's better than the Iranian or Mexican governments. Some governments are better than others, and we should be working to make all governments better, not just giving up on them.
The US Government does enough all by itself for people to not trust the process or the candidates. I don't think the Russians actually need to do anything.
The title of the comment references app optimization, which only happens on Android after an OS update. Therefore, OS updates were the comparison.
Some emails were classified when they were on the server. Some emails were not marked as classified, but still contained classified information. It's not much ado about nothing; she definitely mishandled classified information, and did so on a large scale.
Alcohol isn't a social sickness, and alcohol-related deaths are down. Most college students aren't drinking themselves to death. You're just being hysterical.
If your goal was to reduce binge drinking, I don't think that would help, for a number of reasons. One: people would move the drinking to off-campus, like fraternity or sorority houses. Two, with a penalty as harsh as automatic expulsion, reporting would be really low - your RA isn't going to want to get you expelled, and the school doesn't want to lose that much money by kicking people out.