Japan was not "rebuilt by USA" in any significant way. US barely kept the Japanese from starving for a few years past WWII. The biggest US contribution to the Japanese economy post-WWII was military spending for the Korean wars, but, of course, they got things in return for that.
While I have my own doubts about who contributed what to 9/11, two things I'm quite sure about is that buildings did not fall neatly in their own footprints and that the collapses looked nothing like a controlled demolitions. You know how? I watched the videos on the internets carefully.
This is quite far from a "fact", in fact, the facts point in the completely opposite direction. By the end of WWII, the USSR was not in a position to fight another world war, or even a local war. It was, in fact, not in a position to fight any wars except proxy skirmishes until about the end of the 1970s. The evilness of the regime towards its people aside, the country was devastated by WWII, its male population decimated or worse, its infrastructure heavily dependent on Western aid, and on top of that the USSR had to support extending communism in half of Europe. If you believe that was free, you're wrong.
By many accounts, the real reason for the huge nuclear buildup on both sides of the iron curtain had, after a while, not so much to do with the threat that was addressed by the nuclear weapons, but more to do with the prestige and the resource allocation benefits that manufacturing nuclear weapons brought. In other words, it was a classical case of a principal-agent problem where the goal of the principal (maximizing safety) was not aligned to the goal of the agents (maximizing power of nuclear arsenal).
I believe this is also known as not allowing a mineshaft gap.
Amen, bro. I've had all the sony ebook readers since 2004 (using a 650 now), and I am not buying a tablet until it has one of those new shiny color e-ink screens. And weighs 200 grams.
So, they are not really a baseball team, but are trying to convince us they are one? Well, then it is an apt comparison to the situation with "intellectual property" then, it isn't real too, but its fans are trying hard to convince everybody else otherwise.
Meanwhile, the International Atomic Energy Agency has found evidence that Iran is pursuing work on a bomb.
Not exactly. Some experts in IAEA were allegedly shown "evidence" from "one member state". The evidence is, of course, not available for public review, but it is known which is this mysterious "member state". Apparently, it is the same "member state" that manufactured a lot of "evidence" about alleged nuclear and biological weapons programs last time around.
In other words, it is all propaganda and bullshit.
I can't see why I should care about some young animals, even if they are in the Chicago zoo. But what do they have to do with the fiction of "intellectual property"?
Get your terminology right, please. There's no such thing as "intellectual property", there is a large body of laws and regulations that pertain to patents, trademarks, copyright and other related rights and mostly create various monopolies. "Intellectual property" is a WIPO marketing term for the weak-minded.
Housing ain't cheap, but most of the price goes into the land, and houses are viewed as somewhat disposable, most people expect a house to last about the lifetime of a generation. There are some companies that run commercials about a "100 year houses", implying this is a long-life structure, so that should tell you what the general expectations are.
Also, I don't believe the "being crushed" argument will be really critical, except in marketing. Most people seem to die from the fires that inevitably follow the earthquakes, not under the collapsed structures.
If you missed that news the 3457 times it was reported before the clips of those reports made by US various embassies were released by Wikileaks, you should not pretend that you care about wikileaks.
If they are as exciting as the Manning leaks, I'll pass. Newspaper excerpts and rumour collections from various countries, even when stamped "CIA" or "Stratfor" do not an interesting reading make.
Slashdot Mirror
Japan was not "rebuilt by USA" in any significant way. US barely kept the Japanese from starving for a few years past WWII. The biggest US contribution to the Japanese economy post-WWII was military spending for the Korean wars, but, of course, they got things in return for that.
While I have my own doubts about who contributed what to 9/11, two things I'm quite sure about is that buildings did not fall neatly in their own footprints and that the collapses looked nothing like a controlled demolitions. You know how? I watched the videos on the internets carefully.
Two friends I got left good jobs in Boston and LA for Riyadh. So, they're coming from a lot of different places.
And, more importantly, will it actually fly to Mars at all?
No, we will call them "Old ones".
And?
This is quite far from a "fact", in fact, the facts point in the completely opposite direction. By the end of WWII, the USSR was not in a position to fight another world war, or even a local war. It was, in fact, not in a position to fight any wars except proxy skirmishes until about the end of the 1970s. The evilness of the regime towards its people aside, the country was devastated by WWII, its male population decimated or worse, its infrastructure heavily dependent on Western aid, and on top of that the USSR had to support extending communism in half of Europe. If you believe that was free, you're wrong.
By many accounts, the real reason for the huge nuclear buildup on both sides of the iron curtain had, after a while, not so much to do with the threat that was addressed by the nuclear weapons, but more to do with the prestige and the resource allocation benefits that manufacturing nuclear weapons brought. In other words, it was a classical case of a principal-agent problem where the goal of the principal (maximizing safety) was not aligned to the goal of the agents (maximizing power of nuclear arsenal).
I believe this is also known as not allowing a mineshaft gap.
Quite a while: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FeliCa. I broke two laptops with a built-in card reader extension already, so at least 5 years.
Amen, bro. I've had all the sony ebook readers since 2004 (using a 650 now), and I am not buying a tablet until it has one of those new shiny color e-ink screens. And weighs 200 grams.
Okay, I get that, but is the display really made from retinas? And whose retinas were those?
Confucius didn't have much to say on the issue of homeopathy, he was a philosopher. These days he'd gotten a job in the talk radio industry.
So, they are not really a baseball team, but are trying to convince us they are one? Well, then it is an apt comparison to the situation with "intellectual property" then, it isn't real too, but its fans are trying hard to convince everybody else otherwise.
Evil people would say it has all those abilities you seem to be referring to, and more.
Meanwhile, the International Atomic Energy Agency has found evidence that Iran is pursuing work on a bomb.
Not exactly. Some experts in IAEA were allegedly shown "evidence" from "one member state". The evidence is, of course, not available for public review, but it is known which is this mysterious "member state". Apparently, it is the same "member state" that manufactured a lot of "evidence" about alleged nuclear and biological weapons programs last time around.
In other words, it is all propaganda and bullshit.
When did that happen, in 2003 too?
I can't see why I should care about some young animals, even if they are in the Chicago zoo. But what do they have to do with the fiction of "intellectual property"?
Get your terminology right, please. There's no such thing as "intellectual property", there is a large body of laws and regulations that pertain to patents, trademarks, copyright and other related rights and mostly create various monopolies. "Intellectual property" is a WIPO marketing term for the weak-minded.
Putin would have been even more succinct: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dqDqvKYDv9M
You sound angry, but you're wrong -- I did not eat your breakfast.
Housing ain't cheap, but most of the price goes into the land, and houses are viewed as somewhat disposable, most people expect a house to last about the lifetime of a generation. There are some companies that run commercials about a "100 year houses", implying this is a long-life structure, so that should tell you what the general expectations are.
Also, I don't believe the "being crushed" argument will be really critical, except in marketing. Most people seem to die from the fires that inevitably follow the earthquakes, not under the collapsed structures.
Heh, so you could not. Complete lack of surprise here.
Which exactly did you find "interesting"? Can you name at least 10 that you dug up personally due to your interests in the matter? I didn't think so.
If you missed that news the 3457 times it was reported before the clips of those reports made by US various embassies were released by Wikileaks, you should not pretend that you care about wikileaks.
You'd tell me which "crime" it is, unfortunately it isn't there.
If they are as exciting as the Manning leaks, I'll pass. Newspaper excerpts and rumour collections from various countries, even when stamped "CIA" or "Stratfor" do not an interesting reading make.