Helsinki is less than one hundred miles away from the Russian border. I suppose it's possible that a modern day Russian would make yesterday's mistake of wasting manpower in the forest meat grinders rather than focusing on the population center in the South, but I wouldn't count on it. The analogy would be the United States invading Canada. Sure, it's a big country, but 90% of the population lives within one hundred miles of the American border. A fat lot of good holding onto the Northwest Territories will do you when the American flag flies over Toronto, Ottawa, and Vancouver.
In any case, you got way ahead of yourself. Putin isn't going to invade Finland, Poland, or the Baltic States. The former is a member of the EU and the latter are members of NATO.
Here's the big one: Hitler's grand design was to obtain Lebensraum for the German people, at the expense of the subhuman Slavs to the East. Putin's grand design is to reassert Russia's influence in those areas she has traditionally regarded as being within her sphere of influence. He doesn't care if neighboring countries have dictatorships or liberal democracies, so long as they toe Moscow's line, particularly in the realm of foreign policy. He doesn't regard his neighbors as Untermensch to be enslaved or exterminated.
None of this is to suggest that the West should acquiesce to the de-facto annexation of Crimea, but we really do need to dispense with the hyperbolic WW2 analogies.
What part of "Do you think you'll find popular opinion in support of taking on a country with 8,000 nuclear weapons...." did you not understand? Do you honestly believe there is popular support for the course of action that you describe? The Ukraine isn't a member of the EU or NATO, public opinion in both Europe and the United States is opposed to further interventionist adventures, and it's debatable that NATO (never mind the EU) has the military wherewithal to oppose Russia in her backyard if push came to shove without resorting to nuclear weapons.
But hey, let's ignore all of that and deploy some troops anyway. Which rules of engagement do you propose they operate under? Will we secure the entire Russian/Ukrainian border or just stick some boots in Kiev and see what happens? Will we engage Russian aircraft operating in Ukrainian airspace? How will you handle Ukrainian military units that defect? Most important: How do you propose to manage the escalation of tensions to prevent World War 3 if Putin decides to throw more chips into the pot?
However, the problem is that the school boards have also allowed exclusions for "religious or personal beliefs", which is a crock.
Exemptions for religious beliefs are a crock? Those are well supported in the case law. School boards allow them because the case law says they'll lose if they try to fight it in Court and most school districts don't have spare cash laying around to throw at lawyers.
The General Welfare clause is part of the taxing and spending power, it's not a license for the Federal Government to mandate behaviors on the part of the general populace. Even the current administration didn't try and argue the General Welfare Clause authorized their insurance mandate and they take a very broad view (by American standards) of Governmental power.
There were exactly three, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and the United Arab Emirates, not Yemen as I said in the previous post. Saudi Arabia and the UAE withdrew their recognition after 9/11.
Devil's advocate: What part of the United States Constitution (or even the Constitution of one of the 50 States) authorizes the Government to compel vaccination? It's "compelled" through requirements to vaccinate your children before they can attend public school, which has passed muster, but an outright mandate absent no other interaction with the State? Where does such authority come from?
No more BS opting out on religious grounds
That wouldn't pass Constitutional muster even if you can find authority to mandate vaccinations.
A far more effective IMHO (and Constitutional) way to encourage vaccines would be to give the opposed parties an all expenses paid vacation to any part of the Third World that doesn't have access to modern vaccinations. People forget just how horrible some of these diseases truly were. Perhaps it's time to remind them.
The EU doesn't have a military and even NATO is a shadow of what it once was. Besides, it's all a moot point, the nations that make up NATO and the EU are democracies. Do you think you'll find popular opinion in support of taking on a country with 8,000 nuclear weapons over the Crimea or even Ukraine proper?
A useful idea is stronger than the full force of any military and not so easy to destroy
You've missed the point. The USD has value precisely because the United States has a vibrant economy, a large amount of educated human capital, and a strong military. That's the answer to the question of "Why do fiat currencies have value?" I was not suggesting nor trying to imply that the American state could destroy bitcoin or even that it would be desirable to do so.
Bitcoin in its current form is a speculative investment, not a currency. Will Wegmans exchange my bitcoins for groceries? Can I put gasoline in my automobile with bitcoins? Can I buy a plane ticket? Pay for college? Buy stuff from Amazon?
Frankly I think it's a solution looking for a problem. If one wants to buy into the anarchist libertarian philosophy one should be investing in currencies that actually have a store of value (gold), goods that can be traded (non perishable foods, ammunition), or other items (land) that have intrinsic value. Whatever floats your boat I suppose.
And yes, the US did take control of cell networks to track phones and calls in Afghanistan and Iraq to find and eliminate those who fought the US invasions of those countries
Afghanistan had a cellular network in 2001?
It's debatable that the United States invaded Afghanistan. We were invited there by what used to be called the Northern Alliance, a group that was the near-universally recognized government (held the UN seat, was recognized by everyone except Saudi Arabia, Yemen, and Pakistan) of the country. Even if you want to call it an invasion it was certainly a justified one, given that the de-facto Government had provided refuge to a group that murdered nearly 3,000 American citizens.
We've made a lot of mistakes there, trying to build a modern Democracy in a country with a literacy rate in the 20-30% range heads the list, but I do wish people would stop conflating Iraq and Afghanistan.
Propaganda is war. Steering the online discussion is the 21st Century version of the Vietnamese using American students to place pressure on the United States Government.
There have been plenty of pro-Russian commenters on Slashdot over the last couple of days defending the Russian invasion of Ukraine.
Russia has online sockpuppets to push her agenda. No news there. You'll see some of the same apologists chiming in whenever there's a discussion about Tibet.
There's no real defense for Russia's actions. Of course, the United States and/or EU aren't about to go to war with a nuclear weapons state over Ukraine. Sucks if you're the Ukrainians, realpolitik is a bitch sometimes isn't it?
Russia is in charge now of the entire ex-Soviet Union area.
Not quite. NATO isn't likely to roll over and accept aggression directed at Poland or the Baltic States (boy, I bet they're happy they got admitted now) and I suspect even the EU would grow a spine if Russia started pushing Finland around.
I was referring to the insults being directed Ukraine's way as being particularly offensive, not the other way around, though of course there are few worse things you can call a Russian than 'fascist'.
As far as the comparison, it's not all that apt. Russia in 2014 is a vastly different place than 1938's Germany, Putin is not Hitler, the Crimea is not the Sudetenland, and the other Great Powers have not signed off on his actions.
TFS got it wrong though, making the comparison to Godwin's law. This is a particularly offensive piece of propaganda that goes above and beyond mundane internet stupidity, given historical events (see: Great Patriotic War) and the particularly heavy price that Ukraine paid in WW2, likely worse than any European nation not called Poland.
Calling someone a Nazi is a special level of insult in the Slavic countries.
That seems to be the problem all around. Read a Federal Reserve note sometime. There is nothing backing it but the government's promises. There isn't a hard currency on the entire planet at the moment. The difference between Bitcoin and a government currency is, Bitcoin didn't have a government 'guaranteeing' the cash.
The United States of America has 314 million people with a near 100% literacy rate, a highly educated workforce, diversified economy, and 5,000 nuclear weapons. What does bitcoin have?
Just saying that a particular path is slow doesn't mean that it's Verizon interfering - it's more likely something else that's causing the problem.
Dude, you're forgetting the talking points of the modern internet crowd. Any and all unexplained slowdown is the result of ill intention by ones ISP. The fact that the network is a broad collection of networks that your ISP has no control over is irrelevant. Congestion at a peering site two networks removed from your ISP? That's Verizon's fault! Google doesn't give Youtube the money to upgrade their infrastructure? Verizon's fault!
If I pay for 50MBPS download, I don't give a fuck what content it is, I want 50MBPS.
Your "shitbag carrier" only controls their own network. The internet is a collection of networks. The "shitbag carriers" ability to influence your speeds ends at their network edge.
Slashdot Mirror
You're dangerously close to being an apologist for one of the most atrocious regimes of modern times.
Helsinki is less than one hundred miles away from the Russian border. I suppose it's possible that a modern day Russian would make yesterday's mistake of wasting manpower in the forest meat grinders rather than focusing on the population center in the South, but I wouldn't count on it. The analogy would be the United States invading Canada. Sure, it's a big country, but 90% of the population lives within one hundred miles of the American border. A fat lot of good holding onto the Northwest Territories will do you when the American flag flies over Toronto, Ottawa, and Vancouver.
In any case, you got way ahead of yourself. Putin isn't going to invade Finland, Poland, or the Baltic States. The former is a member of the EU and the latter are members of NATO.
I tried to pay for my tank of gasoline with the moral high ground but the clerk told me they only accept US Dollars. :(
Parallels do fall down though in many other ways.
Here's the big one: Hitler's grand design was to obtain Lebensraum for the German people, at the expense of the subhuman Slavs to the East. Putin's grand design is to reassert Russia's influence in those areas she has traditionally regarded as being within her sphere of influence. He doesn't care if neighboring countries have dictatorships or liberal democracies, so long as they toe Moscow's line, particularly in the realm of foreign policy. He doesn't regard his neighbors as Untermensch to be enslaved or exterminated.
None of this is to suggest that the West should acquiesce to the de-facto annexation of Crimea, but we really do need to dispense with the hyperbolic WW2 analogies.
What part of "Do you think you'll find popular opinion in support of taking on a country with 8,000 nuclear weapons...." did you not understand? Do you honestly believe there is popular support for the course of action that you describe? The Ukraine isn't a member of the EU or NATO, public opinion in both Europe and the United States is opposed to further interventionist adventures, and it's debatable that NATO (never mind the EU) has the military wherewithal to oppose Russia in her backyard if push came to shove without resorting to nuclear weapons.
But hey, let's ignore all of that and deploy some troops anyway. Which rules of engagement do you propose they operate under? Will we secure the entire Russian/Ukrainian border or just stick some boots in Kiev and see what happens? Will we engage Russian aircraft operating in Ukrainian airspace? How will you handle Ukrainian military units that defect? Most important: How do you propose to manage the escalation of tensions to prevent World War 3 if Putin decides to throw more chips into the pot?
However, the problem is that the school boards have also allowed exclusions for "religious or personal beliefs", which is a crock.
Exemptions for religious beliefs are a crock? Those are well supported in the case law. School boards allow them because the case law says they'll lose if they try to fight it in Court and most school districts don't have spare cash laying around to throw at lawyers.
The General Welfare clause is part of the taxing and spending power, it's not a license for the Federal Government to mandate behaviors on the part of the general populace. Even the current administration didn't try and argue the General Welfare Clause authorized their insurance mandate and they take a very broad view (by American standards) of Governmental power.
There were exactly three, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and the United Arab Emirates, not Yemen as I said in the previous post. Saudi Arabia and the UAE withdrew their recognition after 9/11.
Better than the alternative, though one would kind of have to admire the second guy for his forthrightness. ;)
But just make vaccinations mandatory
Devil's advocate: What part of the United States Constitution (or even the Constitution of one of the 50 States) authorizes the Government to compel vaccination? It's "compelled" through requirements to vaccinate your children before they can attend public school, which has passed muster, but an outright mandate absent no other interaction with the State? Where does such authority come from?
No more BS opting out on religious grounds
That wouldn't pass Constitutional muster even if you can find authority to mandate vaccinations.
A far more effective IMHO (and Constitutional) way to encourage vaccines would be to give the opposed parties an all expenses paid vacation to any part of the Third World that doesn't have access to modern vaccinations. People forget just how horrible some of these diseases truly were. Perhaps it's time to remind them.
The EU doesn't have a military and even NATO is a shadow of what it once was. Besides, it's all a moot point, the nations that make up NATO and the EU are democracies. Do you think you'll find popular opinion in support of taking on a country with 8,000 nuclear weapons over the Crimea or even Ukraine proper?
A useful idea is stronger than the full force of any military and not so easy to destroy
You've missed the point. The USD has value precisely because the United States has a vibrant economy, a large amount of educated human capital, and a strong military. That's the answer to the question of "Why do fiat currencies have value?" I was not suggesting nor trying to imply that the American state could destroy bitcoin or even that it would be desirable to do so.
Bitcoin in its current form is a speculative investment, not a currency. Will Wegmans exchange my bitcoins for groceries? Can I put gasoline in my automobile with bitcoins? Can I buy a plane ticket? Pay for college? Buy stuff from Amazon?
Frankly I think it's a solution looking for a problem. If one wants to buy into the anarchist libertarian philosophy one should be investing in currencies that actually have a store of value (gold), goods that can be traded (non perishable foods, ammunition), or other items (land) that have intrinsic value. Whatever floats your boat I suppose.
And yes, the US did take control of cell networks to track phones and calls in Afghanistan and Iraq to find and eliminate those who fought the US invasions of those countries
Afghanistan had a cellular network in 2001?
It's debatable that the United States invaded Afghanistan. We were invited there by what used to be called the Northern Alliance, a group that was the near-universally recognized government (held the UN seat, was recognized by everyone except Saudi Arabia, Yemen, and Pakistan) of the country. Even if you want to call it an invasion it was certainly a justified one, given that the de-facto Government had provided refuge to a group that murdered nearly 3,000 American citizens.
We've made a lot of mistakes there, trying to build a modern Democracy in a country with a literacy rate in the 20-30% range heads the list, but I do wish people would stop conflating Iraq and Afghanistan.
Propaganda is war. Steering the online discussion is the 21st Century version of the Vietnamese using American students to place pressure on the United States Government.
There have been plenty of pro-Russian commenters on Slashdot over the last couple of days defending the Russian invasion of Ukraine.
Russia has online sockpuppets to push her agenda. No news there. You'll see some of the same apologists chiming in whenever there's a discussion about Tibet.
There's no real defense for Russia's actions. Of course, the United States and/or EU aren't about to go to war with a nuclear weapons state over Ukraine. Sucks if you're the Ukrainians, realpolitik is a bitch sometimes isn't it?
Russia is in charge now of the entire ex-Soviet Union area.
Not quite. NATO isn't likely to roll over and accept aggression directed at Poland or the Baltic States (boy, I bet they're happy they got admitted now) and I suspect even the EU would grow a spine if Russia started pushing Finland around.
I was referring to the insults being directed Ukraine's way as being particularly offensive, not the other way around, though of course there are few worse things you can call a Russian than 'fascist'.
As far as the comparison, it's not all that apt. Russia in 2014 is a vastly different place than 1938's Germany, Putin is not Hitler, the Crimea is not the Sudetenland, and the other Great Powers have not signed off on his actions.
Comparing to Nazis? Really?
Yes, really.
TFS got it wrong though, making the comparison to Godwin's law. This is a particularly offensive piece of propaganda that goes above and beyond mundane internet stupidity, given historical events (see: Great Patriotic War) and the particularly heavy price that Ukraine paid in WW2, likely worse than any European nation not called Poland.
Calling someone a Nazi is a special level of insult in the Slavic countries.
How does regulation help if someone breaks into your house and steals a big pile of USD that you keep under your bed?
The "well regulated" militia (i.e., my 1911) might have something to say about that. ;)
Systems of power have historically been very sensitive to small potatoes, as a little bit of research will show up.
Thus explaining the vast amounts of attention policymakers have paid to Ithaca Hours.
That seems to be the problem all around. Read a Federal Reserve note sometime. There is nothing backing it but the government's promises. There isn't a hard currency on the entire planet at the moment. The difference between Bitcoin and a government currency is, Bitcoin didn't have a government 'guaranteeing' the cash.
The United States of America has 314 million people with a near 100% literacy rate, a highly educated workforce, diversified economy, and 5,000 nuclear weapons. What does bitcoin have?
You're arguing in favor of a 1 to 1 contention ratio. You can get such a connection today if you'd like it, you'll just have to pay a lot more for it.
Just saying that a particular path is slow doesn't mean that it's Verizon interfering - it's more likely something else that's causing the problem.
Dude, you're forgetting the talking points of the modern internet crowd. Any and all unexplained slowdown is the result of ill intention by ones ISP. The fact that the network is a broad collection of networks that your ISP has no control over is irrelevant. Congestion at a peering site two networks removed from your ISP? That's Verizon's fault! Google doesn't give Youtube the money to upgrade their infrastructure? Verizon's fault!
If I pay for 50MBPS download, I don't give a fuck what content it is, I want 50MBPS.
Your "shitbag carrier" only controls their own network. The internet is a collection of networks. The "shitbag carriers" ability to influence your speeds ends at their network edge.
The opposition had been using the filibuster against appointments far too frequently
Fixed it for you. Hint: Democrats did the same thing.
Worry not, they'll reap what they've sowed sooner or later, when the GOP controls the Senate and White House. Politics is cyclical.