I mean, we’ve barely started. I don’t think it’s time to think about when we should stop. But, if we have to, it’ll be when it’s finished.

They do have these programs but they barely scratch the surface or even contra the damage currently being done to the communities in question.

It’s not exactly easy but it’s not exactly impossible either. Of course, not you necessarily, someone could keep declaring it impossible to do no matter much the subject is researched.

For example, we can see that the communities effected by this have had far less investment than places that benefitted. The way to fix a severe lack of investment is through significant investment. There’ll be more, of course, but that’s an easy one right there.

Arming and radicalising traumatised people and setting them against people you don’t like is quite the American staple.

That’s how you deal with terrorists.

One of the most Christian things I’ve heard from a pope in quite a long time

When the genocide happened. I thought that was obvious.

They had private enterprise. So, In what way were they not capitalist? Imperial colonial economies are capitalist, by nature.

Tbf, i dont think they could name all of the African American slaves or the millions killed in the DRC.

You know the drill: Ukrainian starvation genocide = crime of communism.

When the Turkish capitalist empire does the same to Armenians, that’s just one of those things. Feels kinds commie though.

I see what you mean, in terms of democracy being a problem capitalism is trying to solve and, also, that the rich and powerful will never allow us to simply vote away their ill-gotten wealth and power.

I don’t think that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t try though or just lament that we were born too late though.

If enough people wanted to, we could change things very quickly. I don’t see why that would mean we would have to have those all of those things, let alone for an extended period. Really, you’re rationalising a status quo bias.

Your mad scrambling to not back down over a very silly statement is getting boring now. The fact that you genuinely think that there’s literally nothing Germany could ever do to be rid of American soldiers, if they wanted to, is just bizzare and has no basis in reality.

Why wasn’t West Germany invited until six years later?

Because of WW2. You’ve heard of that one right? Sheer desperation and very little thought going on here.

If they wanted them gone bad enough, they could starve them out. I’m not sure how you’ve convinced yourself that isn’t a possible option for them, if pushed far enough. I’m not saying they will but the idea that they couldn’t is just ridiculous.

Nato was formed in 1949 which was before the korea war and was always about preventing soviet aggression. No amount of pretending otherwise will change that. Britain and America had already occupied Germany after ww2 and that didn’t officially end until 1955. I get it, you don’t like nato but you’re not doing you side any favours here.

I agree that direct confrontation wouldn’t work. However, Germany could just refuse to allow anyone to supply food, power, petrol etc. to American bases and they’ll have to take themselves home sooner or later or declare open war on Germany.

The reason nato was created was the threat of the soviet Russian empire and continues to exist for almost the exact same reason.

As a British person, I know gunboat diplomacy when I see it.

Even the soil is refusing to grow plants.

Theres a reason people go with published peer reviewed journals and not the data sheets of non profits who refuse to disclose their sources of income. The link to the journal they’re referring to is in the article:

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/may/31/avoiding-meat-and-dairy-is-single-biggest-way-to-reduce-your-impact-on-earth

The data used in thr screen grabs you have also, very deliberately, separated the energy and transportation used by the meat industry, as separate things not used by the meat industry

deleted by creator

Yeah but the IDF did show the effect their mass starvation was having on the Israeli hostages. So, I guess we’re even right?

Right?

Its just a dance both sides are doing.

China claim the straight and, under maritime law, if that’s accepted then it’s theirs. So, British etc. ships sail through it saying “what a lovely straight of water. I’m going to sail through here, as no one owns it.” If China doesn’t react, they have relinquished their claim to the straight. So, they have to follow up with “hey you, get off my lawn!” Every so often, the dance is repeated.

Nothing to worry about.

Thats crazy because rich people keep telling me low tax on them funds growth and helps everyone.

I mean, why would rich people lie?

Fair enough, most people tend not to enjoy being incapable of understanding something so very simple. I mean, if you enjoyed that, I can only imagine how much fun you’d have disagreeing with what was actually l being said.

Oh well, I’m glad you’re still managing to find a way to have fun though. Well done you.