Now, I'm not going to sit here and defend globalism or our military posturing as it stands post- cold war. But between the security and economic benefits we offer to the world, it is undeniable that it is in the best interest of western allied governments to remain mostly benevolent toward their people. For instance, if Canada were to suddenly decide that they were going to round up and prosecute a certain class of people, it would be the United States that would spearhead a worldwide response - global shipping to and from Canada would begin to restrict, and in the worst case scenario, military action would be employed. Of course, this example is deliberately ridiculous, but it remains less ridiculous to think that Canada would establish the next Auschwitz than it is to think that we would do nothing about it. There is a very clear carrot (free trade and prosperity) and stick (military action) that keeps western allied governments mostly benevolent.
So, how do we trust the American government to remain mostly benevolent, if it is maintaining the foundation of the peace, prosperity, and approximation of freedom that most of the western world takes for granted? Because I think we can agree that the US government is not worthy of our trust. Simple: a government must respect their people's vote if there exists the means to dismantle that government with force. If a government cannot be held to account with violence, it has no long term reason to not run roughshod over its people. The United States government usually remains in line, because it is afraid of its people. Anyone who tells you otherwise didn't learn any lessons of fighting insurgent forces in Vietnam or Afghanistan. And if there's any government employee who isn't afraid of pissing off American gun owners, it's because they're too goddamn stupid to make a living in the private sector.
To recap, there is a clear chain of accountability that forms a critical cornerstone for world power, stability, and economics: civilians in most countries live at ease because their governments remain mostly benevolent. Those governments would largely devolve into dictatorship, war, and genocide without American military presence and security in global trade networks, as they did for most of their histories. And the American government remains accountable to its people, because Americans reserve the right to revoke their privilege to govern by force.
I believe, wholeheartedly, that if this chain breaks the world will experience unimaginable consequences.
Y'all can keep planet California. People from New York, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, and Maryland can elect to be relocated there or receive corrective bitch slaps until they shape the fuck up. If they demand to become their own country, then we're still keeping I-95, but it'll have to be rerouted, because I'm sure we can all agree that New Jersey just needs to be nuked off the face of the earth.
Alternatively, Vermont, New Hampshire, and Maine can become its own libertarian nation, and y'all can duke it out and leave us the hell alone.
True, but I was trying to describe the origin of our social structures and why homosexuals are reviled throughout history, not the etymological root of the word in question. If you have a suggestion for a better pejorative to use against people who demand unworthy masters, I definitely want to hear it.
The difference between a rich moron and a poor genius is that the poor genius is waiting for someone to recognize his potential and multitude of great ideas, while the rich moron got one or two decent ideas across the finish line.
Actions will always be better than ideas.
Whereas you demand to live in a world where masked gunmen burst into schools and shoot kids in the face with extralegally sourced firearms, and no chance for anyone on scene to stop them. But hey, you're entitled to your opinion, until king and country decides you aren't.
I don't contest any point here whatsoever, except the idea that any country is overly concerned with the parameters of international law. You want to know how concerned we are in that department, go look up Operation Hat. No big deal, we just lost a portable nuclear reactor in the Himalayas.
Slightly different questions of whether the individual balloon was a serious threat and to what degree they're employing the same tactics on a grand scale. As easy as this was to detect, I doubt they've been doing this for long over US airspace, but we'll have to see what the investigations shake out.
Ok. I'm no fan of Biden, anyone who knows me can tell you that. But this is more complicated than "balloon not shot down, Biden bad". Unfortunately we don't have all of the information.
What we can infer: China has a geosynchronous satellites watching missile silos and other major military infrastructure 24/7. We are undoubtedly doing the same to them. There is very little, if anything, to be gained from a camera on a balloon but a bit more picture detail, and those silos haven't changed much since the 80s. Instead, the balloon was probably primarily gathering signals intelligence (SIGINT). Now, you'd need an electrical engineer if you want more detail, but it's not difficult to quiet your electronic signature, and even less difficult to jam a balloon with electronic noise, and we almost certainly were doing both. So, there's a good chance that balloon wasn't picking up anything useful ten minutes after it was detected. And if it isn't a threat- which, if it's not picking up useful SIGINT, it probably wasn't - then it's more useful to us if we can get it to a lab mostly intact. Now, does that mean there should be a water landing? I doubt it, not only is it not going to be a much softer landing than on land, but obviously salt in the water will corrode sensitive components.
Should we have shot it down sooner? Yeah, probably. But I also think that it probably wasn't nearly the threat people were treating it as.
Yeah, keep talking about hitting any of us like you'll ever have the balls or the money for a plane ticket, and calling me the self declared hardman. That's the kind of delusional hypocrisy I keep coming back to see.
Kid's doing lovely, thanks for asking.
I bet she's really proud to have an alcohol dependent dad who creeps online late at night to write mean things.
My dude, I'm only here occasionally. You've turned "writing mean things" into an unpaid career, and to make the matter more pathetic, you do it here on CreateDebate. Who's looking up to you? Who's looking to risk having a kid with you? Have you been laid once in the last 20 years?
There's not a single person on this website who wouldn't benefit from receiving a solid fist to the mouth, but let's face it, your dainty little mitts would hit about as hard as a four year old girl.
I'm not sure anyone would recoil from pain as much as disgust that you touched them.
You say all of this, and yet you'll turn around and defend communism, despite it's track record of being one of (if not the) most genocidal ideologies in history by necessity of function. Is this really how you see the world? That working and producing and being fairly compensated for your time and efforts is synonymous with being exploited? Have you had even one noteworthy accomplishment since graduation? Anything to be proud of? Or do you neuter yourself because you're too selfish to put something of real value into the world? What a fucking waste.
And as a matter of historical accuracy, it was the generals and politicians and the worst of the low level camp gaurds who were hung. The doctors and engineers were swept up by the Soviets, Americans and Brits and put to work. The guy who patented the ear thermometer used to do experiments to test the limits of the human body by subjecting Jews to freezing, drinking salt water, and sudden decompression. The director of NASA when we landed on the moon used to hang the five slowest working Jews on display for the rest in his camp. Bayer Inc. would order Jews from Auschwitz to experiment on until they were dead like you and I order chicken wings. Agree with it or not: we kept them around because they were useful.
It's fun, but set your limit, and walk away when you lose your money. Yes, when you lose your money, not if. When you buy your chips, consider the money already spent. Have a good time, and hey, once in a blue moon there are big winners. But go look at Vegas and tell me that casinos operate on a business model of losing money to gamblers hand over fist, rather than the other way around.
And if educated people thought like you, every engineer, doctor, lawyer, nurse, businessman, etc would go home and waste their life after college, rather than building the world you so proudly leech off of. No one to design the computers, rockets, vaccines, etc that you apparently believe showed up magically. But then, they get degrees in something useful, don't they?
You are not educated, you're indoctrinated.
I must be retarded, because I keep coming back here and enduring your company.
Or, maybe I just need the cautionary reminder of the fate of bootlicking faggots such as yourself. It's kinda like going to the zoo and seeing that the sloth is either too stupid, lazy, or scared to notice that the zookeeper left the door open.
And with all of your schooling, did you actually do anything useful with it? Or have you spent the last fifteen years living off of the taxpayer, waiting for the world to validate you for regurgitating "your" "ideas" onto this cyber shithole?
