Yeah but the EU also got it shortly after.

The Democrat party elites would celebrate together with the Republicans and the cokeheads at Wall Street as this means putting the sexual predator and “centrist” Cuomo back on the D ticket.

It als gives healthy bones and natural anti depressants.

Seeing the sun rise over the snow as you take the train to work can be quite nice though. Who am i kidding we only get proper snow every 5 years now.

I thought the elected representatives get to vote on every issue that is raised. Do they have a limited amount of votes in the US?

They could have abstained then. Would have had the same practical outcome, but they would not have sent the signal of support to Trump. Also if they had voted in favor it would have shown unity and dedication to fight Trump, something that would have gotten a lot of disgruntled voters back. Instead they made sure to prove that they have learned nothing from the elections and they would rather concede power to Fascism unopposed than stop being murderous imperialists.

How so? By dividing Korea and ensuring permanent US military presence? Because South Korea was and to some extent still is quite authoritarian and massacred a lot of democracy protestors over the past 80 years.

The Korea war ended with two authoritarian states, as they keep being at arms with each other.

If there hadn’t been outside meddling maybe we would have a unified, strong and peaceful Korea.

They pay your politicians so that your politicians take your tax money and buy Israel guns with it from your arms companies, who give your politicians money so that your politicians buy their guns and send them to Israel.

They also destabilize a region with hundreds of millions of people, whose countries have vast resources and sit on critical trade routes. If people in West Asia were united, they would quickly move on to become a geopolitical power-house rivaling the EU. if all Muslim countries were to work together, they would be the global superpower.

Oh and of course racism. Lots of racism and murdering brown people. The US and many European countries love that.

I think “cash and run” is rather simple minded.

Imagine doing a larger “raid” at a farm or cobstruction site and take tractors, machines and equipment in the hundreds of thousands or even millions…

As these are also in more remote places it would take longer for any responder to arrive.

“We were able to determine that to the best of our estimation he was an ICE agent. … We will not look into it any deeper than that,” he said.

So having a shoddy fake card that looks like it could be real on a shoddy video camera is good enough for the police to not investigate further? Human traffickers must be having a blast in the US right now.

If you tried some “repairs” yourself maybe…

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vietnam_War_casualties#Deaths_caused_by_the_American_military

For official U.S. military operations reports, there was no established distinction between enemy KIA and civilian KIA. Since body counts were a direct measure of operational success, U.S. “operations reports” often listed civilian deaths as enemy KIA or exaggerated the number. There was strong pressure to produce body counts as a measure of operational success and enemy body counts were directly tied to promotions and commendation.[36][37][38][39] The My Lai massacre was initially written off as an operational success and covered up.[40][37] Sometimes civilian casualties from airstrikes or artillery barrages against villages were reported as “enemies killed”.[36][37][41] All individuals killed in declared free-fire zones, combatants or not, were considered enemy killed in action by U.S. forces.[42] This might partially explain the discrepancies between recovered weapons and body-count figures, along with exaggeration, although the NVA and VC also went to great lengths to recover weapons from the battlefield.[14]

Nick Turse, in his 2013 book, Kill Anything that Moves, argues that a relentless drive toward higher body counts, a widespread use of free-fire zones, rules of engagement where civilians who ran from soldiers or helicopters could be viewed as VC, and a widespread disdain for Vietnamese civilians led to massive civilian casualties and endemic atrocities inflicted by U.S. troops.[45] One example cited by Turse is Operation Speedy Express, an operation by the 9th Infantry Division, which was described by John Paul Vann as, in effect, “many My Lais”.[45]

Air force captain, Brian Wilson, who carried out bomb-damage assessments in free-fire zones throughout the delta, saw the results firsthand. “It was the epitome of immorality…One of the times I counted bodies after an air strike—which always ended with two napalm bombs which would just fry everything that was left—I counted sixty-two bodies. In my report I described them as so many women between fifteen and twenty-five and so many children—usually in their mothers’ arms or very close to them—and so many old people.” When he later read the official tally of dead, he found that it listed them as 130 VC killed.[46]

Indochina Newsletter, Issue 18, November – December, 1982, pp. 1-5 [October, 1982] - The Legacy of the Vietnam War

CHOMSKY: As far as the opinion makers are concerned, they have been doing exactly what it was obvious they would do. Every book that comes out, every article that comes out, talks about how — while it may have been a “mistake” or an “unwise effort” — the United States was defending South Vietnam from North Vietnamese aggression. And they portray those who opposed the war as apologists for North Vietnam. That’s standard to say.

The purpose is obvious: to obscure the fact that the United States did attack South Vietnam and the major war was fought against South Vietnam. The real invasion of South Vietnam which was directed largely against the rural society began directly in 1962 after many years of working through mercenaries and client groups. And that fact simply does not exist in official American history. There is no such event in American history as the attack on South Vietnam. That’s gone. Of course, It is a part of real history. But it’s not a part of official history.

…

QUESTION: This question of who the United States was fighting in Vietnam is pretty basic in terms of coming to any understanding of the war. But why would the U.S. attack South Vietnam, if the problem was not an attack from North Vietnam?

…

Then the National Liberation Front of South Vietnam was formed. And its founding program called for the neutralization of South Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia. And it’s very striking that the National Liberation Front was the only group that ever called for the independence of South Vietnam. The so-called South Vietnamese government (GVN) did not, but rather, claimed to be the government of all Vietnam. The National Liberation Front was the only South Vietnamese group that ever talked about South Vietnamese independence. They called for the neutralization of South Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia as a kind of neutral block, working toward some type of integration of the South with North Vietnam ultimately.

Now that proposal in 1962 caused panic in American ruling circles. From 1962 to 1965 the US was dedicated to try to prevent the independence of South Vietnam, the reason was of course that Kennedy and Johnson knew that if any political solution was permitted in the south, the National Liberation Front would effectively come to power, so strong was its political support in comparison with the political support of the so-called South Vietnamese government.

…

Well, why did they do it? Why was the United States so afraid of an independent South Vietnam? Well, I think the reason again is pretty clear from the internal government documents. Precisely what they were afraid of was that the “takeover” of South Vietnam by nationalist forces would not be brutal. They feared it would be conciliatory and that there would be successful social and economic development — and that the whole region might work.

This was clearly a nationalist movement — and in fact a radical nationalist movement which would separate Vietnam from the American orbit. It would not allow Vietnam to become another Philippines. It would trade with the United States but it would not be an American semi-colony.

https://www.encyclopedia.com/history/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/wars-effect-vietnamese-land-and-people

Despite the fact that South Vietnam was America’s ally in the Vietnam War, it suffered severe damage to its land, people, and culture. The war also affected North Vietnam, but not as severely or as permanently as the South.

So things work exactly like they want them to. They get money, the oligarchy gets their interests represented, the middle class gets destroyed, people overseas get bombed and minorities get discriminated. Everything is perfectly like it should be for these people.

30 hours aren’t multiple days. Nonetheless it is completely reckless for this to occur in the first place, endangering both patients and staff.

Even then, taking some sleep during the breaks is preferable over going without any sleep.

This is terrible advice.

Nobody goes “routinely” multiple days without sleeping. The only way military is doing that if necessary is methamphetamine, see German troops during WW2.

After 24-48 hours there will be an onset of psychosis, after 48 hours without sleep most people experience psychosis, especially in combination with drugs.

More importantly the US wasn’t waging “war” against the “North”. They were waging a genocidal destruction campaign against all Vietnamese, mainly in the US controlled South as a means to keep the region destabilized and prevent it from emerging as an economic competitor in the sphere of UDSSR/China.

So if you were Vietnamese in the North or South, Rice farmer or of another profession, chance was US being out to kill or subdue you, so resistance was the only option.

I have posted it a few times already over the past days: but we need to remember this:

This is the Democratiic parties election platform 2024 (see P82/P83):

Through aggressive diplomacy backed by U.S. military power, the Administration has worked alongside our allies and partners to deter and defend against Iran and its terrorist surrogates. President Biden has postured U.S. military forces in the region and authorized precision airstrikes on key Iranian-linked targets tied to attacks against U.S. troops to deter further aggression by Iran. President Biden has also continued to protect the American people from terrorism, authorizing military strikes that took out ISIS emirs and the leader of Al Qaeda, Ayman al-Zawahiri. In response to brazen attacks by Iranian-linked Houthi forces against international commercial shipping, U.S. naval vessels in the Red Sea, and Israel, President Biden ordered military strikes, alongside key allies, against Houthi targets and organized Operation Prosperity Guardian, a coalition of more than 20 nations committed to defending international shipping and deterring Houthi attacks.

When Iran launched more than 300 missiles and drones against Israel in April 2024, President Biden led an unprecedented defensive coalition – together with partners from Europe and across the Middle East – to defeat the attack, protect Israel, and stop the spread of a wider war. Through direct defensive action by the U.S. military and its partners, Iranian munitions did not cause significant damage, demonstrating both America’s ironclad commitment to the security of Israel and our unrivaled ability to leverage growing regional integration among U.S. partners to counter Iranian aggression.

All of this stands in sharp contrast to Trump’s fecklessness and weakness in the face of Iranian aggression during his presidency. In 2018, when Iranian-backed militias repeatedly attacked the U.S. consulate in Basra, Iraq Trump’s only response was to close our diplomatic facility.

They are literally calling Trump “weak” for not engaging militarily enough. This is the same language of Trump of “Peace through strength” and ultimately there is no indication, the Democrats would not have jumped at Netanyahus order to get into the war.

Cutting out tumors is part of the healing process.

Forests aren’t exactly “unexploited”.

Obviously the misspelling was deliberate to appear more down to earth. /s