|
I am going to jump on the bandwagon here and also say that I can't see another world war, or a massive all-out war between developed nations due to the amount of destruction that could be caused by modern military machines.
Though we do have to realize that it is possible, warfare may not be sending boots on the ground anymore -- it may be sending out unmanned drones to attack individual targets and to wipe them out. Or to use cyber warfare to attack a countries tech infrastructure. Something along those lines.
We're not in the days of sending boots on the ground for combat, that's long gone.
But back to the original question: Preparation for war and militarization is one of the best deterrence towards someone else attacking you.
|
|
|
|
|
I've never heard any of the information relating to vaccines not being able to hold liability on the company that created them. Though I'm assuming this comes from the fact that Government is heavily subsidizing the process and is involved in creating these vaccines. There may be little to no profit in creating something like this (This is an assumption, I don't know about profit in this field) so the government must get involved in order to bring a common good to people.
That's my take on the whole matter, though I do truly want to see the liability info on vaccines (as I know there are people that have some pretty bad side effects from certain vaccines)
|
|
|
|
If Iran had been successful in seizing the ship, we would be much closer to war with Iran.
I suspect this will eventually lead to Iran escalating the situation in one way or another by making it more dangerous. for ships to travel through the Strait of Hormuz.
Iran's goal is to make this passage way unsafe to travel through to get the West to remove sanctions against Iran. If they cannot use their Navy to do this, they may resort to surface-to-surface missiles to attack civilian commercial ships traveling through the Straight; this would clearly provoke conflict.
I don't think it is very likely to see the year ending without some kind of military action against Iran.
I fully understand what they’re trying to do. But I think they’re overplaying their hand here. They’re comparing themselves a little too much to the North Koreans, and they think they can get the same negotiations and deal with their sanctions. The only reason North Korea may get that deal is because theres no other power in North Korea that the US wants to take over and can see bringing peace. Iran is different, Iran has people that can takeover. This is interesting, I had not read this. Do you have any sources for statements from them where they compare themselves to North Korea? Yeah, I listen to a podcast from the WSJ and the NY Times. Had a very interesting take on the whole situation here - https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/02/podcasts/the-daily/north-korea-iran-nuclear-deal.html Very listen. Just know you may have a liberal bias on Ny times and consv on wsj Before I listen to this long form piece, did you base the idea on statements from Iran itself or the interpretation of the reporters here? All sources have a bias, but that is more of a problem if it is an opinion piece rather than just reporting facts. This is based on the interpretations of Iranian actions and talks by National Security experts from the Times. Not an opinion piece though I could see how you could interpret it as such as it is pretty much just someone's interpretation (which is an opinion) on the matter. |
|
|
|
If Iran had been successful in seizing the ship, we would be much closer to war with Iran.
I suspect this will eventually lead to Iran escalating the situation in one way or another by making it more dangerous. for ships to travel through the Strait of Hormuz.
Iran's goal is to make this passage way unsafe to travel through to get the West to remove sanctions against Iran. If they cannot use their Navy to do this, they may resort to surface-to-surface missiles to attack civilian commercial ships traveling through the Straight; this would clearly provoke conflict.
I don't think it is very likely to see the year ending without some kind of military action against Iran.
I fully understand what they’re trying to do. But I think they’re overplaying their hand here. They’re comparing themselves a little too much to the North Koreans, and they think they can get the same negotiations and deal with their sanctions. The only reason North Korea may get that deal is because theres no other power in North Korea that the US wants to take over and can see bringing peace. Iran is different, Iran has people that can takeover. This is interesting, I had not read this. Do you have any sources for statements from them where they compare themselves to North Korea? Yeah, I listen to a podcast from the WSJ and the NY Times. Had a very interesting take on the whole situation here - https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/02/podcasts/the-daily/north-korea-iran-nuclear-deal.html Very listen. Just know you may have a liberal bias on Ny times and consv on wsj |
|
|
|
If Iran had been successful in seizing the ship, we would be much closer to war with Iran.
I suspect this will eventually lead to Iran escalating the situation in one way or another by making it more dangerous. for ships to travel through the Strait of Hormuz.
Iran's goal is to make this passage way unsafe to travel through to get the West to remove sanctions against Iran. If they cannot use their Navy to do this, they may resort to surface-to-surface missiles to attack civilian commercial ships traveling through the Straight; this would clearly provoke conflict.
I don't think it is very likely to see the year ending without some kind of military action against Iran.
I fully understand what they’re trying to do. But I think they’re overplaying their hand here. They’re comparing themselves a little too much to the North Koreans, and they think they can get the same negotiations and deal with their sanctions. The only reason North Korea may get that deal is because theres no other power in North Korea that the US wants to take over and can see bringing peace. Iran is different, Iran has people that can takeover. |
|
|
|
So dishonest of you not to mention that this was an equal response to Britain pirating the Iranian oil tanker grace 1 in Gibraltar. The world clearly belongs to the US, UK and their allies. Everyone else is just living in it on lease.
Dishonest of you to fail to notice that Iran had been violating EU sanctions on Syria by attempting to sell them oil. So they had been violating international law that they had originally agreed to, and they were punished for it. Retailing when you're wrong isn't something that is going to work too well in the international stage. |
|
|
|
Yet again, Iran is going down a path of no return as they attempted to stop a British commercial vessel today which was in the Strait of Hormuz. They had only turned stopped and turned around when they were approached by a British Royal Navy Frigate. The leaders in Iran are obviously attempting to show that they will stop at nothing in order to get a deal out of the Trump administration and the EU, though it seems like they may fail to retain their leadership on the country if they continue to anger more and more world powers. I'll be attempting to post updates as they come ( https://www.wsj.com/articles/three-iranian-vessels-tried-to-block-u-k-ship-from-passing-through-strait-of-hormuz-11562822874?mod=hp_lead_pos1) |
|
|
|
|
Most of the time I write off projects like this, as I think they're just a random new gambling site on a network or a coin that no one is going to use. Though I must say this is actually very interesting, and I want to see something like this do well. I love an idea that's original, and this seems like it.
I think there is an immense market for collectibles and cards on the blockchain. Though I'm not fully sure if people are going to love it as much, we'll see!
Good luck!
|
|
|
|
|
Without a doubt it's pretty and all, but I see no real reason for something like this existing in the presence of tons of either coins that do the same thing. Do you really think that there is substantial demand to be able to support this?
I think most people are going to answer no to that, as they can see that something like this is doomed to fail. People are going to use BTC, XMR, BCH, and so on and so forth to bet. They're not going to use Steem.
I wouldn't waste valuable resources creating this and maintaining this, you could focus on so much more.
|
|
|
|
|
Just a way for the gambling site to get some money from tards that want to say to their friends 'look at the bet I just made' which obviously they know (and we know) has no chance of actually happening. Obsurd odds, and it will make people think that they can make some crazy money if it happens.
This sort of thing is basically free money for the gambling site.
|
|
|
|
|
You're going to have the best shot at winning based on your own skill alone, and you're not going to be hampered by the house edge or anything along those lines. This is a game of skill, not a game of chance. Though this could also be a negative as well, as you're the only person that can control how you do here (instead of just pure luck, like other casino games)
I'd like to be able to control my own destiny and be able to win my own money if I was able to learn the game and play correctly with my bankroll. This sort of thing isn't present in the world of regular gambling, as you're bound to lose just because of the house edge destroying your odds over time.
|
|
|
|
He beat a dude in the street of a foreign nation... why shouldn't they hold him? Would you think it was ok if Swedes came here and started beating random people in the street and just got to go home?
+1 Here. Even if there was an altercation on both sides, it's understandable that both are going to be hold. It's a minor charge, and something that will lead to the two of them being released. Lets not just let the rich get away with whatever they want though. Rocky shouldn't be able to get into fights in the middle of the street with no consequences at all just because he's wealthy, American, and a rapper. |
|
|
|
To understand the Hong Kong situation, you need to go back in History a bit. Britain forced opium onto the Chinese people, and as a result of this China rebelled, and this started the opium wars, which China lost. As a result of this, Britain claimed Honk Kong on a long lease. When HK was handed back to China, much of the old UK based legal and political structure was retained, but with emphasis on the protection of property, and a lack of democracy. The new extradition laws don't seem to be particularly draconian, and seem to refer to extraditions to countries that do not have a current agreement with HK, and are to be evaluated on a case by case basis. It would appear that the protests are being funded by the CIA as part of the campaign to vilify China in the eyes of the world. Of course there are various versions of the "truth" being reported, and it will be interesting to see how much of the actions by Washington and the City of London are revealed over the next few months.
Going to agree with TecShare here, you are delusional. China is attempting to force extradition on the people in Hong Kong to further force their hand in the government there. They're trying to blur the line between the whole 'two government system' This would be the first step, so thank god it has received backlash and is DEAD. Take a quote from NPR, explaining what could be done by the Chinese government if this was to pass: . The measure would have allowed people in Hong Kong to be sent to mainland China to face trials in courts controlled by the Communist Party, sparking fears of politically motivated prosecutions targeting outspoken critics of China. Do you truly think that the Chinese government is this amazing government with no flaws? We're going to ignore the communist power that silences oppressors of the government and would attempt to do the same thing to people in Hong Kong if given the chance. Delusional. Your hatred for the United States blinds you. |
|
|
|
A lot of those hedge fund managers routinely make a billion plus each year so ya this guy is extremely wealthy. Nothing will come of this, this is just normal behavior for most billionaires. People don't really understand how wide spread this type of activity is.
Just because someone is massively wealthy and can spend a large amount of that wealth to protect themselves through expensive lawyers, bribes, and so on and so forth -- doesn't mean that we shouldn't try to fight them on their crimes. Once we submit to the fact that the Rich have an advantage in the justice system, thats when the rich will be able to get away with anything they want. Keep up the fight, and maybe we can change things. |
|
|
|
ffs You seem focused on a small group of those likely to be implicated. I used the word powerful for good reason. The purpose of these large scale trafficking rings is primarily the creation of blackmail material on powerful people in all sectors in order to maintain compliance. This is much bigger than low level thugs like the Clintons. This is something that reaches to the highest levels of organizations globally and people are just barely beginning to realize it. It's interesting at least to me, that nobody has ever explained where Epstein got his billions. You hear vague phrases like "Oh, he was a hedge fund manager <<blah blah blah>> Oh this is without a doubt one of the most interesting parts. Even when investigators were prying into this sort of thing, his lawyers said that they wouldn't be able to disclose this as they're working with his accountant and finance people to answer the question. I did find some information relating to him being an options trader at Bear Stearns, and he proved that he was able to do a good job ( https://nymag.com/nymetro/news/people/n_7912/) which led to him later on being promoted to Partner. With those connections built, he created his own investment / wealth management company. Barr just recused himself as well, as one of the prior companies he worked at had represented Epstein before Barr worked their. |
|
|
|
Trump is pretty much pushing for a rate cut, and with the economy not showing signs of slowing down (with the newest jobs report being good), the Fed isn't going to want to do this for him. And this makes sense in my eyes, we can't have low rates forever because if a recession is to come and we have low rates -- we can't cut rates as a way to spur growth.
In an economy like this, we need to increase interest rates -- so we will have a way to save ourselves if a recession comes.
Obviously, Trump's mind is on a much shorter term, as he needs the economy to stay stable for another 2 years for him to get reelected. So that's his line of thinking, and I honestly don't blame him for this. Put anyone in the same position and they would do that too.
Do what it takes to buy a little Bitcoin. The FED will end, and the $dollar will crash. When the FED and $dollar crash, for a moment - a week or a month - Bitcoin will soar. But most people won't understand what is happening. They will still be so used to the $dollar that they will accept the Bitcoin valuation of, say, $1,000,000 per bitcoin, and buy some off you as an investment. You can sell off a little of the Bitcoin you have, and buy some fertile land with its own fresh water supply. This will give you a place to live off the land after the $crash. But get ready now. Nobody knows when the $dollar will crash. It could be now, a month, or a year or longer. Nobody knows. You might have time to get things ready for yourself.  I mean, I think if the dollar crashes we're going to be in a pretty horrible spot. There's no way that people truly do think that if the dollar crashes, then another currency (like bitcoin) will just swoop in. If something like this was to happen, the only currency that's going to help you is food, guns, medicine, bullets, and so on. If USD crashes, we're talking about a complete and utter meltdown of the financial world and government. That's not something that we can just move on from. Look at all the countries in the world where the countries currency isn't the one that is used by the people due to hyperinflation (look at something like Venezuela) that's a country that is in complete and utter chaos. |
|
|
|
|
Trump is pretty much pushing for a rate cut, and with the economy not showing signs of slowing down (with the newest jobs report being good), the Fed isn't going to want to do this for him. And this makes sense in my eyes, we can't have low rates forever because if a recession is to come and we have low rates -- we can't cut rates as a way to spur growth.
In an economy like this, we need to increase interest rates -- so we will have a way to save ourselves if a recession comes.
Obviously, Trump's mind is on a much shorter term, as he needs the economy to stay stable for another 2 years for him to get reelected. So that's his line of thinking, and I honestly don't blame him for this. Put anyone in the same position and they would do that too.
|
|
|
|
Finally, Jeffrey Epstein may be brought to justice for sex trafficking of minors.....
police alleged that Epstein installed concealed cameras in numerous places on his property to record sexual activity with underage girls with other prominent people, which he had been using to blackmail other celebrities and big whigs. ....
That's pretty disgusting, I have only one question. From time to time we see a media blurb about "XYZ went with Epstein on his Lolita Express..." Is it probable that the guilty one here is Epstein, not those who went with him? That Epstein knew the girls were underage, but the "customers" did not? In most states, the crime of having any sort of sexual contact with an underage girl is a statutory crime. Which pretty much means that if you violate it, you're going to have to face the consequences -- and you wouldn't be able to use the defense of -- " I didn't know" or "She looked 18 though" or even "She lied to me about her age" So both would be guilty in this case. Not sure in part about that. Here's why. Epstein was taking girls to the island. --> "Trafficking." That's a US crime in the states he got the girls in. People go to the island and have sex. --> "statuary rape" on the island in question "Little St. James Island", for which the age of consent is 18. Prosecution would have to be there, not on the US mainland. If I ever heard of a case a prosecutor should decline to prosecute, statutory rape entrapment for purposes of blackmail qualifies. On the US mainland, this is affected by the politics of each state and who those running each state wants to destroy. Here it's not the US mainland. But who knows. Well yes, without a doubt. Kinda forgot that this wasn't on the US mainland and that prosecutors probably wouldn't be so happy to go after a guy like this. But in a perfect world, where the prosecution is blindfolded when picking cases (instead of thinking about the chance of winning and their careers) -- this would be something that they would go after people for statutory rape. You're without a doubt right on the blackmail portion of it though, but this wouldn't be true for the people that he isn't blackmailing. Epstein has dirt on a lot of very powerful people. This is quite an important event. The chances of him flipping or being shanked are pretty high, but he probably is well secured, law enforcement knowing what he knows. He could end up taking down a lot of well known faces.
He'll probably die before he says anything. Maybe even suicide with two bullets into the back of the brain if ya know what I mean. |
|
|
|
Finally, Jeffrey Epstein may be brought to justice for sex trafficking of minors.....
police alleged that Epstein installed concealed cameras in numerous places on his property to record sexual activity with underage girls with other prominent people, which he had been using to blackmail other celebrities and big whigs. ....
That's pretty disgusting, I have only one question. From time to time we see a media blurb about "XYZ went with Epstein on his Lolita Express..." Is it probable that the guilty one here is Epstein, not those who went with him? That Epstein knew the girls were underage, but the "customers" did not? In most states, the crime of having any sort of sexual contact with an underage girl is a statutory crime. Which pretty much means that if you violate it, you're going to have to face the consequences -- and you wouldn't be able to use the defense of -- " I didn't know" or "She looked 18 though" or even "She lied to me about her age" So both would be guilty in this case. |
|
|
|
Finally, Jeffrey Epstein may be brought to justice for sex trafficking of minors. Disgusting to think that we live in a world where it takes 12 years to even bring this guy into a courtroom. It's horrible to know that there are two justice systems in the United States, one that pertains to you if you're rich and wealthy enough to pay off some lawyers. And another that pertains to to the common folk I'm going to break down below the atrocities that pedophile Epstein committed, and we'll judge him based on that. Epstein was first alleged to have taken a 14-year-old to his home, who had been paid $300 to strip and massage Epstein. This was the first crime that had been known to the public, as this is what started the investigation. After an 11 month, undercover investigation of Epstein, police alleged that Epstein installed concealed cameras in numerous places on his property to record sexual activity with underage girls with other prominent people, which he had been using to blackmail other celebrities and big whigs. Thirty-six girls came forward to the FBI and stated that Epstein had sexually assaulted and molested them on multiple occasions. What's the punishment for this, you ask? An immunity charge and a sealed indictment from the US attorney in Southern Florida, Alexander Acosta (currently Trump's labor secretary). Some of the lawyers that helped him obtain this fantastic deal (and I genuinely do mean incredible, as he didn't go to jail for the rest of his life as he should have) included Alan Dershowitz, Ken Starr, and Gerald Lefcourt. He's been rearrested for the same crime, and he's been doing the same thing with another 40 underage girls. I hope this guy rots in a prison cell, as he should. UPDATE: AG Barr has recused himself from the case, citing that he has a conflict of interest in relation to himself working at a law firm that Epstein has sought counsel from regarding his 2008 case. Note that Barr did not represent Epstein, nor was he at the firm at the time. ( https://www.foxnews.com/politics/barr-recuses-from-jeffrey-epstein-case-citing-past-legal-work) Sources: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeffrey_Epstein#Sentencing https://www.thedailybeast.com/alexander-acosta-trumps-labor-secretary-broke-the-law-in-jeffrey-epstein-case-judge |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
