You want to defend yourself from bad government with an AR-15? How did that work out for the people in Waco? An AR-15 isn't going to defend you from the government. A Michigan militia isn't going to cut it either. The only thing that will defend you from the government is a 2+ Star General who doesn't like what the government is doing and gets his troops to agree.
For dealing with Robbers/Mice - A normal cat, is much better suited in that case. An AR isn't going to provide you any more protection, in fact it will likely provide less. There are 2 schools of thought for home protection - A big bang to scare/kill a robber or accurate and a little less deadly. I'd go for less deadly as then I don't have to worry so much about rounds flying through walls and hitting other people. A 12 gauge with bird shot should be perfect for that, loud as hell, but wont blast through the drywall and hit a kid. Plus it will get a nice spread, so I'm likely to hit whoever was dumb enough to come into my house. An AR-15 will go right though the walls - of my house and maybe the one next door.
So I don't need a bad cat to defend myself. A good cat does it well enough and it isn't worth having the bad cats on the streets keeping me up all night.

We have a treaty with the Ukraine.
In exchange for them giving up their nuclear arsenal left over from being part of the USSR, we, and Russia, agreed to guarantee their borders.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum_on_Security_Assurances

It's because Russia was secure in thinking we would not honor our promises to defend them that they invaded Crimea, a Ukrainian territory at the time, and later the Ukraine itself.

It should be noted that, in effect, Israel declared war against Russia days ago by attacking Syria, a Russian ally, and likely killing Russian troops in the process. Be prepared for that to get messy fast.

This business will get out of control, and we'll be lucky to live through it.

Cassowary attacks

Cassowaries have a reputation in folklore for being dangerous to people and domestic animals. During World War II American and Australian troops stationed in New Guinea were warned to steer clear of them. In his book Living Birds of the World from 1958, ornithologist Ernest Thomas Gilliard wrote:

The inner or second of the three toes is fitted with a long, straight, murderous nail which can sever an arm or eviscerate an abdomen with ease. There are many records of natives being killed by this bird.

This assessment of the danger posed by cassowaries has been repeated in print by authors including Gregory S. Paul (1988) and Jared Diamond (1997). A 2003 historical study of 221 cassowary attacks showed that 150 had been against humans. 75% of these had been from cassowaries that had been fed by people. 71% of the time the bird had chased or charged the victim. 15% of the time they kicked. Of the attacks, 73% involved the birds expecting or snatching food, 5% involved defending natural food sources, 15% involved defending themselves from attack, and 7% involved defending their chicks or eggs. The 150 attacks included only one human death.

The one documented human death was caused by a cassowary on 6 April 1926. 16-year-old Phillip McClean and his brother, aged 13, came across a cassowary on their property and decided to try to kill it by striking it with clubs. The bird kicked the younger boy, who fell and ran away as his older brother struck the bird. The older McClean then tripped and fell to the ground. While he was on the ground the cassowary kicked him in the neck, opening a 1.25 cm (0.49 in) wound which may have severed his jugular vein. The boy died of his injuries shortly afterwards.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cassowary

Did you fall on your head as a child? Those people taking a knee aren't bashing America. They aren't bashing the flag, the troops, or anything like that. They are peacefully protesting injustice.

As has been pointed out by many many people, Rosa Parks wasn't protesting public transpiration, the Greensboro sit-ins weren't about Woolworth's dominance in retail at the time... they were all protesting injustice. How can that really simple little fact be ignored by Trump and his supporters? Are they so brain washed by him, that they'll believe every little pile of shit that comes out of his mouth. Do they want to suck his cock that bad? They need to fucking learn to think for themselves. Learn to vet information... and actually vet, not just find the first couple Google answers.

Somehow it is okay for a bunch of white Nazis to protest, and that is fine, and free speech, but the instant a black man protests injustice, suddenly he's an ass hole who needs to be fired? Over 400,000 Americans died fighting Nazis, but now according to Trump, Nazis are "very fine people". No they are not. Not a single person who's a Nazi, KKK member, white nationalist, or would march with them are very fine, or even fine, or even good. They are all evil.

The fact that most on the right think Jesus would side with a Nazi over a black man's protest of injustice (because, if you are a Christian, then every thought has to be what would Jesus do in that case) just goes to show how evil, and horrible the right's Jesus is. It's why I'd rather me and my children burn in Hell than be around people like those Nazis, and that Jesus who'd love them more than the black man protesting the injustice his people still endure to this day. I'll do everything in my power to insure my children hate the Jesus that the right promotes. No wonder Christianity is loosing numbers, it's a faith about hatred and bigotry, the love that Christ promoted in the Bible, is no longer there. They may think they show love, but I can 100% assure them, from the outside looking in, all anyone sees from that form of Christianity, is hatred and bigotry, and as it is the dominant form of Christianity in America, it is all anybody ever sees. I hope there is a Heaven and Hell, and I hope that God points to the millions of souls burning in Hell because of their bigotry and hatred... I'd love it if for the first 20 billion years they had to live outside the gates of Heaven, or in the slums of heaven, hearing the torrents of those of us in Hell, knowing they personally are the reason we are there, that we were all turned off Christ because of the way modern Christians act.

I think it's silly to say "treason is wrong period." The USA was born of a revolt against England.

If the south had wanted to secede for almost any other reason but the right to own human beings, then Lincoln would have been a monster to pursue such a bloody war to hold the union together. It would be as if the EU sent troops to force the UK to stay part of the EU.

I think there are plenty of examples in history of groups justifiably wanting to replace their leaders or separate from a political union.

Although the movie made it seem like the troops and boats were pretty helpless, it HARDLY conveyed the amount of bombing (according to this video) that was being done by the Germans. Good movie though. Constant suspense.

The problem is that this health care cost is so small, when you compare it their other health care costs.

DoD spent 1.9 billion on tobacco-related health care issues in 2009. I think that is more than the cost of health care for transgender troops.

They currently spend more on Viagra ($41.6m) than on health care for transgender troops ($8.4m).

The deeply conservative (!) "Die Welt" in Germany has two pieces by Sy Hersh, completely debunking the supposed chemical attack by the Syrians at Khan Sheikhoun. It also paints a highly disturbing picture of the decision-making process in both the White House and the Pentagon.

The first one is a rather short conversation that includes all the goodies: the chemical attack in Syria was, once again, not a chemical attack by Syrian forces -- they hit a stash, just like both the Syrians and the Russians claimed at the time.

The piece also details that US forces are keenly aware that it was not a chemical attack, that the response (Tomahawk strike on Syrian airfield) was equally ridiculous and dangerous, and that the bellicose stance of the US vis-a-vis Russia is complete lunacy.

The longer piece by Hersh himself and displays in great details the disconnect between Trump and his military advisers, as well as between the upper echelons of the military and the troops in the region.

Just a snippet about the strike itself:

A Bomb Damage Assessment (BDA) by the U.S. military later determined that the heat and force of the 500-pound Syrian bomb triggered a series of secondary explosions that could have generated a huge toxic cloud that began to spread over the town, formed by the release of the fertilizers, disinfectants and other goods stored in the basement, its effect magnified by the dense morning air, which trapped the fumes close to the ground.

And the media went along for the ride, for the umpteenth time. Remember Brian Williams fawning about the beauty of the weapons?

At some point, this volatile mixture of warmongering and McCarthyism is going to start WW3, and they'll blame it on the Russians.

I think this quote illustrates the issue quite nicely:
“Did the Syrians plan the attack on Khan Sheikhoun? Absolutely. Do we have intercepts to prove it? Absolutely. Did they plan to use sarin? No. But the president did not say: ‘We have a problem and let’s look into it.’ He wanted to bomb the shit out of Syria.”

Clash of Clans Update - New Village (Night Mod & Balancing Troops) - Date 22 MAY 2017
[url redacted]

What I understood him to be claiming was a large portion of 'anti Trump' people are stuck on the accusations about Russia, but there are so many other issues they are ignoring because of that focus, and I wholeheartedly disagree, with the constant non-Russia protests as my evidence. I just do not see the myopia he decries.
I also disagree the world is laughing at our claims about foreign interference in our election, they are laughing at the hypocrisy of America complaining about our M.O., but they think Russian interference is both real and serious for us and themselves.

I'm talking recent history, last 3 years. No point in rehashing the 20th century. Had NATO really been a thought, he would not have invaded Crimea nor annexed the East Ukraine. I see NATO troops as sacrificial lambs, put in harm's way to force member nations to act if they are over run by a hostile nation....and even then there's no guarantee any action will come, but it's easier to sell military action if some of 'our boys' are killed or captured.

Russia, Russia, Russia is about the implications of world, or at least super power war. If they did collude (like we often do in other countries) to subvert our election, that's an act of war that could lead to military action if not handled carefully and thoughtfully....something Trump is incapable of.

Is there evidence...apparently, according to the FBI and several prosecutors at least. Has the public seen enough of it to evaluate it for themselves...no. That means one should keep an open, engaged mind on the important subject....not act like he's already convicted, and not pretend there's nothing there but whining. Certainly not forget it and move on to the next scandal....I think we are capable of being outraged about numerous things at once....and again I point to constant protests as proof (not that they accomplish much).

To be fair, we have an obligation to physically defend Ukraine. They gave up their nukes for our promise (by treaty) to keep their borders secure. It was Putin starting a war by invading them, we just walked away from our obligation to avoid war.
And no, I don't want war with Russia, but neither do they. If we had mobilized troops into Ukraine, I doubt the Russian invasion would have continued to expand, but even if it did come to war that's what we promised, we lose all future credibility if we don't keep our international obligations.

Yes, I agree, Assad would be replaced tomorrow if he went against Putin, but he won't. He knows who butters his bread.

I don't think a targeted assassination was what Obama meant when he drew his red line in the sand over Assad gassing civilians. I expected, say, a no fly zone or US bombings of Assad's troops and headquarters, assisting the rebels without arming them. Agreed, that would be NO guarantee that another despot or worse wouldn't fill the void in power.
Perhaps the 'democratic" alternative would be separating Syria into 2 or more countries with local rule? That seems like it would have been better in Iraq than what happened.
Best would be if we could just stay out altogether and let them sort it out themselves, but that seems an impossibility for numerous reasons.

I can understand, it's not a simple issue, but this expansion happened 18-20 (invited in 97, members in 99) years ago. I simply can't grasp anyone being upset that NATO troops are in a long term NATO country.
If Putin/Russia hadn't been massing troops on it's borders, and then moving them into neighboring countries it now claims as part of Russia, the other bordering countries would not be asking for this safeguard, but to imply that NATO troops in Poland are somehow an attack on Russia is laughable. NATO troops would never invade Russia, that would certainly be WW3. As it stands, I feel like NATO probably wouldn't respond if it's troops were overrun by a Russian invasion of a member country, we (the US and others) certainly didn't help Crimea or Ukraine, even though we have a binding treaty requiring us to come to their defense, one paid for by giving up their nuclear arsenal.

Sadly, it's looking like there can be no stability/security in Europe with Russia either.

I would downvote this video just to shut up this guy. What shortsighted stupidity.

That guy from Kansas who is on a field trip to Estonia is there to demonstrate NATO commitment. No "massive numbers", no "offensive threat to Putin".

This guy speaks of the "border" with russia like its some desert wasteland where NATO and russian troops can move in and out at will. These are civilised countries with hundreds of millions of people living in them, currently in a defensive partnership with the USofA. I wonder what the "good deal" will be that the clown gets to sell out.

Poland doesnt even border the main part of Russia, only the Kaliningrad exclave.

Also dont forget that all these other countries also contribute troops to NATO. The only thing that the clown has right is that they should be contributing more.