Really? Can you offer a comparative American/Russian timeline of computer telecommunication innovations, or are you just assuming? Be sure to focus on pre '68 era, before American socialism was applied in large part (public funding/monopoly busting).

And for some unknown to you reason China is beating the ever loving pants off America lately....so what's your point? Certainly not that Capitalism always beats socialism, I hope you aren't that deluded. Both have strengths and weaknesses, both ebb and flow. Neither are the sole determining factor for inventiveness, neither has a monopoly on invention.

Russia beat America into space even with their near poverty level economy at the time, and despite the fact that their scientists definitely didn't personally profit from their myriad of inventions required to make it happen.
I'm not arguing which is better, that's like arguing over which color is better....better in what way? I'm arguing against your contention that ONLY personal profit drives invention or innovation. That's clearly a mistaken assumption imo.

How do you solve something that's going apeshit in another country? For starters, in the case of Ukraine and Crimea, we keep our obligations we agreed to and support them with the U.S. military from day one when Russia invaded Crimea, and again in Ukraine proper. Had we done that as we specifically and unambiguously agreed to do when they gave up their nukes in return, the "civil war" (that's clearly a foreign invasion) wouldn't have occurred. That's an Obama administration failure, one that seriously harmed our international standing and trustworthiness, imo. If we had just put 100 Marines on the borders, Russia wouldn't have risked WW3 to invade either country.
My point is human political or boundary issues are nothing compared to intentionally reengineering the makeup of the atmosphere and getting enough cooperation to implement the desired (required) changes.

If she changes policy in the west, that will impact the East....and South. What America does is more often than not mirrored, especially when we're successful.
Her impact is more for the public than governments. Sway enough of the public, get them to vote on your issue, and politics will evolve at light speed.

Her delivery is exactly what's needed. An angry, educated young woman (they called me young man at 14, so don't balk), being unpleasant about having her future stolen makes exponentially more impact to the audience she targets than a thousand dry, factual, statistic rich talks by scientists. (Those are a dime a dozen today) Kids telling their parents that when the shit hits the fan, the kids are tossing them in the swollen river, not supporting them through their old age, is exactly the kick in the face many need. Kids of today will blame adults of today for the future they live in. Adults of today clearly don't consider that enough.

Something is better than nothing, she's demanding something. She's 16, do you expect her to have all the answers? (Some feasible solutions would be nice) She's well ahead of the curve just understanding the severity of the problem. I'm sure if we listened to all her speeches she gives some suggestions of action we could take to move in the right direction, but I doubt any one person has answers that solve every major effect of climate change, much less all the secondary and tertiary effects. I certainly don't expect her, at that age, to do more than demand those in power take it seriously and find solutions....and act. Chastising a major polluter who walked away from the weak, insufficient Paris agreement is a good start if it works, but I agree it's only barely a start.

You should consider it, she got millions to March for her cause worldwide. Even if she is a willing tool for some adults, it's clear more adults are tools for her. Consider, she isn't talking to kids, she's talking to adults, and some at least are listening to her, not her parents.

Personally it disturbs me that emotional delivery like this is required for many to even consider the issue beyond "what does my political party say on this issue, that's what I say too." I wish scientific issues like climate change were immune to politics, propaganda, and emotion, but they aren't. That's why we're hosed imo, humans are too willing to be deceived if the lie is more pleasant than reality, and denying there's a problem or need for change is quite pleasant to lazy Americans, far easier than facing facts and implementing difficult solutions....until it's not at least, by which time it's far too late.

Oh. I see now. This is Andy Gno trying the same thing he couldn't sell on his own, but this time putting "children" in danger to try to sell his lies.
Footage of Gno planning the violence to provoke a response they could film at the rally where he claimed to have been attacked has surfaced, so he had to produce another video to sell his fake narrative....this time the morons brought their kids (edit: turns out she's 24 and a well known provocateur, not a little girl, just a small woman they tried to play off as a young girl) to their attempted riot and armed them with pepper spray, only to abandon them when the inevitable shit hit the fan.

Andy Gno is not one bit credible, he's been repeatedly caught making up his stories and lying about facts, @bobknight33, just like 99.9% of your sources of misinformation.

Also note, your heroes here, Bianca and John Turano (alt right violent activists who posted their hope Bianca would be beaten before the event), are trying (and weakly failing) to smash random business windows as they flee....so who are the thugs?

Funny enough, video of the pair angrily accusing 5 year old girls of being terrorists because they're Muslims has surfaced, so in reality they , two adults, are the ones who attacked children that day.

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/video-shows-trump-supporters-saying-5-year-old-girl-looks-like-a-terrorist_n_5a3037d0e4b07ff75afe3900

Not worth channel reassignment, but this isn't news, education, or learning. It's debunked propaganda from a disgraced fraudster, miseducation, and as usual you bought it hook line and sinker and tried to resell it.

Sad you feel compelled to continuously spread obvious lies. Reality must be incredibly painful and frightening for you.

BAM! You nailed it Dude!

Trump has always believed that money BOUGHT him love. His father raised him that way. He loved his father so he followed his father's teachings.

Trump would lie, cheat and steal for money as long as it BROUGHT him love.

Now, many years later, Trump has gotten angrier and angrier. He wants something else but he doesn't know what it is. Over the course of his life, little by little, he has attracted many people that kissed his feet and his ass.

This pacified him for a while making him feel special, great, "loved."

But something was missing. Could it be people really loved his money and not him? If that's true then he has fallen into his own trap. He can't trust anyone other than himself. They will always walk past him to get his money.

Now he finds himself having to sell himself as a great, great man. The best! The one and only. Top shelf saviour!

Best used car salesman EVER!

But what about his followers? They love him. Not for his money but for his anger. His anger against those pussy dems and anyone else that doesn't know how to change brakes on a car or plow a field or throw sod or repair a roof or work real hard.

Trump might not make them richer but he can punish them there weak snowflakes. Make this country tough again! Make the world submit again! Make 'em all fear us again.

Make us destroy each other again until he gets the love and happiness everyone else talks and sings about. How can those peasants be so happy without money?

"V'ger is a child" -Spock

Yes, considered that by partisan idiots who couldn't see past their hatred for anything left of Regan....they thought him a dumb country bumpkin too. To the rest of us, he was the last responsible president not interested in using the office for personal gain, one who kept us out of war with Iran, and was cheated out of a second term by the right wing/Regan Iran Contra scandal, which delayed the release of hostages to help Regan win the election.

Read. There's proof of 100 contacts between the campaign and Russia, and an undeniable estimation of their actions which were 100% aimed at electing Trump, because he would divide us even more than Clinton (which is a high bar, to be sure), and be weak on foreign policy.
Edit: for someone trying to deny the efficacy of Russian propaganda, you certainly repeat it a lot.

Look at him go, still building houses by hand. Trump can't walk from one hole to the next tee without getting winded, that's why he drives his cart onto the green.

Nuclear submarine designer....proof of extremely high level intelligence. Commander and tester of same, proof of high level of competence and service to the nation. President bone spurs can't compete in any way.

Wow, Bob. You can't do better? Even you say he's a pedophilic lech at best, and you can name not a single charity he's involved in you know isn't fraudulent? Sad.
That's what you come up with, a joke about his lack of character that's not even a joke because it's true, caught on tape? Sad you see him for the anti humanitarian, misogynistic, infidelity flaunting, charity fraud he is, and still stand with him and smirk. Pathetic Bob. Just pathetic.

I think the focus should be aimed toward those who have been injured physically, emotionally and mentally from all forms of violence whether it is natural disaster, crime, abuse, sickness etc. The people who have been broken and have lost hope need to be picked up and repaired and brought back to a better reality of caring and belonging.

Those are the ones who have seen enough of fighting and killing and need to know they are not forgotten. They need to there are good people without anger in there hearts. Someone on their side.

They've seen enough punishment from those who have no answers. Force should be used to save lives, not punish lives, otherwise you are the thing they fear.

Not all bad people are bad. They become afraid or don't know how to get or ask for help. No one wants to look weak.

People need inspiration and the knowledge that they are loved and OK and that their numbers are growing.

I know all this sounds like wishful thinking and fantasy, dreams come true for the good, the bad and the ugly.

All alone, or in two's
The ones who really love you
Walk up and down outside the wall
Some hand in hand
And some gathered together in bands
The bleeding hearts and the artists
Make their stand
And when they've given you their all
Some stagger and fall, after all it's not easy
Banging your heart against some mad bugger's wall

Isn't this where

Roger Waters

And they still don't. But hey, this is pop science. It is now expected to be horribly wrong and highly entertaining. To be successful, it must only affirm existing beliefs (or challenge weakly held beliefs) for a great number of people. The perception of accuracy and truth only needs to persist for the length of the video + or - a few minutes for early dropouts and comment skimming.

Lol...an old Glen Beck video he himself has admitted is nonsense. Great proof there Bob....I thought you said yesterday that CNN videos are all bullshit lies, today you link one that's been denounced by it's own creator as pseudoscientific propaganda as your good supporting proof?! You are just too funny, buddy.

Are you really just trying to prop up weak straw men for us to knock down? Because that's what you're doing, and it makes you look pretty dumb or dishonest, your choice.

And this one, some random internet dude actually claims there's no decent temperature data before 1950. Also, note the thumbnail graph has one line go to 1974 and the other 2018 on a graph that ends in 1970. That's all the brain numbing stupidity I'm willing to stomach for this latest dishonest industry attempt at spreading unscrupulous nonsense.
Would love to see the facts on their funding, but we won't because they hide their funding by funneling it through private third party donation companies so oil, gas, and coal money can be hidden and claimed as "small donations on this blog" but are actually well organized industry funding of industry shills.
Just asinine.
*facepalm

Admit it Bob. To you, being a democrat very simply means being weak, a pussy, and dare I say, a fag.

You on the other hand are the opposite. Strong, brave, moral. A man's man. You have a line drawn in the sand and dare anyone to cross it. You have your troops and your weapons and booby traps all ready to protect yourself.

The only reason you hold onto your arsenal is because there is still this little nagging fear in you. You're not quite sure what it is but it's got something to do with what's wrong with the world.

You might have, at one time or another, caught a fleeting glimpse of what that fear is and had to deny it, look away or suffer the consequences. The consequence being that you would become what you fear. Weak, a pussy and dare I say, a fag?

You only have one fear Bob. Just one. You fear a broken heart. And you will do EVERYTHING to protect it.

Cowboy up.

Using violence, torture, and the backing of the Russian military, and after numerous failed coup and assassination attempts he took and held tenuous control. Torture hardly played a huge roll or he would have been successful the first time, or the second. He retained and increased that power in the 70-80's by spending his huge amounts of oil money on the people, mostly not by torturing them (except for Kurds).

The "others in the room" we're his forces, not random people who murdered for him out of relief. He didn't hand weapons to an adversarial group he was convincing to follow his lead by having them kill those who wouldn't. I mean...WHAT?

You use fear mongering as proof torture works? Um... ok.

Since what I've been discussing is torture working to get sensitive, useful information, not the long term terrorism and brutal oppression of a population, I'll just move on.
Yes, despots can ride nations into the ground by making the populations powerless and fearful until those populations revolt. Yes, an iron hand and willingness to make your population stone aged can allow you to hold on a long time. Yes, torture can be part of that, but only one small unnecessary part, a strong military willing to murder unarmed civilians is what it takes, torture or not.

Wow, now you think the U.S. military taking out Saddam proves torture works because ...force and violence?

Strength vs weakness is what worked, not torture or terrorism, that's why he failed, brought down by a coalition of locals and Americans with his military deserting him in droves when he needed them most.

Torture is not a functional interrogation technique nor a means to foster loyalty, only fear. Fear only works until someone adds hope to the equation.

Torture is good for getting someone to name any person they know. It is not good for getting useful information....so it's only barely useful if you torture someone weak who knows the name of others you are looking for, and gives them up. That's useless information, even to a monster like Saddam. He would never know if the important names were withheld and only acquaintances named, so would be forced to murder the entire country eventually. Only unknown hermits would be "safe".

Your example assumes dissidents with families would be allowed to have sensitive information.
Clearly it didn't work, too. There was a strong opposition to Saddam he utterly failed to destroy even though he tortured without pause. You create more enemies than you could ever catch by torture. Smart leaders start to wonder if torture for information is worth the cost. (Hint, it's not)

Torture for coercion, a different topic, that often works, but only until the tortured decide death is preferable and try to revolt, which requires you to keep them in N Korea conditions to keep any revolt from winning. Hardly a net gain for even third world nations.

Oh the anger, the anger.

These movies are targeted toward children and also adults. Mostly children.

Children can and want to relate to the heros. Take Woody for example. The kids love Woody. They understand all of Woody's happy times and sad times. All his strengths and weaknesses. Woody is a lot like them. By design, the kids are Woody.

When Woody gets tortured, kids are very sensitive to that. Some kids more than others relate all to well. Those kids are the ones that these movies are reaching out to. The ones that see the horrors of dad beating mom. Spanking. Bullies at school. Handicapped children. On and on.

Because kids love Woody they know he understands their pain and fear. Woody has relatable problems and Woody is going to show them how to cope in deep ways that they can understand.

They understand Woody has great friends that can help him. And Woody would do anything to help his friends.

Sometimes if you look at something and see only bad, don't let anger get in the way of finding the good.

Video Title: Slurring guy on the internet defends alcohol consumption, jesus wept lol.

And let's talk about bias for a minute. Nobody is drinking alcohol for the protective effects for the 3 cancers it apparently protects against.Aaron is clearly trying to make himself feel better about his bad habits.

Moderate alcohol is not protective against 3 types of cancers, it's merely associated with it, because people who drink moderately are in a certain demographic, age, class, social/economical, education etc. and the studies that are shown in the nutritionfacts.org video control for these kinds of things.

I'm not sure if you watched the video , but they show research which says that the alcohol industry use the same tactics as big tobacco do (that Aaron is perpetuating) to keep the public confused.

The tactic Aaron is using, is cherry picking a weak study, debunking their shitty method, and then using it to dismiss all other credible evidence. It's effectively a strawman, because he did nothing to address the hundreds of studies with strong evidence.


TL:DR ALCOHOL IS A GROUP 1 CARCINOGEN - IT CAUSES CANCER:

EVERY MEDICAL BODY RECOMMENDS ZERO CONSUMPTION

I don't understand the mentality that respect equals weakness.

I'm also curious as to whether mechanical skill makes someone more manly. Where do I find the list that ranks manly activities? How do I figure out my manliness quotient and what is the threshold for turning into a soyboy? Is it reversible by eating some red meat or watching rambo?

I would think fishing would be manly but where does fly fishing stand? Surely all that swishing and fucking about is classic soyboyism? May as well be doing rhythmic gymnastics. Does eating a fish caught when fly fishing negate the method of fishing used?

So many questions, why didn't they teach me this in school!?

Strong back, weak mind. Is that your final answer?

I'm sure your son will do just fine lugging around all of your fears you've put into him.

Changing a tire and putting brakes on a car is sooooo much tougher than giving birth.