^ It is not. Eskimo is a term for northern people across all polar regions from Russia to Lapland to Canada and Alaska. In Canada some have got bent out of shape over the term but linguistically and practically it has never been pejorative. Canada has a pro sports team called the Eskimos and it hasn’t been faced with the backlash the Redskins or others have faced. Mostly because its not really offensive. Inuit, the Canadian preferred term, is really a subset of the broader Eskimo. The meaning of Eskimo is derived from the Innu language and means snowshoe netter. Hardly offensive. Further, Canada has northern reservists made up of Inuits that actually do defend northern sovereignty so any Canada/Denmark conflict would probably realistically involve an Eskimo battle. So I appreciate the concern but I’m not being racist.
If you lived under Pinochet or Saddam you’d know your last statement is wrong.
I would give you a more detailed response, but since you’ve already shown me in the Investments thread that you’re not the sharpest knife in the drawer, I’ll just leave it here.
But it is if you were an inhabitant of just about everywhere else. I don’t see your point with China, though. The US engaged China in a different manner and, by and large, it was pretty successful. Relative to most places today, China is rather restrictive. But relative to China 40 years ago when Nixon first engaged them, they are far more free.
That’s a myth, most places did just fine without the US fighting for their freedom, and in many cases where the US intervened, they became worse off. China is somewhat free today due to their own internal impetus, not because the US fought for their freedom.
Just ask the Afghans. Arming, training, and funding tens of thousands of brutal militants to wage violent jihad surely brought a lot of “freedom”. That brings us right back to Israel actually.
I have no answers here, but as an atheist, I can’t bring myself to particulatrly care about religious wars. We’re something like 4000 years into holy wars in the middle east and it doesn’t seem like we’ve solved any problems. It would be great if Hamas stopped lobbing missiles, it would be great if Israel would stop lobbing missiles, but I have neither the time nor energy to care about who is right or wrong. It’s really hard to get worked up about people fighting over whose made up stories gives them control of a piece of desert.
I’m not an isolationist, but I also realize that American ‘superiority’ is a thing of the past. We have neither the economic might or will to be great at home and defend our allies abroad. We have no control over our own border, how could we possibly control theirs?
In most cases the US didn’t have to fight. Just by having an effective military and saying that they *would* fight was enough to keep the USSR at bay (and, eventually, destroy them economically).
China is somewhat free today because the British influence in Hong Kong and the American influence in Taiwan showed the population that greater wealth comes from free markets. Without Hong Kong in particular being British up until relatively recently, I doubt China would have progressed half as much.
What the US has lost is hegemony, and its ability to dominate within its sphere of influence (i.e. the world today, and the non-soviet aligned world during the cold war). The US still remains a great power, and an essential participant (if only as an opiniant in some cases) in major world issues. It will continue to be that way for some time.
During the Cold War, US military doctrine was to maintain sufficient resources to fight a conventional war on two fronts simultaneously. One can argue that Iraq and Afghanistan were those two fronts for a while, but it doesn’t seem like a two front war the way WWII was.
China is free today because Deng wanted it to be free. And China is not really free, it may be a capitalist economy, but politically they are the same. Those are two separate things.
China is just as corrupt as Russia except the leadership is not batshit crazy like Putin and they actually trying to be more capitalistic.
Besides disliking the guy, do you have any commentary related to the events and paradigms he discusses ha ha
And have you been to Palestine Palantir? Almost everyone I know who has gone is very sympathetic to Palestine. I’m pretty sure everyone can agree that Isreal is doing things it shouldn’t.
Where does Ron Paul fit in there? And other libertarians who are fed up of sending $3 billion in welfare checks to Israel every year and billions to other countries in the region.
As long as the most powerful country on the planet gives unconditional support to one side, this conflict won’t be resolved. My plan would be to impose economic sanctions on Israel and Palestine and remove foreign aid to both (80% of Palestinians rely on foreign aid). You have to put pressure on the more powerful side of the conflict (Israel) to get things done as they have more room for concessions. Money not only talks, it swears.
AIPAC has become too powerful these days and have significant influence in DC. Even many Jewish people believe what AIPAC is doing is detrimental to Israel’s future.
Funny you say that since I would say the only people for Israel are terrorists/zionists/defensive idiots like you.
Last time I checked running over Palestinian kids with tanks, forcibly removing someone from their home, and murdering huge groups of people without consequence weren’t actions that would garner any kind of support from a rational mind.
Israel is real terrorism.
^ Yup, but firing rockets into civilian territories is legitimate warfare.
Did you watch 5 Broken Cameras?
libertarians are isolationist from a military perspective. There was a big debate in the inner circles if we should do anything after 9/11. Attacks on our personal liberty eventually won out over arbitrary isolationist stances (probably for the best).
As to foreign aid, libertarians are categorically against it.
Not only is this POV boring but if you even try to expand on this we can rip this argument to shreds.
Ah love it, born and bred in backwater Kansas.
Rawraw, the documentry any good?
Nothing to see here gents, just middle east’s most ‘liberal democracy’- wait hang on, that’s Lebanon ‘defending’ itself.
http://m.aljazeera.com/story/201472413198190287
UN run shelter whose cordinates were communicated to Israeli authorities was taken out by precision strikes. All countries including communists Russia, China, liberal open countries like India and African countries move to open trial for war crimes.
One country votes no - And some idiotic yanks think radical muslims took the fight to american shores because they didn’t like their ‘liberty’.
funny how Fox News doesn’t mention a word of this.