Up until a couple months ago, none of these people would even describe themselves as “Iranian.”

They would all use another term to distinguish between themselves and those living in Iran.

> You can't then say that the West Bank is not responsible for what the rest of Palestine did.

Collective punishment is a war crime.

I love this concept. I was recently thinking about how I used to be able to skip from one channel to another when an ad break came on. I would love the harness on a smart device to be like this so that I may switch between the Hulu and Netflix apps at will. Why should I have to restart the app each time I navigate in? Why do the apps even know that I am switching around?

Classic incentive misalignment for us plebs. The platforms want(need?) their advertising revenue.

Yes, Reagan was noted for his desire to avoid privatization of anything. /s

Kidding aside, the US has had libertarian pipe dreams for the better part of its history. The aberration was the New Deal period up until the mid 60s.

The point the OP is making is not about the justification used by the US Admin, but instead a point about how when a country has nuclear weapons, they are typically not invaded, because you risk those weapons being used. NK developed a weapon and has some degree of safety from direct invasion.

NK is safe from invasion because of conventional artillery pointed at Seoul.

That's why they were able to develop nuclear weapons in the first place.

Israel has been invaded multiple times while having nuclear weapons.

Ukraine has invaded Russia here and there during the war even though Russia has nuclear weapons.

The argument is weak, because in general the countries that have nuclear weapons wouldn't be invaded even if nuclear weapons did not exist.

Since it developed nuclear weapons, Israel has never been invaded by a foreign country. Israel launched the 1967 war, and in 1973, Egypt only attacked occupied Egyptian territory. Same for Syria.

Does October 7th count?

that's trying to move the goalposts. You are trying to make it a moral argument while the argument is a practical one.

It shouldn't matter if a country's territory is occupied or not if nuclear weapons are the ultimate deterrent.

The fact that the 1973 war only occurred in Egyptian and Syrian territory actually had a major impact on how other other countries reacted to it.

Even the US - Israel's main backer - basically treated Egyptian and Syrian war aims as legitimate.

There is a widespread belief that Israel would have used nuclear weapons if the Syrians and Egyptians had broken through to Israeli territory, and that this was one of the major American motivations for resupplying the Israelis during the war.

You moved the goal posts, at least on what I inferred the point to be. Nothing is an “ultimate deterrent” to war.

At some point, one should ask oneself, “is fully breaking the system the point?”

In the recent Epstein releases, Epstein told Thiel that the best deals come from a system on the way to collapse. I think at this point it’s reasonable to consider that this is what Trump and his allies are trying to do. Crash the US economy so severely that they might use their ill-gotten wealth to buy an outsized portion of it.

Trump hasn’t managed to adequately combat inflation though. Last I heard, it’s ticking up once more.

You heard wrong.

https://www.usinflationcalculator.com/inflation/current-infl...

This seems like the most obvious, legal, and direct way to stigmatize use of these glasses. Put a phone up to their face and say “I might be recording you.”

Exactly. If you do this and the wearer says something like “I’m not even recording bro” the perfect response is “I’m not either”

At proper breaking distance, it’s probably negligible.

It probably still does fleet wide. Remember, the other driver isn't gonna brake hard without reason because he has an electronic narc in the cab that will tell his boss every time he does. The flipside of this is that the driver in the back isn't gonna imperil their "stats" by tailgating to save fuel because their own electronic narc will report that to their boss.

And even if the company crunches the numbers and finds that tailgating saves a ton of fuel, they can't say "well ackshually guys, you can tailgate if it's another truck" to their drivers because society is full of dishonest jerks and we therefore can't have an adult discussion about just exactly how much diesel exhaust you have to save to make the marginal increase in semi trucks rear ending each other worth it.

Heck, the company probably can't even run that fuel vs braking analysis overtly because Pinto. Isn't progress great.

Because the power users of the max plan are subsidized at the upper end of usage by people who don’t approach the per account limit. In other words, the power users are getting more than they pay for, because most people don’t reach that threshold. If you let the power users have dozens of accounts, it has a multiple effect on the proportion of accounts breaching the profitability line.