I mean, there’s an infrastructure problem that’s worth considering. With low enough population density, it could become no longer feasible or worth it to maintain large-scale, country/globe spanning infrastructure projects such as power grids or undersea fiber optic networks. This infrastructure didn’t matter much a few thousand years ago, but it’s pretty critical now, so the same rules don’t necessarily apply.

I don’t know how likely I consider this outcome to actually be, as you’d need a very steep decline, but it’s at least worth keeping in mind.

Obviously. The point the person was making was to say that even if we buy into the bullshit narrative that this was consensual, it still doesn’t make sense. They didn’t use incorrect terms to skirt around it, they were making a specific point about their claims.

Ukraine’s constitution forbids an election during a state of emergency. This isn’t him overriding precedent, this is codified into law.

At risk of misreading, I think they might be parodying the usual IDF line. The ‘runs into shrapnel’ bit is a little over the top.

Yeah that’s a perverse incentive if I’ve ever heard one

Pardon?

Bang on. You don’t make someone your bodyguard without trusting them, so this guy is a good pick from the perspective of maintaining power as an autocrat.

Eh. Brilliant is maybe a stretch. Acknowledging the abject horror of the situation and putting it aside for the moment, this isn’t the first war where civilians have been targeted intentionally by bombing, and it certainly won’t be the last. Historically, the response to terror bombing such as this has been mixed, as such things are highly dependent on the population in question. Generally, however, the balance leans toward it being mostly a waste of resources. I’m sure the Russians think they’re doing some 4D chess maneuver, but from my perspective they’re just wasting valuable weapons systems (the missile that hit the hospital costs well in excess of one million dollars per and was part of a barrage) on targets which provide little or no military utility.

If I had to guess, this is more about domestic propaganda than anything else, but that’s just conjecture.

Jesus, your perspective is just toxic and hateful. How is this any different than any other incident where people are trampled (see: Travis Scott)? Why is religion at fault here suddenly? Or is this an objective reason that you are a fool for liking Travis Scott?

I grew up religious, and I’ve distanced myself from spirituality for the better part of a decade now, so I’ve played both roles at different times in my life. Even so far removed, though, I can still objectively acknowledge that religion has played a critical role in human evolution and history. It’s not wrong for people to want to want answers about the universe and life, and the human experience is built around community. Religion can, for many people, provide for those needs, and there’s nothing wrong with that.

Look, I acknowledge that religion is responsible for, or at least a justification of, a lot of human suffering. That is true of lot of human institutions - we are deeply flawed beings. I would also say, however, that in saying those things, you are adhering to your ideology and casting vitriol with the same fervor that a hyper-religious person would.

Please just try empathy next time. Such hateful statements do nothing to change minds, and are more likely to push people away from looking deeper at religion and objectively examining if it’s actually good for them as an individual.

Valid. I assumed they were talking about the political terms rather than parties due to the lack of capitalization in the original comment, though my own comment has them capitalized so I certainly muddied the waters further. Definitely my bad, I’ll edit it to be more clear.

I must say, though, you are quite an aggressive fellow. I wasn’t making any judgements or even really commenting on foreign politics in any meaningful way - simply making an observation.

Separate from the Canadian parties, it’s also worth noting that ‘liberal’ and ‘conservative’ are not mutually exclusive ideologies.

Edit: clarified that this is not in reference to political parties in particular.

Fr. Leftists need to exercise their second amendment rights way more.

I agree, but it’s also worth noting the influence of police forces, riot police, swat teams, and the national guard.

The US basically has an occupying army to quell unrest in every county across the country, so it’s harder to properly protest without state retaliation. Not to say we shouldn’t do it, but I can understand people’s reticence.

Happy endings are banned in Slavic history

I’m honestly not sure we can truly say that Hamas ‘instigated’ this situation in good faith, as this is merely the most recent flare-up in a long history of atrocities that goes both ways. That doesn’t excuse what Hamas has done either, but I also wouldn’t consider shelling civilian buildings to be a particularly defensive action.

People aren’t trying to ‘bind Israel’s hands before they can achieve meaningful military objectives’ they’re trying to bind Israel’s hands before they can commit more atrocities. These atrocities are being actively supported by US taxpayer dollars, and the sentiment among voters (at least the ones I know) is that US support means that we have blood on our hands by association. That’s not something I’m willing to support, and voters shouldn’t feel bad for not supporting it either.

Nothing about this mass casualty event should be considered a foregone conclusion. All we can do is try and stop this cycle of violence from being perpetuated.