Page #1
Pages: #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 #7 #8 #9 #10 ...#225
New Comment Rating: 2 Similar topics: 1.NEW STUFF, OLD STUFF, ANY STUFF 2.A Forum Topic 3.NEW STUFF, OLD STUFF, ANY STUFF II 4.NEW STUFF, OLD STUFF,, ANY STUFF III 5.NEW MONGO STUFF, OLD MONGO STUFF, ANY MONGO STUFF III Comments: | ||
You must be logged in to post here. Log in
Respect international law.
--------------------------------------- added after 90 seconds
92% of Americans, many of whom far right maga mob, oppose invasion.
--------------------------------------- added after 114 seconds
Oppose or unsure
only registered users can see external links
"To imagine a hypothetical world in which Greenland becomes an American territory, on a path toward
statehood not unlike that which Alaska followed, is to imagine a world in which North America is far
more secure and united than it is today. Greenlandic Inuit, who suffer from a long legacy of neglect and
whose colonial experience, despite recent gains in autonomy, has not been entirely positive, may indeed
stand to benefit in many ways. First and foremost, the defense of Greenland in time of war would be
strengthened by its constitutional integration into the U.S. polity,"
Again as I said, sometimes you get what you need, not what you want. Greenland could be a prosperous place
Greenland needs to be left alone, as a peaceful democratic country. They do not wish to be taken over by kleptocratic dictators.
europeans that object to greenland becoming part of the US will be paying tariffs of 20% to sell in the US now until they wrap their heads around the NEW reality.
it is just a island territory with roughly less than 60,000 people. denmark can load them up and take them to demark. That is roughly 10% of the population of Wyoming here in the US.
considering how little empathy denmark has for the women and girls their boat would probably accidentally sink to avoid the perceived financial burden they would put on demark and they could file insurance claim on the ship and make money.
quint is right: involuntary displacement of Inuit people from their generational land is ILLEGAL, UNETHICAL, UNACCEPTABLE, INHUMAN.
Google gives this quick response
"The expansion of various Western European colonial powers such as the British and Spanish empires and the subsequent establishment of colonies on indigenous territories frequently involved acts of genocidal violence against indigenous groups in Europe, the Americas, Africa, Asia, and Oceania."
It would behoove you to read about history!
only registered users can see external links
You claim to be so humane and sane and morally mighty, you are a descendant of heathens and are nothing but a fucking hypocrite. Your ancestors fucked over more people on earth than Hitler.
Fuck off
If I used all the added words I guess I would be German-Scottish-Cherokee-Confederate-American.
Although Spain and Portugal had originally dominated the trade, by the eighteenth century Britain had become the most important slave-trading nation in the world. Between 1501 and 1866, over 12 million Africans are estimated to have been exported to the New World, around 2 million of whom probably died en route.
only registered users can see external links
How many of the slave owners were Jewish?
Jews accounted for only 1.25% of all Southern slave owners.
How many slave owners were black?
By 1830, there were 3,775 black (including mixed-race) slaveholders in the South who owned a total of 12,760 slaves; the Southern slave population at the time was around 2.3 million people. 80% of the black slaveholders were located in Louisiana, South Carolina, Virginia and Maryland.
3,952, 838
According to the 1860 census, the population of the United States that year was 31,429,891. Of that number, 3,952, 838 were reported as enslaved. The 1860 census was the last time the federal government took a count of the Southern slave population.
OH, and by the way, when did maryland become a SOUTHERN state????
On the eve of the Civil War in 1860, there were a total of 34 states in the United States of America. Nineteen of those states were Free States and 15 of those were Slave States. The states of Maryland, Tennessee, and Missouri all abolished slavery during the Civil War.
only 13 states separated from the union, so where those other states???
OK, that is British.
Who did we here in America have to fight to get our independence? Britain. Now if we go back in history, many European country's conquered and "colonized" other places.
Here is what the people of YOUR residence did to the Indians further north of me,
" The British give smallpox-contaminated blankets to Shawnee and Lenape (Delaware) communities—an action sanctioned by the British officers Sir Jeffery Amherst and his replacement, General Thomas Gage. Image of a Mesoamerican infected with smallpox."
only registered users can see external links
By the way, I already knew alot of this history but while trying to address you I am using google to save typing and to provide a broader explanation.
So to think it is so inhuman of Trump just offering to BUY a island with 57,000 people on it, when folks from your country did all this, is quite a stretch,
“ involuntary displacement of Inuit people from their generational land is ILLEGAL, UNETHICAL, UNACCEPTABLE, INHUMAN.”
Are you going to state it’s not? And let’s come back to the American Confederacy, that regime, and, yes, it was a regime, promulgated the active practice of enslaving people as a right of white rich people. Whatever else they brought into the argument on why they became seditious, that alone is enough to justify the destruction of the Confederacy and the people who supported it. Don’t try to make it a noble cause that got trampled by an evil government.
Let me also remind you by quoting Google since that’s were the facts seem to come from these days )unless you got an American history class in school)
The first shot of the Civil War at Fort Sumter was fired by Confederate forces on April 12, 1861, with Lieutenant Henry S. Farley firing a signal mortar shell under the command of Captain George S. James; however, secessionist Edmund Ruffin is often credited with firing the first shot that struck the fort, while Union Captain Abner Doubleday fired the first U.S. Army return shot later that morning.
One more thing, @Phart. You may have Native American ancestry. Yes, the conquering of these fine, proud and rightful original owners of these lands was terrible, but, that was then. And, from where I stand, you are not oppressed nor dispossessed. A modern Englishman, or any other European person is not to blame for that. You want to feel proud of your heritage? That’s good, or, obviously, in your case, feel ashamed to put that adjective in front of your Americanism. Others, like me, are not.
Guys, Quint, Leopoldij, it’s hopeless
Cat, let's compare a issue that has been in the news lately.
repreations for descendants of slaves.
it is just wrong, plain and simple. And for the exact same reasons you have typed out to me for holding a grudge because of historical of things Englanders did here in the US many moons ago. The folks alive today did no harm to us, Nor have any of us physically harmed them.
To forget history and to refuse to compare it with what is going on now is being naive and stupid.
Have you read about the cost of a slave? 3000 dollars in 1858 money to buy a slave fit for physical work. around 70,000 dollars today,the cost of a average car.
the monthly salary of a confederate soilder was 11 dollars a month. Could he afford a slave? Most who fought in the war were simply trying to defend their homes and farms.I feel like that is a noble cause even if slavery was added to the fray later into the war to foster support for the war up north. In regards to your liberal thinking cat, I think the concept of fighting to protect your home left the equation after the loss of your father apparently.
The main cause of the American Civil War was the institution of slavery, which created deep economic, social, and political divisions between the North and South, leading to clashes over states' rights, federal power, and westward expansion, ultimately culminating in secession after Abraham Lincoln's election. While factors like economic differences and states' rights were involved, they were intrinsically tied to the Southern states' desire to preserve and expand slavery, their foundational labor system and way of life.
The war started to force reunification of the states and to garner support for the war ,slavery was inserted.
First to Secede (7 states): South Carolina, Mississippi, Florida, Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, Texas.
Joined Later (4 states): Virginia, Arkansas, North Carolina, Tennessee.
Claimed States:
Missouri and Kentucky also had pro-Confederate governments and were claimed by the Confederacy, though they remained divided and had loyalties to both sides.
I'm originally from Elista, but I'm only partially Kalmyk even though the largest percentage of Elistans are from the Republic of Kalmykia.
But I'm talking to an American so chances are you don't know nothing, as they say, without cheating. You only know there are good people (Oklahomans) or bad people (Minnesotans).
Well gee,
"Europeans were reeling Sunday from U.S. President Donald Trump's announcement that eight countries will face 10% tariff for opposing American control of Greenland."
With that statement ,and Demarks history of being concerned about the economic burden greenland places on them so badly they neutered the women and girls, perhaps this is what it will take to turn the tables, a economic burden.
BESIDES,Have you bothered to check on HOW denmark wound up with greenland sucking off it's hind tit?
"Greenland's colonial history sheds light on its complex legal status under international law. The Kingdom of Denmark colonized Greenland in 1721. The 1814 Treaty of Kiel, ending hostilities between Denmark and Sweden during the Napoleonic Wars, affirmed Denmark's control over Greenland"
So greenland was taken in by WAR and violence way back when. Trump simply wants to fucking BUY IT without firing a shot. NOW who's the Barbarian?
You're not telling me anything I don't know.
Greenland does not want to be owned by the US or invaded by it.
I can go into more detail of the more direct affects of all this in a pm, but you don't take pms.
No one in the democratic world wants to be under fascism.
I get harassed by folks all the time about me not having 1 of those "smart" phones. Or a car with built in gps and such.
I despise the hyper portion of capitalism as much as you do probably. I fight it every way I can.,
I just know that greenland is a land filled with resources that could improve the quality of life of all humans and denmark has their thumb over it.
I guess you don't understand simple English.
Let's see'
"What was Hitler's end goal?
Hitler pledged to restore prosperity, create civil order (by crushing industrial strikes and street demonstrations by communists and socialists), eliminate the influence of Jewish financiers, and make the fatherland once again a world power."
ok, so if Trump is facist like hitler, does that also mean the protesters in minnesota are communist and socialist?
Or quit bullshitting.
quint said it quite eloquently:
"you need to give it up. You're getting too fixated on it. You're actually talking about involuntary displacement of Inuit people from their generational land. Greenland is not for sale.. end of story."
I can hear the piss boiling in your bladder thru the computer screen
Who brought all this sickness to America?
YOU EUROPEANS
"Epidemics of smallpox, typhus, influenza, diphtheria and measles swept the Americas subsequent to European contact, killing between 10 million and 100 million people, up to 95% of the indigenous population of the Americas. "
DO YOU SEE THAT NUMBER LEO?? 95 fucking % of the indigenous people were killed because of European sickness's. But Trumps Offer to BUY a island is inhumane? THey STOLE this country by KILLING it's people
not of the indigenous people who died from that sickness.
Mar-a-Igloo,here we come! With Missiles and mining machines and plenty of high carb snacks on the boat!
But you do know what you're saying there, I hope.
Sending the military to kill an alley, to enrich Trump personally.
We have to go way back to find a king who made his country do that.
My, oh my, did that man ruin your country's morality.
I didn't say deny, you did, I said you didn't want to acknowledge it at that particular time.
and here we come.. really? you ain't going anywhere.
So they are already having issues with charging electric cars?
Sheesh,what about in 5 years? The power company are not permited to build new power plants.Solar and wind are going to be important to keep the grid up. But that didn't work in Texas did it?
They make a lot of energy in Texas,but how many folks died over the winter this past 1?
Angel1227!
So a private, for profit, company did not plan on a hard winter so their production of electricity was not sufficient? And this utility, regulated by the states, failed to meet the demands? This state (Texas) governed by Repukers was not regulated correctly so this company spent less on production and got richer because of it? This sounds very much like a Repuker business idea.
I fault the power companys in texas to a point but I also fault the citizens for lack of preparedness.
Face it, sometimes you need regulation, especially for basic facilities like power.
And I then mentioned the issues in texas with electricity.
What everyone is missing here is the fact there is NOT enough electricity being produced to meet CURRENT demand.As Ananas has indicated.So imagine if you will,5-10 years from now,when there is GREATER demand? What a mess we are in for.
Regulation is not the solution. that is how you GOT TO THIS POINT. To many regulations preventing new power plants being built and trying to snuff out coal,a effective energy source.
You think that if they are running short they won’t try to catch up? The regulations you protest are there to protect the people and the environment. But, knowing how you think, fuck that. Let coal continue to pollute. We’ll be dead by the time our grandkids die of poisoned air.
only registered users can see external links
Only 2 under construction according to this chart.
only registered users can see external links
The US shut down how many? lets see
only registered users can see external links
Now, we shut down 39 and we are building 2. Does that sound like regulations are helping any? 2, there are 50 states. So state regulation is not changing anything where it may be either.
If you want coal gone,you need to have a replacement handy before hand.
Nuclear power is not the solution. There are 80 sites in the United States where nuclear waste is stored. Some of it is stored temporary in a location that is not safe long term. The best uranium sites are already running out and it's getting ever more expensive to mine the stuff.
That waste has to be looked after for the next 20,000 to 1M years, before it's safe. Humanity probably kills itself before that or there might be a few survivors that don't know how to keep the waste safe and radiation will finish them off. But who cares, right?
only registered users can see external links
Like nuclear is the only alternative to coal.
I just used nuclear here because MOST tree huggers-liberals,think nuclear is the answer.And it has Ooodles of issues that take Many years to deal with.
Actually, I even prefer fossil fuels over nuclear, even though I'm a tree hugger-liberal. Nuclear might be a bit better on carbon emissions when the reactor is built, but building new ones creates so much emissions, it takes 20 years to recover.
Another problem is that nuclear reactors take ages to start up and stop again, which is not practical as backup for solar and wind. Fossil fuels are at least needed until we have enough geothermal, hydro (incl. wave), biofuel, biogas, hydrogen, chemical storage (formic acid), thermal energy storage, battery storage and whatever I forgot or they think up next.
Then there is off-course the waste and the risk.
Eh so more electric cars will reduce demand?
I know you are not a engineer,but even you should be able to figure out that can't work.
groas violations of human rights, so the US or Europe don't need them as an ally.
If they can't sell us oil ,they will make their money on interest from loans.
We could afford to use fossil fuels if we could finish our pipelines and drill in otherwise useless lands like up north in alaska where there is nothing but woods.
The alaskan pipeline built long ago,was supposed to be such a wildlife disaster,ha,the animals love it,it is warm near the pipeline.
California has MILES of coast line,Why are they not looking into this tech?
only registered users can see external links
Instead of wasting all that coast line for half naked people to lay around and spread covid,there could be power plants there!
NO pollution! No noise that is not already there,and erosion control! WOW,
Kansas,could be using wind and solar to help of course.
Another non polluting power source,
only registered users can see external links
When I build a green house,yep,I will use geothermal to help with temp control.
Every bit you can use of it is better than none at all.
Here are some fun do-it-yourself builds on YouTube.
I had seen them before and it made me regret living next to a stationary ditch.
Maybe there are some ideas you can use:
only registered users can see external links
only registered users can see external links
only registered users can see external links
I DO NOT quite understand the amount of AMPS he is getting from that washing machine motor.
only registered users can see external links
How many Chernobyl’s do you know? One in the states, one in Japan, and one in Russia. Here, in Miami-Dade county, FP&L has been operating the local one over 50 yrs. Same in other cities around the state. And no pollution
You don't hear about the Mcquire plant here in NC getting to hot but it did a few years ago. The tree huggers were angry because a type of fish was dieing from getting caught in the cooling system water.So they put a screen over the intake. Worked fine for a while. Until the screen clogged up with little fishes.A employee told me about it.
Here is a long list of potential accidents and how to deal with them
only registered users can see external links
Yea,I know,I got dizzy after 10 minutes of readin!
I can't see a coal plant being any where near as dangerous to operate
They can't even take in water, without sucking up all the fishes
According to the Rainforest Action Network. For decades, climate change has been a global crisis that will impact every single person and living being on this planet. Now, according to the latest UN climate report, we have less than 10 years to cut global emissions in half.
Burning fossil fuels isn’t just bad for the climate, these industries also violate countless fundamental human rights. From frontline communities facing a fossil fuel pipeline on their land to Indigenous people facing fires in the Amazon to worker rights violations on palm oil plantations, the industries fueling climate change are also fueling injustice.
Coal, tar sands, and fracked gas show everything that’s wrong within the fossil fuel industry. These extraction practices are harming people and planet every day, and big banks are fueling this destruction of the planet and negligence of life.
So what’s so bad about coal, tar sands, and fracked gas? Basically everything, from start to the finish these fossil fuels are disastrous. For decades, climate change has been a global crisis that will impact every single person and living being on this planet. Now, according to the latest UN climate report, we have less than 10 years to cut global emissions in half.
Burning fossil fuels isn’t just bad for the climate, these industries also violate countless fundamental human rights. From frontline communities facing a fossil fuel pipeline on their land to Indigenous people facing fires in the Amazon to worker rights violations on palm oil plantations, the industries fueling climate change are also fueling injustice.
Coal, tar sands, and fracked gas show everything that’s wrong within the fossil fuel industry. These extraction practices are harming people and planet every day, and big banks are fueling this destruction of the planet and negligence of life.
So what’s so bad about coal, tar sands, and fracked gas? Basically everything, from start to the finish these fossil fuels are disastrous.
Like I said, “What you don’t see can be more dangerous.”
only registered users can see external links
chernobyl didn just happen and stop.It is still happening today.
Smog will go away at some point.
coal smoke can be filtered.Try filtering radiaton.
So we only would need half that exclusion zone filled with solar panels
and that would cost about 78 Billion Euro's. That would raise our national debt from 56.3% of GDP to 66.2% of GDP.
Jobs for all our unemployed people will pull that debt down soon enough.
Accidents happen. Even if the chance is 1:1M (historically proven it's much higher), when you multiply that risk by the number of nuclear power plants required, something catastrophic will happen at some point. Such catastrophes could cost more than the complete energy transition.
That's not worth it, because nuclear power is only a temporary solution, because the uranium will run out at some point. It's already becoming more and more expensive to mine the stuff.
Even if all those problems didn't exist, it still takes 10 years before any nuclear power plant has compensates his own build. But it first takes 10 years to build any. Then after 20 years, they are just as CO2 effecient as wind and solar. That's too late. We need to lower CO2 emissions ASAP.
Anyone with some money to spare can invest in their own solar panels,
lower their costs and be less dependent on power companies.
It's nice to have air-conditioning in a heat wave, when the government
is telling you not to use power or you can't afford it when power companies are charging you 100x the normal rate.
only registered users can see external links
There are al sorts of natural disasters, but it can also be a terrorist attack or a hacker or just basic human error.
BTW, instead of Kansas I could have picked West Virginia
--------------------------------------- added after 4 minutes
As far as anything else, we have to trust security will prevail. Every thing is a crapshoot. Hopefully we don’t roll snake eyes,
only registered users can see external links
I also don't like nuclear energy and my arguments are in line with the science on climate change. That uranium has to be mined, which also emits CO2.
A nuclear power plant takes a lot of energy to be built and maintained.
Then afterwards we have to keep the waste safe for the next 20,000 years.
On the short term nuclear is about as energy/CO2 efficient as wind power and even less than solar. In the long term nuclear has a horrible energy/CO2 efficiency, because keeping the waste safe also costs energy. Also, building nuclear power plants takes a long time and lots of materials. It takes about 10 years before a nuclear power plant compensates his own build. That's about 1-1.5 years for wind energy and 2 years for solar. However solar is cheaper
on maintenance.
Other than that, I agree with most of what you said.
All energy technology costs money, materials, energy and land to build and maintain. All energy technology has downsides like pollution, mineral shortages, exploitation of people and CO2 emissions. We just need to stop with the worst energy technologies first and expand on the best ones the most.
It doesn't require completely changing our life or have impact on the quality of our life. However climate change already impacts our life and it will only get worse. We can either choose to accept some changes now and prevent total catastrophe later or we can deny the truth until catastrophe proves us wrong.
New Comment Go to top