notpc

7 ms·

1.
by notpc 10y ago
That wasn't immigration. That was the dislocation of one people by another. 90% of Indians died shortly after first contact because of smallpox, which moved faster than the Europeans themselves did. And of course, if the Indians had th
2.
by notpc 10y ago
The ones who were engaged in tribal wars of conquest with each other before Europeans ever showed up?
3.
by notpc 10y ago
You need only look at the banlieues of Paris, full of second and third generation Middle Easterners who hate France and hate French values to prove my point.
4.
by notpc 10y ago
I'm going to very amused as Google's "don't be evil" facade comes crumbling down, having lost their revolving door with the US government and protection from antitrust enforcement. Google has a very small business,
5.
by notpc 10y ago
Yes, there does have to be a winner and a loser. Given that ISIS aims for a global caliphate and the destruction of the US and Israel, I sure hope you want them to lose...
6.
by notpc 10y ago
I can't put together a proof that we're the 'good' and they are 'bad' in some objective moral sense. We have our vision for what we want for the world and our nation, they have theirs. It's better for us i
7.
by notpc 10y ago
"It is better to be feared than to be loved, if you cannot be both." Muslims are the primary victims of terrorists groups. They would be very happy to be rid of the likes of ISIS and Al Qaeda. > That's more or less how we
8.
by notpc 10y ago
It will only become easier and easier to do great harm to many people. And so there is no number of terrorists that is an acceptable risk. We can't allow these savages to keep developing their capabilities, growing their numbers, and
9.
by notpc 10y ago
I'm highly amused that you start with "actually, no it's not", implying that you are going to disagree with my comment, because you don't actually address anything I said. Did you even read what I said?
10.
by notpc 10y ago
It doesn't sound like ad purchasers have much of a choice here.
11.
by notpc 10y ago
The fact that Obama wasn't as environmentalist as some would have liked doesn't change the fact that Trump is clearly much much less so.
12.
by notpc 10y ago
This is a silly argument. Trump and Clinton competed for the electoral college, not the popular vote. Which means that Trump spent a lot of time campaigning for one electoral vote in Maine and almost none in courting millions of people in C
13.
by notpc 10y ago
Like it or not, increasing fossil fuel extraction and cutting environmental regulations is now the policy of the President of the United States. The public communications of the executive branch are under his authority and he's not jus
14.
by notpc 10y ago
It shouldn't be an ad network's job to adjudicate truth, especially given Google's monopolistic position. They should stick to selling and reselling eyeballs and clicks, and regulating things directly material to that, e.g. d
15.
by notpc 10y ago
These critics don't understand what it means to get things done. It's becoming a meme at this point. Media for the last year and a half: "Donald Trump will NOT be able to build the wall." Just now, Donald Trump: "We
16.
by notpc 10y ago
This is driven by expectations of Trump's deregulatory agenda. He says he's going to cut 75% of regulations. I can't believe this is happening. America is back people.
17.
by notpc 10y ago
Given that certain opinions are very unpopular around here, why should I be forced to use my primary account to post on political topics? If you look through the comment history of this account, I think you'll find that the posts are a
18.
by notpc 10y ago
You retain sovereignty in a technical legal sense, but the cost of exercising that sovereignty becomes prohibitively expensive if you can't get the other signatories to agree. That's why trade agreements that mandate extensive int
19.
by notpc 10y ago
I just removed it because it's not even the right word. I meant to refer to the philosophy that seeks to incrementally build an international legal order. It's commonly called "liberalism" within the context of internati
20.
by notpc 10y ago
TPP was a threat to the sovereignty of the United States. It would have encoded in a multilateral trade agreement, representing huge amounts of economic activity, massive regulatory requirements, enforcement courts, and processes for furthe
21.
by notpc 10y ago
You've got to be kidding me. This is quite straight forward. 1. America has figured out how to listen to Merkel's phone calls. 2. Merkel finds out we listen to her phone calls. 3. Merkel stop using her phone for communications. 4.
22.
by notpc 10y ago
I doubt that Angela Merkel, or 35 other world leaders, knew we were listening to their phone calls. I doubt the EU knew that several of their offices were bugged by US intelligence. The same goes for the embassies of 38 countries that we h
23.
by notpc 10y ago
> You say he damaged our ability to collect data but don't have any proof. The damage is very obvious. He revealed a bunch of mediums that the NSA had the capability to monitor. Any sophisticated actor that wants to avoid US intell
24.
by notpc 10y ago
The whole thing seems very cowardly. If Snowden truly thought he was acting in the best interests of his country, he could have: 1. Leaked only information about the NSA spying on Americans within the US. 2. Stayed within the US and faced t
25.
by notpc 10y ago
> I also don't see how Ecuador is part of an "anti-American bloc" given that they are a democratic state and literally use the US dollar as their official currency. You should familiarize yourself more then, with Rafael C
26.
by notpc 10y ago
I question whether you even read my post because your reply is so comically ignorant of all the points I made.
27.
by notpc 10y ago
Leaking to "trusted news sources" is still leaking! Further, my central claim, that Snowden leaked the details of legitimate foreign intelligence activities, is hard fact. Look at my response to 'abandonliberty'. As for
28.
by notpc 10y ago
Just to name one example, Snowden disclosed the America's wiretapping of 35 foreign leaders: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/oct/24/nsa-surveillan... As for "articulating an impact&quot
29.
by notpc 10y ago
The purpose of prison is to strike fear deep into the hearts of those who would follow in Private Manning's footsteps. And actually, the sentence was 35 years with eligibility for parole in 8 years. There is always a certain arbitrarin
30.
by notpc 10y ago
Indiscriminately leaking thousands of diplomatic cables is the kind of thing that can change the world forever. It can cause major treaties to fall through, wars to start, etc. Just as an example, Manning's leaks have been cited as a m

More ›