US abducted the leader of a sovereign in a night without having any military installations in his country. Sovereignty is very brittle in this context. I am sure an unprepared installation can still be useful if need be. But in any case no need in sight. Europe is not sovereign because it’s not a nation, it’s a loose union with very limited actual integration outside the integration required to facilitate easier trading from strong industrial economies to their poor neighbours. There is nothing to be concerned about in this space for the US until someone in Europe (France or Germany) actually becomes more dangerous to Europe than the US.
I don't think GP was implying anything about US military fighting against Europe? Just that having another country's military all up inside your country is weird from a sovereignty perspective.
When you suffer from a clinical depression, no amount of accountability will fix this.
Also, when you are low on mental resources, don't try to do something that you dislike to begin with just because you believe it's optimal. Instead, do the thing that's potentially non optimal but sustainable.
For example, start to do regular walks instead of going to the gym.
To be honest, I am kind of shocked of the comments here on HN regarding this topic.
That's a dangerous take. People that suffer from a clinical depression oftentimes won't be able to do any of these things and this has nothing to do with responsibility and everything with suffering from a depression.
From what I have learned from friends working in the field, meds often work as an enabler, allowing people to do some of the things that are known to improve their condition further.
If you think you suffer from depression, don't keep trying to "just buckle up", don't keep trying to "just need to take responsibility". Go talk to professionals, therapists and/or psychiatrists. Mental disorders do things to a person outside of their control.
Many welcomed the Nazis when they invaded Eastern Europe because they relieved them from the Soviets. When literal Nazis are perceived as the better option you can imagine the alternative isn't very shiny.
Part of Russian propaganda over the years has been this view of the "clean Red Army". You see it all over the Internet. "American history books teach it wrong". It was the Soviets, they insist, that fought the good war and good victory over the Nazis and western powers only fought the frail, old German army in the west.
Reality on the ground is much different. While the Soviets did bear the brunt of the Nazi onslaught, what is often overlooked is their own culpability in the war (invading and splitting Poland in partnership with the Nazis, &c) and their evil annexations of peoples and countries that were nearby as part of their own power-grab. In other words, part of the reason they were in the war in the first place is because they joined the Nazis in effectively kicking it off, at least in Europe.
Soviet apologists also tend to forget that the United States and other anglo powers* simultaneously fought the Nazis in the west, took down the Japanese, invaded and liberated Italy, the Philippines, and more, fought and won in North Africa, and did all of this while providing the Soviets with the equipment they needed to stay in the war. Nevermind staging additional campaigns and operations, such as those in China to aid them against Japanese occupation.
* I don't intend to suggest that it was only the United States, United Kingdom, Australia, and Canada that fought the good fight because we undoubtedly received heroic contributions from numerous allies and friends during the war.
To be fair, American propaganda had the same effect. For example, in South America, if you ask the average person about WW2, people will talk about USA mostly. Most people would be surprised if you told them that URSS had 24 million deaths, almost 50x what USA had. I'm not saying that USA didn't play a major role, but it's weird how it is the only country besides Germany that is ingrained in America (continent) mind when you talk about WW2
>When literal Nazis are perceived as the better option you can imagine the alternative isn't very shiny.
Nice story. One problem though: they eagerly joined Nazis in exterminating Jews.
The ideology of nationalists aligned quite well, be it German Nazis, Baltic states, Hungarians or Western Ukrainians.
The problem with recuing calorie intake is that it can also lead to lethargy, where you burn even less calories, and reducing intake even more means you arent getting vital nutrients.
That's not wrong but often not that drastic. Reducing NEAT (non exercise activity) on reduced calories is person dependent and can be quite significant.
The body however is quite robust. For a healthy person, there's no acute risk associated to significantly reduce the calories intake for a few months. You should take care to have a balanced diet, of course.
Depends on the person. Ive known people that have tried fasting and it wasn't working - but they literally were just coming home from work and going to sleep.
reply