Why on earth would they want to keep the execution of traitors secret? Now would be the best time to bring the rioters and other scum in front of the public, show the people the damage they have caused, and make an example of them for anyone else thinking of collaborating with the CIA. Do these journalists have zero braincells?
Schools, colleges, research institutions … Trump really hates education, huh?
Yes, but then the US army will pay you a visit instead of Iran, and unless you’ve been spending the last decade building tunnels and drones it probably won’t work out as well for you.
I had to think a couple of minutes who the current president is, and I’m one of those freaks who reads the news. So yeah, no one will notice.
It’s a two-tier system. Friendly countries - China, Russia, Malaysia and Bangladesh - don’t even need to pay the toll. ‘Neutral’ countries like India, Indonesia, etc. can transport oil after paying the toll. US and its allies don’t get oil, toll or no toll.
Distractions all the way down.
You could take one of the five available seats in the middle of that cluster.
Source please
Nazi sidekicks, but also Linux and Nokia, so I don’t know.
I think Ireland at least should be excluded; they were colonised by the British.
the only verifiable guarantee that such attacks will not be repeated is economic and energetic death of the usonian empire
I feel that Iran should ask for Russia to act as guaranteer. Perhaps with a fund set aside as collateral.
Okay, but hear me out:
Alligator-mounted velociraptors
If a developing country invests in public education, free healthcare, transport infrastructure, housing, etc., is that not social democracy? Why wouldn’t that work?
The label shift was a survival tactic
Fair, but why can’t social democracy function in a peripheral (=developing?) country?
Social democracy needs superprofits from the periphery to fund the core.
But there are social democratic parties in developing countries.
even if we were only using half the oil we presently are when the strait was shut down, the same portion would likely be coming from there, so the “shock” would still be the same
The same fraction of oil production, yes, but a much smaller fraction of total energy production.
You would still have shortages of specific fractions that have non-energy uses (like Helium or plastics), but at least fuel would be less affected.
But in 10-15 years nobody will let the Strait of Hormuz get blocked like this again.
How??? You have giant, slow, unarmed ships filled with flammable liquid that are forced to go through a small channel. Forget missiles and drones; you could set them on fire with artillery.
More likely, in 10-15 years we will have moved away from fossil fuels to the point that a closure will no longer crash the world economy.
The point is, it’s not an apples to oranges comparison when you talk about the energy efficiency of an EV vs. a ICE car.
Energy efficiency does matter because even if you are burning diesel to generate electricity, you can make power stations a lot more efficient than car engines. So shifting from ICE cars to EVs would reduce fuel use even in the absence of green electricity.
ICE cars are inefficient, but carry around a very energy dense fuel source and can go hundreds, sometimes thousands of km without needing to stop. EVs have much more efficient engines, but have to drag around really heavy batteries that aren’t very energy dense.
This is true, but like I said, the difference isn’t huge. An ICE car’s fuel + engine would be in the 100 - 400kg range, while an EV’s batteries + motor would be in the 200 - 500kg range. An additional 10% or so of weight is bad, but is outweighed by the at least fourfold increase in efficiency.
60 kg of fuel, which can supply 2.74 GJ of energy
‘Contain’, not ‘can supply’ 2.74 GJ of energy. At 20% efficiency, you’d need a 800kg battery to match.
The only thing that stood out to me was the high heels and skirt instead of proper trousers.
Short answer: British
Long answer: When India got independence from Britain, each province and princely state was asked to choose whether to join India (secular, Hindu-majority) or Pakistan (Muslim majority, with legal protections for minorities). Kashmir’s Hindu king decided to join India, even though its population was majority Muslim. Three wars later, most of Kashmir is now in India, while the westernmost part is under Pakistan. Politicians in both countries have sabre-rattled and done other stupid shit to inflame the situation.
The India-China dispute is because the British Empire promised that bit of land to both India and China. Now it’s controlled by China, as part of Tibet Autonomous Region.