NATO membership is a liability, and a risk. Consider Canada, just like the US, no country threatens it. But since they are part of NATO, in a hot war, they're getting nuked as well. How smart is that? Not very smart at all. Canada does not need a military. Not a full one, at least. In the end, the USSR, and NATO were born out of security competition between two superpowers. However, the issue with NATO is that the USSR and the Warsaw Pact are no more. The US pretends Russia to still be the USSR.

On the US end, every NATO member that joins, the US must now procure defense for it, and assume the risk of conflict. Similar to the US-Israeli alliance, if Israel escalates a war with Iran, the US will be pressured to join in, because of the Israel lobby. We see how the US is entangled with alliances with Turkey and Israel, being non-friendly toward each other. In the fact, the US is allies with Turkey's enemies, such as the Kurdish resistance in the Levant.

The US thinks by building up alliances and bearing the cost for those alliances is strength. What it does is overstretch the capabilities of the US, since now they have military bases all over the world that are vulnerable to a concentrated attack. For example, like the ones in the Middle East. Iran can wipe off the US military bases off the map if it wants. It has that capability. Not only does the US have to fund, and support Israel, now they have to launch B-52s against the Houthis. They are the principal enabler of Israeli policy. Now the US is fighting a war in Ukraine, a potential escalation in the Middle East, and this does not even consider China who is the most powerful rival the US has on this planet at the moment.

These different alliances the US has is essentially putting its enemies in a position where they need to be closer to each other to survive their common enemy: China+Iran+North Korea+Russia+Houthis. Where is Turkey going? Being shunned by the EU for years, it has no choice, but to look else where. I would question Turkey's loyalty to a unified NATO.

NATO expansion was known as a bad thing as early as the 1990s after the Soviet Union collapsed. Officials in the US and the principle European NATO states (France, Germany) knew that the continued expansion of NATO in Eastern Europe would not be received well by the Russians. In 2008, they made it formal the expansion of NATO to Ukraine and Georgia. In 2014, the US assisted the Ukrainian nationalist, who are right-wingers by the way, to topple a democratically elected government, so they can install a pro-NATO regime. The whole concept is to socially engineer Ukraine to be culturally NATO and EU-centric culturally on the elite level. Ukrainian nationalist are right of MAGA. They are referred to as fascist by Russians for their symbology of neo-Nazi imagery. Neoliberal democrats and republicans say MAGA is bad, well, Ukrainian Ultra-Nationalist are your "far right" buddies that you give a lot of money to fight Russians in what is supposed to be a forever war.

I am not sure if they really believe they are a pure race, or it is just an intimidating tactic against Russians. Either way, within Western circles, it is whiffs like a Nazi, it is a Nazi. Not unless, it serves US interests. Western media and Western officials pretend Ukraine nationalist are liberals. Considering the environment, liberalism does not work in Ukraine, because power politics dominates.

An example of why NATO expansion is bad in certain cases is making a hypothetical example of Warsaw Pact Expansion. Imagine an alternate timeline of events where NATO collapsed, and the Warsaw Pact won the Cold War. The expansion of Warsaw Pact to the West beyond Poland and East Germany would make the US and British very scared. But since Westerners believe they are the good guys, and the world is composed of bad guys vs good guys, they don't see the obvious instigator of the conflict. They believe in their own BS.

The United States is the principal country in NATO. It runs NATO. Therefore, NATO power is de facto US power, because it runs the show. NATO is how the US controls European policy in Europe. European interests are subservient to US interests. The US is the head of the NATO hierarchy. In exchange, NATO removes security competition among the more powerful NATO states, by paying for most of their defense. When a new country becomes a NATO member, the US wants to install military bases in that country. Let me ask you a question. Does Germany or France have military bases in the US? No, they don't. That in itself is very telling. The US has no threat in the Western Hemisphere. No Chinese, no Russians, no Iranians, and no North Koreans. Therefore, the US is not a country concerned about defense. It is able to "roam" around the world, and in the process create all kinds of havoc, because it can. So this is about power, and dominance; to dominate the world. Instead, what you hear from the US government, and their narrative peddlers, is that it is about "national security". This is nothing more than a cover to hide the ulterior policy of power dominance.

The EU is the other component of the militarization of Europe under NATO. The point of the EU is to control member states. It is for EU nations to submit to a central authority. To strip away their sovereignty. The idea is to minimize the concept of nation-states by eliminating borders and to force policy such as mass immigration. Brexit was about this, among other things. Originally, and initially, I thought the EU was simply about economic integration, but it seems obvious it is simply more than just economic integration. It is the submission of its members to Brussels.

The ideology, behind this, is neoliberalism. Things like security competition are ideologically neutral. All nation-states, regardless of ideology, communism, capitalism, whatever, seek security by being dominant. If they can't, they should navigate wisely international politics. Think small states like Liechtenstein and Singapore, who are simply too small to be powerful to have many options to project power. The Russians are conservative. The EU and NATO are liberal. Not only do the Russians object to US dominance over them, they are also opposite in the views of everyday issues.

NATO is bad on the whole, because the world is not liberal. The world is composed of nation-states. They do not want a foreign power like the US involved and determining their national politics. Take, for example, Afghanistan, and the fake liberal democracy the US installed in that country. Was it their politics, or was it American politics? It wasn't their politics. It wasn't their democracy. Furthermore, it was American democracy. Neoliberalism will inevitably run into the stumbling block of nationalism. When multiple nation-states see a single actor as a threat to their national politics, they coalesce. In these cases, US-NATO, and US-Israel are the prime threats to nation-states. The US is the principal financier, supplier, and fomenter of destabilization in the world right now. If you follow the money, whether it is death, and destruction in Gaza, or a repression of NATO in Ukraine, the US is behind it. If you remove the US, neither theaters of conflict would exist. Israeli belligerence would not be anywhere as great as it is now without US support. Israeli's are clever people. They hijacked middle eastern foreign policy from within the US. For Ukraine; the whole issue is US-NATO, that's it. The US is the principal troublemaker in the world right now.

New Mexico? Eww...

So we need to put up with high crime rates, disharmony, and paying taxes for welfare recipients, because my ancestor was an immigrant? Let me think about it… No. If my ancestor felt like he had to emigrate, he, or she did so, because they wanted to leave that country, not bring that country with them.

Is Sweden better off with immigrants, yes, or no? The answer is no, and the Swedish voter lives in a state that is worse due to unfettered immigration, than without it. This is the same sentiment across Europe that is bringing the “far right” into government, or closer to government. Now you can be emotional about it, or you can be reasonable about it. Do I want to walk the street safely, or do I feel good about supporting diversity, because that is what I think is a good? You think rich people put up with this? They live separately in their own world. The politicians don't put up with it. Not your elites, at least. For the Swedes, their open-minded idealism backfired. The immigrants, they openly greeted into their country, are not so open-minded.

UBlock Origin — Wide spectrum ad blocker. https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/ublock-origin/

Tab Stash — Store tabs efficiently by using bookmarks. https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/tab-stash/

Web Archives -- Save and look up archived web pages. https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/view-page-archive/

Bypass Paywalls — Access premium articles. https://github.com/bpc-clone/bypass-paywalls-firefox-clean

CopyTabTitleURL — Copy title & URL as a format with one copy. https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/copytabtitleurl/?utm_source=addons.mozilla.org&utm_medium=referral&utm_content=search

EPUB Reader — Read EPUB files within Firefox. https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/epubreader/ Read Aloud: A Text to Speech Voice Reader by LSD Software — It works with EPUB Reader. https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/read-aloud/

Default Bookmark Folder — Save bookmarks to a specific folder by typing, and the most relevant directories appear as you type. https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/default-bookmark-folder/

Gesturefy — Use gestures to navigate pages. Instead of looking for the back and forward buttons, just gesture with the mouse, left or right swiping motions. https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/gesturefy/

Swift Selection Search — Create right-click context menu searches. You can group searches together to output multiple queries at the same time, if you need that. https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/swift-selection-search/

Undo Close Tab — Pretty self-explanatory. https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/undoclosetabbutton/

TinyURL — Shorten long URLs with one click. https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/tiny_url/

SponsorBlock - Skip Sponsorships on YouTube — Watch YouTube videos and skip through all the sponsorships and promotions. https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/sponsorblock/

Bookmark search plus 2 — As the name implies. Very useful for large bookmark collections. https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/bookmark-search-plus-2/

Firefox Multi-Account Containers — Segregate your cookies for security reasons. https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/multi-account-containers/

Search Engines Helper — Create searches for your search bar or omnibar. https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/search-engines-helper/

Tree Style Tab — Organize your vertical tabs in their own hierarchy of trees. https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/tree-style-tab/

The problem is you can't tell which large breed of dog is dangerous, and that is why people get attacked and killed. In general, people are not responsible for their dogs, and let them roam around the neighborhood. For a pedestrian walking in the sidewalk, they are a nuisance, and potentially dangerous. In situations where society is not up to par in responsible ownership, the city, or state should step in, and address the issue as the consequence of the deficit. I know a pit bull breed that is a nice dog, but if that dog is let loose in the streets, she will bite people. Ultimately, because of this issue, the question is, do we need big powerful animals as pets?

Beef is expensive because of the drought. Remember climate change?

1. When there is a drought, there is less water for cows, and grass feed. When there is less food and water for cows, they can't survive. Which leads to number 2.

2. When cows don't thrive, their numbers drop. That means less beef that can be sold in volume. Which leads to number 3.

3. When there is less beef to make profits from, then prices must increase to maintain the survivability of ranchers and the beef industry, as well as demand putting pressures on a smaller supply.

Causation: noun — the action of causing something.

This lawsuit reminds me of the ignorant customer who feels the beef industry is scrounging them. McDonald's needs to pay their workers 50 dollars an hour.

US port strike disrupts hamburger supplies, frozen seafood | Reuters https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-port-strike-disrupts-hamburger-supplies-frozen-seafood-2024-10-02/

You have nothing to say? Well, it doesn't matter anymore.

Ukraine is not supposed to win militarily on the battlefield. If the West wanted Ukraine to win, things such as allowing AFU to use ATACMS on Russian territory would not be a debate. The West wants Russia to attack Ukraine out of security necessity by threatening the expansion of NATO to Georgia and Ukraine, which it announced in 2008. Russia is a nuclear power. You don't threaten defeat on a nuclear power without risk.

The situation is like how the Russians were arming the North Vietnamese against Americans. The US justified involvement in Vietnam because of the so-called communist domino theory. North Vietnam won anyway and the South fell to the communist, and the communist domino threat theory went unquestioned. Because the domino theory was absurd. Vietnamese were ultranationalist, and no communist domino effect happened when the US cut and ran. The idea that communism was like a virus that needed to be contained from turning into a pandemic was a justification to be involved in the politics of other countries. Vietnamese were never allies of China or the Russians, just like the mujahedeen were never allies with the US.

These counteroffensives are propaganda for the consumption of the gullible public and civilian leadership to justify extending the war. An enemy that had years to create a defensive line, with another line behind it, isn't going to break meaningfully. When you launch a counteroffensive, the risk if you overextend and can't sustain the offensive. This is a political war in the grand scheme of things. Launching a NATO style offensive was a signal to Russia that NATO has it in their gunfights, and that Ukraine will eventually be a NATO country.

Russia decided on a war of attrition because it does not have a large enough population to draw from, despite being the bigger country. The logistical issues have been there for a long time.

Contrary to Western misinformation, Russians do not send in wave attacks. They did that in the very early days of the war as reconnaissance, to measure the hostility of enemy territory. Those were conscripts.

To win a war of attrition, you need firepower. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to recognize that Ukrainians are under-equipped. If Ukrainians don't release actual KIA numbers, you just need to look at their equipment numbers. Not only is there no evidence of Russian wave attacks. It makes no sense to do that when you have a firepower advantage over the enemy. Ukrainian counteroffensives only benefit the war of attrition strategy that Russia is fighting. The point of attrition is to gradually decrease the strength of the enemy, before you move in. That is done by enveloping the enemy forces from three sides, under range of artillery. Destroy the supply depots of the enemy, their equipment, and infrastructure. In addition, air superiority. Ukrainian SAM batteries are actively hunted, and simply are not effective against swarms of cheap drones. This makes air superiority even more important.

Ukrainians have to measure vitality by being aggressive, because the numbers don't support their claim otherwise. That is why they won't release KIA numbers, and they feign strength by being offensive. Zelenskyy's propaganda speeches use these offensives, such as in the one in Kursk, as the visible strength of Ukraine on the battlefield. Ukrainians were more successful in 2022 when the Russian military was weak due to war rust and the decaying nature of the Russian military. The Russian military of 2024 is much better than the Russian military of 2022.

I don't see how this has much to do with politics, and more to do with economic competition. If anything, progressives are against desalination because of the brine pollution. These desalination plants are foremost for industrial use. The city of Corpus Christi and the port authority are trying to compete with Houston in attracting business. Sometime in the future, it may become important for general consumer use because of droughts. Historically, before the Port of Houston became the most prominent port, due to Buffalo Bayou dredged by state, and federal funds, the Port of Corpus Christi was the leading Texas port until a major hurricane hit it.

Israel is not a liberal democracy. The “State of Israel” is an ethnic-state. That was the purpose since the beginning. People can assume it is a liberal democracy, then those people would lack common sense. Israel is a country for the Jews to control. An ethnocracy can be totally secular and not be religious. The article uses Western terms that does not fully capture the mindset. The Israeli elites are not ultra-orthodox. If the Israeli lobby is any indication, these Israelis who are moving due to security situation, are still partial to the state of Israel. The state of Israel is one of those priorities that many Jews, even non-Jews, think is important. And that is why Israel has such a powerful lobby within the US. It is basically the 51st state of the US while being autonomous. A liberal democracy is equality under the law and suffrage for all. Israel isn't that, and if these people value liberal democracy over the ethnic homeland, there are plenty of Western countries for that.

There were many streams of Judaism in ancient times, and they were not as closed off as they are today. Jews converted other people. The major distinction between Judaism and that of Christianity and Islam is the sense of universalism. The concerns of Jews are mostly toward Jews. Not outwardly toward non-Jews. It is a covenant with God. Christianity and Islam proselytize for universal reasons. For Christians, to save the souls of people against the eternal damnation of the original sin and to seek eternal existence with God. For Islam, it is to expand the community of Muslims, and in a similar Abrahamic eschatology, to prepare mankind for the end times, which strangely involve Jesus. In belligerent times, more Muslim recruits for war.

Christianity was a religion for the lower strata of society. In a world, where poverty was considered normal, and frowned upon. Poverty, disease, and oppression were considered a deserved affliction. It was a world without compassion. Entire economies were run by slavery and a Roman, saw it as his duty, without any doubt, to discipline his rebelling slave, because of what is at stake. Since there were more poor people and downtrodden people, Christianity spread like wildfire. It was not a religion just for the elites and the rich, whose gods were only concerned with superior things, even pettiness. This type of morality is the basis for Marxism, feminism, communism, etc., because the New Testament is about Jesus being against oppression, regressive taxes against the poor, and treating people equally, and against corruption. The poor in Christianity have a special purchase on the rich. For the Romans, who were looking for a religion to unify the empire, saw Christianity as the most marketed religion, and made it a state religion for that purpose.

I think Islam started as a war booty army that expanded control of ceded territory by the bankrupt Eastern Romans, who sacrificed much to lay a technical defeat on the Sasanian Empire. The Saracens, who were anti-Roman as pagans, and even as Christianized tribes afterward, they were known as thieves who robbed the caravans of the Eastern Romans. That culture was palpable to the Turks. It is important to note that the evolution of Islam involved different factions of people. For the example, the Turks, the Saracens, the Persians, etc. The Qur'an is a collection of heretical literature and theologies that are not mainstream Christianity today, but were in significant communities under the thumb of the Eastern Roman rule, who had a policy of orthodoxy. What was to become Islam, was originally anti-Trinitarian Christianity. The Qur'an contains mostly a Christological polemic against other Christians. If you were anti-Roman, how fitting it is to be against Trinitarian Romans by being non-Trinitarian. I digress.

For the Jews not having any type of universal mission for mankind in general, this was a disposition of being dominated by those religions that were universal.

It is a transmission line that is part of the overall national strategy to increase reliability and connectivity. The ERCOT market is different from the rest of the country, which is a federal jurisdiction. Different rules that make electrical trade illegal/incompatible. For the ERCOT market, it means it can, under emergency request, draw energy from MISO-S region, instead of burning coal & oil emergency stockpiles. While the same line provides additional reliability and throughput for the MISO-S region.

How about Venezuela do better? Nobody personally owes these people anything. When there is a need, then she will be hired. How about you hire these people instead of just badmouthing other people because you think you are morally superior? Talk is more than cheap, it is free. There are many illegal immigrants in the US who earn money, they pay their own rent, and they are illegal. What this says about this woman, in particular, is she has no reputable job skills in a country saturated with job skills. She had the wrong impression if she thought earning money in America was easy. The clues as to why these migrants come from abject poverty are found in this anecdotal story. Including clues why Latin America constantly votes in leftist governments.

If you read the article, you would have answered your own question.

You do know there are other possible hurricanes that could be a threat? Where is the money? Where is it? What if another hurricane hits?

Hear, hear, who is talking about ignorance!?

Fiscal Year 2024 Awards | FEMA.gov - https://www.fema.gov/grants/preparedness/shelter-services-program/fy24-awards

You are also blocked.

Awful comment.

It allowed people to be lazy and unproductive, hence the chronic inflation problem. They need to get a job and earn hard currency in this new economy.