Gromnir

HA! Good Fun!

am thinking folks is getting suckered in by skarpy_one and a meme he found somewhere on the arse end o' the internet. atp wave 64 were a covid specific survey conducted by pew between march 19 and march 24, 2020. asked respondents views on school closures and international travel and the like. a quick looksee didn't reveal anything similar to the s'posed chart data from pew or from groups such as the nih which commented 'pon pew wave 64. the chart skapry offers clear ain't from pew, so one wonders what were actual data and the relevant questions regarding mental health, which again would be almost necessarily covid specific. am thinking until something a bit more concrete is offered, ordinary and prudent skepticism, particular o' anything provided by skarp_one, should make the question as to the chart data validity a non-starter. HA! Good Fun!

ps am moderate embarrassed we didn't mention the aztecs. pretty sure we linked on these boards in 2014 or 2015, explaining our shame for not mentioning this time. is short and includes peter weller, so perhaps deal with a commercial if need be. https://www.history.com/videos/aztec-ingenuity#aztec-ingenuity stuck with terrible soil for farming? well, ok then. make land for farming. 'course you need a really big and shallow lake to pull this off-- is nevertheless awe inspiring impressive but also unique. producing enough food to support a thriving population has been the largest obstacle to human advancement since... forever. rare and recent has such obstacles been overcome with any regularity beyond the handful o' famous rivers mentioned previous. HA! Good Fun!

am not liking the designation o' africa as backwards. not your observation. in the US, we take advantage o' being a capital producer, selling those "backwards" nations tractors and fertilizers and other stuff the "third world" nations cannot current make for themselves. unfortunately, w/o serious help, even the oil producers in the middle east never reach a point where they may transition from commodity to capital. mali might be a terrible example for 2021 'cause most o' africa is indeed stuck with commodity-based economies similar to those o' the 1300s and there is no seeming way to bootstrap themselves into capital production. china hasn't even been complete successful at such a transition and they invested decades in their transformative efforts, used brutal authoritarian means to do so and is now faced with a serious population crisis with no obvious or ez solutions. is worth remembering, per capita gdp o' china is less than 1/6 that o' the US. but am thinking all too often the most obvious explanations is overlooked. for a considerable time, egypt fed the roman empire. by late in augustus' rule, egypt was supplying 1/3 o' the grain feeding the roman empire. the nile river delta were different and near unique back in those days. were a fertile river which flooded regularly. am thinking most people do not realize how recent is innovations to farming which makes it possible to achieve anything other than bare subsistence in most places on the planet. nile were unique in africa. other than harnessing electricity as a power source, am thinking the evolution o' the plow, and subsequent mechanization o' agriculture, is arguable the most transformative advances in human science and engineering. 5000 years ago is likely when plow appears in mesopotamia. 3000 years ago in egypt and china. perhaps somewhere 'round 1000 bc, metal were added to the plow to make it more durable if not more effective... not a metal plow per se, but kinda a metal cap on the pointy stick which were the plow for a long time. in places with regular flooding and silting, a pointy stick plow were sufficient, which is why the great river deltas such as yalu and yellow in china, tigris and euphrates in modern iraq and the nile in egypt is where the largest populations o' people were located. farm elsewhere were exponential more difficult and plows were not up to the task. it weren't until the 1600s that the dutch invented a metal shaped different than the pointy stick plows used for millennia. until technology advanced, there were extreme few places on the planet which could support a genuine empire sized population. am gonna note the incan empire is an exception to aforementioned generalizations as their agricultural innovations is genuine kinda mind-blowing by standards o' even today and they did w/o stuff like horse collars and metal plow coulters. not even the wheel. genuine fascinating stuff if you are fascinated by that kinda thing. cradle o' life bit is from when humans were hunters and gatherers and everything changed for humanity 'round 3000 bc. not many hunter gatherers remain, eh? the thing is, "everything changed" has happened numerous times in the past handful o' centuries, and if you ain't at the forefront when change happens, you get left further behind. HA! Good Fun!

well then, based on your comparisons, there is nothing to fear from the chinese. the older and more basic lifeform indeed stands no chance 'gainst the hairless ape who has been on the scene for a relative brief period o' time. anybody here speak ancient sumerian? no? well, that is weird. am suspecting the ancient egyptians believed the age o' their civilization gave 'em invincibility. but perhaps hoon is correct. age o' a culture is vital, which is why westerners should start fostering their kids with aboriginal australian peoples if they wanna insulate the next generation from a possible chinese threat, 'cause the australians significant predate the chinese. naked appeals to tradition/antiquity is so 19th century. HA! Good Fun!

first masks. next thing you know, they are taking your guns. worst part is, 1/3rd o' fox viewers (and possible a few obsidian boardies) is gonna see the chucklehead as a hero for standing up for his rights. HA! Good Fun!

our lactose intolerance is o' the don't be a jackarse variety. am much aware that if we have a bacon, egg, spinach and cheese frittata for breakfast, cheese enchiladas for lunch and then baked mac n' cheese for dinner, there is a good chance we will pay for our overindulgence. am knowing there is people who can drive past dairy cows at 55mph and have their intestines torque, but such is not the case for us. all we need do is be reasonable with cheese and sour cream and am able to avoid being punished. nevertheless, we frequent have lactose intolerance issues, proving once again that Gromnir is a jackarse. which is kinda same situation we have with most foods. am finding that as much as we love red meat, we can't eat too much. broccoli and brussel sprouts? Gromnir won't be the only one suffering if we eat too much o' the sprouts. beans. bread. rice. apples. artichokes... dear lord, am still recalling our artichoke heart dip nightmare o' 1995. whatever. is a threshold for most foods beyond which we become "intolerant." ... chicken is an exception. we seem to be able to eat chicken multiple times a day for weeks on end w/o ever having a reaction other than comic ennui. too bad. particular as am not a huge fan o' chicken breasts, we kinda wish we had a better excuse to avoid boneless and skinless chicken breasts. HA! Good Fun!

HA! Good Fun!

@ShadySandsposted a similar story... were march or april 2020... maybe? am getting old and maybe our memory for dates is getting fuzzier. in 2015 (and 2020) we couldn't figure out why anybody would object to a private business owner taking less income to guarantee his employees got more. hope the happier employees would be more efficient and less likely to quit? am suspecting employee dissatisfaction and turnover is not low in the credit card processing biz. weren't government forcing dan price to take less in personal compensation, so why would fox business pundits or rush limbaugh see as problematic? we were admitted baffled by the venom from a few so-called conservatives. still don't get the over dramatic angst. HA! Good Fun! ps even if you thought dan price were wrong and doomed to fail, wouldn't you be hopeful he succeeded? is not much down side to success as such a win at least suggests some o' the preconceptions 'bout the costs o' maintaining a business dependent on employees who tend to suffer high turnover rates is less absolute than many believe.

am suspecting most reasonable people will not view similar to dp. "Or causes the death of a human being without intent to effect the death of any person, while intentionally inflicting or attempting to inflict bodily harm upon the victim when the perpetrator is restrained under an order for protection and the victim is a person designation to receive protection under the order." were custodial and the cops had a duty to floyd. the restraint o' floyd did harm. period. is not actual worth arguing that point. watch video and have reasonable people decide that at no point during the +9 minutes chauvin understood his restraint were harmful? was police use o' force reasonable? was reasonable for entire +9 minutes. particular during the point in time when floyd became unresponsive and other cops on site expressed concern regarding floyd safety, how convincing is the argument that chauvin were unaware o' harm? over the course o' +9 minutes o' video, it becomes increasing difficult to believe the defense. even if you believe the initial use o' force were justified, and am suspecting many jurors would, +9 minutes makes... problematic. keep in mind this case is a bit different than most in that chauvin's superiors from his own department were put on the witness stand and they did not support the chauvin defense portrayal of events. no blue line o' silence. back in march, the judge reinstated the 3rd degree charge against chauvin. 3rd degree murder is what you described earlier when you suggested chauvin actions didn't look like murder. 2nd degree murder became much more difficult for the defense when minnesota police and training witnesses identified that chauvin's actions were unreasonable and not following policy, and the reason they were not ok from a policy pov is the likelihood to cause serious harm. but... jurors do not like to convict cops. am thinking a majority o' jurors, based on evidence so far, will see chauvin as guilty o' at least 3rd and probable second degree, but you need unanimous for criminal. am not in the court and am not seeing the jurors. assume jurors is being logical and rational is not smart. jurors liked Gromnir, so we should like jurors. nope. the reasons jurors make their descions rare is what you expect and chances are will have less to do with the evidence you is hearing 'bout on tv. the defendant looked shifty or uncomfortable. the defendant looked like a good christian. the judge were overharsh. the assisstant da were mean (is a problem particular if is a woman prosecutor and there is older women jurors, 'cause older women is particular harsh when judging younger women.) etc. whatever is final decision, there is a good chance the real reasons acquittal or conviction won't be based on what you are hearing from news regarding evidence. HA! Good Fun!

is worth dp checking what entails 3rd degree murder in minnesota. even if you do not believe chauvin deserves second degree murder, you are doing a fair job o' describing 3rd degree murder requirements in mn. chauvin is being charged with, among other things, 3rd degree murder, which may be punished by up to 25 years. manslaughter is punishable by max ten in mn? didn't bother to double-check. HA! Good Fun! ps am knowing this will confuse, but chauvin defense were trying to dismiss the 3rd degree charge and not second. second degree is the negligence murder charge and for practical reasons would result in less jail time than succesful prosecution o' 3rd degree. 1st degree is probable what dp is actual thinking o' when he is arguing no murder, 'cause that is the, "causes the death of a human being with premeditation and with intent to effect the death of the person or of another," crime.

some truth to that. russian and chinese abilities is likely to be overstated to an overcautious degree, but would prefer over estimate than underestimate. however, am wondering if you have heard of general paul van riper? do self a favor and do a search for paul van riper + war games. the millennium challenge (2002) were a functional US loss, and the pentagon brass were not happy. HA! Good Fun! ps: (edit) misspelled "paul van riper" once in the post. got it right the second time, but flubbed the first. doubt it woulda' serious borked a search, but jic...

nothing new. as has already been noted, china takes taiwan if it is willing to invest the resources. am repeating self, but... headline clickbait aside, those rand studies mentioned in the article show that china never achieves air superiority and a significant % o' chinese vessels is sunk before ever reaching taiwan. following a near certain successful invasion o' taiwan, china has gotta deal with a hostile population o' 23 million. post ww2, the US has been almost universal unwilling to make the necessary human and monetary investment to achieve successful regime change. is doubtful china makes similar mistakes in taiwan, but am thinking is too easy to forget how expensive it is to bring 'bout successful regime change. is tough to envision a scenario where china comes out looking like a winner following an invasion o' taiwan, even if they is most assured gonna be victorious in their efforts to invade. HA! Good Fun!

fixed. china has a few looming potential catastrophes to address which is undersold here in the west. IF situation gets bad enough in china (and "bad enough" is soonest gonna be years from today) would the chinese invade taiwan as a way to distract the populace from the failures o' the ccp? is a bit too what if for us to serious consider today. however, am not dismissing the possibility. if china were to invade today (not today. would take many months to prepare a massive amphibious assault and is unlikely the west would be caught unawares.) pretty much every model projects a successful chinese invasion o' taiwan, with a few serious caveats. 'ccording to rand and others, the chinese could delay the US from achieving air superiority, which is hardly ideal for china. furthermore, taiwan has a robust typhoon season which lasts better than three months (july-september) so figure at least a few additional weeks pre typhoon season is also gonna be deemed verboten for an amphibious landing making 1/3 of the year impractical for an invasion. a successful invasion o' taiwan is start o' problems for china as they need then deal with a hostile population o' 23 million who enjoy a per capita gdp better than 3x that o' mainland chinese and is unlikely to see the invaders as liberators. invasion sees a substantial % o' chinese vessels sunk before ever getting to taiwan shores. from a couple years ago rand had estimates that subs alone could dispatch 41% o' a potential 2017 chinese invasion fleet making the invasion alone brobdinagian costly. etc. a chinese blockade o' taiwan might be an alternative to invasion. am honest not having seen much serious discussion o' who does what in the event o' a blockade. the thing is, am admitted not certain what exact a blockade achieves. possible explanation: if you make everybody believe you is gonna invade taiwan, then perhaps china can use the threat as leverage to get away with doing something heretofore untenable in hong kong? apologies for double. HA! Good Fun!

you gut his philosophy. am not overstating. when trump seemed to misunderstand the stoopid of abandoning conventional forces and traditional troops in favor o' nukes approach, a few o' the generals were no doubt horrified but they gave the President the same clausewitz-based explanation the 50s and 60s politicians needed regarding the mind numbing stoopid o' depending on nukes as a functional replacement for traditional means o' imposing nation-state will. nukes is less 'bout imposing will. reliance on massive nuclear deterrence functional emasculates the capacity to impose will on adversaries. by surrendering a nation's capacity to exercise its will across the globe in favor o' a defensive posture which would only ever be utilized in extreme examples, the ability to realize clausewitz visions becomes impossible. nuclear deterrence is a crude response to the actions of other nation states and recycling abandoned 1950s era policy and/or trumpian ignorance is no excuse for trying to rewrite clausewitz to suit your purposes. (complete aside: a fundamental flaw o' clausewitz is he did not envision asymmetrical conflicts 'tween nation states and non-state actors. ) nukes is a profound blunt instrument. worse, the military folks who oversee the arsenals but do not control nuclear policy and preparedness has explained, many times, that the most likely nuclear war scenario is accidental. so many near misses. that reality should horrify everybody, but especial somebody who voices contempt and distrust for politicians like some kinda religious mantra. as such is once again impossible for us to square different aspects o' what you claim to ardent believe. regardless, am thinking Gromnir and not gd is the one who may legitimate ask the following question: "Have you ever read Von Clausewitz?" HA! Good Fun!

am gonna assume you is joking, 'cause lord knows clausewitz would roll over in his grave to hear gd opine 'bout US troop withdrawals overseas. sacrifice one o' the most obvious and effective methods for the nation state to impose its will (at least from Clausewitz pov) while simultaneous advocating a poison pill approach made all the more ridiculous by your stated lack o' trust o' any and all persons who might be responsible for making decisions regarding a nuclear arsenal. must be joking, 'cause is no way gd gets to invoke clausewitz serious. HA! Good Fun!

and cia operatives. don't forget the cia. gd again being selective with the details. so it were a US supported invasion o' cuba by cuban nationals and cia operatives. and yeah, in 1962 the range o' missiles were limited and the accuracy were a joke, but recall our statement: "also, increasing accurate and mirv'd icbms and sub launched nukes made the whole rationale for being enraged by missiles in cuba moot w/i a few years anyways, so in retrospect the whole fiasco were even more stoopid." less than a decade and whole rationale is moot. kill millions over what is rendered meaningless in a decade? sure, is no way for kennedy to see into the future, but kennedy's self serving and platform advancing choice looks worse (not better) given a bit o' the 20-20 hindsight. again, preach to the choir. please review. we already stated we ain't marked safer today than back then. is a whole host o' lesser powers who now have the capacity to unleash bio weapons and dirty bombs and whatnot which could have a cascade effect resulting in death o' far too many, but it ain't genuine MAD. am not sure if this is an age thing or not, but for gd there should be less excuse 'cause he does read history. am suspecting he knows better but genuine believes the enhanced possibility o' accidental annihilation and/or world spanning death due to supreme bad judgement is worth the cost. am recalling a post war senate study which quiet recognized near two dozen times the US and soviets were literal moments away from ww3, and reasons were often supreme stoopid-- geese and the moon were actual culprits o' two extreme near misses. which is all particular weird as gd expresses lack o' trust for any and all politicians. can't trust any of them to condemn land to build a damn or pass laws to prohibit smoking indoors or make worthy o' a traffic citation to engage in dangerous behavior while driving, but he is ok with the politicians having the requisite judgment and clear headedness to initiate or forestall nuclear armageddon? okie dokie. HA! Good Fun!

again, the US had already invaded cuba in 1961. that detail is kinda important and keeps slipping through the cracks o' your responses. mcnamara and kennedy's choice only appears wise now 'cause khrushchev backed down. can dress it up however you want, but kennedy and khrushchev opted to play a game o' chicken with many millions o' lives in the balance. the wise choice? also, increasing accurate and mirv'd icbms and sub launched nukes made the whole rationale for being enraged by missiles in cuba moot w/i a few years anyways, so in retrospect the whole fiasco were even more stoopid. btw, no, am not in favor o' ignoring chinese aggression regarding taiwan, but if you genuine think a return to MAD is a good option as 'posed to an admitted terrible choice 'tween a whole lotta horrible options, am genuine a bit saddened. am not advocating a neville chamberlain approach 'cause as we already stated, we ain't a peace at all costs advocate. even so, we recognize just how stoopid and dangerous is MAD and am thinking gd is willful ignoring all the times MAD almost resulted in actual nuclear apocalypse 'cause o' mistakes and bad judgment... narrow avoided. but again, a few years ago we woulda' been at least marginal agreeing kennedy deserved credit, but am think far too many forget just how much o' a hawk he were and how his policies had created a whole lotta arguable unnecessary additional tension with cuba, china and the cccp. HA! Good Fun!

am thinking it is impossible to make people understand what it were like during the height o' the cold war. weren't as if we worried constant 'bout nuclear armageddon, but it were always there. and intellectual we know we ain't much safer today from apocalyptic stoopid than were the case in the 80s or 70s, but such a recognition not change fact it felt different. is difficult/impossible to explain the difference. if there is a way to avoid a MAD standoff with china as a way to keep peace, am in favor of it. am not a peace at any cost guy by any stretch o' the imagination, but a return to MAD is not gonna be our notion o' a win scenario. am knowing gd recent gave kennedy credit for his handling o' the cuban missile crisis, but as we has grown older, we can't help but think the guy who deserves the most credit were khrushchev. keep in mind kennedy had ok'd the bay of pigs fiasco which in part failed 'cause o' a failure to consider daylight savings? serious? bay of pigs were a US supported invasion o' cuba in 1961, and arguable kinda cowardly. so a year later you got the US and CCCP playing chicken with nukes with cuba at the center o' the conflict and kennedy refused to back down. kennedy intransigence were not a shock. as so many forget, kennedy did not run for the Presidency on a platform o' social conscious reform. #1 issue for kennedy were to build up US military and resist soviet and chinese aggression wherever such were happening 'cross the globe. resist soviet and china were his raison dêtre. khrushchev and kennedy woulda' ridden out armageddon in their bunkers as the world burned. real courageous. were political suicide to back down, but somebody had to... and that somebody weren't kennedy. ... ten years ago we woulda' agreed with gd 'bout kennedy courage insofar as the cuban missile crisis. am just not sure anymore. HA! Good Fun! ps am not suggesting kennedy were a coward even if the bay of pigs was chicken sh!t. kennedy proved his mettle during the war. no need to convince us he were brave.

after obsessive checking for vaccine appointment availability w/i a 30 mi radius since we became eligible on april 1, we managed to get an appointment on monday at 10:45 am at literal the closest possible vaccination site. the appointment became available late sunday afternoon. moderna. second shot will be may 10. we were warned of possible side effects, but most common 'ccording to the health care professional administering the shot would be injection sight discomfort and/or next day fatigue. no side effects worth noting so far. we were a bit early for our vaccination, but we didn't have anybody waiting immediate before or after us to receive the shot, so am not certain if folks hadn't shown for their scheduled appointment or if there were some other explanation for the lack o' any kinda que. from what we could tell, the appointments were being staggered fifteen minutes apart. based on when we arrived and the time it took to administer the shot, we woulda' expected to have seen at least either the previous or subsequent vaccine candidates, but such were not the case. HA! Good Fun! ps have not gotten a haircut since late last february. we learned that Gromnir's hair grows kinda quick as we went from high and tight using #2 clippers side and back, blended in on top, to having our hair ~2" past shoulder length. is kinda silly, but am much looking forward to full vaccination so we may get rid o' our excess hair.

first season o' daredevil did a good job o' making matt murdock's faith central to the story and father lantom got some o' the best dialogue in the show. is tough to do faith and sooperpowers. overt expressions o' god's approval is incompatible with faith. however, if it makes you feel better... "The Lord of the Rings is of course a fundamentally religious and Catholic work; unconsciously so at first, but consciously in the revision." --j.r.r. tolkien all those folks who loathe religion but adore lotr were covert indoctrinated by tolkien. HA! Good Fun!

and Gromnir were initial responding to shady observations 'bout the ussr. more specific, the baltic states is having significant russian expat populations, and the expats is curious more pro putin than those current living in russia. also, the baltic state economies were inextricably linked with russia during the dismal post 1991 years. same problems. the thing is, it is our admitted limited experience (mostly lithuania) that the the baltic governments is hardly pro moscow. as recent as a couple years ago (haven't checked recent) lithuania were calling russia a terrorist state and estonia is always at the forefront o' nations pushing for tougher western sanctions o' russia. HA! Good Fun!

fake news. western lies. only kinda kidding. russians know there is better than what they have, but particular the older generation o' russians remember just how bad things can be. for near a decade after 1991, russians were promised how much better things would be. just wait a little bit for free market magic to work. starve. freeze. putin made things better. is not complicated or deep or profound. HA! Good Fun!

looking at it the wrong way. the russian economy, by any western metric, is not good, but the situation from 1991 until near 2000ish were kinda nightmarish. germany and japan, after ww2, were rebuilt by the winners. the russians/ussr lose cold war and then the west stands by and watches as many freeze and starve. putin shows up and and gdp functional doubles in eight years, lowest wages is significant supplemented and pensions is restored. not a surprise people in russia love putin. today, no matter how bad things get and regardless o' how many is sent into poverty with each new self-inflicted financial crisis, putin has convinced russians it is the fault o' the west. putin's playbook is based on deflection and whataboutism and he uses with his own people as much as in foreign policy. but again, post 1991 were a terrible and frightening time for russians. can bring up statistics ' bout how terribad is the russian economy in 2008, 2014-2017, today, but none living in russia has ever known better. is not a hard sell for putin to convince russians they is doing good, 'cause compared to how bad things were, putin is not wrong. HA! Good Fun!

yeah, that was ugly. the army lt did not immediate pull over and did not mindlessly follow all police instructions. cops reflexive see as a contempt of cop situation justifying force? serious needs to be an effort from cops to end contempt of cop /attitude test nonsense. until cops see as wrong, am not sure we are gonna see widespread change. HA! Good Fun!