481–490 of 660 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am questioning the idea that there is one "the holocaust". I understand that is not a very popular notion at some places. (As I anticipated, here comes the downvotes) Being at the other end of colonialism, we are aware of many holocausts and acknowledge them if not equally we don't identify any one as 'the holocaust'. Don't get me wrong, I suspect our values mostly agree. I literally have a 3ft by 3ft Anne Frank's…
Ok, thank you for clarifying because I thought you were coming from a different place. Well I disagree. I don't think the Holocaust took away the word "holocaust" and stripped it off from it's meaning, and from being able to be used to describe other events. I also don't think that was the intent behind the choice. So much so that I've capitalized the Holocaust. If it's the right choice or not to name it, I trust the…
Upvoted because I think your comment was downvoted out of emotions this topic triggers.
Those Danes should study the Falklands war. Using F35 in this situation is like brining in a billion dollar paperweight to the battle.s
That doesn't matter. It is not so much about whether the USA could do this and expect to win, of course they can. Nobody has any doubt about that. It is about gross miscalculation of consequences. Attack Greenland ->attack Denmark, attack Denmark -> Attack the EU. So you don't attack Greenland. Because that would be wrong. Unless all that stuff about shining cities on hills was nonsense. Instead of making America gre…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Trust me, Denmark wasn't posturing. The assumption was - and still is - that the USA wasn't posturing either. We (and I realize I obviously don't speak for all of Europe but I have my finger on the pulse in many places here) are also not assuming that when Trump is gone the USA will go back to normal.
This is absurd in the extreme. In actual war there is absolutely no possibility of success for Denmark, even with the help of allies. Failure to capitulate results in nothing but death and destruction with no hope of strategic gain to begin with. What you are likely experiencing is a modern belief that screaming and shouting will bring popular diplomatic pressure to bear on the opponent, thus arresting their actions.…
And, Norway did fight back, and lost. How much worse did that work out for Norway than for Denmark?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm really happy these topics are being discussed here on HN, when they weren't ~1 year ago. When considering a post-USA world, we also get to consider a post-Microsoft, post-Meta, post-Google, post-CloudFlare, post-Amazon, etc world. I can't say I know much about how the EU operates or how quickly their Open Digital Ecosystems initiative could take shape, but this is a really opportune time to build a better tech in…
What does post-USA world mean? Who is the leader in culture, business, technology? The only other contender I can think of is China. And this is better?
Fake report, ignore, move on
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The US wouldn’t even need to “attack” Greenland. What is there to even attack? 50 Danish soldiers? They could just say “that’s ours”, ignore whatever Europe says, and start doing whatever they wanted to do and instead force the EU to attack American forces or civilian business interests. I’m not suggesting this is a good idea or anything but there’s a ton of other ways that something like this could play out which in…
> What power has the US ceded? Seriously? You live in a multi-polar world, there are three major power blocks and Europe isn't one of them, though that may change now (we're sick of war, but we're also sick of the threat of war, which one of the two will win out is up for grabs). There is - or rather, was, by now - Russia, China and the USA. Russia is unacceptable for many reasons, China is too clever for its own goo…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I feel like it's ruining HN. The internet did not lack places to talk politics. The comments threads are a solid 20% anti-semitic dog whistles now.
Maybe it's because stuff gets flagged and deleted. But I haven't really seen it? Unless you equalize 'critical of Israel' with 'antisemitic dogwhistle' maybe.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Under which "law" is President allowed legally to start a War - citation needed :)
It's been the established president since the Korean War when the US began ignoring the constitutional provision that gave congress the power to declare war. Additional examples are the Vietnam War, Serbia, Afghanistan, Iraq I & II, the Libyan regime change, and the current Iran conflict, and there are plenty more. The written law still states that the president does not have this power, but the actual unwritten law…
First, not US but Presidency and second, breaking Constitution is not very legal last time I checked but I could be wrong... /s
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is absurd in the extreme. In actual war there is absolutely no possibility of success for Denmark, even with the help of allies. Failure to capitulate results in nothing but death and destruction with no hope of strategic gain to begin with. What you are likely experiencing is a modern belief that screaming and shouting will bring popular diplomatic pressure to bear on the opponent, thus arresting their actions.…
> In an actual war there is absolutely no possibility of success for Denmark, even with the help of allies. Assume that Denmark's strategic success criteria is not "win up-front battles with US armed forces". And that they understand the difference between "lost battle(s), got occupied" and "nation permanently removed from existence". Also, US service members are not slavishly loyal Clone Troopers. That I've heard, t…