Recent comments in /f/worldnews

purplewhiteblack t1_jebmfg1 wrote

My biggest thing about the checkmark was always "So what?"

You can tweet with or without one. 99% of people didn't have one. And I know celebrities are not always great sources of information. A tweet will be in your view either way. and that's text in your face.

Now you have to pay to have that tweet prioritized in the reply order. So, now misinformation campaigns are throwing money away, where they didn't have to before.

Thinking someone having a checkmark and is therefore credible has always been an ad verecundium logical fallacy.

The people most pissed about the checkmark thing were the people who bribed twitter employees to give them one. Simply because you applied didn't mean they would ever get back to you. Grease the wheels and maybe they would. You could tell which youtubers paid 1000s by how visibly pissed off they were about it.

−13

SKT_Phoenix1 t1_jebm8wx wrote

Uhhhh under Trump we went from 13k troops to 2.5k troops and he ignored multiple calls on the dangers of drawdown even from people like Rubio. They HAD left, just not every soldier. Biden was put in an impossible situation where he was obligated to respect a treaty signed by his predecessor but that treaty was just utter shit.

Biden even stated: “it is not my intention to stay there for a long time. But the question is: How and in what circumstances do we meet that agreement that was made by President Trump to leave under a deal that looks like it’s not being able to be worked out to begin with? How is that done? But we are not staying a long time.”

I’d advise maybe getting a bit more acquainted with the events that unfolded, as it is very apparent to pretty much everybody in the thread the narrative you are presenting isn’t quite reflective of the reality of the situation

https://www.factcheck.org/2021/08/timeline-of-u-s-withdrawal-from-afghanistan/

7

Terracatosaur t1_jebm1i5 wrote

It kind of always was if you look at climate history.

One of the other inconvient truths of life is that we humans were born into a rare and unstable climate. All human civilization happens just in this little Interglacial window of nice climate, but it's kind of always rapidly warmer or cooling with the transitions in and out of the Interglacial being brutal.

Humans sped up climate change, but it was going to happen either way. That's mostly why 99% of all life has been killed off by climate change. Not just from meteors and supervolcanos, but even just the never stable no real balance climate Earth always produces.

We tend to like to think there is some equilibrium and like if we are goo to the planet it will reward us with stability, but that's some very serious wishful thinking once you look at nice cores and glacification cycles ever 100k years with only 20k of climate even close to what we have now.

Humans always had to learn to control Earths climate or face mass death. We made it all worse, but the earth mostly plans to kill us like the other 99%.

The humans who lived through the last glacial period and almost went extinct understood this better than we do now because they saw the much longer and more brutal side of what Earths climate really looks like.

The to make it worse humans need an Ice Age to have the climate they evolved in..and ice ages are rare. about 70% of Earth's existence since complex life is Greenhouse Earth with no polar ice year round or what I call Dino temperatures.

Dinosaurs seems to get a far more stable climat than we did, but not one good for warm blooded big brains that literally need a cooler climate for the big brains to no overheat.

We can turn food to heat, but we can't turn food into cooling so we are screwed for the most common climate the planet produces.

Feel better now?

−21

afraid_of_zombies t1_jebljpy wrote

Oil is sold globally. It doesn't matter if we didn't get it directly, just having it on the market lowers the price for all. Additionally we are the biggest producers partially because of all the tech that we have developed to produce that stuff. An Iraq occupied by the US is buying US technology (exactly the type Haliburton and buddies works on) to extract the oil.

Win win really. The American consumer gets lower prices, the American producer sells their expertise to the competitor.

It was always about the oil.

−1

Opi-Fex t1_jeblj89 wrote

It wouldn't work. It's not like they need to run the operation from inside Russia. They have actual people all over the world, including ordinary citizens, or employees at large tech firms inside the EU and US.

They can just use those people to acquire residential internet connections, or rent VMs. They can also run VPNs through other countries, like India. Are we going to block India as well? There's nothing you could really do to stop that outside of shutting the internet down completely.

8