azuth

There is a moon mission and a starship variant is supposed to get people on and off the moon in 2027. Probably wants that cancelled and changed to a manned Mars mission with new, further away deadlines. Such a mission would be probably be cancelled anyways due to the much higher difficulty allowing him to save face by blaming regulators etc and promising SpaceX will colonize Mars “in the next 5 years”™.

It was not even the framework for countries the US rebuilt like Germany and Japan.

As if Israel would let the US take what it (wrongly) considers theirs.

It was a combination of some infrastructure being offline (a VOR beacon) thus requiring a different procedure that was not followed correctly.

I don’t believe the pilots ever considered they had crossed into Soviet airspace, they were probably unaware of any deviation from their flight plan.

Nor was there any contact with Soviet forces. Were they ordered to leave the airspace would significantly change the share of blame making the pilots criminal and letting the Soviets off easily.

The intercept claims to have tried to have fired warning shots but admits they were not really visible in the night. I think that if he flown directly in front of them, they would notice if not visually the turbulence. But the decision seems to have been taken that it was not a civilian plane at a higher level and the identification part of the intercept a formality. Apparently they had actually missed intercepting some actual spy planes recently and they had to save face.

Yes the US already were invading Syria, an offensive operation. This ain’t self-defense.

What about them? They were there while South Korea was a dictatorship, weren’t they?

Firstly act of wars do not necessarily, in fact usually, do no lead to full blown war. Iran and Israel launched missiles at each other recently and they did not go to full blown war, does that mean that both of those acts were not in-fact act of wars but perfectly normal behavior?

I presume you are referring to KAL-007 (as when MH-17 happened the Russian proxies were already at war with Ukraine). It was the Soviet Union and it didn’t shoot it down for violating an imaginary ADIZ but after twice overflying Soviet territory. It’s disputed whether the plane did manage to exit Soviet airspace after the second overfly but it not relevant, the SU justification was always that it crossed in their territory not that it entered a unilaterally declared ADIZ.

Why? China also has an ADIZ which just like S.Korea’s and every ADIZ is based on bullshit not on international law. China will also “intercept” aka fly planes alongside and whine about Korean “aggression”.

ADIZ violations are not real. Actually trying to enforce one by shooting down planes would be an unprovoked act of war.

There are legitimate uses like health information campaigns (vaccination campaigns, anti smoking campaigns) and other informatio campaigns.

Advertising is probably a misnaming.

Probably. My point is that I was very confused by the original claim (officials deciding whether people are jewish or not) and the following comments drawing comparisons to Nazi Germany.

OP’s claim was that official call anti-zionist Jews ‘allegedly Jewish’ (ostensibly actually, a synonym) and that they decided if they are “bad” or “good” Jews. It seems obvious to me from the choice of words as well as the punctuation he is not referring to official acts but bias of the official. Which may well affect their official decisions.

If it’s not relevant, then why quote it? In any case it tells me something about the quality of the article.

Are the communities not the ones referred to by the commissioner in his defense? That makes them relevant. If the article is wrong that you have to be part of such a community to be “officially” Jewish it’s irrelevant, the issue is that the commissioner tried to defend his position by appealing to them.

You are much quicker to attack the OP, the article, me than the commissioner.

You could perhaps read the first part as that, a matter of % of Jewish people in an organization rather than one of ‘true’ Jewishness of the members identifying as Jews. Your reading is very generous to him.

But from the second commend it’s obvious it’s the latter. He is attacking the Jewishness of Jewish members of that organization. That he does it en mass does not make it better.

I don’t have time to learn German to read your source, in an English based discussion. It is not relevant that it is wrong. The commissioner tried to use it to defend his position that they are ostensibly Jewish. Actually being wrong makes it worse as he should know better or he is lying.

Blume was embroiled in a small scandal after he referred to Jüdische Stimme as “ostensibly Jewish” on Twitter

Blume demurred, claiming that, while he was happy to accept anyone’s self-definition as Jewish as a matter of personal religious freedom, he was not sure whether the group’s members counted as members of the Jewish religious communities that are legal partners of the German state

In Germany, membership in religious communities is regulated by state-designated institutions, meaning that to be officially Jewish, one must join the Jüdische Gemeinde, the state-affiliated Jewish community

A requirement to assume a major office a person has been elected to should be part of the constitution. Otherwise Biden would not have been in power for sure, perhaps not even Obama.

A Russian defeat would again deprive NATO of purpose.

Doubt it. He ranks low on the color chart.

They need to ban them from forking the browser. Google has the ability to get people to install the new Google totally-not-chrome browser. Especially if they keep Android as well.

You can’t read can you?

I did not deny that I question your atheism. I clarified that it is not due to you reading the bible but due to your defence of Christianity.

I am not doubting that you are an atheist because you 've read the bible (after all I wrote in my last post that I 've also read it) but because of your Christianity apologia.

As usual you answering a strawman and not me.

Rofl. I suggest your realize that even the Protestants don’t actually care about what the Bible says, despite it being the basis of their attack on the Catholic Church (whose origins alongside the Orthodox predate the Bible and have consistently been against a Bible only interpretation of Christianity). In practice Christian churches have been railing against queer people since forever.

Thus it is you who should look at the history of Christianity in the last 2000 millennia and not just the read the Bible.

I 've read the fucking bible, it’s morally reprehensible and indefensible if you have a shred of decency. It’s understandable since it was written by people with completely different morals to us with an agenda to push.

Trump’s base, his defense secretary, identify (strongly) as Christians, most people consider them Christians. A no true Scotman objection by you is meaningless pedantry. Even if we deny them the title of Christian they are still more dangerous than Gabbard’s little and more mainstream. Actually them being more mainstream is the reason they are more dangerous than Gabbard’s cult.

Are you really an atheist? If you are a Christian remember lying is a sin!

Believe it or not, I care about people other than my daughter and I don’t buy the “everything is at one level of bad and it can’t get better or worse” argument you seem to be making.

So more dishonesty and strawmen. Forget your daughter; Would your suggestion to queer people be different if Gabbard was not part of the Trump administration ? Flee if Gabbard is in, don’t if it’s just the good Christians?

The fact that you are apparently not aware that people convert to Christianity, including queer people, does not speak well of you.

So Fuck you it is.

Christianity’s message still condemns queer people as sinners. I suppose part of the people who convert to Christianity also believe that.