LarkinDePark @ LarkinDePark @lemmygrad.ml

Posts

5

Comments

836

Joined

3 yr. ago

Instilled fear in potential future whistleblowers.

I doubt if there's a major difference between them all but for each one there'll be a getting used to curve that you just need to get over. In case you didn't know. You can swipe on the space bar to move the cursor. You're all welcome.

The people who live there don't want to be part of a Nazi junta puppet state of America.

The US could stop provoking Russia with its proxy puppet state.

Here's an interesting thread on the matter.

In short: The most important component of US balance of payments by a very large amount as Debt Securities that are 'Long Term'. These were traditionally held by states and are now being picked up by private investors because the current high interest rates make them attractive. So no major issue right now. There's enough willing buyers. These interest rates look to continue too for now, but as soon as interest rates go down these private investors will dump this debt, which states used to hold on to, leading to a potential big problem for the US balance of payments.

Does Saitama have a long history of losing against lesser opponents and only winning against weak and poor people?

$230 billion? But at what cost?

Okay but you're just arguing that the tit for tat is fair. Okay, now what? Ukraine hasn't a hope in hell of winning this war. This is all just a face saving attempt for US and NATO.

I can't fathom why anyone would want to have kids. Not for me.

Western Christian missionaries have a lot to answer for.

Hope this gets applied to the USA too.

OP doesn't say what he means by "baby" but if they're asking, it means they're already on solid food. In which case they can have meat. It's a really bizarre question. Why not ask if they can have fruit?

Another day another China W.

All mammals not only can have milk, but require milk to survive and grow.

What would that achieve? What's the military strategy? Just petty tit for tat?

Smart move.

That they eventually had to take a massive climbdown and take down an article based on some American propaganda bullshit?

An encyclopaedia that trades on its reputation should have articles with better credibility than mythical creatures or events.

This is the wikipedia that ran an article for years about "The Uighur Genocide". They still have one up that has less credible evidence than the werewolf but they eventually had to rename it out of shame.

I'm looking. What?