fine_sandy_bottom @ fine_sandy_bottom @lemmy.federate.cc

Posts

7

Comments

843

Joined

1 yr. ago

That's not what's happening.

In 50 years time, they'll be able to say they've asserted claims since forever, list all the countries which have observed their claims, and point to instances like this one where they've shown restraint to avoid an international incident.

They've been playing this exact game in the south China Sea since forever.

This is really reductive and doesn't really consider how complex these situations can be.

What should police or first responders do when someone is at risk of harming themselves or others?

Whatever your answer, consider that the person is already having a bad day, and there are no on the spot cures for what ails them.

Hospitals in general are not nice places to be, as a patient. If you're there for a physical illness it's still traumatic.

You don't go there to have a nice time, you go there to avoid the worst outcomes, like death.

I am certain that there are very, very few instances where people end up in a psych ward when there's better places for them.

Yeah but that horror story is the same in Australia and there's no bill.

Yes it matters.

It's not really important what Trump says.

It will come down to pressuring officials to fudge the results. The less fudging required, the easier it will be.

You keep using the term "allowed" as though there's some global arbiter of the rules. There isn't.

As I started off by saying, if China claims sovereignty in whatever waters, and other nations respect that claim, then sooner or later it will be theirs for all intents and purposes.

Being signatories to a treaty is not decisive if no one follows the treaty.

If what you're saying is true, why would we need freedom of navigation exercises?

LOL. It's like any tertiary level test. You don't know the questions but you do know the content. Learn the content and tailor it to the questions.

Everyone has known this would happen for three last 3 years. Have the dems done anything at all?

That's not it. It's simply that if someone comes suicide after watching, no one can point the finger at the producers.

I think this kind of anecdotal horror story exists in every country, but of course it's not the usual outcome.

There's a whole chain of people involved in a process like this, and I have a hard time believing that everyone in that chain routinely locks up healthy people just to give themselves more work to do.

I think it's far more likely that there are many people who genuinely should spend a few days in a psych ward but are unable to due to a lack of resources.

Feeling suicidal usually isn't something that talking to a friend can resolve.

Getting a suicidal person to access the right kind of help is the right move.

That doesn't mean you refuse to talk to a suicidal person, it means that part of supporting them as a friend is helping them get help.

Just want to point out that this woman made a mistake and expressed remorse.

The guy who's trying to be pres, deliberately and knowingly stoked this fire for his own benefit.

UNCLOS doesn't cover this type of dispute:

UNCLOS does not deal with matters of territorial disputes or to resolve issues of sovereignty, as that field is governed by rules of customary international law on the acquisition and loss of territory.

From your link...

UNCLOS does not deal with matters of territorial disputes or to resolve issues of sovereignty, as that field is governed by rules of customary international law on the acquisition and loss of territory.

You could say the same of any public service role.

The voting public doesn't have the requisite experience and knowledge to make good decisions about candidates for executive or judicial roles.

Government is a different case. You're selecting a representative. Someone to represent you in parliament. The skills required to do so are in theory less significant. It's just a responsible person who will raise their hand at the right time.

Yeah I found this phrase quite irksome too.

Conservatives everywhere seem to get this "good economic manager" perception for free. It shits me. The tarries he's talking about would be a terrible idea for everyone - especially lower class consumers.

Bidens timing nullified the bump Trump would've gotten from the assassination attempt. It was well timed

I listened to a podcast that interviewed "undecideds" in swing states.

It's was just absurd. They seem to be conservatives trying to make themselves feel more logical and intelligent.

One of them said that he was disappointed Harris didn't seem to have a week developed plan for the economy, because he had doubts about her financial outcomes, but didn't about trump.

It's just absurd to me that anyone could spend more than a few seconds considering Trumps economic plans and conclude that he's a sensible economic manager.

That was my implication, yes. Well done.

but it is officially an international waterway

That's not how this works though.

Who decides what is an international water way? Basically, if everyone does what China says, then it's their water. If everyone ignores Chinas bitching, then it's international.

Australia's electoral system is far from perfect, but it seems to be less focus on the prime minister then there is on the US president.

Of course the PM still needs to be popular and electable, and we're sliding to the right like most democracies, but I can't imagine we could have an election like the current US cycle where no one is really talking about policy.