Exactly. Every time the UN does something, people say “they can’t enforce it”.
Well, that’s the whole point of the UN. To resolve things without using force.
It’s a good design, designed by people who learned from the horrors of WW2.
It’s sad to see how many people nowadays forget those lessons and are itching for global war.
Why doesn’t the USA or Europe just accept the Jews and let the Palestinians have the land?
Jordan especially has a ton of Palestinians. More than half of Palestinians already live outside of Palestine.
Your question actually boils down to, why don’t they take all the Palestinians so Israel can have the land?
And the answer is: they don’t want to be complicit in ethnic cleansing.
Totally with you here.
How did I end up on a timeline where I am vibing with Erdogan.
No more billionaires, but everyone can be a millionaire.
The shortest path to equality is to greatly reduce taxes on the middle class and increase them on the wealthy.
It puzzles me why leftist parties don’t all embrace lower taxes for the middle class.
Israel only bombs terrorists, not civilians.
Your German nationality will now be revoked for thinking the wrong thought.
Exactly.
If the USA tried to again be a White/European ethnostate and allow anyone with Caucasian heritage to immigrate and barred everyone else from immigrating, then no one today would accept that.
And if they went full on apartheid and started putting natives and minorities in locked down ever-shrinking reservations, people would really lose their shit.
When white nationalists try to advocate for such policies, they are rightfully criticized for being racist.
I can never understand why Israel gets special treatment in that regard.
Netanyahu and the right need more terrorists in order to justify further land grabs, so yes, that’s the goal.
Radicalize more people, so that those people strike back, then engage in war and take their land.
And yes, this is also how the Europeans and Americans took land from the natives during colonization.
I didn’t think I’d find a mercantilist in 2024, but here we are.
No, that’s not how it works, otherwise the US would be a poor country based on their massive trade deficit.
Trade takes place because it is mutually beneficial. Each parties gets something out of each trade.
Reducing trade therefore will always hurts both countries.
Exactly which loses more will depend on a lot of factors, but in general smaller economies are more dependent on larger economies.
Usually with these types of things, it tends to be worse for the smaller economy, but both suffer. (See Brexit, Sanctions on Russia, Iran and Venezuela, and also historically those on apartheid South Africa and Rhodesia).
Turkey has a GDP 2-3x that of Israel, so I don’t know why you’d think it would be worse for them.
You are correct.
I could swear that when I read the primary source yesterday, it said Bangladesh had zero sugar.
But going to the link, that’s no longer the case.
Either I was wrong or they corrected it.
Primary source: https://stories.publiceye.ch/nestle-babies/
Does anyone know why Bangladesh had zero added sugar?
Could it be that Bangladesh has stricter regulations?
Edit: it seems I was wrong. I thought when I read this yesterday it said Bangladesh had no sugar, but looking it up today, that’s no longer the case.
The continuing American embargo on Cuba after the Cold War has always been toddler tantrum level of pettiness.
I thought Obama had finally closed that chapter, but I was wrong.