Posts written by Vninect

85

43100!!

Yummie

26701 now.

Youtube channel Crash Course has a very fast-paced, but nice "crash course" to history. From Americans, but they do it really quite well.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yocja_N5s1I...DA2E52FB1EF80C9

I like it.

Also, the same channel has a crash course on biology.

Fun.

www.flashbynight.com/viroos/

Hi:

18228

F#CK!

I'd have to become a breatharian, but then I guess you'll come up with some study about the totally messed up global air quality!

I am increasingly convinced that I should be a vegetarian, for material reasons: it costs like 2/3rd of the harvest to feed the animals that make up only about a fifth or tenth of our diets. (I am guessing the numbers: they didn't quite stick - but you get the point.)

"But meat is so delicious" is just such a weak defence, if I'm honest.

Still a tough dilemma, though...

That is an awful design. The bland emptiness of the corridors and balconies and atria is simply overwhelming - in a bad way.

I am unsure of the reasons: but it is clear peace and democracy indeed are not it. "Starting a war for peace is like fucking for virginity".

In Iraq, there's clearly oil. But the fact is that there is not much oil or gas in the Afghan region that I know of. There are some pipelines, but I don't know how important they are... It could be cheaper and easier to reroute.

Perhaps control has some advantages, but at this point I cannot see how that would work.

On the other hand, I understand there are more police in Manhattan than soldiers in Afghanistan. Perhaps the whole occupation is just symbolic?

And this right here may be the result of the symbolic act. Religious fanaticism has not much traction when there are worthy alternatives. It is a sign of despair, as I see it. What America does not like is nationalism and self-determination in the Middle East. The problem is that there is no good argument for preventing people from taking their destiny -and the resources of their land- in their own hands. That is colonialism. What we can (and perhaps should) fight is totally crazy people. Religious fanatics. They happened to be in power in Afghanistan, thanks to the CIA's efforts in the 80's, when they were training and arming Taliban to fight Russians. You blatantly occupy the country, after causing a rich mess, and you will sure as hell create some extra resentment in the region: some of which tacking on to religious cells. But I believe it is not religion that makes these people fight for their countries: religion doesn't necessarily teach that. Nor do you have to be religiously inspired to retaliate against the aggressor who kills your relatives and friends.

Now that I think of it, the use of "religion" reminds me of the use of "socialism" in the Cold War. The Russians loved to pretend they were advancing Glorious Socialism, while they were actually horrible corrupt communists who did not do any justice to the term. The Americans then pointed at the massacres, gulags, and poverty and claimed that all of that is caused by Evil Socialism: which it wasn't.

Now, we supposedly have Jihadists fighting for Islam, while in fact motivated by rather secular self-determination and retaliation. The one side claims it is fighting for Glorious Islam, which gives the local religious leaders a lot of power indeed. The other side claims they are fighting Evil Islamists: an irrational force that cannot be reasoned with and that exists independent of our doing: their holy book simply makes them furious and crazy.

This is not about Islam.

I suspect there have been few weeks the last 10 years that Afghanistan was not somehow in the news - usually because of attacks and killings on either side.

Again, such a report today. "Afghan policeman kills 4 NATO soldiers - third attack in 3 days", said the title of the article.

The last stretch of this war has been about training police officers and soldiers to defend their country. We are supposed to believe it is not a war any more. Our politicians say it is a peace keeping police mission - the irony of every single word of that is killing me, as it is a criminal war that does not seem to be under control, and has no clear objectives.

Anyway, it seems training these Afghans is not without risks. Incidents of trainees firing on the NATO "peace-keepers" have been rising lately. Tougher selections are made in an attempt to exclude as many terrorists as possible from access to weapons and training.

However, the tragic death of these 4 soldiers was not the only news today. The same article mentions further down that also 8 civilians have been reported to be killed in a NATO airstrike. They were 8 women. 8 women of whom we must hope their sons, men, brothers, or fathers are not currently training to defend their country from evil terrorists. Because the fact is that those terrorists are the militaries that we have sent there. But it is those Afghan men that make the F##KING HEADLINES.

I saw a third of the long trailer. That was almost 4 minutes of absolute SUCK.

Fucking hell, Occams razor on the idea that you need a God to violently protest this movie!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Patrick%27s_Flag

Saint Patrick's Saltire is rejected by many Irish nationalists as a British invention. [...] The saltire was used in the regalia of the Order of Saint Patrick, a British chivalric order established in 1783 by George III, (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Order_of_St._Patrick [a deeply monarchic order exclusively populated by Irish peers and English nobility])

I don't think they would mind..

England:


Deal with it

To be fair to the scum: he does say that doctor and patient need to believe that a homeopathic treatment works. Not one or the other: both. That includes the doctor, who has trained for years.

It's an interesting debate. One that I am not at home at, but I recognize some sides.

In the red corner, you have people who suspect this is all a plot by "Big Pharma"[ceutical companies]. They believe these companies pay the doctors to prescribe pills for every minor thing. And there is some evidence of this happening - though I have no idea if it's anecdotal or endemic. If this is large scale, there is something wrong with the incentives structure and we need to look at the influence of profits in Health Care. That's not a bad idea to do, especially in the more market driven parts of the world. However, many people in this corner believe that it is not systemic, but in fact part of a battle between good and evil. These folk are best avoided, or you will find yourself wearing a tin foil hat - and they are terribly unfashionable.

In the blue corner: efficiency and technology. It's pretty awesome how we can scan our brains and analyse stuff and also come up with new, safer, better, cleaner compounds of chemicals. We can calm down any busy-bee. We can activate any lazy-bum. We can un-depress people or mellow them out if needed. In short: we can make everyone perfect(ly average). Indeed, we can focus better on the things that need doing, and we can make sure to cause least offence with others. There are two shadowy sides to this story of the artificial state of mind. First, there are the side-effects. Pills can make you fat, tired, bland, dependent, and at risk of worse evils especially in combination with alcohol. Second, there is a philosophical question to be asked: Exactly how are we "supposed" to be? If we are sad, should we not cry, sometimes? Where is that boundary between good derangement and sickness? To take your example: I think it is great that you choose be able to focus on your studies with the help of chemicals. But can this be demanded from you for example? In a workforce of focussed people, can you afford to be unfocussed? "Brave New World" is around the corner there. I don't think there is an obvious right answer to these questions.

Just my two c- Omg look a butterfly!