The college I worked at had a few classes at the prison. I was an adjunct and agreed to do it. None of the tenured faculty would do it. Didn’t really have any support. Did wear a body alarm. One way the body alarm would be activated was if it was horizontal for more than 3 seconds.
I quickly figured out they were mostly there to break the monotony. I threw out the curriculum and did basic graph theory and some logic stuff. I only had one run in with someone. The prisoners treated me decently. I gave them all passing grades and just wanted them to get out of the experience whatever they wanted to get out of it.
I taught a semester in a max security prison. It was described to me as a controlled movement facility. It was an interesting experience and one that stuck with me. That prison was a bad place. Thanks for your anecdote about the former police officer.
Thank you for sharing your experience and bringing these things to light. As Dostoevsky said, you can judge a society by how well it treats its prisoners. We are not a free people when we live under the threat of being out into a prison system as barbaric as the one we have.
It’s hard to give meaningful security assurances when the powers involved have nuclear weapons. Ukraine is far more important to Russia than it is to the U.S. Clearly the U.S. is not willing to go to war with a nuclear power over Ukraine. Treaties are only as useful as the willingness of the signatories to abide by them and/or enforce them.
The question is about Putin and his cronies using their power as dictator and oligarchs doing a specific type of stock trade. Nancy Pelosi is neither a dictator or an oligarch and as far as I know has not shorted the market since she’s planning to start a war. Why bring her up?
I see no amount of evidence will convince you that China is ok with Russia invading Ukraine. Your thesis about China and international norms is clearly false and your beliefs about China’s position is not supported by the facts.
My contention that Russia has China’s blessing is correct. It’s ok to admit when you are wrong.
RU actions are against PRC interests in terms of international norms.
They are not and I don’t believe Russia would do what it is doing in Ukraine without Chinese approval. The timing of the recent agreement between Russia and China is pretty much proof that Russia has China’s blessing.
Since 1960 China has had military incursions against Vietnam, Soviet Union, and India. It has blatantly violated norms regarding the laws of the seas and used pseudo naval vessels to blatantly overfish in the territory of other countries. It has told VW that if it wants to sell cars in China then VW must stop doing business with a Lithuanian company. Your views on the subject of China and international norms is weird to me and not supported by history.
I will not convince you of anything and likewise I doubt you’ll be able to convince me of anything. I stand by my assertion that China approves Russia’s actions.
I believe your analysis is wrong and that there is no way Russia would do what it is doing without approval from China. China will do nothing to punish Russia. They might make some meaningless gestures but nothing meaningful.
So you don’t know which situation I was referring to? The fact the Musk accomplished what he did with SpaceX is prima facie proof that he had sufficient power/influence to accomplish the goal.
Some Russians view Ukraine as legitimately part of Russia. China views Taiwan as part of China. China also wishes to garner as much support as possible for its desired takeover of Taiwan. The recent agreement between Russia and China spells out each country’s respective views on these matters. They are in agreement with each other.
Look up Wernher Von Braun. A group of people thought Jim Crow was a great idea. A group of BP executives thought it was a great idea to not fix oil leaks in Nigeria and poison a bunch of people. I think you miss the point. People with power in any system can use that power for bad. It’s not the economic system that causes this it’s shitty humans that do.
A person (or persons) with sufficient power/influence decided to pursue space flight and it happened. Which example does the previous sentence refer to?
Isn’t the issue less to do with “communism” than with concentrating too much power in too few hands? It seems to me all political systems tend toward autocracy and the only thing preventing that eventuality are robust systems in place that disperse power.
We can go back and forth and quibble over using the word “murder” as you have and quibble over who ultimately is to blame. I won’t convince you of anything and likewise you won’t convince me of anything. War truly is hell and after the way the Japanese conducted themselves during the war there’s a certain karma involved in terms of them getting the total war they so desired.
War sucks. My dad fought in World War 2. Frontline soldier in Western Europe in Patton’s Third Army. His battalion war book has the names of the dead and many are underlined in red because those are the ones he knew. He was a drunk and abusive and obviously suffered from untreated PTSD.
His division was preparing to transfer to the Pacific when the atomic bombs were dropped. He appreciated that as a result the Japanese surrendered (at least it appeared to be a causal effect from his perspective). Who can possibly calculate the efficacy of the alternatives even in retrospect? It’s easy to criticize after the fact. Are you so certain you’d have decided differently than Curtis LeMay were you in his position?