mas o menos aqui en la batalla, compadre. y tu?

Right‽ I think it's a great idea. I am going to look into it. I need to figure out what kind of camera I can use, but also need to consider the ethics with it. I don't think people would appreciate me posting them on the internet without their consent, especially if it is with negative connotation. The public can go on a manhunt and hurt people's lives when they may have just been having a bad day, following orders, or their behaviors were misinterpreted. If anything, I'd likely blur out their faces to protect their identity.

Thanks for the encouragement 🙂

ELI5 anyone?

I think I get what you're saying, but as far as I can tell, policy with that sentiment wasn't in place until ~4 years later. This dude was set to be deported as ordered by an immigration judge in Miami, then it was mysteriously overturned without any public explanation. It is unbelievable to me that an immigration judge in Miami in 1962 was not aware of a policy that gave Cubans residency for being here.

Am oh

Ah, thank you! I didn't realize who it was. Pretty funny lol

What I find interesting about this is that someone can still afford it because the market sets the price. We know that housing costs have increased immensely due to limited supply and because housing is a need, but someone can still afford it. Otherwise, they'd lower the price to whatever someone can pay. So if a lawyer cannot afford the rent, who can??

Someone told me they saw people on Facebook complaining that the Olympics opening ceremony was too diverse. I was like, did they want to have an Olympics with all other countries banned?? That already exists, and it's called national championships. Otherwise, a sports competition that includes the entire world is going to include people from the entire world. I don't understand what they wanted...an Olympics in Paris with only White USA??

• Wants to continue democracy and peaceful transfer of power

• Consistently demonstrates adequate mental health

• Respects religious diversity

• Has stable and data-driven policy stances

Sounds like the ex made a good decision breaking up with anon

Yoooo, there were two incidents in which a Soviet service member saved the world by refusing to fire nukes. One was during the Cuban missile crisis. The USA blockaded Cuba in response to the USSR placing nuclear missiles there. A Soviet nuclear-armed submarine went down under a US naval ship. The ship started throwing dummy charges over to scare the submarine to come out. The sub hadn't had any comm with the USSR in days and thought they were under attack. Two of the three officers needed to approve a nuclear torpedo strike argued for the strike. The other, Vasily Arkhipov, declined despite the other officers insisting. Arkhipov was able to convince the other two to not strike and bring the sub up to reconnect comm with Moscow. The immediate conflict eventually ended with no casualties or strikes. Had they fired a nuclear torpedo, it could have led to a nuclear war.

The other was pretty close too. Three weeks before the incident, a Korean airliner full of civilian passengers accidentally flew into prohibited Soviet airspace due to a navigation error. The Soviets thought it was a US spy plane and shot it down, killing everyone on board. Tensions were high af. Three weeks later, Soviet surveillance equipment showed that the USSR was being attacked with 5 nuclear missiles by the US. Stanislav Petrov saw the incoming missiles and decided to not report the info further up the command because he thought there was no way an American first strike would only be five missiles. He waited for confirmation of the missile strike from the ground, which never came. After a while, it was evident that the system had a malfunction. They eventually discovered that a rare coincidence between the Sun, some clouds, and the Soviet satellites resulted in the false alarm. Had Petrov reported the incoming strike, it is quite possible that higher command would have ordered a "counter" nuclear-strike because of their view of the US.

Both of these incidents were scary close to ending the world as we know it. It wouldn't have just destroyed the USA and USSR. Aside from the direct attacks and destruction of infrastructure and institutions in the stated countries, the strikes would have resulted in a nuclear winter and eventual worldwide famine for over a decade.

I feel like I'm going insane. How is this even happening right now? One of two presidential candidates is so old, that his own party is asking him to not run because he looked like an elderly person that got lost at the grocery store during a live presidential debate. The other is a deranged narcissist that was the previous president, clearly colluding with Russia, has be found guilty of 34 felonies, attempted to overthrow the previous election, and has explicitly stated he will be a dictator.