As for the pockets, Ms. Taymour suggests you think of them less as places to store stuff, as they once were intended, and more as architectural elements or “an accessory to your outfit.”

Appalling that she would reduce the noble cargo pocket to mere greebling.

The authors share your concerns

Our results demonstrate a surprising and broad antiviral effect of the aminoglycoside family of antibiotics, when applied to mucosal surfaces. However, we do not advocate for use of these compounds as antivirals, as aminoglycoside application is expected to cause local dysbiosis of commensal bacterial community.

Almost certainly because, while they don't have women in their lives globetrotting, fighting men, bushcrafting, and parkouring, they've all been aggrieved by a women who wore clothes they didn't like

To an observer, I would be indistinguishable from cis het, but finding oneself can be a fuck, so let's call me a work in progress trending towards "not strongly identifying with or performing" my AGAB or another gender. Parent to plural children.

If they grow up to become bigots, it is my obligation to work to change that fact. The best chance I have to enact such change is to remain a part of their lives as much as they'll allow. Above all else, however, I have an obligation to look out for their well-being. It may break my heart to be around them, but I brought them into this world, and so long as I'm around they will have a roof and a meal should they require it.

Milei Massacre

One upside is that the water surrounding the wreck would provide excellent radiation shielding

If only there was some other place besides money that political power could grow from

no commercial application for missiles makes them unprofitable

Low key glad they've actually learned a lesson and aren't trying Project Plowshare again

I'm going to argue myself and everyone else in the thread to the point of exhaustion as a bit

Has convinced me to disengage. Have a good night.

Historically, indefinitely.

A case remarkable for its singular, improbable nature makes a poor argument for calculated policy.

I don't understand this notion of 'most legitimate heir' that keeps cropping up

Then pick a different name for it, "person whose claim to the throne could mobilize the most rubles, guns, and hands to hold them". Non-legitimate claimants may still gain the throne by force of arms motivated by virtue of their adjacency to the last legitimate holder of power. The law exists, but its ability to influence action and the ways it will be rhetorically implemented are not cut and dry. Legally, Peter I was a non-legitimate Tsar while Ivan V should have ruled alone, but de jure legitimacy and "that quality which will motivate believers in a feudal monarchy to support a candidate materially" are not one and the same. "Being the child of the last guy" is a rhetorically resonant plank for such a believer.

And yet monarchists feuded amongst themselves until 1929 over the rightful heir. I have a low level of confidence that this would be the case with a surviving Alexei.

Any good study should acknowledge its limitations. In this case, applying statistical analysis to historical events faces the issue that statistical analysis is highly dependent on data integrity and on the ability of future events to be predicted by historical data. When we are discussing a proletarian revolution and attempting to predict how the forces of reaction will attempt to combat it, we lack a representative sample in 1918. In this case, we must take the approach of the clinician rather than the pure theorist. Statistical analysis is an invaluable data point, but it is a data point among others. Understanding of the underlying mechanism can and ought to drive decision making in the absence of conclusive data.

Does it matter?

Does it matter that they can't kill Romanovs they don't have in custody? Yeah, I'd argue that that puts a damper on things. "There's Romanovs now" obscures a lot of information about where they are at that time and whether they were even in a position to be executed. Additionally, the entire issue of the dynasty need not be exterminated if the most likely threat is that his direct male-line heir is used as a tool by counter-revolutionary forces. The previous Tsar's child will enjoy broader support than a cousin by virtue of proximity.

Getting back to my core problem with this argument, "why not just kill everyone" is a poor component of an otherwise well documented and well thought-out post. I think you make some thought provoking points and genuinely care about the moral calculus of revolution.