Obligatory old joke:
One day, at a U2 concert in (insert traditional butt of jokes for your area, I'll say Newfoundland,) Bono stops the music and starts clapping his hands, slowly, rhythmically.
As he gazes out over the crowd, still clapping slowly, he intones 'Every time *clap* I clap *clap* my hands, *clap* a child *clap* in Africa *clap* dies *clap* of starvation. *clap*'
From the audience comes up the outraged cry of 'Then stop fucking clapping, you idiot!'
The cameras like that already exist - all that's needed is adding an accelerometer to one to detect the shot being fired.
All this talk about how to handle cell phones in the car is just silly, don't do anything! It's not up to the car or police to control phone use in car, it's up to the driver to realize that they have no control of a car well texting or calling. Yes people have died as a result of someone using a cell phone well driving, but in reality they died because the person behind the wheel was given a license when in fact they shouldn't of been. A cell phone has never caused an accident, only a driver can cause an accident, can we start calling out piss poor driving and stop trying make excuses. Bad driving is the problem, don't make your cellphone take the fall for the fact you can't drive.
(b) it's an easy mental barrier between people venting at you, and, well, you (because they're not yelling at me, they're yelling at "Antonio".)
When your introductory training includes psychological coping mechanisms, rethink your decision to be there.
You think the Castro dynasty would give up their communist ideals just because the US lifts the embargo?
Of course not. But you give the right answer immediately.
The truth is that the US has very little to do with Cuba's problems. All the embargo really does to Cuba is give its leaders someone to blame for everything that Cuba is not. A convenient scapegoat for the government.
Exactly. Embargo is a convenient scapegoat - it lets the government to explain away harsh life and crackdowns by an ongoing conflict, "us vs them", "everything for the victory". Remove it, and it makes that much harder for them to maintain that. Long term, it will accelerate the inevitable collapse of the dictatorship and the transition to something saner. If Castros are smart, they will do what Chinese and Vietnamese elites did, and head the transition rather than trying to resist it, so as to reap the maximum benefits. If not, there will be another revolution.
Either way, all that embargo does is delay that process. So it hurts the people of Cuba, not its government.
The embargo started before the Cuban missile crisis (in fact, many historians believe that it was the extreme hostility of US towards Cuba after the revolution that pushed the latter towards Soviets). In any case, the notion that if the embargo is lifted, Cuba would rebuild the missile bases, just defies any common sense. It was not their bases to begin with, and if someone else would want to rebuild them today, the embargo makes it easier not harder (because it takes that much less to pay to Cuba for them).
If you seriously consider the Black Book of Communism to be the "best estimates for communist regimes killing people", you're either deluded or retarded. Heck, even if you take the book at its face value, even then it counts "victims of communism" - and by this they mean anyone who has died due to e.g. starvation during a famine, regardless of whether said famine was artificially induced or not (and Soviet Russia had plenty natural ones in the aftermath of its Civil War). For the actual killing estimates, they tend to take the highest figures from the sources that are basically pure guesswork, like Solzhenitsyn's books.
The embargo is by US on Cuba. If US truly wanted to lift it, it could just do that. The fact that it is not lifted because "Cuba does something" means that US doesn't really want to lift it, either.
Which is stupid, because Cuba is as communist as it is only because of that embargo. Hell, look at Vietnam: a country that US actually went to wage war in, with numerous civilian casualties, and now? They're rapidly catching up with China on that whole capitalism business, and you can actually talk to a Vietnamese guy on the Internet and ask him what he thinks (and tell him what you think).
More like 11th century, actually.
I mean, this is Europe we're talking about here. If two states had a common border, you can be pretty sure they had at least one war per century, and often more than that. In case of Russia(/Ukraine/Belarus) and Poland, the only reason why it doesn't go back earlier is because Rus was a proto-state before then, and it wasn't until the end of 10th century that it was fully formed.