Because then you know it doesn't work. Would you put some faith in the healing effect of something labeled "sugar pills"?
Where the hell do you get your history "knowledge" from?
Where does that "US invests in Germany" story come from? The US propped its economy up for another ten years with the money flowing in from Europe and the shit hit the fan a decade belatedly, but investment certainly was not the name of the game of the time. The money was mostly used to fund the bubble that popped in 1929 because there was simply nobody abroad that could actually serve as a demand for all the junk the US pumped out (in case this sounds familiar, well, history repeats itself).
But that was not even the main reason for the rise of the national socialists. The economy crisis itself (that started pretty much right after the war in Germany and most of the rest of Europe to a lesser degree) was even a minor reason. The main reason was the feeling of unfair treatment and the thirst for revenge.
George Clemeceau was the driving force behind the "crippling" of Germany. His idea was that a Germany that cannot wage war will secure France's eastern border. So his goal for the peace between Germany and France after WW1 was to ruin Germany. On the outside, that plan is solid: A country with no money, no political power and no military power is no threat.
What he didn't take into account was that a country that you abuse to the point of breaking will resist this treatment. Especially when the general feeling is that this treatment is not deserved.
The first reason for this was the front line at the end of WW1. When you look at the front line between Germany and France, you will notice that by the time the armistice was called, the front line was actually well within the territory of France. From the point of view of a German soldier, there was no obvious reason that they lost. Hell, we won territory! We ain't the losers here! And certainly not losers that deserve to be crippled in such a way!
Well, you also should take into account that a century ago, waging war was not an "evil" thing. War was, quite literally, just politics with other means. And it was seen as such. Wars also never had that kind of dimension before. War was something where two countries fight, after a while they settle, some territory changes hands and everyone moves on. That's what wars were like 'til then. The idea that wars end governments was pretty new then. But this just as a side note.
The army still standing rather deep in enemy territory when the armistice was signed and the "unfair" treatment by the French quickly led to the Dolchstosslegende, the myth that the German army was not really beaten but that it was assassinated by a stab in the back by
Combine this now with a peace that doesn't aim at peace but at crippling the country losing the battle and you probably find out why this is a breeding ground for radical ideologies. And we learned our lesson here. Any country you try to neutralize by ruining it will do anything to shake off those shackles. No matter the cost.
sorry, i forgot the source
they can rule against them in an international tribunal
The Philippines' attempt to haul China to an international tribunal is a problem because it is invoking the very compulsory jurisdiction which China has disavowed since 2006. But even if the Philippine attempt to arbitrate fails, any marshaled argument can subsist, and that case may be fielded in other venues. If a military engagement were to ensue, the same case could be brought to the United Nations Security Council -- the principal repository of enforcement powers under the UN system. A state can be found to be in violation of a substantive legal norm even without a coercive or compulsory judgment in a given venue, provided, of course, that there is truth to the argument supporting a violation, and that it is acknowledged by an alternative venue.
While China is disavowing the UN Convention of the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) against the Philippines, it is expressly invoking UNCLOS provisions in its claims against Japan -- so it wants to have its cake and eat it, too. In 2009, China submitted a claim over the Senkaku Islands (which, like Scarborough Shoal and the Spratlys, are believed to be fuel rich) and turned to UNCLOS rules in defining and delineating its continental shelf beyond the 200 nautical mile exclusive economic zone, again within the meaning of UNCLOS. There is some international legal doctrine supporting the view that a state's acts in one place can be used as an admission and adversely bind that State in another set of circumstances.
a legal claim against china won't make the han imperialists move, but the ruling will stay dormant
then, after any sort of conflict in the future where china loses, china is going to lose these islands in the peace treaty
this is an interesting, informative, and comprehensive post
and here you are, reading and responding
you are what you hate
good, glad to entertain, that's the right attitude
usually, if someone is not nice to you, you avoid them. are you a masochist? do you crave social contact so badly abuse is acceptable?
if you see a comment of mine, don't read it. and don't respond to it. is this concept too complicated and confusing for you?
It is a private agreement between the French and a corporate entity.
wow! really? did you read the fucking sentence right after the one you quoted genius?
I have no idea what you are talking about with "music sharing" since I never mentioned it once. I'm going to assume you are trolling at this point.
What a laugh. They can certainly do so. All they need to do is ask Google and Google needs to agree to it in order for it to happen. DMCA requests to Google already expunge data from Google IN ALL COUNTRIES, not just the US.
any other help you need today moron?
at this point i have to conclude you're just trolling me
i'm not a nice person. and this is not couple's therapy
if someone says something stupefyingly dumb (on a "news for nerds" website no less), they deserve to be pilloried
i understand the concept of educating the ignorant patiently. but then there is stupidity so amazing there is no hope
prideful ignorance exists in this world. it resists logic reason and patience. such stupidity needs to be attacked for the cancer it is (irony intended). blind and dumb people actually cause real damage in this world
Um, no. I never said that. Read it again. And use caps.
i understand exactly what you said. and i additionally understand that your comment does not address the actual topic. i will use caps just as soon as you actually try to understand the fucking topic in front of you, and then commenting
furthermore, to actually follow you down your lame red herring topic change, just to completely show your idiocy (as if you confusing music sharing with "right to be forgotten" didn't do that effectively enough):
you don't think that all sorts of countries twist the arms of all sorts of multinationals for all sorts of lame reasons already? that's just corporate life. this isn't new or even noteworthy
the hard line, the important point, is that the sovereignty of a *country*'s laws is not subjugated to the fickle bullshit of another country's ignorant laws
of course governments often go into treaties and agree on limited exceptions to their sovereign laws. these situations are narrow and up for constant review. that's fine too
but i can guarantee you no US government is going to respect French requests to censor based on this useless "right to be forgotten" band aid, ever. the request will be laughed at and waved out of the room, as it should be
finally, if france does kick out google, the usa reciprocates against french companies operating in the usa for the fickle bullshit of a logically incoherent and invalid law. so france won't do it, or they will hear from their influential multinationals
any questions? any other remedial hand holding you need today on this topic?
it is a moral issue
and france has the wrong understanding of the topic and the immoral position
additionally, if france does kick out google, the usa reciprocates against french companies operating in the usa for the fickle bullshit of a logically incoherent and invalid law
news like this makes me so mad. because it demonstrates something wonderful we as a civilization have achieved time and again. something that should be applauded and celebrated and championed:
1. disease, unfair deaths
2. science, hard work by intelligent people
3. vaccine, innocent lives saved
it's obvious, straightforward, undeniable, a wonderful good
against that we have prideful ignorance, that continues to claim the lives of innocent children and others, simply because of their various paranoid conspiracy theories, lies, and petulant low iq
in a just world, those who don't vaccinate die from ebola
in the real world, those who do vaccinate protect those who do not, and when the herd immunity breaks down, because of the unvaccinated, the vulnerable innocent and the unlucky few who got a vaccine but it didn't take hold, also die
objectively, based on the content of what you just wrote, you are a moron. not a baseless insult, an accurate characterization of the content of your thoughts, to be someone who wrote what you just wrote