I think the 'let us decide together' approach digs a legal rabbit hole nobody is particularly keen to go down

good points.
Nonetheless I think there are emotions at play here and I would rather listen to a Japanese analyst.
Also I don't really buy into the 'people were gentlemen back then' idea.
The amount of public information available about a person 100 years ago is/was orders of magnitude less compared to today and thus more susceptible to 'curation'.

I didn't mean fighting, literally.
Point is, they've been leading a successful and tough conventional war for years, and it appeared to be near conclusion by then. Maybe.
Then they say it was all the effort beforehand, and not the nukes. Yes I am questioning their integrity.

We are talking about a weapon that can be carried by a single airplane and level a city within seconds leaving many many ten thousands dead and a multiple of that injured. And the exposure to that weapon twice within days.

Claiming this experience had _NOTHING_ to do with the Japanese surrender, as LeMay did, is extraordinary (absurd). I don't see extraordinary evidence backing it up.
Claiming it was 'the scientists' who decided to drop the bomb is equally absurd.

All of the guys you quote have fought in that war, with their respective conventional assets.
They say it was _them_ who won the war, and not the new miracle weapon they had very little/nothing to do with.

Color me cynical but I don't think that's much of a surprise.

because those companies and their managers are invested in real estate and services surrounding the office.

hold my beer.
greetings from Hungary

YES YOU DO.

exactly as GP said. You must accept cash for debt settlement. When you consume a service first and pay after, e.g. dine in a restaurant (you wish, all closed down around here) there is debt incurred. As opposed to going to the movies where you buy tickets first.

and that is corruption no? Writing and enforcing unrealistic plans for political gains?

Not as straightforward as direct theft of tax money, but corruption nonetheless.

I know I am late to the party, but I have seen this argument many times and it is wrong. In order to hit anybody in the face with a wrench, you need to find their present location, physically send out physical thugs with a physical wrench and do the face hitting. That is a lot of effort and it doesn't scale well. Plus, when all hell breaks loose, there is the option of resistance via second amendment or flight. When everybody's everything is a mere number in a database somewhere, things like 'freeze assets of everyone present at location X at time Y' (political rally or whatever) can be done in an automated fashion with basically zero effort required and zero order scaling. And there is no straightforward way of resistance or evasion. that is a significant difference. Another aspect of 'cashless' that I never see mentioned is the institution of negative interest imposed on deposits. When there is no cash the government can basically force you to spend your money.

Aren't the holes under the keys the inlet for the cooling air? I thought that's how they eliminated the grilles on the side and the bottom of the case. If so, how are they going to make the keyboard crumbtight?

when you take information in advertising into account for a purchasing decision, that's a clear sign there are no real stakes involved.

So the GPs point is actually too specific. Advertising is for shit you don't need AND/OR don't give a fuck about.

What should be done is taxing corporations after gross revenue, just like people are, and _at the same rate_. The aim should be to remove the asymmetry in how corporations vs how people are taxed. Not make it bigger.

Corporations should be taxed after gross income. That would put an abrupt end to shit like the double Irish.

Imagine the hordes of tax lawyers hopelessly looking around for something productive to do. Wouldn't that be a sight.

maybe not on helicopters, but a kinetic weapon called the GAU-8 Avenger produces recoil that does appear to be a big deal for the aircraft that carries it.

What is the recoil like, with a rail gun? That kinda could be an issue on an aircraft.