State of the Discussion

Yes, there's also nukes and nukes. It's possible the big strategic nuclear weapon systems are in disrepair. However I doubt every single one their tactical weapons that can be launched from planes or submarines is a dud. No idea if they can still reliably hit the US eastern seaboard with the push of a button but it would surprise me if things were so bad they couldn't do damage the likes of which the world has never seen to Europe, including US installations there. There's also the fact that Putin has at least potentially been put on notice based on initial performance in Ukraine and there has been some correction.

Random question that comes to mind... Is the administrative markup the same for all departments? The only time I did work at a university on a federal grant it was through the Navy, and was an applied math problem. I can understand that the markup is high if the work requires a Level 3 biosafety lab that has to be maintained even when there are no grants. Less so for the blackboard where I did my particular work.

The Chinese don’t control the canal. Don’t now. Hint king firms controlled the adjacent ports. But they don’t make transit decisions or set and receive fees
For that transit. Panama as a sovereign nation did and still does that.

So no, not a win. A smokescreen to make another billionaire even richer IF the sale gets approved.

I think the worry was that Ukraine (and other smaller former Soviet republics) would not protect their nukes as well. Perhaps to a lesser extent, there was a worry they'd sell them, but just thinking back to the post-Cold War discourse around the nukes in the former Soviet Union, it was security that was the big issue. I remember talk of these nukes basically being out in the open for anyone to take.

Whether this was realistic or not, I don't know. I wasn't paying a whole lot of attention to the politics of Ukraine in the early-to-mid 90s.

So, being concerned that the Chinese had too much control over the Canal and then a US firm is set to take control of these ports to reduce Chinese influence is not a win? Got it.

The articles I read implied that the Parks Service could charge things from $2 to $10,000 without sending it to a regional office for approval and this is the change

If by "meaningful," you mean something like interesting or instructive, sure. Just like Aeschylus or Shakespeare. Though nobody burns you at the stake for being wrong about them.

Yeah, that's probably a good comp.

I think if I were in the House and wanted to undermine the narrative, I wouldn't fact-check or make a scene, I'd just make a point of scrolling my phone, laughing where appropriate, and basically just shrugging when asked what I thought... about what? He didn't really say anything... the kids were cute, the moms were sad, I like fire fighters too.

Manicheanism dates to the 3rd Century A.D. so we're well past the books of Moses there.

Would it be enough to discuss Manichean beliefs regarding the resurrection of the dead?

Mani's emphasis on oral tradition versus Jewish emphasis on it?

What are you looking for? I can give you a somewhat scholarly answer depending on which part of Talmud we're going to be pointing at.

Please cite to where in Jewish texts it says that Manicheanism is heresy. Are you saying I should be totes okay with the fact that the Trump admin is hiring anti-Semites who believe in blood libel for public facing rolls?

Anyway, the trolls comment was deleted so, clearly he or she passed a line.

With whom, exactly, are you arguing? I explicitly pointed out a hotly-disputed issue, indeed, in some folks' view, a heresy, in Islam. Is there some reason Saul, or any non-Christian, should care about whether Manicheanism is a "heresy"? A non-Christian might find it interesting that some Christians so regard it and why they do, but whether the club rules of someone else's club are "correct" is meaningless to non-members.

I put it on in the background as I was defending Wraeclast from its demonic denizens. On the rhetoric, a few thoughts hit me.

1. He speaks at I dunno, a 5th grade level. I have a 5th grader and he can follow Trump and get his jokes. Though, to be honest, my 5th grader's vocab is bigger and his sense of humor is more ironic -- but he's raised by GenX wordcels.

2. Most people speaking at a 5th grade level would come across as anxious and have an inferiority complex that would make their rhetoric dreadful. Not Trump. He own's his rhetoric... not a care in the world about how simple it is.

3. He's not bright, he's not clever, his content is boring... but dang, is he comfortable doing what he's doing and has the ability to look for opportunities to ad lib, usually to good effect. There's a strange existential *thereness* to his rhetoric... one minute he's making up stuff that isn't true, another he's reading things he has no idea the meaning of, and another he's just saying things he think might be neat.

What I'd call the total falsity of his political existence seems entirely authentic. This is genuinely difficult to replicate, especially for a politician. Politicians are acutely aware they are lying, and it shows. Trump? He believes 100% contingently everything he says, for the length of time it takes to leave his mouth.

His guileless guile is beguiling.

... not to me, but it's fascinating to watch it work.

Despite how cool it would be if Christianity were the only religion with heresies, sadly, many religions have them.

Hell, there are even atheists who argue for the existence of heresies within atheism (though if you wanted to talk about post-protestantism, I'd probably concede the point even as the atheists refuse it).

But Mani took and twisted Christianity, Judaism, Buddhism, Zoroastrianism, and probably some other stuff. Er, not "twisted". "Made his own". "Forged a new path".

In any case... Heresy ain't limited to Jesus Enthusiasts.

Well it’s a win for billionaires. But if Trump think black rock buying the ports - which still requires Panama giving the ok - means he can tell them to do things he’s not paying attention.

Yes, that's the chief argument against strategic missile defense; that it's actually destabilizing because a defended nation can survive a counterstrike and therefore has no incentive not to attack (or, more correctly and as the story points out, it makes the undefended nation think that the defended nation could survive and therefore has no incentive not to attack, and that the only logical responses are immediate capitulation or an immediate all-out attack in hopes of catching the defended nation before its defenses are fully operational.)

The same criticism on a smaller scale was applied to Israel's Iron Dome, the idea being that the only thing stopping Israel rolling over Gaza was the threat of a mass rocket attack, and that Iron Dome negating that rocket attack meant it was only Israel's daily choice to not attack that kept Gaza in existence. (which...yeah, turns out that was exactly how it worked!)

Like, if Trump were announcing "we're going to develop a missile defense system and we're also going to eliminate our strategic nuclear arsenal", that's one thing, but he is very much not saying that.

(I'm not super worried because the reasons Strategic Missile Defense didn't work in the 60s and didn't work in the 80s still apply, and all Trumps' idea will do is spend another few billion dollars confirming it.)

They also want to close the office in Norman Oklahoma that develops, tests and installs new rather radar and the office in Asheville North Carolina that house our weather climate and ocean data archives.

The West Wing watchers do not want bipartisanship in my experience but want more of a Warren type to take on Trump. Partisan but also with the bougie educated liberal aesthetics. The people who want a leftist pro-wrestler tend not to be in the Democratic Party at all.

The Ukrainian government prefers the use of Kyiv over Kiev. The Turkish government prefers the use of Türkiye over Turkey. I am not aware of any German governmental guidance stating that München should be used over Munich.