Brzezinski Calls For ‘Retaliation’ Against Russia For Fighting ISIS
The leading anti-Russian figure of the Anglo-American establishment and geopolitical chess player, Zbigniew Brzezinski, has recently declared in an op-ed for the Financial Times that the United States should “retaliate” against Russia for its actions in Syria, even going so far as military action to do so.
Brzezinski argues that the recent Russian involvement in Syria puts American credibility and global reputation at stake and suggests that such a situation is intolerable. Brzezinski wrote that Russian attacks against what he and the U.S. State Department have labeled as the “non-ISIS” targets and “rebels backed by the United States” at best reflects “Russian military incompetence” and at worst signals “evidence of a dangerous desire to highlight American political impotence.”
“In these rapidly unfolding circumstances the U.S. has only one real option if it is to protect its wider stakes in the region: to convey to Moscow the demand that it cease and desist from military actions that directly affect American assets,” he wrote.
“But, better still, Russia might be persuaded to act with the U.S. in seeking a wider accommodation to a regional problem that transcends the interests of a single state,” he added later.
Brzezinski hinted that Russia was engaged in a “new form of neocolonial domination” and offered up his assessment of the geopolitical situation when he stated
China would doubtless prefer to stay on the sidelines. It might calculate that it will then be in a better position to pick up the pieces. But the regional chaos could easily spread northeastward, eventually engulfing central and northeastern Asia. Both Russia and then China could be adversely affected. But American interests and America’s friends — not to mention regional stability — would also suffer. It is time, therefore, for strategic boldness.
It is, indeed, a strange kind of “neocolonial domination” that sees the “dominated” country invite the “dominator” in for support with the “dominator” incredibly resistant to doing so for years. It is also incredibly hypocritical to suggest that Russia is the state actor representing a “neocolonial domination” when the United States has marched its blood-drenched boots all across the globe for decades, slaughtering, draining, and oppressing the hapless civilians that have been unfortunate enough to have been born in a country with natural wealth or strategic positioning.
Of course, the idea that U.S. credibility is on the line as a result of the Russian involvement is without question. Unfortunately for the United States, however, that ship has already sailed a long time ago and what little shred of American credibility that was left is being eaten up by every sortie flown against ISIS by the Russian military.
Indeed, it is quite amazing what one can accomplish when one bombs the actual terrorist organization it claims is the enemy. The Russians have clearly demonstrated that either the United States military is not capable of fighting itself out of a wet paper bag, or the U.S. government never wanted to fight ISIS to begin with. Considering the trail of destruction the United States has left behind in its wake, it is safe to say that the latter is the logical conclusion.
Found this one HERE.
How hard is it to legally buy a gun in cities around the world?
America’s gun laws have once again come under scrutiny, following the latest mass shooting at Umpqua Community College in Oregon where nine were killed. The shooter, in this case, had 14 guns in his home. After a tragedy, often the same question comes to mind: How could someone with his intentions acquire so many weapons?
How hard is it to legally purchase a weapon? Is it really that much easier in the U.S. than abroad? We researched the specific steps to acquiring a gun in three U.S. cities and in six cities around the world, some of which are in countries whose gun policies are lauded by those who support gun control in the U.S.
When paired with the number of gun deaths per year per city in the U.S. —per country elsewhere—the big picture is more complicated than we usually imagine. The steps listed below are not the only ways to acquire a gun in these cities. (In Chicago alone, police confiscate an illegal gun approximately every 75 minutes.) But the controversy over gun legislation largely regards the legal means for acquiring firearms.
The steps below are simplified and don’t include every method of obtaining a gun, just the easiest. We didn’t include every single detail of each application, but rather wanted to convey a sense of the number of hoops needed to jump through to purchase a firearm legally in these cities. Our sources are cited at the end.
Continue reading this HERE.
For decades, the government steered millions away from whole milk. Was that wrong?
U.S. dietary guidelines have long recommended that people steer clear of whole milk, and for decades, Americans have obeyed. Whole milk sales shrunk. It was banned from school lunch programs. Purchases of low-fat dairy climbed.
“Replace whole milk and full-fat milk products with fat-free or low-fat choices,” says the Dietary Guidelines for Americans, the federal government’s influential advice book, citing the role of dairy fat in heart disease.
Whether this massive shift in eating habits has made anyone healthier is an open question among scientists, however. In fact, research published in recent years indicates that the opposite might be true: millions might have been better off had they stuck with whole milk.
Scientists who tallied diet and health records for several thousand patients over ten years found, for example, that contrary to the government advice, people who consumed more milk fat had lower incidence of heart disease.
Read on HERE.
When Amazon Dies
What will happen to digital collections of books, movies, and music when the tech giants fall?
When you purchase a movie from Amazon Instant Video, you’re not buying it, exactly. It’s more like renting indefinitely.
This distinction matters if your notion of “buying” is that you pay for something once and then you get to keep that thing for as long as you want. Increasingly, in the world of digital goods, a purchasing transaction isn’t that simple.
There are two key differences between buying media in a physical format versus a digital one. First, there’s the technical aspect: Maintaining long-term access to a file requires a hard copy of it—that means, for example, downloading a film, not just streaming from a third party’s server. The second distinction is a bit more complicated, and it has to do with how the law has shaped digital rights in the past 15 years. It helps to think about the experience of a person giving up CDs and using iTunes for music purchases instead.
“In the good old days, you purchased a CD, which meant that you owned the medium outright and had an authorized copy that you could do anything you liked with, subject to copyright,” said Dan Hunter, the dean of Swinburne Law School. “For example, you could give it away to a friend, or resell it, or whatever. These days we live in a world where we generally license copyright content, like games and music. This means you’re given a limited right to do things with the content—generally this is limited to playing it on a small number of devices—and you definitely can’t resell the content or even give it away. You haven’t really bought the song, you’ve bought a contract to play the thing for a while.”
So what happens if the company that sold you that song goes out of business? Very quickly, things go from being complicated to becoming a “super complex” problem, Hunter told me. Apple’s document outlining terms and conditions for purchases from the iTunes and App stores is nearly 80 pages long. “Good luck working out if you still have a right to use the music if Apple goes out of business,” Hunter said. “I’d have a hard time working it out, and I’ve been a copyright lawyer specializing in high-tech issues for 25 years.”
For streaming purchases, the unfortunate fate of one’s collection is pretty straightforward: “Let’s imagine Amazon goes out of business,” said Siva Vaidhyanathan, a media studies professor at the University of Virginia. “In the case of streaming videos, yeah, you just lose it. It’s just not stored locally.”
Continue reading HERE.