I don’t think the government will risk significant increases in fuel prices on the eve of the Bihar elections. On the other hand, it is quite possible that they agree to stop buying Russian oil from Russia as a compromise - it could be bounced off a third country so we can technically agree to the US demands.
Because the real power of the US isn’t the ICC exemption or the UN SC veto, but their six thousand nukes and the biggest navy in the world.
I mentioned those too (‘any south Asian alphabet’). But it’s okay.
Gameplay? Xiangling (Genshin) - She does more damage.
Story? Focalors / Furina - peak character and peak storytelling
This silly meme tells you everything you need to know about Xiangling (apart from ‘every team becomes 10x better with XL in it’) and everything Furina wants you to know about her.
Nobel prizes cannot be given to the dead.
Asian
The Latin, Greek, Cyrillic, Arabic and Hebrew alphabets are more similar to each other than to any south / southeast Asian alphabet. Chinese and Korean are completely unrelated to this alphabet family (which is of Egyptian origin), or to each other. Japanese has four scripts. So you’ll need to be a little more precise than ‘Asian’.
To answer your original question, Cyrillic and Greek have upper case, Arabic and Hebrew have cursive which is not exactly the same, and neither Chinese nor south Asian scripts have upper case.
Exactly.
They are trying to get greater control over the US economy / resources / society. Such an oligarchy is inefficient, so the US will get outcompeted by China. But that is a price they are willing to pay, as long as they benefit personally.
Put another way, the cake will become smaller, but they’ll get a bigger slice of it.
What is best for the public is not necessarily what is best for the ruling class.
But those labour, machinery and materials could be used for more productive uses. I agree that you need some nukes to protect your country, but both Russia and the US already have enough nukes to send humanity back to the stone age. Why build even more?
As far as we know we have not found the colonialism gene, and there is no evidence that Europeans are somehow genetically different at this locus. So we can, at least for now, ignore the possibility that Europeans are inherently evil, or predisposed towards colonialism. Rather, the actions of any people must be understood as a consequence of their circumstances and culture.
due to all that’s happened in history, white people today are, while not intrinsically or genetically evil, tainted by the colonialism that has already happened and are therefore more likely to be the exploiters than the exploited due to their historical advantage.
White people are not only the beneficiaries of the colonialism that has already happened, they are often also the beneficiaries of colonialism that is currently happening. The CIA didn’t coup random Central American countries because they were bored. The IMF and World Bank don’t give loans to African countries for humanitarian reasons.
But human societies are not species and human-human interactions are not strictly ecological. For one, human societies have overarching coordination and collective will that species don’t have, and human societies as a whole often show more characteristics akin to a single organism than a species (though even that is apples to oranges)
I feel that the same principles that govern other animals should apply, more or less, to humans too. Although it might be more appropriate to compare human societies to populations of social animals (such as ant colonies or beehives) than to different species.
Does that imply that Imperial China was less evil than Imperial Europe? Or are they just as evil but in a different way (land-based conquest instead of sea based)? Or did they just not have the resources to do what Europe did but absolutely would have if they did? I don’t know hence why I’m asking.
I think the difference is that historically China had excellent agricultural land, a relatively modern and stable economy, and was surrounded by poorer and less advanced countries. So people had all the resources they wanted, and had little incentive to go far away. In contrast, Europe was fragmented, with Scotland, the Netherlands and Portugal actually having poor / too little land, and so there was a push for both raw materials and markets.
As far as I know, no one was forced to change their religion (Uyghurs aren’t even the biggest Muslim group in China, that’s the Hui) and there was no mass murder. I believe some innocent people who were wrongly suspected of being terrorists were strip-searched, particularly in the immediate aftermath of the attacks.
Yogthos, Cowbee etc. have given very detailed answers below. From what I know, the things they said are mostly correct. However, one point to note is that a very small minority of Uyghur people, who were influenced by fundamentalist Wahhabi teachings, carried out terrorist attacks against non-Uyghur people in the 2010s. So there was an atmosphere of fear and suspicion against all the Uyghurs, and many innocent people were subjected to searches, arrests, and so on. This has been documented by the UN. Of course, this is not dissimilar to the way Muslims were treated in France or the US after terrorist attacks. In fact, representatives from Muslim countries who visited Xinjiang praised the government’s response, as it included a lot of job creation and infrastructure projects to turn people away from extremism.
Every country is ‘authoritarian’. That’s pretty much the practical definition of a country - that they, and they alone, can use force within their borders.
If you travel to another country, you should of course consider your own safety, as well as whether that country crosses something you see as a red line. To give an example, I oppose state restrictions on religion (unless they are dangerous to the public), am a republican, and support Palestinian independence. But I would visit France, the UAE or Germany if I got the chance, and I would try to understand why they have those policies (restrictions on Muslims’ clothes, monarchy, and ban on criticising Israel). But I would not go to the US, since getting shot by a random madman is not good for health.
He first graphic here proves you wrong
Look at the six categories in the graph. Only the dark red represents processed petroleum.
Why would anyone sell cheap crude then buy back expensive gas??
Right, why would any country export cheap raw materials and buy back expensive finished products? That could never happen, right? Surely the majority of the world’s countries aren’t doing it?
Why have refiners if youre exportibg crude?
Bunch of reasons: (1) for domestic use, (2) they can sell it for more, and (3) Russia had a great industrial sector back when it was part of the USSR, and some of that still survives.
But you are right that attacks on Russian refineries will reduce the processing that is happening within Russia. They will have to buy more products from China, etc. Hopefully this convinces their government to invest in industry, but based on what I’ve seen so far I’m not holding my breath on this.
Big if true. Good on the UAE for finally standing up for the Palestinians.
I think it’s a lot simpler than that. Venezuela has oil.