Comments by "King Ace" (@kingace6186) on "The Infographics Show"
channel.
-
105
-
48
-
44
-
23
-
21
-
20
-
19
-
19
-
15
-
14
-
14
-
13
-
13
-
12
-
11
-
10
-
10
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
8
-
8
-
7
-
7
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@seanmcquilkin7753 No. The Natives were human beings like the rest of the world. So, yes, some tribes/nations would fight wars, practice slavery, & conquer.
Now the difference between the Natives (and the rest of the world) from Europeans was colonization and racism.
Similar to Alexander the Great, when the Aztecs or Mayans conquered people, they would let them keep their own identities. Something European Colonization never did.
And when it comes to racism, how could Natives be racist when they are (by European definition) all on race? It is like saying, Black people are racist toward other Black people. Instead, there was ethnic discrimination, mostly by the more powerful nations/empires.
Additionally, the only non-Euro empire that practiced colonization and racism was Imperial Japan. But that was because they modeled their imperialism after Europeans, and not the Chinese.
In conclusion, racism is a distinctly European practice for colonization purposes.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
@deeboxjones6601 There is a reason philosophies like "United we Stand, Divided we Fall" & "E Pluribus Unum" are the backbone of America's union.
While States look after themselves, the Federal Government has served as the cohesion that maintains the strength of the Union. This has been proven time and time again; during the War of 1812, Civil War, Reconstruction, both World Wars, the Great Depression, Cold War, War on Terror, -- and even today, 7/8, when President Biden signed Executive Order 14076.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Surprising to know that events like this are far more common to know about.
1) Of course, there is that famous instance during the Cuban Missile Crisis when a Soviet submarine (B-59) thought that WW3 was already underway. But Brigade Chief of Staff, Vasili Arkhipov, refused to launch since he taught there wasn't enough information on the situation to assume the worst.
2) Then, there is the lesser-known '1983 Soviet nuclear false-alarm incident' in which Lieutenant Colonel, Stanislav Petrov, played a key role in preventing nuclear armageddon. As an officer of the Soviet Air Defence Forces, LTC. Petrov was the duty officer stationed at the Oko early warning systems when the system reported a nuke had been launched from the United States at the Soviet Union -- followed by ~5 more. This was 3 weeks after the USSR shot-down civilian, commercial Korean Airlines Flight 007 so it was considered plausible that the West could have indeed launched in retaliation. But Stanislav Petrov reasoned that the US couldn't have started WW3 over a Soviet mistake, so instead of reporting that an attack was imminent, he reported that a false alarm occurred. Following an investigation, it was discovered that Petrov was right, and the system had indeed malfunctioned.
3) All the several other close calls -- from system malfunctions to unscheduled drills -- both the USSR and US's STRATCOM had to deal with due to hair-trigger readiness protocol.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I often think about this Yes, America has the most technologically-advanced and economically-financed ballistics in the world. Yes, Russia has an aging, barely-maintained nuclear arsenal that has been seriously degrading due to strategic, international sanctions. However, in my practical opinion, while, at the best very best, the US could knock out 90% of incoming warheads, maybe around 10% would probably hit the target.
And all that is factoring in Russian missiles, not Chinese nuclear capability. China has a more advanced, difficult-to-intercept, & precise arsenal -- but, fortunately, China has long since promised only to use its warheads for second-strike purposes.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1