mkii

For the sibling commenters trying to grief OP, he never said he randomly selects verses. I wish you all a nice day.

It could have been for a service that was not in production yet, and in an isolated environment.

Whenever I listen to these types of recordings, there's so much static and it's hard to hear the words. Is this how it actually sounds to pilots/ATC operators or is their feed actually much clearer?

I'm sorry, what? Do Russians not live on Earth or something?

I had a more charitable reading of GP's comment: supposing, hypothetically, the US wanted a proxy war against Russia, it didn't have to "trick" Russia. This is a perfectly valid rebuttal to GP's parent imo, especially because GP's GP never suggested US "tricked" anything.

> If China downs one in South China sea, the US might keep it quiet because neither country wants a violent escalation into war just yet.

>> just yet

No, sorry. Neither country wants a war. Full stop. I despise this tendentious reading of normal tension between two major world powers as a claim that war's going to break out. It's dangerous fear-mongering.

Sibling commenters saying US did not want to provoke a war with Russia are being biased imo. US drew a line in the sand, or kept pushing on the issue for Ukraine to NOT promise it would never join NATO. These are facts. Whether that justifies Russia invading parts of Ukraine is the debatable part.

Hint, when you hear the mainstream media constantly repeating a slogan or phrase nearly unanimously, there's probably something that language is hiding. I'm thinking about how all media called the war "unprovoked". Well, that isn't entirely true, and is some US propaganda/face-saving measure.

That might be a necessary condition, but definitely not a sufficient one to be considered a superpower. Simple thought experiment, "completely erasing" the US as you suggest would render the Earth unpleasant to live on, for a while, for all inhabitants.

> indentured servants

Could you explain what you mean?

Ok, so you want to make a system that does not include some otherwise very popular criteria to the citizens of the host nation? Because... it benefits you?

> point based system

Today if you're an illegal migrant and claim asylum, you get +inf points. If you're born in certain countries with long wait time, you get -inf points.

Clearly the system today is working within your definition.

> I suppose the counterargument is that the US educational system is generally so poor that it's not generating enough people with the necessary technical capabilities

But what if it's not a policy/ed system issue but a culture/society/values choice? As a teen today, why go to college when I can try my hand at drop-shipping/digital marketing/content creation/ChatGPT startup/whatever guru du jour's shilling today

You describe the current system, just that country of origin is a factor in the "scoring system."