themeekforgotpw

The long term strategy of the US is to provide energy security to Europe between tar sands, crude, gas and oil. It has multilateral plans with Canada and Mexico to build North-South pipelines to achieve this.

Recently the conflict over oil off the shore of Guyana and the documents I linked to above (where it is STATED that the coup is motivated by oil) show recent actions by the US that contradict you.

And further it is not merely about TAKING the oil (though it is). Venezuela uses its energy economy to unilaterally fix political outcomes. Think their shipping of oil to Cuba despite US sanctions. The US wants control of that oil.

Like China's "One Belt, One Road"?

I bet corruption will remain. But it's my understanding its been drastically reduced.

No positive news of China gets upvoted in America though, because we are burned that they are winning the trade war.

Can you document that for me, and for HN?

They've been purging corruption for the entire Xi Jinping's administration. Not that it isn't there.

They would also have to disrupt the world reputation of China - not just its domestic one.

And be rest assured the US already does and attempts to do this.

Right but 'they reached too far during Windows 8' isn't an argument for reaching too far on Windows 10 (plus, Windows 8 really wasn't that long ago so it's still a pretty new policy).

> shouldn't include the full contents of emails, just telemetry on how they were typed.

Can you explain how you got to this from what you asserted before? Autocomplete data should be more than enough to get that content.

The fact is that there is a greater East-West struggle going on right now. It was Saddam. Now it is Assad. Next it may be Rouhani.

The Middle East is caught between Eurasia and Europe: the East's plans to move Westward and the West's plans to move Eastward and the conflict in each of these regions to ensure their security into the future and their access to geostrategic assets.

Obama's deal gets a 10 year delay on nuclear forces. So while it may appear to be conventional now or nuclear tomorrow, it's conventional now or nuclear in 10 years.

Israel, especially with its technological superiority, Western backing and Iron Dome, would most certainly win. Would still be quite costly.

Inalienable rights. Not civil rights.

Inalienable rights are human rights - which extend (at least in theory) to foreigners.

I read the story.

But anyway if the Supreme Court ruling holds from Zimmerman it would apply equally well to everything in the article. Of course the Zimmerman case was about foreign exports as well.

Try to be charitable.

Aren't cyberarms arms?

Isn't the right to bear arms an 'inalienable right'?

I don't get it. And I don't get why this is a 'privacy' or 'free speech' issue or why corporations, as Google argues, should be exceptions to the law.

Well they are trying to destabilize the regime - I didn't provide data on that. (Would you like some?)

The anthrax thing is reporting facts. I didn't say that the US IS organizing this. I didn't say NK was RIGHT about their worries. What I did say about anthrax is quite true.

No leg pulling sir.

How difficult is it to configure this? Users should definitely choose passphrases of sufficient length and sufficient types to be secure. This is unfortunately an infamously tricky area of security to get right.