That would turn the Democrats into a progressive party, which would have nation wide positions, proper party infrastructure in every state and some funding systems. Given how few vote for third parties, that would be a huge win for progressives.
The problem is that birth right citizenship is in the constitution. So if Trump can get rid of that, he can get ignore the Bill of Rights as well.
EDIT: Also basically every country has birthright citizenship usually be having a citizen as a parent. What is different in the Americas is jus soli, so being born in the country making you a citizen.
Why do you need me to come up with reasons justify your hate booner for China?
See? Moving the goalposts. Moving from cumulative, the real important metric, to per capita current emissions during a renewable transition, because otherwise the data doesn’t fit your preconceived, chauvinistic anti-china views.
I initially just wanted to point out that China does in fact consume a lot more coal, then you claimed. If you want to have the moral discussion, we can have that. The fundamental problem with your logic, is that you presume future emissions do not matter. The fact of the matter is that we will emit much more in the coming decades. Higher current per capita emissions make it much more likely that future emissions will be higher as well. At the 2023 rate of emissions, China emits as much as the EU cumulative did until 2023 in 25 years. Last year China increased its emissions by 0.8%. Current UN forecast put the population of China 633million and the EU at 347million. I hate to say it, but it is very realistic to presume that China ends up just as guilty by your metric as say the EU.
First of all greenhouse gases not just CO2.
It is also a metric China will not want to use. Per capita annual emissions are already higher in China then in many Western countries. More so UN population forecast shows Chinas population falling much more quickly then that of the West.
Now what will you come up with? Suddenly coal numbers don’t matter anymore?
Do you think I am here to hate on China or something? Your inital claim was:
How much coal has China cumulatively used in its history compared to the US or Europe? Spoiler alert: much less.
And when you looked at the numbers and you were clearly wrong, you moved the goal poast again:
So yeah, China would have to literally consume twice as much coal as it’s already consumed to reach US values of per-capita historical cumulative coal consumption.
Or 50% more to be at the level of the EU, using the Our World in Data numbers from 1900(thanks btw). Given current production, China would overtake the EU around 2040 in that metric.
Maybe that is because I have the elementary school education necessary to understand that burning coal and gas also causes emissions. So when I am looking at cummulative coal consumption, I have the very basic common sense to not look at CO2.
EDIT: Btw 2/3 of EU emissions happened in the last 60 years. So this very likely shows most of the EU coal consumption. Also if you happen to have actual coal numbers and want to share them, I am happy to have a look at them. But please no CO2 = coal bs.
Pollution per GDP is a bad measure. Mali has a high CO2 intensity, but the GDP per capita is low, so pollution is low. The best measures are emissions per capita in consumption and production terms. China is not a saint in either of those metrics, being rather close to the EU in both of them today.
Not so sure about that. China overtook the EU in 1987 in coal consumption, but today it is at 25,000TWh or so. In 1965 the current EU countries were at 4,500TWh. It certainly is not much less, if China has not overtaken the EU by cumulative coal consumption.
It is a modified version of Mastodon, with a Soapbox front end. It does not have ActivityPub enabled and lacks a bunch of features.
Thankfully only DDos. Truth Social is Mastodon so a security flaw could have been a real problem.
Also closing it means Iraq, Kuwait, Qatar and Bahrain have a massive shipping problem, which would really threaten those countries in such a massive way, that it could be seen as an attack on them. Not to mention that oil is shipped to countries all around the world. Basically everybody who is not an oil exporter is going to hate them for doing it.
Also Iran needs to ship oil via the straight as well. Starting some conflict around it, would really hurt their income.
Higher oil prices. The US has become an oil exporter after all. They also went after Venezuela and Russia for similar reasons.
The Iranian revolution hates monarchirs, so a lot of Arab monarchies like the Saudis or UAE love this. Trump loves those monarchies for plane reasons.
US arms industry sells weapons.
Iran supplied weapons to Yemen disrupting the Red Sea shipping.
Mostly international cooperation on developing weapon systems. F-35, NASAMS, naval strike missile, RIM-116 and some Abrams parts fall under that. It gurantees international customers and lowers US development costs. Sometimes the US likes a foreign weapon systems and buys some. That is rarer though.
Still the US exports a lot more then it imports.
How does anyone, let alone 150 million Americans, take this idiot seriously?
No. You are thinking of The Daily Wire.
Sounds like the US is nuking theirs, which certainly makes a bang.
Time to take the Zionists back to America…
China is not invading Taiwan. However if it comes to a war with the US, then it really has to take out Taiwan. It is just too close to the mainland, allowing for easy bombing and missile attacks, while als being able to cut off shipping from the mainland. Obviously the US likes that a lot, as it makes war against the US much more costly for China.
At the same time leaders often make horrible decisions. Just look at the US invading Iraq and Afghanistan or Russia invading Ukraine. Clearly not good wars for the countries invading, but they still did it.