In Eastern Orthodox Christianity, the environment is not a resource, nor is it a god. It is a sacrament. A tangible vehicle of God's uncreated grace. Your status is that of a royal priest who stands between heaven and earth. You are to "subdue" the chaos within your own soul first, and then, with humility and awe, lead all of creation in a perpetual song of thanksgiving, protecting it as you would protect the chalice on an altar. To harm the earth is, quite literally, a sacrilege.

Thank you for pointing this out, as Eastern Orthodox Christian.

It’s called NDAs and I in fact did reply. Hours before yours

The only saving grace here is that it goes to the municipality at least

The author also said "almost" one shotted. Almost can mean a lot of things. I'm almost rich and almost handsome. But just not there...

For those using Zotero for knowledge management or bookmarking, can you give us some examples of how?

Sounds very time consuming. Glad you're able to sustain yourself to be able to do it full time.

Butterick's type books are great.

And the US in turn abdicated its separation of powers. A US president lacks the ability to make treaties, or use military force without congressional authorization.

In what world does the president have the authority to annex an autonomous territory from an ally?

The world where he does it and then tries to present it to Congress as a fait accompli. If the security concerns around Greenland are seen as legitimate enough, he’ll get his Democratic congressmen to approve it, particularly as it’s unlikely that it would become a state (too few people).

In the world that thinks and does: "Might is Right".

Oh wait, that's the history of humanity - especially the bloody brutal history of Colonialism & Imperialism.

USA (rather The Five Eyes led by USA), EU, China are not just nations or blocs. They are Empires.

And this is what Empires do best: war (war for oil/resources, war for territory, war for wealth & glory, war for slaves, etc.)

The core issue is that the current US leadership has abandoned its status as a former trustworthy leader that accepted cooperation and responsibility as key operating tenets.

If anyone threatened to take your home by force if you didn’t sell at his favorite price, the sane social discussion would focus on their uncivil threat and pro-social responses, not on victim blaming “the core issue is that I’ve abdicated my ability to defend my house by force.”

You could have a reasonable conversation about sovereign defense budgets and alliance contributions, but not while you’re threatening the sovereignty of an ally.

And all of this will make American citizens less safe, not more. It’s madness. There’s nothing to be gained here for most people by threat of force or hybrid warfare.