u/asusthrowaway123

She’s honestly just fwb material 🤷‍♂️.

Are you sure you guys are even exclusive?

If three people say they won’t beat you up, and then one decides to do so (or try) anyway, are all parties obligated to come to your defense?

To put it bluntly, no they are not, that wasn’t the agreement.

That’s an odd way of putting it.

Russia, the U.S., and U.K. agreed to respect Ukraine’s sovereignty. No one wanted a nuclear armed Ukraine in the 90s, and Ukraine not having the ability to launch said nukes or technical expertise to maintain them had more trouble on their hands than it was worth.

Anyways, not sure why people make it sound like the U.S. and U.K. agreed to keep Russia in check.

NTA…but frankly I don’t even see how you telling her this is a big deal.

I am not a professional problem solver, but can’t she just meet him at his place?

Saying NOTHING is generally your best defense, and these companies think in terms of protecting themselves from liability.

Literally any official statement ties you down to a specific narrative, which can lead to a lawsuit.

Many companies won’t say anything, ESPECIALLY over email, for legal reasons

Don’t actually work from home; work from a local coffee shop, library, college campus, etc.

I would have a bit of a more nuanced take:

In general, if you want to interact and be accepted from people in a given social circle, to some degree you have to conform to their social norms. (Whether or not that’s right is an entirely different discussion)

So as you pointed out, your mother and you will probably be judged accordingly for not following norms; again it’s not right but that’s the reality(at least as you put it).

So long story short, no you are NTA, you don’t even want to be there so why should you conform?

HOWEVER, in my opinion you need to decide on either not going, or shaving and going. I don’t see how going to something against you will, and knowingly embarrassing your mom in the process is productive for anyone.

Investing in literally anything is speculation. By your definition, any form of investment is gambling…

While I would agree, I don’t think that statement captures what people mean when they use the terms like “gambled HARD”.

I disagree about his boss “gambling” in FTX. To make a long story short, most people who lost their money in FTX were literally scammed and defrauded.

Blaming his boss for that is like blaming someone for getting mugged.

With that being said, his boss is using the fact that he got scammed to try and defraud his employees, which is completely absurd.

Since he got mugged, he’s going to mug his employees now??? Boss of the year

While I agree with most of what you are saying/suggesting, it is categorically false that any country who uses a nuke will get nuked back.

No nuclear power can nuke ANOTHER nuclear power without the potential of mutual destruction; non nuclear powers do not have that “protection”

People like to lie about this a lot.

The fact of the matter is that there are a lot of women who find vulnerable men unattractive.

So if you want to have a serious relationship, I’d just open up relatively early on in case it’s a dealbreaker for her so you can move on with your life. Would you live your life as a lie and bottle everything up?

But if it’s casual I would hesitate.

Going to college is an easy way to “make it”…BUT you usually have to be a stem or Econ/finance major.

(Both the above group can make high five figures or low/six figures starting)

But honestly, there’s work for Humanities majors too assuming they take career seriously; many positions recruit ANY major and are more so interested in you having a degree with a good gpa.

Overall, the main point is that the UPPER end of what college graduates make is significantly higher than what you can make without one, on average.

So tying up soldiers who have surrendered and executing them is okay?

(It is not, it is literally a war crime)

Russia might be worse, but we shouldn’t be so hypocritical that we refuse to identify unacceptable behavior on the side we are rooting for.

Also you should think about what I said, nearly ALL people in America who existed before the 1960s were racist and supported racist policy.

My point is that hyper focusing on the fact that they had racist tendencies is disingenuous because you could do that for literally anyone.

FDR is the god of the democrats, and his policies transformed America in the New Deal, YET he also implemented Jim Crow style segregationist mortgages practices at the largest scale in American history, effectively entrenching segregation in housing to all corners of America.

Should all our conversation about FDR be about this? Is this good grounds to call all democrats racist?

Probably not.

Exactly lmao.

The upper limit of salary in America is perhaps the highest in the world.

And I think a lot of Americans cling on to the idea that they will be the top 1%ers.

Source: Somewhere on Twitter/Facebook

I literally said France briefly had reeducation camps for certain groups(I.E. people from Muslim majority nations), not that they are ongoing. The fact that it got that far is telling…

Overall, France has taken in double the Ukrainian refugees in a month, than Syrian refugees in nearly a decade, and this is a trend in the west, not an exception.

Similar to what China claims it is doing*, which in and of itself is a major human rights violation.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/france-fights-terror-with-re-education-camps-plan-7wg9vrrgd

The west overall has been more accepting of Ukrainians.

Many western nations have accepted more Ukrainians in a month than a decade of Syrian civil war.

And it’s funny you mentioned France, they briefly set up Muslim “reeducation” camps similar to what China is doing with the Uighur’s, so perhaps not the best example.

Yes, but Germany was the exception, nations like Poland, Britain, and even the U.S. pretty took in an incredibly small numbers of refugees.

I think the west is angry that WAR CRIMES are being committed. One type of war crime is targeting non military objectives (i.e. civilians). Another type of war crime is executing prisoners.

The differences (morality wise) aren’t as obvious as you are suggesting.

If another conflict broke out in Gaza, do you think there'd be a much more serious effort to push for peace?

Absolutely not. War is an extension of politics, and the primary reason western countries get involved in war is for some direct benefit.

People who believe that we stand with Ukraine due to "morals," are mistaken. The most likely reasons the U.S. is involved are:

1. The West is involved primarily to weaken Russia (which is the goal of most western foreign policy with regards to Russia)
2. Western leaders are taking advantage of the chaos; i.e. America is attempting to become the dominant supplier of European energy as a result of this crisis
3. The West supports Ukrainians because they are White Europeans (i.e. strange how most countries refused Syrian refugees escaping literal genocide and chemical weapons being dropped on them, but had open-door policies for Ukrainians)

While I am not confident that these are the exact reasons, if another conflict broke out in lets say Gaza, western involvement would be a calculation of what the west has to gain out of it.

The distinction between killing "noncombatants," and killing enemy soldiers who have surrendered, are tied up, and then shot in the back of the head is not a clear distinction as you are suggesting.

They may technically be different types of war crimes in the strictest sense, but they are still war crimes nonetheless.