On 2023-06-03 15:58:47.614000 martijn braam published the article Developers are lazy, thus flatpak this response will go over this article and adress some of the core points of it.

Developers are lazy, thus flatpak

On 2021-11-18 Nicholas Fraser published the article Flatpak Is Not the Future this response will go over this article and adress some of the core points of it.

Flatpak Is Not the Future

Beurteilung und Kritik

+Hobbes Vorstellung eines Staates ist recht einfach zu folgen, jedoch schleichen sich in seinem gesamten Staatsmodell Fehler ein, die das ganze Modell beinahe unbrauchbar machen, da sie den Staat, wie Hobbes ihn sich vorstellt, in Gefahr stellen. +

+Der erste Fehler in Hobbes' Argumentation ist bereits bei seinem Menschenbild. Hobbes stellt sich den Menschen als Wolf vor ("homo homini lupus" - "Der Mensch ist dem Menschen ein Wolf"), ein Biest, welches hinterhältig ist und nur die eigenen Interessen im Blick hat. Dieses Menschenbild ist teilweise verständlich, wenn man sich im Klaren ist, in welcher Zeit Hobbes seine Staatstheorie verfasst hat. Jedoch fehlt Hobbes ein wichtiger Teil in diesem Menschenbild. +

+Der Mensch ist dem Menschen ein Wolf, wenn sein Leben auf Spiel steht. Das Töten eines anderen Menschen ist sehr stressvoll für Menschen, Hobbes geht davon aus, dass alle Menschen Soziopathen sind, die keine Emotionen verspüren und alles töten können, was ihn auf den Weg läuft. Was nicht stimmt. Dazu kommt auch, dass Menschen soziale Wesen sind, in einem Naturzustand, wo das Recht auf alles herrscht, würde die Mehrheit der Menschen auf den Mord und Gewalt verzichten, da es einfacher ist sich mit anderen zusammenzutun und sich gegenseitig zu helfen, wobei das Recht auf alles weiterhin herrscht, jedoch nicht realisiert wird, da es besser ist sich gegenseitig zu helfen, als sich umzubringen. +

+Geht man jedoch von Hobbes Menschenbild aus und folgt ihm mit dem Aufbau eines Staates durch einen Gesellschaftsvertrag, stößt man auf das nächste Problem. Einer einzigen Person, die Macht auf alles zu verleien, und selber das Recht darauf, sich zu verteidigen, falls diese Großmacht nur aus Selbstinteresse arbeitet, zu verzichten, löst das Problem des von Hobbes beschriebenen Naturzustands nicht. Es wurde sogar schlimmer gemacht. Es wurde zwar eine Gesellschaft gebildet, in der Menschen zusammenleben, jedoch kann nun eine Person alles über das Leben der Untergeordneten entscheiden. Durch das Menschenbild Hobbes muss der Herrscher, dem alles zusteht, sehr egoistisch sein. Das heißt, dass es nur eine Frage der Zeit ist, wann dieser Herrscher zu einem Tyrannen wird, falls er das nicht schon direkt war und sein Recht auf alles ausnutzt, um sich selber zu bereichern, während die untergeordneten Hilfslos zuschauen müssen, da sie ihr Recht auf die Selbstverteidigung abgetreten haben, und nach der menschlichen Vernunft wie sie von Hobbes beschrieben wurde, die Menschen lieber "sicher" leben würden, als sich zu verteidigen und in einen Naturzustand zurückzukehren. +

Verbesserungsvorschlaege (beziehungsweise eine andere Staatsvorstellung)

+Um Hobbes zu verbessern, muss an den "Wurzeln" seiner Theorie gearbeitet werden, dem Menschenbild, der Mensch ist kein Wolf, der Mensch ist ein soziales Wesen, welches mit anderen Menschen in Frieden und glücklich leben möchte. Falls Menschen jemals vollständig egoistisch leben, dann ist es, wenn es darum geht, ihr eigenes Leben zu sichern. Sobald dieses Grundbedürfnis gedeckt ist, wird ein Mensch keine Probleme damit haben, mit anderen zu teilen und ihnen zu helfen. +

+Diese leichte Abänderung des Menschenbildes kann jedoch weiterhin dazu genutzt werden, um Hobbes' Menschenbild zu verteidigen. Weshalb noch dazukommt, dass Menschen, wenn sie nicht Soziopathen sind, es sehr schwer haben, Menschen zu töten und damit zu leben, dass sie Menschen getötet haben. Das soziale Wesen der Menschen führt dazu, dass sie es einfacher finden, mit anderen zusammenzuarbeiten, als sich gegenseitig umzubringen nur für das eigene Leben. +

+Ein Naturzustand, also der Anarchismus, ähnelt nicht dem Kriegszustand, ganz im Gegenteil, der Naturzustand wäre sehr friedlich, da sich Menschen gruppieren werden, um für sich gegenseitig zu sorgen, damit sie alle das haben, was sie für das Leben brauchen. Dadurch werden die Grundbedürfnisse abgedeckt, und der einzige Grund ihr Recht andere Menschen für das eigene Wohl zu töten wäre vom Tisch, die Gefahr, dass sich ein Kriegszustand entwickelt, eliminiert sich im Naturzustand dadurch selber. +

+Jedoch braucht es in dieser neuen Gesellschaft weiterhin eine Art Koordination, damit zu jeder Zeit klar ist, wie groß die Vorräte an bestimmten Waren sind. +Dazu wird keine zentrale Person benötigt, auch nach dem Menschenbild, wie es von mir beschrieben wurde, haben Menschen weiterhin einen leichten Egoismus, welcher dazu führen könnte, dass eine einzige Person, die alles zentral koordiniert, ihre Machtposition teilweise ausnutzt. +

+Diese Koordination kann genauso gut dezentral erfolgen, indem alle an der Koordination mitarbeiten, in einem offen einsehbaren Register, welcher in regelmäßigen Versammlungen unter Beobachtung aller bearbeitet werden kann. +

+Genauso kann diese Versammlung dafür genutzt werden, um Personen, die gegen das Allgemeinwohl gehandelt haben, zu bestrafen. Da es immer Personen geben wird, die kein Problem damit haben, Menschen zu töten und dies vielleicht auch, so bizarr wie es klingt, aus Spaß machen. So können unter mehrheitlicher Zustimmung Strafen ausgehängt werden. Jedoch sollten diese Strafen nie einer Person aktiv schmerzen zu tun, sondern es sollte immer eine Art Rehabilitation oder Wiedereinbringung gelingen, oder zumindest versucht werden, da Straftaten in diesem Fall mehrheitlich aus irrationalen Gründen erfolgen werden, welche in verschiedenen Formen "ausgeredet" werden können. +

+Diese Staatsform kann zudem auch rekursiv gesehen werden, Hobbes geht nicht darauf ein, wie Konflikte mit anderen Staaten gelöst werden sollten, oder ob diese überhaupt lösbar sind. Dies kann jedoch einfach gelöst werden, indem man davon ausgeht, dass die Gesellschaften selber wie Menschen sind, wodurch mehrere Gesellschaften eine weitere Gesellschaft bilden, eine Art Gesellschaft der Gesellschaften, die kann aus mehreren Gründen erfolgen. +

+Zu einem können verschiedene Gesellschaften verschiedene Waren zur Verfügung haben. So kann Gesellschaft A Äpfel anbauen, aber keine Birnen, während Gesellschaft B Birnen anbauen kann, aber keine Äpfel. Es bildet sich ein gemeinsames Interesse, die Früchte zusammen zu teilen, damit Gesellschaft A Birnen essen kann, und Gesellschaft B Äpfel essen kann. +

+Hinzu wird dadurch die Existenz der Gesellschaft und somit der Menschen, die in der Gesellschaft leben, gesichert, da sich Gesellschaften gegenseitig aushelfen können, falls bei einer Gesellschaft eine bestimmte Ware knapp wird. +

+Abschließend kann man sagen, dass Hobbes Staatsvorstellung sehr fehlerhaft ist und meiner Meinung nach nicht wirklich verbessert werden kann, weshalb hier nur die Menschenvorstellung wirklich "wiederverwendet" wurde, um eine andere Staatsform zu bilden. +

NOTE:

Assesment and criticism

Improvements (or rather a completely different state model)

+To improve Hobbes, one must modify the roots of his theory, the image of humanity. The human is not a wolf, it is a social being, which wants to live happily and peacefully with others. If humans ever live egoistically, then it is to make sure they do not die. As soon as this need is fulfilled, no human will have any trouble sharing with others and helping them. +

+This small change in the image of humanity can still be used to defend Hobbes' image of humanity and his idea of a state of nature. Which is why another point has to be added, the fact that humans, when they aren't sociopaths, don't like killing others and will live under strong emotional stress if they ever do it. The social aspect of humans leads to them seeing it as easier to help each other and live peacefully, than to kill each other to save their own life. +

+A state of nature, or also known as anarchism, is not similar to war, it's the complete opposite. The state of nature would be very peaceful, since humans would form groups to help each other and make sure that they all are able to cover their basic needs. Once their basic needs are covered, they have no reason to use their right for everything and the need to kill humans to save their own life. The danger that the state of nature turns into a state of war would eliminate itself. +

+This peaceful society however still needs some form of management, to ensure that it is at all times possible how big the available resources are. Except this does not require a central person to do it, since even after my image of humanity, humans are still egoistic to some extent, which could lead to this central manager to abuse their power. +

+This management can function decentralized, by simply involving everyone who is part of society into the management, in an openly visible registrar which can only be updated in regular meetings under supervision of everyone. +

+The same way can this meeting be used to "punish" people who work against the collective good. Since it is still possible that some people have no issue with murdering others. To combat this, a form of punishment can be sentenced under absolute agreement of everyone in the meeting. However, these punishments should never actively harm people, they should offer some form of rehabilitation to go against anything that drove people to do these crimes, since under the circumstances in this society, crimes would mainly be committed out of "random" reasons that can be talked about to be resolved. +

+This state model can also function recursively, Hobbes does not mention any way how conflicts between other states should be solved, or if these are solvable in the first place. This can be solved quite easily, by simply assuming that the societies act like humans themselves, through which multiple societies form another society, a form of society of societies, which can happen out of multiple reasons. +

+Different societies can have different resources. For example, society A has apples, but no pears, while society B has pears, but no apples. A common interest is formed to share these fruits between each other to ensure that they both have apples and pears, further fulfilling the needs of the people living in these societies. +

+It is additionally possible to ensure the existence of the society, and in turns also the people living in these societies, since societies can help each other in case one society runs out of specific resources or has some other issue. +

+All in all, one can say that Hobbes model of state is very flawed, and in my own opinion cannot be improved in any constructive way, which is why this mainly fixes up the image of humanity to form a completely different state model. +

Post translation notes

+This text is only a translation of my original German text (as noted in the note at the top), however I have plans to expand on this new state model I explained in the Improvements section, this would either consist of reusing this text and adding more paragraphs, or writing a completely new text from scratch (more likely, as my English is better when writing freely than when translating). +

PHP

a real language or just an illusion?

Most of you probably have heard about php already, or so you think. My theory is, that php is in fact NOT real!!

Why it isnt real:

here I will go over on why php isnt real

please note that those reasons arent subjective opinions, but facts.

Have you ever seen php code? I certanly haven't
I have also never met a real PHP programmer, now you might say you're one, well then... you just arent real either :)
Every website I've been on doesn't use php! It either uses html, css or javascript but not php!
We also cannot verify that files that have the .php extension actually are php code, as the source is not visible(see point 1)
PHP would cause a lot of security vulnerabilities, no one would create a language with that many vulnerabilities

Why people might say php actually is real:

Some people might say php is actually real

which is completely fine, we all have those moments in our life

I code in php!
my answer: You arent real either then.

+ + +

Why only one argument that it is real?

Because there are no other arguments, further proving php isnt real

+ + +

But what about the software made for it?

The Software is made to make people believe php is real, as people could go insane when they find out php is not real

So all the governments around the world hired some companies to make software for php, like phpstorm, to make people believe it is real and prevent people from going insane

php.net

the existence of php is a good lie, hence people who know about it made a website for it so people think it is real

also, the php website has random pictures of elephant plushies at the bottom, this only screams "hey, we aren't real"

+ +

axtlos is always wrong

no im not! I'm wrong most of the time, which isnt this time!

+ +

You can dig up old photos of php code form like 2010

We're talking about 2010, I think everyone knows what a year 2010 was.

+ +

The php source is on github!

It infact, is not! The "php interpreter" is there, but not php itself, and everyone can make an interpreter for anything, this doesnt mean it needs to exist!

Code exmple

So apparently this is how php code looks:

<?php echo"Hello World, I'm not real";?>

Doesn't this look similiar?

It should, because its just html!

Since php doesnt even seem to have its own syntax, its not real

Conclusion

PHP just isnt real

You are lying if you say you code in php

If you say its real then you are smooth brain!

+ +

Update (idk the date, 2022)

After seeing the php "mascot"(something not real can't have a mascot)(which is really cute btw) I have concluded that php is partially real, meaning that the first p is real, the rest is still a lie!

+ +

Goodbye and thanks for reading :)

This is a joke btw, you can use php if you like it

Thanks to ibzan for giving me reasons on why php is real and helping me expand this

“Let Europe arise!”, is what Winston Churchill said in a speech +delivered at the University of Zurich on the 19th September 1964. What +he envisioned was a European Union, or as he called it, the United +States of Europe. His vision gained a lot of support, so much support +that we now actually have a European Union.

+Except that nowadays I look at this European Union, which was created +with the motivation of uniting Europe and creating peace in Europe, and +ask myself one thing. Where has the support, the union, the motivation +gone? Why is the European Union, which was meant to be a democratic +Union of Europe now falling apart? I can tell you why, the European +Union is not what it used to be. The European Union is not the great +Union that it used to be, sure there are some nice regulations here and +there, but the majority of European actions have just been idiotic. +Which completely warrant the Brexit and now the potential Dexit, the +European Union simply is not what it used to be.

+How dare you call yourself Democratic, when you actively allow countries +to completely bypass the Democracy, do you consider it Democratic to +allow the french and dutch to veto a European Constitution without any +consequences? I certainly do not. To me the European Unions seems like a +mega corporation which only follows the lead of the countries that give +it the most money.

+Does anyone here happen know who that country currently is? It is +Germany. Does anyone here know what would happen to the European Union +if Germany would leave? The European Union would crumble. It would turn +into a joke, a joke with no funding.

+No one would benefit from Germany leaving the European Union, which is +exactly why I would not mind if Germany were to leave. If all powerful +countries have to leave the European Union to cause the European Union +to change, then so be it. This is what you get for piggybacking off of +Germany and turning a blind eye on Greece going into massive debt with +Germany. You get a nice f-you from the powerful countries who are sick +of your hypocrisy.

+But of course, no one here cares, because it gives you what you actually +strive for. Money. This is the system we live in, a system where having +money is rewarded and not having money will cause you to be completely +Ignored. I cannot blame anyone for trying to make Money. But what I can +blame you for and what I will blame you for is the fact that no one +tries to replace this broken system with a system that actually works, +one that does not only benefit the powerful. A system which properly +helps the poor without putting them into massive debt. But of course no +one here will do this, because the lobbyist tell you not to. The fact +that you people allow corruption like this on a continental level is +absolutely despicable. I am deeply disappointed with everything you have +done. I used to be a fan of the European Union and admired everyone who +is sitting here. But now I am just disgusted by the corruption, +discrimination and violations of Human Rights you people do on the +daily. And of course none of this will change, since "boo hoo change +scary"

+Additionally, the European Union fails to listen to any young voices, I +am quite honestly surprised that I am able to talk to you in this moment +and that the majority is somewhat listening to what I have to say. Does +anyone here remember article 13? The robo copyright regulation that +would stop any form of fair use? Has anyone here seen the mass outrage +young people had online? I’m guessing you have not, since all I see here +is a group of old timers who accidentally leak confidential emails and +fall for the most obvious phishing attacks known to man. Has anyone here +ever actually listened to a young persons opinion? I would not be +surprised if some people here had their last interaction with young +people on Epstein Island. You are the ones who complain about the newer +generations not being politically motivated, yet you also make no effort +to listen to politically engaged teenagers. Why is that? Are their ideas +too radical to you? Do they not know enough about politics to be able to +make proper decisions on specific topics? I would argue that politically +engaged teenagers know more about politics than some of you, mainly +because they cannot buy their position in politics.

+Now to be completely fair, the European Union does not only consist of +bad things, you people sometimes do things which I and many others, +genuinely appreciate. Enforcing proper worker rights across every +European Country, allowing anyone who is European to travel to any +country in the European Union. Allowing tax free trade for any good. +Showing Corporations the middle finger with their monopolistic and +anti-consumer strategies. We genuinely appreciate that. Except then you +add regulations that would make open source programs impossible to +maintain and also cause mass surveillance, is it really that hard to not +fall for the default "it will stop child predators" mass surveillance +reasoning? I feel like we have been through this multiple times. In the +end the politicians who wrote those regulations turn out to be child +predators themselves and were only trying to distract from the actual +issue.

+I really want to like the European Union, it is a great concept and it +has the potential of becoming so much better. But all I see nowadays is +a concept that everyone is starting to loose interest in. The European +Union in its current state will not change for the better anymore. So if +it takes the dissolution of the European Union for us to get a true +United States of Europe, which does not consist of separate countries +but is one big state with one unified language and one unified law, then +I am fully on board. But realistically, even with the most powerful EU +members leaving and creating their own partnerships, this will not +happen. We are stuck with the current European Union, so let us improve +this Union the best we can, completely rework the process of introducing +regulations to a process that features actual proper Democracy, let us +not favor the will of powerful money givers of the poorer countries, let +us accept refugees and give them a new home where they do not fear +missiles hitting their home or soldiers committing war crimes, let us +not spy on Europeans and put journalists at risk of being arrested for +spreading the truth, let us listen to what the young generation has to +say. Let Europe arise again!

Introduction

The purpose of this Term +Paper

At the time of writing this, war is starting to become a more +important topic again, with the invasion of Ukraine in 2022 , increasing +complications between China and Taiwan , as well as the US withdrawal from +Afghanistan and the following takeover from the Taliban .

In the western world, people usually take a side with the US or other +western countries and see them as the "good guys", however people often +fail to see the background of wars and completely ignore the fact that +wars are not for the "Liberation of a country" , but for the profit of +those, who win the war. Which, due to the NATO mainly consisting of +Western countries and being the strongest Military force, is +guaranteed to be them . With this Term paper I want +to show that there are no "good guys" in a war, only "better guys" at +best.

The reason I chose the United States for this is simple, they are the +strongest force in the NATO , which results in +them having the most influence in NATO decisions. If I want to show the +reasons for wars, then America will be the best example since other NATO +countries follow America in a lot of military decisions.

But it should also be noted that America is not the only country +guilty of starting wars because of money, every war is in some way +caused by money, no matter if the war was started by America, Russia, +China or any other country. Every war is a crime on humanity and an +example as to why Capitalism is a horrible economic structure.

List of wars America was +involved with

Since the second World War, America has been involved in four War +operations . The Korean war, Vietnam war, +Operation Desert Storm, which is also known as the Gulf War , and the Global +War on Terror .

In these four wars the US committed a bunch of war crimes, the +most common one being massacres of unarmed civilians. The +US made no efforts in cooperating with human rights organizations or the +International Criminal Court, effectively commending any war crimes US +soldiers committed .

Vietnam War

The Vietnam War is most likely one of the most well-known wars +America was involved with. The origins of this war date back to the end +of the second world war in 1945, where Japan withdrew its soldiers from +Vietnam, which then was split up into the Democratic Republic of +Vietnam, under control of Ho Chi Minh, who strove to create a country +following Chinese and Soviet Communism and the state of Vietnam under +control of the French emperor Bao Dai, who wanted a Vietnam which had +close cultural and economic ties to the West .

Both sides of Vietnam had signed a treaty in the year 1945 during the +Geneva Convention, which split Vietnam along the 17 degrees North +Latitude, also known as 17th Parallel and set Minh in control of the +North and Dai in control of the South.
+This lasted until 1955, where Ngo Dinh Diem, a "strongly anti communist +politician" , became President of the +Southern part of Vietnam. Due to the cold war and the US hardening +policies against any Communist states, the currently acting US President +Eisenhower pledged "firm support to Diem and South Vietnam" .

With the formation of the National Liberation Front in 1960, which +was meant to be a resistance against Diem at the request of a US report +team, John F. Kennedy started increasing US Military Aid in South +Vietnam based on the Domino Theory , which assumed that once a +country falls to communism, many other countries would follow, like a +chain of dominoes .

The situation escalated in 1965 when Lyndon B. Johnson sent US Combat +Troops to Vietnam.

The Global War on Terror

The Global War on Terror began after the Terrorist attack on the +World Trade Center on the 11th September 2001, George W. Bush, who was +the acting President at this time, announced that the US was creating a +plan to locate and stop Terrorists all around the world . In connection to +these announcements the US first started a war in 2001 with Afghanistan +and then in 2003 in Iraq , these wars are part of the Global +War on Terror, however the Global War on Terror also describes +non-violent actions taken against the financing of Terrorist groups. The +invasion of Iraq began on the 20th March 2003 with US air strikes, the invasion was +justified with the Global War on Terror and Iraq’s ownership of nuclear, +biological and chemical weapons. . The first stage of the war +ended a month after the first air strikes with the downfall of Saddam +Hussein’s regime on the 1st May 2003 .

The war however continues with the hunt for Saddam Hussein, who was +captured on the 14th December 2003 and executed 3 years later on the +30th December 2006 . During this time the battle in Iraq +continues after Shiites won the 2005 election . Even though the war went on until +2011, the Bush Administration admitted on the 24th January 2004 that no +biological, chemical or nuclear weapons were found in Iraq, as the +former US weapons inspector David Kay told the congress: "we were almost +all wrong" .

This then begs the question, if it was already known that Iraq had no +weapons of mass destruction in 2004, why did the US continue the war +until 2011, what are the real reasons for the war?

The +real reasons for the wars and how America hides them

As shown in the first paragraph, the US is not always fully honest +about their reasons for invading a country or starting wars. So in this +paragraph I am going to show the multiple reasons America, and other +countries, go to war or start Invasions.

(Big-) Oil

Big Oil is a term that describes the biggest Oil Companies under +public ownership, these include BP plc, Royal Dutch Shell plc, Exxon +Mobile Corporation, Chevron Corporation, ENI SpA and Total SA . Due +to these companies being Government controlled, the Government will set +regulations or even start Wars, just to benefit their Oil Companies.

The Wars which are started for the acquirement of Oil are usually +called "resource wars" , these however are not +the only wars started due to oil. There is the petro-aggression, which +is not a war directly started because of oil, but due to the domestic +isolation which oil can cause, making a country more likely to try out +potentially controversial foreign policies . Another type is the +financing of other groups with profits made from oil, like Iran +financing the Hezbollah through oil profits and wars started +over oil market domination, as seen in the US war with Iraq over +Kuwait .

However, the existence of oil wars are a very controversial, there +are people who claim that oil has no cause in wars, while others claim +that oil is a very important factor in wars. Often these discussions are +made on the example of the wars in Kuwait, to which the US Secretary of +Defense Donald Rumsfeld stated that it’s "nonsense to suggest that the +US invasion of Iraq involved oil in any way" . Even among political +Scientists oil, or even energy in general, is rarely mentioned, the few +scientists who do focus on the involvement of oil in wars also disagree +about the importance of oil, one group argues that resource wars play a +major role in wars, while the other group rejects this claim due to the +lack of systematic evidence . The main issue with these +discussions is that people often fail to check the influence of oil in +the country before the war started, as oil may not be the direct cause +of the war, but start a chain reaction of other events which eventually +lead to a war. It is also noteworthy that oil is a very important +resource and simply cannot be ignored when analyzing international +security. This can also be seen in the aforementioned discussions about +the involvement of oil in the Iraq wars, as scientists argue about +involvement of oil in the war, rather than the preconditions caused by +oil .

Resource Wars

A major example of resource wars is the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait in +1990 and the following US Military operation Desert Shield, in which +Iraq successfully annexed Kuwait and gained control of 20 percent of oil +reserves . This is more proof that oil is +not always the cause of a war, but rather a precondition of war.

Although the goals of Oil Resource Wars are not always only the +ownership of more oil, but also the gain of more Control over the +Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries, also known as OPEC, +which would allow a country to have more control over the worldwide oil +price, and as a result of this power also cut countries out of oil +trade.

Oil Market Domination

Wars about Oil Market Domination are similar to Resource Wars, +however they differ in one main point, the wars aren’t for personal gain +of oil, but rather to make sure that the opposing force has less oil +Power . +The US fears that countries with a big oil power could artificially +raise the Oil price, which OPEC would have to follow with, allowing the +country to enrich itself on oil profits.

Oil Market Domination wars are often a cause of Resource wars, a good +example is the US operation Desert Shield, which itself started due to a +fear of Oil Market Domination from Iraq, but was caused by the Iraqi +invasion of Kuwait, which, as already mentioned, was a Resource War.

Communism

Communism as a cause of war is an interesting topic, the US did not +start any wars against communism ever since the cold war, yet Communism +and Socialism are still an important topic in modern foreign policies +and even internal policies, with the rise of Communism and Socialism +among Millenials and Gen-Z , it becomes a more +broadly discussed topic in politics, with the majority of politicians +not being very happy, as they are a prime target of Communist and +Anarchist movements.

As a reaction to this, the US tries to silence any Communist +politicians or countries, be it through direct wars, secret CIA +operations or the influence of media to spread false information . +Secret CIA operations include assassinations of Communist leaders, like +the Cuban Prime Minister Fidel Castro, who survived over 600 murder +attempts from the CIA and ended up dying naturally at the age of 90 in +Havana on the 25th November 2016 .

The war against communism however is not always violent. During the +cold war and the Red Scare, the US also made a huge effort to keep +people away from Communistic believes through state propaganda. This +propaganda was usually spread through movies, literature, music, +television and art. It would usually mock the soviet union and communism +through misinformation. The US Government however did not display it as +propaganda and insisted that everything shown was factually correct. An example of this propaganda can be seen in the +attachments.

Power in other countries

Most wars which involve gaining power in other countries are not +military wars, but economic wars. The US in this case often sets +embargoes on countries that do not follow them in their decisions, like +with Cuba, Venezuela or a lot of countries in the Middle East .

Cuba

The US embargo against Cuba started with the Cuban Revolution in +which Fidel Castro took over the Cuban Government, even though the +currently acting US President Dwight D. Eisenhower officially recognized +the new Cuban Government as legitimate, relations rapidly started to +deteriorate after Fidel Castro began nationalizing more companies and +started the agrarian reforms, in which the Government broke up large +landholding and redistributed them to the people who work on that land +and the state. With each state take-over of privately owned land the US +embargo rose in strength, up to the point where any trade with Cuba was +prohibited for US Companies. This embargo also got extended to the point +where the US threatened any non-US based company with sanctions if they +were doing trade with Cuba . The US opposition to the +Cuban government under Fidel Castro even went as far as the CIA +attempting to assassinate Fidel Castro over 600 times .

Israel

Israel is a very controversial topic in international politics, which +also makes it a prime reason for wars. The controversy stems from the +fact that Israel lies on land stolen from the Palestinian +population . During the +second world war, Palestine was controlled by the British, due to the +holocaust in Europe a lot of Jewish people immigrated into Palestine, +under supervision by the British. They formed their own villages, also +called kibbutzim, and were not interested in forming any Jewish State. +After the British retreated from Palestine, Zionist groups started +attacking Palestinians with the goal of starting a Jewish State. The UN +tried to settle these attacks with the 1947 Partition Plan, which would +split Palestine into two parts and assign one half to the Zionists. +Palestine openly expressed their dissatisfaction this plan as it would +illegally steal part of their country, while the Zionists seemingly +agreed with it . After the +Partition Plan was completed and Palestine was split into Palestine and +Israel, Zionists started attacking the Palestinian land and claimed it +for themselves, causing Palestinians to flee into other Arabic countries +like Jordan or Lebanon . Even though +Palestine is an occupied territory, Israel continues to send their +population into these territories and apply Israeli law, which directly +violates the fourth Geneva Convention. Despite this, countries still +acknowledged the new Israeli territory as a legitimate part of +Israel .

With Israel being a country with western ties in the middle east, the +US had an interest in forming good ties with Israel in order to have a +proxy in the middle east. This has been the case with the Iran-Israeli +Proxy conflict, in which Iran threatened to dissolve Israel and give the +land back to the Palestinian people. And now is a proxy war involving +Syria, Lebanon, Russia, the United States, the United kingdom and Saudi +Arabia .

Conclusion

What to take from this Term +Paper

In the end, what to take from this Term Paper is up to the Reader, +however I hope that this Term Paper cleared up that there are no good +reasons for War. Even if countries tell us that their War is for the +"removal of Nazis" or for the "liberation" of a country, it is never the +truth. Every War always boils down to the gain of power or money, +although nowadays these things are the same.

The war for Oil results in a shift of power in OPEC, which allows the +most powerful country to influence the international Oil price. Due to +this easy way of gaining a monopoly, any state can abuse their position +in OPEC very easily.

The war against Communism has the goal of defeating an idea that goes +against everything the US stands for. Communism tries to abolish the +entire concept of a class based society, which would result in the +Government any rich people would loose their power. It is clear why the +US government tries everything they can to avoid any Communist movement +in any country, since they seemingly still believe in the Domino Theory, +and fear that any communist country that gains a lot of power could +cause other countries to move towards communism.

And finally, the attempts of gaining power in countries. This is not +always very easy, as seen with the example of Cuba, getting power over +countries can also mean completely blocking any cooperation with +specific states, in this case setting an embargo on Cuba and threatening +non US companies to sanction them if they decide to trade with Cuba. +This gives the US control over every company that is interested in +having the US as a partner, which usually every company wants. Based on +this example it becomes clear that wars with the objective of directly +gaining power in countries does not always mean getting power over the +country in which the war is happening, but to gain power over other +countries through this war.

What I learned from this +Term Paper

The core information of this was nothing new to me, however the +extend of what the US does to justify their wars and war crimes was very +shocking and only increased my critical attitude towards US politics. +This Term Paper showed me, that countries are able to ignore war crimes +through and lie to the population in order to make them seem better to +retract a statement, which also is the reason why I want to retract a +statement I made in the beginning of this Term Paper, I said that there +are only "better guys" in wars, not "good" guys, after writing this +Paper it has become clear to me that even "better guys" do not exist in +wars. Everyone who participates in any war is a horrible person and it +does not matter what their political opinion is. They all commit +genocide towards groups of people and point at the others saying that +they are the ones violating human rights, while leading a genocide +against transgender people in their own country and secretly murdering +children in a state based on stolen land. I have also noticed that +Imperialism is not dead, as many assume. Imperialism never ended, except +that now the government knows how to hide their Imperialism and sell it +to the population as a "Liberation", "removal of Nazis" or "fighting +terrorist groups". Due to this system of gaining power through money and +gaining money through power it is only a matter of time until every +country turns into some sort of fascist, imperialist state.

Developers are lazy, thus flatpak

Flatpak Is Not the Future

Beurteilung und Kritik

Verbesserungsvorschlaege (beziehungsweise eine andere Staatsvorstellung)

NOTE:

Assesment and criticism

Improvements (or rather a completely different state model)

Post translation notes

301 Moved Permanently

PHP

a real language or just an illusion?

Why it isnt real:

Why people might say php actually is real:

But what about the software made for it?

php.net

axtlos is always wrong

You can dig up old photos of php code form like 2010

The php source is on github!

Code exmple

Conclusion

Update (idk the date, 2022)

Introduction

The purpose of this Term +Paper

List of wars America was +involved with

Vietnam War

The Global War on Terror

The +real reasons for the wars and how America hides them

(Big-) Oil

Resource Wars

Oil Market Domination

Communism

Power in other countries

Cuba

Israel

Conclusion

What to take from this Term +Paper

What I learned from this +Term Paper

Attachments

Anti-Communist propaganda