jerryskids

I wasn't saying Denmark had not provided the US anything, I was merely going by the statement you quoted. I'm confident that they've done things, like provide us land for the Space Force base, which count as reciprocal. You missed the point on China. China owning any land on Greenland is a concern for the US. With Denmark owning Greenland, the US doesn't control that decision. It is a geopolitical strategic reason for the US to own Greenland.

Sniffs bait, swims away...

You posted your treaty definition in response to a post that claimed that Denmark wanted the US to protect them and provide nothing in return. I was merely saying that such a contract would not hold up legally. Anyway, I don't recall your or other Lefties' responses to my earlier post about Denmark entertaining selling parts of Greenland to China a few years ago. Should that be a concern to the US?

AI answer but I don't feel like chasing the links. At most you could try to make a case for Man 2:

I've been saying some variation of this since KBJ couldn't define a woman, a whole video worth of people in the Matt Walsh documentary couldn't, lately the lawyer arguing before SCOTUS, and now this. The question is: why don't they say it? My theory is that any "qualified" answer is antithetical to the Progressive cause. It must be 100%. Recall back to gay marriage: for a while there was general consensus that it was OK, but just call it a "civil union." Nope. It had to be "marriage." No difference whatsoever. Eventually they got their way which is often the case, as conservatives said "fine, whatever, just STFU about it already." It will be interesting to see how this one turns out. We need to differentiate between men and women for medical and legal reasons at least. How will the Progressives reconcile that?

We don't know if there was any contact prior to the videos we see. We can determine that she didn't start to leave when the first officer told her to get out, and her wife yelled to drive only when the officer reached for the door handle. We'll never know if more words would have worked; my guess is not so much, your guess is that she would have agreed to move I guess? My question is more in the hypothetical; let's say beyond all belief she chooses not to move despite a request to move. What do the officers do then? I'm fine with prosecuting her, not because she was Un-American, but because she was violating the law.

is a treaty a contract? AI Overview Yes, a treaty is essentially a formal, legally binding contract or agreement between sovereign nations, must a contract benefit both parties? AI Overview Yes, a legally binding contract generally must have mutual benefit (consideration)

how many days of training are required to sell insurance? To sell insurance, you need initial pre-licensing training (around 20-40 hours) for state exams and company-specific onboarding, followed by ongoing continuing education (CE) (e.g., 48 hours every 4 years in AZ) ICE is 9X better trained than Rusty.

I've already said that there should be a review of the procedures and if those procedures were followed.

Good points. As an Arizonan, I'm familiar with our attempt to police illegal immigrants, since the administration at the time (Obama, 2010) wasn't doing it. The Supreme Court (not the current Trump appointed fascist Nazi evil Supreme Court) ruled that that was too bad, and that this was the purview of the feds.

My believing that she didn't do it intentionally is irrelevant, as is yours. And your statement: Didn't provide any context. We can agree on the last sentence. ETA: On the context, what I should have said was that the two scenarios were not the same. You probably believe that the lady from Florida would have been shot in the face had she punched an ICE agent in Minnesota, so I'm not sure it's worth discussing.

Punch = driving a 5000 lb vehicle at them. It's the same! They should have tased Good as she drove!

Wut I do?

I'm waiting for @dogcowsto confirm that the UAE is Islamophobic.