Decline is one thing, but US protestants, specifically evangelicals, are definitely the most out of touch Christians. I'd love to see them take the same stance as the pope on homosexuality.

I mean, now you're just moving the goalposts. I don't disagree with you there, but that isn't what we were talking about.

There is a world of difference between boycotting an Olympics games held in the Capital of a country invading others, and to refuse to host that countries athletes in an Olympiad held elsewhere. One is a political stance, the other is just racist/nationalist.

We boycotted the 1980 Summer Games in Moscow, but the 1980 Winter Games in Lake Placid welcomed Soviet Athletes with open arms. Who would have thought that we could learn a thing or two from 1980's America...

We still make movies about what happened in the 1980 Winter Games

Guess you missed people boycotting Soviet athletes at the 1980 Winter Olympics in Lake Placid. Oh wait, you did, because that didn't happen. Good thing, too, or we wouldn't have had the Miracle on Ice.

If that's what you want, then I'd have to agree with the IOC - this would be the end of international competition as we know it.

I know you think it would make them look like fools with their "Olympics" of only 4 or 5 nations, but what you suggest would just grow into it's own monster. What we would end up with are "blocks" of international competitions where only countries that get along politically compete against each other.

People need to sit down and think before they just blurt out and run with the first solution that comes to mind. If we aren't careful, our solutions may not lead to a more peaceful world in 100 years, but a blocked-off, isolated one.

Personally, I don't want to look back at the 20th century as a rare and fleeting time in human history where we actually had our shit together enough to compete as a world.

The only reason the Korean War was undertaken by the UN and not Vietnam is because during Korea, the USSR was boycotting the UN for recognizing Taiwan as the true China immediately after the communist government took over and didn't have veto power in the Security Council. They were an active member of the security council during Vietnam and would have vetoed any resolution that didn't support the Viet Minh.

If that's literally your only reason, I think you might want to look back and re-examine that "international consensus"

>Canada and the us were settled at the same time. Jamestown and Quebec City were the first two permanent European settlements in North America. And settled within months of each other. The history of Europeans in Canada didn’t begin in 1867 just like the history of Europeans in the united states doesn’t begin in 1776.

Right, but everything until 1867 is generally shrugged off as "done by the French/British settlers, not us". Hell, that might as well have been the Canadian governments official slogan until the 21st century.

>There have been others, named above in previous comments where the unites states has pursued self interest to the detriment of human rights, democracy, and common decency. Can you name a single conflict in which Canada has done the same?

Yes. To use your examples above, Vietnam (through logistical support) and Afghanistan. After all, Canadian snipers didn't get a reputation as among the world's best in the modern age by staying in Canada and shooting paper targets.

Also, I'm very curious to hear why you have such a high opinion of the Korean War and not the Vietnam war, considering the many parallels between them.

Dude, by the time Canada came around, the United States had already had it's Civil War, abolished slavery and had expanded out to California. You weren't even around to get involved in any of that.

You were settled by western Europeans, too. You'd have been right by our side if you didn't show up to the party so late. What Canada did to the First Nations was all it could do at that point in history. Given the chance, no doubt it would have been worse.

That's not the game we're playing. The game we're playing is "don't be a hypocrite". Canada is complicate in more of the US's foreign policy blunders than a lot of other countries.

And while we're here pointing fingers, Canada is on quite a few of those black squares, and has greatly benefited from the ones that it isn't on.

Many countries did, but many countries didn't.

While we haven't always had everyone's backing, we've always had someone's backing. The US's foreign policy history is certainly checkered, but every single country can find themselves somewhere in one of the black squares, too. Some, many more than one square. That's my point.

You were talking about which sport are fluff and which are "where it's at". Ratings are a pretty good indication of which sports more people care about

The Olympics doesn't care about the "athletic" sports as you think they do. Don't they regularly think about getting rid of wrestling, which is probably the most quintessential Olympic sport?

The ratings for each competition don't agree with you lmao

It's certainly bigger than basketball... Which is another that the players care less for the Olympics than their own league.

All of North America and most of Europe play hockey. That's already like 80% of the top medalling countries at the Olympics

If it's a major US sport (half of which are featured in the Olympics), the Olympics aren't the highest stage.

Then you'd have to block the entire Western World, and many parts of the Eastern world, too, because we've always had everyone's backing.

NHL players give way more of a shit about getting their name on the Stanley Cup than winning an Olympic gold...

They didn't even put up a big fight when the NHL decided they aren't stopping the season for the Olympics anymore.

If the coach they mentioned with 4 undefeated seasons was some sort of left-field ridiculous answer, I'd agree with you. But their two sentences were telling the person that they're ridiculous followed by him backing up how ridiculous he thinks they are being by comparing it with a real life stat of 4 undefeated UCLA teams. They are very clearly being sincere.

Dude, this is the internet. 9/10 times, it's some unhinged dude throwing a fit when they think someone displays sub-par knowledge about their favorite thing

Wtf is clear about that? Seriously, I'd love for you to tell me what about that comment is a joke? Haha

What's ridiculous is that you saw that number and were like "yeah, that's totally what this dude means. After all, everyone but me is an idiot" and then acted like a raccoon with rabies instead of just being like "hmm, that's so ridiculous, maybe that's a typo, and perhaps I should ask for clarification."

Oxygen is actually the third most abundant element in the Milky Way

Idk what they said other than "Come on", but I can only imagine they are skeptical as to how harmful it actually is. After all, I never expected my anesthetics to be biodegradable.

No clue. I could see him hanging the hat.

Good thing Bergeron has set the Bruins culture of taking a pay cut for the team

The only thing I'm certain of is that you can't be certain of the costs enough to be comparative.

With so many unknowns, how on earth can you say "damn, starship is cost competitive with space elevators"?