all 29 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 50 points 5 days ago (3 children)

I don’t understand how we were treating the US unfairly by selling commodities the US upsold and exported while watching our own defence and manufacturing industries wither and die.

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 31 points 4 days ago (2 children)
  • [–] 7 points 4 days ago (4 children)

    I've never really heard anyone pronounce it like aboot (as in "rain boots). More like abeut (as in beutiful) or abowt (as in 'bow down'). Is it because I'm from Ontario?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 4 days ago (2 children)

    I've got a theory about that. As someone from the US, I've tried pronouncing "about" the way people from Ontario do... and it's really hard. It's a sound we just don't make in our accent. Which is why I suspect that so many Americans say that you say "aboot" - not because you literally say "aboot," but because it's the closest approximation many of us can make to your pronunciation.

    In other words, it's a skill issue on our part.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 4 days ago (2 children)

    As a west coaster, I assumed it is, like most of the dumber stereotypes, a Quebec/maritimes thing.

    Other than bagged milk, which I know is your fault.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 4 days ago

    There's no will to fight Canada in the US. No one can articulate what the actual goal is, beyond vague unfairness. Meanwhile, the Canadian government here has ~75% cross partisan support for walking away from the table.

    Or to put it in words MAGA might understand: it ain't the size of the dog in the fight, it's the size of the fight in the dog.

  • source
  • [–] 14 points 5 days ago (1 child)

    In fairness, David in this metaphor is probably the guy in the Levant knocking out predator drones with a slingshot.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 4 days ago (2 children)

    Obligatory reminder that a sling was actually pretty much a gun of its time, easily capable of killing a guy.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 days ago

    Yeah the David vs Goliath fight is a lot less one-sided when you remember David was a shepherd and a dab hand with a slingshot, he'd have been using it to defend his flock from predators from childhood and ancient armies fielded them as weapons of war. The man basically took a gun to a sword fight.

    The lesson I think is less 'the weak can defeat the strong' in general and 'don't engage your enemy on his terms, engage him where you are strongest'.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 4 days ago (1 child)
  • [–] 1 point 3 days ago (1 child)
  • [–] 1 point 3 days ago*

    Accuracy, for starters.

    Rate of fire is another big one.

    Killing someone with a single sling stone is significantly more impressive than with a pistol.

    Re: @mobyduck648@lemmy.world

    The lesson I think is less ‘the weak can defeat the strong’ in general and ‘don’t engage your enemy on his terms, engage him where you are strongest’.

    David wasn't the only Jewish soldier with access to sling stone technology.

    I think the moral of David v Goliath is supposed to be "corporal strength is no match for divine providence"

    If David had missed, nobody would be talking about him - except, perhaps, as a cautionary tale about hubris.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 3 days ago

    And this Goliath is 6 foot 3, 235 pounds with 5% body fat. Honest 🤞

    Its totally not a 5 foot 8, 300 pound tub of lard and spray tan wearing a diaper.

  • source
  • [–] 8 points 5 days ago (2 children)

    He must not be a Christian. If he doesn't know, how that story ends.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments