Wow, that’s late.

Most people don’t know: There’s a multiplayer variant of Civilization 1: CivNet. Barely playable today, as it’s a Windows 3.1 game. I loved it till late in the 2000s.

Right. I’m not saying there’s no problem coming up. Whatever’s happening in Iran might make things expensive again. I’m just saying that in comparison to previous crisis, nothing has happened YET.

Wow wow wow!

Wait, let’s do what’s always important when looking at wow wow wow graphs: Check scale. Ok, you’re looking at a period of a day. Let’s look at more.

Wow wow wow. This is what we are looking at. NOTHING happened. Really nothing.

You seem to have no clue of Discord’s business model - and those of other data scraping companies.

Too little, too late.

Lol

Don’t. It isn’t the internet who’s being an asshole. It’s men.

I do use QoS on my router, but that’s not what I want: I want it explicitly on OS level. If that doesn’t prioritize in the first place, it’s one hop lost with bad/missing prioritization. In my example, my bad ping was actually with enabled router-prioritization. It’s not enough.

Thanks for the links, I’ll check them out!

Elite Dangerous. Extremely beautiful, especially impressive in VR - but way too time-consuming for me.

NATO would break down, yes. Soldiers would lay down guns: I didn’t say anything about that.

It’s so weird people cannot see that a mutual protection treaty ends, once there’s fighting WITHIN the group - especially if it involves the strongest party. It’s so logical and clear it doesn’t even make sense to discuss.

That said, I’m outta here. Let’s hope it won’t happen.

Interesting point. From my external view, a US civil war looks to be on the verge anyway

In my oppinion exactly the opposite. EU would fall devided and be in between USA and Russia, most countries would just decide for one side in order to be “protected”.

I don’t react to orders, sorry. My time at the army is long gone. Also, the question shows that you still don’t get my point.

And even if it was against US, I ment combat. There is no combat in Greenland so far. As soon as this started, NATO would break.

deleted by creator

Nope. They sent “troops” (like 15 people e.g. German), not AGAINST US, but exactly the opposite: To show Trump, that they take his security worries for real and that they can protect Greenland. Ridiculous.

I think it would just break down in THIS event: No country would want to stand against US for an icy island that isn’t their own. So one after the other would just let Greenland fall to the US, and that would practically mean the NATO is done - because there would be proof that the treaty doesn’t help in a real case.

Nope, I didn’t say there would be no war.

and - what do you think I’m thinking? And what do you think would happen in that hypothetical case?