I don't get the logic here. We observe behavior A is man, therefore behavior A is good. So if we observe behavior B in man, it is not good, but they should instead act according to A, even though there isn't any reason why it should be better than B.
In more concrete terms, belligerence isn't always the best option, not even for "primitive" humans or primates or whatever you're making a comparison too. Humans are social animals after all.
In more concrete terms, belligerence isn't always the best option, not even for "primitive" humans or primates or whatever you're making a comparison too. Humans are social animals after all.
You're probably thinking of Monaco. Luxembourg mainly relies on banks and Jean-Claude Juncker's deep voice calming everyone to sleep.They rely on NATO and France to keep their peace for them. So they don't have to.
Or is it Monaco that's tied directly to France? Can't remember.
Now don't show deference to the moderators! Issue a clear and definite declaration of intent as God wanted you to!Can some moderator move this thread to the Chamber, where I now post with the civilized people. I posted here by mistake. Dreadful mistake, but we are not perfect.