Egregoros

@WandererUber @lichelordgodfrey @Terry @suquili @VidMasterEon The USA relies on trade among nations it likes. Harming opponents like Iran or Russia's ability to trade doesn't hinder the USA. As for how it is a success; the goal of the USA is to hinder Iran's ability to be a regional power, and a nation in internal chaos (time will tell how much new Iranian leadership will struggle to take control) cannot effectively project power in the region.

On the topic of allies, anyone who fights alongside you is an ally. Doesn't matter if it is a vassal, a hired mercenary or someone unwillingly pressed into service. This makes middle-eastern nations that comply with the USA allies, although you could argue that Kuwait, with the alleged friendly fire incidents, are really bad at it, or even traitors.

Not attacking Iran was not an option for the American government, because USA's own overlord, Israel, demanded it.

@WandererUber @hfaust Actually Danish imports were not all that affected by the blockade, and Danish grocery manufacturers made a lot of money selling way too low quality canned food to the Germans, since they would buy anything they could get. At least according to a documentary I saw once.

As for your questioning regarding languages: Products, and particularly food products, are pretty much always labeled in the native language of the end-user country. This would mean that Danish-produced dairy intended for export to Germany would be wrapped in German-language packaging.
I would assume that Mexican-produced products intended for the American consumer is also usually wrapped in English-language packaging, no? As in 99% of the time, or so?

@WandererUber @Waldbrand "Go satisfy your intellectual curiosity" is far from the same as "just to whatever". The former inspires growth and greatness, and the latter inspires substance abuse, crime and decadence.

Asceticism is not particularly white-coded and the immorality of having exotic animals in zoos is debatable, since the immorality of leaving them in an environment that would kill them is also, well, an immorality.

>Yes, and I am making it
Good for you. Me myself, I enjoyed the last time I visited a zoo.

@WandererUber @Waldbrand Zoos exist to satisfy the white race's inherent curiosity about the world.
In life before internet and earlier before convenient long distance travel, when a European, young or old, would be told about fantastical creatures the description of which could often sound like something out of a fable, there's a good chance that they would wish that they could see such creatures with their own eyes. To fulfill that White Man's Wish zoos came into existence. By spending only a reasonable amount of time and money required to visit a capital city it became possible to satisfy the natural curiosity found in the aryan soul.

There's an argument to made that the need for these institutions has become obsolete with convenient airplane travel, videos and the internet, but the time period where they served a purpose not easily filled by other means was enough for them to become a staple of white culture.