3 ms·
Reminds me of the story: > A Pan Am 727 flight, waiting for start clearance in Munich, overheard the following: > Lufthansa (in German): "Ground, what is our
by jjk166 2y ago
Reminds me of the story:
> A Pan Am 727 flight, waiting for start clearance in Munich, overheard the following:
> Lufthansa (in German): "Ground, what is our start clearance time?"
> Ground (in English): "If you want an answer you must speak in English."
> Lufthansa (in English): "I am a German, flying a German airplane, in Germany. Why must I speak English?"
> Unknown voice from another plane (in a beautiful British accent): "Because you lost the bloody war"
- ktosobcy 2y agoAs a Pole I'm also fairly annoyed by having to use English daily ;)
- phkahler 2y agoIn the air traffic example it's required so everyone on the radio can understand everything going on around them.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- falcor84 2y agoI might regret saying it, but I think we as humanity should go back to wars being definitively won, rather than dragging on indefinitely. It's obviously a poor metaphor, but I'm thinking of something like the "Fifty-move rule" in chess - e.g. if no significant area changed sides in e.g. 100 days, then we officially redraw the maps (by treaty if possible), cease hostilities and let people rebuild and get on with their lives.
- int_19h 2y agoThere's no authority that can enforce such a rule.
- falcor84 2y agoThat's a good point. Maybe it could be handled like the Geneva conventions?
- int_19h 2y agoGeneva conventions don't really have a good enforcement story, either - not against countries like Russia (or China, or US). If you're Rwanda or Yugoslavia, that's a different story, but note that in those cases it was UNSC that established the corresponding tribunals, so if the violator has UNSC veto power, that avenue is effectively blocked.