Tell me /sci/ What are some breakthroughs in medical science

>>8327580
ree why do amerifats get fresh water but my country is vulernable

>tfw your country will be invaded by burgers because of your water

Feels bad man

No seriously though. Can I get an answer?

>>8327662
>breakthrough
>expect
Check one.

There's your answer.

>>8327662
A recent relevant thread to satisfy you in the meantime:
https://warosu.org/sci/thread/S8281648

>>8327666
Thanks satan trips

>>8327664
Expect

>>8327602
I wish my country (Canada) would stop selling the water for so cheap to the Americans and only sell it later when they're dying and ready to pay big money.

>>8327714
>ready to pay big money
No need to pay big money when you have 1.5 million soldiers.

>>8327725

I didn't know nestle, and other individual corporations had 1.5 million soldiers.

File: 1416587514582.jpg (30KB, 600x450px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 600x450px

>>8327733
Yeah I'm sure the american gubmint is gonna stand back and not do shit.
Come on.

>>8327739

I'm glad you have a firm grasp of reality.

Corporate taxes are the only way the govt. gets involved, and the aquisition of assets being sold for pennies isn't going to make a huge dent.

>>8327747
Yeah, there's obviously no such thing as policies springing from significant interaction between corporations and public organizations.

>>8327725
So the US would break international law and invade a fellow Western democratic country without expecting any international backlash? Naw boi, the US will sit down and pay up all the money we ask it to pay. Water will be the new gold, I just hope our retarded govt can save this precious resource because in 100 years world wars will be waged over water.

>>8327762
>break international law
>international backlash
kek

>UN goes all "b-but that's mean, America, pls don't do this ;_;" like it always does
>end of story

>>8327762
>So the US would break international law and invade a fellow Western democratic country without expecting any international backlash?
US did it before with Mexico

>>8327768
America would break NATO if it decides to invade Canada. Without NATO, the US only has a small chance of winning a war against China and Russia.

You guys just don't realize how much the world hates America. We only stand silent because you impose your power on us, but when you break your own rules, the world will unite to bring you down. Maybe then Americans will stop wasting a resource they have so little of.

>>8327781
>Without NATO the US only has a small chance of winning a war against China and Russia.

China has shit logistics, and Russia is a threat for Europe.

Without the US, European Countries and Canada have a shit chance winning a war against Russia and China.

>>8327781
If they reach the point where normal citizens actually die of thirst due to scarcity they won't give the smallest of shits about NATO, China, Russia, or pretty much anything else.

>>8327781
You know the point of NATO literally is: Keep the Americans in, Germans down, and Soviets out.

>>8327786
If Europe bails on the US, China and Russia will most certainly take out the US first. Do you think that WW1 and WW2 haven't taught anybody a lesson? The morale of both the 1st and 2nd worlds was that you never start a war against Europe without taking out the US first. Otherwise the US will just wait until you get beat up and start losing the war, then they will finish you off and claim victory.

>>8327788
The US will declare wars for water long before it becomes a question of scarcity. Water is also an important resource in war.

>>8327790
That used to be the case, but with the emerge of China as a new world-power the game has changed. NATO is still a military alliance.

>>8327733
They probably do actually have a few tens of thousands of soldiers, though.

>>8327801
>The US will declare wars for water long before it becomes a question of scarcity. Water is also an important resource in war.
That's exactly my point.
If you were in an important need for water would you go next door where freshwater is plentiful and where hardly anybody lives or would you start a war with another major power that may or may not have more water than you for the sake of politics?

>>8327781
>Without NATO, the US only has a small chance of winning a war against China and Russia.

damn son, you must think really highly of europes military capabilities.

NATO isn't protecting the US from china and russia, the US is protecting NATO. not a single country outside maybe the UK or Germoney could go toe to toe with Iran or N. Korea.

Europe is pathetically weak militarily and does almost nothing to support the US's military might.