I believe what people say is the US has technically not been at war since WWII, since everything since then has not gotten the approval of Congress, so has been a "military operation," not a war.

However I was taking a look at the VA pension benefits, and they define "wartime periods" as including the Korean War, Vietnam War and Persian Gulf War/Iraq and Afghanistan operations. This of course leaves out things like Grenada, Panama, Haiti, and also instances where US troops were part of UN/NATO troops, like Yugoslavia.

Since technically these conflicts have the same status as larger conflicts like the Korean and Vietnam wars, why aren't they treated the same way? Why are some military operations considered "wars" while some aren't, even though neither have congressional authorisation? Is it really just subjective thinking since clearly the Vietnam War represents a much larger conflict and went on for longer than Grenada, so can more accurately be called a "war" - even though there's no definition really to back up that assertion?

Idk maybe there's no answer. Just something I noticed and was wondering if anyone knows if there is a reason for this.

Does any English person actually understand this shit? Oh yeah this is a ceremonial county, this one's a metropolitan county, oh this one is a ceremonial county and a metropolitan county, but hold on its not a historic county. I mean, a single location seems to be in like at least 5 different locations. Some of them are tied in to some local government, some have seemingly no reason to exist at all?

Say what you will about the US, at least I know where I live. The US does have some confusing shit going on, but I've never experienced anything like this. Every time I try to understand how England works I get "oh yeah no one really understands how it works." There are like 5 different maps all overlapping each other. Does anybody know how this works?

Feel like I'm just staring at like 12 different maps of English divisions going "damn bitch you live like this?"

Looking for some books or other resources that serve as good overviews of the long nineteenth century, especially as it pertains to Western Europe. I of course know of the Hobsbawm series which people have recommended. I also found a book recently - The Long Nineteenth Century: A History of Germany, 1780–1918 by D. Blackbourn. I know nothing about it or the author, but it sounds like it could be okay, though I don't think the author is a Marxist like Hobsbawm.

Does anyone know of any other good histories of this period? Looking to give myself some historical context for Marx.

Thinking of joining an ml party. I’ve been doing little things with dsa and other orgs now and again but it gets tiring having to hold my tongue around liberal progressives all the time and I’d like to be part of an org where I theoretically don’t have to do that.

If you’re in one of these parties, why do you like it, why should I join? I’m also mainly interested in any reasons why I should not join any of these orgs. Like are any of them just full of cops, or are they political cults full of abusers or anything? Tbh right now I’m leaning towards frso just because I like their stance of national liberation struggles within the us and also the idea that they’re sort of a “pre-party” organization, since I recognize while I’m probably knowledgeable enough theory-wise to join an ml organization, I definitely still have a lot of learning I need to (and would like to) do. But it would be nice to have comrades and not just be reading alone in my room lol.

But that is by no means set in stone and I’m hoping someone can give me a rundown of the ml landscape in the USA and/or guide me away from any parties I probably shouldn’t join.

Lead, microplastics, forever chemicals, etc - seems like a lot of things to be worried about when it comes to water these days. What is your source of water, how do you get your drinking water? Tap, bottled, do you use some kind of filter? And what do you think is the best way to get water?