The correct response to that is to provide the actual guidelines based on actual data, not to fearmonger while quoting lines referencing wild game.

A huge part of why commercial pork is safe -- that you're consistently leaving out -- were major changes to how livestock are raised. Trichinosis transmission in pigs is primarily caused by the consumption of infected meat; US standards were changed to more strictly control what's fed to pigs, which led to the decreased risk. The risk remains in wild boar because they're omnivores that will scavenge whatever they can find.

The USDA and FDA, which both lean conservative in their recommendations, consider whole cuts of pork safe down to 145F (roughly equivalent to cooked to medium):

https://www.usda.gov/media/blog/2011/05/25/cooking-meat-check-new-recommended-temperatures
https://www.fda.gov/media/107000/download

This has been the case for over a decade. Pork should be cooked but the old 160F recommendations have been gone for a long time now because commercial pork is relatively safe.

Assuming you're in the US, I 100% would've done a credit card chargeback. Bank would've taken your side on that one.

Nevermind abroad. A lot of them would do well just to get some actual exposure to larger cities in their own states.

Part of the urban/rural divide is fueled by the pervasive belief that cities are lawless hellholes because they've never had real exposure to it.

Worth noting that ATC is unusual in that there is both a maximum age that you can start (30) as well as a mandatory retirement age (56).

Sustainability is a large part of Framework's mission as well. The CEO has explicitly said that one of their goals is that none of their laptops should end up in a landfill.

The transmission in those things is an amazing level of suck, too. It's this bizarre automatic manual thing that's just awful to drive.

Stakeholders are people with any kind of interest in the company doing well

Corporate social responsibility as a concept is even broader than that -- it's not just anyone who has interest in the company doing well, but broad consideration of anyone impacted by the decisions of the company.

A company might be able to save operational costs by dumping toxic sludge in a river, but within a CSR framework, people living downstream would be considered stakeholders and the potential negative impact of the decision on those people is supposed to be taken into account when decisions are made. The corporation is supposed to have a responsibility to do right by anyone impacted by their actions wherever possible.

At least that's the theory. It shouldn't be surprising that the language of CSR gets pretty commonly coopted by companies looking to whitewash what they're actually doing.

The wider international community has largely rejected wars of conquest as legitimate in modern times.

The exact same argument could be applied to Israel and e.g. the Golan Heights, but I don't think you'll find that to be a particularly popular position.

The US has 11 out of 22.

This is only a partial picture.

The US has 11 supercarrier groups that individually rival the power of most nation's entire airforce. These are unrivaled by anything else in the world.

The US additionally has 9 America and Wasp class amphibious assault ships that have an airwing capability that rivals most other nations' carrier groups. The Navy plans for this force to eventually be made up of 11 America class ships.

So the reality is that the US' secondary aircraft carrier capability rivals that of the rest of the world combined. The total power disparity of the combined supercarrier and amphibious assault fleet is mind boggling.