Why Did No Avatar Appear to Punish Pakku When He Refused to Teach Aang?

Pakku was never unwilling to teach Aang, only Katara, and then only in combat-related water bending. While women taught healing, he might have been willing to help her out on practical uses of water bending (such as making ice buildings/walls etc.) if he ever had free time.If he had refused to teach Katara at Aangthe current, and therefore, most relevant Avatars requestwhy on Earth would he listen to some dead one?Unlike Jong Jong, who simply wasnt willing to teach Aang yet when they met before Roku convinced him, Pakku has no excuse for not wanting to teach Katara aside from tradition. Besides, even if one did try to manifest and talk to him, whose opinion would he possibly care about?Roku The guy was from the Fire Nation and is arguably responsible for the war in the first place because he ignored Sozins plotting. Pakku would have every reason to hate him, and none to listen to him.Kiyoshi She had no particular ties to the Northern tribe, let alone Pakku. Besides she had been dead for 180 years at that point, who cares what she thinks.Kuruk He was tied to the Northern tribe. Unfortunately, rightly or wrongly, he also had a reputation for being an irresponsible jackass. Assuming Pakku knew who he was, he wouldnt respect him.

Yangchen Same problem as Kiyoshi. If Pakku wouldnt listen to Aang, he wouldnt listen to herSome other, even older Avatar Pakku: Im sorry, who the hell are you again?

• Other Questions

What are must-read science fiction books?

I see LOTS of great choices here. Ive read about 98% of what has been posted. My list would include the following:#1 The Mote in Gods Eye by Larry Niven and Jerry Pournelle. These two have put out lots of good books together and seperately. This one, though, is the best because it has so many of the elements that make good Sci-Fi, in my opinion. A great treatment on evolution, society, and threats from another world.#2 The Foundation Trilogy by Isaac Asimov. A great book about humanity and eternity.#3 Hitch Hikers Guide to the Galaxy by Douglas Adams. What can I say, Dont panic.#4 Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? by Phillip K. Dick. Hated the movie, though.

#5 Stranger in a Strange Land by Robert Heinlein. I dont Grok why?#6 A Princess of Mars by Edgar Rice Borroughs. Was my fist favorite author and still remains in the top 5.

#7 Have Spacesuit, Will Travel by Robert Heinlein. I found Heinlein right after my summer of Burroughs. So hes been a favorite author for a long time.

#8 Babel 17 by Samuel R. Delaney. One of the first books where the macho main character was actually a woman.#9 The Martian by Andy Weir. The newest of my classic Sci-Fi selections. I like the movie as well, but the book is still better.

#10 The Time Ships by Stephen Baxter. This Wellsian treatise on time travel uses the Morlocks and Moi from Wells The Time Machine. The difference, and what makes it readable, is the update to technology and our understanding of quantum physics

------

What is Putin's strategy? Why is he operating so overtly and catching flak from all the western countries? It's as if he's intentionally trying to get more sanctions put on Russia.

Vladimir Putin is not trying to have more sanctions placed upon Russia but he is willing to accept the consequences of this for now. He knows that the Russian people are used to suffering and are surrounded by a media that fills the airwaves and internet with stories of Russian suffering and how Russians survived and thrived despite the fact that the world hates them. Russians are taught that they are hated throughout the world and that the world is against them. The world is bigoted against Russian people. This is a very powerful theme that Putin makes use of. So the sanctions just feed that meme. All the accusations that are presented about Russian interference, athlete doping and murders just feed that meme. The media/propaganda machine in Russia just plays on this and denies everything. They tell the Russian people these accusations just prove the prejudice the world has against Russia and Russian people. This way Russian people will suffer in silence. This strategy works very well with most Russian people.Putins strategy is to create chaos in the western world. When other countries are focused on their own internal chaos they do not have the resources to deal with Russian military and cyber attack adventures. Also, as countries like the USA display weakness and chaos it makes Putin appear to be the sane, stable and strong statesman around the world. It gives Russia more credibility in the eyes of most Russian people. That is one of the reasons that Putin is so popular there.

Most people in the west are ignorant of the Russian mindset and are naive about the intentions of Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin. Their naivete is extremely dangerous

------

As India surrenders to China at the Doklam standoff, what message goes to the world about the Indian Armyu2019s reputation?

The report in the link clearly states that the Indian Army has withdrawn from the disputed region after a successful dialogue between the two countries. Then, what on earth makes you believe that India actually surrendered to China?Indiau2019s objective was pretty clear.The Indian Army entered into Doklam on Bhutanu2019s request after the PLA trespassed into the disputed region with the motive of constructing a road. This isnu2019t certainly the first time that the Chinese have done something like this. Since the government of Bhutan did not have direct diplomatic relations with China, it requested India to negotiate this issue. The Indian Government did have every right to object over the road construction, since it was also overlooking Indiau2019s chickenu2019s neck.

The Indian Army did the right thing by sending itu2019s troops into Doklam. The objective of the Indian Army was not just to stop the PLA from constructing the road in the disputed territory, but also to let them know that they are capable of striking back, even harder. For the very first time, we actually saw China flinch after Indiau2019s vigorous stand on this issue and the whole world knows how low the Chinese stooped. Full marks to our government for staying undeterred throughout the course of this issue. This move by the Indian government did pay off and it garnered huge praise from various countries across the world.Finally, Indiau2019s objective was successful. The Indian Army stopped the PLA from constructing the road and urged the Chinese government to maintain the status-quo. By this logic, India has won this battle

------

Why were the Germans and Japanese not able to conduct realistic assessments of their economic and military strength prior to WW2?

Both the Germans and Japanese were capable of making realistic assessments. Neither the Hitler or the Japanese militarists turned to the people capable of making a realistic assessment.Hitler made the decision to go to war from a very early point. It is clear if you read Mein Kampf (1924). He had no interest in any kind of assessment. There were plenty of smart people who could have worked up the numbers. He simply did not want to here them. He had made the decision. All he was interested in was how to win the War. Chamberlains appeasement policy convinced him that the British and French were not a threat. And he had no inkling of the power of the Soviet Union. He did have a vague understanding of Americas military potential. But the United States was far away and in 1939 had a minuscule military. One reason he invaded the Soviet Union in 1941 was to complete the conquest of Europe before American preparedness efforts reached significant levels.

The Japanese actually did assess the situation. The assessment, however, was made by the military which over valued the importance of fighting spirit and undervalued Americas industrial power. That is not to say they ignored it. But three factors convinced the Japanese to go to War. First, Hollywood movies suggested that American men were weak and controlled by their women. Second the United States did not have a substantial well equipped army. Third, they concluded that the Wehrmacht had dealt a death blow to the Soviet Red Armymeaning that the United States would have to ficus its resources in Europe.

------

Was Led Zeppelin the best band of the 70's?

The biggest things I weigh are the consistency of quality album output, all-time classic records, all-time classic tracks and influence. The only other bands in this realm that are in their league in the 1970s was The Rolling Stones and Pink Floyd. The Beatles only released one album in the 70s, Let it Be so they dont count.

Led Zeppelin had four flawless all-time classic albums in a row in the 1970s: Led Zeppelin III (1970), Led Zeppelin IV (1971), Houses of the Holy (1973) and Physical Graffiti (1975). Now look at the tracks - classic after classic including one the greatest and famous songs ever, Stairway to Heaven. Their later albums, Presence and In Through the Outdoor, were still solid albums with some superb tracks.

Pink Floyd also released three flawless all-time classic records: The Dark Side of the Moon (1973), Wish You Were Here (1975), and The Wall (1979). Animals (1977) and Meddle (1971) are great albums. Then go look at track listings for all these albums - classic after classic.

The Rolling Stones had at least three flawless all-time classic records: Sticky Fingers (1971), Exile on Main Street (1972), and Some Girls (1978). Then go look at the track listings for those records. Even their in between albums which were still great but not necessarily classics include some all-time classic rock tracks.

Honorable mentions to Steely Dan and The Who which had a bunch of all time classic records and an incredible output of consistent high quality records including many all-time classic rock songs.As with any of these lists its very subjective but Led Zeppelin from my criteria has an extremely strong case to be arguably regarded as the Best band of the 1970s

------

Why is India not fighting to get POK back and Aksai Chin?

This is an interesting question. Both regions originally belonged to India and should be rightfully be part of Indian Union. Why then, we choose to only defend what is remaining with us, just Jammu and Kashmir?As a nation, culture, we are peace loving and not at all expansionist. It appears that we are content with just defending what is left with us.

. This type of thinking may be flawed because, in future, some leader with great influence over the country may start thinking, why keep fighting with neighbours for some land mass? This could have serious consequences. No matter how much goodness a culture may have, it needs to zealously guard itself from other's onslaught.I have no access to official files since independence to really understand this defensive outlook. Why don't we follow the philosophy that offence is the best form of defence. A failed state like Pakistan can forment so much trouble in our territory and it continues to go ahead with its agenda with impunity.We have so much of resources, man power, brain power, military superiority yet we struggle against Pakistan. Against China, the story is different. We are pitted against bigger, more powerful and stronger adversary. Still, such defensive policy (some change is visible in current dispensation) weakens us.A firm and well thought strategy needs to be in place to explore possibilities of regaining our lost territory. Peace in current era means being strong and war ready all the time. This requires change in mindset of everybody.Why is it that India never claim PoK and Aksai Chin while we have seen Pakistan and China openly claiming the parts of India as theirs?.