Once upon a time there was peace.

The tools of security are weapons, restraints, and surveillance. They are designed for the denial of freedom. Security consists in the limitation of freedom. Freedom consists in the limitation of security. The tools of freedom are good education and mental and physical health.

Thus a war of liberation is a rare and fabulous beast. If there is anywhere one might justifiably pursue a war of liberation, I suggest N. Korea would be the place. And saying that is an indication of how costly, onerous, and precarious a war of liberation would be, if any country had the selflessness and moral fibre to make such an undertaking.

In practice, wars always emerge from simple fact that our security is incompatible with their freedom, and vice versa; winners gain in security, and losers lose freedom.
"Us" and "them" are also fabulous beasts created by propaganda working on fear. Fear of the other's freedom feeds the need for security. The other is different, unreasonable, vicious, immoral, unscrupulous, duplicitous, and above all dangerous. We are the opposite. As soon as we are united in our virtue, we are ready for war.

Don't tag me, tag @Streetlight and @Isaac

Them? I've tried talking to them...

I've given up too. Thanks for the beautiful talking points. Always open to more wisdom, selfishly.

Is Putin Russophobe?
https://www.wireservice.ca/putin-sends-ethnic-minorities-to-die-who-are-the-buryats-kazakhs-tuvans-corriere-it/

We the Philosophers of pf, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity ... do establish a forever war against @Streetlight and @Isaac, in order that they might put aside their differences to unite against us.

You gotta love the " secure the Blessings of Liberty" bit. 'Catching running water in a bucket' comes to mind.

Nothing is absolute, all is relative.

How's Australia doing? — Noble Dust

According to the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) Global Rights Index 2021 (https://www.globalrightsindex.org/en/2021/countries/aus), Australia has the same rating as the Russian Federation: 3 - 'Regular violations of rights'.

All countries rated 1 ('Sporadic violations of rights') are in the EU, bare two (Iceland and Norway). Most countries rated 2 ('Repeated violations of rights') are in the EU as well.

The US is rated 4 - 'Systematic violations of rights', which seems fair.

Wait are you actually under the impression that workers rights are counted as human rights in the West?

Global Rights Index

2021

About the Global Rights Index
The ITUC
The International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) is a confederation of national trade union centres, each of which links trade unions in that particular country. It is the global voice of the world’s working people. The ITUC represents 200 million workers in 163 countries and has 332 national affiliates.

The Global Rights Index
The ITUC Global Rights Index depicts the world’s worst countries for workers by rating 149 countries on a scale from 1 to 5+ on the degree of respect of workers’ rights. Violations are recorded each year from April to March. Information on violations of workers’ rights in countries is published throughout the year in the ITUC Survey.

Nothing is absolute, all is relative. — Olivier5

Then your claim should have been "the EU takes worker's rights more seriously than most other countries". You can't expect us to second guess that you might have some clandestine second meaning behind such a clear claim as...

the EU is the only place on earth that takes workers rights seriously. — Olivier5

Yet again, this double standard where you expect to be able to use some rhetorical license but accuse others of lying when they do so.

The EU is categorically not the only place on earth that takes workers rights seriously.

Iceland, Norway, and Uruguay are in the same category as the EU countries you mentioned.

Greece, Hungary, and Romania are in the EU yet in category 4.

Why oh why do you have to lie all time? Why do it? I think you should just take a good look at yourself and ask why it is you always lie.

Cool. Now in keeping with the notion that everything is relative, one must measure said rights according to a nation's own past trajectory, rather than making meaningless cross comparisons. Since we started talking about Georgia, let's see how they're doing hey? Nope, completely shit and getting worse. How about some of Ukranie's NATO neighbors. Say, Hungary? Oh would you look at that, completely fucking atrocious and also getting worse. Poland? Nope, totally crap and getting worse. As it turns out, the entire Baltic region basically fucking sucks if you're a worker, and continues to suck worse and worse.

It's going to be so great when Ukraine joins this list. Oh wait, Ukraine was very much on track to join this list which is why they started to fuck over their workers long before this war started, a process initiated by Western 'hero' Zelensky himself.

All of this is common knowledge, and the idea that "the EU is the only place on earth that takes workers rights seriously" would count as the stupidest fucking thing you've ever said in your life, if your life wasn't one stupid fucking thing said one after the other.

Oh wait, Ukraine was very much on track to join this list which is they they started to fuck over their workers long before this war started, a process initiated by Western 'hero' Zelensky himself. — Streetlight

Got a link?

You quoted it. Squint a bit.

What?

There is literally a link in the bit you quoted.

Ah okay. Not much on workers rights in there, but in any case, it is true that Ukraine doesn't have a good-enough record to enter the EU, on this issue and others.

Estonian Prime Minister: Estonia would be 'wiped from map' under existing NATO plans
by Marielle Vitureau, Courrier International

A few days before the NATO summit in Madrid, the Estonian Prime Minister, Kaja Kallas, expressed concern about the defense plans for the Baltic countries of the Atlantic Alliance, which, according to her, assumes that Tallinn will be completely destroyed.

Concern reigns in the Estonian capital since the punching remarks against NATO by the head of government, Kaja Kallas. “The Alliance's current defense plans for the Baltic states are to let them be invaded, then liberate them 180 days later. Estonia would be wiped off the map and the old town of Tallinn completely destroyed”, revealed the Prime Minister, quoted by ERR, the Estonian public media .

In an interview given to the Financial Times and relayed by ERR , Kaja Kallas specifies that “if we compare the size of Ukraine to that of the Baltic countries, this will mean the total destruction of our countries and our cultures”.

Since the annexation of Crimea by Russia in 2014, the Baltic countries have been worried. Four months of war in Ukraine have further heightened their fears. Lithuania, Estonia and Latvia have therefore sent NATO a “joint proposal to obtain additional troops and permanent divisional command centers in each country”, indicates ERR .

“The current device is not working”

For five years, multinational Alliance battalions have been stationed in each of the three countries bordering Russia for the purpose of deterrence. But, as Kaja Kallas points out, “everyone sees that this tripping device [the enemy] doesn't really work”.

Kaja Kallas's remarks provoked a certain bitterness in the political class of another Baltic country, Lithuania. For Eva-Maria Liimets, the former Minister of Foreign Affairs, “confidential plans should not be made public”. But they are appreciated by others in Lithuania. Laurynas Kasciunas, the deputy at the head of the Committee on Defense and National Security, believes that Kaja Kallas' claims are there "to raise the political temperature" .

Four months after the start of the war in Ukraine , the Baltic countries are strengthening their security in all directions by considerably increasing their defense budget. In these countries, NATO remains the guarantor of security. After the declarations of many politicians saying they are ready to defend every centimeter of the territory of the Alliance, the Baltic countries are awaiting very concrete decisions from the next NATO summit in Madrid, on 29 and 30 June.

What's the complaint?

Putin's Russia is threatened by NATO.
It's just that the threat is against Putin's expansion (land-grabbing) ambitions.

And that goes to show how the sort of tu quoque type switch of narrative, "NATO is the threat", has been successful.
"Bring up and focus on that, and watch", you might hear Surkov say, with Medinsky nodding in agreement, and Kiselyov implementing for the masses.
"Shut others down", you might hear Putin say.
That was easy. :sparkle:

It became clear enough some time ago that no NATO membership for Ukraine isn't a peace-maker.
And Russian bombs are still bringing ruinage to Ukraine. :fire: — jorndoe

:100: :up:

If they were about to join into a hostile military alliance they certainly would.

How did the United States react to Cuba getting into bed with the USSR? By calling it an existential threat and threatening nuclear war.

That happened over half a century ago, and Cuba is still under sanctions as a result of that. Do you realise that? — Tzeentch

And if during the Cold War there would have been a Marxist revolution in Mexico, yes, extremely likely the US would have intervened. Mexicans themselves understand this quite well.

But there wasn't a leftist revolution in Mexico. Hence you really should give the reason why Mexico would think it would be better off to shed it's neutrality and join in a military alliance with China.

The simple fact is that countries seek military alliance if they feel threatened. The US isn't an existential threat to Mexico. It simply doesn't have ambitions to annex parts of Mexico. (You could argue it was in the 19th Century, but then it was attacking it's northern neighbor too...and got it's ass kicked.)

Possibly, but you've still not countered the objection that they would never invade without any excuse (note 'excuse' not 'reason'). Every single invasion Russia has ever carried out in its modern incarnation has been for 'supporting separatists autonomy', or 'repelling NATO', or 'supporting legitimate governments against foreign intervention',... and so on. Never, not once, has it been "because we wanted that land". — Isaac

Really?

HOW ABOUT CRIMEA?

Anyway, I think you should put the trust in Stalinist rhetoric to a level where it belongs. After all, in Soviet (Russian) history Finland attacked Soviet Union in 1939 and the Soviet Union attempted to liberate the Finnish proletariat, and saw as the legal representative of Finland the Finnish Democratic Republic, which then likely would have joined the Union of Soviet Republics just like Baltic States.

Same rhetoric is continued now.

What's the complaint? — Tate

Supposedly, NATO serves little purpose to the Baltic states if they won't get protected by NATO from a Russian attack, so NATO should aim to defend the Baltic states from a Russian attack.

The EU to Africa: Don't buy Russian fertilizer. Also don't make your own fertilizer. Just die, thanks.

At a summit of EU leaders later this week, the EU was planning a new initiative that would structurally decrease poorer nations' reliance on Russian fertilisers by helping them develop their own fertiliser plants. But at a meeting with EU envoys last week, the EU Commission explicitly opposed the text, warning that supporting fertiliser production in developing nations would be inconsistent with the EU energy and environment policies, officials said.

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/eu-split-over-fertiliser-plants-poorer-nations-food-crisis-bites-2022-06-20/

But moving on to another issues...

What is interesting and a show of good political moves from Russia is the defense of the ruble. After the initial plunge, it has strengthened prior to the war.



It's worth wile to look at what are the reasons for this. Yes, Russian companies had to change the foreign currencies to rubles, yes you cannot freely convert them and there are many restrictions. However this isn't the reason. The reason is basically that anybody needing rubles is basically buying them for gas, oil and other natural resources. There isn't the usual currency market casino operating with the ruble anymore. In fact, Russia has gone partly to a gold standard:

The Central Bank of Russia has announced that “In order to balance supply and demand in the domestic market of precious metals, the Bank of Russia will buy gold from domestic credit institutions at a fixed price of 5,000 Russian rubles per gramme from 28 March to 30 June 2022. The established price level makes it possible to maintain a stable supply of gold and smooth functioning of the gold mining industry in the current year. After the period specified, the purchase price of gold can be adjusted taking into account the emerging balance of supply and demand in the domestic market.”

(See Russia Positions Itself To Move The Ruble To A Gold Standard)

So basically buyers of Russian gas and oil can buy with gold the rubles they need. Now linking your currency basically to natural resources that the World needs seem to be an answer, especially when the other side is printing money at enormous quantities. And this hasn't gone unnoticed by Vladimir Putin. The accusations that the global inflation is because of the war are in my view flimsy, and here I have to agree with Putin.

Putin's speech from June 17th 2022, at theSt Petersburg International Economic Forum:

Surging inflation in product and commodity markets had become a fact of life long before the events of this year. The world has been driven into this situation, little by little, by many years of irresponsible macroeconomic policies pursued by the G7 countries, including uncontrolled emission and accumulation of unsecured debt. These processes intensified with the onset of the coronavirus pandemic in 2020, when supply and demand for goods and services drastically fell on a global scale.

This begs the question: what does our military operation in Donbass have to do with this? Nothing whatsoever.

Because they could not or would not devise any other recipes, the governments of the leading Western economies simply accelerated their money-printing machines. Such a simple way to make up for unprecedented budget deficits.

I have already cited this figure: over the past two years, the money supply in the United States has grown by more than 38 percent. Previously, a similar rise took decades, but now it grew by 38 percent or 5.9 trillion dollars in two years. By comparison, only a few countries have a bigger gross domestic product.

The EU's money supply has also increased dramatically over this period. It grew by about 20 percent, or 2.5 trillion euros.

Lately, I have been hearing more and more about the so-called – please excuse me, I really would not like to do this here, even mention my own name in this regard, but I cannot help it – we all hear about the so-called ‘Putin inflation’ in the West. When I see this, I wonder who they expect would buy this nonsense – people who cannot read or write, maybe. Anyone literate enough to read would understand what is actually happening.

Russia, our actions to liberate Donbass have absolutely nothing to do with this. The rising prices, accelerating inflation, shortages of food and fuel, petrol, and problems in the energy sector are the result of system-wide errors the current US administration and European bureaucracy have made in their economic policies. That is where the reasons are, and only there.

(See here)

Or likely that fertilizer plants in Africa would be dangerous competitors to European fertilizer plants. Not only the salaries would be lower, but also the transportation costs would be lower.

Or likely that fertilizer plants in Africa would be dangerous competitors to European fertilizer plants. — ssu

Obviously. Hence: kindly drop dead unless you're willing to pay us.

Obviously. Hence: kindly drop dead unless you're willing to pay us. — Streetlight

Well, when they do start dropping dead in a great famine in the Sahel or somewhere else, the Europeans (and Australians too) can show their immense benevolence and generosity by sending them food aid. :halo:

Western food aid makes everything worse.

This is an important issue, actually.

With the Baltics, first it was that the states just became NATO members.
....without anything else being done.

Then actual warplans were made to defend them, sort of.
.....without actual exercises.

Then actual exercises were held with trip-wire troops deployed.
.....without asking what then.

And now Kallas is asking the obvious. If NATO in the Baltics is just a tripwire.

This is the fundamental question IF you don't have anything else but the nuclear deterrence: what if Putin moves the border just 500m in the Suwalki gap? Is that enough to use nukes?

The funny thing is that this kind of tactic has been used literally. Even the Grand Tour found this amazing 'moving border'.



Yep. It does. Ruins that already precarious markets for the local farmers. But who cares about that.

Supposedly, NATO serves little purpose to the Baltic states if they won't get protected by NATO from a Russian attack, so NATO should aim to defend the Baltic states from a Russian attack. — Olivier5

The Baltic states are NATO members but NATO isn't committed to defending them?