Posts like these seem tankie to me:

10 years since the far-right coup in Kiev
^{— A Ukrainian socialist · World Socialist Web Site · Feb 28, 2024}
In Kiev visit, Trudeau reaffirms Canadian imperialism’s support for US-NATO war on Russia
^{— Roger Jordan · World Socialist Web Site · Feb 28, 2024}

Ironically, they could have come straight off the Kremlin's propaganda press, and Putin's Russia is not socialist. I'm more "socialist", in a democratic sort of sense anyway. TF? :D

In modern times, the term is used across the political spectrum and in a geopolitical context to describe those who have a bias in favor of authoritarian states that have socialist legacy and often anti-Western, as the Republic of Belarus, the People's Republic of China, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, and the Russian Federation. Additionally, tankies are said to have a tendency to support non-socialist states with no socialist legacy if they are opposed to the Western world, regardless of their ideology,^(4)(11) such as [...] — Tankie (Wikipedia)

A tankie is a member of a communist group or a "fellow traveller" (sympathiser) who believes fully in the political system of the Soviet Union and defends/defended the actions of the Soviet Union and other accredited states (China, Serbia, etc.) to the hilt, even in cases where other communists criticise their policies or actions. For instance, such a person favours overseas interventions by Soviet-style states, defends these regimes when they engage in human rights violations, and wishes to establish a similar system in other countries such as Britain and America. [...] I wouldn't be surprised if the tankies even defend Saddam Hussein. — tankie (Urban Dictionary)

The World Socialist Web Site has been infiltrated by Putinistas or there be tankies (in a pejorative not-so-socialist sense), something like that. Can you tell which?

On a Russian perspective (Kremlin really), here are some options (inexhaustive), not mutually exclusive:

• ↓ Ukraine to develop on a self-chosen path
• ↓ maintain a Kharkiv Pact of sorts
• ↗ force Ukraine into a vision of Russia of theirs
• ↘ democratize

They're running with the 3rd and rejecting the others (so far), for all to see. :death:

Largest countries, further perspective: military, population, area

Apparent reasons are themselves straightforward enough ... (attempt to) assert control in order to implement their idea of what Russia ought to be; (attempt to) manage threats to said vision ... Common to invasions, power ambition resources etc, evident origin.

Here apparent threats risks dangers include ... Ukraine going its own way, e.g. democracy (can be unpredictable); NATO membership, or any strong defense; Ukraine increasingly looking to others (the EU) and decreasingly Russia (slipping away) ... Threats everywhere, poor Kremlin.

And threat management includes ... counter-threats; diversions, e.g. point fingers at others; muddle the waters; oppress, strangle, solidify ... Here be playbooks.

When freedom and sovereignty themselves are perceived as threats then we get results like what we're seeing (word, infra, civil, grab). Too bad for Ukraine, eh? They're not ready to get sucked down that drain.

Will we see an end to it? As it stands, is there any progress in sight or available?

^{(↑ taking available evidence into account is relevant, un/controversial main/fringe-stream less so)}

Great :/

Trump supporters target black voters with faked AI images
^{— Marianna Spring · BBC · Mar 4, 2024}
Fake images made to show Trump with Black supporters highlight concerns around AI and elections
^{— Matt Brown, David Klepper · AP · Mar 8, 2024}

I came here to discuss how democracy is just another term for homogenization of the masses. A homogenized mass is easier controlled. Gustave Le Bon's "The Crowd," can teach you that too. Same with Edward Bernays' "Propaganda."

Regardless, sorry there was some miscommunication that occurred. Amor Fati. — Vaskane

I think it depends.

People are ... taught a main language, rarely more than a couple others ... incentivized to not just shoot others on the street (e.g. minority protection) by law ^(†)(‡) ... "indoctrinated" with arithmetic ... enculturated regionally ...

Does that count as homogenization though?

Infinites can be counter-intuitive but are not themselves logically contradictory, e.g. Hilbert's Hotel and Shandy's Diary.

Here's an old attempt to derive a contradiction from infinite time:

• An argument that an infinite past is impossible (Nov 2, 2016)

And another:

Assumption (towards reductio ad absurdum): infinite temporal past.

Let's enumerate past days up to and including last Wednesday as: {..., -1, 0}. That is, there exists a bijection among those past days (including Wednesday) and the non-positive integers.

Now come Thursday.

We find that {..., -1, 0} cannot accommodate Thursday.

Let's (re)enumerate the same past days but including Thursday as: {..., -1, 0}. That is, there exists a bijection among those past days (including Thursday) and the non-positive integers.

We find that {..., -1, 0} can accommodate Thursday.

The two findings are contradictory: {..., -1, 0} both cannot and can accommodate Thursday.

Therefore the assumption is wrong, an infinite past is impossible.

This proof is also invalid (left as an exercise for the reader), so I failed once again in my attempt to necessitate a finite past.

Here's a story, not a proof, demonstrating counter-intuitive infinites:

Wittgenstein overhears someone saying "5, 1, 4, 1, 3. Done."
He asks what that was about, and they respond that they just finished reciting π backward.
"But, how old are you?"
"Infinitely old. I never started, but have been at it forever and finally finished."

Say, why finish right at that time, and not some other time, any other time in fact? No sufficient reason (which is metaphysics, not logic). Our intuitions violated.

I keep coming up short, suggesting that an infinite past (duration) is not logically contradictory/impossible. Maybe "seemingly absurd" is more fitting?

In some places you're not allowed to laugh...

We will no longer tolerate criticism of our democracy and allegations that it is not what it should be. Our democracy is the best, and we will continue to build it. — Pesky · RIA Novosti · Mar 6, 2024

Ironically, this was during a "Knowledge.First" marathon of the Russian "Knowledge" Society. :)

Russian missile may have targeted Zelenskiy, Greek PM, says Ukraine aide
^{— Yuliia Dysa, Bernadette Baum, Gareth Jones · Reuters · Mar 7, 2024 (— WION 3m:7s)}

Further troubles if the Greek Prime Minister had been killed? I'm guessing much noise, but nothing drastic. There are a few examples of Russian attacks, not particularly military (infra, civil). Coming up with denials excuses rejections isn't hard, whatever the truth of the matter.

Observation: A few comment as if Russia is invisible, "the unmentioned attacker", the Kremlin a machine in a Siberian basement somewhere, blind to the Kremlin circle, only to repeatedly go "NATO bad" "Ukraine sh¡thole" "US evil" ... I guess it's up to others to pick up the slack?

Was just going over some analyses of seemingly influential dis/mal/misinformation campaigns, maybe I'll post something later. Will likely remain applicable for the foreseeable future.

Part of what I'm also seeing (personally) is a Ukraine trying to develop past the sticky (post)Soviet shadow, trying to free themselves from the dominating regressive authoritarian north+east neighbor, trying to make new friends if you will. But then they're sh¡t all over by some instead — "Nazis" "Banderas" "Genociders" "Beggars" "Burdens" "CIA-puppets" "Fools" "Betrayers" "Underlings" what-have-you — prior having allowed them to try. Well, some people are decency-challenged. Bombed all over too, by a Kremlin seemingly lost to keep them from developing/trying, while working hard at reasserting control over them. Trying is a pertinent part of what's going on, which admittedly takes time.

What they wanted: (Different in Russia...? :chin:)

Protesters opposed what they saw as widespread government corruption and abuse of power, the influence of Russia and oligarchs, police brutality, human rights violations,^(29)(30) and repressive anti-protest laws.⁽²⁹⁾ — Revolution of Dignity (Wikipedia)

At least with support they've proven more than a mouthful for the world's largest country. Good for them I guess. And in mentioned north+east (check "I want the Soviet Union back" :fire: :grin:):

• What young Russians in Saint Petersburg think about Putin? (2023 Jan 10 · 11m:53s)
• Should we invade Finland and Sweden before they join NATO? (2023 Mar 7 · 10m:45s)
• Rural Russians, why do you support Putin if you live poorly? (2023 Dec 26 · 8m)

Russians and Ukrainians will live exactly as befits brothers and good neighbors after the implementation of the goals of the special operation. — Sergey Lavrov · 2024 Jan 22

For them (the West - TASS) this is about improving their tactical position, but for us this is about our destiny, a matter of life and death. I wanted people that will listen to this [interview with Carlson] to realize that. It’s not up to me to judge whether it hit the mark or not. — Vladimir Putin · 2024 Feb 18

Some developments so far:

The election was recognized as free and fair.⁽⁴⁾ — 2019 Ukrainian presidential election (Wikipedia)

• Accession of Ukraine to the European Union » Candidacy (Wikipedia)

Wouldn't it be cool if Mr Bush, Mr Putin, and various (politically) related persons, headed to The Hague for public hearings and inquiries (and potential trials, depending)? :)

(end rant, and pardon my French)

, alternative brief: "Witty defender of democracy retires"

Gave Annihilation (2018) (sci-fi) another spin.
Had forgotten how creepy the screaming bear-thing is.
Also reminds me a bit of Solaris (2002).
I suppose, in a way, it renders something we would likely think of as alive, a lifeform of sorts, whether we (can) recognize it as intelligent or not.
Defying our/human understanding, hard to relate to in an anthropocentric sense, alien.
Relatings-to is by the human characters and their interactions.

, would it be better to say that there are lots of fools (of whatever sort) around?
It's not confined to people that are extremely ignorant, though. Intellectuals may find faults all over (+ focus/magnify), and hence stoke fires all over. Fault-finding isn't that hard anyway.
So, choosing the right battles matter.
(Incidentally another reason that mudslinger-politicians are a turn-off, to me, more so than politicians that focus on what their programs are.)
Anyway, if the US was significantly weakened on the international stage (which could happen by domestic division or foolery), then others would just jump right in. In the present environment, I'm not all that optimistic in case that was to happen, but I guess we'll see (or might).

Understanding these arguments is the easier part, agreeing is harder.

Presidential Address to the Federal Assembly
^{— Vladimir Putin · The Kremlin · Feb 29, 2024}

Here is a good example of their hypocrisy. They have recently made unfounded allegations, in particular, against Russia, regarding plans to deploy nuclear weapons in space. Such fake narratives, and this story is unequivocally false, are designed to involve us in negotiations on their conditions, which will only benefit the United States.

We are also aware of the Western attempts to draw us into an arms race, thereby exhausting us, mirroring the strategy they successfully employed with the Soviet Union in the 1980s. Let me remind you that in 1981–1988, the Soviet Union’s military spending amounted to 13 percent of GDP.

We all know that their claims are utterly baseless. And at the same time, they are selecting targets to strike on our territory and contemplating the most efficient means of destruction. Now they have started talking about the possibility of deploying NATO military contingents to Ukraine.
But we remember what happened to those who sent their contingents to the territory of our country once before. Today, any potential aggressors will face far graver consequences. They must grasp that we also have weapons – yes, they know this, as I have just said – capable of striking targets on their territory.
Everything they are inventing now, spooking the world with the threat of a conflict involving nuclear weapons, which potentially means the end of civilisation – don’t they realise this? The problem is that these are people who have never faced profound adversity; they have no conception of the horrors of war. We – even the younger generation of Russians – have endured such trials during the fight against international terrorism in the Caucasus, and now, in the conflict in Ukraine. But they continue to think of this as a kind of action cartoon.
Indeed, just like any other ideology promoting racism, national superiority or exceptionalism, Russophobia is blinding and stupefying. The United States and its satellites have, in fact, dismantled the European security system which has created risks for everyone.

Others might comment·suggest·mention·talk ("space weapons", "ground troops") and be recast (in the extreme), or consistently shut up. Either works for the Kremlin as long as the recast is taken seriously. I don't think people are going to shut up. For that matter, the Kremlin circle isn't shy about dishing out nuclear and other threats.

Did "not ruling out troops on the ground" hit a nerve? Maybe "troops on the ground" is a major concern (fear) of theirs after all. Not NATO though, I think it was just French, maybe some Baltics, and everyone else declined. Well, "our territory" isn't Ukraine; French soldiers in Ukraine isn't French soldiers in Russia; ask anyone but the land grabbers, the significant majority.

With Gorbachev a kind of optimistic attitude — not Russophobia, but Russo-hug — aired in the world in terms of Russia. Now there's a kind of Kremlin-phobia, largely due to the (present) Kremlin circle, especially in Ukraine. (Is Putin sort of looking for "payback" for the cold war, having learned from that...?)

As mentioned before, the clear threat to them is against the Kremlin's free reins to bomb, grab land, sham, destabilize, their neo-colonial ambitions, etc. That's one primary "threat" they're faced with. And related to bona fides peace.

Only they, along with North Korea, are doing nuclear posturing. With the attitude on display, what's to stop them from nuclear blackmail anyway? Hopefully North Korea won't jump on South Korea (whether on a signal from Moscow or not).

Don't they wonder why their claims·arguments·sentiments are so markedly outnumbered? And apparently need friends like Kim Jong Un? Maybe if they wonder in public they'll go the way of Navalny (not the best way to avoid revolutions).

Some US-Europe efforts after the 2nd world war that came to mind...
• keep it from happening again
• the Marshall Plan
• keep the USSR from taking over
How much was in good/bad faith? NATO has helped dull national attention to defense in Europe, which has since been criticized (Obama, the Clown, whoever). I suppose we might compare East/West Germany (back then), North/South Korea, ...

So, to what end?

Anyway, good to see that Putin is addressing domestic issues like poverty, even if the details surrounding numbers and such are opaque.

Right wing Israeli settlers also seek to expand and these acts should be discouraged/condemned but 10/7 is in no way a justified response to settler aggression. — BitconnectCarlos

And those thefty/violent settlers should be hit by Israeli law and order as readily as we might expect elsewhere. To the extent that Palestinians would trust the justice system. Right, the Hamas attackers "should be discouraged/condemned".

, are you going by the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis here...?

Putin's address to Russia's parliament
^{— Lucy Papachristou, Gareth Jones, John Davison · Reuters · Feb 29, 2024}

Uncanny how little change to the relevant parts could make it a speech by the Ukrainian president instead. Then there's that whiff of alternate world stuff again. So hard life is for poor Mr Putin :cry:. Or Mr Putin's vision, let's say.

Just about all nuclear posturing lately has come out of the Kremlin circle and North Korea. (2023Oct20, 2024Feb7)

Why would anyone in their right mind want to invade Russia? (e.g. hostile takeover)

• Whereas some reasons can be thought up, it doesn't make much sense. (Napoleon, Hitler, Danilov (ukranews 2022Dec1, news360 2022Dec1) are excused.) Besides, it would be a massive + costly undertaking. No one is particularly interested, and most would rather just the Kremlin chill out and democratize instead. Not much by way of threats to invade China, the US, India, Brazil, either.

What sort of nuclear threat is Russia faced with?

• Not a whole lot. Russia is already the world's largest country with the largest nuclear weapons stock around (and has long-range delivery). Mutual assured destruction seems a deterrence. If a country with nuclear arms is led by a paranoid/insane person, then the world already has a larger problem. No one is particularly interested in nuking Moscow (barring Ukrainian animosity due to their treatment of Ukraine), and no one is particularly interested in a nuclear world war.

Omitted above: "backstabbing" (supposed) partners of Russia; long-range attacks; threats to their land-grabbing and neo-colonialism.

Maybe it's the (present) Kremlin that's the main threat to Russia at the moment? They allegedly have popular domestic support.

Russia (including Kaliningrad) borders

• Norway ⁿ
• Finland ⁿ
• Estonia ⁿ
• Latvia ⁿ
• Lithuania ⁿ
• Poland ⁿ
• Belarus ☢
• Ukraine
• Georgia
• Azerbaijan
• Kazakhstan
• China ☢
• Mongolia
• North Korea ☢ †

Belarus borders

• Poland ⁿ
• Lithuania ⁿ
• Latvia ⁿ
• Russia ☢ †
• Ukraine

ⁿ NATO member
☢ presence of nuclear weapons (theconversation 2022Apr1)
† nuclear posturing

:D

Pesky to announce that the Kremlin is carefully considering their request to come to the aid of their operativ...err...pu...cough compatriots, ahem after a proper democratic vote of course (ending separatism), and that violations against Transnistrian brothers and sisters will be addressed.

Thanks for the history lesson, . Wash? No, observation.

Fellas, the heated he-did-she-did routine isn't really adding much. The Middle East thing has been developing (unveloping) since, let's say, the end of the 2nd world war, to the point of a tragic dead-lock/cycle of sorts, replete with bad actors and distrust on all sides. Think there's a way to regain some trust? Perhaps to dampen things at least?

Another example of tiptoeing around Russia:

Scholz Reiterates No Taurus Delivery To Avoid Ukraine War Involvement
^{— dpa via RFE/RL · Feb 26, 2024}

Although (vaguely)...

Macron refuses to rule out putting troops on ground in Ukraine in call to galvanise Europe
^{— Patrick Wintour · The Guardian · Feb 27, 2024}

Orlov isn't so vague:

Rights campaigner calls Russia 'fascist' in court
^{— Lucy Papachristou, Gabrielle Tetrault-Farber, Mark Trevelyan, Philippa Fletcher · Reuters · Feb 27, 2024}

Macron's sort-of-suggestion doesn't seem likely though, at least not at the moment.

Afghanistan — Benkei

And now the Afghans have been left in the hands of a barbaric theocractic cult. How unfortunate.



You wrote "generally [...]" which applies to an emerging European defense force that's sufficiently strong just the same. Such "a fourth power" will border the world's largest country in a few places. For that matter, it would be naïve to think they won't launch whatever (aggressive) campaigns to influence counter propagandize ... to assert power. They wouldn't suddenly start focusing on creating a democracy, because "look, friendly neighbors, kumbaya". (2024Feb21, 2024Feb23)

:point: A question: why do Moldovans get nervous and jittery when there's talk of Putin? — Feb 5, 2024

The present Europe isn't sufficiently strong. (Germany and Hungary might argue, France and Slovakia might argue, Croatia and Serbia are arguing (2024Feb25, 2024Feb26), ..., meanwhile in Moscow...) Europe should get its act together, NATO or not, though at least NATO is there for now. Has come up before, more than once, maybe you missed it... "Can't have such a strong (capable) defen...err..threat on our doorstep. Offensive!"

Furthermore, "generally [...] - until it isn't" applies to defense (which is what NATO is, and what such a future European defense force presumably would be). Sure, defense can turn to offense, defensive organizations might launch offensives (I've yet to see anyone accurately predict the future in detail). Yet, by this logic (by implication), defense ought then be abandoned. (Docility? "Peacemongering"? Spinelessness?)

Implicitly placing trust in the Kremlin and blanket distrust in NATO is plain out of whack. You can ask the good folks of the Baltics if it isn't clear enough to you (might compare with the Moldovans by the way). Let's not have more Belaruses emerging, please.

It wasn't specifically about NATO anyway. It was about the Kremlin losing control of Ukraine. (2024Feb12, 2024Feb23) Again, to what end?

^{↑ with the embedded links you can see there's not much new here}

More generally, I don't see how anyone can call an expansion of any military alliance as defensive. Expansion is by definition offensive. It is the "trust our blue eyes" we're really a defensive organisation that everyone in the West sincerely believes because it's our guys claiming it - until it isn't. — Benkei

And thus by that note, abandon defense, especially sufficiently strong ones? Nah.

We only need enough to deter. — Benkei

It's not just nuclear deterrence. But Europe should get its act together, NATO or not. I don't think you can dismiss a large, authoritarian land-grabber with a hand-wave.

the death throes of the end of an empire — Benkei

Maybe? Prophecy aside, that's certainly what the Kremlin would have (everyone think). By the way, acting on what seems like overall "European interests" isn't so straightforward. For that matter, it's quite easy to find anti-EU sentiments within the EU, and some defer to NATO for defense.

what do you have in mind when saying that Europe getting it's act together? — ssu

Cooperation for starters. I wouldn't vote against NATO, though. It's fine, for now anyway.

Supporting a country that has been invaded by a larger country that wants to annex large territories from it is enough reasons for me. — ssu

And quite a few have found reasons. (Not that this thread is particularly representative.)

Let's try some...humor...of sorts:

Lots of talk at the UN, New York ...

Ukraine accuses Russia of 'colonial conquest' at feisty UN session
^{— Bernd von Jutrczenka · dpa international · Feb 23, 2024}

Russia's aim is to destroy Ukraine and they are quite outspoken about it. The only reason for this war has been and remains Russia's denial of Ukraine's right to exist and its continued colonial conquest. — Dmytro Kuleba (Ukraine)

The reality is there are no temporarily occupied territories of Ukraine. — Vasily Nebenzya (Russia)

We reiterate our demand to Russia to stop its war of aggression against Ukraine and to ensure the full, immediate and unconditional withdrawal of all Russian forces and military equipment from the territory of Ukraine within its internationally recognized borders. — joint statement (≈ 50/193 UN)

The Independent International Commission of Inquiry on Ukraine reported civilians and prisoners tortured, and more than two hundred cases of sexual violence, mostly at the hands of the Russian Federation forces. All perpetrators must be held to account. Many Ukrainians are experiencing the living nightmare of losing their children. — António Guterres (UN)

President Putin has proved again and again that to him, human lives count for nothing – neither abroad nor at home, where he now doesn't even shy away from arresting Russian children for laying down flowers to mourn the death of Alexei Navalny. — Annalena Baerbock (Germany)

This is not a man seeking compromise. Rather, this is a neo-imperialist bully who believes might is right. We must recognize the cost of giving up. Putin has said there will be no peace until Russia's goals are achieved. — David Cameron (UK)

At least there is some talk, not just Russian North Korean Iranian Belarusian bombs falling on Ukraine. What people want others to hear is communicated. Not that it'll lead anywhere for now.

War can be attractive to some, like money for family (or a promise anyway), ... There are some similarities between reported stories:

Deal ‘with the devil’: Meet the Cubans who’ve joined Russia’s war on Ukraine
^{— Eva Hartog · POLITICO · Sep 25, 2023}
Putin speeds up a citizenship path for foreigners who enlist in the Russian military
^{— Dasha Litvinova · AP · Jan 4, 2024}
Russia has recruited as many as 15,000 Nepalis to fight its war. Many returned traumatized. Some never came back
^{— Sugam Pokharel, Matthew Chance, Mihir Melwani, Nishant Khanal · CNN · Feb 11, 2024}
Delhi approaches Moscow for early discharge of Indian ‘army helpers’
^{— Vijaita Singh · The Hindu · Feb 24, 2024}

Unlikely that death as cannon fodder will benefit family here though. Anyway, same old story.

Hmm. Well. Cannon ball trajectories (roughly) form a parabola over time. The position (spatial) can be expressed as a function of time. Physics. (High school if memory serves.) Meaningful, reliable. But, yes, our expressions are descriptive, not pre/proscriptive. Anyway, carry on. :)

, I'm not quite seeing the difficulty.
When the bus arrives (temporal location) + where the bus arrives (spatial location) — the spacetime location — means I can then get on the bus, unless I went to the pub instead (spatial), or missed the bus (temporal).
FYI, I've done it a few times myself, i.e. have justification to find it meaningful. ;)
Do you not find those notions meaningful/reliable?
Also, it takes some time (duration) to get to my destination, and there's usually room on the bus (volume).
Roughly, I suppose we might say that when+duration are to events/processes (temporal) what where+volume are to objects (spatial), or something like that anyway.
On another note, I don't know if space or time are considered physical as such; in some contexts, physical tends to mean objects (or something that's conserved or persists).
Apologies , didn't mean to distract the time travel discussion.

, so a location in time and space, both?

:up: I'm thinking that duration and simultaneity are reliable/meaningful enough that we depend on them, both in everyday life and science. The ontological examination (philosophy) is another matter perhaps.

Navalny team says Russia threatened his mother with ultimatum to avoid burial at Arctic prison
^{— CBS (+ AFP) · Feb 23, 2024}

Would the authorities (also) be scared of an independent medical examination? Seems ehh...appropriate, given the circumstances.

Meanwhile in Belarus:

Ukrainian children are taught to love Russia: special camps, "Lyube" songs, meetings with the military (investigation)
^{— Maxim Savchuk, Andriy Shauliuga · Radio Svoboda (RFE/RL) · Feb 22, 2024}


I moved the following snippet over here, where it's more on topic:

but expansion of NATO has deteriorated relations with Russia several times and therefore deteriorated our safety in Europe — Benkei

More generally, I don't see how anyone can call an expansion of any military alliance as defensive. Expansion is by definition offensive. — Benkei

Sure, maybe that's an aspect of sorts, yet it was never about NATO specifically. It's about the Kremlin's vision of Russia, at least the current authoritarian leadership, and that losing control of Ukraine or parts thereof would be contrary to that.

We (the EU) need our own defensive alliance and leave the US and create a fourth power. — Benkei

Yep :up: if Europe can get its act together (I intentionally expanded "the EU" to "Europe"). Do you think Europe can create + maintain an effective defense? Hopefully so. (I don't just mean some "blue eyed" part of Europe, or Western Europe, I mean those wishing to be part thereof that can meet a set of requirements.) Yet that, all by itself, could be argued the same way by the Kremlin: "Can't have such a strong (capable) defen...err..threat on our doorstep. Offensive!" Authoritarians don't require much discussion debate bureaucracy agreement back-and-forth etc, things we've seen in North America, Europe, and elsewhere. The Kremlin, in its aggressive posturing, would further argue Ukraine wanting to join a European defense as being a "dire existential threat", "critical security offense", whatever. Again, it was never about NATO in particular, but about a grand vision of Russia's "destiny", that Ukraine has been forced into, evidently with little concern for Ukrainians or their aspirations.

No. What you've got there is a metaphor. You can mess with language, but you can't mess with physics. — Vera Mont

What am I to do over at the bus stop, when I find that the bus is scheduled to arrive in a few minutes...?
Do I deny that "events have temporal locations", and ehh head over to the pub instead? :)

Just the fact that time has no physical locations. — Vera Mont

Isn't it more that events have temporal locations?
Anyway, duration and simultaneity are meaningful enough, and suggest some temporal structure taken together.
Processes/events can be reasonably clear temporally, and less clear spatially.
Objects can be reasonably clear spatially, and less clear temporally; volume and place are meaningful enough, and suggest some spatial structure taken together.

but expansion of NATO has deteriorated relations with Russia several times and therefore deteriorated our safety in Europe — Benkei

More generally, I don't see how anyone can call an expansion of any military alliance as defensive. Expansion is by definition offensive. — Benkei

Sure, maybe that's an aspect of sorts, yet it was never about NATO specifically. It's about the Kremlin's vision of Russia, at least the current authoritarian leadership, and that losing control of Ukraine or parts thereof would be contrary to that.

We (the EU) need our own defensive alliance and leave the US and create a fourth power. — Benkei

Yep :up: if Europe can get its act together (I intentionally expanded "the EU" to "Europe"). Do you think Europe can create + maintain an effective defense? Hopefully so. (I don't just mean some "blue eyed" part of Europe, or Western Europe, I mean those wishing to be part thereof that can meet a set of requirements.) Yet that, all by itself, could be argued the same way by the Kremlin: "Can't have such a strong (capable) defen...err..threat on our doorstep. Offensive!" Authoritarians don't require much discussion debate bureaucracy agreement back-and-forth etc, things we've seen in North America, Europe, and elsewhere. The Kremlin, in its aggressive posturing, would further argue Ukraine wanting to join a European defense as being a "dire existential threat", "critical security offense", whatever. Again, it was never about NATO in particular, but about a grand vision of Russia's "destiny", that Ukraine has been forced into, evidently with little concern for Ukrainians or their aspirations.

Remove all Hamas — RogueAI

OK, or neutralize.

Remove all Israeli war criminals — Benkei

And those as well.

Nazism — BitconnectCarlos

And that. :fire:

Russia is rebuilding capacity to destabilize European countries, new UK report warns
^{— Danica Kirka · AP · Feb 20, 2024}

The Threat from Russia's Unconventional Warfare Beyond Ukraine, 2022-24 (pdf)
^{— Jack Watling, Oleksandr V Danylyuk, Nick Reynolds · RUSI · Feb 2024}

Well, the Kremlin organizing and sending operatives (destabilizing insurging propagandizing staging arming shooting), employing extremists (including locals), invading (shooting bombing all over), land grabbing (annexing intimidating referendum'ing (foretold?)) ... can pass for a variety of neo-colonialism. (← steps fairly well-documented, including in this thread, not ad hoc story-telling)

The former parts (destabilizing etc) need not lead to the latter parts (assimilation) though.

COVID-19 vaccines and adverse events of special interest: A multinational Global Vaccine Data Network (GVDN) cohort study of 99 million vaccinated individuals

^{— K Faksova, D Walsh, Y Jiang, J Griffin, A Phillips, A Gentile, J C Kwong, K Macartney, M Naus, Z Grange, S Escolano, G Sepulveda, A Shetty, A Pillsbury, C Sullivan, Z Naveed, N Z Janjua, N Giglio, J Perälä, S Nasreen, H Gidding, P Hovi, T Vo, F Cui, L Deng, L Cullen, M Artama, H Lu, H J Clothier, K Batty, J Paynter, H Petousis-Harris, J Buttery, S Black A. Hviid · Vaccine · Feb 12, 2024}

@neomac, long tedious invasion at first masquerading as uprising. Known playbook, seen before.

Don't know how much of this stuff is news around here, was to me anyway:

Former Wisconsin Republican Party chair says he was tricked by fake elector plan
^{— Anderson Cooper, Aliza Chasan, Sarah Koch, Madeleine Carlisle · CBS · Feb 18, 2024}

:D The Donald Dog Toy

For them (the West - TASS) this is about improving their tactical position, but for us this is about our destiny, a matter of life and death. I wanted people that will listen to this [interview with Carlson] to realize that. It’s not up to me to judge whether it hit the mark or not. — Putin · TASS · Feb 18, 2024

The largest country in the world...? :brow: Russia will persist, Putin is 71. Once again conflating grand (somewhat USSR-style) vision, at the expense of Ukraine (and Russia(n youth) for that matter). ^{2024Feb16, 2024Feb12, 2024Feb7}

:D Old Joe versus The Clown

Look, this is going to be a long, grueling, and mostly pointless campaign, since everyone already knows which of the two elderly candidates they prefer to barely tolerate. The one who can’t walk up stairs or the one who can’t walk down ramps.

It gets so dull hearing these talking points. The American dream is dead because Mars bars were $1 and are now $1.25.

I know what you hacks on both sides will say before they say it. Is it really healthy to blame every problem on Joe Biden?

The reason for that [more people have registered as independent voters than ever] is this kind of mindless partisanship.

We gotta get used to it, this is it, this is the race. Biden and Trump, the race is over. This is bad news for the country, I think. Very good news for people who build ramps on debate stages.

Did you know that Bill Clinton, has been out of office for 25 years, is still younger than both of them? I’m not kidding about that. That is a true fact. Their combined age is 158 years old. The first debate is going to be at the Museum of Natural History.

You know what’s trending on Twitter? Dementia Don, because Trump was talking about Nancy Pelosi during January 6, but he kept calling her Nikki Haley.

You know what else Dementia Don did this week? This is a direct quote, I don’t know what it means, no one does, he said word for word, ‘We are an institute in powerful death penalty. We will put this on.’ Even Biden was like, ‘What the f---?'
— Bill Maher (Feb 17, 2024)

(my emphasis)

would super very likely trigger a Russian invasion (plenty experts predicted this) — boethius

Not saying right/wrong, just that you keep interspersing postulates. Per earlier, the war was about loss of control. (Aren't resources/assets among the most common reasons for warring?)

, climate can terrorize if poked long enough collectively by humans.

Russian activist and Putin critic Alexei Navalny dies in prison
^{— Andrew Roth, Helen Sullivan · The Guardian · Feb 16, 2024} — Feb 16, 2024

A fictional dialogue ("When what happens in Moscow, goes to FUK3") translated to English:

Putin: "Get him out of my sight."
Unknown: "Yes, sir."
Putin: "Get rid of him but do not allow him to become a martyr."
Unknown: "Understood, sir."
Putin: "Forgotten by election season."
Unknown: "Yes, Mr President."

Some of the footage that came out of the imprisonment reminds a bit more of Hannibal Lecter treatment than a political opponent. Putin fears Navalny, Putin makes example of Navalny, Russians fear becoming another example?

, you missed the point (again), or skirted or whatever. Regardless of Kremlin CIA Mossad Sri Lanka whatever, this is what the Ukrainians wanted (again):

Protesters opposed what they saw as widespread government corruption and abuse of power, the influence of oligarchs, police brutality, and human rights violations.^(29)(30) Repressive anti-protest laws fuelled further anger.⁽²⁹⁾ — Revolution of Dignity (Wikipedia)

^{(you're free to work backward from the facts, but no matter)}
And there still was/is no independence in the grabbed regions.
So, to what end?


:/ Another one bites the dust:

Russian activist and Putin critic Alexei Navalny dies in prison
^{— Andrew Roth, Helen Sullivan · The Guardian · Feb 16, 2024}

, yes yes, I know, everyone should hate the US...and blame...at least suspect...always. Well, I've been asking "To what end" in contexts like this, and here's what they wanted (again):

Protesters opposed what they saw as widespread government corruption and abuse of power, the influence of oligarchs, police brutality, and human rights violations.^(29)(30) Repressive anti-protest laws fuelled further anger.⁽²⁹⁾ — Revolution of Dignity (Wikipedia)

Seems reasonable enough to me. Except, such a tedious lengthy damned process, surely if wanting to join modern democratic clubs and wrestle free from ghosts of the past. But the Gremlin threw a wrench in that with a roar...err war.

Anyway, the repetition is also getting tedious.

And there still was/is no such independence. Probably not really the Gremlin's plan in the first place.