They have invaded Ukraine, a country that is not in NATO nor in the EU, this article is talking about a war with all the European member states of NATO. I think my wording was clear.

And considering rearmament, do you know what the security dilemma is, and what that means for the security of everyone in Europe?

Is there any credible material proof that Russia is preparing for an invasion of Europe???

They are just barely capable of winning a slow war of attrition against Ukraine, how can you make a credible argument they could achieve any war aims against all of Europe?

You can’t even argue they can take one country at a time, the entire border is riddled with NATO tripwire troops, guaranteeing the direct involvement of each major European military from the get-go.

Is this just fearmongering to drum up support for more military Keynesianism?

the windows of siracusa county

First thing I thought when reading: „it is said that“.

Obviously the rape victim should not go to jail yeah.

I prefer the term: “I hope such a thing does not exist, but it probably does, in which case everyone involved should be in jail”.

If they take any inspiration from the American counterpart, it might be a good time to take out a life insurance policy on Orbán and friends.

Given that they have already designated all Palestinians as being terrorist this feels like the legal preparation for the next phase, maybe even the final phase…

The article does not mention the evidence basis, so I will keep my comment general. In the Netherlands similar accusations were made against Lucia de Berk, the evidence was based on opinions of superiors and colleagues plus the statistical unlikelihood of so many patients dying under her supervision. But crucially there was never any direct evidence that she deliberately killed patients, and in the end it turned out that she didn’t. She was particularly unliked by her colleagues because she was a sex worker in the past and that is why she was given the worst shifts (and coincidentally the shifts where more patients die). In the end her life was ruined by her colleagues and the judiciary system not understanding statistics (5 percent of all nurses have a statistically-significant high death rate). Again this case could be a real psychopath but the fact that they don’t mention the evidence basis makes me think of Lucia de Berk.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucia_de_Berk_case

Are there also logic gates that fill all possible areas (or fill none for that matter)? Would that just be True and False?

Edit: apparently they are called the Tautology (always returns True) and Contradiction (always returns False) gate.

With recursive list comprehensions you can cram quite some complexity into one line of code.

You are part of the HR Department and a traitor. Take her away!

The last 4 republics were all ended by an authoritarian despot, I wonder who it will be this time. Secretly wishing for Mélenchon, but if you believe the conspiracies, Brigitte might be a more likely candidate.

According to this math the entire population of the Netherlands has to bike on one single road more than 80 times to create the same amount of damage as one truck…

Be careful insulting the Dutch or there might be a “stabbing party“ (Literal Dutch translation for a knife attack).

For me the main factor was if I liked the book. So I would say find the right book, and don’t hesitate to quit a book if you don’t like it.

Once I reestablished the habit I was also able to force myself to read a book I didn’t particularly like, but first I needed to create the habit by reading enjoyable books.

Why, what did you expect from billionaires? That their carefully crafted image was actually genuine? That they care about anything besides hard cash and raw power? That you can get into such a position by being an emphatic person that believes in common values?

I guess their PR teams were worth the money then.

You can add a Dutch tourist with a caravan to the bottom picture.

My point isn’t who is right or wrong, my point is that this war was preventable. A different security arrangement, for example a neutral Ukraine could have prevented the country from being destroyed. This was not a fringe opinion, many international relations experts and politicians have stated this, yet somehow knowing all this the US pursued. It’s almost as if there is a group of Russia hawks within most administrations that actively seek to escalate conflicts with Russia.

And if you think the US supports Ukraine altruistically you’re delusional, especially after what they are doing in Gaza. (Or Iraq for that matter).

Merkel literally said that adding Ukraine to Nato would cause war, and here we are. Is Merkel a „Tankie“?