Bullshit warmongering propaganda. edit: and let me guess, part of the solution would be buying very expensive, US made weapons.
edit 2 since I see it’s a popular post: I also love how - like how immigrants are at the same time too lazy to work and living on social security, but also stealing all the jobs - Russia is at the same time too weak and pathetic to invade a country like Ukraine but also going to start a war with all of NATO, lol. 🤡
Perpetually perplexed by those who still maintain Russia wouldn’t invade a sovereign nation. It’s not even “fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me” when at this point it’s like “fool me 7 times in the last 20 years”
My first thought reading the headline is: I don’t see how Russia is building up a stockpile while burning through their stockpile it in Ukraine. That makes no sense whatsoever.
Russia is also burning through bodies so I don’t see them being particularly able or willing to try to invade Norway or anywhere else anytime soon.
It seems from all accounts they’ve got their hands full in Ukraine and are making little or no progress.
I think you’re right about buying US weapons. I don’t think it is warmongering but rather shilling for the military industrial complex.
Edit: still, I wouldn’t disarm or anything and maybe somewhat shore up defense. Maybe a decade or two Russia tries some more stupid shit.
I would call a response prudent, especially with additional ties to Chinese manpower and the middle east playing up. Like it or not the whole world economy is linked to Chinas cheap manpower/goods and Middle East oil.
Four years ago we didn’t think another global pandemic would happen, or a presidential cheeto would be done for insurrection (do it, not charged), or anything else of the last few years. Russia can still do something stupid that changes the course of human history.
Russia is producing a lot. Yes, they are burning through more on the front line until now, but western support has ground to a near standstill in recent months, so it’s entirely plausible that they could continue fighting and start building up supplies if NATO can’t provide more weapons to Ukraine.
it's certainly not propaganda.. Russia is a shambles, and nobody knows what happens when Putin dies.. Norwegian generals are not known for hyperbole.. unlike little trolls on the internet..
and they certainly won't buy cheap Chinese and North Korean stuff like the Russians do
If you had an influx of say 100,000 people that would be enough to disrupt labour markets due to supply and demand and that would reduce wages and total avaliable jobs to the native population. So from a native point of view you are looking at either being unemployed or having a job at a lower wage.
Now if another 100,000 people came into the country and didn’t work and was on benefits then as a native your taxes are going to them.
Those two groups of people don’t impact each other. So both statements can be true. Low paid workers don’t tend to create jobs. So from a low paid point of view you got nothing to gain from immigration.
I think the west is pretty concerned in not losing elections to Russia - intervened parties… I love democracies and everything, but they are proving to be extremely weak with lunatics like Putin roaming the streets.
I think that we need to build better ways of understanding between each other. Polarization is the real killer of democracy.
Well that… And the fact that globalized capital isn’t particularly beholden to the interest of individual nation states.
The west could utilize their economic hegemony to truly starve the Russian war machine if they wanted, but that would require leveraging their economic trade status with countries like India and China and would come with a large disruption of capital.
The biggest flaw in modern democratic states is fairly uniform in nature. Instead of corporations being beholden to their governments, governments are beholden to their corporations.
I have another Idea: Provide the fucking Taurus to Ukraine. It will destroy russian infrastructure and it will kill russian soldiers, which in the end will reduce the amount of troops they have and the necessity to ramp up our own troops.
Removing impurities is really tricky, but that said, it’s not like industry grade equipment and operations are being used here to manufacture it. There may be a simple step or two that would help significantly reduce impurities.
Your comment also made me realize for the first time, a lot of these illicit drugs are made by hobbyists, so to speak, not professional manufacturers. Just knowledge isn’t enough, and I say that as a chemical engineer. If I tried to synthesize anything at home it would have a high degree of impurity – even if I bought some nice lab equipment.
There’s probably a lot of benefit in having the government subsidize a pharma company to make high purity drugs. The impurities could be responsible for a lot of side effects.
I bet many go out of their way to avoid getting proper equipment because those purchases can get them on a list. It’s legally safer to produce sketchy shit, and since you’re breaking the law anyways, who cares if what you’re selling is really what you say it is.
Profit comes from volume, you can take the risk of selling to as many people as possible or you can inflate your volume with other cheaper shit and never even consider the bit of powder that remained in a lethal dose-sized clump as you mixed it.
That’s like saying that the best way to reduce harm from alcohol is to make good strong alcohol cheap so people wouldn’t drink eau-de-cologne and denaturate.
Problems with alcohol are not limited to it sometimes being mixed with poison.
Problems with cocaine didn’t start with it becoming illegal.
Let’s please not talk as if it’s normal to consume it.
You brought quite a lot of things together, and I’d say they should be addressed separately if you want to get your message across.
On my part, for example - USSR wasn’t holy, but its demise instead of improvement is a giant tradegy that still negatively echoes in the world history.
Someone else would say there’s nothing wrong with prostitution, for example.
Some would point out folk medicine is not all entirely wrong even by medical science standards and it becomes a problem when patients ignore science in favor of unproven methods.
And at the end of it, you end up with the comment that is half wrong, and the message poorly sent.
On my part, for example - USSR wasn’t holy, but its demise instead of improvement is a giant tradegy that still negatively echoes in the world history.
I agree, but that’s not the position I described.
Someone else would say there’s nothing wrong with prostitution, for example.
Definitely better than alcoholism.
Some would point out folk medicine is not all entirely wrong even by medical science standards and it becomes a problem when patients ignore science in favor of unproven methods.
The latter is what I meant exactly.
And at the end of it, you end up with the comment that is half wrong, and the message poorly sent.
That depends on reader’s interpretation, so you are basically ascribing your own choices to me. If something isn’t clear, it doesn’t mean you can pick the wrong variant and ascribe it to author of that comment. It just means you can ask.
My point wasn’t about the content of statements, but about how such wide statements going way beyond original question will inevitably cause conflict and will drive your point across less effectively.
What the actual fuck are you talking about? The fall of USSR was the second best thing that ever happened to the country I was born in. The first was the end of nazi occupation. Although the negative consequences are still echoing through the entire eastern block.
As I said - USSR was by no means holy, and some regions, particularly forcefully occupied states of Eastern Europe, gained quite a lot from its downfall.
I’m talking about a more global effect, particularly economic and political pressure USSR exerted on major capitalist powers. It was a simple sign: “the policies we implement do work, your workers can and will demand them, and you better do it or the same revolution will strip you out of all your riches”.
Pretty much since its inception, USSR was able to literally shift global policies regarding working conditions and universally available services. It’s after severe protests in pre-Nazi Germany and USSR that all major powers suddenly decided to shorten the work day from 10-12 hours to 8, then from 6 days a week to 5, introduced (except for US) full universal healthcare and higher edication, and many more policies we take for granted today.
Then, when USSR went into its demise, the improvements stopped. The income inequality rose significantly in most major economies, going straight up through the roof in the US, UK, Canada and Germany. Same happened to the post-Soviet countries themselves, even though it has been at first greatly compensated by the sheer volume of money coming from foreign investors. Social services started to receive less funding, and population is more in debt than ever.
If anything, USSR was the force that kept major powers in check and didn’t allow capitalism to do what it does best - concentrate wealth, population be damned. I know capitalism can look like magic when your country has got significant economic boost in living memory, but global trends show a very different picture.
It’s after severe protests in pre-Nazi Germany and USSR that all major powers suddenly decided to shorten the work day from 10-12 hours to 8
Some industries in the west has been adopting the 10 or 8 hour working day even before the soviet union has existed. And this is going to be only my personal speculations, but as the nature of the work itself has been changing over time, so did the time requirements.
from 6 days a week to 5
It’s funny that you mention that, because one thing that I distinctly remember from what my parents and grandparents has been telling me about the previous regime was something called “working saturday of honor”, when the workers were mandated to come work an extra day. Some of them were to compensate for the state holidays, some just to ramp up the productivity.
Tell that to my two infrequent user friends who decided to share some cocaine at home, after going out the bar, catching up after not seeing each other for a while who both died from fentanyl overdose.
Inert cutting agents that simply dilute the product are not type of impurities in the sense that I was talking about. And I think there’s clear.
Also. when inert cutting agents are used without the user knowing the potency they are more liable to overdose. Legal and regulated cocaine would not have fentanyl or levamisole etc, and the potency would be printed on the bottle.
telegraph.co.uk
Active