Glider
Major
A very worrying development
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
A very worrying development
Currently, Ukraine methodically imposes "sanctions" against Russia's oil products infrastructure, avoiding the crude oil sector. If the USA adds more sanctions against the crude oil, it will be a significant contribution.Wave of Russian strikes kill at least 20 and injures dozens, officials say
Ukraine's President Zelensky urges more sanctions against Russia as he says the strikes show the Kremlin's goals "are unchanged".www.bbc.com
HALLELUJAH!!!!! Now let's see "considering" turn into "doing."
Clearly I should never have read through this thread (and I don't know why the fuck I did) I don't think I'm in the right forum. I came here for aviation discussion not to knock heads on political issues. Looking at the reaction icons (and replies) I see I'm pretty far apart from many of you, I should have stuck to the mantra of never discussing politics or religion, neither side convinces the other of anything. I could engage in this but life is too short, it's been a pleasure but further discourse it pointless for me. I wish all of you the best.
Adios
Related to that, and also to Ukraine war.Bottom line is to be careful what you ask for. The new world order you hoped for may not be the new world order that you actually get. We're already seeing individuals and nations change buying habits to reduce purchases of American goods. The decision by Canada's biggest liquor wholesaler to remove Jack Daniels and other American suppliers from sale is a trivial example but it's just the tip of the iceberg. Expand that type of thinking to the defense industry and America's ability to influence globally will be hurt, maybe not today but in the long run.
Bummer. I hope you stick around.Clearly I should never have read through this thread (and I don't know why the fuck I did) I don't think I'm in the right forum. I came here for aviation discussion not to knock heads on political issues. Looking at the reaction icons (and replies) I see I'm pretty far apart from many of you, I should have stuck to the mantra of never discussing politics or religion, neither side convinces the other of anything. I could engage in this but life is too short, it's been a pleasure but further discourse it pointless for me. I wish all of you the best.
Adios
Bummer. I hope you stick around.
While I share your opinion about the posted article as can be seen from my reaction in this thread earlier, I do feel that I have to step in here as a moderator.Food for thought. But its giving me indigestion and a sense of nausea.
Without wishing to diss it completely out of hand, your link is to a low readership online publication, with a paywall for many articles. The writers submit articles under pseudonyms - which is clearly designed to protect them from possible legal action. By its very nature, its a publication designed not to root out new information, so much as to generate clicks, engagement and advertising revenue which it does under the guise of 'free speech', but which is pretty transparently wanting to attract controversy and attention. The idea that its a reliable and fact-checkable source of objective information is flawed from the off. For example, the hyperlinked sections just veer off into speculation: The supposed justification of the censorship claim is German discussion about the banning of the AfD is but one example of hyperlink BS -not only has the AfD NOT been 'banned', its just won a substantial victory in the German elections. This is classic Orwellian double-speak. Naked misleading propaganda. There has been no 'suppression', even if there has been discussion of what constitutes a neo nazi organisation, something (unsurprisingly!) is banned under German law. Its the corollary of trying to argue that concern over where porn veers into paedophilia is 'censorship and suppression'. Adult consideration is a quite rational and fair given German concern about the far right- and what nationalism brought to Germany twice in the 20th century.
The piece may reflect or reinforce your opinion - but what new insight is it actually bringing to the table? I mean, he's a $hit writer for starters: 'It is difficult to say what specifically most triggered the catatonic European breakdown'.
Catatonic means - "Appearing mentally stupefied, unresponsive, and motionless, or almost so; seemingly unaware of one's environment".
Whether you agree with it or not, European response was ANYTHING but catatonic.
There are also a lot of straw-man implications in the rest of what you say:
"IMO A government that suppresses or deems free speech as hate crimes, prohibits ANY peaceful assembly, imposes their will on their citizens, prohibits the right to keep and bear arms, trashes the right to privacy and the right to confront accusers in a criminal procedure - are either fascist or have tendencies toward totalitarian rule in my world view."...
I'm gobsmacked ...errr, an ACTUAL one, like Russia, the invader of Ukraine...?...
I've read much of the rest of the article. I mean, dear god, where even to start?!
The mischaracterisation of European democracy is laughable. Its also insulting as well as dangerously inaccurate. Why would anyone simply accept this steaming pile of dung as either true and therefore a justification boggles my mind. I find it genuinely terrifying. You're an eloquent guy and clearly not alone in giving this stuff uncritical bandwidth. Differing opinions I can handle, but how far in extremist denial can you be to give countenance to this kind of stuff? But then again, many of not most of the people to whom this content appeals, know most no little to nothing of the outside world, in reality, do they? How many gobbling this sewage down have even been to Europe, and of the few that have, how many spent time not sealed away on a base or on some whistle-stop 'do all the sights' week holiday?
I had an insight into this naïve (and casually arrogant) view of the outside world once, when I was asked to invite the head of European Marketing for a large American mobile phone company to a meeting in the UK to discuss raising the profile of his products in our market (which were dismally failing to attract custom). I got on the phone to his secretary. "Could I come to the US?" she asked. "Erm, that would be an amazing opportunity for me, and would require clearance from my management", I said, "But surely he'd like to come here, meet some of the key executives, get an understanding of the market and have a tour round - really get to see the diversity of the culture, potential customers, the local competition and the challenges and opportunities. We can then host a round table and make suggestions on how we might be able to help." "Ah, I'm sorry," she said, "He doesn't have a passport". The Head of European Marketing for a leading US phone manufacturer!
How do you think the half dozen or so Europeans who regularly post here not only feel about what you've said, but who's intelligence you're now insulting by reposting and endorsing this article? You see, we ARE diverse. We have no problem expressing fundamental disagreements between our nations. If this hit-piece had any accuracy, I'm sure we'd all be pointing at each other and sagely nodding. But I'd be astounded if anyone here recognises what's described in this appalling piece.
Lets look at the author. 'Tyler Durden'. This nom de plume 'to protect his amendment rights' is pure BS for starters. The site founder and one of the key writers is purported to use it - and his identity is long since established. So who is this 'journalist' and what is his CV? Aha. His daddy registered the domain - Krassimir Ivandjiiski of ABC Media Ltd.
Who he? - A former Soviet-era Bulgarian Ministry of Foreign Trade official. Let that sink in.
And the main writer-come-owner is his son - Daniel Ivandjiiski. And his 'qualifications'? He's a Bulgarian-born, U.S.-educated, former hedge-fund trader, who was barred from the securities industry in September 2008 for earning US$780 from an insider trade by FINRA .
This is the source 'that succinctly explains the last 45 days in office in context that I agree with'. And therein lies the problem. You agree with. But no one in their right mind would trust if they dug any deeper as to the objectivity, motivation or source, would they?
So why are you???
'Taking what you want and leaving the rest' means you're probably filtering out some otherwise unpleasant truth that contradicts the easier to swallow and more simplistic narrative. You're far from alone. But surely you and the USA are better than that? Don't we ALL owe a better democracy more than this?
Thank you for your reasoning…While I share your opinion about the posted article as can be seen from my reaction in this thread earlier, I do feel that I have to step in here as a moderator.
We we have to remember that everybody approach this from their own side. While I agree I found this article offensive and faulty, I think we have posted plenty of articles and clips here that will be offensive to people who's convictions differ from mine as well.
Looking at the thread, we have an overwhelming majority on one side and and a small minority on the other side. It's easy for the majority to crush the minority. But it's dangerous. It is the cause why a phenomenon like social bubble is a thing.
I would like this forum to be better than Facebook or Twitter in this regard. Maybe I'm looking for an utopia, but I've always been an idealist.
Real freedom of speech means that every voice can be heard. So I would like to invite the "other side", so people who are Pro Trump or even Pro Russian to speak up. And for all: If you don't agree with what they say, it would be great if you could point out the facts and opinions that you deem wrong in a respectful manner, realising that the chance of you changing the others opinion with that is unlikely. That will never happen with one post.
This way we keep our forum open and inviting for everybody and we won't turn into another toxic Social Media group.
Maybe I'm being unrealistic and naive here, but to say it with Dr King's words: "I have a dream"