Jump to content
Bellazon

The "What Are You Thinking About Right Now?" PIP


Francesca

Recommended Posts

9 hours ago, SympathysSilhouette said:

 

His attempt at "diplomacy" followed by threatening to pull Starlink from Ukraine after it predictable got strong negative reaction from Ukraine.

His child-like temperament is fine when he is just using it to pump and dump stocks or just act like a garden variety troll on twitter but this is fucking war, one which will likely determine the future of all of Europe.

 

Quote

Ukraine : Elon Musk annonce que SpaceX n'a plus les moyens de financer le réseau internet Starlink en Ukraine

Depuis le début de l'offensive russe, fin février, SpaceX a livré à l'Ukraine quelque 25 000 terminaux qui permettent d'assurer une connexion à internet grâce à une constellation de satellites formant le réseau Starlink.

Link

 

It seems more like a negotiation between him and the US government on financing Starlink's costs in Ukraine. There's a problem between Biden's administration and Musk's companies.

 

Musk shouldn't interfere in diplomacy (but Gates shouldn't as well, and Soros, etc.)

 

The real problem is that the actual guy in charge (Biden) is a senescent puppet under the influence of neocons and unrealistic advisors (though they are very effective). And Putin is a solitary guy with nukes (which is even more worrying).

 

Putin is certainly a destabilizing force in Europe, but Biden's USA is not a stabilizing force either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Cult Icon said:

 

what did he do now?

 

I find it interesting that he comes across as impulsive at times (not good for Tesla investors) but is so successful that the fallouts are absorbed.  But one day he may cross the Rubicon and make a serious mistake.

 

I don't know if his unpredictability/impulsiveness is an asset or a liability.

 

I wonder :idk:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Enrico_sw said:

The real problem is that the actual guy in charge (Biden) is a senescent puppet under the influence of neocons and unrealistic advisors (though they are very effective). And Putin is a solitary guy with nukes (which is even more worrying).

 

Putin is certainly a destabilizing force in Europe, but Biden's USA is not a stabilizing force either.

 

 

 

There are two military narratives going on- one largely led by Ukraine's state propaganda apparatus (reinforced by US and UK intelligence and mass media) and one by the Russians.  The two military narratives couldn't be more different.  The one we are getting is absurd and makes little military sense.  The Russian narrative actually makes more military sense.  The information environment on both sides however, so incredibly corrupt that it's often hard to figure out what is real and what is fabricated.

 

What is certain is that the war is incredibly bizarre and is run irrationally by both sides.  It will have no winners, just losers.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Cult Icon said:

 

There are two military narratives going on- one largely led by Ukraine's state propaganda apparatus (reinforced by US and UK intelligence and mass media) and one by the Russians.  The two military narratives couldn't be more different.  The one we are getting is absurd and makes little military sense.  The Russian narrative actually makes more military sense.  The information environment on both sides however, so incredibly corrupt that it's often hard to figure out what is real and what is fabricated.

 

What is certain is that the war is incredibly bizarre and is run irrationally by both sides.  It will have no winners, just losers.

 

 

Yep, definitely.

 

Misinformation has always been part of wars, but with new tech, it seems to be even worse (which seems counter-intuitive). I don't trust anyone's information on this topic (like on many).

 

Europe is going to be one of the biggest losers in the end, but it's just the continuation of the aftermath of WW2 and decolonisation. Europe has been weakened since decades and several forces keep trying to pillage what's remaining.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Enrico_sw said:

Europe is going to be one of the biggest losers in the end, but it's just the continuation of the aftermath of WW2 and decolonisation. Europe has been weakened since decades and several forces keep trying to pillage what's remaining.

 

So tell me, how exactly should Europe be handling this instead?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, SympathysSilhouette said:

 

So tell me, how exactly should Europe be handling this instead?

 

I'm not a fan of how Ukraine is trying to drag the US into direct war with Russia.  If this happens it will go nuclear.  Not only that but the US taxpayer has to foot the bill for most of the aid.

 

If Europe could protect Ukraine conventionally with their own resources, it wouldn't be such a problem.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Cult Icon said:

 

I'm not a fan of how Ukraine is trying to drag the US into direct war with Russia.  If this happens it will go nuclear.  Not only that but the US taxpayer has to foot the bill for most of the aid.

 

If Europe could protect Ukraine conventionally with their own resources, it wouldn't be such a problem.  

 

Europe is already giving about as much as it can. Well, apart from Germany and France, who could probably do more. But the likes of the Baltics, Poland, ... have probably already delivered more of their own equipment than was wise and the UK has helped out a lot with both equipment and training from day one (as well as intelligence sharing).

Almost every EU memberstate has boosted its defense budget but it will take a couple of years at least before this better funding translates into better equipped troops/large militaries.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, SympathysSilhouette said:

 

So tell me, how exactly should Europe be handling this instead?

 

Well, here's my opinion (it's just an opinion):

 

- Words: Le Drian shouldn't have spoken of nukes in February. Le Maire shouldn't have spoken of "collapsing the Russian economy" in March, because his didn't, but it sure seems that ours did.

- Azerbaijan: this country is horrible. Azeris are barbarians who rape, kill and massacre Armenians. We shouldn't buy these people's gas.

- Empty threats: We don't make threats that we can't enforce. If we threaten to do something under conditions, then we enforce the threat. Otherwise, we're not credible, we look weak.

- Russian minorities: Europe should've intervened to protect Russian minorities (specially in Donbass) in the past years.

- Respect of Minsk agreements: make sure everybody enforces them.

- European defence: Europe should've built an independent EU defence in the past decades. We shouldn't have relied on NATO for our protection. NATO's objectives are American objectives, which are not fully aligned with ours. NATO wants to weaken Russia, they don't care if we get weakened in the process (some may enjoy seeing us weaker and more dependant).

 

I don't pretend it's an easy matter, but that's just my opinion. Please just don't twist my words again (otherwise, it's just you discussing with chimeras)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree we should not rely on Azeri oil. The problem is that beggars cannot be choosers. Ideally Europe as a whole turns away from fossil fuels as quickly as possible. Then we do not have to deal with any of the horrible regimes, whether they are Russia, Azerbaijan, Iran, Saudi-Arabia, ...

 

As for European defense, most countries have expanded their defense budget already. But it will take time for those investments to make a difference, at least a few years. So it's not something that will have an impact on this current situation, either way.

 

I'm talking about stuff that can impact the war effort right now and that Europe could conceivably do differently.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, SympathysSilhouette said:

I agree we should not rely on Azeri oil. The problem is that beggars cannot be choosers....

 

Yes, but Azeris (who are under the Turkish influence) are terrible, among the worst. They massacre Armenians. They are way worse than Russians.

 

Turkey (which is in NATO )plays a double game to double cross everybody. BTW this country committed an actual genocide in 1915. They killed millions of Armenians in a very horrible way. They were the first nazis of the 20th century (but we often forget it). The first genocide.

 

8 hours ago, SympathysSilhouette said:

 Ideally Europe as a whole turns away from fossil fuels as quickly as possible.

 

Yes. The solution is both renewable and nuclear energies. Both of them.

European elites made a mistake in the past decades when they curbed and/or stopped their nuclear programs in several countries.

 

8 hours ago, SympathysSilhouette said:

As for European defense, most countries have expanded their defense budget already. But it will take time for those investments to make a difference, at least a few years. So it's not something that will have an impact on this current situation, either way.

 

They should've done that decades ago. The European union failed. Many countries refused UK and France's military gear which made them dependant on the USA.

 

We have the right to talk about people's failures. European "elites" have made many mistakes regarding defence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...