SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Arthur T Knackerbracket has processed the following story:
A group of technology companies and lobbyists want the European Commission (EC) to take action to reduce the region's reliance on foreign-owned digital services and infrastructure.
In an open letter to EC President Ursula von der Leyen and Executive Vice-President for Tech Sovereignty Henna Virkkunen, the group of nearly 100 organizations proposed the creation of a sovereign infrastructure fund to invest in key technology and lessen dependence on US corporations.
The letter points to recent events, including the farcical Munich Security Conference, as a sign of "the stark geopolitical reality Europe is now facing," and says that building strategic autonomy in key sectors is now an urgent imperative for European countries.
Signatories include aerospace giant Airbus, France's Dassault Systèmes, European cloud operator OVHcloud, chip designer SiPearl, open source biz Nextcloud, and a host of others including organizations such as the European Startup Network.
OVHcloud said the group was calling "for a collective industrial policy strategy to strengthen Europe's competitiveness and strategic autonomy. We are convinced this is the premise of what we hope will be a larger movement of the entire ecosystem."
Proposals include the sovereign infrastructure fund, which would be able to support public investment, especially in capital-intensive sectors like semiconductors, with "significant additional commitment of funds allocated and/or underwritten" by the European Investment Bank (EIB) and national public funding bodies.
It also suggests there should be a formal requirement for the public sector to "buy European" and source their IT requirements from European-led and assembled solutions, while recognizing that these may involve complex supply chains with foreign components.
[...] This isn't the first time that concerns about US hegemony in technology have been raised. Recently, the DARE project launched to develop hardware and software based on the open RISC-V architecture, backed by EuroHPC JU funding, while fears have been aired about the dominance of American-owned cloud companies in the European market.
Such concerns have been heightened by recent actions, such as the suggestion that the US might cut off access to Starlink internet services in Ukraine as a political bargaining strategy. Starlink owner Elon Musk later denied that this would ever happen.
The letter notes that these issues have already been set out by the EuroStack initiative, made up of many of the companies that signed the letter to EC President von der Leyen. The Register asked the European Commission to comment.
On the other side of the pond, the Computer and Communications Industry Association (CCIA) recently published a report claiming that US companies face "substantial financial burdens" due to the European Union's digital regulations.
It says that US tech companies are losing "billions" through having to comply with regulations such as the Digital Markets Act (DMA), and having to obtain user consent for their data to be used for advertising purposes.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by FuzzyTheBear on Saturday March 22 2025, @01:03PM (68 children)
Right now consumers producers industries and governments everywhere are all at work to ditch the USA.
Retaliation in this fashion will prove Trump completely wronh about his tariffs war.
They're loosing business , they're loosing credibility and as a country turned the clock back a few hundred years.
Trump bankrupted a casino .. imagine that .. bankrupting a freaking casine.
He proved 6 times he knows zit about business in the form of 6 bankruptcies.
He's also known as Captain Banjruptcy for a reason.
He's going for the gold : bankrupting a whole country.
Here in Canada a change in consumers awareness about the country of origin of the procusts in food stores , even at WalMart we forced a change in their supply chain.
This is all for the best. When a supposedly friend stabs you in the back , trust's gone and we keep that in mind that what used to be a friend with a simple change of government has turned the USA into an enemy.
We don't forgive , we don't forget. We're Canadians and we'll all be better off without the USA>
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 22 2025, @01:37PM (29 children)
We USAians have been giving, giving, and giving some more. Time for it to stop. There are many of us USAians who think we're going to be better off without all the lampreys (parasite fish) attached.
More and more countries are realizing that suckling off the USA's teets is an inherent weakness, keeping them dependent and immature.
You can call it "Trump's trade war". I call it "you started the war, we're (finally) responding in kind. Stop whining."
(Score: 4, Touché) by Gaaark on Saturday March 22 2025, @02:44PM (10 children)
and some say the world would be better off without the USA:
look at all the wars you have started/interfered in that have made things worse in the world.
And now you have an 'immature' president (2 lying, immature presidents in fact) who are destroying their own country in order to enrich themselves.
Good luck. Hope you still have a job in the future.
--- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. I have always been here. ---Gaaark 2.0 --
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 22 2025, @03:58PM (9 children)
Name one war the USA started. Okay, Revolutionary War of 1776. England attacked us in 1812. US Civil war- internal. Go ahead, name a war we started.
All smug of you to say that, BTW, as we are your protectors. Maybe we need to stop protecting you.
In fact, I work in military support. :)
(Score: 3, Touché) by PiMuNu on Saturday March 22 2025, @04:27PM (1 child)
I don't particularly want to pick sides on the Trump stuff, but I think it is disingenuous to say USA never started a war. For example, the most recent two wars that USA was directly involved in were instigated by the USA. In particular, the Second Gulf War was set up by Tony Blair and George Bush inventing the so-called "Dodgy Dossier" of nonsense "evidence" that Iraq had Weapons of Mass Destruction. It was obvious, to me at least, that it was a bollucks Casus Belli. I understand the reasoning for the Afghan war, but the Second Gulf War I never really understood why we (I am Brit) were involved. Strategic stuff going on behind the scenes I guess?
Second Iraq war
----------------------
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_War [wikipedia.org]
The Iraq War also referred to as the Second Gulf War was a prolonged conflict in Iraq lasting from 2003 to 2011. It began with the invasion by a United States-led coalition, which resulted in the overthrow of the Ba'athist government of Saddam Hussein.
--
Afghan war
----------------
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_in_Afghanistan_(2001%E2%80%932021) [wikipedia.org]
The War in Afghanistan was a prolonged conflict lasting from 2001 to 2021. It began with the invasion by a United States-led coalition under the name Operation Enduring Freedom in response to the September 11 attacks carried out by al-Qaeda
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 23 2025, @09:43AM
The US messed up Libya too: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6DXDU48RHLU [youtube.com]
They messed up Syria: https://www.ap.org/the-definitive-source/behind-the-news/exposing-behind-the-scenes-efforts-by-us-to-aid-syrian-opposition/ [ap.org]
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/us-secretly-backed-syrian-opposition-groups-cables-released-by-wikileaks-show/2011/04/14/AF1p9hwD_story.html [washingtonpost.com]
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/21/world/middleeast/cia-said-to-aid-in-steering-arms-to-syrian-rebels.html?pagewanted=all [nytimes.com]
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-syria-wikileaks-idUSTRE73H0E720110418/ [reuters.com]
And other places too:
https://www.npr.org/2019/01/31/690363402/how-the-cia-overthrew-irans-democracy-in-four-days [npr.org]
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jun/03/us-isis-syria-iraq [theguardian.com]
The US has been giving and giving alright: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_involvement_in_regime_change#1950s [wikipedia.org]
The US is like a pyromaniac firefighter starting fires around the world, pretending to be hero putting some of them out. And crying victim or blaming others when they get burned.
(Score: 5, Touché) by Gaaark on Saturday March 22 2025, @04:30PM (4 children)
If you are in 'military support', maybe you remember a little war started over "Dey gots WMD!"
https://english.news.cn/20220902/735703a45cfd458791179d4c0a80e727/c.html [english.news.cn]
--- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. I have always been here. ---Gaaark 2.0 --
(Score: 2) by number11 on Saturday March 22 2025, @04:57PM (3 children)
That's a bit of an exaggeration (from a PRC source). But it may well be true that (since WW2) there has been no military attack upon US territory by any other country. US attacks on other parties have been for other reasons, usually economic or political. If we're keeping count, the US would almost certainly be the world's biggest perpetrator, though part of that is that the US has also been the world's most powerful country, and one of the largest.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Gaaark on Saturday March 22 2025, @05:28PM (2 children)
Can you refute it?
Also at:
https://www.investmentwatchblog.com/america-has-started-81-of-the-wars-since-wwii/ [investmentwatchblog.com]
--- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. I have always been here. ---Gaaark 2.0 --
(Score: 2) by number11 on Saturday March 22 2025, @07:02PM
Refute it? I'm not sure what it even means.
First, I'd guess that there have been far more than 248 armed conflicts since WW2. Only 47 cases not started by the US seems like a pretty low number, and 201 seems very high. They only describe half a dozen, though there are certainly more, China alone has engaged in half a dozen that didn't involve the US. Does "153 regions of the world" comprise the whole world, or exclude some regions? They don't show their list to us, or tell precisely what "initiated" means, so we have no way of knowing, It's a propaganda piece (which does not mean it's not true, just that the authors have an ax to grind).
The investmentwatchblog piece seems to be a rewrite of that same Chinese story. I don't know who they are, but their homepage stories seem to mostly be rightwing/MAGA/goldbug content.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday March 23 2025, @02:00AM
Indeed. For a glaring example, the Korean War is cited as being started by the US. It was instead started by North Korea. When they get their first example so brazenly wrong with obvious bad faith, it's not worth the effort to go through the rest. Note the weaselly language:
In other words, they acknowledge that the war started before the US was involved and still blamed the US for starting the war! The above quote does have value as a historic relic, this is probably the first time in decades that such North Korean propaganda has been used outside of North Korea!
(Score: 3, Informative) by Gaaark on Saturday March 22 2025, @04:32PM
And why are you supporting Trump, a person who avoided service with a fake, lame, non-adult reason and who calls people who died in service "Losers!".
Trump is a loser. A true American loser. Get over him.
--- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. I have always been here. ---Gaaark 2.0 --
(Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday March 23 2025, @02:21AM
How much protection has the US provided Afghanistan? Sure, Biden surrendered the country, but the US had two decades to develop a solid country. Even four years of Trump I. What happened? Answer: US protection is not that valuable. It's more an excuse to spend public funds than in protecting anyone.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 22 2025, @02:51PM (1 child)
Simple. Start eating the rich, it is them to whom you gave and gave and gave some more.
Are you tired of wining yet? Well, good luck with that, you are about to reverse-Robin-Hood even more [cbpp.org].
(Score: 3, Touché) by hendrikboom on Monday March 24 2025, @02:56AM
Did you mean "whining" or "winning"?
(Score: 5, Insightful) by janrinok on Saturday March 22 2025, @03:19PM (15 children)
The USA wanted Europe to buy their military equipment. Now that we have done so the support is being withdrawn unless we bow down and profusely give thanks to your new master.
The USA wanted to fight on someone else's territory. Now they say that we are just taking things because we let them have hundreds of installations in Europe. Don't you also have numerous bases in the Middle East, the Far East, and the Pacific arena? Are they all 'sucking off your teats" too. Or perhaps you have overstretched yourself and need an excuse to reduce your forces?
The USA wanted to have all the top posts in NATO, indeed they insisted upon it. Now your leader is compromising our secrets (Mar-a-Lago files anyone? The UK and at least one other NATO country have been affected) and doing their best to de-fang NATO's ability to function as a defensive force.
The USA has agreed to all the existing trade agreements and they were quite content with them until Trump came along. Nobody forced them upon the USA. Now those same agreements are all Europe's doing and we are supposedly taking advantage of the USA? Why did you agree to them?
The USA has, for around 80 years, been claiming to lead the fight against dictators and globalist expansion by force. Now it seems that claiming other countries' territory (Canada, Greenland etc) is justified because it gives the USA control of the rare earths and other valuable minerals, or it is suddenly essential to the defence of the USA itself?
Now that the USA has suddenly turned about face and become the best friend of the biggest threat facing Europe how is that our fault?
The USA wants us to support their businesses in Europe but they are not prepared to follow our rules when we allow them to operate here yet pay negligible taxes. Hence this story.
Everyday we see reports of the wilful destruction of US Federal functions with NO realistic justification being given whatsoever to those people who are most affected. Your legal system is being repeatedly ignored by those in power. The USA has become a Dictatorship. There is no point in waiting for the next election - there will not be one. Everything that is happening is described in Project2025 and, perhaps more importantly, in the classified Manual of Revolutionary Warfare. It was never expected that you would use those lessons and techniques on yourself.
So you have quite some way to go to convince us that what we are now seeing is entirely altruistic and for our own good. Your claims don't require close scrutiny to counter them, they are bullshit and everyone can see it. We are being stabbed in the back and we will NOT forget it.
[nostyle RIP 06 May 2025]
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 22 2025, @04:06PM (6 children)
I don't have time to refute you, but you're very one-sided. I only wish we (USA) had NOT helped you in WWI or 1940s. The $ and lives we lost, and what we get in return, smug arrogant one-sided mocking? So Trump is finally trying to even things up, and instead of looking at everything and being gracious, you're acting like a little child who got caught doing something bad but is 100% ego-driven, rude, smug, arrogant, flippant. You're just making more and more of us (USA) happy to stop helping you.
On a more positive note, I'm encouraged to see much of Europe recognizing the need to strengthen your own military and defense against, well, mainly Putin.
The credit card is maxxed out, time to start paying down the debt.
(I'll let out a little secret- in spite of your horrible attitudes, we (USA) will come to your aid, again, if things get bad enough. But we might wait it out a bit first.)
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Gaaark on Saturday March 22 2025, @04:40PM
That's what we in Canada say when talking about how Trump treats all his 'enemies' as he takes revenge. He is a CHILD and only knows how to hit back at his perceived enemies.
Remember when he was going to lower the price of eggs? On day one, he was going to do that.
Instead, all he has done is throw tantrums and hit back at his 'enemies'. He is paranoid, he is a liar, he is an adulterer and a failed businessman.
He is a loser. A hugely, biggly American loser.
--- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. I have always been here. ---Gaaark 2.0 --
(Score: 5, Informative) by janrinok on Saturday March 22 2025, @04:54PM
US losses were about 250,000 about (0.17% of the US population in 1945) killed in the European theater.
European losses were:
I haven't include figures for the Baltic states, Finland, Norway or Sweden. I think the point is made.
We are grateful for your involvement. The French village in which I now live has a special day to remember being freed by US forces. It has 3 different monuments to US dead, a wreath is placed at each one. The ceremonies are well attended and school children also participate. You contribution is not forgotten.
Your participation enabled a 2nd front to be established in order to divide Germany's forces between the western front and the eastern front. But you seem to be ignoring the European losses. Perhaps you think Europe was sat around doing nothing until the US got involved.
You lost far more though in the Pacific arena, but the UK and others also fought in the Far East providing land, air and sea forces.
Since that we have as Europeans supported wars alongside you in Iraq, Afghanistan, Vietnam, the Balkans, and many other places. I had both UK and US military forces under my administrative command in Bosnia. Yesterday, on FlightRadar24, I watched US, UK, Sweden, Lithuania and Latvia flying air missions in support of each other in the Baltic and Black Sea regions.
The US has a habit of mocking France - yet they lost almost 10 times the number of losses you experienced in the whole of Europe. Poland lost 100 times your losses. We are stronger united - but that lesson is quickly being forgotten.
Being thrown to the mercy of Russia doesn't impress us at all. Trump should get his Nobel Peace Prize by doing something to justify it.
[nostyle RIP 06 May 2025]
(Score: 5, Insightful) by PiMuNu on Saturday March 22 2025, @06:28PM
> The $ and lives we lost, and what we get in return, smug arrogant one-sided mocking?
I am grateful for the alliance with USA, both during the 20th century and into the 21st century. NATO is a good thing.
Having said that, US joined the war after they were attacked by the Axis powers (Pearl Harbour); the declaration of war was not an act of altruism. I realise they provided indirect support particularly to Britain before that point. I also realise that the US presence in the European theatre was not strictly necessary, but I believe that there were strong strategic reasons for supporting the European war directly given the war in the Pacific.
It's worth also pointing out that US did quite well economically during, and following WW2. One might argue that this would have occurred regardless of the outcome of the war. It's also worth noting there was a recession in the year or two following the end of WW2.
Economics don't replace lives lost of course. And I want to reiterate that Europeans are grateful for the alliance with USA. It's an important message that both sides must remember: together we are stronger.
(Score: 2, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 23 2025, @12:14AM
I wish we (the rest of usa), never had to hear from jackasses like you.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by khallow on Sunday March 23 2025, @05:59AM (1 child)
Just because someone else - not you - fought and died for Europe doesn't mean you have a blank check for everyone else to put up with your bullshit.
Back at you on that one. Don't waste our time with imaginary tales of what Trump allegedly is "trying". Trump is a con artist and walking dumpster fire. Always has been.
I was willing to put up with him because DOGE sounds like it might go somewhere. In a few months, I've been proven very wrong. For me the line was crossed when Trump started mouthing off about impeaching judges doing their jobs (which happened to be blocking some illegal Trump administration actions). Actually carrying that impeachment out would be breaking the law on top of breaking the law. Not "working overtime to restore the rule of law" [thespectator.com]. Don't piss on me and call it rain.
Look, you can continue to believe whatever you want, but you've been had.
(Score: 4, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 23 2025, @09:59AM
I wonder whether the current/near future USA would qualify for regime change by the USA's own standards for other countries... Ignoring the fact that the USA has tons of nukes which would of course disqualify it.
I mean:
1) Has oil
2) Sponsors and creates terrorists
🤣
(Score: 2) by PiMuNu on Saturday March 22 2025, @04:32PM (7 children)
I actually think USA foreign policy is quite sensible. Russia and China together is a far bigger threat than each acting separately. I think the creation of the axis of North Korea, China, Iran, Russia was a huge mistake of Biden/Boris Johnson. It is a good idea to break that axis. There is a tight rope to walk to bring Russia back to the West (since 1990s when they were allied), and I think it is essential we do it.
Not sure that is Trump's planning - he seems not to be very strategic and a bit more haphazard/disorganised. But it's what I would do.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by number11 on Sunday March 23 2025, @04:37AM (6 children)
I doubt that Iran is part of any axis, other than those who will trade with them. The US is blocking trade, so what sources of foreign income do they have? Note that Iran does not recognize Russia's claims to Ukranian territory even now. They're just selling stuff to whoever will buy it.
(Score: 2, Interesting) by khallow on Sunday March 23 2025, @06:01AM (3 children)
Which happens to be Russia and China. I sense a pattern here. Also keep in mind that we still don't have a clear idea of why Iran's proxies started a war with Israel last year. It might have been at the behest of Russia.
(Score: 2) by number11 on Sunday March 23 2025, @05:27PM (2 children)
Yes, Russia and China have become their trade partners. I suspect that the fact that the US bans commerce with Iran even by other countries may have something to do with that. What countries would you expect them to trade with, if the US (and because of US pressure, Europe) won't trade with them?
(Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday March 23 2025, @10:55PM (1 child)
The worst of the lot is who I'd expect them to trade with. And well, it's not a stretch to group them at that point.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by number11 on Monday March 24 2025, @06:14PM
It's not like the US doesn't trade with Russia and China as well. And making threats toward Canada, Denmark, and Mexico. Yeah, the Iranian theocracy is scum, just like the Saudi one. But the Iranian theocracy came about because the US propped up the Shah and his secret police. No point pretending anybody has clean hands in this show.
(Score: 2) by PiMuNu on Sunday March 23 2025, @09:53AM (1 child)
> The US is blocking trade, so what sources of foreign income do they have?
Your comment exactly supports my point! Economics and military strategy are bedfellows - for example the reason, historically, US supported Europe is because US and Europe are strong trade partners.
ps: I guess one might argue that this is only a "trade relationship", but Iran has been supplying Russia with arms to prosecute the invasion of Ukraine:
https://edition.cnn.com/2023/07/25/politics/us-russia-iran-drones/index.html [cnn.com]
(with many other hits from a search engine)
(Score: 2) by number11 on Sunday March 23 2025, @05:17PM
Sure Iran has been supplying arms to Russia (I heard that Russia pays in gold). They'd probably sell arms to Ukraine, too, if the money was right. Does the fact that the US sells (or gives) arms to Israel necessarily mean that the US is pro-genocide?
(Score: 4, Insightful) by zocalo on Saturday March 22 2025, @01:50PM (24 children)
Supply chains and operations can't be moved overnight, but when you're looking at four years or more of economic turmoil all of a sudden the financials, logistics, and effort of doing so look an awfully lot more viable. That process has definitely started and once those new routes are established it's going to take a huge amount of time and effort for the US to get them to moved back again, if they can do it at all. Once bitten, twice shy. It's going to be awfully hard for the US to recover if they need to pay top dollar to get former trading partners to sell them stuff again, or sell what they produce cheap to in order to get people to buy it.
UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
(Score: 4, Interesting) by RamiK on Saturday March 22 2025, @03:21PM (23 children)
Trump has done more for the unification of Europe in a couple of month than any statesmen has done since Napoleon.
No seriously this is all according to plan. Trump knows he can't drive a wedge between Russia, China and Iran but he also knows Europe can't depend on China for critical military-industrial infrastructure after they saw how easily China cut itself off the world markets during COVID and when they too know China is preparing for invasion against Taiwan. So, he's forcing Europe to overcome their internal bickering and get into military and industrial shape so they'll be able to at least deal with Moscow while also lessening their incentives to trade with China. And it's working: https://www.politico.eu/article/germanys-friedrich-merz-radical-spending-election-berlin-green-energy-fund/ [politico.eu]
When the invasion starts around '26-'27 and the US diverts all its fleets to defend Taiwan, you'll be thanking Trump there's troops to defend the EU as Russia takes advantage to march on Poland.
compiling...
(Score: 3, Insightful) by janrinok on Saturday March 22 2025, @03:35PM (13 children)
We can no longer rely on the USA either. But you were pleased to sell us the aircraft, weapon systems and other equipment even though now you are refusing to allow it to be used without your express permission. We bought it but, in typical US fashion, we now don't appear to own it.
[nostyle RIP 06 May 2025]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 22 2025, @04:10PM (9 children)
Again, no time to research, and I'm not aware of this, but I admit it sounds unfair. I'd have to look at the balance sheet. IE, you may have paid something, but I'm very aware of how much $ we GIVE to EU and other countries.
Try really really hard to keep in the forefront of your thinking: Putin has nukes. Okay? Get it yet? You want to piss him off even more? Think, think.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by janrinok on Saturday March 22 2025, @05:07PM (8 children)
So we should just surrender to him? The UK has nukes, France has nukes, YOU have nukes. But only one country has threatened to use them. Think, THINK!
I thought that we were supposed to be better than that. Backing down to bullies has never been our way. Don't worry, it will not be in your country. I expect to see either the white or Russian flag fly over the Whitehouse someday.
Paraphrasing what somebody said a short while back: "I would rather die fighting on my feet than being executed on my knees."
[nostyle RIP 06 May 2025]
(Score: 3, Touché) by c0lo on Saturday March 22 2025, @08:59PM
Does Russian oligarchy display a flag on their possessions?
https://www.youtube.com/@ProfSteveKeen https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 22 2025, @11:39PM (5 children)
You liberals are all angry knee-jerk reactionaries.
You are a "binary thinker". Learn about shades of grey; more than just two possibilities.
I really hate when people take a statement and try to refute it by stating something absurd, as if that was the original stater's intent. You just create arguments, flame wars, strife, and division. I think much more highly of you than that. Try to resist the low-brow ways.
Nobody said to surrender. The point is to not piss him off further. Trump tried to negotiate, tried to appease Putin. Obviously Putin isn't willing to be reasonable. Don't jump to conclusions. There are many possibilities. A big worry is, what will Putin do if enough countries aid Ukraine (as we all should) and Putin starts really losing bigtime? He's threatened nukes many times, so we all have to take it seriously.
Two old sayings of wisdom for you:
- Walk softly and carry a big stick.
- Keep your friends close, and your enemies closer.
BTW, how would you feel about USA joining the British Commonwealth? Hmmm?
:)
(Score: 3, Interesting) by janrinok on Sunday March 23 2025, @05:04AM (3 children)
Lol - I am accused by some of being a liberal and, at the same time, by others of being a fascist who is supporting the right-wing. Neither of you is correct.
Putin announced in 2001 that he would restore Russia's influence and pride. We, the west, did not understand fully what he intended.
Since that time, he has explained further. He plans the complete return of Eastern Europe to Russia's sole area of influence. He has more recently rewritten the nuclear policy of Russia: If Russia believes that if its territory or people are threatened it reserves the right to use nuclear weapons as a first strike option. The problem is that Putin views the whole of Ukraine, the Baltic States, parts of Poland, Moldova, Georgia. various former republics and elsewhere as being "Russian". Some of those countries are now in NATO. If we surrender each time Putin threatens the use of theatre nuclear weapons in order to protect "Russians" then there will be no long term peace in Ukraine, Europe or elsewhere. Ukraine is not the end of it, but merely the start.
When the USA was threatened by Russian weapons being located in Cuba you did NOT surrender, but now you expect Europe to accept the same threats and just let Putin decide which countries are 'his'. But as this does not immediately affect the USA mainland Trump is prepared to throw the NATO defence agreement away just so that he can claim to be a peacemaker. Backing down is not a defence. Having a very clear line of what NATO will accept and what it will not is now vital again. Trump has already played his cards. It is too late to expect him to change his mind.
When you were at school you learned very quickly that if you give in to a bully you will never be free from his influence again. He will decide what you can do, and what you cannot do, and how you live some aspects of your life. Now is the time to stand up to a bully.
I served on a nuclear bomber crew. We knew what the role required of us. Our life expectancy was short once hostilities began. That is the decision that we all took when we agreed to serve. We also knew that the threat of our use helped maintain a peace of sorts. Putin has put the nuclear policy back 50 years or more. He is gambling on the West backing down. And a fair number of Americans are quite prepared to do so. That is why I say that we are being stabbed in the back. Not standing by Ukraine is like not fighting back against the bully. Ukraine NEEDS those security guarantees - which Russia has given before but now ignores. You only have to give in once and your future is decided. This is what NATO was designed for and when it comes to the test you are failing every one of those promises that you have made over the last 80 years.
Call me names - I learned to cope with that at school too. Try to pigeonhole my politics into something neat and tidy. You will not succeed in persuading me that we should go back to the Europe of the Cold War. I was part of it!
[nostyle RIP 06 May 2025]
(Score: 2) by turgid on Monday March 24 2025, @10:13PM (2 children)
I served on a nuclear bomber crew.
Vulcan?
I refuse to engage in a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent [wikipedia.org].
(Score: 2) by janrinok on Tuesday March 25 2025, @04:43AM (1 child)
[nostyle RIP 06 May 2025]
(Score: 2) by turgid on Tuesday March 25 2025, @09:11AM
Wow.
I refuse to engage in a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent [wikipedia.org].
(Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday March 23 2025, @12:35PM
Your previous post was not a call for grey thinking.
That last paragraph is a call for absolutes: cowardice and appeasement or making a principled but risky stand against evil. You want "shades of grey"? Then learn to speak in shades of grey.
Rather I think this reveals your line of thinking. The Ukrainian conflict isn't about making Putin mad or not. That's not how wars are won. Will we allow Russia to make a naked territorial grab or will we resist that? Ukraine has already decided to resist and they've been successful for three years.
Nobody is interested in merely pissing off Putin. There may at times be tactical advantage to making him mad - such as encouraging him to make bad decisions or distract his generals during critical stages of a battle. Or it might happen incidentally as a result of thwarting his plans for years. But not for its own sake.
I think rather it's important to consider who gratuitously makes people mad without a plan for winning. That would be Trump.
Bullshit. There's no way to successfully resist Putin without pissing him and his successors off. This FUD propaganda has gone on since the very beginning with Putin playing these brinkmanship games all along (following the usual Soviet playbook on that, I might add). Sorry, it already failed. And as janrinok noted, Russia isn't the only country with nukes. Probably shouldn't piss those other countries off either, right?
And should Putin actually use tactical nukes in Ukraine? It's a blank check for the allies supporting Ukraine. Trump would be forced to support the war for starters. NATO would soon control near Ukraine airspace. And if Putin escalates beyond that? Better hope his nuclear forces aren't just as shoddy as the rest of his military else it'll be a humiliating footnote in history for former Russia!
(Score: 2) by hendrikboom on Monday March 24 2025, @03:10AM
And only one country *has* used them.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by RamiK on Saturday March 22 2025, @07:01PM (2 children)
Nor should you.
You're barking at the wrong tree.
Regardless, from where I'm standing, the US been trying to get Europe to increase military spending in preparations for war with Russia since at least the 2008 Russo-Georgian War to no avail. And don't forget that the annexation of Crimea was back in 2014 should have jolted Europe into action without the US having to say anything. So, scaring Europe straight by starting to shop for new allies IS the only proved way to get the EU to get its act together before its too late.
Oh but you see, the EU did such a good job at convincing Biden that selling heavy guided bombs to Israel is a grave violation of international law, with it risking the lives of those innocent Gazans and all, that Trump, being the great humanitarian law abiding peace activist that he is, just couldn't look away from Ukraine's attacks on Russia's energy infrastructure and all those poor Russian children shaking in the dead of winter... Those heartless warmongering Europeans refusing Putin's ceasefire proposal just because it doesn't offer any security guarantees... Nazis I hear... /s
( The /s stands for schadenfreude. )
But seriously, whether Trump is a Manchurian candidate or just trying to scare you straight, Europe really needs to get a military and a military-industrial sector going before its too late for everyone's sake. And seeing how Putin's tanks aren't marching down Warsaw's main street quite just yet, it's very likely Trump cutting you off cold-turkey now is doing you a favor and you should be thanking him rather than criticizing him.
compiling...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 22 2025, @09:12PM (1 child)
Yeah, thanks Trump for pushing an old lady down the stairs.
(Score: 2) by RamiK on Saturday March 22 2025, @10:14PM
The old lady been stuck on the top floor since '08 since Georgia got invaded, through '14 when Crimea got annexed, '22 as Ukraine was re-invaded and '24 during North Korean troops joined in.
The bitch needs the kicking.
compiling...
(Score: 4, Insightful) by zocalo on Saturday March 22 2025, @07:07PM (2 children)
I do agree that it's a good thing, and long past time, for western Europe to discard the US crutch (for both sides), but there are far better ways of achieving that than also breaking trade and other international relationships with what are starting to look very much like former allies and are now at best someone else with some shared goals and common foes. Trying to fix the European reliance on the US' military like this is like hacking your hand off to fix a hangnail; there is going to permanent economic damage to the US, and much stronger trading like between almost everyone else - China included, because Europe loves their cheap Chinese goods too.
If that's genuinely "the plan" (which I very much doubt), then it's not just the DEMs that should be standing up to him, it's the GOP too.
UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
(Score: 2) by RamiK on Saturday March 22 2025, @07:58PM (1 child)
You just don't understand how late in the game this is:
https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2025/01/china-suddenly-building-fleet-of-special-barges-suitable-for-taiwan-landings/ [navalnews.com]
https://apnews.com/article/mideast-tensions-iran-china-russia-naval-drills-b150bd7fa1336e52fbbf6fd4afd593de [apnews.com]
https://apnews.com/article/iran-nuclear-iaea-weapons-grade-uranium-trump-0b11a99a7364f9a43e1c83b220114d45 [apnews.com]
There's simply not enough time for soft-gloves diplomacy anymore.
compiling...
(Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday March 23 2025, @12:39PM
(Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday March 23 2025, @06:05AM (5 children)
Your gullibility is endearing, but sorry, I won't partake. I don't buy that this is somehow a part of a Trump master plan. Having said that, I don't buy that China can do long game thinking any better than Trump can. Whatever happens in the future will have the usual fubar characteristics no matter who starts it.
(Score: 2) by RamiK on Sunday March 23 2025, @09:11AM (4 children)
It's not gullibility. I've heard Witkoff in the interview screwing everyone over by saying how rational Russia is and how Hamas isn’t ideologically intractable and how Tehran can be forced through sanctions to back off on its nuclear plans with and How Qatar and the Saudis only wants peace. I know the Republicans and Trump in particular get their money off the Golf. But, while we agree this is all bullshit and that the immediate outcomes will be worsening of US relations with its allies, I also see the US and UK are bombing the Houthis to open the navel trade routes to Europe while US military expenditure is ballooning in stark contrast to the last 20 years: https://quincyinst.org/research/the-fiscal-implications-of-a-major-increase-in-u-s-military-spending/ [quincyinst.org]
So, when I put 2 and 2 together, it comes off as the US readying for a huge engagement and working towards keeping its allies on edge and ready to defend themselves. As for what goes on in Trump's head, it could be hookers and blow for all I care. What matters is where the Pentagon's generals are steering he ship. Not the team's mascot.
compiling...
(Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday March 23 2025, @01:11PM (3 children)
For those who don't magically know who Steve Witkoff [wikipedia.org] is, he's involved in unilateral negotiations between the US and Russia. Witkoff also chose to recognize [pravda.com.ua] the sham referendums in occupied Russian territory and a feeble Russian pretext for the war.
Sorry, I don't buy that the US has some clever plan here. But it does look like Trump is beholden to Putin for some reason.
(Score: 2) by RamiK on Sunday March 23 2025, @04:57PM (2 children)
No no this isn't your typical throwing-more-money-on-defense. Total spending actually went down. This is about $50 billion worth of re-prioritizing on modernization R&D and China: https://defensescoop.com/2025/03/17/congress-defense-appropriations-2025-rdte-spending-141b/ [defensescoop.com]
Where the ballooning is coming from is venture capital investments tripling due to the focus on modernization: https://www.axios.com/2025/03/05/defense-industrial-base-reagan-study-factories [axios.com]
And it's not downsizing personal either. There's actually an increase in recruitment: https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/military-officials-recruiting-off-strong-start-2025-building/story?id=119762980 [go.com]
Witkoff is just following some real estate sales pitch manual 1:1. Sit through his recent Carlson interview while trying to not to barf. Once you're pass the critical threshold of disgust, you'll realize he's going through a bullet list type thing whenever he approaches a negotiation similar to one of these: https://convin.ai/blog/best-sales-pitch [convin.ai]
He's just telling his customers what they want to hear at the political level to get them to the negotiations table: The Israelis want security assurances as well as knowing the US has their back. Qatar wants to be thought of as trustworthy peace negotiators. Russia wants for its casus belli to be recognized. Hamas wants not to be treated like pariahs and that they'll be able to stay around when the war is over... But, in the end, the US has hard requirements and they're completely divorced from anything the marketing material says.
Regardless of the visuals, it's in Europe's and the US's best interest to end the war as quickly as possible regardless of how much territories Russia holds right now and focus on an arms race towards automation and nuclear missile interception. Cause, right now, China is speed running RISK while Europe is squabbling over who will put the down-payment for the carbon credits covering the deforestation required to put together artillery shells... Yes this really happened just a few weeks ago.
compiling...
(Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday March 23 2025, @11:18PM (1 child)
Not for FY (Fiscal Year) 2025 which is slightly higher than FY2024. Maybe for FY2026.
Depends on what "as possible" means. Too much urgency and you'll get a bad deal from Russia, right? Meanwhile I think we need to encourage more China top-down investing. That's an excellent way to squander Chinese resources. Even Japan's MITI couldn't pull it off after they got past the catching up phase - they were more competent.
They'll need the EU and Ukraine to come to the negotiations table too. In the end, everyone has hard requirements. And sometimes in war you can't meet those hard requirements with negotiation - especially when you leave out critical parties. I'm not interested in the wheeler dealer when the basics aren't being met. Also, visuals are an important part of negotiation.
(Score: 2) by RamiK on Monday March 24 2025, @10:19AM
From my first link:
( https://defensescoop.com/2025/03/17/congress-defense-appropriations-2025-rdte-spending-141b/ [defensescoop.com] )
It would have been too urgent in 2014. Now it's too late. Again, 26'-27'...
It's better for the EU's and Ukraine's public and politics to think the US isn't on their side and it's being forced on them so they won't resist the increased spending and military drafts in the coming years.
Look, we're back to WW1 era secret pacts and alliances. Things aren't going to be done transparently anymore.
compiling...
(Score: 3, Funny) by Captival on Saturday March 22 2025, @02:42PM (12 children)
Trump may have a net worth of billions of dollars and is one of the most successful human beings in the history of the planet, but one of his many ventures didn't work out!!!! That means he's BAD! Look at how smart and special I am for noticing! That obviously means I'm a superior human being!
(Score: 3, Informative) by Gaaark on Saturday March 22 2025, @02:51PM (8 children)
One?
One of his ventures didn't work out?
He went BANKRUPT 6 HUGELY TIMES!
SIX!
If you consider a bad businessman who goes bankrupt 6 times, lies CONSTANTLY, surrounds himself with 'Yes' men, fools around on his wife (who seems to want nothing to do with him now and whose children are abandoning ship), starts an insurrection just to see what would happen, etc, etc, etc a successful human....
...you and i have completely different views of success.
--- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. I have always been here. ---Gaaark 2.0 --
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 22 2025, @04:13PM (5 children)
Define "insurrection".
(Score: 0, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 22 2025, @04:20PM (2 children)
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 22 2025, @11:42PM (1 child)
I know your side has redefined the word for your political agenda. How has all that drama and lying been helping you at the voting booth?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 23 2025, @12:00AM
(Score: 2) by Gaaark on Saturday March 22 2025, @04:22PM
The defence of the mentally useless.
--- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. I have always been here. ---Gaaark 2.0 --
(Score: 2) by Sourcery42 on Monday March 24 2025, @05:42PM
Hillbilly Olympics
(Score: 2) by Captival on Monday March 24 2025, @11:11PM (1 child)
Trump: National TV celebrity
Trump: Real Estate Mogul
Trump: Billionaire
Trump: President
You: useless anonymous internet turd
The math doesn't lie.
(Score: 2) by Gaaark on Tuesday March 25 2025, @01:01AM
I don't lie with every word i say.
I don't fool around on my wife.
I don't bully people to get my own way.
I have never gone bankrupt.
I smile and laugh.
My family stands beside me through thick and thin and never abandons me.
Trump... not so much.
You? You are so much a part of the Trump cult that you use phrases like "Useless anonymous internet turd" because you can't come up with anything better.
The math doesn't lie.
--- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. I have always been here. ---Gaaark 2.0 --
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Saturday March 22 2025, @02:55PM
Thanks for the laugh.
https://www.youtube.com/@ProfSteveKeen https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday March 23 2025, @06:06AM (1 child)
Speaking of lying, this may be one of those areas. Trump may have a net worth of billions of dollars. Or he may not.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 25 2025, @03:45PM
Could be both. He's a very quantum president, you know