distic
1yr ago
There is no international competition, those conferences will be restricted to locals for the exact same reason. The american military researcher can't just choose to go to a chinese conference instead
distic
1yr ago
Then just change the rules? For example make any deadly touch eliminatory, so that no one says "I'm going to leave myself wide open and go for an uncovered afterblow" . I suspect the problem is that you want tournaments to be more spectacular than realistic (if the adversaries are more conservative it might get a bit boring)
distic
1yr ago
Likely giving other nations time to choose (with us or against us), and slapping the nations who chose to align with China with huge tariffs in 90 days.
If that was the plan, it's pretty dumb. First you can't really un-declare a (commercial) war. Second, if you want people to side with you, you don't start a fight with them. Third, it puts everyone except China and the US in a better negociating position with those two, because they can play one against the other.
distic
1yr ago
It's a commonwealth of nations (that's its name...) not a commonwealth of individuals
distic
1yr ago
(apparently agreed upon in advance by the heads of state)
Isn't the british monarch the head of state of like 90% of the commonwealth?
distic
1yr ago
They would have to end democracy to achieve the conquest (just imagine the protests...), and therefore the opinion of canadians would not matter at all
distic
1yr ago
It's only a waste if you think Putin will stop there. If you think you will have to defend yourself against Russia at some point, then the sooner the better
distic
1yr ago
Cyprus is a very small country with 1 million inhabitants, and Turkey invaded a third (not half) of the country and its population. 300 000 people is the same order of magnitude as just the losses during the war in Ukraine.
About Syria, it's a mess. Everyone and their friend owns some part of Syria. If you can tell me more about it I'm curious, honestly. How many Turkish soldiers are their in Syria? What part of the territory do they control?
distic
1yr ago
No those governments weren't autocratic given that the power has swiftly switched hands. Sure they were and are still corrupt, but the corruption level is continuously decreasing since those revolutions.
distic
1yr ago
I'm pretty sure Russian or Chinese nukes in Portugal would have an important effect on the geopolical balance
distic
1yr ago
What is your theory exactly? The proof that Ukraine is a threat to Russia is that Russia decided to increase the threat level? If Ukraine in NATO is dangerous to Russia, what about Finland and Sweden then? The NATO threat on Russia plays absolutely no role in the actions of both sides (excepted as a propaganda tool) therefore it is unimportant.
distic
1yr ago
Yes it can because:
-
it is not important for Russia: it's just an excuse (once again, if they felt threatened they just increased the threat)
-
It's not important for NATO, given that the west has never really promised anything to Ukraine.
Therefore it seems to me you all say it is "important", but if it's neither important for Russia (their policy proves it) nor for NATO, I don't really think it can be important "per se"
distic
1yr ago
Yes I know, that is the point. What in the world makes them secure without a proper army and wouldn't work for Estonia, excepted that none of their neighbours have been imperialistic for decades?
distic
1yr ago
It's perfectly possible to decrease the threat level significantly, for example by verifiably decreasing the stockpile of nuclear weapons both sides, establishing verifiable demilitarized zones both sides of the border,...
distic
1yr ago
But Ireland and Portugal have also a relativemy weak military and they aren't particularly threatened
distic
1yr ago
All this discussion started with my very falsifiable claim that Ukraine surrendering to Russia would increase, not decrease, the threat level for eastern Europe. I'm not sure how you got to the point that there is any metaphysics involved
distic
1yr ago
You are strawmanning, you know. If Russia wanted to decrease the threat at their borders there are other ways, like building trust. With their invasion they only increased the perceived threat from the other side and therefore their own threat level. Given that they were perfectly able to predict it the perceived NATO threat is just a pathetic excuse and you know it
distic
1yr ago
Yes we shouldn't have let Turkey do that, but it seems to me the orders of magnitude involved in those wars is not similar at all
distic
1yr ago
Regime change is fine as long as border change isn't?
It's not about being fine or not, it's about disproving the claim that Russia is only interested in protecting itself against NATO
If you're unable to understand
I'm not unable to understand anything. So you are telling me if NATO drops its defenses in eastern Europe, Russia will become less threatening? Is this what you mean?
There are other way to build trust and increase your security than invading neighboring countries
How fast from "there is no such thing as a limited freedom of speech" to "just fire them"...
More options
Context Copy link