>The French nuclear subs are shit

Source ?

Wasn’t rabin assassinated for formulating a peace plan that was accepted by the PLO

They wouldn’t be denied for being Russian, they’d be denied for representing Russia during a time where it’s actions has been deemed unacceptable.

The simplistic tradeoff would be civilian deaths caused by landmines vs. civilian deaths prevented by use of landmines against Russian troops. It is clear that Russian troops have no qualms about intentionally massacring civilians. If landmines stop a group of tanks from overrunning a Ukrainian village or whatever, is that worth it? Hard to say without looking at a ton of very specific scenarios.

If Ukraine is doing a good job documenting where landmines are being laid and keeping civilians away from those areas (which, based on what you said, maybe not) then that could be ok.

[deleted]

Can someone ELI5 on the situation in Pakistan and what would the attackers (Taliban? Splinter group from the Taliban) hope to gain from this?

Thank you in advance.

Japan? sure. No way the US would share nuclear sub technology with an unreliable ally.

[removed]

For those quick to compare this to the negated US strike from last year, Biden at least met railroaders halfway and they can still pull the rug out if they want. And in an ironic twist, America's conservatives were fully prepared for a total strike meltdown just to make Biden look bad, and now have such power (if only tenuously) to block a strike ban. America's threatened rail strike was also contained to freight, as American passenger RR workers lack the scheduling problems that prompted the (threatened) strike.

We already see Sunak's long-term strategy here anyway: as public services close more will be shifted to online-only. The article mentions this vis-a-vis education and healthcare but this will be forced more generally as transport closes. This will also permit outright firings and service closures which is his only real response to the strikes, as he has not postulated any way to resolve them otherwise and lacks the votes to do so.

> What is there even to talk about? Russia doesn't have any right to Ukrainian land, you're making it seem like Russia had a reasonable justification for invading Ukraine.

Well, this line of thinking is exactly why it's ridiculous for you to pretend that Zelensky's "preconditions" are actually preconditions to anything. And even more ridiculous for him to pretend that.

> Wait, you're talking about conventional warfare after Ukraine joined NATO? That would trigger MAD, no?

Who knows? Like, I said, if Russia is suddenly getting attacked by the US from Ukraine, is Russia going to nuke its own border? Or the US - and trigger MAD for itself too? I don't know - this is brinkmanship. Maybe we'd see some other tactic - like economic sanctions intended to make Russia give up the nukes. Or attempts at political regime change.

NATO has 30 countries. The only time bodies that large all vote for the same thing is Russian run elections.

You’d expect different opinions and mixed messages. It’s democracies.

Both the title and the tone of the article present an anti-union bias, even if that tone is subtle.

[deleted]

[removed]

This would seem to conflict with your earlier assertion that a rising tide lifts all boats?

Official reports actually show that the retirement system in France is fine.

They did the measure because they lowered industry taxes, it's written in the reform.

How could it be "justified" if it's a banned weaponry (becsuse they indiscriminately hit combatants and non-combatants). Especially considering that Ukraine signed the agreement in 1997 and people suffering are their own citizens.

As per article - it already resulted in 11 civilian deaths, and 50 life-changing injuries.

MFW no steel chair 😔

Nah it’s accurate. CCP Twitter attack dog Chen Weihua already bellyached in the replies to one of Pavel’s tweets

A more neutral view would posit that daily life is already disrupted, thus forcing a protest. Repeating the PM's statement is a useless assessment when the PM is useless.

I believe it was proposed that athelets could participate so long as they did not support the war, but it was rejected by Russia? And for the Olympics, this is totally fair since its supposed to be a symbol of unity. I think those first athletes who broke the rules about political statements and ended up banned have eroded any faith in Olympic participants abiding by the rule. And, honestly who can blame them - if I was told make a statement or youll be sent to the gulag, id probably make the statement.

Her appearance at Pavel’s victory event was such a pleasant surprise

When introducing her, Pavel could only say “President of Slovak—“ before the crowd went NUTS

>The referendum was on the fate of the USSR.

That was the January 1991 referendum, which was never implemented because the USSR imploded before its reorganization (including Crimea) could be completed. That implosion mooted the results of the January 1991 Crimea referendum - you can't enforce something that no longer exists.

>They weren't given a choice between being part of independent Ukraine and part of independent Russia.

In December 1991, Ukraine held a referendum and Ukrainians voted for independence. This essentially marked the end of the Soviet Union. 54% of Crimean voters opted for Ukrainian independence, with the turnout in Crimea placed at 60%. Thus Ukraine became independent, and Crimea remained part of the newly independent Ukraine, retaining its autonomous status.

>Since then there is a history of Crimea trying to get some form of independence or autonomy from Ukraine, and Ukraine suppressing it. Even before Putin became Russian president.

True, but only half the story. Russia was working just as hard to suppress pro-Ukraine sentiment. You forgot that part.

The only free expression of Crimean desires that's still actionable was that December 1991 referendum. Russia and Ukraine both sought to leverage the results in their favor. Ukraine won that battle by political means (the pro-Ukraine parliament ousted the pro-Russian president).

Instead of continuing the battle by political means, Russia reverted to raw force - taking Crimea whether Crimeans wanted it or not. Nobody in Crimea ever voted for that.

Probably yes, if that country sending F-16’s wants to replace them with new F-35’s.

The numbers were going up this whole time?