What? The two things have nothing to do with each other. A GNU operating system doesn't need to be open source or have its source code available anywhere. A GNU operating system just means it uses GNU tools.
You could write a new kernel from scratch, never distribute a single character of the source code, make an operating system with your new kernel along with GNU tools, and even sell your operating system, which the GPL allows for. The GNU tools would still be open source, sure, but your operating system would be neither open source, nor have its source code completely available.
"This decision also sends a clear message to the international community: states cannot violate international law with impunity."
And how have they been punished, exactly?
"We call upon Russia to finally face up to its responsibility for this horrific act of violence and make reparations for its egregious conduct, as required under international law,"
You call upon them? So they haven't been punished and won't be, got it.
Did you read the whole comment? OP finishes his comment addressing exactly what you question, they say the good outweighs the bad, and it should be legal.
The closest I've seen to true decetralisation is nostr, all other protocols either died or were just concepts. Activitypub is a good middle ground between true decentralisation and centralised services.
I read that, but my question still stands.