Given that from my understanding the Ukrainian constitution requires any change in the nation’s borders to win a public referendum, and that the current polls show 3-5 support for such in a mock referendum, something tells me this isn’t going to do much more than buy time for Ukraine to integrate more modern weapons into its arsenal.
Was bipartisan, keyword was. Trump is an isolationist, and both has an continues to run on a platform of appeasement and withdrawal. See withdrawing for Kosovo for instance. Moreover, support for Russia is probably very high among the maga crowd as it has been heavily marketed as a white christian ethnostate pushing back against the ‘woke agenda’.
If the GOP was so interested in supporting Ukraine, why did they delay any action for months and constantly attach absurd border riders to an bill that has nothing to do with the border.
The idea that Nato lacks the industrial capacity to fight Russia in a peer conflict is so absurd I don’t even know where to start. The US provided Ukraine 31 tanks, at the same time it sold 116 to Poland. Simultaneously, the US provided some long range strike capability to Ukraine in the form of ATACMs -A, a weapon system that forced the Russian air force to withdraw all quick reaction forces from bases in occupied Ukraine, including Crimea, and which ceased production in 1997 owing to haveing been replaced by more modern designs and which was being broken down for spare parts when the decision was made to send some.
How many systems that the US considers modern enough to use itself have been sent? How many Aegis systems? How many Tomahawks? How many of the thousands of F35s that have been built in the last decade have been sent, let alone F22s?
Maybe the Patriot system, of which Ukraine has three batteries, putting it on par with Jordon and the UAE? Japan alone has six whole battalions of Patriots, and there hardly the largest user.
Russia is not the Soviet Union, that included over a half a dozen major industrial nations that are now Nato members.
Russia is not a peer to the US or China, it is a hypercapitalist dictatorship with a lot of 60s and 70s tech laying around rusting in fields, and which self proclaimed opponents are fighting to a standstill using decades old scrap and in the US case, a line item worth less than a quarter of what the federal government spent on subsidizing health insurance providers alone.
We dont think Twitter with win this war, mearly the basic economic scale of a small dictatorship trying to pretend it is some great imperial empire by amexing yet another of its neighbors.
But hey, they managed to take Adivka, a town within walking distance of the center of a city that they took in 2014 and which has seen constant fighting since day one. It only took three years and a large donation of shells from North Korea to do it.
No. Trespassing is generally considered trespassing even if the door is unlocked. Your the one arguing that it makes a difference if the door is unlocked or if the door is locked by the key posted in plain sight.
As to the other point, it’s more like they were with you, or at least as close as you can be when we’re talking about internet stuff. If one of your friends in the same industry says, hay, i’d like to show you something, let yourself in, we keep the key hanging from a nail right next to the door, it would be resonable to expect you were allowed to be there.
We are talking about one journalist being invited into an another news agencies archive. This isn’t that uncommon of an occurrence, otherwise no agency would otherwise know what footage was available to license from their competitors.
In that scenario how do you propose that the key under the mat is any different than if the door wasn’t locked in the first place?
What if one of the workers at the business invites you in to quietly look around? Should you still be arrested for trespassing if it turns out that specific worker didn’t have permission to invite you in?
The credentials were published publicly and freely available on the open internet.
Maybe the person who published them did something illegal, if they themselves did not have permission to share, but it could have also been an accident or on purpose. At most they violated an NDA, but that doesn’t have criminal consequences.
The journalist who later used them would seem like they should br in the clear.
Not to be too favorable to the Dems, but they had a supermajority for a single month this century, and even then several of their congresspeople were elected as ‘pro life democrats’.
I’m mean, it’s not that surprising that a republican controlled congress would refuse to pass federal laws overturning their hard fought state level wins. The dems have only had a majority this decade if you count democrats who started their careers as republicans and haven’t changed their stances since, but now run as dems because the republicans have drifted so far right that the dems are now closer to their own views.
Ion and Hall effect thrusters have high efficiencies, but absurdly small thrusts. They work in situations where you can burn for months on end to get the same change in velocity a few minutes worth of a chemical rocket, but would never be able to lift even their own weight off earth.
I also don’t the think that you can even get one to function as deep into the atmosphere as ground level as the would just ark across the potential instead.
You can’t exactly use electricity directly to power a rocket, and fuel represents such a small cost compared to everything else that governments can afford the dedicated production.
Honestly though, the spacecraft themselves are such a tiny emitter compared to things like manufacturing, transport, and electrical generation that they can basically be ignored untill we have basically eliminated thouse emissions.
Russia has consistently signaled that they have no intention of accepting even the current frontline as a negotiating point, as far as recently passed Russian laws are concerned, large areas of currently Ukraininan controlled territory like the city of Kerson are part of the Russian Federation and any agreement that gave them up would be illegal under Russian law.
Moreover, given how well appeasement worked for them in 2014, there is little public support for such a strategy in Ukraine, even if Russia’s stated core goal wasn’t to prevent the possibility of Ukraine joining any defensive agreement that would make a further invasion difficult.
If Russia comes to the negotiating table, it will either be because a large scale collapse is inevitable on either side, or because they’ve run out of North Korean shells at a time where their opponent is gaining access to increasingly more modern weapon systems. The Soviet Stockpile is massive, but you can only empty it once.
Hasn’t the US been hostile to the Pakistani government since they found a lot of aid given to the government was being used to directly finance the Taliban? I mean they still provide some humanitarian aid, especially after the floods that put a decent chunk of the nation underwater for a few days, but that’s a spike in what’s been a downward trend for decades.
All of this is to say that i’m not sure the Pakistani government is all that US backed.
Ohh it wouldn’t convince any of the far right, but it would take time to embed the new rote complaints after spending so much air time repeating the same age issue, and which how unsubtle they’ve become I’m curious as to if they’ll get braden enough to alienate the ‘social progressive, fiscal conservative’ crowd.
If that’s the the primary concern with Biden the mainstream is willing to actually talk about, because every actual criticism tends to boil down to being a standard Democratic centrist unwilling to take much of a stand on anything but throwing money at climate and student debt, then Harris solves that by providing a generic Dem that fulfills the one thing they’ve been told is a problem with Biden for the last few years.
Harris is at least positioned as slighly more radical than Biden, so it could lead to better support the younger left if she manages to stay clear of Gaza and other problems of inaction. I also doubt very many people are going to change their vote for Biden based on round 2 of debates.
More practically, given that no party is going to drop a incumbent nomination without a lot more pressure then Biden’s under, it is at least slightly less fantastical if it’s just switching the order. It’s not going to happen, but it might be interesting if it did.
Practically, the only way I think we might see a change from the DMC strategy of moving righword to try and gain moderates is if Trump actually splits the Republicans, unlikely because none of them have enough of a spine, and thusly gave one of the actual left candidates enough comfort with the margin on a four way race they don’t bow out without major concessions.
I don’t know, I’d say Fox News and the New York Times running constant stories on a canadates age or speaking ability while avoiding more than a footnote mention of any policy, actions, or laws the candidate has shaped, no matter how watered down they were, is whining. If it was justifiable outrage, surely the focus would be on things he was actually doing, like supporting Isreal’s far right or backing down when faced with a incompetent House, and not about how someone with a speech impediment flubed a speech?
Could they just trade places? Run as a Harris Biden ticket. There is a lot more endless whining about Biden than Harris after all, and I imagine it would throw Newscorp for a spin while they refocus on new non politics reasons to hate Harris. She’s younger, more likable, and can point to the same exact record.
Given that the current Dem plan seems to be to do nothing and just hope that the Republicans never win again, starting a tradition of the VP of one admin graduating to the Presidency of the next seems like it might also make sense to limit the difficulty faced holding the office after a second term.
Sonori @ sonori @beehaw.org Posts 12Comments 424Joined 2 yr. ago
Given that from my understanding the Ukrainian constitution requires any change in the nation’s borders to win a public referendum, and that the current polls show 3-5 support for such in a mock referendum, something tells me this isn’t going to do much more than buy time for Ukraine to integrate more modern weapons into its arsenal.