Ukraine Invasion - Please do not post videos showing attacks/similar

Status
Not open for further replies.
Excellent post Angilion, very true. One only has to look at how the world still exuberantly trades with China, whilst decrying their alleged human rights abuses and brushing compelling suggestions they covered up a release of the most deadly virus discovered in recent times under the carpet.

It won't be long before your beloved Chinese tat, bought and shown off in a sub forum here, despite sister threads condemning the Chinese for ethnic cleansing and their blatantly stolen and copied tech is sharing your home with fuel sourced from the those the west currently wage a proxy war against.

Once again the evidence is irrefutable that long term stability lies in self sufficiency and a dramatically reduced population level, not unworkable globalisation which is totally contrary to our tribal nature.

"our tribal nature" would put the maximum group size at maybe as many as 150 people. Certainly not 70,000,000 people, let alone the far larger population of some other countries.

But apart from that, I broadly agree. Humanity would be much better served as self-sufficient groups choosing to trade surpluses with each other. Perhaps, in time, merging. Or not. The system of globalisation we're all being forced down now is unworkable and bloody dangerous.
 
c5wMSCw.png
 
Last edited:
"our tribal nature" would put the maximum group size at maybe as many as 150 people. Certainly not 70,000,000 people, let alone the far larger population of some other countries.

But apart from that, I broadly agree. Humanity would be much better served as self-sufficient groups choosing to trade surpluses with each other. Perhaps, in time, merging. Or not. The system of globalisation we're all being forced down now is unworkable and bloody dangerous.

The Masai Mara, possibly one of our best known, genuinely still tribal populations, numbered about 2 million, at their last census,
and that's despite them being actively averse to providing even remotely accurate census returns, but I take your point :) And I most certainly agree that the enforced road to globalisation some insist we pursue is madness, economically, socially and ecologically.
 
Last edited:
"our tribal nature" would put the maximum group size at maybe as many as 150 people. Certainly not 70,000,000 people, let alone the far larger population of some other countries.

But apart from that, I broadly agree. Humanity would be much better served as self-sufficient groups choosing to trade surpluses with each other. Perhaps, in time, merging. Or not. The system of globalisation we're all being forced down now is unworkable and bloody dangerous.
It's a land grab.

I don't see further than that.
 
c5wMSCw.png
*Top U.S. Diplomat for East Asia Daniel Kritenbrink: Top Priority With Blinken’s Meeting With Chinese Foreign Minister Is to Underscore U.S. Commitment to Diplomacy and Maintaining Open Lines of Communication
*Top U.S. Diplomat for East Asia Daniel Kritenbrink: Expects Blinken Will Raise Human Rights in Meeting With China’s Wang Yi
*Top U.S. Diplomat for East Asia Daniel Kritenbrink: Expects Myanmar to Figure Prominently in Blinken’s Meetings in Asia
*Top U.S. Diplomat for East Asia Daniel Kritenbrink: Expects Candid Exchange Between Blinken and China’s Wang Yi on Ukraine
*State Department Spokesperson Ned Price: The Time Now Is Not Right for Blinken to Meet With Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov
*State Department Spokesperson Ned Price: U.S. Would Like to See Russia Be Serious About Diplomacy but Has Not Seen That yet
*U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for Economic and Business Affairs Ramin Toloui: G20 Countries Should Hold Russia Accountable and Insist That It Support Ongoing U.N. Efforts to Reopen the Sea Lanes
*U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for Economic and Business Affairs Ramin Toloui: Food and Energy Security Will Figure Very Prominently in G20 Discussions
*U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for Economic and Business Affairs Ramin Toloui: Expects Blinken Will Raise Energy Security in Main G20 Session and in Bilateral Meetings
 
I think that's not true if Russia succeeds in subjugating Ukraine within the next decade or two. Russia might then be isolated from NATO countries, but there are a lot of countries that aren't in NATO and that want to buy what Russia sells. Russia is primarily an oil and gas company nowadays. If Russia succeeds in subjugating Ukraine, Russia will probably become an industrial agriculture business too. Oil, gas and food will usually trump political concerns, especially when those councerns are about countries unconnected (in either geographical, social or political terms) to your own and there's no threat to your own. India, for example. It's not under threat from Russia and it's not connected to Ukraine in any way. It's government will hedge a bit while the invasion is in progress, but will continue to buy oil and gas from Russia even then. Or China, whose government doesn't even pretend to care. Two massive countries that account for more than a third of the world (in terms of population) and that will buy what Russia's selling. That's very far from being "isolated from the world". They might hedge a bit in public for the benefit of their own businesses selling to NATO countries, especially their own agriculture businesses (which would then be in a much better position for selling to NATO countries, with Ukraine being removed) but they'll buy what Russia sells.
Yes its only western liberal democracies that are outraged by russias behaviour europe and america (and the outlier, Australia) the rest of the world doesn't care isn't interested and don't have a problem with russia trade or otherwise. Russia is a large country with plenty of borders with non western countries and plenty of outlets for trade including ports in the pacific
 
Yes its only western liberal democracies that are outraged by russias behaviour europe and america (and the outlier, Australia) the rest of the world doesn't care isn't interested and don't have a problem with russia trade or otherwise. Russia is a large country with plenty of borders with non western countries and plenty of outlets for trade including ports in the pacific

Some of the rest of the world have their own problems to worry about. Africa, for example, still has massive amounts of inequality, poverty, civil unrest and even Islamic terrorism - in the face of the way Africans have to live their lives, they will have little to care about some war in a country they've never heard of and yet the damaged streets of Bucha (or pretty much any other Ukrainian town) are still in better condition than 95% of Africa
 
Last edited:
*Russia’s Medvedev: Japanese Proposal to Cap Russian Oil Price Will Lead to Higher Oil Prices Globally
*Russia’s Medvedev: Oil Prices Could Rise to Over $300-$400 per Barrel
*Russia’s Medvedev: Japan Will Have Neither Oil nor Gas From Russia As a Result
*Japan Deputy Chief Cabinet Secretary Kihara: Aware of Russia Medvedev’s Comment but Won’t Comment on Individual Official’s Remarks
*Japan Deputy Chief Cabinet Secretary Kihara: Actual Price Cap Figure for Russian Oil Will Be Discussed As Necessary Among G7 Members
*Japan Deputy Chief Cabinet Secretary: G7 Agreed to Discuss Price Cap, and PM Kishida’s Comments Were Based on That Agreement

ob1PoPj.png
w45Y53c.png
QLsOnJh.png
 
Last edited:
"our tribal nature" would put the maximum group size at maybe as many as 150 people. Certainly not 70,000,000 people, let alone the far larger population of some other countries.

But apart from that, I broadly agree. Humanity would be much better served as self-sufficient groups choosing to trade surpluses with each other. Perhaps, in time, merging. Or not. The system of globalisation we're all being forced down now is unworkable and bloody dangerous.

However those tribes went to war over (a) resources/land/wealth (b) fear (ie advanced technology or better standard of living) and (b) women/men breeding pool.

Security of 150 people is very low too as to is the capability to invest in programmes larger to benefit the whole.

Globalised single economy has been tried before - the Roman Empire for example. You're right that further from the central seat of power the weaker the influence. Romans also understood that to keep power and authority they needed (a) to build in the local administration and worship into the roman norms and (b) kill those that disagreed. The EU doesn't do a or b, Russia and China simply do b. Therefore they are doomed to fail (well China less so than Russia or EU).

The original European trade was to allow countries to trade better.. Then came the single EU state idea. I'm pro-EU in that I want that capability to trade although I feed that a single EU state is rather like the Roman Empire substituting the bureaucracy for killing.
 
However those tribes went to war over (a) resources/land/wealth (b) fear (ie advanced technology or better standard of living) and (b) women/men breeding pool.

Security of 150 people is very low too as to is the capability to invest in programmes larger to benefit the whole.

Globalised single economy has been tried before - the Roman Empire for example. You're right that further from the central seat of power the weaker the influence. Romans also understood that to keep power and authority they needed (a) to build in the local administration and worship into the roman norms and (b) kill those that disagreed. The EU doesn't do a or b, Russia and China simply do b. Therefore they are doomed to fail (well China less so than Russia or EU).

The original European trade was to allow countries to trade better.. Then came the single EU state idea. I'm pro-EU in that I want that capability to trade although I feed that a single EU state is rather like the Roman Empire substituting the bureaucracy for killing.

The EU does a better version of "a)". Each member state retains its own govenrment voted for by that country, takes turns in being EU president, and each member states elects it's own MEPs. To represent the members interests.
 
Last edited:
*Russian Rouble Falls to 64 vs Dollar for First Time Since May 30
*Austrian Chancellor Nehammer: Gazprom Will Lose Its Share of Haidach Gas Storage Facility for Not Using It, Other Energy Companies and Austria Will Use It

*Kremlin Spokesman Peskov: There Have Been No Substantive Contacts With Pope Regarding Proposed Visit
*Kremlin on Possible Nornickel-Rusal Merger: This Is Corporate Matter
*Kremlin: Japan Is Taking ‘Very Unfriendly’ Position Towards Russia
*Kremlin: Japan’s Unfriendly Position Does Not Facilitate Developing Ties In Trade and Economy, Including in Energy Sector
rnr0IPw.png
VfjoOVG.png
GtMP7Kq.png

j6hCLxR.png
FiTtUsh.png
sP81ZcY.png
hQJESgX.png

*German Chancellor Scholz: Question of Promised Security Guarantees to Ukraine Cannot Be Specified yet, Will Be Discussed With Partners and Ukraine

*HSBC Is in Talks to Sell Russian Unit to Expobank — Bloomberg News
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...to-sell-russian-unit-to-local-lender-expobank
*TotalEnergies: It Is Quitting Kharyaga Oil Project in Russia, Agreed to Transfer Its Remaining 20% Stake to Zarubezhneft
*TotalEnergies: This Transaction Is Subject to the Approval by Russian Authorities
*TotalEnergies: Still Holds Stakes in Terneftegaz, Artic LNG, Yamal LNG and Novatek
 
*Port of Mariupol in Southern Ukraine Operating at Full Capacity — TASS Cites Director

*German Economy Minister: What We’re Now Doing Is Pretty Close to Expropriation of Companies
*German Economy Minister: The Current Situation Can Result in a Recession
*German Economy Minister: Credit Crunch Could Threaten the Country’s Economic Power
*German Economy Minister: There Are Considerations of Further Sanctions Against Russia in My Ministry, We Are Not at the End yet
*German Economy Minister: We Are in Green Zone on Planning of Both LNG Terminals for Winter

*US, ALLIES DISCUSS CAPPING RUSSIAN OIL PRICE AT $40-$60 A BARREL - BLOOMBERG NEWS
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...s-discuss-capping-russian-oil-prices-at-40-60
 
Last edited:

Sounds pretty ominous giving such a warning at such a time

Quite why we have, let alone need 150.000 plus Chinese "students" in UK universities I don't know, save to line the pockets of the university hierarchy with no regard to the security risks they pose. If we want to, and we certainly should, subjugate Chinese technological advancement I see no good reason to have ANY Chinese students in the UK. To coin a phrase I haven't heard much of lately, "Send them back". Why take the risk to global security to enable some university chancellor to live the life of Riley?
 
On Energy:

*Germany’s Scholz: We Must Implement Energy Transition Even Faster After Russian Attack on Ukraine
*Germany’s Scholz: Russia Is Using Energy As a Political Weapon, No One Believes in Technical Problems With Supply Problems
*Germany’s Scholz: Germany Needs ‘Massive Expansion’ of Renewable Energy — BBG

*UK Business Minister: Drax Agreed to Keep Their Coal Plant Online This Winter, if Needed
*UK Business Minister: We Now Have Two Coal Plants Available This Winter, Negotiations Ongoing With One More
*UK Business Minister: Will Announce on Thursday Results of Our Biggest Ever Renewable Energy Auction
 
Quite why we have, let alone need 150.000 plus Chinese "students" in UK universities I don't know, save to line the pockets of the university hierarchy with no regard to the security risks they pose. If we want to, and we certainly should, subjugate Chinese technological advancement I see no good reason to have ANY Chinese students in the UK. To coin a phrase I haven't heard much of lately, "Send them back". Why take the risk to global security to enable some university chancellor to live the life of Riley?

It can also work the other way around, experiencing life in the UK will have an effect.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom