The US and Israel started this and now have put Iran on “death ground”. So them doing anything they can for regime survival, and after Trump’s genocidal language, civilizational survival is …understandable. It’s grimdark, yes, but there is no “both sides” here.
Ok, the first thing you guys need to do is shut the fuck up about Kamala. Nobody outside the US cares that you’re mad at the people who didn’t vote for Kamala because of Gaza. It’s in the past. The snark makes you feel good but is 100% pointless.
Proud of you, keep pushing!
I see @jordanlund@lemmy.world in the list of mods in this community and I know from !world@lemmy.world that he feels strongly about substacks. But as far as I can see there is nothing on the sidebar here that follows similar rules as, say !world@lemmy.world’s Rule 1. He mods both communities and Rule 1 here says “only links to articles”, whereas Rule 1 there says “news articles only”, so I assume that qualification identifies a meaningful difference. On the contrary, I see that “original content” is encouraged. At any rate, if this violates the rules of this community, sorry, and please update your rules because it’s not otherwise clear.
This is a pretty straightforward declaration of genocidal intent. If the Americans bomb civilian infrastructure, there is a credible case for accusing them of Genocide in the Hague.
EDIT: Historian Timothy Snyder also identified it as such, pointing that this creates legal liabilities up and down the American state: https://snyder.substack.com/p/the-president-speaks-genocide
This is a pretty straightforward declaration of genocidal intent. If the Americans bomb civilian infrastructure, there is a credible case for accusing them of Genocide in the Hague.
EDIT: Historian Timothy Snyder also identified it as such, pointing that this creates legal liabilities up and down the American state: https://snyder.substack.com/p/the-president-speaks-genocide
You seem very invested in making me out to be a manipulator. I can’t prove to you that I’m not an elephant.
The Danish opt out is not a precedent, it was grandfathered in when the 1992 Maastricht treaty was signed. The same treaty requires all new members to eventually join the euro once the convergence criteria are satisfied.
And chill it with the propaganda accusations. Some times people actually know what they’re talking about and poisoning the conversation with bad faith accusations of some hidden propaganda agenda is just fucking toxic.
I don’t need “identity” issues to argue against the EU. My actual deepest objections stem from the State Aid EU rules that make democratic socialist policies impossible. I just voted for Avi Lewis to lead the NDP and his public option policy proposals are literally illegal in the EU framework. That’s my actual argument against joining a constitutionally neoliberal economic bloc. If the EU tomorrow abolished those rules I would have less of a problem.
Edit: the Euro and the SGP are also problems. Even Trudeau’s moderate deficits would have not been allowed under the SGP. And pegging to the Euro doesn’t make that much sense either, especially when we have Dutch disease in Alberta and we’re generally a materials exporter. My disagreement is economic not identitarian. I’m a dual EU citizen for fucks sake.
We can improve Canada in any way we want. We don’t need the EU to do that. There is nothing that stops us from recognizing EU credentials but ourselves.
I don’t see how pegging the CAD to the Euro would be useful.
I agree on negotiating freedom of movement, potentially joining Schengen. Same for negotiating recognition of Canadian credentials in Europe although that’s less of a problem, usually the other direction is the problem.
The UK was in, fucked up and crashed out. It also has some very weird peculiarities due to the Good Friday Agreement.
I suspect a version of the Swiss model is probably best for Canada, with high integration and Schengen membership but done very granularly on a bilateral basis.
Edit, I changed my mind, see above.
We should develop much closer commercial and other ties (eg regulatory) with the EU but Canada should not outright join. We don’t need the Euro and we don’t need the European Stability and Growth Pact. Lower as many barriers, but we have to keep control of our basic economic policy levers.
Edit: by the way, after looking it up, I’m finding that EU rules about “State Aid” would make the new NDP platform (Avi Lewis campaigned on public options and Crown corporations for various sectors, and buy-canadian rules to protect workers during the green transition) infeasible. So… no, I’m not interested in joining an economic bloc that makes democratic socialism functionally impossible.
Treating Trump as a source of any kind of truth is extremely shaky.
I’m of two minds too. Maybe the compromise would be something like moderation IRL? So like not involving policing by default but protecting the public sphere?
Really can’t blame them. They have zero incentive to trust anything the US is offering because the US has repeatedly negotiated in bad faith as a cover for preparing military escalation. When you behave like an honour-less scumbag, at some point people start assuming your word means nothing.
The drone revolution is truly something to behold.
You sidestep everything else (so, do you retract the assumption of a gotcha?) which is … moving the goalposts fallacy.
But let’s talk about the new goalposts. I did not set up the “test” in the first place. In the first place was a cheap moralistic finger wagging point about the tired cliché regarding supposed single issue voters refusing to back Harris. My “test” was precisely challenging the cheapness of that moralistic finger wagging.
So no, I didn’t do anything “in the first place”.
Any more bad faith one liner comebacks?
In other words, meaningless paperwork just to keep the population disciplined. Germans 🙄.
I would be happy with something to the effect “not allowed to serve in the army of countries engaged in illegal occupation and/or found in contravention of this and that treaty”, and enumerate the treaty for the prevention of apartheid, the one for genocide, and the Geneva conventions.