I get in on UK now… Japan… gosh, I hope not but I am very afraid that is the underlying truth.

That is very hard to asses. I prefer to look it like this, what chances is that you will find a partner (like for marry to) out of 100 or so. I do believe, if given equal chance of interaction, you could find a marrying-material partner every 7 or 8 people. Now, in a world of plenty of choices, biases etc, we shuffle through hundreds of people before settling with one… and, even then, still unhappy with the choice for the people we haven gone through yet in our search. Now, that is for me… Chances is you would choose a different person out of these very same 7 to 8 people. Both chosen persons have the same chance of being equally good persons, as the non chosen ones.

You have a point… a scary point!

Those that claim it is a “Special Operation” say it to deny the word invasion… of course, is nonsense. That is what I was referring to. Sorry for the misunderstanding.

Oh… there are! I oppose the invasion 100%, like oppose US trying to invade Cuba with the same claims. Now, I accept as an argument that when you have been invaded three times through Ukraine by western powers and each resulted with millions of deaths… you may have a cause to ask for neutrality from Ukraine. Very unfair for the sovereignty of Ukraine, but I understandable from Moscow. Ukraine should have been more pragmatic. Mexico’s current leader detests the US leadership, but instead of asking from Russian or Chinese assistance, it tries to keep a neutral yet clear stance tone. Acting like Cuba or Ukraine is just asking for trouble. Finland learned that in the 50s too, the best way to deal with a country that stole 1/3 of your country was to be neutral and it flourished in that premise… to now becoming NATO… good luck flourishing from now on!!! Singapore and Switzerland also learned the benefits of genuinely assuring neutrality to the powerful neighbors.

I agree with many of your premises, but not the main one. People are brainwashed for sure that migrants, jews, muslims, etc are the problem, but they do have grievances that the state does not care for them. Blaming Putin on that perception is silly, he wish he was that powerful. US had for decades massively aired propaganda in all corners of the world, financed NGOs, payed journalists and the results were mixed. Putin does not employ not even a 5% of the US budget into those operations. Farage is a good example, he noticed that the British are not happy, that Brussels was getting more powerful and blamed all in Brussels with memes like curved bananas etc (I know trade and knew Brexit was horrible for both side of the Channel) but I don’t blame Putin for Farage or Trump… they both are just opportunistic in a situation those countries fail to deliver. UK and US are both in a worse situation due to these two politicians, but banning them both would have been far worse since the discontent still unaddressed. Blaming in Putin for them both is just ridiculous, he wish he had that power!

I don’t think is that… the EU happily come to “rescue” Uyghurs from Beijing, or Kosovars from Belgrade, or Chechens from Moscow… the pattern I find is always to support Washington DC. For sure, you have much more chances of success by standing with the US (till now at least), but tens and tens of countries… that is not a normal statistical curve! And Corbin’s expulsion doubt US had anything to do with it.

One thing you said lighted my mind though, countries that committed genocide are very into Israel today though… well, no Belgium though… it is complicated I guess, not a normal curve though.

The colonial abuses of 2 centuries ago were not recorded for most to see. Most recently, from blaming Spain for the sinking of the Maine to blame 9/11 on Afghanistan and Iraq the press got away with it, but now sources are so varied it is hard to suppress the reality any longer. True, we are less likely to protest in streets for change (I blame social media), but no one now trust the system and their arguments either. As we won’t protest, we won’t also join any army to fight in a foreign land for any cause. This will eventually corrode the system from within… just wait for a mayor financial crisis.

What puzzles me is not US, the lobbies are very strong and the media gets funded by well know institutions… but why the EU? Why Japan? Why even the UK since financial contribution is capped… how virtually every single one leader is blind or worse? Even calling for an investigation is outrageous for them!!!

Worry less about what Kremlin wants and what million of French now, like millions of Romanians, feel completely disfranchised. I don’t know if Le Pen’s ruling holds any water, (I know Romania’s does not!), but I see corruption cases left and right everywhere but the only candidates that are suspended are the same type… anti-establishment ones with a high degree of making an impact. As I mentioned in other posts, I detest the Le Pens (father and daughter), but not their ability to listen to their voters.

Independently of one thinks of the invasion (yes invasion!) of Russia in Ukraine, any potential “peacekeeping” force should not only behave in an exemplary manner but also avoid any appearance of bias, in order to maintain the highest standards of integrity and reputation. Keir Starmer’s army, let alone Macron’s, sorry to say, I think does not fit that… UN or from non belligerent parties is the only option.

100% agree! The EU has opened a pandora’s box by going after elements like Le Pen and Georgescu. That is not the way! Address people’s concerns, penalize huge corporations negative externalities and wrongdoings as it should… banning voices just exacerbates their grievances. I don’t know about Le Pen, just dislike her incendiary immigrant rhetoric wanted to reduce drastically immigration is a valid stance in my mind, although I disagree with, but being anti-[fill_religion_or_color__here] is not). What I know is that the claims posed by Romania does not hold any water… There is no evidence presented to this day of Russian interference… just claims; with that any current government can also ‘claim’ interference and stop a candidate. Bad, bad times in the EU.

If we take its actual definition; far-right, authoritarian, and ultranationalist, countries like Cuba for sure fits the bill. Now Cuba is authoritarian (and normal since they are in permanent and genuine threat from its neighbor) and probably that is not what is in your mind. Latin America is, as many as you pointed out, no ideal… but most countries there at least lacks of a strong government to enforce things (for better or worse) so, in a turbulent world, it is indeed a better bet. I think, for the time being, Spain has proven to be resilient to authoritarianism and even the voters of “extreme” parties are not that extreme themselves! In Latin America, Mexico is proven to have an amazing leadership (today, I consider it the best worldwide) so unlikely to change overnight. Colombia, Chile and Uruguay seems promising too.

Go on… I don’t like much all these populists/narcissistic/nationalists but first Poland’s Lech Kaczyński dies in a airplane accident, Slovakia’s Robert Fico gets shot, Romania’s election gets cancelled and then the front runner banned, and then the second banned too (have any evidence been published?!). Duterte gets arrested in Manila and sent to the Hague (Philippines is not a ICC signatory)… I remember McAfee and Epstein suicides but miraculously cameras in prisons failed to work… and today in Spain the records from a spy working for the CIA that spied on Assange gets all deleted… while in Spanish top authorities custody! I am not fan of these eccentric people, but you have to give it to them there is something in our “law and order” system that is “odd” to say the least… and us blindly clapping is worrisome.