International Relations

Yes it's especially handy to go to a low IQ distraction when you realise you're wrong but don't want to admit it.Of course, comparisons between a holy site and a rubbish film are also pretty great. - @Fred

Ok, Star Wars is not a great film and their universe's tech is a bit weirdly clunky and there are some daft things that go on.   But that said there are some great Star Wars TV shows now. Particularly, I'd cite the show Andor.   Well worth a watch.  Mandalorian isn't bad. But Andor is probably the best Star Wars themed show ever made (so far). I don't think they'll make a Season 3 as they all died in the movie Rogue One.

This is the way.

Yes it's especially handy to go to a low IQ distraction when you realise you're wrong but don't want to admit it.Of course, comparisons between a holy site and a rubbish film are also pretty great. - @Fred
Ok, Star Wars is not a great film and their universe's tech is a bit weirdly clunky and there are some daft things that go on. But that said there are some great Star Wars TV shows now. Particularly, I'd cite the show Andor. Well worth a watch. Mandalorian isn't bad. But Andor is probably the best Star Wars themed show ever made (so far). I don't think they'll make a Season 3 as they all died in the movie Rogue One.
This is the way. - @fluffy2560

The problem with dumb is such people have no clue how a throwaway silly post might well be seen as insulting.  The Masjid al-Haram is the most holy site in Islam, not something to be ridiculed with a stupid comparison to a daft film.

Pathetic.

  The problem with dumb is such people have no clue how a throwaway silly post might well be seen as insulting. The Masjid al-Haram is the most holy site in Islam, not something to be ridiculed with a stupid comparison to a daft film.
Pathetic. - @Fred

You have to admit that it looks like someone built some buildings over a crashed space ship.  That's in no way insulting.  Islam does not disallow sci-fi references or use of imagination, aliens or other worlds. 

I'll concede that perhaps the Millennium Falcon is probably not the right ship for the image. Even the Enterprise-D is not sufficient. 

Probably the crashed ships in Independence Day and possibly Alien are more like it - massive generational ships of lizard people. 

Courtesy Hollywood Reporter

You have to admit that it looks like someone built some buildings over a crashed space ship. - @fluffy2560

I would imagine it does to those with a brain capacity comparable to a slug with learning difficulties, but I can't be sure as I'm unable to think down to that level.

The most difficult thing for me to understand is what would drive an unthinking bigot to post such rubbish.

You have to admit that it looks like someone built some buildings over a crashed space ship.  - @fluffy2560 I would imagine it does to those with a brain capacity comparable to a slug with learning difficulties, but I can't be sure as I'm unable to think down to that level.The most difficult thing for me to understand is what would drive an unthinking bigot to post such rubbish. - @Fred

What have I said? Nothing really.

Read about the mice with human brain cells.  It might help.

I'm getting bored.

I'm going back to watching a history show on the rise of the Nazis.   

I'm going back to watching a history show on the rise of the Nazis. - @fluffy2560

That's easy.

Tough economic conditions, an enemy created in order to focus blame, and (most importantly) a stupid public that were ready to believe any crap as long as the lies suited their stupidity. 

That same formula is still in use today and, sad as it is, it's the stupidity that the Nazis used so effectively.

I'm going back to watching a history show on the rise of the Nazis.  - @fluffy2560 That's easy.Tough economic conditions, an enemy created in order to focus blame, and (most importantly) a stupid public that were ready to believe any crap as long as the lies suited their stupidity. That same formula is still in use today and, sad as it is, it's the stupidity that the Nazis used so effectively. - @Fred

It is indeed a model.

I don't think it was stupidity as such. It was the entirely and apparently easily manipulated masses by those evil people with a plan.  There's lots of writing on it obviously.  Analysed to death many times in fact.

I was idly looking for key indicators and critical points of today's current and recent affairs to see which if  there are any parallels on where we are going.

I've got a bit of disorganised list forming up  which might lead towards WW3

1. Economic collapse due to the oil price (cf. stock market crash in the 1920s)
2. AI  and deindustrisalisation causing unemployment (economic issues)
3. Global warming, desertification, water shortages
4. Falling birth rate (maybe eugenics start to be used)
5. Dumbing down of intellectual thinking possibly due to social media propaganda.
6. Easily found scapegoats (religious, asylum seekers etc)
7. Cult like "strongman" figures emerging or even merging (obviously Trump, Xi, Erdogan, Putin and Farage, that Korean dude)
8. Increasing numbers of conflicts like Ukraine, Iran, Sudan, Thailand/Cambodia with the potential to merge

Meanwhile, the Hitler and the Nazis series I am watching covers Nuremberg and this is where we see the "banality of evil".   I've studied Nuremberg several times.  In German, one can say "Befehler sind befehler" or "Orders are orders" which was used I think by Eichmann to say he was just a civil servant following orders.   This kind of excuse still being used daily.  Like there is no responsibility.

Anyway, if anyone wants to objectively tune up the above list without resorting to extremist rhetoric or name calling, then please feel free to assist me in streamlining it.

Not stupidity,  mass stupidity.

People are idiots and are willing to believe any rubbish they are fed as long as it suits them.

The very fact of you including Xi in the list puts you in the wrong group as you are accepting propaganda as fact instead of total crap.  Xi is no strongman in the way you appear to believe,  but he is the leader of the strongest capitalist state in history.  That's why the US pushes so much rubbish about him and his country.

While the US was spending billions of Dollars on killing people, China was spending the same sort of money on high speed rail, EVs, renewable energy development,  and pretty much everything else the west should have been doing.

That leaves us with a very unstable west more interested in arresting people for especially boring tweets, than actually helping the people they were supposed to fight for.

However, let's just blame China because few see what they have really done, so they can be the new Juden.

As for asylum seeks, they used to be called illegal immigrants, and every sensible country deported them.

Not stupidity, mass stupidity. People are idiots and are willing to believe any rubbish they are fed as long as it suits them.The very fact of you including Xi in the list puts you in the wrong group as you are accepting propaganda as fact instead of total crap. Xi is no strongman in the way you appear to believe, but he is the leader of the strongest capitalist state in history. That's why the US pushes so much rubbish about him and his country.While the US was spending billions of Dollars on killing people, China was spending the same sort of money on high speed rail, EVs, renewable energy development, and pretty much everything else the west should have been doing.That leaves us with a very unstable west more interested in arresting people for especially boring tweets, than actually helping the people they were supposed to fight for.However, let's just blame China because few see what they have really done, so they can be the new Juden. As for asylum seeks, they used to be called illegal immigrants, and every sensible country deported them. - @Fred

Ok, Fredo,  let's break that down into elements while trying and be objective and non-judgemental at this stage.  Just identifying more for the list, not placing them in any order, just key points to add.

These is the summary of the above:

1. Militarisation and rearmament
2. Emergence of China as super power economically and technologically
3. Autocracy
4. Migration

Right?

Not stupidity, mass stupidity. People are idiots and are willing to believe any rubbish they are fed as long as it suits them.The very fact of you including Xi in the list puts you in the wrong group as you are accepting propaganda as fact instead of total crap. Xi is no strongman in the way you appear to believe, but he is the leader of the strongest capitalist state in history. That's why the US pushes so much rubbish about him and his country.While the US was spending billions of Dollars on killing people, China was spending the same sort of money on high speed rail, EVs, renewable energy development, and pretty much everything else the west should have been doing.That leaves us with a very unstable west more interested in arresting people for especially boring tweets, than actually helping the people they were supposed to fight for.However, let's just blame China because few see what they have really done, so they can be the new Juden. As for asylum seeks, they used to be called illegal immigrants, and every sensible country deported them. - @Fred
Ok, Fredo, let's break that down into elements while trying and be objective and non-judgemental at this stage. Just identifying more for the list, not placing them in any order, just key points to add.
These is the summary of the above:


Militarisation and rearmament
Emergence of China as super power economically and technologically
Autocracy
Migration


Right? - @fluffy2560

Sort of right, but you have to understand why instead of vomiting up US 'facts'.

Militarisation and rearmament

For Nazi Germany,  it was a mix of national pride and a wish for revenge.

For China, it's to counter the US threat. China militarised islands as a reply to US carriers (check the dates), and moved away from coastal defence to aircraft carriers in order to protect their shipping.

Emergence of China as super power economically and technologically

They were sensible when the west was stupid. They saw the future whilst the west was conducting oil wars.

Autocracy

One that has made its people and country rich, as opposed to western plutocracies that focus all the cash and power to a tiny elite whilst the rest live in varying states of misery and/or poverty because they believe the dream that buying rubbish will make them happy.

The UK has a democracy,  and extremely high fuel prices, taxation that goes on buying rubbish aircraft carriers, and giving millions in weapons to support the autocratic Ukrainian regime.

Migration

You'll have to clarify that one. If you mean Chinese expats are an issue of some sort, perhaps you could explain why you think so.

- @Fred

To summarise - without over analysing, engaging in lecturing and trying to link to the Nazis (yet) but putting some rough categories in order (for ease of use we can use STEP - Social, Technological, Economic and Political categories), vis-a-vis:

Social

1. Falling birth rate (maybe eugenics start to be used, genetic manipulation)
2. Dumbing down of intellectual thinking  due to social media propaganda (politics as reality TV)
3. Media control by few
4. Easily found scapegoats (religious types/groups, asylum seekers etc)
5. Autocracies - cult like "strongman" figures emerging or even merging (Trump, Xi, Erdogan, Putin and Farage, that Korean dude Kim Jong Un)
6. Social collapse or division due to emerging elites - likely revolution driver (crypto, Musk, Ellison etc)

Technological

1. Militarisation and rearmament (usually driver for modernisation and innovation, even in non-declared conflict, i.e. Space Race)

Economic

1. Economic collapse due to the oil price (cf. stock market crash in the 1920s)
2. AI  and de-industrisalisation causing unemployment (economic issues)
3. Global warming, desertification, water shortages, resource demands (i.e. rare earths, oil etc)

Political

1. Migration and nationalism
2. Increasing numbers of territorial and power based conflicts like Ukraine, Russia, Iran, Sudan, Thailand/Cambodia, Myanmar, China/Taiwan+USA (South China Sea), Kashmir, Ethiopia-Eritrea etc with the potential to merge

Kind of interesting I have more in the Social category at the moment.

PoliticalMigration and nationalismIncreasing numbers of territorial and power based conflicts like Ukraine, Iran, Sudan, Thailand/Cambodia with the potential to merge. - @fluffy2560

Excepting weapons sales to Thailand but not Cambodia,  the US started the Ukraine war by removing their democracy,  started the Iran war directly (and caused today's political situation by removing Iran's democracy), and have a dog in the race in Sudan's civil war.

In other words, the US is directly responsible for most of the world's conflicts today, or supplies weapons or other support that keep them going.

The potential to merge, and expand, goes away if you remove the US.

China, Iran, and Russia are painted as evil states, but the US is the real culprit.

If and when China becomes the world leader, trade will take over from oil wars.

PoliticalMigration and nationalismIncreasing numbers of territorial and power based conflicts like Ukraine, Iran, Sudan, Thailand/Cambodia with the potential to merge. - @fluffy2560 Excepting weapons sales to Thailand but not Cambodia, the US started the Ukraine war by removing their democracy, started the Iran war directly (and caused today's political situation by removing Iran's democracy), and have a dog in the race in Sudan's civil war. In other words, the US is directly responsible for most of the world's conflicts today, or supplies weapons or other support that keep them going.The potential to merge, and expand, goes away if you remove the US.China, Iran, and Russia are painted as evil states, but the US is the real culprit. If and when China becomes the world leader, trade will take over from oil wars. - @Fred

I think we've covered autocracy and war/conflict at least as a line item. 

And we're not apportioning blame here or diagnosing right now, just doing accounting.  Further analysis to come.

OK, in summary then, with a more helicopter view? More to add? 

BTW, I've added Myanmar as a conflict.

BTW, I've added Myanmar as a conflict. - @fluffy2560

Mass murdering Buddhist extremists are a bit of an oxymoron

BTW, I've added Myanmar as a conflict. - @fluffy2560 Mass murdering Buddhist extremists are a bit of an oxymoron - @Fred

Like I said, it's just accounting for it, not diagnosing or trying to determine the root causes.

I also added China/Taiwan+USA, South China Sea as a potential flashpoint.   There is already conflict there, albeit at a low level.  Russia and Kashmir also added.

I also added China/Taiwan+USA, South China Sea as a potential flashpoint. There is already conflict there, albeit at a low level. - @fluffy2560

That's a civil war with the usual country sticking its nose in.

As for Russia, they're just like the US, but only at 1% of the crap value.

I also added China/Taiwan+USA, South China Sea as a potential flashpoint. There is already conflict there, albeit at a low level.  - @fluffy2560
That's a civil war with the usual country sticking its nose in.
- @Fred

It hasn't quite reach actual shooting yet but I include as they've had their water cannon.   

US does have a dog in the race with its territories butting up against China in the form of the Marianas and Guam etc and allies in the Philippines and across Micronesia.

I was thinking of Argentina vs Falklands/UK but there's no actual fighting.   

I am also think Ethiopia-Eritrea.

As for Russia, they're just like the US, but only at 1% of the crap value. - @Fred

Like I said, not diagnosing or judging, just listing/accounting.

US does have a dog in the race with its territories butting up against China in the form of the Marianas and Guam etc and allies in the Philippines and across Micronesia. - @fluffy2560

Ah, US invaded and militarised islands they use to defend against Chinese not invaded, militarised islands the Chinese use as a first line of defence against US aircraft carriers.

US does have a dog in the race with its territories butting up against China in the form of the Marianas and Guam etc and allies in the Philippines and across Micronesia. - @fluffy2560Ah, US invaded and militarised islands they use to defend against Chinese not invaded, militarised islands the Chinese use as a first line of defence against US aircraft carriers. - @Fred

US occupied these islands (Marianas, Guam, Micronesian chain etc) post-WW2 after ousting the Japanese and using it all for bomb tests (i.e. Marshall Islands).  There remnants of Japanese involvement all over (I know, I've been to most of these places).  Some people on these islands still can speak Japanese.  But they had nothing to do with China as a threat until much more recently.  Of course, other countries feel they have valid claims in the South "China" Sea so it could easily turn into a regional conflict which is more objectively interesting.  And US is obliged to rescue Taiwan (but under Trump, would it?).  The Chinese island aircraft carriers don't seem much of a threat.  Bombing raid and they're gone.   

But let's return to the list.  Anything further?  Particularly on the Social category? I mention that because it's human driven.

US occupied these islands (Marianas, Guam, Micronesian chain etc) post-WW2 after ousting the Japanese and using it all for bomb tests (i.e. Marshall Islands). There remnants of Japanese involvement all over (I know, I've been to most of these places). Some people on these islands still can speak Japanese. But they had nothing to do with China as a threat until much more recently. Of course, other countries feel they have valid claims in the South "China" Sea so it could easily turn into a regional conflict which is more objectively interesting. And US is obliged to rescue Taiwan (but under Trump, would it?). The Chinese island aircraft carriers don't seem much of a threat. Bombing raid and they're gone.
But let's return to the list. Anything further? Particularly on the Social category? I mention that because it's human driven. - @fluffy2560

The Chinese built military bases on the islands as a first line of defence against US forces. The US claims they are military expansionism, but they were built after Obama's shift to Asia. The same goes for China's carriers. China's military was all defensive,  but they were forced to expand into carriers in order to protect against US threats.

It's true that the is bases wouldn't last a long time against a US attack, but the idea is to create a picket line that would give mainland and naval defensive forces a few extra hours to prepare.

The US has been at war with at least one country, often 2 or 3 at a time, since 1947, but China has only has a few border conflicts that can to almost nothing.

China has no military forces that threaten the UuS mainland, or even major US bases, but the US is active close to China.

China had only local defensive forces incapable of power projection until the US threatened trade routes,  but has been forced to build carrier groups.

China has brought in a new model for world influence that involves the partner country building infrastructure and improving life for its people, but has shown no interest in invading or bombing any of those places. War gets in the way of trading relationships,  so it isn't in China's interest to start any.

Indonesia is a fine example. It has suffered from a CIA bombing campaign, and CIA interference in its democracy in the last elections,  but benefited in massive ways from Chinese investment. A car journey from one end of Java to the other was 4 or 5 days, but it can be done in 12 hours or so now becauseof Chinese partnerships in toll roads.

We are now looking at Chinese renewable energy and state encouraged EV motorbikes and cars, all based on Chinese technology, and all there to mitigate the ill effects of US oil wars. We get separation of the US threat caused by oil price pressure, and a clearer, quieter country because of Chinese tech.

Whilst the US and UK economics have been hit by the US/Israeli war against Iran, we have been insulated from much of it by buying cheaper Russian oil, and Chinese renewable tech.

Chinese investment via Indonesian state run companies has changed the country,  and everyone has won.

One has to ask which country is the problem, the one that removes democracies, creates wars, and actually starts wars, or the one that Invests in and improves partner countries.

China is only a threat if you believe US propaganda but, in reality, is an especially good trading partner.

Here's a thinking problem to work on. Take every major world conflict since 1947, remove the US from them, and see how many would never had happened., or would have been shortened,  thus killed fewer people. 

Korea would have been a short war and, like all nutcase communist dictatorships, would have died a death or changed to capitalism.

Vietnam,  that the one that kicked the US out in epic fashion, Is still a communist dictatorship,  but is of no threat to anyone and, apart from now being capitalist,  it buys US weapons.

Iran would probably still be a democracy, as would Ukraine. What Cuban revolution?  and no bay of pigs. The USSR would have gone the way of China, or just died under its own stupidity.

9/11 would never have happened, and the US backed ba'ath party in Iraq would never have taken power, so no Sadam.

ISIS would never have existed because the US wars that allowed them to thrive wouldn't have happened.

It's a very long history of death and misery that would never have been written.

The US takes effective control of Greenland.

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c63d7lexyym1o

He said it includes a rule that no US adversary can maintain a military presence in Greenland or "make sensitive investments in Greenland, without our express written approval".

The means Chinese investment in REEs.

Still, at least submission to US threats of invasion means they won't suffer the death, destruction,  and misery so many others have dealt with.

US occupied these islands (Marianas, Guam, Micronesian chain etc) post-WW2 after ousting the Japanese and using it all for bomb tests (i.e. Marshall Islands). There remnants of Japanese involvement all over (I know, I've been to most of these places). Some people on these islands still can speak Japanese. But they had nothing to do with China as a threat until much more recently. Of course, other countries feel they have valid claims in the South "China" Sea so it could easily turn into a regional conflict which is more objectively interesting. And US is obliged to rescue Taiwan (but under Trump, would it?). The Chinese island aircraft carriers don't seem much of a threat. Bombing raid and they're gone.
But let's return to the list. Anything further? Particularly on the Social category? I mention that because it's human driven.  - @fluffy2560
The Chinese built military bases on the islands as a first line of defence against US forces. The US claims they are military expansionism, but they were built after Obama's shift to Asia. The same goes for China's carriers. China's military was all defensive, but they were forced to expand into carriers in order to protect against US threats.
It's true that the is bases wouldn't last a long time against a US attack, but the idea is to create a picket line that would give mainland and naval defensive forces a few extra hours to prepare.
The US has been at war with at least one country, often 2 or 3 at a time, since 1947, but China has only has a few border conflicts that can to almost nothing.
China has no military forces that threaten the UuS mainland, or even major US bases, but the US is active close to China.
China had only local defensive forces incapable of power projection until the US threatened trade routes, but has been forced to build carrier groups.
China has brought in a new model for world influence that involves the partner country building infrastructure and improving life for its people, but has shown no interest in invading or bombing any of those places. War gets in the way of trading relationships, so it isn't in China's interest to start any.
Indonesia is a fine example. It has suffered from a CIA bombing campaign, and CIA interference in its democracy in the last elections, but benefited in massive ways from Chinese investment. A car journey from one end of Java to the other was 4 or 5 days, but it can be done in 12 hours or so now becauseof Chinese partnerships in toll roads.
We are now looking at Chinese renewable energy and state encouraged EV motorbikes and cars, all based on Chinese technology, and all there to mitigate the ill effects of US oil wars. We get separation of the US threat caused by oil price pressure, and a clearer, quieter country because of Chinese tech.
Whilst the US and UK economics have been hit by the US/Israeli war against Iran, we have been insulated from much of it by buying cheaper Russian oil, and Chinese renewable tech.
Chinese investment via Indonesian state run companies has changed the country, and everyone has won.
One has to ask which country is the problem, the one that removes democracies, creates wars, and actually starts wars, or the one that Invests in and improves partner countries.
China is only a threat if you believe US propaganda but, in reality, is an especially good trading partner.

Here's a thinking problem to work on. Take every major world conflict since 1947, remove the US from them, and see how many would never had happened., or would have been shortened, thus killed fewer people.
Korea would have been a short war and, like all nutcase communist dictatorships, would have died a death or changed to capitalism.
Vietnam, that the one that kicked the US out in epic fashion, Is still a communist dictatorship, but is of no threat to anyone and, apart from now being capitalist, it buys US weapons.
Iran would probably still be a democracy, as would Ukraine. What Cuban revolution? and no bay of pigs. The USSR would have gone the way of China, or just died under its own stupidity.
9/11 would never have happened, and the US backed ba'ath party in Iraq would never have taken power, so no Sadam.
ISIS would never have existed because the US wars that allowed them to thrive wouldn't have happened.
It's a very long history of death and misery that would never have been written. - @Fred

I won't read long essays where it looks like a lecture. Add to the list.

The US takes effective control of Greenland.
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c63d7lexyym1o
He said it includes a rule that no US adversary can maintain a military presence in Greenland or "make sensitive investments in Greenland, without our express written approval".

The means Chinese investment in REEs.
Still, at least submission to US threats of invasion means they won't suffer the death, destruction, and misery so many others have dealt with. - @Fred

Sudentenland anyone?

US occupied these islands (Marianas, Guam, Micronesian chain etc) post-WW2 after ousting the Japanese and using it all for bomb tests (i.e. Marshall Islands). There remnants of Japanese involvement all over (I know, I've been to most of these places). Some people on these islands still can speak Japanese. But they had nothing to do with China as a threat until much more recently. Of course, other countries feel they have valid claims in the South "China" Sea so it could easily turn into a regional conflict which is more objectively interesting. And US is obliged to rescue Taiwan (but under Trump, would it?). The Chinese island aircraft carriers don't seem much of a threat. Bombing raid and they're gone.
But let's return to the list. Anything further? Particularly on the Social category? I mention that because it's human driven. - @fluffy2560
The Chinese built military bases on the islands as a first line of defence against US forces. The US claims they are military expansionism, but they were built after Obama's shift to Asia. The same goes for China's carriers. China's military was all defensive, but they were forced to expand into carriers in order to protect against US threats.
It's true that the is bases wouldn't last a long time against a US attack, but the idea is to create a picket line that would give mainland and naval defensive forces a few extra hours to prepare.
The US has been at war with at least one country, often 2 or 3 at a time, since 1947, but China has only has a few border conflicts that can to almost nothing.
China has no military forces that threaten the UuS mainland, or even major US bases, but the US is active close to China.
China had only local defensive forces incapable of power projection until the US threatened trade routes, but has been forced to build carrier groups.
China has brought in a new model for world influence that involves the partner country building infrastructure and improving life for its people, but has shown no interest in invading or bombing any of those places. War gets in the way of trading relationships, so it isn't in China's interest to start any.
Indonesia is a fine example. It has suffered from a CIA bombing campaign, and CIA interference in its democracy in the last elections, but benefited in massive ways from Chinese investment. A car journey from one end of Java to the other was 4 or 5 days, but it can be done in 12 hours or so now becauseof Chinese partnerships in toll roads.
We are now looking at Chinese renewable energy and state encouraged EV motorbikes and cars, all based on Chinese technology, and all there to mitigate the ill effects of US oil wars. We get separation of the US threat caused by oil price pressure, and a clearer, quieter country because of Chinese tech.
Whilst the US and UK economics have been hit by the US/Israeli war against Iran, we have been insulated from much of it by buying cheaper Russian oil, and Chinese renewable tech.
Chinese investment via Indonesian state run companies has changed the country, and everyone has won.
One has to ask which country is the problem, the one that removes democracies, creates wars, and actually starts wars, or the one that Invests in and improves partner countries.
China is only a threat if you believe US propaganda but, in reality, is an especially good trading partner.

Here's a thinking problem to work on. Take every major world conflict since 1947, remove the US from them, and see how many would never had happened., or would have been shortened, thus killed fewer people.
Korea would have been a short war and, like all nutcase communist dictatorships, would have died a death or changed to capitalism.
Vietnam, that the one that kicked the US out in epic fashion, Is still a communist dictatorship, but is of no threat to anyone and, apart from now being capitalist, it buys US weapons.
Iran would probably still be a democracy, as would Ukraine. What Cuban revolution? and no bay of pigs. The USSR would have gone the way of China, or just died under its own stupidity.
9/11 would never have happened, and the US backed ba'ath party in Iraq would never have taken power, so no Sadam.
ISIS would never have existed because the US wars that allowed them to thrive wouldn't have happened.
It's a very long history of death and misery that would never have been written.  - @Fred
I won't read long essays where it looks like a lecture. Add to the list. - @fluffy2560

Iintelligent people would explore a variety of opinions

Intelligent people would explore a variety of opinions
- @Fred

Do not offer opinions as lectures.  That doesn't go down well with me. 

Intelligent people would explore a variety of opinions
- @Fred
Do not offer opinions as lectures. That doesn't go down well with me. - @fluffy2560

Yes, I gather (from your previous statements), you have difficulty reading opinions that don't suit you, even when they are a matter of undisputed history.

You asked how the Nazi party gained power - A lot was down to idiots accepting what they wanted to believe over the truth.

Intelligent people would explore a variety of opinions - @FredDo not offer opinions as lectures. That doesn't go down well with me.  - @fluffy2560 Yes, I gather (from your previous statements), you have difficulty reading opinions that don't suit you, even when they are a matter of undisputed history. You asked how the Nazi party gained power - A lot was down to idiots accepting what they wanted to believe over the truth. - @Fred

Well, at the moment, and in past interactions, there's a lack ability to conduct discourse.  I had hoped for more as you have strong opinions which might have value. But if I was sitting in a round table with you, I'd say  you don't know how to deliver them correctly and without bias.  Hence the need for the helicopter view.  If it was a group effort, round the table, you would benefit from following the usual rules enforced by group dynamics.

Anyway, I know how the Nazis gained power.  The circumstances of the time and the years before allowed it to create a perfect storm.    I was looking for parallels but other dictatorships work too.

For you, my suggestion is not to class people as idiots as this is far too simplistic and generic.   At the time, the Nazis did not have social media and the likes of Twitter etc.  But they did have media control like radio and print newspapers and charismatic orators like Hitler,  Himmler and others.   My hypothesis is that it just took longer for the Nazis to deliver and focus their message whereas in today's connected world, people can be radicalised much faster.

If you want to provide analysis (far too early in my mind), then please put it into the classifications I provided.  This is what professionals do (me included).  The ultimate outcome of the list is working  towards rationalising some scenario planning - see Wikipedia - if you want to read up on that.

You can jump directly to scenario planning if you want but it's not a serious effort if it creates - for you - just a pulpit for spouting a bunch of unsubstantiated claims. It needs to be tempered if you want to be taken seriously as a commentator.

France Running Out of Petrol: 1 in 9 Stations Dry as EU Acts

France is running out of petrol at one in nine stations while diesel hits record prices - and the

EU is now calling for new measures. Here's what's actually happening and why it matters. Stations across France are reporting shortages of petrol or diesel, with the problem worst in Grand Est, Centre-Val de Loire and Occitanie. Official figures have climbed from around 9% mid-week to 11-15% of stations missing at least one fuel type. Diesel has broken previous records above €2.39 per litre; some sites are charging well over €2.50. Macron held an emergency meeting and the government is extending targeted aid for high-mileage drivers, fishermen, farmers and public-works firms. The EU is discussing coordinated stock releases, a fuels observatory, and further crisis tools after Middle East supply disruptions.

#FranceFuelCrisis #PetrolShortage

#DieselPricesFrance #EUEnergyMeasures #Macron

Travellers from EU countries will have less time to explore Thailand without a visa from 15 September, as the popular holiday destination halves its current 60-day allowance.
➡️ https://l.euronews.com/MjrL - @SimCityAT
I did read that. Apparently they are sticking the boot in to stop overstayers. According to reports on ASEAN news there are many people who stay there illegally for many years. - @fluffy2560

Also:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/world/articl … 28916.html

Seems like they wish to change the country image.

Dozens of co-ordinated arson attacks hit southern Thailand
"....Since 2004, a low-level conflict has simmered in the southernmost provinces of Buddhist-majority Thailand, as rebels in the Muslim-majority region battle for greater autonomy. More than 7,000 people have been killed in the violence so far.

The insurgency is mainly led by the Barisan Revolusi Nasional.

Since talks facilitated by Malaysia began in 2013, the peace process ​has repeatedly stalled amid changing governments in Bangkok, with internal divisions on both sides.

In July, five soldiers were killed in a gun and bomb attack at a checkpoint in Narathiwat, prompting the authorities to postpone a planned dialogue process.

Thai media report insurgents often target security officials and government buildings, sometimes ahead of visits by officials to the region."

I rest my case M'lud. Don't go there. North is OK. - @fluffy2560
I've been, and would go again without worry. Of course, when you rely on Wiki and half a news story, it's hard to know what's really happening.
- @Fred

Hehe, that reminds me to a guy, I did meet him, when he worked as a stunt in a film.

In the 90's he was eager to visit India, so gone there by hitchhiking in a few months.

Hungary -> Ukraine -> Russia -> Caucasus (includes Chechnya!) -> Turkey -> Syria -> Iraq -> Iran -> Pakistan -> India.

It is only a question of mentality. If someone finds just normal friday when on a wedding a few dozen guns use up a magazine worth of ammo to shoot into the air when attending as a guest it is fine.

Prime tourist areas are most often heavily sanitized / internationalized - not the real country.

France Running Out of Petrol: 1 in 9 Stations Dry as EU Acts
France is running out of petrol at one in nine stations while diesel hits record prices - and the
EU is now calling for new measures. Here's what's actually happening and why it matters. Stations across France are reporting shortages of petrol or diesel, with the problem worst in Grand Est, Centre-Val de Loire and Occitanie. Official figures have climbed from around 9% mid-week to 11-15% of stations missing at least one fuel type. Diesel has broken previous records above €2.39 per litre; some sites are charging well over €2.50. Macron held an emergency meeting and the government is extending targeted aid for high-mileage drivers, fishermen, farmers and public-works firms. The EU is discussing coordinated stock releases, a fuels observatory, and further crisis tools after Middle East supply disruptions.

#FranceFuelCrisis #PetrolShortage
#DieselPricesFrance #EUEnergyMeasures #Macron - @SimCityAT

I would very much wish to se some comparative world outlook.

Any source what I encountered in the past month always talk about just one or a few countries.

France still in better position than for example Japan, which burned away most of the strategic reserves, and not bordering helpful neighbors. Indonesia eager to sell instead to China which have problems to import from the Middle East, and willing to outpay others.

France Running Out of Petrol: 1 in 9 Stations Dry as EU Acts
France is running out of petrol at one in nine stations while diesel hits record prices - and the
EU is now calling for new measures. Here's what's actually happening and why it matters. Stations across France are reporting shortages of petrol or diesel, with the problem worst in Grand Est, Centre-Val de Loire and Occitanie. Official figures have climbed from around 9% mid-week to 11-15% of stations missing at least one fuel type. Diesel has broken previous records above €2.39 per litre; some sites are charging well over €2.50. Macron held an emergency meeting and the government is extending targeted aid for high-mileage drivers, fishermen, farmers and public-works firms. The EU is discussing coordinated stock releases, a fuels observatory, and further crisis tools after Middle East supply disruptions.

#FranceFuelCrisis #PetrolShortage
#DieselPricesFrance #EUEnergyMeasures #Macron - @SimCityAT

The EU is supplying armaments to Ukraine.

Ukraine is actively destroying Russian oil production facilities and its downstream.

The EU is running out of oil.

Since the only threats from Russia are the invasion of Ukraine that was caused by the CIA run coup against the democratically elected government,  and EU/ UK arms being supplied to Ukraine,  it would strike me that the solution is to stop sending weapons to Ukraine,  then to buy Russian oil and gas.

That was, as a note, exactly the situation before the CIA removed Ukraine's democracy.

In other words, people all over Europe are paying stupid petrol prices as a direct consequence of their politicians' stupidity.

France still in better position than for example Japan, which burned away most of the strategic reserves, and not bordering helpful neighbors. Indonesia eager to sell instead to China which have problems to import from the Middle East, and willing to outpay others. - @sjbabilon5

Indonesia still has subsidised petrol that is available to all motorbikes and all cars that have fuel economic engines. That fuel has hardly changed in price, so the vast majority of people here have been untouched by the US/Israel attacks on Iran.

In order to maintain stability for its people, Indonesia has remained politically neutral so buys oil from a variety of sources,  including Russia.

However, US wars, interventions,  and destroyed democracies are a serious long term threat to the world's energy needs, so Indonesia is pushing a massive buildup of solar power generation along with a big move to EVs, especially electric motorbikes that require very little power to run for a lot of miles.

The EU is pushing against Chinese renewable energy and Chinese EVs, and that  idiocy is hitting the EU's people right in the wallet.

The answer to fuel shortages,  and many environmental problems,  is available to the EU today - All they have to do is follow Indonesia's policies.

@Fred

Well the UKR drone strikes in Russia are just a drop in the global market, mainly given local disruptions. Russia mainly export crude, not much direct diesel/ others.

The real problem for the global market is the Gulf and Iran production + the wider area.

As for Indonesia they are smart - only semi-OPEC not a mass crude exporter, but more like a trade hub: import/ export. 

CBS:

Ukraine ready to sign landmark drone defense deal with U.S., sources say, amid new details on Kyiv's role in Iran war

Kyiv — Ukraine is ready to sign a landmark drone defense deal with the United States, according to three sources familiar with the matter.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy is prepared to sign the deal on the sidelines of the United Nations General Assembly this week in New York City, but the sources said the deal may instead be finalized at a later date, when the U.S. is ready to sign.

Over the past year, the Department of Defense and its Ukrainian counterpart have developed a framework that would allow the two countries' militaries to expand testing and production of Ukrainian defense technology in the U.S.

An interesting development.  Article says Ukraine will make 10M drones per annum vs 50K drones bought by US Army. As always, war promotes innovation out of necessity.

Commanders of a UKR drone battalion (aka Nemesis, interviewed by the Economist) predicted that drones allow cheap terrorism at a state scale.  Pretty pessimistic stuff.

The EU and UK are now paying more for diesel than every before, and the new supply is from the US. Sanctions against Russia and Ukraine causing massive pollution by bombing Russian plants has turned Russia from the most productive country in the world to (I think from memory) the seventh.

It's also increased US sales by about the same amount of lost Russian sales, but the war is about Ukraine,  not another an oil war.

As readers will know, diesel prices control shop prices as transport costs increase, so does the cost to supply.

So, support for the US set up oil war, sorry, bring democracy to Ukraine (or at least the right democracy because they already had one) has really cost EU and UK citizens.

Now for the fun part. Trump want to stop all US diesel exports.

Imagine what would happen the the world if he actually did that.

They set themselves up as the world's biggest supplier, then turned of the tap.

The way to stop this stupidity is easy.

1. Stop supplying Ukraine with the weapons they are using to destroy Russian oil plants.
2. Help Russia rebuild it's refineries under deals that guarantee supplies to the EU and UK.
3. Stay neutral in all US wars
4. Join BRICS in order to insulate from US retaliation.
5. Build up solar and other renewable energy production
6. Buy Russian cheap Russian natural gas again, and scrap US shale gas orders

Well, maybe not easy, but it has to happen.

This will stop the environmental damage, lower prices for everyone,  and probably stop a nasty war caused by the US overthrow of Ukraine's democracy.

@fluffy2560

I am skeptical about both the 10 million claim, and also that UKR - US needs match.

UKR needs kamikaze and medium range surv. drones + local tactical.

US is more like the UAV direction, also longer range, re-usable, guided missile based.

Also Zelensky may eager for a deal, but do the US gov/ corps also?

I remember when they made headlines that they ready to adopt Iron Dome - ISR. said: no way.