Rusty Nails
Country Member
I look forward to the result of the Indian authorities' thorough investigation into the possibility of covert Russian involvement in these tragic accidents/incidents.
I look forward to the result of the Indian authorities' thorough investigation into the possibility of covert Russian involvement in these tragic accidents/incidents.
Meanwhile are good friends the Americans ramp up the war rhetoric with China ! Surrounding China with military bases and weapons, and saying China will ‘initiate hostilities’
https://www.ft.com/content/bf5362de-60a6-4181-8c2a-56b50be61383
Who's saying good and evil ? I'm against war or threats from either side.Let's hope its as you say and it's just a game of power and influence.It is possible to view this dispassionately and without the need to invoke polarised notions of good and evil, right and wrong. Both countries are playing the same old game of trying to project power and influence. A resurgent and economically strong China wishes to develop a blue water navy and push the US out of its back yard, and push itself onto other nations' front lawns. A slowly declining US is trying to work out how to maintain the economic strength it has, in part off the back of cheap Chinese labour, whilst not further enriching China. Conflict is inevitable in one form or another. Clearly all eyes on Taiwan and its bounty of semiconductor manufacture. How you feel about this depends on who you are and where you are. I doubt the Japanese are particularly chuffed. Gil Scott Heron's B Movie comes to mind.
The plans of a EU army still haven't gone but gained their momentum after Brexit, after there was criticism on the EU because in the fractions of the EU lobbying for amongst other things and EU army, if there are problems within the EU we need more EU. (who ever heard about solving problems right?) The term ''united states of europe'' comes from the same fraction. I known it sounds better to frame it on some populist but that would be wrong information.If you think back to 2016, one of the more rabid talking points of the Brexiteers was that the EU planned to form an "EU Army", followed by exclamations along the lines of "we never signed up to that", and invocations of the Evil Empire from Star Wars.
Where do you get that nonsense from? Ever heard of Norstream 1 and 2? Those project proceded because the EU was tone deaf, looked happyliy the other way for years. And when Trump, yes that same Trump you talk about criticized them for then Nortstream 1 and eu countries not keeping up with Nato payments he was ridiculised, laughed at etc. And while i think there are plenty of reasons to ridicule or laugh at Trump he had a point here. (and yes that was actually one of the triggers for the calls of an EU army, mind you that didn't stop eu countries from cutting their defense budgets.)The reality was more prosaic, and more frightening. The EU recognised that they could no longer entrust their security to the Americans, both in terms of increasing US isolationism (see the Trump years, and the revelation that he planned to pull the US out of NATO) but also with US as a declining power. This dawning realisation was not limited purely to defence and was a prime motivation for the EU to start developing their own structures, abilities and institutions (Gallileo is a good example).
Trump has been president for only 4 years, in which he barked a lot but did very little(as in foreign policy), because his election pledge was not to start a war. Clinton's, Bush and Obama's policy's have had far more influence on Putin as well as the steady flow of money from Western gas and oil purchases. As west we have to stop pointing at the populist and realize the monster in Moscow is bolstered by ourselves.Trump is gone, but the fundamentals remain, brought sharply into focus by aggressive Russian expansionism.
Well supply those fact to Wikipedia to have it edited if your so sure. However i have a paper enclopedia here (yes that old fashion) that says the same. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo_(satellite_navigation)I personally know one of the former key players in the Galileo project, a Professor of Geodysy. I say former because he is no longer involved because of Brexit. Want to tell him he is wrong about the origins of the project? I'm sure you know best.
Considering how the Us for years also was one of the largest controbutors to NATO their criticism is justified. If you agree on a certain percentage, then you have to stick with it. I beleive the call was on NATO countries not NATO EU countries specific. Alltough much if not all EU countries are also Nato members. And a country like Turkey doesn't need reminders for military spending because just like for example the us the military is a strong part of culture.Likewise, there is plenty of documentation about the shifting sands of European defence. The US has for years criticised EU NATO countries for law %GDP spending in defence, Trump made it explicit. Everybody knows NATO will not last forever, and whilst a standing EU Army is not on the cards yet, the thought processes that will lead to one are occurring.
Yes i did, that's why i said the decision to come with galileo was based upon a us policy change, under Clinton, particular quote ''Galileo is intended to be an EU civilian GNSS that allows all users access to it. Initially GPS reserved the highest quality signal for military use, and the signal available for civilian use was intentionally degraded (Selective Availability). This changed with President Bill Clinton signing a policy directive in 1996 to turn off Selective Availability. '' end quote. Your quote seems to be related to thatDid you even read the Wiki page you cited?
"European Union member states decided it was important to have a satellite-based positioning and timing infrastructure that the US could not easily turn off in times of political conflict"
Ok, i don't agree with you on that point, in terms of i think the calls for an EU army are completely separate from the Us. seems to be mainly politicians on a power trip in my view, looking to distract from the realities of the European dream, especially at that time not panning out like expected, so then gripping to more control instead of being more open. (a good example is a dutch channel/weblog then went to film EU officials abusing a certain sign in bonus of think it was 400€ instead of stopping the practice the EU forbade media to be able to film said practice. )As for the putative EU army, I haven't offered any sort of value judgement. I've merely posited that it is symptomatic of a recognition of declining US power, and the perceived need for an eventual alternative. I think this is blindingly obvious, and hardly a radical view.