#THE CAPITAL OF EASTERN EUROPE: WESTERN BERLIN | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

dykepuffs · 1 year

Text

I want to argue that Dracula is the first work of Nokiawave.

-It's heavily concerned with new technology which drives the plot: Telegrams between everyone being collated into the text, Dr Seward's audiolog on the phonograph which Mina types up, mass transit in the form of both trains and Tube, steamships (and specifically the contrast between steam and sail) and loads of minor examples.

-It's concerned with new social technologies and social change: Mina is a typist, a respectable modern job for a young middle-class woman. Jon is a clerk and is working in an exciting emerging market. Dr Seward uses all the modern methods and keeps up with theory and scientific developments. Lucy is pleased to have plenty of male friends, not just to be seeking to marry. And it contrasts this with both the "good" Old Ways - The helpful, hopeless, peasants who give Jon his anti-vampire icon, the "broad minded" but also clearly steeped in superstition Van Helsing - and the "bad" Old Ways - Obviously, Dracula and also the enslaved Roma (Who, oh god, I I have to write about them in the context of Romanian chattel slavery of Roma, which was technically abolished in stages throughout the 2nd half of the 19th century, but where emancipation came with enforced sedentarism and obligation to a landowner - And where many remained enslaved in all practical terms into the C20th, and specifically in Transylvania the effects of Maria Theresia's Four Decrees that were still in effect that meant they would both be indentured to a landowner as "new farmers" and their children would be kidnapped by the state and given to white families for "reeducation" - but most people analysing the text seem to treat them as willingly Evil Minions).

-It's full of the anxieties about what Eastern and Southern Europe will do as they "modernise and open" (ie become financially and culturally available to the West) and specifically the fear of the Rich Slavic* Oligarch (to a certain kind of British mind, anyone east of Berlin and north of Athens is Slavic, sigh) spreading their malign influence in the Capital Cities of the West. Even the touch that Dracula was once a warlord but is now a slick investor and man-about-town.

-It has lots of continent hopping, focusing on the ~local colour~ in Transylvania and the contrast between both the "superstitious" locals and the traveller who finds it all very quaint and interesting but not very serious, and between the poverty of the normal people and the wealth and seclusion of Dracula, and then likewise giving us whistle-stop tours of the interesting bits of Whitby and London, making the city as much of a character as the humans. The Westerner abroad is seen as just a natural phenomenon, but the foreigners* in Britain are notable and exotic.

- It has a mysterious superweapon/monster which is hidden around a big western capital city, where most people (and even the police and regular military) have no idea what it is and are powerless to stop it, and a lot of tension lies on the crux of "What happens if this gets out here, surrounded by all these civilians?" - In a way that treats the mythological East* as a natural place for atrocities to occur, but them happening in London is a shock.

-It has spying: Jon sneaking around the locked-up Carfax with his miniature camera, trying to take pictures to find out what Dracula is doing in there, could have absolutely been in a 1990s thriller. Likewise, meeting in Harrods to avoid suspicion because it's a plausible place for a fashionable young lady to be, surrounded by anonymising crowds.

-It has information warfare: Dracula reading up on British politics, studying maps of London, paying clerks and using shell companies to disguise his property acquisitions, and likewise the heroes using the telegram and port records and the sheer mass of paperwork generated by his activities to track Dracula, which feels like close kin to the Nokiawave staples of finding someone on cctv or by their credit card, or their car registration being flagged at a checkpoint. Jonathan lamenting the lack of an Ordnance Survey in Europe and the unmapped bits of Transylvania specifically really fits with the idea of the "Control Grid" posited by Gregory Flaxman who writes a lot about surveillance and information control in cinema.

-It has a team of both specialists and laypeople who were dragged into the action by circumstance, and much relies on their relationships. The laypeople's "unimportant" skills (Jonathan's knowledge of property and finance especially, and Mina's skills with logistics as well as her innovation and bravery in using herself as a conduit to Dracula) turn out to save the day. The team is multi-national and basically represents The Free World (TM), as well as allowing for jokes about national stereotypes.

-Mina being notably not a damsel in distress, but instead using her personal connection to the villain to absolutely ruin him in ways that nobody else could, is very much like the role of many women in Nokiawave films: She may be traumatised and in danger, more than anyone else because of the villain's obsession with her, but she's smart and deadly and willing to take risks to complete the mission.

-It ends with a massive cross-continental vehicle chase with tonnes of explosions.

#dracula daily #dracula

149 notes · View notes

mariacallous · 7 months

Text

In February 1994, in the grand ballroom of the town hall in Hamburg, Germany, the president of Estonia gave a remarkable speech. Standing before an audience in evening dress, Lennart Meri praised the values of the democratic world that Estonia then aspired to join. “The freedom of every individual, the freedom of the economy and trade, as well as the freedom of the mind, of culture and science, are inseparably interconnected,” he told the burghers of Hamburg. “They form the prerequisite of a viable democracy.” His country, having regained its independence from the Soviet Union three years earlier, believed in these values: “The Estonian people never abandoned their faith in this freedom during the decades of totalitarian oppression.”

But Meri had also come to deliver a warning: Freedom in Estonia, and in Europe, could soon be under threat. Russian President Boris Yeltsin and the circles around him were returning to the language of imperialism, speaking of Russia as primus inter pares—the first among equals—in the former Soviet empire. In 1994, Moscow was already seething with the language of resentment, aggression, and imperial nostalgia; the Russian state was developing an illiberal vision of the world, and even then was preparing to enforce it. Meri called on the democratic world to push back: The West should “make it emphatically clear to the Russian leadership that another imperialist expansion will not stand a chance.”

At that, the deputy mayor of St. Petersburg, Vladimir Putin, got up and walked out of the hall.

Meri’s fears were at that time shared in all of the formerly captive nations of Central and Eastern Europe, and they were strong enough to persuade governments in Estonia, Poland, and elsewhere to campaign for admission to NATO. They succeeded because nobody in Washington, London, or Berlin believed that the new members mattered. The Soviet Union was gone, the deputy mayor of St. Petersburg was not an important person, and Estonia would never need to be defended. That was why neither Bill Clinton nor George W. Bush made much attempt to arm or reinforce the new NATO members. Only in 2014 did the Obama administration finally place a small number of American troops in the region, largely in an effort to reassure allies after the first Russian invasion of Ukraine.

Nobody else anywhere in the Western world felt any threat at all. For 30 years, Western oil and gas companies piled into Russia, partnering with Russian oligarchs who had openly stolen the assets they controlled. Western financial institutions did lucrative business in Russia too, setting up systems to allow those same Russian kleptocrats to export their stolen money and keep it parked, anonymously, in Western property and banks. We convinced ourselves that there was no harm in enriching dictators and their cronies. Trade, we imagined, would transform our trading partners. Wealth would bring liberalism. Capitalism would bring democracy—and democracy would bring peace.

After all, it had happened before. Following the cataclysm of 1939–45, Europeans had indeed collectively abandoned wars of imperial, territorial conquest. They stopped dreaming of eliminating one another. Instead, the continent that had been the source of the two worst wars the world had ever known created the European Union, an organization designed to find negotiated solutions to conflicts and promote cooperation, commerce, and trade. Because of Europe’s metamorphosis—and especially because of the extraordinary transformation of Germany from a Nazi dictatorship into the engine of the continent’s integration and prosperity—Europeans and Americans alike believed that they had created a set of rules that would preserve peace not only on their own continents, but eventually in the whole world.

This liberal world order relied on the mantra of “Never again.” Never again would there be genocide. Never again would large nations erase smaller nations from the map. Never again would we be taken in by dictators who used the language of mass murder. At least in Europe, we would know how to react when we heard it.

But while we were happily living under the illusion that “Never again” meant something real, the leaders of Russia, owners of the world’s largest nuclear arsenal, were reconstructing an army and a propaganda machine designed to facilitate mass murder, as well as a mafia state controlled by a tiny number of men and bearing no resemblance to Western capitalism. For a long time—too long—the custodians of the liberal world order refused to understand these changes. They looked away when Russia “pacified” Chechnya by murdering tens of thousands of people. When Russia bombed schools and hospitals in Syria, Western leaders decided that that wasn’t their problem. When Russia invaded Ukraine the first time, they found reasons not to worry. Surely Putin would be satisfied by the annexation of Crimea. When Russia invaded Ukraine the second time, occupying part of the Donbas, they were sure he would be sensible enough to stop.

Even when the Russians, having grown rich on the kleptocracy we facilitated, bought Western politicians, funded far-right extremist movements, and ran disinformation campaigns during American and European democratic elections, the leaders of America and Europe still refused to take them seriously. It was just some posts on Facebook; so what? We didn’t believe that we were at war with Russia. We believed, instead, that we were safe and free, protected by treaties, by border guarantees, and by the norms and rules of the liberal world order.

With the third, more brutal invasion of Ukraine, the vacuity of those beliefs was revealed. The Russian president openly denied the existence of a legitimate Ukrainian state: “Russians and Ukrainians,” he said, “were one people—a single whole.” His army targeted civilians, hospitals, and schools. His policies aimed to create refugees so as to destabilize Western Europe. “Never again” was exposed as an empty slogan while a genocidal plan took shape in front of our eyes, right along the European Union’s eastern border. Other autocracies watched to see what we would do about it, for Russia is not the only nation in the world that covets its neighbors’ territory, that seeks to destroy entire populations, that has no qualms about the use of mass violence. North Korea can attack South Korea at any time, and has nuclear weapons that can hit Japan. China seeks to eliminate the Uyghurs as a distinct ethnic group, and has imperial designs on Taiwan.

We can’t turn the clock back to 1994, to see what would have happened had we heeded Lennart Meri’s warning. But we can face the future with honesty. We can name the challenges and prepare to meet them.

There is no natural liberal world order, and there are no rules without someone to enforce them. Unless democracies defend themselves together, the forces of autocracy will destroy them. I am using the word forces, in the plural, deliberately. Many American politicians would understandably prefer to focus on the long-term competition with China. But as long as Russia is ruled by Putin, then Russia is at war with us too. So are Belarus, North Korea, Venezuela, Iran, Nicaragua, Hungary, and potentially many others. We might not want to compete with them, or even care very much about them. But they care about us. They understand that the language of democracy, anti-corruption, and justice is dangerous to their form of autocratic power—and they know that that language originates in the democratic world, our world.

This fight is not theoretical. It requires armies, strategies, weapons, and long-term plans. It requires much closer allied cooperation, not only in Europe but in the Pacific, Africa, and Latin America. NATO can no longer operate as if it might someday be required to defend itself; it needs to start operating as it did during the Cold War, on the assumption that an invasion could happen at any time. Germany’s decision to raise defense spending by 100 billion euros is a good start; so is Denmark’s declaration that it too will boost defense spending. But deeper military and intelligence coordination might require new institutions—perhaps a voluntary European Legion, connected to the European Union, or a Baltic alliance that includes Sweden and Finland—and different thinking about where and how we invest in European and Pacific defense.

If we don’t have any means to deliver our messages to the autocratic world, then no one will hear them. Much as we assembled the Department of Homeland Security out of disparate agencies after 9/11, we now need to pull together the disparate parts of the U.S. government that think about communication, not to do propaganda but to reach more people around the world with better information and to stop autocracies from distorting that knowledge. Why haven’t we built a Russian-language television station to compete with Putin’s propaganda? Why can’t we produce more programming in Mandarin—or Uyghur? Our foreign-language broadcasters—Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, Radio Free Asia, Radio Martí in Cuba—need not only money for programming but a major investment in research. We know very little about Russian audiences—what they read, what they might be eager to learn.

Funding for education and culture needs rethinking too. Shouldn’t there be a Russian-language university, in Vilnius or Warsaw, to house all the intellectuals and thinkers who have just left Moscow? Don’t we need to spend more on education in Arabic, Hindi, Persian? So much of what passes for cultural diplomacy runs on autopilot. Programs should be recast for a different era, one in which, though the world is more knowable than ever before, dictatorships seek to hide that knowledge from their citizens.

Trading with autocrats promotes autocracy, not democracy. Congress has made some progress in recent months in the fight against global kleptocracy, and the Biden administration was right to put the fight against corruption at the heart of its political strategy. But we can go much further, because there is no reason for any company, property, or trust ever to be held anonymously. Every U.S. state, and every democratic country, should immediately make all ownership transparent. Tax havens should be illegal. The only people who need to keep their houses, businesses, and income secret are crooks and tax cheats.

We need a dramatic and profound shift in our energy consumption, and not only because of climate change. The billions of dollars we have sent to Russia, Iran, Venezuela, and Saudi Arabia have promoted some of the worst and most corrupt dictators in the world. The transition from oil and gas to other energy sources needs to happen with far greater speed and decisiveness. Every dollar spent on Russian oil helps fund the artillery that fires on Ukrainian civilians.

Take democracy seriously. Teach it, debate it, improve it, defend it. Maybe there is no natural liberal world order, but there are liberal societies, open and free countries that offer a better chance for people to live useful lives than closed dictatorships do. They are hardly perfect; our own has deep flaws, profound divisions, terrible historical scars. But that’s all the more reason to defend and protect them. Few of them have existed across human history; many have existed for a time and then failed. They can be destroyed from the outside, but from the inside, too, by divisions and demagogues.

Perhaps, in the aftermath of this crisis, we can learn something from the Ukrainians. For decades now, we’ve been fighting a culture war between liberal values on the one hand and muscular forms of patriotism on the other. The Ukrainians are showing us a way to have both. As soon as the attacks began, they overcame their many political divisions, which are no less bitter than ours, and they picked up weapons to fight for their sovereignty and their democracy. They demonstrated that it is possible to be a patriot and a believer in an open society, that a democracy can be stronger and fiercer than its opponents. Precisely because there is no liberal world order, no norms and no rules, we must fight ferociously for the values and the hopes of liberalism if we want our open societies to continue to exist.

23 notes · View notes

warningsine · 5 months

Text

Seven coal-fired power stations in Germany were shut down over Easter, power generators RWE and LEAG said on Sunday.

The government took five plants out of mothballs to cope with a shortfall in gas supplies through the winter as Europe's largest economy sought to reduce its dependency on Russian gas.

Two more were allowed to continue operating after their scheduled shutdown dates.

Which plants have been taken offline?

Five of the plants were located in the Rheinish mining district of Western Germany, near the city of Cologne.

They included the Grevenbroich-Neurath and Bergheim-Niederaussem sites.

The move means that some 2,100 megawatts (MW) of lignite capacity will be decommissioned, operator RWE said.

Two other plants at Jänschwalde in the eastern state of Brandenburg, near the capital Berlin, were also shut after being brought back online recently.

Why did Germany keep coal plants open?

Germany's plans to reduce its reliance on coal to tackle climate change were dealt a blow by Russia's invasion of Ukraine in February 2022.

Germany and other European countries cut their dependence on Russian gas in the months following the war, which helped spike the price of energy.

To lessen the impact, the German government decided to extend the life of some coal-fired plants and restart other closed plants temporarily.

Berlin also delayed the closures of several nuclear power plants as a contingency measure. The last three nuclear plants were shut in April last year.

Now that the 2023/4 winter season has ended, Germany's grid operator said it does not foresee any impairment in the security of power supply as a result of the coal plant shutdowns.

Germany's Economy Ministry is legally obliged to review the increase in greenhouse gas emissions from its early decision to delay the closures.

By the end of June, the ministry was required to propose measures to offset the additional emissions.

Decision hailed by Green Party politician

"In view of the worsening climate crisis, the closure of coal-fired power plants is an important measure to reduce greenhouse gases," said Green Party lawmaker Kathrin Henneberger in a statement.

She said the closures were "a great success for climate justice and is happening in the knowledge of the historical and global responsibility for achieving our climate goals."

#germany #power plant #environment #news tag

3 notes · View notes

good-old-gossip · 5 months

Text

Dr. Ghassan Abu-Sittah: ‘Tomorrow is a Palestinian day’

On April 12, the German government prevented Dr. Ghassan Abu-Sittah from entering the country to address a conference in Berlin as a witness to the genocide in Gaza. The day before, on April 11, Abu-Sittah was installed as Glasgow University Rector in Bute Hall following his landslide election with 80% of the vote. Below is a transcript of Dr. Abu-Sittah’s address.

“Each generation must discover its mission, fulfill it or betray it, in relative opacity.”Frantz Fanon, The Wretched of the Earth

The students of Glasgow University decided to vote in memory of 52,000 Palestinians killed. In memory of 14,000 children murdered. They voted in solidarity with 17,000 Palestinian children orphaned, 70,000 wounded — of whom 50% are children — and the 4-5,000 children whose limbs have been amputated.

They voted to stand in solidarity with the students and the teachers of 360 schools destroyed and 12 universities completely leveled. They stood in solidarity with the family and the memory of Dima Alhaj, a Glasgow University alumni murdered with her baby and with her whole family.

At the beginning of the 20th century, Lenin predicted that real revolutionary change in Western Europe depended on its close contact with the liberation movements against imperialism and in the slave colonies. Glasgow University students understood what we have to lose when we allow our politics to become inhuman. They also understand that what is important and different about Gaza is that it is the laboratory in which global capital is looking at the management of surplus populations.

They stood next to Gaza and in solidarity with its people because they understood that the weapons that Benjamin Netanyahu uses today are the weapons that Narendra Modi will use tomorrow. The quadcopters and drones fitted with sniper guns – used so deviously and efficiently in Gaza that one night at Al-Ahli hospital we received over 30 wounded civilians shot outside our hospital by these inventions – used today in Gaza will be used tomorrow in Mumbai, in Nairobi and in Sao Paulo. Eventually, like the facial recognition software developed by the Israelis, they will come to Easterhouse and Springburn.

So, in reality, who did these students vote for? My name is Ghassan Solieman Hussain Dahashan Saqer Dahashan Ahmed Mahmoud Abu-Sittah and, with the exception of myself, my father and all of my forefathers were born in Palestine, a land that was given away by one of Glasgow University’s previous rectors. Three decades before his forty-six-word declaration announced the British government’s support for the settler colonization of Palestine, Arthur Balfour was appointed Lord Rector of the University of Glasgow. “A survey of the world… shows us a vast number of savage communities, apparently at a stage of culture not profoundly different from that which prevailed among pre-historic man,” said Balfour during his rectorial address in 1891. Sixteen years later, this antisemite masterminded the Aliens Act of 1905 to prevent Jews escaping from the pogroms of Eastern Europe from coming to safety in the United Kingdom.

In 1920, my grandfather Sheikh Hussain built a school with his own money in the small village where my family lived. There he set the foundations for a relationship that made education central to my family’s life. On May 15, 1948, Haganah forces ethnically cleansed that village and drove my family, who had lived on that land for generations, into a refugee camp in Khan Younis that now stands in ruins in the Gaza Strip. The memoirs of the Haganah officer who had invaded my grandfather’s house were found by my uncle. In these memoirs, the officer notes with incredulity how the house was full of books and had a certificate for a law degree from the University of Cairo, belonging to my grandfather.

The year after the Nakba, my father graduated from medical school at Cairo University and moved back to Gaza to work in UNRWA in its newly formed clinics. But like many of his generation, he moved to the Gulf to help build the health system in those countries. In 1963, he came to Glasgow to pursue his postgraduate training in pediatrics and fell in love with the city and its people.

And so it was that in 1988, I came to study medicine at Glasgow University, and here I discovered what medicine can do, how a career in medicine places you at the cold face of people’s lives, and how if you are equipped with the right political, sociological and economic lenses, you can understand how people’s lives are being shaped, and many times contorted, by political forces beyond their control.

And it was in Glasgow that I saw for the first time the meaning of international solidarity. Glasgow in that time was rife with groups that were organizing solidarity with El Salvador, Nicaragua, and Palestine. Glasgow City Council was one of the first to twin with cities in the West Bank and Glasgow University set up its first scholarship for the victims of the Sabra and Shatila massacre. It really was during my years in Glasgow that my journey as a war surgeon started, first as a student when I went to the first American war in Iraq in 1991; then with Mike Holmes to South Lebanon in 1993; then with my wife to Gaza during the Second Intifada; then to the wars waged by the Israelis on Gaza in 2009, 2012, 2014 and 2021; to the war in Mosul in Northern Iraq, to Damascus during the Syrian war and to the Yemen war. But it wasn’t until the 9th of October that I got to Gaza and saw the genocide unfold.

Everything that I had known about wars compared to nothing that I had seen. It was the difference between a flood and a tsunami. For 43 days, I watched the killing machines tear apart the lives and the bodies of the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip, half of whom were children. After I came out, the students of Glasgow University reached out for me to run for election as rector. Soon after, one of Balfour’s savages won the election.

So what have we learned from the genocide and about genocide over the last 6 months? We’ve learned that scholasticide, the elimination of whole educational institutions, both infrastructure and human resources, is a critical component of the genocidal erasure of a people. 12 universities completely flattened. 400 schools. 6,000 students killed. 230 school teachers killed. 100 professors and deans and two university presidents killed.

We also learnt, and this is something I found out when I left Gaza, that the genocidal project is like an iceberg of which Israel is only the tip. The rest of the iceberg is made up of an axis of genocide. This axis of genocide is the United States, the United Kingdom, Germany, Australia, Canada, and France… countries that have supported Israel with arms – and continue to support the genocide with arms – and have maintained political support for the genocidal project so that it would continue. We should not be fooled by the United States’ attempts at humanitarianizing the genocide: Killing people while dropping food aid by parachute.

I also discovered that part of the genocidal iceberg are genocide enablers. Little people, men and women, in every facet of life, in every institution. These genocidal enablers come in three types.

The first are those whose racialization and total othering of Palestinians has rendered them unable to feel anything for the 14,000 children who have been killed and for whom Palestinian children remain ungrievable. Had Israel killed 14,000 puppies or kittens they would have been completely destroyed by the barbarity of it.

The second group are those whom Hannah Arendt said in ‘The Banality of Evil’, “had no motives at all, except for extraordinary diligence in looking after his personal advancement.”

The third are the apathetic. As Arendt said, “Evil thrives on apathy and cannot exist without it.”

In April 1915, one year after the First World War began, Rosa Luxemburg wrote about German bourgeois society. “Violated, dishonored, wading in blood… the ravening beast, the witches’ sabbath of anarchy, a plague to culture and humanity.” Those of us who have seen, smelt, and heard what the weapons of war do to a child’s body by design, those of us who have amputated the unsalvageable limbs of wounded children can never have anything but the utmost disdain for all involved in the manufacture, design, and sale of these instruments of brutalism. The aim of weapons manufacturing is to destroy life and to ravage nature. In the arms industry, profits rise not only as a result of the resources captured in or through war, but through the process of destruction of all life, both human and environmental. The idea that there would be peace or an unpolluted world while capital grows by war is ludicrous. Neither the arms trade nor the fossil fuel trade, have any place at University.

So, what is our plan, this “savage” and his accomplices?

We will campaign for divestment from arms manufacturing and the fossil fuel industry in this University, both to de-risk the University following the International Court of Justice’s ruling that this is plausibly a genocidal war and the current case brought against Germany by Nicaragua for complicity in genocide.

Genocidal blood money made as a profit from these shares during the war will be used to set up a fund to help rebuild Palestinian academic institutions. This fund will be in the name of Dima Alhaj and in memory of a life cut short by this genocide.

We will form a coalition of student and civil society groups and unions to turn Glasgow University into a campus free from gender-based violence.

We will campaign to find concrete solutions to end student poverty at Glasgow University and to provide affordable housing to all students.

We will campaign for a boycott of all Israeli academic institutions that have progressed from being complicit in apartheid and the denial of education to Palestinians to genocide and the denial of life. We will campaign for a new definition of antisemitism that does not conflate anti-zionism and anti-Israeli genocidal settler colonialism with antisemitism.

We will fight with all othered and racialized communities, including the Jewish community, the Roma community, Muslims, black people, and all racialized groups, against the common enemy of a rising right-wing fascism, now absolved of its antisemitic roots by an Israeli government in exchange for their support for the elimination of the Palestinian people.

Only this week, just this week, we saw how a German government-funded institution censured a Jewish intellectual and philosopher, Nancy Fraser, because of her support of the Palestinian people. Over a year ago, we watched the Labour Party suspend Moshé Machover, a Jewish anti-zionist campaigner, for antisemitism.

On the flight up, I was fortunate enough to be reading ‘We Are Free to Change the World’ by Lyndsey Stonebridge. I quote from this book: “It is when the experience of powerlessness is at its most acute, when history seems at its most bleak, that the determination to think like a human being, creatively, courageously and complicatedly matters the most.” 90 years ago, in his “Solidarity Song,” Bertolt Brecht asked, “Whose tomorrow is tomorrow? And whose world is the world?”

Well, my answer to him, to you, and to the students of Glasgow University: It is your world to fight for. It is your tomorrow to make. For us, all of us, part of our resistance to the erasure of genocide is to talk about tomorrow in Gaza, to plan for the healing of the wounds of Gaza tomorrow. We will own tomorrow. Tomorrow will be a Palestinian day.

In 1984, when Glasgow University made Winnie Mandela its Rector in the darkest days of P. W. Botha’s rule under a brutal apartheid regime, supported by Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan, no one could have dreamt that in 40 years South African men and women could be standing in front of the International Court of Justice defending the Palestinian people’s right to life as free citizens of a free nation.

One of this genocide’s aims is to drown us in our own sorrow. On a personal note, I want to hold space so that I and my family can grieve for our loved ones. I dedicate this to the memory of our beloved Abdelminim killed at 74 on the day of his birth. I dedicate it to the memory of my colleague Dr. Midhat Saidam who had stepped out for half an hour to take his sister to their house so that she could be safe with her children and never came back. I dedicate it to my friend and my colleague Dr. Ahmad Makadmeh who was executed by the Israeli army in Shifa Hospital just over 10 days ago with his wife. I dedicate it to the ever-smiling Dr. Haitham Abu-Hani, head of the Emergency Department at Shifa Hospital, who always met me with a smile and a pat on the shoulder. But most of all we dedicate this to our land. In the words of the ever-present Mahmoud Darwish,

“To our land, and it is a prize of war, the freedom to die from longing and burning and our land, in its bloodied night, is a jewel that glimmers for the far upon the far and illuminates what’s outside it … As for us, inside, we suffocate more!”

And so I want to end with hope. In the words of the immortal Bobby Sands, “Our revenge will be the laughter of our children.”

HASTA LA VICTORIA SIEMPRE!

Source -

4 notes · View notes

zerogate · 2 years

Text

At first the effects of tuberculosis were scattered, but as people moved more often, travelled more widely and came to live in larger communities, these became epidemic. Waves of TB spread across the world, devastating cities, bringing a new “white plague” hot on the heels of the “black death”. The last and greatest European epidemic began in England during the sixteenth century and reached a peak of mortality in London around 1750. Each of the capitals of western Europe was affected in its turn during the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries, peaking in the cities of eastern Europe by about 1870. And then something peculiar took place. There was a sudden, marked and inexplicable decline in TB everywhere that records have been kept – beginning, it seems, in Germany in 1882.

Surgical intervention in cases of tuberculosis did not begin until 1912, and chemotherapy (mainly with streptomycin) was unknown until 1944. So it was not any dramatic advance in medical treatment that led to the spontaneous decline in the late nineteenth century. But something did happen in Germany in 1882 that could be very significant.

In 1876, there was an outbreak of anthrax amongst cattle in Silesia. A country doctor working near Breslau took samples from the spleen of infected cows and succeeded in transferring the disease to several mice, all of whom produced specimens of the same bacteria. Dr. Robert Koch was convinced that these micro-organisms were the cause and agent of the dreaded cattle disease and his paper on its life cycle led both to a teaching post at the local university – and to growing fame as the founder of modern medical microbiology. Koch went on to track down the organisms responsible for cholera, bubonic plague and sleeping sickness. But his greatest triumph, the one for which he was later to receive the Nobel Prize, was the description of Mycobacterium tuberculosis – the tubercle bacillus. And he made this discovery in 1882 in Germany, announcing it triumphantly on March 24th before the Physiological Society of Berlin.

Almost immediately there was a marked decrease, not only in the incidence of the disease, but also in its mortality. Deaths fell from 600 per 100,000 to around 200 in less than a decade – and they have continued to slide to the present level of about 20 out of every 100,000 people infected. The recent improvements can all be attributed to better medical care, but nothing comparable happened to account for the sudden and rapid decline which is evident in Hamburg and Berlin during the 1880s. Nothing, that is, except Koch’s discovery and a spreading awareness of what lay behind the disease that had come to be called “Captain of all the Men of Death”.

-- Lyall Watson, Beyond Supernature

#quotes

5 notes · View notes

biblenewsprophecy · 12 days

Text

Shifts in Germany and elsewhere in Europe

COGwriter

A shift is happening in Europe.

Many there are concerned about Islam and migrants.

Germany’s Alternative für Deutshland (AfD) party continues to increase in popularity and looks to soon have more political clout:

Germany far-right party could win first state in eastern regional elections

September 1, 2024

BERLIN, Sept 1 (Reuters) – Germans were voting in two eastern states on Sunday, with the far-right AfD on track to win a state election for the first time and Chancellor Olaf Scholz’s coalition set to receive a drubbing just a year before federal elections.

The Alternative for Germany (AfD) is polling first on 30% in Thuringia and is neck-and-neck with the conservatives in Saxony on 30-32%. A win would mark the first time a far-right party has the most seats in a German state parliament since World War Two.

The 11-year-old party would be unlikely to be able to form a state government even if it does win, as it is polling short of a majority and other parties refuse to collaborate with it.

But a strong showing for the AfD and another populist party, the newly-created Sahra Wagenknecht Alliance (BSW), named after its founder, a former communist, would complicate coalition building. …

Both the AfD and BSW are anti-migration, eurosceptic, Russia-friendly and are particularly strong in the former Communist-run East, where concerns about a cost of living crisis, the Ukraine war and immigration run deep.

A deadly stabbing spree linked to Islamic State 10 days ago in the western German city of Solingen stoked concerns about immigration in particular and criticism of the government’s handling of the issue.

“Our freedoms are being increasingly restricted because people are being allowed into the country who don’t fit in,” the AfD’s leader in Thuringia, Bjoern Hoecke, told a campaign event in Nordhausen …

‘POLITICAL EARTHQUAKE’

All three parties in Scholz’s federal coalition are seen losing votes on Sunday, with the Greens and liberal Free Democrats likely to struggle to reach the 5% threshold to enter parliament.

Discontent with the federal government stems partly from the fact it is an ideologically heterogeneous coalition plagued by infighting. A rout in the East will only exacerbate those tensions, analysts say.

“The state elections… have the potential to trigger an earthquake in Berlin,” Wagenknecht told a campaign rally in Erfurt, the capital of Thuringia,…

The AfD and BSW together are expected to take some 40-50% of the vote in the two states compared with 23-27.5% at a national level, laying bare the continuing divide between East and West more than 30 years after reunification. https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/far-right-could-win-first-state-two-east-german-elections-2024-09-01/

The AfD is considered Germany’s anti-migrant party. Its influence has been growing as more in Germany have been supporting it in elections. The fact that the Islamic State took credit for the stabbing (see Suspected Islamic terrorism hitting France and Germany–‘Islamic State’ claims involvement) reinforces the AfD view that migrants from the Middle East and Africa are a danger.

And yes, it wants many migrants–particularly Islamic ones–to leave Germany.

But Germany is not the only nation in Europe shifting on migrants.

A reader tipped me off to the following today related to Sweden:

The Swedish government is considering offering foreigners who become naturalized citizens money to leave the country. The current “voluntary remigration“ scheme offers 10,000 Swedish kroner ($960) per adult and 5,000 kroner ($480) per child, as well as travel costs for refugees and migrants to leave Sweden.

Stockholm is considering widening the program under which migrants struggling to integrate into Swedish society are encouraged to leave, including naturalized Swedes and migrant families, according to a proposal submitted to Swedish Immigration Minister Maria Malmer Stenergard on Aug. 13.

A report based on an inquiry recommended widening the proposal but rejected increasing the grant in case it sends a signal to immigrants that “they are not welcome in Sweden.” Ministers in Stockholm had sought advice on how emigration could be “greatly stimulated.” https://prescottenews.com/2024/08/19/sweden-considers-offering-naturalized-citizens-money-to-return-to-countries-of-origin-the-epoch-times/

The AfD has suggested an involuntary program to move migrants out of Germany.

Notice also the following related to Sweden:

Europe’s lefties bash migrants (nearly) as well as the hard right

As Europe faced a sharp rise in the arrival of migrants seeking asylum in 2015, many national governments demanded more be done to stem the flow. Sweden’s prime minister disagreed. “My Europe does not build walls,” Stefan Lofven, leader of the Social Democrats, thundered in response, exuding the high-mindedness left-wingers muster at will. A couple of electoral setbacks later—it turns out voters are rather keen on walls during migration crises—the party is speaking from a different register, this time as an opposition force. “The Swedish people can feel safe in the knowledge that Social Democrats will stand up for a strict migration policy,” Magdalena Andersson, its current leader, said in an interview to a local paper … https://www.economist.com/europe/2024/08/29/europes-lefties-bash-migrants-nearly-as-well-as-the-hard-right

When my wife and I visited Sweden several years ago, we found that Swedes were getting concerned about the migrant matters there. Now, some steps to remove and restrict them have begun.

Pope Francis decried anti-migrant moves last week, yet made his own last Fall (see Pope Francis’ hypocrisy on migrants and wealth).

The Bible also shows that religion will be used by the coming European King of the North:

36 “Then the king shall do according to his own will: he shall exalt and magnify himself above every god, shall speak blasphemies against the God of gods, and shall prosper till the wrath has been accomplished; for what has been determined shall be done. 37 He shall regard neither the God of his fathers nor the desire of women, nor regard any god; for he shall exalt himself above them all. 38 But in their place he shall honor a god of fortresses; and a god which his fathers did not know he shall honor with gold and silver, with precious stones and pleasant things. 39 Thus he shall act against the strongest fortresses with a foreign god, which he shall acknowledge, and advance its glory; and he shall cause them to rule over many, and divide the land for gain. (Daniel 11:36-39)

The King of the North Beast will also push out Islam (cf. Daniel 11:40-43) and lead a powerful European military (cf. Revelation 13:3-4; Daniel 11:39-43). These are things that many in Europe want!

While the AfD has its own problems, its rise is demonstrating that Germans are becoming less tolerant of migrants than many thought.

A while back, we put out the following video:

youtube

14:22

AfD: Prelude to a Hitler Beast?

Germany’s Alternative für Deutshland (Alternative for Germany in English) party celebrated its 10th anniversary on February 6, 2023.

It objects to: ❌More illegal migration ❌More asylum abuse ❌More crime ❌More housing shortage ❌More Cancel Culture

The AfD also asserts, “Now it’s time to change that. And that’s only possible with us.” Many are concerned that the AfD’s growing political influence will impact Germany. Can a strong man worse than Adolf Hitler, that the Bible calls the Beast rise up from Germany? Could Europe reorganize with a small backing to put this leader into place? Does the AfD want to make a deal with Russia? Will Germany make a future deal with Russia that would be opposed to the USA? Does the AfD want religion involved to meet its objectives in such a way that it could support the coming King of the North Beast power that the Bible warns will arise in Europe? Could Europe unite under such a leader according to scripture? Steve Dupuie and Dr. Thiel go over these matters.

Here is a link to our video: AfD: Prelude to a Hitler Beast?

Ireland has has migrant concerns (see ZH: ‘Irish People Are Being Attacked’ – Anti-Immigrant Riots Erupt After Dublin Stabbing Spree). As has Italy (e.g. Fox: Italy’s call for naval blockade may be only way to stem Europe’s migrant crisis, expert says) and France (e.g. Macron warns against ‘extremes,’ while Le Pen vows to deport Islamic extremists from France).

Related to Italy, notice also the following:

Italy’s Meloni Scores a Victory on Illegal Immigration as the Rest of Europe Is Reeling

The lack of a crisis is largely due to a can-do prime minister who campaigned on getting migration under control.

August 28, 2024

Impounding of MSF’s ship for 60 days is 23rd seizure of a vessel by Giorgia Meloni’s government … illegal arrivals have fallen by 65% https://www.nysun.com/article/italys-meloni-scores-a-victory-on-illegal-immigration-as-the-rest-of-europe-is-reeling

Italy steps up clampdown on boats rescuing migrants in Mediterranean Sea

August 28, 2024

Giorgia Meloni’s government has impounded a humanitarian rescue ship for the 23rd time, as Italy steps up its clampdown on irregular migration across the Mediterranean.

Just over 39,500 irregular migrants have arrived in Italy by sea this year, compared with 112,500 in the same period last year, and 53,400 in 2022, according to Italy’s interior ministry. “Italy continues to reap the fruits of the work of the Meloni government on the front of the fight against wild clandestine immigration,” Tommaso Foti, head of the Brothers of Italy’s parliamentary delegation, said this month. https://www.ft.com/content/ada8343c-3783-4600-9726-9aba86f3e38a

We are seeing a shift happening in Europe related to migrants and other matters.

However, it will end up being too little too late as far as democracy goes.

Despite elections, the Bible shows that Europe will reorganize and power will be granted to a dictator:

12 “The ten horns which you saw are ten kings who have received no kingdom as yet, but they receive authority for one hour as kings with the beast. 13 These are of one mind, and they will give their power and authority to the beast. (Revelation 17:12-13, NKJV throughout unless otherwise specified)

These ten kings have no kingdom, but are to attain one. Thus, this is a type of reorganization in verse 12–and basically a type of major or great reset (see also Is a Great Reset Coming?). Since they give their power to the Beast in verse 13, this is a second reorganization–and that Beast will be a dictator. The Beast is the one who was the prince of Daniel 9:26 (see also The ‘Peace Deal’ of Daniel 9:27). He is also the seventh king of Revelation 17:10, and becomes so with the fulfillment of Revelation 17:13. As far as the identity of the sixth king of Revelation 17:10, check out the article: The European Union and the Seven Kings of Revelation 17.

Migrant matters will be a factor in his rise.

He will also be the one who will lead the attack against the USA and its British-descended allies in what could be called WWIII.

The time for that is getting closer.

LATEST NEWS REPORTS

LATEST BIBLE PROPHECY INTERVIEWS

0 notes

tripflicks · 9 months

Video

youtube

Top 100 Best Places To Visit In Europe

100 Best Places To Visit In Europe | Ultimate Europe Travel GuideEurope, a continent steeped in history, culture, and breathtaking landscapes, has long been a dream destination for travel enthusiasts around the world. With its diverse array of countries and cities, Europe offers an unparalleled experience for those seeking to immerse themselves in the beauty of this enchanting continent.

From the romantic canals of Venice to the majestic castles of Scotland, Europe is a treasure trove of iconic landmarks and hidden gems waiting to be explored. Whether you’re a history buff eager to wander through ancient ruins or a food lover yearning to indulge in delectable cuisines, Europe has something for everyone.

The sheer variety of European destinations is astounding. From the sun-soaked beaches of Greece to the snowy peaks of the Swiss Alps, each country within Europe offers its own unique charm and allure. Whether you’re seeking vibrant nightlife in Berlin or picturesque countryside retreats in Tuscany, Europe’s top cities cater to every traveler’s desires.

A European vacation is not just about visiting famous landmarks; it’s about immersing yourself in local cultures and traditions. The warm hospitality of the locals combined with their rich heritage creates an unforgettable experience that will leave you longing for more.

In this section, we will explore why Europe stands as the perfect destination for travel enthusiasts. We will delve into some of the best places to visit in Europe and uncover what makes each European city so special. So pack your bags and get ready for an extraordinary journey through this captivating continent that promises memories that will last a lifetime.

1. Western Europe:

Western Europe is a treasure trove of iconic attractions and must-see destinations. From the romantic streets of Paris to the bustling city of London, the vibrant city of Barcelona to the ancient wonders of Rome, this region offers a diverse range of experiences for travelers.

Paris, known as the City of Love, boasts world-famous attractions such as the Eiffel Tower, Louvre Museum, and Notre-Dame Cathedral. Strolling along the Seine River or exploring charming neighborhoods like Montmartre are also highlights not to be missed.

In London, sightseeing opportunities are endless. From the historic Tower of London to Buckingham Palace and Big Ben, there is no shortage of iconic landmarks. The British Museum and Tate Modern offer cultural enrichment while Hyde Park provides a tranquil escape in the heart of the city.

Barcelona is a vibrant coastal city that seamlessly blends history with modernity. Gaudi’s architectural masterpieces like Sagrada Familia and Park Güell showcase unique artistic visions. The lively Las Ramblas street and Gothic Quarter are perfect for exploring local culture and indulging in delicious Spanish cuisine.

Rome, often referred to as an open-air museum, is home to countless must-sees. The Colosseum, Roman Forum, and Vatican City with its stunning Sistine Chapel are just a few examples that transport visitors back in time. Exploring narrow cobblestone streets lined with charming cafes and gelaterias adds an authentic touch to any Roman adventure.

Whether you’re captivated by Paris’ enchanting attractions or fascinated by London’s historical landmarks, Western Europe offers an abundance of unforgettable experiences for every traveler.

2. Central and Eastern Europe:

Central and Eastern Europe is a region that is rich in history, culture, and architectural wonders. Cities such as Budapest, Prague, Vienna, and Krakow are known for their unique charm and elegance that captivate travelers from around the world.

Budapest, the capital of Hungary, is often referred to as the “Paris of the East” due to its stunning architecture and vibrant atmosphere. From the majestic Buda Castle to the iconic Chain Bridge spanning across the Danube River, Budapest offers a blend of old-world charm and modern sophistication.

Prague, the capital of Czech Republic, exudes a fairytale-like charm with its cobblestone streets and medieval architecture. The Prague Castle overlooking the city skyline is a sight to behold while strolling through Old Town Square transports visitors back in time with its Gothic buildings and astronomical clock.

Vienna, Austria’s capital city, is renowned for its elegance and grandeur. From opulent palaces like Schönbrunn Palace to magnificent landmarks like St. Stephen’s Cathedral, Vienna showcases a seamless blend of imperial history and contemporary culture.

Krakow in Poland is a treasure trove of historical landmarks such as Wawel Castle and St. Mary’s Basilica. Its well-preserved Old Town Square features colorful townhouses and lively market stalls that offer a glimpse into Krakow’s rich heritage.

Whether you’re seeking architectural marvels or immersing yourself in cultural experiences, Central and Eastern Europe beckon with their enchanting cities like Budapest, Prague, Vienna, and Krakow — each offering their own unique wonders waiting to be explored.

3. Northern and Scandinavian Delights:

Prepare to be enchanted by the beauty and wonders of Northern and Scandinavian delights. From the picturesque streets of Copenhagen to the awe-inspiring wonders of Stockholm and the breathtaking natural landscapes of Reykjavik, this section will take you on a journey through some of the most captivating destinations in this region.

Copenhagen, known for its charming canals and colorful buildings, is a haven for those seeking architectural beauty. Explore iconic spots such as Nyhavn, with its vibrant waterfront lined with historic houses, or visit Tivoli Gardens, a magical amusement park that has been captivating visitors since 1843.

Stockholm, often referred to as the “Venice of the North,” is a city built on 14 islands connected by bridges. Immerse yourself in its rich history by visiting Gamla Stan, the old town that dates back to the 13th century. Marvel at royal palaces like Drottningholm Palace or discover modern marvels like ABBA The Museum.

Reykjavik offers an entirely different experience with its natural wonders. From geothermal hot springs like the Blue Lagoon to majestic waterfalls like Gullfoss and geysers such as Strokkur in the Golden Circle route, Iceland’s capital city is a gateway to some of Mother Nature’s most incredible creations.

Whether you’re drawn to architectural splendor, cultural heritage, or awe-inspiring landscapes, Northern and Scandinavian delights have something for everyone. Get ready to embark on an unforgettable journey through these enchanting destinations that will leave you longing for more.

4. Southern European Gems:

Embark on a journey to discover the hidden gems of Southern Europe, where breathtaking landscapes and rich history await. From the enchanting paradise of Santorini to the unparalleled beauty of the Amalfi Coast and the historic charm of Dubrovnik, these destinations offer a unique and unforgettable experience.

Santorini, with its iconic white-washed buildings perched atop cliffs overlooking the azure Aegean Sea, is a true paradise for travelers seeking tranquility and natural beauty. Lose yourself in its narrow cobblestone streets, indulge in local cuisine, and witness mesmerizing sunsets that will leave you in awe.

The Amalfi Coast is a picturesque stretch along Italy’s Sorrentine Peninsula, renowned for its dramatic coastal cliffs, vibrant lemon groves, and charming seaside towns. Immerse yourself in its timeless elegance as you explore Positano’s colorful houses cascading down the cliffside or sip limoncello while admiring the panoramic views from Ravello.

Dubrovnik, often referred to as the “Pearl of the Adriatic,” is a city steeped in history and architectural splendor. Walk through its ancient city walls that have stood for centuries or wander through Stradun Street with its limestone-paved thoroughfare lined with cafes and shops. Discover hidden gems within this UNESCO World Heritage Site at every turn.

These Southern European gems offer an escape from everyday life into a world where natural beauty intertwines with cultural heritage. Whether you seek relaxation or adventure, Santorini’s paradise, Amalfi Coast’s beauty, and Dubrovnik’s historic charm will captivate your senses and create memories that last a lifetime.

Unraveling Nature’s Beauty: The Most Breathtaking Natural Landscapes across Europe

Europe is home to some of the most awe-inspiring natural landscapes in the world. From towering mountain ranges to pristine lakes and breathtaking coastlines, the continent offers a diverse array of natural wonders that are sure to leave you speechless. In this section, we will take you on a journey through Europe’s most breathtaking natural landscapes, exploring its national parks and reserves that showcase the beauty and grandeur of Mother Nature.

European national parks and reserves are not just protected areas; they are gateways to experiencing nature in its purest form. Each park has its unique charm, with distinct ecosystems, rare wildlife species, and stunning geological formations. Whether you’re an avid hiker seeking panoramic views or a nature enthusiast looking for tranquility amidst untouched wilderness, Europe’s natural wonders have something for everyone.

Join us as we unravel the secrets of Europe’s most captivating landscapes. From the majestic peaks of the Swiss Alps to the mystical forests of Romania’s Carpathian Mountains, we will delve into each destination’s extraordinary features and share insider tips on how to make the most of your visit.

Get ready to be inspired by Europe’s remarkable natural beauty as we embark on a virtual journey through its enchanting national parks and reserves. Prepare yourself for breathtaking vistas, hidden gems, and unforgettable adventures that will leave you with memories to last a lifetime.

Taste of Tradition: Exploring the Culinary Delights That Define Each Region

Embark on a culinary journey as we delve into the rich tapestry of European cuisine specialties by country. Each region boasts its own unique flavors and traditional dishes that have been passed down through generations, encapsulating the essence of their cultural heritage.

From the hearty stews and robust flavors of Germany to the delicate pastries and aromatic spices of France, every country in Europe has its own distinct culinary identity. Explore the mouthwatering delights of Italy’s pasta and pizza, savor the indulgent cheeses and chocolates of Switzerland, or indulge in Spain’s vibrant tapas culture.

Through this exploration, we will discover how food is not only a means for sustenance but also a reflection of history, geography, and cultural traditions. Uncover the stories behind these iconic dishes as we celebrate the taste of tradition that defines each region.

Join us on this gastronomic adventure as we uncover hidden gems and well-known favorites alike. Whether you are a seasoned food enthusiast or simply curious about different cuisines, this journey promises to tantalize your taste buds and ignite your passion for culinary exploration. Get ready to experience the diverse flavors that make European cuisine truly exceptional.

The Hidden Gems: Off-the-Beaten-Path Destinations Worth Exploring

Are you tired of the same old tourist hotspots in Europe? Do you long for unique and off-the-beaten-path destinations that offer a truly authentic experience? Look no further, as we unveil the hidden gems that are waiting to be explored.

While popular destinations have their charm, there is something truly special about venturing off the well-trodden path. These hidden gems offer a chance to escape the crowds and immerse yourself in lesser-known cultural treasures. From picturesque villages tucked away in the mountains to remote islands with pristine beaches, Europe is brimming with enchanting locations that are often overlooked by tourists.

Imagine strolling through narrow cobblestone streets lined with colorful houses in an undiscovered village, or hiking through breathtaking landscapes untouched by mass tourism. These offbeat locations allow you to connect with locals on a deeper level, experiencing their traditions, cuisine, and way of life firsthand.

Whether you’re an avid adventurer seeking thrilling outdoor activities or a culture enthusiast yearning for authentic experiences, these hidden gems have something for everyone. From Slovenia’s fairytale-like Lake Bled to Albania’s untouched Riviera coastline, Europe’s lesser-known destinations promise unforgettable memories and stories to share.

So why follow the crowds when you can forge your own path? Embark on a journey of discovery and uncover Europe’s hidden gems — the off-the-beaten-path destinations that will leave you spellbound and longing for more.

Conclusion: Start Planning Your Ultimate European Adventure Today!

In conclusion, planning your ultimate European adventure should be an exciting and fulfilling process. By using the right Europe travel tips, you can ensure that you make the most of your trip and create memories that will last a lifetime.

Start by researching different destinations in Europe and identifying the ones that align with your interests and preferences. Consider factors such as historical landmarks, cultural experiences, natural beauty, and culinary delights. This will help you create a well-rounded Europe itinerary that caters to your specific desires.

Next, take advantage of various online resources and travel platforms to gather information about each destination. Look for recommendations on must-see attractions, hidden gems, local customs, and transportation options. This will enable you to plan your itinerary effectively and make informed decisions about how to spend your time in each location.

Additionally, consider the practical aspects of travel planning such as budgeting, accommodation options, visa requirements, and transportation logistics. These factors play a crucial role in ensuring a smooth and hassle-free journey across Europe.

Lastly, embrace flexibility during your trip. While it’s important to have a general outline of what you want to see and do in each destination, leave room for spontaneity and unexpected discoveries along the way. Some of the most memorable experiences often happen when we deviate from our original plans.

So don’t wait any longer! Start planning your ultimate European adventure today by utilizing these Europe travel tips and creating an itinerary that suits your preferences. Get ready to immerse yourself in the rich history, diverse cultures, stunning landscapes, and delicious cuisines that await you in this enchanting continent. Bon voyage!

Visit our youtube Channel

#EuropeTravel #MustVisitDestinations #TravelGuide #EuropeTour #BucketListTravel #ExploreEurope #EuropeanVacation #EuropeanDiscovery #EuropeTrip #TravelInspiration #TravelGoals #Wanderlust #ExploreTheWorld #EuropeanAdventure #TravelEurope #EuropeIsCalling #TravelBucketList #EuropeBound #TravelAddict #EuropeExploration

#youtube

0 notes

atozearth · 1 year

Text

25 Best Place To Travel To In Europe In 2023

Certainly, here are the list with details of 25 of the Best Place To Travel In Europe https://www.youtube.com/embed/0GZSfBuhf6Y 25 Best Place To Travel To In Europe

Paris, France:

- Eiffel Tower, Louvre, and Champs-Élysées: The Heart of Romance and Culture.

Rome, Italy:

- Colosseum, Vatican, and Pantheon: Walking Through Ancient History.

Barcelona, Spain:

- Gaudí's Masterpieces and Beach Vibes: The Catalan Gem.

Santorini, Greece:

- Whitewashed Beauty and Aegean Sunsets: Island Paradise.

Swiss Alps, Switzerland:

- Alpine Adventures and Breathtaking Landscapes: Nature's Playground.

Plitvice Lakes, Croatia:

- Cascading Waterfalls and Verdant Wilderness: A Natural Wonder.

Hallstatt, Austria:

- Alpine Tranquility and Lakeside Charm: Postcard-Perfect Village.

Cinque Terre, Italy:

- Coastal Marvels and Colorful Cliffside Towns: Italian Riviera Delight.

Bruges, Belgium:

- Canals, Chocolate, and Medieval Marvels: Fairytale Flemish City.

Florence, Italy:

- Renaissance Art, Uffizi Gallery, and Duomo: Cradle of Culture.

Amsterdam, Netherlands:

- Canals, Museums, and Tulips: Dutch Capital's Charms.

Vienna, Austria:

- Imperial Palaces, Classical Music, and Café Culture: Elegant Austrian Capital.

Bologna, Italy:

- Culinary Delights and Historic Beauty: Gastronomic Paradise.

Lyon, France:

- Gastronomy Capital and Presqu'île District: A Taste of France.

San Sebastián, Spain:

- Pintxos, Beaches, and Basque Beauty: Northern Spanish Gem.

Prague, Czech Republic:

- Charles Bridge, Prague Castle, and Old Town Square: Bohemian Elegance.

Dubrovnik, Croatia:

- Adriatic Gem and Ancient Walls: Pearl of the Adriatic.

Edinburgh, Scotland:

- Castle, Festivals, and Royal Mile: Scotland's Historic Crown.

Venice, Italy:

- Canals, Carnival, and Venetian Grandeur: Floating City's Allure.

Berlin, Germany:

- East Side Gallery, Brandenburg Gate, and Urban Cool: Modern Metropolis.

Lisbon, Portugal:

- Fado Music, Tram 28, and Belém Tower: Enchanting Coastal Capital.

Budapest, Hungary:

- Buda Castle, Thermal Baths, and Danube Panorama: Eastern European Gem.

Stockholm, Sweden:

- Gamla Stan, Vasa Museum, and Archipelago Beauty: Scandinavian Sophistication.

Dublin, Ireland:

- Literary Heritage, Temple Bar, and Dublin Castle: Lively Irish Capital.

Athens, Greece:

- Acropolis, Plaka, and Ancient History: Cradle of Western Civilization. Each of these cities offers a unique blend of history, culture, architecture, and experiences that make them some of the best destinations to explore in Europe. Also Read More about travelling topics - Travel bags for men - Travel bags for women - Travel accessories Read the full article

1 note · View note

cyberbenb · 1 year

Text

Andreas Umland: Should Kyiv be pressured to exchange land for peace?

Both Kyiv and the West want a full and stable truce with Moscow – sooner rather than later.

Why and how Ukrainian national interest currently contradicts a ceasefire with Russia is clear: Kyiv’s problem in negotiating with Moscow is that an agreement with the Kremlin now will not lead to the full restoration of Ukraine’s territorial integrity. It will also not protect Ukraine from continuing Russian imperialism and anti-Ukrainianism.

According to most Ukrainians and other Eastern Europeans, talking to the current Russian government about accommodation is a waste of time. Only after a crushing defeat of Russia is a lasting condominium between Moscow and Kyiv feasible. As in earlier periods of Tsarist and Soviet history, a military disaster may trigger fundamental domestic change in Russia.

Western countries, as well as other states across the globe, face a different dilemma.

They may be more equivocal toward Putin’s idiosyncrasies, Russia’s future, and Ukraine’s sovereignty. Western capitals may worry far less than Kyiv about the long-term prospects of a ceasefire or peace agreement. Electoral cycles in democratic states suggest to politicians in pursuit of public offices to look for quick solutions today rather than engaging in multi-year stand-offs.

Andreas Umland: Why Russia and Ukraine will not find a compromise soon

Editor’s Note: This article is based on a series of four reports currently produced by the Stockholm Centre for Eastern European Studies (SCEEUS) at the Swedish Institute of International Affairs. The opinions expressed in the op-ed section are those of the authors and do not purport to reflect the

The Kyiv IndependentAndreas Umland

The cynics' challenge

Many in Washington, Brussels, Paris, or Berlin – not to mention capitals in Asia, Africa, or Latin America – may view Russia’s war against Ukraine as a far-away regional, post-Soviet, and/or Slavic dispute. Some politicians continue to argue openly that this Eastern European confrontation is of little concern to them.

Ukraine is geographically, culturally, historically, and politically remote from most Western actors’ homelands. That could be seen to imply for their governments that financial, military, and political investment in Ukraine’s defense, security, and recovery should be limited or even discontinued. It could also be seen to mean that a bad but soon peace now is preferable to a noble but long military confrontation.

Even politicians and governments unconcerned about justice, freedom, and self-determination cannot separate, however, their behavior vis-à-vis Moscow and Kyiv from issues of global stability and security. Ukraine is – like Russia – part and parcel of the world’s political and legal order. It constitutes a full member of the international community of states.

Already in 1945-91, the Ukrainian Soviet republic was, unlike the Russian Soviet republic, a non-sovereign participant of the United Nations.

Ukraine became, after gaining independence in August 1991, not only a regular member of the UN as a fully sovereign state. It is today also an orderly participant of the Council of Europe, OSCE, and Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, as well as many other international organizations, regulations, and agreements.

youtube

The Kremlin’s gauntlet

For this reason, Russia has, already with its illegal annexation of Ukraine’s Crimean Peninsula in 2014, created a fundamental problem for the international community of states – including those governments caring little for the fate of the Ukrainian people and state.

Moscow insists that the Ukrainian nation and state have no full value. The structure, logic, and functioning of international order, trans-border cooperation, and the security system suppose, however, that it does.

Eight years after its armed capture of Crimea, Moscow doubled down on its denial of Ukrainian statehood. Again illegally and even more unashamedly, Russia annexed yet four more regions, now in Ukraine’s southeastern mainland.

This additional demonstrative violation of international law, as well as Moscow’s escalating terror campaign against Ukraine’s civilians since Feb. 24, 2022, have increased the stakes. The war’s course, duration, outcome, and repercussions have become ever more fateful not only for Ukraine, but also for the solidity of the planet’s order of sovereign states.

Nine years ago, the Kremlin’s story about the allegedly disputed status of Crimea was partly bought by the international community. Today, in contrast, only a few politicians, diplomats, and experts would any longer accept the Kremlin’s odious justifications for Russia’s outrageous behavior in Ukraine.

The Kremlin still provides putative explanations as to why Ukraine does not have the right to exist, at least not in its internationally recognized borders. Moscow continues its selective presentation and plain falsification of Ukrainian history, law, politics, culture, etc. All of this is meant to substantiate the Kremlin’s claim that Ukraine is “not really a thing.”

Pelechaty, Robertson: Decoding Russian disinformation campaigns

“Valerii Zaluzhnyi, the commander-in-chief of Ukraine’s Armed Forces, is dead.” Such was the false message spread by Russia’s propaganda machine in early May – even Wagner Group head Yevgeny Prigozhin joined in. Kyiv was quick to dispel the claim as an intentional effort to “demoralize Ukrainian f…

The Kyiv IndependentTeah Pelechaty

International order, adieu?

The problem of the Kremlin’s disinformation campaign is not only and not so much its factual inaccuracies and cherry-picking of events in Ukrainian history. Moscow’s more fundamental challenge with its narrative about Ukraine is that rhetorically similar stories could be told about many countries.

Most states and territories across the globe had confusing histories, contradictory allegiances, and odd episodes during their ancient and recent pasts. Some have until today disputed territories and ambivalent identities. All countries of the world did, like Ukraine, not exist at one time. They were all once not real nations, and had, like Ukraine, different borders.

In spite of the explosiveness of Moscow’s behavior for the international system of states, the Kremlin insists that Pandora’s Box is empty. Worse, Russia is, in doing so, not just any country in the post-Cold War world. It has inherited from the Soviet Union a permanent seat in the United Nations Security Council (UNSC), and the status as an official nuclear-weapon state under the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).

The Russian Federation is one of those five members of the community of peoples which have special rights and responsibility for upholding the order of states, world security, and international law. With its actions, Moscow is undermining the most fundamental principles of the UN Charter.

Russia is turning the logic of the worldwide regime to prevent the spread of atomic arms and the exceptional status of the five official nuclear-weapon states on its head. The UNSC and NPT have, in Russia’s hands, become instruments not of stabilizing but of undermining the international order.

Richard Cashman: Understanding Russia’s imperial conceits

Understanding Russia’s February 2022 full-scale invasion of Ukraine as part of an imperial war begun in 2014 has become increasingly commonplace in Euro-Atlantic foreign policy-making circles and amongst a wider group of countries concerned with ending the war. Yet the full range of imperial conceit…

The Kyiv IndependentRichard Cashman

Nevertheless, peace now?

Most self-proclaimed pragmatists and pacificists who argue for a land-for-peace deal are not on the payroll of the Kremlin. They may have little sympathy for Putin & Co. Some express empathy for Ukraine and its people. Their ceasefire and peace proposals are drawn in the belief that they correspond to the assumed real interests of the Ukrainian people.

Yet, the supposed pragmatists seem to be unwilling or unable to consider all consequences of their pacifist plans.

First, a land-for-peace deal with Moscow begs the question of what kind of truce in eastern and southern Ukraine this can lead to. The local population in Ukraine’s Russian-occupied territories has been exposed to deportations, torture, executions, expropriations, and other human rights violations. Many of the ceasefire advocates are prone to moralistic argumentation. They typically avoid, however, the fundamental ethical issue of prolonging Russia’s terroristic occupation regime in parts of Ukraine.

Second, the various peace plans either ex- or implicitly foresee a temporary or even permanent limitation of Ukraine’s territorial integrity or/and political sovereignty. Among the most popular proposals are leaving Crimea under Moscow’s control or/and excluding Ukraine’s NATO accession. This would, however, create a problem not only for Ukraine. It would also send an ambivalent global signal.

Following such a path to peace implies that the territory, freedom, and independence of a full UN member would be constrained not only by Russia. An internationally promoted compromise would mean that other countries too become complicit in subverting the international order.

This course of action would repeat France’s and Germany’s dubious pressure on Ukraine within the infamous “Normandy Format” of 2014-21. After using large-scale military violence and nuclear blackmail, Russia would again be officially allowed and supported, by a multilateral group, to harvest the fruits of its aggression.

youtube

Inconvenient questions

What authority and legitimacy will the UN system and European security order have if Russia gets away with violating dozens of bi- and multilateral commitments it has taken upon itself in various international treaties and organizations?

If a larger community of states promotes and accepts a deal resulting in net gains for Russia, this would not only fail to respect Ukraine’s political sovereignty and territorial integrity. It would also contradict these countries’ obligations, according to international law, not to legitimize the spoils of military conquest.

Even a partial satisfaction of Moscow’s political and territorial demands may send a message to certain countries around the world that may try to be as “smart” as Russia. Why should other relatively powerful countries in different parts of the world not attempt, with some semi-plausible apology, to do things to their neighbors similar to those which Russia did to its southwestern “brother nation?” Aren’t other territories around the world not as disputed and as much waiting to be brought home as so-called “Novorossiia” or “New Russia” (i.e., Ukraine’s east and south)?

Worse, several or even many smaller nations around the world might want to make sure they do not end up in the shoes of the Ukrainians. Why would governments of relatively weak states across the world continue to rely on international law and organizations for the protection of their borders, territory, and independence?

If Western governments and other influential states signal that they cannot be counted on as defenders of the international order, perhaps, other instruments may be necessary for self-defense, such as chemical agents or nuclear warheads?

How controversial cluster munitions give Ukraine needed punch during counteroffensive

Ukraine has begun using American cluster munitions in the field and is doing so effectively, according to the White House. “They are using them appropriately,” National Security Spokesman John Kirby said on July 21. “They’re using them effectively, and they are actually having an impact on Russia’s…

The Kyiv IndependentIgor Kossov

Conclusions

The slow and half-hearted reaction of the international community to Russia’s illegal annexation of Crimea in 2014, hybrid war in the Donbas in 2014-2021, and large-scale invasion since Feb. 24, 2022, has already done damage to the international system. The implementation of a well-sounding peace plan may temporarily end the fighting in Ukraine today. Yet, it would further deepen the already worrisome cracks in the world order.

A multilaterally sponsored land-for-peace deal between Russia and Ukraine would acknowledge that might is right. This admission would derail not only the international liberal order, but world security and stability in general. It would do lasting damage to the worldwide regime for the non-proliferation of nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction.

The Russian armed aggression and genocidal campaign against the Ukrainian nation cannot be fully reversed with non-military means. There is thus no other way than to meet force by force. This is in full accordance with international law, in general, and the UN Charter’s Article 51, in particular.

Compromises, concessions, and other allowances to an aggressor state are no way toward a durable peace in Eastern Europe and elsewhere. A land-for-peace deal would do lasting damage to the rules-based international order and future rule of international law.

This article has been written within a larger SCEEUS project on hindrances to a Russian-Ukrainian truce. (See: https://sceeus.se/en/publications/)

Editor’s Note: The opinions expressed in the op-ed section are those of the authors and do not purport to reflect the views of the Kyiv Independent.

Submit an Opinion

0 notes

xtruss · 2 years

Text

‘Criminal Thug Zelensky’ Admits He Never Intended to Implement Minsk Agreements

Berlin (Sputnik, February 9, 2023) — Volodymyr Zelensky admitted that he had previously told German Chancellor Angela Merkel and French President Emmanuel Macron that the Minsk agreements were "impossible" and he did not plan to implement them.

"As for Minsk as a whole, I told Emmanuel Macron and Angela Merkel: we will not be able to implement it like that," Zelensky said in an interview with a German magazine published on Thursday.

According to Zelensky, he said the same thing to Russian President Vladimir Putin at the first and last meeting with him in the Normandy format in 2019.

"I told him the same thing as the other two. They were surprised and replied: 'If we knew in advance that you would change the meaning of our meeting, then there would be problems even before the summit,'" Zelensky added.

According to him, the Ukrainian side used the agreement only for the exchange of prisoners of war.

The Minsk Agreements Explained

Signed in 2014 and 2015 by representatives of Ukraine, the Donetsk and Lugansk People's Republics, Russia, France and Germany, the Minsk Agreements failed to bring a peaceful resolution to the conflict in Donbass.

Speaking at a meeting of the Council for the Development of Civil Society and Human Rights on Wednesday, Russian President Vladimir Putin, mentioned the issue of the 2014 Minsk Peace Agreements.

The Russian president said that western politicians prefer to remain tight-lipped when he reminds them of the accords, which were supposed to pave way for the peaceful resolution of the conflict in Ukraine but ultimately failed to do so.

So what exactly were these agreements about and what prompted the parties involved to sign them?

What Were the Minsk Agreements?

In February 2014, the democratically elected government of Ukraine was toppled by the so-called Euromaidan coup backed by western powers. The coup sparked a bloody conflict in the country's eastern regions where people who refused to bow down to the new Kiev leadership formed the Donetsk and Lugansk People's Republics (DPR and LPR, respectively) and proclaimed their independence.

Attempts by Kiev to quickly bring the newly formed republics to heel via the use of military power failed. The hastily formed DPR and LPR militias, armed with whatever weaponry they could scrounge from local armories, managed to hold their ground against the onslaught of the forces loyal to the new Ukrainian government.

Having failed to secure a decisive victory on the battlefield and with Russia and the European powers calling for a peaceful solution to the conflict, Kiev resorted to negotiations, which were hampered by the fact that the Ukrainian government was reluctant to talk directly with the leaders of the DPR and LPR.

Amid this delicate and precarious situation, the newly formed Trilateral Contact Group on Ukraine comprised of Ukraine, Russia, the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) and the Normandy Format comprised of Ukraine, Russia, Germany and France managed to work out what became known as the Minsk Agreements. They were named so because the talks were being held in the Belarussian capital of Minsk that served as a neutral ground.

MThe first of these accords, the Minsk Protocol, was signed on September 5, 2014, with an updated version of it, known commonly as the Minsk-2 Accords, being signed on February 12, 2015, when the previous iteration of the agreement failed to bring an end to the fighting.

The documents are in full known as “the Protocol on the results of consultations of the three-member Contact Group on joint steps aimed at the implementation of the peace plan by Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko and the initiatives by Russian President Vladimir Putin.” Poroshenko became the president of Ukraine following the overthrow of Yanukovich during the Maidan coup.

Lavrov Warns Reversing Minsk Agreements Could Lead to Massacre in Donbass (04.28.2021)!

What Did the Minsk Agreements Say?

Under the auspices of the agreements:

The parties pledged to a ceasefire and withdraw their forces from the line of contact.

The presence of heavy weapons in the area of the buffer zone was strictly prohibited.

The multiple-launch rocket systems Uragan and Smerch as well as the Tochka short-range ballistic missile system were supposed to be pulled out 70 km away from the line of contact.

OSCE observers were due to monitor the implementation of these rules.

In addition to the exchange of prisoners in line with the "all-for-all" principle, the sides were obliged to carry out the amnesty of those captured during the armed clashes.

The Ukrainian side was also supposed to adopt the law on the special status of separate DPR and LPR districts and hold local elections there, taking into account the position of the representatives of both Donbass republics. The day after the elections, Ukraine was set to take full control of the state border.

Additionally, the Minsk Protocols stipulated the implementation of a reform in Ukraine, which envisaged the introduction of a concept of decentralization into the country’s Constitution that should have taken into account the specifics of “certain districts of the Donetsk and Lugansk regions."

Who Signed the Minsk Agreements?

The Minsk Protocol was signed by the members of the contact group, as well as the heads of the Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics.

On February 12, 2015, a 13-point spate of measures on the implementation of the Minsk Agreements (the so-called Minsk-2 accords) was signed, and, on the whole, the document coincided with the September protocol in terms of content.

On behalf of the OSCE, the Minsk Agreements were signed by the OSCE’s Ukraine special envoy Heidi Tagliavini, while on the part of Ukraine and Russia, the document was inked by former Ukrainian President Leonid Kuchma and then-Russian Ambassador to Kiev Mikhail Zurabov, respectively.

Kiev, Washington Responsible for Failure of Minsk Peace Agreements, Ukraine's Former President Says! (03.14.2022) Kiev and its US patrons are squarely to blame for the failure of the Minsk Agreements on peace in eastern Ukraine, former Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych has told Sputnik. "An initiative group was formed from a variety of regions and countries - Ukraine, Russia, Israel, the US, and others. These were industrialists, businessmen, religious leaders, academics, journalists. A plan to implement the Minsk Agreements was quickly developed," Yanukovych said.

"Starting from 2015 and until the beginning of 2022 this initiative group carried out a tremendous amount of organizational work, negotiations, persuasion, clarification with the representatives of Ukraine, Russia, the US and some EU countries. As a rule, we were heard out, discussions were mostly conducted in a correct manner, no one denied that peace must be achieved. But in the end we received neither a 'yes' nor a 'no,'" he added.

"Our representatives handed this project to Volodymyr Zelensky for review and study. It was agreed that they would study it and get back to us with an answer. The answer came very promptly: 'we are not interested in this.' My people were indignant - if they are not interested in peace, what are they interested in?" the former president stressed.

Zelensky's election was accompanied by hopes that he could resolve the conflict in the Donbass, Yanukovych said. "Unfortunately, this did not take place. The people said that [confectionary oligarch Petro] Poroshenko came in and things became unsweet. Zelensky came in and things became unfunny."

"The history of this conflict began a long time ago, eight years ago. Yes, it was not not Zelensky who started the war in 2014, but [former National Security and Defence Council chief Oleksandr] Turchynov. Poroshenko continued it and made business off of blood. But it was Zelensky who during the election campaign who promised Ukrainians that while he wasn't the one to start the military conflict in Ukraine, he was the one who would finish it. Voters believed him and elected him president. Unfortunately, he deceived them. But today the masks have been dropped, the moment of truth has arrived. There is still a chance to stop the tragedy," Yanukovych concluded.

The Minsk Protocol was also signed by Alexander Zakharchenko, then-head of the DPR, and his LPR counterpart at the time Igor Plotnitsky.

The Minsk-2 agreement was clinched during a meeting of the Normandy Format, which included Russian President Vladimir Putin, then-German Chancellor Angela Merkel, then-French President Francois Hollande and then-Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko.

Who Violated the Minsk Agreements?

Over the past five years, the Ukrainian side simply refrained from implementing political clauses of the Minsk Agreements, demanding instead that the control of the border between the DPR and LPR territories should be handed over to Kiev first.

These demands, however, were rejected by DPR and LPR authorities and by Moscow, who suspected that once Ukrainian forces got control of the border and effectively cut off the republics from the outside world, Kiev may then attempt to crush all opposition there through the force of arms.

The DPR and the LPR authorities, as well as Russia, have also repeatedly accused Kiev of illegally occupying settlements in the buffer zone and deploying heavy military equipment there.

The situation was further exacerbated by the fact that the European powers repeatedly turned a blind eye to Kiev's blatant refusal to adhere to the Minsk agreements, while at the same time constantly berating the DPR and LPR for the alleged violations of the very same accords.

On Wednesday, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov recalled that both Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and his predecessor Petro Poroshenko openly said that they were not going to implement the Minsk Accords.

The remarks came after Russian President Vladimir Putin condemned Ukrainian authorities for effectively killing the Minsk Agreements, stating in late February that the document stopped existing long before Russia decided to recognize the DPR and the LPR.

Putin signed a decree to recognize the Donbass republics – which later became a part of Russia - as independent states on February 21, 2022, in a move that came amid escalating shelling, sniper and sabotage attacks against the LPR and the DPR. The decree was followed by the Russian president announcing the beginning of a special military operation in Ukraine on February 24.

0 notes

creatiview · 2 years

Text

Eighteen people including Ukraine's interior minister, other senior ministry officials and three children were killed on Wednesday morning when a helicopter crashed near a nursery outside Kyiv, Ukrainian officials said. The regional governor said 29 people were also hurt, including 15 children, when the helicopter came down in a residential area in Brovary, on the capital's northeastern outskirts. Several dead bodies draped in foil blankets lay in a courtyard near the damaged nursery. Emergency workers were at the scene. Debris was scattered over a playground. National police chief Ihor Klymenko said Interior Minister Denys Monastyrskyi had been killed alongside his first deputy, Yevheniy Yenin, and other officials in a helicopter belonging to the state emergency service. "There were children and...staff in the nursery at the time of this tragedy," Kyiv region governor Oleksiy Kuleba wrote on Telegram. Officials did not give an immediate explanation of the cause of the helicopter crash. There was no immediate comment from Russia, whose troops invaded Ukraine last February, and Ukrainian officials made no reference to any Russian attack in the area at the time. Monastyrskyi, responsible for the police and security inside Ukraine, would be the most senior Ukrainian official to die since the war began. Separately, Ukraine reported intense fighting overnight in the east of the country, where both sides have taken huge losses for little gain in intense trench warfare over the last two months. Ukrainian forces repelled attacks in the eastern city of Bakhmut and the village of Klishchiivka just south of it, the Ukrainian military said. Russia has focused on Bakhmut in recent weeks, claiming last week to have taken the mining town of Soledar on its northern outskirts. After major Ukrainian gains in the second half of 2022, the frontlines have hardened over the last two months. Kyiv says it hopes new Western weapons would allow it to resume an offensive to recapture land, especially heavy tanks which would give its troops mobility and protection to push through Russian lines. Western allies will be gathering on Friday at a U.S. air base in Germany to pledge more weapons for Ukraine. Attention is focused in particular on Germany, which has veto power over any decision to send its Leopard tanks, which are fielded by armies across Europe and widely seen as the most suitable for Ukraine. Berlin says a decision on the tanks will be the first item on the agenda of Boris Pistorius, its new defence minister. Britain, which broke the Western taboo on sending main battle tanks over the weekend by promising a squadron of its Challengers, has called on Germany to approve the Leopards. Poland and Finland have already said they would be ready to send Leopards if Berlin allows it.

0 notes

qqueenofhades · 3 years

Note

Thanks so much for all the breakdowns you’ve done for us at a very difficult and stressful time: they’re really informative (and very interesting). Please feel free not to answer if you’re getting burned out on this, but if you’re happy to continue I was hoping to ask my own question. One thing I’ve heard from a number of commentators who seem to know what they're talking about is that NATO’s general attitude and eastward expansion post-1997 massively contributed to Putin’s anger with the West and aggression. I can definitely see how the Western whole attitude of ‘capitalism won you lost’ was neither classy, kind, just, nor particularly helpful; however I’m less informed about NATO’s expansion and what should have been done here in a better world. If various Eastern European countries *wanted* to join NATO and asked to join NATO (I’m assuming that countries such as Poland, Romania and the Czech Republic applied to join and they weren’t forced into the alliance against their will) should NATO have turned them away – and would that not have been prioritising Russia’s wishes over the wishes of these countries themselves? What would have been a better way of handling the situation? I know very little about this so any insight would be much appreciated!

(also this is the same anon as before! I also really wanted to say that these posts have been a huge source of comfort at an incredibly scary time when a lot of people are - understandably - freaking out about how this situation might spiral: while I've been really scared it's helpful to see carefully-written, level-headed commentary. I hope you're looking after yourself and taking a lot of breaks from the news)

Aha, it looks like you didn't ask this on anon, but if it's all right with you, I will answer anyway. :)

Basically, the answer to this question is that, as with most global problems, it is a complicated mix of factors, including Western arrogance, the brutality of the Soviet regime, Putin's personal ego, paranoia, background as a KGB agent in the last days of the Cold War (he was in Dresden when the Berlin Wall came down) and the long-standing Russian belief in "western aggression" as an explanation for pretty much anything. I have written several posts, most notably this one and this one, explaining how Russian mistrust of the west goes back as far as the thirteenth-century Baltic and Northern crusades, and involves the status of the medieval Kievan Rus' as the birthplace of the Russian Orthodox Church, to which Putin has closely tied his religious and moral strategies. For centuries, Russia has viewed itself as neither fully part of Europe nor entirely separate from it, and felt that the West has been aggressively and militarily forcing its way into Russian lands and imposing Western values, which are supposedly incompatible with Russian values. This is, of course, not entirely a lie; Russia has been attacked by European powers, including on a very large scale. During WWII, the Nazi German attack on the USSR was viewed as a straight-up continuation of Baltic Livonian crusade aggression, and since Den Pobedy (Victory Day, May 9, marking the end of WWII in Europe) is still the biggest public holiday in Russia, this memory has been cultivated and re-cultivated. That's why Putin is trying to use "de-nazifying" Ukraine as a casus belli, since this is a universal cultural memory and traumatic experience in post-1945 Russian people. The USSR suffered absolutely horrific losses in WWII, with by far the most civilian deaths, and that's why modern Germany has been treading so carefully in regard to this current crisis. Anything they do that is too aggressive will give Putin propaganda ammo that the Nazis are attacking again.

That all said, Stalin was an equally repressive and brutal dictator as Hitler, with many of the same methods, and the USSR had already undergone large-scale purges, disappearances, deportation to concentration camps, and otherwise been distorted and torn apart in the 1930s even prior to the war. Stalin died in 1953 and the Iron Curtain is generally considered to have come down in 1961. After that time, until the collapse of the Wall in 1989 and the end of the USSR in 1991 (albeit after a period of increased liberalization under Gorbachev), Soviet control of Russia, its constituent republics, and the Eastern Bloc communist countries was more or less complete. (Satellite states such as Romania weren't under direct USSR rule, but Nicolae Ceausescu was one of the most brutal of all Warsaw Pact dictators, while enjoying support and cultivation from the West simply thanks to acting as if he was anti-Soviet). Popular uprisings against the USSR in Hungary in 1956 and Czechoslovakia in 1968 were brutally put down and involved the tightening of the leash from Moscow. Almost all the Eastern Bloc states likewise had infamous secret police (the Stasi, the KGB, the Securitate, etc) and relied on information and ideological control of the populace, as well as the economic precepts of communist rule.

Thus, when the Cold War ended, repressive twentieth-century old-school socialism was put in the historical dustbin, and the Eastern Bloc states gained their independence and were allowed to reorganize themselves as modern capitalist democracies, a lot of them -- not surprisingly -- wanted to put safeguards in place against ever going through anything like that again. As you note, nobody held a gun to their heads and forced them to join NATO; they were eager to obtain concrete security guarantees to keep themselves out of the newly-formed Russian Federation's sphere of influence. But so much of the security and political apparatus of the former USSR was imported whole-cloth into the Russian Federation with just the names and acronyms changed, especially when Putin took over in 1999 and began bringing in all his old KGB pals. They're running Russia like the USSR because it's literally where they all grew up, came of age, and learned how to exert political and cultural control, and that's all they really know how (or want) to do. The siloviki are as much a problem as Putin himself, aside from the fact that they've discovered that they've all discovered they really like capitalism as long as it makes beaucoup bucks for them, and the West won't really push back on them for anything. As long as the Russian state is serving its purpose in keeping them, personally, rich and powerful, they don't really care what other damage it wreaks, whether on its own people or abroad, and they want to make sure they do everything in their power to make sure it doesn't change.

In one sense, as you note, NATO isn't blameless in how they handled post-Cold War policy (truly, far from it), and an opportunity was genuinely missed to create a new world order that wasn't just "we won you lost suck it up na na nah." If they had listened to the Russians or implemented a different policy or tried to create a collaborative instead of dominative post-1989 system, a lot of this could have definitely gone a different way. But there was no way they were squandering the cachet of "winning" the Cold War, of course this is all much easier with thirty years of hindsight, and human nature has always been to conquer instead of share. The undeniable Western arrogance and eagerness to expand NATO into historically Soviet/Russian Empire-controlled territories was, obviously, a major point of contention, and involved many controversies and fudging of the truth and other diplomatic runarounds. But as noted, it would have been hard to tell the newly independent countries that they couldn't join, and the USSR's own actions made their former republics eager to distance themselves. The historical responsibility for that legacy is not NATO's fault, even though it obviously has flaws. Putin wants the power of the USSR without taking ownership of any of its damage, and yeah, that's not gonna work.

That said: despite NATO's missteps and Western arrogance in forcing capitalism-at-any-cost, Russian historical anger at "Western aggression" dating back many centuries, the trauma of WWII, and all the other aggravating factors, this current situation is still a personal, and entirely avoidable, choice by Putin, and ultimately the responsibility for it is his alone. Russia obviously does not need to attack its neighbors, sponsor destabilizing political movements in the West, impoverish its own people, revert wholesale to the worst habits of the USSR, and everything else that the regime has done, because Putin is fundamentally stuck in an us-vs-them Cold War way of thinking, in order to flourish as a country. As the Russian opposition has pointed out at serious cost to themselves, Russia can be a modern democracy that finally bucks its old imperialist authoritarian habits, builds a new economic and political future that works for all its people and not only the tiny old-school KGB crust at the top, and finally sheds its crippling addiction to the past and determination to recapture that geopolitical/cultural/social domination at any cost. However, until Putin and his enablers and sycophants are out of power, and the Russian people fully embrace this change, rather than trading freedom for "security" (since obviously they now have neither, and it is always a false-equivalence favorite of fascist regimes), that can't happen. The West can't make it happen either, even if they can try to hasten its arrival. This isn't to say that Russia should just make itself into a pale copy of the West, as its defenders like to argue, but it's going to require some serious soul-searching about what they're willing to do and what their beliefs are. We'll see.

#hacash #ask #history #modern history #russian history #soviet history #cold war #russia ukraine war

36 notes · View notes

mariacallous · 6 months

Text

Since winning power in October 2023, Poland’s current (and former) prime minister, Donald Tusk, and his foreign minister, Radoslaw Sikorski, have visited Paris and Berlin and sought a revival of the Weimar Triangle, a multilateral format once central to reconciling the western and eastern visions of European affairs, largely marginalized over the past decade due to the right-wing Law and Justice party’s antagonistic approach to Germany. And in late January, a trip to Kyiv—of vital symbolic importance—reassured Ukraine that Poland will continue to be its advocate in Europe, a job ever more burdensome given the waning resources and growing war fatigue among other allies.

Cynical observers might conclude that Tusk and Sikorski are simply wining and dining in other countries’ capitals rather than governing their own country. But that is not the case. The diplomatic offensive they have ushered in is, in fact, an integral part of their political mission: They campaigned under the promise of Poland returning to Europe after years of self-initiated conflict with Brussels.

Tusk and Sikorski have even buried the hatchet with Andrzej Duda, Poland’s president, backed by Law and Justice, their archenemy in domestic politics. On the occasion of visiting U.S. President Joe Biden in the White House to rally support for Ukraine (and to seal military deals for Poland along the way), they spoke in harmony.

Duda, a Euroskeptic, commenting on plans for Poland’s 2025 EU Council presidency, even concluded that “just as there is no strong NATO without Europe, there is no strong Europe without the United States and NATO.” Liberal internationalism seems to be spreading through osmosis in Polish politics.

Tusk has also become feisty on social media, bashing U.S. Republicans for withholding aid for Ukraine, with references to former President Ronald Reagan “turning in his grave,” as well as writing a powerful critique of Russian President Vladimir Putin after the death of Alexei Navalny.

A Christmas gift of unlocked EU funds arrived from Brussels in December, previously suspended due the European Commission objecting to Law and Justice’s reforms violating independence of the judiciary and state media, but now made available as a goodwill gesture on behalf of the EU just days after Tusk’s swearing-in. The second coming of Donald Tusk seems almost like a campaign for an unelected leader of Europe.

Except it is not—at least, not in a way in which most European commentators are hoping for it to be. Poland is back, no doubt. After years of self-proclaimed isolationism, when Law and Justice did not see any value even in being present at the continent’s most important negotiating tables, the surge in Warsaw’s international activity is impossible to miss.

Tusk, a figure of authority in European politics due to his tenures at the helm of the European Council and the European People’s Party, is not solely responsible for it, of course. Equally—and in some aspects, even more important is the role of Sikorski, returning to the foreign office just as Tusk comes back to lead the government. Sikorski, a University of Oxford graduate, is well-acquainted with Britain’s conservative elite and the high-profile figures in Washington but equally appreciated on the continent for his efforts to expand both EU and NATO influence eastward

He took his previous job as a member of the European Parliament extremely seriously, defying the commonplace perception of the parliament as a political retirement home. Even before the full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022, he campaigned heavily both for a more sober approach to Russia and a rapid increase in Europe’s defense capabilities—and both these efforts gave him enormous political clout. As a result, Sikorski is now a clear front-runner to become the EU’s first defense commissioner, should this post be eventually established after the June parliamentary elections, as proposed by European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen.

With such a pair of diplomatic heavyweights at the helm, Poland might appear to be a rising power, capable even of shifting the continent’s balance away from populism and authoritarianism and in favor of liberal multilateralism and cooperation, especially in the realm of geopolitics. And despite the fact that there is enormous hunger, both domestically and abroad, for that to happen, Tusk and his team might have neither the resources nor the energy to assume a long-term leading role in Europe.

And if they succeed, it might be different than many now imagine.

After the electoral victory of the liberal and progressive parties last October, when the self-proclaimed democratic opposition defeated Law and Justice after two terms in power, enthusiasm was palpable in Europe. Sandwiched between triumphs of the far-right in Slovakia and the Netherlands, Poland became almost automatically a beacon of hope for the left across the continent.

Defeating a modern-day populist incumbent through direct elections is no small win, and Tusk deserves credit for it, but expecting him to lead a Europe-wide charge of liberals against populists and far-right Euroskeptics is both naive and unrealistic. First, because he will continue to have his hands full at home. Second, because Poland under his leadership will not be the Poland that everybody in Europe remembers from more than a decade ago.

This was already apparent on his first visit to France. Widely criticized in the past for being Germany’s supposed puppets, both Tusk and Sikorski signaled decisively that Poland is ready and happy to talk—but as an equal, not as anyone’s patsy.

At a meeting with French President Emmanuel Macron, Tusk said that while “it would be difficult to find a politician in Europe that would be more pro-Ukrainian than me,” the food security of both Europe and Poland needs to be taken into account. These comments, made with regard to a farmers blockade on the Polish-Ukrainian border and a crisis over the importation of Ukrainian grain to EU, were already a signal that being favorable to Kyiv does not mean bowing to all of its demands.

Similarly, in Berlin, Tusk made rather spiky remarks at a press conference with German officials when he reflected on complacency being a thing to be avoided in relationships—a multilayered comment that many in the room saw as both a criticism of Berlin’s policy toward Russia over recent decades as well as an announcement heralding change in Poland’s approach to Germany.

Weeks earlier, Sikorski touched a similar note by jokingly offering Germans a discount on war reparations (previously demanded by the Law and Justice government) “should they transfer the whole amount by year-end.” It was not so much the mischievous humor but the very fact that he did not dismiss the notion of reparations entirely that made the comment a focal point of his visit.

For the past decade, hunting for arguments to back up financial claims from Germany was the idée fixe of Law and Justice’s diplomacy—to the point to which some civil servants included it in their email signatures. While in opposition, the liberals and progressives many times labeled the idea as absurd and harmful for bilateral relations. Now it is an integral part of the bilateral conversation.

Sikorski’s stature and experience will be pivotal for Poland’s return to multilateral decision-making —and he needs to move fast. Domestically, he started his tenure short of experienced personnel, as Law and Justice purged the civil service and filled it with political loyalists and party members, the latter being forbidden before the party took over power.

It should come as no surprise that he appointed as many as seven deputies, a move that came under fire from the opposition as an unnecessary expansion of administration and political hirings. But a careful examination of the nominations shows that Sikorski is gearing up for battles on many fronts: Among the state secretaries are Marek Prawda, a former ambassador to Germany and head of Polish mission to the EU; Robert Kupiecki, an ex-ambassador to the United States, deputy ambassador to NATO, and deputy defense minister; and Anna Radwan-Rohrenschef, an experienced think-tanker and public policy expert, well-connected in Brussels and Paris.

It’s not all rosy, however, since Duda does not share all of the foreign-policy views that Tusk and Sikorski are trying to impose. Although legally, according to a 2009 ruling of the Constitutional Tribunal, it is the prime minister who decides the country’s foreign strategy, it still needs to be agreed on with the president. And Duda is, after all, a conservative politician, who famously refused to congratulate Biden on his electoral victory in November 2020. In the event of former President Donald Trump winning another term, more disagreements on the U.S. front will arise, as Tusk and Sikorski are clearly siding with Biden while Duda actively praises Trump for good, especially economic, relations during his first term.

Sikorski himself takes on the issues of rallying support for Ukraine—where he is remembered for his involvement in attempted peace talks after Russia’s 2014 annexation of Crimea—as well as trying to control bilateral relations with the United States. Heavy criticism of Trump will not earn him many favors should the former president return to the White House, but Sikorski will not be entirely isolated. Good trade relations between Washington and Warsaw will help, even in the event of a Republican administration in 2025.

The biggest challenge, however, lies at home. Tusk’s government enjoys a stable majority in the parliament but needs to cohabit with a hostile Duda. Backed by Law and Justice, he will remain in office until mid-2025, and he is likely to try to influence Sikorski’s strategy. Duda and Tusk have already clashed multiple times over the new government’s attempts to restore the rule of law and remove the public broadcasters from political control, with the president even accusing the prime minister of creating the “first political prisoners” since the 1989 democratic transition. An already-strained relationship will be echoed in Poland’s diplomatic endeavors, as Duda is unlikely to back down.

In January 2025, Warsaw assumes the presidency of the European Union—and Law and Justice had passed a bill that compels the government to agree its priorities with the sitting president. On the basis of that, Duda already announced the pillars of Polish EU leadership, wanting to focus on relations with the United States, the proposed accession of Moldova and Ukraine, and Ukraine’s postwar reconstruction and energy transition. On paper, these do not appear too hard to swallow for Tusk, but it remains to be seen how the government will implement them and who will be the face of the EU presidency.

Duda will claim the right to represent Poland as head of state, but Tusk has a history of clashing with Law and Justice presidents; he was repeatedly challenged by the late President Lech Kaczynski over EU summit participation during his first tenure as prime minister. Tusk might have a stronger hand this time, which is also due to an instrumental role of Piotr Serafin, his former chief of staff during the European Council days, now Poland’s acting permanent representative to the EU. With Tusk’s man in Brussels, he will be more ambitious both at home and abroad.

On the other hand, Duda is also responsible for approving the government’s choices for ambassadorships. Back in January, he was expected to agree on the vast majority of replacements proposed by the foreign office, but now the presidential palace is objecting to the government’s plans. Sikorski wanted a swift and sizable turnaround, proposing to replace some 50 ambassadors in a very short time span—and Duda objected.

An unofficial stalemate continues, to the point that the presidency has reportedly threatened to block a potential nomination for Sikorski to become an EU commissioner if he does not bow to pressure. The Foreign Ministry plans to respond by recalling ambassadors and sending new chargés d’affaires in their place, a provisional solution at best. It could result in a severely polarized diplomatic corps, on the one side faithful to Law and Justice, on the other heavily pro-European.

Right now there is certainly a lot of will in Warsaw to transform Poland’s role in Europe—but there might not be a way. Domestic struggles will consume time and energy, possibly at the expense of international aspirations.

Last year, during the Warsaw Security Forum, an annual geopolitical gathering, a senior foreign diplomat noted that Poland has become Europe’s center of attention, but not yet the center of its gravity. Tusk and Sikorski will want to change that.

6 notes · View notes

ukrainenews · 2 years

Text

Daily Wrap Up June 19, 2022

Under the cut: Ukraine’s parliament has voted through two laws which will place severe restrictions on Russian books and music in an attempt to break cultural ties between the two countries; Kyiv has been attacked from the air again in Vyshhorod district this morning; Ukrainian troops have “successfully repulsed” Russian attacks on villages near the eastern city of Sievierodonetsk; Germany will significantly increase its use of highly polluting coal to preserve energy supplies ahead of the winter as Russian cuts to gas exports threaten shortfalls; The Kyiv Independent has published photos documenting Russia’s invasion of the Donbas region.

“Ukraine’s parliament has voted through two laws which will place severe restrictions on Russian books and music in an attempt to break cultural ties between the two countries.

One law will forbid the printing of books by Russian citizens, unless they renounce their Russian passport and take Ukrainian citizenship. The ban will only apply to those who held Russian citizenship after the 1991 collapse of Soviet rule, Reuters reports.

It will also ban the commercial import of books printed in Russia, Belarus, and occupied Ukrainian territory, while also requiring special permission for the import of books in Russian from any other country.

Another law will prohibit the playing of music by post-1991 Russian citizens on media and on public transport, while also increasing quotas on Ukrainian-language speech and music content in TV and radio broadcasts.

The laws need to be signed by President Volodymyr Zelenskiy to take effect, and there is no indication that he opposes either. Both received broad support from across the chamber, including from lawmakers who had traditionally been viewed as pro-Kremlin by most of Ukraine’s media and civil society.”-via The Guardian

“Kyiv has been attacked from the air again, with the sound of air raid alarms and explosions ringing through the Ukrainian capital.

“Explosions were heard in Vyshhorod district this morning. Air defence fired at enemy targets,” the military governor of the Kyiv region, Oleksiy Kuleba, said on his Telegram channel on Sunday.

He said the shelling had not caused damage or injuries in the city, but asked Kyiv residents to continue taking refuge in shelters.

Russia’s defence ministry said it had hit a tank repair plant in Kharkiv with its Iskander missiles, and destroyed ten howitzers as well as up to 20 military vehicles in the Ukrainian city of Mykolaiv that had been supplied by Western countries over the past 10 days, Reuters reports.”-via The Guardian

“Ukrainian troops have “successfully repulsed” Russian attacks on villages near the eastern city of Sievierodonetsk, where bloody battles have been raging for weeks, Kyiv’s armed forces said Sunday.

The UN warned this week that remaining civilians in Sievierodonetsk, in the eastern region of Donbas, are running out of clean water, food and sanitation.

“Our units repulsed the assault in the area of Toshkivka,” the Ukrainian army said on Facebook. “The enemy has retreated and is regrouping.”

It said an attack from Russian forces who were “storming” towards the village of Orikhove had been warded off.

Sievierodonetsk is mostly, but not entirely, under Russian control, according Ukrainian officials, AFP reports.

“All declarations by Russians that they control Sievierodonetsk are lies. Indeed, they control the majority of the city but they do not control it entirely,” local governor Serhiy Haidai said on Telegram Sunday.”-via The Guardian

“Germany will significantly increase its use of highly polluting coal to preserve energy supplies ahead of the winter as Russian cuts to gas exports threaten shortfalls in Europe’s largest economy.

The German government said on Sunday it would pass emergency laws to reopen mothballed coal plants for electricity generation and auction gas supplies to industry to incentivise businesses to curb consumption. The move illustrated the depth of concern in Berlin over possible gas shortages in the winter months.

“This is bitter but in this situation essential to lower the use of gas,” said German economic minister Robert Habeck, a member of the Green party.

Russia cut capacity on the main gas export pipeline to Germany this week by 60 per cent, sending ripples across the continent as western officials became convinced that Moscow is weaponising its gas exports in response to EU sanctions following the full-scale invasion of Ukraine.

Italy, which has also seen gas supplies from Russia fall, is expected to announce emergency measures in the coming days if supplies are not restored.”-via The Financial Times

The Kyiv Independent has published photos documenting Russia’s invasion of the Donbas region.

“Two months after President Volodymyr Zelensky declared that the “Battle of Donbas” had begun, shelling and rocket fire intensifies as fierce fighting continues across the region.

“Russia wants to destroy every city in Donbas, (and) ‘every’ is not an exaggeration,” Zelensky said in an evening video address on June 10. “Like Volnovakha, like Mariupol. All these ruins in once happy cities.”

Russia turned its focus towards Ukraine’s eastern and southern regions after failing to capture Kyiv in a nine-week assault that reduced the capital’s suburbs to rubble and killed thousands. Moscow now focuses on capturing the Donbas, Ukraine’s industrial heartland comprised of Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts.

Both Ukraine and Russia are suffering an immense number of casualties as the conflict transitions into a war of attrition.”

#Daily Update #Ukraine #Russia #War in Ukraine #Severodonetsk #sieverodonetsk #germany #kyiv #donbas

14 notes · View notes

papirouge · 2 years

Note

Why don't you be specific? You're getting asks about China... because you suggested nuking the United States. You want China and Russia to be portrayed as "heroes" for once against the United States.

You don't have to be a U.S. simp to know that's hateful. You don't need to be an edgelord to recognize China and Russia are authoritarian, aggressive and oppressive.

Pro-life Christians need to see their privilege alloted from Western civilization and not erase the victims of communism and corruption. I don't care how demented the government of any country is, to suggest they are nuked over some flippant idea of equity is not pro-life. It is not charitable. It is not Christ like.

Are you done lying? I talked about fiction. There's no need to be "specific", I have nothing to hide, my initial post is still here and it's very obvious in that I'm talking about a piece of media. You're just an illiterate.

And I never said I "wanted China and Russia to be portrayed as hero", once again you are lying ; I actually said:

"the amount of URSS casualties are much higher than any other Allied force; and yet it doesn't stop Americans to obsessively downplay the Red Army sacrifice and act like the US army was the savior of ocCupied Europe, which is nothing more than good ol'American washed historical revisionnism"

....which is totally true, cope. The USSR Red Army has been the main leverage in defeating the Nazi, whether you like it or not. These dudes CONQUERED BERLIN. The Red Army’s victory on the Eastern Front was decisive. None of that is mutually exclusive to admit all the legit criticism that could addressed about the Red Army/Communism system.

"After the Red Army prevented the Wehrmacht from taking Moscow in 1941 and prevailed at Stalingrad—one of the most decisive battles in history—it began a counteroffensive that drove the enemy all the way back to Berlin in 1945. In one of the final stages of the Red offensive, Soviet advances in the summer of 1944 drew away German forces that could have blunted the Allied offensive in Normandy."

For over four years and across a frontline over 1,000 miles long, the Red Army resisted and then turned back the German forces during the war on the Eastern Front. The great majority of German military casualties can be attributed to their battles with the Red Army, in which nearly 4 million German troops died.

To bolster the Red Army’s chances of resisting the German invasion of the Soviet Union, the US started shipping military supplies to the Soviet Union in the summer of 1941. Over $11 billion of military aid flowed to the USSR during the war, embodied by Dodge trucks, locomotives and canned rations. This was aid for which the Red Army paid in blood, so Stalin believed. (...)

The Nazi capital of Berlin was captured by the Red Army in April 1945. Having advanced hundreds of miles in the preceding months, the Red Army resumed their offensive on 16 April. On 2 May, the city’s garrison surrendered.2.5 million Red Army troops were involved in the Battle of Berlin, and Soviet prestige was boosted by the military achievement of defeating the Germans. But the battle is also notorious for the mass rape and murder that took place in the aftermath of fighting. (x)

It doesn't have to be pro communist to acknowledge that. That's not being "hateful" this is reality. You are not a child to call anything you dislike "hate"...

ALL COUNTRIES INVOLVED IN WAR do commit war crimes and atrocities. Pointing the fingers at a specific ones to argue that for some reason they are "worse" is when it becomes clownery. I also got shit for saying that Allied forces weren't the "good guys" of war and they too had innocent blood on their hand (they nuked the entire city of Dresden in Germany and casualties were mostly civilians)

Pro-life Christians need to see their privilege alloted from Western civilization and not erase the victims of communism and corruption

The only privilege we have is living in a world with CHRISTIAN VALUES on which the West relies on. And being a raging anti Communist isn't any more Christian than being a raging liberal like 99% of yankees are. I remember how SHOOK Christian USAmerican were when I made that post stating Christian commune system relied on sharing valuables with the whole community, and of course they got mad at me for shilling communism...smh

And stop with this silly "we won't erase the victims of communism!!" as if you were doing something. Being against communism is the most stale, unproblematic middle-of-the-road take one could made. Beside delulu radical leftists, no one is "defending communism".

And that's what so irritating in your whole posture, you are literally right there....screeching about a post describing a MOVIE SCENARIO where the USA would be NUKED (which is legit a good SCI-FI, dystopian movie idea, IDC), and having the audacity to be like "aRenT YoU pRo LifE?" while proceding to downplay REAL LIFE atrocies the USA perpetuated IN THE REAL WORLD ; LIKE FOR REAL - NOT ACTORS. Clown behavior. So yea, time for the USA to be "pro life" - I already am ; I am not the one that have blood on my hands or downplaying war crimes lmao

You are, right there, butthurt about the potentiality of a MOVIE(!!!) where the USA would be nuked, yet I am sure you've yet go out of your way to lecture the countless of idiots and literally supremacists/terrorist mocking REAL PEOPLE DYING or calling to kill people. Your overall reaction is why a movie with the USA disapearing is needed btw ; it would make you realize how dispensable to this world you are, how fleeting this world is (in the end of times, the USA will disapear too) and will tone down your pridefulness

I said what I said and you will cope.

#answered

2 notes · View notes