Is this only GitHub? I noticed other pages and services being extremely slow or erroring more often. Claude errored on file uploads, LinkedIn took 1minute+ to load a simple page.
As someone who likes many cases of brutalist architecture, I wonder if you'd explains why many of the examples I like are in Mexico whereas many of the negative examples are in the UK.
I will never understand why it has to be this way and Russia cannot be a normal country that has the goal to join the EU and be prosperous instead of doing nonsense for over a hundred years now.
A thousand years almost. As a Pole I have no faith in Russia ever becoming anything other than a savage hostile wart on this planet. It's not just their leadership. It's the nation. More accurately their culture. Their malice is a result of a rare combination of ineptitude and megalomania all in one package.
Not anymore. Marie Antoinette literally had to lose her head for this to happen. Mustache man too, suffering humiliating total defeat. What happened to Russia? They killed their czar and got soviets that destroyed most of the legacy of Russian empire. They live in a constant dissonance ever since because their fake red empire was never a system to last, but it introduced enough destruction to kill religion and their ability to perceive world through a rational lens.
>Marie Antoinette literally had to lose her head for this to happen.
Arguably it was actually Robespierre losing is head that had to happen to stop the madness (Terror) in France, or at least create the conditions for it to stop eventually.
I don't know what has to happen in Russia. It is possible for autocratic states, that have always been autocratic, to transition to liberal democracy. It did happen in France, but even after the end of the Terror it still went through a long phase of imperial autocracy. It takes time to develop institutions strong enough to resist autocracy.
Russia needs to find a new identity. Someone like Navalny might have led it out of the blind alley it was in. I still hope after Putin dies there is some good changes as young people, at least the educated ones, don't share Putin's twisted worldview at all.
No, Navalny was never “the guy”, he’s literally jokingly referred to as “the buterbrod” (sandwich) because of his comments about Crimea (“Crimea is not a sandwich to be passed around” in the context of “returning” Crimea to Ukraine).
“Russian liberalism stops at the border of Ukraine”
You omit the fact that he took those words back and said “Crimea is Ukraine” while being in prison, knowing well it will not make his life (and death) easier
> He and his cohort were sponsored by the West and the West clearly loves Russian people and wish us the best possible future, yeah, we believe.
Why do you not believe this? As someone who identifies as Western, I want for all people's to prosper. I don't think I've ever talked to anyone in Europe or the US who had it out for Russians. All resentment send exclusively be towards nationalists.
For the same reason no one in the West believed Putin when he said expanding NATO was not necessary since Russia was not the enemy anymore. The West still wanted to allow ex Soviet countries to join NATO even if that would cause hostility from Russia. It really is a self fulfilling prophecy caused by mistrust from both sides. It’s always so easy to blame only one side when you’re strongly biased towards one of the sides, but if you look at it from a neutral perspective, clearly both sides behaved in a way as to make the current situation completely unavoidable. And neither is willing to make a change now and will just double down until one side is completely defeated. Russia alone has no chance, but if when shit hits the fan its BRICS friends continue to back it up, we may be heading to something even more disastrous than WWII. I am not optimistic.
Yes it is if it was the case that the whole purpose of the neighborhood watch was to contain me, and breaking into your house was in my view the best defense against allowing you to contain me.
Russia has a history of raping, pillaging, and stealing land from their neighbors with NATO acting as the only (somewhat) successful defense against that so far.
Your idea of ‘containment’ in this sense means you’re defending the equivalent of a gang of serial rapists and murderers entering innocent people’s homes, taking their families hostage, and saying the home is now theirs.
I'm asking seriously: do you really believe that if Ukraine ever joined NATO (which is dubious as they already requested in 2008 but their request was denied), it would actually attack Russia?
The question is whether NATO would attack Russia through Ukraine. And if you don’t think that’s absolutely possible you need to read history books. I think it’s actually very possible it will happen within the next few years, in fact, given the rhetoric coming from the UK, Baltic states and some other EU countries.
So explain why the countries neighboring Russia are building all possible border fortifications, spending large sums of money for something that would make any invasion much more difficult.
> The West still wanted to allow ex Soviet countries to join NATO even if that would cause hostility from Russia.
I find it hard to understand people still use this argument with the straight face. NATO is not an entity that expands itself - individual countries, like Sweden or Finland, request to join it to protect themselves from the situation when Russia attacks them and they have to fight alone like Ukraine. Of course Putin hates that as he cannot fulfill his dream of expanding Russia to the borders of Soviet Union, but this argument doesn't stand any scrutiny.
reply