.io is a ccTLD though and is subject to the whims of the British Indian Ocean Territory. They can, for any reason, remove domains. See what recently happened with Mali and .ml.

Lovely racism!

There was also evidence that these balloons had equipment on board that did not line up with what is expected on a weather balloon.

Do you mind sharing your evidence? Because that’s not what was officially reported by the Pentagon. It was reported that it had off-the-shelf components (i.e., exactly what you’d expect on a weather balloon), and didn’t collect or transmit anything.

Chinese spy balloon didn’t collect intelligence as it flew over US: Pentagon:

The Chinese spy balloon that was shot down over the Atlantic Ocean in early February was built, at least partly, using American off-the-shelf parts, a U.S. official has confirmed to ABC News. […] Later Thursday, Pentagon press secretary Brig. Gen. Pat Ryder said that the balloon not only did not transmit data back to China – it never collected any.

You’ll note that media still insists on using the phrase “spy balloon” when it was just a weather balloon. They even said as much, and they still use fearmongering phrasing because they know it serves their narrative.

No point lying. If you check the modlog plenty of his comments get removed. You can check for yourself.

I’ll just summarize my point: if you think you have educational value in your comments, that value is nil if the comment gets removed.

As someone who largely agrees with the content of what you have to say, your delivery is absolutely disgusting. You litter every comment with personal attacks, insults, and are needlessly offensive. I genuinely don’t know if you think that aggression helps get your point across, but it doesn’t. And, considering how many of your comments get removed by mods for that insult and disrespect, you should realize that even if you personally think it’s constructive, the mods don’t. If you think the content of your comments is valuable, don’t you think it’d have more value if it is left up for others to see, instead of having it removed where nobody can learn from it? If you resort to this namecalling and aggression so much, and the comments get removed, they’re of no value. As an outside observer, by reading your comments, I’m less likely to trust what you have to say, and instead would assume you have a set agenda that you won’t stray from. Your behavior detracts from your trustworthiness.

• Chinese Communist Party
• Revolutionary Committee of the Chinese Kuomintang
• China Democratic League
• China National Democratic Construction Association
• China Association for Promoting Democracy
• Chinese Peasants’ and Workers’ Democratic Party
• China Zhi Gong Party
• Jiusan Society
• Taiwan Democratic Self-Government League

What a weird framing you’re taking. They’re literally threats. They’re contingent threats, but they’re still threats. Your claim was that they have not made threats; in reality, they have.

Also: isn’t every threat contingent? If the threat is “I will use nukes if X event occurs” it’s contingent on X occurring. If the threat is “I will use nukes” then it’s still contingent, but the contingency is implied: “I will use nukes if I want to”. There is no such thing as a threat that isn’t contingent.

In fact, since you asserted that the only threats had come from the US, can you point to any sources from the US that are threats (and let’s use your definition of threats here, too: you don’t get to point to a contingent threat)?

Really shifting the goalposts there.

You start with

The only nuclear threats have some from the US.

Then someone provides a list of such events that are from Russia and not the US, then you shift to

Every single one of these is outlined as a response to military aggression.

The original commenter didn’t say they were without context. They simply said that the threats were made, which they were. You were so adamant that they weren’t made that when you were shown proof that they were made, you have to reframe it.

Who has spent the most on this conflict? Hint: it’s not Russia; it’s not even Ukraine; nor is it any European country or…any other country. The USA has spent more on this conflict than any other country, including Russia. Who platformed Nazis, embedded them into the military complex, and helped put them in positions of power within NATO? You guessed it, the USA. Do you think the USA is some independent third party observer here?

Thank you, I’ll look at that. It might be my misunderstanding of a technical term, but I don’t see the logical sequence that makes it apparent that socialist countries can’t engage in imperialism/colonialism.

I don’t think you’re doing a very good job of attempting to answer the very direct confusion I’m having. You’re doing a lot to make sure it’s obvious how capitalism can and does result in imperialism, which frankly I’m mostly in agreement with. My issue is that you’re asserting that socialism can’t lead to imperialism. You’ve still given no reason that this is to be the case except for this attempt:

Socialism’s goal is to provide for its people by moving past a society based on exploitation. This is why it wouldn’t engage in colonialism.

And I agree that, by definition, it’s a society based on the betterment of its people. Stress should be applied there to its people. I’m not justifying imperialism at all, but it’s a pretty obvious argument that by subjugating other nations/peoples and exploiting them, you can make the lives of your people better. Perhaps you’re trying to say that the type of leadership and ideology that creates and maintains socialism would also be ideologically against imperialism, but that seems more pragmatic than theoretic. You’re saying socialism can’t engage in imperialism by definition but the most I’d give is that it doesn’t engage in imperialism in practice.

I don’t see how that follows.

Because you need to get to imperialism via capitalism.

Socialism’s goal is to provide for its people; in theory, why can’t it engage in colonialism to bring in resources to benefit its people?

There is definitely no other way.

Its obvious how capitalism leads to imperialism, but it’s definitely not obvious how that would be the only way to arrive there.

Any elaboration you can provide would be great because you’re acting as if it should be obvious why what you’re saying is true but it absolutely is not.

You didn’t answer what I asked.

You said that capitalism by definition leads to imperialism. I asked how socialism by definition precludes imperialism.

A more accurate title and thesis would be “How the West’s historical amnesia took everyone for a ride”.

The West has made a very concerted effort to ignore the historical and geopolitical context (and misrepresent it where it must mention it) surrounding the situation. The conflict did not begin in 2022 by Russia. The only way the West has managed to gain and hold support has been by deceptively misrepresenting the reality of the situation in order to rally everyone around a perceived Evil. They don’t bother describing what the people in the actual territories that asked for Russian support want. They don’t bother describing how Ukraine has bombed its own people. They don’t bother to describe how, partially due to Ukraine’s abuses, several regions voted to join Russia. They don’t bother to describe how Russia was invited by those fighting for their homes and families against Ukraine. They don’t comment on how millions of Ukrainians have chosen to immigrate to Russia since Ukraine bombed its citizens in 2014. They don’t dig in to why the majority of the global population supports Russia here.

This is not Russian imperialism or colonialism. This is not Russian aggression. The attempt to describe it that way is dishonest and, unfortunately, most people don’t care enough to actually inform themselves so this portrayal catches on rather easily.

The Western media has taken advantage of the fact that very few people are informed about historical context, and that most people don’t care about context. The Western media has taken advantage of the fact that people like to be united against a Big Evil, in a fully black-and-white way, devoid of any context and nuance.

China is a socialist state so by definition cannot be

Can you elaborate on that? I agree that China is not imperialist, but I don’t see how socialism by definition precludes that possibility.

If you truly think this is a display of Russian aggression I genuinely doubt that you have any historic view on the geopolitics of the region. The conflict did not appear out of thin air in 2022. The situation is more complex than “Russian aggression”; in fact that’s not even a part of the picture. Russia is responding to requests for assistance after Ukraine began bombing its own people in 2014. Many of these people voted to join Russia after this disgusting display by Ukraine. Before 2022 most of the combatants against Ukraine were regular people fighting for their homes and families. These people realize that Ukraine wants to bomb their homes and Russia is offering to fight alongside them. On the weekend before the SMO began, there were 2000 ceasefire violations in the Donbass. Between 2014 and 2022, 1 million Ukrainians immigrated to Russia because of the abuse by the Ukrainian government. And since the operation began in 2022, another 1.3 million immigrated. The people in these territories that Ukraine has zero regard for view the support they are receiving from Russia positively: they invited Russia in to assist them, and they are somewhat reliant on Russia to protect them from Ukraine.

I know life is a lot easier when you don’t muddy things with context. I know that it’s a lot easier to be righteous in your condemnation of a world power because they’re “evil” and an “aggressor” than it is to acknowledge that the situation is more complex. I know that it’s a lot easier to go along with what Western media says than to be informed and hold your own opinions. I know it feels nice to rally with everyone against a perceived enemy. I know it feels nice to feel that your country (and military) is finally doing something good for once. But you can’t let wanting to feel good stand in the way of reality. The Western media has done a hell of a job propagandizing this war, attempting to remove any historical and geopolitical context, in order to gather and maintain support. Think honestly: how much historical and geopolitical context have you seen, especially from popular media sources? How much more effort is spent on raging about current “evil deeds” than understanding the desires of the people in the actual territories that have asked Russia for help?

Please read, and inform yourself. Life is less black-and-white than “Russia evil”.

So what’s the conclusion as to what’s happening?

As I wrote about in a thread a couple weeks back (here, here, and here), this should have been fine, and was fine on paper.

According to official statements it was going to be diluted, before release, to a level that was even lower than what Fukushima NPP put out while operational. Then it was going to be released at a rate that maintained this concentration.

Did Japan lie? Did it not dilute how it said it would? Was it a technical failure and dilution did not occur at the level they said it would, or was it released too fast at the dilution level they set? Was there not testing at release time/site?

Olga is glad that Russia has intervened in the conflict, and she indeed corrected me when I once referred to the Russian SMO as an “invasion”, telling me that Russia did not invade. Rather, they were invited and welcomed in. That does seem to be the prevailing view in Donetsk as far as I can tell.

Russia, Donbass, and the reality of the conflict in Ukraine

The OP put a non-paywalled link in the post body.