They discovered Porn when they got to Russia and have been chronically exhausted ever since…

And let’s not forget their “Western Values”.

One would expect that any competent national leader would’ve requested an intelligence folder about Trum,p at the lastest when he was elected POTUS, and this being Germany, they have the capability to produce one which is very complete and beyond what we common mortals can deduce about the man’s nature.

Whilst a politician in such a high position in a country isn’t necessarilly more capable of analysing things than a common mortal (though it’s logical to expect they’re significantly better at judging people than most, since that’s a requirement in their profession and to reach such a high position they must be top performers at it), they most certainly have access to much better and deeper information than any of us and to people who can do the analysing for them.

Let’s be fair: “I was wrong about the bad nature of somebody else” is pretty much the lowest, mildest, weakest possible form of self-criticism there is, to the point that it’s quite common for posh manipulator types to use “I was wrong about your ,<proceeds to criticized the other person>” format of discourse to criticize others.

It’s funny how the criminal immediatelly implied that it’s a Jewish characteristic to be a criminal like him, just like he and his minions (which includes the American Administration) have been continuously implying that commiting all manner of horrid crimes, from theft and rape all the way to Genocide and purposeful child mass murder, is a Jewish chacteristic.

Like the last bunch of Nazis, these people aren’t merelly immoral, they’re so depraved, disgusting and devoid of even the most basic humanity that they’ll slander millions of those they claim to defend in order to avoid the consequences of acting like the most extreme and out of control psychopath (far beyond mere Serial Murderer and well into Hitler-level).

The original Nazis would always claim that they represented the Arian Race and that any criticism of them was “against the Arian Race” and the Zionists, a Neue Nazi group, do the same only using a different ethnicity.

This is far from the only way in which these Neue Nazis are the same as the original Nazis.

By this point it’s more like a new Holocaust, using starvation rather than gas chambers.

Seems weird to ask the US for glass when they can get it from a lot closer, assuming we’re just talking about normal glass.

The “Most moral army in the World” really showing their country’s “Western values” there…

Well, I for one am fine with them attacking foreign military navy ships of their own coast.

Not the the attacking of civilian vessels though (unless we’re talking about Israeli owned or Israeli bound ones were I’m a bit more conflicted - there should be a blocade and sanctions of Israel, but attacking civilians is wrong) and if they’re indeed extorting shipping companies then that’s just criminality rather than any sort of resistance.

It’s curious that the “terrorists” are actually targetting military targets whilst the military are killing civilians.

In my experience, how many people vote tactically massivelly depends on the voting system and whether it’s a presidential system or not.

The kind of utilitarian votes that sees one vote for somebody one does not like is not quite an Americanism because it doesn’t happen only in the US (for example, the UK, even though it doesn’t have a Presidential system, has a lot of tactical vote because they use First Past The Post for Parliament so each parliamentary seat is like a mini-presidential election where thare can only be one winner), but it’s not really common in other countries.

As I said, I was involved in Politics in two countries, including canvassing and leafletting, and from talking to people (as well as observing how my family, friends and party colleagues did their “politics”) voting it’s far more often an affair of the hearth than of the head, starting by how people chose which politicians to trust given that they all promise nice things to them.

The cold and rational pondering about who to vote is not actually that widespread and many of those who try are still being swayed by emotional factors (for example, via who they chose to trust and how much) and people tend instead to vote on who they like and trust (or dislike and distrust all of them hence refuse to vote).

Further, even the cold and rational pondering is often not that rational because when it comes to such complex subjects with such a high level of uncertainty and misinformation, most of what one choses to believe as informations and one’s own most favored forecast, is chosen based on less that scientific proof. (There is so much misinformation, disinformation and outright lying that chosing not to chose - i.e. not to vote - might be the most rational option of all).

What I’ve learned from decades of trying to go at things in a rational way is that we can never be fully Objective so it’s a good idea to be aware of and keep track of the Subjective elements in one’s decision making. Sure, it’s valid to try, just don’t decieve yourself that you have a perfectly logical decision making process and that everybody should be reaching the same conclusions as you.

From were I stand, your idea that you have a valid tactical approach and that it THE superior approach without question is just you misleading yourself about the nature of your information gathering and your thinking processes, hence you passing judgment on others for not going through the same obstacle course you do to end up making a decision which was de facto contaminated by subjective elements such as your choice of what information to trust and what forecasts you judged more likely, is like the blind criticing others for not seeing.

You really are not standing on top the moral high ground you think you’re standing on.

Not just me. This is common in other countries. People most definitely do not treat their vote as an endorsement. You can believe me or not or say I am bad, but this is a matter of fact.

Being from an “other” country, having lived in another 3 of said “other” countries, an even having been involved in politics in 2 of them, what you wrote is complete total bullshit.

Plenty of people do indeed have an utilitarian view of their vote, but lots of people, maybe even most, treat their vote as an endorsement.

In fact from my own experience in various countries the utilitarian view is more common in countries with less Democratic voting systems with few actually electable choices, similar to the US (so, for example, Britain) whilst the endorsement view is more common in countries with highly Democratic voting systems with lots of choices (such as The Netherlands, which has Proportional Vote).

I’m sorry but whilst you having an utilitarian posture is perfectly valid, your idea that it’s the only valid posture and other people don’t have different postures is complete total mindless self-centred bollocks.

Israel is literally a “Nation for Jews” in its constitution were it says roughly that all Jews and only Jews are entitled to Israeli nationality, hence why any Jewish person can just land at Tel-Aviv, ask to get Israeli nationality and get it.

That said, Israel, pretty much uniquelly in the World, separates Citizenship from Nationality and assigns different rights to both, so non-Jews can get Israeli Citizenship but not Israeli Nationality.

Limitations on the rights that people get from having Israeli Citizenship without the Nationality include, for example, limits to where they can live.

Appartheid in Israel is already officially implement, since the very beginning, so even if the Palestinians were given Israeli Citizenship (highly unlikely given Israel’s track record on this: for example tens of thousands of Arab residents in Jerusalem have for decades been refused Israeli Citizienship even though they were born there and lived there their whole lives), they would still have less rights than Israeli Jews or in fact any Jew in the world if they came to Israel.

Both of those things are the same: Liberal Politicians are just pro-Oligarchy (i.e. anti-Democracy) types cosplaying as pro-Equality using a highly hypocrite construct (not really Equality, which is equal in all dimensions, but rather one that only defends “equality” for some people or things and not for others, especially not for anything involving Wealth) and hence morally bankrupt.

PS: I wrote “Liberal Politicians” because a lot of normal people who see themselves as Liberals haven’t actually deep dived into analysing the ideology whose superficial slogans they parrot to discover its fundamental contradictions - starting by how it classifies people by characteristics they were born with (hence not of their choise and not reflecting them as people) and then treating them based on the prejudices one holds for or against the one of such classifications those people are deemed to belong to, as well as the whole "NEVER, EVER, EVER talk about Wealth Inequality and the inequality of treatment based on Wealth) - so genuinelly think they are defending a moral and ethical position whilst in fact being the useful idiots of the Neoliberals who just to divide the Left into a neoliberal-style competition were people, driven by Greed, fight against each other but claiming to do it for the “group” rather than for themselves.

Zeleneskyy voiced support to Israel right after 7 October and has been completely silent about the whole thing since.

Sounds a lot like how a lot of Jewish people (and not only Jewish people) reacted to it and subsequent events afterwards - they first saw Israel as a victim and supported it but over time changed their minds seeing what Israel was doing using that attack as an excuse and possibly as additional information about Oct 7 that was not straight out of the Israeli Authprities emerged.

It certainly doesn’t sound at all like a Zionist (for example Biden or most political leaders in Germany) have reacted: those have very vocally continued their “unwavering support” for Israel.

If Zeleneskyy morally supported the actions of Israel even once it became clear they had gone from self-defense to committing a Genocide, he would have kept voicing unwavering support for Israel, yet he has stopped talking about it altogether, and since Ukraine requires the support of the US and Germany, both countries were all main parties support the Israeli Neue Nazis and their Neue Holocaust, saying nothing at all is the smart balance he found between Morally being against the actions of Israel and doing what is best for Ukraine.

Good old German power elites: there has never been a Holocaust they didn’t support…

I lived in the UK back during Brexit and the only people who said that “the BBC is Leftwing” were the English Far-Right - in fact that kind of stuff started (or at least became “mainstream” enough to be noticeable) at around that time and then was picked up by the Far-Right populist side of the Tory Party during the Leave Referendum.

They’re a posh kind of Rightwing, so far more subtle than loudmouths like Farage, Boris Johnson and Trump, but it didn’t take me long after coming to live in the UK (a decade before Brexit) to notice how much to the Right they were (not even Center-Right) from their fawning coverage of the Monarchy, almost invariably positive spin on the “upper” classes and the ultra-wealthy and heavy nationalist take on all foreign affairs (they almost invariably spinned it as “other countries are listening to Britain” when the same news in foreign media barely if at all mentioned Britain).

Certainly the core message from the BBC was always that “the System is good as it is, be proud of it” and “don’t make waves”, in a country which is highly unequal and has pretty low Social Mobility when compared to the rest of Europe.

Also remember how, well before they had any meaningful impact, the likes of Nigel Farage and Boris Johnson got way more airtime in the BBC than, say, the leader of the Greenparty.

Brexit didn’t happen by chance: the fields were Far-Right Nationalism flourished had been long plowed by amongst others the BBC.

But, but, but … the propaganda bot here keeps telling us the BBC is Leftwing.

How could they be Leftwing and have a bias in favour of ethno-Fascists, the farthest Far-Right there is?

Surely the BBC employees are wrong!!!

It’s the most boring thing of the technical side of the job especially at the more senior levels because it’s so mindnumbingly simple, uses a significant proportion of development time and is usually what ends up having to be redone if there are small changes in things like input or output interfaces (i.e. adding, removing or changing data fields) which is why it’s probably one of the main elements in making maintaining and updating code already in Production a far less pleasant side of job than the actual creation of the application/system is.