elon musk was asked to point a legal rep and show up to answer questions about spreading fake news and promoting criminal activity. He denied point out the rep or participating in the investigation at all. There is some backlash as the judge gave the final warning on twitter since there was no legal rep, which would be a first.

so in a possible hostage situation as far as IDF claims (the hijacking), you bomb the bad guy with hostages? got it

fifa is weird, it is a private company kinda but not really. And they have all rights to the word football (?)

the advantage of having a supranational organization is that everybody is looking at it and its reputation relies on how good it is. the disadvantage is that they have no power other than advisory

when you have to click once, means they have been gathering all your actions up to that point, and for sure you are human. If you get asked to click images, means they don’t have enough information yet, or you failed some security step (wrong password) and the site told captcha to be extra sure

so they are destroying both the future and the families, got it

south africa and ireland are taking them to international court, but at the end of the day, it is the countries that actually have people/resources/power to enforce the court’s orders. And nobody is willing to invade Israel to bring them to justice (and bring their leadership to the courthouse). Almost all countries in the UN signed treaties promising they would enforce arrest orders, but when push comes to shove, nobody wants to be the one to do it. Israeli offivials can go visit their allies freely

when the rich countries start paying to fix the problem, the the poor countries will stop trying to improve their situation and help.

The north always says “do your part, we are all in this together” when asking to keep the status quo, but they have never accepted any treaty that makes them suffer the consequences of their actions (or are you gonna tell me that the south fucked up the world?)

this is proposed every chance possible and is never accepted.

The global south can be 100% commited to ending climate change and nothing would happen. If the north doesn’t take their oily, coaly money and do the heaby lifting, nothing will change. The task of saving the world is impossible.

so as long as the north is short soghted and petty, the only reasonable action for the south is the same. sacrificing their short term well being just buys a little more time for the north to polute us to death

most places in the world require that you have a license for tourist renting. In theory, they inspect each unit before giving the license, to make sure it is safe. And in theory airbnb requires that license before allowing you to list on their site. If you don’t have the license, you get fined, same as if you opened a store without stablishing a formal company

The U.N. (as an organization) is always in a weird position, if they take a hard stance on something they risk their own existence. Saying they will investigate the allegations is reasonable, altough immediately firing the people involved is a bit too much.

Exactly, when Russia was being invaded, they lost a ton of people to defend their land. Doesn’t mean they died willingly (people were drafted against their will, in every war in history that happens), but the pressure to surrender didn’t mount up on the government. In a defensive war, people are more willing to die and to let their fellow citizens die. There are always people clamoring for an agreement or a surrender to avoid loss of life, but those voices are few compared to the ones who want to defend their land (or want others to go do it).

In a war of aggression however, every death come with a “why the fuck are we attacking them anyway? why did my son/brother/cousin have to die?”. USA lost in vietnam that way. More kills, more money, won basically every engagement and still lost the war. If the population is against a war of aggression, it will end.

Very few wars end in complete domination of the enemy. Most end in an agreement of some sort or a retreat. I believe that, if Ukraine keeps getting money to stay in the fight, they will outlast Russia in political willingness to fight and will recover their land.

not even if they were facing complete destruction would they conscript even 1% of the population.

Wars end when people get pissed or you run out of money. We are getting closer to that every day for both sides. if ukraine can at least keep getting more money, they eventually win. Ukrainians are the defenders, so their population is willing to fight for longer