I don’t know, it could be, my experience in military strategy is summarized in having lost many times in the Europa Universalis. What I do understand a little more about is politics and international relations and I know that if Russia presented itself to negotiate with a deal that said “if you give me Crimea I won’t ask for anything else” Ukraine should accept without hesitation.

It may be, but in the case of Spain the party has not moved, it has always had those positions, both economically and socially, not so much perhaps against immigration, as on abortion or religious issues, they have always been the version most radical of the European PP

The current system DOES allow it, it’s not a system like the American one, what does not allow it’s the will of the voters, those on the left would be cool with the idea, but they are not going to vote for it because they are not on the left and those on the right do not like a center party. It’s not the system, it’s the people.

The problem is that considering the Spanish PP as a center is a basic error, it is not fascist in the style of the German ultra-right, but it is more similar to Le Pen or Meloni than to Merkel, it is dominated by the most extreme wing since its foundation.

I completely agree, I wanted to say if they ONLY give up Crimea and absolutely nothing else. Neither territory nor other things like NATO. Unfortunately, seeing the feedback from my previous comment, many see other better options as realistic, maybe they know more than me.

Realistically, if Ukraine only has to give up Crimea, it’s not a bad deal. I’m not saying I like it, just that getting 100% of the territory back may not be achievable.

Maybe Eisenhower was still a good president, but I think FDR should be considered one of the greatest leaders of all time, not only in America. Any other will not be up to par

Ok thanks

I always use the .onion domain that I find at https://lemm.ee/c/zlibrary@lemmy.ml

Does it seem strange to you?

The hypocrisy of Israel’s actions being consistently covered up by its allies is going to cost us dearly in credibility and influence in the future, especially when compared to the demands made on other countries, like cutting ties with Russia.

Yes, well, they can always play against the other half, if they lose they invade them alleging anti-Semitism and that’s it, all advantages

They boycotted the minute of silence before the game for the victims of the floods in Valencia (something that as a Spaniard I thank the organizers for). You should kick them out of the country as soon as possible, I don’t even know what they are doing competing in Europe, they are an Asian country, they should try to play with their neighbors

This has 0 relation to Europe or European federalism

At the beginning of the game they boycotted the minute of silence for the victims of the floods in Valencia (a minute that as a Spaniard I thank the organizers for). Let them leave as soon as possible, I don’t even know what they are doing playing in European competitions as Asians, let them play with their neighbors if they can.

As long as NATO exists, the EU will never have a united army.

Don’t get me wrong, Canada, the UK and others are, and in my opinion should remain, close allies with 100% mutual defense. But for the European Union I would like a fully integrated common army, even more than the current NATO and that would not make sense without at least a partial political union, something that the EU already has and that neither Canada nor the UK want

I’m sorry but I think the UK and Canada should not be in that union. Being allies ok, being part of a military union not so much. The European Union must be a strong enough actor and to do so it must have its own aircraft carriers if you understand what I mean.

Well, you’ll see what happens with Trump in the White House. NATO as a collective defense organization is on the verge of failure. Europe has the obligation, if it wants to survive as an independent power, to replace it with its own army, it is an unavoidable imperative.