If only Musk would use LSD or whichever drug helps to resolve those issues instead of ketamine.

You will get that war. The USA and China will clash and the EU is preparing to take care of Russia when that war starts.

That’s what makes OP’s question interesting.

Heatpumps in front of houses.

For those attacks the size doesn’t matter but the willingness of breaking the law. My size argument is that the USA and China will clash. Europe will engage Russia when that happens.

Thank you for your insightful feedback. Have a great WE, too.

So you’re genuinely advocating breaking international law?

No, I just believe that the EU will break the law and attack, like members already did in Libya and Iraq.

I can also say that I was not the one talking about fantasies.

Edit and yes, there is a need to wait for Ukraine EU membership

Is there a reason for that? UN article 51 seems to allow support of other countries if they are attacked.

Too simple for an explanation, they are not stupid.

Ukraine soldiers are trained for 3 months. There can’t be much infrastructure needed for an attack since the battle is on enemy territory when it starts.

Also, surely you’re aware that wars of aggression are banned in international law?

Iraq, Libya and others. At worst we call it a special military operation in support of Ukraine.

That’s why we need to get Ukraine to the EU, so that then it’s not a war of aggression, but honoring the mutual defense clause.

I guess there is no need to wait for EU membership to help a country in need.

Oh and, in which country’s military forces would you be participating in this attack fantasy?

None. After these comments at most they will use me for medical support.

So the laws won’t protect the children. Then why do those laws exist?

That’s why the new weapons are needed, to prepare for an attack.

Why else would Europe need those weapons? Russia has problems fighting Ukraine. How could they fight Europe?

Btw, I say we because any serious war will use the entire population, like Ukraine.

A European attack is prevented by critical voices from within Europe. If those voices are removed we will attack despite the threat of nuclear bombs.

By presenting an arbitrary other motivation, which implies that there is no obvious motivation.

Yet why does my reasoning not make sense? We fought in Libya. Everybody hates Russia and would be eager to fight if Russia didn’t have nuclear bombs. Remove the critical voices and we are ready to go.

It could be. So you agree that the surveillance laws don’t make much sense?

Are people that stupid to overvalue Tesla that much for years or is somebody stabilizing the market rate? Somebody is playing 5D chess but it is not Musk.

Why else would it be introduced? If they don’t plan to lock down the entire internet, the age verification is useless. It could be security theater but it receives full media attention. So it is important. What else but war could be so important that it demands so much power over civil liberty?

This is going to happen. The European age verification and messenger surveillance are preparations to control any remaining opposition for that war.

Where as we know our money is ours

I agree with the sentiment of your comment but you should look into this. You don’t really own money that is in accounts.

Like the other comment says, it must be the New START treaty, but I am no expert. It seems like it’s a Russian excuse for their carelessness however some parts of the treaty were respected so I think Putin and Trump had some topics to clarify.

On 21 February 2023, Russia suspended its participation in New START.[8] However, it did not withdraw from the treaty, and clarified that it would continue to abide by the numerical limits in the treaty.

On 2 June 2024, the United States revoked visas of Russian nuclear inspectors, describing this step as a “lawful countermeasure” to Russia’s “ongoing violations” of the treaty.

So some parts of the treaty must have been considered active.

On 1 June 2025, Ukraine claimed to have destroyed more than a dozen nuclear strategic bombers, including two Tu-160, at airfields deep inside Russia with swarms of small drones. The bombers were still parked not in nuclear strike protective bunkers, but in open-air, according to obligations under the New START Treaty with the US.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_START

He can legally be president for a third term

Has the law already been changed?

The issue is that because of nuclear treaties between USA and Russia, Russia is required to park their nuclear bombers out in the open. If USA wants Russia to keep them out in the open, they had to make a good argument.