Alternative prediction:
Destabilized Iran will make another migration crisis in Europe, will divide it politically because of the rise of anti immigrant far right, and finally set the scene for a full scale european war with russia, followed by other counties on both sides.
US will be forced to join and millions of its citizen will die in WW3.
Alternate prediction: Iran - a country detested in much of the middle east - getting nuclear weapons will quickly lead to proliferation as other middle east countries feel compelled to pursue their own nuclear weapons programs to counter the threat of Iran.
This is why the west has been working to counter Iran's nuclear ambitions for decades.
Maybe, but the EU has different policies and a different understanding of immigration now compared to say 2010-2023, right? Also those countries you mentioned are a bit closer to Europe compared to Iran.
But I’m also not sure that the situations are comparable. In the case of Ukraine which is probably most similar to Iran from an economic standpoint, had many refugees who were temporarily fleeing Russian aggression but planned to return to Ukraine. Iran, especially if/when it’s out from under sanctions has a more robust economy and geopolitical forces going for it, versus Libya or Syria, in my view.
It will matter because they can have policies like “stricter border control” to stop legal or illegal immigration. It’s like Pakistan and how they closed their border to refugees from Iran.
> Economy will matter only if there will be no fallout in Iran which is not guaranteed.
Sure it depends on what all happens, but my point was it is different than Syria or Libya in many aspects.
I know that this kind of comment makes sense from the American perspective (based on past US actions in South America) but the EU is not actually responsible for massively destabilising the Middle East.
A nuclear armed Iran is very definitely a threat. Much of the middle east considers Iran to be an enemy, and if Iran gets nukes, the rest of the middle east will feel compelled to follow.
The west has been working to counter Iran's ongoing nuclear weapons program for decades.
“De-Nazification” required every Allied power to commit to years of occupation and decades more of economic support to prevent backsliding. No such agreement is possible today.
Contemporary experience shows the probable outcome of regime change policy is a failed state that remains a hazard to its neighbors.
De-Nazification required the Allies mass-murdering about a million Germans after the war was over. There's a reason why there's a fudge factor of 1M in the POW camps in the years after the war.
During the Civil War, Abolitionists mass-murdered slave owners by way of dueling them. The story of Cassius Marcellus Clay is littered with stories of brutally killing slave owners and we champion Abolitionists as righteous.
De-Nazification as policy essentially evaporated in the west in the earliest years of the Adenaur government. Killing and displacement of Germans in the east certainly occurred, but the example of the west shows this was not essential.
Killing men in personal duels is not comparable or relevant.
My point being that it makes no sense for a society that just underwent Nazi occupation to let it continue.
After such a violent effort, it is a foregone conclusion that the remaining cancer is mercilessly destroyed. If you don't, then all of the lives sacrificed for the cause are meaningless.
What the West has a problem with is reconciling the inescapable reality that true believers absolutely must be killed (for good reason).
There is nothing within the Western view that affords anything short of death for these people. This makes people very uncomfortable, but it's necessary if Western civilization is to continue.
In Lebanon the state is attempting to reassert itself. In Syria the rebels took control. But with no foreign boots on the ground, and no organized opposition ready to step in, what exactly is supposed to happen after the regime folds?
Russia will bump up arms shipments to Iran. We'll have no choice but to strike interior of Russia. Russia will not hit mainland US, but will attack US bases across Western Europe. This will be WW3.
Russia needs everything it can manufacture for itself to use in Ukraine, and they have already gotten everything useful there was to get from Iran, so the latter is on their own.
This absolutely will not happen. Iran has been shipping missiles & drones TO Russia, because Russia can't domestically produce enough of either to sustain their war against Ukraine.
Its actually incredible how this exact thing could have been done by any other President and half the people losing their minds about WW3 in these comments wouldn't have even logged on to comment.
The Ruble was on it's way to complete devaluation before Trump propped up the Russian economy by signaling he's willing to give them everything in exchange for nothing.
But it's also true that the west never really fully committed to the sanctions, the fact that you still had Russian oligrarchs traveling around Europe with relative ease was a pretty strong tell.
Absolutely. Microsoft stuff is so mediocre and incompetent.
They get away with it because they're pretty much the only game in town for enterprise. So there is no drive for them to improve in any way.
But really, companies choose Microsoft because it's all connected (easy to manage for them) and fairly cheap if you take the whole package and because "nobody ever got fired for picking Microsoft". But AAA third-party solutions are always way better in terms of UX and features. Picking Microsoft tools always feels like you're settling for less.
I manage a lot of the microsoft 365 stuff at work and I really hate my job. Also the condescending attitude of their employees and 'consultants'.
I'm not sure if deferred losses counts as 'unfair' or not, they exist in Canada and other western countries too. Employees, vendors, capital gains, property taxes, fees, etc generate plenty of tax revenue regardless of federal corporate tax rate. It's basically impossible for an $8 billion a year revenue business to not result in large amount of tax revenue for the various branches of gov.
Sure, but I guess what i'm implying is that some companies and business tycoons will do everything in their hand to pay as little tax as possible, and I'm pretty sure Musk is one of those people.
And yes, most companies will try to minimize taxes (shareholder obligations and all that), but I do think some use much more aggressive tactics than others and will use every loophole and every accounting trick possible.
I wouldn't call Putin smart - Russia overall is a fairly failed state. They could've been in a much better position. Perhaps maybe smart in terms of satisfying his own ego.
He’s getting what he wants and successfully destabilizing the US, and now has an invite to the White House. Does anyone think this isn’t going to end with Russia gaining Ukrainian territory and getting the sanctions dropped? How is Europe going to behave when they can’t be sure America is going to protect them?
Yes, Russian Empire failed 100+ years ago, but Russian Federation is strong enough to send hundreds of thousands to death to achieve their goals. It far from a «failed state».
