I can't be the only idiot who didn't realize the Titanic went down that close to Maine/Newfoundland. I'm 38 years old and never once even thought about where they actually sank.
A month ago, Colombia’s first left-wing President Gustavo Petro dismayed many of his supporters by committing to strengthen Colombia’s cooperation with NATO in areas such as climate change, human rights, integrity building and cyber defence
What would it even mean to co-operate with NATO on
climate change, human rights, integrity building and cyber defence[?]
NATO is only concerned with one of these things. Co-operation in this respect can only mean exacerbating climate change, ignoring human rights, and I don't even know what it might mean for one of the most violent military alliances in history to build integrity.
I stand corrected. I still don't think they plan to do anything about climate change. Not unless they're forced by public pressure. The plan is more to protect the capitalist class from the destruction of climate change.
Edit: the linked report is informative but it's very idealist. It says that NATO has been aware of climate risks since 1969 and had done this or that through the years to take environmental degradation, such as cleaning up after wars. This may all be true. But if we used a weighing scales and measured these positive actions against the environmental degradation it has caused, the scales would tip over.
Not to mention that one of the functions of NATO is to maintain the conditions of the existing balance of international trade, which allows the global north to contribute disproportionately more to global emissions than the global south. So NATO-as-a-military-alliance cannot be analysed in isolation from the political economy that NATO exists to protect.
we use environmental input-output data and footprint analysis to quantify the physical scale of net appropriation from the South in terms of embodied resources and labour over the period 1990 to 2015.
This analysis proposes a novel method for quantifying national responsibility for damages related to climate change by looking at national contributions to cumulative CO2 emissions in excess of the planetary boundary of 350 ppm atmospheric CO2 concentration. This approach is rooted in the principle of equal per capita access to atmospheric commons.
Methods
For this analysis, national fair shares of a safe global carbon budget consistent with the planetary boundary of 350 ppm were derived. These fair shares were then subtracted from countries' actual historical emissions (territorial emissions from 1850 to 1969, and consumption-based emissions from 1970 to 2015) to determine the extent to which each country has overshot or undershot its fair share. Through this approach, each country's share of responsibility for global emissions in excess of the planetary boundary was calculated.
Findings
As of 2015, the USA was responsible for 40% of excess global CO2 emissions. The European Union (EU-28) was responsible for 29%. The G8 nations (the USA, EU-28, Russia, Japan, and Canada) were together responsible for 85%. Countries classified by the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change as Annex I nations (ie, most industrialised countries) were responsible for 90% of excess emissions. The Global North was responsible for 92%. By contrast, most countries in the Global South were within their boundary fair shares, including India and China (although China will overshoot soon).
Can‘t believe all the waste of resources to look at some trash on the ocean floor, die, search the whole place, then find some more trash on the ocean floor. Climate is doomed.
Only good headline I read today is the orcas now attack boats, at least they try to fight before going extinct, admirable effort.
Question... why wasn't this an unmanned, remotely controlled submarine with a front-mounted camera? If it had been destroyed, that would have been a lot of money up in smoke, but no lives lost.
I wonder if there's going to be some sort of culture crisis across The West when reality hits, or if Western media is strong enough to distract everyone with something new like they did with Afghanistan.
The article describes Dina Boluarte as Peru's "unelected president" — but a different description would be that she was vice-president at the time that president Pedro Castillo attempted a self-coup to elevate himself from president to dictator, failed, and was then impeached & removed by Congress.
As a US citizen, I have to wonder if there's an analogy there with Mike Pence, who was VP to president Donald Trump but did not cooperate in Trump's attempted self-coup on January 6 2021. Pence's non-cooperation arguably saved the US from a Trump dictatorship.
Peruvians, or other folks who know more about Peruvian politics — is that an entirely terrible analogy?
The situation is pretty complex. I don’t have my finger on it entirely, but I get the feeling he was going to be forced out whether he self-couped or not. They seemed to be looking to remove him from the get go and were obstructionist
Well I mean the coverage on the submarines isn't really because of their net worth (not denying that it isn't a contributing factor), but submarines sinking isn't really that common, as another user have said in their comment. Remember MH370? A majority of the passengers weren't wealthy, but it still got a lot of media coverage.
Let me tell you, folks, those Ukrainians, they're doing tremendous things with what they've got. I wish them nothing but the best in their efforts to keep the Russians out. Nobody understands the importance of tight border security better than I do, believe me.
The real Donald Trump would probably stop supplying aid to Ukraine though, and thus force Ukraine to accept the loss of some of their territory. He's said publicly that he would get the war ended as soon as possible if he was president again, and I'm sure this is the sort of end he means.
Another problem with Trump is that he implied in an interview with Tucker Carlson that the US blew up the Nord Stream pipeline. I doubt this is true. I think Russia did it. Also, Trump didn't even believe his own intelligence agencies who said that Russia interfered in the 2016 US presidential election.
I'm willing to entertain this notion if you extend it to America doing Pearl Harbor, 9/11, and the Unabomber. Oh, and also Ukraine did the Ukraine war by shelling and raiding the Donbas for 8 years.
You know that Russia until today still pumps gas through pipes in Ukraine and sells it to Europe? Why wouldn’t they start with or at least close/bomb that pipe too then?
Ah yes, The Intercept, founded by blatant Russian propagandist and "Ukraine had biolabs" conspiracy promoter Glenn Greenwald. Surely this article is unbiased and not at all misleading.
Ah yes, character assassination that doesn't address the content of the article -- which quotes journalists from mutliple outlets and doesn't involve Greenwald. A picture of unbiased, non-misleading discourse.
worldnews
Active
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.