myata

OK, short: 1. Cower to the thug and beg to "negotiate". 2. Munich was a "good scenario". Let's see if there's more. It would be an astounding discovery.

So he proposes as a "good scenario" giving aggressor what they want and hoping that they wouldn't come for more. Why wouldn't they if you just gave them what they wanted? Why wouldn't they come for more and more until they take all? Like he has an answer that doesn't and cannot exist. This is the same exact: word to word adage that was used to justify the Munich deal on the verge of WWII. As the whole world knows, it failed grotesquely, causing immeasurable suffering. There's no good paths giving brutal thugs what they want. They will always come for more, and you will achieve nothing by bleeding the strength and will to stand up. And they'll keep drumming this old and tired adage on and on, in a complete ignorance of the lessons of the past and the reality. Is it a surprise the the suckers, inspired by their fetish want nothing less than to rewrite both the reality and the history? Four billion years, and for nothing. What a failure.

In his own universe, where Hitler and Putin are cute, rosy-cheeked innocent victims. The brain took 4,000,000,000 years to evolve. What a failure!

Not going to comment on that bizarre idea of "peace" with the likes of Hitler, ISIS and the bunch what the word could mean in that strange brain. But can one really be this naive, repeating the exact mantra that Putin needs above all these days, or is it more? Really nothing would work for Vlad better than a break in fighting now; however it turns in January, he would win. To stop his ass being kicked, save and replenish war resources, bring in more cannon fodder that he burns like a madman on a rampage. From now and till January he just couldn't dream of a better deal. And lo, we have a flock of birds suddenly singing "peace" here, Vlad's word for lying word. What a surprise.

He knows where "he" will be, when he crosses paths with a big and ugly bully: on his knees and sucking That he knows for sure. Much else? Nah. Said it himself.

See, nothing but some salivating pretenses of visions of the future as the only argument. Just nothing. QED.

Well, his only claim here is that she cannot be beaten. He needs this belief only to have some credibility in his own eyes. That's why it goes incessantly, can't can't can't against the reality needs to convince himself that his only claim cannot be wrong. And if it is, what's left? Cower to every bully that crosses your path and beg for "negotiations", until the next time? Not much.

The greatest dictator Vlad also the wet fetish of the macho suckers around the globe suddenly (given that he rules going on three decades) changed his tune on ultimatums to the West. This is real unlike some sucker babbling. Something happened, Vlad? What's the problem with dictating to NATO? Yes suckers we know that you couldn't ever dream of standing up for yours to a big bully thug. You said it clear enough and way too many times already. What else can you add? Does it worth the bytes?

The suckers/losers could never dream of standing up to a big ugly bully. That's who they are and they think that the whole world is like them. That is the only message they are sending with their babbling, over and over. It's just you, suckers. Nothing to do with the world. In the meahwhile Vlad, their secret macho fetish has drastically downsized his demands believe it, they aren't even addressed to NATO anymore, something happened? A third of the thug's fleet is actively exploring the sea bottom, and counting. Two-year treatment course did that and it's not completed yet as Western aviation is on track to come to Ukraine. Let's see what the next installment will bring can count on Vlad not liking it, with his suckers. They can know only their own, useless and sucking future. Nothing to be proud of, sure.

Two years back, before unleashing his criminal aggression Putin set ultimatums not to Ukraine but to the West and NATO. One of them was to roll back the expansion of NATO and give in to various demands of Russia (Putin's ultimatum to NATO, 2021) Two years on, and what a difference. - He swallowed without even noticing the ascension of two new members, yes: eastward f-cker, and the extension of the border with NATO by whopping 1,300 km. - He assures West that Russia has no intent to attack it (just as he did in early 2022 - for what's his word is worth). - He asks West only to lift the sanctions that he didn't even have before his invasion. The latest round by the way, sent Russia forex market scrambling headless chicken, could that be the cause for the rush? What a difference: visual and palpable. Vlad, the all-powerful macho dictator turned but a victim, offended and abused, poor thing. And the proof that the only language brutal thugs understand is when their a-ses are kicked hard and sore. Needs just a little more persuasion before they begin talking about the conditions of their exit. Sore losers and suckers for brutal thuggery do notice. This is the reality and how it works: unlike your useless babbling that stinks.

Here's how it works with this folk: they know, for themselves: that they could never stand up against a bully who looks big and strong. No chance even trying: for them. Then they assume that everyone is like them: a cowardish loser, and make this pronouncement, "can't win". See, they pretend to know the future of the world while its only their own, sore and sucking future they see and babble about. The world so far at least worked exactly opposite to these suckers who would squeak and cower the moment they see a big fist. It's only because of those who had will of their own and stood up to the evil that we're here now. They never got that, just couldn't and so keep peddling their little useless lies. Stinks.

"Peace with Hitler"? Only a liar.

The questions they can't answer and won't even try to: what is there to stop Hitler, Putin, Xi etc. from wanting more and coming for more, if you give them what they want and won't stop them here and now? No answer, from liars and losers.

There were no negotiations with Hitler, and for a good reason: they could not produce a solution that would be acceptable to all sides. No: the polarities are too far apart. They just cannot exist together because one will keep coming until it's defeated utterly or takes all. Because in their miserable, useless imitation of existence they have no other goals, know no other purposes than to invade, rob, and burn. Try negotiating with the alien: same thing. And then, there will be little sucker ups who pretend to not see the obvious and throw up many useless, meaningless words that mean nothing and can bring nothing, obviously. More force, more resolve standing up to brutal evil, fascism of our time. Not giving it more, and hoping against all reality that it could somehow keep it from wanting more and coming for more. So: a liar. If the free world listened to them the last time, we would be living in an entirely different world now. Why would have it stopped in Europe and Asia? Why wouldn't it go on until it takes all, if not stopped?

What an id!ot ohoh. The USA was a part of the Great Britain. China was a part of Japan. Every country in Europe was a part of something else at some point in its history. What does it explain, today? Only this maybe: how many lying f-king id!iots is just enough to screw up any place? Russia is one, success! and counting.

The same can be said succinctly: if you want and can make Russia observe rules and norms, why wouldn't you do it now, without conditions, squeaks and twitches? Why would you want first to give her what she wants? Absurd. Doesn't make any sense, does it? The answer: no, he doesn't want to make her observe the norms. Just to give her what she wants.

He is lying of course. In a better case, to himself. What "peace agreement": with who? Russia broke no less than six or eight agreements it has signed with Ukraine, not including international commitments to observe peace and internationally recognized borders such as OSCE and the Charter of the United Nations. Who cares what she will sign next if the confidence in that couldn't even be zero - but in the deep negatives? What Russia says she does not or will not do, she does with certainty over and again. How blind or dumb one has to be to not see that in plain sight? So, the first lie. There can be no "peace" in this case other than defeating this aggression; and showing all the aspiring ones that the cost of such attempts will be high and all the way to their demise. That works by the way, as proven in history. F-ing lying "peace" with brutal thugs never worked as proven in any number of examples. The second lie: we want to arm them but need this (lying) peace first. No. Read it as: I want to help Russia. First let's do as Russia asks and then I won't help you. I'll find the reason, sure. This is my tongue. No you don't need it, the peace that is impossible and doesn't exist. Arm them now, squeeze the aggressor dead with sanctions and that would be the perfect solution to this problem and all the future ones. The diagnosis: he has a hidden attachment to the brutal might of Putin's new fascism in Europe but he would'nt admit it even to himself; and instead he's squirming and twitching to connect the two, hide it behind some empty words that never worked, couldn't work and only one honest look at the history would tell him that with a final certainty. The reality is very clear though: if you won't stand to a brutal thug, he will come for more and will keep coming till you are done for. No other ends, no miracle solutions. Please don't lie.

Yes, they don't have any intelligible answers to simple questions. No surprise, as I can see the people who admire Putin and his doings fall into two categories (excluding the bots and trolls which Russia uses extensively and ubiquitously). The first one is, the admirers more often tacit, of aggressive brutality. It's really down to school mob psychology: 90% or 95, 99% of the power of a bully is the perception that they cannot be beaten. That one mental thing causes all that follows. It has been recorded in so many stories and movies: the moment this perception is broken, most of the power disappears like a punctured balloon. "Britain cannot stand up to the Nazis". "Israel cannot win". A classical school bully story - and mentality. They really can't add, at their best anything to "you can't win". And the second group, split-mind or "trampist" people: one kind of terrorist brutality is so wrong, while this one can be understood and perhaps, compromised with. No principles or logical rules. Just because I like it so it has to be that. OK that's pretty much it. Anyone with a sound mind, looking at these situations cannot find essential difference between the Nazi invasions; Russia in Ukraine; ISIS; Hamas attack on Israel and if China decides to attack Taiwan. Pure, unjustified aggression as clear as it gets. No miraculous ways to deal with it; no magic words to "negotiate"; the only options are to stand up to it and defeat it; or cower to it and watch it come back for more again and again. Really, what more to explain here?

So the split-brain people are fine with negotiating with Hamas, ISIS and any kind of brutal, abysmal evil? Or is it just a different conversation? Because the "can't" argument can obviously be verified only by the reality test. Those same words could have been said: and were, about the Axis when it controlled most of the world. If you can do it in the reality then yes, you can no matter what someone wise or dumb said. The reality decides: not words, any words. And if you won't even try then it will be "can't" by default and you've only proven to yourself that you won't, from the outset and nothing else. So let's get back to the essence: do they advocate to accept and compromise with any kind of obvious, inhumane, brutal evil? Or it's the split-brain: I say something in one place and the opposite, in the next? Both are known and have been tested extensively in history. So, which one?

Interesting isn't it? Because it can be the last piece of the puzzle that was missing. Indeed there's that bat agent RG something with 96-97% similarity to Cov that was discovered by Wuhan in 2013 and kept ever since (Congress report). The Cov genome is about 30K bases so the difference comes to about 1,000 bases which is a lot, in the natural mutation timeframe (a few mutations per variant so in five years of Covid there would be a few dozen at most). But of that thousand, only a handful are in the key furin site and some dozens, in the spike protein overall. This is entirely doable in the lab: and importantly, has been done with SARS and some other agents. Now, only hypothesizing, if someone thought of making an RG + spike chimera, that was done for the first time with SARS around 2006 if I'm not mistaken and with countless other agents since, it would certainly work - there would be nothing, like zero new about it except everyone would see it instantly for what it is, like a huge laser beam tag impossible to mistake. But if only one could rapidly and randomly change it, it would put everybody off the trail. Yeah kind of looks alike but no would take decades to appear in the nature, have to rule out. Ironically isn't it - it would also obstruct the nature origin to impossibility: try to find a close match to a bunch of random changes and in a limited time. Did it even look like an honest effort? And that opens an opportunity for a team of independent scientists to add the last deciding piece to this puzzle: produce a Cov-like artificial agent from RG and show that it was possible. No need to touch the spike, we already know that it's doable and has been done. Doesn't need to be identical, a similar number of random changes would do. The gun, the cartridge and the intent, all there. Short of a signed and stamped confession, could be the best we could hope for, looking for the origin of this thing.

The only outcome that is compatible with any futures of the humanity that do not involve a global catastrophe in a short to medium term is the complete defeat of the Russian aggression. The association with WWII is very direct: there was no resolution that wouldn't involve the defeat of the Nazi regime. It can happen in a number of ways: - a depletion of Russia's military resources and gradual pushing it back to the internationally recognized borders, without any exceptions or compromises. - accelerating social and economic collapse in Russia - ascendance of Ukraine to NATO, temporary cessation of hostilities followed by a military defeat and/or social collapse of Russia. But there are no good scenarios for the world if Russia is allowed to prevail, even in a limited way. For the exactly same reasons as in the last century.

No disagreement this time: these are the hypothesis, there's no final evidence either way and they can still be evaluated on the balance of the arguments that go for and against them.

Back to the topic. In the two of the earlier epidemics of coronaviruses, SARS and MERS, both the intermediary host and the original reservoir have been found: civets, bats for SARS-Cov and camels, bats for MERS. As we are approaching the year five of the pandemic, and despite unprecedented efforts, no such connection was made for Covid. It's just too different from any that were found in the nature and would have taken decades of natural mutations to produce. On the other hand, the evidence of work with a sufficiently close natural virus; genetic manipulations to increase its transmissibility in humans; and creation of artificial viruses in the same facility have all been documented. The coincidence of the time and place with these activities, in the scenario of the natural origin would be even more perplexing. So at this time, seems like it's down to the balance of likelihoods.

Disagreeing with the reality, facts of it and logic? indeed. The classical definition.

Only for the record, I would attempt to answer, if there was even a trace of a meaning in the question or comment. Alas. So again, In this world now, we have made the rule against unilateral, violent aggression. We do have such cases unfolding. So, our options are limited to, either enforcing the rule; or doing away with it and thus tacitly encouraging this and all future aggressive wars. There are no words-only solutions to this conundrum.