Zoraptor

You know, I was going to say those are pretty pedantic objections. But then I remember that every time I see a class designation of Destroyer I get an urge to ask where the torpedo boats it's meant to Destroy are. So, maybe not.

Pretty traditional though. Terms like spastic and cretin were medical terms before entering common usage. Yeah, just try substituting Russia with NATO in that situation and see if anyone would accept 'poor job' as an excuse. You don't even need to, just look at how the Russian intervention in Syria was portrayed. They didn't just do a poor job. It wasn't an accidental misinterpretation. They 100% deliberately used it as an excuse to do exactly what they wanted to do, whatever it actually authorised. Having spent days getting an acceptable compromise resolution through they ignored every bit of compromise in it. And then had the temerity to cry about not being given similar powers again and how China and Russia were big meanies; they also systematically lied about the content of the resolution. So not only dishonest in application, dishonest in justification too. The original question was why Russia would distrust NATO anyway, and that shows pretty much absolutely why they wouldn't. Regime change was 100% not authorised, regime change was 100% pursued from the outset. There'd be a 0% chance of the US being directly involved in something like that. If they wanted a provocation there are plenty of Ukrainians they could get to do it completely deniably. While most Ukrainians have a more or less realistic assessment of what would actually happen in a war- they'd lose, badly- there are most definitely enough who think it'd end with Novgorod and Vladimir-Suzdal being reunited with the motherland to do something stupid if encouraged.

Except they didn't, they went for regime change which was not authorised. When the rebels attacked Sirte, or Tripoli, under the actual terms of the UNSC resolution (and relevant section quoted below) NATO should have started bombing the rebels, but didn't. That abrogation is why they never got a resolution that even approached allowing force in Syria. Of course, NATO likes to pretend that the resolution allowed regime change- but then that's part of the problem isn't it, NATO pretending it's allowed do stuff that it shouldn't. It's always a special case with special justifications when NATO does something against the rules, but somehow only when NATO breaks the rules. No mention of bombing only one side, it just says that civilians should be protected. Maybe the rebel grads and artillery etc fired only pot pourri and fluffy bunnies? Oh yeah, and the NATO backed side used chemical weapons too, in Bani Walid.

Own a corrugated iron shack. Have a dozen people living in it. Don't have power (or jack the lines to get free power). Get water from public access. That's how much of the world's population still lives.

That seems likely, there have been a few too many 'accidental' mentions of Ukraine agreeing not to join NATO in the last few days that look far too much like proposals being floated. Zelensky's patience with some of the pro war rhetoric from the UK and US has also clearly run out, since he's being about as overtly passive aggressive about things like the announcement of the Feb 16th invasion date as I've ever seen a politician be with supposed close friends.

If beating the war drums includes frenzied handwaving we've had two nights (Ukraine time) of US journalists saying that they've got the good oil from their Pentagon sources that the Russians were moving to firing positions and war was absolutely imminent. CBS even managed to have new intelligence from US officials about the Russians deploying to firing positions, on both nights. Hardly surprising, lest we forget the only organisation punished for inaccurate reporting in the lead up to the 2003 Gulf War was the war skeptical BBC. All the dodgy intelligence used then was laundered freely through 'respected' outlets like the NYT. Indeed launderers in chief like Michael Gordon are still employed, and still writing on foreign affairs. In much the same vein. Not really NATO. Its most prominent player by far has been pledging undying and unyielding support for Ukraine's current position and no compromising. France and Germany though sure, since it was their diplomatic baby, even if they're largely sidelined in the current narrative in the anglosphere. They don't have any leverage over Ukraine to get them to implement though, not when the US and UK are shouting about compromise being treason.

Ukraine has buried the Minsk Accords already. They've publicly said they can't/ won't implement them on their side and they want the agreement replaced. At least formally, they probably accept that practically there won't be a renegotiation as they have no leverage. Russian peacekeepers were in Georgia for 16 years with no real issues in terms of escalation. They've been in Transnistria for 30 years too. It took Sakashvili directly attacking them in a sustained manner to get a (per OSCE, ad hoc, unprepared) response in Georgia, and that was very much the consequence of Sakashvili's deliberate choices. The design for them being present is very much to freeze the situation. Recognition is an escalation, but it's a more or less rhetorical one compared to, say, recognising their independence then having them join the RF (which happened with Crimea; but hasn't with South Ossetia or Abkhazia)- it's also a door that was very much opened by NATO itself deciding that chopping up countries was legitimate. It may even be designed to put pressure on Ukraine to implement Minsk, which could effectively give Russia its desired veto over NATO membership.

Netflix is making a Bioshock movie. Wonder if Ken Levine will bring all that experience from MASH to the party...

Hey guys, Tyson Fury is meant to come to my house and punch me on the nose today. If he doesn't, it's because I've successfully deterred him. In terms of response South Ossetia/ Abkhazia is probably a closer comparison since they're pretty much direct equivalents, just Georgian, though they were justified as legal thanks to the stupidity of Kosovo's 'unique case'. Also had more of the genuine genocide adjacent about them since the Georgians were confirmed to have ethnically cleansed 100k ethnic Ossetians. Not that you'll see that particular fact mentioned very much; and that isn't the case for novorossiya no matter the rhetoric of Bandera fans. They'll throw a wobbly about Russian peacekeepers moving in. They'll do nothing about it except maybe some toys coming out of the cot. Doesn't make any practical difference anyway, that's the effective status quo already.

What is it with Scott Morrison and cringey photo ops? I'm sure I remember some old bloke telling him to f___ off at the airport when he tried to get a handshake around that time too, which was about the most stereotypically Australian thing I've ever seen. OTOH New Zealand's PMs have too many people shaking their hands. Not quite as topical though.

The Australian Federal Police Raids- on three media organisations. What sparked them. IGADF Report ('Brereton Report') on Australian SAS conduct in Afghanistan- pdf, and long. 2021 update. And for balance, the report on the allegations of war crimes by the New Zealand SAS ('Operation Burnham'; TLDR definitely killed civilians, probably didn't meet the criteria for a war crime though the systematic lying about it was a very bad look. The guy who wrote the exposé on that has definitely been the target of SIS spooks before and since, too). That should give Bruce some light reading for the next few days.

There's one problem with that- it's fundamentally incompatible with what they've already done. The whole point is that they've already made the existence of the intelligence public, so the hand is shown. It's the card equivalent of going for a lay down misère and then saying that maybe the player is bluffing instead of trying to lose. Once the cards are down it can't be a bluff because... that's the point of putting the cards down; once the intelligence is revealed you've already shown its existence. If the aim is to protect the intelligence then they shouldn't have revealed it in the first place.

Yeah, I'm not sure I've seen anyone at all who liked completed Picard. IIRC Guard Dog at least liked it up until the last two episodes, and I found it tolerable up to them. And that's about it for positivity. I wouldn't put it quite as regarding toys being broken, but I think that my opinion that the Federation has always been a busted flush* helps when it comes to not hating the programs. End of the day it's the bad plotting which ruined all the shows for me, not them being bad Star Trek. *I also watched Blake's 7 first, so I'll view any 'Federation' with an arrowhead symbol as less than intrinsically great, which helps when it comes to Picard.

So does the ambassador who made them for that matter. The ambassador to the UK making them was always a bit of an odd option (compared to, say, Germany), if they were intended as a positional change and not just made off the cuff. Kind of amusing seeing the number of Brits and Americans online who think that anything less than complete and unequivocal support for their assertions and inflexibility from Zelensky and other Ukrainians is treachery though. Apparently wanting to actually see the supposed plan that the US has for tomorrow's invasion is a completely unreasonable request, given that the Ukrainians are the ones who would actually have to fight said invasion. You'd think that would be more useful than some expired Javelins. Only really two options from that, either the plan doesn't exist or they don't actually want to help Ukraine fight it; and neither of those options is very complimentary.

On a my personal bête noir/ Discovery like Albatross round the neck from a couple of months ago; I watched Shadow and Bone on Netflix. Wasn't really expecting much, but I thought it would be a fairer comparison to Wheel of Time than S2 of The Witcher even if it wasn't effected by covid as much. Well, S&B was better in every single regard and I ended up liking it completely unironically. Better written, better effects, better acting (though that comparison at least may be unfair, doubtful the actors in WoT could have done much better with what they had), way better direction and cinematography overall, and it didn't reek of cheapness and being rushed despite all the money spent on it. It's not outright brilliant but I would outright recommend it to anyone who isn't allergic to a touch of the Young Adult Tropes, at least. At the time, those were pretty much exactly my thoughts. It wasn't good, but there was potential there to be built on.

I'd have far rather had a different vaccine than Pfizer for exactly those reasons. The funniest people* are those defending its cost- now the most expensive- as being due to all the research Pfizer had to do. The research was done by BionTech, and paid for by the fine volk of Deutschland. All Pfizer did was... license the design. I do rather like to pretend that all the people worshipping Pfizer are paid to do so, but facts have to faced: a lot are just stupid enough to fanboy an utterly morally bankrupt multi billion dollar company, for free. It's not even the best vaccine, half the reason boosters are needed is because its efficacy drops so steeply- considerably more so than Moderna's. Given it's Pfizer you might expect that being great short term and crap longer term is entirely by design, but as above they didn't actually design it so I guess that at least can't be blamed on wanting windfall profits. *OTOH the worst thing was slandering the cheaper alternatives, aided by useful idiots like von der Leyen desperate to throw poo at the UK for having the temerity to leave their club.

The Afghans had ~7bn USD in gold and foreign currency (USD) reserves, held in the US (at the New York Federal Reserve); but starting at the latest in 2017, ie 5 years ago. So it's certainly not from recent donations. The ultimate source probably was aid though, as Afghanistan had few ways to accumulate cash otherwise, eg less than 1bn in exports. It was definitively Aghanistan's money legally though, you can't get more formal than held by its central bank. Main lesson: don't use the US to store your cash.

I really couldn't care less about what politicians wear, unless it's actively stupid. Unfortunately Truss's outfit was. I do very much enjoy the annual APEC silly shirt competition though. And very occasionally you get an outfit I'd 100% unironically wear.

Boba Fett was always a stupid idea for a Disney series. "No disintegrations"; from Darth Vader? You were never going to get the same character, so to many it would be automatic disappointment. It required far too much santisation and let's be frank, removes any mystique and mystery from the character while doing so, so it's a double whammy of bad. Thus you end up with the weird spectacle of a ruthless bounty hunter running a criminal syndicate that is... extraordinarily tame, and pretty frequently looking like a putz while doing it because you need some sort of tension. It's the sort of thing that looks great on paper but when you come to actually put it on screen you find that the reasons that Boba Fett was 'cool' are exactly the same reasons he can't work on screen as a Disney lead.

My booster gave me a dead arm. The 2nd shot was worse, since that actually made me feel outright ill for a day. I almost always get some odd immediate interactions from injections too, with the booster I got a feeling as if my hand was wrapped in ice for a couple of minutes. Having had 'long flu' before though any minor inconveniences from vaccines are just that. A sore arm and a bit of a headache is nothing compared to that mass of completely random ailments; 'favourite' being the random feeling that my skin was shrinking that I got for literally months on end. You knew perfectly well it wasn't, but that didn't stop the feeling of it. Oh yeah, and my caffeine tolerance got randomly reset so even as single cup of coffee could have me bouncing off the walls. Needless to say I've had a flu jab every year since except the last one as there was no flu in NZ last year.

The articles deal with that fine, really- on the British side it was always intended as political theatre and not as constructive diplomacy; and quite possibly even intended to be actively destructive to attempts at diplomacy. She was always going there with the explicit purpose of looking tough. Hence cosplaying Thatcher despite it being comparatively bikini weather (with apologies to anyone now imagining Maggie in a bikini). It mostly failed at looking tough because it got overshadowed by her looking stupid, at least for the publications that published her looking stupid (which it has to be said many didn't for some reason). The British approach has always been to pour oil on the flames- there was also that ludicrous incident with the RN destroyer months ago and them panicking about reports from the bbc and daily fail they'd run away from warning shots. If you're in a domestic crisis you always have the option to wag the dog. As with the bombing of that aid worker and his children* in Kabul it was pretty obvious from the start that the US version was at best... selective. *Hmm. Wonder whether that guy's family will get a 3.5bn slush fund for compensation? I'll offer, hmm, 3.5bn to 1 odds, and feel a bit dirty taking the $1. Probably, as the US does not accept Russian sovereignty over the southern Kurils. Indeed, they don't actually recognise anyone's sovereignty over two of them. Which may be a hold back to Truman's demand that the Soviets hand one of the Kurils over to the US for basing rights...

But Joe Biden said the ground would freeze in February... Though that reminds me of one of the more obscure funny things from Liz Truss's visit to Moscow. She deliberately dressed up like Maggie Thatcher did, as if it was -20. It was actually a toasty 3 degrees, and she must have absolutely broiled herself. If anyone wants an actual illustration of just how stupid the New Zealand economy is at the moment, our Prime Minister already has one of the highest pay rates in the OECD (strangely enough there's always money to give politicians salary and benefit increases, otherwise their, haha, "quality might drop"). She made more money, tax free, from her house appreciating last year than from her salary- 8 times the median household income. "There will never be a capital gains tax so long as I am PM" says woman who would have to pay extra 125k in tax if there were. Oh yeah, and the alternative leader owns no less than 7 properties...

Meh, they still don't have enough troops. Indeed, the propaganda about that has been pretty ludicrous. Enough for an "imminent" invasion, supposedly spend another couple of weeks adding troops and readiness was... down to 70%? Guess it's the old anxiety habituation in action, ie you can't tell people they're in immediate danger too long or they start to ignore it. Now we're back to 'imminent', just avoid mentioning the word itself. At least Pentagon spox or whoever it was got to the meat of the issue- making NATO relevant again. Didn't see if he mentioned the attempts to get Europe to buy overpriced US gas, but he didn't really need to. Nothing braindead about that. Every increase in energy price helps out all the massively overexposed shale operations that were in trouble with the low energy prices of the early pandemic phase. Bad news for ordinary americans, but big stragetic advantage to the US, and neither party cares about poor people anyway. Not a US only phenomenon, of course, we've got reports coming out about how historic high inflation disproportionately effect... the rich. The logic being, if you're poor and spending all your money anyway you don't spend extra when prices go up because you have no extra money to spend, so there's zero impact. OTOH, rich people pay more for the Jaguar or Cayenne, so are effected. This is mostly to run interference for the entire $50bn stimulus package that caused a a lot of the inflation going to rich people who bought houses, leading to a completely unpredictable 30% (no typo, thirty percent, and yes that's annual) appreciation in house prices. The average household would now have to save every cent- ie spend literally nothing- for 14 years to afford a house at current prices. Problem being, of course, that by the time that 14 years has elapsed on historic trends the house prices will have trebled again while wages will have gone up ~15%. Coincidentally, the average NZ member of parliament owns 3 houses... Wonder how many shares in defence production and energy US politicians have?

The British FM Liz Truss and Russian FM Lavrov had a meeting today. It was... interesting, apparently*. I'd say it was pretty much exactly what you'd expect when one of the more experienced international diplomats meets, well, an idiot trying to look tough for domestic brownie points. Most of the damage done was self inflicted. Truss didn't know how translators worked, and spent the first part of the meeting speaking over them before being told to shut up and be patient. How you can be a FM and not know that basic level of etiquette is difficult to understand. It's not even a power move, it just makes you look stupid, and as if you simply couldn't be bothered with even the basics. Which was kind of a recurring theme. She also managed to say that Britain would never recognise Russian sovereignty over Rostov and Voronezh. Which are internationally recognised parts of Russia; again a sign of being hopelessly underprepared and worse, it plays perfectly into the Russian narrative. She had to be corrected by the British ambassador, and it wasn't even a trap question since the context was pretty obviously whether Russia was allowed to move troops around Russia. That she apparently thought they were regions of Ukraine was indicative of being hopelessly underprepared but also kind of irrelevant, if you have any pretensions towards competence as a diplomat you always use a generic non answer like "We recognise Russian sovereignty on Russia, but not on Ukraine" for such questions since getting them wrong doesn't make you look tough, but like a moron. It also makes it hard for other diplomats to take you seriously. (Not her first rodeo, she also somehow managed to say that Baltic Nations were on the Black Sea) *there's a more detailed take from the FT, which I'd have used but thought would be be paywalled when it isn't.

We have a similar protest here which is labeled as being alt right etc, but the 2nd most popular flag there is actually the Maori Sovereignty flag; not exactly a staple with neo nazis and the like. Does get rather amusing constantly being told that it's all alt right imported american conspiracy theories from Steve B*nnon and his coterie of trumptards- and there is a lot of MAGA stuff, to be fair- when every shot has a uniquely local flag being waved enthusiastically by decidedly brown people. The most amusing in absolute terms though? Could be the guy who thinks face masks cause lung cancer, and that the media deliberately make them look stupid? Or maybe the South Island convoy forgetting that Wellington is located in the cunningly named 'North Island' and that they couldn't simply drive across Cook Strait; leading to them trying to organise a Dunkirk type operation on short notice...