None of those restrictions ever prevented terrorists from carrying out attacks in Europe or America, they just switched to alternative compounds or purchasing methods. You'd think a former US military would have enough experience with IEDs to know fireworks would be a terrible choice.Fertilizer and any nitrate containing materials are generally well regulated, as are cleaning compounds that when mixed release chlorine and other harmful gases. Depending on where you are, purchasing any related materials either requires a proof of xxxx (e.g. plumbers license) and could trigger a visit by the police if it looks out of character for your profession or purchasing habits.
yes ministry will make recommendation and Putin will support it but once it goes into implementation stage than all stake holders will be consulted as this thing pass through soft power. when Putin get stuck than that soft power bails him out whether in Syria or Ukraine or demographic policy of early births or exit of women soldiers from Ukraine. Putin is always late in understanding soft power.You are deflecting and making stuff up at this point. Just like last time several months ago. First you say the pipeline is the opinion of the ministry therefore it can’t happen. I tell you there are direct state to state discussion. Then you try deflecting the main topic because you can’t deny it any longer. This always happens.
I read that stuff regarding Soft Power because it is my interest and i cannot spoon feed all the analysis but with current demographic trends there will be 200m to North of Kazakhstan and 250m to the South and this Turkmenistan will have to deal with there requirements. forget about 5 to 10 years down line if today Arabs decide they can create a state whose one side is at Caspian sea and another side at Arabian sea and Arabs are the center of the world in energy trade. why do you think they will be less ruthless in Central Asia when they dont care about Mideast and North Africa?You are still deflecting and avoiding the question. Why are they building a pipeline that they can’t use. Arab soft power is not an answer.
For two decades, hawkish voices in Washington have called for the United States to attack Iran’s nuclear program. And for two decades their calls have been rejected. That is because for most of that time, the argument against military action was compelling and straightforward. Iran’s nuclear capabilities were immature. The international community was united on the need for Tehran to prove that its nuclear intentions were entirely peaceful and thus was reasonably united in sanctioning the country when it became clear that they weren’t. These sanctions imposed high costs that pushed the Islamic Republic into negotiations.
There are still many good reasons to not bomb . Striking the country would inject more chaos and instability into the Middle East. It would consume substantial American resources at a time when Washington wants to focus on other regions. It could undermine U.S. credibility if the attacks don’t succeed. And the odds of failure are high: even the most accurate strikes might only delay Iranian nuclearization. The best, most durable solution to the issue remains a diplomatic agreement.
But today, the case against military action is not so neat. Iran’s nuclear program is no longer nascent; in fact, the country has just about everything it needs to make a weapon. Tehran, meanwhile, is more vulnerable and more in need of a new deterrent than it was a few years ago: its network of partners is in tatters, and Israel struck targets within Iran’s borders several times in 2024. The international community is also now fractured on whether to pressure the Iranian regime. There are still harsh sanctions on Iran, but they are constantly being breached by China, India, and Russia, among others. Resuming full enforcement may be possible, but it will require China’s cooperation in particular at a time when Beijing faces bipartisan hostility from Washington. Russia’s relationship with Iran is likewise stronger than it has been for decades, buoyed by mutual defense ties. Tehran’s incentives to go nuclear have hardly ever been greater, and its expected costs have likely diminished.
Given the risks of military action, the must make a final, good-faith attempt to negotiate a halt to Tehran’s nuclear program early in the Trump administration. But unless it is prepared to live in the world that Iranian nuclear weapons would create, it may have little choice but to attack Iran—and soon. Prudence demands that Washington both plot out military action now and ensure that Iran understands that this threat is real, even as it tries the diplomatic path once more.
The West is so arrogant and they wonder why the world is so not under their control. When you read about polls that show how Westerners don’t like China, what is it that they don’t like? Are Chinese causing wars around the world like the West does? Do you think Westerners intellectually study what’s happening in the world? No, they don’t like China simply on the basis that China doesn’t know its place by not blindly following everything the West says and does. They get upset like when China does its own thing from the West. That basically tells them they’re not in control of everything like they rightfully believe is theirs. They get upset when Chinese don’t watch the same movies they do in making them as popular as Westerners do. Those simple things shows how much control they think they should have in the world. That’s why you see like the EU get angry when China retaliates against their actions against China. China is suppose to understand that they’re only doing it for China’s own and the world’s good so China isn’t suppose to retaliate. They spun the same nonsense regarding EVs questioning if they were made with slave labor but it was really about how they were just saving their own economic self-interests using humans rights as an excuse. But they get upset because they think they can never lie and because they can say it and not have their tongue explode into flames for lying, their intentions must be true which Chinese don’t automatically believe like they do. They hate China because Chinese don’t have as much faith for Westerners as Westerners do for themselves.
yes ministry will make recommendation and Putin will support it but once it goes into implementation stage than all stake holders will be consulted as this thing pass through soft power. when Putin get stuck than that soft power bails him out whether in Syria or Ukraine or demographic policy of early births or exit of women soldiers from Ukraine. Putin is always late in understanding soft power.
The proper way for China if it need Russian gas is that Russia develop a new gas field possibly Arctic and piped it to Northern China with binding long term contracts.
I read that stuff regarding Soft Power because it is my interest and i cannot spoon feed all the analysis but with current demographic trends there will be 200m to North of Kazakhstan and 250m to the South and this Turkmenistan will have to deal with there requirements. forget about 5 to 10 years down line if today Arabs decide they can create a state whose one side is at Caspian sea and another side at Arabian sea and Arabs are the center of the world in energy trade. why do you think they will be less ruthless in Central Asia when they dont care about Mideast and North Africa?
Fickling means "little fucker" in german or fuckling in english