They provoked it to cause the renewables. They provoked it to contain them. Bog Russia down completely. If it alludes to peace it's the Cold War. Competing technology. In the meantime it has put them in a bigger corner. If they really whatever far more condemnation isolating them more. Let's suggest it takes Kiev. Or even deals for any territory. Big stupid wall again. As most diplomats are ejected cut off. Of course it has caused red lines and sides again. Competition. But there's also opportunity to regime change.
For the sake of argument how many European nations have just stated 2030-2035 no more gas cars. It was previously by 2040 or even 2050. By slicing the flow it diverts it. Suddenly the agenda becomes force other tech through quickly. In the meantime they're forcing and exploiting a reset. By collapsing it. But stupidly coal has just increased in usage massively. So I mean. It's all uncertain anyway.
But the problem is how much does it all collapse first and does it provoke wider conflict anyway.
I am sure they can deal in 10 seconds. If it wasn't serving some other point.
Who fucking knows except the timing was perfect and now look at it. It is forcing collapse, not because it did, but because it is causing a bigger narrative. Of course there's all this other stuff happening creating the perfect storm. But it's had planning and intent and agenda. Or what?
If they were serious about war. They wouldn't Biden or Sunak. Or even Marcon. Sure they could pull a trigger but who'd march into it. Hahaha. Nobody would even pass it through their governments. Blunder into it, by looking weak. Yea. But charge into that or another conflict. Hahaha. They haven't got national backing.
So what are they achieving? Forcing change by.. It's just getting worse first.
No, they provoked the whole thing. Planned the lot. The entire time they're throwing out a bunch of deflection and distraction. Hiding the motive. How popular would that be. No, it isn't mitigation. Containment, yes. But they're forcing it. While blaming it on everything else as not their fault, a product of circumstances. While literally causing it.
Mitigating collapse, because collapse it is, hahaha. It sounds nicer. It sounds like something an opponent would claim. They're doing their damnest but it ain't working. Hang on. Get the next one in. Hahaha. They forced it. It's not a product of circumstances if it stinks of agenda. They caused this shit. If they didn't why is it happening. What because of Russia. Hahaha. Ukraine is still a shithole. But you meant the gas. Come on they could open far more. But it ain't selling that, now is it. It's cutting the gas like Biden just did, he cut the gas, to sell the bullshit. Dunno how popular that was, Supreme court. But that was internal. Here they simply provoked a catalyst causing, what is it actually causing. The conflict. Sure because that's obvious. No, what else?
You meant Europe. You meant suddenly it is all provoked into the Cold War again instead of who cares. It hasn't changed much apart from it's suddenly adopting another narrative. A narrative where what does that run off really cause? Collapse sure but not the bloc, it would be Europe again 5 minutes later, movement, trade, laws, currency who knows. The bloc can't collapse if they're all armed against Russia. Instead it simply forces change by collapsing the current methods. Because it seeks to change them rapidly.
Collapse forces resets. It changes existing methods quickly. Nobody wants collapse, it doesn't make them popular, so they blame everybody and everything else. But what are they actually doing??? Look, you don't say.
Collapsing a self sustaining nation doesn't work. It cannot collapse when it still has far more partners. They can only attempt to isolate it. In doing so perhaps it causes internal change. Not the entire point. Nato wasn't prepared to war. Nuclear no. Instead it sought a narrative for its own changes. Renewables quickly. Europe has almost as much danger of splintering, not with Nato holding it together. It like Russia will weather. But what have they created here?
Russia losing, not likely. Literally Russia losing a nuclear base without nuclear war. Because it ousted its president? Hahaha. Europe winning, no. What? Seriously. You're selling Russia will just collapse so Europe can win that shithole the Ukraine, and get a few gas coupons. Because there needs to be a winner. Hahaha.
They provoked it to cause the renewables. They provoked it to contain them. Bog Russia down completely. If it alludes to peace it's the Cold War. Competing technology. In the meantime it has put them in a bigger corner. If they really whatever far more condemnation isolating them more. Let's suggest it takes Kiev. Or even deals for any territory. Big stupid wall again. As most diplomats are ejected cut off. Of course it has caused red lines and sides again. Competition. But there's also opportunity to regime change.
For the sake of argument how many European nations have just stated 2030-2035 no more gas cars. It was previously by 2040 or even 2050. By slicing the flow it diverts it. Suddenly the agenda becomes force other tech through quickly. In the meantime they're forcing and exploiting a reset. By collapsing it. But stupidly coal has just increased in usage massively. So I mean. It's all uncertain anyway.
But the problem is how much does it all collapse first and does it provoke wider conflict anyway.
I am sure they can deal in 10 seconds. If it wasn't serving some other point.
Who fucking knows except the timing was perfect and now look at it. It is forcing collapse, not because it did, but because it is causing a bigger narrative. Of course there's all this other stuff happening creating the perfect storm. But it's had planning and intent and agenda. Or what?
If they were serious about war. They wouldn't Biden or Sunak. Or even Marcon. Sure they could pull a trigger but who'd march into it. Hahaha. Nobody would even pass it through their governments. Blunder into it, by looking weak. Yea. But charge into that or another conflict. Hahaha. They haven't got national backing.
So what are they achieving? Forcing change by.. It's just getting worse first.
No, they provoked the whole thing. Planned the lot. The entire time they're throwing out a bunch of deflection and distraction. Hiding the motive. How popular would that be. No, it isn't mitigation. Containment, yes. But they're forcing it. While blaming it on everything else as not their fault, a product of circumstances. While literally causing it.
Mitigating collapse, because collapse it is, hahaha. It sounds nicer. It sounds like something an opponent would claim. They're doing their damnest but it ain't working. Hang on. Get the next one in. Hahaha. They forced it. It's not a product of circumstances if it stinks of agenda. They caused this shit. If they didn't why is it happening. What because of Russia. Hahaha. Ukraine is still a shithole. But you meant the gas. Come on they could open far more. But it ain't selling that, now is it. It's cutting the gas like Biden just did, he cut the gas, to sell the bullshit. Dunno how popular that was, Supreme court. But that was internal. Here they simply provoked a catalyst causing, what is it actually causing. The conflict. Sure because that's obvious. No, what else?
You meant Europe. You meant suddenly it is all provoked into the Cold War again instead of who cares. It hasn't changed much apart from it's suddenly adopting another narrative. A narrative where what does that run off really cause? Collapse sure but not the bloc, it would be Europe again 5 minutes later, movement, trade, laws, currency who knows. The bloc can't collapse if they're all armed against Russia. Instead it simply forces change by collapsing the current methods. Because it seeks to change them rapidly.
Collapse forces resets. It changes existing methods quickly. Nobody wants collapse, it doesn't make them popular, so they blame everybody and everything else. But what are they actually doing??? Look, you don't say.
Collapsing a self sustaining nation doesn't work. It cannot collapse when it still has far more partners. They can only attempt to isolate it. In doing so perhaps it causes internal change. Not the entire point. Nato wasn't prepared to war. Nuclear no. Instead it sought a narrative for its own changes. Renewables quickly. Europe has almost as much danger of splintering, not with Nato holding it together. It like Russia will weather. But what have they created here?
Russia losing, not likely. Literally Russia losing a nuclear base without nuclear war. Because it ousted its president? Hahaha. Europe winning, no. What? Seriously. You're selling Russia will just collapse so Europe can win that shithole the Ukraine, and get a few gas coupons. Because there needs to be a winner. Hahaha.
The winner is by forcing another method.