walrusfromspace

>(lenovo T61p)

Not the person you're responding to but I wouldn't call a T61p brand new, it was released in 2012 after all.

>Since when is that the definition? That's the Marxist definition of the Working Class[0], although nowadays some Marxists would programmers, lawyers etc. "Professional Managerial Class" to distinguish them from the workerist idea of the Working Class.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Working_class#Marxist_definiti...

The European Commission's official website[1]

[1] https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/law-topic/data-protection/refo...

Which is tragic considering that the Nazis did not see any future for those people other than dead or slaves.

Somehow people forget that the Nazis wanted to kill or enslave all Slavs[1] within their "lebensraum" territories.

[1] They also considered Estonians and Finns as "Mongoloids" and as such subhuman although both were elevated to "Aryan" status following the winter war.

While it is not 1:1 with regards to human rights there was a pivot in the media away from Ukraine's "Problem with far right violence"[1] after the war started[2] into "Azov battalion is only 10% Nazi so there are no Nazis in Ukraine"

[1]Here I am quoting one of the articles in the image [2]https://i.imgur.com/tfJ7PtX.jpg

>Preventing genocide next door is defense

The problem here is that when you give a defensive alliance a mandate to defend entities that are not covered by it's mandate it becomes a de-facto offensive alliance.

>NATO was defending Kosovo from a war of aggression and ongoing genocide.

Except that Kosovo was not a part of NATO so you can't say that NATO is a defensive alliance unless you are going the Roman way of pre-emptive defence[1].

[1] All Roman wars were officially defensive because they believed gods would not support an offensive war

>You are either in favor of democratic self-rule for all people, or you are against it.

So can I assume that you were protesting against Spain's suppression of the Catalan independence referendum in 2017?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catalan_independence_movement#...

It's largely because Finland has never felt a need to be in NATO.

During the cold war Finland was firmly Soviet aligned despite all the claims of neutrality, the Finnish president, Urho Kekkonen, was de facto a dictator who stayed in power through Kremlin's support (although he wasn't really bad for Finland) and Finland had a defence guarantee from the Soviet Union in the form of the YYK-agreement.

After the Cold War Russia was expected to become a western liberal democracy and as such not a threat, and even after it became clear that it wouldn't become one people still understood it as a "known threat" and a bully which would act tough and try to intimidate but who would never actually hit you.

The largest reason for why joining NATO got a surge in polls is that most people weren't expecting the Invasion of Ukraine (I myself believed that they would've limited themselves to just Donbass and Luhansk).

I expect, although I may be wrong, that once people calm down support for joining NATO will fall, although the FUD spread by NATO supporters about how we would need to fight Russia alone if were not in NATO despite being covered by EU's article 42.7 may keep it high.

>Where was this energy when the US was taking a flamethrower to the entire Middle East region?

It was missing because it wasn't a relatively civilized country where people who look like them are dying.

https://leftypol.org/leftypol/src/1645920148117.mp4

While there are treaties intended to limit the usage of cluster bombs the Russian Federation is not a signatory on any of those. Neither is the United States for that matter.