I recall some findings from a consumer watchdog on goods from Shein. They found kids toys (including biting toys for infants) with thousands of times the legally permitted amount of toxic substances. There was a necklace that was made of over 80% cadmium. This is beyond negligence and crosses into chemical warfare territory.
Russia could still strike Germany with medium-range drones and missiles tomorrow, as part of an attack on NATO to test its resolve. Putin believes that NATO is weak, a house of cards that needs little more than a kick in its Eastern Flank and some strikes and/or provocations in its heartland (like Germany) for it to come down. This is very likely a mistaken assumption, but: An attack on NATO is believed to be highly likely within the next few years. Putin is preparing for a war against Europe, hoarding tanks and other equipment instead of sending them directly into Ukraine:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c62v63gl8rvo
The above article is from last year, but NATO members have been increasingly warning of an impeding attack, including just a few days ago:
https://www.euractiv.com/news/russia-accused-of-planning-attacks-on-baltic-polish-infrastructure/
While Poland is strong and more than willing to fight, Germany would have to help its Eastern ally, as well as the Baltics and Finland defend themselves against a Russian invasion, which is where, among other things, our tanks come into place. We can’t wait until Russian forces are at the German border, in case Poland falls. Defending Germany would necessitate defending our allies directly. We would also likely be at the receiving end of drone and ballistic missile strikes.
The amount of pure fiction being spread as fact surrounding this conflict is quite staggering. What you replied to is a comparatively harmless (if common) example of it.
They are CURRENTLY nothing alike.
Yes, and currently Russia is attacking a fellow democracy and threatening us with the same thing.
While Germany is definitely not heading the right way, the worst case scenario you are describing is not guaranteed and should not prohibit anyone from defending what we have now. It makes no sense.
Are you seriously trying to hypernormalize the likes of Russia?
Germany is a democracy with widening economic inequality. Russia is a brutal, expansionist dictatorship run by a Mafia boss. They are nothing alike and you know that.
Because the one that is trying to conquer us is infinitely worse.
These are not your run of the mill leftists. They are the kind that even tankies would consider extreme. There are people out there who reject any kind of industrialized society and want to bring it all down (even to the point of humanity’s extinction), so naturally they want to damage large infrastructure like railways.
It’s transmitted electronically these days.
In the past, you could just hand it in later once you were healthy or send it by mail.
Lots do ask, of course.
Or jokingly twist it into “Mehrzweckeier”, which is pronounced almost the same and translates to multiple-purpose eggs. The literal meaning is irrelevant - it’s a reaction to someone getting persecuted by the state for using the original insult (Merz lick eggs/balls).
Worth noting that there already are many employers in Germany who demand a notice from the doctor (and not one via telephone) from day one. In fact, I’ve never had one that does not, both public and private.
It’s still stupid to codify this idiocy into law for everyone.
Reminds me of “it’s only Imperialism if the West does it”.
It is a Chinese firm. Why would one not include this in the title? Chinese investments in Europe are a contentious topic, not in small part because the country is notorious for exactly the kind of crimes against the environment as described in the article, as well as poor labor practices (including slavery), corruption (obviously a hot topic in Hungary right now), human rights abuses, IP theft, espionage, intimidation, etc.
It is not xenophobic (or “sinophobic”) to report these things. Why are you carrying water for this awful regime?
There is a noticeable difference to America’s aggressiveness since Putin placed his Manchurian candidate in the White House. While the US has certainly acted in an imperialistic fashion in the recent past, it was nowhere near as blunt, callous and, for lack of a better word, “Russian-style”.
America hegemony was built predominantly on the basis of soft power instead of occupying territory long-term. Coca Cola, Levi’s jeans and rock and roll, combined with skillful diplomacy, consistent foreign policy between Republican- and Democratic-led administrations and a backing of unparalleled hard power projection capabilities was a winning combination in the second half of the 20th century.
Threatening to annex the territory of close allies in particular would have been unthinkable at any previous point in American history, even when they were fighting Colonial wars (e.g. in the Philippines) or during the most coke-fueled periods of the Cold War, when the CIA seemingly enjoyed a carte blanche, especially in Central and South America.
The difference is that these companies have to adhere to EU regulations, e.g. on harmful chemicals. Cheap Chinese products famously do not, often times to an absurd degree, exceeding limits by thousands of times.
They recently added the ability to pay with an EC card upon delivery.
You missed the second part of my comment.
Good ol’ moving the overton window.
The more unstable the world becomes, the more frequent and aggressive moves towards authoritarianism will be.
No, it’s not that simple.
Of course they can shoot down Western planes in a war. The question is how consistently and how many losses they would suffer in return. At the moment, everything looks like the Chinese air force is extremely poorly trained and, obviously, very inexperienced from top to bottom, which puts them at a significant disadvantage, even if we assumed - which I don’t think is likely - that their equipment is competitive with the West. There’s a reason they are trying to bribe experienced Western pilots to get some infusion of institutional knowledge.