leicsmac

Oh, yes. And further out, too. James Corey had it about right in his Expanse books.

It's darkly funny because there are companies looking to commercalise that truly vital resource in various places in the world in exactly this way.

Or sometimes use a deniable "clean skin", with the difference being that they have, as you say, trained them much better, or simply been better at making sure they're not discovered. Anyhow, while this is naturally shitty behaviour from the Iranians, state-sanctioned killing is state-sanctioned killing and IMO this isn't really egregiously more filthy than the filth that is realpolitik that most other global players get involved in. They're simply being stupid enough or don't-give-a-toss enough to not train their killers (agents or deniable recruits) the way everyone else does.

I agree that's a big issue. I also think that the Iranians are far from the only party engaged in it (or practices that could be qualified as it) even though they're the only ones currently being talked about on the topic.

I'd agree with the general sentiment here but would add the observation that at least some of the hotheads over there, two in particular, aren't just talkers - they're in the room when "bad" things are happening.

The only thing different the Iranians have done from practically every other global player here is be either unprofessional enough or careless enough to outsource their killing jobs to amateurs. (And/or careless enough to get caught doing it.) Not sure that's a massively significant difference in terms of the big picture tbh.

De Chelonian Mobile.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx2v91xn1z9o If it was designed as a psyop to get EU nations bickering with each other and not actually using the brains the powers that govern the universe gave them beyond a purely superficial level, then it looks like whichever entity was responsible got what they wanted. Depressing.

Lynas et al is pretty damn clear on the consensus, as per the very first page of this thread, yes.

Thank you for the resource. It's just unfortunate that while there are good people everywhere, it appears to be only the bad people in that area who wield the power and the good people are sadly unable to do enough to check them.

He's learned from at least two capable teachers in that regard. Of course, one of them is barely coherent these days.

That would involve some element of introspection and humility, which appears to be anathema to some people.

I, unfortunately, could. Violent death as entertainment/sport is a habit our species has engaged in for a rather long time and sadly still don't seem to have grown out of.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c4g4djgdyk2o Ten million for one. An insight into how some people in that area of the world think. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cz05yx5dd7yo Oh, they lied. And arrested people for apparently no reason at all. Quelle surprise.

This still applies.

As it happens, there has been a pretty good discussion on the topic of migration not far back on this very thread. Page 657/658 is where the meat of most of it happens. Just goes to show how often such discussions crop up.

Human. This is some of the wider geopolitical concerns I'm referring to here.

I think we're going round and round here tbh. I'm not favouring one set of people over another, I'm advocating for a solution where migration is reduced a fair bit because there is much less reason to migrate. Again, I fail to see why that's somehow problematic.

If that's where you come out and the fate of at least some people who did nothing wrong other than being born in the "wrong place" is no nevermind to you then so be it - that's between you and your conscience. However, and I'm repeating myself here, why is it so difficult to look at the matters that make that choice necessary in the first place and not go at least some way towards addressing them? Yes, it wouldn't be easy, but that's the only way that this debate gets settled - short of a catastrophic population crash.

They're not leaving their homes solely because of that, as per above, other geopolitical matters are more pressing (for now, anyway). What I think is (again repeating myself) that if nations actually take the time to address those root geopolitical issues, then this whole matter becomes much less of one. Or we keep going as we are, and again have the choice between the status quo and the risk that may entail, or abandoning a great many innocent human beings (because how can someone know who is some kind of threat before they actually demonstrate it) to their fate.

If it wasn't for geopolitical issues (of which climate change is one steadily increasing part), there would be no need for them to get on one of those boats in the first instance. I'm not sure what about addressing the bigger causal issues rather than just reacting to their consequences is somehow unclear or problematic here.

And give the way the world is changing, that's just the beginning. So perhaps instead of being simply reactive, could the UK and other players instead be a little proactive and look more at the causes of these migrations in the first place? Because otherwise, the only options are the status quo or abandoning a great many innocent human beings to their (rather horrible) fate in pure social Darwinist style.

Clearly I need to be less diplomatic when I'm talking about this stuff on here.

Well, in a reasonably short space of time (given current data), one of us is going to be wrong. I think that it's you. I hope that it's me. Have a good evening, Prussian.

Here it is in map form.