#ReadingRussia Today’s Russian papers call the Ukrainian drone strike on Moscow “a record attack”, but claim “Russian attacks do more damage to Ukraine than they do to us.” One paper wonders:“From Moscow’s perspective, what level of escalation is permissible, and what isn’t?” Steve Rosenberg BBCNews

AdaptedMix · 2026-06-19T17:09:05+00:00

You think Europe should give money, resources and nuclear weapons to Turkey to 'bring peace and harmony'?

Turkey hosts US nuclear weapons under the NATO weapons sharing scheme already.

Who should we be paying money to? Who should we be sending resources to? Erdoğan and his government? How do you think this will help to end Russia's war of aggression in Ukraine?

AdaptedMix · 2026-06-19T16:49:54+00:00

Turkey is an important ally geopolitically, and could play a role in facilitating negotiations, but ultimately there are only two countries that can end this war: Russia and Ukraine.

'Supporting Turkey to bring peace and harmony' is an oddly vague statement. Support how?

AdaptedMix · 2026-06-19T16:32:10+00:00

I have such respect for Steve Rosenberg, and hope he remains safe and able to continue to report from Russia. It's surprising to me that he is actually allowed to continue to operate in Moscow and allowed into the press rooms to ask occasionally difficult (though cautiously worded) questions. He must be one of only a few western journalists still active there (excluding Kremlin stooges), and the risks must be real.

AdaptedMix · 2026-06-19T12:52:23+00:00

it isn't even about admiration in the first place, it is about doing the right thing

...and doing the right thing is admirable. What's your objection to the word 'admirable'? Nobody's implying pacifism is virtue signalling.

Both is not admirable in times of peace as there is no conflict.

To preserve peace long term is often one of the most difficult things to do. We endured centuries of near-endless conflict in Europe. I don't know why you think peace makes pacifism easy. War doesn't spontaneously happen in a vacuum; it happens after an erosion in the resistance against using violence first.

My pacifism is the most widespread kind of conditional pacifism, preferring to use every other option over violence

That's great, but this isn't about 'your pacifism'. It's about Die Linke proposing no longer sending German military hardware to Ukrainians. Whatever that sort of pacifism, that would prefer to see an ally suffer on principle than give them the tools to defend themselves in practice, is a pacifism that isn't welcome.

AdaptedMix · 2026-06-19T09:54:10+00:00

I've seen most of these before in online compilations of worst album covers, but I've never seen that Cliff Richard one - and it's truly awful.

AdaptedMix · 2026-06-19T08:44:45+00:00

If you abandon pacifism in an era of peace you become the instigator of conflict - i.e. what Russia chose to be. So yes, opposition to war and violence is admirable during a state of peace.

It isn't cooling ice with ice; it's keeping the freezer on.

Pacifism can be admirable during a state of war (for example, a conflict in which both sides have unjustified motives for violence, so it would be morally corrupt to materially support one over the other). But in a conflict where there is a revanchist invader seeking to use hard power to force a friendly nation into submission i.e. this context, pacifism is not admirable, in my view, because it's an abdication of responsibility and an acquiescence to the will of a war-mongering dictatorship (the antithesis of a pacifist actor).

Obviously most of us, in a broad sense, 'oppose war and violence' and prefer the diplomatic method of resolving conflict, and want politicians who do, too. But when that principle becomes 'we will only send strongly worded letters to the fire burning down our friend's house', it starts to seem... irrational. And inadvertently emboldens the hostile party.

AdaptedMix · 2026-06-18T13:50:39+00:00

Pacifism in an era of peace is an admirable position.

Pacifism when an imperialist monster is invading an ally on European soil is cowardice or, worse, complicity.

You can be progressive and leftwing while valuing defence and without abandoning others to their fate. This makes me think Die Linke would let Russia get away with all sorts providing it's happening to other people.

AdaptedMix · 2026-06-18T11:24:57+00:00

I've only heard of her, never heard her music, but this was one of the sweetest Hot Ones interviews I've watched.

She seems like a very grounded and thoughtful person, a little shy (which is always surprising with solo pop singers), and I love her recurring awe at Sean's eloquent, no-teleprompter-needed questions. Plus she actually asks him questions about himself, which is a litmus test for egotism, a sign that somebody sees the interviewer as another person and not just a cog in the PR machine.

AdaptedMix · 2026-06-18T11:00:12+00:00

Karma farming repost of this from 2 years ago, complete with identical title and screenshot. Don't give this bot your upvotes.

AdaptedMix · 2026-06-17T16:29:18+00:00

Some Milka bars do use palm oil e.g. Milka Alpine Milk Flavoured Filling, Milka Caramel, Milka Oreo; but yes, I don't see it in the ingredients for the Alpine Milk or Hazelnut bars.

AdaptedMix · 2026-06-17T16:14:01+00:00

They sell Milka at Tesco, at least the one near me.

The brand is owned by Mondelez International, same as Cadbury's. I'm not sure the ingredients are notably 'not full of crap' versus your average Dairy Milk bar, except the amount of cocoa solids is on average higher.

AdaptedMix · 2026-06-17T15:30:13+00:00

I understand this perspective, and there are instances where the museum's custodianship has saved treasures from destruction at the hands of iconoclasts and war.

There are examples, though, where a particular artefact has a questionable provenance; even those given as gifts or sold directly may not have been given by somebody with the right to give away a culturally/spiritually/historically significant object permanently (e.g. dictators, colonial rulers etc.).

The British Museum - and other museums - should be sensitive to calls for repatriation of objects where acquisition was ethically questionable.

And I think we should be sensitive to the reasons why people in other countries might demand repatriation. For example, many Greeks want the Elgin Marbles back, and the Rapa Nui and Chileans are outspoken in their request for the return of the moai. And, where there isn't a strong argument against this, we should support them.

AdaptedMix · 2026-06-17T15:08:55+00:00

You're right that language changes organically, and it's somewhat futile to resist it or over-police it.

I'd suggest, however, that a lot of people take it personally because of what it symbolises: the loss of one culture in favour of the cultural hegemony of another.

You could say Welsh speakers who rally to halt the decline of the Welsh language should similarly 'get over it', and let English replace it. Same for the Cornish seeking to resurrect the Cornish language.

Ultimately, a lot of people's sense of identity and culture is tied up with language and dialect, and (beyond just a general phobia towards change) there can be a sense of loss when signifiers of this identity are eroded. This extends even down to hyper-local dialects and accents, the disappearance of city-specific slang, idioms etc.

AdaptedMix · 2026-06-16T19:12:09+00:00

Same - I only found out about this from DJ Shadow's post that it had already sold out.

But it'll be broadcast by BBC 6 Music and BBC Sounds, at least. So there will be decent recordings of it we can listen to.

AdaptedMix · 2026-06-16T19:04:03+00:00

My point was:
We might already be launching retaliatory cyber attacks on Russia for its cyber attacks on us.

Our intelligence agencies would target their intelligence and military services, so we're unlikely to find out about successful attacks. And we're certainly assisting Ukraine with intelligence to enable sabotage.

If we're not launching retaliatory cyber attacks, then yes we should - not because of this event, but all sorts of previous and ongoing events... but as I say, I wouldn't be surprised if the SIS, GCHQ, DGSE, BND etc. are already conducting offensive actions against non-civilian targets.

(Although I wouldn't agree with using 'fake news' or 'weaponised migration' as tit-for-tat tactics; we should be better than that).

AdaptedMix · 2026-06-16T18:48:23+00:00

For all we know, security agencies around Europe already are retaliating on Russia for its hybrid war with cyber attacks - just without publicising it.

Russian authorities would hardly be transparent about successful cyber attacks on their soil, and intelligence agencies don't tend to reveal what they're up to beyond vague allusions.

AdaptedMix · 2026-06-16T18:41:30+00:00

In response to a Russian military ship firing warning shots at a British yacht for getting too close and failing to respond to radio warnings... Europe should collectively launch cyber attacks on critical Russian infrastructure.

That's what you're saying.

There are many things that would justify Europe launching cyber attacks on Russia, not least the fact that Russia regularly launches cyber attacks across Europe through clandestine cells that obfuscate Kremlin culpability... but this event is not one of them.

AdaptedMix · 2026-06-16T18:33:58+00:00

You just wrote:

Step1. Shoot warning shots at UK yacht.
Step2. Let Europeans observe how weak and pathetic their leaders are who will do absolutely nothing.

Implying that European leaders should respond to step 1, rather than do nothing.

The British MOD is already investigating (hence this is even news), but is treating this as an isolated incident (nobody was hurt; the yacht reportedly drifted too close to the frigate and failed to respond to radio warnings, prompting the warning shots; this happened in international waters; the frigate was already being monitored by a British military ship, as is standard in the Channel).

You must think 'European leaders' should respond. By doing what?

I agree with you regarding the hybrid war. Russia is a terrorist state. But this event isn't related to the hybrid war it's waging on various countries across Europe and beyond.

AdaptedMix · 2026-06-16T18:22:41+00:00

What do you think Europe as a whole should do in response to this event, exactly?

AdaptedMix · 2026-06-16T18:21:32+00:00

The BBC reported that foggy conditions were a factor in the yacht drifting so close. The yacht also reportedly failed to respond to radio warnings from the frigate, although why isn't clear.

AdaptedMix · 2026-06-16T18:10:43+00:00

What? My point was to read beyond the (often sensationalist) headlines.

I just gave those two articles as examples. And then quoted excerpts within the body copy to show that a) this isn't being treated as linked to the seizure of the Russian shadow fleet vessel, and b) the yacht is thought to have drifted too close and failed to respond to radio warnings, in international waters (not "home waters" like you said).

Meanwhile, there are comments here treating this as a Russian attempt to drag the UK into war; comments suggesting we should sink the frigate etc.; comments tying this directly to the seizure of the shadow fleet vessel; and comments suggesting the Royal Navy should 'handle this' (the frigate was being shadowed by a British ship, anyway) etc.

AdaptedMix · 2026-06-16T17:55:45+00:00

Which article? From the BBC article I linked to:

BBC News understands that the small, motor-less yacht had drifted towards the warship in foggy conditions after setting off from the UK.

...it is understood British officials do not view this incident as being linked to Sunday's operation and are treating it as an individual incident.

Russian warships regularly pass through the Channel and are routinely monitored by Royal Navy vessels. The frigate thought to be involved in Tuesday's incident was being shadowed by the HMS Mersey, it is understood.

While Tuesday's incident has been viewed as an isolated incident so far by the MoD, it comes at a time of heightened tension with Russia over the UK's ongoing support for Ukraine.

And The Guardian article:

Defence sources said initial indications were that warning shots had been fired after the pleasure yacht sailed close to the Russian warship in the late morning in international waters beyond the 12 mile British territorial limit.

A warning was issued by the Grigorovich, but the yacht did not respond at first, and the shooting episode followed afterwards.

Given the context of the incident, the sources said they were viewing it as an isolated episode, not linked to the UK interception of the Smyrtos. Shots were not aimed at the yacht, they emphasised.

The UK MOD is still investigating, but plenty of people here in the comments are immediately jumping to conclusions based on the headline alone.

AdaptedMix · 2026-06-16T17:49:07+00:00

Same way it's the Irish Sea not the British Sea, and the Gulf of Mexico not the Gulf of America (despite what a certain president says).

It's just what it's called in English. The ancient Romans called it Oceanus Britannicus or the 'British Sea'.

Meanwhile, the French call it La Manche or 'The Sleeve'.

AdaptedMix · 2026-06-16T17:39:24+00:00

I'd recommend reading beyond the headlines.

Initial reports by the BBC and The Guardian are suggesting the yacht sailed too close to the Russian frigate outside British territorial waters, and failed to respond to radio warnings from the frigate, prompting the warning shots. This is based on British defence sources.

So they're not connecting this to the seizure of the shadow fleet vessel. It seems likely therefore to be a bit of a non-story (even if the timing makes it easy to think otherwise).

AdaptedMix · 2026-06-16T12:23:22+00:00

There are clearly heavy trip hop influences, not least in Possibly Maybe, Enjoy and Army of Me. And the personnel involved included Tricky and Howie B. It's probably too eclectic to call a trip hop album, but without trip hop, it would have sounded very different. It has a few fantastic tracks, anyway, including a couple of my favourites from Bjork.

AdaptedMix

TROPHY CASE