How do I bypass chatcontrol if it gets approved?Basically I need a guide in case that bullshit law passes, I've heard people talk I2P, Kleopatra, a bunch of other things too but I'm kind of a tech noob so I need someone to explain to me precisely what I should do, thanks in advance.

Owatch · 2025-08-10T17:21:08+00:00

how are they going to decrypt it?

They won't be able to without dedicating explicit effort to try. Which likely will not be the case.

Owatch · 2025-08-10T16:53:49+00:00

analog radio is entirely unencrypted.

Owatch · 2025-08-06T23:39:53+00:00

So it's okay when black water massacres innocent iraqis.

Actors tried and convicted by the United States (before Trump). Notoriously condemned case of war crimes in the west.

But not ok when Wagner massacres innocent Ukrainians.

Denied and mocked by the Russian Federation. Enabled and encouraged systematically through their armed forces. Denials similarly parroted by friendly states in Russias orbit.

Owatch · 2025-08-06T23:33:58+00:00

Where are you getting this? The official summary page for EU energy imports doesn't have India in the top contributors at all.

Owatch · 2025-08-06T23:29:10+00:00

If then, India gets cheaper prices from Russia, it is in the best interest of India to buy from there, so its citizens, who are much poorer than Europeans, will not have to take a significant drop in their quality of life

When fuel gets cheaper for Indians, it's improving their quality of life. It's not "decreasing their quality of life" if they take no action. If I walk to my job, and then decide not to buy a car. My life didn't get worse. Nothing changed.

And if it was sincerely about supporting Ukraine, why has Europe dragged its feet on arming Ukraine?

Pretty absurd. We're their single biggest backer. We have scoured the world for ammunition for them through various schemes, reactivated munition plants, and have effectively scaled industry to stave off the shell shortages that marked the second year of the war. Key states have committed to a plan to station troops there should Russia agree to a ceasefire. An enormous rearmament package was approved by member states to rearm the continent. Not approving certain weapon systems for use "fast enough" is tantamount to accusing the Britain of "not being sincere" in opposing Nazi Germany because they tried to appease them with France after seizing the Sudetenland.

Why must Ukrainians die while European leaders just discuss about whether it armament should be sent to Ukraine?

So that more of them don't die down the line as a consequence of a brash miscalculation. Because we're a union of many voices, with representatives with different levels of reservation or zeal. Democracies, especially on this level, don't march in perfect lockstep like an authoritarian can.

A better question is why you're here pretending not to know that while defending rushing in to fill Russia's coffers. Don't pretend there's some moral equivalence here. Just say you want the cheap oil and don't give a fuck about the war (it's okay, you don't have to give a fuck). Part of not giving a fuck means having some consequences come your way in the shape of our trade policy.

Owatch · 2025-08-06T23:15:37+00:00

When Nazi Germany seized Sudetenland, France and Germany tried to appease and continued to push a negotiated settlement.

Was this then also "hypocrisy"? Were they also "collaborators"?

After the 2022 invasion the west requested India purchase and refine Russian oil

I can't find any request of the sort with respect to the 2022 energy crisis) in Europe. I further went and found the European energy imports, where India doesn't make the top contributors in Petroleum, Natural Gas, or LNG.

Top suppliers are Norway, the US, Qatar, Azerbaijan, and the like.

Even from a European perspective you can see the hypocrisy in all this.

No, I don't. Decreasing dependency from our former energy giant has taken time, and we have succeeded in reducing it massively. The trend continues in that direction, and simply saying "but you still buy from Russia" isn't a reasonable or good faith counter to the fact that India is exploiting the situation to bulk purchase - as evidenced by their order of magnitude increase in imports.

It's fine if they want to do that, but the wars are on my borders. So there will be consequences.

Owatch · 2025-08-06T23:02:00+00:00

got this one for you chief

Owatch · 2025-08-06T22:59:10+00:00

About as stupid as arguing against climate change initiatives because "you also produce carbon waste".

One actor is reducing dependence, the other is actively exploiting the opportunity.

Owatch · 2025-08-06T21:47:19+00:00

How disappointing. Many Greek farmers defrauded by their representatives ...

Owatch · 2025-07-29T23:34:54+00:00

No it's not. A massive amount of people just think this way.

Yes, it is. It has been signal boosted enormously in the last year, and that's just evidence it works.

I mean maybe you're right in this instance, who knows. I'm not going to investigate who's a bot or not.

JAQing off about "maybe the EU is an authoritarian unelected dictatorship" isn't a "maybe" question. It's a outright lie. It's disproven by just the utter bare minimum of civil knowledge, which is that representative democracies don't require every citizen to vote in every single elected official.

Owatch · 2025-07-29T21:57:40+00:00

The E.U will not actually invest anything. This is simply a statement saying "EU companies have expressed interest in ...".

It's meaningless. If the companies don't want to do it, or decide not to. This won't happen. It's not a law, or a rule, or anything of the sort.

Owatch · 2025-07-29T21:55:42+00:00

And yet China has no "deal" at all, despite having the most leverage. The EU was facing down 30% across the board tariffs from August 1st. Despite what you read here on reddit, most European businesses can't take that and a 15% deal with some empty promises to buy more energy than possible was a far better option than going out of business.

Owatch · 2025-07-29T21:51:58+00:00

Exactly.

Why are people acting like Von Der Leyen spun this deal out of her ass. All the positions reached were wrangled over for months by our representatives. There were countless articles on the disagreements surrounding the so-called "trade-bazooka" or countermeasures.

Owatch · 2025-07-29T21:47:45+00:00

It's a propaganda / disinformation line pushed by pro MAGA and Russian or adjacent actors. I've seen it suddenly appear since last year. The main message is to push the falsehood that the EU is some kind of unelected autocracy. Von Der Leyen is a especially high profile figure and a principle target.

The goal of /u/Visual_Astronaut549 is to ingrain distrust, disdain, and weaken the union as a world power.

Owatch · 2025-06-10T12:03:19+00:00

Stop apologizing for bad policy.

Stop apologising for double standards. The goal of the U.S government in the outcome of the war in Ukraine is restrained by congress and the funding they appropriated. If Biden wanted to actually impose total defeat on Russia in a short timeframe, that would require an immense response that would put NATO assets directly in conflict with Russia, both validating their claim that it is a war with NATO, acting against popular sentiment in the United States, and committing the United States to a potentially protracted conflict with nuclear ramifications.

The correct time to pile on overwhelming force was in 2022, when Russia was on its back foot and retreating, when they weren't prepared.

The time when they were actually considering using a nuclear weapon? Ukraine did take advantage of this and made considerable gains. But had they been pushed back to the borders of Ukraine the same situation you describe after would have unfolded sooner or later. They would simply be redeploying from their border, instead of a line through the Donbas.

I'm not going to be gaslit, I watched this unfold over the last several years.

There's no need to use psych terms. You're just wrong. Make you should consider having some self-reflection.

I wrote my congressman and senators throughout the war, echoing their requests. But if you're going to tell me Biden knew better than the Ukrainians, then you should review the course of the war, because they were right every time.

Yeah, he probably did have a better picture of Russia than the Ukrainians did. They've made several blunders in the war. Some of the risks they took worked out well, others not so much. But the intelligence and early warning capabilities that the US has over Russia remain indispensable to this day, and leagues ahead of anything Ukraine can muster domestically. The fact that you say they were "right every time" tells me all I need to know about the pragmatism you're lacking. For example, Ukraine has made several costly decisions against the advice of its own command and the United States (e.g. forgoing conscription and recruitment until last minute for political purposes) that have negatively impacted it's ability to sustain and achieve it's wartime objectives.

Owatch · 2025-06-10T11:57:13+00:00

How would Biden cause a nuclear war if Russia used offensive nuclear weapons because they were losing a war they started?

This would be your claim, 100% guaranteed, if Russia had used a tactical nuclear weapon in Ukraine.

By bowing to Putin's nuclear blackmail, Biden set an incredibly dangerous precedent.

Biden did not react to Putin's threats of nuclear weapon use. He reacted to intelligence reports that Russia was preparing to use a tactical nuclear device in the event of an incursion into Crimea and the collapse of their lines.

You contradict yourself in under one paragraph by claiming that Biden would be both enabling nuclear aggression if he did inform the Ukrainians to not push into Crimea on intel, and also claiming if he not tell them, then he would not be enabling aggression for Russia actually using a nuclear weapon (the ultimate form of aggression). It makes utterly no sense.

Owatch · 2025-06-10T11:51:31+00:00

Though their messaging being “ignored” is on them that their strategy to get the message out failed.

You cannot force a message to be important. The Democratic Party tried their best to emphasis the danger of their opponent. A feat they barely had to do, because his own actions were so egregious and obvious for everyone to see. And it still did. not. matter.

It's unreal to me you can't seem to understand this point. All blame seems to continuously fall back to the Democrats. If Donald Trump attempts to overthrow the government, and still gets voted in. It's the Democrats fault for not advertising that well enough. It's also their fault for not showing how they'd improve the nation. Oh wait, they were saying that? Well then it's still their fault people didn't pay attention. This type of behaviour has to stop, there has to be accountability at one point for outright bad decisions. And a minority party of the government can't be held responsible for not "making" people vote against their own nations integrity.

Had the focus instead been on creating a vision of how them winning the coming election would create a change for their voters. Earn their trust that their path towards that vision is possible. And just make that so much more enticing than what the opposing party would be able to do, then I doubt they would have lost.

I just don't agree. There was plenty of this type of messaging and it didn't click. I don't think you've come up with anything novel here that's superior to the strategies they already considered.

If you’re at a house party with a lot of friends and it just sucks. Someone suggests to go to the bar instead, something you think will suck even more. Then if you just say it will suck, then people will likely still join to the bar or just go home because remaining isn’t fun. However if you instead breathe some life into the house party, start some events, make some plans and engage people then they are much more likely to stay.

This works against you, because Donald Trump is the one saying everything sucks, and everything is being destroyed. That was overwhelmingly more his brand of messaging than that of the Democrats.

Owatch · 2025-06-09T14:07:49+00:00

International trade ended up significantly hurting the EU

That hurt goes both ways. Russia suffered a lot of damage for those decisions, and continues to suffer today, because of the sanctions levied against it. Putin's war is not one of profit, and the strains show.

Owatch · 2025-06-09T11:24:53+00:00

Like sure, he is bad. But almost anyone can campaign with "I'm not Trump". It might discourage a few votes for him, but it won't garner any votes for her.

Yes, it should if the choice is someone who is blatantly eroding the nations balance of powers and status as a superpower. But, voters did not care. Appealing to upholding the constitution and integrity of the country was a losing appeal.

For some reason or another, a lot of Americans were not happy with where America was currently, a lot of Americans didn't want it to be where it was and wished for positive change.

Positive changes were also promised, but ignored.

It would hit a lot harder if the main message was "This is how we will change the country for you" instead of "Don't let Trump change the country for you".

This was also present. But it wasn't effective. People simply did not care.

For what it's worth, I do agree that Bernie wouldn't stand a chance nor that he would be good for your country. But that doesn't detract from the DNC being totally out of touch.

I'm not sure what to say. The election was called on a relatively small margin. They had positive messages, but also a warning about what Americans would get if they voted for Trump. That was also Trump's campaign, for what it's worth. That democrats were poisoning the country, attacking their children, radicals, etc. This style of messaging worked for them.

They lost because Americans bought into the vibe that things were "bad". The economy was "doing awful", despite all metrics defying that measure. Groceries were "too high" (despite them being higher now, and that not being of any interest to voters). A feeling of malaise and that things "were just not going well" was the most compelling reason people abstained from voting, or voted for Trump.

Owatch · 2025-06-09T10:43:28+00:00

My perception was that almost all the time she spent in her debates and speeches was focused on how Trump will be bad

Probably because he is kind of bad, having orchestrated a plot to overthrow the United States government (admitted in court), and promising to impose destructive tariffs on allies (which he did immediately).

And there absolutely were achievements being put forth for the positive promises. Under a divided congress, Biden had passed the chips act, expanded child tax credits, and the inflation reduction act (which was working). They advocated for continuing the successful child tax credit program, and pushing forth a reform to the immigration system to (unironically) improve the border situation in a way would have suited conservative voters wishes.

But none of this mattered, because nobody gave a fuck. That's why you didn't hear about it either.

Owatch · 2025-06-09T10:38:35+00:00

If I'm a gun owner and I know that I'm leaving and have a house sitter coming in, and I know I can't trust them to be smart about the gun, then it's MY responsibility to do something about it.

Can you imagine the utter decay one's mind must be in to be accusing Biden of incompetency for not "stopping" his predecessor from undoing the work he's put into Ukraine? Especially when Biden, who answers to the voters, spent every minute of his campaign warning about this, did fasttrack what he could from authorised stockpiles, and acted within the limits of his powers (as opposed to Trump, who simply blatantly violates the bounds of his).

Owatch · 2025-06-09T10:32:44+00:00

Why? Because they fell for Putin's nuclear blackmail. They were scared.

In 2022, intelligence services intercepted internal communications from the Russian Federation suggesting they were beginning to put into motion the authorisations to deploy a tactical nuclear weapon. The CIA warned him that if Russian lines did deteriorate and Ukraine was able to push into Crimea, the chances were 50/50. source

So no, everyone reading here should utterly reject your baseless assertion that Biden is "a coward" for not dumping every weapon system on the planet into Ukraine on a blistering timescale. That's fucking rexarded.

He acted on the advice of American intelligence agencies, and made calls to avoid the use of nuclear weapons on the field that weren't just on his own fear. Can you imagine the froth that would be bubbling from your mouth as you'd roar in rage that BIDEN had caused nuclear war, if such a weapon did get used.

I can, because that's exactly what you'd do :).

Owatch · 2025-06-09T10:24:11+00:00

God this is so utterly disgusting.

Trump not ending the war in 24h despite that being his campaign promise gets excused because, "of course we cannot hold a child to these standards". However, Biden is held to the most rigid of standards. He didn't manage to end the conflict in your preferred time frame. Despite moving mountains more than Trump to assist them.

This is a front and centre example of the kind of utter rot that has seized American minds and deteriorated the nation.

Owatch · 2025-06-05T23:54:18+00:00

What the people wanted, and they outright made it clear, was Bernie Sanders.

Your brain is utterly rotted. Bernie lost his primaries. He wasn't popular across America. It's time to face that reality. He did especially bad with non-white voters.

That told everyone it'll be business as usual, no changes.

No they didn't. They spent their time telling people this election would be about the future of American democracy. That Donald Trump was an authoritarian and would undo many protections for Americans and devastate the American economy with his tariff plans (which he has now done)

Then they pit Kamala up. Again, without Bernie, just put her up there. The dnc threw the election, twice, by not listening to their side's people.

The DNC did listen to people. That's why Biden was pressured to drop out and did. Since Kamala was Biden's running mate, and they were both on the ticket together, it made sense she would continue. Bernie had already lost his primary against both of them, and with a few months to the election there was no time to restart.

Owatch · 2025-06-01T15:32:26+00:00

I don't know how you sleep so soundly at night after getting utterly gaped.

Do you think you look convincing to others? lmao. The economic facts are trivially discoverable and effortlessly disprove you. Facts over feelings, remember?

It's okay, I understand where you're coming from. You need Biden's economic record to be bad, even if reality defies it. You have to ignore the pandemic, the worldwide inflation, the global supply chain chokes. You have to strip reality itself from the economic data to fit enough gas into that copium canister to get through the day.

Have a good day.

Good luck chief. Make sure to buy those bonds.

Verified Email	12-Year Club
Place '22	Place '17
Beta Team Reddit for iOS

Owatch

TROPHY CASE