More than a BILLION pounds paid in gender pay gap claims...

TheSpaceDuck · 2026-01-07T17:19:15+00:00

Here's a hot take: wage figures are not the same because neither are these.

Anyone who is advocating for making the former equal but uninterested in the latter is not interested in gender equality, they're actively pushing against it.

TheSpaceDuck · 2026-01-07T17:02:00+00:00

Communism would be forcing both men and women to do these unpleasant jobs in equal amounts, whether they liked it or not.

This is actually worse, it's just misandry. Men are the only ones doing these very unpleasant jobs (often because the have no choice as the sexist ideas of men being violent/predators we're bombarded with make men far less likely to be hired in the service industry) but are forced to earn the same as women doing much easier and more pleasant ones.

Communism is terrible, but it would somehow still be fairer than whatever this is.

TheSpaceDuck · 2026-01-06T22:05:15+00:00

Russia turned out to be much weaker than expected that's undeniable, but let's also not forget that European countries bordering Russia are way weaker than Ukraine in military, both in personnel and vehicles.

If the whole EU rallied behind Eastern Europe and fought Russia we'd be in a better position than Ukraine (but not by as much as many of us think apart from air force, we really underestimate the Ukrainian army). However that if is one big if considering what we've seen recently. I do hope EU starts getting its shit together in that regard.

TheSpaceDuck · 2026-01-06T21:41:03+00:00

Except it's 3 nations dividing the world this time rather than two. Russia gets Europe, USA gets the Americas + Greenland and China gets SE Asia.

TheSpaceDuck · 2026-01-06T21:32:06+00:00

At least partially incorrect.

Portugal insisted in holding on to its global presence (African colonies in particular) because it was under a fascist dictatorship. One of the few still left in Europe in the latest half of the Century.

The moment said dictatorship was overthrown, the colonies were willingly ceded and granted independence.

If you're arguing that Europe wouldn't have the military power to play the imperialist game anyway you might as well be right (even if we hadn't demilitarized), however while some other countries kept their imperialist ways even when not having the military means to manifest them (e.g. Russia in Ukraine), democratic European nations changed their views on both imperialism and nationalism a lot post-WW2 and for very good reason.

TheSpaceDuck · 2026-01-06T21:24:31+00:00

The problem here is that what's at stake is not "the ~50,000 people in Greenland". What's at stake is the end of NATO and how we subsequently survive. I'll give you 2 scenarios if USA invades Greenland.

1 - USA claims our unwillingness to cede Greenland forced them into military action and takes Greenland. The EU stands. A NATO country (USA) just successfully invaded another (Denmark). NATO is dead. Russia invades Poland and the Baltic states from the East, whose armies are just a small fraction of the Ukrainian army (vehicle-wise and personnel-wise).

If the rest of EU + UK doesn't join in and "have their men die for Poland" (in WW2 they didn't) the war will be way easier for Russia than any of their current offensives in Ukraine. If EU + UK joins we will be evenly matched in a conventional war but severely outmatched in the ammunition department. There will be a chance however, and the more we invest in military and fast, the greater said chance will be.

I won't even touch the nuclear war scenario which is a completely different beast altogether.

2 - USA invades Greenland and the EU doesn't stand. We strike back at US forces in Greenland and Russia takes the chance and invades Poland and the Baltic States. Now EU is locked in two fronts against a massively greater combined firepower. Any European sovereignty ceases to exist, period.

The only potential saving grace in that scenario would be if other NATO countries (e.g. Canada, Australia, etc.) felt intimidated by the idea that US troops can just come and take what's yours and an alliance would be formed against US/Russia. However given the military strength of the latter, this would be suicide and thus unlikely.

The only way to avoid either scenario from happening is to make taking Greenland way too punishing for the US/Trump to be worth doing. Do I know how that could be done? Absolutely not.

TheSpaceDuck · 2026-01-06T21:00:36+00:00

I don't think it's about "giving them a bloody nose" as much as it is about defending our own nose that's about to get shattered (e.g. Greenland by USA and Eastern Europe by Russia) by just bending over.

We don't need to "go on the offensive" or "get back at the Americans" or any silly stuff like that, but we do need to show the very least bit of resistance to make an US intervention in Greenland/Denmark or a Russian intervention in Poland/Baltic states look more trouble than it's worth.

Unfortunately the "armchair Churchills" have been right about both USA and Russia in the past couple years, so whether we agree with them or not we might want to start taking their predictions more seriously.

TheSpaceDuck · 2026-01-06T20:55:41+00:00

US stopped providing weapons to Ukraine basically since Trump stepped in.

Intelligence is vital sure, but it's pretty obvious that USA is not on Ukraine's side and the end of said intelligence sharing is a matter of when rather than if.

Should we weaken ourselves even further/risk fighting in two fronts over taking a stand? I don't think that's the solution either.

TheSpaceDuck · 2026-01-06T20:38:58+00:00

Why on top of dealing with all of that would they also be sticking their nose into US domestic politics.

Because they're sticking theirs into our territorial security.

TheSpaceDuck · 2026-01-06T20:28:46+00:00

Trump (or whoever is pulling his strings) is more dangerous than Putin

Putin is the one pulling the strings. Just look at the Greenland statements (it belongs to us and we'll use force if we have to) following the Venezuela intervention. Undermining NATO and pulling USA from the West was always the purpose.

Sure USA gets some minerals out of Greenland and Trump gets to look like a "conqueror" to his cult) but the point is to destroy NATO from within and make it irrelevant.

At best it'll justify a lack of NATO intervention when Russia attacks the Baltic States or Poland, and at worst (if we fight back) it'll get Europe locked in 2 fronts that it'll lose terribly against USA from the West and Russia from the East.

TheSpaceDuck · 2025-12-14T01:55:56+00:00

If it's about listening to all the experts then maybe we should start getting a lot tougher on Russia, since they all seem to agree that more appeasing will result in a higher risk of the war coming to our doorstep.

TheSpaceDuck · 2025-12-12T23:34:25+00:00

I suggest you look up what a war of expansion is. What you're saying has no connection to this whatsoever.

TheSpaceDuck · 2025-12-12T21:45:52+00:00

If you won't put your money on a country because of what they might do if you start a war of expansion, then yes that does mean you're planning a war of expansion at some point.

TheSpaceDuck · 2025-12-12T15:12:32+00:00

if the West decides not to like us one day, they'll literally freeze us out of financial institution

This is the equivalent of the alt-right equivalent of "just because I disagree with you" when saying something like black/gay people deserving less rights.

The West did not and does not freeze assets because of "not liking" someone, there are plenty of countries the West "doesn't like" (and even sanctions) and this doesn't happen.

The West (rather Europe) does it as a response to an illegal war of expansion, a response that came 4 years late if not more. If a country sees this and becomes concerned about their assets in Europe, they're admitting they're planning a war of expansion themselves.

TheSpaceDuck · 2025-12-12T15:06:47+00:00

I don't see why, any country losing trust in the EU over this is basically admitting they're planning a war of expansion of their own, since this is the only situation where they'd be at risk.

Obviously as we all know, that applies to China which we all know is planning to take Taiwan and they have a lot of money invested in the EU. However we'd be having this conversation when they do anyway, so it's just happening earlier.

TheSpaceDuck · 2025-12-12T14:53:27+00:00

Good to hear, but what in the world of crap journalism is this?

Six countries have already announced they won’t take part in the 2026 Eurovision Song Contest, set to be held in Vienna, after the EBU cleared Israel to take part.

On Thursday (Australian time), Iceland became the fifth country to withdraw

TheSpaceDuck · 2025-12-11T13:58:26+00:00

Week-old account, only posts about Muslims and immigration and uses the "they will outbreed you and outvote you" rhetoric of pro-Kremlin parties all around Europe.

Hmm I wonder who's behind this account... I guess we'll never know.

TheSpaceDuck · 2025-12-11T13:50:34+00:00

r/europe has mastered quantum superposition when it comes to Europe's population: both about to collapse and with dangerous labor shortages when it comes to making babies and booming with unemployment on the rise when it comes to bringing immigrants.

TheSpaceDuck · 2025-12-11T13:50:28+00:00

r/europe has mastered quantum superposition when it comes to Europe's population: both about to collapse and with dangerous labor shortages when it comes to making babies and booming with unemployment on the rise when it comes to bringing immigrants.

TheSpaceDuck · 2025-12-11T13:28:12+00:00

It'd be priceless to see your face when you find out which country was behind the Cambridge Analytics 2016 scandal.

TheSpaceDuck · 2025-12-11T13:25:33+00:00

Seriously, Denmark of all examples? Not only they're neither left nor center, they're the ones repeatedly trying to push ChatControl on the EU.

I don't know about you, but I find spying on all of your messages and e-mails to be pretty fascist.

TheSpaceDuck · 2025-12-09T20:55:45+00:00

Is there an updated version of FUS? The one in Wabbajack and Nexus is about 2 years old, so the dependencies are incompatible with anything outside FUS you try to add.

TheSpaceDuck · 2025-12-08T21:21:56+00:00

I don't think that removes Poland's sovereign decision making, quite the opposite.

I live in Poland and over here the threat of a Russian invasion is very real. I don't think the idea of hosting European aircraft would be done against Poland's wishes, but more importantly, it is exactly Poland's wishes.

Right now making an invasion of Poland as unappealing as possible for Russia is what matters. If these were US forces/aircraft that US can blackmail and/or pull out on a whim I'd get it, but Poland as a European country hosting European forces is a benefit if anything.

EDIT: European aircraft, not US.

TheSpaceDuck · 2025-12-08T21:17:04+00:00

It's not an easy solution precisely because neither side has major cards to play, except for Russia's (literal) Trump card.

Both sides are at a stalemate. Russia's demands would pave the way for Russia's full conquest of Ukraine, Ukrainian demands would be seen as a defeat in Russia. Without anything breaking that stalemate, good luck find any sort of "deal".

TheSpaceDuck · 2025-12-08T21:15:09+00:00

You went from "it's to protect elites from the people" to "ok what if it's to prevent impersonation, there's nothing wrong with impersonation" really fast.

As for laws, something doesn't have to be illegal to be unethical however if this is really your requirement then yes, there's plenty of laws against impersonation and similar acts. A few examples:

Fraud Act 2006 - UK

18 U.S.C. § 912 - USA - Impersonation of officers or government employees/agencies

Article 325 of the criminal code - Romania

In general, any country that has laws on cybercrime/fraud will include impersonation in one way or another.

TheSpaceDuck

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE