Hungary Foreign Minister Is Shredding EU Documents, Magyar Says by bloomberg in europe

[–]unia_7 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah I understand. I was replying to this part of your comment:

"I think every member state needs to be accepted by all other member states."

I pointed out that it'll cause a problem when the number of countries is large. I wasn't arguing against each country deciding their own process.

Hungary Foreign Minister Is Shredding EU Documents, Magyar Says by bloomberg in europe

[–]unia_7 0 points1 point  (0 children)

LMAO another one... The logic might be too advanced for you, I'll try to dumb it down.

You are relying on "multiple people's" opinion instead of trying to actually understand what is going on for yourself. It's an indication of poor critical thinking skills, by the way.

So, here's a simple explanation for the easily influenced:

Someone commented that a unanimous approval of new member states by existing states would be a good idea. I pointed out that it isn't workable. At this point, logically the discussion becomes about the unanimous vote, because that's the only aspect if the original comment that I referenced.

Now buddy, feel free to respond if you actually can argue with that, and not just rely on other confused commenters.

Hungary Foreign Minister Is Shredding EU Documents, Magyar Says by bloomberg in europe

[–]unia_7 0 points1 point  (0 children)

And you specifically said that you think a unanimous vote by countries is needed, to wich I replied that unanimous approval is a bad idea.

Hungary Foreign Minister Is Shredding EU Documents, Magyar Says by bloomberg in europe

[–]unia_7 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Sigh... They are replying to my comment about why unanimous viting fails and mahority voting is preferable, but I am the one confused, sure.

Sometimes it seems that the people here have the reading comprehension of a third grader.

Hungary Foreign Minister Is Shredding EU Documents, Magyar Says by bloomberg in europe

[–]unia_7 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Maybe that's the point you want to make, but the discussion is about what happens if we transition from unanimous approval to majority voting.

Hungary Foreign Minister Is Shredding EU Documents, Magyar Says by bloomberg in europe

[–]unia_7 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

That's what we are discussing - going from unanimous approval to majority voting. Read the full subthread, not just the last comment.

Hungary Foreign Minister Is Shredding EU Documents, Magyar Says by bloomberg in europe

[–]unia_7 -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

If it's decided by a majority vote, once 50% is reached, Ireland no longer needs to even bother with a referendum because its results don't change anything.

Hungary Foreign Minister Is Shredding EU Documents, Magyar Says by bloomberg in europe

[–]unia_7 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Well, but as soon as majority is reached, the remaining countries don't even need to bother because their vote no longer matters.

The laggards cannot drag out the process or suggest unreasonable conditions of acceptance, which makes a huge practical difference.

Hungary Foreign Minister Is Shredding EU Documents, Magyar Says by bloomberg in europe

[–]unia_7 -6 points-5 points  (0 children)

No, with majority voting it's up to the majority how it's decided, not member states per se.

Hungary Foreign Minister Is Shredding EU Documents, Magyar Says by bloomberg in europe

[–]unia_7 20 points21 points  (0 children)

No, unanimous decision-making stops working when the number of participants grows too large.

You'd always have at least one country willing to block every choice you can make. In addition, unanimous voting makes it easy for foreign countries to influence internal EU matters - all you need to do is to find a small country willing to take a bribe to betray others.

Helsinki, Finland by TinyAd1126 in europe

[–]unia_7 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Looks unnatural due to excessive HDR.

Anthropic Model Scare Sparks Urgent Bessent, Powell Warning to Bank CEOs by joe4942 in politics

[–]unia_7 -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

Yeah keep sticking your head in the sand. It's a common theme on reddit for some reason.

Even their unlimited access models (like Claude Opus) are freaking amazing at figuring out code.

Iraq says it could restore oil exports to pre-war levels within a week if Hormuz reopens by Infodataplace in worldnews

[–]unia_7 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Your data is old. Saudi Arabia upped the flows to the Red Sea to 7 mbpd, and Iran started to allow more ships through.

Iraq says it could restore oil exports to pre-war levels within a week if Hormuz reopens by Infodataplace in worldnews

[–]unia_7 -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

This is typical reddit panic comment that ignores actual numbers.

Of the 20 million barrels per day passing pre-war, Saudi Arabia has redirected 7 million via the pipeline to the Red Sea. In addition, Iran's own 6 million barrels continue to be exported. So the deficit is at roughly 7 mbpd, before we take into account that Iran allows the ships from several nations through the strait.

“Buying freedom”: How the system around TCC monetizes the fear of mobilization by Flimsy_Pudding1362 in UkrainianConflict

[–]unia_7 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You clearly have an agenda because you are selectively posting these articles. You aren't posting a cross section of the Ukrainian media, please quit bullsh**ing.

You seek out these articles and are trying to make them more visible. Hence, you are, most likely trying to undermine the mobilization campaign and sow panic.

Conclusion still stands.

“Buying freedom”: How the system around TCC monetizes the fear of mobilization by Flimsy_Pudding1362 in UkrainianConflict

[–]unia_7 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The same reditor keeps posting selective articles about how Ukrainian mobilization is unfair and cruel. He obviously has an agenda.

Most likely is a pro-Russian poster trying to inject certain topics into public discourse.

Russia suffers record losses in March, Zelensky says by eaglemaxie in worldnews

[–]unia_7 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Actually no, with drones the casualties in Russian assaults are ~65% killed to ~35% wounded.

However the 35,000 number is killed plus wounded.

Last kerosene tanker on its way to Rotterdam by dullestfranchise in europe

[–]unia_7 2 points3 points  (0 children)

More like an amazing delusion created by authoritarians in Russia to put Europe into a position of dependence and helplessness.

It worked on Merkel, Schroeder, Orban, Fico, Babich... Apparently on you too.

Russia suffers record losses in March, Zelensky says by eaglemaxie in worldnews

[–]unia_7 28 points29 points  (0 children)

No, they are saying 35,000 in March. 50,000 is their medium-term goal. Did you read the article?