Upon surrendering sovereignty over military policymaking, which some EU members have proudly protected up until now, every other aspect of federalization would quickly fall into place shortly afterwards and entrench German hegemony.
There are so many brainless young women and men running around in Western Europe who can't do anything with their lives and join the idiot organization NATO!!!!
The EU was never about respecting individual member nations' sovereignties and national dignity. It was a globalist contraption from the outset, much like the WTO, whose objective was to subsume the national identities and political consciousness of individual nations within the larger superstructure of Franco-German hegemony, and predatory parasitisation of local economies by rapacious corpimperialists from the elite club of Nordic, Germans and France. It was a trap or snare masquerading as emancipation. As such it was to be only a matter of time before it switched names with NATO, being the living embodiment of feudalist hierarchy in Europe of the twenty first century that it always had been. Superimposing NATO on the EU, or vice versa, makes no difference to the state of affairs.
The ghost of NATO has hijacked the empty shell of EU. Combining two dying entities into one does extend their joint life somewhat. But after a while, since the original reasons for the decay are not addressed, the glow will die down again. 20 years ago, EU seemed to be much more vibrant than today. What is the main factor for the changes ? I will claim it is the illegal immigrants and "refugees". Some people think larger is better. They can look at Chinese history for the final stage of the Manchurian dynasty. In terms of total economy size, it was still huge. Yet China at the time was very weak, almost fragmented and taken apart by "the West". Using the Federalism approach or not, this is not a solution to the deeper problems.
The Problem highlighted by the global conundrum resulting from outage at Microsoft server in USA, is the dependency of operating systems powering critical sectors of the economy, aviation, transport, banking, healthcare etc. being controlled or managed remotely remotely from servers in a country thousands of miles away. Critical systems must be sequestered and insulated from alien control, this is the number one tenet of operational security. Sadly, much of the corporate philosophy pre supposes that apps liable to remote management from servers belonging to multinational software providers are an exception to security risks, and do not constitute security issues. Pragmatism would call for reckoning every single operation performed on such systems as a potential security breach event. The American multinational software giants prohibit end users from reverse engineering or derivative dissection of their softwares in the end user licensing agreement, leaving a critical vulnerability lurking in end user computers in respect of digital crisis management and events of potential espionage or sabotage abetted by the parent OS software provider . However, such firms sometimes weaponise such vulnerabilities to the disastrous disadvantage of the end user, such as the hacking of uranium centrifuge at a civilian nuclear facility in Iran by sleuths based in talent incubation facilities operated by American software giants inside Israel, with potential ramifications of ecological catastrophe. Russians are much less vulnerable to sabotage from OS parent software provider, because it has reverse engineered those softwares and identified all potential vulnerabilities, And made arrangements to forestall malicious malware strikes apart from introducing suitable code modifications to sequester peripheral computer devices from remote hijack by the OS providers servers! It is about time emerging economies worldwide drew valuable lessons from Russia's example.
In a nutshell, the takeaway from Microsoft server outage is as follows:-
Privacy breach is immanent in the very idea of dependency of operating systems powering critical sectors of the economy, aviation, transport, banking, healthcare etc. being controlled or managed to variable extents from remote servers. For operational security to be foolproof, Critical systems need to be sequestered and insulated from alien control. However, as a pragmatic working compromise, an exception to this assumption is made in whitelisting the default operating system apps by "trusting" the service providers who own them. The conservative approach would call for reckoning every single operation performed on such systems as a potential security breach. Critical vulnerability lurks by default in end user computers in respect of digital crisis management and events of potential espionage or sabotage which might originate in rogue eventualities emerging in OS parent servers. One way of protecting Critical digital infrastructure is by introducing suitable code modifications to sequester peripheral computer devices from remote hijack even from the OS server end.
However, anti-Russia propaganda which is rife on You-Tube as part of the Ziooligarchic entity's war of narratives against Russia in cahoots with EU top brass, has blamed cyber-strikes from Russia for the Microsoft outage and it's attendant impact worldwide, in a fantastic leap of faith. The idea is to exonerate Microsoft and deflect global scrutiny from potential mischief originating in OS servers, while falsely blaming Russia to create a causus belli for subsequent malicious cyber strikes on Russia from America and EU soil.
It is plain obvious that the hosts peddling such narratives do not possess even an essential understanding of technical vocabulary necessary for a meaningful discussion but are parrotting a scripted anti-Russia narrative with a biased and closed mind.
As usual, You Tube shadow bans and deletes comments which offer insights counter to the maintream anti-Russia narrative peddled by the EU.
I wouldn't call it GERMAN hegemony. Germany is so clearly a vassal state - it implements US policy and has nothing to say about it. Some of the post WWII occupation regulations have not been abandoned.
I'd suspected there were more reasons for Finland and Sweden to give up neutrality and join NATO than have been acknowledged in US media.
I don't believe the Europeans are really terrified of Russia. They've been dealing with Russia for a long time.
I'd been wondering if they thought Trump would return to power in the US; pull the US out of NATO or at least greatly reduce US oveeseas activity; and NATO would become the military apparatus of the E.U. And that they thought that might be in their interests to be part of.
Hitlers project reprised. Likely to fail for the same reason, attacking Russia.
There are so many brainless young women and men running around in Western Europe who can't do anything with their lives and join the idiot organization NATO!!!!
The EU was never about respecting individual member nations' sovereignties and national dignity. It was a globalist contraption from the outset, much like the WTO, whose objective was to subsume the national identities and political consciousness of individual nations within the larger superstructure of Franco-German hegemony, and predatory parasitisation of local economies by rapacious corpimperialists from the elite club of Nordic, Germans and France. It was a trap or snare masquerading as emancipation. As such it was to be only a matter of time before it switched names with NATO, being the living embodiment of feudalist hierarchy in Europe of the twenty first century that it always had been. Superimposing NATO on the EU, or vice versa, makes no difference to the state of affairs.
The ghost of NATO has hijacked the empty shell of EU. Combining two dying entities into one does extend their joint life somewhat. But after a while, since the original reasons for the decay are not addressed, the glow will die down again. 20 years ago, EU seemed to be much more vibrant than today. What is the main factor for the changes ? I will claim it is the illegal immigrants and "refugees". Some people think larger is better. They can look at Chinese history for the final stage of the Manchurian dynasty. In terms of total economy size, it was still huge. Yet China at the time was very weak, almost fragmented and taken apart by "the West". Using the Federalism approach or not, this is not a solution to the deeper problems.
I think the E.U., like the US, has been subsumed by Finance. What used to be a useful tool has now become the reason needed things can't get done.
The Problem highlighted by the global conundrum resulting from outage at Microsoft server in USA, is the dependency of operating systems powering critical sectors of the economy, aviation, transport, banking, healthcare etc. being controlled or managed remotely remotely from servers in a country thousands of miles away. Critical systems must be sequestered and insulated from alien control, this is the number one tenet of operational security. Sadly, much of the corporate philosophy pre supposes that apps liable to remote management from servers belonging to multinational software providers are an exception to security risks, and do not constitute security issues. Pragmatism would call for reckoning every single operation performed on such systems as a potential security breach event. The American multinational software giants prohibit end users from reverse engineering or derivative dissection of their softwares in the end user licensing agreement, leaving a critical vulnerability lurking in end user computers in respect of digital crisis management and events of potential espionage or sabotage abetted by the parent OS software provider . However, such firms sometimes weaponise such vulnerabilities to the disastrous disadvantage of the end user, such as the hacking of uranium centrifuge at a civilian nuclear facility in Iran by sleuths based in talent incubation facilities operated by American software giants inside Israel, with potential ramifications of ecological catastrophe. Russians are much less vulnerable to sabotage from OS parent software provider, because it has reverse engineered those softwares and identified all potential vulnerabilities, And made arrangements to forestall malicious malware strikes apart from introducing suitable code modifications to sequester peripheral computer devices from remote hijack by the OS providers servers! It is about time emerging economies worldwide drew valuable lessons from Russia's example.
In a nutshell, the takeaway from Microsoft server outage is as follows:-
Privacy breach is immanent in the very idea of dependency of operating systems powering critical sectors of the economy, aviation, transport, banking, healthcare etc. being controlled or managed to variable extents from remote servers. For operational security to be foolproof, Critical systems need to be sequestered and insulated from alien control. However, as a pragmatic working compromise, an exception to this assumption is made in whitelisting the default operating system apps by "trusting" the service providers who own them. The conservative approach would call for reckoning every single operation performed on such systems as a potential security breach. Critical vulnerability lurks by default in end user computers in respect of digital crisis management and events of potential espionage or sabotage which might originate in rogue eventualities emerging in OS parent servers. One way of protecting Critical digital infrastructure is by introducing suitable code modifications to sequester peripheral computer devices from remote hijack even from the OS server end.
However, anti-Russia propaganda which is rife on You-Tube as part of the Ziooligarchic entity's war of narratives against Russia in cahoots with EU top brass, has blamed cyber-strikes from Russia for the Microsoft outage and it's attendant impact worldwide, in a fantastic leap of faith. The idea is to exonerate Microsoft and deflect global scrutiny from potential mischief originating in OS servers, while falsely blaming Russia to create a causus belli for subsequent malicious cyber strikes on Russia from America and EU soil.
It is plain obvious that the hosts peddling such narratives do not possess even an essential understanding of technical vocabulary necessary for a meaningful discussion but are parrotting a scripted anti-Russia narrative with a biased and closed mind.
As usual, You Tube shadow bans and deletes comments which offer insights counter to the maintream anti-Russia narrative peddled by the EU.
Of course the EU was from the outset a bait-and-switch.
So what does anyone propose to do about it?
I wouldn't call it GERMAN hegemony. Germany is so clearly a vassal state - it implements US policy and has nothing to say about it. Some of the post WWII occupation regulations have not been abandoned.
I'd suspected there were more reasons for Finland and Sweden to give up neutrality and join NATO than have been acknowledged in US media.
I don't believe the Europeans are really terrified of Russia. They've been dealing with Russia for a long time.
I'd been wondering if they thought Trump would return to power in the US; pull the US out of NATO or at least greatly reduce US oveeseas activity; and NATO would become the military apparatus of the E.U. And that they thought that might be in their interests to be part of.
This thesis is different but somewhat similar.