Can we look at where Russia threatened to nuke Europe ? I looked into it once, and I don’t think it was ever said . Certainly, it was widely reported, but I seem to remember the actually words were ‘we wouldn t hesitate to use nukes, if threatened’.
Well we’re risk at of going off track here, because we are talking about trade and economics being possible, with people who have different politics. Which it was.
Europe has long pursued integration with Russia through trade. The Americans instead push for NATO expansion.
America has never liked the idea of the EU because it loosen their control.
The Ukraine war is perfect for them, because they are making bank off of weapons and energy sales, have nothing at risk and sees Europe and Russia weakened.
Not sure you’re equipped for this. ?
The Lease on Hong Kong expired and Britain handed it back in accordance with those terms.
As for the Salisbury case, one civilian death has never really stood in the way of trade deals before.
Western Europe has no argument with Russia. They were enjoying cheap Russia gas until the war began in Ukraine, their oligarchs were welcomed in London, they bought our football clubs. We supplied cars, luxury goods, expertise.
There’s one reason and one reason only why Britain doesn’t have extremely prosperous partnerships with China and Russia, and that is The USA.
I really must .
The other problem of course is I keep buying the books I should read instead of books I would enjoy !
My phone has killed my reading habit to the point where I feel shame.
You drew ….Microsoft Barney ?!
PR has sprung into action - Fortune articles, Guardian articles, all running damage limitation.
Innovation from other countries is not subjected to similar scrutiny
As you and I recently discovered in another thread, you don’t know whataboutism is, and entire account is dedicated to sinophobic comments .
As are your other accounts.
Don’t distract ?
We’re talking about developments in AI tech, and you want to make it about Tiananmen Square .
Point to it on a map.
This is pathetic Sinophobia.
I have only pointed out how the BBC is setup and governed. It’s a matter of public record. I’ve pointed large media outlets are owed by the billionaire class and so have their own biases.
You can verify everything I’ve said, or you can going around yelling Russia! China! Blatant lies !
I don’t give a fuck, because I’m not responsible for your media literacy.
Performative cruelty.
Readers will be aware of the recent push for early release of prisoners by Starmers government , to ease the overcrowding situation.
Not so for the climate protester.
Shame on Starmer and a plague on his house .
I don’t think you actually know how it works ?
The government set the Charter.
The Government can end the BBC at any time in number of ways, not least by refusing to enforce collection of the license free, which Boris Johnson threatened to do when he wasn’t receiving favourable treatment. Before that, David Cameron threatened to shut them down completely following unfavourable election coverage 2015z
The Chair itself is appointed by the Secretary Of State and approved by the monarch .
It is, the British Establishment.
The BBC is state apparatus. It was founded by the Government and exists at the governments pleasure. It is to Britain and America what RT is to Russia only more sophisticated, using techniques such as funnelling for many many years .
The “plenty of Western media not own by the state” is owned by the billionaire class and further the agenda of the elites - so not only are you getting western bias, but you’re getting class division thrown in.
In 2025, the only way to discern any truth at all is to read what was actually said, a transcript of speech for example .
If you did that, you would understand that 90% of what is attributed to Russia or Putin, was never said at all.
Can I ask you to read what I wrote again, but more carefully? Because it does not mention being friendly .
Then, consider your own view of Russia and what sources informed it, and reflect on that.