Comments by "TJ Marx" (@tjmarx) on "euronews" channel.

  1.  @grahamellis6029  Will and competency are very different things. Moreover, a national civilian vaccine rollout run by politicians is an incredibly different thing to a military strategy run by a military. If the EU start demanding members mean minimum military capabilities triggering a build up, that is political will.
    2
  2. Completely false @grahamellis6029  Military strategy is not undertaken by politicians. Military strategy is undertaken by the military officers. The only role politicians play is in whether the military is deployed or not, and even then when we're talking about a NATO response the politicians aren't involved in that either it's automatic when one member state is attacked. I'm not sure what you imagine happened in Afghanistan, but the reality in no way demonstrates your claims. What happened in Afghanistan was multimodal. Afghanistan was (technically still is) in civil war over control of the country. You have professional soldiers who hadn't been paid in 3 months being expected to put their lives on the line. Soldiers recruited from the enemy who in reality acted as moles to help capture cities. Rampant government corruption and wildfire rumours the president fled with the national treasury. NATO held Afghanistan together for 20 years. This post withdrawal outcome was inevitable regardless of when the withdrawal occurred. Indeed that's the entire point. It was a revenge war with no real goal and no possibility of genuinely improving domestic standard of life post exit. Despite that NATO members were forced to participate automatically in response to the 11 September attacks because of the North Atlantic Treaty which NATO is formed to administer and respond to. Service personnel from NATO member states fought and died in Afghanistan over 20 years so that yankville could feel avenged. That's sparked discussion through NATO members, not just Europe as to whether continuing to participate in NATO is worthwhile. That's what this video is about, the EU member states debating whether they could form their own defence league without yankville, such that Europe would only respond militarily to events Europe cares about. And Europe could set the terms of their own withdrawal when the time came, instead of having it dictated by yankville as is currently the case under NATO.
    2
  3. No one is actually blown over.
    1
  4. This is a pretty funny overreaction. This idea that Russia will create war with NATO is absurd and reckless. Yankville can stop this whole thing today, all they have to do is put in a signed, written document that they will not admit Ukraine into NATO. There is no intention from NATO to admit Ukraine anyway, such a move has little support inside NATO. So refusing to put such a commitment in writing can only be taken as incitement.
    1
  5.  @BluntmanAndChronic  No, imagine thinking Russia are going to directly attack any NATO state and in the process overwhelm themselves by starting a war with 30 NATO member states and all of their allies. The goal is to push back NATO and help Donetsk/Luhansk. Imagine thinking Zelenskyy was a good guy and that Ukraine under him is innocent.
    1
  6. This constant reliance on twitter by the cube makes it valueless. If I wanted to know what was being tweeted I'd open the twitter app, not watch EuroNews. Axe the tweets, they're not journalism
    1
  7.  @azimny97  False. The UDHR and convention on refugees hold now such limitations. No one seeking asylum is "barging in" they are seeking asylum. Not all countries are signatories to the UDHR &/or convention on refugees. There are no limitations under international law on how many countries you may transit before you find one you feel safe in. The safety requirement is subjective, it isn't where you or I think an asylum seeker might be safe, it's where they individually feel safe. The EU as a bloc have an internal law that pretends all EU member states are the same with the same rights and values as each other, so states that inside the EU asylum will count as from the country the asylum seeker first entered the EU from. This is done mostly to protect inner countries like Germany, France and Belgium from having to process many, if any, asylum applications. However once an asylum claim has been granted and they become refugees they are allowed to move freely throughout the EU and live in any EU member state. EU law inside of the bloc is separate to international law, and works because the EU is a bloc with common laws. These international laws have been around since 1947. That means unless you're 76 or older, they have been in existence your entire life. They have certainly been in existence for the entire lives of essentially everyone in politics today. So rallying again asylum laws is frankly, idiotic. Germany should process and deal with all the Syrian asylum seekers, because Germany invited them to the EU.
    1
  8.  @azimny97  Completely and utterly false. If you bothered to read why I wrote you'd know you are entirely wrong. Poland has every obligation to accept them and process them in accordance with international law, and to accept all genuine asylum seekers as refugees. You are wrong on every point, try understanding what's going on before you comment
    1
  9.  @azimny97  Are you always this uninformed or only when you're being xenophobic? Literally nothing you just said is accurate. Moreover you contradicted yourself, first claiming there is no international law then trying to erroneously define a refugee. 🤦 I've referenced the international laws over and over again. The UDHR (1947/48) and the refugee convention (1951). By definition a refugee is only someone who has had their asylum claim accepted/granted by a country. A refugee has most of the same rights as a citizen of their host country. When they're escaping a bad situation, and seeking asylum their official term is asylum seekers. Imagine that. These are legal terms, use them correctly or stop using them altogether. War is one possible reason for claiming asylum under the law but very far from the only one. Other examples include political prosecution and persecution on the grounds of an immutable trait or religious (dis)beliefs. There's a long list available on the UNHCR website if you want to read it in full. Poland is a signatory, so it has no choice in the matter it must accept and process asylum claims. If it no longer wishes to do so, it must leave the EU and rescind it's signature to the UDHR. Remember though, the same legislation that grants asylum seekers and refugees rights, also grants basic rights and freedoms to general citizens.
    1
  10.  @azimny97  Your ignorance is astounding. You have no understanding of the law. They could have 50 visas in their passport and it wouldn't change their status as asylum seekers. You are trying through mental acrobatics to selectively apply a law that is very clear. Truth isn't on your side. Again Poland doesn't really have much choice here. It can either accept asylum seekers or it can get out of the EU and rescind the UDHR. Good luck if you choose the latter, but remember your own words now when it means you want to seek asylum and no country wants to take you.
    1
  11.  @azimny97  Yet again everything you said is factually incorrect. The likely scenarios are Poland is forced out of the EU, or loses it's independence. Enjoy
    1
  12.  @zawiszaczarny7876  False. Learn the law.
    1
  13.  @azimny97  Nope. That's deserved, the guards are acting illegally. Learn the law.
    1
  14.  @azimny97  There were no stun grenades from the asylum seekers, you're completely making things up now. Just ludicrous fantasies you have. That was shameful spin on your part. The border guards were no "defending their border", they were breaking international, EU and Polish law. It is an offence to hinder or impede the crossing of any person for the purpose of seeking asylum to any country that is a signatory to the UDHR and to any EU nation. Period. Every last one of those border guards are criminals. Civil disobedience is to be expected, those people have every right to cross that border. Yes, please learn the law because you currently do not understand it. You can dislike the law and wish it was something else but that does not change reality. In reality your argument is empty. You have no leg to stand on.
    1
  15.  @azimny97  lol That was Poland throwing stun grenades 🤣 Please go and read the UDHR and refugee convention. I'm through wasting my time on you.
    1
  16.  @marsol562  Please try reading article 14 of the UDHR and the Refugee Convention.
    1
  17. The first change to it's vaccine program that the EU should make is returning the 250K units of AstraZeneca vaccine Italia stole from Australia.
    1
  18. I wonder on what charge they arrested him on. Is it a criminal offence to speak over the pope? Genuine question. If it's a criminal offence to speak over the pope, that sounds like a pretty big violation of human rights. Sort of thing you'd expect the EU to denounce. I couldn't really hear what he was saying, does anyone have an English transcript? Pope seemed to handle it the way one would expect a teenager in the comments being called out to handle it. Quite discouraging.
    1
  19. That's a nice bit of fiction Ylva Johansson is pushing there. Meanwhile in Poland illegal migrants seem to be drowning in a field and starving to death as they walk across the boarder. Sounds legit
    1
  20. It's concrete...
    1
  21. Asking a historian about present day complex geopolitical issues is like asking a plumber to build you a road. They can try to do it, but you shouldn't be surprised when they get most of it wrong. Tim should be quite. He has no clue what he's talking about
    1
  22. @Dogelore Fundamentalist Sharia did not apply during the last 20 years. Parts of Sharia applied but most of it was excluded. Remember that the Islamic Emirate was in control before the ISAF invasion, and they have ceased control by force again upon the ISAF withdraw. One can not accurately describe a paramilitary cult who have ceased control a government. Governments are legitimate entities who have the authority to govern. A paramilitary religious cult who took a country by force are not legitimate. Before their control it was Russian supported governance. During the ISAF supported governance men and women mixed in society freely. Women had rights, they could move around on their own, they could work in any profession, they attended mixed gender schools, they were an integral part of the democratic government holding positions as ministers, aides and advisors. Music was allowed. Public laughing was allowed. Dancing outside of ritual was allowed. Attire was not controlled by law. There weren't morality police trying to flog you on the street if they didn't like something you wore or did. Poetry that wasn't scripture was allowed. There was a heavy influence of human rights and western idles. There was a free press. None of those things are allowed under Sharia law, and none of them have been allowed since the Taliban ceased control. The ISAF supported government wasn't perfect, they suffered a lack of real experience and corruption. But it was a start, experience, anti-corruption mechanisms and good governance take time for a society to build. Time spans best measured in generations. You have to be running a democratic society to build them though. The economy of Afghanistan was building, it was becoming vibrant. It wasn't self sustaining yet but it held all the signs that it was on track to become self sustaining. Afghanistan had all the right signals to tell us it was finally becoming a free society. If the Taliban want the aid money flowing to Afghanistan again they must remove Sharia law, give people back their rights and reinstate democracy. It's very simple and that's what this meeting is about
    1
  23.  @kukulroukul4698  We are all less intelligent for having read your comment.
    1
  24.  @mariuszfurman4767  This is false. Accent is not determined in childhood and then lifelong. Instead it's a result of the community you find yourself in. After spending time surrounded by and engaging with people whom hold a different accent to your birth, you will in fact acquire their accent. Accent is fluid, not fixed. These were very clearly first generation immigrants, whether they had been granted citizenship yet or not is irrelevant if they're now displaying antisocial and criminal behaviour. Citizenship granted upon immigration is different than that inherented with birth. Granted citizenship can be, and as a regular occurrence is, revoked. To defend those whom act with utter disregard to community and law, is a reflection upon your character. To do so with such hollow and preposterous narrative reeks of desperation. You have no argument, implied nor actual.
    1
  25. Turkey stopped flights to Belarus a week ago. Can we stop lying about refugees now? They're mostly going on foot. Belarus isn't doing this, Germany created this situation in 2015. Syrians are going to be trying to get to Germany for decades to come because of Merkel's 2015 invitation. That's how this stuff works, let them in and blame the person responsible. Merkel.
    1
  26. It's interesting that so many in the tinfoil hat brigade are invoking words like democracy, rights and freedom without knowing what any of those words actually mean.
    1
  27. The thing about the antivaxxers is, we don't know the point at which herd immunity is created for SARS-CoV-2. For all we know it's 95% So, what we need to be aware of is that these vaccines do not stop you getting CoVID-19, instead they prevent severe disease in most cases. To stop you getting infected you need heavy suppression or herd immunity.
    1
  28. It was always inevitable that Roe v Wade would eventually be reversed. The only real surprising thing about it is that it took this long. Roe v Wade was a political decision that never held water, how ironic then that it's come down to another political decision to reverse it. A federal HB won't be anywhere near as enforceable as a constitutional requirement. Even if a federal HB passes demanding abortion rights, states will win any enforcement cases where they choose state laws which aren't in line with federal law. Plenty of precedence there. What yankville really need is a national referendum on a constitutional amendment to incorporate reproductive rights into the constitution. A second referendum question might ask about reinforcing representative democracy with increased protections surrounding secularism (ie. Representative politicians shouldn't be making decisions based on their own personal beliefs, which swings both ways).
    1
  29. @MR Green Who said anything about prison? Government debts get paid, or the government takes your assets, freezes your bank accounts and forces you into bankruptcy. You think you're rebelling like a try hard teenager who thinks they're cool but really you're just acting like a 4 year old throwing a tantrum in the candy aisle.
    1
  30.  @flioink  You're using words you clearly and obviously do not understand. You live in a society. There are rules in a society. No, governments recouping their debt is in no way overreach. You owe a debt, the end. Just get vaccinated, it's seriously not a big deal.
    1
  31.  @flioink  🤦🤦 You understand that "rights" are made up by governments, right? The point of giving your population rights is to facilitate their social responsibilities. No one is stomping on your rights. Let me put it to you like this, should you be allowed to just walk into anyone's house and take whatever you want? Why not? Are your rights being violated because you can't do that? I mean, my neighbour has this original Van Gogh that I really like shouldn't I be allowed to have it if I want it? Show me you understand why we can't do that.
    1
  32.  @flioink  🤣🤣🤣🤣 Nice false comparison. In actual fact it's business as usual well inside the normal range of powers governments have to protect their communities. You belong to an extremely small minority, less than 1% of people. I'm sorry to see that you aren't rational right now, perhaps you could see someone about that
    1
  33. @MR Green I'm not sure how you got any kind of suggestion I agree with any of the rambling nonsense you've commented so far. Banking in Austria is almost 100% 14+. Freezing or taking of assets only occurs if you really fail to pay fines over a long period of time. Fines incur interest if not paid by the due date. There is no, what will they do then. You can't survive without money. Period. There is nothing stupid about it, indeed the only thing stupid is the ideas you're coming out with and the thought not to get vaccinated in the first place
    1
  34. @UCoO7HqTWaihWFGWdErtOIzQ Yeah, literally everything you just said is a rambling mess of nonsense and absurd exaggeration. You have no credibly. Edit: You claim to be vaccinated because of your job, but you're sitting here arguing that people are going to somehow avoid paying fines by using cash. And you can't see the irony in that. Hilarious.
    1
  35. @MR Green claim* 🤣🤣🤦🤡
    1
  36. @MR Green You're going around in circles now and your punctuation is becoming unreadable. Your attempt at trolling was pathetic. Grow up
    1
  37. That's an interesting recount of your weekend, but why do you think it is relevant here?
    1
  38. What makes living in a concrete microwave dish more sustainable? Sustainable (adj) Capable of being continued with minimal long-term effect on the environment. If you're using the same materials, in the same quantity but just spreading that quantity across more projects what makes it more sustainable? More economically sustainable perhaps in that you can create greater profit. But the environmental impact is the same
    1
  39. This is a dumb af comment
    1
  40.  @andreisimion247  lmao. No he wasn't. You have zero evidence otherwise. My gosh, stop blindly parroting.
    1
  41.  @nigeljohnson9820  What?
    1
  42.  @nigeljohnson9820  I'm confused at your mentality. You're making unfounded claims about other countries then deciding that means no law was broken based on what you think about other countries where clearly a law was broken in Belarus. I'm also confused which plain you're talking about, X, Y or Z? How is one removed from a plain? Are they 2D now? This sounds like pretty exciting technology. I jest to highlight how rambling and nonsensical your comments are. You of course mean plane. There was nothing particularly elaborate about pulling a passenger of a commercial flight crossing Belarusian airspace. Articles 1 and 18 of the chicago convention make it perfectly legal under international law, and such acts are undertaken a few times a year by western countries for various reasons. Lukashenko was elected, no one is disputing that. What the opposition are disputing is the authenticity of election results, ie. they think the election was rigged. What's happening in Belarus sucks, the last thing the world needs is another dictator in the making. But it's essential that we talk about what is ACTUALLY happening in Belarus instead of making things up, or making non-sequitur comparisons.
    1
  43. More manipulated nonsense for ratings. Easter Sunday & Good Friday is a time where people traditionally do not work. So the tiny 6.3% of Myanmar that are Christians and thus would celebrate easter at all, would normally not be working on those days regardless of what is going on in the country. That's not a strike, it's a religious holiday. Please take the time to learn about Myanmars history, it's people, it's struggles, it's governance and it's internal disputes. Then you can start to understand the actual truth of what's happening in Myanmar, not the twisted nonsense you're watching in coverage by this outlet and others. Myanmar is far more complex a situation than you're being led to believe.
    1
  44.  @nigeljohnson9820  Read your original comment to yourself, if my comment doesn't become obvious then it'll be a waste of time trying to explain it to you.
    1
  45. ...so something you THINK you saw in a YouTube video one time about something completely different justifies police violating a COURT ORDER and killing people in cold blood? Really? That's what you're going with?
    1
  46.  @malamutmadre4930  Learn to read.
    1
  47. Won? Won what? There was never anything to win, sovereign nations are allowed to do what they want, article 1 of the EU charter.
    1
  48.  @roboldx9171  🤦🤦 It's funny that you talk about being stuck in a hole when you're talking about a referendum still that has nothing to do with the subject matter of this video. What a joke
    1
  49.  @roboldx9171  You're the joke mate and you're certainly not on me. What a lame attempt at disparaging me. You clearly have no idea who I am, which just makes this quite funny. How big a fool of yourself are you going to insist on making? 🤣
    1
  50. But Russian troops have backed the Donbas for 7 years. Why does their existence keep getting reported as if it's something new and sudden. If Ukraine want peace they should probably stop shelling the Donbas and withdraw their troops. The people of the Donbas have been pretty clear that they don't want to be ruled by a Ukrainian criminal oligarchy, they want to be ruled by a Russian criminal oligarchy. It's their choice to make. Biden should probably come to terms with the fact the oligarchy he put in power and whom pay him aren't going to be able to provide returns on the oil and gas in the Donbas.
    1