The worst consequence of the necessary step of Finland and Sweden joining NATO is that we lost some of the most important voices on nuclear sanity and disarmament by doing so. That was the best—albeit rightfully losing—argument for them staying out.

All I can say is: yeesh.

Embrace the what now?

But how much did they offer to pay you to read it?

But you have to admit: "Mine, baby, mine" does fit this administration to a T.

Funny! Spot on. On 10 Jan, I suggested the same to a Swedish diplomat, who insisted that it was a terrible idea and that we needed to work towards a diplomatic solution "because NATO." I said yes, because of NATO, I'm saying raise the cost of the alternative.

When it comes to right wing conspiracies, you know it always comes around to blaming the bergs.

*Garden, singular!

It's all so very Buddhas of Bamiyan.

The kind of people who are horrified at what is happening here and find it deeply un-American are, maybe counterintuitively, the kind of people who are MORE likely than average to know and remember historic abuses. It is their determination to rise above them that gives them moral strength!

A whole lot of "well, it worked for me" energy.

"If great powers abandon even the pretense of rules and values for the unhindered pursuit of their power and interests, the gains from transactionalism will become harder to replicate... Hegemons cannot continually monetize their relationships. Allies will diversify to hedge against uncertainty."

We genuinely wouldn't know which parties to reach out to! There's the rub.

Though no Pests, Many little Bodhis to be sure.