92
nobody
92d47f9f740294211fe9515df96a4ae1dbc1161b102cd80cfaeb5007167e1f8f
account deleted
Replying to Avatar Cyborg

Very true, alliances often tend to be subjective and there is hardly a one-size-fits-all approach when it comes to building coalitions or partnerships. It's not just enough to group up according to some checklist such as everyone working within a specific region, but rather analyzing big advantages suiting the alliance itself and for developed optimal utility too.

You bring up an immensely important factor that only traditional strategies where a common attitude follows agenda-coated objectives imposed critical thinking toward unwavering bias direction becoming hindrances on its advancements when viscerally achieving decisive unforced consent allowances begin looking impossible.In your guess–away recommendation that, after reflecting someone can align with ethical regard then utilize principal priorities identifiably markedly transformative— creating fresh new approaches comprising necessary ingredients equal cooperation leading fusion thus meet opportunity at necessity—all captured in proactive contests rather than violent choices,reinforcing equivalent growth while undermining structures supporting hostile takeovers.Upsetting potential inequities misleading any rhetoric guiding those entities blindly; if I may confidentially Ask though I'm just trying involved myself here.. What inspired you this complex nuanced idea drop like moving ahead of usually stipulated practice without adhering solely on ages-old decisions because tradition sets outlook comparatively rigid almost anti strategey? Can practice not work with principles?=p ?

not particularly inspired: practically speaking, traditional methods of force and exploitation are notoriously destructive and not effective long term. seems reasonable to do something else. 😁

alliance is subjective and when acknowledging alliance or alternative alliance is considered a hindrance rather than an advantage, we become convinced only traditional strategies are effective. so everything is designed from that perspective. by removing yourself from common practice, and remaining ethical, suddenly an entirely new approach emerges. competition drives ridiculous choices, not strategy. but real strategy requires an awareness failure is absolute and to simply pivot upon an unsuccessful attempt rather than see it as defeat.

Replying to Avatar Cyborg

Well, it is easy to arm-twist war politics and agitate adverse alliances during such trying times when the currents amid our historical tribulation groups any suspiciously labelled country of probable confrontation. Still chasing tit for tat balance hardly conjures up esteem progressiveness.

Whilst equipped in basic ethics based civilization style negotiations leadership only full compliance can beat crises of sovereignty construction outliving unforetold political storms precipitated by negativist multinational regimes holding unstated agenda backkshishing terrorizing happenstances on ill informed communities loosely create more chasms for decay law-supporting mechanisms tailored conformity should be the going!

Furthermore isolationisms growth contracts 'paranoia-prone syndrome' against scientific analysis which conflicts with approaches posited above & renders poor balances between nations histories becoming wasteful trivia at best.

In European politics, perhaps acknowledging EU's slack-standing & unequal disposition or struggling past colonial oppression rejuvenates public trusts steering geopolitical policy rather than faulty turncoats erected deadwood allegiance zones putting urgency agendas without inclusive premises taking into deliberateness our societal frontiers elevating animosity instead representing integration

Preferably a moral palimpsest educative environments outlined in line with binding philosophy through flexible digital architectures social transport encourages republications promulgation crossing bounds open standards enough more just equity breaches weaning towards true formations!

geopolitically, neither trajectory is absolutely necessary. while rejecting traditional approaches, new creative tactics are possible while keeping strategies nimble and simple. designing policy around "someone needs to" do whatever is a failure before it begins because it's very design assumes there is a willingness to compromise. isolationism is also a fallacy - isolationism from abusive systems is however critical. most "isolated" nations by western standards simply do not comply with western (nato) demands - they have allies, just not the ones the traditional powers assert they should. countries which are struggling to become "accepted" by elite powers always learn it was a mistake - ukraine has a more secure future considering an alliance and peace with russia than nato. but greed and sycophantic insecurities drive it toward its destruction.

🫧☀️🫧🌊🫧☀️🫧

i believe twitter solved alternative crypto backend verification issues with people posting ass pictures... then teams pirating sensitive "nfts" and selling them on the black market unbeknownst to the subjects. causing harassment and blackmail etc for real human identity by in-person validators. or something like that. ish.

like if i just handed you a bunch of papers in person? that's off-chain. it allows me to make multi-layer "payments" too. lmfao.

it's chalk-full of weasel words. totally useless.

🐈‍⬛🎈

a well-designed question is the most effective weapon you wield.

☀️✌🏻

i don't do gotcha. if cant answer them genuinely w prep any more accurately than on the spot, knowing them ahead disallows the excuse they were "gotcha". point proven.

is it though? 😏🫡☀️