Terence Bunch - Astronomy, Music, Science, Internationalism, Peace, and everything amazing.

We do see the argument that the Russian Federation has put into place about NATO, the issue is that if the Russian Federation feels threatened by the expansion of NATO then the issue is one of diplomacy and tact, not whether the Russian Federation's position is justified or not. NATO as an organisation has a feeble position here, in the first part because NATO is not, nor was ever, designed to have any expansionist component to its existence, and in the second because NATO was designed as a defensive organisation and has no means about it that allows it to be used in any offensive capacity. If it transpires that NATO is attempting to full-fill some role that does not exist, then that role must be fully known.

But the Russian Federations position is also weaker than is supposed, the special operation that has been put into place by the Russian Federation primarily concerns itself with the security and safety of the Russian-speaking part of eastern Ukraine, which the Ukrainians continue to attack for some species purpose that will never succeed.

What exactly is NATO's role in the midst of what is, essentially, a large scale and established peacekeeping operation?

Whatever the answer to all of this actually is, and whatever will transpire of its own accord in time, Ukraine is currently under martial law, the European Union is determinately inconvenienced, the United States is depressed and the rest of the world can't see the point of any part of it, supposedly.

My reading of this is that Ukraine’s "situation" is the most feeble part of it all, and the background, whatever that actually is in this particular instance, would rather not be the background.

Take a leaf out of our wonderful and marvellous play-book, and redeem your tattered coupon in the till of our most glorious good fortune.

"In formally articulating a casus belli, a government typically lays out its reasons for going to war, its intended means of prosecuting the war, and the steps that others might take to dissuade it from going to war."

Yeah...

Our judgement on this particular issue is that "western" media haven't the capacity or intellectual philosophy to even perceive the reality of what they are seeing, let alone reason with it.

The "western" media live in a business model of political division, because it is profitable for their companies to operate in and within.

Our message to "western" media is make the most of your platforms, hire extra reporters, make documentaries, dedicate extra resources to producing compelling content, rather than filling your space up with 10 minute tripe that no-one cares about, travel and integrate with your surroundings, do hour long pieces that go into enormous and enriching detail, educate, inform, enliven your audiences.

In other words, spend, spend, spend.

Oh, no you can't can you, your editor doesn't think it's a good idea.

I'm sure Mr Lavrov will say something interesting, and will at least make some effort to set it out in terms that others will find useful.

The Venera program and its probes to Venus currently stand as human-kinds most notable achievement in space research, development and exploration, to date.

We expect that nations will continue this fine work for the benefit of all of humanity, because it is your duty.

Call it innovation, call it progress, call it science, call it whatever you damn well please.

We make, nor see, any difference in the exacting standard of the Peace.

For the benefit of the peace we will defend Afghanistan, we will defend Iran, we will defend Iraq, we will defend Syria, we will defend Turkey, we will defend Kurdistan, we will defend Lebanon, we will defend the Holy Land, we will defend the Russian Federation, we will defend the European Union, we will defend the U.K., we will defend the U.S., we will defend South Africa and on and on it goes.

Because we are the Peace.