It is impossible to give a brief summary, that allows for an adequate asessment. Just the Reactions and criticism section wikipedia is about a ten minutes read.

Very broadly it is a gigantic infrastructure investment project by China, with the goal to strengthen and industrialize along certain trade routes through central asia and east africa connectinc China and Europe.

It could bring strong economic development especially for the central asian and african countries along the route but also further dependance on China. A particular point of criticism is the financing through China, where potentially entrapping debts for the countries are insured through access to natural ressources and the infrastructure itself. At worst a country could build a railway line or other infrastructure that ends up being owned and operated by China, employing chinese workers. On the other hand the criticism from the west needs to be also put into context of who gets to exert geopolitical control in areas like the middle east. The countries there could prefer chinese over US influence as US influence brought destabilisation and war.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belt_and_Road_Initiative

i strongly doubt that many people had the money for a room that they just used to present someones body if they died.

This needs to be seen in the context that there is two unions in the train sector. The first is the EVG which is large, corrupted (high ranking union officers getting nice jobs at the company after leaving the union) and generally reluctant to fight. The train drivers founded the GDL to actually have a fighting union and since then most of the train drivers joined them instead of EVG.

The GDL aims to also get to negotiate contracts for other functions within the train sector, but the allegdegly social democrats passed a law to kill smaller unions, by forcing them to accept the deal made by the larger union if two unions are present in the same site. This law was challenged and upheld by the constitutional court under the condition that the positions of the smaller union are adequately represented by the larger union too. This is highly questionable in the context of the train sector in Germany.

So this is a critique by a larger partly compromised union organization reluctant to fight, against a smaller and willing to fight union.

Also the DB, the largest and state owned train company in Germany didnt even start formal negotiations until after the last contracts ran out.

The whole term is just nonsense.

A state has three defining features: A territory, a people and a government. Anyone who claims the right of Israel to exist should answer specifically which territory, which people and which government.

I have yet to see someone able to specify these in a way that does not involve forced displacement of Palestinians and justifying other crimes according to international law. And if someone refers only to the territorial areas according to the UN accords, then the next step would be to condemn Israel as a brutal opressive regime, that is illegaly occupying and trying to annex territories that they have no right to.

Finally there is no part of international law that gives states a right to exist. People have a right to exist and people have the right to sovereignity that they can exercise through a state. But as long as the current state of Israel exists it is denying this right to the Palestinians. So anyone claiming a right for Israel to exist is claiming support of crimes against humanity and denying millions of people their rights.

Oh and something that just crossed my mind too. While Israel gets a right to exist and is German “reason of state” because of the holocaust, other people that were just as terribly tortured and murdered by the Nazis did not and do not get the recognition. Queer people, people with disabilities, Sinti, Roma, Communists. None of them received proper reparations and acknowledgement by Germany. The jewish people are abused as a token to claim having bettered and learned from the past mistakes, while other Holocaust victims were and are continuously discriminated.

The british government has more than enough money to cover for its people. Poverty in Britain is deliberately caused by the british government, not by a lack of wealth of the overall nation. Also Britain can still buy enough veggies from the US and China. They just wont be fresh.

How is it “weaponized”? A weapon can injure and kill someone. If the UK needs to pay more for vegetables they import from countries they deemed an invasion discussable for, then this is hardly “weaponized”. If the UK fails to provide its citizens with normal goods then it is an expression of systematic failure. Also the EU used tariffs on food products to handle the trade war instigated by Trump. How is that not an appropriate response to plans of a military invasion?

It wouldnt be weaponized. The UK can still buy these products. It is only that the sale would incurr an additional tax that has to be paid by the exporting company.

Also the EU supports the US in its sanctions against Iran and has supported the sanctions against Iraq, that killed more than half a Million Iraqi childrens in the 90s by affecting food and medicine. The reimposed sanctions have lead to drastic inflation for food and rising food insecurity in Iran.

So it is not a moral stance of the EU. It is purely strategical and i find a strategic response to invasion plans perfectly appropriate

Fast fashion is responsible for up to 10% of global cimate impact. It is long overdue and the whole industry needs to be dismantled. From the fashion of the season magazines over the instagram and tiktok people buying clothes just to wear them once to the companies that produce for most to go into the thrash and only last three wears at best.

The EU should increase its export tax on food products to the UK by 500% for a month and compensate the affected farmers.

Let them have a christmas on potato and chlorinated chicken.

It is not armed robbery when the military is sent to another country. war is ultimately always about ressources, so you could argue every war to just be an armed robbery gone wrong.

If someone sends their military to another coubtry without this countries explicit consent it is an act of war.

I fully agree. Having a ton of steel and gasoline with some igniters fall uncontrollable to the ground is more than reckless.

You know there is both a tunnel between UK and France and a bridge between Denmark and Sweden?

Doesnt make it an efficient option, but it is possible.

It is incredibly harmful for muncipalities to create a too big surplus of housing. Large swaths of empty houses mean crime, povertyand desolation.

The core problem here is the disproportionate power that gets even worse with the wealth concentration.

For the landlords it is ultimately about money. For the tenant it is about his very livelihood and secure private protected place.

A landlord of a single house is interested in forming a long term cooperative relationship with his tenant, which mitigates some of the power imbalance. But a company thats sole interest is maximizing profit will abuse this power imbalance, especially in poorly regulated markets.

The answer is not to create more 90s Detroits, but to regulate the market and keep the worst actors out.

Our only source is a book from a guy who lived three generations later and a month on sea away. Guess this will have to do.

Only 8 years of unreported potentially critical security risks.

How many more of these stories do we need, until the pro nuclear crowd realises that these issues are systemic to the sector and it is a technology not handleable for mankind in its current state?

Then why did Germany hesitate to promise equipment and unserselivered on its promises?

Also Germany did nit put boots on the ground in Iraq, which would be unconstitutional anyways, but it did provide extensive support to the US. US army bases in Germany were integral to the logistics and control of the US invasion. Germany did everything it could to support the Iraq invasion within its own legal limits.

Before swinging big accusations, maybe consider judging politics by actions instead of words

That is a different stat though.

Past 12 month is an okayish statistic to get an idea of active users, although having drawn two puffs on a joint once is bery different from wake and bake every day.

But the EU countries also dont want Ukraine to decisively push the Russians out. The longer the war goes, the more Russia will weaken itself, being less of a threat in the long run.

Also Germany is a puppet of the US, when it comes to military decisions. They will do what the US tells them to do and if Trump tells them to kiss Putins ass they will do that. They already did that before without the US telling them.

In terms of terrorism, the statistics say otherwise.

he claims, not providing any source. But how about taking a proper look:

https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/infographics/terrorism-eu-facts-figures/

Oh what is this? Ethno-nationalist terrorism being by far the most prevalent, by about factor 8-10 compared to jihadist terrorism? I am sure this must be a conspiracist source. Oh what is this? It is the European Council.

This is conspiracism. It’s impossible to argue with, by definition.

I fully agree, that you are trying to spread conspiracies and that it is moot to discuss further with you.

Have you never asked yourself why so many people of this one religion turn out to have “psychological problems”? What are the chances of that statistically if, as you seem to suggest, religion has nothing to do with this?

No, because this is horseshit. Muslims in Europe aren’t more violent than non muslims. They are more often subject to violence and discrimination by the white majority though. It is just that violence commited by muslims, or people claimed to be muslim is disproporitonately sensationalized by right wing media. Of course this is accompanied with white supremacists spurting desinformation and claiming every crime, where no information on nationality, skin colour or religion of the suspects is known, as being commited by muslims. Also violence against muslims is systematically underreported, but that would make for another dozens paragraphs.

and in response you are insisting on essentializing them on the basis of biology. Have you considered how close this puts you to people you claim to abhor?

You are wrong. I’m warning him, that this will be done to him, by the people whose agenda he is supporting, by making evidently false claims about the suspect and the treatment of the suspect. He is also blowing the right wing dogwhistle of violent muslims being “imported” to Europe. And the fascists whose position he is strengthening by doing this will not care. Just earlier this week an ex-muslim gay men of turkish origin wanted to join the German Nazi party AfD. He was met with calls to violence and having him deported, that led to him experiencing more racism and hostility in a few days, than in his entire life in Germany before. The fascist dogs will not accept him for blowing their whistle. They’ll tear him apart like everybody else if they get the chance to.