The thing is, it’s not in their interest. You can’t make a reliable deal with the USA and while you try, you’re losing ground to others.

Germany tried making deals with Putin and failed Europe. You’d think they’d have learned their lesson.

Yes, I don’t see how they don’t see that. I get trying to drag it out while opening other markets, but as china showed, he responds to shows of strength. There I no point negotiating in good faith. He won’t honour it.

Europe should not be looking at what’s the best way to trade with the USA, but look at what’s the best way to support European companies being alternatives to the USA monopolies.

That’s Trunos plan for the USA. Europe has an opportunity to take the lead and spread worldwide while other countries have the same issue.

If the large blocs, like EU can’t stand up to Trunos tariffs, smaller countries have no chance and that is to everyone’s detriment. If the EU stands up, china stands up, then medium economies like Canada and Australia can stand up too. He only has leverage when people are divided.

Isn’t that normal? I mean people can start greying in their 20s.

No, just put a large import tax on their services, and watch European ones proliferate. If ads are 50% more expensive on google and Facebook, the ROI is terrible and nobody used them. Advertisers will choose European alternatives instead, channelling money back to journalism and European search alternatives. Now is the ideal time as Google is becoming worse for search.

Yep, I agree. Yet some things can be kept apolitical when there’s a will to do so.

And screw the environment and passenger safety.

People should not be forced to work. However, having an agreement with the union that when striking, certain activities are protected is not a bad outcome for workers.

It could be at overtime rates (or triple time), fees collected could go to the union or workers instead of the agency and flights originating or terminated in France would remain affected.

The eu should not be making secret deals with anyone. I believe Ryanair has had to change their operating procedures and advertising based on hefty fines from Spain. Not quite the cosy relationship you’re portraying.

It’s not anti worker rights. It’s about keeping air travel safe, which often requires travel over disputed territory, conflicts etc.

It doesn’t have to makes strikes ineffective. Essential services, like air traffic control, could have a basic overflight service where striking workers are paid overtime rates and all fees collected go to the union rather than agency, or general taxation. Internal flights have already been banned in France for environmental reasons, where there is a train route. Requiring flights to travel around them would upend that progress. International flights originating and ending in France would still be affected, so those most affected would be those that benefit the french economy, therefore more targeting those that the strikers wish to pressure.

Keeping travelers safe and keeping the concept of apolitical travel cooperation safe is beneficial to workers and people from all countries. Take for instance Russian sanctions. One case where politics has been allowed to affect flight travel. Western flights no longer use their airspace based on the sanctions, but Chinese companies do. Chinese companies can now offer cheaper flights and so European airlines are less able to compete, eroding competition. Do you think Chinese companies care about french workers?

Are you unaware of the purposeful downing of passenger planes? America did so for Iranian planes, Russia did so for a Malaysian plane, near Crimea. Are you unware of Russia testing giving GPS misinformation on commercial (not military) GPS.

I don’t think it is reasonable for strikes in one country to affect travel from other countries. Ireland or Iceland striking, for instance could interrupt most transatlantic flights. Saying to go around is not good from an environmental or safety point of view. It’s not just company profits, but passenger safety. Longer flights also lead to cancellations as there would be inadequate supply of planes and staffing.

If air traffic control is political, airplanes travel into territory and get purposely crashed. That’s the point of keeping it apolititical and has been through many wars.

If Russia wanted to crash European planes, they could quickly pretend to be Ukrainian air traffic control. It’s all based on trust. We shouldn’t mess with that trust.

Yes but you have to balance passenger safety. Making air traffic control.subject to politics, which incudes strikes, makes them subject to misinformation which can be deadly. Airline passengers should not be pawns.

Flyover operating is a reasonable compromise. Ryanair have cut airfares, which depends on cheap staff and cheap destination airports. However, I don’t think they’ve ever had a fatal crash.

If you think France striking is due to Ryanair, who operate there but not hugely, then lol. Even if they did and were responsible,it’s a reasonable point. Bad actors can make a good point and be right. Your goalpost shifting is quite clear.

Displaced

I mean that Israel depends on usa support. That could disappear on a whim.

War crimes and normalised genocide is a risk to all countries sovereignty.

You’re looking at the current layout of the middle east. It’s a constantly changing unstable environment. Iran going nuclear is in nobodies interest but Iran.

Not punishing Russia for invasion of Ukraine showed the world that if you don’t want to be subject to larger countries rule, you need nukes. Ukraine is the only country to voluntarily give them up. Look how that turned out. Israel has not signed the non proliferation treaty. All other signatory countries have an obligation to stop them too. Where was that will?

Israel won’t be isolated due to protests. Israel receives support as a vassal state to be useful in the middle east. USA is no longer dependent on the middle east. Europe less so, but still dependent. Israel is therefore less useful. So support will end eventually, irrespective of Israel’s actions. Israel might hasten that end with actions that are politically damaging for the politicians in countries that enable their genocide.

Lol, calling Russia the largest country in the world is a strange way to increase the might of a faded superpower who can’t deploy an army to win against a country much smaller than them.

It is absolutely a big deal and most of Europe offers financial, military and humanitarian assistance above what you’ll see on Lemmy. The difference is the genocide in Palestine is war crime after war crime. Sure, Russia commits and has committed war crimes, but even they follow most of the rules of war. Israel is genocidal. It’s supported by their people. It’s abhorrent.

I think Israel is foolish. They are protected by their international support and not viable on their own. Trump is unpredictable and nationalistic. They could get left out in the cold, like USA did to Ukraine very easily. Netanyahu has is ear. As does Putin and the Saudis. In trumps case, it’ll be what he can get. Israel have less to offer while requiring the funding the others don’t.

From the article: O’Leary said that of Ryanair’s 400 cancellations caused by the strike, “360, or 90 percent of those flights, would operate if the Commission protected the overflights as Spain, Italy and Greece do during air traffic control strikes.”

“Von der Leyen and the Commission made a big song and dance during Brexit about: ‘We must protect the single market, the single market is sacrosanct, nothing would be allowed to disrupt the single market,’” he said. “Unless you’re a French air traffic controller and you can shut down the sky over France.”

From me: I don’t think it’s unreasonable to require strike actions to not affect non french traffic. In wartime, air traffic control continues. Countries in conflict wills till communicate with air traffic control. It makes sense for it to be an apolitical system and strikes are effectively political.

That needs to be balanced with the right to strike which is quite strong in France! Frances central location in Europe would affect quite a number of flights.

Be aware that the original devs get nothing.

No, I’m pointing out, again, about the reduction of votes they got. They are the only party with the potential for seats to support ending genocide. They had less votes and lost seats.

I’m not saying it was their only issue but it clearly wasn’t an important issue for Australians based on that.

If it was important to Australians, more would have voted for the greens. Australians either didn’t care or supported genocide instead.

It’s not like the USA where it was a hold your nose situation. We have preferential voting. If people cared about other issues, they could still preference the greens for their genocide stance, of they deemed it important. they did not.

Yes, based on many. However, that implies that people don’t care about the genocide, which is what ive repeatedly said.

If you want to be more precise, they cared about everything else more, which is a different way of saying they don’t care about it.

No, I’m saying that as the only party to be anti genocide, if Australians cared about it as an issue, their votes would have increased, not decreased.

On a GendARM

Irans response is pretty clever so far. Proportional and restrained, with warnings. I don’t doubt that’s more because they know the USA Israel wants a war and trump is foolish enough to be led into one. Of the repercussions were less and they matched equally, they’d have done more. I wonder if next is spread into Qatar, UAE and Saudi. All the regimes playing proxy wars are now having them come home to roost.