eagleal
Imposing it top down requires oppression. Imposing or pressuring this huge layer from the bottom requires a continuously updated base so you can squeeze from the top and the bottom to enact the changes needed quickly.
It's impossible for leaders at the top, to personally vet the members of a village or city council for example.
I think I've never seen any of such concatenation of events and organization to have ever happened.
The integration in the cyber domain is a different tier compared to the default the US has with other eyes.
But this agreement concerns raw, non minimized, SIGINT (eg. direct tapping into feeds/traffic) mainly from US -> Israel.
This was also true for Five Eyes/EU sharing too, even though with this year's legislation some EU countries have offered Israel a direct access to INT feeds.
[1] https://www.theguardian.com/world/interactive/2013/sep/11/ns...
These articles were supposed to come out in about a week
It's business and by now it should be clear to anyone that there's no morality involved in this space.
There's nothing wrong with Russia as energy partner, as long as you don't shoot yourself in the foot by blowing up the alternatives. South of EU had proper energy supplies from ME/NA. For example crisis in ME was mitigated by Russian energy or NA energy (Algeria, Tunisia, Lebanon, etc).
The new hegemons like Turkey, Israel, etc came only later, yet we can't say they're Saints can we? Also to appease the US administration line a lot of green energy projects were put on hold, and were only restarted this year after the Hormuz situation.
The only real explanation is shortsightness for personal interests (but even then you'd have to have all your capitals abroad), or being a tool for foreign interests.
Be it the Ukranian conflict, the ME crisis, the NA wars and instabilities, etc. The EU is the one that geopolitically speaking lost the most.
Unless they're full puppets for foreign interests, I simply do not understand how they could leave foreign actors to dictate policies that affect thier own territory and enterprises without any sort of critical thought.
But even then, they could not have possibly been all mere puppets. And yet.
They mean voter buying cases, "paying you to confirm a vote for X" and see you check the card.
In ballot cabins the buyer can't come with you inside the booth to confirm, so your vote has verifiable privacy/secrecy.
It doesn't really solve all type of vote buying problems (like clientelism lists, etc), but removes that confirmation step.
You can always make your enemy. Current rearming efforts really remind historians of WW1 arm races.
At some point once so much interests and offers are at stake, that creating the demand is inevitable and just a matter of time.
Especially as you will have to file tax forms and disclosures for your salary.
You guys might want to take a consultation with a proper accountant/tax advisor for these setups.
Even roofs of civilians apartments, let alone reinforced structures such as hospitals, town halls, schools, etc if they can't use alternatives.
Even antique frontal wars used terrain to their advantage. That's why we wrote rules of engagement, but if the bigger powers themselves abuse them, how can you expect militias that have to carry guerrilla or urban tactics to stand by them?
I really don't want to descend into countless counterexamples, but that's how virtually every military or militia wages war, including the IDF. I assume your confusion on this issue may be due to a lack of familiarity with the subject.
Usually never ever has anything to do with malevolence (eg. in an attempt to use the counter strike as a propaganda story). More often, it's just a matter of convenience, logistics, and the realities of operating in populated areas.
If there's one thing that CIA manuals on training militias stressed on, or any military history book in that regard, it's that soldiers need to be fed and supported. Or they'll find ways to meet those needs without you.
The strong minority base that has been artificially inflated to advance the personal interests of the leadership has linear roots dating back to the XX century rhetoric promoters and activists. In Europe there's the militant and militia groups of Gladio and the likes that thrived in illegal affairs and that have persisted and were integrated into power following 90s (case in point in Italy Berlusconi basically legalizing the MSI, AN, FdI and Lega by using his privately owned televisions and media, to acquire an election victory).
People usually attribute the term fascist to this admin, because of the racial/ethnic retaliatory actions or the neonazi/neofascist base they need to overpower/outweigh the more moderate right.
At a time when state actors are becoming increasingly non-cooperative, it may not be wise to put all your eggs in someone else's basket.
Given there will at some point be the need to deliver competing cruise missiles for this platform, and after the crisis of the US not being able to keep demand with Israel's and Ukraine's orders they greenlighted SK and Japan to enter the European defense market, to answer your question yes, this is of course a defense related project.
There's been an industry request to develop native defense components on these matters within the EU following pressures and contrasts with the US (on a report to the EC for the ReArm campaign, EU's biggest playes of aerespace industry made a joint report estimating 60-80% of their components and tech are sourced from the US).
A famous case is the CAMERA's takeover of key administrator positions in Wikipedia back in 2008, but in local communities it went probably unnoticed.
Congestion data was also used to track the advancing Russian army invasion in Ukraine's urban area according to the probably sponsored articles on Bloomberg for Project Maven.
To access the DB through the modern archive (well modern as new rules) you'd have to be an accredited professional passing through a few legal hardles and digital chancellor's office for each copy. It's like going to a bureaucracy^bureaucracy office.
Some early companies given their initial foothold were not required these checks so they were able to get hold of bigger archives (it's also important to remember often legislation or conformity is done through consulting or lobbying done by these entrenched players).
They can also build on the Data professionals themselves submit.
Most probably, but Israel and US are now being more conservative with interceptor targets though so that seems to go both ways.
Conscription is enforced with martial law only in ukranian territories, by both the official ukrianian government, and by the russia's occuption forces in donbas.
For example it is now common knowledge that IAEA shared reserved data with Israel INT agencies, and this info was used for the previous strikes.
In this age this is akin to funding and arming a militia in a foreign country, or what would've been on old times preemptive land operations.
In Italy for example RT website is blocked.
Like the Meta/Yandex apps were doing, just not strictly for position tracking, but more centered toward pinpointing your unique id.