Dutch spy services have restricted intelligence-sharing with the United States(intelnews.org)
intelnews.org
Dutch spy services have restricted intelligence-sharing with the United States
https://intelnews.org/2025/10/20/01-3416/
240 comments
> our Dutch government and related services all run on AWS and Microsoft Office/Azure
And this is already being criticized over and over again. With various German government organizations now actively moving away from Microsoft and demonstrating that you don't need Outlook & Office 365 to run a government, I would be quite surprised if the possibility of doing the same here won't at least be discussed any time something needs an overhaul.
And this is already being criticized over and over again. With various German government organizations now actively moving away from Microsoft and demonstrating that you don't need Outlook & Office 365 to run a government, I would be quite surprised if the possibility of doing the same here won't at least be discussed any time something needs an overhaul.
The Dutch IRS just doubled down on M365 though saying they couldn't find any alternative. Strange detail though is that they were not on a cloud service until now. It's a bit of a weird time to decide to migrate to a US cloud service when most places are trying to get away from them.
I'm not surprised, I used to work for a cloud SaaS provider, everything we had ran on Linux, everyone in the office ran on Macs and Google Docs.
Then as we grew the finance team, they found that Google Docs couldn't handle the spreadsheets they needed, and even Excel on Mac wasn't compatible.
So, the Finance team started running VM's where they could run Windows and native Excel. Then as they grew (in size and power) they found themselves using the VM so much that they started moving from Mac to Windows laptops. Then as our windows footprint grew, more and more departments started requesting Windows.
When I left around 25% of the ~1000 person company was on Windows (almost all on the corporate admin side, engineering remained overwhelmingly on Mac), and the Windows support team was twice as large as the team that managed the Mac infrastructure.
Then as we grew the finance team, they found that Google Docs couldn't handle the spreadsheets they needed, and even Excel on Mac wasn't compatible.
So, the Finance team started running VM's where they could run Windows and native Excel. Then as they grew (in size and power) they found themselves using the VM so much that they started moving from Mac to Windows laptops. Then as our windows footprint grew, more and more departments started requesting Windows.
When I left around 25% of the ~1000 person company was on Windows (almost all on the corporate admin side, engineering remained overwhelmingly on Mac), and the Windows support team was twice as large as the team that managed the Mac infrastructure.
To be fair, Excel (on Windows) is far ahead of the competition, especially for power users like Finance.
For other office apps, the alternatives work, although I don’t know how, for example, LibreOffice fares with collaborative editing.
For other office apps, the alternatives work, although I don’t know how, for example, LibreOffice fares with collaborative editing.
Excel is probably more critical to Microsoft's success than anything else they've ever done.
I see it used very much for the wrong purposes though. It's a really mediocre database for example. It allows numbnuts to make really poorly designed stuff that then worms its way into critical business processes.
Microsoft could have worked to make access more accessible to non technical users. But they didn't bother.
Microsoft could have worked to make access more accessible to non technical users. But they didn't bother.
Similar experience. The best excuse was that Google Sheets wasn't secure enough for the head of finance to store his passwords, so need needed a password protected Excel sheet. He also got phished for about $50k.
[deleted]
Bullshit, Belastingdienst has been on Azure for a very long time.
Source: I was inside one of their offices for a few Azure trainings.
Source: I was inside one of their offices for a few Azure trainings.
Source: https://tweakers.net/nieuws/239890/ook-fiscus-kan-geen-eu-al...
"De Belastingdienst, met daarnaast ook de Douane en de Dienst Toeslagen, gebruikt momenteel eigen software voor kantoorautomatisering."
This is M365 so it's not to do with Azure. It says they used their own office software before that was not cloud. That's what I referred to.
I was not aware what they do with the more traditional cloud stuff but I'm not surprised they handed everything on a silver platter to the US though. The neolib party that has been in power for the last 20 years is super US centric and their previous prime minister is now acting as Trump's lapdog as general secretary of NATO.
"De Belastingdienst, met daarnaast ook de Douane en de Dienst Toeslagen, gebruikt momenteel eigen software voor kantoorautomatisering."
This is M365 so it's not to do with Azure. It says they used their own office software before that was not cloud. That's what I referred to.
I was not aware what they do with the more traditional cloud stuff but I'm not surprised they handed everything on a silver platter to the US though. The neolib party that has been in power for the last 20 years is super US centric and their previous prime minister is now acting as Trump's lapdog as general secretary of NATO.
I've been hearing about the German government moving to Linux from the days when I installed Red Hat Linux 7, I think https://www.nytimes.com/2002/09/09/news/it-managers-cite-sec...
We will probably have fusion power first.
We will probably have fusion power first.
I think it's not a binary yes/no thing. No one will ever be full-on Microsoft, and no one will ever be full-off Microsoft.
But even knowledge that your department must support non-Microsoft way is good, as it helps getting at least some parts vendor-neutral.
Same as security -- there's no perfect security, but the grade matters a lot.
But even knowledge that your department must support non-Microsoft way is good, as it helps getting at least some parts vendor-neutral.
Same as security -- there's no perfect security, but the grade matters a lot.
I think it's not a binary yes/no thing. No one will ever be full-on Microsoft, and no one will ever be full-off Microsoft.
But even knowledge that your department must support non-Microsoft way is good, as it helps getting at least some parts vendor-neutral.
Same as security -- there's no perfect security, but the grade matters.
But even knowledge that your department must support non-Microsoft way is good, as it helps getting at least some parts vendor-neutral.
Same as security -- there's no perfect security, but the grade matters.
'Some linux' is also useful for negotiating lower prices.
As with every large Microsoft migration, the problem isn't figuring out what's necessary to run a government.
People in high places only know Microsoft and they don't want to risk having to learn something new. National security isn't as big of a deal as having to spend a few afternoons of training, after all.
People in high places only know Microsoft and they don't want to risk having to learn something new. National security isn't as big of a deal as having to spend a few afternoons of training, after all.
People in high places have assistants to operate Word for them. If anything, the money Microsoft pours into lobbying is a bigger threat to gaining independence - the killing of the LiMux project[0] made that quite obvious.
[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LiMux
[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LiMux
I don't disagree but the world then and the world now are different places and people pushing for less of a dependency on american tech companies have a real chance to make some headway with The Orange One(TM) sitting on his throne over the pond and Microsoft seemingly determined to make themselves (more) unpopular with techies generally not entirely sure what they are doing with Windows 11 but after 3 decades of running a microsoft OS I don't have one in the house (in fairness windows hung in for gaming for the last 20 odd years, I've been linux for everything else since the millenium).
It's easy enough to wrap some open source software in GUIs that closely resemble proprietary software (cf. LibreOffice as an example).
The bribes also make a difference.
I bet they will still be using Android and iOS devices, accessing those systems from Windows and macOS desktops and laptops, developing the bulk of the applications in Java (Oracle), C# (Microsoft), Go (Google),....
The solution isn't going for a few cloud products, or Libre Office, the solution has to be the whole stack like during cold war days when almost every nation had their own computing stack.
The solution isn't going for a few cloud products, or Libre Office, the solution has to be the whole stack like during cold war days when almost every nation had their own computing stack.
That won't ever happen at a large enough scale in Germany itself because of the Ramstein military base (and other such US military bases located on German soil). Playing "we're independent!" it's just a futile game as long as the military US presence in Germany is an ongoing thing.
Well if you were ever planning on evicting those bases you’d probably want to start by getting off of other infrastructure controlled by the owner of said bases, right?
Even before getting off of MS Word, Germany would have to start by having a military capable of self-defense since leaving the country undefended would be very foolish. Ironically the imperial overlord USA which would hypothetically be getting evicted is the main party urging them to do this.
> Ironically the imperial overlord USA which would hypothetically be getting evicted is the main party urging them to do this.
I always found the framing on this funny. Europeans will talk about data sovereignty and decreasing reliance on the Americans and simultaneously cry foul when the Americans threaten to take their ball and go home.
I always found the framing on this funny. Europeans will talk about data sovereignty and decreasing reliance on the Americans and simultaneously cry foul when the Americans threaten to take their ball and go home.
> Europeans will talk about data sovereignty and decreasing reliance on the Americans and simultaneously cry foul when the Americans threaten to take their ball and go home.
I am sure that you are aware that there are more than one person in Europe, and most of the countries there being democracies, those people are allowed to have different opinions. They even have the right to express them, go figure!
I am sure that you are aware that there are more than one person in Europe, and most of the countries there being democracies, those people are allowed to have different opinions. They even have the right to express them, go figure!
Nah, you are more than welcome to take your ball.
You won’t because your administration is not stupid and knows what kind of soft power it gives them. But I really, sincerely, wish they would fuck off.
You won’t because your administration is not stupid and knows what kind of soft power it gives them. But I really, sincerely, wish they would fuck off.
> Be kind. Don't be snarky. Converse curiously; don't cross-examine. Edit out swipes.
> Comments should get more thoughtful and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive.
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
> Comments should get more thoughtful and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive.
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
Are you crying foul because I’m telling you that you are welcome to take your ball?
Talk about irony.
Talk about irony.
I made no indication as to my nationality in my original post and you responded with rudeness and hostility. This is illustrative of the type of person I was talking about. Your country would not exist if the Americans did not have bases in Europe. There are 26,000 people in the Swedish armed forces. You and everyone you know are either dead or speaking Russian in less than a year if the Americans leave.
Ok.
You can still take your ball.
You can still take your ball.
the offer was that the US would play ball and Europe would remain militarily weak and not start another world war. now that the Amerikka Oblast answers to mother Russia, the Europeans are having second thoughts about the match.
> now that the Amerikka Oblast answers to mother Russia
This is a nearly decade-old baseless conspiracy theory.
This is a nearly decade-old baseless conspiracy theory.
What’s the baseless part?
I remember the Mueller report explicitly stating they would say he was innocent if the evidence showed but that they could not indict a sitting president.
The theory might be incorrect be incorrect, but to claim it’s baseless is factually wrong
I remember the Mueller report explicitly stating they would say he was innocent if the evidence showed but that they could not indict a sitting president.
The theory might be incorrect be incorrect, but to claim it’s baseless is factually wrong
The Trump administration has been passing Ukraine targeting data enabling them to hit Russian energy infrastructure. Doesn't seem like much of an alliance.
American soldiers knelt down to hold the red carpet for the head of the KGB.
By this logic Gavin Newsom is an agent of the Chinese Communist Party.
TACO keeps flipflopping, but each time Russia ends up with an advantage. Random noise should average to zero. When it averages in one party's favour, it's not noise.
> but each time Russia ends up with an advantage.
They are fighting against a country with something like 1/5th of their population so this reasoning is completely fallacious. You will use any advantage gained by Russia as evidence of collusion without demonstrating that the advantage was based on collusion. The intelligence agencies have tried and failed to prove this theory of Russian infiltrationism for more than 10 years now; you haven’t seen something that they’ve missed.
They are fighting against a country with something like 1/5th of their population so this reasoning is completely fallacious. You will use any advantage gained by Russia as evidence of collusion without demonstrating that the advantage was based on collusion. The intelligence agencies have tried and failed to prove this theory of Russian infiltrationism for more than 10 years now; you haven’t seen something that they’ve missed.
FridayoLeary(1)
Don't underestimate the AIVD/MIVD. They have quite the history infiltrating Russian networks and operations and operate a rather useful satellite listening post.
That said, the current American administration probably doesn't see Russia as a threat.
America has always been spying on Europe, making it a bit harder by not willingly providing intel is a step in the right direction at least.
That said, the current American administration probably doesn't see Russia as a threat.
America has always been spying on Europe, making it a bit harder by not willingly providing intel is a step in the right direction at least.
That said, the current American administration probably doesn't see Russia as a threat.
Gee, you think? https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/pete-hegseth-tie-causes-...
The entire Trump administration is indistinguishable from a deliberate -- and very successful -- attack.
Gee, you think? https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/pete-hegseth-tie-causes-...
The entire Trump administration is indistinguishable from a deliberate -- and very successful -- attack.
Somebody might even say that the administration sees russia as a useful tool to force europeans into paying a protection tol, not sure it's limited to this administration either
> That said, the current American administration probably doesn't see Russia as a threat.
That's just pabulum for the masses which you're better off not repeating so as not to appear so easily fooled. Keep your friends close and your enemy closer [1] rings a bell I assume?
[1] https://www.thehistoryofenglish.com/keep-your-friends-close-...
That's just pabulum for the masses which you're better off not repeating so as not to appear so easily fooled. Keep your friends close and your enemy closer [1] rings a bell I assume?
[1] https://www.thehistoryofenglish.com/keep-your-friends-close-...
> Keep your friends close and your enemy closer
That this is the strategy being deployed is so far without meaningful evidence as far as the rest of the world is concerned.
It appears far more scattergun, corrupted, ignorant, incompetent and focused on the aggrandisement of US leadership than really at any time in US history.
That this is the strategy being deployed is so far without meaningful evidence as far as the rest of the world is concerned.
It appears far more scattergun, corrupted, ignorant, incompetent and focused on the aggrandisement of US leadership than really at any time in US history.
No it's a summary of repeated pro-Russia statements and actions. Ignoring it doesn't make it go away.
> The USA probably doesn't worry much
No, if they did, they'd know about certain attacks or planned attacks earlier [1]. So they should but they don't.
[1] https://www.amazon.nl/Het-oorlog-maar-niemand-ziet/dp/946381... - not an affiliated link, just the first one I could find.
No, if they did, they'd know about certain attacks or planned attacks earlier [1]. So they should but they don't.
[1] https://www.amazon.nl/Het-oorlog-maar-niemand-ziet/dp/946381... - not an affiliated link, just the first one I could find.
Stuxnet comes to mind.
If Dutch intelligence is failing to encrypt their data to the point that AWS / the US government could see it then they deserve to lose every byte of it.
Don't worry, these agencies seem to be appropriately paranoid. As an example: each intelligence worker gets three desktops PCs with various levels of security / airgapping.
The most paranoid use typewriters.
and burn, bury, and store the remains in the basement.
If they were truly paranoid, there would be a lot more they would do. I would call it naive, but then again, they are.
Why assume that's all they? This is just one example of reasonable paranoia I happen to know about. Most things they do are, unsurprisingly, secret.
Is it fair to say the US has been a bit erratic lately?
Seems to me its hard to maintain trust in these circumstances.
Yes, Americans made the mistake of electing somebody that doesn't believe in stepping down peacefully if he loses an election, among other things.
> doesn't believe in stepping down peacefully if he loses an election, among other things.
Source?
We do have evidence that he stepped down after his first term.
Source?
We do have evidence that he stepped down after his first term.
Certainly not peacefully.
Forgive me, I don't pay attention to the national news that much, what did I miss when Trump left the Whitehouse for Biden?
Edit: I know about January 6th, I thought OP was talking about something else, my mistake.
Edit: I know about January 6th, I thought OP was talking about something else, my mistake.
Incited a riot to interrupt the certification of the election with ~500 individuals resulting in the deaths of a few individuals and hundreds of convictions. Most notable Trump did not face prosecution.
I edited my previous comment because I knew of January 6th, I was just thinking OP meant something else. However I did not follow the events or aftermath with great detail.
Considering he was prosecuted for other things, I'm guessing there was not any actual evidence to support even a prosection?
Considering he was prosecuted for other things, I'm guessing there was not any actual evidence to support even a prosection?
> I'm guessing there was not any actual evidence to support even a prosection?
You don't have to guess, there was.
So much so that the special counsel that was shut down when Trump won re-election took the extraordinary step of declaring publicly that he had more than enough evidence to secure conviction of Donald Trump for Jan 6th.
https://www.npr.org/2025/01/14/g-s1-42358/trump-jack-smith-e...
You don't have to guess, there was.
So much so that the special counsel that was shut down when Trump won re-election took the extraordinary step of declaring publicly that he had more than enough evidence to secure conviction of Donald Trump for Jan 6th.
https://www.npr.org/2025/01/14/g-s1-42358/trump-jack-smith-e...
Not just prosecuted, convicted.
This is not some secret information, google it.
Sorry, there is a lot of misinformation from "both sides" - That is why I don't care much to watch the dog and pony show while I "dress myself" (to the person who wrote that, really?)
I am going to try to take this thread in good faith.
Here is an event that happened on Saturday, 7 million plus people took to the streets.
One side says this was a Hate America rally made up of marxists, hamas supporters and protestors paid by George Soros. The president shared an AI video of himself in a crown flying over the protesters he is supposed to represent dumping shit on them.
Every news outlet on the other side says it was a peaceful protest against authoritarian overreach.
Call me a biased leftist but the misinformation and divisive bullshit is severely tipped to the right side of the scale.
Here is an event that happened on Saturday, 7 million plus people took to the streets.
One side says this was a Hate America rally made up of marxists, hamas supporters and protestors paid by George Soros. The president shared an AI video of himself in a crown flying over the protesters he is supposed to represent dumping shit on them.
Every news outlet on the other side says it was a peaceful protest against authoritarian overreach.
Call me a biased leftist but the misinformation and divisive bullshit is severely tipped to the right side of the scale.
> I am going to try to take this thread in good faith
I am less inclined: “he did leave though” as evidence of innocence was a typical bad faith sea-lioned argument throughout election season.
I am less inclined: “he did leave though” as evidence of innocence was a typical bad faith sea-lioned argument throughout election season.
There isn't. The misinformation is from one side. You can just read the Jan 6 select committees report or just ask Grok to slop summarize it for you.
[deleted]
Lots of people, esp on HN, will say J6 was some kind of insurrection, but the BLM riots were peaceful protests. From the other perspective, what happened was a bunch of disgruntled republicans saw the riots that summer, among many other things, and rather than burn down Minneapolis, they took their grievances to the one place that actually could make a difference - the politicians in DC. Instead they were led thru the halls of the Capitol (by the police!) and the resulting footage used to frame the whole debacle as an insurrection. Certainly they were some angry protesters, but the premise that they intended to overthrow the govt by stopping the certification ceremony doesn’t even make sense, since nobody would have recognized it.
The riot wasn’t the attempt: it was the threat of violence that underscored the attempt, which was to happen in the chamber when Mike Pence chickened out (ask Chuck Grassley).
Only for once he didn’t chicken out.
Trump’s obvious, incandescent anger at Pence not doing his bidding makes it clear what that whole “protest” (along with Trump’s own plan to join it) was all about.
Any other interpretation is really a ludicrous, bad faith reframing of quite commonplace behaviour in attempted overthrows.
Only for once he didn’t chicken out.
Trump’s obvious, incandescent anger at Pence not doing his bidding makes it clear what that whole “protest” (along with Trump’s own plan to join it) was all about.
Any other interpretation is really a ludicrous, bad faith reframing of quite commonplace behaviour in attempted overthrows.
> Instead they were led thru the halls of the Capitol (by the police!) ... but the premise that they intended to overthrow the govt
You could have just said you didn't read the John Eastman memo and left it there. Or any of the Jack Smith findings. There was a coordinated top-down plan to violate the Electoral Count Act, its not even hidden. Just say you have no clue what you're talking about next time
You could have just said you didn't read the John Eastman memo and left it there. Or any of the Jack Smith findings. There was a coordinated top-down plan to violate the Electoral Count Act, its not even hidden. Just say you have no clue what you're talking about next time
His account was created four days ago and he's exclusively posting January 6th denialism. Neither of us should have taken the time to feed the troll.
> You could have just said you didn't read the John Eastman memo
Show me where exactly in the Eastman memo, the so called "coup plot", it calls for a group of protesters to go into the Capitol?
Spoiler: It doesn't. So it's actually you who hasn't read the memos. If anything, it shows Trump sought to remain president by legal means, a gray area at worst, but nothing to do with the "violent insurrection" claimed.
> Jack Smith findings
You mean the cases that were thrown out by the courts? And another that he closed himself? In other words, they had 4 years and found nothing. You are innocent until proven guilty, and ultimately he proved nothing.
Just say you have no clue what you're talking about next time.
Show me where exactly in the Eastman memo, the so called "coup plot", it calls for a group of protesters to go into the Capitol?
Spoiler: It doesn't. So it's actually you who hasn't read the memos. If anything, it shows Trump sought to remain president by legal means, a gray area at worst, but nothing to do with the "violent insurrection" claimed.
> Jack Smith findings
You mean the cases that were thrown out by the courts? And another that he closed himself? In other words, they had 4 years and found nothing. You are innocent until proven guilty, and ultimately he proved nothing.
Just say you have no clue what you're talking about next time.
> Show me where exactly in the Eastman memo, the so called "coup plot", it calls for a group of protesters to go into the Capitol?
Really cynical stuff. The Eastman memo was the blueprint on how to actually stop Biden's certification. That was the paperwork, the legal attack. January 6th was the kinetic attack.
Just because both actions were not detailed in the same piece of paper does not mean they weren't both part of a clearly coordinated action (of which the special counsel agreed).
https://cdn.cnn.com/cnn/2021/images/09/20/eastman.memo.pdf
> You mean the cases that were thrown out by the courts?
Wrong again. His findings were not thrown out. He ended the case himself because he knew Trump would shut him down anyway once back in office.
Look, I get it. This is a narrative that is very important to you. You can't believe that your side are the violent ones or your president is the lawless one. So much of this is a waste of time.
Just know that this is your narrative and it has no connection to reality.
Really cynical stuff. The Eastman memo was the blueprint on how to actually stop Biden's certification. That was the paperwork, the legal attack. January 6th was the kinetic attack.
Just because both actions were not detailed in the same piece of paper does not mean they weren't both part of a clearly coordinated action (of which the special counsel agreed).
https://cdn.cnn.com/cnn/2021/images/09/20/eastman.memo.pdf
> You mean the cases that were thrown out by the courts?
Wrong again. His findings were not thrown out. He ended the case himself because he knew Trump would shut him down anyway once back in office.
Look, I get it. This is a narrative that is very important to you. You can't believe that your side are the violent ones or your president is the lawless one. So much of this is a waste of time.
Just know that this is your narrative and it has no connection to reality.
pdt409231(1)
> If anything, it shows Trump sought to remain president by legal means, a gray area at worst, but nothing to do with the "violent insurrection" claimed.
You do realize John Eastman himself literally says he would lose 9-0 [1] when heard in the supreme court, admitting he is illegally violating the ECA with no sound legal argument. And he was literally disbarred for this behavior. [2] How do you reconcile with this cognitive dissonance?
> In other words, they had 4 years and found nothing.
So you just admit you have never heard the Jack Smith report. Just say that next time, why lie?
[1] https://www.nationalreview.com/news/eastman-admitted-bid-to-... [2] https://www.politico.com/news/2025/06/17/california-court-jo...
You do realize John Eastman himself literally says he would lose 9-0 [1] when heard in the supreme court, admitting he is illegally violating the ECA with no sound legal argument. And he was literally disbarred for this behavior. [2] How do you reconcile with this cognitive dissonance?
> In other words, they had 4 years and found nothing.
So you just admit you have never heard the Jack Smith report. Just say that next time, why lie?
[1] https://www.nationalreview.com/news/eastman-admitted-bid-to-... [2] https://www.politico.com/news/2025/06/17/california-court-jo...
> J6 was some kind of insurrection, but the BLM riots were peaceful protests
I'm not a fan of shameless whataboutisms, but this one is particularly bad. The attempted insurrection on January 6th had nothing to do with Black Lives Matter riots (Funny, you can never say those words. It's always an abbreviation).
It was a premeditated attack on the Capitol at the exact time and place the new president was being certified.
It is the most cut and dry example of an attempted coup this country has seen in decades, and it was organized and executed by the sitting, and current President.
There's no reason for you to try to remake history. Your guy got back into power and made all of his legal problems disappear.
He has not avoided prison because he was somehow not guilty. He avoided prison by overcoming the legal system.
I'm not a fan of shameless whataboutisms, but this one is particularly bad. The attempted insurrection on January 6th had nothing to do with Black Lives Matter riots (Funny, you can never say those words. It's always an abbreviation).
It was a premeditated attack on the Capitol at the exact time and place the new president was being certified.
It is the most cut and dry example of an attempted coup this country has seen in decades, and it was organized and executed by the sitting, and current President.
There's no reason for you to try to remake history. Your guy got back into power and made all of his legal problems disappear.
He has not avoided prison because he was somehow not guilty. He avoided prison by overcoming the legal system.
> He avoided prison by overcoming the legal system.
> this sounds like a failure of the legal system, not of the defendant
100%. He found a flaw and exploited it to escape justice, which is different than not being guilty of the crimes he clearly committed.
100%. He found a flaw and exploited it to escape justice, which is different than not being guilty of the crimes he clearly committed.
On second thought, isn't a core tenet of the US justice system "innocent until proven guilty"? Under that tenet, along with the fact that he was never found guilty, wouldn't US values require considering him innocent? Or have US values changed since that tenet was adopted?
He had already been convicted of multiple unrelated felonies.
He was in the process of being tried in multiple cases in multiple jurisdictions regarding his attempts to compromise an American election, each time with overwhelming, nearly comical evidence against him.
Saying he's innocent until proven guilty not only ignores the reality that the cases against him, even based on what is publicly available evidence, were airtight, but also the fact that these cases only went away because he won re-election and made them go away.
That's not justice.
He was in the process of being tried in multiple cases in multiple jurisdictions regarding his attempts to compromise an American election, each time with overwhelming, nearly comical evidence against him.
Saying he's innocent until proven guilty not only ignores the reality that the cases against him, even based on what is publicly available evidence, were airtight, but also the fact that these cases only went away because he won re-election and made them go away.
That's not justice.
Yes, good point.
pdt409231(2)
That one of the J6 insurrections was shot dead was just for shits and giggles, of course.
Bear in mind these people are very much pro-gun and believe the 2A is there to protect against the govt. If they had intended to violently overthrow the govt, it would have been very apparent. Yet not a single bullet was fired from the protestors. As you pointed out, the only ones doing the shooting was from the police towards the pro-trump people. That lady was unarmed, and was shot while climbing thru a window. (Considering this [1] was the standard for 'peaceful protests' at the time.) Hardly qualifies as self defense, and had this been any other situation the policeman would be stripped of his badge and jailed. But of course, Biden's DOJ declined to prosecute.
[1] https://www.reuters.com/resizer/v2/SNVVJFX2IVP2NLXEUPMJJMH2S...
[1] https://www.reuters.com/resizer/v2/SNVVJFX2IVP2NLXEUPMJJMH2S...
Let me tell you about Belgium in 1830. It got attached to the Netherlands, and their king would not listen to the locals. Things got completely out of hand until we got huge protests. All the while, the idea at the Belgian side was things would calm down once their king would stop being so bloody minded and make some concessions. Well, the Dutch king didn't, the revolution succeeded, and we more or less accidentally liberated ourselves. France couldn't invade yet, and there was a general air of: whoops,we created a country, now what? Belgium is a country to this day, for no real reason.
You can start an armed revolt, but you have no idea what's going to happen afterwards.
You can start an armed revolt, but you have no idea what's going to happen afterwards.
Arguing that it was a poor insurrection attempt does not negate what it was. Arguing that it could have been worse doesn't change the fact that five people died. The unarmed lady was shot climbing through a window you didn't say what window it was the window dividing a violent mob from congress people sheltering in place.
And making excuses for political violence guarantees that there will be more in the future. It should never be tolerated.
And making excuses for political violence guarantees that there will be more in the future. It should never be tolerated.
There aren’t some kind of magic levers inside of the building. To perform an insurrection you need military support. Do you think all of the people involved were just so dumb that they thought they could take over by simply being inside the building? The reality candidate where they intended to delay the proceedings by protesting on site makes massively more sense. Certainly one can disagree with the method there and say it wasn’t appropriate, but there is a lot of hysteria over it and I don’t really get why people are sucked in by it.
The plan was, according to the special counsel who had researched it, to buy time for the Eastman memo's plan of sending fake electors to create a constitutional crisis, whereas then the House needs to vote on who is president.
The attack on the Capitol wasn't meant to overthrow the government itself. It was meant to stop the certification, which it did, so that the rest of the plan could take place.
Under no circumstances take my word for it all of this is freely available.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastman_memos
The attack on the Capitol wasn't meant to overthrow the government itself. It was meant to stop the certification, which it did, so that the rest of the plan could take place.
Under no circumstances take my word for it all of this is freely available.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastman_memos
Okay, that isn’t an insurrection or an attack though. It’s some attempt at a legal loophole via targeted protest, right? Insurrectionists typically don’t rely on legal mechanisms to achieve their goals.
That is a strawman argument, or perhaps you misunderstand the comparison. Nowhere did I say it was a poor insurrection attempt. I said it was not an insurrection at all. They were set up and led into the capitol for the cameras, in a ploy to frame it as an insurrection. And ultimately, that's what happened.
To this claim that "5 people died" - how many were shot by the "violent insurrectionists"?
The answer: none.
1 policeman had a stroke and 4 committed suicide. You cannot blame the J6ers for the policemen's pre-existing conditions or suicidal tendencies. None of the suicides were coerced. The only person who was killed was the aforementioned pro trump woman.
To this claim that "5 people died" - how many were shot by the "violent insurrectionists"?
The answer: none.
1 policeman had a stroke and 4 committed suicide. You cannot blame the J6ers for the policemen's pre-existing conditions or suicidal tendencies. None of the suicides were coerced. The only person who was killed was the aforementioned pro trump woman.
You can't blame them for anything, it seems. Just a stroll, seeing the sights. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DXnHIJkZZAs
You do know they were convicted in court?
You do know they were convicted in court?
[deleted]
No, we have evidence that he ran out of road in his attempted autogolpe. There’s no evidence that he did what he “believed” was right. He literally tried to persuade people to change vote counts.
Maybe, but he's selling Trump 2028 hats, has them in the oval office, and is posting memes on Trump social about being president for eternity.
He's a business man that seems to like to troll.
Anyway, this is why I usually avoid talking about politics.
I'm sorry for the consternation that I caused.
Anyway, this is why I usually avoid talking about politics.
I'm sorry for the consternation that I caused.
> He's a business man that seems to like to troll.
“I don’t kid. Let me just tell you. Let me make it clear”
https://www.politico.com/news/2020/06/23/trump-joking-slowin...
“I don’t kid. Let me just tell you. Let me make it clear”
https://www.politico.com/news/2020/06/23/trump-joking-slowin...
Is it a troll if he's serious?
> Is it fair to say the US has been a bit erratic lately?
More than usual? Not really
More than usual? Not really
The current dutch (demissionary) PM is the former head of the Dutch intelligence services. To say that Trump isn't trusted by EU intelligence services would be a vast understatement.
Well, that's the same guy that planted Palantir in the Dutch government, since 2011.
Palantir might be an American company, but if you hire them it's not like a bunch of Americans come and take over your IT systems. There entire business model is "forward deployed engineers" who by necessity are locals and come help setup things on your own infrastructure.
unless those engineers know about, and can shut off, backdoors in code, then their locality is meaningless.
10 guys in Northern VA are making those calls, not the forward deployed engineers and not your infra.
palantir dials home at some point to verify a license, right?
10 guys in Northern VA are making those calls, not the forward deployed engineers and not your infra.
palantir dials home at some point to verify a license, right?
It does not. In fact most of the big enterprise software doesn't because enterprise won't allow it, or it's running airgapped.
Enterprise software is licensed based on support contracts and audits. "trust" is actually more present because a large company or the government can't just vanish if they're in license compliance breach and can later be sued to recover costs.
This is basically Oracle and IBMs business model: let people install whatever they want, then request a spot check if usage and discover the license breaches which can be rectified by buying more of whatever now that it's business critical.
Enterprise software is licensed based on support contracts and audits. "trust" is actually more present because a large company or the government can't just vanish if they're in license compliance breach and can later be sued to recover costs.
This is basically Oracle and IBMs business model: let people install whatever they want, then request a spot check if usage and discover the license breaches which can be rectified by buying more of whatever now that it's business critical.
I have never been a big enterprise integrator, and I thought exactly like this.
Then in 2024 the CrowdStrike BSOD screw up happened, and I was surprised to learn that no, not everything is airgapped. Apparently, businesses are okay with untrusted, unvetted, self-updating pieces of code that run in kernel mode.
Then in 2024 the CrowdStrike BSOD screw up happened, and I was surprised to learn that no, not everything is airgapped. Apparently, businesses are okay with untrusted, unvetted, self-updating pieces of code that run in kernel mode.
From my experience in Europe, this comes to being the least bad choice amongst a large series of bad choices. They install CrowdStrike in legacy devices running in critical industries like manufacturing because a lot of devices are legacy (think Windows 2000 and XP in 2025) which cannot be changed because either the company is bankrupt, the machine change would cost millions or the company is strapped for cash and/or labor to actually update all of the necessary (and not supported) industrial computers.
This + corporate shit policies from departents disconnected from the needs on the terrain.
This + corporate shit policies from departents disconnected from the needs on the terrain.
Yes, so?
Indeed, that wasn't a great decision. But... there is a serious lack of alternatives that makes it very hard to get around the United States and Israel when it comes to this kind of software. Of course the Dutch should have rolled their own but give that we can't even get our tax software sorted out (I think they've been at it for 30 years), had our digital notary services hacked and a number of other noteworthy items I think that maybe 'buy' instead of 'build' was the right decision.
It's very tricky, I would definitely not be able to claim that in his shoes I would have done better. As a prime minister he's done a fair job given the absolutely impossible situation in our government right now, and this decision is one of those where at least he's willing to make a stand (unlike many other EU countries).
This level of governing is always going to be an exercise in endless compromises.
Indeed, that wasn't a great decision. But... there is a serious lack of alternatives that makes it very hard to get around the United States and Israel when it comes to this kind of software. Of course the Dutch should have rolled their own but give that we can't even get our tax software sorted out (I think they've been at it for 30 years), had our digital notary services hacked and a number of other noteworthy items I think that maybe 'buy' instead of 'build' was the right decision.
It's very tricky, I would definitely not be able to claim that in his shoes I would have done better. As a prime minister he's done a fair job given the absolutely impossible situation in our government right now, and this decision is one of those where at least he's willing to make a stand (unlike many other EU countries).
This level of governing is always going to be an exercise in endless compromises.
Palantir installing their kit on your on prem network doesn't give them anymore magical ability to exfiltrate data than installing Microsoft office would.
> To say that Trump isn't trusted by EU intelligence services would be a vast understatement.
Trump isn't trusted by any intelligence service, but seems to only publicly distrust his own ones.
Trump isn't trusted by any intelligence service, but seems to only publicly distrust his own ones.
Well... taking into account that Trump was screaming and swearing at Zelenskyy to surrender to Russia or Putin will destroy Ukraine just yesterday... I don't see why the Dutch would stop sharing intel with the US
</sarcasm>
</sarcasm>
Where did you see this? I haven't read that anywhere.
I genuinely don't understand why Trump doing whatever Putin says, every time, is not a bigger deal in American politics.
I've never seen one human being own another human being so completely yet it seems to be a complete non-story.
I've never seen one human being own another human being so completely yet it seems to be a complete non-story.
It would be glorious to see Five Eyes fall apart, but that is much bigger ask. Canada would be wise to kick it off before the US annexes it.
Because what we all need is to see the Ministry of State Security be the most capable intelligence agency in the world . . . wait, no we don't.
Russia and China still exist and are pre-eminent dangers. The US has gone crazy but we still need to work together to discourage wars related to invading taiwan or Europe. I am terrified the US won't come back to being an actual democracy that follows the rule of law. At the same time, we can just stop surveilling our citizens in the democratic free world. We can just decide to do that.
The main danger is not Russia and China - it is us. Why? Because we actively stop big tech from developing and deploying cybersecurity solutions to protect billions of people. Why? Because we want us and Israel to be able to hack their systems, just not Russia and China. We want it both ways, to develop the most defensible and the most vulnerable system, and this is why we can never win. This self-incompatible ask will be our collective undoing.
Also, if you think the US was a proper democracy, I have news for you - it wasn't. It has been an alternating two-party system that prevents the system from evolving beyond its current state. In a real democracy, information from the voter would be maximized, the first result of which would be to transform it beyond a rigid two-party system. The voting system would not be first-past-the-post. Superior forms of voting such as Ranked Choice and Range Voting would not be banned as they are in numerous red states; they would be welcomed. People would not be denied the right to vote. Gerrymandering wouldn't be a thing.
Wake up and see the truth for the darkness it is.
Also, if you think the US was a proper democracy, I have news for you - it wasn't. It has been an alternating two-party system that prevents the system from evolving beyond its current state. In a real democracy, information from the voter would be maximized, the first result of which would be to transform it beyond a rigid two-party system. The voting system would not be first-past-the-post. Superior forms of voting such as Ranked Choice and Range Voting would not be banned as they are in numerous red states; they would be welcomed. People would not be denied the right to vote. Gerrymandering wouldn't be a thing.
Wake up and see the truth for the darkness it is.
five eyes falling apart now seems like a "be careful what you wish for" situation where we'd start losing long-held alliances?
I think you might be putting the cart before the (stampeding) horse here.
the vast majority of people rooting for this outcome want to see a more powerful china or russia
That's not true. We just don't want the Five Eyes to be used as excuse for domestic surveillance without a non-FISA court order, which strongly happens to be the case.
Five Eyes is the mechanism for intelligence sharing between countries. Domestic surveillance, if it occurs, is not inherently part of that framework.
And ironically, one of the reasons why Five Eyes was so valuable is that it allows spy agencies that are banned from domestic surveillance from surveilling their own allies and then sharing the results, or at the very least sharing intel they've received elsewhere.
Snitching on each other's citizens, thereby illegally engaging in domestic surveillance of one's own citizens, absolutely is an integral part of it.
The Germans would have loved intelligence on the Hamburg cell planning 9/11. It wouldn't have just been a benefit to them.
Those alliances are language and culture-based. Bit stronger than one orange dipshit can disrupt.
Sharing of information can be restricted though for various reasons, as has been suggested happened regarding Pearl Harbor.
Sharing of information can be restricted though for various reasons, as has been suggested happened regarding Pearl Harbor.
so they say.. perhaps they detected leaks and just doing some a/b testing now
Trump is widely adopted around intel services; at least in Spain.
Good
Smart move.
Covzire(2)
Dramatic headline. They're probably not sharing Ukraine-specific planning info but will continue sharing everything else. My theory is that they can't trust Trump to keep Ukraine stuff secret and I agree with them.
Am I the only one that doesn't really think of most of Europe as an ally anymore? If it wasn't for shared opposition to Russia and China I would support us cutting most of these ties anyways.
Well, if it helps, plenty of us Europeans don't think of the US as allies anymore. The current administration has made it quite clear.
The only hope is that the next administration will be a bit less eager to cut ties with all its allies and might fix some of the self-inflicted damage.
The only hope is that the next administration will be a bit less eager to cut ties with all its allies and might fix some of the self-inflicted damage.
The only actual hope is a common European defence policy (and industry) independent of NATO. The day Germany agrees to it, the dominos might fall, and the USA might realise what it has lost.
After that maybe we can cut our defense spending so we aren't covering for a bunch of other countries.
Maybe you can, indeed.
I mean, the US was paying for the ability to project both force and influence all over the world. Clearly, the US isn't willing to pay for either thing at the moment.
I mean, the US was paying for the ability to project both force and influence all over the world. Clearly, the US isn't willing to pay for either thing at the moment.
Germany where 20% of the population currently votes for AfD? I don't think they should get to have an army until they can figure out how not to use it for evil. They should have a lot of defence treaties and pay for them, though.
Germany, where 80% of the population does not vote for the AfD :)
What the United States has just demonstrated is that it's idiotic to rely on them for anything fundamentally vital when its government can drastically and dramatically go manic/bi-polar ever 4 years
Yes, you are the only one that thinks that.
I mean, without mentioning Russia or China, why should we?
Without a positive suggestion of who our allies should instead be, the question is incomplete. Surely you don’t think we should have none?
I mean kind of? I feel like other than allies of necessity (to counter other great powers) there isn't really a point in pretending to be friendly to countries that are different to us in practically every way.
Is the cultural difference really that big? Bigger, then say, the difference between NYC and rural Kansas?
Me and my generation (born in the 80s) of Western European have grown up admiring the US. Listening to your music, watching your movies, wearing your brands. And we still do, mostly.
The unease seems to have started some time after 9/11 though. European countries joined various wars, that turned out to be mostly a grab for control of oil states. (WMD anyone?)
And the US basically just stopped leading the way on international cooperation. Instead of cofounding the Internation Court of Justice, the US threatened to invade The Hague because of it. Instead of leading the way on averting climate change, having the tech, the global power and the money to do so, the US chose to block much of the initiative coming from elsewhere. And there've been many similar things.
So yeah, to me at least the US feels kind of like an old friend that's been derailed. By 9/11, perhaps.
I'd love to be proven wrong. I'd love to come back to visit the US more often in the future. But with this administration, I just won't risk it. And also.. I just don't want to, at the moment. :-/
Me and my generation (born in the 80s) of Western European have grown up admiring the US. Listening to your music, watching your movies, wearing your brands. And we still do, mostly.
The unease seems to have started some time after 9/11 though. European countries joined various wars, that turned out to be mostly a grab for control of oil states. (WMD anyone?)
And the US basically just stopped leading the way on international cooperation. Instead of cofounding the Internation Court of Justice, the US threatened to invade The Hague because of it. Instead of leading the way on averting climate change, having the tech, the global power and the money to do so, the US chose to block much of the initiative coming from elsewhere. And there've been many similar things.
So yeah, to me at least the US feels kind of like an old friend that's been derailed. By 9/11, perhaps.
I'd love to be proven wrong. I'd love to come back to visit the US more often in the future. But with this administration, I just won't risk it. And also.. I just don't want to, at the moment. :-/
Honestly fair enough. And for the record, I do not want the US and Europe to stop cooperating, I just think that we have lost much of the intrinsic cultural reasoning for allying in the first place. But at the same time, your statement about the urban/rural culture gap kind of refutes my point anyways. Either way, we still have much bigger fish to fry with Russia and China on the horizon, so we definitely have more in common with each other government wise compared to the rest of the world.
(Kind of) Changed my mind award <3
(Kind of) Changed my mind award <3
Happy to hear that! :-D
I'd say many people in the EU have similar views and ideas to about 2/3rds of the US (maybe I'm being generous on the US size), the half of the US that doesn't think the world is flat, that global warming might be happening, that following the rule of law is a good thing and we don't need to destroy the US to fix it.
Pretty sure lots of smart-minded europeans would love a chance for europe to detach and be actually allowed to develop its own services sector. Seems to me the US wants europe to be a contributing ally when it suits, and an open market to dump services into when it doesn't
Yes. And the current US government not opposing Russia, it's actively helping Russia destroy democracies
Why?
Different ideas on economics (socialism vs capitalism) and personal freedoms, lack of a shared cultural background anymore, etc.
What countries in Europe are not capitalist? Genuine question. And who has less personal freedoms in your opinion?
I'm genuinely curious, could you elaborate?
Which European countries would you consider to be socialist? Or perhaps a better question is what makes a country socialist?
Which personal freedoms are different in the US vs Europe?
I've lived in both US and Europe, and have an opinion on this, but really would like your take.
Which European countries would you consider to be socialist? Or perhaps a better question is what makes a country socialist?
Which personal freedoms are different in the US vs Europe?
I've lived in both US and Europe, and have an opinion on this, but really would like your take.
This is just American nonsense. Literally every single country in Europe is capitalist. Socialism is the democratic ownership of the means of production. Nowhere do we have that in Europe. Frankly this is the real problem with America, about half the population are extremely poorly educated and yet extremely arrogant. A deadly combination, clearly, as it’s led to the very sudden decline and fall of the American Empire.
MiiMe19(2)
Europe is also capitalist. The last time I checked we had stock exchanges, corporations, and private property laws.
Those don't seem like the best reasons. European and American economics are pretty close. Europe isn't socialist, it has broader welfare system than the US, but the US has significant welfare systems as well.
I've lived in the US and in Europe and the UK. Shared culture is still very significant. If anything, maybe even closer now than in the 90s.
There's probably other reasons to think about the why and how of alliances than these.
I've lived in the US and in Europe and the UK. Shared culture is still very significant. If anything, maybe even closer now than in the 90s.
There's probably other reasons to think about the why and how of alliances than these.
You are correct in terms of economics and culture, but the UK has turned extremely authoritarian and jails people for social media posts frequently.
I'm okay with a country jailing people for the crime of tweeting "we should murder all trans people". That probably should be a crime. Punishment should fit the crime though, so no more than a few weeks.
The UK is nowhere near as authoritarian as the USA currently is so I don't understand your criticism. If anything it could bring us together!
The US is allied with actual authoritarian regimes.
I'm not a big fan of the UK, I grew up there and left. But this whole UK is authoritarian thing is totally overblown in the US media and HN comments. Having free speech restrictions implemented by an elected government isn't authoritarian. You could even say that having totally free speech imposed by a non-elected government is authoritarian if people don't want it. These things are separate. I listen to UK media quite often (topical comedies mostly) and my feeling is that these laws are generally supported. There's a lot of negativity about social media from bullying up to incitement of violence.
I'm not a big fan of the UK, I grew up there and left. But this whole UK is authoritarian thing is totally overblown in the US media and HN comments. Having free speech restrictions implemented by an elected government isn't authoritarian. You could even say that having totally free speech imposed by a non-elected government is authoritarian if people don't want it. These things are separate. I listen to UK media quite often (topical comedies mostly) and my feeling is that these laws are generally supported. There's a lot of negativity about social media from bullying up to incitement of violence.
The US is allied with actual authoritarian regimes.
So is the EU, btw: Hungary, Turkey, and Israel.
So is the EU, btw: Hungary, Turkey, and Israel.
yes? I wasn't doing a moral comparison, I was just pointing out that it's not really in the equation of reasons the US makes alliances.
Israel is not authoritarian in present time
> socialism vs capitalism
What is different is that there is more opposition and cultural resistance to hyper capitalism. Think monopolies, corporatism, live-to-work, hustle-culture.
With regards to any messaging about "freedom" in the USA, be vigilant, I do think people will be unpleasantly surprised about what has been transacted away. Personal freedoms are indeed extremely important, so zero Schadenfreude here. And yes, those lobby groups in the EU fail to get their stupid anti-encryption laws passed, but they keep trying, so it is frightening. Citizens and visitors of the Five Eyes have lost any privacy already, but we need all of us to fight back.
TLDR: it is better to cooperate around common causes than to fight imaginary opponents. We are in the same boat.
I genuinely can't tell whether you are serious or trolling. Please tell me more about how Europe is socialist.
Or what does that even mean to you. Is socialism when state exists? You are not first American to say that, and every time it happens, I'm genuinely surprised. (I mean, rhetorical question. I suppose that's what socialism is to you. And you are a part of a problem too, because you are growing up internally people who genuinely believe that socialism is good because it means healthcare and higher education. Words no longer have meaning to you in America.)
Or what does that even mean to you. Is socialism when state exists? You are not first American to say that, and every time it happens, I'm genuinely surprised. (I mean, rhetorical question. I suppose that's what socialism is to you. And you are a part of a problem too, because you are growing up internally people who genuinely believe that socialism is good because it means healthcare and higher education. Words no longer have meaning to you in America.)
MiiMe19(2)
> Different ideas on economics (socialism vs capitalism) and personal freedoms, lack of a shared cultural background anymore, etc.
In other words, you mean there isn't any country that you think could be an ally to the US?
Can you name any?
In other words, you mean there isn't any country that you think could be an ally to the US?
Can you name any?
Yes. Aside from Trump the United States and Europe share overwhelming interests and values. When Trump is gone they should work hard to repair what he has destroyed
Tensions in Venezuela and Dutch interests in the Caribbean. That's the explanation and its public posturing that likely doesn't reflect reality.
The Dutch governments haven't exactly shown a lot of interest into their Caribbean links over the last few decades. The actions of the US regarding Venezuela are barely getting mentioned in the Dutch news, and the physical proximity to Aruba/Bonaire/Curacao is not even mentioned in passing.
The government-funded news was surprisingly open about it two months ago:
Many residents would rather see the American ships leave than arrive. Curaçao traditionally maintains close ties with Venezuela, and residents fear the island will be drawn into a geopolitical conflict. [...] The Dutch government determines the course in these areas under pressure from Washington, while Curaçao itself has little influence.
https://nos.nl/artikel/2580380-curacao-voelt-spanning-tussen...
Many residents would rather see the American ships leave than arrive. Curaçao traditionally maintains close ties with Venezuela, and residents fear the island will be drawn into a geopolitical conflict. [...] The Dutch government determines the course in these areas under pressure from Washington, while Curaçao itself has little influence.
https://nos.nl/artikel/2580380-curacao-voelt-spanning-tussen...
> ...inter-agency relations between Dutch and American intelligence organizations remain “excellent”.
While I highly doubt that Dutch Intelligence is significantly more accountable tothat the American ones are, and therefore don't assume that any meaningful intelligence will actually be withheld (or at least, if is being withheld, it isn't because of the decision being discussed in this piece), BUT it is at least interesting that they made this announcement, which suggests some element somewhere in the European deep state is at least trying to pressure Washington in some way.
While I highly doubt that Dutch Intelligence is significantly more accountable tothat the American ones are, and therefore don't assume that any meaningful intelligence will actually be withheld (or at least, if is being withheld, it isn't because of the decision being discussed in this piece), BUT it is at least interesting that they made this announcement, which suggests some element somewhere in the European deep state is at least trying to pressure Washington in some way.
[deleted]
Everything's for sale. The Dutch were still buying natural gas from Russia as late as 2020 [0] despite 6 years of irregular warfare in the Donbas at that point and 12 years of South Ossetia in Georgia. Hell, they still might be through some sort of third-party reseller.
Compared to the early years of the Donbas invasion, having a leader full of hot air is small potatoes.
There's always room for spies to get what they want. It's just a matter of what that will be.
[0] https://www.gasunie.nl/en/gas-infrastructure/blog-247-energy...
Compared to the early years of the Donbas invasion, having a leader full of hot air is small potatoes.
There's always room for spies to get what they want. It's just a matter of what that will be.
[0] https://www.gasunie.nl/en/gas-infrastructure/blog-247-energy...
The main reason for the Dutch dependence on Russian gas is the rapid shutdown of the Slochteren field for political reasons[0], while there weren't yet any LNG terminals available to import it from outside Europe. Considering Europe didn't yet view Russia as a genuine threat it's not exactly surprising that importing Russian gas was seen as a viable short-term strategy.
[0]: The Slochteren field still has plenty of gas remaining. It was shut down due to pushback from the inhabitants of Groningen, whose houses were being destroyed by earthquakes - caused by soil subsidence as a result of gas extraction. If there were to have been a serious war with Russia at that point, The Netherlands could've trivially shut off all gas imports by scaling the extraction back up.
[0]: The Slochteren field still has plenty of gas remaining. It was shut down due to pushback from the inhabitants of Groningen, whose houses were being destroyed by earthquakes - caused by soil subsidence as a result of gas extraction. If there were to have been a serious war with Russia at that point, The Netherlands could've trivially shut off all gas imports by scaling the extraction back up.
The point isn't about the potential for future production of natural gas or other petrochemical products from Slochteren. The point is that Europeans regularly participate in dealings with countries that act against their best interests on a regular basis, and that there's no real reason to believe that the Dutch will behave any differently with Trump.
> Considering Europe didn't yet view Russia as a genuine threat it's not exactly surprising that importing Russian gas was seen as a viable short-term strategy.
That's exactly what I'm talking about. Everything should have told Europeans that Russia was reverting back to its old autocratic imperial ways. Everything. Ukrainian politicians and internal dissidents were being poisoned with dioxins and radioisotopes almost 20 years ago by Russian agents. Putin was stacking on more and more repression as the years went by. Hacking campaigns have been a constant problem in the West for decades with strong evidence to suggest the Russian government as a threat actor. The Russian military was building weapons specifically designed to counter NATO, which is the backbone of strategic defense in Europe. And that's before you take into account things like the South Ossetia war which saw the Russians literally invade another country for wanting to move towards a Western sphere of influence.
What was funding all of this? Purchases of Russian petroleum products by Europeans who were told over and over to stop by American allies, only to be caught with their flies unzipped when the tanks started rolling into the Donbas three years ago.
I have no reason to think that the continent will behave any differently when faced with a Trump administration that would give them benefits to look the other way. The damage he could do to the continent is insignificant compared to what Putin did.
> Considering Europe didn't yet view Russia as a genuine threat it's not exactly surprising that importing Russian gas was seen as a viable short-term strategy.
That's exactly what I'm talking about. Everything should have told Europeans that Russia was reverting back to its old autocratic imperial ways. Everything. Ukrainian politicians and internal dissidents were being poisoned with dioxins and radioisotopes almost 20 years ago by Russian agents. Putin was stacking on more and more repression as the years went by. Hacking campaigns have been a constant problem in the West for decades with strong evidence to suggest the Russian government as a threat actor. The Russian military was building weapons specifically designed to counter NATO, which is the backbone of strategic defense in Europe. And that's before you take into account things like the South Ossetia war which saw the Russians literally invade another country for wanting to move towards a Western sphere of influence.
What was funding all of this? Purchases of Russian petroleum products by Europeans who were told over and over to stop by American allies, only to be caught with their flies unzipped when the tanks started rolling into the Donbas three years ago.
I have no reason to think that the continent will behave any differently when faced with a Trump administration that would give them benefits to look the other way. The damage he could do to the continent is insignificant compared to what Putin did.
The Dutch did extend Groningen for a time after the Russians invaded Ukraine.
The problem with earthquakes is no one wants to be held accountable when a house is destroyed and people die.
The problem with earthquakes is no one wants to be held accountable when a house is destroyed and people die.
Not to mention the downing of MH17, with 193 Dutch citizens aboard, by the Russians in 2016.
So sure, there are probably some signals the USA won't receive, but they still get the bulk of it.