BlueOak

War is not a prerequisite for respect. It's a fallacy to suggest that nations only learn through conflict, it dismisses diplomacy, institutions, education, and hard lessons in human suffering. None of which necessitate repeating the exact same cycles that others have done. You are advocating for suffering as a teacher rather than empathy, strategic leadership, and wisdom. India and Pakistan don't need another decade of conflict to honor a line on a map. They need leaders who can see beyond the past, organisations and institutions that foster cooperation, and citizens educated to demand the accountability of their governments, not educated to look to conflict as the preferred solution. If you really wanted to heal that area of the world, that is what you'd be advocating for, because it'd be required if a line were there or not. (And by your own advice, more movement over the borders) You are severely glazing over India's and China's history if you are calling them peaceful. To the point i'm just going to say refer to google or wookieepedia, because we'll be here all day going over the details. Humans are humans the world over, all countries have fought wars, and suffered through violence done to them

There are 44 countries in Europe. With well over 100 borders, with diverse cultures and people and yet nearly all of them are amiable. All the examples you are talking about are either not in Europe (Turkey) or funded and armed by Russia. The last parts are literally half in Asia. For WW2. As I said before, its a poor example to cite things over 70 years ago and then use that as a basis to live by, it's just one more excuse as to why things can't be improved now. We didn't, we took what happened and improved life for everyone here. BRICS countries are stuck in the past, constantly. Even though Russia's efforts to push governments into being militaristic and rightwing have had some effect, there is still nobody here looking to fight each other over borders inside Europe.

There are a few things here. Have you seen how fractured europe is, and how they are not constantly fighting each other? I mean there is one region in the Balkans where Russia likes to stoke trouble, and some localized issues each country faces, but for the most part we don't resort to violence. So the argument that a border on a map makes people violent never sits well with me, it's an excuse and a poor one. The people there are adults, they need to act like it, take responsibility for their own actions and stop looking 70+ years into the past if they ever want to move forward. Then we get people saying let's dissolve borders, which while it can work, its as arbitrary a solution as making the border in the first place. Its avoiding the pressures causing the issues, the usual looking at the symptom (or a factor here) not the cause. I'm just going to say it and not sugarcoat it for all BRICS members or supporters. I don't go to my neighbour when he's doing something I don't like and tell him that we don't need this boundary or kick in his door, I wouldn't do that even if there were no police looking over my shoulder. I work it out or I live with it. Boundaries always exist, they'd exist even if we dissolved the map line, and although the expressions of violence would lessen in magnitude (a good argument), the pressures causing these issues would not disappear. Now people will come back with all the difficulties, and i'll say YES. Its not easy. But war isn't the answer either. This goes for Russia, America, India, Pakistan, and anyone else who picks the path of a large mobilization or military action. I am not a pacifist either, and don't say violence isn't an option, but airstrikes or missile strikes over the border on a neighbouring nuclear power would be bottom of the list of things I'd be doing. - It all comes about because once again, people have been socially engineered to be authoritarian, right wing and frankly bloodthirsty, so they need large-scale scale overt 'solutions' that all they do is make these problems WORSE not better unless taken to absurd extremes.

And India can't just walk all over disputed territories or cut off water supplies without consequence. Two far right governments with territorial disputes and people waging war all over the world are not likely to coexist peacefully. Yes terrorism is abhorrent, but the balance is off, and further violence will off-balance us further. Which is what's happening. Its like complaining about symptoms of the issue.

Far right government vs Military Dictatorship in a time where war is not only normalized but supported and backed by industry. As i've said 5 million times the world has shifted way too far authoritarian and right with no counterbalance or authority which supercedes nation states with a more benevolent mandate. I watched Osho say dissolve world governments, and I face-palmed, because that's not going to address the root cause of any of this. What good would it do to have this on regional levels or even a global authority sharing the mindset these countries' populations do? All we've done by removing western liberal influence globally is replace it with an authority that sets the planet back several hundred years, and I what I can't believe is nobody on this planet but me and a few others can see it. Yes it looks different, yes it has different moral frameworks, but expansion is still the goal, and violence is still the tool of it.

Putting aside allergies, disease etc, sensitivity tends to come about from diet. Your body will know if something is junk if you detox all that particular food out of your system, then spend a few years not eating it and go back to eating it. I do agree, though that it's felt more strongly if you develop body awareness. To remain objective here, I will substitute junk with 'anything'. It's just more noticeable in things which have a higher impact on your body/mind.

No. You are just chosing not to be the victim of your creation.

Part of the process of God realization. More concisely, realizing you are or are creating infinity.

Authenticity vs A Created Reality that I want to experience. It's a tough duality to collapse. This seems to repeat in an endless dance throughout everyone's day to day experience.

That's why I said Pakistan, not the government of Pakistan. In the mind of the average person you won't see a difference. That's why they say America, not the government of America for example. Or Russia not the government of Russia, the distinctions are not made in the general populace, thus their elected leaders either are of that mind directly or have to respond to that. I usually go along with it, then every so often I restate that most people just want their basic needs met, they are the same the world over. 6 Human needs conversations, etc. https://www.tonyrobbins.com/blog/do-you-need-to-feel-significant https://www.earlyyears.tv/the-6-human-needs/ https://tealswan.com/resources/articles/relationships-and-the-six-human-needs Then it just becomes a matter of how to satisfy those needs with the least amount of suffering globally, and if we want to take that even further, the most amount of joy/love/gratitude, but that's not usually the conversation we are having.

There will be a certain level of conflict. We can't ignore that we have a far right government in India and a Military dictatorship in Pakistan. India has threatened the water of Pakistan and escalated in Kashmir previously, Pakistan have killed people in India, and now India has launched missiles. Major countries around the world have already lowered the bar for invasion and set a precedent for doing it repeatedly, as well as pumping out more war industry to assist it (excess arms and production or the ability to produce arms) The civilian industries such as media or the collective mind of each nation and individual expect it. Along with electing leaders that represent strong stances against threats matching that expectation or fear. Each war makes more war likely. They are already above what they've been at before, with the current governments further right than ever. The wrong missile hits the wrong person, the wrong commander or official gets killed, that'll be it. I want to say it won't go into a full scale war, but I can't call this one; its too close to being either. The only thing is the nukes, it may pull them back, it may not.

You are never a victim. You are always the creator.

Eh. 30 Seconds into a video of hers. + Female + Pretty + Engaging + Extravert + Charismatic + Interacting with her community + Funny Social Commentary + Self-deprecating/humble + Lighthearted + + + + + + + etc We'll add lucky to that also. Because any youtuber doing well had a certain amount of luck, even if they had everything I just listed going for them and more. Do you know the percentile of those doing well on youtube, hint, its like winning the lottery.

Come be a cat for a few minutes Love these, sorry if they are already posted

Like 99.999999% of the world, we all create victim narratives, me included. Until someone realises they create the entirety of their experience, accepts that, and readjusts every single thought or pattern they enter into, changing themselves from the victim to the creator. But this would mean they are ready to finish human experience and accept that they are creating their own universe/experience.

Yes. I suppose flipping it to the Russia perspective. I would say giving Belarus nukes would be the best thing for Russia. Especially as people can leap to the old, 'well they are not controlled by Belarus', as if Belarus isn't a direct puppet of Russia. Its not the best thing for the world, but the best thing for Ukraine, yes.

No guarantee from Russia is worth anything without a military alliance, and no alliance will be allowed by the Russians, so there is nothing to offer Ukraine. Europe won't risk getting into conflict directly if it can sit back and let Russia just waste itself in the east of Ukraine. Russia is in a dire position economically, militarily, politically, and demographically in terms of trade or further development in the future. They just hide it better than most. But some people are willing to accept dire positions, and others are not. This is the final decades of dominance for central European powers, Russia, eventually the USA etc just because of demographic concerns alone, let alone things like water and resource shortages. Unless AI really kicks into high gear. Anyone who comments that Russia or Ukraine is 'doing well' after this much death and economic downsizing, in a global recession, is honestly is blinding themselves from reaching more parity on the situation. For that matter, anyone telling me any country is doing well is ignoring the objective reality or doesn't care for economic and social conditions relative to how they were even a few years ago, let alone decades. Now to the European comments, people here have just decided to keep going further right into fascism also so on mass they really couldn't care less what happens in either country, they'll keep funding the war indefinitely on the Ukraine side if it suits their own interests and it does @LordFall 'Europe can't field 64k troops? What? Their economy is vastly bigger than Russia, they have barely been touched by the war. If they wanted to they could field millions. Russia grinding itself down on Ukraine's guns barely bothers people in Europe at this stage, its only a bonus to keep the dictator in check and slowly cripple them from advancing further. People have told me about Ukraine's manpower issue forever, yet here we are, and they still have people fighting. I said from the start it'll be many years of disturbances, and it will. There is zero benefit from the Ukrainian perspective, or mine for that matter, in giving Russia anything at all. Not without the strength to resist another invasion. Because Ukraine doesn't trust one thing Russia says and I don't either, I also don't trust Trump at all to intervene or Europe either without a direct military alliance (and maybe not even then)

Yeah, there have been two russian assassinations talked about on our soil in my lifetime. The other was a russian businessman called Alexander Perepilichny. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Perepilichny

No, they won't. I have zero confidence that anything will invoke Article 4 short of a full-scale occupation and overthrow of a member country's government. That doesn't mean there isn't a consequence for every action however.

Yeah they take out people all the time. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Russian_assassinations That's just the ones we know of publicly. I mean, unofficially, Russian's fall out of windows more often than I have breakfast, I stopped listening years ago when someone reports it. For context, the US do plenty too: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_assassinations_by_the_United_States they just tend to be non-Americans, al-Qaeda or the Middle East generally.

Russians have killed plenty of people before with the same tactics, nothing new here. Surprised anyone is even doubting things like this anymore. Just a Tuesday for the Kremlin.

Body awareness and what you are used to dictate this. You reshape yourself based on what you eat and experience every single day. Blanket statements like this aren't objectively true.

So putting aside we can create AI to make people more intelligent, which defeats any argument to the contrary if its implemented well. I want you to picture a future where the AI has standardized answers for every question, or rough estimations of it, and the same for jobs or tasks. Now, to stand out for a job, you need to do better than that, or at least be different enough to be of benefit. This automatically means that society has to operate at a certain level from the get-go, and that people will need to be educated to the level the AI operates at as a base to start at through their development. This is limited only by what society can accept or receive, so there is a limit to how far AI can boost us up but it's still a boost for all of us. *And I finally see the end to the authoritarian collective nightmare of the last 20 years, where diversity of operation or thought is more important than hierarchical ability again.

I guess it depends how you use it. Its making me more aware, which is the only thing I take with me at my death. For this reason it's invaluable. But then so can a dog or a painting. Life doesn't discriminate unless you do. The creation of consciousness can better be modelled and mapped with the AI, which is intriguing to the part of me which loves doing so. But most fascinately, you can put two subjects together in a custom GPT's persona and get answers someone might never conceive (Which I love). For example a perfect balance of American political dynamics by including all the relevant domains, OR a painter and a mountain climber, OR a psychologist and a engineer OR a doctor and an environmentalist etc. - This is where human development can skyrocket. I wouldn't say more intelligent directly, but indirectly, it's facilitating all the things that can make me more intelligent when I engage with them at a faster rate. It certainly increases my capacity to do anything when I engage with it, and as indicated the variety of responses and interactions I can access. If people use it as a crutch it'll be a crutch, if they use it as a tool it'll be a tool, if its a device for analysis, that's what it'll be etc. *Its told me multiple times that a job I can specialise in is facilitating this growth to people. And perhaps I should. But I can't be certain of the return for my time invested so I hesitate.

If we drop the word obligated. Do you take the well-being of your spouse as your well-being? This will create resistance in some people, because of the level of individualism in English-speaking countries. So to prevent this, it's not a statement it's a question. If the well-being of your spouse is taken as your own well-being, then it's the same thing. If you see your well-being as individual in nature, it isn't. Others might consider the relationship as a whole, and whether it would benefit, so they are relating to the relationship. These thoughts take a certain mindset in the spouse you pick, and in yourself to have a reflection of it given back.