Oh, absolutely. The sneakier part is that they keep altering the snapshot. The historical temperature record keeps getting corrected, and always in the direction that shows more warming.
Outstandingly well said and reasoned, Peter! This adds in the vital element of international context as well, to paint a picture that looks a LOT like Ukraine-Russia in BOTH an international and chronological setting.
It's hard to know what's going on over there because of the general ineptitude of the media, but it's likely that we DO have a decent idea of what went on there in less recent history, and your explanation of things fits well in that sense. As any correct assessment of anything must.
I love the reference to "snapshot geography!" One thing about that, of course: the "snapshot" changes over time. Just a question of who's holding the camera, I guess. However it adds a cautionary note to the Fukuyama notion that history might have an endpoint.
Of course, the snapshot is in the eye of the beholder. And, beholders do change the tunes they whistle (though they often deny the change).
There's more than a bit of "Oh, NOW you care?" smug-sarcasm coming from various quarters, but that's as much contrarian posturing as anything else. Unlike, say, Yemen, this business matters globally because of what comes next. Putin wouldn't be satisfied with Ukraine, even if the West conceded.
Oh, absolutely. The sneakier part is that they keep altering the snapshot. The historical temperature record keeps getting corrected, and always in the direction that shows more warming.
Sort of the discredited "steady state" view of the universe."
Outstandingly well said and reasoned, Peter! This adds in the vital element of international context as well, to paint a picture that looks a LOT like Ukraine-Russia in BOTH an international and chronological setting.
It's hard to know what's going on over there because of the general ineptitude of the media, but it's likely that we DO have a decent idea of what went on there in less recent history, and your explanation of things fits well in that sense. As any correct assessment of anything must.
I love the reference to "snapshot geography!" One thing about that, of course: the "snapshot" changes over time. Just a question of who's holding the camera, I guess. However it adds a cautionary note to the Fukuyama notion that history might have an endpoint.
Of course, the snapshot is in the eye of the beholder. And, beholders do change the tunes they whistle (though they often deny the change).
There's more than a bit of "Oh, NOW you care?" smug-sarcasm coming from various quarters, but that's as much contrarian posturing as anything else. Unlike, say, Yemen, this business matters globally because of what comes next. Putin wouldn't be satisfied with Ukraine, even if the West conceded.