393
u/hagamablabla 5d ago
Zelensky is also taking the fight against data centers to the next level.
279
u/GripAficionado 5d ago
Zelensky wanted to build a gaming PC and saw the latest pricing on a 5090, RAM and SSD and took out his frustration on a few Russian data centers.
89
u/PooMonger20 5d ago
Who knew Zelensky would be the one to cause lower RAM prices.
He is our savior.
16
u/geniice 4d ago
He hasn't. Indeed one the fun things about this is that with hardware prices being so high those datacenters are going to be seriously expensive to rebuild.
6
u/Zack_Wester 3d ago
True But consider that most Data Center are not making a profit and are just shuffeling money around between 3 peaple.
Guess what happen when one of them while holding the money just have some of that cash catch fire.
can´t shovel money around if its on fire.
so This might actually cause the other two players to go... we can´t afford this.94
u/chickenfriedrice416 i showed u my dongfeng pls respond 5d ago
He wants a PC so he can play Minecraft woth Trump, Obama and Biden
11
26
5
55
u/Narrow_Vegetable_42 3000 grey Kinetic Energy Penetrators of Pistorius 5d ago
Environmentalist hero. All he wants is yellow fields and blue skies. Call him a visionary, but not a dreamer
1
u/PandoraIACTF_Prec I snort noncredibleMa9pie artwork 4d ago
Tell him I'm interested on some big boom drones for data centers here in Asia lol /j
141
u/GripAficionado 5d ago
Ukraine saw Just stop oil and took that literally. You gotta love kinetic sanctions, it's the best.
21
135
u/PermissionSoggy891 5d ago
Paving the way towards a better future, one destroyed oil facility at a time!
18
596
u/Downtown-Act-590 Unleash L-39 cruise missiles 5d ago
You hate oil because of climate change, I hate oil because of our adversaries.
We are not the same.
112
u/Pyrhan Pyrotechnic flair 5d ago
Porque no los dos?
5
u/redmercuryvendor Will trade Pepsi for Black Sea Fleet 4d ago
Maxim 29: The enemy of my enemy is the enemy's enemy. No more, no less.
1
262
u/Zalapadopa 🇸🇪 Perpetual NATO Applicant 🇸🇪 5d ago
All the countries that produce oil are evil. Coincidence?
It's a thick black goo, it's obvious that it would have a dark corrupting influence!
211
u/kozak_mazepa 5d ago
Yeah, especially Norway. Thick bastards
57
u/Downtown-Act-590 Unleash L-39 cruise missiles 5d ago
They raided my home on a longship
1
2d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/AutoModerator 2d ago
This post is automatically removed since you do not meet the minimum karma or age threshold. You must have at least 100 combined karma and your account must be at least 4 months old to post here.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
132
u/Narrow_Vegetable_42 3000 grey Kinetic Energy Penetrators of Pistorius 5d ago
Well, actually they just pump it out of the ground right off their coast and immediately ship it far away, not letting the black goo touch their land. They are just protecting themselves.
53
u/Stennan 🇸🇪 Gripens for Taiwan 🇹🇼 5d ago
Hence the 95% EV share of new car sales.
42
u/Narrow_Vegetable_42 3000 grey Kinetic Energy Penetrators of Pistorius 5d ago
to be fair, they had a 99% renewable electricity production since they had electricity at all. Lucky mofos.
14
u/DeathBonePrime 4d ago
Not lucky, smart. They have a well educated population voting like how a well education population should vote
5
u/Narrow_Vegetable_42 3000 grey Kinetic Energy Penetrators of Pistorius 4d ago
When they started producing electricity, they were all poor farmers. The first ever elecricity production was created for the first ever factory in Norway. Universities came later.
38
u/GripAficionado 5d ago
Ah, a Swede I see. And they're disgustingly good at skiing as well, it's not fair.
15
u/XhazakXhazak Fun-Tzu in the Sun-Tzu 5d ago
5
u/geniice 4d ago
All the countries that produce oil are evil. Coincidence?
No. Enough Oil is essentially an economic cheat code. You don't need your population to be productive so you can oppress them without side effects.
You can also be annoying to other countries because realistically someone is always going to buy your oil.
5
u/chattytrout 5d ago
Only the heavy and sour stuff. Light and sweet crude is basically the nectar of the gods.
3
5
5
52
u/super__hoser Self proclaimed forehead on warhead expert 5d ago
Once again, the Armed Forces of Ukraine is making the world a better place.
70
129
u/AutistiPyry 5d ago
Greta seems like the type of person that would bomb oil facilities if legally possible.
68
u/AsstacularSpiderman 5d ago
One doesn't really care about the law when bombing oil facilities though.
61
u/AutistiPyry 5d ago
Greta is playing the long game. It's easier to bomb more than one if you are not in prison after the first.
5
u/sphericalhors 4d ago
She is free to join the Ukrainian army, where bombing oil facilities is not only legal, but you get money paid for doing that.
9
u/Helpful-Work-3090 vark vark vark 5d ago
In my mind, given the power, she'd either follow one of two extremes: Either we would find out that she's actually a pussy and bluffing, or she'd go on a power trip and use every means necessary to remove all forms of fossil fuels from the world.
22
u/Foxyfox- 5d ago
I'd bet money on the latter.
28
u/Serupael 5d ago
She's one crashout away from founding a worldwide ecoterrorist network bombing pipelines and assassinating oil execs
10
1
6
-2
u/Helpful-Work-3090 vark vark vark 5d ago
Yeah, that's the idea I get. I'm all for wisely using our natural resources, and not unnecessarily polluting the world, but she goes a bit too far in my opinion
2
-21
u/PirateQueen8352 5d ago
Well, considering she and her dumbass friends threw their phones into the ocean, I can safely say she's just a dumb bitch who doesn't actually care. Gods, I wish Time magazine had run the other article instead...
18
36
u/T_Engri 5d ago
Give Greta a few Flamingos and even the playing field
3
u/Shoddy-Childhood-511 2d ago
This. She does what she can, but she's only one person, and not wealthy.
If folks want to troll Greta, then they should crowd fund $500k for one Flamingo with her face painted on, and the request that Ukraine hit a refinery using it. After that, they can write "Greta herself 0, Internet Greta trolls 1" and laugh.
I suppose CloudFlare could be more comparable the opposite way: CloudFlare has made a lot of money off Ukraine's recent strike on a Russian data center, because it took out some major Russian botnets. Amusingly, Trump appears afraid Ukrainian strikes on Russia data centers could cost Republicans the elections.
CloudFlare always talks about energy efficiency, etc. If they were serious, they could pick out k Russian data centers that help run botnets, and secretly give Ukraine k million dollars to hit those with Flamingos. Ukraine builds 2 k Flamingos at $500k each, hit all the requested data centers, and also hit some refineries. Voila, positive climate action, while profitable for CloudFlare.
203
u/SecondaryMilk 5d ago
Funny meme and all, but I kind of hate how people dog on Greta for caring about the world. Like talk about how “ineffective” she is all you want, but she’s doing more than 99% of people, at least she tries.
108
u/HolyMoleyGuacamoly 5d ago
100%. she was like 12 and led global school walkouts while getting absolutely roasted by right wing chuds. she’s petty impressive
-60
u/The-Board-Chairman ブァカ者が、ドイツの科学は世界一！ 5d ago
She didn't lead anything. Her parents instrumentalized their daughter because children make for better emotional PR.
38
u/HolyMoleyGuacamoly 5d ago
that’s not true at all actually
-32
u/The-Board-Chairman ブァカ者が、ドイツの科学は世界一！ 5d ago
No, it is very true.
12
10
u/grenad3r 4d ago
brudi guck dir mal deine post history an, get a grip ahhahah du pico.
klingt nach hartzer projektion. geh arbeit-3
u/The-Board-Chairman ブァカ者が、ドイツの科学は世界一！ 4d ago edited 4d ago
Wenn der Junkie einem erklärt man solle arbeiten gehen - ganz mein Humor.
20
u/MrWarfaith 4d ago
God forbid somebody actually cares about something unimportant, like the basis for our existence on this planet or something.
61
u/PanickedPanpiper 5d ago
I think some of it is the activism vs practice question. Who does more to curb climate change: someone protesting about it a lot, or someone who sits down and does the hard work of getting, say, a renewable energy engineering degree and designs next gen wind turbines? There's a decent argument for the latter - which is also a quiet, behind the scenes role that doesn't have the benefit of making you famous at the same time. There's a certain "Look at me" energy to all activists that can be pretty offputting. Just some thoughts.
84
u/Rhododender 5d ago
Greta has just protested, and anti-ecology advocates had just been abusing her in ways totally inappropriate against a child.
If she had just slightly scratched a single gas pump, I can't even imagine what they would have done.
2
u/TurboFucker69 5d ago
I totally agree in principle, but I can’t help but note that she’s in her mid 20s now. Time flies.
25
u/Mantaraylurks i guess common sense its not that common (allies are allies) 5d ago
Thank you for your observation u/turbofucker69
66
u/Boowray 5d ago
Designing turbines doesn’t mean jack shit if nobody ever installs the damned things. Case in point, we’ve already got high quality green energy solutions, and we already don’t install the damned things. You need to push people towards actually adopting that technology, otherwise any advancement you make is meaningless.
20
u/Sasquatch1729 5d ago
And it's already at the point where they're cost-effective over the short-medium term. This isn't even factoring in carbon taxes or anything. It turns out, shipping in train cars of coal or diesel to a power plant costs tonnes of money, while the wind and sun are free. Amazing, who could have predicted this?
35
u/throwtowardaccount Flame Thrower Bayonets pls 5d ago
The advanced new solutions don't matter if the people in charge are actively reverting back to shit like coal and undoing clean energy initiatives.
13
u/b3nsn0w 🧊🧊🧊🧊🧊🧊🧊🧊🧊🧊🧊🧊🧊🧊🧊🧊🧊🧊🧊🧊🧊🧊🧊🧊🧊🧊🧊 4d ago
i'm picking up that you're a yank from context clues, and even in the us solar installs have been growing, just not as fast as before 2024. and that's despite the many structural roadblocks in place.
solar is dirt cheap now. it costs less to deploy per megawatt than nuclear, the previously undisputed king of energy production at scale (accounting for batteries too, iirc), it has extremely low maintenance costs, it allows for extremely granular energy logistics, and it is a massive boon for energy sovereignty because once you import the panels and battery cells you can keep that entire capacity domestically controlled, and decades down the line still remanufacture end-of-life devices into new ones using the materials already present in the used panels and batteries. and in the us, specifically, vast swaths of land are already devoted to energy production, they're just often used for bioethanol, which is objectively stupid in comparison.
even hostile regulatory regimes cannot meaningfully stop renewables, and that's all due to how well the tech works.
4
u/YUNoJump 4d ago
The problem is we’re still not building enough, and we’ve started too late to prevent further severe damage. Plus a whole lot of major political groups would still be happy to completely ignore climate change, despite it being a science-proven thing for several decades.
Politics and corporate dishonesty has directly led to severe environmental damage, including thousands of human deaths, and will continue to do so even with current renewable trends.
6
u/PanickedPanpiper 4d ago edited 4d ago
I actually have started to think that in current cicumstances, democracies are kinda incapable of solving hard problems until they become critical. What clinched it for me was here in Aus where (like many parts of the world) we've been having a housing crisis. Housing affordability in the big cities (where 95% of the population lives) has plummeted over the last couple of decades. A significant part of this was due to negative gearing and captial gains discounts enacted by the Howard govt in the mid-late 1990s.
Everyone has known this is a problem for ages, but it's a hard problem because the 2/3rds of the population that are already homeowners desire prices to increase (my house is worth more!) while the other 1/3rd trying to get into the market want the prices to lower. So the can has been kicked down the road for ages, because even when people can see that forever inflating prices will be bad for society long term, they like the short term benefits too much.
It's only this year, when the problem has reached a sufficiently critical level that the current govt has tackled it. A second-term government with a historically weak opposition currently. The affordability problem had to get so bad that even existing homeowners could see it was gonna mess up their kids ability to ever buy a home. Only with this combination of very safe political position + problem reached completely critical level could the necessary legislative changes actually be made.
Hard problems can be solved, but the unfortunate reality is we might need to let them get way worse than they need to be before the public will have a taste for resolving them. I think the US govt debt crisis is going to be another one of these. Either taxes need to increase, or spending needs to decrease - but each party are vigorously opposed to one of these. It's already bad (interest payments on US federal debt now cost MORE than the entire miltiary budget?! INTEREST!!) but I think it's gonna need to become critical before there's the political will to solve it.
Democracy is still the way to go, but with civic-mindedness at historic lows making the "good but hard" decisions govts need to be able to has become extremely difficult.
→ More replies (1)8
u/Intelligent_Study728 5d ago
Advancement does push people towards adopting technology, and it also improves that technology at the same time.
26
u/VintageLunchMeat 5d ago
There's a certain "Look at me" energy to all activists that can be pretty offputting
Please tell us how she and activists generally should be doing it properly.
or someone who sits down and does the hard work of getting, say, a renewable energy engineering degree and designs next gen wind turbines? There's a decent argument for the latter
Lie. Misjudgement rather. Current gen wind turbines are fine, the pols lack the will to deploy them.
Also, Exxon has known about global heating since the 60s. The issue has been the messaging and culture war game, not our lack of engineers.
13
u/PanickedPanpiper 5d ago edited 5d ago
The other thing is, current wind gen turbines + Solar are only fine because of all the improvements those quiet engineers have been making for decades.
Why have we seen an explosion in global renewables uptake in the past handful of years? Sure, there have been some political shifts due to global emissions treaties etc. But the vast majority of the change is because now the technology is so good that it outcompetes fossil fuels.
Look at the almost parabolic growth in solar: https://ourworldindata.org/renewable-energy
It more than doubled 2022-2025, and is still going crazy. Because around that time we reached a key inflection point where it became the best economic choice. As much as motivation by abstract ethical goals is important, actual change occurs when material conditions support it.
The real proof of this? China. They are a totalitarian state completely immune from external (or internal) activism. And they are leading the charge on renewables installation.
https://www.visualcapitalist.com/sp/visualized-renewable-energy-capacity-through-time-2000-2023/
It's the engineers at Tesla and BYD making electric cars that are as good or better than ICE cars that have made them successful, not because people were shamed into buying them.
We're not going to solve the problems of climate change by sheer political will. Yes, politics and messaging have an (important) role to play, but the biggest changes come from the hands on, practical, unglamourous, difficult work of finding real solutions that work in the world. We're gonna solve the problems of climate change by making the renewables transition economically desirable.
8
u/Hodorization 4d ago
I've never read a more braindead glorification of the salaryman life than this silly paragraph of yours.
As if there was glory in doing paid labor. The engineers at Tesla are good people but they're just doing a job. They're paid handsomely for it. If money was offered for them to do something else, they'd do something else. That's how it works with paid labor for most people. There's no shame in that but also no glory.
I'm am engineer myself, also paid handsomely, and in no way would I ask for people to glorify my everyday work over the work of activists who actually face adversity and plenty of hostility for what they do.
You also grossly underestimate how powerful the astroturfed activism against green energy can be. If there were no public consciousness about climate change (which is largely stimulated by activists!!) then the established fossil industries, with their huge money, would have a much easier time smothering any attempt to put green technology into the markets through negative PR, political lobbying and lawfare. Which is EXACTLY what they do in other countries where consciousness about climate change doesn't exist, like Russia.
2
u/PanickedPanpiper 5d ago
Engineers, policy advisors, researchers, project managers, financiers. All very practical roles.
I didn't say she doesn't have a role. Just explaining a still-aligned-with-environmentalism place of where the distaste can come from.
7
u/DeluxianHighPriest 5d ago
Thing is that the people who in the end decide what's done aren't any of those. They're policy makers.
And the express and explicit job of policy makers is generally to do what the people want them to do. (They often don't bit that's besides the point for the moment).
That means that the correct way to get these things actually getting done is to convince THE PEOPLE that it needs to be done. That's the job activists do.
Only AFTER THAT POINT do people like engineers, financiers et cetera enter the picture at all! So without activists, none of the other jobs really... Matter.
4
u/TolarianDropout0 Hololive Spaceforce Group "Saplings" 4d ago
Policy makers aren't what determine what happens. It's economics.
Example: Texas has the highest rate of solar buildout of any US state. It's sure as shit not because the Texas electorate and policy makers care about green energy. It's because they accidentally made it economically viable by being a state with little paperwork for building stuff.
6
u/Hodorization 4d ago
No, politics is the supreme power, not economics.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merchant_Marine_Act_of_1920
They legislated the cheapest method of transportation out of existence. Not allowed to compete with trucks and rail. 100 years ago! And it's still not allowed
2
6
u/PanickedPanpiper 5d ago edited 5d ago
see my reply below. Economics is the behemoth to harness. Economics drives politics more often than politics drives economics
5
u/Hodorization 4d ago
That's only true if the economically favorable options are allowed to be developed and to compete in the first place.
Why do you think the USA doesn't have a real coastal and riverine transport system? Why is everything transported by truck and rail across the continent? Certainly not because the Mississippi and Ohio rivers are any worse as potential waterways than big rivers in other countries.
It was a POLITICAL choice made 100 years ago that smothered river and coastal shipping. They legislated the cheapest method of transport into non-competitiveness.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merchant_Marine_Act_of_1920
So, no, economics does not always win. Politics is the supreme power
6
u/HolyMoleyGuacamoly 4d ago
valid argument to be made that without activism, you get no movement on the practice side of things
5
u/KimJongAndIlFriends 2d ago
Who does more to secure science funding?
Neil deGrasse Tyson, or scientist #197654 working in lab #7536 on project #107?
11
6
u/Defengar 5d ago
In her case it's only offputting to people stuck in an algorithm that spews the most uncharitable headlines about her possible and that have been brainwashed by generations of fossil fuel propaganda ranging from "climate chainge aint real" to believing things like the plastic they put in the recycling bin actually gets reused and not dumped on a mountain of plastic in China and now Africa.
3
u/PanickedPanpiper 4d ago
It's pretty bad faith to think that anyone who has any objection to her could only be a brainwashed coal-lover.
3
u/Defengar 4d ago
I don’t tend to encounter any reasonable good faith criticism of her compared to waves of regurgitating chud memes and opinions based of half remembered New York Post and such headlines from over the years. I would not count “but why don’t she become a scientist inventor instead!?!?” To be good faith either as some in this thread have argued.
1
u/IAMBATMANtm 1d ago
She was fine doing climate activism but then wanted to ride any form of political activism she could to remain relevant
1
u/Defengar 1d ago
People can care about multiple things. "That MLK shouldn't be talking about unions, he needs to stick to his lane!"
1
u/IAMBATMANtm 1d ago
Sure but saying people that don’t like her are brain washed by big coal is being disingenuous. When you get political there are many reasons you may not be liked.
1
u/Advanced-Budget779 Nuclear Holocaust Agitator 4d ago edited 4d ago
The practice thing is sometimes still too focused on certain innovation that doesn‘t have a realistic impact at scale. While activism can be off-putting, it‘s still important to get a lot of ppl on board to even accept the reality of global warming and the potential for arising negatives, even just for those within their lifetimes. It would help a lot if more ppl would care for affected regions or the following generations, but that‘s too much to ask for from a lot of ppl merely surviving. Often those most affected (who increasingly understand the causes) still cannot gather enough momentum to steer a population/nation into a better path, because of their numbers and low status/resources. Citizens in developed countries still have more power in affecting global policies - albeit slow and hindered by economics as well as necessities - through their collective decisions, which are affected by beliefs and circumstances - in turn affected by awareness, societal acceptance etc.
While important to r&d, short to mid-term it‘s probably just as important to reduce (still growing) emissions with tried and tested renewables at scale until potential geoengineering is accepted and proven effective.
Problem is the atmospheric content will still lead to warming even if we magically stopped emissions (not net-neutral, an aboslute stop) somehow tomorrow. We still have to get to net-neutral in the first place (over multiple decades). Completely stopping climate change for many decades (or maybe centuries) to come is physically impossible just by carbon removal.
The orders of magnitude in the sun-earth system make total human primary energy production look laughable and the physics behind the problem require loads of energy if carbon capture is the method.
Regarding R&D: best-case we find some effect in opposite magnitude to how we manipulated the atmospheric windows to (mainly) solar radiation. That‘s how we managed to unbalance the system in the first place, total human energy output would never manage climate change by itself, but there‘s secondary effects which lead to more energy input.
A much simplified practical example: slowly opening blinds in a room requires much less energy than the total energy of a constant stream of additional light is let in - the room is heating up over time, not being able to emit enough energy away; water evaporates, making air able to hold more heat, etc. - just that this room is spherical with a thin floating canopy, a balanced internal heat source through radioactive decay, is sunlit 24/7 half its surface (while revolving) and not able to get rid of heat through convection or conduction, but mainly by thermal radiation - which is much slower compared to the other means - 70% of it surface covered by thin water which still captures most of the added heat, expanding in turn. Ofc evaporating water is a more complex climate effector.
We can just cap warming at some level within this century, even with idealised aerosol input in desirable atmospheric strata to offset insulating effects. If we focused only on carbon removal and would manage to reduce atmospheric content, certain sinks (especially oceans) will over time release the delta in CO2e back into the atmosphere (natural mechanism of equilibrium), even slowing down the desired reduction of certain particles. Oceans are currently the largest carbon sinks, but it takes centuries for carbon to be fully dissolved throughout them, so not viable.
Still, it would be big if we even got this far, but unlikely.
Some ppl like Phil Mason think large-scale geoengineering is the only realistic way to prevent much collateral, specificly through aerosols: https://youtu.be/fvxNmStSC3M?si=xHabfTwxCnWysgqQ
Some effects witnessed by natural processes recreated through technical lab equipment look promising if large-scale engineering, economics and politics behind global implementation get solved.
0
u/plyingpotato 4d ago
Both are equally important parts of the solution. We can churn out Nuclear reactors, solar panels, and wind turbines all day, but if people don't believe in them or believe the disinformation about them, what was the point? If a politician wants to implement these things as policy and people won't vote for them because of it, it doesn't matter how robust the infrastructure could be because it won't happen.
Greta and activists like her lay the groundwork for people to see these solutions as a requirement for moving forward and get voters onboard so the system those voters are apart of can feel comfortable making those changes.
I agree with you to a degree, the method is the message and if people find you annoying you aren't doing anything, but this is work that needs to be done.
15
u/Mouse-Keyboard 5d ago
She's largely ditched the environmental activism to campaign against Israel (and occasionally NATO) instead.
5
u/Federal_Thanks7596 4d ago
To be honest, standing with people getting genocided is an understanable priority.
-3
u/Mouse-Keyboard 3d ago
Honestly Gaza already has enough Westerners obsessed with it.
6
u/Federal_Thanks7596 3d ago
Still not enough apparently since the West still supports Israel instead of using similar sanctions like to Russia.
7
u/mig_mit 4d ago
> but she’s doing more than 99% of people
In terms of effort, maybe. In terms of results, no.
3
5
u/Stabile_Feldmaus 4d ago
She was probably THE person that made climate change as a topic become main stream in the world around 2018/2019. Suddenly governments (except the US I guess) started to actually implement meaningful climate change laws. The whole thing then sadly became a background topic again with covid, the Russian Ukraine war, Iran, Gaza, AI and all the other shit that has happened.
4
u/Mando_the_Pando 4d ago
I’m not gonna dog on her for that.
I’m gonna dog on people venerating the ground she walks on like she is a saint for saying that an issue that have been a main stream talking point for decades is still an issue.
-7
u/CrypticCowboy4509 5d ago
It’s more that she’s perceived as whiny and doesn’t really have anything meaningful to co tribute to deal with the problem, as she famously stated when she literally said “it is not out job to provide solutions, it is our job to demand solutions”
While it’s nice to get visibility, being a childish grandstander about it while hanging with rich influencer friends and clout farming, living lavishly off your fame you got by complaining is borderline counterproductive to the movement.
0
u/new_KRIEG 4d ago
Regarding her quote, she's absolutely correct. Providing the solutions to the populations problems is quite fucking literally the main job of any government and the reason why taxes are paid. Hating her for it is just an extremely advanced form of bootlicking
-5
u/MartinBP 5d ago
She's done nothing in recent years except co-opt trendy causes to keep herself relevant. She's become a full-on tankie. The PR stunt she pulled with the party flotilla which both trespassed international borders and brought zero aid should've been the end of her influencer career, and for many people it was.
4
u/jakob20041911 5d ago
excuse me the flotilla was illegally intercepted in international waters
that aside, climate change is a result of our current capitalist (neo-liberal) system of economy where growth is the main goal for everything. her turning in to a "full-on tankie" is just her seeing this reality
3
u/Finnish-Wolf 3000 Finnish Femboys of the FDF 4d ago
Whether or not they can legally stop the vessels in international waters part is up to interpretation. When it is known that a vessel is going to sail through a blockade, with certain justifications you can intercept it before it reaches the coastal waters. It makes sense that they intercepted the vessels in international waters because there were over 50 vessels to be stopped and there was no question whatsoever where they were headed to. Trying to stop all of them only after they reach the coastal waters would put immense pressure to intercept all of them in time which would lead to unsafe interceptions. If it would even be possible at that point.
The legal question comes from whether or not the blockade itself is legal or not.
2
-16
u/Claim-Mindless 5d ago
Partying on luxury cruises through the Mediterranean sure helps the world a lot.
-8
u/Hakunin_Fallout Glass Moscow yesterday 5d ago
Hey, at least she's trying! I can't remember last time (or any time) I partied at a luxury cruise!
1
u/Defengar 5d ago
I can tell you just read some absurdly bullshit headlines about it and nothing from the actual people there.
→ More replies (1)-18
u/General_Totenkoft Article 5 enjoyer 5d ago
We should probably be criticising his parents and the morons who used her for greenwashing.
12
u/thefirstdetective 5d ago
Trump and the ayatollahs are just Gretas puppets to stop carbon hydrates shipping. Wake up sheeple!
12
u/CrazyMadhav08 FP-5 FlamingYES 5d ago
So when is Trump getting the Champions of the Earth Award? He clearly deserves it!
8
10
9
u/Noncrediblepigeon Military enforced Eco-Social democracy fan 4d ago
Naval blocades run (greta): 0 Naval blocades run (ukranian grain shippers): a fuckton
23
u/AnonVinky 5d ago
Greta Thunberg has been to Kyiv in 2023. I have seen environmental politicians support Ukraine in 2022 purely to permanently cut Russian fossil fuels.
18
u/daniel_22sss 4d ago
In recent years Greta wad actually blaming Ukraine for some stupid shit
12
u/Capable-Parsnip-9615 4d ago
The visit to Kyiv was before October 7th, I think that might have been the point where she turned away from environmental activism
5
7
17
12
u/ForgedIronMadeIt 5d ago
what I have learned here is that we should give Greta some rocket launchers and the training to use them
13
4
u/HRTreppinManmoder 5d ago
Ukraine, IRGC, and houthis racing to see who blows up the most oil infrastructure
8
9
u/3_man 5d ago
Funny, but bombing oil facilities isn't very eco friendly. I learned this from a documentary with the well known environmentalist and champion of the exploited Steven Seagal I saw many years ago.
3
u/neonxmoose99 5d ago
You mean the greatest Gravy Seal in the history of God’s United States of America? That must have been a documentary for the ages
8
u/GripAficionado 5d ago
I thought she was all in on being anti-Israel these days?
1
2d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/AutoModerator 2d ago
This post is automatically removed since you do not meet the minimum karma or age threshold. You must have at least 100 combined karma and your account must be at least 4 months old to post here.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
3
u/ApprehensiveWin3020 no. 1 Xi Jingping glazer | she/her 4d ago
Here's the real question, who's doing more for the climate, Ukraine or Iran
3
u/AsteroidSpark Military Industrial Catgirl 2d ago
Remember that since the CCP is responsible for more pollution than everyone and everything else on this planet combined, bombing the Three Gorges Dam is good for the environment.
2
2
2
u/Strength-InThe-Loins 4d ago
You can't prove that Thunberg wasn't remote-piloting any of those drones.
4
15
u/Gekokapowco 5d ago
weird post to pick on a kid who's on your team lol
both are doing good things, they aren't competing at all
53
u/jbland0909 5d ago
This is very clearly a joke. She’s also not a kid. Shes 23
10
u/Gekokapowco 5d ago
23 is a kid to me lol
3
u/_xoviox_ Actual Ukrainian conscript 4d ago
I have a funny response to this in my head but it'd be literal treason to write it lol
16
u/Narrow_Vegetable_42 3000 grey Kinetic Energy Penetrators of Pistorius 5d ago
It's a friendly competition, reminding Greta of how far behind she is and trying to nudge her to even the score. Where can I donate to help her?
9
2
u/Free-Artist 5d ago
Indeed, people are still treating her like crap, while she was right all along.
Come on guys, pick on someone your own size.
Or alternatively give her some way of imposing kinetic sanctions and let her even the playing field
0
5d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/AutoModerator 5d ago
This post is automatically removed since you do not meet the minimum karma or age threshold. You must have at least 100 combined karma and your account must be at least 4 months old to post here.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
-1
u/Tequila2Dance 5d ago
Relax
2
u/Elkku_the_Elk 5d ago
I propose we crowdsource greta a naval militia to attack norwegian oil platforms.
1
4
u/HomosexualPresence 5d ago
never ask greta who pressured western europe to rely on russian gas over nuclear energy
1
u/jhaand 4d ago
I think think a lot of people can live with burning oil refineries for national defence, because they can stay on their couch, instead of bombing them for eco terrorism.
Some people already modelled that victims of climate change would go after the factories and infrastructure to get their revenge.
But climate change squeezing normal people accelerates nationalism and war. Which also targets infrastructure, factories and refineries in the end.
1
u/Kishandreth 4d ago
Note: pass along that any munitions targeting Russian oil facilities shall henceforth be nicknamed Greta or Greta's.
1
u/nasandre 2d ago
And Donald Trump, by making fuel really expensive he's getting more people to buy EVs!
0
u/coffeescious 4d ago
Well on the other hand all that oil in the refineries set to be burned in cars or tanks for many months was burned in a matter of hours. The CO2 reached the atmosphere anyways (or a big part of it)
Silly comparison, silly meme, after all this is what we are here for.
0
u/PlainSpader 4d ago
Funny but dogging on Greta for caring about our planet and humanities future kinda stinks.
-3
u/EmberOfFlame 4d ago
Greta made me care about the climate.
As a kid I saw this girl who could’ve been in a class or two higher talk about the climate like it’s my problem, using words that I could easily understand and expand on
She talked about how the weather is changing, how this isn’t my fault, but will have to be my responsibility, she talked about pollution and the ways we are killing the planet
All I heard was very surface-level, I never actually sat down to break down her speeches, she was just someone on TV, but to me back then the kids in a class or two higher were the paragons of fucking virtue (by the fact of knowing more math than I did), and she chose to care about the climate
I think she succeeded in what she wanted to do, that is making the elites feel awkward, and her peers feel empowered
-42
932
u/Saucy6 5d ago
And people have been switching to EV’s because of fuel shortages, win