From: physfitfreak@gmail.com   
      
   On 7/15/25 9:00 PM, Physfitfreak wrote:   
   > On 7/15/25 11:57 AM, Physfitfreak wrote:   
   >>   
   >>   
   >>   
   >> SCO was created for countries who are not on the Nazis' side to   
   >> discuss their issues and find ways to _cooperate_ to solve them. That   
   >> "C" in the middle of the acronym stands for Cooperation.   
   >>   
   >> It is being held in Shanghai right now, and Araghchi is attending to   
   >> ask the big paper tigers why they're so inactive against Nazis and   
   >> minding their own businesses as long as selling and buying stuff to   
   >> and from Nazis and paying not too much tariffs are concerned. This   
   >> will come up, but is not the main reason for his participation of course.   
   >>   
   >> I've done it before here, but even I cannot find it anymore in the sea   
   >> of stuff I'm blogged here. So let me briefly go over a few features of   
   >> SCO once more.   
   >>   
   >> Just like BRICS, I think and believe that, the significance of SCO is   
   >> only in coming together of little countries around the world for such   
   >> discussions, and not in China's and/or Russia's or India's presence   
   >> there. These huge entities feel safe and are greedy enough to keep   
   >> things as it is for little countries while they are profiting from   
   >> Nazis. They're totally useless, to be honest.   
   >>   
   >> Well, the three mentioned nations describe their own disloyalty to SCO   
   >> and fickleness by insisting that one of the foundation principles of   
   >> SCO is "balance", and by that word they mean maintaining relations   
   >> with Nazis. This is their excuse. So they admit what they are, and   
   >> what they're doing is not helping SCO, but have an excuse for it.   
   >>   
   >> Useless. That's what they are.   
   >>   
   >> I say it for the nth time since it got created around the turn of the   
   >> century, that the big guys there are insignificant. The significance   
   >> of SCO is in little countries participating in it ONLY.   
   >>   
   >> These smaller countries are the ones who help each other under SCO's   
   >> principles, and that includes counter-terrorism assistance, regional   
   >> stability, some degree of intelligence sharing, providing economic   
   >> connectivity, and, if you can believe it, _using_ the big fat paper   
   >> tigers in creating a safe zone against Nazis.   
   >>   
   >> THAT's the significance of SCO, not the big fat useless members   
   >> presence in there.   
   >>   
   >> And I repeat (I've said it at least 5 or 6 times before) that SCO does   
   >> not have direct military assistance in its nature. It is no "NATO", so   
   >> to speak.   
   >>   
   >> But it goes a long way just the way it is. And only for the little   
   >> countries in there. For the big fat useless ones it is as good as   
   >> nothing.   
   >>   
   >> Another unique feature of SCO is that it "leaves no child behind", so   
   >> to speak. In voting for a decision for some directive, even one   
   >> negative vote from any member country will veto that decision and   
   >> directive. So it is no "UN" that's so ridiculously at the disposal of   
   >> only 5 or 6 countries in the world.   
   >>   
   >> UN is an abomination against human's dignity. Switzerland, as long as   
   >> it could still maintain a spirit of self-reliance and dignity, avoided   
   >> membership in UN. But by early this century Switzerland had fallen and   
   >> had lost that spirit (read that as: it became Bitch of USA) and joined   
   >> UN.   
   >>   
   >> So this unique feature in SCO means that the "C", the Cooperation, is   
   >> limited to only what can be done for every and all member's benefit.   
   >> It does not sacrifice some to benefit others. It is no UN, so to speak.   
   >>   
   >>   
   >> A lot is included in what I described in SCO. A lot can be done, and   
   >> is being done! But again, almost entirely by the little member   
   >> nations. Just to give instances of that, look at:   
   >>   
   >> - trading oil and gas   
   >> - sharing and creating markets (e.g. Central Asia, Silk Road, ..)   
   >> - providing bank services   
   >> - exchanges in science   
   >> - exchanges in education   
   >> - exchanges in tourism   
   >> - networking the member countries' universities   
   >> - ...   
   >>   
   >>   
   >> Even in Shah's time, some degree of cooperation between Iran and other   
   >> little countries were ongoing, cause it just made a lot of sense. I   
   >> still remember the absolute best teacher of Persian grammar we had in   
   >> our top high school. He was a very well-dressed, very quiet, tall, and   
   >> dark-skinned Pakestani :-)   
   >>   
   >> We _learned_ our own language's grammar perfectly well only because of   
   >> that Pakestani guy (and a superb text by a team of famous Iranian   
   >> Persian experts). He had some accent, and he pronounced some words in   
   >> its correct Persian form (and not in the strange Tehrani way of saying   
   >> them) but knew the subject like nobody I've seen after. Persian has   
   >> amazingly deep features that can be used to describe anything that   
   >> needs description very closely and accurately. We Iranians do not take   
   >> this feature for granted. That's why Iran is so advanced in quality   
   >> literature. World-class, really.   
   >>   
   >> Result? In the university entrance exams held in 1972, some 5 years   
   >> later, I could still score 100/100 in its definitive Persian language   
   >> test. "The hardest test" among all other tests in those exams. I was   
   >> one in five persons only, in those who ended up in Tehran University,   
   >> who got 100% of the subtle and difficult questions correctly!.. (in   
   >> Physics test of it I got the 4th place in those who got into Tehran   
   >> University - not nationally). And I owe my score in Persian to nobody   
   >> but that Pakestani teacher.   
   >>   
   >> He (unfortunately I have forgotten his name) was part of an   
   >> educational exchange program with Pakestan in 1960s :-)   
   >>   
   >> Pakestanis love Iran, mainly because they understand Persian and have   
   >> the exact same history that they share, and they can appreciate good   
   >> Persian literature. Pakestan _was_ Iran till 1872, when the British   
   >> took her away from Iran.   
   >>   
   >> So SCO is effective, believe me. But really only to little nations.   
   >> The big ones don't need anything at all. If they say otherwise,   
   >> they're speaking out of their asses. They're fine as things are today   
   >> and their heads are indeed up their own asses.   
   >>   
   >>   
   >>   
   >>   
   >>   
   >>   
   >   
   >   
   >   
   > World is getting smaller.   
   >   
   > North Korea said today that next attack on Iran will be considered by   
   > North Korea a security threat to Asia and will trigger response from   
   > North Korea.   
   >   
   > They also said that the era of creating "local wars" doesn't exist anymore.   
   >   
   > They mean what they're saying. They sent troops to fight alongside   
   > Russians against Ukraine. In the case of Israel and Iran, though, troops   
   > might not be the best choice of cooperation with Iran.   
   >   
   > I think Korea has come a long way since 1980s to help Russia in that way   
   > now. Back then they wouldn't supply Iran with missiles (Scud). Iran   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)