In the end game, they are going to need some leverage over Israel, that is stuck there with them. If they destroy everything now, they will not have anything to threaten them with.

The one country 'destabilizing the region' is not Iran.

If you are interested in a federation, you could have an American bicameral model, with the senate representing the countries interest (1).

The current path of the EU is, in my opinion, very worrisome. The important issues are decided in close doors. The Commission and the Council feel that they can 'sanction' citizens without judicial supervision. The countries that not play along are blackmailed. The Commission officials feel that they can speak for all Europe when most citizens disagree with what they are saying. They feel that they can block the public discourse that they don't like, and now they want total control of our communications.

(1) - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Congress

You probably think that, because the commission is composed by representatives of every country, but they are "bound by their oath of office to represent the interest of the EU as a whole rather than their home state". That in itself is already contradictory. Those representatives are not elected officials but are the more powerful in the system.

The European Commission is the executive branch of the European Union. In not sane system, the executive branch is in charge of proposing legislation, because that make the all 'separation of powers' concept useless.

>>"How would YOU propose that the EU work to be "more democratic" - while also considering that your government needs to be involved and influential?"

Well, or you give the parliament real legislative and budgetary powers or all the system is a farce and you should dissolve it. If you want to keep the interest of individual countries in the process you need another chamber, elected by the people, that would represent the national interests.

Not only the system is undemocratic but it's winning power. The European Council can sanction you because doesn't like what you are saying without any judicial supervision. The budget is used to blackmail countries that don't agree with the commission views. Even the European Central Bank was used for blackmailing Greece in the Debt crisis of 2011. If that's democracy, the word democracy has not meaning anymore.

Any introduction to democracy explains that the power is separated in the executive, the legislative and the judicial.

The European Parliament is suppose to be the legislative body but can't initiate legislation.

The Commission is suppose to be the executive, but, somehow can also initiate legislation and is not elected directly by the citizens. And the council that, I suppose would be the equivalent to a senate, is not directly elected by the citizens.

And we could talk about how all the important decisions are done in the dark, or how, like in this case, when something is not 'correctly' voted, they just keep bringing it back until it pass, or how they have started to 'sanction' people without judicial supervision.

It's time to open the eyes, because this is not going to improve. The EU 'democracy' is a joke.

Specifically: don't start wars thousand of miles away of your borders.

Even if you have to install using pip it just affect the active environment.

Maybe I'm only trying simple things.

input: what the f* are we doing? this is the end of times!

output: Reflecting on our current strategic direction: are we truly optimizing for long-term impact? We are navigating unprecedented industry disruption, and it feels like a pivotal moment for global transformation.

I find surprising that the polemic I heard more talking, seems to be in the open source to close source direction.

It seems to me, that the more relevant part of this new development, for the software industry, it's a teenager working in the weekend with a LLM and making a functional clone of Autocad, for instance.

Why was Hamas created? From wikipedia: "was founded by Palestinian Islamic scholar Ahmed Yassin in 1987 after the outbreak of the First Intifada against the Israeli occupation"

What about the Houthis? From wikipedia: "The formation of the Houthi organisations has been described by Adam Baron of the European Council on Foreign Relations as a reaction to foreign intervention."

But sure, the problem is Iran.

There is not evidence about that 20-30k civilians dead. I could say it was 3 and I would have the same proof that you have.

This rationale of 'Iran is not democratic enough' (despise they have a constitution, a parliament and elections) but I will support Saudi Arabia (that light of human rights in the middle east) is nonsense.

All this is done for the geopolitical interest of USA, the oil and Israel. Anyone that say otherwise is taking us for idiots.

Anyway, it's kind of funny that the USA have military posts more than 7000 miles away from its borders, but the danger of 'expansionism' is from Iran.

We are in a fantasy propaganda land where Iran is attacked in the middle of negotiations and is Iran the guilty party. How many people have to die in those USA wars? I mean, enough is enough.

It's not in the strategic interest of Iran to do that, and they have been very strategic and rational. It's the Americans who have abandoned rationality. The Iranian goal is very clear: they don't want to sign an agreement and be attacked again in three months or one year.

In order to get that, they want a new security framework in its part of the world. They want Israel to suffer so its population think two times before doing this again. And they want to create enough economic pain to punish the current USA administration, again to teach a lesson.

Go beyond CNN or Fox News, listen to what the Iranians are saying (1).

1- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lNZ_nta8NRM