Indeed it was.

I agree, but remember the US has form. It sat on the sidelines during the WW1 slaughters until German U-boat activity brought them in, then absented itself from League of Nations, then didn't join WW2 until Pearl Harbour. Even then, many wanted to focus more or less exclusively on Japan.

I am increasingly inclined to agree. I am no longer sure that the peculiar state that is Russia is capable of pursuing a security policy that seeks cooperation and interdependence, rather than relying on threat and domination. It has so little to offer, and in any case is only 70% ethnic Russian.

Is that thumbs up in response to my comment or in response to Arsenal's 4-1 victory yesterday?

Yep. The whole point is that Russia wants to prevent Ukraine from joining a Europe in which people trade with each other, travel to each other's countries, etc etc. And Russia seems incapable of envisaging a security policy for itself that does not require the intimidation of its neighbours.

The US tried to sit out WW1, until German U-boats dragged them in. It was absent from the League of Nations, and tried to sit out WW2, until Pearl Harbour dragged them in. Despite the arguments of Asia Firsters, and the US softening of Article 5's wording, the US fronted up in the Cold War. Now....

And when immigration will be reduced - which may well happen, although attempts to escape poverty/insecurity to reach rich western societies will continue - the NHS, care provision, services, building progs, much high tech/science based growth, and much else, will also be reduced. Decline beckons.

There is no cheap solution for more and more, and more and more sick, elderly people, with fewer and fewer younger people to care for them. Nor can current building plans, and tech-based growth, and a service-based economy, etc etc be sustained without immigration. But immigration may well reduce.