The ironic thing is that I think the only realistic way to get an European army on a reasonable time scale would be pretty much the worst case scenario: A full conventional war with Russia without US support, which would literally force European countries to integrate their militaries beyond what we currently do in NATO.

Damn, you’d think weed dealers would be more chill, lol.

lemmus.org was online the entire time.

But I’d rather not contribute too much to that economy

Why not?

I guess it could, but I’d say it’s rather unlikely.

Still, I’d rather have a military than can stand up to Russia should things escalate instead of not having one on the off-chance democracy collapses.

I guess I just wouldn’t call it insurance as it barley mitigates the impacts of a potential blockade. It’s more like their backup lifeline should shit hit the fan.

That’s a bit of a stretch. I’m sure Russia could supply them with oil, but you can’t just shift China’s sea trade to land like that. So a blockade would still have a massive impact. Not a very good insurance.

How is Russia an insurance against that?

1st class train tickets. More comfortable, more space and no seat neighbour is way worth it on longer journeys.

Removed by mod

It’s because they occasionally eat small mammals (and insects).

How the hell do I know if these shredded soy pieces, extra salt, or pink broccoli smoky tempeh taste like bacon?

Easy. They don’t.

For the purposes of this part, ‘meat’ means edible parts of the animals referred to in points 1.2 to 1.8 of Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 853/2004, including blood.

In the end it’s a legal document and the terms are defined for the purpose of the regulation, not necessarily how the terms are used in daily life.

Well now blood sausage is not a sausage too despite being almost entirely animal product

The EU document specifically mentions that blood based products counts as meat, so blood sausage is fine.

This not only affects vegetarian food, but also salmon steak for example.

Where are you getting this from? In the document you linked they define meat as “edible parts of the animals” and I can’t find any wording in here that would exclude fish from being meat.

Yeah, think it’s quite silly that the EU is wasting time on this, but here we are.

In the end it’s more about labeling than language anyway. No one is banned from calling anything they want to a “burger”. You can’t just put it in the label when you want to sell it, and I think that is fair enough.

In Danish it’s definitely a shape, so… Which underlines the fact that this sort of legislation is pretty ridiculous in a multilingual society like the EU.

I’ll be up to each country to implement the rules so everyone can account for their own language.

Please also remember, as per Saussure, that for the language user only the present exists. Etynologies are curious facts at best and doesn’t necessarily mean anything for current usage.

I see where you’re coming from, but I think that is quite sad. That actually gives some credibility to the argument that the names of traditional foods should to be protected to some degree.

It’s not a shape, it’s always been a meat product. It comes from the Latin salsicus which means “seasoned with salt”.

There you go.

https://github.com/laylavish/uBlockOrigin-HUGE-AI-Blocklist

But margarine literally isn’t butter? I’ve never heard anyone complain about that. If anything, the opposite. Don’t hand someone margarine when they asked for butter.