Comment: Meanwhile Hungary and Italy denounced sending troops to Ukraine as dangerous.

Comment: Listen to the author of the article, Derrick Broze on Redacted:

Comment: See also: China wants to preserve and strengthen its foothold in and around the EU and is investing diplomatic effort where it is worth it

For more information about what happened during NATO's 1999 campaign, though not specifically about the bombing of the Chinese embassy, see NATO's illegal 1999 bombing of Yugoslavia 'a huge tragedy' - Putin It and the comments contributes to the background for the conflict between the US and other global actors that we witness today.

Comment: About China and the EU, there was recently: Alastair Crooke: EU's Von der Leyen to meet Biden to discuss addressing 'China threat' - be worried! however it appears President Xi still met with the head of the European Commission. The Guardian writes in Xi's European tour: where is Chinese leader going and what are visit's aims?

The Chinese leader's visit begins on Monday in Paris, where he is meeting the French president, Emmanuel Macron, for a day of talks that will include a trilateral meeting with the head of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, and a state banquet at the Élysée Palace in the evening.

On Tuesday, Macron will accompany Xi to the Tourmalet pass 2,000 metres up in the Hautes-Pyrénées mountains, an area where the French president spent childhood holidays visiting his grandmother, for a day of less formal discussions. The two last met in April 2023 during a three-day state visit to China by Macron.

On Wednesday, Xi will travel to Belgrade for talks with Serbia's president, Aleksandar Vučić, and on Thursday he will go to Budapest where he will meet Hungary's prime minister, Viktor Orbán.

See also:

• Xi Jinping pens an article in French media before state visit
• China is preparing its economy for 'something major' - Newsweek
• China buys huge £135billion stockpile of gold
• NATO is responsible for Ukraine crisis - China
• China reveals plan to end Ukraine conflict
• China tells US it won't be bullied on Russia
• The Russia - Iran - China search for a new global security order
• 'Sacrilege': China says US actions over Gaza ceasefire undermine UN Security Council

Comment: Comparing what what the IDF has done in Rafah according to the short early notice from RT and the later reports from Aljazeera and PressTV.

In the first, and very early article, there are descriptions from IDF like:
"a precise counterterrorism operation in the eastern Rafah area", "managed to establish operational control of the Gazan side of the crossing." and as reported by RT 'claiming to have eliminated approximately 20 militants'.

In the Aljazeera article, there is: "bombardment of Rafah on Monday, killing dozens of people after ordering about 100,000 residents in its eastern areas to evacuate"

From PressTV, there are "seized control of the Rafah border crossing after advancing during the night through heavy bombardment of residential areas", "1.5 million Palestinians are sheltering in Rafah" and "Palestinians are now struggling to evacuate Rafah since the Israeli military dropped leaflets ordering them to leave."

Taken together, when the IDF says "precise counterterrorism operation in the eastern Rafah area" it is more like "bombardment of Rafah" and from the perspective of PressTV even: "heavy bombardment of residential areas". When the IDF claims "eliminated approximately 20 militants" it is a rough estimate of what came out of the efforts and on the low side of "killing dozens of people after ordering about 100,000 residents in its eastern areas to evacuate".

The Aljazeera article reported in their article the US response as:

Washington, DC - The United States has played down the deadly Israeli assault on Rafah, saying the offensive appears to be "limited" despite concerns over the fate of the more than 1.5 million Palestinians sheltering in the southern Gaza city.

State Department spokesperson Matthew Miller told reporters on Tuesday that the US still opposes a major Israeli offensive against Rafah.

The problem with a major offensive is that the US has to answer more questions, receive more critique, it is expedient to play "down Rafah assault". Some observers may find it odd, that the attack comes, after according to some sources: "hours after Hamas said it had agreed to a ceasefire proposal from Egypt and Qatar". It is justified, as Iran says, that "In attacking Rafah, Israel is sabotaging global efforts to stop Gaza war".

Comment: From The Warzone:

Israel had faced myriad drone threats long before October 2023. The IDF has acknowledged accidental shootdowns of friendly drones in the past, as well. That being said, the IDF has arguably the most advanced integrated air defense system on the planet. So the fact that this is a huge issue for them, doesn't bode well for other militaries.

Israel has been sucked into the Western illusion that high-tech is best. But high tech is also high ticket. A single Iron Dome missile costs $50K and in the recent Iran retaliation, the IDF launched $100-$200 million worth of them. In contrast Iran:

[...] Iranian ballistic missiles cost around $100,000 each, and its Shahed drones only $20,000-$50,000 each, according to reports by The Guardian. Experts have calculated the cost of the attack for Iran at $100-$200 million — perhaps five to ten times less than what Israel spent to repel it.

If Israel can't even tell the difference between its own UAV and an opponent's, they're going to blow their defence budget pretty fast. And right now sugar daddy Uncle Sam is also trying to arm Taiwan for the next war, and keep Ukraine afloat until the election. It's not that there isn't enough money, there just isn't enough actual, physical weaponry to deliver.

• Slow manufacturing and price gouging threaten the new U.S. military arms race
• Supplier bottlenecks threaten US Navy effort to grow arms stockpiles

Comment: Truth hurts, eh? Macron is the perfect example too. In his quest for EU domination, he approaches, then distances France from Russia, talks tough about 'strategic ambiguity' and sending French troops to Ukraine (even if under the fig leaf of the Foreign Legion), then backs down. He talks with Xi have commenced, and we'll probably be hearing accommodating noises regarding China, until he's yanked into a back room and set straight by his true masters. "Flip-flpper" is Macron's best description.

Majority disagree with Macron's comments on sending NATO troops to Ukraine - poll