Greece is one of the Euro zone countries that economically suffers the most from the EU sanctions against Russia. Their "flirting" with Russia, as you said, is merely trying to find a way to continue to sell greek agricultural produce to Russia. Given the economical state of Greece I think that's a pretty sensible approach.
Russia's share of Greek exports is less than 2%. Total value of the goods covered by the Russian sanctions is approx mio 200 EUR / year. I sincerely doubt that it is worth jeopardising EUs long term economic support to the Greek economy in an attempt to circumvent Russian sanctions even if individual Greeks or even sectors are hit hard by them.
@peterfirefly (sorry, I can't reply directly to you because of the negative karma of my original post)
Yes, the EU are of bigger importance, but OTOH those trade partners are still there. Only the exports to Russia are lost. If the trade amount relative to GDP really is 1%, that would amount to more than 2 billion Euros in lost trade. Greece is small and in a precarious financial situation, I can understand why they risk to affront other EU members for those 2 billion.
The Greek loss due to the Russian undeclared war against Ukraine is tiny, even if it meant that all the trade with Russia disappeared (which it doesn't).
Compare with Finland and Sweden when the Soviet Union fell.
They were hit a lot harder but they cleaned up and enacted reforms. They certainly didn't complain that Greece was unreasonable for not lending (or giving) them money so that things could continue as before.
Not only after Soviet Union fell. Also in the current trade war, Greece's problems from Russian sanctions are negligible when compared to Sweden and particularly Finland. Russian trade was almost 10 % of Finnish exports in 2012 and has since then collapsed. Finland will very soon be in a position where it is not possible to pledge any bailout money for Greece. Even if not counting the political fallout.
Greece should have flirted with Russia earlier? I don't get that.
Of course, regarding requirements for compensation from Germany, it would have made sense to ask those in 1980, i.e. before joining an economic community with Germany, a community whose purpose was to put back wars and their compensation requirements, and start up a free trade area and bind economies together to avoid further clashes and wars.
Greece couldn't have asked in 1980. There was a debt conference in the early 1950s -by the world war winning superpowers of the time- that postponed compensation questions until the reunification of Germany (then thought to be coming soon). In 1990, after the reunification, the same superpowers convened again, and decided _instead of all countries and without consulting_ to drop the debt.
A mandatory loan from the Greek government to finance the German war effort would be at around 11 billion euros now. It is a multiple of that for many other EU countries.
I'm not saying that this "repay the war debt" is a good idea, but there certainly are a lot of hard to contest historical arguments for the validity of a small part of their claim.
"The misleading conclusions all resulted not from incorrect math but from overgeneralizing from narrow assumptions or parameter values. For example, all of their models implicitly assumed high relatedness, but modifying the model to allow lower relatedness shows that relatedness is essential and causal in the evolution of eusociality. Their modeling strategy, properly applied, actually confirms major insights of inclusive fitness studies of kin selection."
Since both Opportunity and Curiosity are on the surface of Mars how can their present distance from Earth differ by 6+ mio. km? And even with Mars Express in orbit it doesn't appear right that it should be 20+ mio km closer to Earth. I wonder if these were the distances relevant when th probes were launched?