World News
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
Can't say I'm a military analyst but if Russia can't take over Ukraine why should NATO be worried, 2% or otherwise? Russia's ongoing sabotage against NATO countries is a job for intelligence and policing. Greasing the palms of the arms industry won't touch that.
Because the industrial base for producing critical things like ammunition is nearly nonexistent. Despite USA and European arms support Ukraine has been permanently shell-starved for the entire course of the war. Three years later, even after spinning up some new production, Ukraine's allies still don't make enough shells to get anywhere close to 1:1 with what the Russians fire at them (and that was before North Korea started supplying the Russians)
The invasion of Ukraine has made it crystal clear that Europe's military industrial base is utterly incapable of responding to an actual peer conflict on their own soil, let alone providing a deterrent to wars of expansion outside of it. It would be foolish not to be investing in sovereign military capability in today's world.
You're talking like the whole of Europe has been pouring everything it's got into the war in Ukraine, which it hasn't even come close to.
I think Czechia is the only country who has not immediately replenished military aid given to Ukraine. UK arms manufacturers continue to supply the international market. Meanwhile Russia is pulling tanks out of museums, begging from impoverished North Korea and has spent nearly three years capturing 20% of a non-NATO country below Egypt and Australia in military rankings.
The issue here is not that Europe is vulnerable to Russia, it's that there is a renewed American mandate to cut spending on other people's wars and deterrents and they are wondering whether Europe should cough up more money. Mark Rutte licks Trump's anus and is making what he thinks are the right sounds. Fair enough. On the flipside European lawmakers are going to be wondering whether Donald will go back to keeping intelligence documents in his bathroom, whether US military bases in their countries are really worth it and whether they want much to do with the US at all as gets more and more nutty.
Other countries should be jumping at the opportunity to shed their american shackles.
Because Russia doesn't exist in a vacuum. Also it is better to be prepared and not need it, rather than not be prepared and lose a large portion of the population, industry, potentially getting genocided away etc.
If you put aside the argument that Russia isn't capable of running over Ukraine, cities are still laid to waste, people are getting killed...
Why put that aside? It was the whole point of their invasion.
Wether or not Russia is capable of taking over Ukraine, lives are lost in Ukraine. That's a reason to be worried. You can laugh at Russia's failure to carry out the task they put before themselves, but in the end people are suffering.
The whole point of their operation wasn't to "not be capable to take over Ukraine", it was "(to be capable) to take over Ukraine".
I think you misunderstood me.
Agreed in part. We should absolutely continue to support Ukraine in any/all ways possible against Russia. However Russia doesn't have the economy to really do much to the rest of Europe. Rubles are going to be worth more as toilet paper than money in the next few years.
does intelligence count as defense spending?
Ukraine is receiving a TON of military aid, a lot of which is about the cease.
Trump is Putin's pet, and the new US National Intelligence director is a Russian asset. Ukraine is about to be railroaded.
Stop spreading cold war propaganda. Made people scared.
Provoking each other. Buying expensive killing machines.
We have more important social problems to solve.
Make love, not war.
?? you are aware of whats going on right now, correct?
I agree. Fear, hate and greed are not the solution to our problems.
This is like saying don't lock your car door
After all, Putin just wants peace!
A piece of Ukraine, a piece of Moldova, a piece of Estonia, a piece of Poland...
Well, give us all a rifle, a hundred rounds and some marksmanship training, you knobhead. I’ve always been a big proponent of arming your populace in defense of a large threat from beyond your borders. And this seems like the right time to do it.
I’ll gladly follow a week’s worth of training and do a background check if it means I get to keep a machine gun in my closet.
My dude you are Dutch, if the russians make it to the Netherlands for you to shoot at then the west will already be ashes.
Could be. But I was also around when the Soviet Union was still a thing and reached to East Germany.
Also, if you think I trust those shifty Belgians, you’re very wrong ;-)
A week's worth of training? I'd be more likely to shoot you by accident than any Russian soldier.
You mean it wasn't already? The organization was created to counter the USSR and never really drifted from that, even when the USSR fell, funnily enough.
The organization got complacent with the countries not developing their armies and letting them wither away and lose effectiveness instead. The entire eastern flank of NATO screamed that Russia is still a threat, even with the USSR breaking up. Those countries were called "war hawks" and then 2008 happened, 2014 happened and now 2022 happened. Apparently it wasn't enough to shake them up.
2008 is about 17 years after the collapse of the USSR. Within that time, Russia experienced an economic crisis with the push for a "free market" and actually had lower life expectancy than during the USSR. Unless you want to argue that Russia is just inherently a warmongering country, surely something could've been done to prevent this later aggression. Similar to trump, putin getting elected is a symptom of a broken system.
Oh sorry, they needed time to build up. Fuck em, and fuck their genocidal, warring regime.
Your assumption is that it's always been a genocidal, warring regime, and that it's just been building up the entire time. I disagree with that defeatist attitude. If Germany can be de-nazified and Japan can transform from the ruthlessness displayed during and before world war 2, then surely something similar could be done with Russia. If you think this is impossible, then what solution do you propose?
Both Germany and Japan were defeated in war (that they themselves started) and occupied by foreign forces. Their "denazification" was enforced by occupiers. You are arguing against your own points (not that you have any, except "war is bad and America is to blame for Russia's actions").
The USSR fell and has now been replaced with someone with far more warlike intentions than anyone since Stalin.
We need to examine the conditions that allowed such a figure to get elected. It wasn't an instantaneous transition to putin, it took about a decade of a miserable economy where people had to sell whatever they could (including vouchers for shares in previously state enterprises they were given, which ended up being bought up by oligarchs to consolidate power) just to eat. Life actually got worse than during the USSR. Along comes putin and luckily for him, the price of oil increases while he's in power and things look like they're improving. Is it any wonder that someone like that could grab power during such a turbulent time? It's happened in the US with trump and things are a lot less dire here than they were in Russia post-USSR-collapse.
What do you think examining them will do?
Help us to prevent it from happening again in the future and perhaps give a hint as to how to resolve the issue now. Changing the status quo is much harder than preventing it from becoming the status quo in the first place or, put another way, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. Either way, it's important to learn how/why things happen if we wish to have them not happen.
You can't get rid of a warmongering dictator through careful examination.
That's why I said changing the status quo is much harder. You can, however, prevent a warmongering dictator from rising by preventing the conditions in which they rise. To know what those conditions are, you need the careful examination.
Cold wartime, maybe. For sure we're not at the "assess tolerable casualty percentage" stage of conflict yet, which is what that means to me.