top 99 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 134 points 1 year ago (13 children)

Just removing the US from another world stage

Soon we will be completely irrelevant

Which is the plan

  • source
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] 22 points 1 year ago (8 children)

    Except they have the largest nuclear arsenal and the world biggest navy. They can't be ignored.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] -3 points 1 year ago (7 children)

    My brother-in-law is career Navy and he says they'd get mopped by the Chinese.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago*

    Eeeeehhh, if you just look at numbers of boats, yes. The US Navy has far, far more experience, though. Drones are also going to change the game in ways we're only starting to see with the Ukraine War. With that, the answer might be "everyone's boats are sunk now".

    China probably couldn't gain air superiority over Taiwan, and without that, an invasion will fail. That will be true even if the US ends up losing more boats.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] -7 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    sounds like E1 speak to me. I'm sure your BIL is a lovely cadet, but he should learn when to turn-to and stfu.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 1 year ago* (4 children)

    He's an officer and over 20 years now. This discussion took place shortly after he gave me a tour of the bridge of the carrier he was assigned to at the time. The terminals were running Windows XP. This was 7-8 years ago tops.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [+] -13 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    ah, so you're full of shit and know nothing.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 64 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    This took longer than I thought it would. It seemed like a priority during trump’s 1st term, then it stalled.

    Given some of Putin’s comments lately, he seems increasingly restless. I wonder if this is related to that?

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 52 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    He's preparing to attack the Baltics.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago

    Based on news lately cracks on Russian economy start to show and their meat grinder in Ukraine crawls forward with massive casualties. At this rate they can't attack a garden shed.

    Putin himself can preparen and wish to conquer whatever he wants but as long as the little remains what's left of Soviet Union might is scattered around Ukraine, Russia can't really do anything. If Europe can't get their shit together and Russia eventually wins (after several years at this pace) in Ukraine it would still take years to build up any kind of military force against anyone and even then they'd need to fight against whole EU and whatever remains are left of NATO.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 42 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    That's fine, just pack your shit and close all military bases in nato countries as well.

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    Hey, you know how much money they spend on having this bases? Some regions depend on it.

    On the other hand... I think Trump and his mad posse wouldn't risc being such bigmouths without their Bases in Turkey or Ramstein.

    Also their level of megalomanic moronity makes me fear that when the USA leaves Nato it would start attacking the rest of the world. Canada and Mexico first. Then they would find "justifications" to raid through middle america and "bring idiocrazy" to south america. Reinstating slavery for everyone that ain't "a good godfearing white patriot"... Because... the white race is superiour and needs Lebensraum.... Oh god, I've heard that shit all over in history class when I grew up in Germany in the 1970ies...

    Please, anyone stop them now!!!

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 80 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    france was right all along

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago

    Yes, but what's the point? Nobody listens to France anyway, we are irrelevant. The only way to push our ideas is if somehow the EU embrace them.

    And then we've got our own issues (doing nothing climate-related, lack of financing for science, nazi ideas getting popular, etc...).

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 39 points 1 year ago (21 children)

    If they're going to withdraw then why are they strong arming all the other nations to spending 5% GDP on defense? If they're not in NATO, who gives a fuck what they want?

  • source
  • hideshow 21 child comments
  • [–] 40 points 1 year ago (10 children)

    Probably because they want those 5% GDP spent for contracts with the 'murican military industrial complex.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    But that's definitely (hopefully?) not going to happen if they pull out of NATO.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 1 year ago*

    Never underestimate the corruption and stupidity of European politicians. "Divide and conquer" works like a charm on most of our corrupt assholes. See the stupid opportunist fuck that the Germans elected chancellor. His (our :'( ) government is pushing for the use of the Palantir(!) software from fucking uber-Nazi-piece-of-shit Thiel in German administrations.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    So, they wished the increased spending to the monkey paw and got exactly what they were wishing for: countries are cancelling orders of complex US equipment all over the world, and Europe is developing a military industry to compete with them.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    that is the less undesirable outcome, but still it is depressing how primitive and fucking dumb humans are to still be bashing each others skulls in in the year 2025.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (1 child)

    I don't think the US military complex consider that "less undesirable" than basically any other possible outcome.

    ... well, it may be better in their minds than an asteroid destroying Earth before they can cash-out. Maybe. I'm not sure about this one...

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • I don’t think the US military complex consider that “less undesirable” than basically any other possible outcome.

    Either I disagree about the preferences of those murder-weapons-vendors, or you misunderstood my intentional double-negative, whose purpose it was to emphasize that it is absolutely not desirable that budgets have to be increased for mass-murder weapons.

    I am saying the military industrial complex over in the divided states of fuck all and everyone, would absolutely prefer if people bought from them, less so as a cash-out but preferably as a permanent source of income. A privatized murder-weapons industry in the billions is the best way of ensuring we will never get lasting peace on this planet.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Defending yourself is so dumb, hey? Go and whine to Pootin. Everyone else has to react to the bully, or go extinct. Pacifism has no place so long as there is ONE invader/bully left.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (7 children)

    It was a talking point that Trump had in his first term. He tends not to let go of bad ideas once they get into his head.

    At the time, people didn't take it seriously. With the Ukraine War, Europe feels like it has to now. But it's going to be domestic production, not paying US MIC companies like Trump was thinking.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    The 5% is probably too much, but its realistically 3.5% the othet 1.5% can be spend on infrastructure (like make bridges strong enough so tanks can drive over them), on cyber defense and other things that are not weapons.

    Also it's about deterrence, when we spend enough Russia can't attack unless they match the spending, this is part why the Soviet Union collapsed.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] -3 points 1 year ago* (5 children)

    The Soviet Union collapsing is what allowed the war in Ukraine. Do you see why rising military budgets in Europe doesn't exactly promote peace?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (2 children)

    This is like saying Germany losing WW2 is what allowed Israel to attack Iran.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -2 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    The antagonism between Ukrainians and Russians is a project the west has been pushing for a century. First it was Nazi Germany weaponizing a hunger episode that hurt Ukraine disproportionately more in order to create anti-russian sentiment (see Stepan Bandera), then it was Europe+US talking of Ukraine as a Russian colony during Soviet times.

    In the 1991 referendum, Ukraine voted to remain part of the Soviet Union which was illegally dismantled against the democratic will of the majority of the Soviet population. Despite this, the country was dissolved, the economy was auctioned to the most corrupt bidder, the industry was dismantled, and by 2022 Ukraine still hadn't recovered the economic level it had before 1991. The dissolution of the Soviet Union literally caused a demographic crisis in Ukraine comparable to the ongoing war.

    Until 1991, the tensions between Ukraine and Russia were minor and the countries had a benign, sisterly relationship. It is the breaking of the eastern block that primarily triggers anti-russian nationalism in Ukraine and vice versa in Russia. It's the broken promise of the west not to push NATO eastward that puts Russia on its toes, and it's western-backed colour revolutions like the Euromaidan that proved Russia that Europe would always position itself against Russia, and not establishing friendly economic and diplomatic ties.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

    Was Ukraine actually added to NATO? No

    Do Ukrainians want to be Russians? No

    In fact after the NATO summit of 2008 where Bush said Ukraine should be a NATO member, Putin who was at that NATO summit said he didn't want that (same for Georgia).

    After that NATO didn't push membership further and Putin attacked and claimed parts of Georgia anyway.

    About a month after Putin said he had no plan to attack Ukraine he took Crimea.

    I know people from both Ukraine and Georgia and they always tell me that Russia has been an agressive neighbor forever and they really don't want to be Russians.

    I'm not saying the west it perfect and we definitely did things wrong. But the invasion of Ukraine is 100% Putin, he did this, there was no war, nobody was threatening Russia. In fact the EU was slowly getting a better economic relationship with Russia.

    But in the end all of this doesn't matter, it's not about NATO, or the west. If you listen to what Putin is actually saying, he thinks Ukraine and Georgia both are not counties. In his view they have always been part of Russia, so he would have invaded them at some point anyway.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago*

    If you think Drumpf may be a Pootin asset, then it makes perfect sense. Spending more GDP on defense usually makes the incumbent party less popular, which may create opportunity for russia leaning candidates. Obviously, this would weaken NATO. NATO countries go along with Drumpf because they really still hold some hope that USA won't leave the fold. They are still in the Denial stage of mourning. Anyway, events in Ukraine have shown that more GDP spending on military is pretty much essential for any country within range of ruzzia.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 38 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (10 children)

    I'm not saying Donald is a russian asset... But what more could daddy vladdy wish for?

  • source
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [+] -21 points 1 year ago (9 children)

    We really need to examine this need people have to blame Russia for everything. Do you blame Russia when your dryer loses a sock too? It's fascinating to me.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 22 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    I might if Russia had a vested interest in taking my socks, and the dryer had a history of justifying Russia's sock stealing.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [+] -11 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    That's a load bearing "if", holy cow.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago

    several intelligence offices from several countries have proven russian influence into western politics, infrastructure and social media. What is your claim based on? Feelings? Strong base to stand on lmao

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Are we, including or excluding that it’s all, but been confirmed that he is a Russian asset ?whether it’s willing or unwilling remains to be seen.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago

    Let's pretend he isn't a Russian asset. What would he do differently upon becoming one? At this point, being a Russian asset is the better explanation for his actions. If he isn't, he's making a lot of dumb decisions that benefit Putin and hurt the US and her allies.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 37 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    Does the bill include all military installation closures and those that are on European territories? For example Greenland. If MAGA wants out, then GTFO and I do not want hear any crying afterwards because that will give the Europeans every excuse not purchase US made weapons. I'm certain US MIC lobbyists will weasel their way in to tear apart the bill.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    This is what I don't get about their plan to take over the US. It won't work because it will cost everyone money, the people they are ultimately beholden to will lose out because of actions they chose to take.

    As soon as the consequences become apparent interest in project 2025 is going to drop off a cliff.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 73 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    If the US leaves NATO, Europe would lose a lot of support.

    If the US stays in NATO, they would refuse to support them anyway and could use their veto power to stop any potential action.

    If they're not going to have the support of the US military either way, and the US staying in NATO could prevent the organization from taking any action at all, it may be in the best interest of Europe for the US to leave NATO so they can't cripple it from within.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 1 year ago

    NATO is a defensive alliance so the only thing a US veto would do is prevent Ukraine from joining NATO. But that wouldn't happen until the war is over, and it doesn't look like that's going to happen until Russia's economy collapses. At that point Russia won't be a threat for awhile so kick the US out, add Ukraine as a member since Ukraine would be a stronger ally than the US anyway.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 92 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    What's next? Helping Russia in their wars? I hope it was fucking worth it to "own the libs."

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 110 points 1 year ago (14 children)

    Honestly, the American far-right unknowingly dismantling US global hegemony piece by piece is pretty sick

  • source
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • [+] 63 points 1 year ago (8 children)
  • [–] 11 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    the fascists == idiots trope needs to go bc that’s exactly what makes them dangerous.

    That plan doesn't work. It assumes that the rest of the world just sits back and takes their crap lying down which isn't happening. They genuinely think they can just take over Greenland and nothing would happen. I don't know if they're intelligent or not, but they're definitely delusional.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    Just when I warmed up to the idea that NATO was a necessary evil to counter Putin's worse evil.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    It also is a necessity to keep the USA from going Putin... Trump wouldn't stop wanting to be a King. As a King he'd work on becoming the Emperor. As Caesar Donald the step to becoming the god emperor isn't that big...

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago

    Between this and USAID I can't say I'm unhappy about it. Of course dismantling imperialism is a good thing, but I also don't understand. The republicans should be all about illegal invasions, bombing civilians, and installing puppet dictators, so they should love USAID and NATO, yet here we are. Is this just incompetence?

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 28 points 1 year ago
    [+] 27 points 1 year ago (2 children)
  • [–] 97 points 1 year ago

    As directed by Vladamir Putin.

  • source
  • [–] 50 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    US: "NATO members need to up their defense spending!"

    NATO: "Okay, we'll do it."

    US: "Actually, We're leaving NATO." 🤡

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)
  • [+] 8 points 1 year ago (2 children)
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago

    I'm pretty sure that last decade or so has shown that Europe doesn't spend enough. It's not just Russia's invasion. Military action in Libya was reliant on the US to sustain more than a few days of action.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 24 points 1 year ago* (1 child)

    Isn't this the same psycho whose reaction to Minnesota politicians being assassinated was conspiracy theories?

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 23 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    From a Turkish perspective, it's fucking ridiculous for Trump to first convince us to increase the defense budget, then withdraw from the alliance completely. The fuck is his goal?

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    "Keep 'em guessing". You have to understand Trump is not a statesman. It's that simple. He views everything as a one-to-one personal power dynamic in the context of some silly real estate deal about which restaurant supplier to choose for the crispy tortilla shells.

    I don't think he understands the ramifications beyond a contract he won't respect or some clever insult he can hurl.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›
    35 comments in c/news@lemmy.world view that post
    5 comments in c/usa@midwest.social view that post