top 100 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 247 points 7 months ago (5 children)

He can ask "Board of Peace" for help

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 7 months ago

    haha didn't think of that yet. The "thank you" from trump to Qatar, Bahrain, Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Jordan: quite a few of the members got fucked over very quickly with the generous gift of regional instability!

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 91 points 7 months ago

    "I would also like to remind you that the U.S. and Israel did not consult us before the war, and that Washington explicitly stated at the start of the war that European assistance was neither necessary nor desired," Kornelius said.

  • source
  • [–] 174 points 7 months ago (22 children)

    What does he think NATO is? Isn’t the treaty to protect against aggression, not be the aggressors?

  • source
  • hideshow 22 child comments
  • [–] 129 points 7 months ago (4 children)

    He believes he is the king of the world and NATO is a human resources investment similar to the many departments of Trump Kingdom LLC.

    Far as he's concerned, who cares if that's not their job or intention. He's paying the bills damn it - he pay the bill, plebs do what he says. It's really that simple.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 31 points 7 months ago (3 children)

    I mean, some NATO nations have been known to join the US in a dumb fight. But Trump has also directly tariffed and threatened many of the nations that would normally help the US. Friends are gonna be short supply.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 7 months ago

    Spit your allies/friends in the face and see what you get ....

    I wouldn't be surprised if trump is looking to use this for an eventual "out" ... throw a tantrum that he's not getting help so he'll pull out of the gulf region completely, only do the bombings but leave the strait and it's cargo issues as the unresolved mess they are.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 7 months ago

    Americans can't afford to buy stuff now anyway, it's not like they were going to get a lot of trade. We can barely afford our rent/groceries and hundreds are getting laid off every week.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 16 points 7 months ago (5 children)

    Hm, many NATO countries actually did the latter for the US in the past.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 7 months ago (4 children)

    The US was actually attacked at that time. Iraq was a different story and "coalition of the willing" was used.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago

    He's spent more than the last decade doing nothing but criticizing NATO and saying it should be abolished and is shocked when they won't cover his war crimes and the consequences there of? Stable genius everybody.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 54 points 7 months ago (7 children)

    "We will protect them, but they will do nothing for us, in particular, in a time of need."

    I thought the US already destroyed 100% of the Iranian military? If I were an ally, it would sound to me like the help is not needed as there is no military remaining to fight.

  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 41 points 7 months ago (2 children)

    Like how the US protected Ukraine when it gave up its nukes, trusting that the West and NATO would protect them if Russia decided to invade?

    I know, that invasion began between Orange Man's two terms, but still. The US in general needs to STFU about how it supposedly protects the world, they dropped the ball bigtime there.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 50 points 7 months ago* (5 children)

    Literally no official channel from the US has asked NATO. (Rage tweets are not official) The US was not attacked so it can’t invoke article 5. No one from NATO needs to help this American war adventurism.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 16 points 7 months ago (4 children)

    No one from NATO needs to help this American war adventurism.

    Further to that, they all recognize the folly of the whole thing and don't want to get mired in the disaster that Trump has triggered.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 7 months ago (3 children)

    they all recognize the folly of the whole thing

    Oh I wouldn't be so sure about that. I mean I doubt NATO will get involved, but some individual countries might – there are a lot of reich-wing governments over on this side of the pond.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago (1 child)

    but some individual countries might – there are a lot of reich-wing governments over on this side of the pond.

    Maybe, but how many of them have fired all their military strategists and historians?

    It should be obvious to most moderately intelligent people that this is a no win situation, unless they're prepared to genocide an entire country. And if they go down that route, they'll become a pariah nation.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago

    It should be obvious to most moderately intelligent people

    This already disqualifies eg. the entire government of Finland, and we are absolutely not alone in this.

    The EU is already mulling expanding an existing Red Sea mission into the Gulf: https://apnews.com/article/eu-iran-shipping-hormuz-brussels-6360165465e302cbe05d2f27eafff145

    Conservatives (including literal neofascists) are in the majority in the European Parliament. Don't underestimate their capacity for stupidity and evil

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 97 points 7 months ago* (6 children)

    Reads like a text chat between an incel and a woman on the internet.


    Trump: You are stupid. You are ugly and fat. I'm so much better than you ever will be and also fuck all our agreements. Null and void. And you owe me $13.47 for that coffee I paid for.

    Them: stares confused . Then watches their economies be negatively impacted by trump.

    Trump: hey we are buddies right? Come help me bomb civilians.

    Them: no thanks.

    Trump: you are a stupid fat ugly bitch and I don't need you anyway.

    Trump (next day): how's it going? . So when are you deploying your troops to help out at the straight?

    Them: blocks trump

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • load more comments (3 replies)
    [–] 43 points 7 months ago (7 children)

    That was one labored sentence! I cannot be the only one that parsed it as: "Trump says he's been rejected by NATO (while) most allies (are) to join mission ..."

    Instead, it wants to say: "Trump says he's been rejected by NATO and most allies (in his desire for them) to join mission ..."

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

    The comma is for enumeration and not for segregation of two sentences. So it makes sense. They just used a comma instead of an "and".

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

    News title grammar has distinctly different rules from normal language. Extreme brevity and using commas in place of any other punctuation are typical of it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 42 points 7 months ago (1 child)

    But I thought that the “greatest military in the world” wouldn’t need help for a war that has “already been won”?

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 12 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

    That's not it. It's the lack of enthusiasm that drags Donnie down, the feeling that he always has to be the one who comes up with ideas to keep this relationship with NATO alive.

    Would it kill them to bomb one little school, leave some civilian corpses as a surprise around the (white) house or do those sweet little coups together in a foreign land, like they used to do?

    It's exhausting, really

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] 41 points 7 months ago (2 children)
  • [–] 40 points 7 months ago

    He's being"rejected" by a group that he has spent the last year shitting on?

    Gee, what a surprise...

  • source
  • [–] 35 points 7 months ago (5 children)

    He wanted the war, he can go out and fight it

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 69 points 7 months ago (4 children)

    NATO was created as a defensive measure to present a combined defence in the event of being attacked.

    It was NOT created to provide back up to a wannabe Napoleon with tiny dick syndrome because he decides to start a war on his own.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 32 points 7 months ago

    So let's recap...

    You gave NATO and all your allies the middle finger by cutting their budget, tariffing them, insulting them, attempting to bully them into complying with your will, and threatening to invade some of them...

    You seemingly forgot their contributions to America's previous pointless wars in the Middle East by saying they "weren't on the front lines", when most of them had sent people who lost their lives...

    You end US funding for Ukraine's defense because you didn't think it was your problem, and you told Europe that it's their job to foot the bill...

    You give the UN and NATO the middle finger with this farcical and extortionary "Board of Peace"...

    And now you launch a pointless invasion of Iran and complain that NATO, a defensive organization is "rejecting" you by not participating in it?

    Get fucked, old man!

  • source
  • [–] 29 points 7 months ago

    "hey, you, fuck you! also, I'll take your shit. also, come help me pls! but also, fuck you." - tronald dump

  • source
  • [–] 28 points 7 months ago (12 children)

    "Guys! GUYS! You really depend on the oil that flows through the Strait so come and help me open it!"

    "But your actions closed it in the first place."

    "OMG I CAN'T BELIEVE YOU WON'T HELP! :`("

    Fuck me, this is what international politics and diplomacy have become.

  • source
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 7 months ago (11 children)

    Also, most NATO countries don't really depend that much on that oil. Most of it goes to Asia.

    It's the various US allies in the gulf that are going to be feeling the pinch the most. If oil isn't getting out, they won't be getting paid. And they're getting pelted by Iranian drones to boot.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 7 months ago

    Not just that, but Europe is able to pay the oil price, although Russia getting it is a problem. At the same time oil consumption is half of the USAs and falling due to BEVs and heat pumps. It is probably a lot cheaper then to go to war.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago (9 children)

    "don't really depend that much on that oil"

    Then why tf do I have to pay 30cts/liter more for gasoline?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 7 months ago (7 children)

    Okay, some people depend on that oil. I don't, because I ride a bike.

    We should all have gotten out of our oil dependency a long time ago, but apparently politicians prefer being dependent on questionable regimes in unstable regions.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago (2 children)

    depend on that oil. I don't, because I ride a bike.

    I dont remember the exact number, but about half of the nitrogen in your body was made using oil/fossil fuels. This is the ultimate climate end boss fight, manufacturing everything without sucking (more) oil from the ground. Until this happens we are all slaves of it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago (1 child)

    As long as we don't put more CO2 in the air, it's not that big of a problem, but I think we've got more than enough nitrogen in our biosphere already. The excess nitrogen is causing pollution problems by itself.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago

    Yes. Part of the inputs to Haber bosch process is natural gas and a ton of process heat. The hydrogen source has to be switched to H2 from electrolyzers and the plant can't burn the NG for heat. So the energy cost for switching is very steep. This transition is huge, as it would decouple production of food from fossil fuels.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago (3 children)

    I don't, because I ride a bike.

    What an unbelievably stupid thing to say. Do the fields where your food grows ride a bike as well? Did your bike ride a bike to the store you bought it at? Did the clothes on your back ride a bike to your wardrobe?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 7 months ago (2 children)

    It might surprise you, but stuff I already have is unaffected by the recent increase in fuel costs.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago (1 child)

    Transportation costs will rise throughout the entire supply chain, including consumables/perishables, it will affect you unless you’re self sufficient for those too.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago

    It'll undoubtedly have some effect, but I'm not seeing any difference at the pump, because I don't go there.

    And I already try to buy my food locally sourced. Shorter supply chains proved to be more robust during Covid too. All this international trade with unstable parts of the world makes us more vulnerable than we need to be.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 94 points 7 months ago

    Still too big for this fool.

  • source
  • [–] 25 points 7 months ago* (4 children)

    NATO is a defensive alliance, not to be invoked when you get bribed by the zionists to start a war you cant finish. Our NATO allies owe us nothing in this situation but lawsuits for US/Israeli terrorism and destroying the oil markets.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 7 months ago (1 child)

    Which NATO nation was NATO defending in Yugoslavia in 1999?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago*

    If I recall correctly the yugoslavian communist serbs organized under the JNA had decided to cleanse their muslim population. Not that NATO cared specifically about genociding muslims (I think we all see that now) , but they did care about a previously "centrist" communist organization that disavowed Alliance with Russia creeping visibly closer to russian influence and becoming a satellite state, which seemed inevitable. So the war was about kneecapping a communist movement. Even though democracies like to claim they are all about letting their citizens decide their own government, they will not willingly let communism prosper, and proxy wars are preferred to direct ones.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 25 points 7 months ago

    He's been rejected by everybody he's ever met. That's probably why he's a rapist and a predator.

  • source
  • [–] 17 points 7 months ago (1 child)

    American people could think of it anther way. By not getting involved, other countries are attempting to keep this as a bad idea by Trump and not full on WWIII which would probably be the result if NATO got involved now. What you really need is some adults in the room in the WH who convince Trump that it is his brilliant genius idea to just walk away.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 7 months ago

    Yeah but you also assume reason on the other side. That's not granted. The joke now would be for the US to just walk away and Iran to re-open the strait EXCEPT for ships with a US interest (and probably Israel's). "Retribution for the damages."

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 14 points 7 months ago (3 children)
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›
    25 comments in c/world@lemmy.world view that post
    17 comments in c/news@lemmy.world view that post
    4 comments in c/usa view that post