this post was submitted on 27 Nov 2025

211 points (97.3% liked)

News

33309 readers

2522 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil

Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. 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. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.

2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.

Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.

3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.

Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.

4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.

Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.

5. Only recent news is allowed.

Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.

6. All posts must be news articles.

No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.

7. No duplicate posts.

If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.

8. Misinformation is prohibited.

Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.

9. No link shorteners.

The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.

10. Don't copy entire article in your post body

For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

JonsJava@lemmy.world

gedaliyah@lemmy.world

little_cow@lemmy.world

211

Europe is planning retaliating against Russia (www.politico.eu)

submitted 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) by falseWhite@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world

41 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Ideas range from joint offensive cyber operations against Russia, and faster and more coordinated attribution of hybrid attacks by quickly pointing the finger at Moscow, to surprise NATO-led military exercises, according to two senior European government officials and three EU diplomats

“The Russians are constantly testing the limits — what is the response, how far can we go?” Latvian Foreign Minister Baiba Braže noted in an interview. A more “proactive response is needed,” she told POLITICO. “And it’s not talking that sends a signal — it’s doing.”

Finally.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] bearboiblake@pawb.social -5 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

You think having a military offers any form of protection against aggressive militarism?

If anything, it makes wars and invasions more appealing - if the infrastructure of control and oppression, the police, the military, the courts, etc. are all there, all they need to do is seize those levers of power.

If that infrastructure does not exist and a population is hostile to your attempts to impose it, you would effectively stand no chance against a determined resistance. There are no major military targets, no leaders to assassinate, no positions of power to leverage. They would need to keep boots on the ground to maintain power. And those soldiers, while constantly stationed in hostile territory, can't do anything else and would constantly find themselves under attack by decentralized militia forces - there would be very little hope for holding such territory, and as soon as the occupying force left, anarchy, and therefore peace and order, could once again be restored.

[–] falseWhite@lemmy.world 5 points 13 hours ago* (last edited 13 hours ago)

Such a naive opinion you have. And I say opinion, because I challenge you to find any proof in history where the weak successfully fought off the bullies?

You think having a military offers any form of protection against aggressive militarism?

Tell me how many times a nuclear power has been in invaded in the past 80 years and then tell me how many small countries with weak military have been invaded in the past 80 years.

Your argument is not based in reality.

You cannot let bullies be stronger than you.

But if you want proof of the opposite, history is FULL of it.

Maybe start with the Baltics and the two Russian occupations they suffered through in the past 100 years or so. Or maybe WW2, or if you want more recent examples, tell me how well Ukraine is doing? Or how well Palestinians fought off Israel?

Honestly your opinion is ridiculous.

if the infrastructure of control and oppression, the police, the military, the courts, etc. are all there, all they need to do is seize those levers of power.

If that infrastructure does not exist and a population is hostile to your attempts to impose it, you would effectively stand no chance against a determined resistance.

So you are essentially saying countries should have NO military, NO police, NO courts, NO leaders, etc. in order to not be invaded.

Again, ridiculous.

And those soldiers, while constantly stationed in hostile territory, can't do anything else and would constantly find themselves under attack by decentralized militia forces

So still a war, people still fighting and dying 🤦‍♂️

I'd say deterrence and prevention is much better.