this post was submitted on 30 Mar 2025
401 points (98.5% liked)

World News

45297 readers
3844 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

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.

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/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

cross-posted from: https://lemm.ee/post/59867996

German media outlets Süddeutsche Zeitung, WDR, and NDR also cite the report, noting that Russian President Vladimir Putin appears intent on testing NATO’s Article 5 guarantees. The alliance’s mutual defence clause obliges member states to come to one another’s aid if attacked. The assessment suggests Putin may seek to challenge how seriously that commitment would be honoured.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] atthecoast@feddit.nl 64 points 2 days ago (6 children)

They burned through their Soviet stockpiles of artillery and tanks in 3 years fighting Ukraine, what makes anyone think they could fight NATO?

[–] Infernal_pizza@lemm.ee 95 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Depends which side the US is on

[–] alvvayson@lemmy.dbzer0.com 40 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Bingo.

And also depends on which side China is on. Their war production dwarfs even the US, and I find it difficult to believe that it will all be spent fighting the US and Taiwan.

There is a very real possibility that these three countries gang up together and divide the world among themselves.

[–] Hubi@feddit.org 9 points 2 days ago (1 children)

At this point it seems much more likely that the US sides with Russia than China. The EU is their largest trading partner, they'd never risk losing that market.

[–] alvvayson@lemmy.dbzer0.com 11 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Why would Russia risk alienating China?

In realpolitik, China is the more desirable partner than the USA.

[–] InvertedParallax@lemm.ee 4 points 2 days ago (1 children)

The problem is China is right there, and a lot of parts of Russia used to have Chinese names.

Mostly, Siberia is literally infinite resources, the kind of thing China desperately needs.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] jubilationtcornpone@sh.itjust.works 33 points 2 days ago (2 children)

US has a sizeable advantage in terms of sheer firepower but lacks the collective will to side with Russia in a conflict with NATO. To be clear, the Trump administration might try to side with Russia and the initial consequences of that would be very serious. But, long term, I think that would bring a swift end to the US' global dominance. Potentially even bringing us to the point of total collapse.

That's just one American's perspective though.

[–] RamblingPanda@lemmynsfw.com 29 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (3 children)

As an European, could you please collapse before siding with Russia over us? That would be great, thanks.

Alternatively, and much preferred, just kick the whole Trump administration into the ocean, hold your own Nuremberg trials and start refreshed into the future. K thx bye.

Alternatively, and much preferred, just kick the whole Trump administration into the ocean, hold your own Nuremberg trials and start refreshed into the future. K thx bye.

I like the way you think.

[–] Azal@pawb.social 12 points 2 days ago (2 children)

I really would love the kicking the Trump admin in the ocean, but living in a red state that is cheering for this, I don't think that's going to happen.

Collapse, that's far more likely and will look rather middle east 2.0. Our biggest states money wise are on the west coast and more politically aligned with Canada than anyone, and our east coast is more European minded. There's a reason in the US a constant whining is "Coastal elites" so the political fight is going to go after them, especially if they resist any wars for expansion which is going to be the case. If things get bad enough, they potentially would secede which would lead to another civil war, which was caused by the last batch of secessionists.

The thing is, the people who are aligned with this administration are the ones that still support the southern secession, now if the Republicans didn't have double standards they'd have no standards at all so I don't expect them to take the will of blue states breaking off as "See, we were right all along" and instead go for an attack instead.

The trouble with... all of that... and why I say it'll look like the middle east is when that goes down, we're going to lose our nice dividing "red/blue Republican/Democrat left/right" divisions... which normally would be great, except it's going to be all sorts of ideological areas in active combat. Those that have fully shoved the current administrations rhetoric down their throat will be pro-expansionisitic. They're actually a pretty tiny minority, I'm surrounded by Trump voters at work and when I tell them about the "51st state" or annexation of Greenland rhetoric they're horrified. Partially because the draft has always been in our mind and now they're considering their kids going to war with a former ally... these guys mock Canada, but invading has never been in the thought process in our lives to the point that most people forget the war of 1812 happened.

But the largest church in the United States is the Catholic church, which until the last decade has really seemed to have been politically out of it, but now it's been putting pressure on Rome to the point the Pope has called it out. I've been waiting to see if we'd end up with a US Anti-Pope. The trouble is, the MUCH MORE politically powerful church is the second biggest single church in the US, AND the biggest of the current religion in the US, Protestantism, headed up by the Southern Baptist Church. The Southern Baptists were created pre-Civil War literally over the purposes of slavery, and while they have shut up about slavery they keep their southern roots and having grown up down there... they've been ready to go to war for years against the "Mary Worshipers" and "Jesus killers" (Catholics and Jews) to turn the country into the "Rightful Christian country it should be." So now we potentially might be getting a nice religious civil war going down, we've got waiting in the wings the Mormons, they're an odd bunch, very insular. One of their tenants is to be prepared for the end times and build communities together, effectively it's a religion of doomsday preppers. They're by far a smaller group, but far less infighting and as I say, are prepared for "The Collapse". And the biggest concentration of them is in Salt Lake City, Utah... where the great salt lake is drying up and the dirt under it is toxic and being blown over the city. But that's fine... their holy land where they expect Jesus to descend is just East of Kansas City in Missouri... where the reason they're not really there in force is because Missouri literally had a law to legalize hunting Mormons in the 1800s, so surely no bitterness there. The Southern Baptists is biggest concentrated from Florida to Texas, the Catholics have the biggest gathering in Chicago so that nice North/South thing will come up again, now with a potential holy crusade in the middle from a third group.

OKAY, so we've got the religious fights I've been hearing rumblings my entire life going, but religion is taking a back seat, lets see what else we have happening. The South wants to bring back Jim Crow against the blacks, but surely that'd be localized, the South has never attempted to pressure states to do what they want to do (see the Fugitive Slave Acts to see how dripping with sarcasm that is.) Frankly the South has been ready to restart its Civil War for the past 160 years, and I've been saying the Trump administration is them winning it, so you'll have a racial war going down in the same time, and if you look up the Tulsa Race Riots, you'll see the US really knows how to go all out on a race war.

Now just political ideology wars. Sure, as I said, only the most hard core MAGAts want to go to war with other countries, but this country has been spending the last 20 years splitting the political ideologies from each other to a point I have no idea how we can come together. I have had to keep my mouth shut politically in jobs because I'm always outnumbered and retaliation can happen. Because of such I get to hear such wonderful things about how they believe Democrats are pedophiles and believe the Pizzagate thing. Now of course I think Republicans are unforgiveable fascists... but holy fuck it's not like I don't have a massive pile of evidence on that one, but that shows even the bias of I have no idea how I can ever trust one again. For the most part, the left is in the cities and the right is in the country. So of course the right wingers keep saying "Fine, we can cut off cities out of food" but dont' realize the numbers of people and guns do outnumber in the cities, and when people start starving they will invade. It won't save the cities, people will die if that goes down as people in this situation tend to not think in the long term and will destroy instead of trying to grow... and but the country folk won't make it through any better... yet seem perfectly willing to think they can try.

And finally, the one that's more theoretical as I only have some historic perspective to work off of, but I've heard no rumblings about it, however movements seem to show it. Company towns. We did have some history of towns owned entirely by companies, where you were paid in company scrip and the company owns your home. I grew up in the hometown of WalMart, and I've made "jokes" about the Walmart military being the security, but Arkansas has weak gun laws, walmart has a massive security operation, has made it a point that if you want to do business with them you have to move to their home area and has made sure to clear out any competition. There are surrounding towns that papers are finding that the Walton family ends up owning 75%+ due to shell corporations to buy up the land of the towns. Amazon has been trying to take over towns with their distribution centers, running anything out and running on low taxes but they're really decentralized, and President Musk has outright stated wanting to bring back company towns. Now, there aren't many willing to fight and die for a company here. Left and Right, most people hate these major corporations (but not enough hate to stop giving them money and power), but thinking about Bentonville, if things go down like I'm predicting above, you'll have these very powerful companies that have consolidated land and people and has enough money to effectively buy a military... well security becomes a "militia" to protect the stability of the town, now people can get on board with that. Once the militia has stabilized the area around where it's not in danger from the fighting... now what? People belong to that company. And then while the others are fighting, they can expand. We may see a rise of feudalism within the US.

I realize this is all tin foil hattery, but this is a perspective of someone in the middle of it watching some of my tin foil hat predictions coming true and listening to what people are willing to yell about. This would probably be "entertaining" as in watching a train crash entertaining for all of you across the world, if it weren't for the part I never mentioned... the US military. Their ideologies are as split as the US... so all of the above will be trying to scoop up the military. Even companies have been some of the biggest hiring of former military for security, both digital and physical. Again, probably not so bad if we weren't bristling with nukes and at least a couple of these groups I mentioned in fighting are outright doomsday cults.

Thoughts from someone who lives in a state where the general populace, police and political leaders all are in agreement with the current administration and the nearest bastion that isn't completely surrounded is over 500 miles away. I'd say send help but if we get to that point, I'll be in the ground before yall get here.

[–] RamblingPanda@lemmynsfw.com 6 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Let me just start with: holy fuck, that's a lot of text.

I hope you're paranoid and everything will be fine, but I fear you're not, and at least part of that will become reality. I would send thoughts and prayers, but I'm an atheist, and thoughts and prayers is what got you in that situation.

Good luck, and I mean that. I'm glad not to be in your situation.

[–] Azal@pawb.social 7 points 2 days ago

I appreciate it. I really wish I weren't in my situation either and if I had the means I'd be getting me and my parents the fuck out of here. But stuck with it and just trying to figure out the best way to help those that will be in more danger than I. I've got at least the luck of looking like the people that are taking over (the downside is that's why I can discuss the way I do, I get to hear it from them because they look at me and think "Oh he'll be on our side.") but I know I will never be safe.

When you say part of it will be reality, that's the point I'm really going down. Even with the wall of text, it still looks neat and tidy how the battle lines will be drawn, and the US has a bad habit of thinking like that, all our wars have been pretty "This side vs This side" even back to our civil war. But what will be coming is a war where the sides will be best expressed as a "gagglefuck of people." Hopefully when blood is spilled there may get some sense and we figure out how to pull out of the nosedive, but to have hope would make me an optimist.

At least I did laugh about the thoughts and prayers, and appreciate you not sending any more. Thanks to the Republicans after every shooting we have so many that we're swimming in them.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] InvertedParallax@lemm.ee 8 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Don't worry, we would.

The south would demand we side with the champions of (white) Christian culture.

The coasts would finally have enough and we'd continue the civil war we should have finished 160 years ago.

[–] finder585@lemmy.world 7 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Reconstruction ending the way it did was a national tragedy.

Second times the charm as they say. . .

I’m honestly ready for Civil War 2. Let the south rise again so I can kick some fascist ass. It’s what they’ve always fantasized about anyway.

[–] Serinus@lemmy.world 10 points 2 days ago (1 children)

But is there a downside for the guy running our country?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] InvertedParallax@lemm.ee 19 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Their unlimited supplies of Russian delusions of superiority.

[–] SkaveRat@discuss.tchncs.de 4 points 2 days ago

they have the US on their side now

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] ReanuKeeves@lemm.ee 35 points 2 days ago (9 children)

So I just looked into the numbers quickly and am probably off by a bit

NATO has 3.2m active military personnel and 2.2m in reserve

Russia has 1.5m active and 2m reserve

BUT, American forces make up 1.3m of NATOs active and 800k reserve

If I were to randomly combine the American army with Russia rather than NATO for no particular reason,

NATO would have 1.9m active 1.4m reserve and the Axis-sorry I mean Russia and America would have 2.8m active 2.8m reserve...

[–] Tryenjer@lemmy.world 14 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (2 children)

Maybe this is a suicidal plan, Putin is going to die and wants to take the world with him. From what we know about him, he is megalomaniacal and sadistic enough to want something like this.

He must also be counting on the United States being out of NATO by then, maybe Trump will even send some soldiers to help his Russian allies.

[–] Carrolade@lemmy.world 6 points 2 days ago (1 children)

It has nothing to do with wanting to actually fight NATO. The idea is to manufacture a carefully crafted situation where Article 5 is triggered, but due to internal disagreement and individual risk, it is not fully honored.

Needless to say, any such move would be very risky.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (8 replies)
[–] LuckyPierre@lemm.ee 25 points 1 day ago (3 children)

Elsewhere on Lemmy today;

Russia has depleted its tank stocks: the industry is not covering combat losses

Both of these cannot be true.

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 16 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Well they can both be true, It just depends on Putin's mental state.

There was a rumor going around that he is dying and he is basically just doing this to try and make a name for himself, he will rebuild the USSR and it will stand for a thousand years as him as its founding father, and all that rubbish. Of course it's impossible for that to happen, but if he's dying anyway why not try?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] octopus_ink@slrpnk.net 6 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (3 children)

Hmm who do we know that will sell anything that isn't tied down and currently controls the US government and is buddy buddy with Putin? No, not Satan, but you are close!

collapsed inline media

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] orclev@lemmy.world 23 points 2 days ago (7 children)

Considering that Putin got his ass absolutely beat by a small country using second hand and surplus military hardware he'd have to be an absolute moron to pick a fight with NATO. Literally the only card he has to play is nukes and that's kind of an all or nothing sort of move. If nukes are off the table any concerted push by NATO is going to be mopping up in moscow within a few months.

That's also assuming the US doesn't get serious about it, but considering Putin's puppet in the Whitehouse there's a pretty good chance the US would quit NATO and so wouldn't factor in. Even without the US though Russia has demonstrated the rest of NATO is far more than sufficient to handle Russia.

[–] Sundiata@lemmy.world 19 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Poland + Ukraine is enough to practically destroy Russia.

Honestly I really hope putin just croaks over and dies at this point, the old fuck has practically killed endless amounts of his own people just for land. He can't use the excuse of "Hur dur NATO is encroaching on my borders via Ukraine" because Finland is in NATO now thanks to his stupidity.

He's gambling with WW3 with a high chance of losing it.

And he can't keep America under his grasp forever, by the end of the decade trump could lose the election or get couped by anyone.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] phoenixz@lemmy.ca 21 points 2 days ago (5 children)

Taking how successful Russia was on the battlefield of Ukraine, I'm going to go ahead and say "try us"

I know that Europe is a bit behind on military spending but that is rapidly changing and in the meantime Russia lost nearly a million soldiers on the frontline. That alone is enough to cripple the nation for the next two decades.

It's hard to see how Russia is going to do anything of that. The only "strength" it currently has is misinformation which works well for the US right now but that will have its limits soon enough

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] KulunkelBoom@lemm.ee 20 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Take out putin now and set the stage for a world at "peace" with humanity's eye back on a civilized future.

[–] floofloof@lemmy.ca 11 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Problem is the people waiting to take over from Putin. They're not at all nice.

[–] phoenixz@lemmy.ca 5 points 2 days ago (1 children)

None of the candidates are nice and most are much, much worse. Don't recall the name, but one of them basically is ready to drop the h bombs and push us all straight into WWIII because reasons.

If anyone takes out Putin, they'll have to take out the entire military top and government of Russia with it or we're all fucked

[–] Paddzr@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago

Eh, it's the sword rattling. Common tactic to make himself look strong and to be feared. He could still be spineless or once not under watchful eye of Putin, a drastically different person.

Putin isn't known for keeping people around if they're a threat to him.

[–] GrumpyDuckling@sh.itjust.works 5 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Take them out first so it looks like Putin is doing it.

[–] MehBlah@lemmy.world 14 points 1 day ago (1 children)

With what? I read yesterday they were not able to keep up with the losses from just fighting the ukraine.

[–] chiliedogg@lemmy.world 12 points 1 day ago (2 children)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] zephorah@lemm.ee 8 points 2 days ago (1 children)

10yrs? That long? Is Putin really that healthy? He looks like he has Cushing’s.

[–] alvvayson@lemmy.dbzer0.com 24 points 2 days ago

End of the decade is 31-12-2029, which is about 4.7 years away, not 10.

10 years would be "within/in/over a decade".

[–] ArchmageAzor@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago (5 children)

Honestly, I believe Europe needs to go on the offensive, we need a single unified offensive against Moscow with the intent of crippling the KGB and arresting Putin. They are both too dangerous to be left to their own devices.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] vga@sopuli.xyz 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Germany has to pump out these messages because they live so far from the critical border. It's easy to not understand the risk.

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 12 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Germany is still so uncertain of the risk that they still use Russian gas even 4 years after saying they were going to stop.

[–] rrabochiy@lemmy.world 5 points 2 days ago (1 children)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›