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.
-
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 [email protected]
Politics [email protected]
World Politics [email protected]
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
view the rest of the comments
Here we go again.
It will end not differently than last time.
When they had their leader, they might have had a chance to taking down Putin. Maybe. Slim chance, but a chance. Now they are fucked.
Still would be nice to put a hurt on the Russian military.
Any military units they manage to destroy is good for the rest of the world.
Not necessarily, because (I suspect) less soldiers Putin have more he would be willing to press that red button.
We can't change that regardless and can't forever cower under every threat Putin makes. Unless we just want to make him dictator of the world.
Appeasement never works, we should have learned that by now, but we need to make it clear.
Putin's unwillingness to push the red button is due to it resulting on every single nation in the World including China turning against him and Russia if he did do that (because if the first nation to use nukes offensivelly isn't examplarily punished for it, every nation in the World will rush to become nuclear capable - if only for self defense - which funilly enough flattens the capability of the giants such as China to push the little ones around hence even if only because of that they're against it) and likely Russia, he himself and his family ending up nuked sooner or later.
If there is one thing the Invasion of Ukraine has taught us is that if he thinks get away with it and end up better from doing it, no matter how evil. Putin will do it or have somebody do it for him.
Does Putin seem reasonable to you? I think it's pretty possible that he will be willing to take the whole world to the grave with him.
Absolutelly - so far he seems to be rational.
Not necessarily wise, certainly not morally upright (quite the opposite), but yeah, absolutelly rational.
He started a war to conquer territory and resources, likely based on certain expectations of capability of the Russian Military which were far from realistic as well as expectations on the Ukranian Military and Society which were also far fromrealistic. He went for a decapitation attack expecting Zelenskyy to be killed, captured or flee but none of that happenned and thus the "easy way" failed. From there onwards, as a dictator who has anchored his authority on an image of "strong man", we couldnt simply back down so everything that has been happenning since has been him trying to ideally gain something out of a bad situation or at least not to lose face.
All pretty rational. Not exactly strategically intelligent but certainly rational.
As for the use of nukes, notice how the ever increasing talk about using it from the russian authorities maybe a year ago suddenly stopped (except for fringe types and well known powerless russian muppets) when China made it very clear they would have to do something about it if Russia used those...
Even a strategically inept but rational actor can't miss the implications of China turning against Russia.
In hindsight, all he had to do was setup an assination squad before mobilizing troops in 2022. Had he killed Zelensky before the real fighting happened I think the country would have been very demoralized and it would have been much harder for them to get aid with a new leader, even if it wasn't a Russian plant.
And the more gains that they would have made earlier on, the less likely the West would have been to send aid, less it fall into the hands of Russia or some new corrupt politician.
Without the aid, Russia would have already won by now.
Apparently he did try it, several times, after the invasion started.
I suspect that in Putin's mind, before Zelenskyy revealled himself as a real leader ("I don't need a lift, I need ammo"), he was nothing more than a week "western-style politician" and comediant who would easilly fold.
It's very easy with hindsight to say he should've tried to take him out beforehand but at the time he (or, lets be honest, any of us, even the US President) really didn't know Zelenskyy's character (and for all he knew back then, killing Zelenskyy might've just be taking out a weaker man and end up with a stronger man leading the Ukranian Government).
Sure, it makes sense now, but back then knowing what he knew then, for Putin it clearly did not.
Again, it's like failure to do even the most basic research. He had all sorts of plants in Ukraine in before all this started, it would have been relatively easy to have spies to a character assessment. Just like I really don't understand why he wouldn't have done an equipment specification before moving all this equipment with dry rot and other failures. He had to have known that the everyone was skimming at best, and straight out stealing at worst.
Considering that even the US' intelligence failed to spot Zelenskyy's character as a war leader, I think we should be wary of proclaiming that the russian's could've find it out with "the most basic research"...
In fact people often don't really know if they'll rise to the occasion in such a life and death situation themselves until faced with it.
As I said, it's easy to look at it now and think "it was obvious", but that's due to hindsight.
What was rational in this war?
He wanted territory, mineral resources and even human resources (lots of industrial production in the territories Russia took) and expected the mighty Russian Army would crush the Ukranian Army (just like when they took Crimea) and the rest of the World wouldn't do much more than bitching & moaning (again, just like when Russia took Crimea). Apparently he was even expecting his men would be welcomed by the ukranians with open arms (remember how the head of Russian Intelligence was fire not long after the war started because of that?!) and that the rest of Europe could be controlled via Economic Pressure because of its dependency on Russian Gas.
It makes all sense that having overestimated the Russian Army and underestimated the Ukranian people and its Army as well as the will of the West to genuinelly help Ukraine (and looking at all the pussyfooting around providing modern jets and long range missiles to Ukraines, I would say that at least partially that's true), it looked like a good idea to begin with.
Once commited, given the style of leader he portrays himself as and the overreliance on nationalism to control the russian people, he was stuck with the Ukranians pushing back with western help and unwilling to give up and being politically unable to just conced the War as that would be almost literaly putting his neck on the block.
Then they'd have no soldiers