this post was submitted on 06 Nov 2024
568 points (94.7% liked)

NonCredibleDefense

3509 readers
830 users here now

Rules:

  1. Posts must abide by lemmy.world terms and conditions
  2. No spam or soliciting for money.
  3. No racism or other bigotry allowed.
  4. Obviously nothing illegal.

If you see these please report them.

Related communities:

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 29 points 14 hours ago

NATO will be fine. They'll just have to up their game a bit militarily. If America wants to be insular and wrap a flag of isolationism around them, it'll hurt in the short term, but after four years of being more independent of Americas tit, its more than likely the US that will find itself less relevant globally.

Even before this, there was already rumblings, not just in China, but elsewhere, about ditching the american dollar standard and returning to the gold standard. That's just going to gain momentum as soon as Trump starts trying to wave his mushroom around.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago) (5 children)

Trump's point about NATO countries needing to adhere to the funding that was agreed with mutually is a good one and I'm super confused why he was ridiculed about it when he said it. I mean, what's the point of the alliance if we don't do the things we agree to do?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago)

The problem is the technology gap between nations. Europeans are literally sending over their smartest and they are going over because all they care about is greed, politics be damned because because to them it's a rest of the world going around in a cycle of stupid problem. Which is stagnating both societies, science, and global security. The US is using those engineers to build the most modern weapons against fictitious "if we won't, they will" enemies, weapons that are disseminated to opposing world powers through corruption except those still stuck in the system of legitimacy rapidly devolving into subservience, weapons that are getting battle-hardened through imperialistic use throughout conflict world wide through the industrial military complex.

Europe militarily has been in shambles since WW2, evidenced by how much of its colonial ambitions it had to give up. It wasn't just oligarchs suddenly becoming good. What is going to happen is not that Europe is suddenly going to become capable of sustaining NATO, it's that it is going to have to give concessions to the nations that aren't going to be cutting them off. Before, that was the US, now it will have to be Russia and China.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 hours ago (2 children)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 55 points 23 hours ago* (last edited 22 hours ago) (3 children)

Nato without USA is still bigger military than Russia.

[–] gravitas_deficiency 22 points 22 hours ago (5 children)

But with a fraction of the nukes, which is the actual big stick part of NATO

[–] [email protected] 29 points 19 hours ago (11 children)

It took two nukes for Japan to wave the white flag. Do we really need 5,000+ nukes for anything? France has 290 and UK has 225. Thats enough to wipe one or multiple countries clean off of the map without any form of surrender.

load more comments (11 replies)
[–] [email protected] 31 points 22 hours ago

In the game of nukes you don’t really need many.

You can destroy the world just so many times.

The rest is just for showing who has it bigger (the arsenal)

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 129 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (107 children)

Good job to all of the fucks who stayed home because of Gaza, thinking that not voting and letting the GOP rise to power would actually help the situation.

Yeah, because Netanyahu's extreme right-wing policy was a problem with the US's left-wing party, right?

[–] [email protected] 59 points 1 day ago (14 children)

I doubt Gaza was the deciding factor for 20 million people, but I could be wrong. Especially since anyone that aware of the whole would see trump would worsen the situation not improve it. I'm curious why they did stay home.

I also guess Americans don't want a woman president and they do want a hard crackdown on migrants. Especially Latinos, who apparently overwhelmingly came out for trump.

[–] [email protected] 46 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

I also guess Americans don’t want a woman president and they do want a hard crackdown on migrants. Especially Latinos, who apparently overwhelmingly came out for trump.

Latinos voting for hard crackdowns on immigrants is the biggest "fuck you, I've got mine" energy I've ever seen.

[–] [email protected] 34 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

And they will be so fucking shocked when ice comes for them.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 17 hours ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 9 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

But they are one of the good ones!

[–] [email protected] 6 points 14 hours ago

Narrator: they weren't.

load more comments (13 replies)
load more comments (105 replies)
[–] [email protected] 180 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (10 children)

I mean if Europe wants to increase their military funding and move items in house I think that would be a wonderful idea. Because America is not a reliable partner in this at all in the past two decades.

load more comments (10 replies)
[–] [email protected] 13 points 20 hours ago (2 children)

Hopefully the EU takes over. It has a lot more economic strength then NATO. Also the UK is strong as well, but that can be managed. Turkey does its own things anyway and I would not trust them. Norway and Iceland are not that important. Canada is going to go with the US anyway. The advantage is easier common funding for projects, due to the EU having more direct access to money. There are also a lot of the basics in the works already.

[–] gravitas_deficiency 20 points 19 hours ago

Norway and Iceland are crucial to European defense - what are you talking about?

[–] [email protected] 12 points 19 hours ago

Yeah, what is your reasoning behind that statement about Norway and Iceland?

[–] [email protected] 27 points 23 hours ago

I think that’s unlikely.

But I also thought Trump winning was unlikely,

So what do I know?

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›