228
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Saik0Shinigami@lemmy.saik0.com 13 points 2 years ago

This is exactly what you do if you want to give Russia a reason to attack NATO.

[-] explodicle@local106.com 17 points 2 years ago

If they didn't attack non-threats, then they wouldn't have attacked Ukraine.

[-] Skyrmir@lemmy.world 11 points 2 years ago

Russia is getting it's ass kicked by NATO toys delivered via slow roll. They really aren't stupid enough to actually attack NATO.

[-] Saik0Shinigami@lemmy.saik0.com 6 points 2 years ago

Oh I completely agree... But you can be the biggest baddest dude on the planet... Backing a honey badger into the corner isn't a good idea.

I doubt Russia could ever "win". But it can sure fuck shit up on it's way out. And if it feels that NATO is a threat, then that might be the direction the munitions go. I'd rather not see any war at all. I just simply don't see what 3000 more soldiers will accomplish EXCEPT to act as a threat to Russia, which is just shoving them further into a corner.

[-] sangle_of_flame@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago

it is 100% a dominance thing

fucking bunch of high schoolers these governments are

[-] McJonalds@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago

Couldn't the same be said for the other NATO countries sending help to Ukraine?

[-] reverendsteveii@lemm.ee 8 points 2 years ago

Have they ever waited for a reason?

[-] InverseParallax@lemmy.world 6 points 2 years ago

Sending 3000 reservists to Europe?

Shit, I'm going there on vacation in a few weeks, that's definitely provocative.

I wish they'd try something, they need to learn a lesson about screwing around in Europe.

Surprised russia sending troops "on vacation" to Crimea wasn't a reason for nato to bomb half of Russia to shit.

[-] Saik0Shinigami@lemmy.saik0.com 5 points 2 years ago

Crimea was Ukrainian territory... It's not in NATO. Thus not protected by NATO treaty.

[-] InverseParallax@lemmy.world 11 points 2 years ago

So wait, your argument is invading another sovereign country isn't a provocation, but sending reservists into an allied country that welcomes them is?

Man, Russian logic is complex.

[-] SirShanova@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years ago
[-] Saik0Shinigami@lemmy.saik0.com 19 points 2 years ago

Yes, more senseless war! Ukraine is in the right to protect their territory. But outright wishing for senseless war is stupid as hell.

[-] BunkerBusterKeaton@lemmy.ml 16 points 2 years ago

deranged comment

[-] klieg2323@lemmy.piperservers.net 12 points 2 years ago

Hope you're ready to die in a foreign war then

[-] jdsquared@lemm.ee 12 points 2 years ago

You do realize there's like 80,000 troops already there in europe? We have bases around the world. I'm not sure how these 3,000 national guard make a difference in your mind, but okay.

[-] klieg2323@lemmy.piperservers.net 12 points 2 years ago

This is just the start. It's the exact same way the "weapons assistance" went. First small, then billions of dollars worth of weapons being sent on the regular. It's to get us used to the idea of even more troops being sent over. The fact that there's 80k US troops on a foreign continent already doesn't make it any better. If anything, it provides the context for why Russia is acting irrationally as it is being surrounded by an adversaries military

[-] jdsquared@lemm.ee 7 points 2 years ago

No offense but you sound like a teenager

[-] klieg2323@lemmy.piperservers.net 11 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

No offense but you sound like an idiot.

I have just as much a right not to die fighting a foreign war as a Ukrainian has to die fighting for their country.

Advocating for an increase in US military involvement in a foreign war sounds like someone hasn't studied the great 20th century conflicts. If you'd like, I am a practicing historian and I can give you a reading list at your literacy level to give you some context for current world events.

load more comments (7 replies)
[-] 133arc585@lemmy.ml 8 points 2 years ago

No offense but you sound blue-eyed and idealistic when history has shown this to be a typical outcome.

[-] InverseParallax@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago

Actually the typical outcome was letting hitler take the sudatenland while doing nothing.

This is us stopping the typical outcome.

[-] sangle_of_flame@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

that's not what they mean

they mean "America sending troops over to a foreign country to 'save them', and then sending more, and OOPS now we've started a war there and we're already racking up those war crimes, and now the civilians there literally see us as goddamn evil and they're not even wrong to think that way because it turns out that we were basically there mainly doing heinous shit so that the nation was in a position where they kinda had to let us have a share of their resources so rich old white men back home can add an extra 3 zeroes to their bank accounts" was something we literally did for the last 2 decades

it is very much the one of the likely historical outcomes of "now the US gets militarily involved"

load more comments (10 replies)
[-] sangle_of_flame@lemmy.world 6 points 2 years ago

but I mean, we did basically that already

like relatively recently

in the middle east

[-] CmdrShepard@lemmy.one 2 points 2 years ago

In the middle east, we invaded Iraq and Afghanistan. Here, Russia is the invader. The two situations aren't comparable.

[-] 133arc585@lemmy.ml 9 points 2 years ago

To me, the issue is that it increased. Whether by a small amount or not is rather meaningless if your complaint is that troops are being committed at all. It could have increased by 30 troops and (although it wouldn't have made news) it would bother me.

[-] jdsquared@lemm.ee 4 points 2 years ago

Okay I just realized what instance I'm on. Time to unsubscribe.

[-] klieg2323@lemmy.piperservers.net 13 points 2 years ago

People are mean to me that I'm advocating for a senseless war with a nuclear element. Since obviously I can't be wrong I'm taking my ball and hiding in my echo chamber

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Saik0Shinigami@lemmy.saik0.com 10 points 2 years ago

LMFAO Like this is a valid excuse. Only 2 people in this comments section is from Lemmy.ml. Everyone else is commenting here from different servers.

What a truly stupid take.

[-] klieg2323@lemmy.piperservers.net 5 points 2 years ago

For real, I had to do a double take when I read that. Buddy probably thinks this is lemmygrad

[-] barsoap@lemm.ee 3 points 2 years ago

lemmy.ml is federated with lemmygrad.ml, and both are old instances (also run by the same people but that's less relevant here). Point being is that all the people on tankie central are subscribed to !worldnews@lemmy.ml for their worldnews community and thus you get a certain voting pattern you don't see in other worldnews communities even if you don't see any lemmygrad.ml users commenting.

[-] klieg2323@lemmy.piperservers.net 3 points 2 years ago

Maybe take some time to inspect the votes? They're not coming from lemmygrad. It's all public info

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] Saik0Shinigami@lemmy.saik0.com 2 points 2 years ago

Votes/karma mean absolutely nothing.

load more comments (6 replies)
[-] 133arc585@lemmy.ml 9 points 2 years ago

I'm guessing you are in voluntary reserves then, right? Because to advocate for sending others to die in a needless war, when you yourself aren't volunteering to do exactly that, is hypocritical and frankly ghoulish.

[-] queermunist@lemmy.ml 3 points 2 years ago

Nuclear Armageddon is good actually!

this post was submitted on 15 Jul 2023
228 points (100.0% liked)

World News

37121 readers
1065 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS