246
submitted 22 hours ago by MicroWave@lemm.ee to c/world@lemmy.world

Summary

Germany warns that Russia is rearming faster than expected, replacing war losses and stockpiling tanks, missiles, and drones.

Putin has redirected Russia’s economy to fuel its military, aided by supplies from Iran and North Korea.

While there’s no clear evidence of plans to attack NATO, Russia is creating the conditions for it.

On the Ukraine front, Russian forces are advancing in south Donetsk, nearing strategic town Pokrovsk, a key supply hub and coal mining center.

Analysts suggest Putin aims to seize land before potential peace talks.

all 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] recreationalcatheter@lemm.ee 1 points 20 seconds ago

2 surgical nukes and we can melt putin back into the puddle of excrement he really is.

[-] GreenKnight23@lemmy.world 43 points 10 hours ago

surprise surprise! just after his little orange butt plug was sworn in too!

[-] werefreeatlast@lemmy.world 4 points 8 hours ago

Hold on! The orange buttplug is about to do something stupid!...

[-] ShinkanTrain@lemmy.ml 48 points 16 hours ago* (last edited 16 hours ago)

Simultaneously so weak and incompetent that they can't take a village of 80 year olds but so scary that they'll go to war with like a fifth of the planet.

How does the Umberto Eco thing go again?

[-] TheFriar@lemm.ee 15 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago)

While there’s no clear evidence of plans to attack NATO, Russia is creating the conditions for it.

This is also a very telling sentence.

“There’s not evidence this is even on their minds or that they would ever attempt such a monumentally stupid move, buuut…just use your 🌈 imagination 💫”

[-] mount_snowden@lemmy.ml 3 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago)

The Telegraph loves this. " MAY OCCUR!!" = It has not been proven mathematically impossible.

While there's no clear evidence of plans to attack NATO, Russia is creating the conditions for it.

Have they read the news within the last 3 years?

[-] john89@lemmy.ca 2 points 6 hours ago

Simultaneously so weak and incompetent that they can’t take a village of 80 year olds

If they're that weak, why hasn't Ukraine beaten them out yet?

[-] InternetCitizen2@lemmy.world 2 points 7 hours ago

I mean Russia is doing quite poorly. Even if the Ukrainian Army poofs out of existence today and gives Russian a leisurely stroll to the capital its still kind of a pyrrhic victory. They have done well to go in a war economy and have learned from their mistakes, but they are still punching under their expected weight.

[-] HappySkullsplitter@lemmy.world 22 points 15 hours ago* (last edited 15 hours ago)

Russia has faced a tiny fraction of NATO's combined military strength and has failed to produce any meaningful results. Attacking NATO would be suicidal

[-] john89@lemmy.ca 4 points 6 hours ago

and has failed to produce any meaningful results.

The absolute delusion among you people.

[-] HappySkullsplitter@lemmy.world 7 points 6 hours ago

Sure, at this rate Russia should take all of Ukraine... in roughly 100 years.

[-] Venator@lemmy.nz 2 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago)

When Ukraine stops receiving arms from the USA the odds might switch towards Russias favour 😢

Hopefully other countries can make up the difference.

[-] john89@lemmy.ca 3 points 6 hours ago

Yeah, war really brings out the stupidity in you people.

You just can't understand propaganda for what it is.

[-] HappySkullsplitter@lemmy.world 6 points 5 hours ago

You keep saying "you people" as if the war would affect you lol

I guess I must just be too stupid to preemptively surrender

[-] eronth@lemmy.world 18 points 11 hours ago

Yeahhhh, but what if someone in charge of the US sides with them instead of against them.

[-] GreenKnight23@lemmy.world 18 points 10 hours ago

they must have not got the memo.

just to catch everyone up to speed.

Screenshot_20250120-195222_Firefox

[-] sem 1 points 9 hours ago

Something something mutually assured destruction?

[-] PugJesus@lemmy.world 127 points 22 hours ago

They're betting on their fascist puppet in the US tearing apart NATO, so they don't have to worry about such things when they start eyeing the Baltic states.

[-] ChicoSuave@lemmy.world 41 points 20 hours ago

And what, lose another 3 years and a third of the country's young to losing the fight for Estonia? Russia is absolutely incapable of successfully invading anything. They couldn't even stay in Syria when a bunch of untrained militia said they might show up later. Russia is weak.

[-] john89@lemmy.ca 2 points 6 hours ago

Russia is absolutely incapable of successfully invading anything.

Why is Ukraine constantly begging for help, then?

[-] marcos@lemmy.world 42 points 19 hours ago

As long as there is an war going on for the rest of Putin's life, I don't think he cares about the any of those problems.

All he cares about is that if there isn't a war going on, Russians will start to look at what their own government does.

[-] ThePrimitive@lemmy.world 2 points 13 hours ago
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] rustyfish@lemmy.world 17 points 17 hours ago

As my GM once said, right before I TPK’d my whole group: “You can certainly try.”

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 65 points 21 hours ago

I'm sorry, but even with the U.S. out of NATO, Russia would get their ass kicked. Putin must know that.

[-] TimeSquirrel@kbin.melroy.org 50 points 21 hours ago

All depends on if NATO as a whole isn't just a bluff. Are the UK, Germany and France, the three remaining major economies after the US leaves, actually going to go to war with Russia over Lithuania (no offense at all toward Lithuanians), for example? That's what he's testing, and that's why he wants the US out.

[-] barsoap@lemm.ee 8 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago)

NATO could crumble and Germany and France would still come to Lithuania's aid, they're an EU member. With NATO gone UK might technically not be on the hook any more but they'd still get into the fray, despite their faults and their insistence that they're not they're still Europeans.

The actually difficult part would be stopping Poland from bee-lining for Moscow, nukes be damned. They don't spend 4.7% of GDP because they plan on sitting back.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 14 points 20 hours ago

NATO is required to come to the defence of any member nation if it is attacked.

[-] TimeSquirrel@kbin.melroy.org 43 points 20 hours ago

On paper, yes. Will they, though?

[-] Madison420@lemmy.world 18 points 19 hours ago* (last edited 19 hours ago)

Yes.

I'm not sure if people know the history of trilateral defense agreements.

Iirc it was the French and English who put their war on hold to fight the Spanish specifically because of a weird defense pact.

[-] Carrolade@lemmy.world 13 points 19 hours ago

This is actually not true.

Article Five states that an attack on one becomes an attack on all. This wording is very specific, and they wrote it with this wording intentionally, to get people to be willing to agree to join.

It does not require counterattacks or declarations of war, merely that you consider an attack on a member an attack on you.

How do people respond to different sorts of attacks? How can they theoretically respond if they so choose? These are the kinds of games being played in Putin's head.

[-] blakenong@lemmings.world 17 points 21 hours ago

I think the plan is to be ready for WWIII, when China, Russia, Iran, and… haha…. North Korea, team up.

[-] Xanthobilly@lemmy.world 3 points 8 hours ago

Add the US to that list. Just watch.

[-] blakenong@lemmings.world 1 points 6 hours ago

Nah. What’s the end game there. Greenland?

[-] earphone843@sh.itjust.works 6 points 18 hours ago

Not if the US gives them troops and arms.

[-] nexguy@lemmy.world 25 points 20 hours ago

It takes Russia weeks/months to take a tiny village at the cost of thousands of soldiers. They can't attack NATO.

I mean they can... but it would go as expected.

[-] Catma@lemmy.world 18 points 20 hours ago

Until the US starts giving them munitions because we have to fight the deep state/globalists that infect Europe.

[-] endeavor@sopuli.xyz 17 points 19 hours ago

lmao, russians can stockpile rocks and have their propaganda call it best weapon ever.

[-] Rentlar@lemmy.ca 15 points 20 hours ago

An armchair analyst take here but I think they are gearing up to finally try to take Pokrovsk in the spring.

Folks at lemmy.ml were shouting from the rafters most of last year: Invading Kursk was a mistake! Russia will drive them back, and Pokrovsk will fall any day now! But like Avdiivka, I expect it to be a siege and for it to take a while. If they can take it early enough this year, Russia will again be able to conquer massive swaths of farmland because that's really the only thing the "throw bodies at the problem" strategy is very effective at. If Ukraine holds out until the late fall, Russia will again be stalled for months, so the pace of their entire army will be "1 regional hub per year", which I'm not sure is sustainable for Russia's economy and society.

[-] Triasha@lemmy.world 8 points 17 hours ago

Honestly the pace of Russian advancement has been slowing down which is understandable because their losses are not sustainable. Their only hope for true victory is if Ukrainian losses are even less sustainable.

This is possible, especially if Germany and the US, the 2 wealthiest partners, cut off or scale back aid. But at the moment Ukraine seems slightly ahead of the attrition game and the US just INCREASED sanctions.

[-] SineIraEtStudio@midwest.social 4 points 14 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago)

Perun (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=EHUQmJCa3aY) just released a video yesterday that went over Ukraine's war material situation.

TLDW: Ukrainian military equipment is for the most part qualitatively better than it was at the start of the war but not quantitatively.

Russia on the other hand is qualitatively worse, is running out of reserve war equipment (Soviet stockpiles), and is expected to deplete some of categories of equipment sometime in 2024 (tank stockpile source: Covert Cabal https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=K8CcuVCDEUw).

Edit: some spelling mistakes.

[-] Triasha@lemmy.world 2 points 8 hours ago

That's about what I thought. Ukraine has gotten 40 trucks here, 12 tanks there. Better than the old Soviet stuff Russia is using, but not enough to decisively turn the tables.

[-] FartsWithAnAccent@fedia.io 14 points 20 hours ago

Kinda seems like Russia is getting fucked up pretty badly already and they haven't even taken one country. Seems doubtful they would have much luck against an alliance.

[-] Tujio@lemmy.world 15 points 18 hours ago

If the US leaves that alliance and then starts surreptitiously sending drone parts to Russia, it'll get dicey.

If the AfD forms a coalition government with the normal conservatives and Germany decides to turn inwards and keep Deutsche money für die Deutscher, it'll get dicey.

If Macron finally completes his heel turn and appoints Marine le Pen to interior secretary...

If Italy keeps going the way they've been going...

If the Finnish right decides that joining NATO was a mistake that let too many minorities in...

If the rest of Africa goes along with the Sahel nations and starts funneling their resources into the Russian war machine...

If Modhi lets Russia open more factories in India...

If China decides that they're cool with sharing power on the global scale and fully buys in on the BRICS bloc...

Russia looks weak right now because the invasion has been such and embarrassment, but that can change surprisingly quickly. The global shift towards authoritarianism is coming hand-in-hand with a shift away from US/Eurocentric hegemony.

[-] earphone843@sh.itjust.works 2 points 18 hours ago

They will if they have the US backing them.

[-] FartsWithAnAccent@fedia.io 2 points 18 hours ago

Still seems like they'd get their shit wrecked if they started a war with Europe, even with help.

[-] earphone843@sh.itjust.works 4 points 17 hours ago

You vastly underestimate the size and power of the US military. This isn't even a brag; it's atrocious that our military is so large, but the US would have little trouble taking on Europe.

[-] barsoap@lemm.ee 2 points 6 hours ago

The US can't project power without aircraft carriers which would be gone quite quickly. Noone has a counter against stealth subs and Europe has both the best and plenty.

[-] FartsWithAnAccent@fedia.io 6 points 17 hours ago

That's what they said about Afghanistan too though. Plus, the odds of the US getting directly involved in a war against Europe any time soon are still pretty damn low.

this post was submitted on 20 Jan 2025
246 points (100.0% liked)

World News

39662 readers
2490 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