this post was submitted on 23 May 2024
451 points (96.3% liked)

World News

39347 readers
4287 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 [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/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
  • US officials are considering letting Ukraine strike Russia with US weapons, The New York Times reports.
  • Ukraine says it's necessary to fight cross-border attacks. 
  • But fears of crossing Russia's red lines have long made the US hesitate.

The US has barred Ukraine from striking targets in Russian territory with its arsenal of US weapons.

But that may be about to change. The New York Times on Thursday reported that US officials were debating rolling back the rule, which Ukraine has argued severely hampers its ability to defend itself.

The proposed U-turn came after Russia placed weapons across the border from northeastern Ukraine and directed them at Kharkiv, the Times reported, noting that Ukraine would be able to use only non-American drones to hit back.

The Times reported that the proposal was still being debated and had yet to be formally proposed to President Joe Biden.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] partial_accumen 36 points 7 months ago (2 children)

As an American, and therefore a potential target, this is a risk I am willing to take. I think Putin is better at talking shit than actually carrying out his threats.

Same.

Further, even if Putin is serious about carrying out his threats, when do we stop capitulating? If Russia had Ukraine, then invaded Latvia? Then? After Russia rolls into Warsaw? Then? How about with Russian troops in Munich? Then? How about Anchorage?

If Putin is willing to attack when his other invasion of a sovereign country is threatened then the time to push back is RIGHT NOW when a free and sovereign Ukraine is still the future.

[–] Blackbeard 15 points 7 months ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 6 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

Fortification against NATO? If NATO wanted to attack Russia they would do it now. Prigozhin was able to march in Moscow with something NATO might sneeze out and forget about.

Kremlin propaganda says that Putin is invading Ukraine as a defensive measure, and that's horse shit. It's a war of brutal and barbaric conquest against a peaceful country.

[–] khannie 9 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (5 children)

when do we stop capitulating? If Russia had Ukraine, then invaded Latvia? Then? After Russia rolls into Warsaw? Then? How about with Russian troops in Munich? Then? How about Anchorage?

There's a great British comedy skit describing exactly this scenario that someone on here recently introduced me to. Short watch.

Salami tactics.

[–] Bernie_Sandals 7 points 7 months ago

Salami Slicing Tactics are actually a very real thing.

It's basically what Russia and China have been doing for decades

[–] partial_accumen 5 points 7 months ago

That is very very good, and depressingly accurate. The only difference today is that the fall of the Soviet Union in the 90s pushed back the border to Russia farther away from Europe. However the inclusion of the Baltic countries pushed it slightly closer, and then Russia pushed it closer from their side by invading Crimea then Luhansk and Donetsk. Then Russian pushed again invading Kherson, Zaporizhzhia, and Kharkiv. Then NATO moved closer with the induction of Finland and Sweden. So we're nearly back to the situation in that video skit.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 7 months ago

Here is an alternative Piped link(s):

Salami tactics

Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.

I'm open-source; check me out at GitHub.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil 1 points 6 months ago

If Russia had Ukraine, then invaded Latvia?

Rolling tanks across a flat plain is easier than rolling them up a mountain.

Might as well ask "Why keeps Switzerland safe if Belgium is taken?

[–] [email protected] -1 points 7 months ago

Here is an alternative Piped link(s):

Salami tactics

Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.

I'm open-source; check me out at GitHub.