this post was submitted on 24 May 2024
165 points (97.1% liked)

World News

39032 readers
2645 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 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

The war in Ukraine has shifted thinking — both among politicians and the public — on the need to spend more on defense.

The European public and politicians are in agreement that EU countries should do more to increase weapons production.

That's according to the results of the latest Eurobarometer poll, obtained in advance by POLITICO Playbook, and a draft of the EU's Strategic Agenda seen by POLITICO.

Russia's invasion of Ukraine more than two years ago has dramatically shifted the rhetoric around defense spending, pushing it up the agenda across the bloc — often at the expense of other policy areas like tackling climate change.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Viking_Hippie 23 points 5 months ago (5 children)

As a pacifist, I fucking hate this timeline 😮‍💨

[–] [email protected] 29 points 5 months ago (2 children)

Sadly, pacifism only work if everybody agrees to it.

[–] afraid_of_zombies 3 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Not really. Defense is easier than offense at this point. And offense becomes a lot cheaper in a world where everyone is keeping the prices of weapons lower.

Don't be an economist, be smart and look at data to see where it goes. America vs Afghanistan. Using a ten million dollar missile to take out a guy with a hundred dollar rifle. Or look at Russia unable to beat a country right on their border that they greatly outnumber.

War is expensive, offensive war more expensive. Everyone armed means arms cost less money. We don't require that the entire world be pacifist to get peace just enough, just like we don't need every single person to agree to not commit rape to enforce rape laws.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

What do you actually think is causing Europe to build weapons?

Do you think they are planning a era of conquest? Or maybe they've got an aggressor on their border and they feel the need to defend themselves.

[–] afraid_of_zombies 1 points 5 months ago

Putin. Now why does Russia have so many weapons? Is it because they were doing well selling them for so very long?

Like I said, stop thinking like an economist. Follow the data. An economist will ramble about game theory and argue that the only two worlds are possible a. No war b. Always war. Someone actually viewing the data will point out that humanity has had decades of very little war. That the changes in human society have made conquest super fucking expensive and the only countries capable of a war anymore are the very rich ones. The more nations give up warfare the more expensive it will become.

The solution to a problem is very rarely more of the same problem. And the actual data we have doesn't point to a situation where if one nation out of 190 decides war is good but the other 189 disagree that suddenly that 1 cheater wins. Put another way: if the US gave up it's military tomorrow do you think Cuba would conquer the US the next week?

[–] Viking_Hippie -1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Which shouldn't be too much to ask for since everyone agrees that war is awful. Just not hard enough not to constantly make up excuses for why it's ok to keep murdering people.

[–] credo 13 points 5 months ago (2 children)

everyone agrees that war is awful

That doesn’t appear to be the case in Ukraine.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago

War is awful, but not as awful as living in Russia. Also there's the little thing where the russians are committing a whole host of war crimes and committing actual genocide. So yeah the Ukrainians are very keen to stop them advancing, but would be even more keen for the russians to just go home.

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

I get your feelings. An arms race often lead to, well, wars. 😔

However we also need to stand up to bullies.

[–] fluxion 5 points 5 months ago

Climate crisis is out of control and Putin ends up dragging us all off to war and weapons production. Absolute worst timeline.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 5 months ago

O man if you hate that don't think about how WW I basically happened the way it did because everyone spent the previous few years building up their militaries "just in case."

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago

Better familiarise yourself with the ins and outs of performing a blood eagle. I know I'm going to just in case. Also you should look into making Molotov's and IEDs.