World News
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
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.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
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/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
view the rest of the comments
I'm sorry, but even with the U.S. out of NATO, Russia would get their ass kicked. Putin must know that.
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.
NATO is required to come to the defence of any member nation if it is attacked.
On paper, yes. Will they, though?
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.
Do you mind if I borrow your crystal ball? You seem unusually certain of things most leading experts would call "very likely."
It would be weird if experts called it very unlikely, very likely is itself a claim of near certainty.
Good to see you back down from your assertion of certainty.
That's specifically not what I said, try again.
"Will they?"
"Yes."
Those are words, yes. They do mean what they say, I'm not sure exactly how that's confusing to you.
There's no common ground between someone who thinks "likely" is a synonym for "certain" and someone who doesn't. The latter isn't confused.
Does it just say likely? No. It says very likely, like It's very likely you haven't actually looked up the word likely in a thesaurus or for that matter a dictionary.
Add a very and that's very very probable.
Now onto "sure"
I don't know what to tell you. When asked if something was going to happen in the future if something else happened first, you responded with "Yes."
You either have a crystal ball or you're loosely interpreting English.
Best of luck to you either way.
No it means I'm confident of it's certainty, you just read the fuckin definition. What exactly is confusing you.
That's not what "Yes" means. Why are you so confused about such a basic English word?
Correct, I am certain NATO would respond. You're confused bud, I couldn't be more clear.
Yeah, again, please lend me your crystal ball.
I'll start with a dictionary while you try for a clue.
Yeah that's very likely to help you figure out where you went wrong.
See how I didn't say it was definitely going to help? Because even though most people are capable of figuring out such a mistake, I can't see into the future?
At least be original if you can't be right.
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.
https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_110496.htm
As far as mutual defence treaties go Article 5 is worded very strongly and any nation failing to provide assistance to a member nation would find itself a pariah.
The chances that an article 5 event involving Russia doesn’t trigger full scale war are slim to none.
Not if the US gives them troops and arms.
I think the plan is to be ready for WWIII, when China, Russia, Iran, and… haha…. North Korea, team up.
Add the US to that list. Just watch.