• SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        It’s such a bizarre thing… Communism fell in Russia probably before many of these people were born. But the support the successor state to the Soviet Union, which is an authoritarian kleptocracy, because why? Nostalgia? Ignorance?

        Tankies be weird.

    • bumphot@lemy.lol
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      Don’t be racist. Russian government is to blame, not their people who are constantly oppressed by their government. Russian people are the biggest victims in Ukranian war, lost more lives fighting for some idiot. Some successfully surrendered, but a lot of them are forced to fight and lost their innocent lives in all of this.

        • bumphot@lemy.lol
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          Most of the casulties are russian troops, are they not? They don’t join volonterily you know, they are forcefully conscripted.

          • Honytawk@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            8 months ago

            You can’t claim to be the victim when you are the aggressor, even if that aggression is under force.

            All those troops could just … not invade a sovereign nation. They could have a civil war instead of pushing their problems on their neighbouring countries. An equal amount of people would die, but not the ones that have nothing to do with it.

            • bumphot@lemy.lol
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              8 months ago

              It sounds like you where never forcefully conscripted in a war. Difference is that they can hurt your family, this way you die in a war either way. If you are forced to kill, under threat of death or your family getting hurt, you are clearly a victim. Furthermore Russian people aren’t just ones that are still fighting in war, they are also their wifes and childeren that are losing their husbands and fathers. They are also Russians that surrended to Ukrainain rather then fight, not everyone can do that safely without their commenders stopping them or without Ukrainian troops killing them by mistake. They are also Russian people that killed their conscription officers. There are a lot of good russian people, some died as heroes fighting their governments. Some died as victims of the war on the battlefield not willing to shoot back at Ukrainan soliders, some just fought because they had to and died in the process. There are bad people everywhere, but there are good people too. Claiming all russians are bad is just racism.

              • Slotos@feddit.nl
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                8 months ago

                Tell that to those raped and mutilated by those fucking victims of yours.

                Oh wait, you outright dismissed their existence in order to… <checks notes>… not be racist.

                • bumphot@lemy.lol
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  8 months ago

                  I didn’t dismiss any victims. I can critique Israel’s genocide of Palestinians without being anti-semetic. I can critisize Russian genocide and rape of Ukranians without being racist towards Russians. People are not the armies that claim that fight for their interests.

  • HikingVet@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    8 months ago

    So Poutine wanted to weaken NATO, ends up adding countries, including one that has been neutral for an incredibly long time.

    • Resol van Lemmy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      I never knew the Russian president was actually a Canadian dish in disguise.

      In fact, come to think of it, why don’t the Russians simply eat him? If he’s that delicious then surely they gotta dig in.

  • ZeroCool@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    8 months ago

    Putin: If anyone joins NATO there will be dire consequences!

    Sweden: Du är inte lika stark som du luktar dumjävel

    • Rapidcreek@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      Have to add a funny FU to Putin that I saw. Yesterday, a B 52, and a B1B did a flyover of Stockholm escorted by Swedish Gripens

  • GiddyGap@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    Good. Sweden has very strong military capabilities with their Total Defense strategy. They also have very advanced weapons development and a huge defense industry, including their Gripen fighter jets. NATO got a lot stronger today.

    • Muscar@discuss.online
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 months ago

      As a Swede I often find myself thankful we don’t have the military brainwashing the US has, even though we have a strong military for such a small country. The army stuff is there if you look but if you don’t care you don’t notice it much, if at all. I’m not invested enough to have a really informed opinion about us joining NATO. But from what I know it’ll be a good thing, just being able to help countries more that need it is enough of a reason IMO.

      • KrokanteBamischijf@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        NATO was originally founded so that we’d stop invading each other, which should still hold true today.

        I like to think of most developed nations as young adults. All of us are supposed to be mature, which means no more war. We can just talk about things like responsible adults.

        Sadly, some of these younger fucks still haven’t grasped the concept of “don’t be an idiot”, and we now need NATO for a strong message of “no, you’re not going to touch us, there will be consequences”. It’s a sad thing that we still need to do so, but I’d rather have a large group of friends that I’m sure will have my back if someone would start shit.

        So yes, Sweden joining NATO is a good thing. If anything it will lead to better cooperation and coordination between our countries. Not just in the event of war, but just sharing defense resources and intelligence as well. But the best argument is that we just like you Swedes, and we want to keep hanging out together.

        • uis@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          You are confusing NATO and UN. UN was founded so that we’d stop invading each other.

      • bumphot@lemy.lol
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        This just means that Sweden will have send their troops to fight wars in middle east for oil companies. Russia is hardly capable of attacking Ukraine that is right next to it and has some local support of some Russian citizens. They would never make it to Sweden in the next 100 years. But a lot of lives will be lost in the Middle East in that time.

          • bumphot@lemy.lol
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            8 months ago

            Only on paper. In practice there are many financial and military infulence that US gets when a country joins NATO that result in joining wars in Middle East.

            • Zanshi@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              8 months ago

              What’s your source on that?

              If none go spread your propaganda somewhere else, you’re either a russian bot or a sympathiser. Either way you will find no friends here.

              • bumphot@lemy.lol
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                8 months ago

                https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NATO#Military_operations All of NATO wars were in non-NATO countries, all where offensive invasitions. They fight in MIddle East for oil companies. I do not sympathize with Russian government, they are just as bad when given the chance. But NATO is scarier. Calling people to support Russia when they critisize your government is insane.

            • BraveSirZaphod@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              8 months ago

              Such as when America tried to lead everyone into a predictably disastrous invasion of Iraq, resulting in most of Europe telling us to fuck off?

              Truly, the ‘infulence’ of America is mighty and all must tremble before it.

    • Davidchan@lemmynsfw.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 months ago

      NATO is strictly a defensive alliance so any power that did start WW3 would be pretty damn stupid to be aggressive against NATO. And better for everyone this way, rather than give Russia a chance to chew up Eastern Europe country by country like they tried against Ukraine, Georgia and Chechnia.

      • bumphot@lemy.lol
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        NATO is defensive only on paper. Almost all of the wars in the World right now started with invasion of NATO countries in middle east and african countries still unofficaly under collonial rule of western european countries.

        This is classic case of fearmongering. Russia can’t even win a war in Ukraine, despite local support of some of the Crimean citizens and proximity to their nations. They can’t get to Sweeden by the end of this century, Meanwhile, NATO is the biggest war allience this World has ever seen and it is scary how centralized the power in the World has become and US oil companies running the whole show.

        • Honytawk@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          8 months ago

          You keep spewing out this Putin Propaganda, yet nobody cares since it is obviously false.

          How much do you get paid by Putin?

          Blink twice if your family is in danger of being pushed out of a window.

          • bumphot@lemy.lol
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            8 months ago

            If only thing you can say to someone who is proving you wrong that they must be paid by some boogieman, you are insane. Just because I critize the government doesn’t mean I support other governments. This is some cold war type of red scare. During cold war if you speak about worker rights you are branded a communist soviet spy. Now you say that NATO is resposible for wars that they admit to, you are all of a sudden a russian bot.

            • mxl@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              8 months ago

              What you’re doing wrong is trying to reason with people who are just not the reasoning kind…

            • assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              8 months ago

              It’s generally suspicious when someone with atrocious grammar and spelling says Russia isn’t a real problem, but NATO is, and then shows a fundamental misunderstanding of NATO and can’t distinguish formal NATO action from other Western military action.

              • bumphot@lemy.lol
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                8 months ago

                When you debate grammar it shows you have no good arguments. I don’t always spell things correctly, because I am more focused on making sense, then appearance. If you understand what I mean, that is good enough for me. I understand that Russia and NATO are both problems and I understand that NATO is obviously far more powerful and bigger. I also understand what NATO claims to be, but I also see their presence in places where legally shouldn’t be. Take Kosovo for example, by the UN it is not recognized as independent, legally it is part of Serbia and Serbia does not support NATO troops there. Legally speaking, that is an invasion. Practically NATO countries invade many Middle Eastern countries as well, they wear NATO hats when they speak of peace, but often (but not always) remove that hat when they invade other countries. You can either accept that both NATO and countries that invade Middle East are the same countries run by the same people with same interests and same goals, making it the same thing. Or you can pretend that only what is legally defined as separate is important, but then accept that legally NATO also sometimes invades countries and were never invaded themselves, making them more offensive then defensive. You can’t have it both ways.

    • ilinamorato@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      Good for NATO, good for Sweden, good for Europe, good for Ukraine, probably good for the Russian people. Bad for specifically Vladimir Putin.

      NATO is basically a mutual-defense treaty: all member states agree to fight on behalf of other members if attacked by a third party. Having Sweden in the organization means that there are more soldiers available if other members are attacked (good for NATO), it means that Sweden has allies if they’re attacked (good for Sweden), and it means that Europe is more united as a defensible whole (good for Europe). And it reduces the possible targets for Putin’s aggression (probably good for the Russian people, definitely bad for Putin). It also means that, once the war in Ukraine ends and they join NATO, they essentially cannot be attacked by Russia again (good for Ukraine).

  • Troy@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 months ago

    So – pure curiosity… Which countries could yet still potentially join NATO.

    Switzerland doesn’t join anything ever, so it’s the dark horse. But since everything is done by referendum there, it could change on a dime if the public demanded it.

    Austria literally has it in their constitution that they aren’t allowed – but in theory they could change their constitution (unlikely).

    Moldova has the whole Transnistria incentive – but NATO would be shy about that one, because that could potentially immediately put them in hot conflict. However, suppose they backdoored their way in by creating a union with Romania (not impossible, but complicated).

    Ireland has been neutral forever – but the public support for Ukraine is extremely high. So they might even be possible. Higher than Switzerland anyway ;)

    Bosnia and Herzegovina is sort of a special case where they’re sort of partially engaged already.

    Serbia is extremely unlikely while they continue to be extremely contemptuous of everyone. That’s fine. Although Kosovo is sort of under NATO protection.

    In theory, Georgia or Armenia would be candidates, but Turkey would pooh-pooh Armenia right away, and Georgia has contested territory.

    In order of odds, I wager: Ireland, Moldova (via Romania), Georgia+Ukraine (in that order chronologically).

    • makyo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 months ago

      I’m interested in Ireland too, especially in the next few years as the reunification party is resurgent

      • Kentaree@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        Ireland has no chance, people here are extremely pro neutrality to the point there were protests when American Airforce jets refueled here. It’s not a case of alignment, it’s that nobody wants to get involved in any sort of conflict.

    • bumphot@lemy.lol
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 months ago

      Don’t be so blinded by your hatered towards the Russian government to not notice how US used this to strenghten their control over Europe. As horrible as this Russian invasion is, it is nothing compared to the decades of invasions in middle east done by NATO countries. Sweden will have to send their troops now to fight for US oil companies.

    • bumphot@lemy.lol
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      I think this haterred towards Putin blinded most of us to let governments increase their authorariansim. Like in US after 9/11. Of course Putin is dangerous, but he can’t even win a war in a small country right next to his. Lost more troops then Ukraine. Meanwhile NATO expansion across the World and US influance is truely scary and unprecedented. Most of the wars in World are started by NATO counties and here we don’t hear about is as much.

      All the invasions of Iran, Afganistan, Vietnam, Syria, etc where unjustfied invasions just like Ukraine and in case of Palestine, far worse. Yet, media successfully is pointing our focus on a single war in Ukraine where Russia has made no advencments and is clearly inferior military power. It reminds me of 9/11, when fear from a small group of terrorist gave the government power to spy on all of its citizens, run torture camp in Guantanamo and remove citizens rights one by one.

      • Ann Archy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        I don’t think this deserves the attack, guy speaks their mind, perhaps not from the most knowledgeable position, but I think it’s valid nonetheless. There are a lot of arguments being made without really being arguments, more like spoken worries, and I agree with their trepidation, I feel kind of the same way, in that I am wary of the future and not as expediently joyous over the occasion so to speak.

        Also, I felt like when the CEO Prime Minister of Sweden appeared in the House for the State of the Union address to standing ovations felt like we were bringing water and dirt before Xerxes. A half demented, half man half werewolf Xerxes, I have a conspiracy theory that Biden and Trump are the same person. Make of it what you will, the list of US atrocities committed across the world and our common history is a long and dire read, and only seems to get longer every year.

        I’m glad to know that if “someone” invades Sweden the whole planet will go down in a nuclear holocaust, as a deterrent you know, but at the same time we’re ironically posed before a problem common to Americans and Swedes alike- when it comes to our choices it’s slim pickings.

      • uis@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        I think this haterred towards Putin blinded most of us to let governments increase their authorariansim.

        Don’t you think this haterred towards Putin caused by increasing authorariansim of my country’s government? Because Putin is fucking head of it.

        Of course Putin is dangerous, but he can’t even win a war in a small country right next to his.

        I don’t know what is (not) concerning to you, but for me Good Uncle Voenkom that will send me to die in trenches for Stability™ of Putin’s yachts is concerning enough.

      • Eximius@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        Ah, yes, the scary defense-only alliance. Purely by design it doesn’t have the lawful capacity to do any of the things you said, and single members (US or UK) don’t represent it.

        Ah yes, no advancements in Ukraine where 1/3 of the country is under occupier control and in entrenched positions.

        • bumphot@lemy.lol
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          8 months ago

          In is defensive only on paper. In reality it is NATO weapons that supply wars in Middle East. Joining NATO isn’t just mutual defense, you need to sign a lot of other requirements that inevitably gets you under strong influance of US military and finances. Check out military intervantions of NATO, they are all offensive, no one ever attacked a NATO country, they are too strong. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NATO#Military_operations None of these counties they invaded where part of NATO, Iraq, Afganistan, Kosovo, Bosina, Libya.

          Laws don’t matter when you have the military power. Laws only apply to the weak. Powerful countires (and people) don’t protect them selves with laws, since they have the military. When Assange and Manning published US war crimes, militry officials didnt go to jails, but they, whistlblowers and journalists did. Don’t fall for the laws for a second, they don’t apply to them.

          • assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            8 months ago

            Iraq, Afganistan

            The US called on NATO following an attack on them. The idea was to fight those who had attacked the US, which is in the purview of a defensive alliance. Of course that didn’t end up being the reality because the bush admin lied about Iraq.

            Kosovo, Bosina

            This was not defensive, you’re correct. But it was instead to stop a genocide of Muslim people by Serbia. Kosovo exists because of NATO involving themselves to stop genocide.

            Libya.

            This was a UN coalition to aid rebel groups.

            • bumphot@lemy.lol
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              8 months ago

              Well if you claim that you are attacked by “Terrorism” and you declare war on it, you can make any invasion a defensive action. That is my point, in theory it is defensive, but they can twist it any way they want to make it offensive. Also if you go around the World claiming you are there to stop a genocide (ironically while funding a genocide yourself) just so you can send your army there, than you have no reason for CIA not to just finance some genocidal maniacs on one side to justify you going in there to “save” them (like Israel funded Hamas, and HIlary funded Trump). This is not even legally clean, just ignoring the laws when they don’t suit your interests.

          • Eximius@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            8 months ago

            You are not wrong that a lot of shady things can happen with military power. It is a fine general statement.

            But with regards to NATO, I think you are misinformed (or mixed up?). If all those were invasions (and NATO is so strong), I don’t see how any of these countries could be independent countries now.

            • bumphot@lemy.lol
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              8 months ago

              They are not independent, that is the point. NATO military is still present in most of them or have puppet governments or are still at war.

                • bumphot@lemy.lol
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  8 months ago

                  There is this wikipedia article with a list of all the countires in the world with their military presence outside of their countries. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_with_overseas_military_bases You can google for each of these countries as well, such as France and their presence in Africa, as well as other “past”-colonial forces, US with their presence in Kosovo, Turkey with their presence in a lot of Balkan countries (also previous colonies of Ottoman empire). There is a lot of countries in the World that where past colonies that never got rid completly of their imperialist rulers. In fact during cold war they made an alliance just for that, that is where the term third world comes from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_World Obviously imperialist didn’t like that and the media propaganda changed the meaning of that term to the “developing country” to excuse them staying there while they “develop”. Never actually leaving of course.

          • yildolw@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            8 months ago

            Russian weapons supply a lot of wars in the Middle East too. Russia funded the 10/7 Hamas attack. Russia gassed and bombed a lot of civilians in Syria. Russian mercenaries are keeping the civil war going in Libya, as well as couping lots of governments across African countries in the past year

            • bumphot@lemy.lol
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              8 months ago

              I am not defending Russia. They do horrible things as well, but it is no excuse for our governments to do these things too. And they do it a lot more. As for Russia funding Hamas attack, that just sounds like insane propaganda, sorry. Israel government funded Hamas and let 10/7 happen on purpose to justify genocide, they even brag about it.

              • andxz@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                8 months ago

                As for Russia funding Hamas attack, that just sounds like insane propaganda, sorry.

                Your posts on the matter reads like insane propaganda as well.

      • frezik@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        All the invasions of Iran, Afganistan, Vietnam, Syria, etc where unjustfied invasions

        • The US has never invaded Iran
        • Afganistan was completely justified; the US could not let 9/11 go. Few countries in the world disputed this at the time, even among those unfriendly to the US. You can certainly criticize how it played out–I sure as hell do.
        • Vietnam, yeah, not going to argue there
        • Syria was a complex 13 way clusterfuck. We supported a specific side against another specific side, mostly with material and air support, and some limited ground support. It’s not exactly an invasion, but this is certainly another place where it’s more about how it played out than the support in itself.
        • bumphot@lemy.lol
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          8 months ago

          I did mean Iraq, but Iran is not much better. US staged a coup in Iran to get a puppet government https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Iranian_coup_d’état#Release_of_U.S._government_records_and_official_acknowledgement Afganistan is not justified, you don’t invade an entire country because of a terroist attack. It was an excuse, just like the Patriot Act for more imperisalism and antidemocratic actions. Calling things invasions are semantics, more important is the bigger picture. US has huge influnace in the region thorug coups and military invasions.

          • frezik@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            8 months ago

            Afganistan is not justified, you don’t invade an entire country because of a terroist attack.

            You do when that country’s leadership is deliberately giving those terrorists a base. Again, few other countries at the time disputed this.

            • bumphot@lemy.lol
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              8 months ago

              That is like saying it is justifed to bomb New York because Biden is helping Israel in their genocide. People are not their governments, going to war for revenge is cruel.

              • frezik@midwest.social
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                8 months ago

                Not really. More like if there was a terrorist base in the US that was being used to bomb Gaza directly and the US was giving them money and equipment to do it.

                • bumphot@lemy.lol
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  8 months ago

                  Well they are giving them money and equipement to do it. The only difference is that isntead of one attack it is complete genocide of people and the fact that the base is not in US but in Isreal. But the support is the same and the crime is even greater. There is no sense to blame Afganistan for 9/11 and not US for genocide.

          • ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            8 months ago

            The current winner in the Middle East is Russia

            Since they are allowed to support the killing of civilians and suppression of rights they have Iran, Iraq, and Syria

            You can see how hard it is for the US to even have a foothold there with the Israel conflict. Which they are forced to support because of the above

            • bumphot@lemy.lol
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              8 months ago

              US has far more influence in Middle Easst then Russia. Russia didn’t win anything in Middle East. US has control of Saudi Arabia and Israel quite famously. Most other governments where once funded by the CIA as well.

            • bumphot@lemy.lol
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              8 months ago

              NATO is heavily influenced by US. When they ask other countries to join, they wear a NATO hat, when they invade other countries they where their counturies independent hats that just so happens to be in NATO.

              • BarqsHasBite@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                8 months ago

                Oops you admit they are not the same, but try to confuse the issue with “influence”. Followed by more with “hat” which is lol worthy. NATO did not invade Iraq. The US did.

                Something tells me you’re trying to be intentionally obtuse trying to conflate everything so ciao

        • TooManyFoods@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          8 months ago

          Maybe he meant Iraq? I think Afghanistan taught us a lesson in what we’ve become. We were a country that could bomb another into the ground, but then rebuild it into a functional society. Regardless of the morals of that, japan and south korea are functional if unhappy. Unhappiness describes life, but I feel like the contracting on top of contacting and the line goes up profit obsession infected out zeitgeist so deeply, we are no longer capable of rebuilding what we destroy.

            • bumphot@lemy.lol
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              8 months ago

              I did mean Iraq. I am not a russian bot simply because I critisize our governments.

              • nac82@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                8 months ago

                If you’re called a Russian bot so often that you need to have a prepared meme response, I feel like it doesn’t matter if you are or are not a Russian propagandist.

                The cool thing about bad faith propoganda is that eventually, you trick dumb people into repeating it.

                Just look at COVID.

                • bumphot@lemy.lol
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  8 months ago

                  It does matter if it is my honest opinion or if I was just wrongfully accused. One would be a critique of me, another is a critique on the propaganda that anyone who disagrees with people in power must be a KGB agent.

      • kaffiene@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        Iraq was bad so let’s let Russia annex any bit of Europe it wants. Checks out. I was vehemently opposed to Iraq. This is not Iraq. Not all wars are the same

        • bumphot@lemy.lol
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          I never said we should let Russia annex anything, you are assuming that because I am against NATO expansion that I am pro Russia.

      • Aux@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        Putin doesn’t want to win. And actually pretty much everyone benefits from this long standing conflicts. Except for Ukrainians and some dirt poor African nations.

        • bumphot@lemy.lol
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          Yeah, I wouldn’t be surprised. Regular people are always the ones that suffer, on both sides, while for the politicians it is just about profit.

            • bumphot@lemy.lol
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              8 months ago

              Organization can’t be better then it’s members that are controlling it.

              • BarqsHasBite@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                8 months ago

                Whoops, you admitted the organization and the members are different! Lol. Ok really ciao.

                • bumphot@lemy.lol
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  8 months ago

                  You clearly see this as a game. You know exactly what I said and you are running away from it, just to have some kind of play of semantics like that somehow communicates some greater point. I really have no idea what is the point of this comment of yours.