this post was submitted on 06 Nov 2024
609 points (94.8% liked)

NonCredibleDefense

3540 readers
215 users here now

Rules:

  1. Posts must abide by lemmy.world terms and conditions
  2. No spam or soliciting for money.
  3. No racism or other bigotry allowed.
  4. Obviously nothing illegal.

If you see these please report them.

Related communities:

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] inclementimmigrant@lemmy.world 188 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (12 children)

I mean if Europe wants to increase their military funding and move items in house I think that would be a wonderful idea. Because America is not a reliable partner in this at all in the past two decades.

[–] Kalkaline@leminal.space 47 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

The perfect excuse for the military industrial complex to move manufacturing overseas.

[–] inclementimmigrant@lemmy.world 16 points 2 weeks ago

So I'm going to say that the military industrial complex is already there, it would simply be a rapid expansion.

[–] lurch@sh.itjust.works 25 points 2 weeks ago

Multiple EU countries want to, but they also want to give stuff to Ukraine and it's difficult to do both.

load more comments (10 replies)
[–] p03locke@lemmy.dbzer0.com 137 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (47 children)

Good job to all of the fucks who stayed home because of Gaza, thinking that not voting and letting the GOP rise to power would actually help the situation.

Yeah, because Netanyahu's extreme right-wing policy was a problem with the US's left-wing party, right?

[–] Badeendje@lemmy.world 63 points 2 weeks ago (7 children)

I doubt Gaza was the deciding factor for 20 million people, but I could be wrong. Especially since anyone that aware of the whole would see trump would worsen the situation not improve it. I'm curious why they did stay home.

I also guess Americans don't want a woman president and they do want a hard crackdown on migrants. Especially Latinos, who apparently overwhelmingly came out for trump.

[–] p03locke@lemmy.dbzer0.com 49 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I also guess Americans don’t want a woman president and they do want a hard crackdown on migrants. Especially Latinos, who apparently overwhelmingly came out for trump.

Latinos voting for hard crackdowns on immigrants is the biggest "fuck you, I've got mine" energy I've ever seen.

[–] T00l_shed@lemmy.world 35 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

And they will be so fucking shocked when ice comes for them.

[–] DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social 11 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)
[–] T00l_shed@lemmy.world 11 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

But they are one of the good ones!

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] humanspiral@lemmy.ca 20 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

By far, the overwhelming Biden derangement syndrome factor was "transgenders exist and are in my news feed". That healthcare is available to prisoners and immigrants, means that they are all receiving gender reassignment surgeries. This is democrats fault.

[–] Badeendje@lemmy.world 22 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

The fact people can't differentiate edge cases from the norm is a general education issue. But their pushback was anemic.

[–] horse_battery_staple@lemmy.world 14 points 2 weeks ago (4 children)

General education in the US is underfunded on purpose. It's how the right have won on every issue that counts. Distracted, lazy, frightened and greedy. These are the levers the media pull to get whatever the billionaires want to happen. They tried it with Smedley Butler way back when and learned their lesson. Have the dumbass voter just do what they want with outrage. It doesn't matter who's president or who's in Congress. It matters what's on the news and who they can pay to put it there. The rest falls into place.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] bishbosh@lemm.ee 16 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

It wasn't deciding factor at all. People get far too internet poisoned and fail to realize how the median voter is actually motivated in this country. Foreign policy is nearly irrelevant to most voters.

If there is any validity to the idea that Harris' position on gaza tanked the campaign it's in the motivated active base lost interest in giving their time, sweat, and energy to putting boots on the ground for someone that has made every promise to continue bombing children.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Semi_Hemi_Demigod@lemmy.world 32 points 2 weeks ago (12 children)

Millions of people stayed home. I really doubt Gaza was the reason for all of them.

load more comments (12 replies)
[–] NatakuNox@lemmy.world 11 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

My argument is what did the democrats have to lose for supporting Gaza/Palestinians? It's obvious not running a fully left facing candidate and campaign was a mistake.

We are mad at the wrong people. The reality of the situation is that the democrats can't win without the far left of the party. So why won't we extend an olive branch? If we get a next time, what are we going to do differently?! This is the reality. Either we wake up to that or keep losing. Pick one.

[–] Draedron@lemmy.dbzer0.com 19 points 2 weeks ago (117 children)

Fuck the people who didnt vote based on gaza. They are even dumber than Maga hats. They help the candidate that is even worse for gaza win . No one should offer these people any branches. Fuck them. Treat them like the idiots they are just like we do with MAGA.

load more comments (117 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (44 replies)
[–] amlor@lemmy.world 85 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

It will just be renamed to No America Treaty Organization

[–] officermike@lemmy.world 15 points 2 weeks ago (4 children)

Technically not... They'd still have Canada.

[–] chonglibloodsport@lemmy.world 22 points 2 weeks ago (6 children)

Don’t you dare call us American! Next thing you know we’ll stop apologizing for everything and actually build a military with jets instead of snowmobiles!

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] seeyouatthepartyrichter@lemmy.world 62 points 2 weeks ago (9 children)

Thank fuck we didn’t give up our nukes in the UK.

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] ContrarianTrail@lemm.ee 58 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (3 children)

Nato without USA is still bigger military than Russia.

[–] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 22 points 2 weeks ago (5 children)

But with a fraction of the nukes, which is the actual big stick part of NATO

[–] diffusive@lemmy.world 31 points 2 weeks ago

In the game of nukes you don’t really need many.

You can destroy the world just so many times.

The rest is just for showing who has it bigger (the arsenal)

[–] chaosppe@lemmy.world 31 points 2 weeks ago (11 children)

It took two nukes for Japan to wave the white flag. Do we really need 5,000+ nukes for anything? France has 290 and UK has 225. Thats enough to wipe one or multiple countries clean off of the map without any form of surrender.

load more comments (11 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Chee_Koala@lemmy.world 54 points 2 weeks ago (4 children)

It seems like a very real possibility. A new, EU followup seems like a natural next step to protect the borders and peace.

[–] HootinNHollerin@lemmy.world 42 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (2 children)

Next stage of russian ops will focus more heavily on splitting Europe now that UK and US have been severed off

[–] Uranium_Green@sh.itjust.works 16 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Straight out of Alexander Dugins book...

[–] HootinNHollerin@lemmy.world 15 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

thanks! I couldn’t reminder who wrote it.

Foundations of Geopolitics

And later

The Fourth Political Theory

He even used the term ‘special military operation’ in 1997…

His plan is certainly being implemented by putin

[–] BigDanishGuy@sh.itjust.works 11 points 2 weeks ago

It's death by a thousand cuts and nobody seems to care. Smh

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Adderbox76@lemmy.ca 36 points 2 weeks ago

NATO will be fine. They'll just have to up their game a bit militarily. If America wants to be insular and wrap a flag of isolationism around them, it'll hurt in the short term, but after four years of being more independent of Americas tit, its more than likely the US that will find itself less relevant globally.

Even before this, there was already rumblings, not just in China, but elsewhere, about ditching the american dollar standard and returning to the gold standard. That's just going to gain momentum as soon as Trump starts trying to wave his mushroom around.

[–] bungalowtill@lemmy.dbzer0.com 28 points 2 weeks ago

I think that’s unlikely.

But I also thought Trump winning was unlikely,

So what do I know?

[–] MrMakabar@slrpnk.net 13 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Hopefully the EU takes over. It has a lot more economic strength then NATO. Also the UK is strong as well, but that can be managed. Turkey does its own things anyway and I would not trust them. Norway and Iceland are not that important. Canada is going to go with the US anyway. The advantage is easier common funding for projects, due to the EU having more direct access to money. There are also a lot of the basics in the works already.

Norway and Iceland are crucial to European defense - what are you talking about?

[–] brealorg@lemmy.world 12 points 2 weeks ago

Yeah, what is your reasoning behind that statement about Norway and Iceland?

[–] bouh@lemmy.world 10 points 2 weeks ago (7 children)

The biggest thing will be all those nato countries who can't do anything with their US weapons if the US says so.

load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›