this post was submitted on 19 Nov 2024
157 points (97.6% liked)

World News

39045 readers
2382 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 !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


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
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 31 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago) (2 children)

I don't think anyone wants a hot war in NK, and I'm not sure what good it would do.

Europe needs to (and should have) get off their butts and send every piece of hardware they have to Ukraine though, even cutting edge ones. Maybe even enforce a no-fly zone. As I keep asking, what are they waiting for... Spain to invade France? No, they built all this stuff to deter Soviet aggression, and its just sitting there, rotting instead of doing its job. If Ukraine would have stayed secure, they basically would never have to worry about this again.

Now they have no excuse. Russia clearly has no shame. And it's almost (but not quite) too late.

[–] lurch@sh.itjust.works 7 points 11 hours ago (2 children)

Bombing a few prominent military installations in NK could teach their leader a valuable lesson and cause dissent among his sheeple. They probably think they can be safe while joining the war and need a wake up call

[–] Vilian@lemmy.ca 6 points 5 hours ago

Nah, their leader don't give a shit for their population, if something killing the leader would be more efficient

[–] Maalus@lemmy.world 9 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

And then they bomb SK in retaliation and cause a huge mass casualty event, along with a war in Asia.

[–] lurch@sh.itjust.works 4 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

Why would they retaliate against SK when the US, Europe or Ukraine bomb them for basically attacking Ukraine. That would be useless.

[–] Maalus@lemmy.world 2 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago) (1 children)

Because they hold SK hostage with the amount of artillery they have. Same for SK holding NK hostage. It's a mexican standoff that has been in place for decades. Once you start attacking NK, they have nothing to lose. So they make the decision to attack them an even costlier one.

[–] Vilian@lemmy.ca 4 points 5 hours ago

To be fair they never moved their artillery location since forever, SK could steam roll over them faster than desert storm, they aren't afraid of NK winning, they are afraid of them losing and SK fucking their economy for a hell hole full of malnourished and ignorant people with their entire world revolving around their worshiping their leader, bombing Kim Jong-un would be faster tho, but they would have to put a puppet government there for decades

[–] ColeSloth@discuss.tchncs.de -4 points 10 hours ago (2 children)

Because placing putin in a completely unwinnable position will greatly increase/hasten the likelihood of nuking Ukraine and possibly other areas of Europe into a sheet of glass.

[–] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 8 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

Yeah, well, this is what everyone thought in Georgia, and Ukraine in 2014.

He's not going to change. His chosen successor probably won't either.

[–] Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works 9 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

It's the weirdest philosophy. Can't shoot the grizzly bear, that might enrage it and cause it to maul us faster.

[–] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 4 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago)

With the only saving grace being that he's actually like a hesitant coyote not big enough to take a combined Europe, but with a bomb strapped to its chest.

[–] Siegfried@lemmy.world 3 points 9 hours ago (2 children)

You are right, we have to give putin more ground so next time he does this shit he will... have more power? Are you sure this math of yours is working?

[–] thetreesaysbark@sh.itjust.works 1 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

What's your solution then? It's a fair enough concern that Putin backed in to a corner is going to become even more unhinged and throw some nukes around, no?

It seems the only option down that path is to accept that the endgame here is having all of Russia, and at least one other country, nuked.

[–] ColeSloth@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

I doubt there's an easy solution. Right now the play is squeezing Russia at a slow pace, hopefully causing the country to bleed itself dry and most of its people there calling for a war to fizzle out and running them out of a fighting force. Continue keeping Russia in a state of hardship.

[–] thetreesaysbark@sh.itjust.works 1 points 7 hours ago

I was replying to the other guy, and agreeing with you :)

[–] ColeSloth@discuss.tchncs.de -3 points 7 hours ago

I'm not saying give him ground. I'm saying ww3 would best be avoided.