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
Depends which side the US is on
Bingo.
And also depends on which side China is on. Their war production dwarfs even the US, and I find it difficult to believe that it will all be spent fighting the US and Taiwan.
There is a very real possibility that these three countries gang up together and divide the world among themselves.
At this point it seems much more likely that the US sides with Russia than China. The EU is their largest trading partner, they'd never risk losing that market.
Why would Russia risk alienating China?
In realpolitik, China is the more desirable partner than the USA.
Russia has alienated China already by being an unstable and unpredictable mess of a country.
The problem is China is right there, and a lot of parts of Russia used to have Chinese names.
Mostly, Siberia is literally infinite resources, the kind of thing China desperately needs.
And China basically has a monopoly on Siberia with the current arrangements.
Why would either need to side with Russia? They only have 140m people, a untrustworthy and soon to be unstable government. If you're aim is to carve up territory then you don't give a potential long term adversary access to half a billion people.
Alliances aren't forever. Hitler and Stalin made an agreement not to fight each other, which worked to the benefit of both for a while, and the Trump admin and Putin are more closely aligned ideologically than those two ever were. Alliances can be made for expedience and short-term gain, even with a potential long-term adversary.
You don't 'need' Russia, but it's mutually beneficial to have them on your side.
...
The only thing worse than having Russia as an enemy is having them as an ally.
They're a catastrophe in nation form, the best thing we can do is push them as close to China as possible and watch them shoot themselves in the dick.
That's why Trump is such a nightmare, he's showing them our dicks.
US has a sizeable advantage in terms of sheer firepower but lacks the collective will to side with Russia in a conflict with NATO. To be clear, the Trump administration might try to side with Russia and the initial consequences of that would be very serious. But, long term, I think that would bring a swift end to the US' global dominance. Potentially even bringing us to the point of total collapse.
That's just one American's perspective though.
As an European, could you please collapse before siding with Russia over us? That would be great, thanks.
Alternatively, and much preferred, just kick the whole Trump administration into the ocean, hold your own Nuremberg trials and start refreshed into the future. K thx bye.
I like the way you think.
Don't worry, we would.
The south would demand we side with the champions of (white) Christian culture.
The coasts would finally have enough and we'd continue the civil war we should have finished 160 years ago.
Reconstruction ending the way it did was a national tragedy.
Second times the charm as they say. . .
I’m honestly ready for Civil War 2. Let the south rise again so I can kick some fascist ass. It’s what they’ve always fantasized about anyway.
But is there a downside for the guy running our country?
There was no downside for Gaddafi.
Until there was.