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 !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/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
view the rest of the comments
Why are we sending them equipment when they're going to lose?
So that they don't lose? Why do you think they are going to lose?
It's already Joever. Russia has ramped up production to like 10 times the artillery shells.
Ukraine had a chance at the beginning. But we did not give them good weapons. We stalled for two years and now Russian weapons are being produced in mass quantities.
I don't agree with much you say dude, but I sort of admire how passionately you hate Joe Biden.
and for the right reasons
Russia has basically shifted to their old doctrine of using an overwhelming volume of basic artillery shells, which allowed them to capture Avdiivka with losses estimated to be 3 Russian casualties to every Ukrainian. They are maintaining this not with having built new manufacturing capacity, they simply are running their existing factories non-stop with three shifts instead of one. Even like this, they can only manufacture enough shells to keep this volume up for 2-3 more months (maybe the Chinese aid they get helps with that?).
On the other hand, the EU and the US has been building factories for artillery shell manufacturing that will ramp up by the end of this year to March 2025 to the point where they will be making as many 155mm shells as the Russians make 152mm. The Russians will not be able to keep up, for that, they would have had to start building factories months ago, which would be obvious on satellite photos.
On the other hand, Russia is ironically having a problem with artillery guns, with their fleet having gone from 80% self-propelled to 80% towed, which is not a good thing in the age of good counter-artillery. Even worse, old WWII D-10 guns are popping up all too often, with ranges of up to 10km, and abysmal accuracy. These are not good enough to outrange better drones even, and eat more shells to get the same results, taking away from the shell advantage.
Point is, right now it's not even like 1942 against Germany, it's more like 1916, everything is up in the air. Russia's path to victory is to keep this up in the long term, and the only way to do that is to keep Chinese and Iranian imports of shells and drones up, have Trump elected to stop the US from tipping back the balance, and/or get enough people elected in the EU to do it there. If Russia can keep up what they're doing, and keep their current advance up, and replicate Avdiivka all around the front, they might reach Kyiv by summer 2026, Lviv by the end of 2027, maybe.
This is far from over, unfortunately, and a lot of Ukrainians and Russians will die until it ends either way. Russia has some advantage right now, but not enough to break the stalemate, as evidenced by the last 4 months.
Because they are are fighting a better military.
And that automatically means that the larger military will win? Looking at Vietnam and Afghanistan ..
Yeah. Vietnam and afghanistan are identical to the war in Ukraine.
It's not like the US is on the other side of the world, or anything.
Nope. They're exactly the same.
Anything to avoid admitting Ukraine is going to lose and you've been taken for a ride 🤣
Its June 1940. France has surrendered, the continent has fallen, and what remains of the British army has just evacuated from Dunkirk leaving all of its heavy equipment behind. At this stage of the war the British army is outnumbered at least 12-1 by an enemy that is infitely better equipped than it.
Should Britain have surrendered to the Nazis because they were losing to "a better army?".
Lol, the tankers with egg carton “reactive armor” and conscripts without shoes? Better than whom?
I don't think they are going to lose. But at the very least it's good to negotiate from a position of power. IE a banks going to loan money to someone with a job vs a homeless dude..
What the others said.
Also because they need equipment not cash. If the US would give them money, Ukraine would still have to get equipment somewhere.
Now the US is clearing out old inventory that is at the end of its shelf life (explosives have a shelf life) and the Ukranians use them to blow up Russian military instead of the US paying a company to dismantle the munitions.
The US charges the Ukranians current book value (low) and reimburses the military from the aid budget. The US military then uses this extra cash to buy new toys.
Russia's war with Ukraine has done far more to weaken the Russian military than anything during the entire Cold War. Including the Soviet war in Afghanistan.
Why wouldn't America send Ukraine equipment?
That poor cannon fodder :(
I guess Putin shouldn't have chosen to invade Ukraine.
Why?
Then his military wouldn't be cannon fodder.
Looks like Ukrainians are cannon fodder for the West. Lol.
They're literally getting invaded by Russia in a defensive war for the very existence of their country. That's not "for the west".
Regardless, whether you look at it as a moral duty to the Ukrainian people, or as a self interested opportunity to protect Europe and weaken Russia, funding Ukraine is an efficient investment.
They would've surrendered by now if not for the belief they could win with western equipment.
Did you think they were going to take back Crimea? At what point do you acknowledge you may be a victim of propaganda?
Answer: never. Propaganda is only the tool of the enemy, always. Lol.
Funding Ukraine is an efficient investment for the west...
Might wanna brush up on your reading comprehension.
He says, predicting the outcome of a frozen, attritional war with total certainty
If the Ukrainians didn't think they had a chance they could win, they wouldn't be bothering to fight
Yes, funding Ukraine is an efficient investment for the west, but that doesn't mean that the Ukrainians fighting are doing so for the benefit of the west rather than themselves.
Well that's just not true - in fact the vast majority of propaganda is focused on their own sides lol
I'm not sure why you think that's funny.
Is that the sort of thing that makes you laugh? People dying?
I know right, those poor conscripted russians getting slaughtered on the frontline for Putin's imperialism
What about the poor conscripted Ukrainians getting slaughtered because they've been duped into thinking they can win?
You don't ever think about those, huh.
Welcome back with the new burner o/
Something a lot of US fascists asked in the first few years of WW2 when it came to arms shipments to Britain!
To make loans to them if they eventually "win" or they make an agreement with the russians after the war, and to have an US muppet in the area?