this post was submitted on 05 Jul 2026
202 points (99.0% liked)

World News

57284 readers
1705 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 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] someguy3@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

none of NATO's member states have had defensive problems

Why do we need vaccines? Everyone vaccinated never got sick.

[–] NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io 2 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

I mean, who's gonna fuck with Spain? France? Britain? Germany? Italy? Canada? Many countries in NATO are safe from foreign aggression for decades to come, NATO or no NATO. If so many of the major members in the defensive alliance don't need defending, then it's probably not a defensive alliance.

[–] FaceDeer@fedia.io 2 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

There have recently been direct annexation threats against Canada.

[–] NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io -1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Not by anybody NATO would get into a fight with.

[–] FaceDeer@fedia.io 4 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

The point is to make belligerents back down by raising the cost they'd have to pay by carrying through.

This particular belligerent backs down so often that there's a special acronym for it, so NATO's a perfectly good protective tool here.

[–] someguy3@lemmy.world 0 points 3 weeks ago

Answered in my other reply, link for others https://lemmy.world/post/49055523/24607737