this post was submitted on 21 Nov 2024
170 points (97.8% liked)

Ukraine

8279 readers
468 users here now

News and discussion related to Ukraine

*Sympathy for enemy combatants is prohibited.

*No content depicting extreme violence or gore.

*Posts containing combat footage should include [Combat] in title

*Combat videos containing any footage of a visible human must be flagged NSFW


Donate to support Ukraine's Defense

Donate to support Humanitarian Aid


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Supposedly, an RS-26 was launched from Astrakhan and targeted at infrastructure in Dnipro.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world 80 points 1 day ago (4 children)

America here.....heh. We're gonna be useless come January!

Actually we might even be working against the cause. It would not surprise me to see trumps cabinet do shitty things like sending russia weapons and money.

In fact, I'm basically expecting it.

Just know that it's not ALL America. Just like 52% of us......or, I should say 52% of the 2024 voting public.

[–] johant@lemmy.ml 2 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago)

He got 76,916,317 votes (49.9%) (currently, counting hasn't finished)

https://www.reuters.com/graphics/USA-ELECTION/RESULTS/zjpqnemxwvx/

[–] Vikthor@lemmy.world 55 points 1 day ago (1 children)

…or, I should say 52% of the 2024 voting public.

No. I hold those who didn't vote accountable too.

[–] Karyoplasma@discuss.tchncs.de -5 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (3 children)

The moment the Democrats lost the election was the one when Harris was asked what she would do differently than Biden and her answer was basically "nothing". If you ever run for president and are asked that question, just pick something at random and say "Biden does not enough for X. I would make sure that X would be a priority issue!"

This level of stupidity is not the voter's (or non-voter's) fault. Dems made their bed rock and now everyone has to lie in it.

[–] PugJesus@lemmy.world 47 points 1 day ago (2 children)

The mistakes of the Harris campaign are not the fault of the non-voters.

The fact that voters didn't turn out to vote against literal and clearly fucking stated fascism is the fault of the non-voters.

[–] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 1 points 27 minutes ago

Exactly. I don’t care how ineffective the not fascists are. Both sides should have done better

[–] Freefall@lemmy.world 22 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Exactly. Nonvoters didn't vote against insane evil, that is fully on them no matter how they spin it.

[–] BombOmOm@lemmy.world -4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

'Vote for me or you are a bad person' doesn't sell, never has. Democrats had a wakeup call 8 years ago and let it pass them by. Hopefully they take it this time and strengthen the party and candidates.

[–] pupbiru@aussie.zone 2 points 8 hours ago

irrelevant… you shouldn’t need to sell “not fascism”

being a fucking shit campaign is the dems fault

choosing not to vote against literal fascism remains the fault of those people who did not vote

responsibility can be shared; the world is not black and white or pure good and evil

[–] Taleya@aussie.zone 28 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Dude listen to yourself .

Harris was literally up against a fucking emperor wannabe who already fucked the countey in incredibly short order, backed by a batshit party openly admitting they wanted to implement project 2025.

This is not a situation where you go "hmm, well she didn't quite tickle my balls enough, so I guess i'll let the fascists win". And if you do, you are complicit. You got the chance to stand up and instead you shoved your head up your own arse

[–] astropenguin5@lemmy.world 13 points 1 day ago (1 children)

You also underestimate the stupidity of the average voter/person. Most people vote on vibes, not policy, and don't pay that much actual attention to politics.

[–] dgriffith@aussie.zone 1 points 19 hours ago

The US reached the "bread and circuses" stage of politics a decade or so ago. Once the population figures out it can vote itself money (or the promise of money) it's all over.

Look at the campaign promises of the incoming president. "More for you, not them", sums it up. The problem is that everyone hopes they are the "you" in that offer.

[–] Karyoplasma@discuss.tchncs.de -2 points 20 hours ago* (last edited 20 hours ago) (1 children)

Society is in a rotten state. People don't care about others or others' rights, they only care about themselves in the depraved delusion that one day they will have "made it". Look back 4 years ago when people were too selfish to cut out their weekend binge drinking or simply wearing a mask to protect others (and themselves). Introspection, empathy, consideration, those are gone, it's all about self-worth, "confidence" (god how I hate that word) and self-respect to push the inevitable realization that what one is doing is unsustainable and damaging to everyone else far, far back into the future.

I don't know why you take so much offense that I wrote that it doesn't surprise me one bit that a fascist is elected over someone who people are sure to not benefit from. The 40 users of lemmy who show respect and care are not representative to society as a whole from what I've seen.

[–] Taleya@aussie.zone 3 points 19 hours ago

Worth pointing out this is highly dependant on where you live.

This is not universal

[–] Diplomjodler3@lemmy.world 27 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The non-voters tacitly agreed to let fascism happen. I totally get that people weren't happy about voting for Harris, I certainly wouldn't have been. But if I have choice between a carbuncle on my ass on the one hand, and AIDS, Ebola, testicle cancer and leprosy combined on the other hand, the choice is easy.

[–] Minarble@aussie.zone 1 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

But what if the candidate denied he had leprosy?

[–] pupbiru@aussie.zone 1 points 8 hours ago

well shit i guess we better ignore all those obvious symptoms of leprosy in that case… obviously it was just joking

[–] Buffalox@lemmy.world 18 points 1 day ago (3 children)

Actually we might even be working against the cause.

That would mean destruction of NATO. No European country can be in a defense alliance with a country that actively support an invasion by Russia in Europe.

[–] Karyoplasma@discuss.tchncs.de 27 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Trump doesn't care about the NATO. He thinks it's a big US-led charity organization that protects the weak, poor other countries who rally under the umbrella because murricah is just so superior and cool. I don't think he actively seeks to destroy it, but if his actions lead to its downfall, he would not be upset at all.

[–] dgriffith@aussie.zone 4 points 19 hours ago (2 children)

What the incoming president fails to understand is that the money that the US funnels towards NATO helps keep a lid on conflicts "over there", so they don't end up "over here", like WWII.

[–] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 1 points 21 minutes ago

Yeah NATO is a force for American power. It gives us undue influence in the world. And also I can’t imagine wanting a powerful United States and not wanting a powerful nato. It’s a threat of overwhelming force so we can only spend money instead of American lives on stabilizing our interests and critical allies. It’s also a way to have MAD countries without nuclear proliferation, or allowing allies we don’t want to have nukes (Germany) to have them.

[–] Karyoplasma@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 4 hours ago

What the president elect fails to understand is mainly how the world works if your daddy isn't able to give you a small loan of a million bucks.

[–] nexusband@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

It wouldn't. The U.S. is a big part of NATO, but NATO will live on without the U.S. the European Union has very much the same clauses - even the U.K. would still be part of that.

[–] Buffalox@lemmy.world 1 points 4 hours ago

IDK if we can throw out USA in case they work against us, maybe we will form a new alliance without them?
But maybe I should have written NATO as we used to know it will be dead.

[–] octopus_ink@lemmy.ml 16 points 1 day ago (1 children)

That would mean destruction of NATO.

IIRC that's an explicit Project 2025 goal, but maybe I misremember.

[–] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 1 points 18 minutes ago

That really is a baffling project. Like it’s American fascism but instead of attempting to form an axis it seems to be attempting to piss off everyone that might’ve considered joining us as fast as possible. Also it involves just random shooting our own feet pointlessly

[–] Warl0k3@lemmy.world 14 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Yep, he's probably ending nato. Or at least he keeps promising to do that, and there's nothing that will stop him, so.... Good luck! We'll all fucking need it!

[–] Buffalox@lemmy.world 16 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

If Trump continues the policies of his first term, but dial it up as many say he will. He will destroy not only NATO, but American international influence in general, because nobody can trust USA. That will do a lot of harm to American economics especially over time, USA has essentially decided the terms for international trade since WW2, helped by their many allies, ending that will be very costly for USA.

[–] pupbiru@aussie.zone 3 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago) (1 children)

yeah honest at least from the people i’ve spoken to in my country (australia, so take the opinion of the voting populace with a grain of salt - we’re entirely dependant on the US for defence against china, and even more so now that we’re buying US nuclear subs which we have no capacity to maintain ourselves since we literally have to even make laws to deal with nuclear to deal with them)

… sorry rambletangent

… last time people were like “okay well we know that the 4 years are up soon and stability will return”… this round, the world really can’t trust the stability of the US: from now on, who the fuck knows what’s going to happen? we just have to make backup plans, and that severely curtails US influence because there are suddenly alternatives - and nobody wanted alternatives - we all wanted to give the US power (well, kinda)… but you just can’t rely on US politics any more when it’s existentially important

[–] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 1 points 13 minutes ago

Yeah as an American that’s one of the frustrating parts of all this. Like, a lot of our wealth came from dependability. “We give you good deals on military technology that would’ve cost you more to make, you give us good deals elsewhere. Meanwhile this means we dominate the military technology market and we always have the best equipment and produce a stable environment in which those who are on good terms with us are more economically and militarily stable. And anyone who goes against us now can’t maintain their equipment.” Then these fucks ruin a pretty good deal we had not out of ideals against our hegemony but because they think we don’t have it good enough

[–] Warl0k3@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

After how we treated the Kurds, I cannot believe anyone still trusts us. We have a lot of shit in our house that needs cleaning, and we sure do seem to be shooting all the maids....

[–] coyootje@lemmy.world 13 points 1 day ago (1 children)

It's not even 52%, in the end it's ended up being 50% VS 48.3%. He barely got half of all votes with the overall gap only being 2.6 million votes. That's razor thin, the only reason it worked out the way it did (apparent "easy win") is because of the electoral college system, which is a bit biased towards conservatism anyway by giving quite a bit of power to smaller, less populated states.

Besides that, I do agree that it's a bit of a question what will happen. I've seen people say that Rubio and Waltz appear to indicate a slightly different course but no one really knows besides the coming government.