this post was submitted on 18 Feb 2024
525 points (98.3% liked)

World News

39102 readers
2315 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
 
  • Denmark is sending all of its artillery to Ukraine, the Danish prime minister has said.
  • Mette Frederiksen made the announcement while speaking at the Munich Security Conference.
  • It comes as Ukraine faces severe munitions shortages.
all 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] positiveWHAT@lemmy.world 108 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Well, when else would they be used? The other case I see would be Russia winning in Ukraine and blitzing onward, so why not stop them in Ukraine.

[–] bstix@feddit.dk 66 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Yes. Honestly... The plan is to oblige to the NATO 2% requirement, which means that we will need to invest in war production instead of just clinging to old stocks. So even as bad as it is to increase a budget for something that we don't need, it's still better for Denmark to restart the production and give away the old stock. Denmark has reopened an old ammunition factory (which had been an eyesore for 50 years) and also collaborating with Germany on the bigger calibers.

Basically, Denmark is investing domestically, in EU and in Ukraine, and it's all according to agreement with NATO. (Regardless of Trump's stupid speech the other day, this needs to be done.)

It's like donating old bread before it goes bad. Let's hope the Ukrainians can find a Russian head to use it at, because we don't need it now, but we're obliged to keep production up.

[–] Buffalox@lemmy.world 17 points 9 months ago

We already gave Ukraine our bran spanking new artillery a year ago, we had just received, that was supposed to replace the old ones.
So we are not just donating old stuff.

[–] wolfpack86@lemmy.world 14 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Too Good to go, but with weaponry.

[–] bstix@feddit.dk 2 points 9 months ago

Yup. Fire it off and hope it hits someone in the head. The closer to Vladimir Putin, the better. I feel sorry for the Russia cannon fooder, but we didn't ask them to go there, and well, weapons are built to kill, so that's what they're gonna do.

[–] Hubi@feddit.de 7 points 9 months ago (3 children)

Russia

blitzing

Does not compute

[–] positiveWHAT@lemmy.world 6 points 9 months ago

It's a nudge at them being like nazis.

[–] brianorca@lemmy.world 3 points 9 months ago

It's what they were planning on day 1 of the 3 day SMO. Fortunately it did not go to their plan.

[–] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago

The blitz was German originally but it’s just become the term for a rapid combined arms strike on an unsuspecting or unprepared target

[–] newnton@sh.itjust.works 64 points 9 months ago (28 children)

Let’s go Denmark, hopefully you can convince more of Europe that freedom, democracy, and the right to self determination are worth fighting and making sacrifices for

[–] IndustryStandard@lemmy.world 6 points 9 months ago

Easy there you're about to be called Hamas

load more comments (27 replies)
[–] Plopp@lemmy.world 36 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Fellow swedes, this is our chance.

[–] mattgolsen@lemmy.ml 6 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Don't you dare even look at the Øresund, we still have our sticks.

[–] Droechai@lemm.ee 2 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Just you wait until the ice is thick enough to carry an army! It's just a tad heavier now than last time but a time will come

[–] jqubed@lemmy.world 3 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Not if we keep global warming going at its current pace!

Is global warming actually a Danish plot for security from Sweden?

[–] Plopp@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago

Well, global warming might push the gulf stream down south to like Spain and make it even colder up here, and hence the ice thicker. That could be Danish planning, but it sounds more like Norwegian planning.

[–] flyboy_146@lemmy.world 33 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Holly crap Denmark! 😮

If you are from Denmark, I hope you are proud of your leader. I almost am for you! To me, Denmark is showing more leadership and courage then just about all the rest of the planet right now. 👍🏼🫡

Thank you!!

[–] Wootz@lemmy.world 14 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Eh.

Looking through Danish new sites (Dr.dk, Information, Politiken), there is not a single headline about this. I'm curious as to why, and what the angle will be, whenever we get any domestic news on it.

In principle, I think this is a good thing, and something we should have done a long time ago. However, our current PM (Mette Frederiksen) has a history of promising the moon and then never actually getting around to delivering on it, so I'm kind of half-way expecting this to mean "we'll establish a comittee that'll start an investigation into what we can send and when we can send it" and then it'll take them a year or more to figure out the logistics of it, at which point it might be too late.

I should be excited about this, but I am so jaded by our politicans complete lack of interest in anything else than playing the game and staying in power that I struggle to be.

[–] r00ty@kbin.life 8 points 9 months ago

I think it's a very laudable act (if action follows words).

I think in terms of the rest of Europe, and especially NATO countries in Europe, we should certainly be providing everything we can while still being careful to provide enough means for our own defence. This is especially true with the threat (however realistic) of another Trump presidency, which could leave us on our own in this regard.

Provided we have our own Europe-wide defence covered though, yes we should be giving all the aid we can to Ukraine.

[–] randon31415@lemmy.world 22 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Next up: Moldova donates it's entire tank!

[–] SoleInvictus@lemmy.world 8 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)
[–] BombOmOm@lemmy.world 18 points 9 months ago

You go Denmark!

[–] AnneBonny@lemmy.dbzer0.com 14 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (3 children)

Is there a reason why Biden can bypass congress to sell arms to Israel but not Ukraine?

edit: thanks for the answers

[–] NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world 29 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Sell is the keyword there.

Israel bought weapons.

Ukraine CAN buy weapons

Biden cannot gift weapons without congress approval

[–] maness300@lemmy.world 12 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

Yeah... israel bought weapons with the billions of dollars of handouts we've been giving them for decades.

[–] BombOmOm@lemmy.world 5 points 9 months ago (1 children)

billions of dollars of handouts we’ve been giving them for decades

Yep, which underlines why this works, it has congressional approval. The entire point (and a requirement for) those funds is to spend them in the US defense sector.

[–] maness300@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago

I'm not saying it doesn't work.

I'm highlighting how we're still giving Israel weapons because they're buying them with money we gave to Israel.

Perhaps if we gave more aid to Ukraine than we gave to Israel, they would be in a better position to buy weapons.

[–] Num10ck@lemmy.world 10 points 9 months ago

selling arms versus giving them the arms, for starters.

[–] Ashyr@sh.itjust.works 2 points 9 months ago

I've been wondering about this as well. My guess is there's already standing legislation specific to Israel that enumerates such powers.

[–] autotldr@lemmings.world 6 points 9 months ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:


Speaking at the Munich Security Conference, Mette Frederiksen appealed to other European nations to do more to help Ukraine in its fight against Russian President Vladimir Putin's invading forces.

"This is not only a question about production, because we have weapons, we have ammunition, we have air defense that we don't have to use ourself at the moment, that we should deliver to Ukraine."

It comes as Ukrainian forces withdrew from the key eastern town of Avdiivka amid severe munitions shortages.

The Danish announcement will come as particularly welcome news in Ukraine as its military has been starved of artillery shells, forcing it to scale back some operations, Brigadier General Oleksandr Tarnavskyi told Reuters in December.

Meanwhile, in more positive news to alleviate the ammo famine, the Czech Republic says it could supply 800,000 shells to the Ukrainian military.

The EU is taking leadership and responsibility in support for Ukraine; we know what is at stake," President of the European Council Charles Michel said at the time, per Reuters.


The original article contains 416 words, the summary contains 169 words. Saved 59%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

[–] Harbinger01173430@lemmy.world -4 points 9 months ago

Are they going to transport the artillery and munitions there by truck or shoot them so the Ukrainians can catch it? /S the title does not explain how :(