this post was submitted on 03 Mar 2024
424 points (93.8% liked)

World News

39004 readers
2603 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
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Nopulseoflife@discuss.online 36 points 8 months ago (6 children)

No one would win a war between NATO and Russia. No one.

[–] GiuseppeAndTheYeti@midwest.social 14 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Disagree. I seriously doubt that anyone would turn the key. I don't think Russia could inflict enough losses to hurt NATO logistical operations and I think NATO would prioritize careful advancements to minimize casualties and give the Russian military a frog in the pot treatment. When they realize that its all over, it will be too late and I think we would see a russian revolution before then.

[–] DrRatso@lemmy.ml -2 points 8 months ago

Doesn’t matter the tactics used, its corrupt politians measuring their dicks by using regular people as pawns on a chessboard.

[–] ShittyBeatlesFCPres@lemmy.world 12 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I would win. In times of war, I become a gentleman thief and underworld figure who is useful to both sides.

[–] crypticthree@lemmy.world 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Is this a Third Man reference?

[–] ShittyBeatlesFCPres@lemmy.world 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

No, I’m just a person deeply against war but if y’all gonna have one, 🎼 I’ll drink whiskey and Bacardi. I’ll sell dope to anybody 🎶

[–] crypticthree@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago

Well you should check out The Third Man. Orson Welles is fantastic in it

[–] Rapidcreek@lemmy.world 11 points 8 months ago (4 children)

NATO has half a million troops. The largest navy and air force in the world. I like their chances

[–] wintermute_oregon@lemm.ee 8 points 8 months ago (1 children)

NATO has more troops than that. The united state alone has 2 million.

[–] Tinidril@midwest.social 3 points 8 months ago (1 children)

The largest air force in the world is the US Air Force. The second largest air force in the world is the US Navy.

[–] PCurd@feddit.uk 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I hear this all the time and it’s very subjective - I would argue the second largest is the US Army Aviation Branch - if you count helicopters have a lot more aircraft than the US Navy.

Also the Russian Air Force has more aircraft than the US Navy per most sources. I suspect the internet meme got the Navy and Army Aviation swapped around.

[–] Tinidril@midwest.social 3 points 8 months ago

Helicopters are kind of hard to categorize since they are tactically somewhere between aircraft and ground forces. Most helicopters are in support rolls while most airplanes are in combat rolls. Helicopters in combat rolls also get used like they are really fast ground forces.

But yeah, I get what your saying about the subjectivity, and it's true that my knowledge here is mostly from memes.

[–] EmilyIsTrans@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Both sides have enough nukes to kill the entire human race several times over.

[–] Pretzilla@lemmy.world 4 points 8 months ago

More like hundreds or maybe thousands of times over

[–] wjrii@kbin.social 1 points 8 months ago

First, war is always a tragedy. Always. It is to be avoided until the reasonably plausible alternative is worse for human suffering. People who ignore this are asses (not saying you are one of them).

Second, as long as it stays conventional and China stays on the sidelines, then yes of course NATO destroys the Russian military, or at least keeps it hemmed into existing Russian territory. That's been true for 30 years.

Third, those are VERY big 'ifs'.

[–] xePBMg9@lemmynsfw.com 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Russia is coming up on its half a million cassualties milestone. Would be the perfect time for the NATO half million to step in.

[–] Gradually_Adjusting@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago

What is this numerology strategy lmao

[–] barsoap@lemm.ee 4 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)
[–] PipedLinkBot@feddit.rocks 0 points 8 months ago

Here is an alternative Piped link(s):

https://www.piped.video/watch?v=o861Ka9TtT4

Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.

I'm open-source; check me out at GitHub.

[–] Sir_Kevin@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

The shareholders would absolutely win.

[–] Pretzilla@lemmy.world 5 points 8 months ago

Yes, for a brief moment

[–] 50gp@kbin.social 1 points 8 months ago

if we are being honest, current russia couldnt stop china or US from taking over the far east if there were no nuclear weapons