this post was submitted on 02 Jan 2025
392 points (99.0% liked)

NonCredibleDefense

6822 readers
232 users here now

A community for your defence shitposting needs

Rules

1. Be niceDo not make personal attacks against each other, call for violence against anyone, or intentionally antagonize people in the comment sections.

2. Explain incorrect defense articles and takes

If you want to post a non-credible take, it must be from a "credible" source (news article, politician, or military leader) and must have a comment laying out exactly why it's non-credible. Low-hanging fruit such as random Twitter and YouTube comments belong in the Matrix chat.

3. Content must be relevant

Posts must be about military hardware or international security/defense. This is not the page to fawn over Youtube personalities, simp over political leaders, or discuss other areas of international policy.

4. No racism / hatespeech

No slurs. No advocating for the killing of people or insulting them based on physical, religious, or ideological traits.

5. No politics

We don't care if you're Republican, Democrat, Socialist, Stalinist, Baathist, or some other hot mess. Leave it at the door. This applies to comments as well.

6. No seriousposting

We don't want your uncut war footage, fundraisers, credible news articles, or other such things. The world is already serious enough as it is.

7. No classified material

Classified ‘western’ information is off limits regardless of how "open source" and "easy to find" it is.

8. Source artwork

If you use somebody's art in your post or as your post, the OP must provide a direct link to the art's source in the comment section, or a good reason why this was not possible (such as the artist deleting their account). The source should be a place that the artist themselves uploaded the art. A booru is not a source. A watermark is not a source.

9. No low-effort posts

No egregiously low effort posts. E.g. screenshots, recent reposts, simple reaction & template memes, and images with the punchline in the title. Put these in weekly Matrix chat instead.

10. Don't get us banned

No brigading or harassing other communities. Do not post memes with a "haha people that I hate died… haha" punchline or violating the sh.itjust.works rules (below). This includes content illegal in Canada.

11. No misinformation

NCD exists to make fun of misinformation, not to spread it. Make outlandish claims, but if your take doesn’t show signs of satire or exaggeration it will be removed. Misleading content may result in a ban. Regardless of source, don’t post obvious propaganda or fake news. Double-check facts and don't be an idiot.


Join our Matrix chatroom


Other communities you may be interested in


Banner made by u/Fertility18

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] tal@lemmy.today 51 points 5 days ago (3 children)

I think that it is unlikely that China will do this.

I think that it is more-likely that Beijing will seek to dominate Russia, not to conquer it. China has a 2023 GDP of $17 trillion, Russia of $2 trillion. Russia has ensured that it has to rely on China for various things for at least some time. China doesn't need to invade to see increasing influence in Russia moving forward.

https://jamestown.org/program/russias-fiscal-dependence-on-china-grows/

  • As Western sanctions increasingly isolate Russia, it has become highly dependent on China for trade and economic support, particularly in energy exports sold at discounted prices.
  • China has capitalized on Russia’s isolation by expanding its investments and economic influence within Russia, with Chinese companies increasing their share of Russian market participation. This economic relationship shows an imbalance, with China benefiting from favorable trade terms.
  • Western sanctions and the war in Ukraine have deeply impacted Russia’s economy, as seen in the weakening ruble, increasing reliance on China, and signs of Russia potentially becoming a subordinate economic partner to China rather than an equal.

That's maybe not as evocative as the image of Chinese tanks rumbling into Russia, but I think that it's probably a much more realistic geopolitical issue for Russia.

[–] NaibofTabr@infosec.pub 20 points 5 days ago (1 children)

I agree with you. Military deployments are expensive. Why bother when you already control the trade relationship? China is in a position to get anything it wants from Russia. Hell, if they want territory they can probably get it the same way they do everywhere else - business deals.

[–] AlpacaChariot@lemmy.world 2 points 4 days ago

Practice / testing new equipment?

[–] Ilovethebomb@lemm.ee 9 points 5 days ago

Maybe they'll simply buy territory from Russia, in a similar manner to the Alaska purchase?

[–] apodoapodo@lemmy.world 4 points 4 days ago

A century or so of humiliation, you might say