Europe
News and information from Europe 🇪🇺
(Current banner: La Mancha, Spain. Feel free to post submissions for banner images.)
Rules (2024-08-30)
- This is an English-language community. Comments should be in English. Posts can link to non-English news sources when providing a full-text translation in the post description. Automated translations are fine, as long as they don't overly distort the content.
- No links to misinformation or commercial advertising. When you post outdated/historic articles, add the year of publication to the post title. Infographics must include a source and a year of creation; if possible, also provide a link to the source.
- Be kind to each other, and argue in good faith. Don't post direct insults nor disrespectful and condescending comments. Don't troll nor incite hatred. Don't look for novel argumentation strategies at Wikipedia's List of fallacies.
- No bigotry, sexism, racism, antisemitism, islamophobia, dehumanization of minorities, or glorification of National Socialism. We follow German law; don't question the statehood of Israel.
- Be the signal, not the noise: Strive to post insightful comments. Add "/s" when you're being sarcastic (and don't use it to break rule no. 3).
- If you link to paywalled information, please provide also a link to a freely available archived version. Alternatively, try to find a different source.
- Light-hearted content, memes, and posts about your European everyday belong in other communities.
- Don't evade bans. If we notice ban evasion, that will result in a permanent ban for all the accounts we can associate with you.
- No posts linking to speculative reporting about ongoing events with unclear backgrounds. Please wait at least 12 hours. (E.g., do not post breathless reporting on an ongoing terror attack.)
- Always provide context with posts: Don't post uncontextualized images or videos, and don't start discussions without giving some context first.
(This list may get expanded as necessary.)
Posts that link to the following sources will be removed
- on any topic: Al Mayadeen, brusselssignal:eu, citjourno:com, europesays:com, Breitbart, Daily Caller, Fox, GB News, geo-trends:eu, news-pravda:com, OAN, RT, sociable:co, any AI slop sites (when in doubt please look for a credible imprint/about page), change:org (for privacy reasons), archive:is,ph,today (their JS DDoS websites)
- on Middle-East topics: Al Jazeera
- on Hungary: Euronews
Unless they're the only sources, please also avoid The Sun, Daily Mail, any "thinktank" type organization, and non-Lemmy social media (incl. Substack). Don't link to Twitter directly, instead use xcancel.com. For Reddit, use old:reddit:com
(Lists may get expanded as necessary.)
Ban lengths, etc.
We will use some leeway to decide whether to remove a comment.
If need be, there are also bans: 3 days for lighter offenses, 7 or 14 days for bigger offenses, and permanent bans for people who don't show any willingness to participate productively. If we think the ban reason is obvious, we may not specifically write to you.
If you want to protest a removal or ban, feel free to write privately to the primary mod account @EuroMod@feddit.org
view the rest of the comments
That goes without saying, given that this is a completely illegal war of aggression. It is inconceivable that the EU is nevertheless acting as if these were allies. This war is a crime and serves to distract from further crimes: in the US, from the fact that the country is run by a fascist pedophile ring, and in Israel, from genocidal fascists whose agent, Epstein, made all this possible in the first place.
It is outrageous that the EU has not withdrawn from NATO and continues to supply weapons to the monsters in Israel.
Most insane to me is that, it’s EU who will have to deal with humanitarian crisis and spend more money supporting Ukraine to offset Russia’s oil profits from increasing prices.
Call me crazy but US seems to have more interest in supporting Russia’s war and destabilizing EU than destroying Iran’s regime. As part of this operation at least
seems intentional, like with russia causing a "mass migration" into the EU to illicit anti-immigration sentiment amongst the far right. seems like its working in that favor.
Withdrawing from NATO doesn't make sense. It would probably take upwards of 20-30 years to replace what would be lost by doing that. It's not worth it. I 100% agree with everything else you stated, though.
In that case, better start preparing for that replacement as soon as possible. Ideally way back when the US invoked Article 5 the first time.
I understand your point, but I disagree. I think NATO effectively no longer exists anyway - better to get rid of it sooner rather than later. The US recently threatened a war of aggression against one of its founding members. Now would be the right time to punish the geopolitical excesses of the criminal US-regime by creating a new alliance. The US is only a world power because of its military apparatus, which is financed on credit.
I see no reason to let the existing world order collapse, because it has brought nothing but misery since the end of World War II.
There's a good chance the situation will change significant in three years. It's worth to at least wait for that while acting right now either way but without completely giving up already.
The situation will not change on its own. The US president may change, if there are still free elections at all, which I think is highly doubtful given the establishment of an obvious secret police force in the form of ICE (the budget of this "agency" is equivalent to the military spending of a medium-sized country).
Even under a new, less aggressive administration, however, the fundamental problem will not change: The US is exclusively concerned with itself and does not shy away from using its power to its advantage – this was already the case under Obama, for example, who was eloquent and likeable, but also pursued the usual neo-capitalist policy of exploitation; even under him, it was difficult to say that the US was an ally of Europe. The US may be entitled to this as the most powerful nation in the world. However, it is a dying world power and will soon be overtaken by China. This is entirely foreseeable, and as Europeans we should almost be grateful to Trump, because his insane policies make it obvious how the US feels about its "partners." - I think he accelerated the decline of the US by at least 10 years as it stands.
But please don't misunderstand: based on my socialization alone, I would prefer the US to China, but I am not naive. When it comes to autocracy, the difference between the US, Russia, and China is becoming increasingly small. So it seems to me that Europe needs to sell itself as expensively as possible in order to save democracy here - and I think China would be willing to accept the continued existence of democracy in Europe in return for Europe turning away from the US.
The US, on the other hand, can only be expected to follow its own line and continue to undermine democracy, which is what billionaires are already doing in the EU as well, by the way: In Europe, the same social media giants that are enabling right-wing extremist parties to win elections in the US are also highly relevant. They are quite successful in doing so here as well: one example is the neo-Nazi AfD party in Germany, which is the equivalent of MAGA and is hugely popular because it is massively supported by the same billionaires who made Trump big in the US.
De facto NATO is dead, because the US - it's most powerful member - can no longer be trusted. I hope the political leaders of all other Member States see this.
But that doesn't mean it no longer any value. It's main goal has become deterrence, and Russia and China still need to be deterred.
This is totally false, you can argue it has brought misery but you cannot say it didn't bring any good.
The 80 years before it's creation (and the creation of the UN) have been much more violent than the 80 years since. Sure Asia and the Global South haven't shared in the peace it brought, but it's not like the west had brought peace there before.
There might be a better future without Nato, but i don't think the world as a whole would've been better off if Nato never existed in the first place. The Sovjet union would probably still be there for example, and except for the ruling class that was not a nice place to live in.
How can you say that when the whole point of the existing world order was to prevent another World War II, which they have been successful at? There haven't been any wars with as many lives lost as that one ever since, largely in part due to the fact that every time someone looked like they wanted to take over the world again, the rest of the democratic world united to force them where otherwise divided they would succeed.
Don't hold me responsible for this, hold Trump responsible.
You said "since the end of World War II" not "since Trump was elected". How can I hold Trump responsible for things that happened before he was even born?
well i got this pitchfork and this pitch and this lighter. you got a big piece of wood?
Aren't we all learning globally our governments aren't what they tell us they are?
Yes, absolutely. And that is precisely why we should see to it that all politicians who have benefited from this system are eliminated in democratic countries. For western democracies, this is basically synonymous with eliminating US lobbying and therefore includes most established politicians.
However, the democratic process for doing so is significantly hampered by the fact that social media in particular, but also legacy media is owned by billionaires. This ensures that only a minority in a given country is informed about the fact that only of a tiny fraction of the population, the richest 1%, in all Western democracies has benefited from this system while the population got exploited.
For Germany, for example, this means that under no circumstances one should vote for the AfD, because it is MAGA with the same goals and the same influential financiers - just a different brand.
its actually like .05-.01 richest people, the real billionaires.
No, I live in a functioning democracy, don't normalize your electoral college nonsense on me.
Why would the EU withdraw from NATO? What has NATO done to piss them off?
It's in my comment above, but I'm happy to repeat it for you: By threatening to invade Greenland, the US has threatened a founding member of NATO with a war of aggression.
NATO isn't pissing itself off, just one of its member countries is pissing off all the others: the US.
Right, so the EU wouldn't withdraw from NATO, they would kick the US out of it.
Although NATO has survived hotter internal conflicts before, it can probably come out of this intact if Trump turns out to be an abberation.