World News
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF OCTOBER 19 2025
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
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.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
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/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
view the rest of the comments
And why would they want to weaken the economy? Come on you can do better than that. Use your other brain cell.
And who said they shouldn’t do sanctions? Please quote me on that. And you think I’m the one arguing in bad faith? F off
it's literally in my comment above, read.
Why the fuck should I quote you on that? I never said you said that.
What you did do is imply that it didn't impact Russia's war making capabilities, and I told you that you can go ask Ukrainians about that.
yes you are.
"Just asking questions" that you know the answers to. You fuck off
So you think that is supposed to be the end goal? Maybe you can think juuust 1 step further.
Then who were you replying to? God? Santa? Why should I be the one to ask whether Ukrainians prefer no sanctions?
I said they’re ramping up ballistic missile attacks, which they are. I said nothing about the front, drone attacks or whatever. The point was that they still have plenty of production capabilities to ramp these up despite all these sanctions and years of costly war. And supposedly having hit their limit, which is what we’ve been hearing for years now. So yeah, I don’t believe the boy who cried wolf this time. F me right?
When the f did I say I was “just asking questions”? That’s the second straw man you made in two comments. You really couldn’t recognize a bad faith argument if it hit you in the face because they are all you’ve got.
No, I made a statement. There was no question mark at the end. You chose to respond to that with a load of nonsense that shows you don’t understand an iota of this conflict and act like your shitty opinion is truth.
Again "just asking questions". If you want to make a point. Fucking make it. Fuck off with this "just asking questions" bullshit.
And yes, weakening Russia's war making capabilities is the fucking end goal.
Europe was perfectly happy with Russia having a strong economy to buy European goods and sell them cheap gas. There is no other end goal.
Yeah, completely ignoring the fact that they'd be able to produce much more without the sanctions. Also why are cruise missile attacks dropping? Maybe because they can't keep up production because of sanctions? funny that.
According to whom?
The only quote you made was Von der Leyen, who didn't fucking say that, did she?
No we haven't.
If you hear "wolf" when people say something else, that's on you.
A comment with nothing but questions you know the answer to but imply the answer is something else. That is exactly the definition of "just asking questions". And you do it in other places as well.
Not a statement, is it?
May I remind you of your first comment on this thread?
And again, I’m not just asking questions and I never claimed that. Questions are a normal part of life, get used to it.
You know the end goal is to stop the war. That hasn’t happened. I’m asking you questions because you’re dancing around that disingenuously. The end goal cannot be to continue the war but at a lower pace and you know it.
Cruise missile attacks are dropping because they’re much easier to take down than ballistic missiles.
And you’re making it (again, disingenuously) seem like I said the sanctions aren’t having any effects. That is not what I said and you also know it. I said that despite the sanctions they are still ramping up ballistic missile attacks. So the message that they have hit their war economy limits is false. Since once you hit your limit –that’s what a limit means– you can’t continue.
They have not stopped, ergo they have not reached the limit.
Really? You can’t even read the headline of the article this thread is under. How am I supposed to take you seriously?
Here are a whole bunch of people claiming exactly that:
https://www.russiamatters.org/node/35164
https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/currencies/russia-economy-worsens-current-account-ruble-energy-exports-2023-7
https://www.chathamhouse.org/2025/09/fortress-russia-economy-has-adapted-well-pressure-stagflation-presents-opportunity-west
https://www.theguardian.com/world/ng-interactive/2026/feb/06/the-russian-economy-is-finally-stagnating-what-does-it-mean-for-the-war-and-for-putin
I’m beginning to think you don’t have a clue what you’re talking about…
Not the comment you initially replied to, is it? Disingenuous #3
But good talk my man. Keep it up and nobody will ever want to talk to you.
No they don't, have you even read those articles?
They make claims that are completely factual.
The original comment I replied to had a quote of Von der Leyen that you implied was making claims it didn't.
And you keep implying that sanctions aren't having the effect of bringing that end sooner, which they do.
You cannot possibly know if they've hit their limits because you can't see the future. So you cannot say that this message is false.
You keep saying that people have made that claim before, and it was false then, so it must be false now. But as your own sources show, nobody made this claim before.
I have, have you? And here I was thinking asking questions was illegal.
Yes. So not a question. Thank you. You started out by asking question and then get mad when someone asks a question in return that you can’t and won’t answer.
Citation needed. The point is they have never proven to end wars sooner.
I said I will believe it when I see it. I have not seen the war ending because of the economy. Ergo: limit not yet hit. I don’t get why this is so hard for you.
Only to someone who can’t read…
Quote from the first article you posted
So no, it's not saying that the economy has reached its limits, who you have not "heard it before"
it supports the opposite of the point you're trying to make.
Funny, you must really be blind or illiterate, because you read right past:
And
And
And
Funny how that works. And you wonder why people ask you questions to check your knowledge about a certain topic…
In my initial comment a few days ago, if you can even think that far back (idk, it seems like you might not) I said I will believe it when I see whether or not the Russian economy is actually at its limits. The article supports that. People keep saying it is
Or
Or
Or
Or
But it wasn’t. And now:
So I said I will believe it when I see it. And I will, but I haven’t seen it. That’s all.
And none of those said that Russia's economy had reached its limits, as you claim.
"looking ahead"
"in time"
And
That one just says that the car industry is falling apart, which was true and the auto industry is now pretty much dead.
A Russian businessman worried about his wealth, really?
So the article you linked doesn't say what you think it says and links to articles cherry picking quotes to pretend they are saying something they don't.
LOL you really don’t handle being wrong very well, do you?
None of the sources you quoted say what you claim they do and I'm wrong?
Just go away.
In your extremely biased mind where a parallel reality exists they indeed didn’t claim what they claimed.
Good boy
I guess only in my biased mind is a prediction about the future a statement about the present.
Learn about the flow of time.
Only in your mind is a statement not a statement…
And at the same time a statement is a question…
And maybe there are some flying pink elephants around there, who knows, there appears to be a lot of room.
Aye flying, or will fly?
Since you can't distinguish present from future
Bonus from same article:
…
…
…
(Editor’s note: it is now 2026)
Ok? Cherry picking much?
That's not the conclusion they reached, is it? That's the observation they're making upon which they base their conclusions. The conclusion they all reached is that it will have major impacts at some undefined point in the future. But that is inconvenient for the point you're trying to make.
And Deripaska, still, really? He only cares about his own pockets.
And I guess the editor is so far up his own ass, that he didn't realize Russia has been in a recession since end of 2025?
LOL, these are literally in the titles of the articles. Except for the bonus one, which is the last sentence, in the last paragraph of the one with the headline.
You won’t stop trying, will you? Hilarious man!
Is a recession the same as being out of money?
And I thought questions were forbidden…
My condolences for having been in a coma for 20 years.
Here a development that happened to media while you were out to help your media literacy catch up to 2026
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clickbait
Hahaha so let me get this straight:
I said I will believe it when I see it, since I have seen people say things like the headline of this article for years
You: nah you haven’t.
I show you a bunch of headlines saying things like the headline of this article.
And your defense is: “click bait exists” ??
Hahahahaha just when I thought you couldn’t get any dumber –or more entertaining
no you didn't. Don't lie.
Also I never replied to that comment of yours, I commented to your Von der Leyen quote which you implied to be incorrect.
lol you dumbass read my initial comment on this article.
Yep, it was wildly premature to claim such a thing. And the data afterwards of the Russian economy hanging on for years have shown that.
Guess what I quoted above you illiterate clown
So you finally answered my initial question, amazing. Took for fucking ever.
No her claim was factual, dumbass.
You just read "will drain Russia's economy" and understand "will immediately lead to a meltdown of Russia's economy"
Don't blame others for your illiteracy
Mate, you’ve shown time and time again that you don’t understand what is said.
Don’t quote it. Read it.
Ahhhh, so you were… how you say it… “just asking questions”?
And how many questions of mine have you not answered. My question to you was the answer dumbass. You could have figured it out for yourself. The sanctions were intended to drain the economy so much that Russia couldn’t continue fighting
And yes, she was wrong, as they were at their third sanction package at the time of that statement. They needed 17 (!) more to add on top of those. So no, those three packages in 2022 were not in fact draining the economy.
Also, what you don’t get is the simple fact it was just one example. I’ve shown you a whole bunch more after that which you tried and failed to pick apart.
So yeah, I think you’re still very much the dumbass here :)
Sorry, better go look for that pink flying elephant up there.