this post was submitted on 07 Jul 2026
131 points (96.5% liked)

World News

57002 readers
1328 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 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Photonic@lemmy.world -1 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

reading clickbait headlines isn't being informed

If you think the official title of a report by the Kiel Institute is a clickbait headline you really have bigger fish to fry than this discussion.

You wouldn't notice one of it hit you in the face.

You’re really not capable of independent thought are you? Just parroting whatever you heard, like for example:

You really couldn’t recognize a bad faith argument if it hit you in the face because they are all you’ve got.

See, these are examples of similar statements. Just like the ones I showed you. Putting on a sour face and going “nah uh! You’re stupid!” won’t change that.

But as I said before: good talk my man! Good to see you haven’t lost your entertainment value. Is circus clown a job you could see yourself doing? I bet you’d be great!

[–] Vergissmeinnicht@lemmy.ca 0 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago) (1 children)

If you think the official title of a report by the Kiel Institute is a clickbait headline you really have bigger fish to fry than this discussion.

So you base your arguments on a quote of Von der Leyen, articles by business Insider and CNN and whatnot, neither of which support your dumbass take. But suddenly they're not good enough, because you've been called out on your bullshit, and you reference a mysterious previous headline by the Kiel institute that you never even linked?

please do link the Kiel institute articles from the past that have non clickbait headlines that show that we've been "hearing this constantly since 2022"

See, these are examples of similar statements

Go sue me for copyright infringement, since you seem to have come up with that phrase all by yourself and totally didn't steal it

[–] Photonic@lemmy.world 0 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

First, I help you see why Von der Leyen’s quote is nonsense (the third package was indeed in fact, not draining the economy, since 17 more were needed after that). And the obviously ultimate goal of the sanctions, aka ending the war is still not in sight…

or do you really think just making things a little more shitty for ordinary Russians while the war continues to take Ukrainian lives is the goal? (Really, answer this question, I have answered yours).

you've been called out on your bullshit

I said I have seen things like this said before, and I show you literally multiple times when these things have been said before. Whether that’s an official report or a news article is irrelevant. They have been said before in a public place.

And the point is: I don’t believe them. I don’t believe the clickbait titles. That’s the entire fucking point, you dumbass. I literally said I’ll believe it when I see it. And in your head you have made that into that I somehow believe the clickbait? You’re even dumber than I thought.

please do link the Kiel institute articles from the past

And I never said it was the Kiel Institute who said such things in the past. I was obviously talking about this one. How’s that flying pink elephant doing up there?

[–] Vergissmeinnicht@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago)

Ok, let's start from the very very beginning.

Our sanctions and the self-sanctioning by companies themselves are draining Russia’s economy and thus draining the Kremlin’s war machine.

"are draining" is in the present progressive. It denotes an action in progress, not a completed action. Meaning the sanctions were in the process of draining the economy. Von der Leyen's claim was not that the draining had completed but that it was in progress.

next is your complete lack of understanding of how sanctions work.

the third package was indeed in fact, not draining the economy, since 17 more were needed after that

The very first sanctions package was immediately called "first sanctions package" at the time

https://www.noerr.com/en/insights/eu-imposes-a-first-package-of-new-sanctions-against-russia-in-the-ukrainian-crisis

The understanding, from the very first sanctions package, was that this would be a continuous process, with sanctions package after sanctions package, not a one and done deal that then needs to haphazardly be amended as you seem to think.

Sanctions need to be amended as the economic reality shifts and loopholes need to be plugged as the target of sanctions finds ways to evade them.

The 17 packages after the third were always going to happen because that is fundamentally how sanctions work.

And let's look at numbers. European sanctions have reduced Russian fossil fuel export revenues by about $300-500 million per day. Not sure how you would describe this, other than "draining the economy". And this does not include any other sanctions affecting other parts of the economy.

In your favourite metric, ballistic missiles, that is worth about 750-1000 Iskanders per day given the $400-500k unit production cost. Now of course money isn't the biggest limiting factor in Russia's ability to manufacture those, it's largely parts availability leads to big fluctuations in production quantities. Parts availabilities, which, surprise, are limited due to sanctions.

or do you really think just making things a little more shitty for ordinary Russians

Strawman. "draining the economy" is not about making things a little more shitty for ordinary Russians. It's about reducing Russia's ability to finance the war, which takes time considering Russia had a $600 billion war chest, half of which is frozen in mostly European banks, thanks to the sanctions, and the other half is now, thanks to the sanctions, that were draining the economy, mostly drained. And it is about reducing Russia's ability to source industrial machines and components to reduce their ability to manufacture weapons, like your favourite one, the ballistic missile. Where production quantities, as mentioned above, are fluctuating due to sanctions.

As I have stated before, it was constantly repeated all the way back in 2022 that sanctions would not defeat Russia on their own, and certainly not immediately, and would take years. The point was, from the very beginning, to make it increasingly difficult for Russia to finance the war and to produce weapons, so Ukraine could gain the upper hand, which is now manifesting on the battlefield, after years, as predicted.

People like you were told in at the very start in 2022 that the real world doesn't work like TikTok instant gratification, and here you are more than 4 years later still not having gotten the point.