this post was submitted on 08 Apr 2025
121 points (99.2% liked)

chapotraphouse

13785 readers
776 users here now

Banned? DM Wmill to appeal.

No anti-nautilism posts. See: Eco-fascism Primer

Slop posts go in c/slop. Don't post low-hanging fruit here.

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
 

No? We just gonna sit around and let Nazi Germany 2.0 happen? Maybe waggle your finger a bit at them? Cool. Yeah. Okay. I love our leaders, they're so commited to the freedom and wellbeing of their people.

God I wish the Red Army was here to save our asses like last time.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] glimmer_twin@hexbear.net 70 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Pre-war third reich wasn’t sitting on enough nukes to end 100 worlds

[–] Dirt_Owl@hexbear.net 26 points 2 weeks ago
[–] Jabril@hexbear.net 65 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Never interrupt your enemy when they are making a mistake. Anyone who could do such a thing will rather watch the US eat itself and only use whatever resources they have to prepare for a post US world and defend their people during this global transition.

[–] EstraDoll@hexbear.net 55 points 2 weeks ago (25 children)

yeah I feel like the #1 obvious strategy for any country seeking the weakening or destruction of the US right now is just sit-back-and-enjoy. They're shooting themselves in the foot again and again, why interrupt that when they're going to be far worse off in 20 years?

load more comments (25 replies)
[–] sodium_nitride@hexbear.net 50 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (38 children)

Firstly, America is not nazi Germany 2.0, nazi Germany was America 2.0.

Secondly, Who will declare war on America?

China? They already are preparing for WW3 scenarios and Trump's statements do nothing to change the timeline of preparations

Russia? They are already at (proxy) war with the US

Iran or North korea? They have enough defensive capabilities to have a good chance of defeating a US invasion (which appears to be a matter of when not if). But no real offensive capabilities against the US (discounting US satelites).

India or NATO minus the US? Their ideological conviction would lead them to siding with American fascism rather than against it. Like, why would they invade the heartland of world-historical fascism when they themselves are fascist?

We just gonna sit around and let Nazi Germany 2.0 happen?

~~Modern america doesn't a tenth the (relative to the rest of the world) military or economic power that Nazi Germany did. And that's because~~ other countries haven't been sitting on their asses all this time. They've been struggling for decades to create the multipolar world.

load more comments (38 replies)
[–] Dessa@hexbear.net 42 points 2 weeks ago

To be fair, the Red Army hesitated too. War just fuckin sucks and America is batshit and has nukes.

[–] Beaver@hexbear.net 39 points 2 weeks ago

Never interfere with an enemy while they're in the process of destroying themselves.

[–] Lemister@hexbear.net 38 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

There is no country capable of launching and sustaining an across ocean invasion and occupation of the united states. The us navy is everywhere and controls most shipping lanes.

[–] Dirt_Owl@hexbear.net 34 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Okay but what if I were to purchase fast food and disguise it as my own cooking?

[–] vegeta1@hexbear.net 23 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

....... You sneaking mice in there?

[–] Dirt_Owl@hexbear.net 22 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] keepcarrot@hexbear.net 32 points 2 weeks ago

War sucks, so everyone's gonna try to kick the can down the road as much as they can.

[–] CarbonScored@hexbear.net 28 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

In the world's defense, there's a good chance the USA absolutely collapses into a vastly regressed and impoverished state without any capabilities all on its own. Reviving an empire by military means is very expensive, and exceptionally less easy than it was 50 years ago.

War would be sort of redundant and unnecessarily punitive on people in that instance. So it seems wise to wait and see first.

[–] marxisthayaca@hexbear.net 24 points 2 weeks ago

Very likely the United States destroys itself before it can do further harm to the world; assuming some rogue warlord doesn’t shoot off nukes during the civil war

[–] ProfessorOwl_PhD@hexbear.net 23 points 2 weeks ago

Honestly nevermind the nukes, the US is the current hegemonic power, the dollar the current hegemonic currency. Some countries might be starting to break away from the dollar, but basically all the countries powerful enough to act against America still have their economies intertwined with America's, so they would be tanking their own economies by doing so. Even China would suffer massive economic damage from destroying America currently. Even without the threat of nukes it would be difficult to convince people to make the necessary sacrifices to their quality of life.

[–] Adkml@hexbear.net 23 points 2 weeks ago

I think the rest of the world correctly decided it's probablly safer to let the naked guy screaming slurs and waving a knife around just tire himself out.

[–] FourteenEyes@hexbear.net 23 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)
[–] Dirt_Owl@hexbear.net 21 points 2 weeks ago

This guy gets it

[–] Formerlyfarman@hexbear.net 23 points 2 weeks ago

Yemen sort of is. One of only 2 good countries.

[–] ButtBidet@hexbear.net 22 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

I'm absolutely talking out of my butt now, but the US still has nukes and is OK with using them offensively. The best bet is to let a defensive war happen.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›