this post was submitted on 09 Jul 2026
163 points (98.8% liked)

World News

56999 readers
1500 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
 

Donald Trump’s declaration at the NATO summit that the U.S. had returned to war with Iran didn’t lead to the usual gasping allies or perplexed officials.

If anything, it cemented Europe’s increasing reliance on itself.

As motorcades sped out of Ankara’s presidential place and down the barricaded streets ringing the Turkish capital on Wednesday, a half-dozen European officials said the ceasefire’s end only stiffened their resolve to be less dependent on the American militarily and stand alone.

“After seeing what’s happening in Iran and Ukraine, we first of all, have to build our own military might, and then everybody will respect us: Americans, Russians, Iranians or Chinese,” said a European official. “The more muscles you have, the less political anger you show.”

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Foofighter@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

They often enough blamed to not wanting invading a lot of nations which were later (checks notes) invaded by (checks notes again) Russia. How and why should anybody trust Russia in that case?

[–] LeoDalPozzo@infosec.pub 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I see your point, but i don't think that alone is a reason strong enough, or nobody should have any trust in the USA as well. On the exact same premises.

[–] Foofighter@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Dependence comes at a cost, when the EU relies on American military or economic benefits, it's harder to criticize the decisions. Same goes for Russia and the dependence on gas and China and the dependence on cheap labor, goods and resources. Co dependence can be good to keep peace, one sided dependence, not so much.

[–] LeoDalPozzo@infosec.pub 1 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

Your point was about trust tho. How can somebody trust Russia after they turned out to be unreliable? What i'm asking is, how is this not an even more valid question toward the US and instead we give for assumed our uncodnditional allegiance? Seems like a relationship more similar to that between vassal and overlord.

[–] Foofighter@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 16 hours ago

Yes, absolutely. Without the ability to fight for your independence you are in a situation where one can dictate the rules and the other has to follow. Hence building up strength, in this particular scenario military strength, gives the ability to become and stay independent. The fact that the EU has to build up military on their own is a sign of distrust towards the US. The reason why a military is necessary however is not that the EU sees the US as a threat, but Russia. Who the threat is in reality is not that important to the argument though. It's a generic signal towards the world that the EU is willing and able to defends itself (land, economy, values) from any aggressor. Again, I'm not pro war, or pro army. But in a world where one can push you either let yourself being pushed, or push back. The question how much of a concession either of the two options is. Which bringt me back to morally scenario which is more black and white: Should a POC arm themself to defend? I'd say yes because the line for the aggressor will move with every push and aggression. And the same thing happens on a global, national level with China, Russia, the us...