this post was submitted on 03 Jul 2025
282 points (90.8% liked)

World News

48111 readers
2364 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Gsus4@mander.xyz 31 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

Does it say anywhere in the article what social programs are on the chopping block? I've heard this claim hundreds of times, but so far it's on the basis of "it's got to come from somewhere". What if you build military hospitals, military infrastrtucture and military schools? Wink wink, nudge nudge.

[–] fullsquare@awful.systems 36 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

it's not listed because this is not what is happening

italy for example put bridge construction in that military budget (as critical infrastructure)

also the subtext was "spend that defense budget in america" and this is not happening either for variety of reasons, so it's partial failure already for them

[–] Gsus4@mander.xyz 13 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

“spend that defense budget in america”

hah, yeah, that part is hilarious. tramp already ruined the f35 program by suggesting that the ones sold to allies would come with degraded specs...why sink funding in something that you can only use with american permission exclusively for their stupid wars?

[–] fullsquare@awful.systems 7 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

there's a couple of big failures in american defense industry (like shipbuilding) but F35 is not one of them. the alleged killswitch is not likely a thing because first, it could be used by the most probable adversary, and they already shown capability in EW; and second, it's not necessary because it requires constant stream of spare parts and maintenance. as if it's worth it, ask any remaining iranian radar operator for firsthand opinion

some countries switched to euro made jets anyway, but these aren't likely to be doing the job that F35 is cut to do anyway (SEAD)

there's already euro alternative in development, for which americans were explicitly not invited (GCAP, FCAS). there's also the everything else part of military, half of euro countries make now artillery (both tube and rocket) so these can be bought locally too

[–] Gsus4@mander.xyz 8 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Yes, but israel gets the F35I variant. They are probably independent in software, targetting (and parts?), because israel as the US golden child always gets the juiciest deals. The EU, meanwhile, gets the "leeches, warmongers, pathetic freeloaders" treatment.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] HowRu68@lemmy.world 14 points 1 day ago (5 children)

Opinion article. Also they missed many NATO Top nuances, like the whole political game. But yes, NATO members in Europe have been spending more, and more defense is and was needed.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] thejml@sh.itjust.works 7 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Don’t bow down to the psychopath! You know he’s going to just pull out of NATO anyway.

[–] AllNewTypeFace@leminal.space 8 points 1 day ago (1 children)

If the US dumps NATO, that’s all the more reason to increase defence funding. Either that or start learning Russian.

[–] Gsus4@mander.xyz 6 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

I'd rather he did that than abandon NATO by surprise the moment russia attacks Narva or the Suwalki gap and give "putin, the gambler" the illusion that he can win against the EU...

[–] Gullible@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (3 children)

Just read the article, and did it feel as though it was written by 3 different people to anyone else?

But anyway, the EU undeniably needed to spend more on their collective militaries with a hostile, expansionist neighbor on their doorstep. This is literally one of two things that Trump has been right about in his lifetime.

[–] Klear@sh.itjust.works 5 points 22 hours ago

These days you're lucky if there's even one person writing it.

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