A community for discussing events around the World
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
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.
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
"President of the USA threatens to destroy the USAs most powerful geopolitical tool"
Growing up I legitimately thought the US were the head of NATO. Gotta admit that I only recently, like a good few years ago, found out that's not true.
The way they act is so bizarre, no matter from which angle you approach the topic.
It's not bizarre if you look at from the angle that Trump is a Russian asset
That puppet is way too skinny.
The diaper is missing
Its some version of Putin gave him a helicopter, money or something and/or a threat to release pictures of Trump diddling kids.
5min later: shit post by orange fart balloon.
Growing up I legitimately thought the US were the head of NATO.
Depending on what exactly you mean by "head of NATO", they kind of are.
The Supreme Allied Commander Europe has always been an American General. So in case of an actual NATO war in Europe, the US would be in charge of coordinating joint military operations.
I meant sort of like the US government being able to more or less directly command NATO, calling all the shots atleast.
Right, the US couldn't just take command of NATO and other member states' militaries without those countries signing off on it. But they can basically use political pressure to make countries join their excursions, like what happened after 9/11 (the only time Article 5 was ever invoked). And well, the "defensive" aspect of that entire campaign is questionable ...
So while they don't have direct control, I'd still say the US is very much the "head of NATO".
I mean the US's most powerful geopolitical tool is a toss up between its weapons industry, its dominance in global finance and being the richest country in the world, but yeah NATO is a close third/fourth.
Well, it used to be its relationship with other powerful and wealthy countries, which combined with what you've said, made it a superpower.
Now, it can't even corral a coalition of the unwilling. It looks like they are going to walk away from Iran having lost. They have achieved nothing but kill lots of people and damaged the global economy more than any damage to Iran. Iran is now in a stronger position as threats against them will be more empty going forward.
I welcome peace but my worry is that trunos narcissism will prevent them walking away with the loss and he'll be goaded into continuing.
None of that matters when you don't have bases around the world to put your weapons.
He's been very active in it since the first term.
Saw this comment made elsewhere:
Why doesn't Trump ask his 'Board of Peace' to come bail him out?
Or his buddy putain. He will always shit on allies before adversaries.
He’s too busy shrugging off Russian intelligence sharing with Iran to help Iran target and kill American soldiers. Not nearly as disrespectful to our troops as that time Obama saluted a Marine with a coffee cup in his hand.
Because they're the board of peace, not war silly.
Remember the Suez Crisis? Pepperidge Farm remembers...
NATO is not there just to bail you out when stupid wars you start go south.
PS:
Vice-President Richard Nixon (Europe) later explained: "We couldn't on one hand, complain about the Soviets (russians) intervening in Hungary (Ukraine) and, on the other hand, approve of the British (muricans) and the French (israel?) picking that particular time to intervene against Nasser (Iran)".
lol
All he knows is how to act like a mafioso. I think he fundamentally doesn't understand what an alliance actually is.
He fundamentally doesn’t understand a lot of geopolitical and basic human norms unfortunately.
Except for “might makes right” apparently… 😑
And he doesn't even know how to apply that properly. If you're going to be a bully and use hard power, you have to exercise said hard power against anyone who argues.
He doesn't have the heart to be a dictator. The guy likes the admiration too much and is scared of that going away, so he chickens out when a real dictator needs to get tough. By doing that he's showing weakness to the real dictators, the equivalent of having a "kick me" sign stuck to his back.
If you are forced to pick between being feared and being loved, always pick being feared. it's more reliable.
Weak-mindedness and hard power don't really work together.
“He” has a lot of people in the room making decisions.
He doesn't understand what a mafioso does, either. He saw a couple gangster movies but didn't understand the subtext.
He's not a mafioso. He's a schoolyard bully. He's never outgrown that mentality because he's never had to.
Eisenhower was very strongly anti-imperialist and was pressuring Britain and France to relinquish their colonies, which they eventually did, though France tried hard to hang onto Algeria until they were driven out. And both Britain and France still hang onto places here and there (part of Polynesia, Martinique, Diego Garcia, Gibraltar, Northern Ireland,,,).
And of course, Eisenhower cared about not being a hypocrite. Trump will say or do anything, regardless of consistency, like postal voting while trying to ban postal voting. For him, it's a flex.
Eisenhower was surplanting the French and British Empires with the American Empire. That's why he had his brother organize the coup in Tehran and why he laid the groundwork for Vietnam.
Please proofread the PS part, is hard to understand
NATOs power comes from ALL of its "MEMBERS"!!
THE US "IS" ONE OF THOSE MEMBERS!
So if TRUMP is calling NATO a "paper" TIGER then that means he's CALLING HIMSELF and the US a PAPER tiger.
That is UNPATRIOTIC!
Thank you for your attention to this matter.
You forgot the sign-off:
COLE S LAW
The irony of him misusing "paper tiger" and then demonstrating its correct usage is going to implode me.
It's projection. It's always projection.
When you think the orange child rapist cannot display any less understanding of what is happening around him... he reconfirms ignorance knows no limits
You're fired! Oh, in US english: Your fired!
Trump fundamentally misunderstands ~~the idea of NATO and its position purely as a defensive alliance.~~
Edit: ftfmyself
His whole life others get him bailed out from tribute he created, but this time no one wants to get into this mess. I think he is panicking.
Fun fact, the term "paper tiger" comes from the Chinese term zhǐlǎohǔ. The term was popularized by Mao Zedong, who used the term to describe the imperial powers.
Say what you want about the excesses of the cultural revolution, but Mao truly had some bangers. He also said that "women hold up half the sky", and that "it is right to rebel".
I'm sure if he saw a US president calling his own military alliance a paper tiger, he'd get a real kick out of it.
The issue with Mao like all communist overlords is that their ideology is what comes first, not the facts and well-being of people living under it.
I don't think that's really fair to be honest, Mao is an entirely different breed from Stalin for example, and it seems to me from what I've read despite his flaws, he seemed to have the interests of the people at heart, and worked hard to strike a pragmatic balance between pure marxism as advocated by the 28 Bolsheviks and what would actually work best for the Chinese people.
A lot of the worst excesses of the Cultural Revolution were because of how the Red Guards were given wayy too much latitude to crack down on "counter-revolutionary activity" which basically ended up as something a bit like the Purge, where people would take revenge over old grudges and pretend that they were doing so to fight for the revolution, and there was also a lot of anti-intellectual sentiment among the agrarian societies which formed the bulk of the revolution, which resulted in purges of academics, but Mao was incredibly popular among the working class and massively improved quality of life for an average Chinese person (e.g. farmers), at least until the Great Leap Forward.
When it comes to the Great Leap Forward, I think that's really more of a case of terrible mismanagement as a consequence of information-poor decision making, as a result of top-down management of resources, and likely forced industrialization of the Chinese society would have gone just as poorly, if not moreso, under the authority of the Kuomintang, for example, although the anti-intellectualism of the cultural revolution definitely didn't help
I think the lesson to take from this for leftists and revolutionaries is that violent crackdowns on counter-revolutionary activity should be the option of last resort, we should always guard against anti-intellectual sentiment, and that bottom-up organization of resources and management should be used rather than a top-down centrally managed economy.
Everyone eventually turns away from a baby's constant tantrum, except the poor mother, and she's long gone.
Better to be a paper tiger than a barking Chihuahua
"Paper tiger."
What's next? "Running dog curs"?
Trump is stroking out. His last slurred speech is an indication his issues are getting worse.