• @solargeek@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    -811 months ago

    NATO members in general are too comfortable relying too much much on the U.S. defense umbrella. It is something the U.S. has been warning NATO members about for a long time. It’s meant to be a collective defense. What’s happening in Ukraine should be a loud wakeup call.

    • ghost_laptopOP
      link
      fedilink
      1011 months ago

      It’s something the US has basically enforced, it’s their excuse to things like military bases in Okinawa, which goes against Japan’s ideas of not having an army (even though the JSDF has broken this promise of sorts). More military spending it’s not going to bring any good to anyone, specially coming from Europe and its record, specially the Brits.

      • @emerty@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        -411 months ago

        More military spending it’s not going to bring any good to anyone, specially coming from Europe and its record, specially the Brits.

        Ask the Ukrainians how they feel about the Brits rn

        • ghost_laptopOP
          link
          fedilink
          411 months ago

          Ask any of this countries, also include a couple more, Argentina specially, and since we’re are it include all of Latin America since nobody wants them here, how they feel about the Brits. Ah, yeah, I forgot, one European country counts as x100 in contrast with a shitty third world country like ours in your book.

          • @emerty@slrpnk.net
            link
            fedilink
            -3
            edit-2
            11 months ago

            Argentina? Lol. You invaded UK territory that has oil reserves, what did you expect? A cucumber sandwich and some tea?

            Neighbours mean more than strangers, pre Russian invasion no one really cared about Ukraine either. But when they asked for help in 2014 the UK, Canada etc helped.

            • ghost_laptopOP
              link
              fedilink
              311 months ago

              The fucking what? How the hell is a fucking island that is next to my country UK territory you imperialist apologiser, you literally invaded as that’s the only thing you have done in the last 300 years and all of a sudden is our fault? What a way to justify yourself, give back the fucking Malvinas. You have the more twisted mental gymnastics to justify the robbery of land, don’t you?

              Of course, because fascists with imperial past like to help out modern fascists.

              • @dark_shines11@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                -111 months ago

                Didn’t the people living there want to stay part of the UK?

                Ultimately that should be what decides it in all situations really, not stuff that happened in the past.

              • @emerty@slrpnk.net
                link
                fedilink
                -2
                edit-2
                11 months ago

                Ok, so we can claim any territory as long as it’s next door? Pretty sure Germany tried that.

                Btw your sarcasm detector is broken mate.

                Also

                The National Reorganization Process (Spanish: Proceso de Reorganización Nacional, often simply el Proceso, “the Process”) was the military dictatorship that ruled Argentina from 1976 to 1983, which received support from the United States until 1982.

                Actual fascists…lol

                😂

      • @solargeek@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        -1111 months ago

        We’ve had multiple presidents get on their soapbox about defense budgets in Europe. One fat orange man in particular. He’s a corrupt idiot but he wasn’t wrong about that. The NATO % GDP benchmark is not onerous. Only military capability will deter some actors as clearly evidenced most recently in Ukraine.

        • ghost_laptopOP
          link
          fedilink
          811 months ago

          Left wing liberals agreeing with right wing liberals when it is convenient for them. A tale as old as gold.

        • @redditors_re_racist@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          711 months ago

          Only military capability will deter some actors as clearly evidenced most recently in Ukraine.

          the ukraine was invaded therefore more military spending would deter russians from invading the ukraine?

    • @fomo_erotic@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      -511 months ago

      NATO members in general are too comfortable relying too much much on the U.S. defense umbrella. It is something the U.S. has been warning NATO members about for a long time. It’s meant to be a collective defense. What’s happening in Ukraine should be a loud wakeup call.

      I’m fine with NATO members relying on the US defense budget as long as they spend their money on socialist programs at home. The US could provide the best socialist safety net on the planet, and still outspend the rest of the world 40:1 on defense if it would just tax the rich. Tax capitol gains like income as well, and 80% tax on everything over 20 million a year, 95% tax on everything over 200 million a year, and 99% tax on everything over 1 billion a year.

      Boom now we can do the best socialized medicine on the plan and have enough left over to build a couple hundred new NATO bases where ever member states want them.

      • @PolandIsAStateOfMind@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        311 months ago

        Welfare programs in capitalist countries are not socialism. “Socialism program” would be collectivisiation of the means of production.

            • @emerty@slrpnk.net
              link
              fedilink
              -311 months ago

              Must of missed the whole market socialism thing in the Nordics and under Blair in the UK?

              • @PolandIsAStateOfMind@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                611 months ago

                Market socialism examples are Yugoslavia and Poland in the 70’s. Nordics have capitalism with (currently being cut) social safety nets, one of prime characteristics of socialdemocracy, ideology that do not promote socialism but capitalism with “human face”, as Nomad said, based on Keynes work. Blair and his followers in many countries went much off even that into the neoliberalism.

              • ghost_laptopOP
                link
                fedilink
                411 months ago

                That’s not market socialism, at best it’s called Keynesianism.

                • @emerty@slrpnk.net
                  link
                  fedilink
                  311 months ago

                  Yeah you’re right. I think it originated from Adam Smith? Vietnam would probably be described as market socialist

                  The Nordic model has social policies

                  Blair described his as an alternative to socialism

                  In the United Kingdom, Third Way social-democratic proponent Tony Blair claimed that the socialism he advocated was different from traditional conceptions of socialism and said: “My kind of socialism is a set of values based around notions of social justice. … Socialism as a rigid form of economic determinism has ended, and rightly.”[7] Blair referred to it as a “social-ism” involving politics that recognised individuals as socially interdependent and advocated social justice, social cohesion, equal worth of each citizen and equal opportunity.

            • @Rumblestiltskin@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              -511 months ago

              You seem to have a pretty narrow definition of socialism. I think most people would not use the term as narrow as you do no matter what quoted text you are about to post in response.

                • @Rumblestiltskin@lemmy.ca
                  link
                  fedilink
                  -511 months ago

                  From simple Wikipedia: “Socialism is a political ideology that aims to make people equal. It generally focuses on equality of wealth (eg. similar wages, housing, education, healthcare), although since the 1960s, it has often focused on equality of power. It is normally considered left-wing, because it seeks to change society.”

                  • @PolandIsAStateOfMind@lemmy.ml
                    link
                    fedilink
                    311 months ago

                    ??? You seem to have not only weird definition of socialism, because it’s totally not it, but even different wikipedia. Here’s what it says, in the very beginning (your definition is nowhere there):

                    Social ownership of the means of production, as opposed to private ownership. Which is basically as broad definition as possible, everything left of succdems fit right in.

                    For the lulz, i searched for your definition, and it had only a single result, here. Specifically, a comment down below:

                    Concluding, i guess it must be true, since the well known socialist theoretician BAD BOY BUBBY said so /s