Countries must also “face the reality that we have in the eastern flank of Europe, which is this neo-imperialism of (Russian President Vladimir) Putin, vis-a-vis countries such as Ukraine, but not create this false, or fake trade-off between aid and defense expenditure,” Sanchez said.

How does this “echo Russian narratives”? Or is anyone who questions unlimited spending automatically a Russian spy?

You are afraid because politicians told you to be afraid. They don’t want you to notice that you’re getting robbed at home to benefit the weapons industry.

The reality is that Russia is weaker than everyone expected and they can’t even take on Ukraine. The idea that they would simultaneously start a war with NATO is simply laughable. Even without the US, NATO already spends significantly more on defense than Russia’s full-blown war economy. On top of that, NATO has nuclear weapons.

Cutting healthcare spending will cost lives. Not your hypothetical lives, but real people who die from curable illnesses while waiting for care. Those deaths are guaranteed.

Maybe that was good advice 10 years ago. Nowadays it’s practically impossible to stay anonymous. Most social media make it mandatory to provide your legal name and even if you don’t, the government has many ways to still track you down, because you leave all sorts of traces. The only way out of this is by political change.

If the US or another fascist government wants to kidnap you and send you to a concentration camp, it won’t matter if you posted your info online. Don’t put this blame on the individual.

Thanks, that will solve everything 👍

MS Paint isn’t marketed or treated as a source of truth. LLMs are.

I am merely trying to decipher your words. So why don’t you just tell us what you mean?

“there is no valid argument […] for […] taxing suppressors”

This sounded like you were arguing that they should be tax-exempt.

Breaking an NDA (allegedly) is civil, not criminal

I have no doubt that FIFA bribes everyone, including Trump. It’s just in this particular instance that, if it was their intent to bribe Trump with a trophy, they would have created a second one with real gold instead of giving Chelsea a replica. It seems much more likely that Trump just stole it and FIFA didn’t raise a stink about it in order to preserve relations.

It clearly doesn’t make sense that the FIFA would spend a small fortune on creating a trophy, only to give the winner a replica. It is concerning to me that you still take Trump’s word at face value, no matter how obvious and self-serving the lie.

If a government is fighting for survival while it has a bunch of horrible weapons lying around like I described, they are absolutely going to use them. No question about it. That’s why you should ban the development and production of these things even in peacetime and that’s why international treaties are so important.

The mod log is public: https://lemmy.world/modlog/2840

But that’s assuming you actually want to know and aren’t just posting this to create drama.

Your premise is that these countries have a binary choice between either using mines in a “responsible” way or be conquered by Russia which uses mines in a bad way.

This is a fallacy because there are in fact many other plausible outcomes:

• Using mines is not necessary to repel a Russian attack. Russia is currently very weakened by its war in Ukraine and NATO has significantly more material and spending (even without the US). It’s totally possible to work towards peace without resorting to these barbaric weapons.
• It’s theoretically possible that a country uses mines and still gets conquered. Mines aren’t as useful as they were 100 years ago.
• It is unlikely that this country would only use mines in a “responsible” way as you describe. Armies do extreme things when faced with an invasion and any such reservations will quickly be cast aside if it provides a strategic advantage.

Chemical warfare? Cluster munitions? Bombing of population centers?

The point of international law on warfare is that they apply to everyone regardless of circumstances. What you’re suggesting is war crimes in self-defense.

That’s clearly a false dichotomy.

OIP is just a branch of Elbit, so yes 100% of profits go to a company fueling genocide. I don’t see you dispute that.

OIP doesn’t even claim that these protestors destroyed equipment destined for Ukraine (nor is there any corroborating evidence), only that it was delayed.

deleted by creator

… according to Israeli genocide-supporting arms manufacturer.

By buying American aircraft?