579
Biden Allows Ukraine to Strike Russia With Long-Range U.S. Missiles
(www.nytimes.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 17 Nov 2024
579 points (98.0% liked)
News
23664 readers
3596 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. 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. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Too late.
Americans chose to abandon Ukraine when they elected Donald Trump and his Republican enablers.
Russia will win, there will be one less democratic nation on the planet, Russia will expand their borders, and Europe/NATO will be threatened.
Thanks conservatives, 3rd party voters, single issue voters, and non-voters. You really thought this one through.
They failed long before the Trumpanzee was voted in. This is just last moment desperation after they not only failed to support Ukraine, but failed to stop the Russian propaganda and bribery machine in the US.
But, Americans aren't wrong that they also failed long before this. They failed to support the people in favor of corporate interests. They failed to deal stop the Republicans from stacking the courts.
They failed because time and time again, they would rather try to appeal to Republican voters who will NEVER switch sides or change that minds in any significant number, while ignoring the issues that have decimated support with their own base and claiming to have the moral high ground.
Thks isn't just on the people that didn't show up to vote, but also the people in government that let it get to this point by continually failing to act.
Americans didn't. Only 1/3 of eligible voters voted for the rapist conman.
Those over 18 who don't vote, don't count.
What's the issue you have with a non democratic country?
I genuinely think most people (I used to just think most Americans) don't understand the alternatives.
Democracy has been proven not to work, and those involved in it will tell you that they agree, but there's no better option. -
Which if you think about it, isn't really an answer.
It's like saying: Democracy doesn't work, mathematically or otherwise. Try something that doesn't breed corruption. They all do, democracy is just the best corruption.
Which is bullshit. Mixing it up is the best way to stop the corruption.
We need a lot of anarchy in the world right now, otherwise we're just the fertilizer for power families. Our grandkids are fucked in general, except for the few that get a break.
Ah yes, one more country being puppeted by Russia, a country infamous for it's corruption, will decrease corruption. /s
White cisgender males ... You didn't understand my comment Mr collateral. Maybe see you in the next life..
This comment is a great example of why electing a party that runs on deconstructing the public education system is an awful idea.
We're gonna start seeing ignorant comments like this way more often going forward.
Buckle up.
When you say "ignorant comments like this" after you referring to yours?
Genuine question.
Democracy doesn't work. The smaller countries notice it moreso. But the size of the US running a two part t system is insane, and not a true democracy. I wasn't attacking anything but the platform that they use.
Do you grasp that this is an opinion? Because you keep stating it like it's fact.
It is fact. Look up arrows impossibility theorem.
If you read into it at all, you didn't read far enough.
As shown above, the proof of Arrow's theorem relies crucially on the assumption of ranked voting.
The language of Arrow’s theorem can be misunderstood. It does not mean that democracy is doomed to failure and that only dictators are sound political institutions. Arrow’s theorem states that there is no procedure to decide among three or more candidates that satisfies the above properties. If the axioms are an ideal that cannot be met, then other, less stringent, criteria should be used to compare and evaluate election procedures. Or, as may be the case, the selection of an election procedure is a decision about which of the above axioms is less important to the application at hand.
I did read into it. It doesn't mean democracy is doomed to failure, but it proves that it doesn't work. Mathematically or otherwise.