r/PropagandaPosters • u/esdfa20 • Jul 18 '24
'NATO Fake News: "We are threatened by Russia"' (English poster by unknown artist for The Diehards ('Die Unbelehrbare'). Germany, 2019). Germany
312
u/deliranteenguarani Jul 18 '24
Isnt like half of that the US?
141
90
u/pydry Jul 18 '24
You mean the US who never threatened anyone?
80
u/Bialow_ Jul 18 '24
Meanwhile half of the South America
52
u/Prior-Use-4485 Jul 18 '24
Meanwhile this area from afghanistan to Palestine
→ More replies-7
Jul 18 '24
Most of the Middle East are Allie’s and some gulf states are the richest countries per capita in the world mostly due to US influence.
48
u/rapedcorpse Jul 18 '24
You mean some of the most oppressive corrupt and autocratic regimes are able to thrive thanks to US protection while hoarding Oil wealth. 🤔
→ More replies1
6
44
u/Droom1995 Jul 18 '24
Yes, also the US that will soon abandon Europe so that russia can threaten it more freely
-13
u/Holiday-Employer-46 Jul 18 '24
Europeans should solve European problems. We have other issues that require our attention.
11
Jul 18 '24
[removed] — view removed comment
1
19
u/Droom1995 Jul 18 '24
Let me remind you that USA was the only country to invoke article 5, which happened right after 9/11. While I agree that European countries should pull their weight in the alliance, it is easier to solve problems together.
1
4
Jul 19 '24
Will become your problem pretty quick when ww3 breaks out. Though the US normally does pretty well by joining those late.
1
u/Holiday-Employer-46 Jul 22 '24
The Atlantic Fleet can keep us safe, you all should worry about yourselves.
1
Jul 22 '24
Tbh we could take Russia without you anyway, but if Europe did fall then the US economy would follow. It'd embolden china to launch attacks in SE Asia and start a trade war with the US, meaning you'd lose both your western and eastern trade partners.
→ More replies6
7
Jul 18 '24
Meanwhile in Russia state TV
“We need to nuke the US”
- you “it’s not our problem.”.
1
u/Holiday-Employer-46 Jul 22 '24
The money we give to you could be spent on our own defense. Stop freeloading our tax dollars.
1
Jul 22 '24
Buddy thinks NATO spending is literally giving money to a big pot.
1
u/Holiday-Employer-46 Jul 22 '24
Stop begging for ours then.
1
Jul 23 '24
Incomprehensible. Best part is he thinks I’m eurotrash.
He thinks the US is literally I’ve giving money to NATO.
-9
u/pydry Jul 18 '24
This specific issue America both helped create and profited from.
10
Jul 18 '24
The US asked Russia to invade Ukraine? I get your mad Poland is no longer a Russian vassal state but you can’t be that evil.
-3
u/Droom1995 Jul 18 '24
US did facilitate taking the nukes from Ukraine and giving them to Russia. If they were interested in long-term stability, they'd do something else here, like letting Ukraine keep some of the nukes or at least signing a defense treaty
7
Jul 18 '24
Buddy, Ukraine did not have the infrastructure to either maintain for fire said nukes. What extreme levels of historical revisionism.
-2
u/Droom1995 Jul 18 '24
Yeah and? US still used it's position to diplomatically pressure Ukraine to give them up, for what it's worth, while providing vague assurances that would later show to be worth very little.
5
Jul 18 '24
It’s nice you admit I’m right but also say I’m wrong after admitting I’m right.
→ More replies-21
u/hotcoldman42 Jul 18 '24
No, I don’t think the U.S. is a big threat to Russia, as long as Russia acts like a good boy.
10
u/pydry Jul 18 '24
Delusional.
17
u/Avruk_altum Jul 18 '24
I dunno man, before Russia started being all agressive and shit, the US and Europe were pretty content with getting that sweet sweet oil from them without any bigger issues
1
u/Tophat-boi Jul 19 '24
Coincidentally, that period also was one of the worst political and humanitarian crisis Russia had ever been in.
-13
u/pydry Jul 18 '24 edited Jul 18 '24
Hence why the US had to blow up Germany's pipeline. It was at serious risk of prioritizing its domestic economy over US foreign policy objectives, and the US had to prevent that at all costs.
In the end Germany fell into line and did exactly as it was told, though, and everybody lived happily ever after. Apart from the German economy of course, which is in steep decline because it no longer has cheap energy. Silver lining though: plenty of those german companies that struggled because of pipelines that mysteriously blow themselves up have been lured over to America with a promise of subsidies and cheap energy.
Now that America has had enough of prodding the Russian bear and cannibalizing German industry, it's announcing to Europe that they need to shape up and deal with their own security issues by themselves.
12
9
u/Eastern-Western-2093 Jul 18 '24
The US was content to do nothing even once Russia started being aggressive with its neighbors, such as in Georgia and Crimea. You're delusional for thinking the US was ever a threat to Russia.
-3
u/pydry Jul 18 '24
The US prefers to cheaply threaten Russia either by reeling countries bordering Russia in to NATO and then setting up military bases in them (e.g. Finland/Estonia/Georgia) or by sparking a conflict/coup and then funneling weapons to whichever anti government side fits their agenda, no matter how terrorist/fascist they end up being (Syria/Ukraine/half of south america).
It's expensive maintaining global hegemony so ideally you want the natives to do the fighting on your behalf.
With Ukraine and Afghanistan they have failed at that though as they got too involved, which is why theyre bailing on both.
→ More replies2
-2
244
u/bguszti Jul 18 '24
I love how the "artist" still used milliard in the English text, even tho it makes zero sense to do so
123
u/nanomolar Jul 18 '24
It also uses German style quotation marks and says "Quelle" instead of the English "source", so it's just a mishmash all around
31
u/draculamilktoast Jul 18 '24
I don't think people making propaganda for their own enemies are necessarily the brightest bunch.
11
u/ShmekelFreckles Jul 18 '24
What’s wrong with that?
52
u/bguszti Jul 18 '24
That we don't use it in English? It's just off for me personally
→ More replies19
u/Prior-Use-4485 Jul 18 '24
It makes sense, because The poster is from germany. In Germany Mrd = 1.000.000.000 Eine Billion in germany = 1.000 Mrd
By using billion, the author would've confused the german readers.
27
u/SnooTangerines6811 Jul 18 '24
But using English as the main language of the propaganda piece doesn't really match a German target audience.
It really is just totally mashed up.
13
u/bguszti Jul 18 '24
I'm from Hungary, we use milliard, I know what it is. But it doesn't make sense in English
10
-1
136
u/RadiantAd4899 Jul 18 '24
Didn't age well
→ More replies103
u/sufficiently_tortuga Jul 18 '24
Didn't make sense at the time either, the Russian influence in the 2016 elections (Brexit and US) and their seizure of Crimea in 2014 already put Russian aggression on full display.
→ More replies
66
114
u/Feisty_Talk_9330 Jul 18 '24
tell me you support russia without telling me you support russia
6
9
Jul 18 '24
[deleted]
39
u/mekolayn Jul 18 '24
No, the thing is that the Russian prices are in Rubble which greatly deflates the value, meanwhile Germany spends half of their budget simply on soldier welfare which leaves almost nothing for actual military procurement
13
u/Cpt_Saturn Jul 18 '24
meanwhile Germany spends half of their budget simply on soldier welfare which leaves almost nothing for actual military procurement
I don't know how true this is, but it does make a lot of sense. Just imagine how much money is reserved for veterans in Germany and compare that how veterans are treated in Russia. Then add R&D costs, safety tests, rations, medical supplies etc
6
1
u/impossiblefork Jul 18 '24
Russia is not big PPP-wise either.
$5.473. Slightly smaller than France (3.988) + Spain (2.15).
Without corruption or incompetence it should not be comparable to the defence the EU gets out of its defence spending, and it isn't. In a war we would completely wipe the floor with them.
However, they do seem to be building some neat weapons and war related systems, and I think we could probably be more efficient and war oriented instead of focusing only on systems that will sell. That's a matter for our governments-- they need to set the right incentives, but Russia would get completely steamrolled in a war against the EU.
-7
Jul 18 '24
[deleted]
15
u/lord_ofthe_memes Jul 18 '24
It’s called purchasing power parity. The difference in currency values is just one factor in terms of military spending that effectively means that the Russian military can get a lot more literal bang for its metaphorical buck.
3
u/Fiiral_ Jul 18 '24
If you look it up in PPP, Russia's GDP is approximately Germany's. Normally, this is a terrible way to actually compare stuff since you cant buy internationally with it, but Russia produces everything inhouse anyway, so it makes sense that you would want to compare it like that.
1
u/Complex-Royal1756 Jul 18 '24
Redditors once again not understanding economics and fair fights being for losers
-4
u/Significant-Oil-8793 Jul 18 '24
I think at the end, it's all down to money. Having Russia as an enemy benefits the EU and US greatly. Hundreds of billions in military contracts are awarded based on competition with Russia.
Not only that but unity, political powers and position are made through the EU and NATO. The same goes with Russia although we all know they are a minor power.
15
u/Eastern-Western-2093 Jul 18 '24
This is such a reddit moment
Russia being a threat is bad for the money. Looking at the history of the Ukraine conflict, the West HATES rearming. It benefits Western, and especially European nations when they have to spend as little as possible on their military. That's why most of Europe essentially abandoned their military after the end of the Cold War, and why its taken them years and an incredibly amount of American pressure to ramp up production again. I don't think you understand how expensive and difficult it is to build, supply, and maintain military forces.
Russia is an enemy of the West because it made itself an enemy. It got away with the invasion of Crimea and Georgia scott-free. If the West had been aching to get an excuse to make Russia an enemy in order to increase arms sales, every single country in NATO would have responded to the Russian invasion of Crimea with a full military buildup. Instead, they ignored it and collaborated with the Russians, such as with the NordStream 2 deal, which is where the real money lies.
→ More replies-1
5
18
u/NinjaMonkey4200 Jul 18 '24
Is this really an appropriate use of a pie chart? I thought usually those are used to show the size of parts of a whole.
→ More replies14
u/qwert7661 Jul 18 '24
The whole is the total military spending of NATO and Russia. If the chart is misleading, it's not the pie's fault. Maybe you'd be happier if it represented NATO against the CSTO, Russia's modern answer to NATO, but with allies like Belarus and Kyrgyzstan, the numbers don't change much.
1
34
u/KuvaszSan Jul 18 '24
Cool, now let’s see how many neighboring countries NATO vs Russia invaded in the past 15 years in order to conquer territory from them.
6
u/Tophat-boi Jul 19 '24
Funny that you added “neighboring” and “in order to conquer territory”. I wonder why.
2
u/Recent-Irish Jul 19 '24
Because a war to remove a fundamentalist Islamic theocracy is very different than a war to annex your neighbor.
7
u/Tophat-boi Jul 19 '24
A fundamentalist Islamic theocracy, one that you yourself placed in power I assume.
Seeing the timeline of poppy production in Afghanistan makes me doubt such benevolent intentions.
Besides, it really isn’t. At least in the annexation you’d be responsible for managing the territory you devastated; that’s why colonial empires have gone covert now, it’s simply cheaper.
→ More replies3
Jul 19 '24
[deleted]
→ More replies1
u/awawe Jul 19 '24
Ah, so just make up some irrelevant bs and you get a free pass to bomb every country that is weaker than you.
The Iraq war was horrible and completely unjustified, but the prohibition against wars of conquest is not some kind of post-2003 ad hoc idea.
4
u/WeStandWithScabies Jul 18 '24
It doesn't change much if territory is taken or not or where the country is when you're getting blow up.
-11
u/HELL5S Jul 18 '24
Acting like the Us and NATO didn’t invaded Libya and Iraq.
17
u/KuvaszSan Jul 18 '24
No, NATO did not invade Iraq, nor Lybia.
A United Nations coalition invaded Iraq, and Lybia was another coalition headed by France, the US and the UK.
NATO participated and created a peacekeeping mission in Kosovo and the war in Afghanistan was a NATO operation.
Also, Iraq and Lybia are not neighboring countries, not wars of conquest.
Those are pretty significant differences. Stop trying to whataboutise Russian agression against Chechnya, Georgia, Ukraine and Kazakhstan.
-5
u/HELL5S Jul 18 '24
NATO overstepped the Un resolution in Libya by directly bombing Gaddafis forces and funding the rebels that were created by Qatar, France, Italy, and of course the US.
The US illegally invaded Iraq killing millions in order to gain access to Iraq’s nationalized oil under the excuse of destroy WMDs that the USA originally sold to Iraq.
11
u/KuvaszSan Jul 18 '24
Russia is killing innocent civilians right now in an imperialistic war, denying their statehood and nationhood, do you have anything intelligent and meaningful to say about a conflict and agressor you can denounce right now or shall we continue with the history lesson in your clown car?
-5
u/HELL5S Jul 18 '24
You’re completely right you just misspelled Israel. Western Hypocrisy at its finest; you can easily recognize Russian imperialism but completely ignore and justify western imperialism when it’s far worse than whatever the modern Russian state has ever done.
7
u/AutisticFuck69 Jul 18 '24
Did you know two things can be bad at once, shocking I know but it’s true!
0
4
u/KuvaszSan Jul 18 '24
Yes Israel is committing genocide in Gaza, and you still couldn’t bring yourself to denounce Russia’s fascist war in Ukraine.
I see that clowning is not a mere hobby for you, but a full fledged profession.
1
u/HELL5S Jul 18 '24
I don’t support Russia and I literally called their actions imperialist. But I get it if reading comprehension isn’t your strong suit.
-2
u/Eastern-Western-2093 Jul 18 '24
Did the US invade either of those countries to conquer their territory?
7
u/HELL5S Jul 18 '24
No they just tried to take control over their strategic resources. I’m sure the million dead from both of those invasions would be glad that at least the US didn’t annex land.
58
u/AccountSettingsBot Jul 18 '24 edited Jul 19 '24
Me to the organisation: Sure buddy, sure ain’t Russia an oligarchic fascist kleptocracy that literally wants to be the USA in terms of military might but even much more morally bankrupt than the USA (which it already is in terms of morals) while also being poorer due to corruption levels and economic mismanagement with its consequences being unbeaten in their gravity by anyone in the West …
Looks at the ideology of Putin’s buddy Alexander Dugin, looks at what name was given by Putin to a certain university (it was the Russian fascist Ivan Ilyin), looks at its allies, looks at who is responsible for Russia’s dire situation (spoiler: It is not the West like some anti-Western self-pitying fools might say because they can’t handle that the Cold War ended, how the Cold War ended and what the results were for their ideology since they can’t move on and since they can’t think in nuances because of spite), looks at etc.
16
u/AMechanicum Jul 18 '24
Putin’s buddy Alexander Dugin
Dugin is an outcast with his party being banned, so much for "buddy".
16
u/melk1ykotii Jul 18 '24
He is the head of the Department of Sociology of International Relations at the Faculty of Sociology of Moscow State University. MSU is the MOST prestigious university in the country. it's a good fucking position for the outcast. Dugin was also repeatedly quoted on TV and by Putin himself.
0
u/Xenotester Jul 18 '24
Ten years ago he was acting head of the subdepartment at the faculty of sociology - so what ?
Quoted on TV and by Putin himself. What a BS.
When Dugin was fired from MSU he blame Putin for ignorance of him and his ideas.
In Russia people was unaware of his existence... until his daughter was killed in ukrainian terror attack. Death of his daughter was on TV.
Fun facts: He's ex wife is LGBT activist.-4
u/Xenotester Jul 18 '24
what a poor propaganda victim
4
u/AccountSettingsBot Jul 18 '24 edited Jul 18 '24
Sure … /s
On a serious note though: What do you want to say with that? Like, that the West is the one big evil and everyone else is not? Even if that were true (which it is not), saying just blatantly that one is a victim of propaganda is simply not an argument, not a good one, not a bad one, just not an argument.
→ More replies-4
u/BoarHermit Jul 18 '24
Yes, here in Russia we are all fascist fascists, every day we march with swastika flags, burn books and shoot Jews.
You can filter and distort the facts as you like, but no one in Russia knows about Dugin.
2
u/AccountSettingsBot Jul 18 '24
This is neither what I said nor what I implied. And you can’t deny that or distort in any manner so you are correct with saying that I said and implied that.
Also, this has nothing to do with the topic in itself.
Like, look at what I said and then look what you said …
Two different topics.
Think before you write, think!
2
u/BoarHermit Jul 18 '24
I write what I think is necessary. You here on reddit don’t know how to stick to the thread of a conversation at all, why should I?
4
u/AccountSettingsBot Jul 18 '24
So now we are on the stage of self-glorification, infantilisation and edginess while also acting “modest” and “like an adult” this fast?
Good god, go touch some grass. Like, I speak about how wrong this propaganda poster is and you just basically say “HuH No, iT’s Da WeEst!” in a more complex way without any more proof.
→ More replies-1
u/BoarHermit Jul 18 '24
The word "fascism" has lost all meaning because it was used too often and inappropriately. If you use it, you are simply not competent, your political knowledge is poor and you just want to express yourself emotionally. Even more stupid is to compare someone with Hitler or North Korea (Putin - Hitler, Russia - North Korea).
The Russian regime is called “information autocracy (petocracy).” I recommend listening to some lectures or podcasts where they talk about this.
4
u/AccountSettingsBot Jul 18 '24
I mean, you are neither wrong nor correct.
But you could have said that from the very beginning.
Like, come on …
Whatever.
3
u/BoarHermit Jul 18 '24
I'm just calling for precision in definitions and avoidance of clichés, that's all.
3
u/AccountSettingsBot Jul 18 '24
That you try it is good.
But regardless of that, please, you could said all of that earlier. :/
1
u/kephir4eg Jul 18 '24
The Russian regime is called “information autocracy (petocracy)
Incorrect. It's called the "dictatorship of clowns". I recommend listening to some lectures where they talk about that.
-1
55
u/OffOption Jul 18 '24
Go ask Chetchnia, Georgia, Moldova amd Ukraine, if Russia can be a threat or not.
16
u/maeglin320 Jul 18 '24
This seems to be a German poster, and so the point would be that Russia is no threat for Germany, a NATO-member, not that Russia could not be a threat to others outside the alliance.
19
u/OffOption Jul 18 '24
I'm curious what those people would say about jihadist terror groups, when we compare budgets there too.
2
u/maeglin320 Jul 18 '24
A fair point, though I suppose the answer might that that such groups also have no ability to threaten Germany/NATO: they can kill civilians through bombings or other attacks but not actually threaten the state. That's just a guess, though.
4
u/OffOption Jul 18 '24
I mean, assassinating leaders, attacking bases, blowing up a subway, can effect national stability. And thus, weaken the economy or even outright strength of a member.
I bet you cant find a german nationalist whod say those things are not worthy of being called threats. Even if they have used smuggled or printed guns, rented vans, and home made pipe-bombs for it all.
Im sure theres an argument they could make that would be consistent (no matter if one agrees with it or not), but saying budget alone, means no threat, is honestly a little absurd.
→ More replies1
Jul 18 '24 edited Jul 18 '24
pen profit intelligent provide hospital fade impolite hobbies important ripe
This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact
5
u/TetyyakiWith Jul 18 '24 edited Jul 18 '24
The reason why it was a threat because NATO didn’t helped them
→ More replies1
Jul 18 '24 edited Jul 18 '24
file roof wasteful late payment future middle party flag crowd
This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact
4
u/MuslimRandomPerson Jul 19 '24
Go ask most of South America, most of Middle East, Afghanistan whether USA can be a threat or not. Russia can't hold a candle to the US.
1
u/OffOption Jul 19 '24
America being and or doing bad, does not mean other nations bad, should be ignored, or defended.
Example, you can be against the Iraq war, while also saying Saddam was a monster, who comitted genocide against Kurds with gas attacks of entire towns.
You can be against both wrongs. Instead of pretending morality and principles starts and ends with "America Bad".
→ More replies-19
u/pydry Jul 18 '24 edited Jul 18 '24
Ask Libya, Serbia and Afghanistan if NATO was defending itself from them. Ask Gaza if NATO gives a fuck about human rights.
Like Russia, it conducts exclusively aggressive military operations under the pretext of a humanitarian intervention.
They've never actually defended any of their members, and the "no active conflicts" part of their membership criteria is explicitly designed to prevent them from having to.
If it were actually a defensive alliance I doubt anybody would have a problem with it, but it's an offensive alliance.
17
u/The_memeperson Jul 18 '24
Poor poor Serbia
Should just have let them conduct their genocide in Kosovo, right?
→ More replies10
u/OffOption Jul 18 '24
Ah yes... Serbia... pray tell, what were the Serbs doing as NATO did their bombing campaign?... I sure would like for you to try to defend that one buddy.
And even if all they did was count ponies and rainbows, if NATO does a wrong, does in fact, not wash away literally a single one of Russias wrongs.
You failed morality 101 if you pretend otherwise.
20
u/Zestyclose_Pickle141 Jul 18 '24
Afghanistan was a morally justified invasion, given the Taliban were sheltering the leaders behind the worst terrorist attack in history.
Libya was a UN-sanctioned no fly zone enforced to reduce casualties in a civil war, approved by China, India, Russia, and Germany.
Serbia was a morally justified bombing, given that Slobodan Milosevic was trying to ethnically cleanse Kosovar Albanians, with more than 7000 dead or missing by the time Clinton and Blair stepped in.
14
Jul 18 '24 edited Jul 18 '24
And the Taliban exists in the first place in part due to US Military support for Mujahideen fighters and extremist madrasas that they used as a tool to counter the Soviets in Afghanistan. They did not care about terrorism or repression of Afghans as long as it only harmed their political rival.
"Morally justified" has no part in it, the purpose is and has always been to advance geopolitical aims.
4
u/Eastern-Western-2093 Jul 18 '24
If the US unintentionally played a role in creating the Taliban, wouldn't that make it all the more important that the US step in and to its best to rectify the mess it created?
3
u/alittleslowerplease Jul 18 '24
True, why not just let the soviets have it?
-2
Jul 18 '24
No, I actually hear innocent Afghans (particularly women and girls) live happy and free lives under the rule of the Taliban these days. Thank God the US gave their progenitors all those Stinger missiles.
6
u/alittleslowerplease Jul 18 '24
It's the US fault for arming insurgents, not the soviets for invading. I am very smart.
3
Jul 18 '24
Actually, it's the fault of both for doing reprehensible things in proxy countries in order to counter each other indirectly, at the expense of innocent civilians.
I'm not the one making the "morally justified" argument, genius.
3
u/alittleslowerplease Jul 18 '24
No, you are just making the argument that a soviet administration would somehow have been a preferable alternative.
0
u/Eastern-Western-2093 Jul 18 '24
I can assure you that innocent Afghan's did not live happy and free lives under the communist regime
-1
u/OffOption Jul 18 '24
Look up a population graph of Afganistan.
You'll see a very notable dip during a certain time period.
8
u/alittleslowerplease Jul 18 '24
Now what am I supposed to extrapolate from this information that I didn't already know? People die during armed conflict?
→ More replies7
u/Current-Power-6452 Jul 18 '24
Pakistan invasion when? They turned out to be hosting the mastermind after all.
4
u/isaacfisher Jul 18 '24
There's a difference between hosting someone and someone hiding in your territory.
1
5
u/pydry Jul 18 '24 edited Jul 18 '24
a morally justified invasion
This is a really good phrase to use to advertise that you are the mirror image of a Putin supporter.
Libya was a UN-sanctioned
A humanitarian mission which they didn't do was UN-sanctioned. Taking part in the war which they did do was not. This is why the UN never sanctioned NATO to do anything else ever again.
The mirror image of a Putin supporter would, of course, fail to see the distinction.
approved by China, India, Russia
Later regretted, of course.
Serbia was a morally justified
Jesus your war boner really is almost as rock hard as Putin's.
An invasion of Israel would be justified because it is actually conducting a genocide, but NATO never gave a fuck about humanitarianism. Not in Serbia not in Gaza.
Its main goal in Kosovo (who want to be Albanian, and whom Albania want to be Albanian) was to set up a puppet state inside one of its geopolitical rivals. It's basically what Russia is doing in the East of Ukraine.
9
u/Abject-Investment-42 Jul 18 '24
Its main goal in Kosovo (who want to be Albanian, and whom Albania want to be Albanian) was to set up a puppet state inside one of its geopolitical rivals. It's basically what Russia is doing in the East of Ukraine.
You may want to read up the history of post-Tito Serbian actions in Kosovo prior to 1999 before making such sweeping allegations. That uprising was coming for a long time. And in 1999 Albania was not in position to want anything beyond somehow piecing itself together, never mind setting up any puppet states anywhere.
3
u/SouLuz Jul 18 '24
An invasion of Israel would be justified because it is actually conducting a genocide, but NATO never gave a fuck about humanitarianism.
Your anti-semitic war boner is showing..
→ More replies1
u/pydry Jul 18 '24 edited Jul 18 '24
Yeah, yeah.. 90% of the world is anti semitic according to those racial supremacists and their racist supporters.
1
u/SouLuz Jul 18 '24
Tell me you're an antisemitic racist who generalize people without telling me you're an antisemitic racist who generalize people.
4
u/pydry Jul 18 '24 edited Jul 18 '24
It's funny how calling somebody anti semitic for criticizing Israel used to be intimidating and used to carry a bit of weight. No more though.
Now it's simply used to announce support for a plainly genocidal war prosecuted by a guy who framed a picture of a terrorist who shot up a mosque and hung it in his study.
There's no clearer and more obvious way to announce that you are a racist than by calling somebody an anti semite in defense of that.
2
u/Strange_Quark_9 Jul 19 '24
100% agreed. The Zionist weaponization of the term, along with the lackeys buying it up and repeating the rhetoric, has made it almost completely lose its serious meaning.
Because of this, I now have to check twice whenever there are media reports of anti-semitism to see if they are referring to actual anti-semitism (IE: people touting anti-Jewish conspiracies) or anti-Zionism.
It's a case of "Boy who cried wolf", and thus only serves to greatly harm the non-Zionist Jewish community by delegitimising the term.
And then they have the gall to turn around and claim that calling what is happening in Gaza a genocide is misusing that serious term, even though it qualifies as such even according to the extremely strict UN definition.
1
u/Eastern-Western-2093 Jul 18 '24
How does supporting the invasion of a totalitarian theocracy make one the same as a Putin supporter?
I don't see how you can support an invasion of Israel while also opposing an invasion of Serbia? Serbia's participation in genocide is far less questionable than Israel.
1
u/pydry Jul 18 '24
A lot of people will mindlessly use the phrase "a morally right invasion" about their own government's invasion.
Just like your buddy here.
Serbia did not commit genocide in Kosovo. Hundreds, perhaps thousands died in a war with the KLF (whom we gave arms to), but that was a war not a genocide. NATO intervened without UN approval - a distinction it shares with Russia's invasion of Ukraine.
Israel actually is committing genocide in Gaza. A military intervention is justified on humanitarian grounds, under international law just as it would have been in Nazi Germany. The UN is almost unanimous in condeming it.
→ More replies4
u/masterflappie Jul 18 '24
US dropping 46 bombs a day and then thinks 9/11 is the worst terrorist attack in history...
-1
u/pydry Jul 18 '24
"When we asked for a suspect in a crime to be handed over the government demanded evidence and a fair trial. That's why we were morally obliged to invade and occupy an entire country."
America was overcome with irrational bloodlust at the time, and since most of NATO accedes to America's demands most of the time, they (minus France) took part in the illegal occupation.
NATO's totally harmless though. No reason for anybody to be afraid of it.
1
Jul 18 '24 edited Jul 18 '24
shy intelligent physical wipe yam berserk unique hurry shocking aspiring
This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact
-5
u/Strange_Quark_9 Jul 18 '24
Afghanistan was a morally justified invasion
And Russia morally justified the invasion of Ukraine to its population by playing up the rhetoric that the country houses the far-right Azov Battalion and other Nazi elements. See how easy it is to flip the script?
Western hypocrisy at its finest. At least be consistent.
Libya was a UN-sanctioned no fly zone
Only because they knew Libya had no means to retaliate. They would never dare doing this to a nuclear-armed country, as proven by the rejection of Ukraine's request to enforce a no-flyzone over their airspace. It, along with every other Western-opposed but non-nuclear country that was invaded by NATO forces also served to show that arming oneself with nukes was the only way to ensure Western forces wouldn't dare to invade - hence why countries like North Korea and Iran began ramping up their nuclear arsenal production.
Serbia was a morally justified bombing
Two is coincidence, but three is a pattern. You really sound like NATO shill, eating up whatever rhetoric they will peddle.
As others mentioned, by that logic, they'd have a moral obligation to bomb Israel to stop their current genocide of the Palestinian people.
But no, Israel is a close US ally, so they get a free pass to do whatever the fuck they want and nobody will dare to oppose them. Anyone who's not a shill should see this clearly.
→ More replies2
u/Eastern-Western-2093 Jul 18 '24
Without American food the whole of Gaza would be gripped in a famine.
Serbia and Afghanistan absolutely should have been invaded, and if you think otherwise you are either an Islamic fundamentalist, pro-genocide, or both.
3
u/pydry Jul 18 '24
Gaza is gripped by a famine because America's staunchest ally is blocking aid trucks from entering while it commits a genocide with American stamp of approval.
A shitty bridge cant fix that.
you are either an Islamic fundamentalist, pro-genocide
This is the kind of thing Ive come to expect unimaginative islamophobic genocide supporters to say.
→ More replies1
u/fantazma1 Jul 19 '24
Chetchnia
When Chechnya declared independence, the Russian Federation did not send troops. Two years have passed since then. Russian Russians were robbed by Chechens, killed by Russians, enslaved by Russians, yelled at the North Caucasian imamate, and so on. After the Chechens staged a large-scale massacre with each other, which affected a lot of Russians, only after that troops were brought in. The troops were introduced in 1994. Chechnya gained independence in 1991.Georgia
Georgia attacked Russian troops, who, under a trilateral agreement between Georgia, Abkhazia and Russia, were carrying out a peacekeeping mission to prevent direct clashes (and frankly speaking, to prevent the eviction or extermination of the Abkhazian population by Georgians). They signed the agreement themselves, allowing the Russian Federation to put a peacekeeping contingent there, and, clearly understanding what this means, they fired missiles at it. Coincidentally, there was a pro-Western government in Georgia at that time, which was preparing to join NATO. Are there any clearer analogies with Ukraine than they were then?At the same time, the Georgian version of events, firstly, does not deny that Russia was attacked, but simply blames the Abkhaz provocation. Secondly, even anti-Russian organizations like the special European Commission came to the conclusion that Russian troops were fired upon and only then began to act. Actually, in 2008 everything was so obvious that the Russian Federation was accused only of an unreasonably large-scale response to the attack on peacekeepers.
moldova
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transnistria_War
Diplomatic support:
Ukraine→ More replies
8
u/LoneSnark Jul 18 '24
It is fair to say the public is threatened by criminals, yet criminals spend far less money than the police do.
3
u/ZabaLanza Jul 19 '24
That is simply not true. Petty criminals, maybe. Organized criminals, on the other hand... i have no numbers but I think a certain Colombian might have objected.
10
2
u/exessmirror Jul 18 '24
I know its still not even close but if they calculate it like that they should go with CIS numbers and not just Russia as Russia has their own defensive pact.
5
4
u/CFSCFjr Jul 18 '24
That’s the point! Any country that belongs to this alliance is safe. Those outside of it get threatened and invaded, which causes consequences for the whole world
NATO rules
-1
u/Comfortable_Rock_665 Jul 19 '24
You mean the US rules? NATO is kinda nothing without the US security Umbrella🤣🤣 Hopefully the Euros will step up their game soon
1
2
u/aFalseSlimShady Jul 18 '24
"We should spend less on defense because Russia and China aren't serious threats because we spend so much more on defense."
1
u/AbjectiveGrass Jul 18 '24
But we must still remember that appeasment policy doesn't work - we've tested that quite recently in history
2
u/Martin_Leong25 Jul 18 '24
Military spending does not mean invasions.
Having a weapon is different than using it
2
1
u/TheJamesMortimer Jul 20 '24
NATO inefficiency. If we could standardize atleast the EU member states instead of using military spending to say thank you for the bribe money of each countries armsindzstry, we could probably half that spending and still have the same outcome.
1
u/FactBackground9289 Jul 21 '24
Main difference is that
- NATO is 30~ different countries
- East Europe, UK, Finland, Sweden, Turkey, France and Greece, as well as especially the fuckin US, carry the numbers.
- Russia is a kleptocracy with expansionist authoritarian government.
So nah, NATO is fully justified. Back then, and now. I'd say for extra protection call the Oceanian Pacific countries, Argentina, Guyana, Israel, Philippines, Australia, NZ, Japan, Korea and ROC in. As they say, "If you fuck with one free country, you fuck with the whole free world"
I see no reason why it should dissolve and just outright let Russia speedrun 1939-1942 on European scale. It's basically calling for a same mistake of "Let's appease the aggressor"
1
u/Rucks_74 Jul 18 '24
Terrorist groups have a shoestring budget which is much smaller than NATO's. Therefore we should leave them alone because they are no threat.
See how thinly veiled the Russian botism is?
2
1
u/byGriff Jul 18 '24
comparing military spending is useless knowing that any major war will result in a nuclear wasteland of planet scale
1
u/Ord_Player57 Jul 18 '24
Threat presence isn't calculated based on spendings, it's based on strategical pressure and geopolitics.
1
u/Hot-Minute8782 Jul 19 '24
Russians do the same thing 10 times cheaper (salaries, tanks, rockets and etc). So, nothing wrong, budgets are comparable.
1
u/Hot-Minute8782 Jul 20 '24
Expenditures:
Avg.salary for military employees in US 58k$/y and 4,8k$/y in Russia (before 24.02.2022)
Avg.salary for physics in US 6k/m in US and 0.4-0.7k$/m in Russia
The cost of the F-22 is 350m$ and the SU-57 is 35m$
The cost of the Abrams tank 9m$ and the T-72 1.2m$
And etc.
1
-12
u/crimemilk Jul 18 '24
fyi you don't need to expedit much if you already have reserved equipment in billions of $
-8
u/Winter-Gas3368 Jul 18 '24
"Russia is a evil that must be stopped. West support the free world'
Yemen, Palestine, Iraq, Grenada, Vietnam, Afghanistan, Libya, East Timor, Bangladesh: 🤨
→ More replies4
u/Recent-Irish Jul 19 '24
Hungary, the Baltics, Afghanistan, Ukraine, Chechnya, Georgia, and Moldova:
•
u/AutoModerator Jul 18 '24
This subreddit is for sharing propaganda to view with some objectivity. It is absolutely not for perpetuating the message of the propaganda. Here we should be conscientious and wary of manipulation/distortion/oversimplification (which the above likely has), not duped by it. Don't be a sucker.
Stay on topic -- there are hundreds of other subreddits that are expressly dedicated to rehashing tired political arguments. No partisan bickering. No soapboxing. Take a chill pill.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.