badwetter

@misk@sopuli.xyz

Sure, good point

@legolas@fedit.pl

@legolas@fedit.pl Very reasonable proposal, but, I think the controversial posts not showing votes, should be the default for all posts. There’s a lot of brigading, especially in some Lemmy groups.

And then what they did to Telegram. One can’t trust that platform anymore, since the spooks have been given the keys to the kingdom.

LMAO sure.

Removed by mod

Removed by mod

That’s correct, and they’re the active brigades available. I’m a soldier, it takes months to have troops ready for combat, at a minimum 6 months of training. Just because one has a relatively large military means squat. What counts is how many can go to war immediately.

Why would Russia want to invade? If NATO stays out of adjoining countries they won’t need to. Imagine if Russia or the Chinese put troops in Mexico or Canada, what do you think the US would do? Get a damn clue, you’re extremely naive.

I don’t agree with that number.

EU Combat Troop Numbers The European Union has established EU Battlegroups, which consist of battalion-sized forces reinforced with combat support elements, typically comprising 1,500 troops each. As of 2023, eighteen battlegroups were operational, with two being ready for deployment at any given time. Additionally, a permanent European Union Rapid Deployment Capacity (EU RDC) consisting of up to 5,000 troops (the size of a brigade) is to be operational by 2025. These forces are under the direct control of the Council of the European Union. 🌐 en.wikipedia.org Defence forces of the European Union - Wikipedia 🌐 en.wikipedia.org EU Battlegroup - Wikipedia 🌐 boell.de The never-ending debate of the European Army and why it is unhelpful | Heinrich Böll Stiftung 🌐 en.wikipedia.org United States military deployments - Wikipedia 🌐 en.wikipedia.org European army - Wikipedia 🌐 eeas.europa.eu EU Battlegroups |

OK, do you math at any one time 2 battlegroups are ready to go, that’s 27,000 and not all combat troops. LOL

I’m not moving the goalposts. I forget that I’m talking to civilians. It takes more soldiers in the rear to support soldiers in the front. So the % of combat troops is the tip of the spear. The total number of troops means little, it’s the number of troops that are the tip of the spear. The EU has little in combat capacity, and most of the equipment has been destroyed in Ukraine. So what are they going to fight with?

Son/kid That’s not all combat troops. I’m referring to boots on the ground, combat troops. How many rear soldiers do you think it takes to support 100 k soldiers? I bet you have no Fricken clue … Look deeper.

Removed by mod

Removed by mod

Removed by mod

What evidence do you have to prove that Russia broke 2 peace agreements? If you’re referring to Minsk 1 and 2 that wasn’t Russia who broke them. It was France and Germany, both leaders of those countries at the time, are on record indicating that The West never intended to honour those agreements. It’s hard to find the evidence in Western media as it’s been scrubbed (this alone should alert folks) but I found a reference in Ukrainian Pravada via Yahoo: https://www.yahoo.com/news/putin-disappointed-merkels-words-minsk-140859136.html

Removed by mod

You think? Guess you’re not up-to-date on Brexit, eh?

It won’t happen because the Russian’s say that the G-7 isn’t relevant anymore. It’s the BRICs that is relevant, and the G-20. Canada shouldn’t even be in the G-7 or the G-20. We’re nobodies in world affairs.