No? Though, if you’re honestly asking and can’t figure this out for yourself, yes.

Have you considered why Poland doesn’t do anything unless the US allows it? When the command to jump is issued by NATO, Poland asks the US military “how high?” NATO is an extension of US global force projection that the EU benefits from through the deterrence the US military offers and by allowing dramatically lower defense-spending allocations to the member states. “NATO” is simply in no position to dictate much of anything to a country that has a defense budget that equates to roughly 40% of the entire planet’s defense spending.

But, hey. Good luck, I hope you’re right. Nevertheless, in terms of hard power, the EU is simply not a superpower on the global stage, especially militarily. If you think the contribution to NATO by the United States is easily dismissed, I think you’ll get the opportunity in the next year or so to see if you’re right. It’s worth noting that the majority of NATO member-state military leaders would strongly disagree with you.

If the United States were to withdraw from NATO, the alliance would face an existential crisis. Despite your vague posturing, the U.S. forms the backbone of NATO’s military power, financial resources, and strategic coherence. The U.S. contributes unparalleled military capabilities, such as advanced technology, global logistics networks, and nuclear deterrence. Without U.S. leadership, NATO would lose its primary deterrent against major threats, particularly Russian aggression, leaving Europe vulnerable and fragmented. Eastern European nations like Poland and the Baltic states, which rely on the U.S. for security guarantees, would face heightened existential threats, exposing NATO’s diminished ability to uphold its core mission of collective defense.

Additionally the absence of U.S. leadership would render NATO’s operations ineffective and its credibility irreparably damaged on the global stage. No other NATO member has the capacity to fill the void left by the U.S., either militarily or diplomatically. The alliance’s cohesion relies on the U.S.’s ability to unify diverse member states around shared goals and put power, funds, and assets behind it, something no European power can replicate. This would embolden adversaries, destabilize the European continent, and undermine decades of transatlantic security cooperation. In essence, NATO without America would become a hollow shell—an alliance in name only.

The subtext here is brutally simple: Putin knows Trump is willing to withdraw from NATO, taking 70% of its defense budget with him, if Putin’s demands aren’t met. At that point, NATO becomes little more than letterhead, and new territorial “realities” manifest regardless of NATO’s protests. Putin’s saber-rattling serves a calculated purpose–he knows the actual foundation of NATO’s power is already compromised through Trump.

Expect this antagonistic posturing from Putin to increase. Trump is already looking for an excuse to leave NATO, and his staff have outlined the executive branch’s unilateral power to do so. Putin’s role, which he’s gleefully accepting, is to provoke NATO into actions that will give Trump his justification for withdrawal.

The withdrawal seems nearly inevitable at this point, especially given Trump’s planned purge of military leadership. While the EU is attempting to plan for this contingency, losing 70% of your military strength is essentially an insurmountable problem for a coalition that has structured its entire defense strategy around U.S. backing.

The numbers here are stark: the U.S. spends four times what all EU member states combined spend on military funding - not just NATO allocations but total military spending. This creates an irrefutable power imbalance within the coalition. When Trump previously threatened withdrawal, NATO’s attempts to develop alternative deterrent strategies went nowhere because the EU simply cannot afford to compensate for a U.S. exit. They essentially did nothing and hoped Biden’s election would solve the problem.

This allowed the EU economy to avoid difficult choices, as making up for a U.S. withdrawal would likely destabilize the European economy. But now they face an impossible dilemma: attempt to compensate for U.S. withdrawal and risk economic crisis, or maintain current spending levels and leave member states critically exposed. Many NATO states, like Estonia, have defense strategies that amount to “try to survive for two weeks until NATO arrives.” Putin understands the leverage he’s gained through Trump and the Republican party’s capture of the federal government. It’s tremendous leverage. The EU should be in crisis mode, but they seem unable or unwilling to fully grasp that U.S. withdrawal from NATO isn’t just possible but probable.

Pay attention. The tectonic plates of geopolitics are shifting beneath our feet.

Why not

“Trump tells Putin not to escalate Ukraine war. Putin says ‘no problem’ and shares a knowing wink with Trump.”

White man mad

Removed by mod

If only we’d only “decimated” wildlife. Alas.

It’s mild hyperbole, but it’s not far off from best-guess speculation. It’s well and regularly covered in IPCC reports. Have at.

Thanks, everyone, for the education. This was very helpful, and I learned a lot.

The discussion around MAID in Canada is obviously complicated, but there’s something that’s pretty obvious: the system seems to be set up for people who don’t have the money or resources to explore other options. To be blunt, it looks like a way to save costs. Instead of providing better healthcare, mental health support, or improving people’s lives, the program seems to give them an easy out—especially for those who are struggling and don’t see any other way forward. It’s kind of scary when you think about how vulnerable people could feel like this is their only option just because they can’t afford better care. If doctors could prescribe money, friends, enforce therapy, or a dietary coach/trainer, it seems like a lot of these cases would be solved.

At the same time, trying to make suicide illegal is ridiculous. People are going to make that decision for themselves no matter what the government says. It’s a fundamental choice over your own life, and no law can stop someone from doing it if they really want to. What MAID does is offer a more humane, less traumatic way to do it, and that’s important for those who need it. So in that sense, it’s a good thing. It just feels like the bigger problem is how we’re getting people to that point in the first place.

The Canadian government doesn’t seem to want to deal with the real problems that push people to feel like they have no choice but to die. Instead of making euthanasia the easy answer, they should be working harder to fix the system so fewer people feel like that’s their only option.

I know America is fucked – and, indeed, per capita suicide rates in the United States, where it’s almost entirely illegal, are much higher than in Canada – but what the heck is going on up there, yall?

Honest question: I thought Canadian healthcare is subsidized? How did you go through your entire life’s savings from illness? And why don’t you now have medial, dental, or vision coverage? This totally sounds like American healthcare, but I’m surprised to hear it in a Canadian context.

And I’m no way doubting you, just to be clear. I was just wondering if you could educate my ignorant, dumb ass.

Sounds rough. Hope you’re OK.

If you’re reading Lemmy at work, you get what you get, buster!

Haters gonna hate

You’re a horrible zionist when that happens. Rule 6 is AIPAC propaganda. I know it’s you, Netanyahu. The “Flying Squid” nickname is a dead giveaway.

The sad thing to me is that they’ve created six hours a day of time to do something constructive, and they use it to watch movies. That’s the real tragedy of our current society, in my opinion. People want their own time to do something “meaningful,” but very often they don’t honestly know what that is, and instead they just burn their life away being fed the dopamine-hitting, passive consumption that characterizes modern life. I worry the younger generations of millennials and z (of which I’m part) are going to have a serious, wide-spread, paralyzing existential crisis that makes the current malaise and apathy look like the “good times.” People are going to look up from their phones when they turn 50 and realize they spent their whole life waiting for their “real life” to begin.

Reminds me of The Bell Jar:

"I saw my life branching out before me like the green fig tree in the story. From the tip of every branch, like a fat purple fig, a wonderful future beckoned and winked. One fig was a husband and a happy home and children, and another fig was a famous poet, and another fig was a brilliant professor, and another fig was Ee Gee, the amazing editor, and another fig was Europe and Africa and South America, and another fig was Constantin and Socrates and Attila and a pack of other lovers with queer names and offbeat professions, and another fig was an Olympic lady crew champion, and beyond and above these figs were many more figs I couldn’t quite make out.

I wanted each and every one of them, but choosing one meant losing all the rest, and, as I sat there, unable to decide, the figs began to wrinkle and go black, and, one by one, they plopped to the ground at my feet."

Have you tried… not being Palestinian?

-America, probably

Yes, people only started working in offices 20 years ago. 🙄

No, the filtering process to prepare donations for use in plasmapheresis removes microplastics.