Europe
News and information from Europe πͺπΊ
(Current banner: La Mancha, Spain. Feel free to post submissions for banner images.)
Rules (2024-08-30)
- This is an English-language community. Comments should be in English. Posts can link to non-English news sources when providing a full-text translation in the post description. Automated translations are fine, as long as they don't overly distort the content.
- No links to misinformation or commercial advertising. When you post outdated/historic articles, add the year of publication to the post title. Infographics must include a source and a year of creation; if possible, also provide a link to the source.
- Be kind to each other, and argue in good faith. Don't post direct insults nor disrespectful and condescending comments. Don't troll nor incite hatred. Don't look for novel argumentation strategies at Wikipedia's List of fallacies.
- No bigotry, sexism, racism, antisemitism, islamophobia, dehumanization of minorities, or glorification of National Socialism. We follow German law; don't question the statehood of Israel.
- Be the signal, not the noise: Strive to post insightful comments. Add "/s" when you're being sarcastic (and don't use it to break rule no. 3).
- If you link to paywalled information, please provide also a link to a freely available archived version. Alternatively, try to find a different source.
- Light-hearted content, memes, and posts about your European everyday belong in other communities.
- Don't evade bans. If we notice ban evasion, that will result in a permanent ban for all the accounts we can associate with you.
- No posts linking to speculative reporting about ongoing events with unclear backgrounds. Please wait at least 12 hours. (E.g., do not post breathless reporting on an ongoing terror attack.)
- Always provide context with posts: Don't post uncontextualized images or videos, and don't start discussions without giving some context first.
(This list may get expanded as necessary.)
Posts that link to the following sources will be removed
- on any topic: Al Mayadeen, brusselssignal:eu, citjourno:com, europesays:com, Breitbart, Daily Caller, Fox, GB News, geo-trends:eu, news-pravda:com, OAN, RT, sociable:co, any AI slop sites (when in doubt please look for a credible imprint/about page), change:org (for privacy reasons), archive:is,ph,today (their JS DDoS websites)
- on Middle-East topics: Al Jazeera
- on Hungary: Euronews
Unless they're the only sources, please also avoid The Sun, Daily Mail, any "thinktank" type organization, and non-Lemmy social media (incl. Substack). Don't link to Twitter directly, instead use xcancel.com. For Reddit, use old:reddit:com
(Lists may get expanded as necessary.)
Ban lengths, etc.
We will use some leeway to decide whether to remove a comment.
If need be, there are also bans: 3 days for lighter offenses, 7 or 14 days for bigger offenses, and permanent bans for people who don't show any willingness to participate productively. If we think the ban reason is obvious, we may not specifically write to you.
If you want to protest a removal or ban, feel free to write privately to the admin that applied the rule (check modlog first to find who was it.)
view the rest of the comments
NATO was officially founded as a defensive alliance to ensure if one member is attacked, others will support them.
No NATO member was attacked by Iran, Palestine, Lebanon or Yemen. So the war had nothing to do with NATO.
I do know NATO was always used offensively and to tie its members to America's illegal wars without a UN resolution.
The defensive pact doesn't even cover that area of the world.
Portuguese India was invaded in the 60's and NATO didn't step in.
I don't think that matters all that much. It didn't matter back when NATO members backed up the US in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The difference between then and now is that America wants Europe to back them up militarily, but in turn does not want to provide the security guarantees that are fundamental to the alliance.
Afghanistan was due to 9/11, which happened very obviously in North America.
Iraq had nothing to do with NATO, besides a lot of NATO countries fighting in the war. However France, Germany, Canada and a few others did not join.
It is true that Afghanistan was a direct consequence of the US triggering Article 5 following 9/11, so it makes sense that that would be considered a NATO mission.
Iraq is not a NATO mission on paper, but NATO allies backing up the US in Iraq is still an example of NATO allies backing up the US militarily as part of the unspoken agreement of NATO.
The US provides security guarantees for Europe, and in exchange Europe backs up the US in their escapades.
None of the other nato countries put anything more than a perfunctionary effort into helping the US in Afghanistan though, except the UK sort of but they still were half assed. Most sent non lethal aid. I know the Danes and the UK sent actual troops, but not many. Idk who else.
They all just did it to say they did, to appease the US.
Sorry, but that is simply not true. Nearly every European ally sent troops to Afghanistan
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Participants_in_Operation_Enduring_Freedom
I know the American president likes to pretend we were not there, and didn't do anything noteworthy. But that is simply a lie, aimed to break trust in NATO.
Yeah I said they sent troops, most of them were not in combat, and were paltry numbers. Perfunctionary support.
Which is a good thing Afghanistan was bullshit from the start and we all should all know it by now.
Okay so here is a source, at it's peak, like 10 years after it started, all of the non-us soldiers involved numbered at 10,000.
https://www.reuters.com/world/india/blood-billions-dollars-natos-long-war-afghanistan-2021-08-13/
From your own source..
Stop pretending America's allies did not do anything in Afghanistan. It is disrespectful to the veterans and those that lost their lives there.
News articles listing the number of foreign troops in Afghanistan were very small amounts, and that $130,000 figure seems to directly contradict what was directly in front of it which is what I cited and is as follows
'. In 2015, the mission, known as ISAF, was replaced by a training operation, Resolute Support. As of April, it numbered around 10,000 troops from 36 nations.
Furthermore, the more you were involved the more you suck as far as I'm concerned. Bunch of fucking whores to the United States Empire that has such bad fucking leadership they can't do anything right. I knew it but you didn't know it? So maybe you were more involved in sucking my bad.
Numbers I saw were like several hundred from a European country, at least of combat troops, the UK may be several thousand. Those were numbers that I saw at the time in the newspapers. 130,000 foreign troops does not seem accurate, are you trying to tell me there were 130,000 NATO allies in Afghanistan at that time? Bullshit.
NATO being used offensively is part of the unspoken agreement. America would guarantee European defence, and in exchange Europe would back America up in their many escapades around the world.
Trump has repeatedly threatened not to come to Europe's defence in case of a Russian invasion, and has even threatened to invade a fellow NATO member himself. He also does not treat his European allies as allies, but rather as vassals who have to do exactly as he says. The US and Israel unilaterally invading Iran without discussing this with NATO is another example of that.
This kind of behaviour erodes the trust and goodwill that the NATO alliance is based on. It breaks the unspoken agreement.
So why would Europe come and rescue the US out of the mess they made?
Trump gets to slowly figure out what it means for America to lose its soft power.