• 3 Posts
  • 51 Comments
Joined 2 months ago
cake
Cake day: September 23rd, 2025

help-circle







  • Such a naive opinion you have. And I say opinion, because I challenge you to find any proof in history where the weak successfully fought off the bullies?

    You think having a military offers any form of protection against aggressive militarism?

    Tell me how many times a nuclear power has been in invaded in the past 80 years and then tell me how many small countries with weak military have been invaded in the past 80 years.

    Your argument is not based in reality.

    You cannot let bullies be stronger than you.

    But if you want proof of the opposite, history is FULL of it.

    Maybe start with the Baltics and the two Russian occupations they suffered through in the past 100 years or so. Or maybe WW2, or if you want more recent examples, tell me how well Ukraine is doing? Or how well Palestinians fought off Israel?

    Honestly your opinion is ridiculous.

    if the infrastructure of control and oppression, the police, the military, the courts, etc. are all there, all they need to do is seize those levers of power.

    If that infrastructure does not exist and a population is hostile to your attempts to impose it, you would effectively stand no chance against a determined resistance.

    So you are essentially saying countries should have NO military, NO police, NO courts, NO leaders, etc. in order to not be invaded.

    Again, ridiculous.

    And those soldiers, while constantly stationed in hostile territory, can’t do anything else and would constantly find themselves under attack by decentralized militia forces

    So still a war, people still fighting and dying 🤦‍♂️

    I’d say deterrence and prevention is much better.








  • So who exactly is doing it and to what ends, how exactly does it benefit anyone to lie about this? How come there are real politicians quoted in the article talking about retaliation? Are they also part of the conspiracy?

    You clearly haven’t even read the article and are biased with your conspiratorial beliefs.

    I get it that you hate Politico, but you should really read the article and learn to think critically for yourself.


  • This sounds very conspiratorial. What are those agendas you are talking about? You listed just about anyone you can think of to be involved in your conspiracy. Are you a broken clock by any chance, hoping to be right with at least one of those?

    How would them lying about this benefit anyone?

    Did you even read the article? Real people are quoted there talking about retaliation:

    Last week, Italian Defense Minister Guido Crosetto slammed the continent’s “inertia” in the face of growing hybrid attacks and unveiled a 125-page plan to retaliate. In it he suggested establishing a European Center for Countering Hybrid Warfare, a 1,500-strong cyber force, as well as military personnel specialized in artificial intelligence.

    However much truth might be in your comment. This isn’t the case at all.