• geneva_convenience@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    40
    ·
    2 days ago

    Russia has violated Estonian airspace four times already this year, which is unacceptable in itself, but today’s violation, during which three fighter jets entered our airspace, is unprecedentedly brutal

    So has Russia already been doing this for a while and the EU is only now making a big deal out of it? Or is this an actual escalation?

  • MrSulu@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    They keep poking borders without recourse. Perhaps there isn’t enough poking back. I say that to protect our borders from Russia, we give support to Ukraine. We know what happened there already.

    • Tomorrow_Farewell [any, they/them]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      2 days ago

      They keep poking borders without recourse.

      Yeah, NATO keeps doing that without recourse, and should face retaliation.
      In general, NATO should face justice for colonial horrors that it has been inflicting upon the world…

      • Sanctus@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        I was just remarking how I hate war. Dont really think thats an invalid opinion. I get that war is eternal because its good for capitalism.

        • GiorgioPerlasca@lemmy.mlOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          I get that, but it’s like capitalist systems don’t have another tool in the toolbox. Wouldn’t it be so much more effective if they just paid people a decent wage to begin with?

        • LemmeAtEm@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          Not at all comparable. And as has been pointed out elsewhere in this thread, testing rival airspaces with fighter planes has been a common even banal tactic used by a number of country’s airforces, certainly including the US who has employed it countless times.

          • njm1314@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 day ago

            I like how you say even the us as if most of us don’t view the us as a brutal militaristic bully that is constantly escalating tensions and provoking War.

      • sepi@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        23
        ·
        2 days ago

        Yeah. Russia will send 3 dudes on motorcycles, a platoon of scooters and 3 lada nivas without doors for mine clearing. NATO should be terrified.

        • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          18
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          2 days ago

          I’m sure NATO armies that never saw actual combat are going to do great against a seasoned army that’s been destroying NATO proxy for the past three years.

        • GiorgioPerlasca@lemmy.mlOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          19
          arrow-down
          13
          ·
          2 days ago

          Your comment is a classic example of satirical mockery used as a potent rhetorical device. It is not a factual assessment but a psychological operation aimed at framing the opponent (Russia) in a specific, belittling light. Its primary purpose is to influence the audience’s perception and emotional state rather than to inform.

          It creates immediate cognitive dissonance by juxtaposing the grave, threatening concept of a military invasion with absurdly inadequate and non-threatening imagery (“dudes on motorcycles,” “scooters,” “Lada Nivas without doors”). This contrast is jarring and humorous, making the perceived threat (Russia’s military) seem ridiculous and incapable.

          The core goal is to diminish the enemy in the eyes of the audience. By reducing a nation’s military to a clownish parade of obsolete and laughable equipment, it attacks not just its capability, but its dignity and gravitas. This is a powerful tool for undermining morale on one side and boosting it on the other.

          It is a highly effective piece of persuasive communication. While it contains zero factual analysis of military capabilities, it is psychologically astute and stylistically crafted to achieve a specific goal: to mock, diminish, and frame an adversary in a way that boosts the morale of its intended audience and undermines the perceived power of the opponent.

          Its power lies not in its truthfulness, but in its emotional resonance and shareability as a weapon of rhetorical warfare in the modern information landscape.

          • sepi@piefed.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            12
            ·
            2 days ago

            My brother in Shiva, have you been following the combat footage on telegram? What I said is fact, not really opinion.

            • davel [he/him]@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              15
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              2 days ago

              The combat footage that you see is exactly the combat footage that the NATO powers want you to see, and no more. You’re being fed war propaganda, not sober reality.

    • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      At minimum we should support the regular destruction of NATO equipment and the opportunities for the global south to break free from imperialism now that NATO is occupied, such as in the Sahel states. Russia isn’t some saint, here, but in the Russo-Ukrainian War they are siding with the Donetsk and Luhansk People’s Republics in the Donbass, and siding against NATO.

      Ideally, an expedient peace resolution will be reached, but withiut that it’s better that Russia achieves its stated aims than it would be for Kiev.