They were barely given any assurances. They were given a pinky promise to be independent, pinky promise to not get nuked and UNSC provided assistance ONLY IF nuclear weapons are used against them.

The TLDR: Don’t criticize China, you’re wrong anyway.

I don’t think you have an idea of how much of an information bubble Russia is in? In case you haven’t noticed the “western” internet speaks almost universally English. Unless you’re in some niche national community you’re unlikely to see any other language. We’re speaking English right now and that’s not my first language. Last time I checked something like 1 in 20 Russians understand English and even less can actually speak it. The vast majority of the Russian population, despite having near full access to the internet, are locked in the Russian sphere of information. And their primary search tool, Yandex, is majority owned by the oligarchs.

When you live in Russia you really have to go out of your way to escape the Russian propaganda. The vast majority of people in any country would never go to such lengths to get an broader view of a subject. Most probably wouldn’t even understand they need a broader view than what their regular media feeds them.

Feel free to correct me but nobody got a majority so 2 of the 3 largest coalitions would have to come to an agreement to get a majority. Macrons coalition could align with the left and Macron could appoint a prime minister without the opposition blocking it. So how exactly are Macrons hands tied? Does he have no control over the coalition he himself created?

Maybe she was taught the “when mommy and daddy really love each other” way of getting pregnant.

At no point did I say Ukraine shouldn’t get what it needs to end the war. What I said is that we shouldn’t let Ukraine get away with the same things Russia is doing. If for example Ukraine would gas the Russian front line we shouldn’t be “well Russia did it first”. Chemical warfare is not acceptable. Turning a blind eye towards atrocities is how we got Isreal.

The other guy is pretty much saying it would be okay if Ukraine dirty bombed Moscow because he is literally implying we should kill all Russians.

Go learn history. This “we must show them” mentality is how after WW1 Nazis got into a position of power. And no, we didn’t kill all of them. Some were sent to the Hague, most were picked up by the US (unsurprisingly US now has a fascism problem) and the rest (the wider population) got collectively guilted out of nazism. Oh and we made sure Nazi and Fascist are so bad words that actual Nazis and Fascists use them in a derogatory way to not associate themselves with that word.

The idea that we should ruthlessly kill Russians because Putin is a horrible person is Lemmygrad level of idiotic.

You missed the point. The point the other guy made is that for the past 50+ countries have turned a blind eye to Isreal not playing by the rules and that has let Israel become more and more ruthless to a point where they’re the ones effectively committing genocide. Maybe Ukraine won’t turn out like Israel but is it really the door we want to open?

Just because Russia is getting increasing more violent and inhumane doesn’t mean Ukraine should follow the same path. Nobody is saying Ukraine shouldn’t defend itself (or fight on Russian soil), we’re just saying we shouldn’t turn a blind eye if Ukraine starts shelling humanitarian corridors, chopping off legs of prisoners, gas striking the front etc.

I get what you’re saying but it’s still supporting the war. It’s like if someone grew up bigoted because of their upbringing. Guess what, they’re still a bigot.

Your choice to be ignorant about the world doesn’t excuse you when the world bites you in the ass. We can only hope the war at their doorstep is a wakeup call.

If by “well maintained” you mean keeping a whitelist of instances, then yeah. But I doubt anyone is doing that because it’s actually counterproductive to the concept of fediverse. By keeping a whitelist you are creating an in group and an out group and instances can live or die based on that grouping.

As for why you’d need a whitelist, you can’t defend against a malicious attack if they keep spinning up new instances with bots designed to spread misinformation. The moment you ban once instance another one gets spun up. The only solution is a whitelist so all new instances are automatically blocked. Of course that works if all “normal” instances also have proper registration policies and can’t become attack vectors.

If the fediverse becomes wildly popular defending the instance can become a full-time job as the open nature gives more attack vectors. Also most instances are ran by volunteers so it’s probably not going to be a good time for anyone.

Because in many countries 0.5 is considered non-alcoholic and most countries don’t differentiate between non-alcoholic and alcohol-free, so it’s legally not false advertising.

Also you physically cannot get drunk when drinking 0.5 abv beer which means in terms of drunkeness there’s functionally no difference if people drink 0 abv beer or 0.5 abv beer. Recovering alcoholics can have a response to but that can be due to sensory cues making the alcoholic believe they’re getting drunk and not the actual ethanol in the drink. Recovering alcoholics (at least to my knowledge) are also recommended to steer clear of alcohol free beer due to the same sensory cues. So who really needs the distinction between non-alcoholic and alcohol-free?

And as a follow-up. If there really is the need for distinction should that distinction exist for food as well? Do we need a disclaimer that ripe bananas can contain 0.2 to 0.4 ABV of alcohol?

Tankies are never in shambles. If Ukraine doesn’t join NATO they’ll say “See, NATO was just using Ukraine” and if Ukraine joins NATO they’ll say “See, NATO is expanding east again”. Tankies are never wrong when it comes to believing their own delusions.

If you have proof then post it. Don’t be a fucking asshole and waste everyone’s time by regurgitating the same “Do your own research” flat earther argument. In case it’s not clear, the burden of proof is on the one making the statement. You said there’s proof, show the proof.

Otherwise I could say “A study found that @idiocracy@lemmy.zip is a moron”. Now there’s proof you’re a moron. If you want that proof go find it yourself. And don’t even think about blaming me for whatever reason.