• GarbageShoot [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    97
    arrow-down
    26
    ·
    1 year ago

    Just an endless slew of clickbait “China bad” headlines all the time. Really makes you wonder about if there is some sort of systemic problem with western media.

  • anoncpc [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    75
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    1 year ago

    Yes, if you go to aliexpress, you could buy Chinese made helicopter, drones and metals. Thank you the telegraph for the basic info

      • anoncpc [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        47
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Like, the yank was so mad at Ukrainian keep using Chinese drone, that they force them to stop buying it and use their expensive drone.

        • Tankiedesantski [he/him]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          33
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          The Pentagon is mad that Congress forced them to stop buying Chinese drones. Apparently there are no available replacements in some categories and even where there are, they are many times more expensive.

              • forcequit [she/her]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                20
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago
                australia doing the same shit

                Banned from tendering in the National Broadband Network in 2012, banned from participating in the 5G network in 2018, called for removal of surveillance/security cameras in 2018, funded undersea cables in the pacific to block Huawei in 2018, purchased Digicel to prevent Chinese involvement in 2021

                US, UK, CAN & AU, 5eyes has been frothing over this for a while

                The $2.1 billion deal to acquire and run Digicel Pacific is being funded largely by the government, which will provide $1.9 billion toward the acquisition.

                Telstra said it would contribute $360 million and own 100 per cent of the company’s ordinary equity.

                “Australian officials were concerned about whether a Chinese company or potentially a Chinese state-owned entity might look to buy Digicel’s Pacific arm and there were some geopolitical and geostrategic concerns about a Chinese company owning a major telecommunication company in the Pacific region, which is of course so close to Australia,” said Amanda Watson, an expert in Pacific communications at the Australian National University.

                That’s especially since Digicel Pacific uses a 4,700km undersea cable from Sydney that was largely funded by the Australian government in 2018 in an effort to prevent PNG and the Solomon Islands from contracting Huawei for the project.

                Ahh my bad, that was 3 years earlier instead

                https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-10-25/telstra-digicel-pacific-telecommunications-deal-finalised/100564976

            • SexMachineStalin [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              20
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              Somehow on my phone in :estonia-burning: I can access RT and came across this article where the US was coping at South Africa to abandon it’s partnerships with Huawei because “you need to use :lmayo::amerikkka: technologies”. Anyways, South Africa told :amerikkka: to :PIGPOOPBALLS:

          • Frank [he/him, he/him]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            33
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            I love watching Congress fuck over the Pentagon. Just the worst people in the world slapfighting over fake money. Probably a bad idea to let hundreds of lead huffing jet ski dealers whose only qualification is buying more TV add time than their opponents run a global empire.

      • Frank [he/him, he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        32
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        That’s gotta be in some cyberpunk book somewhere. Especially if they start giving different ratings to the equipment and flaming each other over it.

  • Thordros [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    83
    arrow-down
    27
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    China: sends Russia six helicopters (before the war), some children’s toys, a box of consumer-grade hunting scopes, and metal. They are the bad guys who are prolonging the war.

    NATO: sends Ukraine weapons and military vehicles worth more than China’s entire military budget, and provides training and logistics support. They are the good guys trying to end the war.

    • Awoo [she/her]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      64
      arrow-down
      11
      ·
      1 year ago

      The liberals only read the titles and then come straight to the comment sections so they don’t actually realise any of this unless you spell it out for them.

      • Tankiedesantski [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        58
        arrow-down
        17
        ·
        1 year ago

        Does your definition of “attack” include locking people in a church and burning them alive? How about sponsoring Neo-Nazi paramilitaries to murder and rape people for seaking a language? Shelling cities and civilians in defiance of international cease fire treaties?

        • figaro@lemdro.id
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          13
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          I don’t mean to get in an argument, because that isn’t at all productive.

          I wonder though - if Russia hadn’t illegally occupied Ukraine/Crimea, would that have happened?

          • Thordros [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            47
            arrow-down
            12
            ·
            1 year ago

            I wonder though - if Russia hadn’t illegally occupied Ukraine/Crimea, would that have happened?

            If Ukrainian neo-Nazis hadn’t trapped ethnic Russians in a building and burned them alive, would Russia have invaded?

            My point is: there are no good guys in this conflict. Just two bad guys duking it out, with regular schmucks like you and me getting murdered for no reason. Anything that prolongs the conflict is bad.

            • figaro@lemdro.id
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              9
              ·
              1 year ago

              For the record - I agree that burning people alive in a building is bad, and war should be avoided if possible.

              You didn’t really answer my question though. Why do the resistance groups exist in the first place?

              • Frank [he/him, he/him]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                41
                arrow-down
                6
                ·
                1 year ago

                We’ve got a document that lays out the timeline in some detail, but I can’t find it right now.

                The short version is that this is a continuation of a very, very long conflict between the western powers and Russia for control of Russia’s resources. Like in a broad sense this geopolitical conflict as been going on for hundreds of years - Europe and now the USA want access to Russia’s resources and to do that they have to get rid of the government currently in charge of Russia. In the past this was all kinds of great power bullshit, Napoleon’s attempt to invade Moscow. Then it was the Russian civil war, where all the Western powers invaded Russia to try to stop the Reds, then WWII when the Nazis and their allies wanted to conquer everything east of them, exterminate or enslave the Slavs, and do Westward Expansion 2.0: Eastward Edition. Then the Cold War, where NATO was formed to counter and eventually destroy the Eastern Block. Well, 1991 happened, the USSR was destroyed, A few coups and murders and the shock doctrine ensured that the capitalists could loot everything, but ultimately the West didn’t get the complete control of Russian territory and resources they wanted. Too many former Soviet Oligarchs and gangsters got in the way and control of the region stayed more or less in local hands - Russian Oligarchs in Russia, Ukrainian Oligarchs in Ukraine, and so on. NATO didn’t disband after 1991, and didn’t let Russia join when Putin tried a few times,because NATO’s purpose is conquest of Russia and they hadn’t pulled that off yet. NATO started annexing countries and moving it’s borders towards Russia, forward positioning troops and weapons, and gradually encircling Russia on it’s populous Western borders. When NATO started talking about moving in to Georgia the Russian’s responded, invaded Georgia, and put an end to that. At some point later NATO decided to move on Ukraine, take control, and use it as a proxy to weaken Russia. They used the same tactic by supporting the Islamists in Afghanistan decades prior, and they’d used it in the middle east and few other places. The basic program is - destabilize a country, flood it with weapons, then let their neighbors bleed themselves dry trying to contain the insurgency. In pursuit of this NATO deployed a bunch of Ukrainian Nazis they’d saved after WWII for exactly this purpose and were gradually able to expand their influence in the country. 2013, the President of Ukraine doesn’t want to sign a shitty deal with Europe both because it would fuck over Ukraine and it would fuck over Ukraine’s trade with Russia, and the Nazis, almost entirely headquartered in Western Ukraine, use this as an excuse to take control of popular unrest and stage a coup. It gets nasty, Ukrainian Nationalists burn a bunch of Russian speaking Ukrainians to death, they throw the president out, the new coup government immediately passes laws making the previously legal Russian language illegal. Out East in the regions where most Ukrainians speak Russian, they see a bunch of Nazis who want them exterminated couping the government, they see the new coup government passing laws against their language, they say “Fuck this, we know what comes next” and take up arms demanding that Kiev grant them autonomy - some government autonomy, guarantees on their right to speak their language and protect their culture, basic shit. Kiev says no, tries to send the army in to Donbass to crush them, the army tells Kiev “Fuck you”. Kiev isn’t giving up so they arm all the Nazis and send them in to Donbass and they start murdering people. This turns in to a civil war. During the civil war NATO moves in. They start re-structuring, training, and arming the Ukrainian military loyal to Kiev. They stockpile all kinds of weapons and shit. The Nazis are rotating back from the front lines with combat experience and are getting integrated in to army units while their civilian Nazi counterparts are getting more and more control over western Ukraine’s government, civic institutions, and culture. This goes on for years, Ukrainians kill thousands of Ukrainians. Meanwhile Russia, who doesn’t want any of this shit happening in their neighborhood, is trying to get some kind of peace negotiations going to stop the conflict and stabilize Ukraine before it falls apart and turns in to a failed state. Well, Ukraine and a bunch of NATO goverments say yes, we’ll talk, lets resolve this, then the Ukrainian Nazis break all the ceasefires and shitcan the peace talks. Happens twice, the accords were called Minsk I and Minsk II. We later find out that Germany and France, who were acting as restaurants of the peace talks, never had any intention of fulfilling the peace conditions and were just buying time to arm Ukraine. Eventually it’s 2020 or something. Ukrainians are sick of this, they don’t want to be at war with their own countrymen, they don’t want to get dragged in to war with Russia because of Nazi psychos, so they vote for Zelensky. Zelensky’s a very charismatic guy, well known from television, speaks Ukrainian and Russia. He runs on a peace platform, says he’s going to uphold the cease fire and start negotiations. Well, once he takes office he goes out to the front and tells the guys at the front to shot shelling Donbass. The guys who are running the Front are Nazi fanatics, they tell him he’s not in charge and he can go fuck himself and they keep shelling. So now Zelensky knows how Ukraine really works, he starts working with NATO and the Nationalists as basically a cheer-leader for Kiev and Galacia’s agenda. Doesn’t really have any power but he looks good on TV. This whole thing finally comes to a head when someone decides that the Ukrainian army, with all it’s NATO training and equipment and guns and NATO provided Nazis, is ready to go crush Donbass. There’s a big build-up - Ukraine is mobilizing it’s army to go in to the east of the country and fight the Donbass republics plus whatever Specops guys Russia has sent in there. Russia is mobilizing part of it’s army at the Ukrainian border and making threatening noises.

                Now, it’s February of 2022. Russia has it’s troops on Ukraine’s border. Ukrainian troops are moving East in to Donbass. Putin is making threatening noises, but no one thinks he’ll actually pull the trigger and cross the border. Well, for whatever reason, and it’s still unclear what he was thinking, he pulls the trigger. He claims that he’s doing it to protect Russian speaking Ukrainians from the Banderite Nazis who intend to genocide them (probably in the driving them from their homes sense rather than the extermination of all men, women, and children sense but who knows with Nazis?). That might even be true. But other reasons are that he was finally sick of putting up with NATOs bullshit after decades of post-cold-war hostility, or he had a bad understanding of the situation and thought he could win a decisive victory with that swift attack on Kiev, or maybe he thought people in Ukraine were more angry with their government than they were and would demand some kind of end of hostilities? Who knows, high level commanders and presidents aren’t always very bright and aren’t always getting good intel. Whatever happened, Russia made us all look like idiots by invading (pretty much no one, including me, thought he’d actually do it), and now there was a hot war between NATO forces and Russian forces, except everyone inside NATO pretends that it’s between Ukraine and Russia.

                So, that’s the very, very, very short, basically no details, rough sketch version of what lead up to the war. I didn’t even mention stuff like the activities of Ukrainian Nazis in Canada and the US, or all of Russia’s security concerns, or the weird fucked up relationship between the Russiand government and the US government, or how Russia didn’t really invade Crimea because the entire Russian Black Sea Fleet and tons of support personnel were already stationed in Crimea so they really just changed the flags, or the role of propaganda in NATOs decisions on which weapons to send and which weapons to withhold, or what Trump’s trade war bullshit likely had to do with all this, or a trillion other things.

                Suffice to say, there’s a lot of history behind this conflict. And since it’s very unlikely either side will definitively win there will probably be more wars in this on-going geopolitical struggle between whoever is in charge of the west and whoever is in charge of Russia in the future, even if NATO and the Russian federation both collapse tomorrow. There’s no way we’re going to make it through the 21st century without intense wars over the vast unexploited resources of Siberia.

                Either way, that’s the very short summary.

              • Zuzak [fae/faer, she/her]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                29
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                In 2014, the Ukrainian government was overthrown and the new government shifted towards Western alignment while banning opposition parties. Many people in Ukraine, especially in the east, have cultural ties to Russia and disagreed with the change, but were left with no means of having their voices heard because they were cut out of the democratic process, and that’s why the resistance groups exist in the first place.

            • figaro@lemdro.id
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              9
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Ah, by argue I meant something along the lines of “have an upset and angry discussion.” I disagree with some of the premise of what he said though, so I am going to push back on that.

        • figaro@lemdro.id
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          15
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I think my question was misunderstood.

          Your original post makes it seem like you think NATO are the bad guys here because they are supplying weapons to Ukraine to defend themselves.

          I asked “who attacked who” because to me, it seems pretty clear that Russia, a dictatorship whose government has a history of human rights violations and disregard for human life, is doing a bad thing when they invade a neighboring country and start shooting missiles at civilian homes on a daily basis for a year and half.

          Could you explain how this is not a clear “Russia doing bad thing, we should help Ukraine” situation?

          • Redcat [he/him]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            27
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            Ukraine to defend themselves.

            Do you think the people of eastern ukraine have a right to defend themselves?

          • UnicodeHamSic [he/him]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            32
            arrow-down
            14
            ·
            1 year ago

            NATO is mostly responsible for the dead Ukrainians. Ukraine has no reason to fight this war. If they lose, fine, the Russian part gets renamed and a higher minimum wage. Only rich assholes lose out. If Ukraine wins they get dead sons and burned schools but the US oil companies are happy.

            It is pretty clear Ukraine shouldn’t be fighting this war for the US companies.

            • figaro@lemdro.id
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              10
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              What percentage of Ukrainians support defending their country?

              Should it be their decision whether to keep fighting?

              • Tankiedesantski [he/him]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                31
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                1 year ago

                If it were up to Ukrainians to collectively decide whether or not to continue the conflict, Zelensky would not have canceled the elections for his position later this year.

                • figaro@lemdro.id
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  The Ukrainian constitution does not allow for elections to be held during periods of martial law, which was declared at the start of the war.

                  If there is ever a good time to declare martial law, being invaded by a neighboring country might qualify as a justifiable time.

                  In any case, it’s constitutional, but Ukrainian political process isn’t what we are here to talk about.

                  Fundamentally, I agree with you - If the majority of Ukrainians were to decide they don’t want the war to continue, the war should stop. The number show, however, that the people are not ready to give up.

                • figaro@lemdro.id
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  7
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  While humorous, that isn’t actually how polls work. I’d suggest looking up the statistics. The majority of Ukrainians, even in the Eastern regions, still support defending themselves.

                  Does that mean that the majority of Ukrainians support fighting the war for the sake of US companies? Or could there be something else they are fighting for?

          • Thordros [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            18
            arrow-down
            10
            ·
            1 year ago

            I understood. It’s an unserious question, so I gave an unserious answer. China isn’t militarily supporting Russia. They sent some kids toys and the same raw materials they exported everywhere anyway.

            • figaro@lemdro.id
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              ·
              1 year ago

              Ah, I see what happened. I didn’t address the China part of your original question because I actually agree with you there. They aren’t militarily supporting Russia based on this article. I don’t see why China would do that, since it wouldn’t really benefit them.

              I was addressing part 2 of your comment, where you implied that NATO is doing a bad thing by supporting Ukraine. Unless I misunderstood - I assumed “They are the good guys trying to end the war” was sarcasm.

    • tfc@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yes because giving some one the ability to defend their country, and supporting an invasion have the same moral implications

  • CloutAtlas [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    68
    arrow-down
    17
    ·
    1 year ago

    Focusing on Chinese drones that end up in Russia while completely ignoring the Chinese drones that end up in the Ukraine is some cherry picking I expected from the Telegraph. Products and components are made in China, which shouldn’t come as a surprise.

  • mar_k [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    58
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    1 year ago

    The Telegraph is the only one reporting this, we’re supposed to believe a sensationalist conservative tabloid?

    • Dolores [love/loves]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      30
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      well if you trade metal to Russia, and metal goes in weapons, you are basically handing them weapons of mass destruction if you think about it smuglord

    • SeaJ@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      It looks like the data is from Malfar Group which dubs itself as open source intelligence (whatever that means). Looking at their website, it is all Ukraine related. That’s fine in and of itself but it should be noted by them or The Telegraph. But The Telegraph is not exactly a paragon of journalistic integrity.

  • jonhanson@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    45
    ·
    1 year ago

    China is widely suspected of supplying Russia with equipment and materials to support their war, however no-one has adduced anything concrete to support that theory so far.

    The article itself doesn’t cite much in the way of sources or evidence, other than mentioning a report by Molfar, the open source intelligence agency. Molfar has published reports on the same topic in the past, but there hasn’t been anything recently.

    If the Telegraph had new information or evidence they would be shouting a lot louder than this. This is most likely them covering up for a quiet day by dredging up some old rumours and repackaging them as news.

    • zephyreks@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      In other news, China is also widely suspected of supplying Ukraine with equipment and materials to support their war.

      Turns out, China isn’t a single entity but a bunch of companies that want to make a whole ton of money by profiteering off of war.

      The CCP doesn’t care about the conflict so long as they can claim neutrality.

  • barsoap@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    23
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Probably not for long given the state of the Rouble and the economy. Tech-wise Russia has nothing to offer and when it comes to the stuff China might be interested in, such as ores and oil, well you’d have to not send miners to the front to continue producing them. That Russia of all countries is importing metals should make you stop and think.

    Lenin is rotating in his mausoleum.

    • 420blazeit69 [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      31
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      The funniest part of this comment is the idea that Russia will get so desperate for troops that they’ll be unable to operate mines

      Soviet industrial capacity greatly increased over the course of WWII

      • Frank [he/him, he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        18
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yeah, but that was the Soviets. These are capitalists. Capitalists suck at war economics and I’m not even sure it’s plausible under modern finance capitalism. I agree they’re not likely to run out of troops any time soon, but I don’t think we’re likely to see economic gains like WWII.

        • 420blazeit69 [he/him]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I also don’t think we’re going to see industrial development on par with WWII. My point is that during WWII:

          • The USSR suffered something like 25 million deaths, orders of magnitude above even the wildest propaganda about current Russian losses
          • They still had the labor power to not only run their industrial base, but to build much of it from scratch

          It’s a country of around 143 million, and I saw an (undoubtedly cautious) estimates of 11 million+ military age men. They had something like 1.2 million military personnel before the war.

          Just a basic understanding of demographics and even one historical example should tell anyone that “they are so short on people they can’t even run their industry” is absurd.

    • KurtVonnegut [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      28
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      Tech-wise Russia has nothing to offer

      Oh no, their Twitter and Facebook exports are too low. They’ll have to scrape by on checks notes one of the world’s largest supplies of oil, precious metals, and other natural resources. Surely, the Russian economy will collapse any second now!

      • Frank [he/him, he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        23
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Plus their weapon systems are probably looking pretty good after surviving a sustained assault from a NATO trained, led, and supplied army.

    • UnverifiedAPK@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Russia provides a buffer, it’s the same thing as North Korea. China aids NK to keep US allies as far away from themselves as possible.

      • atlasraven31@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Russia’s military strength has been degrading since the war began. How long do you wait with your ally losing strength? Sure, you could prop him up but then that’s a drain on your economy. If you postpone indefinitely, the situation may change to be even more unfavorable.

        • GarbageShoot [he/him]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          24
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Generally speaking, China benefits from stalling for as long as possible. The power of the imperial core is waning, so if China can navigate things such that the US – due to its own economic dependency on imperialism – crumbles to a much lower stature without the US launching nukes, then its influence in the world will become a shadow of what it was and reunification without firing a shot may be viable.

          • culpritus [any]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            18
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            without the US launching nukes

            I was just talking about this today. China is leading towards a multi-polar world very effectively, but the US is the only nation to have used nukes in history. Really puts things in stark relief.

            • Frank [he/him, he/him]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              17
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Plus the leadership in DC are senile psychopaths who have at best a loose grasp on world affairs. And that’s just the Democrats. The GOP are increasingly all fascists completely divorced from reality. Real “Sick old man” hours, except unlike the Ottomans DC has enough nukes to flash-fry the planet if the wrong corpse-lich has a stroke at the right time.

    • Kbobabob@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Not sure that makes it any better. Oppressing a country vs. helping oppress a country.

      • IllNess@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Politically it’s better. Ukraine has 16 countries that committed over a billion Euros. We’re not how many countries would back Taiwan.

        • Rayleigh@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I mean over a billion Euros is technically correct, the actual number however is more like 150 to 200 billion Euros

          • mihor@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            12
            ·
            1 year ago

            Of our hard-earned money, those degenerate warmongers (I’m looking at you, Urszula)!

        • jcit878@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          the difference is in Taiwan’s case america would be directly involved and have already committed to this, it is likely Japan would also and some other countries are likely to contribute to. china wouldn’t have a hope

      • atlasraven31@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        It:s a shame because supplying that gear to Ukraine would have helped China’s reputation on the international stage and bolstered trade. It would have not been well received by the Kremlin but a losing army can’t invade anyone else.

    • zephyreks@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Oh no! Not the DJI Mavic Pro! Whatever will they do without

      *4/3 CMOS Hasselblad Camera *Dual Tele Cameras *Cine Only Tri-Camera Apple ProRes Support

      • atlasraven31@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Here’s hoping. How do you think they will solve their naval border disputes with neighboring countries?