188
Europe in βmost dangerous situationβ since second world war, Danish PM warns
(www.theguardian.com)
True and its all because of Danish push towards chat control.
this post was submitted on 01 Oct 2025
188 points (98.0% liked)
Europe
7438 readers
698 users here now
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 When you post outdated/historic articles, add the year of publication to the post title.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)
- 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. 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 primary mod account @EuroMod@feddit.org
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
True. But the (by far) biggest threat are not the russians that are failing to defeat the ukrainians for years now.
It's the rise of authoritharianism (sometimes even facism) all over the world, which happens with the silent support of european governments, as they decide not to ban those parties in their own countries.
The USA are transforming into Gilead before our eyes, and instead of protecting us from those that want this in europe too, our governments point their fingers to russia and scream SCARY!
WW3 will not be fought by russia alone. It will be fought by far-right governments all over the world joining in to show off their own superiority and conquer resources at the same time.
It's not like their council presidency is actively contributing to it with Chat Control...
That would be a gift on a golden platter to Russia and China, just to mention two.
Isn't Chat Control where they use AI to scan all your online/mobile communications for CSAM? How is that a gift to Russia and China?
And the AFD in Germany.
I don't know if I trust the same government that proposed Chat Control in their opinions of things.
Nothing about chat control? They are so out of touch in this article
Which isn't saying much as WWII was very fucking dangerous
Well it is saying that it's more dangerous than the entire Cold War
Some people argue that USSR collapsed because USA forced them into an arms race. If they only reacted then the West was in control and the threat to the West was only theoretical.
The current war will lead to one side losing if they don't escalate. If no side is willing to lose then this war must escalate at one point.
The US didn't force them into the arms race, russia itself was more than willing to invest that resources to project a sense of strength. They just couldn't compete economically and ruined themselves with it
The graph above "United States and Soviet Union/Russia nuclear weapon stockpiles", doesn't that look like a reaction of the USSR?
And the fact, that the US had a huge headstart doesn't come to your mind? That, by the time the soviets had their first one the US had already understood the system and could develop it further faster? The soviets only gained the bomb through espionage, so even after they had it, they needed more time to reach a level of capability, comparable to the US before they could start ramping up their production.
That explains why the USSR couldn't react faster. It doesn't explain why the US built so many bombs.
The Soviets and their satellite states produced more tanks than cars. So, that shows where the actual priorities of the USSR were.
Hyperbole or fact?
Before its dissolution, the Soviet Union produced 2.1-2.3 million units per year of all types
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automotive_industry_in_the_Soviet_Union
I can't find the source on Britannica, but it did mention that. I admit it could have been a misinformation or misunderstanding on my part about more tanks produced than cars.
In the Wikipedia link you provided, it does mention that you have to wait for years to buy and own a car. That implies not many cars are actually available for many citizens despite the demand. There is a discussion about it on Quora https://www.quora.com/Why-did-the-Russians-during-Soviet-times-had-to-wait-10-years-for-a-car
That implies not many cars are actually available for many citizens despite the demand.
Well, don't quote me on that, but I am pretty sure that the average soviet citizen couldn't get a tank neither. In fact, it still was propably easier for them to get their hands on a car than on a tank.
A country could be producing millions of tanks and zero cars, it still doesn't make tanks something the general public would buy. I don't know the truth of this cars vs tanks discussion, but this specific argument definitely doesn't hold up
The USSR was not a consumer paradise. But as long as public transport works, not having a car is acceptable. The important part is that we shouldn't remember the USSR as a military dystopia as the initial relations could have suggested.
I can see where Soviets are coming from, but not owning a car if you live in rural is impractical.
I don't know the reality but they had those big industrial farms. So public transport could have been possible.
Dugin must be the happiest motherfucker in Russia right now.