916
war, war never rules
(thelemmy.club)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 27 Jun 2026
916 points (97.6% liked)
196
6448 readers
1472 users here now
Community Rules
You must post before you leave
Be nice. Assume others have good intent (within reason).
Block or ignore posts, comments, and users that irritate you in some way rather than engaging. Report if they are actually breaking community rules.
Use content warnings and/or mark as NSFW when appropriate. Most posts with content warnings likely need to be marked NSFW.
Most 196 posts are memes, shitposts, cute images, or even just recent things that happened, etc. There is no real theme, but try to avoid posts that are very inflammatory, offensive, very low quality, or very "off topic".
Bigotry is not allowed, this includes (but is not limited to): Homophobia, Transphobia, Racism, Sexism, Abelism, Classism, or discrimination based on things like Ethnicity, Nationality, Language, or Religion.
Avoid shilling for corporations, posting advertisements, or promoting exploitation of workers.
Proselytization, support, or defense of authoritarianism is not welcome. This includes but is not limited to: imperialism, nationalism, genocide denial, ethnic or racial supremacy, fascism, Nazism, Marxism-Leninism, Maoism, etc.
Avoid AI generated content.
Avoid misinformation.
Avoid incomprehensible posts.
No threats or personal attacks.
No spam.
Moderator Guidelines
Moderator Guidelines
- Don’t be mean to users. Be gentle or neutral.
- Most moderator actions which have a modlog message should include your username.
- When in doubt about whether or not a user is problematic, send them a DM.
- Don’t waste time debating/arguing with problematic users.
- Assume the best, but don’t tolerate sealioning/just asking questions/concern trolling.
- Ask another mod to take over cases you struggle with, if you get tired, or when things get personal.
- Ask the other mods for advice when things get complicated.
- Share everything you do in the mod matrix, both so several mods aren't unknowingly handling the same issues, but also so you can receive feedback on what you intend to do.
- Don't rush mod actions. If a case doesn't need to be handled right away, consider taking a short break before getting to it. This is to say, cool down and make room for feedback.
- Don’t perform too much moderation in the comments, except if you want a verdict to be public or to ask people to dial a convo down/stop. Single comment warnings are okay.
- Send users concise DMs about verdicts about them, such as bans etc, except in cases where it is clear we don’t want them at all, such as obvious transphobes. No need to notify someone they haven’t been banned of course.
- Explain to a user why their behavior is problematic and how it is distressing others rather than engage with whatever they are saying. Ask them to avoid this in the future and send them packing if they do not comply.
- First warn users, then temp ban them, then finally perma ban them when they break the rules or act inappropriately. Skip steps if necessary.
- Use neutral statements like “this statement can be considered transphobic” rather than “you are being transphobic”.
- No large decisions or actions without community input (polls or meta posts f.ex.).
- Large internal decisions (such as ousting a mod) might require a vote, needing more than 50% of the votes to pass. Also consider asking the community for feedback.
- Remember you are a voluntary moderator. You don’t get paid. Take a break when you need one. Perhaps ask another moderator to step in if necessary.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
As militaries are a tool of states to protect their sovereign power: That's not what militaries do, though.
I don't want to die for a state. Even if that state is being challenged in it's sovereignity.
Of course depending on a defensive war, but often times you're not fighting for the state, but your loved ones. Like on a smaller scale nearly everyone would defend the people close to them from harm, for example trying to stop a rapist from abusing your wife/sister/daughter of course not limited to women. Rape can be used against men as well.
In a defensive war the goal of states sovereignty and you defending your loved ones can align.
If I'm part of a state's army, I'm fighting for the militaristic goals of that state. That state only has an interest in my "loved ones" insofar as it's the population they require to achieve their political aims. My loved ones aren't benefactors of the state. That's just state propagana.
Your rape example has little in common from militaristic conflict that it's simply a non-sequitur.
I think you misunderstand what wars are to a state: In war, two or more states fight for their interest by destroying an opponents people and resources by destroying their own people an resources. I'm not a resource that's willing to be used up.
What if the state attacking is doing so for the purpose of murdering you and your family and everyone who remotely looks like you or shares your culture?
That still doesn't mean that I'd be ready to die for another state.
So you prefer to roll over and get genocided?
Not what I said.
I'd flee or if there's any reasonable chance to survive, I'd join some self-defense militia. But I wouldn't die for a state.
Arbitrarily drawing the line at your feet for what form of group is acceptable doesn’t change that your self-defense militia would in fact be akin to “a state” in the context of what is being discussed.
it were a state, I wouldn't have a say in whether or not I will help in defending that state.
There are enough states with voluntary recruitment?
How long do you think that remains voluntary once a state of emergency is called out due to war?
So if your land gets taken over, you'll go somewhere else and take someone else's land?
Is that hou you view refugees? As "taking someone else's land"?
Ok, Mr Musk. /s
There's a big difference between inviting someone into your home and someone entering uninvited. There's also a big difference between inviting one person into your home versus ten people.
Ok. I'll better not ask you about your opinion on the "refugee crisis" of 2015 or what you think about refugees drowning in the mediterranean sea.
You're probably also in favour of male Ukranian refugees between 18 and 60 in losing their residence permit in Germany in 2028.
I don't know enough about these situations to comment on them. In isolation, a non-zero amount of suffering and death is obviously worse than none. But the world isn't an isolated bubble like that. When you consider everything in its totality, it's no longer so obvious what the correct objective should be, and that's with the assumption that we can even even devise a measurable score for any of these objectives. Do we care for a lower bound on everyone's quality of life? Do we want to maximize some quality of life average or total? Do we want to maximize the duration of human existence? Who is this "everyone"? Everyone alive today? Everyone who will ever exist? Do we give the same weight to every person? Or should we use some discounted weighting so that present humans get higher priority than future humans? Or should we put a cap on how much of our collective resources we can allocate to any given individual?
What the fuck are you talking about?
Whatever tangent you're on about: I can't experience anything anymore if I'm dead. And I'm sure as shit doing anything in my power not to die "for my nation".
I don't know. You brought up all those other scenarios. I don't know how they're relevant either.
Anyway, why would it not be a good thing if others want to put their lives on the line so that you can live your life in peace, or flee successfully if it comes to that?
I reject the premise that this is what the military is doing.
I live in Germany and currently the German government is amping up militarisation which actively increases the risk of war with Russia which in turn endangers my life.
Do you believe that Germany disbanding their military and turning over control of the country to Putin endangers your life less? Does this extend to everyone in your community? Everyone inside the geographical borders of Germany?
I reject the premise that Russia (or "Putin") wants to invade Germany.
Yes, I'd prefer Germany to disband their military... and police for that matter.
But considering how unrealistic this scenario is: I'd prefer Germany to reestablish diplomatic connections with Russia. Since the only other alternative is war with Russia.
While a utopia is always an admirable goal, I would like to know what diplomatic relations look like in your viewpoint with Russia. Further, why is Russia invading Ukraine? Do you believe that if Ukraine capitulated, disbanded their military and became Russia that the people of Ukraine would be safer?
Do you believe that the current Russian government would stop expansionism with just the annexation of Ukraine?
Diplomatic relations are not utopian by any stretch. It's literally this or all out war with Russia. For reference as to what diplomatic relationships with Russia could look like: Look at China, India, Iran or pre 2022 Germany and how they inttract with Russia.
I'm not here to disentangle that historical ball of yarn. Also: I believe that you're already predetermined to call me names if I don't give you the answer that you already accepted as the one truth.
I think that if Ukraine accepted the treaty of March 2022, then hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians would still be alive. Also: Russia never wanted to annex the whole of Ukraine.
Again: I reject the premise. Russia never wanted to annex Ukraine.
Diplomatic relations isn't, but disbanding of militaries and police certainly is. As to how Germany's diplomatic relationship is lacking, isn't the only difference with how China is interacting sanctions for the war? If the only option for embargoing oil trade is all out war, I think that is a lack of imagination at play.
Why would I call you names? What would make you think I would?
As you do not wish to discuss this, I can only infer that you might think that Russian annexation of Crimea and Donbas regions is for reasons other than territorial expansion of farmland, industrial centers, and naval ports. I personally do not think there is any justifiable reason for the invasion, even if you believe Ukraine was a 100% Nazi country and the Eastern third of the country was asking for Russia to come liberate them.
If Russia had held to the Budapest Memorandum, thousands of Ukranians and Russians would still be alive. Ukraine would also have lost a third of their territory and been weakened against follow up hostilities with no binding guarantees of lasting peace.
Just like you reject the premise that Russia would annex all of Ukraine if given the chance, I reject the premise that Russia wants to stop at liberating ethnic Russians living in Donbas and Crimea. I believe it far more likely that Putin would like to strengthen Russia by reconquering the former Soviet bloc and restoring national empire as his legacy.
I believe there is a goal of Greater Russia the same way China annexed Nepal, and the same early I believe there is a goal of Greater Israel in Syria. Both countries would happily annex their neighbors, especially as buffer zones against nearby "hostile" neighbors.
Yes. I already said that this was not realistic to happen overnight.
I gave an example on what diplomacy could look like. You asked for it. That doesn't mean that it has to happen in whatever uay you think China is doing diplomacy.
Experience on lemmy. Most people on here can't distinguish between acknowledging that a state government can have coherent reasons for acting in a certain way and the condoning of these actions. If I say that Russia has invaded Ukraine due to security concerns (as they have stated for years before 2014), someone on lemmy will accuse me of simping for Putin.
You yourself conflated reasons with justifiable reasons. I want to disband state military and police. What makes you think that I want to justify Russia's invasion. I just donwt automatically jump to the conclusion that the Ukrainian regime has the population's best interest at heart.
Couldawouldashoulda. I could claim the same about the Nato not expand eastward after the fall of the soviet union.
I couldn't care less about where the borders between two corrupt countries lie.
I reject the claim that follow-up hostilities would have been carried out.
I think that's motivated reasoning. I know as little as you do about the innermost feelings that Putin has. I know however about his statements about Ukraine eyeing the possibility of becoming a Nato member and that this is strictly against Russian interests. And I don't think Putin is that stupid to think that the old USSR population is keen to giving power back to Moscow.
Your examples aren't really comparable with the old soviet block.