this post was submitted on 01 Mar 2026
125 points (93.1% liked)

World News

54313 readers
2540 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] SARGE@startrek.website 11 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

The Budapest memorandum of 1994 ensured that the US and UK would "Seek immediate Security Council action to provide assistance to the signatory if they "should become a victim of an act of aggression or an object of a threat of aggression in which nuclear weapons are used"

That happened. It's a promise to bring the issue to the UN security council for a vote on action. Not a promise to invade any attacking country.

What also happened is that Russia, a seat on the security council, has the power to veto, and a conflicting interest here that the UN decided couldn't possibly be a problem in the future.

I'm not saying we have done enough.

I am, however, saying that we have held up our end of the agreement, as written on paper.

As far as I'm concerned, my country is 1/3 of the reason they're in this mess, so we need to step in and directly protect them at the bare minimum. Ukraine isn't safe until their borders are restored to pre-2014, their infrastructure is repaired and improved, and they have enough to defend themselves from Russia AND the US. And also the government stooges of Russia get put to death for forcing their population to fight and die against an opponent who never wanted a fight to begin with.

[–] Carrolade@lemmy.world 5 points 14 hours ago

UN decided couldn’t possibly be a problem in the future

Less that, and more that the existence of the Security Council with permanent seats and veto powers was a requirement to get the major powers to actually want to join.

Otherwise it'd have been the post-WW1 League of Nations, which pretty quickly fell apart. The US never even joined the League if I recall, they couldn't get it through Congress despite it being President Woodrow Wilson's own pet project.

Ultimately it's easy to get a small power to join an org that basically serves to limit the options of individual countries by applying international law to them. It's hard to get a large, powerful country to sign up for that same thing. The smaller country gains from joining, but the strong country actually weakens itself by joining.