this post was submitted on 20 May 2025
369 points (96.9% liked)

World News

46695 readers
2025 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
[–] PlzGivHugs@sh.itjust.works 15 points 2 days ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Here is the article this article is using for its source: https://www.nytimes.com/2025/05/19/world/europe/russia-finland-border.html

Edit: Yes, the article isn't great, and clearly has a Russian bias. I was just linking it becuase its the original, and more complete source.

[–] nesc@lemmy.cafe 29 points 2 days ago (2 children)

This is one of the least informed articles I've ever read. Phrases like "From Moscow’s perspective, the Russians need to bolster their defenses to protect themselves from NATO expansion" is just a cherry on top. Lmao.

[–] blakenong 6 points 2 days ago (1 children)
[–] futatorius@lemm.ee 1 points 10 hours ago

If Russia hadn't threatened Sweden and Finland, neither would have dropped neutrality and joined NATO.

[–] Saleh@feddit.org -4 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Why? That is the stance Russia has been communicating for years.

And when countries like Germany turn around and say they want the strongest army in Europe and support the idea of spending 200 Billion yearly on defense, that is perceived as a threat.

It is classical security dilemma.

[–] nesc@lemmy.cafe 5 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Because they don't care about NATO nor they fear any kind of invasion they've left borders with with countries in NATO empty for three years. Germany is in their right to spend however they want. r*ssia delenda est

[–] Saleh@feddit.org 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Again, this is the stance of Russia, as the NYT reported. Doesnt mean its true. But if the media would only report if politicians say true things, well the news would be rather short.

[–] futatorius@lemm.ee 1 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago)

this is the stance of Russia

This is a flimsy pretext that nobody believes, including the Russians.