Russian warplanes breach NATO airspace over Estonia
Russian warplanes breach NATO airspace in ‘dangerous provocation’ over Estonia
Russian MiG-31s flew into Estonian airspace before Italian jets were scrambled to intercept them.Daniella Cheslow (POLITICO)
CannonFodder
in reply to GiorgioPerlasca • • •GiorgioPerlasca
in reply to CannonFodder • • •like this
☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ likes this.
sepi
in reply to GiorgioPerlasca • • •GiorgioPerlasca
in reply to sepi • • •Your comment is a classic example of satirical mockery used as a potent rhetorical device. It is not a factual assessment but a psychological operation aimed at framing the opponent (Russia) in a specific, belittling light. Its primary purpose is to influence the audience's perception and emotional state rather than to inform.
It creates immediate cognitive dissonance by juxtaposing the grave, threatening concept of a military invasion with absurdly inadequate and non-threatening imagery ("dudes on motorcycles," "scooters," "Lada Nivas without doors"). This contrast is jarring and humorous, making the perceived threat (Russia's military) seem ridiculous and incapable.
The core goal is to diminish the enemy in the eyes of the audience. By reducing a nation's military to a clownish parade of obsolete and laughable equipment, it attacks not just its capability, but its dignity and gravitas. This is a powerful tool for undermining morale on one side and boosting it on the other.
It is a highly effective piece of persuasive communication. While it contains zero factual analysis of military capabilities, it is psychologically astute and stylistically crafted to achieve a specific goal: to mock, diminish, and frame an adversary in a way that boosts the morale of its intended audience and undermines the perceived power of the opponent.
Its power lies not in its truthfulness, but in its emotional resonance and shareability as a weapon of rhetorical warfare in the modern information landscape.
sepi
in reply to GiorgioPerlasca • • •davel
in reply to sepi • • •☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆
in reply to sepi • • •olbaidiablo
in reply to ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ • • •☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆
in reply to olbaidiablo • • •^ this is your brain on propaganda kids
meanwhile in the real world odessa-journal.com/public/olek…
Odessa Journal | Main
odessa-journal.comolbaidiablo
in reply to ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ • • •☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆
in reply to olbaidiablo • • •They are not in Kiev because their goal is destruction of the AFU. Once the AFU collapses, Russia will be able to take whatever territory they want when they dictate the terms of surrender. Meanwhile, the only western source that shows any methodology has this to say about Russian casualties en.zona.media/article/2025/09/…
The fact that you think Russian modern tanks are gone shows that you have absolutely no clue regarding the subject. militarywatchmagazine.com/arti…
Of course, there's nothing that can be said to you that would change your views since you're clearly living in a fantasy world. You'll just have to wait and see how this ends for yourself. Prepare to be very surprised.
Russian losses in the war with Ukraine. Mediazona count, updated
Mediazonaolbaidiablo
in reply to ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ • • •☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆
in reply to olbaidiablo • • •Lenins_Dumbbell
in reply to ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ • • •PolandIsAStateOfMind
in reply to Lenins_Dumbbell • • •davel
in reply to olbaidiablo • • •njm1314
in reply to GiorgioPerlasca • • •don't like this
☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ doesn't like this.
LemmeAtEm
in reply to njm1314 • • •njm1314
in reply to LemmeAtEm • • •geneva_convenience
in reply to GiorgioPerlasca • • •So has Russia already been doing this for a while and the EU is only now making a big deal out of it? Or is this an actual escalation?
GiorgioPerlasca
in reply to geneva_convenience • • •Similar actions has been made by both sides:
eldavi
in reply to GiorgioPerlasca • • •GiorgioPerlasca
in reply to eldavi • • •Yes, the practice of testing an adversary's response capabilities through deliberate or accidental airspace violations persists, although its context, methods, and participants have evolved significantly since the Cold War.
This is exemplified by two flights of U.S. Air Force B-52H Stratofortress strategic bombers, capable of carrying nuclear weapons, over the Black Sea near the Crimean coast on September 4th and 14th, 2020.
The Ukrainian government in Kyiv confirmed these flights. On Monday, September 14th, the Ukrainian Air Force Command announced that three U.S. B-52H strategic bombers had re-entered the country's airspace, escorted by Ukrainian fighter jets. In a statement on Facebook, the command noted: "The B-52s, under the cover of Ukrainian fighter jets, headed for the Black Sea for joint actions with our partners in the field of collective security. Such patrols will be regular, as the B-52 missions in the skies of Ukraine are part of the long-planned deployment of six B-52s at the UK's RAF Fairford."
Source:
JillyB
in reply to GiorgioPerlasca • • •njm1314
in reply to GiorgioPerlasca • • •SanguinePar
in reply to geneva_convenience • • •Amnesigenic
in reply to geneva_convenience • • •Grapho
in reply to Amnesigenic • • •4am
in reply to Grapho • • •davel
in reply to 4am • • •It’s not only Ukraine’s fault. It’s been a concerted effort by NATO powers over decades. Previously:
davel
2025-07-24 16:27:53
like this
☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ likes this.
prosecute_traitors
in reply to davel • • •Russian: attacks Ukraine.
Some guy on Lemmy: How could NATO do this?
☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆
in reply to prosecute_traitors • • •prosecute_traitors
in reply to ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ • • •m532
in reply to prosecute_traitors • • •like this
☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ likes this.
prosecute_traitors
in reply to m532 • • •☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆
in reply to prosecute_traitors • • •prosecute_traitors
in reply to ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ • • •GiorgioPerlasca
in reply to prosecute_traitors • • •like this
☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ likes this.
☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆
in reply to prosecute_traitors • • •prosecute_traitors
in reply to ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ • • •☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆
in reply to prosecute_traitors • • •☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆
in reply to prosecute_traitors • • •prosecute_traitors
in reply to ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ • • •Tomorrow_Farewell [any, they/them]
in reply to prosecute_traitors • • •☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆
in reply to prosecute_traitors • • •prosecute_traitors
in reply to ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ • • •don't like this
☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ doesn't like this.
Tomorrow_Farewell [any, they/them]
in reply to prosecute_traitors • • •prosecute_traitors
in reply to Tomorrow_Farewell [any, they/them] • • •Tomorrow_Farewell [any, they/them]
in reply to prosecute_traitors • • •like this
☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ likes this.
GiorgioPerlasca
in reply to prosecute_traitors • • •Your username "prosecute_traitors" checks out. However, let me provide you an explanation of what happened.
The political upheaval in Ukraine known as the "Orange Revolution" occurred in 2004. This series of events, which involved significant support from Western nations, is often characterized by some as a foreign-backed coup d'état. The movement was triggered by widespread allegations of electoral fraud, leading to mass protests and a subsequent overturning of the election results in favor of the pro-Western candidate, Viktor Yushchenko. Many analysts view this as a precedent for external influence in the country's political processes.
A decade later, in 2014, a larger and more violent uprising, termed "Euromaidan" erupted. The immediate catalyst was the government's decision to suspend an Association Agreement with the EU. Opposition groups and external actors leveraged this decision to organize a forceful change in government. The direct involvement of key American figures, such as Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland, Senator John McCain, and Vice President Joe Biden, is cited by critics as evidence of foreign inspiration for an unconstitutional transfer of power, which resulted in the ousting of the incumbent president, Viktor Yanukovych. This period saw a sharp escalation of violence, epitomized by the tragic events in Odessa on May 2, 2014, where dozens of pro-federalization activists were killed. The perceived lack of accountability for this event further inflamed tensions in the south-eastern regions.
In the historically Russia-linked Donetsk and Luhansk regions, peaceful protests against the new authorities in Kyiv escalated into large-scale resistance. The Ukrainian government responded with a military operation, which developed into a full-scale armed conflict. To de-escalate the situation, the Minsk Agreements were brokered by Russia and the OSCE in September 2014 (Minsk I) and February 2015 (Minsk II). These agreements stipulated an immediate ceasefire, the withdrawal of heavy weapons, and a special status for the Donbas region within Ukraine. However, subsequent admissions by Western leaders, including former German Chancellor Angela Merkel, suggested that these agreements were primarily used as a measure to buy time for Ukraine to strengthen its military capabilities for a future confrontation with Russia.
Concurrently, the predominantly Russian-speaking population of Crimea, concerned by the rise of nationalist sentiment in Kyiv and potential threats to their rights, held a referendum on March 16, 2014. Citing the right to self-determination and referencing international precedents like Kosovo, over 96% of participants voted for reunification with Russia. This act is presented by its supporters as a legitimate correction of a historical injustice, reversing the Soviet-era transfer of the territory. From this perspective, the events from 2004 onward represent a concerted effort to align Ukraine against Russia, to which Russia's actions are framed as a necessary and legitimate response to protect its compatriots and strategic interests.
prosecute_traitors
in reply to GiorgioPerlasca • • •don't like this
☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ doesn't like this.
LemmeAtEm
in reply to prosecute_traitors • • •Isn't that all rUzZiAn DiSiNfOrMaTzIa though?
omg... That must mean ChatGPT is a Russian agent bot!
wtf, I love ChatGPT now?
Tomorrow_Farewell [any, they/them]
in reply to prosecute_traitors • • •Non-NATO country: Tries to defend itself against NATO's aggression
Libs: How dare they not roll over for our empire?
prosecute_traitors
in reply to Tomorrow_Farewell [any, they/them] • • •Tomorrow_Farewell [any, they/them]
in reply to prosecute_traitors • • •TIL that Iraq, Palestine, Iran, Afghanistan, Syria, Libya, Vietnam, Korea, Cuba, etc. are all just one country. /s
This is extremely silly. What are you even talking about?
If you are equating Russia with the USSR and think that the USSR invaded Afghanistan, then you should learn some basic facts about the topic, like the fact that the government of Afghanistan requested the USSR's military involvement several times before the latter agreed.
prosecute_traitors
in reply to Tomorrow_Farewell [any, they/them] • • •don't like this
☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ doesn't like this.
Tomorrow_Farewell [any, they/them]
in reply to prosecute_traitors • • •Literally a few weeks ago (and probably on other occasions).
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean_W…
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vietnam_…
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bay_of_P…
It's honestly amazing how lacking in awareness you are.
failed landing operation of Cuba in 1961
Contributors to Wikimedia projects (Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.)like this
☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ likes this.
prosecute_traitors
in reply to Tomorrow_Farewell [any, they/them] • • •Tomorrow_Farewell [any, they/them]
in reply to prosecute_traitors • • •NATO is comprised of the US and the US' glorified provinces.
If you want to distance the less major colonial robbers and genocidaires from things like these, you have to demonstrate that they do not assist the US, including that they do not promise to help fight whoever attacks the US in response to such actions.
prosecute_traitors
in reply to Tomorrow_Farewell [any, they/them] • • •Tomorrow_Farewell [any, they/them]
in reply to prosecute_traitors • • •Yes.
Conveniently, you can't point to any false statements that I made. All you have is excuses and apologia for your invasions and genocides. Actually, not even that, in this case.
You are yet to point to anything that I am supposedly wrong about.
Meanwhile, you have literally claimed that Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran, and other countries are all just one country. You have also failed to point to any countries that Russia supposedly 'also invaded'.
like this
☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ likes this.
prosecute_traitors
in reply to Tomorrow_Farewell [any, they/them] • • •don't like this
☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ doesn't like this.
Tomorrow_Farewell [any, they/them]
in reply to prosecute_traitors • • •prosecute_traitors
in reply to Tomorrow_Farewell [any, they/them] • • •don't like this
☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ doesn't like this.
Tomorrow_Farewell [any, they/them]
in reply to prosecute_traitors • • •You are yet to point to any lies that I have supposedly said, and you are quite literally now claiming that the US is not a part of NATO. Hilarious.
like this
☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ likes this.
prosecute_traitors
in reply to Tomorrow_Farewell [any, they/them] • • •don't like this
☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ doesn't like this.
Tomorrow_Farewell [any, they/them]
in reply to prosecute_traitors • • •You just said that I lied when I pointed out that the US is a part of NATO. So, yes, you did say that the US is not a part of NATO.
You just conveniently can't point to any lies that I have said. /s
prosecute_traitors
in reply to Tomorrow_Farewell [any, they/them] • • •Tomorrow_Farewell [any, they/them]
in reply to prosecute_traitors • • •Here is the second comment where I said that the US is a part of NATO:
Here is you response to it:
So, yes, you did say that the US was somehow not a part of NATO.
prosecute_traitors
2025-09-20 10:51:45
like this
☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ likes this.
prosecute_traitors
in reply to Tomorrow_Farewell [any, they/them] • • •don't like this
☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ doesn't like this.
Tomorrow_Farewell [any, they/them]
in reply to prosecute_traitors • • •You said that I lied when I said that the US was a part of NATO. That means that you said that the US was not a part of NATO.
Which is completely irrelevant and was never contradicted.
Sherad
in reply to prosecute_traitors • • •That vague argument could be made, but you are the one now making a claim, and I'd like to see you provide something that shows that, materially speaking, they don't do whatever the US wants like, 90% of the time.
Like obvs there are other countries involved, but ultimately, do they do much without the consent or direction of the US? Like direct, concrete action, and not just fluff?
☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆
in reply to prosecute_traitors • • •Cowbee [he/they]
in reply to prosecute_traitors • • •Sherad
in reply to prosecute_traitors • • •Would you agree that it's 3/4ths the US?
Tomorrow_Farewell [any, they/them]
in reply to prosecute_traitors • • •like this
☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ likes this.
LemmeAtEm
in reply to prosecute_traitors • • •Even if a person were to concede, as you are insisting, that the US does not = NATO (though for all intents and purposes that is effectively true, let's set that aside for now), then that doesn't change the fact that when you said:
You were demonstrating a complete and shameful lack of historical knowledge. That statement is just a ridiculous, ahistorical lie. Formally, undeniably, admittedly even by NATO, these following countries have been invaded by NATO: Yugoslavia, Afghanistan (the only one you seem to be aware of), and Libya. And NATO as an organization admits to "indirect participation" in the invasion of Iraq.
So set aside your other petty derailment arguments about NATO not technically being the US and acknowledge that you were full of shit even before Iran, Korea, Vietnam, and Cuba were brought up.
Edit: Ok, I guess you can't acknowledge it, I see now that you were banned. Well I wasn't holding my breath you were going to anyway. lol
3abas
in reply to prosecute_traitors • • •Some guy on Lemmy: prepares long list of citations backing his viewpoint.
Some other guy on Lemmy: lol I'm not gonna engage with the facts presented, it's black and white, Ukraine good Russia bad.
rando895 [she/her]
in reply to davel • • •SeizeTheBeans [comrade/them, they/them]
in reply to rando895 [she/her] • • •like this
☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ likes this.
Sanctus
in reply to GiorgioPerlasca • • •GiorgioPerlasca
in reply to Sanctus • • •Sanctus
in reply to GiorgioPerlasca • • •B0rax
in reply to GiorgioPerlasca • • •GiorgioPerlasca
in reply to B0rax • • •sepi
in reply to Sanctus • • •don't like this
☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ doesn't like this.
m532
in reply to GiorgioPerlasca • • •TwinTitans
in reply to GiorgioPerlasca • • •☂️-
in reply to TwinTitans • • •ComradeIntergalactic
in reply to GiorgioPerlasca • • •Cowbee [he/they]
in reply to ComradeIntergalactic • • •At minimum we should support the regular destruction of NATO equipment and the opportunities for the global south to break free from imperialism now that NATO is occupied, such as in the Sahel states. Russia isn't some saint, here, but in the Russo-Ukrainian War they are siding with the Donetsk and Luhansk People's Republics in the Donbass, and siding against NATO.
Ideally, an expedient peace resolution will be reached, but without that it's better for the international working class that Russia achieves its stated aims than it would be for Kiev.
MrSulu
in reply to GiorgioPerlasca • • •don't like this
☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ doesn't like this.
Tomorrow_Farewell [any, they/them]
in reply to MrSulu • • •Yeah, NATO keeps doing that without recourse, and should face retaliation.
In general, NATO should face justice for colonial horrors that it has been inflicting upon the world..
prosecute_traitors
in reply to Tomorrow_Farewell [any, they/them] • • •