this post was submitted on 13 Jul 2026
49 points (100.0% liked)

Europe

11602 readers
576 users here now

News and information from Europe ๐Ÿ‡ช๐Ÿ‡บ

(Current banner: La Mancha, Spain. Feel free to post submissions for banner images.)

Rules (2024-08-30)

  1. 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.
  2. 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 When you post outdated/historic articles, add the year of publication to the post title.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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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).
  6. If you link to paywalled information, please provide also a link to a freely available archived version. Alternatively, try to find a different source.
  7. Light-hearted content, memes, and posts about your European everyday belong in other communities.
  8. 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.
  9. 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.)
  10. 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

Unless they're the only sources, please also avoid The Sun, Daily Mail, any "thinktank" type organization, and non-Lemmy social media (incl. Substack). 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 admin that applied the rule (check modlog first to find who was it.)

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] Hirom@beehaw.org 1 points 3 days ago (1 children)

The Ukraine war would have played our diffetently had Europe reduced its reliance on fossiel fuels decades ago. The continent is paying for its short-sightedness.

[โ€“] Ooops@feddit.org 2 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

Why would Russia react differently knowing that the majority of Europeans are brain-washed idiots easily manipulated by bots.

Russia sells <10% of their (already deminished, too) exports to Europe, yet an idiotic article without any actual references makes you believe that Europe is failing and has to be blamed. Sanctions totally demolished Russian imports, yet for years we get articles hallucinating how the import increases in neighbouring countries obviously circumvent those sanctions - even when in reality those increases make up less than 1% in total of what Russia lost, so the actual story should have been that they are 99%+ effective.

It's always the same pattern: "Look, big number! Be angry!! Europe bad!!!" And it works -as can be seen by all the comments here- every single time. Or did you actually stop one second to check those numbers in relation to former imports? Or in relation to Russia's output? Or did you even notice that the article very much avoids to give any reference for their numbers in the first place?

Being obviously unable to annex Ukraine, not even in the planned few days but at all, did not stop them from continuing. But losing about 5% of their already failing economy that is now basically tailored to producing weapons for the war exclusively would totally have made them stop. Sure...

[โ€“] Hirom@beehaw.org 1 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

You seem to be putting words in my mouth, ie I don't think sanctions failed, so I'm going to ignore the conclusions you make from that.

A breakdown of my comment :

The war would have played differently if dedaces ago, ie BEFORE the start of the war, european countries had reduced their reliance on fossiel fuel.

In 2020, the EU was Russia's biggest trading partners, and fossil fuels were a large chunk of EU import. It took years of sanctions, of setting up alternative energy import deals, and of electrification efforts, to get a points where Russia-EU trades are a small parts of today's total trades.

During those 4 years, Ukraine severely suffered from Russian's invasion, and Russia was cashing in on energy export to the EU. Less export and less revenue from exports would have it more difficult for Russia to finance war, and easier for the EU to quickly sanctions Russia.

So yes, the EU's energy policy was bad for some time, because of its members' reliance on fossil fuel, and overreliance on Russia as energy provider. It's definitely improving, better late than never. It's clearly not as simple as "EU bad", the union is doing a great deal to sanction Russia and support Ukraine.