• fatalicus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    73
    ·
    edit-2
    3 天前

    Should be noted that in Norway it is not just for war, but rather any emergency like natural disasters or someone takes out critical infrastructure in a digital attack etc.

    You can see all the information that is sent out here: https://www.sikkerhverdag.no/en/

    • Dasus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      3 天前

      Should be noted that in Norway it is not just for war, but rather any emergency like natural disasters or someone takes out critical infrastructure in a digital attack etc.

      A digital attack would be an act of war, though, so…

      • fatalicus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 天前

        Not necessarily.

        It could be something as simple as “oops, someone downloaded a file they shouldn’t have, and now all the systems of the power grid in a quarter of the country has been encrypted by ransomware”

        • WaxedWookie@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          2 天前

          If the July 19th Crowdstrike incident had affected Linux rather than Windows, the impact would have been orders of magnitude worse.

          People have so little awareness of how fragile the systems we rely on are - it’s not a matter of “if” - it’s a matter of “when” we’ll see a widespread incident that goes well beyond a mild inconvenience for most.

  • index@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    3 天前

    Governments are preparing for war because they want one. Cut the military budget to 0 and drive off lunatic politicians before it’s to late.

    • Shampiss@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      34
      ·
      3 天前

      Unfortunately a strong military is necessary to maintain peace

      It might sound contradictory at first but you should consider that people will always disagree. And if you and your neighboring country disagree and they have 20x more military power than you, they might be inclined to use force to solve your differences

      The only thing that allows you to have a civil and diplomatic discussion is the assurance that war is the worst of the options. As we see today, strong military nations are not afraid to abuse weaker military powers.

      I understand the hate towards the production of weapons, and I’m with you. But defunding the military is a simplistic, utopian argument that unfortunately would not work in the present time

      • index@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        2 天前

        Unfortunately a strong military is necessary to maintain peace

        Peace is maintain by seeking peace and avoid conflict not by spending billions of dollars in weapons that in most cases are designed to attack and kill other people.

        they might be inclined to use force to solve your differences

        And that’s why you want to cut the military budget to 0 so that there’s no leverage to use force against others. According to your logic people will always disagree? So ban nukes and weapons before everyone kill each others, putting a gun in everyone hands is going to lead to a bloodbath not to peace.

        As we see today, strong military nations are not afraid to abuse weaker military powers.

        Again cut the military budget to 0 so that your nation doesn’t abuse weaker military powers.

        I understand the hate towards the production of weapons, and I’m with you. But defunding the military is a simplistic, utopian argument that unfortunately would not work in the present time

        You sound like you are making an apology to war and authoritarian nations. You are not with me and you are not with the human race, you are against it. What’s utopian is to believe that you can achieve peace by spending Trillions of dollars in war. What’s simplistic is to believe that you can’t do without a government tossing billions of public money into military weapons.

        • evergreen@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          edit-2
          2 天前

          I’m very curious as to what your suggested course of action would be if you were to “cut the military budget to 0”, and then another nation with a strong military uses their military to abuse or murder the citizens of your nation because they disagree with your nation in some way…

          • index@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            2 天前

            You don’t need military budget to defend yourself. Governments need military budget to gain power and attack others.

            • Whelks_chance@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              2 天前

              If your country has zero weapons and my country has some weapons, what’s your plan for stopping your country becoming an extension of mine, and your culture, language and history becoming lost forever?

      • FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 天前

        You chickenhawks are always so loud and self-righteous, until someone wants to force you or your kid to actually go fight in the war.

        • AwesomeLowlander@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 天前

          On the contrary, I would rather NOT go to war. You know what’s the best way to get that to happen? Have a strong enough military that bullies like Putin and Xinnie will think very very carefully before launching a ‘special military operation’ into your country.

          • FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            2 天前

            You know what’s the best way to get that to happen? Have a strong enough military

            History, at least in the US, does not support your position on this. Hell, the US has rebranded what war means so we can get involved in even more foreign conflicts and kill more civilians. (“Enemy combatant” and “peacekeeping actions”)

            At one point under Obama and Trump the US was at war in seven different countries. (Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Libya, Pakistan, Somalia, and Yemen.)

            And people call it a bad thing that Trump got us out of Syria and Afghanistan, lol.

            Our military is not a tool of peace. It’s a weapon for corporate interests to brandish throughout the world.

      • index@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        3 天前

        Don’t forget the postcard to Russia inviting them over for tea

        You must have confused me for a german politician

    • FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 天前

      There’s some truth to this. One does need a military, but you don’t need one that costs 2T a year. Canada and Mexico, combined, spend around 35 billion a year on war material, and both have universal health care.