A community for discussing events around the World
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
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.
News [email protected]
Politics [email protected]
World Politics [email protected]
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
What would be China's endgame with this move? Trying to very obliquely help Russia?
What would be China’s endgame with this move? Trying to very obliquely help Russia?
My guess if it was intentional on China's part:
Reducing Europe's ability to import energy under normal circumstances would certainly cause economic hardship in Europe, which could be to China's gain. However, Europe was fairly resolute in their abandoning of Russian gas, as well as very successful in bringing online their LNG terminals much faster than expected.
So on balance now it looks very ineffective, but that certainly wasn't a foreseeable outcome at the time of the pipeline incident.
This wasn't the Nordstream pipeline. This was a Finland-Estonia pipeline and telecoms in Oct 2023.
Also I can’t imagine China fucking over Russia when it was to their advantage.
Important detail missing here is that the crew and captain were mainly Russian, the ship was just sailing under Chinese flag.
It was registered to Cyprus 2017-2023, and just this year changed to China.
Sometimes, this sort of thing is just to show you can do it.
The "u mad bro?" school of foreign policy.
So… despite all the seriousness, I have to ask. The name of the ship is NewNew Polar Bear?
What happened to the New Polar Bear? And the Polar Bear?
So, I can't easily find the name of the ship in Chinese, but it could possibly be a translation error during naming? New New is xīng xīng in pingying (romanized phonetic Chinese), which is also the same spelling as star... If whoever did the translation was bad at it and did it solely off of the phonetics or romanized spelling.
so... it's Star Polar Bear? Huh. There goes a good joke. thanks for the information.
Or... well, on the ship itself it's spelled New New, which is a lot saner and funnier than Newnew.
So I guess we know who used Google translate?
If they also had a penchant for dragging anchors for hundreds of kilometers, I think we can make a few educated guesses as to their fate.
Sabotage is by definition not accidental.
China want a war that they can't win? I really don't see the master plan of China behind that or why someone with Chinese roots would do it on their own agenda...
Really interesting how the NATO will respond to that if this turns out to be a direct sabotage by the China and what the reason of that could look like.
Delusional, like Putin. Also, they blew up this whole ballon posturing as a superpower, their national pride is dependent on it. Of course, it will pop one day, but now they are too committed to turn back
I really don't see... ...why someone with Chinese roots would do it
Tankies hate the West. Psychotic nationalists are capable of all sorts of dumb.
NATO? absolutely nothing, too worried about nuclear war, they will say "wtf don't do that next time" and move on with their day
An Axis is forming.
Ha so Russia can only sell to China, so China can negotiate a lower price. [Outstanding move jpeg]
I think China sells arms to Russia too.
They did until Ukraine bombed the shit out of the train tracks that were used for shipping them yesterday
One of three train routs between China and Russia.
Two more to go.
Where exactly, on a map, would one find these routes? Specifically where they go over bridges or through tunnels.
Wasn't it a tunnel and a bridge? Thought they got 2 of the 3 with the last route having different gauge rails which still fucks with the logistics.
Good to know
To what end?
This is the best summary I could come up with:
BRUSSELS — As the investigation into damage to Baltic Sea critical infrastructure continues, Finland's Minister of European Affairs Anders Adlercreutz said it’s hard to believe sabotage to the undersea gas pipeline was accidental — or that it happened without Beijing’s knowledge.
Finland and Estonia have been investigating the rupture of the Balticconnector, a 77-kilometer-long gas pipeline that connects the two NATO members beneath the Baltic Sea.
An investigation by Finnish authorities identified as the main suspect Chinese container ship Newnew Polar Bear, which is believed to have dragged its anchor across the Baltic Sea seabed, cutting through the cables and gas lines.
The Baltic Times reported earlier this week that the two European countries have asked to send representatives to Beijing to investigate the vessel, which is currently en route to a Chinese port.
Estonian Defense Minister Hanno Pevkur expressed similar sentiment in an interview with Swedish public broadcaster SVT last month, saying the captain of the ship surely "understood that there was something wrong" after dragging an anchor for over 180 kilometers.
Coming more than a year after the Nord Stream gas pipelines connecting Russia to Germany were damaged by several explosions, the Balticconnector incident raises more concerns over the safety of undersea critical infrastructure and possible measures to protect them from external sabotage.
The original article contains 419 words, the summary contains 211 words. Saved 50%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
This leaves out very significant details from the story, like this part for instance:
"The anchor — which weighs 6,000 kilograms — was retrieved a few meters from the site of the damage."
Don't upvote stupid bots!!! And don't think this is as good as actually reading the article. If you waste time reading this bots TLDR, you might as well take the time to read the actual article, and get the proper context.
The summaries it gives are pretty weak.
Absolutely, it may give a sense of having read the most important parts, but chances are that important parts are lost.
HTTPS://SOYJAK.PARTY/ WON
HTTPS://SOYJAK.PARTY/ WON
