World News
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
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.
-
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 OCTOBER 19 2025
-
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.
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.
-
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.
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/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
view the rest of the comments
The carrier is there strictly in a defensive posture. no? I'm not aware of France being involved in any attacks on Iran.
Macron explicitly said that France was involved because of defense treaties with petromonarchies. That means that French weapons and soldiers will be involved in disabling Iranian war capability, i.e. bombing them.
Are you suggesting they simply ignore the defence treaties they signed with allies? Who do you think they are, Russia?
What business do the French have in the Middle Esast that their head of state signs defense treaties with petromonarchies? What's in there for French people? What's in there for French values?
I think mostly selling Rafales, but I'm not French so I can't speak to their motivations when choosing who to vote for.
Bombing them and taking out offensive weapons is not the same thing.
It is, when Iran is using these weapons to push American allies in the region to try and convince the Burgers to stop murdering them, and to take out military installations that help the Burgers kill.
If so, that's an idiotic strategy. It would be like Palestinians suicide-bombing EU countries to make them stop Israel's war.
Not really, closer to suicide-bombing Gulf countries. Neither the EU or America have any skin in the game (for them it's just another far away military fun and profitable venture), they're not neighbours of Iran, whilst the Gulf countries are.
OK then, but that's still idiotic.
There is no such thing as a "defensive" aircraft carrier. Also they said they will strike Iranian targets to disable their missile capabilities.
Iran has been hitting military targets and other infrastructure that's supporting military targets. What exactly would they be defending? France is out of range.
Are embassies military targets or other infrastructure supporting military targets? How about gas terminals?
Are hospitals supporting military targets because they heal soldiers? Are schools military targets because kids can become soldiers?
Embassies, yes. Check out what the US embassy was doing in Tehran during the 70s. Gas terminals, yes. But also Iran has been claiming the strike in SA wasn't them. Hospitals, no. I haven't seen anything about Iran striking hospitals. US and Israel regularly strike hospitals. Schools, no. Once again, Iran isn't, but you can't say the same about the agressors
So anything that Iran hits is automatically a valid target... How come it doesn't work the other way?
Are hospitals and school girls valid targets? One side is acting defensively. If you've been following this conflict for a while, you'd know that Iran has done as much as possible to avoid this conflict. Their back is against the wall and they're swinging.
Absolutely not valid targets, bordering on war crimes.
Which in no way justifies attacking civilians on the other side. Hotels, airports, embassies...
Embassies often hold intelligence offices. They're absolutely a valid target. Airports are infrastructure that supports military operations. (Flying in food and other supplies) Hotels that have been hit were where military personnel were staying. (When other countries do this it's called 'using human shields')
Bullshit excuse. You can use the same reasoning to excuse Israel actuons: hospitals support military operations, schools educate future soldiers, weddings are attended by potential soldiers.
Ben Gurion airport LITERALLY has an Airforce Base attached to it. The US LITERALLY evacuated their bases and had personnel staying in local hotels. Arguing against this is like saying the Iranian frigate in Indonesia wasn't a valid target because it wasn't in the theater of war
What about Dubai Airport?
Gas terminals can be. The others, no.
Embassies are often safehouses for intelligence and espionage, but that doesn't justify bombing them.
I see the geopolitics understanders have logged on...