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
"Yes my point is they didn’t choose cowardice on purpose. They issued a warning and then took action. It’s the law but yes sure it’s good pr and the right thing to do."
No, it is not the law that you have to warn a military ship before engaging it in combat. The only ones you have to warn are merchant ships, or civilian ships. You are just wrong.
Ok... how about we start where you said Submarines were "litterally" invented to seize and capture other ships. (That was not what they were literally invented to do. Just because early German uboats snuck up on merchant ships to seize contraband, doesn't mean it was "literally" what they were invented for.)
And I'm not obscuring or trying to hide behind anything. I've been nothing but clear.
It's a cowardly, planned attack on an allegedly unarmed vessel. But it's not illegal. They are under no obligation to preemptively warn Sri Lanka. It is believed however they did tell Sri Lanka of where people had to be rescued after torpedoing it.
And you are at war with Iran. Just like Russia is at war with Ukraine. War was a fact the moment the US starting bombing Iran. I know the US doesn't want to call it a war. Because if they do, they have to admit Trump started one without congressional approval.
By not calling this war for what it is, you're literally defending Trump.
And I'm not even remotely defending hegseth, you and others claimed attacking this ship was a war crime. It's not. And that by not rescuing the sailors personally, was another war crime. It can be. But unless the US had other ships that could safely do so in the vicinity, it's not a war crime to instead signal a third country and informing them of their location.
That's not me defending anyone. I'm simply telling you it wasn't a war crime.
What was a war crime, and probably breaks lots of other "international laws" was the indiscriminate bombing of Venezuelan civilian ships. Particularly the part where after bombing a ship, which was disabled by the strike. They then ordered a second strike. Ensuring the death of any potential survivors.
THAT was a blatant crime and an actual illegal order. And everyone involved should be tried as such.
It is when it's an auxillary ship carrying civilians bud. You are just wrong.
Ya huh. The most successful subs of the class being designed to do just that is what? Coincidence?
Also wrong but clearly so at least.
Not allegedly, it was boarded and searched and Iran doesn't have the unrep ability the US does unless you're implying they docked somewhere and replenished munitions it was in fact unarmed. No one said preemptively, they didn't even notify them after the strike. Sri lanka said they did not add I do not trust the US because it has time and time again lied about it's actions.
We are not at war, we are taking part in special combat operations. After 150 days without approval from Congress we will be at defacto war. Until then we aren't at war.
By not calling it a war I'm saying Congress did not approve and thus it is not a war. See above for why. But nice try at yet another personal insult.
It was a war crime, auxillary ships are not taken in the same way an active fleet ship is. The US did have other ships in the area notably the pict which had just left sri lanka from the same fleet exhibition.
That's equivocating which is why I keep saying it and it is in fact defending the indefensible.
That is also a war crime, yes. Good job accepting that fact.
Agreed, I didn't say this was an illegal order. I said it was a war because it clearly was.
What's the insult? You feel insulted that I said going along with Trumps notion that this somehow isn't a war is defending him?
You cannot seriously believe that what defines a war is your congress approval of it. So if Trump decides to bomb China. That's not Trump starting a war then? Because Congress didn't approve it?
if that's genuinly your belief, I'm lost for words.
You can start a war without a declaration of war. Sinking another country's warship is an act of war.
The only reason Trump isn't calling it a war (except for all the times he genuinly referred to it as "war") is because that would be impeachable and illegal under US law.
"Special combat operations" laughable. It's exactly what Russia claimed they're doing in Ukraine. "Oh we're not at war with Ukraine... it's just a special military operation".
you're an actual idiot if you think im defending the sinking of the ship. im not. the only thing i've said is that it isn't a war crime. and neither is what followed
you can think it's shitty, cowardly, reprehensable, disgusting, that's all fine. those are opinions. what isnt opinion is that it did not constitute a war crime.
Bro the fact you're taken to multiple personal attacks but can't remember where or when is fairly telling.
That's how it is legally defined in the United States like it or not that's how it actually works.
It's not a belief it's the actual law.
An act of war and declaration of war are two separate things. Taking a head of state into custody is an act of war and yet we aren't at war with them either.
Duh, that doesn't change the fact that we are not at war.
Yeah no shit, two shitty nations using the same playbook doesn't really change anything and Russian law allows Putin control over declaration of war, that simply isn't how it works in the US.
You 100% are, and it 100% is a war crime and that is iirc the fifth personal attack on me.
It's all of those things and a war crime.
You've proven my point but apparently don't know you have. Though it is fairly amusing you insult my reading comprehension and quote that particular section without comprehending it.
Hold on, you're complaining that I've repeatedly somehow insulted you personally by saying going along with Trumps notion that this isn't a war is defending his stance that it isn't a war.
Yet you started by saying I simping for hegseth, and that's not a personal attack?
Yes. Declaration of war and an act of war are two different things. Very astute of you. But they both lead to the same thing. War.
You don't have to declare war to start one. Or be in one. You can just as easily start one by committing an act of war. That's why it's called "an act of war". It's an action someone would take if they were at war with someone.
I know you don't think the US is at war with Iran. But I say Bombing their military installations and sinking their navy is more than proof of the US being at war with Iran. And pretty much every single country would agree with that.
You seem to be offended by just about anything. I don't think it's a direct personal attack to say I think you're a moron if you believe I'm defending hegseth after I've stated numerous times that I'm not, noting his actual war crime of bombing shipwrecked civilians outside of Venezuela and hoping he is brought to justice for it.
If that's a belief you still retain then it is what it is. If not, you have nothing to be upset about.
Oh, and I comprehend what I quoted you perfectly. If you read it thoroughly you will understand that militaries can exercise a litany of 'possible actions' that does not constitute them personally sailing by and picking up survivors. As long as it's a decision taken in "good faith". Which is in itself up for some serious interpretation
Good luck. You'll need it.
You've repeatedly insulted me, no one said it was all claiming I support Trump.
That was after you insulted me first boss, just reread the comments of you're confused about chronology.
No they in fact do not, they can but that is not inevitable or obligate.
In this country it is legally not a war unless declared by Congress. Casus belli does not obligate the declaration of war.
Legally we aren't. That's not the only personal attack you've made either but you're just repeating yourself at this point. Yes those are war crimes as well, it does not mean the US is at war, clearly.
It's not a belief, it's how the construction of the Constitution works.
You clearly do not.
No need for luck nor to condescend.