this post was submitted on 12 Mar 2026
526 points (99.3% liked)

World News

54755 readers
2928 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

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.

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/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] parsizzle@piefed.social 0 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (3 children)

I ~~could be wrong but I think the way foreign litany bases work is that they are in the thinnest legal sense "sovereign foreign territory." To which I mean, the activities conducted on these bases are outside the control of the country who's land they occupy.~~

Edit: I was wrong, amd the US are just tennants on the land which makes this a very questionable thing that they are doing.

[–] ohulancutash@feddit.uk 16 points 4 days ago

Nnnnope. They are RAF bases, with a nominal RAF CO. The USAF are tenants.

[–] Telodzrum@lemmy.world 13 points 4 days ago (1 children)

This is a common misconception (it doesn’t actually apply to embassies either, from which the myth arose). Every military base of a nation within another nation’s territory is governed by a status of forces agreement (SOF); usually a large general SOF for all locations in the territory and also a narrower SOF that applies to that site specifically.

[–] parsizzle@piefed.social 2 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Thank you for the correction! That makes what they're doing against the SOF rules/law, then?

[–] Telodzrum@lemmy.world 2 points 3 days ago

That really depends tbh.

These munitions could be just being moved from one site to another, not destined for a site supplying the Iranian theater. They could be being sent for decommissioning. They could be loaded just for regular evaluation, loaded test flights. They could be going to the Iranian theater, but the UK government gave special exception for this case. Or it could be what we all thought right when we saw the headline and these are going directly ti theater to be used on Iranian targets.

Without more information, it’s impossible to know. Brits should be demanding more information for sure; I just told my partner and she is emailing her MP right now about this.

[–] Buffalox@lemmy.world 1 points 4 days ago

That does not sound like a good idea. I would expect a country would want to maintain sovereignty of their own territory.
Of course embassies have something similar to what you describe, but if an embassy is breaking the law, the diplomats can be expelled.