this post was submitted on 10 Jun 2026
560 points (99.5% liked)

World News

56496 readers
3186 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 3 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] NocturnalMorning@lemmy.world 14 points 7 hours ago (2 children)

I don't understand how people can follow a command like this and then go home and sleep at night.

[–] Duamerthrax@lemmy.world 5 points 7 hours ago

People with thoughtful morals don't join the military. Sociopaths, moral LARPers, and desperate people do.

[–] InputZero@lemmy.world 2 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago)

Well as a subordinate who is given illegal orders they're kind of fucked there's no good choice so that's why it was so important for commanders to only issue legal orders. So they don't put their men in a bad legal situation.

If a solider doesn't follow the command they're given probably going to be found guilty of insubordination, regardless of whether it is illegal or not. They'll probably be called a criminal, lose all the benefits that come from service, or possibly be executed according to this administration.

If a soldier follows illegal orders like these then they can be charged as war criminals and executed.

The ONLY way to be able to refuse illegal orders is to have an enormous amount of support from other soldiers and the judge advocate General's office. Which are resources your average soldier doesn't have. Yes the Uniform Code of Military Justice says following illegal orders is illegal but the reality is very different.

[–] TotalSonic@lemmy.world 9 points 7 hours ago

Aka, more war crimes committed by the regime in charge of the USA.

[–] bold_atlas@lemmy.world 2 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago) (1 children)

We didn't get 9/11ed enough. We deserve way more.

[–] TheKingBee@lemmy.world 1 points 5 hours ago

Goliath holding open auditions for the role of David

[–] Dasus@lemmy.world 19 points 13 hours ago* (last edited 13 hours ago)

Humanitarian law is also designed to protect civilian objects, including those indispensable to the survival of the civilian population. Article 29 of the Convention on the law relating to the non-navigational uses of international watercourses [available on http://www.un.org/], adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations in 1997, stipulates:

“International watercourses and related installations, facilities and other works shall enjoy the protection accorded by the principles and rules of international law applicable in international and non-international armed conflict and shall not be used in violation of those principles and rules”.

General protection under the law applicable to armed conflicts extends to more than international watercourses, and the four main prohibitions laid down in that law are worth noting:

the ban on employing poison or poisonous weapons; the ban on destroying, confiscating or expropriating enemy property; the ban on destroying objects indispensable to the survival of the civilian population; the ban on attacking works or installations containing dangerous forces.

The four prohibitions, to which should be added the provisions on environmental protection, are expressly mentioned in the instruments relating to international armed conflicts, and the last two are also laid down in the law applicable to non-international armed conflicts. Starvation as a method of warfare is explicitly prohibited regardless of the nature of the conflict, and the concept of objects essential for the survival of the civilian population includes drinking-water installations and supplies and irrigation works. Immunity for indispensable objects is waived only when these are used solely for the armed forces or in direct support of military action. Even then, the adversaries must refrain from any action which could reduce the population to starvation or deprive it of essential water.

https://casebook.icrc.org/case-study/water-and-armed-conflicts

[–] postmateDumbass@lemmy.world 9 points 13 hours ago

Really pushing for that Greatest Satan moniker.

[–] MashedTech@lemmy.world 2 points 10 hours ago

I love America. Every time I see them helping kill someone I get a boner!!!! /s

[–] CyroSignal@lemmy.world 14 points 17 hours ago (7 children)
[–] Mrkawfee@lemmy.world 2 points 7 hours ago

International doesn't apply to the powerful.

[–] BilSabab@lemmy.world 17 points 14 hours ago

Where is the UN when russia sends drones straight in Chornobyl confinement unit for shits and giggles and proceeds to brag about it for months? Same shit, pal.

[–] SkunkWorkz@lemmy.world 6 points 13 hours ago

The UN and what army? The UN is nothing more than neutral ground where diplomats and envoys can safely talk to each other. It has no more power than the member states are willing to give it. The US, China, Russia and Israel will never give it the power to intervene in their wars.

[–] Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works 7 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

Probably writing strongly worded letters to Iran telling them to capitulate to the US.

[–] M0oP0o@mander.xyz 3 points 8 hours ago

Eh in this case its not really that. Most members are staying out of it or condemning the axis of evil (us+israel). Now when I say "condemning" I mean some interview with a government person saying something along the lines of "well it is not a good thing blatant war crimes are going on but we in insert nation would never do such things"

[–] mrdown@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 15 hours ago

The UN has no execurive power and stste members pretend veto really matter so they don't act

[–] BeMoreCareful@lemmy.world 2 points 14 hours ago

Watching the world police exterminate Iranians

[–] boonhet@sopuli.xyz 3 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

Trump replaced it with his own pay to play version. Since he no longer cares about what the UN thinks, he's no longer bound by what the UN says.

[–] BilSabab@lemmy.world 5 points 14 hours ago

let's not pretend he's the first president to do so. the lineage of presidents not giving a shit what UN says is rather long. Like every president since Truman.

[–] VoodooMischief@lemmy.ca 5 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

Hey this happened in Spec Ops the Line

🇺🇸 D̴͙͎̎̍O̴̢̰̍̄ ̵͓̻̣̔̂͊Y̴̡͎͗̓͝O̵̡̰͎͒̕U̵͉͍͔͋̀ ̶͖͛F̶͔̍͜ͅE̵̛̲͛É̴̼͍͆̔L̷̻̭̔̀ ̷̜̞͇̈͑͝L̷̞̱̀̚I̵̺͎̔͛́K̵̥͎̆E̵̥̎̅͜ ̸̞͋Á̶̺ ̸̙̋͑̈́H̶͍̓Ě̸͓͓̈́R̸̖̘̄Ó̵̞ ̸̧̫̤̿Y̶͙͗E̵̦̪̩̓T̷̩̼̗̿ 🇺🇸

[–] theacharnian@lemmy.ca 2 points 11 hours ago

To prepare mentally for if and when Iranians target US civilian infrastructure, watch this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rDhuDBjZIkg

[–] itisileclerk@lemmy.world 29 points 21 hours ago

If you count all the war crimes committed by US soldiers, regardless of who was president, you will come to the conclusion that the US is an imperial, colonial, exploitative power.

Previously, they hid behind diplomacy, the UN, "freedom", "democracy". Donald Trump has portrayed the US as it has been all these years after the Second World War, selfish, greedy, without a shred of empathy.

That is why some Americans cannot stand Trump because he exposes them for what they are.

[–] technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 13 hours ago

imperialism <---> terrorism

[–] ironycanal@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 20 hours ago

Oh, so now Americans can't commit war crimes? Who's next? Zionists? You? Me?

First they came for the African warlords with child soldiers, and I did not speak up, because I was not an African warlord with child soldiers.

[–] Greyghoster@aussie.zone 10 points 21 hours ago (2 children)

The US waged war on Iraq’s infrastructure and destroyed large numbers of public assets setting the country back decades simply to make war on a budget. The funny part is the amount of money that the US had to spend to rebuild some of it. Trump is following others footprints but much more wildly and without any idea of what the endgame is.

[–] FlyingCircus@lemmy.world 3 points 14 hours ago

Siphoning taxpayer money to Haliburton and other “rebuilding” corporations was one of the main purposes of the Iraq war. This is how imperialism works.

[–] BeMoreCareful@lemmy.world 2 points 14 hours ago

The US literally bombed Iraq to a "preindustrial" state and were never able to get infrastructure anywhere near what it was before the war.

Electricity is water is life.

[–] TigerAce@lemmy.dbzer0.com 10 points 21 hours ago

"Hey! You possibly shot down a military helicopter from us while it was performing illegal operations within your territory! That goes too far, fuck the Geneva convention, you will pay!"

[–] sportsjorts@lemmy.zip 33 points 1 day ago (7 children)

So more war crimes. Yay. Proud to be an American were at least I know I’m shackled to a government run by pedophiles, corporations, and foreign interests.

Let’s make everyone in the U.S. vote and see what happens. I feel like at least once before the great experiment totally implodes we should just try that once since we are so fucking free and are the best fucking democracy ever……

load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›