this post was submitted on 07 Mar 2026
264 points (99.3% liked)

World News

54706 readers
2810 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
[–] Alcoholicorn@mander.xyz 0 points 5 days ago (1 children)

All three were NATO operations. So was Iraq part 1. And even when articles of defense aren't called, NATO allows countries like America and France to use their resources and bases to carry out its own wars of imperialism.

China

Do you believe NATO needs to defend itself from a country on the other side of the planet?

[–] FiniteBanjo@feddit.online -3 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (1 children)

Correct, America, France, etc have attacked other nations. NATO has not. NATO is a group of 32 nations wherein if one of them is attacked then they all come to the defence of that member. To be anti-NATO is to be pro-war.

When Iraq was invaded several NATO member strongly opposed it, and now that Iran is being attack the USA is being denied logistics support from many nations.

[–] Alcoholicorn@mander.xyz 2 points 5 days ago (1 children)
[–] FiniteBanjo@feddit.online -3 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (1 children)

It's one thing to oppose NATO, it's another to not only oppose NATO but also the entire UN. Both of those links are UN Resolutions. You're easily the most pro-war mf on this platform.

[–] Alcoholicorn@mander.xyz 2 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Do you think bombing Libya was the anti-war position? When the UN supports it, the UN has adopted a pro-war position.

[–] FiniteBanjo@feddit.online -3 points 5 days ago (1 children)

UN was created as a result of WWII. It is participated in by nations as a means of diplomacy. It's sole purpose is to prevent the outbreak of global war, and nothing else. The actions in Libya, which did not condone invasion or occupation, were to prevent unnecessary casualties in the region.

[–] Alcoholicorn@mander.xyz 2 points 5 days ago

It’s sole purpose is to prevent the outbreak of global war

The UN proceeded to recognize the puppet South Korean government (there was literally only 1 ballet presented, if you wanted to vote against the US-chosen candidate, you had to ask the US guards for the other ballet) as the government of all of Korea, and ignore the massacres it was carrying out, essentially creating a situation where either the USSR and China had to accept the US conquering their neighbor or go to war with the US. That's the closest we've been to actual global war, having half the planet on opposing sides of a war again. The UN has mostly been a tool for American soft power.

The actions in Libya, which did not condone invasion or occupation, were to prevent unnecessary casualties in the region.

Libya went from the highest Human Development Index in Africa to open air slave markets. The actions in Libya caused hundreds of thousands of unnecessary casualties and displaced millions.

I don't think there's anything wrong with the UN's stated mission, but we have look at its actual actions. In practice, it does nothing to constrain the biggest threat to world peace, America, while it does constrain anyone who tries to stand up to us.