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. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating 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 10/19
-
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
You need to be. One side is a signatory to a nuclear nonproliferation agreement who is trying to create a nuclear energy program for civilian energy, under watchdog guidance for 40+ years.
The other side is Israel. A nation committing a genocide, with the full backing and support of another nation, the US, who itself is the only nation, in the history of the world, to use nuclear weapons. Ever.
One side has really good propaganda and makes you think “both sides are bad.”
the mullah regime is pretty fucking awful.
And that means they cannot have nuclear energy?
It means take anything they say they're doing with a block of salt.
same in all directions, really.
And yet you seem to be taking one side at face value while dismissing the other out of hand...
Seems less about reasonable skepticism and more about implicit and unreasonable bias.
I’m saying that one nation has no “right” to stop the internal actions of another, especially a nation who is committing genocide at this very moment.
But that wasn't your original point, your original point was that one side was bad and the other wasn't. That was the entire crux of this argument. Are you abandoning that now to just say "Israel bad, all else is irrelevant"?
where did I say one was not bad? I simply said differences. One signed a nonpro agreement. one is doing a genocide.
All nations are bad. They should not exist.
None have the right to “stop” another from progression in a promised fashion by “preemptively” striking.
And just to close the convo, yes, fuck Israel.
Your very first comment. Where you responded to someone saying people shouldn't be on either side because they're both bad, you said we should be on one side because the other is bad. That's saying one is bad, one is good, unless you're saying we should be on the side of a bad guy.
You're right that Israel is in the wrong. They made an attack on a sovereign nation, mostly to distract from that genocide you speak of.
That has nothing to do with Iran being in the wrong, though, which these days they regularly are. And thus we shouldn't take their claims that they're on the up and up and totally good guys at face value.
No doubt Iran is bad too, the death warrant on Salman Rushdie is very clear evidence of that.
The USs actions in world war two are an odd thing to bring up in this context. It was a radically different set of circumstances, 80 years ago, and none of the people involved are alive anymore.
It's entirely irrelevant.
May as well point out that the US was the driver for the creation of those watchdog groups and is a leading force in nuclear disarmament. It's just as relevant to if Iran has a nuclear weapons program or Israels justification for attacking.
Iranian opposition to US strategic interests in the region giving the US a strong motivation to let anything that makes them weaker happen is a perfectly good thing to mention.
irrelevant? I’d say unnecessary and yet game changing.
What does that even mean? How is what a nation did generations ago relevant to two different nations in a totally different scenario?
do you not realize there are people still alive today who were when the US nuked two cities?
No, what I don't understand is what relevance that has to this situation. The US using nukes on Japan 80 years ago doesn't make Iran making nukes justified. It doesn't validate Iran not having nukes. It neither strengthens nor weakens Israeli claims of an Iranian weapons program, and it doesn't make a preemptive strike to purportedly disable them just or unjust.
It seems like you're arguing that the US nuked Japan and therefore Iran, a signatory to the nuclear nonproliferation treaty, is allowed to have nukes. Israel is falsely characterizing their civilian energy program, and we know this because of their backing by the US.
It's just a non-sequitor, particularly when there's relevant reasons why US involvement complicated matters. .
It is not that it makes them justified, you seem to think I support what the US did. No. I say that the US has no right to pretend to worry about and therefore control other nations when the US has a documented history of using them.
If anything, the world could be “within its rights” to “preemptively strike” the US!
“Look, I know I used meth and got thoroughly addicted and it completely ruined my life and it has taken years to get to a place where I’m able to have a semblance of a life, but I can’t tell anyone else not to use meth! That would be hypocritical of me, since I did! No, no one has any right to ever share what they’ve learned through experience.”
This is the hypothetical situation you’re arguing for.
also if an adult wants to do meth no other adult has a “right” to stop them.
The US is NOT the world police. Sheesh. get uncle sam’s boot out of your mouth.
Yeah. because that’s how the world works. Let me sum up my point like this:
US, Israel, UK - all genocidal colonialist projects who have nothing good for the world and should not exist as nations. And in the current “geist”.
The rest of the world - also genocidal colonist projects who should not exist as nations.
Yes, I understand what you're saying, it's not a complicated position.
Your position is that national reputation matters more than anything else. And most pointedly, the national reputation of your allies matters more than any other argument.
What I'm saying is, is that the actions the US, or any other nation, took before the people currently running things were even born have no bearing on current events. Nations aren't people, and they don't possess a national character that you can use to try to predict their behavior or judge them.
Would the world be justified in concluding that it's only a matter of time before Germany does some more genocide? Before Japan unleashes atrocities across Asia?
If you're getting down to it, the US can't control other nations, beyond stick and carrot means. And the US has the same right to try to keep Iran from getting nukes as Iran does in trying to get them. Because again, nations aren't people. They don't have rights, they have capabilities.
And all of that's irrelevant! Because the question is, is Israel justified in attacking Iran? The perception of hypocrisy in US foreign policy isn't relevant to that question.
and re your last- exactly. Israel is the true problem here. The US backing it is another thread for sure. :)