A community for discussing events around the World
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
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 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.
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
It is literally a crime against humanity to declare no quarter be given.
Edit: US Code literally prescribes death for war crimes when that crime results in death: https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid%3AUSC-prelim-title18-section2441&num=0&edition=prelim
Too bad laws are only suggestions for the US government.
It's enough for the ICC to put out a warrant
You mean the ICC that is not recognized by the US? Lmao
Doesn't mean they can't issue a warrant, which would mean he can't ever leave the US after he's done being president.
Bro the US literally has enshrined a law that authorizes them to 'legally' invade the Hague if any of them are tried or captired.
I wouldn't hold my breath. The ICC was always an extension of US imperialism.
I seriously doubt the USA would invade a country in Europe. That would be the end of "the West" as it is currently recognized.
Bro the US literally has enshrined a law that authorizes them to ‘legally’ invade the Hague if any of them are tried or captired.
I think it depends on whether or not the next administration turns them over.
Bro the US literally has enshrined a law that authorizes them to ‘legally’ invade the Hague if any of them are tried or captired.
Going to need a citation to the statute. Not that I don't believe you, but I'd like to see where it is for a better understanding.
The ICC was always an extension of US imperialism.
X Doubt.
But, even if that were true, the ICC has carried forth good actualizations of justice.
Ah yes, I forgot how they captured Netanyahu.
Has he been anywhere that has extradition to that court?
Is googling too hard for you?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Service-Members%27_Protection_Act
Keep licking the boot.
Whose boot was I licking?
It's the Geneva checklist or Geneva suggestion for a reason.
Jesus fucking Christ, the bastards went full movie trope.
"What do we do with the survivors, sir?"
"There were no survivors. Do you understand?"
Our ancestors didn't defy kings, battle their own wayward countrymen, charge trenches, and rush fortified beaches headlong into the jaws of death. . .
. . .for. This. Whatever the disgraceful hell this is.
About now, every real patriot for what's good about this country should feel a profound and gnawing agony at every passing day these monsters aren't held to account and rendered incapable of further harm to humanity, whatever form that would take.
We need to make it loud and clear that if "the other team" in places of power doesn't use every single tool at their disposal to end this threat IMMEDIATELY, they are complicit fools and will be held accountable as accomplices to whatever untold horrors would await us, should we refuse to hold the line.
Yea, this bothers me. At this point I agree that any politician that doesnt start fighting this Nazi is a traitor to the US.
Usual america terrorist moment
11 people? There were 11 people on the boat? There's no fucking way that was a drug smuggling boat. 11 people means at least nine people's worth of weight that can't be dedicated to drugs.
it was not proven those boats were ~~not~~ carrying drugs nor have fuel capacity to reach the US coasts. They most likely killed fisher boats:
https://factually.co/fact-checks/justice/evidence-vessels-venezuela-us-drug-trafficking-e51d01
If anybody is still under the impression that someone somewhere in the chain of command might refuse illegal orders, this tells you everything you need to know
Unfortunately the US doesn't consider that one to be an illegal order. It is heartless, and unnecessary. But ever since the advent of airpower the US has maintained that planes, helicopters, and drones are not required to accept surrender because it is impractical to impossible in any given situation. So the standard is usually to keep firing. Desert Storm and Iraqi Freedom had notable exceptions with mass surrender instructions dropped beforehand. And again, I know that's not reassuring. But this is why politics isn't supposed to be a team game. This is the level of power we are making decisions on. For other things that are completely legal but most people don't realize; heavy machineguns can absolutely be used to target individual soldiers; Flamethrowers are still 100 percent legal against military targets; You can be shot after your surrender is accepted, (I'll expand below); You will be shot if you do not or cannot actively surrender; and Nobody respects the rule against shooting medics and medevacs.
To expand on the most inflammatory one, the only time you are "safe" is while you are in custody. Modern combat operations move very fast and surrendering people are often left in place after their weapons are removed/destroyed. If they don't actively surrender again to follow on forces then they are legal targets because we haven't developed psychic powers yet. This especially matters with surrendered wounded who may not be in a condition to surrender again. Shooting bodies as you advance is legal and expected in a war. You just aren't allowed to personally go back and shoot someone again without them presenting a new threat. With that information in mind you should also know the US military and any professional military sends multiple waves across a battlefield. It is incredibly lethal, by design.
I say all this not to call you out but to highlight that war is a giant bag of dicks that most people outside the military are still naïve about.
The other pressing thing here is this is an order to fire on a declared enemy, outside our border. Meaning the president signed a sheet of paper declaring them to be the enemy, Congress hasn't thrown a flag, and they are beyond the jurisdiction of law enforcement. That is very clear cut to the military. If you change any one of those 3 parameters then things go to gray zone or illegal very quickly. Someone asked me some months ago while Trump was vomiting about Greenland if the military would obey that order versus an order to hunt down and kill Americans inside America. And the answer is Greenland would be fucked but those Americans are pretty safe from the military. They are not however safe from anonymous DOJ task forces and DHS.
If they didn't kill everyone, it's possible one of them would be able to prove there were no drugs and this is just racism...
It probably was drugs - but that is not the point. It's wildly unethical and a violation of many rules of war to simply kill people like they are doing.
We don't summarily execute people at the president's say.
Seriously. Even domestically they aren't allowed to just waltz into a drugden and open fire.
I mean, they still do but they are least have the claim that they fired in self defence. Not so much when you do it with drone strikes and missiles.
It probably was drugs
Based on what do you say it was PROBABLY drugs?
i doubt it was drugs. venezuela doesn't have an expressive drug trade and i don't remember the us offering any proof yet.
its just terrorism for an excuse to invade venezuela. more wmds.
and yes you do execute people without any due process when you go to war with a 3rd world country you want something from, thats pretty common.
Does the Hague not investigate war crimes?
The U.S. doesn't recognize the ICC and sanctions its officials if they investigate war crimes by the U.S. or its allies.
We briefly ratified the Rome Statute in 2000 but pulled out shortly after invading Afghanistan and shortly before invading Iraq.
The us said it would invade the Hague of anyone were tried and attempted to be put on trial.
"all means necessary and appropriate to bring about the release of any U.S. or allied personnel being detained or imprisoned by, on behalf of, or at the request of the International Criminal Court"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Service-Members'_Protection_Act
No, the US would invade the Netherlands if they tried to investigate.
Since it's probably not clear to those unfamiliar, this is literally true.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Service-Members%27_Protection_Act
God you can just tell that he gets off on the feeling that he had the power to kill people. Gets him moist.
But Americans won’t take Hegseth out because that would just be so uncouth and WE WOULD BE NO BETTER THAN HIM.
Cowards.
Dont worry everyone. Republicans will praise the pedophile and friends through tweets. The Democrats will post a mildly worded tweet. No one will actually do anything.
The "I was just following orders" defense is gonna be used a loooot in the future
Man I knew he said that but I didn't know it was in that context. Murderous fucker!
As I understand, not a single one of these boats were even remotely capable of making it to America to begin with. Not without refueling, which isn’t likely that we’re set up for it.
This was all a coordinated targeted mass murder right in front of our faces and they need to be tried and punished for every one.
I'm a world where laws mattered those words would haunt him all the way to the gallows.
It's not a warcrime if you've never formally declared war points finger at temple.
What is the difference between the US military, the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF), and Hamas? The US military is the most effective, the Israeli Defense Forces are less effective than the US military, but much more than Hamas, Hamas is the least effective. Okay, the Russian military is probably the least effective. Let me rephrase this. To someone, someone's hero is a terrorist. And vice versa. If a military force can kill without accountability, it is a terrorist organization, like Hamas or the IDF.
That sounds rather... war-crime-y.
Should the orange cancer expect sternly written letters off displeasure (that are written at an adult comprehension level and not written in crayon, leading to him disregarding them ofc)?