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.
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/
Who would have thought that ignoring international law, treaties, and conventions would encourage your enemies to do the same? It's almost as if limiting yourself to limit those who would do the same to you makes sense. Pesky laws.
It's also noteworthy that neither country, to my knowledge, agreed not to use cluster munitions.
Even if Iran would have agreed to it, after having the US and Israel bomb civil infrastructure, as well as committing other war crimes, they have a right to defend themselves. And so far every answer has been proportional, maybe even less than it could have been.
I thought the right to defend was reserved for attackers, based on usa and israel claims.
Iran War: Special Edition, where it’s been crappily edited to show Iran shot first. “Maclunkey.”
Defense = preventive attack, unless it's the "bad guys"
after having the US and Israel bomb civil infrastructure, as well as committing other war crimes
That was the point of my first paragraph. Israel not participating in the CCM was just a bonus. I was aware there were international agreements not use to cluster munitions and I looked into it because I was curious.
Irans strategy seemed to be to degrade air defenses in Israel, then use their newer munitions when ammo supplies dropped.
My question is how the fuck did anyone in Israel and the US become so fucking stupid that they wouldn't assume what is essentially counter-battery, and why didn't they stockpile munitions for the counter attacks? Like, I'm not surprised that both parties had the hubris to believe Iran would fold after 5 days of fighting. But how did professional men at arms not consider this scenario?
Trump pulled a Stalin and purged all his competent generals. He surrounds himself with yes men. It's the fatal flaw of all authoritarian governments. Turns out it's a really bad idea to give one person absolute power and to never question their decisions.
OP mentions Iran MIRV missile (cluster bomb is a completely different artillery shell that is banned by international convention), but Iran also has hypersonic missiles. MIRVs outnumber air defenses, and hypersonics are too fast for them. There is also apparently less than unlimited exquisite defensive missiles that need to be rationed. For Israel, degrading Iran is the priority. Confident that the US will pay for all important repairs afterwards, and whining about death (none happen) or damage is illegal.
Neither the US or Israel signed onto the cluster munition ban. And neither did Iran or Russia. Why would they? And why would Iran not be allowed nukes when Israel is allowed to have them and openly threaten the world with them?
It's fascinating (in a horrific kind of way) that literally all participants in this war are monstrous. Seriously, there are no good guys. This is turning into WWIII, but I always figured that when it happened, there would be clearly identifiable victims and aggressors.
How naive of me. Everyone involved is victim and aggressor simultaneously.
Citizens are generally more victim than aggressors. Maybe given the genocidal rhetoric common in Israel currently that is not so much the case as one would expect, and USA citizens have an oceanic buffer.
I don't see how the US is anything other than the aggressor. Both Iran and Israel suck and they have no concern for human life, but I can see how they can claim to be victims. Not the US.
Fair point.
How is this turning into WW3?
It still seems like a relatively small scale war. There's no big allies for Iran. There's no attacks on the US beyond military bases and ships really. There's a global economic impact, but that doesn't constitute a global war imo.
Could this change? of course, but so could the ukraine war.
I can't imagine the Iran war's death count is even remotely close to the genocide in gaza that is still ongoing.
People seemed to think Iran was Iraq/Afghanistan.
It ain't and it took us 20 years to get out of there.
Finally, some good news.