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
All of us are in the pre-world War III era and we're gearing up quickly for it. In many ways it's already underway, and we're just now starting to get ready go make it even more massive and global.
Welcome to the 21st century where men have evolved into nothing more than war mongering utter pieces of filthy shit. This is what will be all our legacy, a world scorched into oblivion and not a trace of humanity anywhere left on the planet. Perhaps that's for the best, really.
Shit was going pretty good until Russia fucked it all up. Biggest mistake in the last 50 years in Europe was allowing Russia to Annex Crimea. That set a tone that landed us on this path.
who would have thought appeasement wouldnt work when it has, historically, also not worked?
When your own political standing is dependent on cheap oil, you won't endanger it, even for the lives of fellow Europeans or even your own children.
What was the alternative? Invade Crimea with NATO troops?
Not NATO necessarily, but trade blockades on Russian ports accessible through European waters, hard sanctions, actual seizing of Russian assets, and potentially coalition troops from various countries with approval from Ukraine. NATO isn’t an offensive pact, only defensive. However those countries could form coalition forces to strike back at Russian military assets in Crimea. Instead we just lightly slapped them on the wrist and said “don’t do that again” and then they straight up murdered civilians and attacked a non-aggressive border nation.
We do all that right now. The impact it is having on Russian aggression? Nearly zero.
Oh damn, I forgot if we had done all of that years ago instead of recently we’d still be in the same boat… it’s having an impact. Russia has an unsustainable market, however the US and its allies need to blockade. We don’t do that currently. Start forcing the population there to rethink their support for Putin.
Stop simping for a failed state and leader like Putin.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_military_intervention_in_Libya
Turns out that when there's capital to gain that the "defensive pact" part is negotiable.
That didn’t start as a NATO mission at all. It only became one after the US, UK, Canada and France had already started the mission and Italy wanted NATO to take control otherwise they wouldn’t join in. I don’t know the specifics of how it met criteria for NATO to be involved, but it certainly wasn’t something NATO started. It’s also probably better if NATO generals take over missions that are more western country based as that means all members have a say in what goes on and for how long. They even talk in the article about how the only ground forces were non-NATO troops and were not authorized by NATO.
Sure bro, whatever lets you sleep at night.
Sorry bruh, having a more powerful military than Russia definitely helps me sleep at night. 😴 although that’s not saying much since Ukraine was able to kick Russia’s ass…
Are you under the impression either America or Russia needs anything beyond nukes to protect themselves or...
On 19 March 2011, a multi-state NATO-led coalition began a military intervention in Libya to implement United Nations Security Council Resolution 1973
It's incredible that you could put NATO led right in your quote and think it proves your point
Shitlibs, lmao
Just gonna ignore my point to call me a name? Classy
Um, sir, cows are brown sometimes.
If you’re implying my point is a non-sequitur, it’s directly from your source and relevant context. Not a single nation voted against the resolution, both the African Union and the Arab League strongly supported intervention. I think it’s pretty clear in hindsight it was inappropriate for NATO to handle but a one time intervention backed by the UNSC does not a doctrine make. It definitely doesn’t justify Russia invading Ukraine or stealing Crimea.
Edit: just to head off any Yugoslavia bombing rebuttals, UNSC 1203 was also passed with no votes against.
In other words
It's negotiable when capital is on the line.
Because now the rape is a systemic revenge policy but all of a sudden the oil isn't paying for everyone's college and healthcare.
Negotiable when authorized by a UNSC resolution.
Not sure what you’re trying to say about a systemic revenge policy.
So
Negotiable when the capitalist vetos, aka all the modern vetos, agree. Glad we're on the same page.
https://www.aljazeera.com/program/featured-documentaries/2019/9/7/unspeakable-crime-rape-as-a-weapon-of-war-in-libya
https://www.france24.com/en/20120920-muammar-gaddafi-rape-weapon-libya-annick-cojean-le-monde-sexual-slavery-harem-abuse-women
The primary evidence that Gaddafi was a bad bad dictator in the eyes of public opinion were rape allegations. There wasn't actually a lot of evidence of this, but there was enough that between that and his creepy women bodyguards/sex slaves that no one really denies it unless they're on the full on unhinged America Always Lies train.
So whenever people would ask "what makes Gaddafi so bad besides not liking America," bam, he's a serial rapist.
The problem is he also did a lot of demonstrably good things for the Libyan people, but you start looking like a borderline Dave Chappelle sketch if you defend that aspect.
The other problem, as outlined in the first article, is that Libya's systemic rape problem is/was way, way, WAY worse than before. Only now they don't even get the social benefits they used to.
Which rather puts a point on the issue that NATO and the UN didn't actually give a shit about Gaddafi being a rapist. That was just an excuse for intervention for the people unsure about bombing another group of brown people with oil.
Hopefully it calms down now that civil war is actually ending, but the problem is they're an unstable African country with oil across from Europe so.
Good luck.
Those are some sad articles. The whole Libya intervention reminded me of “don’t let a good crisis go to waste”. The west once again naively thought they could be the harbinger of democracy and fanned the flames. I agree that it certainly doesn’t seem better there than it was 15 years ago, regardless of how much contempt I hold for autocrats.
This is like a "children of men" type usage of men and not like, gender right?
ppl like tusk saying “ i dont want to scare anyone….” Yet every fucking day all day this shit is on tv, social media, the streets whatever. We dont want to scare anyone.. well guess what, no one is scared anymore just fucking tired of warmongeringDICKtator wannabee shitstains. Either pull the fucking trigger and burn everything to the ground (because nobody wants the other guy to have that thing where theres war over, i dont even know what anymore) or shut the fuck up and make shit better.
"I don't want to" and "I have to" can coincide
They evolved into this many centuries ago. Sad development of the supposedly superior sex.
I've never understood exactly what makes the male sex supposedly so superior. From what I've seen they are decidedly mediocre as a sex, very egotistical, gun loving, hate-filled, quick to anger, slow witted and quite dirty minded, with brains that make war and other filth. Extraordinarily gutter-type people.
I agree. Many of them claim women are dreamers and driven by emotion, but look at all the wars caused by males and the day-to-day competitions they have with each other. Strange.