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
Right, but I'm not saying it is. My point is that the fact that someone is challenging American hegemony doesn't mean there has to be war. There was definitely enough time in which the Soviet Union looked strong and unlikely to collapse to show that.
both sides know this, neither of them wants to be seen as the aggressor because then the other side will have a narrative edge for their action. like the Imperial Japanese Army did in Pearl Harbor, where the US government took the opportunity to justify their use of Weapons of mass destruction on Japanese civilians.
Are you really suggesting that the U.S. will conduct a nuclear first strike against China?
I have not, that's your interpretation. Lol
Okay, then why talk about Hiroshima and Nagasaki?
As an example of how powerful it is to have a narrative edge in war. where a government can easily get away with a crime against humanity, without any consequences.
Okay, so the U.S. is going to commit a crime against humanity in a war with China? What crime would this be?
that is your interpretation. You really have a crazy imagination dude. Chill out!
Maybe if you were clearer about what you were saying, these "interpretations" wouldn't be an issue.
I'm not sure what the point of bringing up Hiroshima and Nagasaki to show that the U.S. is capable of crimes against humanity is when you aren't saying that's what the U.S. is going to do again.
I didn't. you stated the names according to your understanding. I only stated the facts that have happened in the history, I don't make statements of my assumptions about what could or would happen.
I stated the names because this is about the U.S. and China.
So you're not talking about the U.S. committing a crime against humanity against China, you're not even talking about the U.S. and China. You're talking about something that has nothing to do with the topic in this thread and you're antagonizing a moderator about it to boot. Did I get that right?
let me be more clear for you, I'm not talking about the U.S. committing a crime against humanity against China. If you follow my comments. you may notice, you're imagining stuff in that regard. specifically, trying to corner me because your opinions differ based on your interpretation of my comment. this is my last time saying this again. CHILL OUT!
Once again, please explain how your posts are on-topic for this thread if they are not about the U.S. or China.
I guess I hurt someone's EGO. 😬
That would be a violation of our civility rule. I would suggest you do not do so again.
Now, please explain how your posts are on-topic for this thread if they are not about the U.S. or China.
My comments were specifically on U.S. and China. until you pick on "Hiroshima and Nagasaki" to divert it, in your interpretation of my statement.
You have repeatedly talked about my interpretation. I have already asked you to explain the connection between Hiroshima and the current tensions between the U.S. and China and you refuse to do so. I'm looking at your post history and seeing a fair amount of trolling.
I think it would be best for us to end this conversation now, but I am going to be keeping an eye on you for both trolling and incivility in this community, since you apparently are not aware of the rules in our sidebar.
I did.
I don't troll. Not my thing.
Your post history would disagree, but I think it is best we stop this discussion entirely.