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 [email protected]
Politics [email protected]
World Politics [email protected]
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
"She might meet a foreign leader who is doing bad things, so I'm not decided between her and Project 2025."
Really?
I won't support pro-genocide candidates. Yes really.
She really should not be meeting with right-wing fascists.
Meeting with someone ≠ Endorsing them
World politics is about negotiation. I’d rather she tucked into the conflict and tried to improve the situation than ignoring it.
You're talking to someone who just told me that it wouldn't even make a difference if Trump marched U.S. troops into Gaza.
You're deeply dishonest.
And yet that's almost literally what you said.
https://lemmy.world/comment/11358062
So it's weird that you're calling me deeply dishonest.
Trying to cut out context is dishonest.
You want to believe that the IDF is held back by lack of personnel, but they're not. They are not being held back from anything they want to do. Putting US soldiers in Gaza does not add to their capacity to continue the genocide exactly as they wish.
Zionists keep trying to convince everyone that Trump would be worse on this, which is simply a way of refusing to accept the reality of just how bad it really is.
There is no context in which "more dead people is not a worse outcome" is a moral answer.
And the context in which you said that saving one life during the Holocaust didn't matter?
I'd say most people here would be absolutely willing to save a single person's life from genocide.
You're not understanding what I was saying (or you're continuing to try to intentionally misrepresent what I was saying).
Using your analogy, you're the one saying 6 million deaths is acceptable as long as it doesn't get to six million and one. You're trying to simultaneously say we need to accept mass slaughter to avoid mass slaughter, it's nonsense.
The "six million deaths" are happening in Gaza right now. They are actually suffering and dying, but you're telling us we should accept that since you're afraid of not being able to kick the political can down the road and kerp pretending everything can be fine.
It doesn't matter, I can't make you understand why rewarding the Democrats for genocidal fascist policy is a losing strategy when they're suppose to be the alternative to genocidal fascists. You either let yourself understand it or you don't.
That's what you want me to be saying, not what I'm saying.
This statement keeps being repeated, but it's simply baseless. Nothing is holding Israel back, they are slaughtering and starving just as many people as they want, right now. And you are arguing for people to accept that.
Ok, you've got to be trolling.
I'm protesting the slaughter of Palestinians and saying it's unacceptable and that I'll never vote for anyone who is pro-genocide. You're arguing for me to accept it as inevitable that democrats continue supporting genocide. And somehow you think that translates into me holding your pro-genocide position. It's nonsensical.
You're desperate for other people to accept your justification for supporting what's going on in Gaza, you can't face how sick that is. You want to believe you're a moral person, but you're literally the cowardly towns folk who sees the plumes of smoke from the camps over your village and tells everyone who mentions it to shut up because "it could be worse."
Fuck. That. Zero tolerance on genocide.
That is not what I am saying at all. If you're going to accuse me of intentionally misrepresenting what you're saying, don't do it to me.
You're deeply misguided.
This is exactly why Netanyahu is doing what he is doing. He wants Trump. He knows the US doesn't/can't lose an ally in the region and he forces the administrations hand, which makes them look bad to their supporters. Those supporters stop supporting... and then Trump gets elected.
Don't let Netanyahu play you. Don't fall into his trap. Vote in local elections for people opposed to the genocide. Reach out to them and express it is a huge, maybe the only, concern of yours. That is how you bring change.
Removing yourself from the conversation doesn't make the problem go away.
There are millions that just don't vote. Never have, never will. So their stance has no impact. It is worse to be willing to use that vote and then throw it away on a single issue that won't change, no matter the candidate (and honestly in this case one candidate there is a chance vs one where there is zero chance for Gaza and things get worse for Ukraine).
We've effectively been given the Trolley Problem and, instead of playing, you're choosing to walk away and whatever happens, happens, as long as you feel good.
It can be endorsing, yes. There's a reason so many democrats are not attending -- going to Netanyahu's speech lends him legitimacy and a greater perception of support.
Stopping the genocide doesn't require negotiation, you withhold aid until they stop.
But as I keep saying, Harris will need to find way to signal that her meeting isn't in support of Netanyahu. If she goes in and is giving him hugs and holding his hand up in unity and that kind of bullshit, that's a really bad sign. It can go either way, I'm just stating that I won't support genocide just because it gets a fresh face on it, Harris needs to prove her commitment to holding Netanyahu to account in a real, material way.
Anything but voting for Harris would be supporting Trump, an even worse pro-genocide candidate. You can't equate Harris, who's calling for a ceasefire, with Trump, who gave Israel Jerusalem and is telling Israel to keep going with the genocide.
"Anything but voting for Trump is supporting Harris."
Nonsensical, right?
Biden and Trump are equally bad on genocide, there is no "worse". If Harris chooses to signal she's continuing Biden's genocide support I'm out again. I'm willing to compromise on Harris' generally but nothing has changed in my tolerance for pro-genocide candidates, and nothing ever will.
Luckily not funding genocide is an easy hurdle to cross. We'll see if Harris manages to do it.
Yes but that's the "things are bad (Harris), so might as well make them worse (Trump)" attitude.
No. This is about Democratic support of genocide. I simply won't support any candidate willing to help kill and starve children.
If Dems want my vote the price is the same as it's been; don't support far-right fascists committing genocide.
Very, very low bar.
Bullshit. You'd find some other reason to whine and discourage others from voting. No one's buying your both sides shit.
Nope. I've been supportive of Harris up to this point since her stepping forward as potential nominee. I genuinely hope she can demonstrate that she's against the genocide.
There will be two candidates to choose from who are going to collectively get 90+ percent of the vote. You can vote for the lesser of 2 evils or waste your vote on third party.
"Genocide is bad, so I'm going to support the candidate who supports ultra genocide with extra genocide at home instead"
There's no such thing as "ultra genocide" and if there was, it's already happening in Gaza and it's being fueled by a Democratic administration, not a Republican one.
I would consider calls to nuke Gaza ultra genocide
Uh huh, and how realistic do you actually think that is? Israel is going to allow Trump to drop a nuclear bomb on their border...
The fact that the retort is "It could be worse, they could drop a literal nuke on Gaza" should be an indicator that what you're arguing as an acceptable alternative is indefensibly extreme.
Do you know nothing about Project 2025? It will cause more genocide. Genocide in your country.
Do you want to see Latinos carted away and queer kids committing suicide after being forced into "conversion therapy?" Because that's exactly what Trump will bring.
I won't support genocide in another country to spare myself from potential harm, no, that would be morally bankrupt.
I don't vote based on fear. I can't be threatened in that way.
Yourself? This isn't about you.
How about all the other people? Millions of people. Fuck them? Because she's just having a meeting with the perpetrator of a different genocide on the other side of the planet? A genocide that Trump will also perpetuate and has already said he would make worse?
So essentially your refusal to "support genocide" in another country will make that genocide worse and add more genocide to the mix.
But hey, this is all about sparing you from potential harm, right? Fuck all those illegals and homos.
You dismiss the idea that the humanity of Palestinians is equal to your own. Its ok for them to die under the bombs and weapons we supply to Israel, as long as it allows us to avoid our own domestic discomfort. We differ on this fact.
I'm part of the groups that will probably be most immediately effected by a Trump admin. That fear will not push me to support a genocide.
If the American system is broken and corrupted then we as Americans should be facing and reconciling those problems ourselves, not transferring our own potential discomfort and suffering overseas to kids that are out of sight and out of mind.
For fuck's sake, it's also not about me.
It's about millions of other people. People whose lives you apparently don't care about. I guess they're too brown or too queer to be part of that whole 'humanity being equal' thing.
Yes, it is. It's cowardice and self-interest. You're not going to be able to flip this.
You can't on one hand claim you care about the hypothetical suffering millions while arguing for ignoring a very real on-going genocide funded by your representatives.
"Just let Democrats get away with funding the slaughter of Gazans as long as we can skirt around the consequences of our corrupt politics here."
Maybe this will help; imagine the Gazans are white Americans. Ignore that they're brown and live behind some imaginary line "somewhere else" in the world and instead pretend you see them as equal to you.
When you take the perspective that they're just as human and deserving of life as any of the other domestic groups you're talking about, you realize that Biden is, at this very moment, doing a "Project 2025" of his own. It's just against human beings who happen to be 7,000 miles away instead of closer to you.
If Harris chooses to continue Bidens policy on this, I can't vote for her, exactly the same as I can't vote for Trump or Biden or any other zionist.
Do explain to me how it's self-interest when I am cishet and white.
And again- the "real ongoing genocide" will be made worse by Trump. You just obviously don't care about that. And if you don't feel like voting for either of them, just stay home and don't vote. Why waste your time or energy?
Why are you putting this in quotes? It's an on-going genocide.
And there's nothing Trump can do to make what's hapoening in Gaza any worse. Israel is doing exactly as they please. There us no more room to push the needle. The fact that you think there's room for "worse" makes me think you don't actually understand what's happening there.
Even if Trump sent troops to help with the killing it wouldn't do anything, because it's a full-blown genocide already and the only thing Israel needs to continue it is what we've bern giving them.
I put it in quotes because I was quoting you. That is why those are called quotation marks.
Again, I am cishet and white, so how is this self-interest?
Also...
What the fuck.
You understand the implication of putting something in quotes. It's not my subjective opinion what's happening in Gaza. It's real. No quotes are necessary, same as if we're talking about cars you don't need to put "car" in quotes when you talk about them as if it's some controversial term.
Because Project 2025 will effect you too. The groups you're talking about (lgbt people, brown and black Americans) have already been suffering the consequences of right-wing oppression and neoliberal negligence. The difference now is that those consequences are threatening to bleed over into the comfortable bubbles of neoliberal middle class and it's freaking them out. Suddenly it's this big priority that we all must pitch in together, while for the last 40 years those minorities gave been told they need to accept "slow progress" and "generational change" so that the corporate status quo can continue on without disruption.
Do you think a Palestinian child cares if it's an American pulling the trigger or an Israeli? Does it make a difference in the result?
I used quotation marks because that is how punctuation works.
Also, the groups I'm talking about have not yet been marched into concentration camps like Project 2025 has planned for one and implies similar issues for the other.
U.S. troops on the ground would make the genocide worse.
You don't seem to understand the concept of a bad thing being made worse. As if Britain aiding the Nazis in the Holocaust by killing all of their own Jews would somehow been equally as bad as what actually happened. Either that, or you're fine with the Gaza genocide being worse and more genocides planned in the U.S., one of them explicitly stated by Project 2025 is a good thing so you can say you told us so.
So which is it- more genocide isn't bad because lots more dead people doesn't make genocide worse or you don't care if there's more genocide because you can gloat afterward?
I'm rejecting your notion that the genocide can be made worse as baseless. You can't fill a bucket that's already full, regardless of how much more water you pour into it.
It's full scale genocide. Nothing is inhibiting Israel, Biden is giving them everything they want already.
They have enough guns, they have enough bombs, they have enough soldiers, they completely control every entrance into Gaza. They control the water, the food, the stopping of aid. They are shooting people indiscriminately in the streets, in hospitals, bombing them in safe zones, pushing them into mass graves.
They have destroyed all the hospitals, all the schools, all the homes, all the infrastructure. They've killed all the press, they've bulldozed all the cemetaries. Children who've lost their entire families areliterally laying down, hoping to get run over by a car or killed.
That's how hopeless the genocide is in Gaza right now. Don't talk to me about vague "worse" options, as if that will give me a reason to ignore what's being done.
You can't actually offer up anything except "Maybe the American-made and delivered bullet that kills a Palestinian will be shot out of a gun held by a US soldier instead of and IDF soldier". That means nothing to me, it's immaterial to the real concern.
So if the hundreds of thousands of Jews that lived in the UK were also put in the ovens, that wouldn't have been as worse as the six million who already were.
That is what you are saying?
So six million and one is your limit then. Mine is lower.
I see, some people's lives aren't worth saving. So much for equality.
Palestinians, apparently, yes. That's the whole problem.
You want me to believe it's ok to off-shore the consequences of our political failings, I just don't accept that as a viable way towards changing the problem of zionism in the Democratic party.
You just told me saving one life in the holocaust wasn't worth it. Is saving one Palestinian life worth it? Is one Palestinian life in 2024 worth more than one Jewish life in 1939?
I am just so relieved that most people seem capable of understanding nuance.
By all means figure out if you can somehow give us a better candidate. But when it's time for you to actually do something real, remember to play the hand you have.
Having different values from you does not mean they don’t understand nuance. They’re not stupid. They just have a moral boundary that they refuse to cross: supporting genocide. If the lesser evil involves voting for a politician who provides military and financial assistance to a genocidal regime, then I would say that the only morally correct course of action is revolution.
What kind of revolution? The kind that involves more soldiers and cops raping citizens here? Because as far as I know that's the only type there is.
No, a working class revolution. A general strike. Whatever you want to call it when the working class refuse to capitulate to the demands of the ruling class. And if necessary we will defend ourselves, but violence is not the goal. The goal is to remove the ruling class from power, by any means necessary. By refusing to provide for them, and to follow their demands, they lose their power, and alternative structures for society without imbalances of power or systems of oppression can be formed.