this post was submitted on 12 Jan 2024
-1 points (0.0% liked)

News

22896 readers
4267 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. 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.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 32 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

They might have a stronger case if they haven't proven to be a 'do nothing' Congress. They can't even put together a budget.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Congress signed over the rights to just do war crimes whenever you feel like it back under Reagan.

Now the President can do the thing, Congress can call a hearing to complain about it, elections happen, power changes hands, and the only people who suffer are the ones getting bombed.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

It's not a war crime to return fire if fired upon.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 8 months ago

"He bombed me back first"

Targeting of civilians and civilian infrastructure, mass arrests and forced removal of native populations, and indiscriminate use of chemical weapons are all war crimes. Hell, use of cluster bombs and mines have been recognized as war crimes since the mid-90s, and yet the US is the world's largest manufacturer and distributor of both.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

I don't think it's his actions that are the problem. I think it is WHO did them that is the problem which can be seen by the charge being led by the infamous Rashida Talib from Michigan.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 8 months ago

Congressman Ro Khanna:

[–] [email protected] -1 points 8 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Iran is a whole ass country, the Houthis are a rebel faction, for lack of a better term. I think this whole situation is kinda different... Matter of opinion I guess...

[–] [email protected] -1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Houthis are the de facto government of Yemen which is important because the US is claiming the right to self defence which is only available between states.under international law. That's why for example Israel's argument of self defence is nonsense because Gaza is not a separate country.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Biden when Americans need help:

I'm just a president I can't do anything without Congress!

Biden when far right ethnostate wants to do another genocide in the Middel East:

Fuck congress, I'm a president! Vote trump if you don't like it.

Motherfucker is 80 years old and has no idea what he's doing. We deserve better than our only two options

[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Oh, is that what this is about? We're attacking the Houthis in defense of Israel?

Don't be fucking daft, or disingenuous, which is worse because it displays complete moral cowardice.

We're attacking the Houthis because they're indiscriminately attacking civilian ships in one of the most valuable shipping lanes in the fucking world.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

So it's about money, as it always is. Going to war is always about money... I'm so tired of the U.S. being at war. We've been at war all but maybe 12 years of the U.S.'s existence. Don't believe me? It's surprising but true.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Unless your ideal is an autarkic Festung Amerika, shipping lanes kind of have to be able to operate without the civilian sailors who go through worrying about getting fucking killed.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Globalization isn't a requirement. In fact, it's completely destroying our planet and its habitability. But yeah, let's worry about the shipping lanes.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Yeah, alright, you have fun with the idea that people exchanging goods without murdering each other is what's destroying the planet. Terribly evil, globalization. Or that the collapse of shipping lanes wouldn't result in incredible human suffering.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

It's called CO2 emissions, I'm sure you're aware of it. The suffering climate change is going to cause in the coming decades will dwarf anything we've ever seen, unless we see a sharp decrease in emissions to zero very very soon, ideally 20 years ago. But, the next best time to do it is right now.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

The core issue of CO2 emissions isn't "People now communicate, travel to, and trade with each other across the globe" but "Massive use of fossil fuels where they are not necessary due to corporate lobbying"

Cargo ships and planes combined emit ~5% of our CO2 output. The major offenders are elsewhere.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago (3 children)

I'm not going to argue about this. We need to reduce our emissions to zero, that is not zero.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

So, you exhale CO2 when you breath.

Draw whatever conclusions from that that you like.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 8 months ago

Yeah, and trees also exhale oxygen. What's your point?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

That is not a rational goal by any stretch of the imagination.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

It's actually the only thing that's going to save us. It's not only rational, it's the only logical conclusion one can come to from the overwhelming data on climate change. If you think burning fossil fuels is more important than having a habitable planet, then you're not thinking clearly.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

A planet without energy use cannot possibly be habitable.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Actually we survived without energy use for hundreds of thousands of years before electricity was invented. So, that's kind of a ridiculous statement to even make.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

No, we didn't. Humans discovered fire a hell of a long time ago.

And unless you're willing to exterminate thousands for every one that lives, "go back to fire" isn't theoretically possible either.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

You know burning a fire isn't the same as driving cars, planes, busses, heating houses with natural gas, oil, coal, etc right? You're just being obtuse now, on purpose, and I don't know why..

[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

For your batshit stated goal of "zero emissions no matter what", they absolutely are the same thing. A fire is emissions.

But again. Even theoretically going back to fire would only be possible if you exterminated the overwhelming majority of humanity.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Zero emissions can be achieved with renewable energy sources. There are lots of them. Nothing bat shit crazy about that. You've bought in to some serious propaganda unfortunately. We have the technology at this very moment to switch over fully renewable sources. But we haven't because of money.

It's sad that this is considered a controversial point of view at all. Its been so highly politicized, for what, money, over the billions of lives we are going to lose in the coming decades?

That's the real insanity here, not what I advocate for.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

There are emissions from the manufacturing process. There will be emissions from recycling, there will be emissions period. Zero emissions is not realistic.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 8 months ago

Right, we should just accept the planet will become uninhabitable. That's your message right now. And that's the real insanity.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

We’ll never reduce to zero, stop engaging in fantasy delusions. What can do is make realistic effort to curb the largest offenders, which ocean shipping isn’t a part of. If you think we’re going to go back to the age of sail and multi-year journeys for items to reach destinations then you’re high

[–] [email protected] -1 points 8 months ago

It's not a fantasy, it's literally the only thing that will save us. Scientists have been very very clear zero emissions is the only thing that will stop climate change. I live with one for God sakes. Don't call me delusional. It's the only rational thing to do, anything else is fucking crazy bcz it's the difference between livable conditions here, and not. But don't trust me, we'll all see the consequences of our dumbest arguments in about a decade.