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
Nah. Thats not racist. Stating that countries primarily populated by non-whites are somehow too weak or lazy to fight for themselves, however, is definitely pretty racist.
This particular country that we're actually discussing was indeed too lazy to fight for itself and gave up within 2 weeks after decades of being occupied.
EDIT: And that's if you don't consider this the wishes of the country itself. To a large extent, I think the Taliban have popular support within the country and I wouldn't be surprised if there were Taliban sympathizers or supporters within the ranks of the military.
Where did you see that? They were pointing out that the person they responded to made the very implication you're accusing them of making.
That user who suggested we 'help' is either malicious or ignorant. Because help doesn't mean we release the reserves of money we've stolen from the Afghans. It means invade them again, whether she means it or not.
The best thing we can do now is let the Afghans be sovereign and no longer interfere (which won't happen). You can expect nothing good socially from there, as the Americans helped the Taliban defeat local progressive and secular forces in the 70s. All we can hope for is for them to eventually stand up on their own two feet.
Anyone who whines about the plight of Afghan women is either doing propaganda or is misled. Afghan women have children too btw - children that are starving - have Biden release the reserves.
This is a much more nuanced approach that I can work with. I don't think that there's nothing we can do, but I can at least understand that perspective. We've done a shit ton of damage to the region over the last 50 years, and if the people had access to self determination, I'm sure that they'd prefer no US government intervention after the last 20 years. The new "insurgency" that was born out of more progressive elements of the old government have a chance to bring some positive peace if they win. The problem I had was the implication from others that the Afghan people are helpless and therefore not worth supporting.
That's cool. My peice had to said, because the rightwing types were benefitting from the silence or disagreement of people like myself who want no more intervention.