this post was submitted on 25 Jun 2025
1291 points (98.3% liked)

politics

24372 readers
4256 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. 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.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. 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.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

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.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Useless. Time for the Social Democrats to form their own party.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 day ago (2 children)

There are probably a dozen things they could (and should) impeach Trump for. This isn't actually one of them. Presidents are authorized to do air strikes.

The left is usually not as ignorant of the facts as the right, but this is one of those cases where the left is ignoring the facts. The President has authorization from Congress to do limited military action. Should all of the Presidents before been impeached for doing similar one-off air strikes? Seems you want to impeach Trump based on dumb memes about this being the start of WWIII rather it being an air strike.

Did Obama get impeached for sending a SEAL Team into Pakistan without getting authorization from congress?

Also Iran does in fact have a nuclear weapons program. The civilian reactor is supplied Uranium from Russia that's already enriched to around 5% which is what you use for civilian energy generation. Iran had Uranium enriched to 60% which isn't useful for civilian reactors and none of the Uranium enriched in Iran is used in their one civilian nuclear reactor. The UN has reported that Iran is keeping secrets from them and there's been an increase in their Uranium enrichment, which again is entirely a weapons program, the uranium for civilian use comes from Russia.

So congratulations, instead of impeaching Trump for doing all of the corruption, or for deploying Marines on US soil without authorization, or for falsely declaring everything an emergency so he can do stupid tariff stuff, you've created a narrative that the left tried to impeach him for protecting Americans from the "Death to America" country's nuclear weapons. I guess the left is fine with the corruption and deploying the military within the US, but only take action to come to the defense of the Ayatollah's nuclear weapons program.

The left only seems to want to attack Trump when they have non-existent chance of winning or even convincing anyone of their position. On issues where the left has a strong case, they do nothing.

[–] FreakinSteve@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

If your claim is that the strike is justified because you believe that Iran has an illegal nuke program, then do you also agree that Israel should be bombed to oblivion because we know that they have an illegal nuke program?

Does the fact that the strike was made when all intel insisted that there was no justification for it matter at all in this, or does past evils justify all future evils?

In the past we very publicly killed Nazis. By your logic can we do the same today?

Also, btw, Obama was in power during a time of declared war.

[–] SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca 2 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

If your claim is that the strike is justified because you believe that Iran has an illegal nuke program, then do you also agree that Israel should be bombed to oblivion because we know that they have an illegal nuke program?

Are you saying the world is supposed to be fair? If Iran launches a nuke at Tel Aviv and 2 million people die and Israel retaliates and nukes Tehran and 2 million people die, that would be fair. Even Stevens!

I'd rather live in an unfair world than live in your fair world because I'm not a psychopath that thinks 4 million people is a good outcome.

Does the fact that the strike was made when all intel insisted that there was no justification for it matter at all in this, or does past evils justify all future evils?

Read the IAEA report: https://www.iaea.org/newscenter/statements/iaea-director-generals-introductory-statement-to-the-board-of-governors-9-june-2025

I don't have the security clearances needed to see the intel and I strongly doubt you do (if you did you wouldn't be blabbing about it a web forum). But we do have publicly available information from the subject experts at the IAEA that Iran was enriching more Uranium and was hiding things from the UN.

[–] FreakinSteve@lemmy.world 0 points 16 hours ago

SO YOU AGREE that Israel should've been bombed to oblivion for having an illegal nuke program.

Your first paragraph makes no sense, but the logical conclusion of your post is that Israel should be bombed for having nukes.

[–] MuskyMelon@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Hello AI friend! Nice grammar and spelling.

[–] SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca 1 points 16 hours ago

I didn't capitalize Congress tho, didn't you notice that? Or maybe I'm a very sophisticated AI that's good at spelling but occasionally capitalizes things incorrectly just to make you think I'm not an AI.

You will never know! BEEP BOOP!

[–] VincentAdultman@lemmy.zip 5 points 23 hours ago

I hate Trump as much as the next guy, but you can't just discredit someone by claiming they're AI, due to good spelling and grammar. That's absurd.