this post was submitted on 02 Dec 2025
194 points (99.5% liked)

Politics

1134 readers
216 users here now

For civil discussion of US politics. Be excellent to each other.

Rule 1-3, 6 & 7 No longer applicable

Rule 4: Keep it civil. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a jerk. It’s not acceptable to say another user is a jerk. Cussing is fine.

Rule 5: Be excellent to each other. Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, ableist, will be removed.

The Epstein Files: Trump, Trafficking, and the Unraveling Cover-Up

Info Video about techniques used in cults (and politics)

Bookmark Vault of Trump's First Term

USAfacts.org

The Alt-Right Playbook

Media owners, CEOs and/or board members

Video: Macklemore's new song critical of Trump and Musk is facing heavy censorship across major platforms.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
pelespirit@sh.itjust.works
194
The Trump administration just admitted to what legal experts call a war crime (www.ms.now)
submitted 4 months ago by pelespirit@sh.itjust.works to c/politics@sh.itjust.works
20 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

But on Monday, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said the second deadly strike did occur. She said Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth had authorized an admiral to conduct “these kinetic strikes” on the suspected drug vessel — and she said that second strike was conducted in “self-defense to protect Americans in vital United States interests.”

Even before Leavitt’s admission that the second strike happened, some legal experts and U.S. lawmakers had already expressed alarm. They argued that even if one accepts the flimsy legal pretext the administration says justifies its belligerence in the seas of the Western hemisphere, that the second deadly strike constituted either a war crime or murder.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] pelespirit@sh.itjust.works 33 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (2 children)

Apparently, it's a pattern:

Pete Hegseth told US soldiers in Iraq to ignore legal advice on rules of engagement

Pete Hegseth, the US defense secretary, told soldiers under his command in Iraq to ignore legal advice about when they were permitted to kill enemy combatants under their rules of engagement.

The anecdote is contained in a book Hegseth wrote last year in which he also repeatedly railed against the constraints placed on “American warfighters” by the laws of war and the Geneva conventions.

Also, here is a tweet he had on killing those people. I think he might be a psychopath:

https://archive.is/inGoJ

[–] corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 3 points 4 months ago (1 children)

constraints placed on “American warfighters” by the laws of war and the Geneva conventions.

So if the yanks invade canuckistan, is it "Canadian Rules" war?

[–] pelespirit@sh.itjust.works 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

I'm afraid to ask, what are "Canadian rules"?

[–] Arancello@aussie.zone 8 points 4 months ago (1 children)

i think Canadian Armed Forces were so brutal in both WW1 and WWII that the Geneva Conventions were created to prevent the Canadian Forces from doing it again. I believe the germany complained about Canadian brutality during WWI

[–] pelespirit@sh.itjust.works 3 points 4 months ago (2 children)

I don't know why I'm surprised, but they don't mention in the wikipedia article how they came to be. Probably for diplomatic reasons. Now I'm more intrigued.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geneva_Conventions#Commentaries

[–] P00ptart@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago

Not everything can be learned from Wikipedia.