this post was submitted on 03 Jan 2026
240 points (98.0% liked)

News

36912 readers
2447 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. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


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


Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.


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. Clickbait titles may be removed.


Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.


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, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.


7. No duplicate posts.


If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. 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 or news aggregators.


All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.


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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] HellsBelle@sh.itjust.works 5 points 2 months ago (3 children)

Whatever else you can say about Thatcher -- and it's a lot -- she could at least speak her mind and stand her ground.

[–] tal@lemmy.today 19 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

considers

Ehhh...The closest analog to the US removing Maduro actually probably happened when Thatcher was in office, Grenada.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_invasion_of_Grenada

The United States and a coalition of Caribbean countries[a] invaded the island nation of Grenada at dawn on 25 October 1983. Codenamed Operation Urgent Fury by the U.S. military, it resulted in military occupation within a few days.[9] It was triggered by strife within the People's Revolutionary Government, which led to the house arrest and execution of the previous leader and second Prime Minister of Grenada, Maurice Bishop, and to the establishment of the Revolutionary Military Council, with Hudson Austin as chairman. Following the invasion there was an interim government appointed, and then general elections held in December 1984.

The invasion drew criticism from many countries. British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher privately disapproved of the mission, in part because she was not consulted in advance and was given very short notice of the military operation, but she supported it in public.[10] On October 28, 1983, three days after the invasion, the U.N. Security Council by a vote of 11 to one failed to pass a resolution "deeply deploring" the invasion, calling it a "flagrant violation of international law" (the United States vetoed the resolution).[11]

Grenada is part of the Commonwealth of Nations and the intervention was opposed by several Commonwealth members including the United Kingdom, Trinidad and Tobago, and Canada.[1]: 50  British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, a close ally of Reagan on other matters, personally opposed it. Reagan had forewarned her it might happen; she did not know for sure that it was coming until three hours before. Although she publicly supported the action, she sent the following message to Reagan at 12:30 on the morning of the invasion:

This action will be seen as intervention by a Western country in the internal affairs of a small independent nation, however unattractive its regime. I ask you to consider this in the context of our wider East/West relations and of the fact that we will be having in the next few days to present to our Parliament and people the siting of Cruise missiles in this country. I must ask you to think most carefully about these points. I cannot conceal that I am deeply disturbed by your latest communication. You asked for my advice. I have set it out and hope that even at this late stage you will take it into account before events are irrevocable.[87][88] (the full text remains classified).

Her complaints were not heeded, and the invasion continued as planned. While the fighting was still going on, Reagan phoned Thatcher to apologize for any miscommunication between them,[89] and their long-term friendly relationship endured.[90][91]

That being said, it very much sounds to me like Starmer wasn't notified in advance, and I can't imagine that he'd make any strong statements without consulting with the Foreign Office, the US, and probably some other countries as well. Probably put together some kind of British position over the next several days, if I were to guess. He also said something more-or-less to that effect, that he'd need to communicate with the US and some other countries on the matter.

[–] zwerg@feddit.org 6 points 2 months ago

Finny thing is, I have a hunch Russia and China were notified in advance...

[–] Naich@lemmings.world 11 points 2 months ago

Nah, you are all right thanks. I'd rather have someone who takes a bit of time to make a decision than Margaret fucking Thatcher. What the fuck?