this post was submitted on 15 Mar 2026
406 points (99.5% liked)

World News

54755 readers
2640 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

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.

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/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

UK and Japan among countries that are considering options but yet to commit warships to blockaded shipping route

Countries including the UK, Japan, China and South Korea have said they are still considering their options but without making commitments after the US president, Donald Trump, urged them to send warships to the strait of Hormuz to secure the vital shipping route.

The effective closure of the strait of Hormuz by Tehran, in retaliation for airstrikes by the US and Israel, has proved catastrophic for global energy and trade flows, causing the largest oil supply disruption in history and soaring global oil prices.

However, the international response to Trump’s call for the dispatch of warships has so far proved vague and reluctant, with countries unwilling to commit to a military response that could prove treacherous for their navies.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] crank0271@lemmy.world 139 points 1 day ago (5 children)

This seems to suggest that shitting on our allies, behaving erratically, and stabbing them in the back (and front) isn't the best way to build a broad coalition devoted to mutual interests, to say nothing of a narrow coalition devoted to obvious imperialism. I look forward to learning more about this hypothesis in The Art of the Deal 2.

[–] fizzle@quokk.au 19 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Everyone is heavily incentivized to watch Trump sweat a bit more.

I imagine there are very few leaders who wouldn't be happy to see Trump replaced.

Why would we come to his aid to mitigate this catastrophic unforced error.

The US has fucked everyone. I've literally been angry about it for a decade now.

The dildo of consequence rarely arrives lubed.

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 6 points 22 hours ago* (last edited 22 hours ago) (1 children)

There isn't a lot of reason for any world leaders to help Trump at the moment. Our strategic oil reserves had some oil in them, it's always a good idea to make sure you have lots of reserve oil before attacking an petrostate, so we can just sit it out for a couple of months.

Also it takes time to ready a naval fleet they're not just sitting around on the off chance that some despotic old fart causes an international incident for literally no reason at all.

So between taking the time to equip and it being strategically advantageous to hold off for a while no one's coming to help any time soon. Also the war is extremely unpopular with the public so there's not a lot of reason for international politicians to damage their reputations, it's not like Trump would be grateful.

If Trump doesn't TACO in the next 6 months then maybe there will be some ships.

[–] fizzle@quokk.au 5 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

I don't think Trump really can TACO on this one. I'm certain that he would like to turn this one off but Iran will continue attacking US allies in the region.

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 1 points 12 hours ago

The economic situation will force Trump to negotiate with Iran or the general public will lynch him. Iran's big problem is that the Americans are attacking them so if they stopped doing that and went away Iran could spin it as a victory and Trump can just lie about it and claim that Iran gave massive concessions which never happened. It's not like MAGAs will fact check.

[–] nymnympseudonym@piefed.social 49 points 1 day ago

Also suggests Trump floated the idea with the press before discussion in detail with, you know, the actual people who would be sending the boats

[–] tempest@lemmy.ca 8 points 1 day ago

I guarantee you they have not made that connection at all.

[–] null@lemmy.org 10 points 1 day ago

Even Bush had a coalition of the willing.

[–] Tyrq@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 1 day ago

The documentaries in ten or twenty years are gonna slap

... If we get there