this post was submitted on 02 Apr 2026
251 points (99.2% liked)

politics

29271 readers
2245 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
 

“US President Donald Trump on Wednesday delivered an incoherent primetime address in which he threatened to bomb Iran “back to the Stone Ages” while also claiming negotiations to end the conflict were ongoing, remarks that provided no clear indication of when or how the illegal war of choice would end.

“Trump’s speech marked his first major address on the war since the US, in partnership with Israel, started bombing Iran more than a month ago, without congressional approval and in violation of international law. A day after declaring that Iran “doesn’t have to make a deal” to end the war, Trump said during his Wednesday speech, “If there is no deal, we are going to hit each and every one of their electric generating plants very hard and probably simultaneously”—a grave war crime.

“Collin Rees, US campaign manager at the advocacy group Oil Change International, said in a statement that “Trump’s rambling lies can’t conceal how his reckless, illegal war of aggression is sending energy prices for working families through the roof.””

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] kryptonianCodeMonkey@lemmy.world 0 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

"only a little bit of death and destruction" is not an effective counter-message to maximum death and destruction.

But it fucking should be. I would also agree that no death and destruction is all that is acceptable. It's really disheartening that that was not a realistic choice. But if you're on the trolley heading towards total death and destruction and pulling the lever takes you to a little bit of death and destruction, you pull that fucking lever. You don't take the "moral high ground" and tear down the Trump tracks while criticizing the other option for not being a good enough choice and take your passengers with you. It mystifies me that anyone disagrees with that.

Perfect is the enemy of good. And good is the enemy of better. If you have no good choice, you pick the better choice. Period.

[–] RedAggroBest@lemmy.world 2 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Too many people on Lemmy either aren't on the trolley (Non-Americans) or they don't realize they're on that damn trolley with us. They're the purity-testers who see their own left-purity as more important than the actual lives that could be not-dead while we try to pull a liberal to the left. Instead we get to collectively flail while fascists bomb Iran.

[–] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 1 points 3 days ago

Yep, this.

I remember being in my early teens, where one is liable to apply purity tests everywhere one goes. Heck, we all do. But most of us tend to grow up.

Doing all this wishcasting about perfect leftist candidates that check all the buttons along with a perfect leftist electorate makes for great fantasy, I guess.

But then sitting back and declaring you are morally superior than everyone else when it doesn't happen and you choose to sit out or vote for a ridiculous party like the Green Party is really not the flex these people think it is.