World News
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF OCTOBER 19 2025
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. 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.
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.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
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/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
view the rest of the comments
The US's own Leahy Law prohibits most types of aid or training from going to foreign agents who can credibly be alleged to be committing human rights violations. The US Department of State website says "The U.S. government considers torture, extrajudicial killing, enforced disappearance, and rape under color of law as GVHRs when implementing the Leahy law." Here's just one UN report from mid-February about "credible allegations of egregious human rights violations to which Palestinian women and girls continue to be subjected in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank." It specifically mentions extrajudicial killings and rape among other offenses, so...is US human rights law actually meaningful or not?
I suppose we've gotten to the level of admission where the media is calling continued illegal support "dicey". Maybe after another few months of killing and starving civilians with Western weapons and aid we can call it "concerning" or "troubling".
This article is about global resistance to sending arms to Israel. It's "dicey" (meaning risky) because, on top of public pressure, governments are now facing potential legal consequences both locally and internationally. Calling it either "concerning" or "troubling" doesn't make sense in this context. Ironically, if they used that language, the article would be doing the very thing you're accusing it of doing.
I think we're on the same side, and I didn't downvote you but it's a weak word. It's like calling arms sales to organized criminal gangs "dicey". No, it's not dicey (which necessarily means there's a chance it's alright) - it's definitively unethical and illegal by the US's own laws.
That's not what it means. I suspect you're reacting to the headline without reading the article. It's not making a moral statement about arms sales. It's saying that countries are realizing that they face potential legal exposure for continuing those sales/transfers. That's why it's risky. No one knows if they'll actually face those consequences so, in that context, there's a "chance it's alright." Legally -- not ethically or morally.
The Leahy Laws are another example of that -- they're frequently criticized for being selectively enforced. The Leahy Laws put Israel aid at risk but it's not a sure thing, regardless of the moral implications. At the end of the day, if the US believes or chooses to believe that they don't apply, they probably won't.