253

A Trump presidency could ‘cripple’ the Paris climate agreement, warns UN chief (www.theguardian.com)

submitted 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/world@lemmy.world

14 comments fedilink hide all child comments

António Guterres says treaty will endure but urges US to remain amid reports of Republican plan to withdraw from the climate negotiating framework entirely

The world needs the US to remain in the international climate process to avoid a "crippled" Paris agreement, the UN secretary general has warned, amid fears that Donald Trump would take the country out of the accord for a second time.

António Guterres said the landmark 2015 agreement to limit global heating would endure if the US withdrew once again, but compared the prospective departure to losing a limb or organ.

"The Paris agreement can survive, but people sometimes can lose important organs or lose the legs and survive. But we don't want a crippled Paris agreement. We want a real Paris agreement," the UN secretary general said.

If the Republican candidate wins, his administration could withdraw the US from the UN climate negotiating framework entirely, according to reports. If he does so, it could require Senate approval for the US to rejoin.

top 14 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] solsangraal@lemmy.zip 40 points 3 days ago

"could" LOL

[-] TheFriar@lemm.ee 23 points 3 days ago

Not to mention, the Paris climate accord was way too little too late and we’re all still falling way short of even those goals! We’re producing more co2 than ever before. Why the fuck are these people lying to themselves and everyone else? WE ARE FAILING MISERABLY, DISASTROUSLY TO FIHT CLIMATE CHANGE.

[-] Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works 9 points 3 days ago

That was my thought... like lol duh. We're all over here concerned about imminent fascism.

[-] blibla@slrpnk.net 5 points 2 days ago

we all know how much that is being upheld

[-] cygnus@lemmy.ca 15 points 3 days ago

Who are these articles for? All those MAGAs who feel strongly about climate change, or Dems who would have voted for Trump if he's commit to GHG reduction?

[-] Blackmist@feddit.uk 7 points 3 days ago

Sanction them.

[-] Badeendje@lemmy.world 1 points 3 days ago

Drill baby drill. And in the mean time, import all the crude you can, refine it and sell. The shareholders must be paid!

[-] TheUnicornOfPerfidy@feddit.uk 4 points 3 days ago

This is clearly sarcasm. I assume the down votes are actually in favour of climate change?

[-] Badeendje@lemmy.world 3 points 3 days ago

Yeah.. I just refuse to use the /s .. so I revel in the down votes instead.

I have no clue how people can think the US becomes rich from drill baby drill. It's private companies that drill and make the money, while subsidised to the hilt by the US government. Any non oil executive or oil shareholder that repeats the slogan u ironically is a moron!

[-] MediaBiasFactChecker@lemmy.world -5 points 3 days ago

The Guardian - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)

Information for The Guardian:

Wiki: reliable - There is consensus that The Guardian is generally reliable. The Guardian's op-eds should be handled with WP:RSOPINION. Some editors believe The Guardian is biased or opinionated for politics. See also: The Guardian blogs.
Wiki: mixed - Most editors say that The Guardian blogs should be treated as newspaper blogs or opinion pieces due to reduced editorial oversight. Check the bottom of the article for a "blogposts" tag to determine whether the page is a blog post or a non-blog article. See also: The Guardian.

MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: Medium - Factual Reporting: Mixed - United Kingdom

Search topics on Ground.News

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2024/nov/01/a-trump-presidency-could-cripple-the-paris-climate-agreement-warns-un-chief-antonio-guterres

Media Bias Fact Check | bot support

this post was submitted on 01 Nov 2024

253 points (98.1% liked)

World News

38970 readers

2216 users here now

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. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating 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 10/19
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.