this post was submitted on 22 Jun 2025
51 points (100.0% liked)

Global News

4565 readers
710 users here now

What is global news?

Something that happened or was uncovered recently anywhere in the world. It doesn't have to have global implications. Just has to be informative in some way.


Post guidelines

Title formatPost title should mirror the news source title.
URL formatPost URL should be the original link to the article (even if paywalled) and archived copies left in the body. It allows avoiding duplicate posts when cross-posting.
[Opinion] prefixOpinion (op-ed) articles must use [Opinion] prefix before the title.
Country prefixCountry prefix can be added to the title with a separator (|, :, etc.) where title is not clear enough from which country the news is coming from.


Rules

This community is moderated in accordance with the principles outlined in Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which emphasizes the right to freedom of opinion and expression. In addition to this foundational principle, we have some additional rules to ensure a respectful and constructive environment for all users.

1. English onlyTitle and associated content has to be in English.
2. No social media postsAvoid all social media posts. Try searching for a source that has a written article or transcription on the subject.
3. Respectful communicationAll communication has to be respectful of differing opinions, viewpoints, and experiences.
4. InclusivityEveryone is welcome here regardless of age, body size, visible or invisible disability, ethnicity, sex characteristics, gender identity and expression, education, socio-economic status, nationality, personal appearance, race, caste, color, religion, or sexual identity and orientation.
5. Ad hominem attacksAny kind of personal attacks are expressly forbidden. If you can't argue your position without attacking a person's character, you already lost the argument.
6. Off-topic tangentsStay on topic. Keep it relevant.
7. Instance rules may applyIf something is not covered by community rules, but are against lemmy.zip instance rules, they will be enforced.


Companion communities

Icon generated via LLM model | Banner attribution


If someone is interested in moderating this community, message @brikox@lemmy.zip.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Washington (AFP) – Democrats bristled Sunday over US President Donald Trump's decision to launch air strikes on Iran without seeking authorization from Congress, accusing the Republican of violating the constitution and demanding a vote to rein in his war powers.

Members of the Senate and House of Representatives argued that US intelligence had not shown an imminent threat from the Middle Eastern country that justified Trump's unilateral action.

"President Trump's actions in bombing Iran puts the US on the brink of a wider war in the Middle East, all without constitutionally required Congressional approval," Senate Democratic Whip Dick Durbin said in a statement.

Democrats were divided between those demanding a vote on a war powers resolution to constrain Trump's authority to launch further action and a smaller group, who maintained that the strikes were grounds for the Republican leader's impeachment.

They included Illinois moderate Sean Casten and New York leftist Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who accused the president of having "impulsively risked launching a war that may ensnare us for generations."

Chuck Schumer and Hakeem Jeffries, the Democratic leaders in the Senate and House respectively, said Trump had "dramatically increased" America's risk of becoming embroiled in a new Middle Eastern conflagration.

"No president should be allowed to unilaterally march this nation into something as consequential as war with erratic threats and no strategy," Schumer said.

The Democrats have foreign policy hawks in their ranks and many were quick to point to the threat that a nuclear-armed Iran would pose


while still upbraiding Trump for acting without consulting lawmakers.

"The Constitution makes clear that the power to authorize war lies with Congress... The American people deserve more than vague rhetoric and unilateral decisions that could set off a wider war," said Mark Warner, vice chairman of the Senate intelligence committee.

The loudest Democratic voice in support of the strikes was staunchly pro-Israel Senator John Fetterman, who singled out Trump for praise -- something even party colleagues who support the strikes have avoided.

"As I've long maintained, this was the correct move by (Trump)," the Pennsylvania centrist posted on X. "Iran is the world's leading sponsor of terrorism and cannot have nuclear capabilities."

Republicans have been lining up since the strikes to praise Trump and endorse his decision to hit three Iranian nuclear facilities -- with little dissent among the ranks.

But Kentucky conservative Thomas Massie accused Trump of escalating the conflict between Israel and Iran.

"When two countries are bombing each other daily in a hot war, and a third country joins the bombing, that's an act of war," said Massie, who introduced a bipartisan resolution earlier this month to require any military action to be approved by lawmakers.

"I'm amazed at the mental gymnastics being undertaken by neocons in DC (and their social media bots) to say we aren’t at war... so they can make war."

top 10 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] aramova@infosec.pub 13 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)
[–] pdxfed@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

"bristled"

"A pipe cleaning analogy, that'll show 'em were serious this time!"

[–] rumimevlevi@lemmings.world 5 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Most Democrats like what trump does they just want to attack iran with their approval

[–] BarneyPiccolo@lemmings.world 3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

Even if I wanted to see Iran get blasted, I wouldn't trust HitlerPig to do it, or to manage the war that would result. Wait until someone responsible and intelligent is in office.

They just want a meat-grinder they can send illegal immigrants, dissidents, gays, welfare recipients, liberals, protesters, etc. through.

[–] rumimevlevi@lemmings.world 0 points 1 month ago (1 children)

You would trust the united snake if Biden or Harris would have been the president . Iranians should try to change the regime by themselves without anybody intervention unless they want to be ruled by a puppet regime or even worse a failed state like Syria, Yemen and Libya

[–] BarneyPiccolo@lemmings.world 1 points 1 month ago

I don't trust ANY politician to wage war, unless it were absolutely necessary. Even then, I would NEVER trust a Republican. They have a long record of waging war in order to boost the profits of the military-industrial complex. Dems aren't much more trustworthy, but at least I'll listen.

As for HitlerPig, no fucking way he should be allowed to manage a war. He's too fucking stupid and incompetent (as are everyone in his administration charged with fighting wars) as well as the most prolific traitor in American history. He is nothing more than Putin's muscle, and he will purposely lose a war if he thinks there's money and/or power in it for him.

My son is draft age, and there is absolutely no way he will be fighting in a HitlerPig war.

[–] Rhaedas@fedia.io 4 points 1 month ago

"As I've long maintained, this was the correct move by (Trump)," the Pennsylvania centrist posted on X. "Iran is the world's leading sponsor of terrorism and cannot have nuclear capabilities."

Seems intelligence is saying that after strikes on three places where such things would be, nothing has changed. So basically they didn't have any. Good job, you needlessly attacked someone. Very brave. Are we trying to make 2020 feel like not as bad of a year as 2025?

[–] BarneyPiccolo@lemmings.world 4 points 1 month ago

Somebody get Fetterman some help.

[–] harrys_balzac@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 month ago

Useless bluster from useless people.

[–] SoftestSapphic@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Unless he is physically removed from power for this it means congress and SCOTUS is complicit