this post was submitted on 04 Mar 2026
96 points (98.0% liked)

politics

28745 readers
1993 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
96
Congress to America: What War? (www.kenklippenstein.com)
submitted 19 hours ago* (last edited 19 hours ago) by supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz to c/politics@lemmy.world
 

In a rebuke of his own party’s rhetoric, congressman Eric Swalwell said this weekend, “Now is the time for values-based arguments against war with Iran,” adding: “NOT process (‘Come to Congress’) ones.”

His point is well taken, but I’m skeptical that the opposition to the strike is focused on the machine that made it inevitable, instead of focused on Trump individually.

top 23 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 0_o7@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 59 minutes ago

"You will die in our wars and you'll thank us for it."

[–] floofloof@lemmy.ca 43 points 18 hours ago (3 children)

"I don't know if this is technically a war,” Senator Lindsay Graham said of the un-war in Iran on Meet the Press on Sunday.

...

But it is not just Trump loyalists who are playing word games. Democrats also have a hard time calling this what it is, with the party’s top officials using terms like “Military attack,” “military operation,” “military assault,” and the like.

Sen. Chuck Schumer says the strikes are “risking wider conflict”; Rep. Hakeem Jeffries says the operation has “brought us to the brink of a possible war.”

What a revolting mass of spineless human worms.

[–] dazzlingclitgame@lemmy.world 15 points 18 hours ago (2 children)

Controlled opposition in full effect.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 8 points 17 hours ago

Turns out Killing All The Brown People was a bipartisan consensus.

[–] ruuster13@lemmy.zip -3 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

If the Dems called it full-on war, you'd say they're stoking full-on war. They can do nothing right if you decided long ago they do nothing right... which is exactly what the GOP propaganda machine has been encouraging you to think.

[–] dazzlingclitgame@lemmy.world 3 points 10 hours ago

It's not like the Dems are innocent when it comes to bombing the ME.

The Dems can do nothing right because they no longer work for the working class. They are beholden to their donors and that's clear as day to many of us.

[–] nesc@lemmy.cafe 10 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

Obviously it's a 'special military operation'.

[–] Dragomus@lemmy.world 1 points 13 hours ago

Or a special police action to fight the Nazi's?

[–] hperrin@lemmy.ca 5 points 16 hours ago

War is peace, don’t you know?

[–] heavyboots@lemmy.ml 15 points 15 hours ago (3 children)

Don't worry, guys! If some country bombed, let's say for example, 2 of our buildings in NYC, would we treat that as act of war? Nah… probably not. Surely we'd just shrug and move on with peace negotiations!

[–] Geobloke@aussie.zone 5 points 7 hours ago

Well, of course the US would declare war, but in their confusion they would pick two countries at random

[–] Buffalox@lemmy.world 8 points 14 hours ago

I also heard that when just a single harbor was bombed, that too was considered an act of war?

[–] supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz 4 points 14 hours ago

No we would do the right thing and blame the religion that those people ostensibly used to justify their terrorism, become super Xenophobic and completely avoid thinking about what motivated the acts of terror or what the intentions of the attack were (which was to get us to do exactly what we did to a T).

[–] itsgroundhogdayagain@lemmy.ml 3 points 12 hours ago

We ran out of missiles, Lindsey

[–] NOT_RICK_SANCHEZ@lemmy.world 16 points 17 hours ago

Republicans like to call what is developing in Iran a “специальная военная операция” or more commonly known as Special Military Operation comrades.

[–] einlander@lemmy.world 15 points 18 hours ago

It's just Sparkling Conflict.

[–] blattrules@lemmy.world 9 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

Oh, not technically a “war” but a submarine just sank one of their battleships in international waters. That sounds like a war to me.

[–] HermitBee@feddit.uk 2 points 10 hours ago

I heard that the submarine captain said "no war" before the torpedoes were fired, so actually no, it's not a war.

[–] panda_abyss@lemmy.ca 9 points 18 hours ago

This is either a war or an international war crime and you have to remove him plus Hegseth from office.

Decide you fleckless sycophants.

[–] PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml 8 points 17 hours ago

Yes yes, of course the US can do all the war stuff, including war crimes, but unless our sacred institutional leaders all agree to call it a war and then sign the sacred war parchment after the master of arms holds the staff of truth then obviously it's not a war. Great stuff, very compelling world we live in.

[–] JennyLaFae@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 13 hours ago

Schrodinger's war: it's only a war if they're confident in winning, otherwise it'll be some euphemism like police action.

[–] someguy3@lemmy.world 1 points 13 hours ago

To Trump and Hegseth there's no boots on the ground so no war. Trump doesn't want imagery of people being blown up by IEDs, he wants planes and maybe some special force operation.

[–] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 3 points 18 hours ago

I saw that dumbass Anna Paulina do a bunch of semantic games over "boots on the ground". It was a real WTAF moment.