this post was submitted on 12 Mar 2026
233 points (99.6% liked)

World News

54650 readers
2778 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

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.

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/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 47 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] FauxLiving@lemmy.world 5 points 1 hour ago

Guys, I'm starting to think that the US is dropping bombs somewhere

[–] OldGrayDog@fedinsfw.app 5 points 4 hours ago

Those are "defensive" bombs!

[–] Doom@lemmy.world 5 points 5 hours ago

Soooo WWIII it is then?

[–] SapphironZA@sh.itjust.works 50 points 10 hours ago (4 children)

The US government can not be trusted. The UK government can not be trusted. The Iranian government can not be trusted. The Israeli government can not be trusted.

I think I am starting to see a pattern.

[–] resipsaloquitur@lemmy.world 13 points 6 hours ago

No war but a class war.

[–] Doomsider@lemmy.world 3 points 6 hours ago

No current country deserves humanity, perhaps some future government will.

[–] Gorilladrums@lemmy.world 7 points 8 hours ago (3 children)

Is there any government that can be trusted? I feel like no matter what system or ideology is used, a society is always going to end up with a weird ruling class that's corrupt, power hungry, and is fond of using authoritarian tactics.

[–] random_character_a@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

Isn't that curve the basic nature of capitalism, since the beginning of money and commerce that has been discussed since ancient Greek.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uqsBx58GxYY

[–] nforminvasion@lemmy.world 3 points 6 hours ago

Mother anarchy loves her children

[–] FEIN@lemmy.world 2 points 5 hours ago

if i was president you can trust me 👍👍👍👍 lol

[–] otp@sh.itjust.works 6 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

Countries whose names start with vowels can't be trusted?

[–] catbum@lemmy.world 11 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

Austrians right about now

hehe

Heck, Australians too

And maybe the aliens ^idk^

Yeah, our government's tonguing the Netanyahu-owned Orange Anus, too.

[–] Buffalox@lemmy.world 38 points 11 hours ago (3 children)

Goddam UK, didn't Starmer say he WOULDN'T allow this?

[–] flamingos@feddit.uk 10 points 7 hours ago

It would be more out of character for Starmer to keep his word.

[–] Bakkoda@lemmy.world 18 points 10 hours ago

All the little pedos gotta stick to the script

[–] architect@thelemmy.club 1 points 5 hours ago

Yes they lie to pit working class British against working class Americans.

[–] KiwiTB@lemmy.world 54 points 12 hours ago (2 children)

What a surprise.... No one could have seen this coming.

[–] Buffalox@lemmy.world 16 points 11 hours ago (3 children)

I may be naive, but I honestly didn't think UK would allow this, when Starmer clearly stated the war on Iran is illegal. Especially not after USA has been caught in several war crimes.

[–] architect@thelemmy.club 1 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago)

Yall are naive as shit. The fucking pedophiles are against their buddy pedophiles they’ve been fucking kids with? Do you really believe that shit?

[–] NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io 17 points 10 hours ago (3 children)

Didn't he literally say he'd allow their use for "defensive" strikes? He's never really been hiding it.

[–] Buffalox@lemmy.world 3 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 44 minutes ago) (2 children)

How is a bunker buster on a bomber defensive?
Defensive is to scramble planes to shoot down missiles. An attack is not defensive in my book.

Edit: A word.

[–] Zombie@feddit.uk 3 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

Yeah but that's because you're using logic, reasoning, and commonly understood meanings of words. In Kid Starver's authoritarian mind none of those things matter.

The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command. His heart sank as he thought of the enormous power arrayed against him, the ease with which any Party intellectual would overthrow him in debate, the subtle arguments which he would not be able to understand, much less answer. And yet he was in the right! They were wrong and he was right. The obvious, the silly, and the true had got to be defended. Truisms are true, hold on to that! The solid world exists, its laws do not change. Stones are hard, water is wet, objects unsupported fall towards the earth's centre.

  • 1984, George Orwell
[–] Buffalox@lemmy.world 1 points 40 minutes ago

Absolutely, the idea that "preemptive" strikes are defensive is Orwellian.
Also how does UK know what target they will hit? Will it be a kindergarten killing innocent children? Will it be a refinery constituting chemical warfare on civilians? There is no plausible reason to believe these strikes are purely defensive.

[–] MagnificentSteiner@lemmy.zip 0 points 44 minutes ago (1 children)

IMO defensive would involve them not leaving the USA.

[–] Buffalox@lemmy.world 2 points 39 minutes ago

Yes, that's a good way to define it.

[–] Trex202@lemmy.world 10 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

Every strike is a defensive strike

[–] DavorS@piefed.social 0 points 9 hours ago (2 children)
[–] Rivalarrival@lemmy.today 1 points 5 hours ago

The best defense is a good offense...

[–] goferking0@lemmy.sdf.org 5 points 8 hours ago

It is in kid starvers twisted mind

[–] goferking0@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 8 hours ago

Wasn't that also when he was admitting that the UK was helping do the preemptive strikes?

[–] parsizzle@piefed.social 1 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago) (3 children)

I ~~could be wrong but I think the way foreign litany bases work is that they are in the thinnest legal sense "sovereign foreign territory." To which I mean, the activities conducted on these bases are outside the control of the country who's land they occupy.~~

Edit: I was wrong, amd the US are just tennants on the land which makes this a very questionable thing that they are doing.

[–] ohulancutash@feddit.uk 8 points 10 hours ago

Nnnnope. They are RAF bases, with a nominal RAF CO. The USAF are tenants.

[–] Telodzrum@lemmy.world 4 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

This is a common misconception (it doesn’t actually apply to embassies either, from which the myth arose). Every military base of a nation within another nation’s territory is governed by a status of forces agreement (SOF); usually a large general SOF for all locations in the territory and also a narrower SOF that applies to that site specifically.

[–] parsizzle@piefed.social 1 points 7 hours ago

Thank you for the correction! That makes what they're doing against the SOF rules/law, then?

[–] Buffalox@lemmy.world 0 points 10 hours ago

That does not sound like a good idea. I would expect a country would want to maintain sovereignty of their own territory.
Of course embassies have something similar to what you describe, but if an embassy is breaking the law, the diplomats can be expelled.

[–] Shameless@lemmy.world 6 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

Starmer the flim flam man. He stands for nothing and will go with anything, he has no morals.

[–] daannii@lemmy.world 0 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago)

Probably in the Epstein files. (The UK leaders).

[–] unexposedhazard@discuss.tchncs.de 26 points 11 hours ago (4 children)

So UK bases are just a valid military targets now lol

[–] RalfWausE@feddit.org 3 points 4 hours ago

Enter an "always has been gif"... I mean, who in his right mind would think that military installations would NOT be valid targets?

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 1 points 6 hours ago

Iran considers UK military bases to be valid targets anyway.

[–] Arancello@aussie.zone 0 points 9 hours ago

I would assume anything the epstein empire (america/israel) have bombed are now legitimate targets in any country that loads bombs onto their planes. This would suggest junior schools, hospitals, shopping malls all have targets on them and there’s nothing you can do about it. americans voted for WWIII. congrats.

[–] AmidFuror@fedia.io -2 points 10 hours ago

If you're Iranian. So are all your neighbors, including hotels, and any ship in nearby waters.

[–] Gates9@sh.itjust.works 4 points 9 hours ago

Herr Schtarmer

[–] blackn1ght@feddit.uk 4 points 9 hours ago

So they're just loading the bombers right by the fence where journalists can see? Probably an order from Trump to stir up things up because the UK said they couldn't launch attacks from the UK.

Fascists helping fascists.  The new Axis of evil. 

[–] theuniqueone@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 9 hours ago

But Britain says its not involved /s