this post was submitted on 29 Aug 2026
96 points (94.4% liked)

politics

30976 readers
2255 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 US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted 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 other users of being bots or paid actors.
  3. No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
  4. No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. 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 an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have 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. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.

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 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

The United States has threatened to oppose Britain's sovereignty over the Falkland Islands if Andy Burnham does not increase defence spending, The Telegraph can reveal.

The proposal is among measures being drawn up by senior defence officials at the Pentagon as an incentive to hit Nato's 5 per cent spending pledge.

A senior US official told The Telegraph that Britain was likely to receive "special attention" in Washington's review of its allies' commitment to Nato, which will examine whether member nations have credible paths toward the target.

top 23 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] jordanlund@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago

We require links go to the original sources, not aggregators like Yahoo.

In this case:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2026/08/28/us-uk-boost-defence-spending-lose-falklands-support/

Please update the link to the correct source or we'll have to remove it.

[–] justOnePersistentKbinPlease@fedia.io 35 points 3 days ago (1 children)

With what? Buzz the islands with some over-tired and exausted soldiers without any weapons because your dumb pedo ass wasted them trying to impress the Iranians?

[–] Kirp123@lemmy.world 14 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

If they bring that Aircraft Carrier from the Middle East over to the Falklands I'm pretty sure all the sailors will jump overboard and swim to the islands to claim asylum.

[–] mobyduck648@lemmy.world 8 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

The Falkland Islands, population about 3000 or so, would suddenly find itself one of the few territories in the world capable of deploying an aircraft carrier.

[–] KulunkelBoom@lemmus.org 4 points 2 days ago

What the actual fuck is the matter with the orange faced dipshit?

Seriously - he is a fucked up piece of shit.

[–] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 21 points 3 days ago (1 children)

as an incentive to hit Nato's 5 per cent spending pledge.

For fuck's sake! The previous 2% was already FAR too much to waste on enriching the world military industrial complex and now they want to increase it by 150%?! 🤦🏻

[–] Naich@piefed.world 7 points 3 days ago

Don's buddies want payback for the money they invested in him.

[–] breakfastmtn@lemmy.ca 17 points 3 days ago

Original link:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2026/08/28/us-uk-boost-defence-spending-lose-falklands-support/

Archive:

https://archive.is/iAtj8

OP you should swap out the link or your post might get deleted. News aggregators aren't allowed in this community (Rule 1).

[–] TigerAce@lemmy.dbzer0.com 16 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Please stop sharing yahoo links as news. It's complete junk. Let's keep the quality here better than this.

[–] bunnybunny@lemmy.zip 0 points 3 days ago

So it reflects America pretty well then

[–] Kirp123@lemmy.world 14 points 3 days ago (2 children)

A new Falklands conflict was not something I was expecting in 2026.

[–] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago

Now we just need some Ronnie Raygun bullshit about how this enabled Americans to "stand tall".

[–] Corporal_Punishment@feddit.uk 7 points 3 days ago

It would be over before it began. Falklands are more heavily defended now and Argentina still has the same "capability" as it did the first time round.

[–] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

And by "US", we mean donnie the dumbass and his apparatchiks, right?

[–] qarbone@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

As the president, he is the US politically.

[–] Gerblat@lemmy.world 11 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I guarantee that’s a Playskool phone in the thumbnail, just painted black to trick Trump into thinking he’s a big boy

[–] ThePowerOfGeek@lemmy.world 11 points 3 days ago (2 children)

"The cow called me last night. Big cow, strong cow, beautiful cow. It was crying on the phone, begging, pleading with me. 'Mr President,' it said, because it respects me just like everyone else, except for the phony dumocrats and the Spanish. 'Please Mr President, the cow goes moo!'

"I said, 'I don't understand what you mean, Mr Cow.' The cow goes moo? Why is he talking in third person? That's my thing, you know? What's he talking about?

"And you know what it said back to me? It said 'the cow goes moo for you, Mr President, because you're so strong and handsome and successful. And you have such big manly hooves and such a smooth neck that doesn't look like a vagayna at all!'

"I said 'thank you Mr Cow. When my beautiful bunker ballroom opens up you should come over and chew on some cud.' But then I had to hang up because Natalie came in with my Baby Mum-Mum biscuits and my sippy cup of warm milk."

[–] Archer@lemmy.world 20 points 3 days ago

Way too coherent

[–] Kirp123@lemmy.world 9 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I can't understand how people can listen to him going on about how there's a B in dumb and take him seriously at all.

[–] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago

This guy's followers talk the same way about "maga" that the aliens talked about "Marklar" in that South Park episode. So we aren't talking about the most coherent bunch of people, and they don't really make any demands of competency or logic from their leaders, either.

I think I should print up a bunch of red hats with MARKLAR on them and see if I can start a cult. We can have fun debates about who is the true Marklar with the most Marklar of beliefs.

[–] rslogix89@lemmy.world 10 points 3 days ago
[–] newton@feddit.online 7 points 3 days ago

What a loser

[–] jbrains@sh.itjust.works 5 points 3 days ago

GO GET NORIEGA WHILE YOU'RE AT IT.