A community for discussing events around the World
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
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.
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
Off-Topic but feel like it is important to share this: https://www.arte.tv/de/videos/114590-000-A/abgehoert/ (various subtitles are avaible). It is a documentary made mostly of phone calls between Russian soldiers and their families and friends. It is hard to listen and watch, but if you want to really be able to feel what is happening there this is unpararelled.
unfortunately going to lead to a take no prisoners thing. This is actually what drove the us to use nukes in ww2.
It actually wasn't. The desire to test and demonstrate the effect of the new weapon before the Germans could get it was the main reason.
We'd already been testing the atomic bomb before the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
Also, Germany had already surrendered a couple months before we bombed the Japanese, they were the last hold-out of the war.
Almost like there can be several reasons
~~what drive the us to use nukes~~
What gave the us the excuse to use nukes
The excuse (at least given to the public) was that using the nukes would save the lives of allied soldiers. The Japanese army was more than willing to fight to the death, and Japanese citizens had been brainwashed into believing allied soldiers would rape, torture, and kill them. So in their eyes it was also better to fight the allies if they were able to.
I know.
The problem is that they felt the need to bomb two massive cities full of non combatant people instead.
In war though the tradeoff between your own people and theirs always lands on theirs ultimately.
I mean… the obvious solution if this is actually a prevalent pattern for NK troops is to assume they’re bullshitting when they try to surrender, and just don’t take them prisoner.
And thus commit warcrimes? You don't kill surrenderring people. You don't retaliate when "the others are doing it". You can take measures, but shooting someone who is surrenderring isn't something anyone should strive for.
🇨🇦👍
It's not something that anyone should strive for. but asking your troops to trust someone who is claiming to surrender given the fact (?) that this has happened is asking a lot of them in a life or death situation. No one wins no matter what you choose here, but it's war. That's not exactly surprising.
Which doesn't mean "take no prisoners".
So, everyone’s allowed to just join in, then.
Only if they're helping Russia, if they join in to help Ukraine it's an unspeakable act of aggression and Putin will start threatening to nuke everyone again.
Anyone thought of sponsoring the South Korean army to join Ukraine and see what happens?