World News
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
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.
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/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
view the rest of the comments
International law is such a fucking joke. Why do they even bother with this performative bs? Stop wasting money on this nonsense.
Most of us are still operating under the assumption that rules still matter, even tho there is proof they don't.
It's hard to turn one's back on order when chaos is screaming in our faces.
Here’s the thing, even when we had order international law was a joke. The only reason laws work within a country is because the state can hold you accountable through violence if necessary. For a country or group of countries to be able to enforce their laws on other countries is through war. If you are not willing to go to war, you should not be engaging in this theater.,
Except caring about ethicality of the conduct of countries is great.
What's not so great is that the county that pitched the idea then withdrew itself from its justification after it was realized.
But as an ideological beacon of jurisprudence we should all aspire to it's pretty cheap and much more worthwhile than wars on drugs, porn and abortion.
It’s meaningless unless everyone is in on it, willing to be held to it and willing to go to war to enforce whatever ethical standards have been agreed. It’s pure theater.
And I didn’t know that it was a choice between international law and meddling in the lives of individuals.
That's rather silly. If jurisprudence would only work if everyone was in on it there wouldn't be any.
'it says in your lawbook that killing is illegal, yet Mr Dahmer here disagrees, so it's of the table'
Law is ingrained with our culture and it's the shitty fact of life that it's perennially imperfect as people always try to skirt it or circumvent it. That doesn't mean it's meaningless.
I don't know how you came up with the meddling in the lives of individuals bit, though.
The situation you describe is different and actually proves my point because Mr. Dahmer, presumably lives in a nation, and in that nation in which he lives there must be some form of state or organization that is imposing that law. Even if he disagrees they can impose the law on him through some form of force. He can run, he can fight, but the organization is bigger and thus more powerful than him and as such can make him follow the law or force him to face the consequences. See also why billionaires may be above the law in some places: they are individually richer and more powerful than the organization that would hold them accountable.
On the international level, if a group of nations declare that invading other countries is a crime but 1 of them disagrees and starts an invasion, the crime can only be punished by force, ie war. You could impose penalties on them too, which is a type of force or power, but look at Russia to see how effective they are.
I am with you that the more countries take the international tribunal seriously, the better. Like I said its a great detriment that the country the idea was instigited in didn't subject itself to its rule. If they had it would be much more effective and beneficial.
However dismissing the institution because of that and giving up on the idea alltogether is being defeatist. I think it very necessary to keep ethics and jurisprudence a part of the discussion of international affairs. For instance Israel may reject any jusrisdiction of the ICC. However the IJC delcaring the war in Gaza as genocide an holding Israel and Hamas responsible will mean that their leaders can be arrested in all 124 member states of the Rome Statute.
Even though they might not be aprehended and some countries have said as much, it still means that the prime minster of Israel is handicapped in his comings and goings and will think twice before traveling to such a country.
It does not mean that every bad guy gets punished. Most will get away with it. But I wouldn't say there isn't any power about being the first jewish prime minister standing trial for genocide. In the end ethics are a part of human understanding of history.
I agree that this will have no real-world effects on Putin, but I do think this is important for the sake of documentation.