this post was submitted on 15 Mar 2025
343 points (98.3% liked)

World News

44051 readers
3595 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
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] FauxPseudo@lemmy.world 26 points 1 day ago (2 children)

In the interests of national security we should always have a plan to seize the Panama Canal because of its strategic importance during a war. It would be irresponsible to not have such a plan.

But this is irresponsible on a completely different level. This is "let's invade Iraq" level stupidity. Trump ran on not having started any wars in his prior term. He ran on ending existing wars. Now that he is in he has talked about starting wars with all our neighbors and other allies. He doesn't call them wars but that's what they would be.

Here is a map of each place he has threatened. Instead of protecting our national security he is a threat to it. The president is a threat to national security. We got here because the cult of personality was determined to defeat the opposition even if they destroyed themselves in the process. They have fucked us all to own the libs. Even if Trump left office today it would take us decades to recover from the damage he has done to us.

[–] mojofrododojo@lemmy.world 16 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Even if Trump left office today it would take us decades to recover from the damage he has done to us.

YUP. Our allies will never trust us - how could they share sensitive and secret information with the asshole country that let a former pres store national secrets in his fucking bathroom?

they shouldn't trust us. 5 eyes my ass...

[–] Saleh@feddit.org 7 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

Well, there was this whole spying on allied politicians thing Snowden uncovered, for which the US started a global manhunt.

The US always looked down on its "Allies" and it was always more of a protection racket than a true alliance.

[–] mojofrododojo@lemmy.world 2 points 22 hours ago

for sure, but acting like we're not in a new, deeper low is simply unrealistic.

[–] Saint_La_Croix_Crosse@midwest.social 0 points 22 hours ago* (last edited 22 hours ago)

IDK, if it were Iraq levels of stupidity, the Democrats would become completely on board. This is a rare break with imperialism, because, also, Democrats usually would be on board with any support of fascism in Latin America (e.g. Pinochet, Operation Condor, etc.). We are finding extremely rare exceptions to right-wing stupidity that the Democrats wont agree and sign-off on.

Edit: And here I was constantly pointing out that the Democrats completely gave up any pretense of being an opposition party. Maybe they have finally found some difference between post 2024 Democrats and Trump in terms of policy.