this post was submitted on 24 Dec 2025
242 points (100.0% liked)

Global News

5380 readers
641 users here now

What is global news?

Something that happened or was uncovered recently anywhere in the world. It doesn't have to have global implications. Just has to be informative in some way.


Post guidelines

Title formatPost title should mirror the news source title.
URL formatPost URL should be the original link to the article (even if paywalled) and archived copies left in the body. It allows avoiding duplicate posts when cross-posting.
[Opinion] prefixOpinion (op-ed) articles must use [Opinion] prefix before the title.
Country prefixCountry prefix can be added to the title with a separator (|, :, etc.) where title is not clear enough from which country the news is coming from.


Rules

This community is moderated in accordance with the principles outlined in Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which emphasizes the right to freedom of opinion and expression. In addition to this foundational principle, we have some additional rules to ensure a respectful and constructive environment for all users.

1. English onlyTitle and associated content has to be in English.
2. No social media postsAvoid all social media posts. Try searching for a source that has a written article or transcription on the subject.
3. Respectful communicationAll communication has to be respectful of differing opinions, viewpoints, and experiences.
4. InclusivityEveryone is welcome here regardless of age, body size, visible or invisible disability, ethnicity, sex characteristics, gender identity and expression, education, socio-economic status, nationality, personal appearance, race, caste, color, religion, or sexual identity and orientation.
5. Ad hominem attacksAny kind of personal attacks are expressly forbidden. If you can't argue your position without attacking a person's character, you already lost the argument.
6. Off-topic tangentsStay on topic. Keep it relevant.
7. Instance rules may applyIf something is not covered by community rules, but are against lemmy.zip instance rules, they will be enforced.


Companion communities

Icon generated via LLM model | Banner attribution


If someone is interested in moderating this community, message @brikox@lemmy.zip.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Situation intensifies as Beijing condemns tanker seizures and US security chief calls to remove Nicolas Maduro from power.

Archived version: https://archive.is/20251223000937/https://www.scmp.com/news/china/diplomacy/article/3337400/china-says-us-broke-international-law-seizing-venezuelan-oil-tankers


Disclaimer: The article linked is from a single source with a single perspective. Make sure to cross-check information against multiple sources to get a comprehensive view on the situation.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Archangel1313@lemmy.ca 1 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

Lol! Ummm, yeah. You get that those examples are not the same thing, though...right? The US isn't actually "blockading" Cuba with military vessels in order to prevent traffic to and from the country. Don't get me wrong...what they're doing to Cuba is wrong. But it has nothing to do with illegally policing international waters.

And bringing up Israel, when talking about China / US similarities, is also not applicable. They have nothing to do with either situation. They're committing their own crimes, completely independent of those being committed by China and the US.

This is what makes it "whataboutism".

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

Why does it matter for you if the blockade involve the military or not? At the end of the day the effects on Cubans are real and goes against international laws.

The usa is envolved in the blockade of gaza it is not whataboutism, you are being ridiculous. With your rhetoric all your comments are whataboutism since the article is about china position on the attack on Venezuela

[–] Archangel1313@lemmy.ca 0 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

Why does it matter for you if the blockade involve the military or not? At the end of the day the effects on Cubans are real and goes against international laws.

Sanctions don't necessarily violate international laws. And particularly in Cuba's case, they don't actually prevent anyone other than the United States from trading with Cuba. As far as I recall, the only other country that is actively participating in the "Cuban blockade", is Israel. The point being...the "blockade" is almost entirely symbolic, unless you believe that trade with the US is somehow the only way Cuba can sustain itself.

But, again...none of this has anything to do with China's recent criticism of US actions in the Caribbean...which is what I was responding to with my comment. The reason I keep calling your arguments "whataboutism", is because none of them have anything to do with the context of either my statements, or the statements that China made, that I was responding to. If China was talking about Cuba...sure...then Cuba is part of that conversation. If China was bringing up Israel...sure...lets talk about Israel. But they weren't talking ab out any of those things. The only reason we're talking about them at all, is because you keep swinging back to them, despite them having nothing to do with what I was responding to.

You just bringing them up to say, "but, whatabout this thing that the US did that was really bad?", and "whatabout that other thing the US did that was also bad?" Why not bring up WW2 while you're at it? Or Vietnam? How about Nixon? Or Ronald Reagan? Those guys were terrible too. Whatabout we talk about the entire history of the US, and see if that distracts from the specific context that this entire conversation was actually about?

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

The majority of the international community consider the sanctions on cuba to be illegal.

You seem to be really invested in discussing what you consider to be whataboutism as if you don't have any issue with it.

You decided to mentionning the theme of hypocrisy and china being the last country to talk about international laws so it is fair for me to want to extend on on that theme. It is not whataboutism. Whataboutism goal is to deflect from the valid critisism but i always try in my comments to keep the idea that China of not respecting international laws and being hypocritical about it either

[–] Archangel1313@lemmy.ca 0 points 7 hours ago

You know there's "context" here though, right? I was responding directly to the article this post is about.

Wanting to talk about everything else, is what makes it "whataboutism". Whataboutism's goal is to change the subject. It's a form of deflection. It's the introduction of a wide range of unrelated details, that have nothing to do with the original point being made.