this post was submitted on 05 Mar 2026
775 points (98.0% liked)

World News

54525 readers
2675 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
[–] Atomic@sh.itjust.works 16 points 23 hours ago (2 children)

It was not an illegal order. And it's also entirely possible the captain didn't know the status of the ships ammunition supply, or lack there of. Not that it changes anything from a legal standpoint.

But, it being a legal target doesn't change the fact that it was cowardly. Both are true.

[–] Amberskin@europe.pub 2 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

He also decided to not help the survivors.

[–] Atomic@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 hour ago

It's a submarine. What do you expect them to do? They are not equipped to handle POW's

It is believed Sri Lanka was notified which were at the scene quickly after it sank.

[–] titanicx@lemmy.zip 8 points 18 hours ago (2 children)

How was it a legal target? We are not at war as idiot orange says.

[–] Atomic@sh.itjust.works 4 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

You are in a defacto war. Despite whatever orange man says. The ship was inside international waters. It belongs to the nation you are attacking. It was a military ship. It is a legal target.

What's not a legal target are the civilian boats they shot down outside of Venezuela.

[–] MaDMaX99@lemmy.zip 3 points 5 hours ago (4 children)

So usa’s ships are legal targets for all world countries?

[–] Atomic@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 hour ago

If you want to start a war with the US, sure.

[–] A1kmm@lemmy.amxl.com 3 points 4 hours ago

Attacking a military ship is generally not a war crime (as defined by international law such as the Geneva treaties, Rome Statute etc...). It is an act of war (same as invasion or bombardment of another country), and is likely to see retaliation by the attacked country.

Aggression (i.e. unprovoked acts of war) is against the Charter of the United Nations, which also includes the International Court of Justice as a dispute resolution mechanism. It is up to the United Nations Security Council (at which the US has a veto) to authorise enforcement of ICJ rulings.

If a nation is acting to protect another nation facing aggression from the US, it would be legal for the attack US military ships. The reason why they wouldn't would more be that it would likely bring counter-retaliation from the US.

[–] Hathaway@lemmy.zip 1 points 4 hours ago

Legal by whose standards? The international law’s? No one enforces that. Unless it’s to benefit the richest. Most international law is followed basically on the honor system.

By the US’s standards, everything is legal because the president has no limitations because our government will never pass those limitations on a president. If it was illegal, no one is can or will enforce it.

Who cares about “legal”?

[–] Typotyper@sh.itjust.works 1 points 5 hours ago

Rules for thee not for me

[–] PrettyFlyForAFatGuy@feddit.uk 1 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

Actually the orange idiot keeps saying you are. It was Mike Johnson going the SMO route

[–] titanicx@lemmy.zip 3 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

Only Congress can declare war. Until then it's a conflict.

[–] PrettyFlyForAFatGuy@feddit.uk 1 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago)

A war is a war whether the aggressor decides to officially call it that or not

War - Noun -fighting, using soldiers and weapons, between two or more countries, or two or more groups inside a country - Cambridge Dictionary

It's just as much a war as Putin's war in Ukraine is. The fact that Congress hasn't gotten round to declaring it yet is moot