this post was submitted on 26 Sep 2025
332 points (98.8% liked)

politics

25936 readers
1921 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. 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.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. 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.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

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.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
all 30 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] DeathsEmbrace@lemmy.world 65 points 1 week ago (4 children)

Why are war criminals and genocidal maniacs allowed at the UN? Would they let Hitler speak at the UN assembly?

[–] hildegarde@lemmy.blahaj.zone 61 points 1 week ago (2 children)

They let him host the Olympics, so yeah probably.

Also the US has veto power at the UN. So nothing can be done unless the US approves. Since the US enthusiastically supports genocide, nothing can be done.

[–] resipsaloquitur@lemmy.world 23 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Not sure the UN let Hitler host the Olympics.

[–] jaybone@lemmy.zip 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Doesn’t Russia also have veto power? But does anything the UN does actually matter? It’s always “non binding” resolutions. And if it’s supposed to be binding, who is going to enforce it?

[–] hildegarde@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 1 week ago

The UN was formed after WWII and it was a scheme by the allies to cement their power going forward. All permanent security council members with veto power were the winning side of WWII.

The UN basically has no powers against the wishes of any member with a veto.

[–] CarbonIceDragon@pawb.social 25 points 1 week ago (1 children)

My understanding has been that one of the main purposes of the UN is to attempt to prevent or deescalate wars, by providing a forum for diplomacy. To that end, the kinds of people liable to start wars are exactly the kind of people one would encourage to attend it. Now, it may not have exactly proven very good at that (though it's a bit hard to say when we can't look at what history since it's founding would have looked like without it), but still, kicking those guys out doesn't actually do anything about what they're doing, it just tells them that you don't like them, which they probably already knew.

[–] DeathsEmbrace@lemmy.world -4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

No it sends a message that there is no tolerance for you especially trying to mimic the holocaust from ww2 that was the whole origin story to the UN.

[–] luciferofastora@feddit.org 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

But there is some degree of tolerance, and must be for diplomacy to work at all.

"No tolerance" would mean actually taking military action against the Zionist regime, at which point diplomacy has failed and the UN is no longer the correct forum.

Conversely, for the sake of minimising the destruction and loss of lives war causes, there always has to be an option to go back to diplomacy instead. Excluding him from the UN wouldn't make him stop. It would just close off one way out of this horrendous war.

To see what happens to a cornered warlord with nothing left to lose and no option for diplomacy, look to the late stages of WW2: absolute war, massive waste of lives on all sides, missery beyond measure. That is what the UN was created for: to provide at least a chance to reduce human suffering.

That chance must be offered to Netanyahu, not for his sake, but for the sake of all the people that might not have to die for his megalomania. Walking out shows the disdain clearly enough, but it's less definite than walling him off entirely.

[–] DeathByBigSad@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 week ago (1 children)

If theu weren't allowed in the UN, the UN wouldn't even exist lol.

UN is just diplomacy, but with an extra fancy logo and symbolic parliamentary voting, it doesn't have real powers.

[–] ILoveUnions@lemmy.world 1 points 6 days ago

It astounds me that people cannot understand this

[–] TankovayaDiviziya@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago

There was no UN assembly when Hitler was alive, and he had Germany leave the predecessor League of Nations when he came to power.

[–] FreshParsnip@lemmy.ca 17 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Imagine how Trump would've reacted of they did that to him

[–] resipsaloquitur@lemmy.world 36 points 1 week ago

I’d rather not imagine it.

I’d rather see it.

[–] magic_lobster_party@fedia.io 11 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Do we know which delegations walked out?

[–] bugfest@lemmy.world 24 points 1 week ago

which delegations did not?

[–] TankovayaDiviziya@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago

I'M GONNA KILL THE PALESTINIANS! I'M GONNA DO IT!

sane people walks out

[–] HazardousBanjo@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago

The world is turning against Israel but your average Israeli dumbass is still convinced that Israel is the protagonist of human history and simply a victim of everyone else's bullying.

Whole country filled with that ex everyone has had.

[–] Nightlight17776@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 week ago (2 children)
[–] wewbull@feddit.uk 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

"I'll have the pepperoni pizza. Thanks."

[–] Nightlight17776@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 week ago

Fine choice sir. Enjoy your pizza 🍕

[–] magic_lobster_party@fedia.io 1 points 1 week ago

Order in da hall is in progress