this post was submitted on 23 Oct 2025
422 points (99.8% liked)

News

32926 readers
2662 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. 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. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Paywall removed https://archive.is/cvouF

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 149 points 4 days ago (2 children)

Imagine if Obama said "We're just going to kill people" in any context. I hate this shit so much.

[–] Archangel1313@lemmy.ca 48 points 4 days ago (4 children)

To be fair...Obama did "just kill people" by the thousands.

[–] Sunforged@lemmy.ml 39 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Liberals like Obama because he did it while keeping a low profile so they could keep their conscious clean.

MAGA like Trump cuz he gloats about it so they can revel in it.

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Where the fuck did I say I liked Obama.

[–] Sunforged@lemmy.ml 12 points 3 days ago (1 children)

When you hear people insult liberals do you always take it personally?

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (2 children)

Maybe go back to the original comment for this thread and read usernames

[–] 3abas@lemmy.world 7 points 3 days ago (2 children)

They were clearly responding to the person who instinctively jumped to defend Obama, if you look at the usernames, he was clearly not taking to you...

[–] village604@adultswim.fan 5 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

That person absolutely wasn't defending Obama. They were clearly calling him out, likely for his drone strikes.

[–] Sunforged@lemmy.ml 4 points 3 days ago

Wasn't even directed at anyone in particular, just stating the observation.

[–] Sunforged@lemmy.ml 6 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I know you were at the top, what I don't understand is why you thought my comment was directed at you.

[–] ronigami@lemmy.world 1 points 3 days ago
[–] rimu@piefed.social 5 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

Do you care to name an incident, so we can compare?

[–] Sunforged@lemmy.ml 26 points 3 days ago (3 children)
[–] rimu@piefed.social 17 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Yes, I see, lots of parallels there.

Apparently Trump is quite a fan of drone strikes too:

There have been 2,243 drone strikes in the first two years of the Trump presidency, compared with 1,878 in Mr Obama's eight years in office,

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-47480207

[–] Sunforged@lemmy.ml 13 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (2 children)

That Trump is worse does not trivialize the fact.

[–] phoenixz@lemmy.ca 9 points 3 days ago (1 children)

No, but it is telling that trump then, according to these number, killed 4x more people in 2x less time

Both numbers suffice that either men should be in an ICC prison

[–] madjo@feddit.nl 5 points 3 days ago (1 children)

And highlights the reason why the US doesn't acknowledge the authority of the ICC.

[–] village604@adultswim.fan 3 points 3 days ago (1 children)

We have a law that explicitly states we'll invade if a US citizen is tried.

[–] phoenixz@lemmy.ca 3 points 3 days ago

Yeah, you can thank one of the bushes for that shit. It's a fucking insult to the world

I think that at this point, if the US wants to ever be eleven remotely respected again, that it will have to rid itself of bullshit laws like that, and acknowledge and fully support the ICC

That, amongst much, much more

[–] rimu@piefed.social 4 points 3 days ago

Yeah I'm not arguing with you on this just sharing information I found.

If my math is right, that's not by the thousands. That's by the tens.

[–] redsand@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 3 days ago

Roughly %10 casualty rate. That's dog shit 💩

[–] neukenindekeuken@sh.itjust.works 2 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Every US president practically has.

[–] Archangel1313@lemmy.ca 2 points 3 days ago

This is pretty much why the Supreme Court ruled that a president's actions cannot be considered illegal, when performed in the name of their official capacity as president. They didn't just give Trump the authority to violate the law...they retroactively gave it to every other president that has committed atrocities during their time in office.

In a twisted sort of way, they were affirming what's already considered established precedent.

[–] absentbird@lemmy.world 1 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

I thought Obama had congressional approval for all his military actions.

That's not just killing people, it's part of the job of being president: executing the will of the republic. What Trump is doing is very different.

[–] Archangel1313@lemmy.ca 2 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Obama was really just piggy-backing on previous "approvals". He was also conducting drone strikes wherever he felt like...in or out of active war scenarios. It was also all based on shadowy intelligence, and done without any due process for those he killed. All in the name of the Republic...just like how Trump is claiming his actions are.

So...not much different.

[–] absentbird@lemmy.world 1 points 3 days ago

Congress approved military strikes in the entire middle east region under Bush. Even if the strikes weren't in active war zones, they were approved uses of military force. Trump has no such authority for his strikes on boats in the Pacific and Caribbean.

I agree that the authorizations granted under Bush were bullshit and tantamount to war crimes, but the actions of the president is starkly different.

[–] Sludge@sh.itjust.works 32 points 4 days ago (3 children)

Dawg is he actively trying to launch into an actual emergency or war to try to hold on to power? Looks like it.

[–] Bronzebeard@lemmy.zip 23 points 4 days ago

Yeah. He tried to get into a war with Iran in term 1. He "predicted/projected" Obama would start a war to increase his polling to get reelected. So we know he thinks this way

[–] Triumph@fedia.io 16 points 4 days ago

All of the above.

[–] ToastedRavioli@midwest.social 6 points 3 days ago (2 children)

He is trying to create a justification for enacting martial law and increased control over the domestic population. “Venezuelan gangs” are simultaneously the excuse for blowing up civilian boats while also being the excuse for making ICE increasingly militant.

He seemingly wants to recreate the conditions of WWII where the military was used to round up Japanese-American people into concentration camps. Except this time it is to round up Latinos. For now they go after undocumented immigrants. Then start the war. Then round up anybody who is brown by labeling them as gang sympathizers

[–] Mirshe@lemmy.world 2 points 3 days ago

He's also wanting Venezuela to declare war first.

[–] Sludge@sh.itjust.works 1 points 3 days ago

Whelp, rip - see y'all in the gulags.