World News
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. 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.
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.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
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/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
view the rest of the comments
You claimed that Portugal not having been involved in major wars for almost a century (which was a false claim) was a reason for the country to not need jets, an argument which literally links the need for jets to being involved in major wars.
Now you've moved the goalposts and it's only "some" major wars that justify having jets, not "other" major wars, and which are the "jet requiring wars and which aren't" being entirelly up to you to define.
(FYI, Portugal used fighter jets in its Colonial Wars)
In summary, you've literally talked yourself into a "it's so because i say it's so argumentative corner".
The feeling that your discourse in all your posts here leaves is that you do not want Portugal to have jets, for reasons that have nothing at all to do with the geostrategical and defense needs and objectives of Portugal and is in fact related to the imperialistic objectives of certain, completelly different and non-friendly, countries being better served by a less well armed Europe, only you can't just outright come out and say it because that would severely damage the "opinion making" ability of your comments, hence the half-arsed circular argumentation balanced on top of nothing more than misinformation and unfundamented opinion.
Hey, maybe I'm wrong, so I'll leave it to others in this thread to make up their own minds about it.
My intention was to say that Portugal has not faced military threats. The fact that it was involved in unjust colonial wars is, in fact, a reason they shouldn't be allowed to have jets.
And no, I don't want them to waste money on military boondoggles that could be used to help actual people.
It's hilarious that after the profound ignorance you've repeatedly displayed about Portugal whilst not being Portuguese and still claiming that you know better than the Portuguese, you still expect that anybody out there, no matter how stupid, will believe that having a genuine concern for the Portuguese (not wanting them to waste money) is in any way form or shape what drives your repeated attempts at convincing others that Portugal shouldn't have fighter jets.
Thanks for the entertainment!
My intention was to point out that Portugal does not face any threats and your argument seems to be "well they murdered all those people in the colonial wars, what if they need to murder indigenous resistance fighters again huh?!"
You just love Portugal's colonial history I guess and want to relive it.