this post was submitted on 31 Jan 2024

37 points (60.7% liked)

Political Memes

5598 readers

2489 users here now

Welcome to politcal memes!

These are our rules:

Be civil

Jokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.

No misinformation

Don’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.

Posts should be memes

Random pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.

No bots, spam or self-promotion

Follow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

Joe "Congressional Approval" Biden (lemmy.world)

submitted 10 months ago by jimmydoreisalefty to c/politicalmemes

25 comments fedilink hide all child comments

top 25 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] [email protected] 34 points 10 months ago (2 children)

Reminder that the last time congress declared war was on Japan in 1941, then Germany shortly after.

[–] Mikelius 10 points 10 months ago (2 children)

Germany declared war in the US first, which was a colossally stupid move by hitler.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 10 months ago

Not really, but it takes a lot to explain why he didn't have a choice and I don't like defending Hitler, so I won't

[–] [email protected] 4 points 10 months ago

That's the kind of stuff you do while on meth

[–] [email protected] 5 points 10 months ago

Reminder that that was one of the last formal declarations of war

[–] [email protected] 30 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Where's the meme? This is just a screenshot of a non-humourous tweet.

[–] [email protected] 30 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

Are you referring to the retaliation for weeks of unprovoked houthi attacks or the culmination of 70 years of the US supporting Israel?

[+] [email protected] -8 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Yemen maybe?

[–] [email protected] 18 points 10 months ago (1 children)

That would be the retaliation for weeks of unprovoked Houthi attacks on civilian shipping.

[+] gmtom -10 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (3 children)

Depends on your definition of "unprovoked" those ships were technically running a blockade in Yemen national waters.

Western nation have "attacked" civilian ships for similar reasons too lately, but nobody cares about it because the powerful Western nations get to decide what is acceptable and what isn't.

e: downvote me if you want. It doesn't change the facts.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 10 months ago (1 children)

"Technically running a blockade in Yemen national wateres"

Funny way of saying "Were attacked in international waters regardless of whether their destination was Israel", but I guess facts are inconvenient little things.

[+] gmtom -7 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Were attacked in international waters

0 of these attacks were in international waters.

but I guess facts are inconvenient little things.

The fucking irony of this statement is palpable.

https://twitter.com/detresfa_/status/1735979072126423252/photo/1

Here is a map of the major red sea attacks.

If you could please point out where on this image the international waters our I would much appreciate it, because i can only see yemeni terirtorial waters (and eritrea and djibouti but none of the attacks accoured in their waters). That's if you can find time in your busy schedule of being a smug condescending and Co fidently icorrect asshole (:

[–] [email protected] 8 points 10 months ago (1 children)

“All of the incidents to date have occurred outside Yemeni territorial waters, but even if they were within territorial waters, these attacks would still constitute a violation of international law, in particular the right of innocent or transit passage and the fundamental rights of the seafarers onboard to carry out their work and to do so without fear of attack,” the spokesperson for the International Chamber of Shipping said.

That’s if you can find time in your busy schedule of being a smug condescending and Co fidently icorrect asshole (:

Truly astounding. Dunning-Kruger effect in the flesh.

[–] gmtom -1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Again the irony.

I provided you a map that shows you where the ships were when they were attacked, this is data you can verify for yourself.

You can look at that map with your own eyes and see that these attacks occoured within Yemeni territorial water.

It's quite literally an undeniable fact that you can verify for yourself. I know you won't though because you've already decided you were right before doing any sort of checking for yourself, then when someone comes along with ACTUAL information that anyone can verify and not just an unsourced quote from someone with every reason to lie, you lash out because it goes the world view you constructed before looking for the facts yourself.

Also. No, seafarers don't have the right to violate the sovereignty of a countries terirtorial waters without repercussions, especially when they are supplying weapoms and other material to a country that is currently commiting genocide, so is not "innocent passage". Or are you going to say that when the UK seized the Grace 1 or the recent incident where the US lost 2 SEALs boarding a boat heading for Yemen, are violations of international law too?

Like if you want to claim these happened in international waters please provide me some actual proof, instead of being condescendin. I assume you're an adult right? Then can we argue this maturely without devoling into acting like redditors?

[–] [email protected] 7 points 10 months ago (1 children)

You're absolutely right, what does the International Chamber of Shipping know about international law and what waters are territorial? The UN is just a lapdog of the US anyway. /s

You can look at that map with your own eyes and see that these attacks occoured within Yemeni territorial water.

Lmao, even your own map doesn't support that, unless your opinion is that Eritrea and Djibouti aren't real countries, and only the "A Curse Upon The Jews" folks are sovereign.

[–] gmtom 0 points 10 months ago (1 children)

So if we were to make the assumption that what im saying was right do you think the international Chamber of Shipping would totally go against the US UK and every other western country to side with Yemen? You really honestly in good faith believe they would do that?

Lmao, even your own map doesn't support that, unless your opinion is that Eritrea and Djibouti

It does because you see those islands in the middles of striaght where most of the attacks take place? That's the Hanish Islansa and the Zubair group, which both beleong to Yemen, and so the waters surrounding them up to halfway between them and the countries on the otherside are part of Yemens EEZ. So the map does show they are in Yemeni waters.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 10 months ago (1 children)

It does because you see those islands in the middles of striaght where most of the attacks take place? That’s the Hanish Islansa and the Zubair group, which both beleong to Yemen, and so the waters surrounding them up to halfway between them and the countries on the otherside are part of Yemens EEZ. So the map does show they are in Yemeni waters.

EEZ isn't the same as territorial waters, which you might realize if you had any interest in anything other than playing apologist for attacks on civilians. We're done here.

[–] gmtom -2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

So you going to write off all the actual factual information because of 1 technical mistake I made while replying? Then accuse me of some bullshit to cover for you complete lack of any coherent argument?

You could at least answer the question asked you. But we both know you're purposely avoiding it because you don't like the answer you would have to give.

Maybe you should go back to reddit, you would be in better company there :)

[–] [email protected] 5 points 10 months ago (1 children)

So you going to write off all the actual factual information because of 1 technical mistake I made while replying?

"Technical mistake"

lol

[–] gmtom 1 points 10 months ago

Yes, because in this example they are effectively the same. For the red sea the EEZs and teritorial waters have the same borders.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Yemen doesn’t have exclusive claim to the entire straight, sorry. At least 50% of the straight would belong to Djibouti on the other side.

Never mind that the Houthis are rebels and do not represent Yemen.

[–] gmtom -2 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Never mind that the Houthis are rebels and do not represent Yemen.

They are the defacto government of Yemen and are "rebels" only because they are fighting against a Saudi backed occupation force and they are considered rebels or terrorists because Suadi is backed by the US.

If the US backed Yemen instead of SA you would be talking about the brave Houthis defending their homeland from the evil Saudi invaders.

At least 50% of the straight would belong to Djibouti on the other side.

That's only if you don't count the Hanish Islands or the Zubair group of Islands as Yemeni territory. If you factor that then then the vast majority, if not all the attacks have been in Yemeni waters.

[–] HandBreadedTools 6 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Do you have an example

[–] gmtom -3 points 10 months ago

https://twitter.com/detresfa_/status/1735979072126423252/photo/1

Most of the actual attacks accour close to those islands you see in the middle which belong to Yemen, so put those attacks in yemeni waters.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 10 months ago

Oh, really?

Explain the Iraq war then