Pete Hegseth said this was "the first sinking of an enemy ship by a torpedo since WWII" (which is false, but that's beside the point), so I decided to look at what happened in WW2 and... this might surprise no-one: turns out the Nazis were more humane than the Americans.
Probably the most abject part here is that the warship had many survivors - 32 to be precise (https://t.co/bS1uARrBtf) - and the U.S. made zero effort to rescue them, despite it being required by the laws of naval warfare and simply being the honorable thing to do.
It took little Sri-Lanka, with its very modest means - especially compared to the $1 trillion US defense budget - to do the honorable thing and launch a (successful) rescue operation.
Even the literal Nazis, during WW2, rescued the survivors of ships their U-boats sank. It was considered a matter of basic honor.
The history of this is actually interesting: the Nazis rescued survivors all the way until the so-called Laconia Incident in 1942 (https://t.co/6wI251aNCv).
The Laconia was a British troopship sunk by U-156, a German U-boat, off the West African coast. Right after the sinking, the Nazis immediately began rescuing over 400 survivors, broadcasting - as was common practice - in plain English their position on open radio channels to all Allied powers nearby, so they wouldn't get attacked during the rescue.
That's when a US B-24 "Liberator" bomber attacked the submarine anyway, even though all the rescued survivors were on its foredeck. The B-24 killed dozens of Laconia's survivors with bombs and strafing attacks, forcing U-156 to cast into the sea the remaining survivors that she had rescued and crash dive to avoid being destroyed.
The American B-24 pilots mistakenly reported they had sunk U-156, and were awarded medals for bravery...
This event completely changed Nazi policy on this matter: Karl Dönitz, commander of the U-boat fleet, issued the "Laconiarefehl" - the Laconia Order - forbidding U-boats from rescuing survivors, because the risk to the submarine was now too high.
In other words, the Americans during WW2 essentially forced the Nazis to abandon survivors - from the allied side (!) - at sea.
Dönitz at least had an excuse.
It must be such a surreal experience to go on a foreign news show to speak to professional newscasters and suddenly find yourself having to explain to two fully grown adults that your nation is fighting the US military because the US military attacked your nation.
Quand un pays en envahit un autre, l'usage c'est de rompre les relations diplomatiques, d'imposer un boycott, d'interdire de territoire national et de geler les avoirs des dirigeants de l'Etat agresseur n'est-ce pas ? #Liban
Lorsque Vladimir Poutine a décidé d’envahir l’Ukraine on a interdit des médias russes d’exister en France.
Là on tend carrément le micro au boucher et dirigeant d’extrême-droite israélien sur l’un des principaux canaux d’informations.
La honte, à échelle internationale.
« Mais comment les gens ont pu croire ces mensonges ? » me demandais-je lorsque j’étais plus jeune en cours d’histoire.
Voilà comment : Via un matraquage médiatique. Notre ministre lui-même fait mine d’oublier qu’Israël a attaqué l’Iran y’a quelques jours et tué 11 personnes.
@marinetondelier Bien d'accord. Mais dans ce cas, que pensez-vous de l'attaque de l'ambassade iranienne en Syrie par l'Etat d'Israël ?
Évitez de louper des épisodes, ça fausse les analyses.
There is no overstating just how absolutely insane this is. There is no precedent - NONE - of a state deliberately bombing an embassy. It didn't even happen during WW1, WW2 or even the 19th century. Heck even during the medieval era and Roman empire, the protection of envoys and messengers - even from enemy states - was a recognized norm.
The only other historical instance was NATO bombing the Chinese embassy in Belgrade in 1999, killing 3 Chinese journalists, but the U.S. profusely apologized, Bill Clinton publicly said it was a mistake (something China still doesn't believe to this day), compensated the families and paid to rebuild the embassy. All this highlighting how profound a taboo this is in international relations.
Israel now doing this - and it obviously isn't a mistake - shows just how rogue and unhinged it has become as a state. It's literally become beyond the pale on a scale that goes back centuries, even millennia.
If the world doesn't forcefully respond to this, it undermines the very core of international relations: the sanctity of diplomacy. And if that's the case, we're literally entering a world we've never known.
It is appalling that AIPAC is targeting women members of Congress who have survived sexual assault with this horrific rhetoric.
Each and every day, their role in US politics becomes a greater scandal.
They are the NRA of foreign policy. Of course they don’t want a ceasefire.
This is wild.
Israel's official Twitter account has posted a picture of aid for Ukrainian refugees in Moldova in 2022, and pretended it's aid from Israel for Gaza.
C’est pas une « émigration », c’est la DÉPORTATION d’une population dont le territoire est colonisé.
C’est pas « controversé », c’est un CRIME CONTRE L’HUMANITÉ.
Et c’est pas nouveau, ça a toujours fait partie du PROJET COLONIAL. Tout comme vos euphémismes & vos contorsions.
Pages 59-67 of South Africa's suit is just a list of quotes from Israeli government officials and prominent members of the public with genocidal rhetoric.
AIPAC lies.
#Israël | La France condamne les propos des ministres israéliens des Finances, M. Bezalel Smotrich, et de la Sécurité nationale, M. Itamar Ben Gvir, appelant à « l’émigration » de la population gazaouie ainsi qu’au rétablissement de colonies à Gaza et à son occupation terrestre.
→ https://t.co/KhedSzjhAs