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.
- Blogsites are treated in the same manner as social media sites. Medium, Blogger, Substack, etc. are not valid news links regardless of who is posting them. Yes, legitimate news sites use Blogging platforms, they also use Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube and we don't allow those links either.
-
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 OCTOBER 19 2025
-
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
Atrocious article. Ridiculously biased wording: Al-Julani "mutated". He "shed" his old clothes.
As for content, basically fuck all. "He's a sectarian dictator and he's doing familial nepotism." "Iran doesn't like him for sectarian reasons." How about actually analyze his policies and statements? From everything I've read he's interested in a stable, secular, Democratic Syria and is courting foreign recognition and investment.
He founded Al Qaeda in Syrian and is doing nothing to stop massacres of Christians and Alawites.
He is an unelected puppet of Israel and the US. The only reason he's in charge is so that he will agree to his country being carved up by Israel and Turkey.
Fuck that guy
"On March 10, al-Sharaa condemned the recent mass killings of Alawite Muslims... He pledged to hold all perpetrators accountable, including those within his own ranks"
What more do you want? This is after alawite assadist insurgents ambushed government troops, by the way. This is all from Wikipedia.
Of course he's unelected, he just ousted the old boss. They're working with an interim government. They only just got around to parliamentary elections. If they don't hold presidential elections within their five year target you can come back and make me eat crow.
And by the way, the majority of the "those poor alawites" articles I saw while looking this up were from Israeli publications. So consider who you're shoulder to shoulder with on this.
Al Sharaa words mean absolutely nothing. This guy is literally one of the reasons why ISIS exists and he was involved in actual terrorist attacks, and he's still an islamist now. Taking his words at face value is like taking the Taliban talking about human rights before the US left Afghanistan seriously, it's an idiotic take.
I don't know what propaganda you've been snorting but trying to frame the Alawites which have always been marginalized group in Syria subject to constant discrimination and violence as the aggressors is just victim blaming. Trying to pretend that there's some connection to Israel, doesn't change the facts, it just means you have no idea what you're talking about.
Until you answer "what more do you want" I'm assuming you want al-Julani to personally gather up the perpetratora and lead them all in singing Kumbayah.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/March_2025_Western_Syria_clashes
Alawites weren't marginalized under Assad. That's why there's a strong pro-assad alawite faction doing things like ambushing government troops. In fact, Assad's family was alawite and he put alawites in leadership positions in the government and military, in fact.
How much reading have you done outside of the OP article and maybe one or two others in the mainstream media? Did you even realize the regime was collapsing before it was over? I ask because I really think you're worse informed than I am
I literally lived in Syria for. Some pretentious schmuck on Lemmy pretending they're experts on a place they've never been to is rich.
The Alawites were marginalized under Assad. The government is not the one that does marginalization, it's the general population. The majority of Syria is Sunni muslim and Arab, and anyone who isn't that is seen as a kafur and not a real Syrian. This is why all the minorities (Druze, Kurds, Alawites, Assyrians, etc) took up arms and tried to get some level of autonomy. They knew that the moment Assad was gone, he's going to replace by a government less secular yet just as ruthless and they're going to pay the price... And guess what? That's exactly what happened.
They got the literal Syrian branch of Al Qaeda as the new government and it's leader as their new president. Al Sharaa is a well known terrorist, islamist, and he's infamous for being one of the primary reasons why ISIS exists. The moment HTS took over, there dozens of reports of islamist fighters under the HTS, aka the Al Nusra front, who went on sprees massacring Alawites just for being Alawites. There are also reports of them them kidnapping and enslaving women, but that's something you just want to conveniently ignore.
What did Al Sharaa do? Nothing! He did nothing. The islamists who committed these crimes are not being exiled or prosecuted and the victims are not being compensated, rescued, or given justice. There has no change in policy outside of Al Sharaa giving lip service to not piss of the west. In reality, he's enabling these islamists which is why the violence against the Alawites and other minorities is still going on right now. Al Sharaa is literally using Sharia law to train new soldiers and police officers so he could have them enforce "morality".
Idk why you're dickriding for a terrorist like him so hard, but this is not the hill to die on. The marginalized minorities in the country are not the problem, that's a fascistic way of thinking. The cold hard reality is that Al Sharaa is and always has been a jihadist, and this violence is just a part of his ideology.
Right, the alawites were oppressed when they had minority rule just like how the Afrikaners were oppressed in apartheid South Africa. We'll have to wait and see. Good talking to you.
You're talking out of your ass. The Alawites have literally never ruled Syria for as long as Syria has been a thing. Stop spreading misinformation.
It’s too early to have much idea of “his policies.” At best, we can keep an open mind and watch him govern for a while. All you’ve read is speculation and PR statements by him. So maybe don’t yell at people for not analyzing his policies JUST yet.
That's what I've been doing, and what the author here seemingly hasn't
Can we at least criticize his policy of blowing up American soldiers with IEDs? Or would that be covered under "dead-naming"?
The ones in Iraq? Can't fault him for that
No, but it's not a reason to bring him to the White House and celebrate him.
Yes, you fucking can. The fuck? He's a Syrian from Syria who left his country to go to Iraq for the sole purpose of joining Al Qaeda, which was already a well established terrorist organization that's renowned for it's evil attacks at that time, and started plotting ways to kill American soldiers. In what world is that justifiable? I'm an Iraqi myself and this guy is a terrorist. Being against the US invasion doesn't mean you start supporting actual terrorists, that's just stupid.
Weren't American soldiers killing countless civilians during that war? I believe 61% of Americans see the war as unjustified in hindsight. Makes for a bit of a complicated situation.
Should we see America entering a war without justification as evil too or just a big oopsie?
Al-Qaeda is in every way unjustifiable but my guess is the person you're responding to sees this individual as a resistance fighter of some sort, which must be in some way how the West sees him for them to be cozying up to him like this.
The regime he toppled was undeniably evil which makes things even messier.
I don't think we necessarily disagree. Al Assad was a ruthless man who brought an era of terror to the country. However, at the same time, he's been replaced by another ruthless man with a history that indicates he'll also bring his own era of terror. In this sense, Syria isn't exactly free, bur under new management.
Likewise, we can agree that the American invasion of Iraq was wrong and unjustifiable, but also acknowledge that Al Sharaa committing terrorist attacks is also wrong and unustifiable.
The main point here is that two wrongs don't make a right, and the guy I'm replying to trying to justify terrorism is just morally represented.