this post was submitted on 23 Mar 2026

267 points (97.8% liked)

Political Memes

11407 readers

2149 users here now

Welcome to politcal memes!

These are our rules:

1) 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.

2) No misinformation

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

3) Posts should be memes

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

4) No bots, spam or self-promotion

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

5) No AI generated content.

Content posted must not be created by AI with the intent to mimic the style of existing images

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

Rooki@lemmy.world

automodbeta@lemmy.world

Tenthrow@lemmy.world

JonsJava@lemmy.world

Lasherz12@lemmy.world

FauxPseudo@lemmy.world

267

Trump's Kobayashi Maru (media.piefed.social)

submitted 16 hours ago by nymnympseudonym@piefed.social to c/politicalmemes@lemmy.world

35 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Iran may have found the move Trump can never play

Original article:
https://www.nytimes.com/live/2026/03/22/world/iran-war-oil-trump

top 35 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] Akh@lemmy.world 50 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

Imagine all it takes is the US and Israel to legit say say sorry to Iran and show Iran respect in the future to restore energy security and know you are fucked because of pride

[–] ajoebyanyothername@lemmy.world 10 points 7 hours ago

Given the people involved, 'all' is doing a lot of heavy lifting in that sentence.

[–] Wilco@lemmy.zip 14 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

They did just defeat Trump ... he has no respect for anything.

[–] D_C@sh.itjust.works 4 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

LIES! FALSE!
What about the respect for the hard work child traffickers put in? What about the redirect for other dictators? What about the respect for other child rapists?

[–] Wilco@lemmy.zip 3 points 6 hours ago

That is envy and sense of entitlement to "his share" ... its almost respect, but is still just the formless emotions of a soulless man baby.

[+] 8oow3291d@feddit.dk -16 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago) (1 children)

So he is saying that Iran is not responsible for *checks notes* Iran selectively and deliberately hitting ships of third party nations not involved in the war? That is not how moral responsibility works. How old is he, 5 years old?

[–] Eximius@lemmy.world 12 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

Strait of Hormuz is not international waters. They are fully allowed to close it, at least on their side of the strait. When people ignore laws, usually there is a penalty and enforcement. Closure here is enforced by missiles.

Whether Oman is a party in this war (given their harboring of US bases and military assets) is up to debate.

[–] 8oow3291d@feddit.dk 2 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago) (1 children)

They are fully allowed to close it

According to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), ships have a right to transit international straits like the Straight of Hormuz. Article 38 to be exact: https://www.un.org/depts/los/convention_agreements/texts/unclos/unclos_e.pdf

at least on their side of the strait.

And as you say, their side. But it is quite clear that Iran has closed the whole thing, also the part Iran has no right to.

Whether Oman is a party in this war (given their harboring of US bases and military assets) is up to debate.

Has Oman allowed attacks from the bases (I don't actually know)? If not, then Oman is not party to the war. But it seems pretty clear that Iran would not restrain itself in either case, right?

And in any case, this is civilian ships, which are not valid targets even in a war.

[–] Eximius@lemmy.world 5 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago) (2 children)

I dont know. Generally it gets a bit muddy at such a stage. Are they party to the war? Did they expressly forbid USA from using military bases to resupply from/attack Iran? Did Oman cushly stay silent and complicit playing both sides? Are trade ships that are trading with the enemy, not expressly and officially guaranteed by Oman not valid targets in a strait majorly controlled by Iran (even the Oman territorial waters are a bit silly once you take into account the geography)? (Not talking about people, but about infrastructure and supply chain)

If anything, Iran, in its desperation, is fighting well against the superest most bigliest ultra fascist state in the making.

[–] nymnympseudonym@piefed.social 0 points 36 minutes ago

To be clear: this war is Islamofascists vs Judeochristian fascists

[–] 8oow3291d@feddit.dk -2 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago) (2 children)

Generally it gets a bit muddy at such a stage.

I think international law is actually pretty clear, in general. You don't get to shoot at every ship that moves.

Are trade ships that are trading with the enemy, not expressly and officially guaranteed by Oman not valid targets

Iran is shooting all the ships. It is pretty clear that "legality" is not a concern Iran has.

If anything, Iran, in its desperation, is fighting well against the superest most bigliest ultra fascist state in the making.

This seems to be the root. You see that Trump/USA is evil here, which it is. And then somehow conclude that Iran must be good, if Iran is fighting against Trump.

Iran is evil too. Fucking evil. Killing innocent civilians deliberately and laughing at it evil.

There is a trend of ignoring how evil some of the Muslim groupings in the Middle East are. That has got to stop. It almost seem like "white man's burden" - as if people think Muslims don't have agency to know right from wrong.

[–] Wakmrow@lemmy.world 1 points 25 minutes ago

What does international law say about assassinating heads of state

What does international law say about bombing industrial infrastructure

What does international law say about bombing hospitals and schools

[–] Eximius@lemmy.world 2 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

I guess you're right about the international law. But then again, it's been out the window for a while.

I didn't write any conclusions about Iran regime being non evil. But looking at history, you'd be a fool not to see its instability rooted in US/Israel/UK domination goals.

The excerpts from UN assemblies I saw, Iran was quite repetitive, but spoke much more eloquently than the US. Make of that what you will, in the age of ai slop.

[–] 8oow3291d@feddit.dk -1 points 4 hours ago

you’d be a fool not to see its instability rooted in US/Israel/UK domination goals.

Yes the US has fucked up bigly in Iraq and Iran. There is a pattern - fuck Republicans.

But in many cases, the US has also created stability. The 1991 Gulf War was fundamentally a stability exercise - Iraq started that war by invading Kuwait. Likely Saddam would gladly have invaded Saudi Arabia, if the US had not enforced the status quo in the region.

The US was the world's policeman. Sometimes they did some shit, but sometimes they kept the peace. Over all, I think people were glad they were there. But keeping the peace involves force or the threat of force sometimes, and it seems to me that some people only see the violence or threat of violence, and not the peace created. As in the 1991 Gulf War, for example.

Iran was quite repetitive, but spoke much more eloquently than the US.

Iran's political leadership has shown far more competence than Trump's administration, no question. Trump apparently started this war without knowing that Iran would close the straight of Hormuz, which random people on the street would have known would happen. Trump's administration is literally idiots - not just people I disagree with.

[–] First_Thunder@lemmy.zip 5 points 16 hours ago* (last edited 16 hours ago) (2 children)

I mean, there were 2 ships hit with drones… there are reasons for the insurers to be afraid

Edit source; https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c80j4rln8zmo

[–] nymnympseudonym@piefed.social 36 points 16 hours ago

Yes, they fear the hot war Trump started without consulting any allies (except Bibi) nor any preparation

[+] FiniteBanjo@feddit.online -19 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

And I don't think those sea mines are American.

[–] Slovene85@sh.itjust.works 38 points 16 hours ago (2 children)

I don't think you two are getting the point. It is the way it is because of Trump's illegal war.

[–] nymnympseudonym@piefed.social 15 points 14 hours ago (2 children)

not just illegal -- arguably like every US action since WWII it's not legally even a war

But the reason it's as f--ed up as it is is because Trump went in without

NATO which has things like minesweepers and actual working littoral combat ships
Getting the needed US aircraft carriers into place before telling Iranians to revolt
Getting the needed US LCS minesweepers into place (oops they are both under maintenance RN)
Getting support ahead of time from allies like Europe, Japan, S Korea, GCC states, all of whom could be exerting economic, political, and even military support RN
Having a fucking plan for how to reopen the Strait which every State Department policywonk and pre-Trump Navy Admiral knew would be Iran's first move
Having a fucking plan for shaheds and USV water drones which are now granting Iran naval control and are built decentralized on the cheap in basements, you are not likely to bomb them all

[–] Aqarius@lemmy.world 3 points 2 hours ago

It may weasel out of being a war by US law, but by international law it's no less a war than the Russian "special military operation".

[–] NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io 4 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

Uh... this war would not be less fucked up if it was run more competently. It'd be worse, in fact, as can be seen in Iraq.

[–] nymnympseudonym@piefed.social 1 points 31 minutes ago

Getting rid of the religious fascist terror-exporting state of Iran is a worthy goal.

Blowing everything up is not a useful nor moral path toward that goal.

[+] FiniteBanjo@feddit.online -17 points 16 hours ago (4 children)

Being invaded by an asshole authoritarian doesn't really justify attacking literally everyone in reach with arms funneled in from two other asshole authoritarians.

Not that I'm particularly fond of Exxon Mobil, Dubai, or Qatar.

There is no "good side" in this fight.

[–] WraithGear@lemmy.world 1 points 3 hours ago

We have cells that triggered are acting on orders of a dead man’s switch, and when you assassinate all possible leaders of a nation you no longer have anyone who can call off the initiated cells, nor speak for the nation to surrender

[–] FlyingCircus@lemmy.world 1 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

All of the people Iran has attacked are directly aiding and abetting the criminal Americans.

[–] FiniteBanjo@feddit.online -1 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

So when the USA warmongers and preemptively attacks it's bad

When Iran warmongers and preemptively attacks it's good

Got it, understood.

[–] FlyingCircus@lemmy.world 1 points 8 minutes ago

I'm not saying it's good or bad, I'm saying it's not the escalation you're claiming it is. Iran is in an existential war against the world's strongest superpower. It's allowed to defend itself, and they have deemed that the best way to do that is to disrupt the global economy to the point that the war isn't worth it. It's quite an immediately effective strategy, too, and will hasten the end of the war far faster than bombing schools or whatever it is that the US's strategy is.

[–] NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io 17 points 15 hours ago (2 children)

They're mainly attacking US bases and related infrastructure in those countries, which is 100% justified

[+] nymnympseudonym@piefed.social -8 points 14 hours ago (3 children)

Don't paint Iran as nice guys. Or even as civilized. These are more racist, more homophobic, more religious nutjob, than any Grand Wizard of the KKK ever was. Part of their M.O. is literally just sowing chaos and straight-up civilian-killing terror.

[–] shawn1122@sh.itjust.works 5 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago) (1 children)

Here's the rub - the UN charter doesn't have a seperate set of rules for countries you don't think are civilized. That's not how international law works.

We either try to have a rules based international order or we don't. Without it, we sow the seeds for nuclear proliferation and great power / law of the jungle politics.

[–] nymnympseudonym@piefed.social 1 points 34 minutes ago

Right now Trump is aligned with Iran, China, and Russia in attempting to dismantle the rules-based order.

Europe, S Korea, Japan, Australia, Canada, Mexico largely trying to preserve what they can

[–] NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io 13 points 14 hours ago

Uh... Setting aside how half (but not all, to be clear) of what you just said is propaganda, how does that have anything to do with what I said?

[–] marcos@lemmy.world 7 points 14 hours ago

Eh, the racist bit is really underserved. They probably have the least racist society of the region, that is still horrible by liberal standards, but it's less worse than everybody around them.

[–] marcos@lemmy.world 9 points 15 hours ago

It doesn't. But justification stops being a concern when the most powerful country on Earth decided to extinguish you.