no comments (yet)

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
there doesn't seem to be anything here
83 comments in c/world@lemmy.world view that post
[–] 54 points 4 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (2 children)

Everything about the way Israel conducts itself flies in the face of the spirit of competition. They should not be allowed into any sport. They shouldnt be allowed into Eurovision either. They are thugs and cheaters. Sports and terrorism are incompatible.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 18 points 4 months ago

    Norway is absolutely right.

  • source
  • [–] 9 points 4 months ago*

    At the time when IOC is restoring russia back to the games I think this campaign will likely follow that of the Norwegian NT.

  • source
  • [–] 29 points 4 months ago (7 children)

    How about kicking Israel out of Israel, maybe there was a reason it was done the first time?

  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 4 months ago (6 children)

    We don't talk about why Canaanites were kicked out of Israel and then Egypt.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] -2 points 4 months ago* (5 children)

    Yeah we don't talk about that because that implies there is something wrong with the Jewish race or religion... so it's an objectively antisemitic line of thinking.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (6 children)

    Why wouldn't Iran and the US also be kicked out?

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] [S] 4 points 3 months ago (4 children)

    What country did Iran invade? The US has political backing.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 3 months ago (3 children)

    Iran has been a colonial power in Lebanon, Yemen, and Gaza for a long time now.

    Their actions resulted in half a million dead in Syria before they finally threw off their yoke.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] [S] 1 point 3 months ago (2 children)

    Colonization is the act of displacing the local population for your own settlers.

    It's ok, bud. You can try to obfuscate Israel's colonial actions. Just keep in mind that there are Canadians on Lemmy and we know what colonialism is.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    I actually am Canadian, and there's quite a number of Syrians that live here. They came here because Iran's puppet Assad and Iran's proxy Hezbollah did some things in Syria.

    So yes, Iranian colonialism adventure in the Arab world has definitely displaced a large number of people. Many of the people Iran's government has displaced live in Canada now. If you were actually Canadian you'd know this.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] [S] 0 points 3 months ago*

    No, they came here because there was a family dictatorship under the Assads for several decades who precede the Iranian regime and who invited Iran and Hezbollah as allies to help in the civil war to maintain power.

    You're not very informed.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] -117 points 4 months ago (62 children)

    Soccer is a sport. No country should be excluded based on politics including Russia.

  • source
  • hideshow 62 child comments
  • [–] 69 points 4 months ago (26 children)

    Why not? Why allow a country committing war crimes to participate on the global sports or entertainment stage like everything is normal?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 26 child comments
  • [+] -22 points 4 months ago (21 children)

    Because contests should not be political. In the 2026 Winter Olympics, a Ukrainian athlete was removed for putting the names of dead Ukrainian soldiers on his helmet.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 21 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 4 months ago (20 children)

    That isn't equivalent because Ukraine did not commit warcrimes. Why shouldn't a country committing warcrimes be blocked?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 20 child comments
  • [+] -24 points 4 months ago (19 children)

    Who would determine if war crimes were committed?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 19 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    Who would determine [whether] war crimes were committed?

    Geneva conventions.

    Stop sea-lioning.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 0 points 4 months ago

    Someone would have to determine whether the Geneva Conventions were violated. I think it's better for simply the best athletes to compete, not the best athletes from countries which behave in an approved way. Some believe that the US didn't follow the Geneva Convention when it attacked Venezuelan ships supposedly carrying drugs. Yet, the US hosted the World Cup.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 0 points 4 months ago (16 children)

    Global consensus would be best. A united league of nations to discuss it would work otherwise. But, barring all of that, I'll use my own judgement. Isreal has committed warcrimes. Russia has committed warcrimes. I'm ok with them being shunned from global sports and entertainment. And, if it is determined that my country is actively committing warcrimes, then we should be shunned too.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 16 child comments
  • [–] -2 points 4 months ago (15 children)

    Some believe the US violated international law when it attacked Venezuelan boats supposedly carrying drugs. There hasn't been any investigation. Remember FiFA President Infantino let Balogun play after Trump called. Perhaps some countries have influence. Wouldn't it be simpler to just let the best players compete?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 15 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (13 children)

    Simpler, sure. Morally incorrect. America should be investigated for attacking those ships, and if it was found to be a warcrime, they should be held to task.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (12 children)

    But was there an investigation?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (11 children)
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (10 children)

    That's the point, there was no investigation.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (9 children)

    Ok? I....I agreed there should be? I'm not sure what your point here is?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 3 months ago (8 children)

    Didn't you claim the action was illegal? Then why was there no investigation? That's the problem with barring countries from competing because of bad behavior. Countries with influence won't be investigated. It's simpler to allow all countries to participate.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (7 children)

    This argument is ludicrous. Something either is or is not moral, and is or is not illegal. Being caught and convicted doesn't change that. It was illegal. It was immoral. It should be investigated. Countries that commit warcrimes should be sanctioned, and countries with influence should not be above the law.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 3 months ago (6 children)

    If the UN investigates the US, Trump will threaten to withhold money. Trump will impose tariffs on any country supporting banning the US.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (4 children)

    Ok? This is likely true. What is your point? It is not easy or convenient. But easy and convenient do not make right or wrong, moral or immoral, legal or illegal.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (3 children)

    No, but is simple and fair compared to disqualifying countries but not others which have influence.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (2 children)

    So disqualify the countries with influence. Not as simple. Still fair.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (1 child)

    How are you going to do that? Trump called FIFA president Infantino and Balogun's one-match suspension was ended.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 26 points 4 months ago (10 children)

    We don't exclude them because of politics; like, because we don't like their policy on women's rights.

    We exclude them because they belligerently attacked their neighbour and reject their neighbour's right to exist peacefully.

    That's different. It's less "we don't like that kid so he can't play in our sandbox" and more "he attacked that other kid with a rock so he can't come over because he's a fucking criminal".

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 4 months ago (4 children)

    What about attacking Venezuelan boats supposedly carrying drugs?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 4 months ago (3 children)

    What about Iran? So hypocritical lol. It's really the neighbor that did Russia in, attacking a country halfway around the world is totally fine. Because they are not white, pray to the wrong god and speak funny.

    I'm so tired of everyone complaining about fascist MAGA. Complain more about fascist liberals.

    Russia bad lol... hosts "soccer" world cup in the fucking fascist USA. Fucking priceless grumble grumble

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [+] -11 points 4 months ago (4 children)

    So should Iran be banned from participating in sports? They've attacked multiple countries. Iran also rejects Israel's right to exist peacefully.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    When has Israel ever existed peacefully. I think at this point people would take that.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] -1 points 3 months ago

    Then you should stop with the hatred which leads to villages in Israel being massacred. You've seen what that hatred has led to. It's obvious to anyone that Palestinians will not achieve anything through violence, do you want another Gaza war for the next generation of Palestinians? The result will be the same.

    What is the end goal of promoting hatred of Israel? Do you want Iran to send another wave of Palestinians into the meat grinder so you can continue to perpetuate hatred?

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    Why should Iran be banned they haven't invaded their neighbors nor have they been wantonly slaughtering women and children like Israel has.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] -2 points 3 months ago

    They've fired missiles at pretty much every country in the region.

    They provide direct support to Hamas which have actually engaged in the slaughtering women and children. This is the act that led to the Gaza war.

    They have been slaughtering Iranian people as well.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 16 points 4 months ago (5 children)

    Let’s include Palestine then.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 4 months ago

    Yes! Let's make them a country and include them in the Olympics and the UN. We already had borders drawn up but I'm sure they'd want to bargain for a more equitable and contiguous space given their shit-bag neighbour.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] -20 points 4 months ago (3 children)

    The problem is that Palestine isn't a country.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 4 months ago* (17 children)

    International sports events are INTERNATIONAL, if you play so far outside the rules as Israel is doing, you don't deserve to participate in international events as a country.
    Of course by that standard we shouldn't have participation from Russia and USA either.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 17 child comments
  • [+] -15 points 4 months ago (15 children)

    You brought up a problem. There is no means of determining what actions disqualify a country. To make it simple, just let all countries participate in contests and keep politics out.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 15 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 4 months ago (11 children)

    There's no means of determining what actions disqualify a country?

    You really think Russia was banned from IOC participation for no clear reason and that it wasn't explained at all? There are some very simple means you can employ to determine what actions disqualified them.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [+] -9 points 4 months ago (10 children)

    Then there would have to be a written list of disqualifying actions. Of course, this could differ depending on the contest. There are myriads of contests, beauty, music, movies, hotdog eating, chess etc. I would just make it simple and remove politics from all contests.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago (7 children)

    Don't pretend like you'd read such a list. You just said you had no way to figure out why a country would be banned from an international competition just one comment ago. If you couldn't even think of reading an official explanation, we're supposed to believe that a list that would be published in the same place would result in you being better informed?

    It's pretty dead simple to ban a country from competition for being warmongering and genocidal. What would be complicated?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 4 months ago (6 children)

    Proving it. Also, some countries have influence. Is there anyone investigating the US over attacking Venezuelan boats supposedly carrying drugs?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago* (5 children)

    What does that have to do with you not knowing that when countries get banned from international competitions, it's easy to find out exactly why, and that having such policies is pretty simple?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (4 children)

    Remember the US attacked a Venezuelan boat, and some survived but was attacked again. Would use consider this an action that should result in a ban?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (3 children)

    Oh so suddenly you found the means of determining what actions disqualify a country now?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (2 children)

    Well, if that is a disqualifying act, why wasn't he US barred from participating in the World Cup?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago

    There are obviously means of determining which actions disqualify a country. We know that because the fucking Russians were fucking disqualified. There were criteria, they met them, and they got banned.

    That's what a ban is. That's how basic shit works, troll. JFC.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    There is no means of determining what actions disqualify a country.

    That is blatantly false, it's actually very easy to determine. For instance starting a war attacking another country unprovoked, could be a rule. Not committing genocide could be another rule.

    How do you arrive at the weird conclusion that such rules would be impossible to determine?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment