I wonder how Flatearthers are going to explain this one.

So your solution is to punish the cleaners by throwing TP on the floor?

Don’t be gross. Have some respect for the next person to use the bathroom.

What is reddit? It’s just a fast paced forum with lots of people.

Lemmy is in essence the exact same thing. It just operates far more decentralised than reddit.

The difference over the last months/years is that lemmy as a whole is growing. More people, more engagement. That’s it.

I don’t know what you mean by “lost it’s uniqueness” the only unique part of lemmy is it’s decentralised system. And that’s still the same.

The US would never admit an F35 was hit. There would have be to be substantial evidence for them to even consider it.

The real answer will come on Monday when the market opens.

If you actually bothered to read what you linked. You would see this paragraph

The scope of what a Party to the conflict is actually required to do on the basis of Article 18(1) will depend on the interpretation of the qualifier ‘possible’. What will be possible in the circumstances is inherently context-specific. Thus, the measures that must be taken in each case have to be determined in good faith, based on the circumstances and the information reasonably available to both the commanders on the spot or nearby and to the other organs acting on behalf of the Party to the conflict.

And also

In this regard, the fact that the obligation of Article 18(1) applies to the ‘Party to the conflict’ as a whole is critical. Thus, it may occur that the commander of a single warship or even of an entire naval task-force considers, in a good-faith assessment, that it is impossible to undertake, with the assets under his or her command, any of the activities required under Article 18. This does not, however, absolve those overseeing the commander’s operations (who will have a fuller picture of the situation and may be able to deploy other assets) from assessing what ‘possible measures’ can – and therefore must – be taken. Nor does it absolve the commander from considering other activities that are possible, such as alerting nearby coastal authorities or other vessels in the area or making an ‘appeal to the charity’ of neutral vessels in the sense of Article 21.

You are right about nazi subs helping sailors. They would carry them on top of the sub, while towing the rest from a lifeboat. And then they stoped doing that. Because they were fired upon by allied planes while they were towing the lifeboat. So they cut the line and submerged.

That was the last time a submarine tried to help sailors in WW2.

Submarine countermeasures have only increased since then.

Another reason for the submarine to not surface is because they don’t want to let anyone else know which submarine is where.

I’m not gonna say sinking an unarmed warship returning from an exercise is cool. But it’s not a war crime if it’s in international waters, And it’s also not a war crime for a submarine to remained submerged. They are simply not expected to conduct rescue operations.

It’s a submarine. What do you expect them to do? They are not equipped to handle POW’s

It is believed Sri Lanka was notified which were at the scene quickly after it sank.

It was not an illegal order. And it’s also entirely possible the captain didn’t know the status of the ships ammunition supply, or lack there of. Not that it changes anything from a legal standpoint.

But, it being a legal target doesn’t change the fact that it was cowardly. Both are true.