so many words, but he speaks and posts at a grade school level. it's astonishing really.
28.02.2026 21:49 β π 10 π 1 π¬ 0 π 0@davidakaye.bsky.social
californian. human rights, free expression, tech, international law. uc irvine. fulbright. article 19. prior: UN special rapporteur, GNI chair. edu coalition (dm for details) go bears!
so many words, but he speaks and posts at a grade school level. it's astonishing really.
28.02.2026 21:49 β π 10 π 1 π¬ 0 π 0dear leader has a very limited vocabulary
28.02.2026 21:47 β π 11 π 1 π¬ 1 π 0propagandists all around: "Altman said the Department of Defense 'displayed a deep respect for safety and a desire to partner to achieve the best possible outcome' in their interactions."
28.02.2026 21:41 β π 5 π 3 π¬ 1 π 0from what i can tell, so are the house and senate armed services committee!
28.02.2026 21:13 β π 0 π 0 π¬ 0 π 0i was curious about this because a very establishment org invited a DoD official to speak (ugh 1) and referred to him as an official of the DoW (ugh 2).
28.02.2026 21:12 β π 0 π 0 π¬ 0 π 0they have talked about supporting 'targeted regulation' & responsible scaling, not to mention 'promulgating' a constitution for claude. agree it'll be interesting to see if the DoD fight changes anything for them.
28.02.2026 21:05 β π 1 π 0 π¬ 0 π 0i had reason to look at this the other day and it seems that NYT, WSJ, Reuters the same.
28.02.2026 21:03 β π 2 π 0 π¬ 2 π 0A reminder that we canβt trust anything that any high government official in any of these countries says.
28.02.2026 19:48 β π 83 π 17 π¬ 1 π 0Crowdsourcing: of all the coverage on the Iran strikes in U.S. media and elsewhere today and leading up to today β how much of what youβve seen has mentioned the UN charter? I have yet to see *any* mention.
28.02.2026 18:23 β π 32 π 16 π¬ 5 π 3wright is one of the only commentators to genuinely care about the charter and intl law
28.02.2026 18:47 β π 1 π 0 π¬ 0 π 0I was hesitant to do book promo during this awful moment but if you're looking for context on US policy toward Iran, please check out my book.
28.02.2026 18:16 β π 16 π 5 π¬ 0 π 0for those who want a quick-and-dirty overview, marko milanovic unsurprisingly delivers
28.02.2026 14:30 β π 9 π 5 π¬ 0 π 0does carney believe there's an iran exception in the un charter?
28.02.2026 13:46 β π 35 π 4 π¬ 0 π 0Or, to put another way, we aim to be both principled and pragmatic β principled in our commitment to fundamental values, sovereignty, territorial integrity, the prohibition of the use of force, except when consistent with the UN Charter, and respect for human rights, and pragmatic and recognizing that progress is often incremental, that interests diverge, that not every partner will share all of our values.
this is the same guy, hardly two weeks ago
28.02.2026 13:44 β π 30 π 3 π¬ 1 π 1i'm trying not to be snarky or mean...
28.02.2026 13:41 β π 0 π 0 π¬ 0 π 0a hearty thank you to those reminding that the us & israel are not parties to the rome statute. that wasn't my point. regardless of enforcement (generally or ag the criminal leaders of these govts), this definition is in fact pretty widely embraced & has deep roots in law.
28.02.2026 13:24 β π 34 π 5 π¬ 2 π 0NYT: Prime Minister Mark Carney of Canada and his foreign minister, Anita Anand, backed the American action. βCanada supports the United States acting to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon and to prevent its regime from further threatening international peace and security,β they said in a joint statement.
so much for that davos speech
28.02.2026 12:40 β π 207 π 59 π¬ 7 π 13
This war could end tomorrow and the US and the region will be living with the consequences for many years.
You cannot put what Trump unleashed back in the box.
this is so weak, passive, & unconvincing.
28.02.2026 10:33 β π 119 π 17 π¬ 7 π 1empires & superpowers disbelieve constraints of any kind
28.02.2026 10:15 β π 1 π 0 π¬ 0 π 0βοΈ thank you
28.02.2026 09:23 β π 2 π 0 π¬ 1 π 0honestly that sounds like the most hopeful outcome...
28.02.2026 09:12 β π 14 π 1 π¬ 0 π 0and i'm sure ppl will say, sure, but presidents have used force without congressional authorization for decades. and yeah, that's true. but nothing like this. not even the pretext of a legal argument, the motion of seeking public & congressional support. we are so far beyond norms.
28.02.2026 09:03 β π 126 π 24 π¬ 1 π 0
for those fixated on congressional authorization, i get it. this is a massive violation of our constitutional order.
even so, congress *cannot* legitimize an illegal war. there is nothing congress can do to make it legal under int'l law.
lawlessness on every level
28.02.2026 08:54 β π 8 π 0 π¬ 0 π 0Heβs a maximalist when it comes to law breaking. Why violate one international law when you can violate several at the same time
28.02.2026 08:46 β π 239 π 33 π¬ 2 π 0department of war indeed
28.02.2026 08:47 β π 14 π 0 π¬ 0 π 0But what remains unclear is how exactly the Iranian people are supposed to 'take over' their government. none of this was thought through.
28.02.2026 08:39 β π 25 π 9 π¬ 4 π 0trump's promise of indiscriminate violence: "...to the great, proud people of Iran, I say tonight that the hour of your freedom is at hand. Stay sheltered. Don't leave your home. It's very dangerous outside. Bombs will be dropping everywhere..."
28.02.2026 08:43 β π 56 π 18 π¬ 2 π 5