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.
-
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 10/19
-
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.
-
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 [email protected]
Politics [email protected]
World Politics [email protected]
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
What about a cease-fire's particularly pro-hamas? Cease-fire means both directions.
A ceasefire where Hamas gets to keep their hostages is a huge Hamas victory. Advocating for something which gives Hamas a huge victory will be interpreted by some as support for Hamas.
These demonstrations are full of Palestinian flags, without an Israeli one in sight. It's hard to argue against them being partisan
If the goal is not to harm your own hostages, you wouldn't be using bombs, which is real using very heavily right now. It makes a literally no sense.
I don't understand how your comment relates to mine. Do you believe that because I consider a cessation of hostilities where Hamas keeps their hostages a victory for Hamas, that I mean to say that rescuing hostages is the scope of Israel's campaign?
It clearly isn't. Israel intends to destroy Hamas and are appallingly callous about the collateral damage they cause in the process
What's the last cease fire that wasn't broken by regular rocket fire from Gaza?
The Hamas active members can have time to hide and reset for another attack if there is a cease fire. They'll refortify the hospitals and schools they use to hide, as well as gather civilans for shields. They can set up booby traps for a ground invasion into Gaza.
I’m sure they’ve already done all that considering they were the ones that initiated this conflict. They had to have known a ground invasion was likely after attacking Israel.
They’ve been mostly locked in place since 8th October. There’s no way for them to regroup and refortify with Israel dropping bombs on anything which looks like a terrorist. A ceasefire would let them regroup in civilian buildings, which I think we all want to avoid. They have to qualms with using children as human shields, so we need to keep the terrorists pinned down and get away from those children.
Well then, best just carpet bomb all of gaza then right?
How bad do you think Israel is at carpet bombing? Honestly, multiple weeks of carpet bombing, by any modern estimate, should dismantle all of Gaza. That very demonstrably has not happened.
So are they really, really bad at it or are they not attempting it?
Have you not seen the satellite images?
Yes, of course I have. I am aware of what wars do.
Then you would see the absurdity of your statement.
I think you may want to investigate what a modern "carpet bombing" campaign can do, because it's at least an order of magnitude more destructive.
Ok so the issue is semantics? Ok fine over 6000 bombs dropped in a tiny area. What gaza is 365 sqaure km, most of the bombs are in the north so over 6k bombs in an area of 180 Square km? Obviously ignoring the open spaces so what is the threshold of acceptability for you?
There were more than that many rockets launched into Israel in the same period. Should responses not be proportionate?
I've already stated multiple times that Israel is bungling the humanitarian aspect of this and should be held accountable for that.
That doesn't make it genocide, or even disproportionate, by any stretch of the imagination. It's most assuredly not "carpet bombing."
There is no country on the planet that would not respond similarly.
Is it a shitty situation? Hell yeah. Are the causes of this long and varied? Sure. Is this specific war uniquely bad? No. It's pretty run-of-the-mill. War is just a terrible thing. This is a tragedy, and there's no need to make it seem worse than it is because of politics.
So if hamas manages to get more powerful weapons, it's justifiable for them to hit back israel? What israel is doing will empower hamas, there will be more and deadlier attacks by them in the future. A saying comes to mind. Bombing for peace is like fucking for virginity.
This is essentially Israel's Cassus Belli for obliterating Hamas. Whether you agree with Israel here or not, Hamas as it stands will cease to exist. They have no chance of holding ground and Israel has made no bones about their willingness to engage in tunnel-fighting.
It's a mistake to think this isn't a 9/11 style realignment. Everyone's concerns here should be on the treatment of Gazans in a post-Hamas world.
From a pure realpolitik sort of reasoning, Israel's lack of simultaneous humanitarian commitment hurts them here. I disagree with some of their choices on moral lines, but even Kissinger would disagree with their moves (though for different reasons).
No one is above criticism, but reality is going to happen. At this point, only the future really matters.
It's easy to paint me as callous here but I think taking the easy road out in this conversation ignores the reality of the situation, and valid discussions that could be had, over insipid political slogans.
Remeber how isis and alqueda were destroyed after the us bombed the shit out of them? Neither do I.
These are extremely different situations, but also to suggest that ISIS is at all a major player right now is silly.
It all has to do with driving recruitment, mass killing of Palestinians will bolters hamas, and the thing about terrorist organizations is that they don't have to be "major players".
They do if they want to be effective
Or they become affiliated with a larger cell, and the cycle continues.
Hamas is currently the government. It won't be the same.
I'm not saying there won't be terrorism. There are already other terrorist groups in Gaza. There will be terrorism.
But the Gazan people will be able to have elections and have self-determination again.
If anything, this is a totally practical, non-morality reason why Israel should be setting up aid camps. There's really no argument against it. They should be showing a closed fist to Hamas and an open hand to Gazans in general.
I agree on your last statement, flattening residential areas however I'd not an open hand to Palestinians. This will get worse before it gets better.