A community for discussing events around the World
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
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.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
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.
News [email protected]
Politics [email protected]
World Politics [email protected]
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
Hmmm, let's see, Netanyahu has been non-stop bombing Gaza since... last October.
It's almost October again. It's nearly been a full year since the actual initial attack.
There was never a justification to still be bombing nearly a year later after one attack.
It's clear Netanyahu has no intention to stop.
Man, I really wish I could have changed the headline. I'm going to get mostly comments like this, I think.
No hate, there's only so much time in a day to read Lemmy.
It's not your fault that all titles are now effectively clickbait. Thanks for putting the important info in the body of your post.
And clear Biden won't do anything to get him to stop :(
He added that the US would not give up, and would "push as hard as we can" for a deal.
If denying future arms shipments isn't on the table then this statement is a lie
If only Biden had some kind of leverage he could use on Bibi like putting conditions on arms exports oh wait he completely refuses to do that so this is just bs rhetoric
Yeah, I'm not sure what the plan is if they turn down the "final" offer. The last time the US bluffed, that I know of, was the red line in Syria, and that involved a place Americans don't care about, and would have involved another American war in the Middle East to respond to.
I find "China's final warning" and actual consequences for Israel equally unlikely. Is there a third option?
Yeah, I'm not sure what the plan is if they turn down the "final" offer.
You're not? The plan is to enable genocide no matter what.
A final offer is followed by a final solution
The US will never stop supporting Israel. They are too dependent on it geopolitically. I believe we may see some more inner political movement against Netanjahu supported by certain US agencies. He will not survive this conflict as prime minister. This will of course not help Palestinians in the long run but it may help with a ceasefire and as a result help the democrats in the upcoming election which would be the main goal right now.
He should pull the plug on the iron dome
He won't because he's a Zionist. Biden will literally spend the rest of his presidency helping Netanyahu help trump get elected
Hopefully, this means that Bibi repeatedly humiliating the US finally broke through the fucking insane inflexible support the US has had for Israel the past 40 years.
You’d think.
But Biden is still gargling those balls; and still hasn’t stopped weapons shipments.
Guess 4.2 million . Is a lot of loyalty.
He's not? That's shocking! Almost like.....no, it couldn't be
"You're not doing enough, so here's another 10 billion in arms funding. You have to spend that in America though because I am very upset with you Bibi."
Oh it's final this time. 5 more years of this and Israel will see their supply drying up, you know, maybe, possibly.
Oh, oh, now you done it, that's another 10000 children. You're very very close to the limit, mister. You better watch out or, you'll get slighly less aid next time! We're not kidding this time.
Lmao I read that as "Biden not doing enough to secure Gaza hostage deal, says Biden," and got real confused.
Man, he's really slipping these days... /s
I'm honestly seeing parallels to how Milosevic had a limit for how long he could delay a cease fire
Hey, I had trouble finding info on this with a quick search. Can I have a recap?
Just a historical comparison I'm making based on the Wikipedia articles for the Kosovo War.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kosovo_War
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NATO_bombing_of_Yugoslavia
A NATO-facilitated ceasefire between the KLA and Yugoslav forces was signed on 15 October 1998, but both sides broke it two months later and fighting resumed. When the killing of 45 Kosovar Albanians in the Račak massacre was reported in January 1999, NATO decided that the conflict could only be settled by introducing a military peacekeeping force to forcibly restrain the two sides.[50] Yugoslavia refused to sign the Rambouillet Accords, which among other things called for 30,000 NATO peacekeeping troops in Kosovo; an unhindered right of passage for NATO troops on Yugoslav territory; immunity for NATO and its agents to Yugoslav law; and the right to use local roads, ports, railways, and airports without payment and requisition public facilities for its use free of cost.[51][35] NATO then prepared to install the peacekeepers by force, using this refusal to justify the bombings.
It took years of fighting, but eventually both sides' refusal to sign a ceasefire was used as justification for NATO to neutralize the military forces in the region.
Oh, I see. I thought you meant they gave Milosevic a specific 6-month deadline or something.
If this was a conflict pretty much anywhere else, I think it would have gotten the standard UN ethnic spat protocol from the get-go. Instead, we're at least back to the 90's in international law.
Biden probably means that Netanyahu hasn't murdered enough children, and will follow up by sending more weapons.
Thanks, Brandon.
I wish Dark Brandon hadn't turned into DARK Brandon. 'Cause things turned dark very quickly.