this post was submitted on 18 Sep 2024
315 points (97.6% liked)

World News

38979 readers
2550 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

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.

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 !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] nonailsleft@lemm.ee -5 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Do you think Hezbollah gave her a pager? What was her father's position within Hezbollah? Maybe he's the one that fired some rockets that killed someone else's kids recently

[–] Dasus@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I'll engage with your shitty whataboutism after you answer which it is: were the bombs "surgical" and killed a 9-year-old girl on purpose, or were they sloppy attacks which caused civilian casualties on accident?

Customary international humanitarian law prohibits the use of booby traps – objects that civilians are likely to be attracted to or are associated with normal civilian daily use – precisely to avoid putting civilians at grave risk and produce the devastating scenes that continue to unfold across Lebanon today. The use of an explosive device whose exact location could not be reliably known would be unlawfully indiscriminate, using a means of attack that could not be directed at a specific military target and as a result would strike military targets and civilians without distinction. Human Rights Watch

[–] nonailsleft@lemm.ee -4 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Although they did kill that girl (and others) on accident, the attack as a whole seems to have been far more surgical that what we usually see in this conflict (and dare I say, certainly more surgical than most attacks from Hezbollah)

[–] Dasus@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago (1 children)

You can't have it both ways.

Either it was "very surgical" and still killed a small girl (ie the girl was targeted) OR Israeli attack methods are so indiscriminate and poorly aimed they end up killing INNOCENT CHILDREN.

It's one or the other.

[–] nonailsleft@lemm.ee -5 points 1 month ago (1 children)

That's a very childish way to look at it.

Imagine if Hezbollah managed to send a missile right up Bibi's bedroom window and killed both him and, unbeknownst to them, some child that was with him. Would you then conclude that it was an 'indiscriminate' attack? Would you not make a difference between that and say a carpet bombing where they just try to level the city block he's in?

Please use more caps and bold formatting in your posts

[–] Dasus@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Bibi’s bedroom window and killed both him and, unbeknownst to them, some child that was with him.

Bibi is fucking kids at night? I thought he couldn't get more disgusting for fucks sake.

Someone's personal bedroom has a bit more of what is known as "a reasonable expectation of privacy" than... *literal marketplaces. To pretend you don't understand the difference is pathetic.

And no-amount of your garbage propaganda will change the fact that you've tried asserting mutually exclusive things to be the case. Like propaganda usually does, claiming literally impossible things.

You CAN NOT answer the question. Was it extremely targeted and Israel killed a child on purpose, or did Israel attack so indiscriminately that it killed several innocents and harmed thousands of innocents.

It can't be both. And I know Netanyahu is a scumbag politician, but I'm sure even his personal bedroom wouldn't fit 3000 people.

So which is it? Extremely targeted (meaning these civilians are dead on purpose) or wildly uncaring (an indiscriminate bombing)?

[–] nonailsleft@lemm.ee -3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

The answer you seek is in my example: in the real world it's not binary, it's always a scale

btw I don't understand why you've used so little formatting

[–] Dasus@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Some things are really that binary, when they're MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE.

Even in the real world, you can't have you cake AND eat it too. Do you not understand what that means?

You can't claim "it was extremely targeted, but all the civilian casualties were an accident, even though the accidental things happened on purpose."

It's like saying "up is down". Some things are mutually exclusive.

I keep underlining these things so even a cowardly whataboutist would understand.

You have to choose one, there is no middle-ground as these are MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE (you may need to Google the term): was the strike "extremely surgical"? If it was, then the 3000 injured plus ~10 dead, including children, are dead on purpose.

OR

Israel indiscriminately bombs civilians.

There's no middle option here, no matter how much you'd like for there to be. Either Israel targeted civilians or didn't care they'd end up killing them.

[–] nonailsleft@lemm.ee -3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Just to be clear on definitions here: could you give me an example of something that you personally believe can be respresented on a scale (as opposed to binary)?

[–] Dasus@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Sexuality is on a spectrum, because the opposing ends aren't mutually exclusive. You can do both. What you can't do is have a cake AND eat it. Because if you eat the cake, you won't have it. See?

Have you ever driven a car? You come to a crossing where you can go left or right.

If you go left, you didn't turn right, and if you turn right, you're turning away from left.

The choices are MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE. You seem to be really struggling to understand what that means.

Just a reminder, it's YOUR assertion that these were "extremely targeted, no accident".

So you yourself have said that Israel bombed and killed civilians on purpose. That's a crime against humanity. Terrorism.

Fuck terrorist scum like whoever did this cowardly pager attack. Disgusting pos.

[–] nonailsleft@lemm.ee -3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I kinda love how you're using the example of sexuality and a traffic crossing together. It's no different than someone 'explaining' how there are only two genders, really.

With violent acts like what we're talking about here, both intent and outcome are on a spectrum. There's a luck factor involved between the two. These clues should be enough for you to understand it's not as binary as you've been led to believe

[–] Dasus@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

I kinda don't love how you're unable to imagine that your b-grade logic would make Israel any less of a terrorist state.

Trying to assert the problem of induction into anything when faced with shitty things your people have done is honestly just shitty rhetoric. Like trying to play hide and seek with a 2-year old who thinks if they close their eyes no-one can see them.

You fail to stand behind your OWN WORDS.

YOU wrote:

the attacks are extremely targeted, thus not random at all

And

People in the vicinity are not harmed

This wasn't Israeli outlets saying these things. It was YOU. I'm having an issue with YOUR statements, which you're desperately trying to run away from.

So the attacks are extremely targeted, and don't harm "people in the vicinity". Those are your statements. Then how come a 9-year old girl among others is dead? (And 3000 people injured?)

[–] nonailsleft@lemm.ee -1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

This wasn’t Israeli outlets saying these things. It was YOU. I’m having an issue with YOUR statements

I'm sorry, but can you point me to where I said either of those two things?

I'm starting to think you're just making things up

[–] Dasus@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

Oh right, you're just another troll backing the bullshit of another person who started this thread, I see, I didn't pay attention to the username. Apologies, terribly.

So just read the comment again and input him where I say "you".

Like I said, you don't have any logic here. Some things are mutually exclusive.