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 !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/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
view the rest of the comments
No good guys here. Hamas doesn't seem to serve the Palestinians, they serve their own Jihadist agenda. Isreal remains a fascist apartheid regime which has been systematically killing all Palestinians in a genocide for decades.
There's action and reaction here.
And reaction and reaction and reaction...going back 5,000 years
Gaza is a massive prison and they don't have anything to loose anymore. Will Israel become the exterminator? We will see.
Murder of civilians celebrated by the whole of their society is not justified by reaction. I suggest you look at some other societies which react to genocidal crimes, for some reference. Most of them don't do that.
Nah, this was the case with Palestinian Arabs all along. Since their "throw all Jews into the sea" till now.
ANC bombed civilians and their attacks were celebrated by many. The IRA did, and were celebrated by many. ETA did, and were celebrated by many. It is common, and suggesting it's unique to Palestinians is pure racism.
EDIT: Ah, looked at one of your other comments that were equally awful. Block incoming.
I don't think you know the difference between collateral damage and massacre. Or maybe you know that, just pretend to be a moron. I can accept your pretense, but not your point.
Are you suggesting it is not true that the groups he mentioned intentionally targeted civilians?
Perhaps you're not old enough to remember the ANC bombing campaign against Wimpy restaurants, mainly timed to go off during lunchtime to maximise damage.
The Church Street bombing it's reasonable to argue collateral damage for, but a burger chain doesn't strike me as a legitimate military or government target you can play the "collateral damage" game with.
Maybe it was just ignorance of history that made you single out Palestinians.
OK. I don't think IRA and ANC had that nasty habit of raping their victims and parading their mutilated bodies, or lynching them, and in general these were not genocidal in ideology while Hamas is. Is that sufficiently clear for you to comprehend?
FFS, I'm Armenian and I could give Israel another try at existing after turning it into radioactive ash, but defending these animals is just vile.
And now you're making an entirely different point and evading addressing the gross generalization you made where you blamed not just Hamas but all Palestinians for the crimes of some and implied they were uniquely bad. At this point I agree with the other person who blocked you.
No, I was only talking about Hamas at every point in this thread.
Because you have no other weapon in this conversation.
Your interpretation is fine. I'll skip your "suggestions", thanks.
Hamas gave being legitimate a try. Israel blocked their accession in the West Bank after they won the election. They were never given a chance to serve Palestinians.
I wouldn't really expect them to idly stand by and let an organization whose charter is essentially "Death to Israel, death to all Jews" to come into power
There cannot be a peaceful coexistence between Israel and Hamas because (and their charter has a section explicitly devoted to this) Hamas does not want it, when they talk of "ending the occupation", they don't just mean of Palestine
Funny thing. If we used that logic then we'd all be dead. No war would ever end but with the complete annihilation of the loser and with nukes that means everyone.
Furthermore, PR line or not, Hamas was elected. Interfering to stop them from taking power is an act of war itself. Justify it how you want but Israel hasn't given peace a chance in a long time.
When one side very explicitly states "there will be no peace, we will keep fighting until one of us is completely wiped out", I struggle to see why the world should not oblige, and while the state of Israel is definitely not perfect it's not very difficult for me lean towards the side that's still managing to perform roof knocking over the complete and utter barbarism displayed by the Hamas terrorists over the fast few days
That's funny because Israel has been violating international law and the laws of war for decades. Roof Knocking doesn't absolve them of using Israeli law in occupied areas, shooting medical personal at unarmed protests, bombing UN facilities, or using White Phosphorus shells that airburst.
I'm not saying Hamas is fighting clean. I'm saying PR doesn't make policy.
How is israel apartheid? Over 20% of israelis are muslim arabs and they are normal citizens just like jews.
Hamas sets up military operations in a civilian building by force - the civilians have no say in this and get killed if they protest Hamas then uses that building to launch rockets, store ammunition, communication stations How the fuck should Israel proceed to neutralize those sites? Because what they do is:
“Roof knocking”: Hitting the building’s roof with a small explosive to announce that it will fall in 15 minutes (see video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=teevWpXlRZY example from yesterday) Automatic SMS and phone calls impacted areas warning and urging to evacuate Precision strikes that make the building fall vertically with minimal damage to the areas As a result, civilians (and potentially military personnel) are given a chance to evacuate while ammunition stashes, rocket launching stations etc stay in the building and are destroyed.
To be honest, I’m shocked those protocols are still used after Hamas’s attack. I would absolutely not be surprised of these measures stopped.
The anti-Israel don’t care that Israel is bending over backwards to minimize human suffering while fighting a decades long war against people who are deliberately trying to kill their children.
Remember how upset they are when Israel does something 100 percent defensive, like build a security fence to keep out an endless stream of suicide bombers?
This isn’t good-faith criticism.
These people hate Israel for this that they works be applauding other countries for. And we all know why
"Hey so I know we've been doing a genocide but look, we're being really nice when we bomb innocent civilians homes by letting them know we're going to bomb their homes."
This (a) doesn't excuse literal genocide and (b) is just a "nicer" version of exactly the thing they're appalled Hamas just did. You don't get to cry foul if you're going to retaliate with a tit for tat play.
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
https://www.piped.video/watch?v=teevWpXlRZY
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I'm open-source; check me out at GitHub.
There is only one country whose national religion is Judaism, but it is practiced in plenty of other places.
More to the point, the fact that there are other Islamic countries is of little comfort to the Palestinians. They do not live in those countries and those countries do not want them.
Some of those countries do provide varying levels of support for Hamas because they (accurately) see it as an indirect way to attack Israel.
By the same token, any blame you want to place on Israel for this conflict reflects on Isreal as whole, and not every individual living within it.
The whole reason why other Islamic (Arab) countries don't accept Palestinians is so that they retain their "rightful" claim to lands annexed by Israel from the 1948 Arab-Israeli war.
The Palestinians did it to themselves that they couldn't live peacefully with the Israelis back then and should accept the outcome of the war as a failing of the Arab League and their resistance.
Besides, you can't deny that the Arab world owes some debt to the Palestinians to accept their refuge since it was the Arab League that lost all those attempts to retake Palestinian lands (amongst other things), and yet they don't do it.
The religious aspect of all this is just secondary to the secular reason.
Dude. The Palestinians only ever reacted in that time frame. It was the Jewish settlers that attacked the British soldiers and then turned on the Palestinians. Go ask a British military historian.
You realise just how racist it sounds when you're blaming the Palestinian people as a whole for the actions of a subset?
When a huge majority support it, is it racist to say they support it?
Do you have evidence that a huge majority wants to take over states if they are invited in, which was the claim you were making?
To quote you:
This is full on far-right "if you let those immigrants in they'll take over" rhetoric.
EDIT: I'd also like to point out, that in fact this notion of a people coming in and trying to "take over" ironically given the context here has a long-standing history as an anti-semitic trope when used against Jewish people. It's no less of a racist trope when employed against other groups, though.
Well, this whole thing would have ended much sooner if it weren't for the Arab League. They used the Palestinian people against the Israelis even as they kept losing.
The Palestinians are probably not that bad of a people, but it doesn't help that they keep making armed struggles for a lost cause when they can just make peace on their loss.
Telling people to just lie down and let their oppressor keep oppressing has historically never worked. Israel will never experience peace without coming to terms with that, because every new generation growing up in those conditions will learn from a young age to hate.
If the Palestinians were actually interested in stopping their oppression, they would stop trying to fight an insurgency against the Israelis. As it is, they are a security threat, and for good reason.
I don't see why Israel should give quarter to Hamas now, nor should they entertain the idea that Palestinians are being sincere in co-existing with Israelis.
It would be so much easier if Israel just considered them as the enemy, and throw them out of the territory of Israel as they wished. It's only right for a bunch of sore losers. Let them resist from outside the territory of Israel proper, and seek help and refuge from their Arab "allies".
Which oppressed peoples have come well out of surrendering to a party that has refused to give concessions?
This is classic victim blaming. It's also demonstrably false: There have been many lullls in the fighting. And yet the Israeli oppression has never stopped. If anything, Israeli has continued the war crimes of settling occupied territories, and the crimes of Apartheid by tightening the control of the borders of the occupied territories and limiting the movement of the Palestinian position, as well as ramped up racist laws such as the nationality law, and this expansion of oppression has never once stopped when resistance has abated.
This notion that you can end oppression by appeasing your oppressor is not one that has a very successful history in general, and Israel has proven time and time again over a period of decades that it definitely does not work with Israel.
And irrespective of that you fall in the typical trap of thinking you can talk about Palestinians as a unified, single entity, rather than as a mass of people with different views where even if 99.9% were to suddenly decide they trusted Israel would treat them fairly if only they stopped fighting, that would not stop the remaining 0.1%.
Notice how you yourself de facto treats Hamas as a proxy for Palestinians as a whole:
Consider e.g. the IRA, which saw support diminish substantially (while Hamas' support is still high), and yet still continued an insurgency in a far less oppressive situation until the UK government sat down and actually listened to their concerns and gave concessions.
Israel has created a population where sufficient numbers of people feel they have nothing to live for. There is no realistic scenario here where the insurgency ever stops unless Israel commits total genocide or seeks a negotiated settlement including giving substantial concessions irrespective of whether or not they think they can trust any of the parties.
That is not a question of whether that is fair, or reasonable, or whether it's the smart think to do for Palestinians to continue.
It is what will happen when you create a situation like this.
So you talk about what Palestinians are "actually interested in", but the Palestinian people as a whole have zero power to end this because it'd require the total agreement of each and every one of five million individuals. Israel on the other hand has the power to end this, because on their end it only requires the agreement of the state to dial back the oppression enough that support for groups like Hamas loses support, and then negotiate an end to it.
Not even Israel considers the occupied territories theirs. They are not the territory of Israel even under Israeli law. As it is what you're suggesting here would be a severe violation of international law, a crime against humanity, a violation of a number of UN decrees, and would violate Israeli law as well, as Israel's actions are only accepted by their own Supreme Court on the basis that Israel's own government have consistently insisted it's done under a doctrine of belligerent occupation: In other words, they do consider them the enemy and despite their many war crimes, not even Israel is prepared to commit the level of war crimes you suggest.
It is fairly fascinating yet also shocking how many people here argue for a maximalist position so extreme that even the far-right Israeli government rejects it as too extreme, as have every Israeli government since 1967.
What matters is that they must unequivocally reject Hamas, and work with Israel to eradicate these factions as best they can so that Israel can trust their populace to not harbor terrorists. Only then can the Israeli leadership end the restrictions placed upon the Palestine territories that seek to prevent the inflow of arms and rocket artillery to Hamas.
It is not an illogical act that Israel has done to secure the safety and security of their people.
With the recent artillery attack by Hezbollah, I don't think there is much question as to where the Palestinian people stand with regards to the Hamas attack on Israel.
Israel does not owe the Palestinians a good outcome. If they keep testing Israel, there is no limit to what Israel can do short of mass-killing genocide. Displacement is the best outcome in an Israeli victory.
False. It takes the will and the courage to out the terrorists amongst them to the Israelis so that the terrorists will be hindered and slowly wiped from prominence.
Or perhaps Hamas will benefit from the reprieve in state suppression, and use the opportunity to import more arms, equipment, and training from Arab countries and bide their time.
Which is why I said it would be so much easier if it could be done. It regretfully can't be done which is why there's so much conflict up till this day. The keyword is "if".
And besides, the Israeli goodwill is running out. I wonder if they might just throw caution to the wind and just do it, given how right wing their government is getting. It would be just, and there will be popcorn in the aftermath and subsequent war for sure.
Asking an oppressed population to collaborate with their oppressors like a bunch of quislings in order to appease the oppressor before they can get peace has never worked.
The have not secured the safety and security of their people, though. What their decades of oppression has bought them is continuous warfare.
So doubling down on the approach of assigning collective blame to a whole population for the actions of some. Who typically assigns collective blame to a whole people for the actions of some? Can you tell me?
So you keep arguing for massive war crimes of a level too extreme even for the far-right Israeli government, in other words.
Ah, so you just want them to be quislings and collaborate with their own oppressors. When has that ever worked again, remind me? This is nothing but an excuse to justify your support for continued oppression.
That is the risk you run when you oppress a population for decades. But if that were to happen, at least they would actually have a moral leg to stand on. Now they do not.
So to make this clear: You're regretful Israel is unable to carry out what would be one of the worst crimes against humanity since World War 2? Something which would reach stage 8 of Stantons 10 stages of Genocide?
Yikes.
Well, yes, gross human rights violations for decades do eventually tend to piss people off.
Calling crimes against humanity "just". So much for caring about the millions of innocents you casually are arguing for harming.
Time for a block - debating people who openly not just argue for crimes against humanity, but describe them as "just" is giving extremism unjustified attention.
Oh yes, what reason do they have to not intensify that effort militarily now? They aren't going to look for peace to solve this anytime soon.
I can blame the whole Palestinian population of the Gaza Strip when Hamas is what they voted for, democratically.
I am an online commentator. Do I look like I hold sway over their policies? This is just the outcome that I expect Israel to pursue, given that the Palestinians have been so belligerent.
And so I see that you support terrorism. A shame.
And so Israel is justified to be worried about the risk, because you handwaved it for them because "they would deserve it".
If you could relocate these troubled Palestinians somewhere that they can form a new state without all this constant conflict - without breaking up families, I will call that a win because they would have a chance to have a future in autonomy rather than little while in oppression.
It isn't a humanitarian failure if done right, just don't scatter them to the world like refugees. It's not that hard to avoid "genocide".
I do actually mean that the Israel's patience has run thin on being amicable with the Palestinians. I don't know what meaning you had in mind.
The Palestinians started the conflict before the independence of Israel, and they lost even with the aid of the Arab League. If that isn't a lost cause, I don't know what is. It's only just that Israel be given the peace that it has earned, multiple times over.
If you don't like it, the Arab world is free to try their luck again. It's better when Israel's enemies take off their mask so that they can openly wipe the floor with them.
Treating all muslims as if they're all the same and interchangeable is pure racism.
Well by another definition they all have the same core religious view. Just as any other religion that perpetuates collective hysteria and war. Humanity is better without any kind of organized dogma. Let's jettison the stone age thinking.
If all they did was argue for jettisoning stone age thinking, I'd have been all for that. But instead the person I replied to engaged in just another variant of the same stone age thinking.
So they should give up their homes, land, resources, and culture for the last gasp of colonialism?
Jews can own land all over the world. So can Muslims. This is a false dichotomy.
There's a hundred countries they can both live in without problems. There is no amount of past trauma that justifies ethnic cleansing for literal settlers to move in.
As a Jew, no, there is no country in the world I can live in without problems, including Israel. America has been wonderful to us, but I grew up seeing swastikas spray painted on my synagogue and being taunted by the goyim. A far cry from the persecution my ancestors have endured, but I don't delude myself into thinking I'm safe here if the economic/political situation deteriorates.
That level of unsafe is true of anywhere for all religions. If that's the standard than none of this matters anyways.
As somebody else pointed out, reducing the people in Palestine to Muslims and they treating all people who happen to be muslims as if they're as the same, is pure unadulterated racism of the worst, most disgusting, kind.
How does it feel to be the exact caricature Hamas shows the children of slaughtered families for recruitment?