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
The west has been supporting a two state solution since at least 1993.
Technically the west has supported a two state solution since 1937.
That's why Israel is getting 38 billion dollars (!) in a ten year period from the US, everyone knows you need an absurd amount of military equipment to reach a consensual two state solution.
It kind of is, yes.
If Israel didn't have military hegemony in the region, there certainly wouldn't be any two-state solution that would include an Israel or any form of jewish nation.
Surely you understand the meaning of consensual.
I don't see how the military hegemony you openly spouse could lead to any sort of consensual agreement. Hegemony, by definition, is directly opposed to consensus.
Next thing you'll tell me the settler colonialism and de facto apartheid state Israel is directly enabling are absolutely necessary, for geopolitical reasons obviously.
Besides all that, if the point you're trying to make is that Israel needs the military spending to maintain its territorial integrity, I seriously question they would need 38bn USD in foreign aid just for that.
And that would be ignoring the fact Israel has been increasingly extending its territorial integrity over palestinian land for the duration of the conflict, and will continue to do so. Not a lot of “two-state solution” in that.
Is it "consensual" if one party in a war surrenders to the terms of the victor after a military defeat? I'm not sure this is the right concept to apply here.
What I'm saying is that Israel has had military hegemony for quite some time and has made several attempts to negotiate a peace (of course on their terms). A two-state solution was at least on the table.
I just can't see this happening in a scenario if the power was reversed. The charters of the Palestinian militant groups makes it very clear that their goal is total military victory.
So yes, if you want the prospect of a two-state solution, you have to support Israel.
I mean, of course. After negotiate fail and fighting resums, your objective is to get into a more favourable position for the next round of negotiate. That's how this works.
But at this point I agree that Israel has also given up on a two-state solutuion. That's why they switched to slow annexation by settlemts in the west bank. And we'll see what happens to gaza, soon.