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.
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.
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 correct answer is that Hamas purposely launches these attacks from city block, schools, hospitals, etc which is literally a war crime so when there is retaliation they can cry foul. Don't believe terrorist apologist.
Have you ever looked at a map of Gaza, the place is all civilian infrastructure, they have to operate from inside it there's no other choice the place is completely overpopulated. Which very much makes it not a war crime as the Geneva convention is about avoiding avoidable civilian casualties, not unavoidable ones.
Shooting rockets indiscriminately is definitely an avoidable action. They don't have to do it. Unfortunately people do need to defend themselves from Israel but the rockets are just to inflict suffering.
Palestine has all the right in the world to combat an occupying force. What are you going to say next "Ukraine doesn't have to shoot rockets at Russians"?
Then Gaza, in particular, has the right to defend itself against a blockade threatening the wealth, health, and indeed survival of its people. Don't want poor people to fight dirty? Don't oppress them, it's that simple. If Israel ever goes around stopping to do that (probably will require re-animating Rabin) they get the right to complain, but not before.
Let me know when Ukraine bombs civilian hospitals inside Russia or massacres Russian civilians at a music festival.
Let me know when Gaza has surgical strike capability. With the type of rockets they're using you can't really target hospitals because you can't really target them at all, they're ludicrously imprecise. Little better than a potato cannon.
People fight with what they have. The more desperate, the dirtier. It is way too easy to sit in your chair in front of your computer, presumably with a fully stocked fridge, reliable water, sewage, and electricity, technical marvels just a mouse click and next-day delivery away, and make moral judgements about people fighting for sheer survival with little more than sticks and stones.
Do I condone it? Nah. Both sides are invariably assholes, and not everything Hamas does is goal-directed enough to be categorised as "dirty war". There's lots of plain hatred in there. But then that hatred isn't exactly unfounded.
And at that point we're getting to a "If you deny me things, then I will deny you things" territory. The mutual assured destruction instinct: "Sure I may lose but I'll make sure that you lose, too". Eye for an eye. That, yes, means simply inflicting suffering. We're past morals at this point, this is human instinct, or one branch of the genome telling the other "yo, cut it out". It's bigger and way more natural -- in the metal sense -- than the quaint and lofty systems we build in our heads.
...which brings me to why I even replied to your comment: We wouldn't be in that situation, we could make moral judgements we'd actually feel good about, if Israel wasn't tightening thumbscrews to mush levels just to inflict suffering, like the whole water situation in Gaza. And there's no, absolutely no justification for that, as Israelis very much are not struggling for survival themselves.
So... terrorism.
No. That's inexcusable.
We would not be the social beings that we are without that underlying threat level. Our whole capacity to emphasise and be kind hinges on being able to tell when we crossed a line with others, and for that people have to have lines that can be crossed.
What's inexcusable is not the instinct, we all have it, but pushing people to a point where it breaks through. Be that to get rid of them, or to galvanise the in-group, as fascists do.
You mean like Hamas does with their murder, rape, and parading or civilian corpses?
Like Israel is doing by depriving Gaza of the necessities for life even though they themselves have plenty?
One side is actually doing it out of material desperation, the other out of political convenience, is all I'm saying.
My dislike of the policies of Israel's government is not relevant. Israeli citizens are not currently massacring Palestinians and parading their bodies through the streets.
This is not equal, this terrorism does not help Palestine, and excusing it is disgusting.
I never said it did.
I'm not excusing I'm explaining.
Indeed. As said: On the one side a cat in a corner, on the other someone pinning it down. Who is at fault when claws go flying?
Animals are not human. Human beings have agency. These people chose to be terrorists. There is no excuse, and the victims of their terrorism are not to blame.
Humans are animals, push any of us far enough and you'll see. As said: It's easy to moralise from your desk.
...also, who are you talking about? Cutting off an area's water supply counts as terrorism in my book. Please clarify.
The Hamas charter literally states that their goals are only attainable through jihad. The motivation is not "material desperation" but Israel's destruction. Israel's actions have helped radicalize people toward Hamas but Hamas goals are expressly not self defense.
Hamas is literally fascist, yes. But then you also have to ask why they have an easy time recruiting fighters instead of being a handful of hateful creeps in a nondescript shisha bar. Without all that energy created from desperation, Hamas would have precious little to work with. Heck without Fatah corruption they wouldn't have anything to work with.
The actions of the IDF and the state don't justify mass murder of civilians. All that accomplishes is poking the bear. Israel is oppressive against the people of Palestine but by no means do two wrongs make a right.
I'm not justifying. I'm explaining. And the explanation is that Israel drives Palestinians to desperation and instincts break through. A cornered cat won't care whether it's a bear cornering her she's going to scratch that fucker no matter what.
Also history has shown that not poking that particular bear doesn't make it any friendlier. Frankly speaking at this point the only thing that could get us out of the conundrum, I think, is an Israeli civil war, with the settlers on the losing side.