531
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 03 Nov 2023
531 points (100.0% liked)
World News
39082 readers
2402 users here now
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 !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
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Whether you agree with Israeli attacks or not, obviously the answer to this is because it's impossible to filter out Hamas terrorists, which is the main thing they're trying to prevent.
Your right, best to kill them all then. What do you agree with btw?
He agrees with the occupiers if his history serves as enough evidence
Where did you get that?
I'm not happy with what Israel is doing. But I don't know of a better way to get rid of Hamas either. And I'm convinced that if we want a free Palestine and a working two state solution, freeing it from Hamas has to be the first step without which no sustainable situation with Israel can ever be achieved.
I'm sure this will work about as well as the US attempt to get rid of the Taliban. Or as well as any of the other instances in the past of trying to get rid of an ideological group through violence.
It doesn't work. It makes everything worse. It radicalizes survivors and kills lots of innocent people.
Some day maybe humanity will collectively abandon these cycles of hatred and violence played out over decades. But I doubt it.
You have a point, but it's not really the same thing and there's a very good recent counter-example too. ISIS was effectively dealt with despite being spread out over a much larger area. Taliban won, but it had a whole huge country to work in and was nowhere near as violent as Hamas, so it had more support. Gaza is tiny in comparison, blocked on all sides and neighbors of Israel don't want anything to do with them either, even if they don't like Israel. There is also at least some alternative in Fatah, which didn't lose the 2005 elections by that much.
Imo it's clearly possible to get rid of Hamas, though I'm not making any claims about the probability that it will happen.
Mostly, I don't really see an alternative. Some radical action needed to be taken because anything else would be interpreted as a clear proof that large terrorist attacks against civilians work, and Hamas should continue committing them. You cannot appease someone whose reason for existence is violence. And keeping Hamas sort of in check, only killing or capturing the worst terrorists, which is what was being done in the last two decades, clearly did not work either.
You don't see any alternative to the slaying of people in a 10 to 1 ratio in what is an offensive reprisal attack? I mean Machiavelli would agree with you.
Why does "radical action" always mean "radical violence"?
"Radical action" can and should include radical kindness in which past wounds can be forgiven and a cooperative future can be built. Right now, all the violence is doing is ensuring that Hamas will be enumerated and maintained for generations by the people that Israel is considering to be sub-human and disposable. Radical violence creates radical ideologues and only ever begets further violence in the absence of total and absolute annihilation.
Radical kindness will specifically tell Hamas "yes, brutal terrorist attacks work, keep doing them". That is unfortunately not an option. It's also just a fantasy because it would understandably never be supported by Israeli population for this reason.
I'm interested in seeing alternative solutions that could actually work and be realistically implemented, but outside of understandable positions like "ease off with the fucking bombing and do more work on the ground" that don't change the goal of what is being done I have not seen any.
This reads like "we don't care about the hostages or their families. We must complete our noble work of eradication of the people we deem "hostile." Also anyone that gets in our way is fully excusable and at fault for their own death by being around where we decide to kill." Do you even possess empathy for anyone you don't directly support? Wild.
It’s naive to say that kindness is going to stop violence from a group who in their founding charter call for the death of the opposing group. Hanas isn’t a good faith group and no amount of kindness will change that.
Any solution that will be durable requires that Hanna’s is not a part of it.
Sure, this is why the American Britain war is still waged today. It's also why France has been relentlessly attacking England. And obviously, the British bombing of Ireland is what ended the IRA.
Besides peace, genocide is the only way to end Hamas. And that's what you are cheering for. Israel is creating the next generation of terrorists by terrorizing the Palestinians.
Fundamentally it comes down to who is more at fault for the death of a human shield, the one who is using the human shield or the one who is attacking.
Clearly Hamas is more at fault. If you want peace tell Hamas to surrender and return the hostages.
How does "clearly" go against all societal norms in your mind? You seemingly know nothing about hostage negotiation, popular culture or just being human. Wolf Blitzer is more human than you. Think on that.
Can we refrain from calling people subhuman? It is really not a good look.
You think being less human than wolf blitzer makes you subhuman? Tell me what do you consider Palestinian civilians to justify their treatment? How does your heart not bleed for them compassionate one?
I think telling anybody that they know nothing about being human and saying some random person is more human than them is wrong, and given the context, frightening. The guy you said that to made two comments. Two. What did he say specifically that provoked such a response? I’d hope your heart bleeds for all innocent life lost. Palestine elected a group to lead them that specifically calls for the eradication of Jews, of course there’s going to be civilian deaths.
lol, sure you do. /s
He justified killing human shields, which is incontrovertibly incorrect.
You dont like it? Take it up with Obama: "Nobody’s hands are clean’: Obama urges reflection amid Israel-Hamas conflict"
How do you feel about killing hostages or human shields? Because I may also be questioning your humanity shortly based on that answer. If you think that response is worse than the stakes of whats being discussed I would say that's very telling.
Unironically, thanks Obama.
I’m not justifying either- I’m just saying that Hamas is the responsible party
If you say Hamas is responsible after Israel kills the hostage/civilian, then your bias is clear. Here, If you'd like to hear a different take try this Mother Jones article. I find the expert within to articulate this point well.
It’s an interesting article, but it’s not an exhaustive look at the situation. Look buddy- the article is from the point of an American, and proscribes American actions that should be taken. While that is interesting, it doesn’t touch nearly at all on what the current parties should do (vis a vis Hamas and Israel) and it doesn’t apply ANY scrutiny to Hamas or suggest any actions they should take.
It’s not that it’s not an insightful piece, but it’s POV is limited, and can’t be applied generally.
Hey, if that's your opinion of it then I won't fault you for it. Perhaps as an American it appeals more to me, as I still really enjoyed his perspective as a Palestine born and raised Christian who has spent his life advising and speaking on the topic.
Thanks for taking the chance and giving it a look. Not many people would, so please accept my apologies for the harsh words earlier.
If the citizens of Gaza aren't offered anything better, why would they gamble what little they have on overthrowing the local oppressors? They don't really have anything to gain by overthrowing Hamas and trying to do so would be putting their lives and their families at risk. If Israel and the wider international community can offer them something better than life under Hamas and the Likud, they'd be much more likely to eschew Hamas' control.
I should have put an /s there I guess. You don't know a better way than genocide? If the treatment kills the host then it is not in fact a cure.
You seem to be implying that israelis are not people or that their lives are less valuable.
Edit: you should look the definition of imply in the dictionary. responding that you didn't say something you implied is not a valid argument.
where did I say that? Must be hard juggling a victim complex with 4000 murdered children. Oh, maybe not?
edit: K, where did I ever come close to implying any civilian life (that's universal jackass) is less worthy or valuable. What a fucking coward, coming in and editing the original as a way to skip a response. Here's one in return piss pants.
You're implying that Israel is entitled to murder thousands of civilians, half of them children, and level to the ground a city that used to house over half a million people up until recently, just because its far right government that has protected people who abused Palestinians for decades doesn't want to seek any solution other than relentless violence. One day you'll look at yourself in the mirror and find yourself a monster.
If Israel wanted to kill all people in Gaza, they could just carpet bomb them without ever stepping a foot in. The only reason to do a ground invasion that will inevitably bring a ton of Israeli casualties is to reduce civilian deaths.
So less deniable war crimes?
Better way is easy: a one state solution like Israel claims it wants would be better than this. Declare everyone in Palestine an Israeli citizen, move in law enforcement in force, and arrest murderers for murder.
I agree that it would be better for the Palestinians, clearly Israeli Arabs have better lives than people in Gaza and West Bank despite also facing some discrimination, but Gazans would never agree to this (that is clear from public opinion polls done by PA institutions - for example over 70% of people in Gaza support violence against Israeli civilians), so the end result would be exactly the same is this one. You would still have an army of violent murderers hiding in tunnels with almost two decades of preparation for exactly this.
The cost of 4000 dead children perhaps.
So, you believe Israel can identify a Hamas terrorist remotely to bomb them, but can't identify Hamas terrorists when they are at the border in person?
Apparently they can: https://www.timesofisrael.com/hamas-tried-to-send-fighters-to-egypt-in-ambulances-for-wounded-gazans-us-official/
Why are they murdering all those journalists then? Seems... Evil.
They weren't journalists, they were Hamas fighters, dressed as journalists. /s
So your point being is let's question Hamas propaganda but not IDF propaganda?
The people IDF is targeting are Hamas leaders or "officers", who need to communicate a lot and sometimes even show in public, so they can be tracked with enough time. Boots on the ground soldiers are a completely different problem and Israel doesn't even have the resources to track all of them because there are so many. How is that not obvious??
So 10,000 people have died now to kill how many? Here's a question, what number is okay to kill? You seem to know these things so the answer should be obvious.
My dude has never seen a customs office or checkpoint in his life
No its obviously because Israel doesn't care about Palestinians lol. They wouldn't have literally any of these issues if they hadn't been doing like 80 years worth of state sponsored occupation and murder.
You really think the people in Gaza chose to willingly leave their former homes and land to move into a military enclave?
You are extremely naive if you think that a military checkpoint would solve this problem. Egypt was not able to stop Hamas terrorists and their supplies going back and forth through the Rafah border crossing to commit acts of terror in the Sinai peninsula for example. And that was during "business as usual", not in a situation where potentially hundreds of thousands of people would likely have to go through.
Bold of you to assume Egypt isn't complicit in letting that happen lol.
Their military literally runs on bribery. So much so that there's a local conspiracy there that Egypt provided Israel with all the intel during the 6 day war because they had no intention of fighting and negotiated to get Gaza off their hands in exchange for never having to worry about Israel again.
Again though, my point is that Hamas as an entity wouldn't exist if Palestinians were considered regular citizens and not forced off from their own property.
This may be true and it would be good to consider this when deciding what to do after Hamas is gone, but it doesn't change anything about current situation. The fact is that thinking a military checkpoint would filter out terrorists is incredibly naive, and whether Israel cares about the lives of civilians or not likely wouldn't change this particular issue at all.
Either they’re armed and easy to identify or they’re not at which point there’s one less person to worry about shooting Israeli soldiers while their tunnel network is dismantled. I don’t see the problem.
No, now you have two more people inspired to shoot Israeli soldiers and civilians. It's like you don't even understand how people's minds actually work.
And Israel’s current strategy isn’t carrying water for Hamas recruitment right now?
Israel’s strategy over the last 70 years created Hamas and has ensured that it has continued to hold power in Gaza. I don’t know what that other commenter is thinking, but I think characterising Israel’s strategy as carrying water for Hamas recruitment is a strong understatement. They’re not just carrying water; they’re pumping it from the ground, putting it in containers, divvying it up, and carrying it as far as they’ll go. Hamas exists because of Israel, much as how Al Qaeda and ISIS exist(ed) because of the US (and allied forces) and Russia.
Do you honestly not see the problem with letting out at the very least tens of thousands of people, possibly hundreds of thousands, and guarding them all well enough so that none of them can do any hostilities that can be done without smuggling arms out of Gaza (whether it's sabotage, inciting violent protests to keep the IDF occupied or terrorist acts using weapons smuggled into Israel from elsewhere)?
It’d be hard sure. Still better than bombing the spots they directed people to and killing droves of civilians.
Why does Israel not let people leave and use its famed intelligence services to identify who the Hamas fighters are? It is looking like the Israeli government simply prefers collective punishment or even genocide.