433

The Israeli army fired artillery shells containing white phosphorus, an incendiary weapon, in military operations along Lebanon’s southern border between 10 and 16 October 2023.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] BMatthew@lemmy.world 64 points 1 year ago

And the US and UK give unconditional support.

[-] Afghaniscran@feddit.uk 46 points 1 year ago

I'm ashamed of my country and it only grows for each day that passes.

load more comments (11 replies)
[-] galloog1@lemmy.world 24 points 1 year ago

If you believe the reports coming out of the Hamas aligned side, Israel has not once hit a legitimate military target. They were all civilians. Do you remember that refugee camp they hit yesterday? You know, the one with all the apartment buildings where Hamas leadership suspiciously died at the exact same time. That was all civilians.

Arab states in the immediate vicinity cannot fathom that Israel could be any more trustworthy than their own governments despite consistency on the Israeli side. To be honest, after having seen how it works myself, I don't believe anything coming out of that region but those channels coming out of the Israeli state itself. I do not understand why people take any of the reports of the Hamas or aligned organizations at face value but they do.

State or no state, Hamas was legitimately elected by the people of Palestine. They committed a horrendous attack against Israel justifying a defensive war. War is fucking ugly. There's no way around it without risking your own forces. This is not genocide as they are targeting military targets despite the narrative. Collateral damage is not inherently a war crime and people should learn what that means. Deliberately targeting civilians is a war crime. White phosphorous is only a war crime if they are signatory to the treaty banning its use which they are not nor are the United States or Russia.

The is a massive information war going on right now trying to pull public opinion to one side or the other and almost nothing can truly be trusted unless it comes from a primary source and even then they should be assessed for trustworthiness based on evidence and past performance.

This is also intended to take our attention away from Russia and Ukraine; just saying.

[-] daitya@lemmy.world 39 points 1 year ago

Israeli strikes are targeting locations where IDF instructed civilians to take shelter. This has been verified by BBC: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-67264703

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] BassTurd@lemmy.world 33 points 1 year ago

This is genocide, you dolt.

[-] galloog1@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago

Define genocide then detail with trustworthy sources why this meets it.

I'm tired of people pontificating that this is genocide who cannot even define what genocide is. The other side are those that can define genocide but fully trust Hamas sources while distrusting Western sources.

... You dolt

[-] Annoyed_Crabby@monyet.cc 20 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

From the UN:

The popular understanding of what constitutes genocide tends to be broader than the content of the norm under international law. Article II of the Genocide Convention contains a narrow definition of the crime of genocide, which includes two main elements:

There's a few from Al Jazeera but to prevent collective screeching i left it out.

[-] Marsupial@quokk.au 18 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Wow you can’t just bring up some made up noname nonsense like the UN, they’re antisemitic terrorists!

I only trust real sources like Israeli newspapers.

[-] Annoyed_Crabby@monyet.cc 8 points 1 year ago

It stand for Unknown News-source. How can Hamas do this

load more comments (9 replies)
[-] galloog1@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

Based on those definitions, what Israel went through is considered genocide against them and multiple times including the recent attacks as they absolutely targeted Israeli civilians.

This is an overly broad definition and includes literally every war ever. Air strikes against seemingly military targets that end up not being military targets does not constitute genocide. Not by a long shot.

Your UN article simply states that there is suffering. Name a single war where that wasn't the case. Is all war genocide? Your other articles simply define that they are at war in response to a massive terrorist attack. That is not genocide by this definition as it does not define the difference between a justified defensive war and a genocide.

Israel was at war the second they were attacked. War is not pretty. It is not genocide. You would be far better off scoping your argument outside of the confines of the current conflict as they were attacked by an elected organization by Palestine.

[-] Annoyed_Crabby@monyet.cc 13 points 1 year ago

Based on those definitions, what Israel went through is considered genocide against them and multiple times including the recent attacks as they absolutely targeted Israeli civilians.

Yes.

This is an overly broad definition and includes literally every war ever.

Yes, that's literally what the Geneva Conventions is about.

Air strikes against seemingly military targets that end up not being military targets does not constitute genocide. Not by a long shot.

One casualty, no. Twenty casualty, no, but that might be a war crime. Eight thousands casualty and rising, including hostages, that is a large group. It include targeting refugee camp, place of worship that house refugees, hospital, evacuation route, that is genocide.

Your UN article simply states that there is suffering. Name a single war where that wasn't the case. Is all war genocide?

Terrible argument because that's not how genocide is defined, 0 point for the mental gymnastic. Genocide is a motive, not all war is genocide. But yes, a lot of war tend to consist the element of genocide because of one stronger group trying to eliminate a weaker group, including Israel - Palestine conflict, where Israel has been oppressing Palestine for decades.

Your other articles simply define that they are at war in response to a massive terrorist attack.

Apply the context of the article to the definition of genocide.

That is not genocide by this definition as it does not define the difference between a justified defensive war and a genocide.

Genocide did not define whether it's defensive nor offensive, nor the Geneva Conventions give a shit about how you think it should be. As it stand, being the defensive party does not give them any right to commit the atrocity they're currently doing.

Israel was at war the second they were attacked. War is not pretty. It is not genocide.

Using your line of thinking, Hamas is not genocidal group because war is not pretty.

You would be far better off scoping your argument outside of the confines of the current conflict as they were attacked by an elected organization by Palestine.

And in return, they murdered 8000 non-combatant of the people that they successfully dehumanised, just like all the conflict they have with Palestine for decades.

Holocaust Denial Trope also detailed on what people do to deny the holocaust, but lets swap some letter:

  • Details of the ~~Holocaust~~ Palestinian Genocide Have Been Exaggerated
  • Witness Testimony is Fabricated or Inaccurate
  • ~~Jews~~ Hamas Invented the ~~Holocaust~~ Palestinian Genocide for Financial and Political Gain
  • The ~~Holocaust~~ Palestinian Genocide is a ~~Zionist~~ Hamas Political Tool
  • ~~Jews~~ Palestinian are Responsible for Their Own Persecution

Wouldn't be too far off from what is happening today.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[-] BassTurd@lemmy.world 18 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Genocide: the deliberate killing of a large number of people from a particular nation or ethnic group with the aim of destroying that nation or group.

See the ~~blown up hospital~~, the blown up camp, the thousands of dead Palestinian civilians, the refugees bombed while trying to use the designated route out, or maybe just the leaked report with details of Israel's plan to ethically cleanse Palestinians in Gaza.

Or, idk, just open your fucking eyes. You have to either be a fucking moron or intentionally ignorant, to both be aware of what's happening over there and still think it's not genocide.

Keep your head in the sand if you want. Fucking moron.

Edit: I'll concede on the hospital. Anyone care to refute my other points, or maybe touch on today's (11/1) bombing of the refugee camp?

[-] mwguy@infosec.pub 11 points 1 year ago

See the blown up hospital

The one Palestinian forced blew up? That's still standing?

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Machinist3359@kbin.social 18 points 1 year ago

Hope you remember in 20 years you were posting genocide denial rhetoric in your free time and feel ashamed. Same points used un many other genocides.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Stanard@lemmy.world 14 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Do you believe UN reports about the "Hamas aligned side"? Or is that just some big conspiracy?

And by your own words: "Deliberately targeting civilians is a war crime." "Do you remember that refugee camp they hit yesterday?" I'll even concede and say sure, let's assume there were Hamas terrorists hiding in the refugee camp. Let's also assume there was terrorist-supporting infrastructure in the refugee camp. Guess what though. IT WAS STILL A FUCKING REFUGEE CAMP!

Let that sink in extra slow through your thick skull. Read through several times if you must. They knew there were innocent civilians in a refugee camp. They also suspected terrorists in said refugee camp. If you think the best and only option was to bomb that refugee camp, you're wrong and a monster. Or is it that you're simply a racist that thinks that every Palestinian is a terrorist simply for existing on the wrong "side"?

Let's say we find out that there's some terrorists hiding out in your city. Is the only solution to bomb the city? Yourself, your family, and your friends included? Let's say we narrow it down to terrorists hiding on your block. What's your solution? How much "collateral damage" (innocent civilian deaths) is acceptable to root out the terrorism that exists in your home town?

Edit: I would like to add that yes, this is distracting from the Russian invasion of Ukraine. I would also like to add that I recognize that I do not know nearly enough about this conflict to speak with authority on the subject. What I do know enough about though is that not every Palestinian is involved with nor supports Hamas. And not every Israeli is involved with nor supports the IDF. There are many Innocent people that have died, and are continuing to die from both sides of this conflict. And every one of those deaths is a tragedy. I wholeheartedly condemn Hamas' killings of innocent civilians, and I wholeheartedly condemn Israel's killings of innocent civilians. Both sides fucking suck and the people that are truly paying the price are the innocent people dying and losing loved ones. I don't know what the answer is, or even if there is a "right answer". Maybe a special ground operation would have minimized loss of life? I don't know. What I definitely do know is that I will never be okay with the deaths of innocent people.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] Lodespawn@aussie.zone 10 points 1 year ago

Bombing a building filled with civilians just because some arsehole who help do (or did) a terrible thing is hiding in there certainly sounds like collective punishment ..

load more comments (8 replies)
[-] CADmonkey@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

No matter how many people my comments may annoy, at least I never typed up multiple paragraphs defending genocide.

[-] ShittyBeatlesFCPres@lemmy.world 56 points 1 year ago

I think it also depends on how it’s used. Like if it’s used to create a smokescreen or to light up a battle field, it’s not a war crime. If it’s used as an offensive weapon, especially in an area with civilians, it almost certainly is a war crime since, regardless of whether it’s a chemical weapon, there’s no real way to aim it at military targets without it raining down on civilians. At that point, it becomes a Geneva Conventions violation and every country has ratified the core of the Geneva Conventions.

[-] Silverseren@kbin.social 49 points 1 year ago

Indeed. And per the above article,

One attack on the town of Dhayra on 16 October must be investigated as a war crime because it was an indiscriminate attack that injured at least nine civilians and damaged civilian objects, and was therefore unlawful

It does sounds like they just fired it at civilian locations to bolster their military actions.

[-] mwguy@infosec.pub 29 points 1 year ago

9 casualties does not scream indiscriminate. Additionally the other example has 48 Hezbolla members and 4 civilians listed as casualties which also doesn't scream indiscriminate.

[-] CADmonkey@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago

Im sure those 9 people and their families don't agree.

[-] MycoBro@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Sometimes, especially after a long day, a few beers, and a joint, I start to think about all the people dying in Ukrainian and Palestine. I spent a year in Iraq so it’s not hard to imagine what the physical sensation of being in one of those foxholes are hiding in one of the blown outbuildings(I can quite honestly even smell the dust and mold in the hair. Kind of taste it. I spent a lot of time in J-dam’ed buildings)but what I can’t fucking imagine is the feeling of hopelessness the Palestinians must feel. Or any realistic Ukrainian. My point is, there is absolutely no one for those 9 people’s family to turn to and that’s horrifying

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] BeautifulMind@lemmy.world 38 points 1 year ago

Well gosh what with Russia throwing white phosphorous at Ukraine and no consequence then with Israel also appearing to do so it's as if international law only applies to countries that aren't nuclear states

[-] GeneralEmergency@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago

Or international politics is a bit complicated.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[-] badhops@lemmy.world 37 points 1 year ago

yeah ... but if we place all of the brown people in a open air prison... cut off their water and electricity maybe a bomb or 10000... that will fix the problem

[-] DoomBot5@lemmy.world 16 points 1 year ago

If you can't tell the difference between middle eastern locations, maybe you shouldn't be talking about it.

[-] Pancito@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

The fuck you talking about? The article is about Lebanon. You don't even distinguish between countries because they are all the same to you? That's ignorant if not racist.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] DarkGamer@kbin.social 26 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Israeli authorities denied that they used white phosphorus in their military operations in Gaza and Lebanon.

Seems like they're lying. All of that taken together seems like pretty damning evidence that they do use white phosphorous shells.

White phosphorus is not considered a chemical weapon because it operates primarily by heat and flame rather than toxicity, making it an incendiary weapon. Its use is governed by Protocol III of the Convention on Conventional Weapons (CCW). Lebanon acceded to the protocol in 2017, but Israel has not.

Oh. So they're not bound by the treaty not to use it.

[-] Jaytreeman@kbin.social 13 points 1 year ago

Lebanon is. Israel didn't sign on

[-] Silverseren@kbin.social 26 points 1 year ago

That certainly makes Lebanon look better than Israel on the subject.

[-] DoomBot5@lemmy.world 12 points 1 year ago

Even better since Lebanon isn't involved here. It's the terrorist organization Hezbollah that is. Since they're terrorists rather than a country, they're not signed on to this either.

[-] UrbonMaximus@feddit.uk 8 points 1 year ago

Hezbollah have 15 ministers in parliament and are literally in the caretaker government coalition.

[-] Hrrz@lemmy.world 15 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Bullshit. They just used ordinary smoke shells. There's no evidence of anything in this post. Amnesty is deep in Russian microdicks pocket.

[-] jlh@lemmy.jlh.name 19 points 1 year ago

I'm shocked at the ignorance needed to call Amnesty pro-Russian.

[-] PrincessLeiasCat@sh.itjust.works 19 points 1 year ago

It is? I honestly never knew that. Can you recommend a good source to read more about it?

[-] Machinist3359@kbin.social 13 points 1 year ago

Zero evidence, and portrays how little you know about the organization. Nice knee jerk against defending human rights though

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 31 Oct 2023
433 points (100.0% liked)

World News

45554 readers
2781 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS