834

Palestinian town of Jericho names street after US soldier who set himself on fire (www.theguardian.com)

submitted 6 months ago by nkat2112@sh.itjust.works to c/world@lemmy.world

31 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Aaron Bushnell, who died last month, ‘sacrificed everything’ for Palestinians, says mayor of Jericho

A few of the initial paragraphs for context follow - but the article is worth reading fully:

The Palestinian town of Jericho has named a street after Aaron Bushnell, the US air force member who set himself on fire outside the Israeli embassy in Washington to protest against the war in Gaza.

The 25-year-old, who died on 25 February, “sacrificed everything” for Palestinians, said the mayor of Jericho, Abdul Karim Sidr, as the street sign was unveiled on Sunday.

“We didn’t know him, and he didn’t know us. There were no social, economic or political ties between us. What we share is a love for freedom and a desire to stand against these attacks [on Gaza],” the mayor told a small crowd gathered on the new Aaron Bushnell Road.

Bushnell livestreamed his self-immolation on the social media platform Twitch, declaring he would “no longer be complicit in genocide” and shouting “free Palestine” as he started the fire. Law enforcement officials put out the flames, but he died in hospital several hours later.

Israel’s offensive in Gaza has killed more than 31,000 people, the majority of them women and children, according to the health ministry in the Hamas-run territory. The war was triggered by the cross border attack on 7 October when Hamas killed about 1,200 people, mostly civilians, and kidnapped 250 people.

Even as governments in Europe and the US have largely continued to back Israel’s campaign in Gaza as part of the country’s right to self-defence, Palestinians have taken heart from popular protests held from Michigan to Madrid.

all 32 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] Binzy_Boi@supermeter.social 110 points 6 months ago

I still question the intentions of the media and how a lot of outlets immediate ran to claim his actions as mental health related.

Like sure, I can see where that's coming from in a sense since self-immolation is inherently self-harm and you have to question a person's mental health for doing so, but at the same time, I don't know of anybody off-hand who says the same about the Buddhist monks who did the same in Vietnam.

Maybe times have changed and people don't see that action the same way as they used to back then, but if they are going to call this a result of mental health, I really hope they keep consistency with that from here on forward.

[-] Rooskie91@discuss.online 73 points 6 months ago

Mental health is a scapegoat for reasonable reactions to the absolutely horrible times we are living through.

[-] SuddenDownpour@sh.itjust.works 40 points 6 months ago

Someone does something crazy for a cause I agree with -> Heroic, valiant, inspiring

Someone does something crazy for a cause I disagree with -> Mentally ill, traumatised, brainwashed

Lest I'd have to begin to consider I might have been supporting monsters all along.

[-] chemical_cutthroat@lemmy.world 31 points 6 months ago

The only mental health issues I see are from the people in power that stand by and let these atrocities go unchecked.

[-] Pips@lemmy.sdf.org 8 points 6 months ago

Just to explain why, not to take from your broader point, it's because he's not of the people being harmed. Typically this form of protest is done by those being harmed.

[-] Land_Strider@lemmy.world 8 points 6 months ago

The thing is, and I'm not bringing it to say it is anyone's obligation no matter what they do or who they are, but Bushnell was a soldier. A soldier is usually already not as removed from the idea of death or harm coming their way, unlike most other people. Ideally, they are not readily available to put their own lives in the line, but they are aware the job entails duty and that duty may require more than common resources, hence putting the body at risk.

When you simply shift this duty to uphold justice for oppressed people on the other side of the planet rather than to sit with thumbs twiddling for your own country's military orders, it is easily justifiable to use this resource in line to protect others.

A journalist, a psychiatrist, or many of the other life occupancies have different resources they use and can also utilize as a last resort.

[-] SkyezOpen@lemmy.world 3 points 6 months ago

Airman. He also had some pretty extreme claims about who exactly was doing what in Gaza.

[-] Cethin@lemmy.zip 2 points 6 months ago

An airman is a specific subset of soldier. I know you're just trying to be dismissive, but stop being a pedantic asshole, and wrong at that.

[-] SkyezOpen@lemmy.world 2 points 6 months ago

Soldiers serve in an army. The USAF hasn't been a part of the army since 1947. Pedantic, sure. Wrong? No.

[-] Cethin@lemmy.zip 1 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

A definition for soldier is one who serve in an army and an army is "a large organized body of armed personnel trained for war especially on land" (emphasis mine, note not explicitly on land) or "a unit capable of independent action and consisting usually of a headquarters, two or more corps, and auxiliary troops"

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/army

The Air Force absolutely fits the latter definition, and it fits the former as well if you don't consider the land part exclusive, which it isn't.

Other definitions of soldier also exist, which do not require it be a member of an army, but a military in general. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/soldier

If you're going to be pedantic, at least be pedantic and accurate. There's no sense in being pedantic and wrong.

[-] JWBananas@lemmy.world 5 points 6 months ago

Vietnam

Not the best example.

There were soldiers dishonorably discharged from Vietnam for shell shock because PTSD was not yet officially recognized at the time. And because of that discharge, they were then not able to get VA benefits for the mental healthcare that they needed.

Source: https://vva.org/benefits-updates/vva-on-dod-announcement-of-guidance-for-upgrading-discharge-requests/

[-] FUBAR@lemm.ee 13 points 6 months ago

What is the connection between a monk immolating himself and American soldiers having ptsd?

The OP has a valid point in that both cases were instances of self immolation.

[-] JWBananas@lemmy.world 3 points 6 months ago

OP made the connection to the monks and said that what they did was not questioned as a mental health issue. I only meant to point out that there was not a great track record of mental health issues being identified/treated during that time.

[-] peopleproblems@lemmy.world 44 points 6 months ago

You know this article pissed me off with the self-immolation bit.

Self Immolation in protest couldn't be from preexisting mental illness. He clearly was emotionally impacted by his experience in the environment enough that his rational brain thought that by assuming such agonizing pain and stating the protest, the message would get heard a squeak louder.

Suicidal people don't think rationally. They want the pain to end. Or they become wildly careless. They don't sit there and go "how do I accomplish some good and end my suffering " while selecting the second worst way to die.

[-] fishos@lemmy.world 27 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

While I 100% agree with your interpretation in this case, I'm sure we can agree that "mentally ill person setting themselves on fire because the voices in their head told them too" is a plausible scenario. Self-immolation itself can absolutely be mental illness.

This was not mental illness.

[-] Random_German_Name@feddit.de 14 points 6 months ago

I agree with most of your comment, but when I was suicidal I absolutely was looking for ways to achieve something good through my death.

[-] HonoraryMancunian@lemmy.world 1 points 6 months ago

What's the first worst?

[-] peopleproblems@lemmy.world 11 points 6 months ago

Drowning by far.

I only took a small amount of marsh water in, but Jesus Christ, the panick is unbelievable. You can't get rid of what's in there and you use up whatever is in your blood so quickly. Also the water fucking hurts like a mother fucker. And if you survive. Like I did, I got pretty bad pneumonia from it.

[-] HonoraryMancunian@lemmy.world 3 points 6 months ago

Horrible.

[-] Aceticon@lemmy.world 10 points 6 months ago

Probably Starvation, because of the whole "body slowly eating iitself up" thing.

You know, the way Israel (with, lets never forget, the unwavering support of the US and Germany) is killing children in Gaza.

[-] whoelectroplateuntil@sh.itjust.works 30 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

See, in order to assume his act was "crazy," we have to start by making it a normative principle nobody should ever lay down their life for others. I think the divergence over whether his act was political or was he automatically crazy boils down to: are you a bootlicker?

[-] aidan@lemmy.world 3 points 6 months ago

The question is does it have any reasonable possibility at all of saving other's lives?

[-] Harbinger01173430@lemmy.world 12 points 6 months ago

Wasn't Jericho destroyed by the ark of the covenant or something?

[-] chiliedogg@lemmy.world 24 points 6 months ago

No, it was destroyed by angry men screaming and blowing horns until the walls gave up.

[-] Harbinger01173430@lemmy.world 7 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

Heck, it would be cooler if it were destroyed by plasma glassing by the scarier Covenant from Halo, not that pitiful ark from the bible tales /S

[-] AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world 9 points 6 months ago

Nope. Just like most of the early books of the Old Testament, that was pure fiction.

https://www.britannica.com/video/179549/Battle-of-Jericho-archaeologists-event-Book-Joshua

[-] AeonFelis@lemmy.world 1 points 6 months ago

Whether it really happened or not, I think enough time has passed to allow rebuilding it several times over.

[-] LinkOpensChest_wav 4 points 6 months ago

It's so nice seeing him get honored. So many people here in the US are trying to bury the story or portray it as a mere suicide.

[-] 0nekoneko7@lemmy.world 2 points 6 months ago

I think it was unfortunate that the dude took the protest to the extreme by self-immolating.

[-] crazyminner@lemmy.ml 1 points 6 months ago

Loop of

this post was submitted on 10 Mar 2024

834 points (100.0% liked)

World News

38578 readers

2365 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.
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.