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
Any chance you can school me in the rights and wrongs of this situation, I have tried to read up on the situation between Israel and Palestine and I just can't work out who, if anyone is at fault. It just seems like a crazy unresolvable mess.
On the face of it I would just think the solution is to let the Palestinians have their bit of land and be done with it, why is it not that simple?
Also it's really hard to understand who is justified in their actions. I often find myself feeling sorry for the Palestinians but then I see them riding through London celebration the murder of innocent people and it makes it really hard for me to feel sorry for them. Similarly with Israelis, it's horrible that they have innocent civilians murdered but killing 250 in response is just crazy...
I'm not trolling or shit posting I honestly can't work it out.
There's a good Louis Theroux documentary that might give some context.
Tldw, Israelites aren't really respecting the borders - in this doco they send over zealous Jewish people from various countries to buy up and live in properties in these disputed areas to slowly take it over. Palestinians retaliate aggressively, typically violently.
Thanks all for teaching me a little about this situation, it is kind of how I had imagined it and there is no real immediate solution. I guess like any long standing conflict there are failings on both sides and neither willing to capitulate. As has been alluded to, it just does not seem to warrant the loss of life on both sides. I might do a little bit of reading on the local politics to see how this is played out to their respective populations.
Louis Theroux is always a good call!
I'm so confused, "various Jewish countries?"
No, Jewish people from various countries. Radical fucks reach out to Jewish communities abroad, the less educated and poorer the better, radicalise people into militant Zionism, the type that's completely at odds with past or present facts and only knows erm manifest destiny (to draw a parallel), then brings them into Israel which is easy because Israel hands out free passports to all Jews.
I mean, it's usually more like... Jews the world over are sick of their home countries and want to live in Israel, don't realize how expensive it is, go there, can't afford housing in Israel proper, and are told they can go live in the settlements. Or, demand causes Jews in Israel to seek cheaper housing.
Which is still an issue, but your conception is really not the norm.
It really doesn't make a difference in the end though, does it, whether people first arrive and then are radicalised (you can't set foot into a settlement without meeting awful but well-organised people, we're not talking about Hippie Kibbutzim), or whether you're radicalised before arriving, or whether the outreach programmes directly indoctrinate abroad or wait until the inevitable happens.
...I'll freely admit that I'm not deep into the details. I'm simply going off my Aunt's rants who actually lives in the country.
I mean, what she's describing has kind of happened. But it's not like Americans are coming over and building their own homes at the behest of Israeli chasids. The settlements are being built by greedy land developers, and Netanyahu is turning a blind eye for... well, complex reasons, but ultimately mostly because he's a corrupt dirtbag.
Some people do go to live on hippie kibbutzim.
So, depends on the incident in question who's at fault changes, but the ones with the power to change the situation are Israel and they're not doing that. Indiscriminately killing civilians is never justified, but with how Israel has been treating Palestinians you can understand where the attitude came from. People tend to hate the shit out of their oppressors, especially when those oppressors put them in open air concentration camps.
That aside there's Israeli settlement in the West bank and East Jerusalem, the whole Apartheid thing, y'know it's a long list. Basically Israel created a situation where terrorism and other armed action is the only way to fight back, which predictably caused terrorism.
I appreciate your thoughtful response. Unfortunately it is an incredibly murky mess at this point. Say you side with Palestine and say it's their land. Do you then kick out the people who were born on the land after the conflict started? Innocent people who's only crime is the location of their birth? Or do you side with Israel and claim it's their land now and do the same to Palestinians? Where do you put the people you relocate?
I won't pretend to have an answer to that. Just pointing out that either answer has numerous problems which is part of why no solution has been reached yet. Few, if any, solution will be a "win-win". Someone will have to concede, and neither side seems willing to right now.
That said, indiscriminate violence from either side is abhorible. I detest the death of any innocent civilian in all of this. "Two wrongs don't make a right" and all that. Both sides have committed crimes and those responsible should all be held accountable for turning the area into a warzone.
We can also spice it up with a bit of game theory. Assumption: Most people on both sides genuinely want peace.
Addition: On both sides, fractions exist which benefit from the conflict. They gain from stirring up hate, provoking fights, portraying threats. They lose power and influence when peace talks succeed. They gain power and influence when their "partners" from the other side attack.
So yes, this is a wicked problem to solve, for many reasons.
That is such a weird way to phrase it. A "bit of land" like Palestinians were some kind of barbarian spawn that just showed up there.
As a Palestinian I want to personally say to you that no one needs you to be sorry for us so you can stop worrying.
I've tried, the whole situation is a shitshow right now.
It's an incredibly complex situation, but as a baseline:
Intentionally targeting civilians is unacceptable.
Hamas does this with great pride. It celebrates the slaughter and kidnapping of civilians. It pays the families of terrorists in celebration of their terrorism.
In my opinion, the IDF is remarkably careful not to kill civilians. There have been incidental killings, largely, from my knowledge, when Hamas fires rockets from civilian areas such as homes, mosques, hospitals, and schools. There have been rogue Israeli actors who killed civilians intentionally, and they have mostly been tried and convicted for their crimes. There have been moral failures on behalf of the IDF, but it does generally investigate those failures seriously, rather than celebrating them.
I do sympathize for innocent Palestinians who are doubly oppressed by Hamas and the Israeli occupation, but feel that the occupation is necessary to prevent greater violence against Israeli civilians.
That's about all I can give you without digging into the history.
Anyone who calls the IDF careful about avoiding civilian deaths is either deeply ignorant or arguing in bad faith and seeking to legitimize a highly brutally murderous apartheid regime.
https://jcpa.org/the-gaza-war-2014/israel-gaza-humanitarian-law-civilian-casualties/
https://kbin.social/m/Israel/t/368817/A-handy-list-of-sources-describing-where-Hamas-produces-stores
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roof_knocking
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-israel-usa-gaza-idUSKBN0IQ2LH20141106
The sheer number of civilian casaulties makes all of this irrelevant, and makes you an apartheid apologist. I don't engage with supporters of apartheid regimes, so enjoy the block.
"Hamas may be using its civilians as meat shields, but no matter how careful Israel is, you're not allowed to call them careful because many of the meat shields still end up dying!"
You're a Hamas apologist. I haven't defended anything that could be called apartheid, and wouldn't. But go ahead and blame me for citing facts.
Thanks for your input, it's always good to get people's perceptions on things, it all helps build context.