this post was submitted on 24 Sep 2024
408 points (92.1% liked)

World News

39023 readers
2962 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 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Deceptichum@quokk.au 86 points 1 month ago (4 children)

Israel desperately trying to start WW3.

[–] andrewrgross 28 points 1 month ago (3 children)

Netanyahu is. The Israeli public is highly racist, but much less enthusiastic about total war than Bibi. Unfortunately, they don't get a say. This isn't a democracy.

[–] archomrade@midwest.social 11 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I guess we'll never know, huh?

If tomorrow Netanyahu get removed from office, there are probably 10 or 12 other genocidal war-mongers who could take his place.

I agree that the Israeli public is far more split on this issue, but the ultra nationalists have a pretty strong hold on power.

[–] andrewrgross 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I honestly disagree.

He's like Trump. There are certainly no shortage of knock-offs who are eager to try and replace him if he falls, but what we saw during the Republican primary is that none so far can quite achieve what he does. They're all lesser copies.

Netanyahu is an extraordinary politician. Not a lot of his peers have what it takes to be as effective, dangerous, and destructive as he is.

[–] archomrade@midwest.social 3 points 1 month ago

I think there's an argument to be made that Trump and Netanyahu are uniquely situated over other fascists, but I think their dominance is more a function of taking up all the oxygen rather than them being uniquely evil/competent/popular (at least when it comes to trump)

I agree that Netanyahu has proven to be extremely effective as a politician, and is leaps-and-bounds more educated/intelligent than Trump (pretty sure he has 3 or 4 degrees, from MIT and Harvard and was rumored to be a prolific student).

I think if/when he ever gets voted out/thrown in jail/assassinated, he will leave Israel as a moldy peach to whoever takes his place. They've effectively burned their good-will, even between 5-Eyes states, and managed to elevate/coalesce the surrounding regional powers and their reputations (Iran and Lebanon are currently getting a ton of credit for not taking the bait and escalating with Israel, and that's done quite a lot to rehabilitate their reputations in the ME and with Global superpowers like China and Russia). Even if there was a successor as prolific as Netanyahu, they would be left without the standing or connections that he had, and western appetite for more escalation from them will have effectively run out.

All that said; the problem of Israeli imperialism won't go away with him, even if it will be a lot less effective in his absence. We need to start thinking of Israel as the Ethnostate that it is, and reevaluate their role in our foreign policy. I think if there's anything their war in Gaza has proven is that they are far more ideologically fascistic than anyone in the west really was willing to recognize. That they didn't end their war and return to their apartheid domination, and instead chose to continue escalating into genocide and now expanding their border with Lebanon, shows that their imperialism is of a different type and scale than the US's has ever really been. They are far less content with soft power diplomacy than we are.

I really wish this generation was less enamored by the 'great-men' historical interpretation - it blinds us to the broader influences and motivations involved with international conflicts.

[–] postmateDumbass@lemmy.world 7 points 1 month ago (2 children)

The people are damningly complicit with their leaders and killing others.

It is telling the world a very dangerous message.

[–] andrewrgross 6 points 1 month ago

I wanna push back on that.

Israel has a population of 5.2 million people, and 2 million of them are Arab Muslims.

The representation of Israel that we see in their media and culture is a reflection of Apartheid. It erases the presence and will of literally millions of people who are the target of the brutality that we're talking about.

[–] UrPartnerInCrime@sh.itjust.works -1 points 1 month ago

Ok, Dumbass, what do you propose people actually do to help, huh? Protest? That hasn't been working. Vote for someone who literally has .001% chance of winning? Write some more snarky comments? What amazing idea do you have to actually get this stopped

[–] jaggedrobotpubes@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago

Tons of Israelis are critical of Netanyahu and don't want this anymore than most Americans wanted trump.

[–] dutchkimble@lemy.lol 6 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Yeah how the fuck is this moving from Gaza, already a fucked up goings on in the world, to more and more of Lebanon? Why are governments of other countries still supporting this? What the actual fuck?

[–] veganpizza69@lemmy.world 6 points 1 month ago

Israel has no sober friends.

[–] index@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 month ago

Why are governments of other countries still supporting this?

Why not? What are you going to do about it?

[–] index@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 month ago

With the back of the west who would hands down win it thanks to the trillions of public money they spend on war. Watch out for the propaganda, iran or russia are not worst than us they are as much as bad.

[–] nonailsleft@lemm.ee -2 points 1 month ago (4 children)

I always wonder when people post this: how exactly would this go down?

Say when Iran sends troops/ships/whatever to support Hezbollah and get into a fight with the US, which other parties with significant military power would side with them? Russia is tied up and probably incapable, North Korea would be unlikely to want to commit suicide by using their nukes over this, ...

Perhaps Erdogan would be the most realistic one but I don't think their military would be very eager to follow those orders

[–] Maalus@lemmy.world 14 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

When Iran joins the war in full capacity, the US needs to give them full attention. That leaves Taiwan open for grabs. Which they also need full attention for. Then there's still Ukraine and Russia making plays. I imagine if Russia ever wins in Ukraine, and there are wars happening in the Middle East, Taiwan, elsewhere, then they might make a play on the Baltics for instance. So US now has 3 fronts to deal with against multiple nuclear powers. And that is of course as long as the US stays the course and doesn't end up isolating from the rest of the world.

World wars happened because of a series of alliances pulling multiple countries into a large, singular war. Israel provoking multiple of their neighbors by attacking them and commiting genocide can absolutely draw the world into a war.

[–] ryathal@sh.itjust.works 11 points 1 month ago

Turkey is a NATO member, they might talk a good game, but they aren't going to act against US interests. The blowback would be catastrophic for Erdogan and Turkey.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago (3 children)

how exactly would this go down?

Israeli expansion draws a bigger fish into the conflict. Perhaps they start attacking Syria or Iran more directly. Perhaps they start bombing into Saudi Arabia or Jordan. Perhaps we see another collapse of the Egyptian military dictatorship due to unrest, and the replacement government isn't nearly as Israel-friendly as the current regime.

Then the US has to intercede. But as the US intercedes in the Middle East, it draws in more countries - fighting breaks out in Iraq to expel what remains of the US military presence, fighting breaks out between Greece and Turkey again as US naval assets are withdrawn from the region, Russia capitalizes on US arms assets slowing down in Ukraine and makes a big push into Kiev. The US has military bases all over the world, so you don't have to travel far in order to pull off a USS Cole style bombing.

You can see this spiral into a global conflict easily enough. We're already seeing low-key upheavels all through the central African states, the disputed territory of Kashmir, and the Chinese/Japanese contested ocean territories. When the Primary Imperial Power is engaged in too many fronts at once, that creates a lot of room for the various minor powers to reassert themselves.

[–] archomrade@midwest.social 3 points 1 month ago

Idk why you're getting downvoted, the risk of regional escalation is very well understood even in the US state department.

[–] FlowVoid@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

Israel has already fought multiple wars with its neighbors, and the US never interceded (if by that you mean "sent US troops"). In fact, the whole purpose of arming Israel is partly so their soldiers do the fighting instead of Americans. I think the US expects Israel to handle Iran as it did Egypt, Jordan, Syria etc.

The US doesn't really care about Central Africa or Kashmir, it has no strategic interests in those regions. So any wars fought there (and again, there have already been a few) will be mostly ignored by the US.

The US cares a lot about China, so this is the only place it might send its own US forces. But those will mostly be US Navy, since it doesn't need to occupy new territory. And the Navy isn't really needed elsewhere.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Israel has already fought multiple wars with its neighbors, and the US never interceded

The US has been sending military aid, military advisors, and military assets into the region around Israel for over 80 years. The US has stationed two different carrier groups to support the Israeli invasion of Gaza.

[–] FlowVoid@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

Right, which is why I specified "send US troops". That's not going to happen, so they remain available for a potential conflict with China.

The US sent two carrier groups in October. Both have already returned home.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago

Right, which is why I specified “send US troops”.

Who do you think is manning those carrier groups?

Both have already returned home.

They're on rotation. The USS Lincoln is set to replace the Roosevelt, which was replacing the Eisenhower.

[–] nonailsleft@lemm.ee 0 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Saudi Arabia is an enemy of Iran in the region, and Jordan even helped Israel intercept Iranian missiles. Why would Israel ever attack its allies in that conflict?

And Israel has been expanding into the West Bank since like '67. What changed that that would suddenly 'draw in bigger fish' now?

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Saudi Arabia is an enemy of Iran in the region

China's been brokering peace negotiations with them for some time as part of its Belt & Road Initiative.

Jordan even helped Israel intercept Iranian missiles

And Israel repaid the aid by bombing a Jordanian hospital in Gaza. Its a very one-sided relationship, heavily predicated on Jordanian security services being in bed with the IDF.

And Israel has been expanding into the West Bank since like '67.

Not since the '48 Nakba has Israel been this aggressive with its expansion. This is in no small part thanks to the flood of Ukrainian and Russian refugees serving as fodder for settlements.

[–] nonailsleft@lemm.ee 0 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

Jordan even helped Israel intercept Iranian missiles

And Israel repaid the aid by bombing a Jordanian hospital in Gaza.

So what you're claiming is they first tricked Jordan in helping them intercept those Iranian missiles, and then went back in time a couple of months to spray some bullets towards that hospital without Future-Jordan being aware? That just sounds too incredible for me. Even if they have that technology there are a million better uses for it

And Israel has been expanding into the West Bank since like '67.

Not since the '48 Nakba has Israel been this aggressive with its expansion. This is in no small part thanks to the flood of Ukrainian and Russian refugees serving as fodder for settlements.

Yeah you might want to look at the expansion after the '67 war first before you proclaim a couple of settlements are the most dramatic thing since '48, going to trigger WW3

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago

So what you’re claiming is they first tricked Jordan in helping them intercept those Iranian missiles, and then went back in time a couple of months to spray some bullets towards that hospital without Future-Jordan being aware?

No

[–] Deceptichum@quokk.au 0 points 1 month ago

Probably China over estimating itself in Taiwan and hoping the US is too bogged down in Israel/Ukraine.