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.
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
view the rest of the comments
Just because no one said that about America doesn't mean this one isn't genocide. Just because one nation got away with it in the past does not make this any less genocide than it is.
Most likely the difference is political. No one could stand in the face of the US when it bombed Iraq, but it's 2023 now and we know better. It took decades to build a strong case against genocide in Israel. It's not a word people toss around lightly.
That's right.
However, if incredibly different standards are being used depending on the nation in question, that certainly raises suspicions that people are not actually criticizing the act (a military intervention to combat a terrorist organization), but rather the nation itself.
If two countries can have the exact same experience (a terrorist attack that killed hundreds of its citizens), react to that in the exact same way (a military intervention determined to root out there terrorist organization at any cost, willingly accepting that thousands of civilians are being killed as "collateral damage"), but one gets accused of committing genocide while the other one gets celebrated (remember "Mission Accomplished" or the spontaneous celebrations when bin Laden was killed?), doesn't that warrant the question why identical actions get treated so differently?
America occupied Iraq and Afghanistan for decades. Why wasn't the same "strong case" never built against America? Why are people accusing Israel of genocide for killing thousands, but nobody has ever bothered accusing America of genocide for causing the deaths of hundreds of thousands?
You say that America is to powerful, that nobody could stand in it's way - but that shouldn't have stopped human rights organizations from saying that America is committing genocide, that shouldn't have stopped the UN from accusing America of genocide, that shouldn't have stopped people to demonstrate in the streets with Iraqi or Afghan flags demanding "free Afghanistan."
Why did none of that happen?
I don't know, what do you think?
Because Israel always gets held to a different standard.
Now the question is: why is that?
No idea. You tell me 🙄
Nah, you have a brain, you know why.
No, I'm really puzzled, please enlighten me.
You're really puzzled that a nation founded as a Jewish ethnostate is being held to an entirely different standard than virtually any other nation in the world? And yet you're here, commenting on the Palestinian-Israel conflict?
Ah yes, poor genocidal Israel is being held to "a different standard" after killing more children and journalists within a month than has ever happened in recorded history.
Poor souls, clearly everyone is only criticising them because they are Jewish, not because they are an apartheid ethnostate (and since fucking when are ethnostates a good thing).
I think you are delusional.
You've never actually opened a history book, right?
We've just been over this.
Your argument would hold water if people criticized other nations doing the exact same thing in the exact same way they criticize Israel.
That's not the case - so something has to be different.
I think your hatred for Israel blinds you.
Dude, who wouldn't hate a genocidal and illegitimate apartheid state? What kind of sad fuck does one need to be to not be able to call them out for their actions?
Exactly.
So why are people not calling out Gaza, which is ruled by a terrorist organization that commits mass murders, mass rape, infanticide and terrorism?
Whatever Hamas did, Israel did to Gaza ten times more. I condemn Hamas. Do you condemn Israel?
I condemn any atrocities committed by any side against innocent civilians.
Doesn't matter whether it's Hamas or the IDF or Islamic Jihad or militant settlers in the West Bank or Hezbollah or Huthi rebels firing rockets into Israel.
Can I ask you why you would say that you condemn Hamas rather than saying "I condemn Gaza" - given that Hamas is being treated as the official representation of the people of Gaza, that Hamas has majority approval in the population of Gaza, that the October 7th attackers came from Gaza, that the rocket attacks are being launched from Gaza, etc?
Because I don't think Hamas are democratically chosen in Gaza. Their approval rates actually dropped a shit ton before the attack. Last election was in 2006, right? With a population of 50% children, and all the people Israel killed, how many of those do you think voted in 2006 or are still alive?
Gaza is not a country. It's an open air prison created by Israel. People there lack basic freedom. I will not condemn them for the actions of a single faction. I should have also been more specific, my problems are not the government of Gaza, but the militant side of it. I will not blame a nation kept behind a wall like dogs to rot and die... I will always blame the aggressor who put them there instead.
So again, I want to ask, do you condemn Israel SPECIFICALLY? Yes/no would be good, thanks.
That's true for the majority of nations in the region, though, isn't it?
Nobody elected the House of Saud to rule Saudi Arabia. Nobody democratically chose the House of Al Thani to rule Qatar. Nobody voted on having the House of Maktoum rule Dubai.
Israel withdrew its troops from Gaza, it evacuated Jewish settlers, it tore down illegal Jewish settlements, it handed over Israeli assets to the Palestinians, it effectively completely handed over control.
It didn't open its borders to Gaza, just like Egypt didn't open its borders to Gaza.
If Gaza is an open air prison, isn't Egypt to blame, too?
People there primarily lack basic freedom because they're being ruled by an Islamist terrorist organization that claims for itself to be the official government of Gaza.
But how is that different from other nations like Saudi Arabia or Dubai or Qatar or Bahrain or Abu Dhabi - other than the fact that those totalitarian regimes are swimming in money, and Palestinians aren't (ignoring the fact that Hamas leadership managed to squirrel away $11 billion for itself)?
I find it hard to draw a line, since the official government of Gaza often just echoes the exact same language used by its terrorist wing.
But let's say it were possible to draw a strict line: would you then be willing to do the same for Israel as well? Are you explicitly drawing a distinction between Likud and e.g. Shas or Labor or Hadash-Ta'al? Or between militant settlers building illegal settlements in the West Bank, and people practicing communal socialism in a kibbutz in Israel proper? Or between people who have been demonstrating for months against the Netanyahu government, and people voting for and supporting Netanyahu?
Or do you just not care, and you'll simply condemn all and anything under the label of Israel?
That's REALLY kind of predicated upon your answer to how you would define Israel or draw distinctions between groups within Israel.
But let me ask you: why do you appear to be so unhappy with a position that condemns any and all violence against innocent civilians? Given how many different sides and factions are committing so many different atrocities, isn't that a reasonable position?