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 [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
Well, specifically what do you mean by that?
As a strategy, I'd say that it hasn't worked. I haven't been following the conflict closely, but the only use of outside hard power that I off-the-cuff recall seeing has been:
Some rockets out of Lebanon.
Some long-range weapons that Iran fired -- some of which were shot down by the US, France, UK, Jordan, and Israel.
Like, Israel's caught some negative press, sure, but if you're Hamas, you aren't gonna start a war that you're gonna lose in hard power terms with the goal of getting some words.
And a lot of that criticism, I believe, isn't related to what Hamas would probably want to see. Hamas wants Israel to stop existing. That's not what is being talked about.
In the 1948 Arab-Israeli War, Arab residents of the region tried to eject Jewish settlers, and Jews took the opportunity to kick Arabs out from a lot of the territory entirely. I think that the meaningful criticism mostly surrounds the potential for Israel doing something like a repeat, but involving the Gaza Strip -- if you've got a war that the other guy kicked off, you've got some political impetus to rewrite the situation to be more to your liking. I mean, Hamas doesn't want the conversation to be over whether it's acceptable for Israel to force Gaza residents out into Egypt. That's not a situation where Hamas stands to gain in terms of having the war at all. They want to win something, not have pressure limiting how badly they wind up losing.
Actually it has been working. Everyone is calling Israel evil and calling for recognition of genocide. ICC is summoning Netanyahu and number of countries are recognizing Palestine as a country. This has not happened so far. I know Hamas has only one goal which is destruction of Israel, but am not sure others realize this.
So in summary world is sending a message where terrorizing people, killing hundreds of innocents will get you what you want. More money, recognition and legitimacy. I dread to see what is coming in future.
The ICC is summoning no one. The prosecutor in the case has requested a warrant for Netanyahu, some of his cabinet and Hamas leaders.
So I'm not sure how that shows it's working. You just seem to want Israel to face no repercussions.
I mean, there are some vocal people out there, but I'd give reasonable odds that a lot of them weren't too keen on Israel in the first place. Getting them more worked up doesn't change the situation.
I don't think that the meaningful parties here, the ones who could change the situation, have shown much interest in doing what Hamas would like to see.
What Hamas would need for this to be a successful strategy, I think, is concrete action from outside countries aiming to produce a situation not only more-favorable to Hamas than the pre-war situation, but one so much more favorable that it's worth the costs of the war for Gaza. I haven't seen anything that looks to me like that.
Indeed there are a lot of vocal people here who weren't keen o Israel to begin with. But that shouldn't justify calling deaths of civilians on either side.
I think this is mostly due to Israel's insistence that Hamas must perish. Which is why I guess every ceasefire talks are falling through constantly. There's no future in which Hamas exists that Israel is willing to accept. Sadly a lot of innocent will pay the cost. So whatever happens Israel will double-down on eradicating Hamas while trying to minimize civilian casualties and Hamas will try to survive by doing the opposite.