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
Do you consider Hamas the aggressor in the overall context of the Israel- Palestinian conflict?
Not being the aggressor does not give you a licence to murder civilians.
Is it amoral? Yes, for sure 100%. But as a global community, we barely punish those who engage in this kind of tactic, and when we do, it's for some kind of political theater. More Palestinian civilians will die in this conflict by a factor, if you're going to criticize Hamas for this, I'd like to see the same standard applied to IDF.
I'm not saying either side is innocent, but you cannot compare this to the invasion of Ukraine since Ukraine does not deliberately target Russian civilians.
Wow. I apologize for the confusion. I absolutely do not believe these two situations are comparable. My bad.
Do you think only one side can be responsible in a conflict?
Sometimes yes. I know very little about the Israelo-palestinian confilct (only what I read from news outlet) so I can't say anything for sure here.
But more generally, in history, there have been plenty of conflicts that were one side's responsability: Ukraine's invasion, WW2, colonie's independance "wars"... IMO, when you defend yourself from an agression, you are not responsible for the conflict.
In this case, I tend to agree with other commentors - Israel seems to have been increasingly oppressive and brutal at least in the past 2 decades, and you can only push people so far before they react.
How they react matters though. If Palestinians brutally murdered Israeli children, I think we'd all agree there's absolutely no justification for that, no matter what rings wrongs Israel has committed.
Palestine has every right to fight back against Israel, but not the civilians. When a country kills your civilians, you solve absolutely nothing by retaliation killing their civilians. Your enemy is their military and government.
I firmly believe it is impossible to push someone to a point where their attacking innocent people can be justified.
No one is denying that.
Israel has left Gaza in 2005 and only received missiles and terrorist attacks in return. Although no side is mother Teresa in this conflict, one is is definitely less mother Teresa than the other.
Israel continues to expand their occupation of Palestinian land, though. Do you think Palestinians in Gaza have no stake in the well-being of other Palestinians in East Jerusalem and the West Bank?
They're only bringing about their own ruin. Fuck, if they actually wanted to do something, then be human fucking beings and adults and come to solve agreement/ compromise. Israel isn't going anywhere. They only stand to lose more and more by not coming to the table but instead being violent terrorists. They can keep killing for hundreds of years. They'll end up with even less and accomplish nothing.
Colonizers are always responsible for any violence that follows.
So if Native Americans fired rockets on e.g. Corpus Christi, Texas, they would have no responsibility at all for this action?
I am not denying the responsibility of "the colonizers", I think other people can also have some responsibility.
They'd be justified.
The point is to not condemn the oppressed without regard for their oppression.
So just to be clear, if a Native American went up to you, told you that he was going to shoot you because your ancestors stole his land, and then murdered you, you have no qualms about this?
I'm not a colonizer.
Neither are most people living today. Their ancestors were. And as a Westerner, you're benefiting from the colonizers' actions even if you're an immigrant. By your logic, their murder of you would be justified.
You can't blame descendants for what their ancestors did, but you can ask them to share the wealth they own because of their ancestors with you.
When did the colonization of the Americas end? I must have missed it.
I'm not an immigrant. Not really sure what you're trying to say.
There's no political will to make up for past and ongoing crimes against Native Americans. In a democracy that makes the common people complicit, no?
Where in this thread did someone "condemn the oppressed without regard for their oppression"?
https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/comment/3820195
They're not being oppressed if they choose to live the why they do. At some point the drug addict needs to come to terms with the fact they are the ones causing their self harm. They could compromise and stop their killing/ bloodshed to build a peace but they don't. Continuously attacking is one of the most dumbass moves they keep making. I'm out of sympathy and patience for these idiots. Keep crying but do nothing. Other parts of the Arab world have moved on and made peace with Israel. The Palestinians only have excuses and children to sacrifice at this point.
I'm down with blaming the British
Well, that goes without saying.
He said aggressor.
And idoubledo did not say aggressor. So what do we gain by fixating on this word?