this post was submitted on 17 Dec 2023
228 points (89.3% liked)

News

23408 readers
5323 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. 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. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] QuaternionsRock 5 points 11 months ago (2 children)

67% civilian casualties is a universally abhorrent figure, and shows a complete disregard for the value of innocent human lives.

Also, mass murder is generally defined as the killing of 3 or more persons at a time. Not exactly a high bar.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

67% civilian casualties is a universally abhorrent figure

Is it? I mean civilians getting killed is bad no matter the number, and I'm not denying Hamas soldiers committed war crimes, but for example in Iraq the US coalition's percentage was 77%.

[–] QuaternionsRock 2 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

Because everyone is so happy that Iraq happened? Here, fixed:

77% civilian casualties is also a universally abhorrent figure

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Yeah I'm not saying 67% civilians is a good number, only that it's a normal number.

[–] QuaternionsRock 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Ah, I see what you’re saying now. Unfortunately yes, 67% it isn’t particularly out of the ordinary. Perhaps I’m in a bit of a bubble, but I think/hope the vast majority of people consider this historical “normal” to be “abhorrent” these days. Such would be a positive change for society.

Perhaps I should also clarify that by “universal”, I don’t mean “everyone agrees”, but rather “regardless of the circumstances”. I included this to suggest that I think the civilian casualty rate in Palestine is also abhorrent, and I don’t think the October 7 attacks justify it in the slightest.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Perhaps I’m in a bit of a bubble, but I think/hope the vast majority of people consider this historical “normal” to be “abhorrent” these days.

That's true. Normally I'd talk about not even close to all the civilian casualties are Hamas-inflicted, but mostly I wanted to point out that the popular Israeli narrative of "they entered our villages and indiscriminately killed our people in a brutal terrorist attack" is wrong even going by the 67% alone.

[–] Linkerbaan -1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

My man you better not start reading about American civilian casualty figures. And ESPECIALLY not about israel ones.

Also most israeli civilians are IDF reservists so they are in fact uncounted soldiers. The IDF just called up 300.000 "innocent civilians" to commit genocide in Gaza? lmao.

The best number is how little children were killed in compared to the total amount of people.

[–] QuaternionsRock 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

My man you better not start reading about American civilian casualty figures. And ESPECIALLY not about israel ones.

Let me guess, I would find more universally abhorrent figures? What exactly do you think “universally” means?

Also most israeli civilians are IDF reservists

Where the fuck did you get that from?

[–] Linkerbaan -1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Do you think Netanyahu just summoned 300.000 reservists out of thin air to commit genocide in Gaza with?

Those "innocent israeli civilians" are now magically members of the IDF.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conscription_in_Israel

In contrary, only a small percentage of Palestinians are part of Hamas and they have no conscription in Gaza.

[–] QuaternionsRock 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I don’t follow your argument. So civilians that go through compulsory military service are not civilians? Korea, Vietnam, and Denmark have basically no civilian population? Or is it wartime conscription that you have a problem with? Is every American citizen an attack target because they theoretically could be conscripted as a response to the attack?

[–] Linkerbaan -3 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

If they are IDF conscripts they're not civilians. Don't even dare to compare israeli colonists to Koreans.

If people went into Hamas military service and become a "Hamas reservist" then you wouldn't even doubt to call those people terrorists.

There are actual israelis that rejected IDF service and even people that advocates for peace that were killed which is very sad. But the majority are military.

[–] QuaternionsRock 1 points 11 months ago

If they are IDF conscripts they're not civilians. Don't even dare to compare israeli colonists to Koreans.

Hah, why not? Their conscription system works the same way, if you haven’t noticed.