this post was submitted on 05 Nov 2023
88 points (90.7% liked)

Ask Lemmy

26700 readers
2801 users here now

A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions

Please don't post about US Politics.


Rules: (interactive)


1) Be nice and; have funDoxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them


2) All posts must end with a '?'This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?


3) No spamPlease do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.


4) NSFW is okay, within reasonJust remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either [email protected] or [email protected]. NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].


5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions. If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email [email protected]. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.


Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.

Partnered Communities:

Tech Support

No Stupid Questions

You Should Know

Reddit

Jokes

Ask Ouija


Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

I'm in the US.

I haven't discerned a pattern, by the media, in the titling of the horror currently underway.

I've seen Al Jazeera use both phrasings. I haven't determined that other media sites are hardlining their terminology either, but I notice the difference as I browse.

Maybe it doesn't mean anything, but these days people seem extra sensitive about names.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] zepheriths 56 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Hamas is elected via a minority of Gaza as a result Hamas doesn't act with the will of the majority and calling this the Israeli-Gaza war is disingenuous to the people of Gaza.

[–] [email protected] 25 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Hamas were elected in January 2006 and have refused new elections since.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

The average person in Gaza was somewhere between "way too young to vote" and "didn't exist yet" the last time an election was held

[–] [email protected] 18 points 1 year ago

And as half the population of Gaza is under 18, they for sure didn't vote for them.

On top of that, Nethanyahu has greatly supported Hamas and sabotaged moderate political alternatives

[–] Psychodelic 5 points 1 year ago

Isn't Gaza losing more people to this so called war than either Hamas or Israel?

This feels like saying there was a fight between two people and not mentioning that the biggest fighter only seemed to really be attacking a third smaller, less-aged person for some odd reason.

[–] [email protected] 31 points 1 year ago (14 children)

gaza is the location, hamas are the terrorists that govern it

load more comments (14 replies)
[–] weeeeum 22 points 1 year ago (3 children)

To me it's who's trying to kill who. Hamas (the group) wants to destroy Israel, Israel in turn wants to destroy Hamas, not Gaza (this part is actually very subjective)

[–] silicon_reverie 8 points 1 year ago (7 children)

It's a good way to frame things. As an outsider, the subjectivity of the IDF's target is why I wonder if people are choosing one term for the war over another. Some see the intentional bombing of refugee camps, ambulances, and aid convoys as targeting the civilians of Gaza in what amounts to a systematic extermination of Palestinians. The casualty numbers seem to heavily favor that interpretation. So could this be one reason for some news outlets to frame the conflict as Israel vs Gaza itself? Or is the word choice more nuanced than that, given how it seems as though the two names are being used interchangeably on both sides of the line?

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago

Israel is definitely attacking Gaza, but Gaza isn't an entity with the ability to fight back. Thus 'Israel–Gaza war' is a false equivalence.

Similarly, 'Israel–Hamas war' is troublesome because both are also attacking people not part of the conflict.

Maybe it's 'a series of Israel & Hamas terrorist attacks in the region of Gaza' 🤷

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Whoever thinks Israel purposefully targets civilians ignores how Hamas operates. It has been documented for years by the UN and human rights organizations that they use civilians as shields.

Getting Palestinian civilians dead is part of their strategy.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Hamas is holding hostages and Israel’s deciding to kill those hostages.

[–] TheBananaKing 17 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It's a nice bit of doublespeak.

Imagine if the UK started carpet-bombing major cities in Northern Ireland, and called it UK vs the IRA, as opposed to UK vs NI.

See, we're not killing people, we're killing terrorists. It's fine, stop complaining, just let us do it.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

One might even say its how language works nowadays... Newspeak if you will

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Hamas is the organization that runs gaza. Theyre the largest political party in Palestine, they collect taxes, and they have an army. Imagine if the US Army was on the election ballot, and ran the East Coast.

Its essentially the same thing, just "Hamas/Israel" reminds you of what Hamas does, and "Gaza/Israel" is trying to erase that.

[–] Earthwormjim91 23 points 1 year ago (1 children)

They have not allowed an election to be held in 17 years. They’re no more a “political party” than the Taliban.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yeah thats true. Political group maybe? Not exactly sure how to label them.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It matters very little. It's performative, trying to justify the conflict by framing it one way or another. The reality on the ground will remain the same no matter what the media calls it. Ultimately, it will be historians that name the war.

The combatants are Israel and Hamas. The location is Gaza. Conclude from that what you will as far the "proper" name for the conflict.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago

The combatants are the IDF and Hamas. The location is Gaza. But if the ones dying aren't soldiers but rather ordinary civilians, and if those civilian deaths aren't tragic accidents but rather the intended outcomes of the attacks, some might believe this isn't a war between militaries. This is a slaughter of populations. This is terror. This is genocide.

Hamas attempted such an act on Israel. But right now, the IDF is bombing refugee camps, targeting ambulances, blocking humanitarian aid convoys, and murdering men, women, and children - civilians - by the literal thousands.

Israel-Hamas, Israel-Gaza, it's all performative. You're right. But there's a lot of subtext behind each performance. Is this a war against a small terrorist cell, or an extermination of a territory and all those who call it home? I can't speak to the motives of newscasters using either wording, but just like OP, I do wonder what they're trying to convey.

[–] chemical_cutthroat 5 points 1 year ago

The first is ideologies, the second is location.

[–] Etterra 1 points 1 year ago

Seems to be like a more accurate description would be the Israeli perpetrated Gazan genocide. Calling it a war is like taking a flamethrower to your backyard because you stepped on a nettle and then calling it lawn care

[–] masquenox 1 points 11 months ago

"Israel-Hamas War" vs "Israel-Gaza War"?

Both are pure propaganda - Israel, and the western countries that backs it, wants to pretend that this is some "new" conflict and not the very same one Israel has been waging non-stop against Palestinians since 1949.

load more comments
view more: next ›