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
What is the alternative?
There doesn't need to be an alternative to killing children, just don't.
But there are two options: kill the terrorist, or don't kill the terrorist. Your choice is to let terrorists win, if they bring enough kids.
That would be exactly my choice. One terrorist is not worth blowing up children over. Wait for a better opportunity that doesn't definitely have collateral damage. A terrorist does not "win" if he lives a bit longer. Nobody is "winning" anything in Gaza anyways right now.
Besides, blowing up children is a win for the terrorists.
What I hear from your comment is "let's let them kill more Israeli kids".
What I hear from your comment is "let's let them kill more Palestinian kids".
You see? Just two options.
I mean if the person you're talking to only believes in two options then you are correct and they are wrong. End of discussion. But there is always a 3rd option for those not talking: receive with empathy.
The thought of people killing Israeli kids makes us upset, to the point where we might consider killing other kids if it means rooting out evil. It seems like you're not so much saying the option is between Israelites and Palestinians, but it's to kill or be killed?
It is exactly that. Your third option seems too abstract to me. Would you mind clarifying what it means practically?
The third option is what I just demonstrated. Instead of me imposing my own feelings on the matter (pro-cease fire) I received what you were saying as an expression of a need and I try to understand it. Being able to understand this as "kill or be killed" gets more to the point, but I'm no Jesus so this is about as far as I can go... For now.
Have you considered rational thought instead?
Nah, that's just the a false dichotomy that's been used to manipulate public opinion.
This whole thing has to be address via Counter Insurgency methods, but that would mean actually listenning to the Palestinians, let them have enough that they don't want to lose it and not commit random acts of violence and land theft against them, so that the Insurgency Movement which is Hamas has little or no popular support at which point it becomes very easy to find and kill the terrorists.
However Israel has a far right government (I would even say Fascist), so it's all about Strength and thanks in a large extent to the support of the likes of the US (plus countries like France, the UK and Germany) they have the means and the "unwavering support" to be as violent as they feel like, hence their choice of purelly violent, no moral considerations (ultimatelly, genocidal), ways of "solving" the problem.
What they want is to "kill all Jews". We've already passed that.
They want to kill whoever is stealing their lands and killing their people, they just happened to be Zionists.
If Israel was of a different religion, or even atheists, the result would have been the same. People fight for their land and their freedom against occupiers regardless of the occupier's religion.
When Ukraine "steals" land from Donetsk People Republic, you support the "stealers", but with Israel you change your opinion to the opposite. How come?
What nonsense are you talking about?
Oh, sorry, I didn't realize you support Kremlin. No more questions.
Yep, that worked well before.
So it's about settlements all of a sudden? People who yell* "kill all Jews" just want to settle.
*not just yell, they actually tried
Yeah, it's about Israel occupying Palestine. Breaking news for you, I imagine.
Yes I will. And you too, I imagine, as most of the people.
Fortunately, there are some very good historical examples of how and why you're very wrong. Maybe you're not the best example of what one would do under such circumstances.
— Most of the grass is green.
— You're very wrong. Here are some examples of yellow, and even red grass.
If you choose to kill a terrorist leader despite them having a bunch of civilians and children around, are you meaningfully different from them?
In this scenario, is that terrorist leader who is hiding among civilians from his country actively killing civilians from my country? If so, it sounds like you're suggesting the moral choice is to sacrifice my own people to save his, while they continue to wage war against my civilians. Bonkers.
Nope, never said anything close to that. There are myriad ways to kill a terrorist without sinking to their level.
Name one.
Just go shoot him. What's the matter? Can't do that without losing some soldiers? How many children is a soldier worth?
How many foreign citizens children is a soldier from your country worth? Let's not pretend any country sees all lives as equal. The US for example uses Dron strikes for strategic targets even tho they've harmed civilians countless times. They see avoiding American deaths as better than killing a couple civilians.
"What about the US" isn't a valid excuse. Just admit that you're down with genocide and stop trying to justify it.
I'm not justifying it. I'm stating you're phrasing is missing perspective.
That's actually a valid question. There are calculations for almost every human life.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Value_of_life
Damn, killing kids can actually prevent terrorism. I guess all these school shooters are the real heros.
Lets put it this way, if the Hamas leaders were hidden in a Tel-Aviv hospital filled with Israelis, would the IDF bomb it?
Fuck yeah they would. israel killed at least 122 of their own civilians by just mass firing their tanks into kibbutzes to kill a few Hamas soldiers. They knew there were hostages and still fired at the buildings.
Unless Hamas is literally standing behind Netanyahu that man will kill anyone. He does not care about israeli civilians the same way Putin throws Russians into the meat grinder.
This is a genocide orchestrated by Netanyahu to stay in power. The exact same strat Putin is using in Ukraine.
You have a point. Just as I finished posting that comment I actually started wondering...
I mean... they kind of already did that in the October 7th attack. They would rather their people be dead than be used to release Palestinians imprisoned without trial.
Maybe it depends on the type of Israeli too. There is a lot of inter-Israeli racism and Arab-Israelis which were historically set near borders to act as buffers, aren't as valued as their European counterparts.
Not creating the conditions where extremist groups thrive.