this post was submitted on 14 Apr 2024
196 points (95.4% liked)

World News

48410 readers
2164 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

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.

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/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 13 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I don't see Iran going so hard that's on the table. The last strike was beautifully calibrated to re-establish deterrence while doing little politically useful damage, for example.

The real goal here for Israel is to bolster Netanyahu's hold on power. Iran would just have to hit back hard enough it makes his situation worse, not better, and they could safely do that without the US umbrella. Of course, it all depends on what "won't support" means. Time for me to read the article.

Edit: Still not clear.

[–] wintermute_oregon@lemm.ee -3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

Other articles I’ve seen were worded differently. They were clear we won’t attack Iran

[–] EinfachUnersetzlich@lemm.ee 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Who are "they" and "we" in this context?

[–] wintermute_oregon@lemm.ee -1 points 1 year ago

We - Americans. They Israel

[–] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

~~Yeah, that's what I worry about. Usually when it comes to the US on Israel "wouldn't support" means "would silently disapprove".~~

[–] wintermute_oregon@lemm.ee -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I have seen nothing to suggest we will cut aid or weapons. Just we won’t directly attack Iran.

I’m pro-Israel but the best way to end the escalation is to stop sending weapons at this point. I don’t see Iran attacking again unless Israel counter attacks.

We need to say stop it and make it clear, you counter attack and we cut aid.

Iran cannot invade Israel. Israel cannot invade Iran. Israel attacked a consulate. They started this and we can stop it

[–] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I thought that said "weren't" for whatever reason. Yeah, that's good then.

I'm not sure other pro-Israel people would call that pro-Israel, but I agree.

[–] wintermute_oregon@lemm.ee 0 points 1 year ago

Allergies. It’s possible there are some typos. My eyes are on fire. Pro-Israel doesn’t mean pro-escalation when they act poorly. We have rules to how the world works and they violated those by attacking the consulate. Now they are trying to escalate a conflict with Iran.

We don’t need a war in the Middle East right now. We can reduce that by reducing aid.

American has become so partisan. You can support something but still have a redline.

[–] trolololol@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago

Give us the facts then and skip the journos opinions