view the rest of the comments
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
Before Oct. all the apartheid collective punishment was absolutely war crimes, and I'd love to see Bibi and many Likud members at the ICC for their crimes. They can still argue that Gaza was an operational location for Hamas, but I think and hope they'd lose that argument.
But after October... Hamas officially made Gaza a theater of war and any target they co-locate in loses legal protections. And when I see 57% resident support for Hamas there (their elected governement), I steuggle and mostly feel awful for the 43% who don't support them.
I am with you that two wrongs don't make a right. Or in this region's case, an endless cycle of thousands of years of violence don't make a right.
But I also believe strongly that Israel has a right to defend itself. The current mess is Hamas's design. I don't know what people want Israel to do, take the terrorist attack that killed 1200+... just take it on the chin and go "oh well"? When any honest person knows no nation on earth would do that.
Take my upvote, a rare one on the worldnews group.
If you replace every occurrence of hamas with nethanyahu your comments makes half sense
I don't see a difference between Bibi and his partner Hamas. Never have. And I hate Likud.
The main difference is the power dynamic. One of those groups has all of the power, including the backing of the US military, while the other is a reaction to oppression.
Only one of those two parties has the power to end all of this right now.
Fully agree Israel has a right to defend itself but what it seems to be doing now is more akin to invasive eradication than defense. They are on the offensive. Why does 1.2K dead in Israel justify 18K dead, hospitals targeted and destroyed, and a forced emigration of citizens in Gaza?
If a terrorist organization ruled the US I'm sure more than half the country would vote in support either out of blind nationalism or fear. Putin's got >90% support, eh? I don't think it's fair to say any recent election in Gaza is unbiased. It would also seem not so unreasonable that to the people of Gaza, Hamas looks more friendly than Israel recently.
Because when Hamas co-locates out of them they lose protected status.
If Hamas looks friendly to you, I desperately urge you to research some history outside of your bubble. I'm floored.
Pompous know it nothing
Thanks for your personal attack! Have a great day.
If I could..
After reading past your first paragraph, I'm not sure I want it from you.
Hamas is a reaction to the mess, not its "designer."
Said every apologist for terroism and terrorists.
Yes, terrorism is one potential reaction/outcome of brutal occupation and oppression. There is a difference between explaining something and condoning it.