I'm struggling with everything on this article. On the one hand anytime a hostage has been freed, that's good news. On the other, at what cost. 40 000 dead. That's the easy stat. Amputations are also incredibly high. Most of them kids and performed without anesthetic. This is the first time the IDF has rescued hostages. So I'm sitting here with my initial feeling of 'oh, that's good news' ,and then I think about the wider picture and context, and it doesn't seem so good anymore.
this post was submitted on 08 Jun 2024
0 points (NaN% liked)
World News
38729 readers
2420 users here now
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.
-
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
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
And half a dozen months ago they could have had a ceasefire to have them released, along with the ones that STILL aren't released.
"we don't negotiate with terrorists" and that stance is "non-negotiable." If only these terrorists would just stop and do what we want.
So you think we should negotiate with terrorists? Give them something to make them stop what they're doing today, and they definitely won't commit more terrorism later in the hope of getting more things later.
Maybe just stick to eating ass, Adam.
Spain did successfully negotiate with ETA, and there is no more ETA today. Colombia's government negotiated with the FARC, and the immense majority of the FARC have gotten peacefully integrated in their country's parliamentary system.
If I looked into those organizations, I would bet they were probably at the point of talking reasonable concessions, and probably resembled a proper government, albeit radical or militant.
Hamas is not at that point.
Hamas is not at that point.
So, how many bombs still need to be dropped on Palestine to get them there?
That would require Hamas to care about Palestinians. Their leadership is a bunch of wealthy shitheads living it up in the UAE. They hold a dictatorship over Palestine and refuse to have elections.
To actually get Hamas there, you probably need to target the rich people giving orders.
Maybe the Palestinians themselves devalue their own lives compared to Israeli lives. Just look at when they agreed to a ceasefire and traded hostages for prisoners: each hostage was worth multiple prisoners released by Israel.
This is also noticeable when Hamas use their own population as human shields, exemplified by when they hide their soldiers and weapons in hospitals and schools. Or when they blend in with civilians on purpose by not using any combatant uniform like the IDF do. They really don't care for their own civilians. These are only useful for acting as human shields and, if they're killed or injured, strike a pose for NatGeo-style photos in their attempts to appeal to western sentiment.
Maybe the Palestinians themselves devalue their own lives compared to Israeli lives.
You should just stop right there. If your logic depends on saying "they actually don't value their lives as much as others" then please stop and ask "what the hell is wrong with yourself?". People who think like this probably value their life least of all. /s
When I see how easily the Hamas uses their own population as sacrifices, I have doubts they really value their lives. Remember: the Gazan population elected the Hamas with more than 60% of the votes. It's not too farfetched to say a significant part of the Gazans think like the Hamas in terms of sacrifice, and by extension, how they value their lives.
Just know that this accusation you make is a confession of your views and you should investigate what that says about yourself on your own.
You don't believe me? Those who are immersed in islamist ideology think quite differently from people of christian heritage (even if they're not christian themselves, but they inherit a set of values). For the islamists, self-sacrifice if a good thing if done for a holy cause. That's what motivated the plane terrorists from 9/11: their religion made them believe that what they were doing was just. And as a reward, they'd have the company of multiple virgins in paradise.
In the western countries, due to the inherited christain values, people value life and reject self-sacrifice. Suicide is considered a sin, because the person is throwing away the body given by God, which is a holy thing. That's why the USA and other west-aligned countries pressure Israel to preserve the life of innocent Gazans: that's what best aligns with their moral values. If a bank is being robbed with the use of hostages, the police will do its best to preserve the life of the innocent, even negotiate with the robbers if necessary.
That's a way of thinking that's the polar opposite of the muslims. For them, if the cause is holy, self-sacrifice is allowed and encouraged. They're indoctrinated in these values since they're children. What the Hamas is doing is exploiting the western values for their benefit. That's why they took hostages, because they knew it would be a huge leverage against Israel. And that's why they're always flaunting the number of casualities (which are obviously inflated, because it helps their goals), in an attempt to reach the western countries' moral values and turn it into pressure for Isreal accept an indefinite ceasefire agreement, even a bad one.
Consider this: if the roles were reversed: Gaza had immense millitary strenght and Israel was the poor country, the Gazans would invade Isreal in a heartbeat and would care much less about Isrealli innocent civilians: for them the cause is holy, so it is justified to kill indiscriminately.
... And massacred a bunch of Palestinians but they're not white so who cares amirite???
There is a majority of Mizrahi jews (ie: not white) in Israel as compared to "white" jews, mostly from European countries.
So your comment is fucking stupid.
Great news. Not sure if genocide of the Gaza population is necessary for that.
Holocaust? Wasn't 'genocide' drastic enough anymore?
I know right? I've always thought calling it genocide a flagrant exxageration. When I think of genocide, it comes to mind images of some evil dictator using poison gas in a population, chemical weapons, an atomic bomb, etc.
To be a true genocide, it must be an indiscriminate elimination of the population of a nation or an ethnicity. It's not the case of Isreal, which is targeting specifically the militants of Hamas. Just because there are civilian colateral damage in the process does not make it a genocide automatically, because the civilians are not what the IDF is after. They're after Hamas militants. Gaza has a very high population density, and the Hamas militants don't use any uniform to differentiate them from the civilians. They do it on purpose to make the IDF hesitant, and get them by surprise. They hide themselves in buildings that they know the IDF would be hesitant to attack, like hospitals, schools and mosques. They play dirty, and then cry genocide when the IDF respond to their missiles sent to Israel's territory.
I'm glad you're the UN with the internationally agreed definition.
Oh. Wait.
When I think of genocide, it comes to mind images of some evil dictator using poison gas in a population, chemical weapons, an atomic bomb, etc.
That's just lack of education on your part, though. Neither the Cambodian Genocide nor the Rwandan Genocide would be a genocide according to you, but in reality these were two of the worst genocides in the last 50 years.
Come to think of it, neither would the Bosnian Genocide according to you, because it mainly targeted males for execution.
then cry genocide
The people who are "crying genocide" are those of us in the international community who know what a geenocide is, including experts in international law.