241
Families of hostages storm Knesset meeting after Netanyahu rejects Hamas offer
(www.theguardian.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 22 Jan 2024
241 points (96.9% liked)
World News
39167 readers
2183 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.
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
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Just fyi for other people reading, proximity shielding is questionable and unlike classical or basically real human shielding.
Here, some more Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_shield
Sorry, not really replying to you in particular, but it's hard to let this one slip. Proximity shielding is horse-shit invented by hateful people to justify killing civilians. Israel demonstrates a classic use of this.
I agree human shields could be used to cover up war crimes.
On the other hand, possibly does not equal probability.
Which do you find more credible?
Every single time something explodes, there's Hamas to say "no members of Hamas, no weapons, and no tunnels were present at the location. Everyone killed was an innocent civilian." Obviously you must agree: that cannot possibly be true every single time. Because of that, I don't give much credibility to Hamas's self-serving statements about who was killed and who was not.
Israel's explanations are at least plausible.
I really wish you would stop saying such illogical things.
There being X number of Hamas members (which I never denied and I doubt anyone here did) doesn't justify killing tens of civilians. You seem to think Palestinian life is worthless.
I actually believe that every life is important and equal, that every death diminishes us all. I just disagree that there is any moral obligation to not engage a valid military target when:
A. The civilians present are there as part of the enemy's formal strategy of using human shields; and
B. There is a reasonable warning.
You show me where the dead civilians were not either voluntary or involuntary human shields, where there was no warning, and where there was no valid military target, and I'll join you in calling it a war crime.
Whenever someone has tried, with literally thirty seconds of research the key details of what they've claimed falls apart. Mostly, there have been warnings before every bombing.
Not sure about those tank shells today at the training center. As I said, if not, I'll call it a war crime right there with you. War is awful and every war kills innocent people. I also believe a little war with Hamas is better than a massive war with Iran, which is where we will end up if the civilized world just lets Hamas and similar ideologies start having their own countries as a reward for making effective use of human shields.
Can you really say my logic is flawed? Seems nonfalacious and straightforward. I can see how it sounds calous, but that's emotion, not logic.