28
"they're not in al-Shifa, they're actually in this other hospital!"
they're actually in multiple
The whole argument about whether they are or aren't in any given spot is moot. Israel isn't differentiating between Hamas and civilians, and none of this is an actual defensive operation.
If Netanyahu wanted to actually protect Israelis, the obvious ways to do so are to:
- Staff the Gaza boarder crossings. They were largely unmanned, as they troops were relocated to assist in illegally annexing the West Bank.
- Replace Hamas. Netanyahu repeatedly supported Hamas because he said that their rule in Gaza prevented the PLO from negotiating for peace.
- Stop trying to ignite terrorism in the West Bank. The whole point of all of this is to TRY to create violence that justifies land theft. He's literally not trying to keep Israeli's safe.
- Just negotiate peace. He's been in charge for nearly a generation, and his primary legacy has been eroding civil rights for both Israelis AND Palestinians.
It's just maddening how we get focused on the trees instead of the forest: Netanyahu has been an authoritarian war criminal for decades, and under his control this situation will never lead to peace or security, because that's never been the goal.
and how do you get the hostages back and launch a counteroffensive because Hamas broke the ceasefire that was in place?
I don't understand what you're asking. Can you rephrase it?
Israel's extreme response is because Hamas killed roughly one thousand innocent lives and also captured civilian and military hostages. How do you get them back while responding to the attack?
You pick up the phone and negotiate a hostage exchange.
You say, meet us at this spot tomorrow with 10 of the oldest and youngest hostages you've got and we'll do the same. If it goes well, we'll talk about doing another exchange the next day.
That's what Hamas wants. That's what they've usually taken and returned hostages for. Hamas released two hostages so far in the weeks this has been going on. How come someone negotiated for 2 and then stopped there?
Hamas:
“No thanks. We want a war that maximizes civilian deaths for the purpose of creating a larger conflict in the region so as to bring support to the eradication of the Zionist State.”
What's crazy about this is that regardless of whether we agree on whether Hamas would participate in a hostage exchange, you're still acknowledging that the current response benefits them, and risks a spiral of violence that draws in the whole region or world.
I believe Hamas would agree to a small hostage exchange in a slow and drawn out manner. In the past, Israel literally used an exchange rate of 1000-1 for prisoner swaps. Hamas knows the value of hostages and won’t settle for anything close to proportional swaps. They also need to retain the hostages in order to prolong the conflict and appeal to sympathetic neighboring countries for assistance.
Netanyahu and Hamas both benefit from open conflict and neither believe in a two state solution. It’s a recipe for disaster. The best case scenario is that Israel manages to cripple Hamas, Netanyahu is removed from office, and then a new Israeli Government helps to rebuild Gaza. The worst case scenario is a broad conflict in the middle-east with nuclear weapons in the mix.
Netanyahu:
“Oh good, I wanted a reason to use the military.”
You’re both right.
Nobody is the good guy here.
By trading them in for Palestinian kids and women rotting away in Israeli jails.
Also, reform the judiciary branch so Palestinians aren't judged by 1 Israeli judge with a conviction rate of 98%. Maybe a council of three judges: Israeli, Palestinian and Christian. And throw an atheist in there too.
Counteroffensive Israel fucked up that plan the minute they also went bloodlust and revenge massacre. It's too late now with so many killed. You can expect a second Hamas with a different name to attack Israel within 15/20ish years max. Unless you change.
Normally cooler heads should have prevailed but they're stuck with Netanyahu.
You should have enforced your borders, so nothing gets in. At the same time, you should have tightened and upped diplomatic relations with everyone else in the region instead of alienating and threatening them. Chances were, they would have helped you get the Hamas military wing labeled as terrorists in the region and made no place safe for them. No one wants to see dead civilians. (Granted this doesn't count for Hezbollah).
Negotiating a deal for the hostage exchanges and knowing Hamas, it would have taken months or years maybe, but most of them would have made it out alive. And this will give you the time you'll need.
Use your intelligence services to get every name and face of the Hamas that killed civilians.Once your list is complete, then you start hunting them down. Just like the Mossad did with ex-nazi's. No matter how long it takes.
Make a long-term plan to get the Palestinians not on your side really, but on their OWN side. Free from Israel AND Hamas. Give them a better life, let them prosper, live their lives, raise their kids and grow old. You don't want them and they don't want you, so a 2 state is the only solution. With each country having its own governance.
Once people value their lives and families and have something to live for, they won't be sucked into this rage, hate and hopelessness and join something that'll be just another Hamas.
Normal people don't join terrorists/freedom fighter causes, desperate people do.
I'm sure that's why the BBC found a planted gun in the MRI room of al-Shifa...
A planted gun? As in the IDF put it there?
Ignore the user who posted it, but this was recently aired on BBC: https://x.com/MarioNawfal/status/1725581508340015530?s=20
The IDF claims that, between their first video through the MRI room and when they led the BBC through it, they found another gun and put it in the MRI room.
We can take a step back and ask why guns made of metal were anywhere near an MRI, but we can also ask where the IDF supposedly "found" the original guns.
Also of note is that the laptop shown at the end of the "uncut" al-Shifa video... Uses an Israeli power plug and displays an IDF soldier. The IDF later took the video down and re-uploaded it with that picture blurred.
I'm not buying anything the BBC says regarding this conflict. They have repeatedly had to apologise for flat-out lying during their reporting.
As BBC News covered initial reports that Israeli forces had entered Gaza’s main hospital, we said that “medical teams and Arab speakers” were being targeted. This was incorrect and misquoted a Reuters report. We should have said IDF forces included medical teams and Arabic speakers for this operation. We apologise for this error, which fell below our usual editorial standards. The correct version of events was broadcast minutes later and we apologised for the mistake on air later in the morning.
Oh, but there's even more. In 2004, the former BBC Director of News commissioned a report into the impartiality of the BBC reporting on conflicts in the Middle East, particularly Israel-Palestine. The BBC spent £330,000 in legal costs (not including staff or VAT) contesting again and again the findings of the report, themselves refusing to publically release the report's findings. Fighting in court repeatedly against activists for almost a decade to withhold the report findings is extremely suspicious.
We can take a step back and ask why guns made of metal were anywhere near an MRI, but we can also ask where the IDF supposedly “found” the original guns.
Because without electricity, the MRI is off? Hospitals don't tend to use MRIs during extraordinary crises due to power consumption.
Also of note is that the laptop shown at the end of the “uncut” al-Shifa video… Uses an Israeli power plug and displays an IDF soldier. The IDF later took the video down and re-uploaded it with that picture blurred.
Yes, in the video, they say that it was one of their captured soldiers. As for the power plug, I don't see what that proves? The soldiers plugged in the laptop to view its contents? Hamas had an Israeli power bank? The main issue is that there were guns inside the hospital, which violates Article 19 of the Geneva Convention, which means that the hospital loses its immunity--that's the problem worth noting here.
The IDF published the first video and the BBC published the second video. You can verify the presence of an additional gun yourself.
That means that we know the IDF intentionally placed another gun behind the MRI machine and calls into question whether the other guns were placed there by the IDF as well.
The IDF is framing it as an uncut, first look inside the hospital (that is, before the IDF got a chance to mess around and manipulate evidence). That's clearly untrue, which is why the IDF took the video down and blurred the laptop.
Looking forward to more hilariously staged videos.
this post was submitted on 17 Nov 2023
28 points (75.9% liked)
World News
38978 readers
1412 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