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 [email protected]
Politics [email protected]
World Politics [email protected]
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
view the rest of the comments
If they're actually telling the truth about 'precise military targets,' and I'm not confident of that, this is not as bad as I had feared.
Not good, but not as bad as I had feared, which was a much more massive retaliation.
Now we just have to hope things don't keep escalating.
The genocide in Gaza and the invasion in Lebanon were "limited ground incursions" so I don't trust Israels wording here either.
Like I said, I'm not confident of that. But I'm not confident of anything Iran says either. I don't trust Israel and I don't trust Iran. Neither government has given me reason to.
I wonder if we will ever find out the truth about anything either of them have done so far in this particular recent conflict they're involved in with each other.
Iran made it clear that if the attack was contained, than they would let it be. If not, then they retaliate.
If they do intend to retaliate, I don't expect it happening before the election. They know these kinds of things help Trump and the last thing they want is a Trump presidency.
My problem is that I don't trust Israel's claim that this was precise and I also don't trust Iran's claim that if it is contained, they won't retaliate.
Because I don't trust either government at all.
Trust them to serve their own self interests.
Israel's interest is escalating and prolonging the conflict to grab more land and kill more Arabs and Persians.
Iran's interest is de-escalation since they're in no shape to fight a war with Israel, and the US.
You could be right in general, but you should know that Iranians are not Arabs and they hate being mistaken for Arabs.
http://www.us-iran.org/resources/2016/10/21/myth-vs-fact-persians-and-arabs
Forgot about that lol, thanks for reminding me. I've edited my comment.
I don't think they said they would not retaliate against a limited attack though that might end up being the case depending on the nature and scale of the damages.
They did say it.
They made the terms clear. Now we see if Israel abides by them. My guess is no.
Different statements were made in the past month:
Iran's General Staff of the Armed Forces said in a statement carried by state media that any Israeli response would be met with "vast destruction" of Israeli infrastructure.
I believe the Iranian ambassador said something of the same vein at the UN security council meeting as well. Either way I still agree that they likely wont respond to this type of limited strike as things currently stand.
At least for now, it looks like Iran is downplaying the attacks, which is a good sign for de-escalation.
Sorry to say that but escalation is the only way to stop Israel and it's genocidal campain
Stopping a genocide by potentially killing far more people than the genocide is killing doesn't seem like a very good alternative.
When in history a colonized power was stopped without ton of civilians dying because of the colonizer refusal for peace? Are you telling me that for example that India shouldn't have resisted the British empire because 100 millions Indian died? I wish there was a world where peace happen without sacrificing a single person, but that's not the reality.
When did I say there shouldn't be resistance?
Resistance to genocide and an escalating war between two nuclear powers are very different things.
If you think Iran actually gives a shit about Palestinians and what Israel is doing to them, you're wrong.
The Usa and other allies won't stop supporting Israel politically and military, Palestine can't beat Israel alone, it need support from other countries . I don't hear people calling for not escalating against Russia and rightfully so. Both Israel and Russia are occupiers.
Yes Iran doesn't really care about Palestinians but their interests align with supporting armed groups against Israel
You don't seem to get it. There won't be a Palestine if this war keeps escalating. Because Iran will annihilate it along with Israel.
Believe it or not, Palestine doesn't have a giant radiation shield.
Also, the idea that millions of dead Israelis and Iranians even if nukes aren't used is worth it because of Palestine is extremely ethically messed up.
And what is stopping Gaza complete destruction right now?
Wait... so now your argument is that in order to stop Gaza's destruction, Gaza has to be made unlivable in a nuclear war?
No what I'm saying is the only option right now for palestinians and countries that have interest in a weaker Israel is to use armed struggle . Even with tactical nuke, it's not possible to nuke Gaza without having a huge effect on Israeli land.
I'm still waiting for your answer for what's is preventing Israel from destroying Palestine completely right now.
Believe it or not, I am not privy to Israeli military policy. I do, however, understand how radiation works and I also understand that advocating for killing more people than a genocide has already killed to stop the genocide is supremely ethically messed up.
Would you also say that every single Israeli should be killed to stop the genocide in Gaza? Do you think a good solution to stop a genocide is a different genocide?
So you basically have zero realistic answer to how to stop the genocide.
No, I'm not saying we should kill every Israeli to stop the genocide, I'm not such a monster. I'm saying Israel should be weakened militarly and economically to be forced to real peace. I believe in a one state solution where religious sects and atheists lives together with no violence.
Why are you expecting me, a random internet user, to have a solution to stopping genocide? And if I had a solution, why would you expect it to be a viable one?
Do you know my foreign policy bona fides? Do you know how much personal experience I have with genocide? Zero.
Are you like this when random people are talking about COVID despite not knowing whether or not they have medical degrees? "You have no solution for how to stop COVID." No shit. They're not doctors. Much like I don't work in foreign policy.
I don't know everything, nor would I ever pretend to. And I am certainly not going to play armchair expert no matter how much I've "done the research."
You don't need to be an expert to look into history and find out that colonized countries has no option but to use armed struggle against their colonizers and also had to rely on other countries to provide them with weapon.
Iran is not a colonized country.
Also, radioactive fallout doesn't care about political borders. Neither do off-course missiles.
And this idea that millions of Iranians who live in a country that has nothing to do with the Palestinian genocide need to die in order to stop it is, again, extremely ethically fucked-up.