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.
-
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
view the rest of the comments
"Failing" implies that it was unintentional.
The evidence quite clearly indicates that it was not - that it was instead a very deliberate choice made in pursuit of long-term goals
Netanyahu explicitly rejects a two-state solution. His goal is to annex all existing Palestinian territory.
The Palestinian people are justifiably unwilling to submit to that, because they know that that way leads to them being made second-class citizens of an apartheid state.
The only alternative then is for Israel to conquer those territories - to kill enough Palestinians to terrorize the rest into subjugation. And that is, certainly not coincidentally, the exact strategy they're pursuing at this moment.
And the Hamas attack is the specific thing that made it possible for them to do so with at least some colorable semblance of justification.
Therefore, the only reasonable conclusion is that when the Israeli government learned of the planned attack, a deliberate choice was made to not move to prevent it - to allow it to happen, because it would serve Netanyahu's purposes when it did. As it has.
This is absurd conspiracy-nut level of thinking. Among other reasons because this will likely end Netanyahu's career after the war ends, he's no longer immediately needed and investigations start (Israelis have a history of actually doing those properly because most see it as an existential threat to not have functioning defense mechanisms), and I'm pretty sure that he knows this. Which means that the reason for him to do this anyway would be because he's so selfless that he doesn't care about his career or power (even though after losing his career he's likely to face lawsuits for other things he's done) as long as this goal is completed. I hope you see how nonsensical it is for a super-populist politician under the threat of several investigations to selflessly give up his career and power.