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 !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
When people shout “Free Palestine” they conveniently forget that if there is no check on Hamas, and if Hamas achieves its goal (and destroys Israel and its population), there would be tyrannical Islamist theocracy in its place. I do not know if there is better way to remove Hamas, I am not a military specialist. Biden advocates for precision strikes, but it might be just the election year maneuvering. But I know for sure, that Palestinians will not be free with Hamas in power. And if Israel lives situation as is and removes its troops, the same thing will be repeated again in future with blood on all sides.
I don't know what the solution is either, but I do know that brutalizing and displacing the entire population won't make the average Palestinian friendlier to the Israeli cause. Say what you will about the US wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, but at least they attempted to be more surgical.
Anything else is more surgical than basically unconcentrated carpet bombing of the Gaza cities a few times over. But yeah, at least the U.S. had a bit of "hearts and minds" approach.
The U.S. also had local opposition fighters to help them gain sympathy from the local population, and we were actually trying to nation build.
You can say that Fatah is basically that for Israel, but they aren't fighting in Gaza. If the fighting in Gaza was being done by Fatah, then global perceptions would probably be a lot different.
It would also probably involve less civilian deaths as Fatah would be much less likely just to bomb a neighborhood to get 10 Hamas fighters as opposed to actually fighting for it and taking casualties which is what Israel is currently doing.
Of course, this couldn't happen under the current Israeli government. They barely trust Fatah with enough weapons to be policemen in the West Bank, let alone enough to take a city of 2 million.
"local" is a relative word their "local" fighters were generally ppl from north who didn't even speak pashto who were looking for a paycheck by joining the army , and were seen as foreign usa backed fighters themselves. .The english translators army hired required translators themselves in a lot of the rural areas because they didn't speak pashto just like the westerners. . Thats why they folded and lost very easily once us support ended. They had very few truly "local" fighting force that were from the areas they were supposed to defend. fatah vs hamas conflict inside gaza is a bit more complicated than just language geogrpaphical and cultural barriers and is still ongoing despite peoples opposition to hamas and the current situation.
Yeahhhh Afghanistan was a shitshow. We were actually nation-building, not just nation rebuilding like we did in Iraq, a lot harder to create a national identity out of several tribes and ethnic groups than it is to change/"modernize" a nation like we did in Iraq.
Even Iraq had that issue with the sectarianism, but atleast almost everyone spoke the same language (sorry Kurds). Iraq had also had a national identity beat into them by the monarchy and then the Baathists, which probably helped as well. Afghanistan never really had that.
there are many more tribes languages and groups in iraq though. That is why they are pretty federated as well and usa only controls and occupies certain areas not all of it today. the westerners only know about kurds mostly and don't really understand the differences between other groups ( kurds I think were mentioned heavily in your media during the 80s and again in 2010s ( also they occupy some of the oil rich areas )Not everyone ( yes I know you said almost ) speak the same language or share the same identitity or even the same arabic dialect . From turkmens ( 5-6 mio) to assyrians to the yezids shabaks marsh arabs (7-8 mio) to different sub tribes of same tribes etc... etc... etc. and even more arab groups with totally different world views and politics that come from vastly different regions. so that ALMOST is a big overstatement in terms of how different iraqis are + the fact that you basically gave the country to the iranian backed political groups which forms the backbone of a lot of political parties - security forces and businesses clashing with the rest of the very diverse iraqi society whether shia or sunni.
Yeah I was aware of the other ethnic/religious groups in Iraq, but haven't done enough research into them (except the Yazidis, ISIS made us get exposed to them in the west). I know about the Iraqi kurds and the factionalist fights they have, so it would make sense if the rest of the country was similar.
My point was really that a state structure already existed in Iraq, all the U.S. had to do was seize it while not damaging it too much in the process. (Or doing something stupid like idk firing the entire military and all the teachers and anyone remotely tied to Baathism) Afghanistan would've taken far, far, far, more effort.
Possibly a bigger mistake than invading in the first place. Not completely sure how it could've been avoided without an endless occupation, but there had to have been a better solution than letting them fund opposition groups, and then letting them be one of the key military components against ISIS with the PMF system.
Well the point I am trying to emphasize is the state structure you keep mentioning was already an oppressive subjugation machine created with "to an extent" cia support, favoring certain groups and erasing the culture language and needs of all of the rest (mostly non arabs or not the right kind of arabs) . Because before that there was General Qasim and he wanted to side with social-democrats and the iraqi communist party. That is way he was assassinated in 63 by the ba'athist with cia and egyptian support, back then ba'athist were the more acceptable option for the west and then in 79 Saddam took over did the ba'ath party purge which took the country to full on authoritarianism and severed ties between iraq and syria ( making them both more susceptible to outside intrusions ). There wasn't an identity , just a lot of massacres and people who are afraid of speaking out or acting out ( or their villages got bulldozed gassed.) . Saddam was the state structure it wasn't like some organic thing existed through a shared nationalist identity.
Oh you've misunderstood what I've said. Sadam definitely wasn't some good leader that united the country, and I know we helped put him in power to stop the Iraqi Communists.
I'm just saying that the oppression had effectively held the country together for decades, and so when we arrived, stuff was a little more stable, and then we fucked it up.
Afghanistan had already been going through a civil war for a long, long, time. I wasn't making any value judgements like "Saddam is good", I was simply saying that Iraq was an easier situation than Afghanistan.
No I didn't misunderstand you . What I was trying to say was that even your slight optimism was misplaced :p no hope no future with us invasions ^^ shit always goes south (especially if you've been fcking with em for decades then decide to invade ) doomer for life ^^ but they have oil and better infrastructure since forever compared to Afghanistan they are still a far more developed nation with a functioning economy give or take. Anyways it was nice talking to you under this " Omg did you know hamas is bad ? says the israeli intelligence thread " yes yes we know and we condemn
No. Hamas was not popular until Israel stepped up its attacks on Palestinians and the corrupt Abbas and Fatah party did nothing in response.
If you want Hamas to go away, you need to actually empower moderates. Abbas lost all political credibility when he promised Palestinian statehood in exchange for nonviolence and couldn’t deliver. Israeli military opened fire on nonviolent protestors and got no consequences for it. Frustrated, the people turned to rightwing parties. Same as what happened in Israel.
If you want Hamas to stop being popular then you need to stop proving them right. Give people freedoms and security. Because the Israeli government has proved that diplomacy doesn’t work, nonviolence doesn’t work, and protest doesn’t work; the IDF still throws people out of houses and steals land. Abbas offered some deep concessions for peace that made him unpopular with his people (giving up Jerusalem, permanently giving up right of return) and Netanyahu refused without even a counteroffer. He wanted Hamas and rightwing parties to rise so he could justify his violent policies. He intentionally undermined Palestinian moderates and put himself into this mess.
Support for Hamas and other extremist groups is a direct result of generations of oppression in an apartheid state.
The problem is how to separate Hamas from a free Palestine going forward. Hamas claims that they would have no reason to fight if Palestinians get their freedom, and would transition to a peaceful government.
Obviously, that is extremely doubtful given all the other examples in history of militant resistances gaining full control.
I posed this question last time lemmy raised internet pitchforks when the US voted against Palestine joining the UN. Who would represent Palestine? Would people seriously be ok with a Hamas representative speaking for Palestine, or even just the western bank subsect?
The PLO, just as they are right now and have been for 30 years. Not Hamas.
You fell for the propaganda push I see
No one is asking for Israel to tear down its walls and emplacements when they shout Free Palestine. Ironically, Bibi knowing but still not taking appropriate defensive measures for the Hamas attack on october, assuming he didn't fund and encourage it directly as some of his interactions with Hamas would suggest, is what caused and keeps causing blood on the other side of the border, too.
There are plenty that are calling for exactly that.
In this current rogue and genociding state? Yeah some increase in wanting that. Normally? No, all everyone wants is Israel to stop the genocide and give back most of the land it had stole over the decades, not a disregard for an Israeli state to exist, nor even somewhere completely else if they can share the land fairly.
Priorities. Getting rid of a colonizer is more important right now