Reuters

    • egonallanon@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’d rather call them facists. A core component of nazism is it’s antisemitism and that seems a touch ridiculous to call israel despite how unfriendly zionosts can be to anti/non zionosts jewish folk.

    • SirToxicAvenger@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      1 year ago

      as the global population increases over time, so do deaths. a small conflict like this may not even be statistically significant.

      • BabyWah@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Mark my words, history will remember this. We can practically watch it live with social media and so on. Wars are different now, since Ukraine. So it hits closer home.

  • qnick@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Genuine question to all Palestinian sympathizers: don’t you see how you encourage Hamas to bring even more kids to the active war zone with your comments and protests?

    • fishos@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      It’s more like “hey, that neighborhood full of families and shopkeepers has some gang members in it. Let’s bomb it all.” Hamas isn’t “bringing in kids”. They’re resistance fighters who live in the same area, which is roughly the size of Los Angeles. And in the minds of Hamas, they’re fighting for those children to have a right to that land in their future. To have a right to grow up free and unoppressed. Those children aren’t “shields” and they weren’t brought there. They were born there and are now being indiscriminately bombed as an excuse to make Hamas look bad. Where’s Mossad? Where’s Israeli special forces? Israel likes to talk a big game about their abilities, but in this conflict, “rain missiles from the sky and blame the victims for being in the way” seems to be their only tool.

      You realize Israel even bombed evacuation routes, right? Told people “it’s safe to leave this way” and then bombed the caravans leaving. You can’t even leave without getting bombed, and you think they’re just importing children in?

      What are you smoking? I want some.

      • qnick@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        In this video by channel 4, they briefly mentioned the story of a wounded boy, who got the permission to get through the Rafah crossing. His Palestinian father didn’t let him go, because the father himself didn’t get such permission. This is how they care about their children.

        • Mrkawfee@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          You must feel very good about yourself blaming civilians for being murdered by Israelis.

        • medgremlin@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          If the child did go through alone, what are the chances that family would ever see him again? Who would care for the child and advocate for his best interests away from his family? All communications have been shut down by Israel. There is no way for the family to know what happens to their children if they are taken away.

          • qnick@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            To me, as a father of two, there’s no moral dilemma here. You get your kids out of the hell no matter what.

            But I guess when you have 14 kids, the priorities are a bit different.

            • medgremlin@lemmy.sdf.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              Would you get your kid out if you didn’t know whether or not they would be adequately cared for? Would you get them out if it meant that you will probably never see them again and that they will be taken to another country speaking another language with no one there to look after them and no plan for how to take care of them after the medical treatment is done?

              This would most likely be a permanent separation and the child would effectively, or maybe even literally become an orphan in a foreign country with nothing. Not their vital documents, not their family, not anything that would give them any hope of ever getting home. Getting your kid out in this situation means gambling your child’s life on the good will of strangers and most likely losing them for good.

              It is not unreasonable to demand to go with his child. Especially since he needs medical care as well.

                • fishos@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Yes, let’s victim blame the person being bombed and not the person launching the bombs. Hmmm. So all the school shootings in the US are just the children not running fast enough? I guess that’s one way to fight childhood obesity, but damn…

  • Limitless_screaming@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    What even is the purpose of a ceasefire? I don’t even understand why the occupation government is against it, they could use it to their advantage. Agree to a ceasefire, give some time for people to desperately try to escape Gaza, allow some aid to the people remaining there, and when it’s all over and people stop seeing you as the monsters you are, then you can continue your “war” and less people will care.

    Afraid Hamas might use that time and aid? Well don’t worry, your army is already getting wrecked on the ground, but it doesn’t matter to you; you can continue wasting equipment, men, and oxygen for as long as you like, while Hamas cannot. Your army will take control of the area, and either get rid of everyone there or get kicked out a second time, either way, you have achieved your actual goals.

    • jet@hackertalks.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      From an international perspective, calling for a ceasefire is reducing the window of forgiveness that Israel currently enjoys from the October 7th terrorist attack.

      The more time that passes, the less tolerance global politicians have, for blatant all-out war crimes.

      This isn’t a secret, the Israeli government knows this, the Israeli military knows this, their doctrine documents acknowledge that they have a window of activity from any tragedy, international politicians know this, their allies know this, the Americans know this.

      So every time an ally of theirs, calls for any delay, ceasefire combo humanitarian aid, they’re trying to reduce that window, so there’s less political damage control they have to conduct for their allies behavior.

    • SirToxicAvenger@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      escape where though? Egypt isnt going to let them in - Egypt has a lot of economic issues right now, they cant handle a bunch of refugees. maybe they could take a boat to Lebanon, Syria, or Turkey - Syria and Turkey are still struggling with the aftermath of that massive earthquake & are unlikely to be welcoming. Lebanon could accept them but there’s not a lot going on there. where else then? Jordan maybe?

  • badbytes@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Risk?!? The Palestinian’s have been murdered for 50+ yrs in a genocidal occupation. Silly UN.

    • jet@hackertalks.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I think Reuters very much know it’s genocide. They put the conciliatory language in there to try to mollify people from attacking them. The important thing is a mainstream, reputable, mostly objective news source is socializing the fact that this is a genocide. That’s progress.

  • Mrkawfee@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Netanyahu is committing genocide in Gaza in much the same way that Milosovic did in Bosnia.

  • Burn_The_Right@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    “Risk” of genocide? Risk?

    They need to update their fucking AI model.

    The burning house is at risk of catching fire. The dead man is at risk of heart failure. This headline is at risk of being full of shit.

  • AutoTL;DR@lemmings.worldB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    This is the best summary I could come up with:


    GENEVA, Nov 2 (Reuters) - United Nations experts called on Thursday for a humanitarian ceasefire in Gaza, saying time was running out for Palestinian people there who find themselves at “grave risk of genocide”.

    Nearly four weeks of Israeli bombardment against the Gaza Strip in retaliation for deadly attacks by Hamas gunmen in southern Israel on Oct. 7 have killed more than 9,000 people, made up of a majority of women and children, health authorities in the Hamas-run enclave say.

    “We remain convinced that the Palestinian people are at grave risk of genocide,” the group of experts, made up of seven U.N. special rapporteurs, said in a statement.

    Speaking to Reuters after the experts’ statement was issued, one of its signatories said the people of Gaza had been deprived of the “the most basic elements for living.”

    “We are using the term risk of genocide because the process that is (underway) is absolutely indiscriminate, affecting, in this case, more than 2 million people,” said Pedro Arrojo Agudo, Special Rapporteur on the human rights to safe drinking water and sanitation.

    “The situation in Gaza has reached a catastrophic tipping point,” the U.N. experts said, adding that Gazans had been left with scarce water, medicine, fuel and essential supplies while facing health hazards.


    The original article contains 520 words, the summary contains 211 words. Saved 59%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!

    • fishos@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I think they mean “at risk of completing full genocide”, sadly enough.