66
Hezbollah and Hamas flags waved during pro-Palestinian demonstration in New York
(today.lorientlejour.com)
this post was submitted on 13 Jun 2024
66 points (72.3% liked)
World News
38930 readers
2203 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 [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
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Hamas is a terrorist organization plain and simple. Trying to call them “Freedom Fighters” is like trying to polish a turd.
Is the IDF also a terrorist organization? How about the US military? I struggle to see any justifiable reason why Hamas should wear that label while the other two should not.
IDF, yes. US military, no. One is deliberately targetting civilians, the other fails to give sufficient fuck about avoiding civilian casualties, those two things are not the same. The US is not saying "let's kill civilians so they become scared and do what we tell them", they're saying "huh why are they suddenly angry at us"? There's a naive innocence to it, you have to judge the US military using juvenile law.
I don't see a practical difference between targeting civilians directly, and a blatant disregard for civilian casualties. Like, if you drop a bomb on a wedding, because you're trying to kill one non-civilian target, but you obviously know that 100 civilians will die-- then how is that any different than suicide bombing the same wedding? Are the civilian victims less dead? Do their families feel differently?
No, and no. But intent still matters. Afghans learned that when you stand next to the wrong type of person, you could be hit, that if you stumbled across the wrong spot, like a hidden US observation post while herding your sheep, you could be hit.
There's at least a plausible connection to military necessity. The US approach helps them fuck all when it comes to winning hearts and minds, and you're still breeding resistance by eliminating that shepherd who stumbled across your position instead of calling a chopper to evacuate and relocate, but the people overall don't feel like they're being exterminated -- because they aren't. Because in the end, the US does have restraint, sometimes even to the degree that they're willing to lose a battle over it, that was the case in Afghanistan for Taliban etc. holed up in Mosques.
That is, there's insufficient regard for the civilian population on the US side, they're prioritising tactical military goals too much -- but not completely. The IDF doesn't even know what regard for civilians is. The US is court marshalling soldiers left and right when they misbehave, Israel is applying military law to 10yold Palestinians who lobbed a stone at a tank, dishing out decade-long sentences. US soldiers carry sweets to hand out to kids. Those two attitudes are not the same, and if you think they are, you're trivialising genocide.
I think you've absorbed too many American movies. The idea that "Afghans learned that" is so fucked up for at least two reasons. One, are you saying it was terrorism until the civvies learned to avoid US targets? Two, how the fuck are rural Afghanis supposed to know who's on the CIA kill list? The idea that they learned anything from being drone struck, besides what it feels like to have PTSD every time you go outside, is pretty silly.
The US military, much like most if not all other militaries will absolutely murder civilians if the objective requires it. You can't just take their word for what the objective is either. And is the US military really handing out court martials over civilian casualties? Given that the vast majority of US caused civilian deaths have resulted from ATG ordnance, we should expect a lot of court martials of pilots and drone operators, no? I'd love to see an example of that if you have one!
I think it's a matter of propaganda and aesthetics. If you kill civilians with an air force, that's "collateral damage". If you kill them with a truck bomb, that's "terrorism". After 9/11 there was at least a conversation about how squishy a word like 'terrorism' is, and how it was going to end up applied to anyone we needed it to.
The fuck does the CIA have to do with anything. And you don't need to be a genius to infer that hanging out with insurgent commanders is not a safe thing to do.
How stupid do you think Afghans are. Do you think that they are capable of language, of exchanging observations and experiences and drawing collective conclusions from them.
Motherfucker.
Bullshit. In both cases, collateral damage is if alongside with the enemy commander or whatever, any legitimate target, you take out civilians. It's in the world "collateral". Look it up. If you're targeting civilians directly that's not collateral.
The CIA is often in charge of designating drone targets.
Not everyone who is targeted is an "insurgent commander"
Even "insurgent commanders" have families who might not have much choice about their proximity.
US military prisons like Abu Ghraib and Gitmo were famously filled with victims of grudges and bounties. Basically the US pays informants for targets, and informants just point at whoever they want. Military "intelligence" has a lot of holes in it to rely on it as an authority on who lives or dies-- and that's before we even get into "collateral".
Speaking of "collateral", yes that is a weasel word, much like "terrorist". Don't allow the perpetrator to define the terms for you. If there was one US general in the twin towers, would that have made the other 3k victims "collateral damage"?
And that is why Germany's kill lists had juridical oversight, and collateral damage was not measured in civilians but "people who at least look like they're probably fighters". The Taliban also once sent the Bundeswehr an apology letter, saying "Some idiots of ours thought your convoy was a US one hope you're not mad".
You seem to be under the impression that I'm defending the US approach, I'm not. What I am doing is contrasting it to the IDF while you're engaged in trivialising IDF actions by insinuating the US is even half as bad. Even in Vietnam it wasn't as bad as the IDF is right now. US military intelligence blindly believing random accusations? The IDF doesn't even need those accusations to target you. Stochastic terrorism is part of their strategy.
Can you get it into your head that this isn't a simple, binary, "good" and "bad" thing, that there's degrees to everything?
I'm not saying they are all "just as bad" as one another. I'm trying to move us beyond the word "terrorism". IDF is worse than Hamas because of the context. IDF is an occupying force.
Hamas very much is an occupying force, too. They've been brutalising Gaza for quite a while and are very very happy with the result of October 7th. It got the exact response they wanted it to have, what's luckily missing is the reaction among Palestinians they wanted it to have, those accelerationist fucks. "Make Israel crack down harder to make the population madder".
Can you please stop that campism it's brainrot. Just because fascists happen to be on the underdog side doesn't make them in any way worthy of supporting, fascists love fighting other fascists as they can reinforce their respective holds over their own population.
Hamas and the variety of militias comprise the Palestinian armed resistance to Israeli occupation. They are made up mostly of orphans. They are not "the big bad", they are Palestinians. I'm not going to justify everything they do, but neither will I condemn them. What is Palestine's alternative?
No. Generally speaking, that's the role of the PLO, a bunch of secular lefties and also Palestine's representative to the UN, which Hamas very much is not a part of. Hamas is an offshoot of the Muslim Brotherhood, rabidly Islamist, very much more interested in martyrdom than liberation, more interested in making sure that male hair dressers don't serve female customers for whatever fucked-up reason, and also very much funded with the at least aid of Israel. Because the PLO has too much foreign goodwill.
Note that I'm saying here "Hamas" as in the organisation. Individual fighters might indeed have better motives, and individual paramedics definitely have better motives. But the middle to upper levels of the organisation, the strategists, the mullahs? Islamofascist, the lot of them. Not a single bit better than the Kahanites on the other side. They love each other, as the existence of the other means their war indeed can be eternal (see Umberto Eco). There can be no Israeli security without Palestinian freedom, and there also can't be Palestinian freedom without Israeli safety. The rest of Palestinians generally understand that, Hamas refuses to acknowledge it.
You know what you're doing right now? You're applauding the Mujahideen because they can be used to fight against the Soviets, blind to the Taliban you're creating. You're using the same fucked-up US doctrine that you slammed a few comments earlier. As said: Stop that "enemy of my enemy" campist bullshit.
Is the PLO offering any armed resistance to the genocide occurring right now? Does it offer any armed resistance to Israeli occupation generally? I cannot find any evidence that it is, but I would be happy to read anything that says otherwise.
They are following their strategy, not yours. Your bloodlust doesn't matter.
So that's a no then? I thought you said that armed resistance to Israeli violence was the job of the PLO. Now you dodge and call it bloodlust to understand the impulse to resist occupation.
It's you who's equating having military capacity and using it. It's you who's equating resisting occupation with massacring far-left hippie Kibbutzim who were out there in Gaza, helping Palestinians left and right, and on the 7th you probably also made fun of them having a rave.
The average Palestinian is channelling Ghandi hardcore and all you care about is giving Kahanites pretext for genocide while freeing them of the inconvenient lefty voices within Israel. That is what your support for Hamas does, critical or otherwise, because that's what they're doing. There were plenty of other targets in reach, plenty of other civilian targets, Hamas chose the hippies. Why?
Ah, now I see who you are. You embody the liberal ideal that dying nonviolently is nobler than violent resistance. So useful to have "military capacity" and not use it while your people are slaughtered and yours lands stolen, eh?
Fuck noble how about strategically opportune. Is that a thing you can do, prioritise strategy and the achievement of aims over your bloodlust.
You talk of lust, but it seems like you have a fetish for the genocide of Palestinians.
Have you actually ever had a look at what Palestinians say. Their political discourse. Would be a much more useful use of your time than mindlessly parroting thought-terminating cliches such as "If you are against bombing hippie civilians you're pro genocide".
Do you seriously think you know better what to do than Palestinians themselves. Is that some white saviour shit or something.
Oh shit. Do you live Palestine?
No. Which doesn't have to do with anything. I also didn't ask you to move there to have an opinion, all I asked you to do was reading up a bit on Palestinian politics. Was that so unthinkable a suggestion that you need to get all defensive now and attempt to deflect.
How is it deflecting when you call me a "white savior" for having an outsider opinion about this genocide, if I hold your opinion to the same standard? Have you considered that the rank and file of Hamas live in Palestine? The ones that are fighting and dying? That they themselves are the children and orphans of Palestine?
I'm am sure that there is a variety of opinions among the Palestinian people, just as there are among the Israelis and Americans. I am aware of the limitations of my own perspective, but all I can do is apply my knowledge and principles to the situation as I see it. You're doing the same, and I don't really see any point in continuing this conversation. Take that as you will.
Then be aware of the average attitude of Palestinians towards stoking the bear, will you, instead of coming here with an attitude of "The PLO is invalid because they're not fighting they're complicit in their own genocide", as you very much insinuated.
Because, you know, being aware of the limitations of your own perspective includes not running your mouth when you haven't done your research.