A community for discussing events around the World
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
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.
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
Israel is 110% not going to heed this warning in the absolute slightest.
Iran does not pose a credible military threat to Israel. They only have a couple of options - terrorist attacks from their proxies, maybe a cross-border incursion from Lebanon that would be a slaughter and change the balance of power there, or an air strike. Israel is so amped up right now that they’d respond with airstrikes inside Iran, and US carrier groups are in the area with no misunderstanding as to what they signify.
This is saber-rattling for theatrics.
Iran are not wrong though, Israel need to chill.
It’s really annoying how the mainstream media is like yeah this is cool, when they’re commuting atrocities no better than Hamas committed.
I don’t know what it is with Israel that makes the world walk on eggshells but they have committed horrific acts and they should be called out on it.
Fucking monsters the Israeli government are.
They might not be wrong about Israel committing atrocities. They would be wrong to add to it by committing atrocities of their own. The article certainly doesn’t seem to indicate they’ll “intervene” in a benign manner, and their track record is as blemished or worse.
This is doubly dumb if Israel is like they say. There is zero chance Israel would back down if Iran intervened; really, they’d probably have no issue extending the rampage to Iran as well. More people will die horribly.
It’s not right to sit and watch everyone commit various crimes against humanity. But adding your own violence with absolutely no chance at preventing loss of life, as Iran is implying they will do here, is somehow worse than apathy.
I'm not saying I support Iran with their threats but I think I have a problem with the generality of what you said. The same could be used to say the west shouldn't support Ukraine with weapons because then the war would be over sooner, preventing deaths and violence.
Iran is an uninvolved third party poised to add to the bloodshed with no possible gain, unlike with Ukraine where lives in the future may be saved. I’m not saying there should be no third party interventions in general. Simply that Iran coming in to make things expressly worse— I think we can all see there will be absolutely nothing improved by their intervention— is of unparalleled uselessness and would result in pointless loss of life. If they could contribute, all power to them, but they cannot do anything but make it worse.
Again I am not in support of Iran taking action here, I disliked the general dismission of intervention in your first comment
I feel like even in that first comment alone I repeated that I’m against this specific case of intervention because it would be “committing atrocities of their own” despite “zero chance that Israel would back down,” and that adding “more violence with absolutely no chance of preventing loss of life”.
That’s three separate quotes from three separate paragraphs, very narrowly commenting only on Iran’s proposed intervention. I’m not sure how I could have made it more clear that I’m only against the pointless killing this specific intervention, the one indicated by the article would lead to? Like even now I don’t see how it could have been clarified, and I’m genuinely interested in knowing how. This thread isn’t even about intervention in general, just the exact instance I was commenting on.
Apologies if this sounds even the slightest bit hostile— I genuinely don’t mean it to have that tone, and I haven’t gotten into a single argument on Lemmy. I just cannot see how it wasn’t abundantly clear when I paid extra effort to comment very very very narrowly across three paragraphs in the first comment alone.
Sorry I should have clarified/specified what I was objecting to. I apparently misinterpreted this paragraph
It’s not right to sit and watch everyone commit various crimes against humanity. But adding your own violence with absolutely no chance at preventing loss of life, as Iran is implying they will do here, is somehow worse than apathy.
The rest of your comment is fine and it's clear that you are explicitly talking about the actions of Iran. I read this paragraph as a summary/generalization which you used as the basis of your opinion about the actions of Iran. I'll switch it around a bit to make it clear how I read it:
It’s not right to sit and watch everyone commit various crimes against humanity. But adding your own violence, with absolutely no chance at preventing loss of life, is somehow worse than apathy. Which is what Iran is implying they will do here.
Where the first two sentences are the generalization tied back to the conflict discussed in the thread with the last sentence. And I would object to this generalization.
Edit:
Apologies if this sounds even the slightest bit hostile
Don't worry I am always happy to be more specific if asked! I get that I am sometimes not as specific as I should be in these comments
Real question: why is the us so involved with israel?
Is it just a "sunk cost fallacy" thing or is it any more than that?
It feels weird sinking so much money for someone else's wars over so many decades.. like trillions over wars and apart from ukraine recently its been always and only israel demanding the aid
Because the US realises that the goal of groups like Hamas and Hisbollah from Iran, and many other extremist Muslim groups, is to get rid of all Jews in the area. But it seems like on Lemmy many people are okay with genocide, as long as it targets the "right" group of people.
So this could widen to Israel/USA/UN(?) vs Iran/Syria/Lebanon(Hezbollah)/Gaza(Hamas) which would essentially be The War on Terror II. Which means another ~20yrs in the Middle East. Oh goody.
Just what the world needs. I am getting some faint WWI vibes too. Maybe I am just being paranoid. But it seems like this could expand to more middle eastern countries than you've listed, should things go horribly wrong. I could also see this being turned into another proxy war—revenge by Russia for Western support for Ukraine.
I do not think you are paranoid. Maybe not straight out world war, but more war in the Middle East and Northern Africa. Egypt for example is suspiciously silent in the matter, although they are already trying to negotiate with Israel to curb the influx of Palestinian refugees. They sit straight at the border and their help for people in Gaza is still just discussed. I am sure they know other countries are watching their decisions on this.
Some people do not want to accept it but this is very much a war between religions as well. For many Muslims there is only one correct answer: Israel has to go. It's part of their identity to want the area to be a Muslim country. This also has an effect on countries everywhere. For example in Germany there is a huge drive to stand behind Israel in this matter. At the same time, Germany has a big Muslim immigrant population.