311–320 of 1001 posts
Meanwhile, Egypt seems to get a free pass, minimal criticism for keeping its border locked down while being adjacent to a terrible conflict? They could at least let the most vulnerable/sick/injured flee.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe rockets wouldn't be shot if Israel would not illegally occupy territories. It seems pretty logical to me that when a state starts illegally extending its borders pretty much immediately after its formation, their neighbors will not be happy about it and will fight back. No need to be an antisemite to understand this, it's just common sense.
> Maybe rockets wouldn't be shot if Israel would not illegally occupy territories. Tell me you know nothing about this conflict without telling me you know nothing about it. Israel was inches away from just having to give the Palestinians their own state. Why then, did Hamas attack just before that? The answer is simple: it is and always has been about removing Israel. That's true for Hamas and all their supporters.…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
With that same logic you can justify the civilian deaths of almost any conflict. Every war crime will be justified. Japanese internment? Justified. Hiroshima? Justified. Agent Orange in Vietnam? Justified. Genocide of 2million Filipinos by the US Army? Justified.... It's exhausting just thinking about these atrocities so I'll take a break
It's not justification, but the reality. War is horrible and innocent people will always die in war.
Taken in isolation there is nothing wrong with this type of reporting, the IDF should be held to high standards. In the context of the Israeli/Palestine conflict, there is a tendency to hold Israel to a much higher standard and excuse the Palestine side as if they were naive children. I don't see how that could possibly set up any lasting peace. Israel will become more deaf to outsiders, and Palestinians will not be…
[flagged]
The same goes for some of the commenters arguing against your position—my moderation point here is certainly not about agreeing with them and disagreeing with you (I add this because I know it can all too easily feel that way).
I have mixed feelings about this topic appearing on HN as I feel like folks are entrenched one way or the other and information isn't going to sway anyone. If this were a discussion we want to have here, this feels like a very bad article as by it's nature it's a one-sided subjective narrative with very little light to shed on the depth of the conflict. An interesting differentiator left unsaid in this article is tha…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You usually nuke stories that are political. I'm not being critical, it clearly leads to significant improvement over similar sites. What makes this one different? When I see a headline like this, I usually assume I managed to see it before you did, and if I refresh the page that it will probably disappear. So again, and without accusation, what's different? Bad things happen all over the world, nearly constantly or…
Users usually flag them, but yes, moderators often downweight them too—and then there are times that we turn off the flags. The answer to your question goes like this: (1) some stories with political overlap are on topic (see https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&so... (2) we try to be careful about which those are, so the site doesn't go down in flames; (3) I think it follows from HN's core princ…
Plenty of Palestinians oppose Hamas and want peace and a free Palestinian state according to the '67 borders. These would be the equivalents on the other side.
And some support the war Hamas rages despite the effect on the Palestinian people/civilians. Is that an other other side? This is complex, and we really can't describe this conflict as just having two sides.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm sorry, but even if I concede the notion that this piece promotes "intellectual curiosity" in some amount (how much?), this news source is highly biased and has been found to spread fake news especially on the events since October 7th including current war in Gaza. There is real harm in spreading this information. As you may or may not know, mobs and individuals around the world are fed such false narratives that…
Are you saying this article is dangerous because it may further engage folks that have been already enraged due to having been misinformation elsewhere to the point it could result in violence? Also how does that compare with the actual harm and health of innocent people mentioned in the article?
Yes
> Also how does that compare with the actual harm and health of innocent people mentioned in the article?
Even if the events as reported in the article are true, they are part of war. Like it or not, Gaza's citizens chose Hamas as their elected government. Said government chose to go start a war with Israel. War is not elegant, and unfortunately innocent citizens on both sides pay the price.
Al-Jazeera English operates under the ownership of the Al Jazeera Media Network, which, in turn, is funded by the government of Qatar. Up to you if you trust them or not. I do not. Swedish.
But this is the first time I've seen a thread allowed, and a bit personally perplexed to see that it's an Al-Jazeera post.
Zero trust. Australian.