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.
-
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 OCTOBER 19 2025
-
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
How can Israel claim to be the victim in this war against Iran?
When don't they?
Well Iran has been attacking them for decades through Hezbollah and Hamas. It's not like they've been keeping to themselves playing Rummikub in this conflict
What a load of one sided crap. Israel has been the aggressor in the region since the nakba. This nonsense started when the ottoman empire retreated in the early 1900s, and its always been the zionists pursuing terrorism, murder and land theft since day 1-- uninterrupted. Endless fountains of blood on their hands for their greed.
Well that's a slight diversion from how Iran is involved but
Even if you ignore the systemic discrimination under the Ottomans, that's incorrect
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1920_Nebi_Musa_riots
It is correct. Your own link for the incident you cite was after Balfour in british controlled palestine. The cause is unknown as your link states. or are ypou trying to blame zionism and the rejection of human rights of the palestinians on the british?
You claim that israel/zionists were the only ones that incited violence. My link is part of the more nuanced history of jews inside the dissolving Ottoman empire first escaping discrimination, then looking to create their own state, then being joined by refugee migrants from Europe, and then local muslim fundamentalists turning violent against them because they wanted to make sure islam remained the privileged religion on all of the land
That's a lot more nuanced than what you posted above, sadly in line with many other lemmings who choose to simplify all of that history into "the jews jumped from their boats guns blazing"
Zionazi complaints for justifying Iran destruction must be dismissed, and certainly dismissed from world consideration of siding with Israel. Palestinian and Lebanese resistance to US/Israel hegemony over decades is justifiable independent resistance, and Iran support for any of it is irrelevant. That US/Israel are innocent loving victims of Iran must be exterminated from policy relevance. Let he who never supports political groups internationally cast the first stone.
Most relevant, the US has been negotiating a peace deal with Iran for over a year. Such a deal, if earnest would forgive the past on both sides. That Israel will always prevent peace, and controls the US means it is not earnest. In this week's negotiations, all US zionazi political stooges are all talking as though the negotiations are for Iran's surrender with no budget to compensate Iran. Zionazi media doesn't even ask the questions.
Iran has been arming resistance to Israeli colonialism for decades, but that does not in any way make Israel a victim. Palestinians and Lebanese have the right to defend themselves, and Iran has the right (and, like the rest of the world, moral duty) to help them defend themselves.
Can you explain how the Lebanese are defending themselves when they're firing rockets over the border into Israel?
Do... do you know why Hezbollah was even founded? For a hint, here's a literal former Israeli PM on the topic:
Yeah, two reasons actually:
1: beat back the Israeli's (who invaded because the PLO was attacking them from Lebanon)
2: to tilt the Lebanese civil war in favour of the Shia sect
But neither seems like a valid reason to keep attacking Israel today
Israel has been bombing and occupying part of Lebanon since the "ceasefire", so your argument is ridiculous on the face of it. Hezbollah is also acting in accordance with internetional law with respect to the prevention of genocide. Finally, it does not count as "aggression" if you enter a defensive war against an aggressor - Britain and France were not aggressors in WW2 just because they declared war on Germany, since Germany had already started the war.
Copying my other reply:
Part of the ceasefire deal was Hezbollah disarming and staying north of the Litani river. Instead, they rearmed and rebuilt. Why would you only focus on the Israeli side of the ceasefire?
No deal with Israel can be relied upon. They only understand force. I wish them a great many "difficult security situations".
If your base premise is that Hezbollah should just be allowed to break a ceasefire deal, why would you bring it up? Can't you see the irony?
Don't care, fuck you, death to Israel.
Your attempt to whitewash the Israeli invasion of Lebanon (brutal enough that even Reagan told them to dial it down) was not missed.
Are Israel's near-daily ceasefire violations and its occupation of Lebanese territory reason enough?
Part of the ceasefire deal was Hezbollah disarming and staying north of the Litani river. Instead, they rearmed and rebuilt. Why would you only focus on the Israeli side of the ceasefire?
Because only Israeli violations fucking kill people wth is this question? Also I like how you ignored the bit about occupying Lebanese territory.
These conditions are there to prevent them from killing more people.
If you're referring about the war of '82 I assume you have either a very, very onesided or a very, very rudimentary view on that part of history. And even then: after that war ended 40 years ago, why would you want Hezbollah to restart it? Who does it help to keep this going?
And/or defend themselves the next time Israel comes knocking. Their occupation of more Syrian territory in 2025 certainly doesn't inspire confidence.
No I'm referring to Shebaa Farms and the outposts they refused to leave in Southern Lebanon after the ceasefire, but yeah the Israeli invasion of '82 too.
But apparently, Israel does not come a knockin' as long as they don't initiate the hostilities. They attacked Israel in 2023 as a sign of support for the attack from Hamas. They still have the goal of destroying Israel and creating an Islamic state instead. Jordan and Egypt accepted that they have a jewish state (with all the history), they don't attack them and they don't get attacked in return. This last concept seems to be something that Hezbollah struggles with on a fundamental level. They feel like they should be allowed to support and partake in the destruction of Israel themselves as much as they want, but any single missile flying back is an absolute breach of human rights and international law...
Shebaa Farms and Syrian territory (you can add the Golan Heights as well, sixty years ago) are interesting to mention.
For starters, the Shebaa Farms area was contested between Syria and Lebanon even without Israel. You could say that it was demographically part of Lebanon that was 'seized' by Syria through lobbying in much the same way as large parts of Palestine were 'seized' by Israel in the partition plan for Palestine. Sure you could say that it should belong to either of those two and not Israel, but then what are you basing everything off anyway?
Secondly, there's a disparity between what we were taught as children in that there are fixed borders between countries where you see a sign and people speak a different language, have different licence plates etc. and people get along and that's how things are and always will be... And reality where countries were shaped through wars and natural boundaries.
If your enemy has attacked you twice from an advantageous hillside position and you manage to beat them back, sometimes with great losses, it might not be unwise to take those hills from them. It might be advantageous to beat them back behind a river and keep your side occupied. First as a buffer zone, and then after a few years you have a castle, fields, a village etc. . Of course I don't know which country you're from but if you study the history of how its borders were formed, there's a big chance they are the result of the same violent reasons that you now feel are in breach of you childish view (meant in the positive sense - see above) that taking that hill or river bank are capital sins.
You're a terrible human being and I hope a fascist throws you into a concentration camp. Goodbye.
I think you're a terrible human being by choosing to take the easy route and not trying to understand these conflicts.
I hope you live a happy life and the world gets better
You're actually a Hamas apologist. Wow.
you're actually a zionist supremacist/terrorism and war crimes apologist. Even bigger Wow. Why not stand on the side of universal human rights for all, eh? Maybe if Israel did that just once they'd have some legs to stand on. But they keep raping and killing women and kids, and keep stealing land, dont they. So yeah, that gets people pretty mad, including Hamas, yeah. Funny how that works.
Would you be so silly to claim Hamas has no reason to seek violent redress for what Israel has done to them? I'm shocked its not 1000x worse than what Hamas and Hezbollah are doing. Did you really think there would be no paybacks?
Because I say both sides are bad for continuing the violence over the last decade? And I specifically called out Isreal on its atrocities? Wtf? Are you really that ignorant and closed minded?
TF do you mean "apologist?" Hamas being a (and, in fact, by far the biggest) Palestinian armed resistance organization and the fact they do a lot of evil shit are two facts that can be true at the same time. That doesn't mean supporting Hamas is victimizing Israel.
It kinda does tho. Hamas, in one form or another, has been attacking Isreal for many decades. Isreal has been attacking Gaza and Lebanon and other Arab countries for decades too. They're all victims of each other and a product of an unfortunate history. There have even been some serious attempts at peaceful resolution, which always get fucked up by one side or the other, or usually both. Yes I 100% agree that isreal's actions are unacceptable and horrific. But they are also victims. Just like the people of Gaza could have voted for a government that strived for a peaceful solution, but chose a violent one - but they are still victims of the result.
Because there were so many free and fair elections in Gaza.
There was one. And they chose Hamas. One of Hamas' platforms was that they'd abolish democracy. And they won.
Do you seriously believe there was a free and fair election in Gaza? Jesus ...
One doesn't become a victim due to being attacked; it takes being unjustly attacked to make one a victim. This makes certain individual Israeli civilians victims, but not Israel as a whole.
With all due respect, this is the most historically illiterate thing I've read today. The only reason Hamas even exists is the complete and utter failure of peaceful solutions. And of course they failed; what, did you also expect the Irish or Algerians to strive for peaceful solutions? Rejecting peaceful solutions has been Israeli policy for longer than Israel existed. Hell, the current state of the West Bank should tell you all you need to know about what "striving for peaceful solutions" looks like,.
No I expect the Irish to keep fighting to this day and bomb people in London next week. Never stop fighting!!!! /s?
WTF?
Look back at the history, there have been plenty of peace talks scuppered by the Palestinians extremists (just as there have been by the Israeli extremists).
Yes, Isreal is totally fucked in the way they attack Palestinians. And visa versa. Both sides can claim tat for tit going a long way back. But unless we find a way to realize violence on BOTH SIDES is bad, it's not going to be possible to find a solution.
Are you fucking kidding me? The Irish got an acceptable settlement in Good Friday, so they're not bombing London anymore. They bombed the shit out of Brits and Loyalists before Good Friday, which is what Palestinians are doing. The Irish didn't get their freedom by fucking magic.
Example? If there are many, give what you consider the best example.
Then what are Palestinians supposed to do? Pray? When peaceful resistance fails, violent resistance becomes the only solution. Violence is only bad if there's another option available; no such thing is available to Palestinians. Again, have you seen the state of the West Bank? That's what the peace you're asking for looks like. Your refusal acknowledge this means your position is built on magical thinking divorced from reality.
And Isreal thinks the same thing, that they need to use violence to stop Hamas from firing rockets at them. And yes it's a lopsided war (putting it mildly) - all the more reason for Palestinians to keep trying for a peaceful solution, I would think. Both side are violent. Isreal is more in control right now, so yes, I put the onus on them to find a peaceful solution. And they're obviously not doing that right now which makes them pure evil. What should the Palestinians do? Have voted for peace when they had a chance, and not do the Oct attacks, and keep pushing for human rights. But we're past that now, so I honestly don't know. But if the chance comes up where Isreal looks for a peaceful solution, I would hope that Hamas stops firing rockets at them.
You seem to have no concrete idea for what should be (or even have been) done. You should have one if you want to have a conversation about this. And no, "vote for peace" (the fuck does that even mean) and "keep pushing for human rights" (see before) don't count. Your current position is basically "if Palestinians are nice they'll get a happy ending through the power of friendship."
Then, no offense, everything you just said is worthless. You can't condemn violent resistance without having a realistic proposal for peaceful resistance.
That's the whole point of the rockets. Hamas pretty much accepts a two-state solution (though in different terms, because Hamas considers Israel illegitimate and refuses to recognize it).
And if that's how they feel, fine keep ratcheting up the violence and either live that way forever or until one side simple can no longer because they're all dead or wounded. Some f'n crazy, but if that's what you really want ...
Just what is it that you find so appealing about genocide, fasicsm, and pedophilia? It boggles the mind.
Can you not read? Just because an opinion isn't 100% aligned with your personal brainwashing, doesn't mean it's diametrically opposed. What you did is called a 'strawman argument'. Try looking that up and learn why it makes you an idiot. No offense.
You didn't answer the question
Neither did you.
Which of the three do you prefer, if you had to choose? I'm referring to my original question if you're confused.
And Israel have been attacking them...
Uh, yeah. Thats the point. They've been attacking each other for decades.