News
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. 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. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
view the rest of the comments
negotiate a ceasefire with Hamas in exchange for the remaining hostages. reign in the West Bank settlers, to focus the conflict on Gaza specifically rather than the conquest of the Palestinian territories. as part of the ceasefire,
sound fair?
Rein in settlers? No. Pre 67 borders. Zero settlers.
This doesn’t address the core issue - Hamas. They have no intention of living peacefully next to a Jewish state. They’ve openly stated that they want to destroy Israel and kill Jews. After the IDF withdrew from Gaza in 2005, Hamas didn’t use that time or international aid to build infrastructure or improve life for civilians - they used it to dig tunnels and stockpile weapons in preparation for the ongoing conflict.
I genuinely don’t believe a two-state solution is viable as long as Hamas exists. If one were established tomorrow, it would likely just return to the same cycle - with rockets being fired indiscriminately at Israeli civilians, and the rest of the world expecting Israel to just take the hits without fighting back.
correct. it doesn't address the core issue. however, sometimes enemies have to live next to each other. a military solution cannot end Hamas. anything short of full-scale ethnic cleansing of the population of Gaza cannot end Hamas. that is the unfortunate reality. the human cost is too great.
Hamas murdered 1,195 people on 10/7. Israel has killed ~57,000 in Gaza, and razed it to rubble. Israel has had its retribution, killing 50 Gazans for each dead Israeli. enough.
I understand that what I’m about to say might come off as cold, but this is how I see the conflict: the overwhelming reason for the high number of civilian casualties isn’t the IDF - it’s Hamas. That’s not to say the IDF or the Israeli government is without guilt, let alone individual soldiers who’ve committed atrocities that absolutely match what Hamas has done. But there’s so much Hamas could have done to protect their own civilian population, and instead they’ve consistently chosen the opposite - to use them as human shields.
If we now decide that the civilian death toll is intolerable and use that as a reason to pressure Israel into ending the conflict, to me, that’s equivalent to paying ransom to kidnappers. It shows the tactic works - and it encourages more of it. I want us to do the opposite: make it clear that it doesn’t work. If you fight from among civilians, then civilians will get bombed, and the responsibility for that will be placed on you. That’s how Hamas should be treated, and honestly, how their own people should come to see them too.
I just don’t buy the narrative that Israel is intentionally bombing civilians as part of some ethnic cleansing campaign. If that had been the goal, they could’ve pursued it decades ago. But they haven’t. Hamas, on the other hand - I genuinely believe they would if they could.