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
For anyone else wondering "why did the US veto it?" rather than jumping to an emotional reaction, the article explains the US's position:
So some total bullshit.
Come the fuck on.
Because Israel does? What a fucking joke. I'm so fucking embarrassed of this country and so fucking sick of being stuck in it.
It would be weird for them to offer so many two-state solutions if that's not a thing they wanted.
Oh, look... the White Supremacism Fan Brigade has shown up to run interference for their favorite fascist regime in the middle-east.
Yawn.
Hmmm that's funny considering that both Rabin and Arafat were assassinated because of the Oslo Accords.
I'll translate for those that doesn't speak US foreign policy-ese.
"We fully support our pet genocidal white supremacist settler-colonialist state in their genocidal ventures."
Oh yeah that totally convinces me to justify the indiscriminate bombing of civilians in Gaza.
"We will not be supporting a call for a full cease fire as it would allow the democratically elected government currently in charge to continue to be in charge, potentially jeopardizing the future peace"
Putting aside the fact that I don't think Hamas would win an election today (if they'd allow one), how is Israel not just as likely to break this "durable peace".
Calling for an end to violence on an immediate basis and being upset when your own government is again going against the will of it's citizens, choosing to back a military that's vastly superior to their enemies and barely even whispering a comment on the brutality they're committing on the civilian population of their adversary, isn't jumping to an emotional reaction because we all already figured that was the reason anyway
You really wrote this out and thought it made sense.
In the same way Zeleneskyy isn't going to hold elections at this time, I doubt Hamas would either, although I think the sentiment between the leader and their citizens are completely different between the two.
There can be nuance here, I don't LIKE that they were democratically elected and definitely took a greater grip than granted by that election, but this is the 57th time we've decided to assist in the deposition of a foreign power and government that, although I think are commitering terrible atrocities, only became so popular and so radicalized due to the mistreatment of their population by the Israeli government assisted by the financial and militaristic aid already given to them by the United States.
People elect dictators all the time for all kinds of reasons, this one just happens to be deeply entrenched in our geopolitical expansion and security game and the harm inflicted on the citizens of palestine is partially our government's fault and they and so many of us refuse to acknowledge that.
Hamas seized power because he PA was trying to form a secular state, as part of a two-state solution. Upon seizing power, they immediately canceled elections forever. Then, they stole aid money from their own people, blocked the UNRWA from distributing further aid (and did so again during this conflict) and forced them to teach genocide against Jews in schools. This is all in addition to torturing and murdering any Palestinian dissidents who oppose Hamas.
Shit, during this very conflict, Hamas literally shot people fleeing south, because maximizing civilian casualties is a stated goal of theirs.
There is nothing redeeming about Hamas.
I dont disagree with the statement that there's nothing redeeming about them. I agree they are a bad organization that is ALSO causing harms to the citizens of Palestine.
All I'm asking you to agree to is that the people of Palestine would benefit from a cease fire, if only to reduce the total number of civilian deaths. They cause civilian death, and so does Israel, but as long as the conflict is hot and active, that death and suffering is at it's zenith.
A) this has nothing to do with Hamas
B) my opinion will not influence this situation at all
You mean... apart from the fact that they are at war with a genocidal white supremacist settler-colonialist state?