Hamas is literally in this video firing missiles. The people on this site including yourself have your heads in the sand.
Hamas is literally in this video firing missiles.
Yes they are. So kill them then without leveling the entire neighborhood, as I already said.
Go for it. If it is so easy you are welcome to go put yourself in harm's way. Don't criticize when you have not been faced with the decisions and a lack of full awareness. Hamas is not sitting out in the middle of a field waiting to be struck.
It is neither my place, nor my responsibility to physically take part in this conflict. However, it certainly IS my place and responsibility, as a human being, to say that purposefully killing innocent civilians and blowing up functional hospitals is evil. Yes, even when there is a bad guy hiding inside.
Bless your heart, sweet summer child.
So, in your mind, rules of engagement allow destroying civilian infrastructure that currently hosts many civilians so you can kill a handful of bad guys?
Article 19 of Geneva states that if a hospital is being used to store military equipment and active military combatants, then it loses its protection.
However, it certainly IS my place and responsibility, as a human being, to say that purposefully killing innocent civilians and blowing up functional hospitals is evil
It's your responsibility to actually know what is happening before you spout false things online.
War is evil. Nothing they are doing is without military purpose. This is a justified conflict. Your perspective is naive and not based in reality and/or military law. Israel did everything they could to avoid this conflict, most of which has been misconstrued as genocide against Palestine.
They have absolutely not made any attempt to avoid conflict
Just wanted to point out a few factual inaccuracies in your comment.
This is no longer a justified conflict. A state has the right to self defence in a limited way. The right to self defence does not override the rules on collective punishment. The right to self defence does not include the right to invade a state where the enemy is a terrorist group within that state, rather than the state itself. The right to self defence does not override the rules on attacking civilian infrastructure (especially ambulances) even where there is suspicion that a terrorist organisation may be using it. The right to self defence does not override the rules on forcible relocation or blockade.
In short, the response to an enemy using a human shield must not be to eliminate the shield. It's astounding that so many people seem to need this explained to them. This is borne out by international law, cf. the UN charters.
Israel did not do everything they could do to avoid this conflict. The one thing they had to do was to abide by the Oslo accords, yet they have built settlements in Palestine every single day since signing, and restricted Gazans every single day since signing. The two state solution has failed as a result of Israel's actions. In terms of actions since October 7th, the usual way to go about dismantling an embedded terror organisation is to use counterintelligence, ground ops and precision strikes. The reasons are obvious, I hope. The only way to get those hostages back is either by freeing them in covert ops or by negotiation at a political level. Destroying entire city blocks from the air will not get the hostages back, as we all know.
The label genocide is not misconstrued, according to the UN genocide experts. Some say there is a grave risk that this is a genocide, based on the available facts, and some say that it already fulfills the criteria.
I can provide sources for all of my claims, if you'd prefer not to do the legwork yourself.
Lol literally none this si accurate
How do you write so much and get everything wrong
It's literally all verifiable and true.
It is accurate, and I can back it up with data. Is there anything in particular you think is incorrect? Or are you just annoyed with it in general.
Literally everything you wrote is wrong so yeah, start anywhere.
Ok let's start with this one:
"Israel has built illegal settlements in Palestine every day since signing the Oslo accords"
Go ahead. Prove that wrong.
"Wrong" isn't so much the right word as "heavily misleading." Here's a good deep dive for why no one adheres to Oslo.
If you'd like to actually say anything meaningful, that would be fun. Snark doesn't get you anywhere when someone knowledgeable is in the discussion.
Ok so everything I wrote isn't wrong.
It's telling how you're accusing me of snark, when that's precisely all you've provided so far. Well, that and a rambling opinion piece on the Oslo accords in support of a tu quoque fallacy. And of not saying anything meaningful when I clearly made three substantive rebuttals above.
Cheers
You've made 0 rebuttals to the fundamental fact that your claims are intentionally misleading, and thus falsehoods.
Hamas were the first to violate the accords. They launched an attack because they weren't being included in the negotiations.
the usual way to go about dismantling an embedded terror organisation is to use counterintelligence, ground ops and precision strikes.
israel has been doing that for a few decades but Hamas continues to attack until they call for a ceasefire. In which Israel agrees, and then Hamas again breaks the ceasefire.
Okay genius, how do you kill them when they are in tunnels under neighborhoods? You cannot get into them without an explosion, even if present in person and they won't just sit there either. This is not a war crime and I'm really questioning everyone's collective intelligence and ability to think through problems instead of reacting to stimulus.
You heard from it this guy. Bombing hospitals is not a war crime if there's a bad guy near there.
This is literally true.
Specific protection of medical establishments and units (including hospitals) is the general rule under IHL. Therefore, specific protection to which hospitals are entitled shall not cease unless they are used by a party to the conflict to commit, outside their humanitarian functions, an "act harmful to the enemy". In case of doubt as to whether medical units of establishments are used to commit an "act harmful to the enemy", they should be presumed not to be so used.
Emphasis mine.
Proportionality is another factor you're ignoring.
They're also still required to attempt to limit targeting to avoid civilian casualties and yet they don't
They do limit targeting. How many strikes are you seeing in the south as compared to the north? That's a limitation and shows proportionality. You folks may not like it but this is categorically not a war crime.
It has to be applied per individual attack, not per region
Correct which is why your entire narrative is false because they never told civilians to go to a specific place. Dig into it. This is exactly what I mean when I call this stuff propaganda. It's stretching the truth and inviting you to draw your own conclusions from warped facts.
Non sequitur
I will put it quite simply. You cannot provide an example where the IDF told Gaza civilians to go to a specific place, only places where they should not go.
Your sources literally don't show where they told them to go, only to leave Gaza City and head south. Try again and this time actually read your sources for literally any point at which they gave specific guidance.
How do you take out the enemy? Answer the question. Your perspective is not useful when you have no alternative. They cannot access the tunnels without an explosive. Name a full conflict where civilian infrastructure was not hit when taking a city.
The alternative is "you don't", but for some reason you don't seem to even consider that there might be a cost in civilian lives too high to kill a handful of terrorists.
So how many festivals are you okay with being attacked? Apparently 260 per isn't high enough for you.
You don't have to shoot missiles indiscriminately into civilian zones. If your enemy is hiding among civilian infrastructure and/or using human shields, you need to change your tactics up to suit. Committing war crimes in order to kill your enemy isn't how you retain the moral highground.
I'm still waiting on these tactics you are recommending. Alternatives don't exist so your argument is absolute bullshit. The faster they can get through this, the less overall civilian suffering will occur.
The civilians can't suffer if they are dead so you're not wrong but are advocating for war crimes.
I think I'd rather be wrong.
What war crimes? There is a difference between war and war crimes and hardly anybody on this site knows the difference.
bombing civilian infrastructure which is likely to have families, children, non combatants inside is a war crime.
collective punishment is a war crime.
forcible relocation is a war crime.
ordering civilians to a new area and then bombing them en route or on arrival is intentional targeting of civilians, and therefore a war crime.
blockading a population within an area which you are actively shelling is a war crime.
depriving a population of non combatants of food and water and fuel is a war crime.
bombing a convoy of ambulances is a war crime.
bombing a refugee camp is a war crime.
killing reporters is a war crime.
use of white phosphorus on civilian targets is a war crime.
Israel has done all of these things. There is no excuse for war crimes. It doesn't matter how evil the enemy is, you are not allowed to do these things and not be a war criminal.
Civilian infrastructure are public works dedicated solely to civilians and does not inherently include power. You do not understand war crimes.
Collective punishment implies no military purpose. Israel is being very careful to include military purpose in all their narratives. You do not understand war crimes.
Forcible relocation is only occurring if Israel does not allow them to return after the current conflict is concluded. This is not relevant right now and is actively warned against. You do not understand war crimes.
Israel has not ordered civilians to any specific area they have then bombed. There's a lot of disinformation around this one in terms of hitting former routes well after they should've been gone. You don't understand the information space.
Israel has a border. That's not blockading a population in anymore than Egypt is guilty of the exact same thing within context. You don't understand war crimes.
Not providing food is not the same thing as depriving of food and it's been shown to go to Hamas, not the civilian population when they do. You don't understand the information space or war crimes. This does however show why they want to end the conflict as quickly as possible. It clouds decision making.
Something called a refugee camp for 80 years is not an active refugee camp. You don't understand the information space
Intentionally targeting reporters is a war crime. I'm yet to see anything close to intent but it is sad that reporters have been caught up and killed regardless. They are actively trying to gain more information from Gaza which does put them more at risk.
The IDF is not using white phosphorous munitions within Gaza City but have probably used it for illumination. This is perfectly legal. You don't understand the information space.
If any of these statements are inaccurate, feel free to provide a source that has actual evidence. War crimes happen in literally every army so don't think I don't think they happen. The difference is when it is planned, condoned, and unprosecuted by the supporting organization. That is my burden of proof. I have seen the Hamas operations order. The IDF have so far not been acting out of accordance with what's expected of a modern professional fighting force.
Civilian infrastructure are public works dedicated solely to civilians and does not inherently include power.
Did I say that civilian infrastructure includes power?
You do not understand war crimes.
I can read. I can read the UN charters. I understand war crimes.
Collective punishment implies no military purpose
No it does not. There is a definition in international law. Nothing is implied, it is defined.
Forcible relocation is only occurring if Israel does not allow them to return after the current conflict is concluded.
Again, relocating is defined in the UN charters. This is where you should go if you would like to understand the definitions of war crimes.
Israel has not ordered civilians to any specific area they have then bombed.
This has been independently verified by the BBC. Israel did exactly this, repeatedly.
Israel has a border. That's not blockading a population
And did Israel allow any Palestinians through that border after October 7th? Or did it close the border and bomb the Rafah crossing, thus blockading the entire Gaza Strip?
Not providing food is not the same thing as depriving of food
Not allowing any food in is depriving of food
Bombing a convoy of mismarked vehicles is not a war crime.
Vehicles were not mismarked, they were legit, as the Red Cross independently verified. You would also need some proof that they were mismarked before bombing them, which was not gathered.
Something called a refugee camp for 80 years is not an active refugee camp.
A "refugee camp" is not a refugee camp. What is it then? A tomato?
The IDF is not using white phosphorous munitions within Gaza City but have probably used it for illumination. This is perfectly legal.
It's not even remotely legal to use while phosphorus in areas where civilians are present, or even where event combatants may be present. Again, check the charters (chemical weapons).
Sources: Red Cross International, BBC, UN charters.
Your entire reply can be summed up as "no you are lying" without addressing any of the points. If you cannot admit that an 80 year old location called a refugee camp I'd not functioning as a refugee camp anymore I don't think there is anything you will accept as truth. You are very taken by propaganda and you do not validate claims, as a lot of folks on here do.
Literally all of these claims have been made against NATO countries when I've seen it personally to not be true and I've seen NATO take the same approach to the response. Insurgents and others at a disadvantage such as Hamas lie because it's the only way they can gain the information war. Find one example where Hamas admits that one of their members were killed. You cannot because according to them, all Israel hits are civilians and ambulances and they've never traveled in one. Not once.
I can accept it if I'm shown evidence. I'm a scientist, I need data and a sound hypothesis to change my mind. I don't care about personal experience or lived truth when I'm trying to find objective truth.
If you'd like to sum up my reply as three words, that's up to you. If you want to believe that I'm taken by propaganda, that's fine too, but it's more than a little bit intellectually lazy. There are laws that define war crimes. In my reading of them, and many others', there is between little and no room for the evidence we've seen to amount to anything other than a war crime. At least a huge amount of compelling evidence the other way would be needed to exonerate. Take for example the footage we've seen of entire square kilometers of Gaza completely flattened by building. There we have evidence of the war crime of targeting civilian infrastructure except if there's also evidence that all of it was a Hamas base. Now, it seems unlikely that this is possible, unless everyone in Gaza is a member of Hamas. Another extraordinary claim which would require extraordinary evidence to be borne out.
In general, my view on the situation in Israel has been that there are no good guys. In recent days, though, I'm watching a democratic state ally of my country committing horrific crimes against humanity, with weapons provided by my country and other allies. Hamas never had my support. Netenyahu's Israel has lost it.
If you are a scientist then I'll ask you to consider two things. How often do people talk to you about your expertise and get it wrong and how does that make you feel? Imagine if it's an ethical issue.
Occam's razor is how you handle what you see without sufficient evidence. What we are seeing is exactly what I would expect to see with a professional army taking two cities defended by 40,000 trained defenders with years to prepare. This includes the information space. Why would you think differently?
I'm talking about intentionally targeting civilian population which is a defined war crime.
How do you figure it is not?
Good luck providing proof of intent. That should be a red flag right there about your narrative. Israel's narrative has never been that they are targeting civilians and they've shown on quite a few occasions in this current conflict that they have justification for their targets. They are at war right now. They don't have time to justify every single target to you personally.
They are bombing a fucking hospital, if you think that’s fine then you’re a shitty person as well.
No one on this site is pro-Hamas, other than if you go over to the tankie instances.
You are spreading their propaganda and disinformation.
I checked the Arabic news scene for "AI" and whatever they call Israel thanks to Google AI and Yandex translate. They label every single "negative" photo,video,audio AI as things created by Israel.
Their heads aren't in the sand, they are indoctrinated which makes the situation truly horrible. There were teenagers getting medals in Hitler's last days.
As a side-note I guess they are trying to bury your opinion like they do in the evil site not knowing this place was founded by FOSS ideals which they don't have a clue about.
I don't think there are media controls on Lemmy but it also opens it up to automated propaganda and manipulation.
I guess they try to "punish" user by downvoting whatever thing they don't like.
Hamas is literally in this video firing missiles. The people on this site including yourself have your heads in the sand.
Yes they are. So kill them then without leveling the entire neighborhood, as I already said.
Go for it. If it is so easy you are welcome to go put yourself in harm's way. Don't criticize when you have not been faced with the decisions and a lack of full awareness. Hamas is not sitting out in the middle of a field waiting to be struck.
It is neither my place, nor my responsibility to physically take part in this conflict. However, it certainly IS my place and responsibility, as a human being, to say that purposefully killing innocent civilians and blowing up functional hospitals is evil. Yes, even when there is a bad guy hiding inside.
Bless your heart, sweet summer child.
So, in your mind, rules of engagement allow destroying civilian infrastructure that currently hosts many civilians so you can kill a handful of bad guys?
Article 19 of Geneva states that if a hospital is being used to store military equipment and active military combatants, then it loses its protection.
It's your responsibility to actually know what is happening before you spout false things online.
War is evil. Nothing they are doing is without military purpose. This is a justified conflict. Your perspective is naive and not based in reality and/or military law. Israel did everything they could to avoid this conflict, most of which has been misconstrued as genocide against Palestine.
They have absolutely not made any attempt to avoid conflict
https://lemmy.world/comment/5306547
Just wanted to point out a few factual inaccuracies in your comment.
I can provide sources for all of my claims, if you'd prefer not to do the legwork yourself.
Lol literally none this si accurate
How do you write so much and get everything wrong
It's literally all verifiable and true.
It is accurate, and I can back it up with data. Is there anything in particular you think is incorrect? Or are you just annoyed with it in general.
Literally everything you wrote is wrong so yeah, start anywhere.
Ok let's start with this one:
"Israel has built illegal settlements in Palestine every day since signing the Oslo accords"
Go ahead. Prove that wrong.
"Wrong" isn't so much the right word as "heavily misleading." Here's a good deep dive for why no one adheres to Oslo.
https://foreignpolicy.com/2023/09/13/oslo-accords-1993-anniversary-israel-palestine-peace-process-lessons/
If you'd like to actually say anything meaningful, that would be fun. Snark doesn't get you anywhere when someone knowledgeable is in the discussion.
Ok so everything I wrote isn't wrong.
It's telling how you're accusing me of snark, when that's precisely all you've provided so far. Well, that and a rambling opinion piece on the Oslo accords in support of a tu quoque fallacy. And of not saying anything meaningful when I clearly made three substantive rebuttals above.
Cheers
You've made 0 rebuttals to the fundamental fact that your claims are intentionally misleading, and thus falsehoods.
Hamas were the first to violate the accords. They launched an attack because they weren't being included in the negotiations.
israel has been doing that for a few decades but Hamas continues to attack until they call for a ceasefire. In which Israel agrees, and then Hamas again breaks the ceasefire.
Okay genius, how do you kill them when they are in tunnels under neighborhoods? You cannot get into them without an explosion, even if present in person and they won't just sit there either. This is not a war crime and I'm really questioning everyone's collective intelligence and ability to think through problems instead of reacting to stimulus.
You heard from it this guy. Bombing hospitals is not a war crime if there's a bad guy near there.
This is literally true.
Emphasis mine.
Proportionality is another factor you're ignoring.
They're also still required to attempt to limit targeting to avoid civilian casualties and yet they don't
They do limit targeting. How many strikes are you seeing in the south as compared to the north? That's a limitation and shows proportionality. You folks may not like it but this is categorically not a war crime.
It has to be applied per individual attack, not per region
Correct which is why your entire narrative is false because they never told civilians to go to a specific place. Dig into it. This is exactly what I mean when I call this stuff propaganda. It's stretching the truth and inviting you to draw your own conclusions from warped facts.
Non sequitur
I will put it quite simply. You cannot provide an example where the IDF told Gaza civilians to go to a specific place, only places where they should not go.
https://www.timesofisrael.com/idf-instructs-gazans-on-evacuation-routes-while-many-find-shelter-in-unrwa-schools/
Huh
https://web.archive.org/web/20231018034732/https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/10/13/dozens-killed-while-fleeing-gaza-homes-as-israel-conducts-ground-raids
Your sources literally don't show where they told them to go, only to leave Gaza City and head south. Try again and this time actually read your sources for literally any point at which they gave specific guidance.
How do you take out the enemy? Answer the question. Your perspective is not useful when you have no alternative. They cannot access the tunnels without an explosive. Name a full conflict where civilian infrastructure was not hit when taking a city.
The alternative is "you don't", but for some reason you don't seem to even consider that there might be a cost in civilian lives too high to kill a handful of terrorists.
So how many festivals are you okay with being attacked? Apparently 260 per isn't high enough for you.
Some are more equal than others, I presume
https://www.ochaopt.org/content/hostilities-gaza-strip-and-israel-reported-impact-day-39
As if the conflict started on October 7th and hasn't been going on since even before Hamas existed.
Israel has killed far more Palestinian civilians since October 7th than Hamas killed on October 7th. Like 10x the amount.
You don't have to shoot missiles indiscriminately into civilian zones. If your enemy is hiding among civilian infrastructure and/or using human shields, you need to change your tactics up to suit. Committing war crimes in order to kill your enemy isn't how you retain the moral highground.
I'm still waiting on these tactics you are recommending. Alternatives don't exist so your argument is absolute bullshit. The faster they can get through this, the less overall civilian suffering will occur.
The civilians can't suffer if they are dead so you're not wrong but are advocating for war crimes.
I think I'd rather be wrong.
What war crimes? There is a difference between war and war crimes and hardly anybody on this site knows the difference.
bombing civilian infrastructure which is likely to have families, children, non combatants inside is a war crime.
collective punishment is a war crime.
forcible relocation is a war crime.
ordering civilians to a new area and then bombing them en route or on arrival is intentional targeting of civilians, and therefore a war crime.
blockading a population within an area which you are actively shelling is a war crime.
depriving a population of non combatants of food and water and fuel is a war crime.
bombing a convoy of ambulances is a war crime.
bombing a refugee camp is a war crime.
killing reporters is a war crime.
use of white phosphorus on civilian targets is a war crime.
Israel has done all of these things. There is no excuse for war crimes. It doesn't matter how evil the enemy is, you are not allowed to do these things and not be a war criminal.
Civilian infrastructure are public works dedicated solely to civilians and does not inherently include power. You do not understand war crimes.
Collective punishment implies no military purpose. Israel is being very careful to include military purpose in all their narratives. You do not understand war crimes.
Forcible relocation is only occurring if Israel does not allow them to return after the current conflict is concluded. This is not relevant right now and is actively warned against. You do not understand war crimes.
Israel has not ordered civilians to any specific area they have then bombed. There's a lot of disinformation around this one in terms of hitting former routes well after they should've been gone. You don't understand the information space.
Israel has a border. That's not blockading a population in anymore than Egypt is guilty of the exact same thing within context. You don't understand war crimes.
Not providing food is not the same thing as depriving of food and it's been shown to go to Hamas, not the civilian population when they do. You don't understand the information space or war crimes. This does however show why they want to end the conflict as quickly as possible. It clouds decision making.
Bombing a convoy of mismarked vehicles is not a war crime. Just because you through a red crescent on your logistics vehicles and then use them to transport combatants does not make it an illegitimate target. Hamas does this because it works. The IDF has shown at least some of their intelligence supporting this. https://www.idf.il/en/mini-sites/hamas-israel-war-articles-videos-and-more/war-on-hamas-2023-resources/hamas-terrorist-uses-ambulances-for-transportation-purposes/ You don't understand war crimes.
Something called a refugee camp for 80 years is not an active refugee camp. You don't understand the information space
Intentionally targeting reporters is a war crime. I'm yet to see anything close to intent but it is sad that reporters have been caught up and killed regardless. They are actively trying to gain more information from Gaza which does put them more at risk.
The IDF is not using white phosphorous munitions within Gaza City but have probably used it for illumination. This is perfectly legal. You don't understand the information space.
If any of these statements are inaccurate, feel free to provide a source that has actual evidence. War crimes happen in literally every army so don't think I don't think they happen. The difference is when it is planned, condoned, and unprosecuted by the supporting organization. That is my burden of proof. I have seen the Hamas operations order. The IDF have so far not been acting out of accordance with what's expected of a modern professional fighting force.
Did I say that civilian infrastructure includes power?
I can read. I can read the UN charters. I understand war crimes.
No it does not. There is a definition in international law. Nothing is implied, it is defined.
Again, relocating is defined in the UN charters. This is where you should go if you would like to understand the definitions of war crimes.
This has been independently verified by the BBC. Israel did exactly this, repeatedly.
And did Israel allow any Palestinians through that border after October 7th? Or did it close the border and bomb the Rafah crossing, thus blockading the entire Gaza Strip?
Not allowing any food in is depriving of food
Vehicles were not mismarked, they were legit, as the Red Cross independently verified. You would also need some proof that they were mismarked before bombing them, which was not gathered.
A "refugee camp" is not a refugee camp. What is it then? A tomato?
It's not even remotely legal to use while phosphorus in areas where civilians are present, or even where event combatants may be present. Again, check the charters (chemical weapons).
Sources: Red Cross International, BBC, UN charters.
Your entire reply can be summed up as "no you are lying" without addressing any of the points. If you cannot admit that an 80 year old location called a refugee camp I'd not functioning as a refugee camp anymore I don't think there is anything you will accept as truth. You are very taken by propaganda and you do not validate claims, as a lot of folks on here do.
Literally all of these claims have been made against NATO countries when I've seen it personally to not be true and I've seen NATO take the same approach to the response. Insurgents and others at a disadvantage such as Hamas lie because it's the only way they can gain the information war. Find one example where Hamas admits that one of their members were killed. You cannot because according to them, all Israel hits are civilians and ambulances and they've never traveled in one. Not once.
I can accept it if I'm shown evidence. I'm a scientist, I need data and a sound hypothesis to change my mind. I don't care about personal experience or lived truth when I'm trying to find objective truth.
If you'd like to sum up my reply as three words, that's up to you. If you want to believe that I'm taken by propaganda, that's fine too, but it's more than a little bit intellectually lazy. There are laws that define war crimes. In my reading of them, and many others', there is between little and no room for the evidence we've seen to amount to anything other than a war crime. At least a huge amount of compelling evidence the other way would be needed to exonerate. Take for example the footage we've seen of entire square kilometers of Gaza completely flattened by building. There we have evidence of the war crime of targeting civilian infrastructure except if there's also evidence that all of it was a Hamas base. Now, it seems unlikely that this is possible, unless everyone in Gaza is a member of Hamas. Another extraordinary claim which would require extraordinary evidence to be borne out.
In general, my view on the situation in Israel has been that there are no good guys. In recent days, though, I'm watching a democratic state ally of my country committing horrific crimes against humanity, with weapons provided by my country and other allies. Hamas never had my support. Netenyahu's Israel has lost it.
If you are a scientist then I'll ask you to consider two things. How often do people talk to you about your expertise and get it wrong and how does that make you feel? Imagine if it's an ethical issue.
Occam's razor is how you handle what you see without sufficient evidence. What we are seeing is exactly what I would expect to see with a professional army taking two cities defended by 40,000 trained defenders with years to prepare. This includes the information space. Why would you think differently?
can you tell hamas to also not be war criminals?
This site?
The perfectly homogenous lemmy?
I'm talking about intentionally targeting civilian population which is a defined war crime.
How do you figure it is not?
Good luck providing proof of intent. That should be a red flag right there about your narrative. Israel's narrative has never been that they are targeting civilians and they've shown on quite a few occasions in this current conflict that they have justification for their targets. They are at war right now. They don't have time to justify every single target to you personally.
They are bombing a fucking hospital, if you think that’s fine then you’re a shitty person as well.
IDF hasn't bombed any active hospital yet.
No one on this site is pro-Hamas, other than if you go over to the tankie instances.
You are spreading their propaganda and disinformation.
I checked the Arabic news scene for "AI" and whatever they call Israel thanks to Google AI and Yandex translate. They label every single "negative" photo,video,audio AI as things created by Israel. Their heads aren't in the sand, they are indoctrinated which makes the situation truly horrible. There were teenagers getting medals in Hitler's last days. As a side-note I guess they are trying to bury your opinion like they do in the evil site not knowing this place was founded by FOSS ideals which they don't have a clue about.
I don't think there are media controls on Lemmy but it also opens it up to automated propaganda and manipulation.
I guess they try to "punish" user by downvoting whatever thing they don't like.