• goferking0@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    51
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    2 months ago

    Israel opening up a 3rd front in their war right before USA elections.

    I’m sure this time USA will totally do something to reign them in…

    (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻)

  • Sundial@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    34
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    Right before the election, of course.

    EDIT: Israel has announced its over and Iran says the attacks were limited. I’m actually surprised, hopefully it means that the escalations between the two are over.

    Taken from the live page at Al Jazeera:

    Iran’s military has confirmed that Israeli strikes on the country targeted military bases in Ilam, Khuzestan and Tehran provinces, causing “limited damage.”

    The statement from Iran’s armed forces was read aloud on state television, which showed no images from the sites of the attacks.

    Iran’s military claimed its air defences limited the damage inflicted by Israel’s strikes.

    Link to page: https://aje.io/zs30s7

    • BombOmOm@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      2 months ago

      What Iranian hospitals or schools did Israel hit?

      Based on intelligence, IAF aircraft struck missile manufacturing facilities used to produce the missiles that Iran fired at the State of Israel over the last year. These missiles posed a direct and immediate threat to the citizens of the State of Israel. Simultaneously, the IDF struck surface-to-air missile arrays and additional Iranian aerial capabilities, that were intended to restrict Israel’s aerial freedom of operation in Iran. Source

      • RangerJosie@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        They missed. Missiles intercepted. The schools and hospitals are safe. For now. (.TM/knock on wood)

  • Etterra@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    11
    ·
    2 months ago

    Whenever they claim that about Gaza the target is usually a hospital. So ya’know, “trustworthy.”

  • ButtermilkBiscuit@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    11
    ·
    2 months ago

    “Israel says” - Oh so lies then. Gotcha.

    Still waiting for the proof of those underground hamas command bunkers filled with gold and beheaded Jewish babies to appear.

  • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldM
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    2 months ago

    If they’re actually telling the truth about ‘precise military targets,’ and I’m not confident of that, this is not as bad as I had feared.

    Not good, but not as bad as I had feared, which was a much more massive retaliation.

    Now we just have to hope things don’t keep escalating.

    • superkret@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      25
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      2 months ago

      The genocide in Gaza and the invasion in Lebanon were “limited ground incursions” so I don’t trust Israels wording here either.

      • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldM
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        2 months ago

        Like I said, I’m not confident of that. But I’m not confident of anything Iran says either. I don’t trust Israel and I don’t trust Iran. Neither government has given me reason to.

        I wonder if we will ever find out the truth about anything either of them have done so far in this particular recent conflict they’re involved in with each other.

    • Sundial@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      2 months ago

      Iran made it clear that if the attack was contained, than they would let it be. If not, then they retaliate.

      If they do intend to retaliate, I don’t expect it happening before the election. They know these kinds of things help Trump and the last thing they want is a Trump presidency.

      • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldM
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        2 months ago

        My problem is that I don’t trust Israel’s claim that this was precise and I also don’t trust Iran’s claim that if it is contained, they won’t retaliate.

        Because I don’t trust either government at all.

      • SamiA
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        I don’t think they said they would not retaliate against a limited attack though that might end up being the case depending on the nature and scale of the damages.

        • Sundial@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          2 months ago

          They did say it.

          If Israeli strikes — a response to a barrage of missiles from Iran earlier this month — inflict widespread damage and high casualties, they said, Iran will retaliate. But if Israel limits its attack to a few military bases and warehouses storing missiles and drones, Iran might well do nothing.

          The officials said Ayatollah Khamenei had directed that a response would be certain if Israel strikes oil and energy infrastructure or nuclear facilities, or if it assassinates senior officials.

          They made the terms clear. Now we see if Israel abides by them. My guess is no.

          • SamiA
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            Different statements were made in the past month:

            Iran’s General Staff of the Armed Forces said in a statement carried by state media that any Israeli response would be met with “vast destruction” of Israeli infrastructure.

            I believe the Iranian ambassador said something of the same vein at the UN security council meeting as well. Either way I still agree that they likely wont respond to this type of limited strike as things currently stand.

    • small44@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      2 months ago

      Sorry to say that but escalation is the only way to stop Israel and it’s genocidal campain

      • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldM
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        Stopping a genocide by potentially killing far more people than the genocide is killing doesn’t seem like a very good alternative.

        • small44@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          2 months ago

          When in history a colonized power was stopped without ton of civilians dying because of the colonizer refusal for peace? Are you telling me that for example that India shouldn’t have resisted the British empire because 100 millions Indian died? I wish there was a world where peace happen without sacrificing a single person, but that’s not the reality.

          • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldM
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            2 months ago

            When did I say there shouldn’t be resistance?

            Resistance to genocide and an escalating war between two nuclear powers are very different things.

            If you think Iran actually gives a shit about Palestinians and what Israel is doing to them, you’re wrong.

            • small44@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              7
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              2 months ago

              The Usa and other allies won’t stop supporting Israel politically and military, Palestine can’t beat Israel alone, it need support from other countries . I don’t hear people calling for not escalating against Russia and rightfully so. Both Israel and Russia are occupiers.

              Yes Iran doesn’t really care about Palestinians but their interests align with supporting armed groups against Israel

              • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldM
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                5
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                2 months ago

                You don’t seem to get it. There won’t be a Palestine if this war keeps escalating. Because Iran will annihilate it along with Israel.

                Believe it or not, Palestine doesn’t have a giant radiation shield.

                Also, the idea that millions of dead Israelis and Iranians even if nukes aren’t used is worth it because of Palestine is extremely ethically messed up.

    • BombOmOm@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Iran would be putting those civilian casualties on blast if they existed. They don’t, which is why Iran is complaining about Iranian soldiers and destroyed Iranian military targets.

  • Media Bias Fact Checker@lemmy.worldB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    12
    ·
    2 months ago
    BBC - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)

    Information for BBC:

    Wiki: reliable - BBC is a British publicly funded broadcaster. It is considered generally reliable. This includes BBC News, BBC documentaries, and the BBC History site (on BBC Online). However, this excludes BBC projects that incorporate user-generated content (such as h2g2 and the BBC Domesday Project) and BBC publications with reduced editorial oversight (such as Collective). Statements of opinion should conform to the corresponding guideline.


    MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - United Kingdom


    Search topics on Ground.News

    https://www.bbc.com/news/live/cn4v67j88e0t

    Media Bias Fact Check | bot support

    • Five@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Groups like MBFC use their position as gatekeepers of the political spectrum to disguise radical ideas as centrist positions, and it’s ironic that !world using such a biased propaganda platform to tell its readers what is credible.

      Bias is not the same thing as propaganda, propaganda is not the same thing as misinformation. Articles should be evaluated on how factual they are, and there are plenty of platforms that are doing the hard work of verifying information without putting their political ideology above their credibility. This bot is a mistake.

      Before removing the bot, !news mods removed comments critical of the bot, and ignored the overwhelming negative feedback and the consensus that the bot should be removed when they opened the discussion up to the community.

      !politics and !world now appear to be willing to change course. The vote to “Kill” – stop their bot from advertising MBFC in all of their posts – appears to be leading in both communities.

      If you upvote the Kill comment so that this lead becomes a landslide, you can make it even more embarrassing and difficult for them to claim ‘bots’ or backtrack.