• Hello_there@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    38
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    21 days ago

    “By the time it was over, four Israeli hostages had been brought home alive and mostly unscathed, at least physically, and at least 274 Palestinians, and an Israeli commando, had been killed.”

    Holy shit. What a clusterfuck.

  • spaduf@slrpnk.netOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    38
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    21 days ago

    Literally hundreds of civilians killed to rescue 4 hostages. I don’t know what happened but I can guarantee we will be hearing more about it.

    Not a huge fan of the title but this is breaking news and I think the AP can be trusted to at least get the basics right.

    • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      21 days ago

      I don’t see a problem with the title. That’s literally what happened. It makes no judgments.

      • spaduf@slrpnk.netOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        20 days ago

        I think it feels reminiscent of an explainer and that kind of gives me the ick. Maybe I’m being silly though

    • Moonrise2473@feddit.it
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      20 days ago

      I can guarantee we will be hearing more about it.

      Huh? Ratios of 300 innocents per 1 terrorists killed are now the norm and we are definitely not hearing more about. It gets buried by the next “accident” where by “accident” destroy a hospital/school/refugee camp full of people

    • BlameThePeacock@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      34
      ·
      21 days ago

      How many people would you be willing to let the military kill to rescue your child who had been taken hostage?

      My answer is “anyone who gets in the way”

      • Avid Amoeba@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        20 days ago

        Let’s take it to an extreme. By this logic, you’d be okay with killing everyone on earth to rescue your child. This includes me and my children. This is insane.

        To answer directly I wouldn’t be okay with the military killing hundreds of civilians to save anyone of my family, myself included. Not sure where my number is but it’s at least an order of magnitude lower.

        • BlameThePeacock@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          11
          ·
          20 days ago

          I don’t see that as insane at all. Why should I put anyone else’s lives above my own children?

          • filister@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            20 days ago

            Congrats, you just found how terrorism is created. By violence. You just openly admitted that you will turn willfully a terrorist if the right conditions are met, e.g. someone endangers your child.

            Now imagine how many Palestinian parents lost their children in this war. How do you think they feel?

      • filister@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        20 days ago

        And now imagine you were on the opposite side. How would you feel if someone kills your child, in the pursuit of saving their own? Would you still be so cool?

  • Silverseren@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    23
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    21 days ago

    And quite possibly killed three more hostages in the action. Hamas is claiming it and the IDF is denying it. But considering that the four hostages saved were being held in the same place as one of the higher ups, if the IDF has just been bombing every other family home of Hamas members (remember the Where’s Daddy AI system?), then it seems quite likely they could kill hostages in the process.

  • AutoTL;DR@lemmings.worldB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    21 days ago

    This is the best summary I could come up with:


    KHAN YOUNIS, Gaza Strip (AP) — They arrived in the middle of the day, when the squat concrete buildings of the Nuseirat refugee camp are stifling and the narrow streets outside are filled with people.

    Hagari declined to say how the Israeli forces made their way to the heart of Nuseirat, a crowded, built-up refugee camp in central Gaza dating back to the 1948 Arab-Israeli war.

    Chief Inspector Arnon Zamora, an officer in an elite police commando unit, was mortally wounded during the break-in, in which all the Hamas guards were killed, Amos Harel, a veteran defense correspondent, wrote in Israel’s Haaretz newspaper.

    Palestinian militants armed with machine-guns and rocket-propelled grenades opened fire on the rescuers, as Israel called in heavy strikes from land and air to cover their evacuation to the coast.

    Mohamed al-Habash, another displaced Palestinian, was in the Nuseirat market looking for humanitarian aid or inexpensive food when the heavy bombing began.

    At the Al-Aqsa Martyrs Hospital in the nearby town of Deir al-Balah, the dead and wounded arrived in waves — men, women and children.


    The original article contains 1,067 words, the summary contains 179 words. Saved 83%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!

  • sir_pronoun@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    20
    ·
    20 days ago

    I am still surprised by how people get (understandably) outraged at the IDF online but seem to forget that Hamas took those hostages in the first place. A lot of this bloodshed could be stopped right now if Hamas released them.

    Sure, the Israeli government is fucking insane, but there are two sides fighting this war.

    • Linkerbaan@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      20 days ago

      You seem to forget that israel took hostages in the first place and the reason Hamas kidnapped people is literally to swap them for the hostages kidnapped by israel.

        • Linkerbaan@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          20 days ago

          I am glad you have discovered the moral inconsistency of your argument. We can now conclude both sides should release their hostages.

          Now remind men which side is open to a hostage swap without bloodshed and which side isn’t?

      • sir_pronoun@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        20 days ago

        That’s my point here, blaming just one side makes no sense. Both sides have been committing atrocities for decades.

        • Linkerbaan@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          edit-2
          20 days ago

          Yet one side is trying to reach a peaceful solution. Hamas.

          You can be mad about Hamas using violence but we have left them no other option.

          In the West Bank israel is committing Genocide as well. And those people have been trying the peaceful way for decades. And we do not condemn israel for doing so. In fact we keep supporting them and sending them the weapons to commit Genocide and help colonists annex more land.

          Israel has made it extremely clear that they will never agree to a peaceful resolution unless they are forced into it. Both with words as with actions, they verbatimly state that they will never agree to let Palestinians have a state.

          So no, there is no both sides. There is one side constantly punching the other and the only reason the other side hits back is because it wants the israeli side to stop hitting them.

    • Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      20 days ago

      I don’t see Hamas as a “side”. I see them as evil fucking terrorists willing to use their own people as shields.

      How many times have we seen this, though? People take human shields all the time in and outside of wars. The answer is never to ignore the shields. Those are fucking people.

      Both sides are fucking monsters in this conflict… But Israel is emphatically more successful at killing civilians. It’s literally a fact at this stage, with mountains of evidence.

    • Serinus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      14
      ·
      20 days ago

      Also the IDF was fired upon when they raided. That makes this just war. Hamas chose the war zone.

      • Linkerbaan@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        20 days ago

        Also the IDF Hamas was fired upon when they raided in October. That makes this just war. Hamas Israel chose the war zone.

        Swap the word Hamas with israel every time you think there’s a great argument to post. Helps to avoid advocating for the murder of civilians like some crazy extremist.

        • Serinus@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          20 days ago

          An extremist would say that this can’t end until one side kills the other, so might as well get it over with.

          I don’t believe that. I think as humans we have an obligation to try for peace without murdering half a million people. Unlike most people here, I want to believe that someday both sides can find a way to peace.

          But if you insist that one side is good and one side is bad, then this can’t end well.

          • Linkerbaan@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            20 days ago

            I would argue that one side is fighting to achieve peace while the other side is fighting for the destruction of a population and the annexation of their land.

            Remind me again who is rejecting the ceasefire offers.

            • Serinus@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              20 days ago

              I would argue that one side is fighting to achieve peace

              Hilarious. Which side is that?

              (The second part I won’t argue. The inevitable annexation is deplorable.)

              • Linkerbaan@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                4
                ·
                20 days ago

                Hamas is has laid out a very clear and peace plan and has even agreed to a 2 state solution.

                Objectively looking at the situation one cannot say that there are two sides which do not want peace.

                Only one side does not want peace, and that is israel.

                • Serinus@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  5
                  ·
                  20 days ago

                  If Hamas hasn’t given up their hostages, they must not be that interested in peace.

          • Count042
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            17 days ago

            You’re also a racist that believes all Palestinians want to kill all Israelis.

            You state this openly, and then post a link to a study that doesn’t make that claim at all or anything resembling it and call it a source. Which, of course, isn’t how sources work. This is how sources work: https://lemmy.ml/post/15906506/11178832 The important bit there is that the source actually shows what I said it shows because I’m not a bad faith liar that enjoys justifying genocide.

            You’re already insisting one side is good and one side is bad when you intentionally, and surreptitiously lie to try and get people to think your racist statement is true, hoping they don’t actually click through to your so-called sources.

            So, please, pardon me if I don’t believe your bullshit pretending you want peace between the two sides.

              • Count042
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                17 days ago

                No, sources link by linking to the thing you say you’re linking to.

                In this example, I’m linking to your disgusting racist lie in your post that you also appended a source to that didn’t corroborate your racist lie.

                I’m going to be curious to see if you end up editing out the proof of your racism eventually in the future.