This was not inevitable. This is a war Israel chose. It could have been prevented. Diplomatic talks were ongoing when the bombers took off for Iran. Israel’s continuing, illegal, unjustified airstrikes are unlikely to achieve their stated aim – permanently ending Tehran’s presumed efforts to build nuclear weapons – and may accelerate it. They must stop now. Likewise, Iran must halt its retaliation immediately and drop its escalatory threats to attack US and UK bases.

This conflict is not limited, as was the case last year, to tit-for-tat exchanges and “precision strikes” on a narrow range of military targets. It’s reached a wholly different level. Potentially nothing is off the table. Civilians are being killed on both sides. Leaders are targets. The rhetoric is out of control. With Israel fighting on several fronts, and Iran’s battered regime backed against a wall, the Middle East is closer than ever to a disastrous conflagration.

Reasons can always be found to go to war. The roots of major conflicts often reach back decades – and this is true of the Israel-Iran vendetta, which dates to the 1979 Islamic revolution. The so-called “shadow war” between the two intensified in recent years. Yet all-out conflict had been avoided, until now. So who is principally to blame for this sudden, unprecedented explosion?

Answer: three angry old men whose behaviour raises serious doubts about their judgment, common sense, motives and even their sanity.

top 95 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 36 points 1 year ago

damn they just pretend the UK is not the country that fuel Jets over Iraq to facilitate the bombing. Or it is not the UK base in Cyprus and vessels that provide a command center and communication tool to facilitate the mission.

If you want to attack Iran and accelerate to a wwiii don't shy from telling the truth about your involvement, we know it, you know it ...

  • source
  • [–] 90 points 1 year ago (21 children)

    Don't forget Putin...

    Fuck thes old, power-hungry war-mongering pieces of excrement. Their death will be celebrated by millions.

    Please put an age restriction on politicians, it would solev sooo much nonsense.

  • source
  • hideshow 21 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child)

    Please put an age restriction on politicians, it would solev sooo much nonsense.

    While I partially agree on this, let's consider some cases:

    • Hitler's reign 1933-1945, his age: 44-56
    • Stalin 1922-1952, age 44-74
    • Putin 2000-?, age 48-?
    • Pol Pot 1963-1981, age 38-56
    • Louis XIV 1643-1715, age 5-77 or 16-77 if you count coronation as the start (sacre bleu jesus fuck)
    • Xi Jinping 2012-?, age 59-?

    Youth is clearly not enough. Age limit + term limit might be a useful combination, but it all falls down when you allow somebody to just grab all power anyway and reset all the rules and limits, like Putin and Xi Jinping have done.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 11 points 1 year ago (16 children)

    Putin is by far the worst one.

    Neither Netanyahu nor Khamenei have the capacity for war the way the other 2 have.

    And Putin already has achieved what Trump wants to achieve: being a dictator with full control of the state.

    Oh how much the world would improve is all 4 of them suddenly get a bullet between the eyes.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 16 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (11 children)

    How is Putin worse than Netanyahu? Just compare the children death toll in Palestine vs. Ukraine.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 1 year ago* (6 children)

    Who knows for sure? But we can assume that Putin had something to do with Hamas launching the strike just by the fact how much it helped him. It did cause half of the world to turn their eyes away from Ukraine, to believe that Gaza is now the most important crisis on this planet.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Why would a population living under a military occupation since 1967 do such a thing? And why would the world see a genocide as the most important crisis?

    Putin, of course.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child)

    You're biased, based on your handle. You think Gaza is important.

    I'm also biased, because I live next to Russia. I think defending against Russia in the current situation is much more important than anything that could happen in Gaza. And if you want to take the historical perspective, Russia has violated my country and the people of my country several times during the last 300 years at least, and probably more. Middle East obviously has the potential to beat us on the historical record, given how the whole of human civilization practically rose in that area, but still. It's not like this is happening for the first time over here either.

    It's not that I don't care about their tragedies, it's just that it's nowhere near a top priority right now. If Russia stops being a crazy asshole, things farther away from my country's borders may become more important to me. Still, note that if what I'm suggesting is true, Putin and Russia are partially to blame about what's happening In Gaza. With a handle like yours, you probably cared about Gaza already before Putin's manipulations, but half of the eyes of the lefties in west were looking at Ukraine. They are not looking at Ukraine anymore, like they should be doing.

    Truth to be told, geopolitically speaking it seems much more sane to be on Israel's side because they're against Iran, who's on Russia's side. And Palestine seems to be kinda on Russia's side as well so remind me again why I should support them at all?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago*

    You’re biased, based on your handle. You think Gaza is important.

    Well at least liberals are being open in their belief that only white people matter...

    But you're literally a Gaza genocide supporter, so maybe you're more of a fascist than a liberal.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    But we can assume that Putin had something to do with Hamas launching the strike just by the fact how much it helped him.

    This is like a parody of what a BlueAnon liberal would say, my god

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    With all the awful manipulation putin and the Russian state have done in the world play, I would be surprised if they didn't have a hand in Hamas.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago*

    Yup, that is indeed a Qanon tier conspiracy theory. Liberals literally just reinventing the Judeo–Bolshevik conspiracy theory to blame Russia for those dirty browns fighting back against being genocided.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -1 points 1 year ago* (2 children)

    putin just kidnaps children and converts them to be Russian to fight in his wars.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -4 points 1 year ago* (2 children)

    Putin is by far the worst one.

    Only if you believe that white lives are far more valuable than non-white lives

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 19 points 1 year ago

    The Zygon Inversion - A Transcript of The Doctor's Speech [edited for brevity]

    The Doctor: You just want cruelty to beget cruelty. You're not superior to people who were cruel to you. You're just a whole bunch of new cruel people. A whole bunch of new cruel people, being cruel to some other people, who'll end up being cruel to you. The only way anyone can live in peace is if they're prepared to forgive. Why don't you break the cycle?

    Bonnie: Why should we?

    The Doctor: What is it that you actually want?

    Bonnie: War.

    The Doctor: Ah. And when this war is over, when -- when you have the homeland free from humans, what do you think it's going to be like? Do you know? Have you thought about it? Have you given it any consideration? Because you're very close to getting what you want. What's it going to be like? Paint me a picture. Are you going to live in houses? Do you want people to go to work? What'll be holidays? Oh! Will there be music? Do you think people will be allowed to play violins? Who will make the violins? Well? Oh, You don't actually know, do you? Because, just like every other tantruming child in history, Bonnie, you don't actually know what you want. So, let me ask you a question about this brave new world of yours. When you've killed all the bad guys, and it's all perfect and just and fair, when you have finally got it exactly the way you want it, what are you going to do with the people like you? The troublemakers. How are you going to protect your glorious revolution from the next one?

    . . .

    The Doctor: This is a scale model of war. Every war ever fought right there in front of you. Because it's always the same. When you fire that first shot, no matter how right you feel, you have no idea who's going to die. You don't know who's children are going to scream and burn. How many hearts will be broken! How many lives shattered! How much blood will spill until everybody does what they're always going to have to do from the very beginning -- sit down and talk! Listen to me, listen. I just -- I just want you to think. Do you know what thinking is? It's just a fancy word for changing your mind.

  • source
  • [–] 16 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Angry old men ... ruling the biggest countries in the world .. and all of them not caring what they are going to do or not do because they're going to be dead or senile or incapable to do anything within the next ten years.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago

    blaming the top government officials only is stupid. Thet completelyignore that they got voted in and have majority support among their population. At least Iran has less of a choice, and even then was negotiating a deal and agreed to one in the past!

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 26 points 1 year ago

    False equivalencies.

  • source
  • [–] 28 points 1 year ago (1 child)
  • [–] 66 points 1 year ago (37 children)

    Khamenei maybe an angry old man considering his country is facing an existential threat but Netanyahu is a wanted war criminal and Trump is a rapist with nefarious ties to the notorious Epstein

  • source
  • hideshow 37 child comments
  • [–] 55 points 1 year ago (22 children)

    My Iranian ass spending minutes to get my VPN working so I can access lemmy and watch people whitewash the man responsible for all my misery only to shit on Netanyahu and Trump:

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 22 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (17 children)

    whitewash the man responsible for all my misery

    Mohammad Reza Pahlavi?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 17 child comments
  • [–] 20 points 1 year ago (16 children)
  • [–] -1 points 1 year ago (15 children)

    Had nothing to do with the overthrow of the Iranian democracy in 1953.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 15 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago* (8 children)

    Khomeini hijacked the revolution that ousted the Shah and turned it from a triumphant moment and chance for change into a "under new management" situation.

    Khamenei now presides over this theocratic regime and continues to oppress Iran.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 1 year ago (7 children)

    Khomeini hijacked the revolution

    The lion's share of the proletariat were religious conservatives. He didn't hijack the revolution, he was a foundational pillar of its execution.

    Khamenei now presides over this theocratic regime

    Show me a Middle Eastern government more liberal than President Masoud Pezeshkia's Independent Reformist coalition. Half their neighbors are Kingdoms, ffs. The other half are military dictatorships. Iran is one of the few proper democracies on the continent. It's theocratic because the majority of its constituents are conservative theocrats sending up religious politicians to the parliament. Iran is no more theocratic than Pakistan or Mississippi.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    I don't have time or will to dive into all of this but this one part: "It is theocratic because the majority of it's constituents are conservative theocrats" There are no non-theocratic politians in Iran, they do not get approved for standing in an election. Every candidate, on every level, has to be approved by the Guardian Council. Who elected that council? Well, half of the council are clerics, appointed the Supreme Leader. The other half are jurists, who are selected by the Majilis from list approved by the Chief Justice. Who appointed the Chief Justice? The Supreme Leader.

    Meaning all 12 positions of the body that decides who can stand for election are either appointed by the supreme Leader or appointed by someone with direct allegiance to the Supreme Leader.

    Take the president for example: Pezeshkian would legally not be able to stand for election if he wasnt a Shia Muslim or didn't affirm that the Supreme Leader is the ultimate authority in matters of religion and social issues. Meaning by law, both social and religious reforms can only be done with the consent of the supreme Leader.

    The constituents send up theocratic politicians because there are no other politicians. A theocrat has the ultimate power of determining who is and isn't a viable candidate.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] -2 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    There are no non-theocratic politians in Iran, they do not get approved for standing in an election.

    Ahmadinejad has taken a number of opportunities to take subtle swipes at the clerics, including Khamenei, questioning in public for example whether their edicts are directives or suggestions. He has also tried to consolidate more power for the presidency, trying to create a parallel foreign ministry and by making political appointments he's not entitled to make.

    Hardly the only President to wrestle for power against the Leadership Council, but this was such an obvious historical bullet point it was easy to find citation on. These are not Theocrats in any meaningful way and they break from religious leadership as they see fit. What's more, Khamenei himself came to his office over the objections of numerous members of the Assembly of Experts, having to argue for special dispensation precisely because he was neither a marja' or ayatollah prior to assuming office. It does not seem as though Iran lacks for partisan wrangling or strict adherence to religious dogma.

    Meaning all 12 positions of the body that decides who can stand for election are either appointed by the supreme Leader or appointed by someone with direct allegiance to the Supreme Leader.

    Such weasel words. You might as well claim no one in the US can stand for election without being approved by a sitting President or someone with direct allegiance to a sitting President. Then wave your hands at the national party apparatus and the various partisan elected county clerks.

    No politician rises on their own accord. They all require networks of supporters and compatriots to climb into higher office.

    The constituents send up theocratic politicians because there are no other politicians

    I asked you to show me a Middle Eastern government more liberal than President Masoud Pezeshkia’s Independent Reformist coalition.

    All you could rebut with is whining at the nomination process being not to your taste.

    I don't think you actually know or care for the state of Iranian democracy one way or another. All you seem to care about is that they've replaced a Western friendly military dictatorship with a religiously inclined elected parliament.

    A theocrat has the ultimate power

    Pick up a copy of John Locke's Social Contract and hit yourself with it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (4 children)

    In the United States, the president does not approve candidates and he doesn't appoint anyone who approves candidates.

    | A government more liberal than Iran in the middle east.

    You might as well ask for the most slave friendly state in the antebellum South. They're shit. The 2009 elections might have yielded a more liberal parliament, but those elections got fudged and when people took to the streets, the state murdered 1.500 of them. If there ever was any democracy, it died that year.

    Not a single man will ever be able to run in Iran on a platform that doesn't rely on the Shariah to dispense justice, that does not demand the subjugation of women or liberalizes society in any meaningful way. Iran had a democracy. It got couped, replaced with a monarchy and now Iran lives under a theocracy with a democratic theater in front.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] -2 points 1 year ago* (3 children)

    You might as well ask for the most slave friendly state in the antebellum South.

    Stacking the antebellum South against Bleeding Kansas and asking which state is the most slave friendly? It's an easy answer. One of them had men and women fight the encroaching slavers off at gunpoint and declared itself a free state. And they did it while waving a few bibles, which I'm sure is the real sin involved.

    Those damned abolitionists were too fucking religious. Therefore, they were just as bad as the slaughterhouses full of mutilated slaves next door.

    Not a single man will ever be able to run in Iran on a platform that doesn’t rely on the Shariah to dispense justice

    How did the far more secular Iraq fair when the Texas-born Southerner George W. Bush came calling?

    It's so crazy to see you bring up the American slave system, in the midst of a US-backed jihad on Iranian soil by their proxies in the ethno-nationalist state of Israel. Gee, why would Iranians be so hostile towards these foreigners and so intent on policing themselves against their influence? Is it because every attempt to reach out a hand in pursuit of peace and prosperity, the response is another bombing run?

    Iran had a democracy. It got couped, replaced with a monarchy and now Iran lives under a theocracy

    Iran had a secular democracy. Then all the secularists got butchered and purged by the Shah. The survivors were the Islamists. And when they regained their strength and revolted, the nation that emerged was a sectarian state, born out of the blood and fire of a western backed civil war.

    The west is still at war with Iran for all the Iranians' efforts at peace. And it seems the western raison d'être for this half century of butchery is "Damn, y'all are too Muslim"?

    Fuck off.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Didn't know the people in bleeding Kansas started executing slaves, but hey, what's a little repression of Kurdish and Arab rebellions in an empire eh?

    And why, if no other possible party was there and the Islamists achieved their goal totally unopposed, did they feel the need to massively purge their own revolutionary government within the year?

    Framing a fucking Shariah state as "trying to keep western influence out", while said State encodes the legal discrimination of women and non-shia Muslims into law, retains apostasy laws and oppresses the shit out of it's Kurdish and Balochi minorities, is the most "West bad" type of shit I've seen in days.

    I don't hate the Basijis and Mullahs because the western media told me, I hate them because of my Iranian friends. I am sure, Nika Shakarami, Mahsa Amini and Hadis Najafi can rest easy knowing that the Regime that murdered them at least isn't a disgusting westernized one.

    Fuck off. Go suck basij dick somewhere else.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (1 child)

    So? US foreign policy has done a number of the whole world. It's not an excuse for Khamenei and his goons to uphold this regime.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] -3 points 1 year ago

    If you don't want to be governed by conservatives, quit lining all the progressives against the wall and shooting them.

    Blaming Khamenei for governing like a conservative Muslim, when you're in a region absolutely choked with religious conservative governments, seems to miss the forest for the trees. Especially after the US was instrumental in undermining and dismantling all the modernist secular democracies from the first half of the 20th century.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    I mean screw the men responsible for your misery, but Iran is objectively the good guy when it comes to Palestine. We don't have quite as much opportunity to shit on Khomeini now that Assad isn't around, but we still hate him don't worry.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child)

    From what I understand from your message it looks like to me that this is all something like a game for you people to virtue signal.

    Edit: Funny how you got Khomeini and Khamenei mixed up. It shows how much you know and care about the matter.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago

    From what I understand from your message it looks like to me that this is all something like a game for you people to virtue signal.

    No? What do you even mean by whitewashing him? The atrocities he commits just aren't relevant to the topic at hand, so they're not brought up.

    Edit: Funny how you got Khomeini and Khamenei mixed up.

    Wow, TIL. I thought their names were both Khomeini but that makes more sense.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    Not every conflict has a good guy, there are no good guys, the Khamenei regime is evil and so is the leadership of Isreal. Just because the latter attacked the former does not make them innocent, let the bastards burn and pity the civilian.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago (7 children)

    Stop pretending like Khamenei isn't a criminal. He's not just an angry old man because they're "facing an existential threat" he's a fuckwad through and through and no Iranian would shed a tear if he was shelled. Israel certainly started this iteration of the conflict but Khamenei and the regime has a rap sheet far longer than Trump's.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [+] 0 points 1 year ago (6 children)
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    What do I know? My parents came to Denmark fleeing from this shitty regime. What do you know?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [+] -2 points 1 year ago (4 children)
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    Of course I have family in Iran, even though I don't know them too well. How are you reading that I'm happy that terrorist (Israeli) bombs are falling on people? Regular people are always the losers in warfare, no matter the circumstances. Just wouldn't be sad if it happened to fall on Khamenei - nor if a missile landed on Bibi's house.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [+] -2 points 1 year ago (2 children)
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Israel is undoubtedly the most evil regime in the world but upholding another evil regime oppressing 90+ million people just because they lay claim to standing up to Israel - without producing any particularly strong results - doesn't seem like the tradeoff to go for. Two wrongs don't make a right. Iran can still be on the right side of history without Khamenei and his goons.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [+] -2 points 1 year ago (1 child)
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago

    Again, what does that have to do with not supporting the regime? They're not there to protect the people.

    Of course not, USA and Israel won't ever let Iran thrive - but it can't be any worse, like in Syria. New crappy regime to replace the old, but a slight improvement nonetheless.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-2 replies)
  • [–] -2 points 1 year ago

    Khamenei is a priest. 'Nuff said. Israel is a theocratic state. Religious people attacking each other, with normal people in the middle. Once more, Rome did it first, 900 something years ago.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [+] -13 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (4 children)

    You are out of touch if you think Trump is worse than Khamenei

    EDIT: Lemmy, wake me up when Trump orders to kill the protestets, because by every passing day most of you look more and more delusional to me, lost in your own hate. Feels weird defending trump, but there is a day and night difference between the two. See what Iranians themselves are saying.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [+] -1 points 1 year ago (3 children)
  • [+] -6 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    I'm not sure what did you mean by this. Violently attacking police officers usually results in the same thing anyways. Read the first lines from that article, he's not talking about normal protesters and neither was that government official. Very poorly worded and stupidly timed.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] -1 points 1 year ago (2 children)
  • [+] -9 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child)

    Because someone didn't wear a gender discriminatory dress that the president enforces upon it's population? Dude, get reality checked. Trump is a piece of shit, but he's pretty far from such extreme levels of evilness. When I'll see news like "Trump administration executes Harvard students for protesting", then I'll re-consider my views

    EDIT: Lemmy, please stop supporting radical islam. Not even muslims like you. Wtf is wrong with you people?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 8 points 1 year ago

    This freaking assholes are going to do the thing that the last string of Putin's morality didnt allow him to do and give a white card to any future psycopath to use nuclear weapons.

    Russia and the USA created this monsters. We need to deweaponize the fuck out of all of them before it is to late.

  • source
  • [–] 37 points 1 year ago (12 children)

    Trust The Guardian to "both-sides" a blatant war of aggression and just completely fail to mention the massive genocide Israel is carrying out.

  • source
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [+] -1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (12 children)
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago (11 children)

    Seriously. The Guardian has had no problem with Muslims being killed up till now. So long as it was Israel doing it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (10 children)

    Huh? I have seen tons of articles in Guardian calling Israel's actions a genocide. This is much more than what one can say for the rest of western mainstream media. And before someone says something along the lines of "yea only after everyone started saying it" there are many articles in 2024 and some of these articles go as far back as 2023 Nov, Dec (the Hamas attack was 2023 Oct and Israeli genocide started in October right after this) saying that dehumanizing language used by Israeli state ministers and events unfolding in Gaza are genocidal. I wonder what do you base these comments on when there are dozens of articles in Guardian calling this a genocide.

    A consensus is emerging: Israel is committing genocide in Gaza. Where is the action?

    Israel committing genocide in Gaza, says EU’s former top diplomat

    Israel’s leaders committed genocide in Gaza and must pay for it. Their political and media allies must too

    Israel’s war in Gaza amounts to genocide, Amnesty International report finds

    Military intervention must be used to stop the genocide in Gaza

    What did you do during the genocide in Gaza?

    We’re anti-Zionist Jews and we see genocide unfolding in Gaza

    There is even an editorial one laying out how inhumane and aggressive Israeli state is:

    The Guardian view on Israel and allegations of genocide: a case that needs to be heard

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago* (9 children)

    They call the Gaza genocide a "war" to this day. Opinion articles and quotes from others are not Guardian editorial.

    Here is what actual news calling it a genocide looks like. Not hiding behind opinion articles and quote marks.

    The ethnic cleansing and genocide of Palestinians remains, as ever, the clear goal of the Israeli government in Gaza. “The Gazans we evacuate will not return. They will not be there; we will control there. There is no other target. Any other target is a bluff,” Netanyahu added.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago* (8 children)

    You mean tens of articles published in a main stream media since the genocide started all calling it a genocide has no impact? It has more impact than a smaller scale news site publishing similar editorial pieces. It has more reach and it contributes more. Having an editorial article with the same tone is the ideal situation but I will take the former any day when other media fire their long time employees for just a single comic for god's sake. And we know how much international bullying there is to call writers of such articles anti-semitist. So creating an environment where people can publish such articles in a mainstream media outlet takes a lot of effort, resources and shielding. If we are going to race quotes here you go:

    Israel’s leaders committed genocide in Gaza and must pay for it. Their political and media allies must too

    There was a palastine support march in London about a month ago with almost half a million people joining it and a kilometers long line of people. I would like to think that main stream media allowing opinion pieces calling genocide a genocide has some contribution to that.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago (7 children)

    Try posting them here or anywhere else and see what the mods do with opinion articles if they are critical of Israel.

    Israel’s leaders committed genocide in Gaza and must pay for it. Their political and media allies must too

    Is written by Owen Jones who heavily pushed for this himself. TheGuardian did not decide to publish that out of their own free will. Owen is one of those "tiny guys" you are talking about. He makes videos against the Palestinian genocide almost daily.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    If the Guardian did not decide to publish this opinion piece and tens of others from Owen and other authors with similar tones how did all these get published? Did they blackmail Guardian into publishing these? How is it not their free will?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago* (5 children)

    TheGuardian readers started getting turned off because they started noticing the paper is a propaganda rag.

    Why do you think it took TheGuardian more than a year to finally shift tone against Israel and allow some opinion articles?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (4 children)

    More than a year? There is a 2023 article calling it a genocide and zionism. I have linked tens of articles above ranging from 2023 to 2024 with similar tones. I have not seen any links from you that support your claims.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago* (3 children)

    I never saw that 2023 article before. Must have been buried in the back beneath TheGuardian their fake rape claims of october 7

    By cross-referencing testimonies given to police, published interviews with witnesses, and photo and video footage taken by survivors and first responders, the Guardian is aware of at least six sexual assaults for which multiple corroborating pieces of evidence exist. Two of those victims, who were murdered, were aged under 18.

    Here is the actual news which you will NEVER see TheGuardian publishing:

    No rape allegations filed from 7 October, reveals Israeli prosecutor

    Gaz stated that her department has found no evidence of sexual violence. “In the end, we don’t have any complainants. What was presented in the media compared to what will eventually come together will be entirely different,” she said.

    Moreover, women’s rights organisations contacted by her office also reported no cases brought to their attention. “We approached women’s rights organisations and asked for cooperation. They told us that no one had approached them,” Gaz added.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

    I agree the tone of the article is extremely biased (the same author (Guardians Jerusalem correspondent I believe) did at least went on to document many civilian deaths on the Palestinians side as well at least). Guardian also reports on the other side of the story too:

    Claims of Israeli sexual assault of Palestinian women are credible, UN panel says

    and many others. So this is to me more a case of bad individually biased journalism rather than a reporting that is enforced by general journal policies. Were it the latter case, we would not be able to see all the other articles I linked and the same author would not be able to write articles such as

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/apr/24/new-details-on-killing-of-paramedics-in-gaza-appear-to-contradict-idf-account

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/apr/19/gaza-palestinians-israeli-aid-blockade

    This is not what a completely biased media is. What you linked looks more like a hastily written article without waiting for resolution of all the evidence, perhaps because the author took the supposed description of events too emotionally. I agree though, it would have been much better if that news was presented in the form of laying all the facts neutrally and leaving it there such as:

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_and_gender-based_violence_in_the_October_7_attacks

    The fact that Israeli government tried to created a distorted perception of what happened during the Hamas attacks or is committing genocide in Palestine does not clear Hamas of killing (in some cases violently) and kidnapping civilians though. So there is that. Fuck state of Israel and zionism but also fuck Islamist terrorist organizations who forces their msoygnistic world views on the populace the moment they get control of a city. So there is that just to clarify my perspective on the matter.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Yes but these other reports did not make their front page.

    Furthermore, what matters is TheGuardian gave their own reputation to spread lies about seeing video evidence of tape. This did not exist. Thus TheGuardian has no reputation left and is an Israeli propaganda outlet. Placing a few pro-Palestine posts after Gaza is flattened does not undo their previous lies..

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago

    I think we have all seen what Israeli propaganda outlets look like. People get fired and labelled anti-semitist at the slightest mention of war crimes by Israel let alone mentioning the genocide. An Israeli propaganda outlet does not publish articles that help form a public consensus that what Israel is doing is genocide. I agree such news definitely cost Guardian its reputation but I disagree that Guardian is a full on Israel propaganda outlet. In fact claiming this after seeing all those articles about genocide and zionism (all of which by the way can be reached by just a one click on the Israel-Palestine link at the main page) is absurd in my opinion.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
    [–] 22 points 1 year ago

    Likewise, Iran must halt its retaliation immediately and drop its escalatory threats to attack US and UK bases.

    Apparently defending yourself is the peak of insanity now.

  • source
  • [–] 31 points 1 year ago (6 children)
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (5 children)

    Because they know they'll lose it as things currently stand.

    That's why they've been trying to build nukes.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago

    First of all: It’s not clear that they want nukes. Like, seriously, they have been accused of almost having nukes for thirty years, it’s much more plausible at this point that they are much more interested in the ability to acquire them quickly in case they need them.

    But even then: It makes no sense for them to use them aggressively, but it makes an unbelievable amount of sense for them to want them for defensive purposes. Like: They have time and time suffered from western interference, including the extremely bloody Iran-Iraq-war and have a hostile, nazi-run rouge state running a genocide and storing nukes without NPT-approval that is receiving unlimited support from the US in their vicinity.

    The fact of the matter is that there is no country on earth that is as justified in pursuing a nuclear deterrent on earth as Iran.

    And none of that changes anything about the government being made up from horrible tyrants that are almost as bad (but definitely not actually as bad, let alone worse!) as the one in Israel. They absolutely should be overthrown, but that’s not the job for the genocidal nazis in Israel.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    They never tried to build a nuke

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] -3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Yes, I'm sure a nation with huge oil and gas reserves wants nuclear just to have very expensive energy.

    They want nuclear weapons to prevent regime change due to external interference. Russia can't protect them. There's no NATO style protection for Russian allies. I think we're only seeing this now because of how weak Russia is on the global stage.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›