295

Gaza’s largest hospital being bombarded, WHO says (www.theguardian.com)

submitted 10 months ago by pleasemakesense@lemmy.world to c/world@lemmy.world

50 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] badbytes@lemmy.world 42 points 10 months ago

Targeting hospitals has a specific end goal.

[-] rodolfo@lemmy.world -5 points 10 months ago

ok, hamas is hidden there. now, people in the hospital, what... what israel govt wants these people to do? to hunt hamas members out of the building? what does Netanyahu want from hospitalized people and their relatives? what does he want?

[-] sndmn@lemmy.ca 24 points 10 months ago

They want the land. All of it, minus its inhabitants.

[-] rodolfo@lemmy.world 4 points 10 months ago

yes I'm highlighting exactly this

[-] guriinii@lemmy.world 12 points 10 months ago

He wants to kill them.

[-] Cethin@lemmy.zip 8 points 10 months ago

Hey everyone, this is an anti-bombing-hospitals message. Stop downvoting it if you don't agree with bombing hospitals. Reading comprehension seems to be failing...

[-] rodolfo@lemmy.world 7 points 10 months ago

someone pointed out my bad English, though i think I'm not able to understand how I could express the same concept with better wording.

in any case, I agree that in general reading comprehension is at an all time low.

about downvotes, i take into account also multiple profiles. lemmy is "the new platform", and I think I've met different profiles saying all the same thing with the same style.

[-] Chakravanti@sh.itjust.works 2 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Say first, "Hypothetical, if..."

[-] rodolfo@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago

I thought it would sound like

ok bibi, hamas is in there

you know, it's done to get on the same plane as the other person, like, ok I accept your premise

[-] constate368@lemmy.world 5 points 10 months ago

Are you saying Israel is justified in killing civilians because some Hamas may be among them?

What exactly is an appropriate civilian:militant death ratio in your mind?

[-] jasory@programming.dev 5 points 10 months ago

Unless it's edited, that seems to be the exact opposite of what they are saying. They even clarify using the same poor English.

[-] rodolfo@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago

hey now, poor English! diversely rich is appropriater, I'd say

[-] constate368@lemmy.world -5 points 10 months ago

He’s pretending that Israel has no other options.

Might want to brush up on your reading comprehension if this is hard for you to understand.

[-] Bayz0r@lemmy.world 6 points 10 months ago

Absolutely not what they're saying. They are clearly making the point that the non-Hamas people who are having to use the hospital have no real alternatives (such as hunting down Hamas members) and shouldn't suffer the consequences of Hamas choosing to be there.

[-] rodolfo@lemmy.world 4 points 10 months ago

good God, thank you. was really that hard, or badly written? someone pointed out my poor English. maybe some people can't simply admit they're wrong and so double down? I don't know

[-] Chakravanti@sh.itjust.works 3 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

It wasn't that hard. Some people just can't think properly. You have write everything to make sure that stupid people understand without error because they are the masses with the power of expression unexplained.

And some of like to shit in their mouth without caring for things like votes.

[-] mwguy@infosec.pub 2 points 10 months ago

The UN believes it to be around 9:1

[-] rodolfo@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

read my comment again, using your voice, and listen to it

Edit then ask to yourself: has this kind of question ever been asked to any member of israel govt by journalists or other govts around the world?

[-] constate368@lemmy.world -2 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

It's okay, I have my answer.

Your answer is "any death ratio is appropriate, but I know admitting it will make Israel look bad so I'm not going to say it."

[-] SkepticalButOpenMinded@lemmy.ca 9 points 10 months ago

I believe that’s again the opposite of what that person is saying.

[-] Bayz0r@lemmy.world 6 points 10 months ago

Correct.

[-] rodolfo@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago

🤦‍♂️

[-] Chakravanti@sh.itjust.works 2 points 10 months ago

See? Stupid fucking people.

this post was submitted on 11 Nov 2023

295 points (94.3% liked)

World News

38578 readers

4761 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.