zlacker

>>ahmetc+(OP)
Some context first so my opinion isn't misconstrued as as leftist stereotype. This is within context of the behavior described in the article.

  - I'm a Jew in USA, and served in the military for more than a decade.
  - I used to get annoyed by the Palestinian protests I'd see in the years before this, and generally sided with Israel, and the operations its military performed in counter-Shia-militia operations etc in the region, and was outraged at the Oct 7 attacks.

Israel's operations as described in the article are clear-cut war crimes. The military and civilian leaders responsible for these ROE should face something similar to the Nuremberg trials. I am embarrassed for my country's support of Israel's operations.

This is large-scale, continued, intentional CIVCAS.

>>the__a+9p
I'll provide context too - I'm a Jewish Israeli. I'd probably be considered left (or even far-left) by Israeli standards, but I'm in the "pro-Israeli" camp as conventionally understood online.

This Haaretz article is very troubling. To the extent it's accurate, there's not much question that it reflects war crimes.

A few thoughts:

1. The article itself says there is an ongoing investigation into some of these accusations. I hope that, to whatever extent this is happening, it's not widespread, and anyone committing war crimes is very visibly and publicly tried in court.

2. There is clearly something broken with the GHF and the new aid delivery - dozens dead every day for weeks. We really need some answers on what's going on.

3. From Haaretz today:

> The U.S.-backed Gaza Humanitarian Foundation on Saturday urged Israel to investigate reports that soldiers opened fire towards unarmed Palestinians near aid distribution sites, detailed in a Haaretz expose, calling the allegations "too grave to ignore," while denying that any such incidents occurred within its facilities.

> GHF Interim Director John Acree stated, "There have been no incidents or fatalities at or in the immediate vicinity of any of our distribution sites."

>>edanm+ye1
I don't like getting involved in political threads but on this I have to.

All information presented is mostly unverified testimony printed verbatim by the press from untrustworthy sources on both sides. It's difficult to tell what is fact and what is not. A lot of early reports in this war turned out to be false information and the rush to immediate news notification rather than quality journalism means that the headline changes context very quickly from the first cut to what people read and remember. (I wrote an extensive suite of software to track this)

Wait and see. Do not judge too early. Take nothing as verbatim from anyone without evidence.

Don't be unknowing partisans of an information war. Veracity takes time.

>>neepi+Ps1
Haaretz is the last news organization I would expect to knowingly spread anti-israel disinformation. If these guys are telling you what Israel is doing is bad then it's bad.

>>snicke+rh2
Could you elaborate? Because it's an Israeli news organization?

>>birn55+Uy2
Yes, and one of the more prominent ones at that. If they had a bias in this, I would expect them to be biased in favor of Israel not against it. If even they are saying Israel is committing these war crimes then I'm inclined to assume that the evidence must be very compelling.

>>snicke+QI2
Just for the record, this is almost certainly wrong in the sense you mean it.

Haaretz is a (far?) left, anti-current-government newspaper. It's not outside the mainstream or anything - it is considered largely credible, and its articles are taken seriously - but most people in Israel would find it funny that you assume it wouldn't be biased against Israel. Lots of Netanyahu supporters routinely consider it a "traitorous" publication.

I think its articles should be taken seriously, but you can't simply assume it's automatically right and not "biased". Think of it the way an American Democrat would think of Fox or something - the news org definitely has a viewpoint.

>>edanm+yM2
I don't think you can frame a media outlet based on which administration is currently in power. Anything and everything an administration says is propaganda, and hence untrustworthy.

I.e. your claim that it is leftist requires some justification.

Yeah, sure, if you are a Nazi, everything to the left of you is going to look "left", and likewise if you are a Communist, everything to the right is going to look "right", that doesn't make your viewpoint reality, however.