Israel social security data reveals true picture of Oct 7 deaths, less than originally claimed(www.france24.com)

posted 11 months ago

return2ozma@lemmy.world

news@lemmy.world

86 commentshide report

Sort:

Hot Top Controversial New Old

You are viewing a single thread.

View all comments View context

[ - ]

exception4289@lemmy.world

17 points

11 months ago

I’m not sure what’s the definition of mass murder but advancing in a city/place and start killing indiscriminately sounds a lot like it.

permalink

report

parent

[ - ]

NoneOfUrBusiness@kbin.social

-2 points

11 months ago

Yes but I’m saying that didn’t happen to my knowledge. From what we know so far about the attack, the IDF response was far from careful not to harm civilians, and in some cases chose to actively kill hostages to get the Hamas soldiers who captured them.

Israel so far hasn’t done anything close to releasing the number of people who died to IDF fire, or just in the crossfire between Hamas and the IDF, and until they do that they have no grounds to claim Hamas committed mass murder.

permalink

report

parent

[ - ]

Linkerbaan@lemmy.world

-6 points

11 months ago

~ 1/3 military kills is definitely not “indiscriminately killing”. These numbers change everything.

It’s not a mass murder anymore. Oct7 was a justified targeted retaliation.

permalink

report

parent

[ - ]

QuaternionsRock@lemmy.world

6 points

11 months ago

67% civilian casualties is a universally abhorrent figure, and shows a complete disregard for the value of innocent human lives.

Also, mass murder is generally defined as the killing of 3 or more persons at a time. Not exactly a high bar.

permalink

report

parent

[ - ]

NoneOfUrBusiness@kbin.social

2 points

11 months ago

67% civilian casualties is a universally abhorrent figure

Is it? I mean civilians getting killed is bad no matter the number, and I’m not denying Hamas soldiers committed war crimes, but for example in Iraq the US coalition’s percentage was 77%.

permalink

report

parent

[ - ]

QuaternionsRock@lemmy.world

2 points

11 months ago

Because everyone is so happy that Iraq happened? Here, fixed:

77% civilian casualties is also a universally abhorrent figure

permalink

report

parent

[ - ]

NoneOfUrBusiness@kbin.social

1 point

11 months ago

Yeah I’m not saying 67% civilians is a good number, only that it’s a normal number.

permalink

report

parent

[ - ]

QuaternionsRock@lemmy.world

1 point

11 months ago

Ah, I see what you’re saying now. Unfortunately yes, 67% it isn’t particularly out of the ordinary. Perhaps I’m in a bit of a bubble, but I think/hope the vast majority of people consider this historical “normal” to be “abhorrent” these days. Such would be a positive change for society.

Perhaps I should also clarify that by “universal”, I don’t mean “everyone agrees”, but rather “regardless of the circumstances”. I included this to suggest that I think the civilian casualty rate in Palestine is also abhorrent, and I don’t think the October 7 attacks justify it in the slightest.

permalink

report

parent

Show more comments

[ - ]

NoneOfUrBusiness@kbin.social

1 point

11 months ago

Justified retaliation, and an operation meant to get concessions out of Israel for Gazans. That’s why they took the hostages.

permalink

report

parent

News

!news@lemmy.world

Create post

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil

Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. 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. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.

2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.

Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.

3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.

Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.

4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.

Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.

5. Only recent news is allowed.

Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.

6. All posts must be news articles.

No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.

7. No duplicate posts.

If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.

8. Misinformation is prohibited.

Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.

9. No link shorteners.

The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.

10. Don't copy entire article in your post body

For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

Community stats

14K
Monthly active users
20K
Posts
510K
Comments

Community stats

Community moderators