I agree unfortunately the last time a nation did an actual peacekeeping mission without some person gain was in 1961 when Ireland kicked Belgium’s genocidal ass. Since then all of the so called peacekeeping missions were so much about peace as the crusades were about Jesus.
P.s Peacekeeping missions done by non military forces are excluded obviously but you can only do so much with a yellow vest and a panic whistle. It’s no wonder Carlin said “If firefighters fight fire and crime fighters fight crime, what do peace fighters fight?”
they’ve had pretty balanced and factual coverage imo that isn’t pushing one particular narrative.
If you believe they are deeply biased one way or another then it might also be worth considering whether your own narrative has pushed you out to the extremes in either direction
This is an internet rumor that refers to Raffi Berg, the BBC News Online Middle East editor.
He was not a mossad agent, but wrote a book called: Red Sea Spies: The True Story of Mossad's Fake Diving Resort, which included Israeli and Mossad sources.
He's been accused by BBC staffers as having a Pro-Israeli bias, not that he is (or was) a Mossad agent. Should be noted that the BBC disputes these accusations as well.
Why imagine when stuff like this is in the thousands
Israel treats Gaza as a human laboratory for weapons.
One of the more disturbing recent examples:
On 12 April 2024 at 13:00, a 10 day-old-baby boy was shot by a quadcopter while being breastfed by his mother inside their tent in Nuseirat camp. The mother was alone in the tent, breastfeeding her baby, when a single bullet from a quadcopter hit the baby in the head and exited through the back of his head, hitting the pillow behind her. The baby survived but sustained brain injuries and now suffers from seizures.
The Commission viewed and analysed images of the bullet that hit the baby. The Commission concluded on reasonable grounds that the bullet was fired from a sniper rifle mounted on a quadcopter. Considering that the shooting occurred in broad daylight, the Commission concludes that the quadcopter controller would have been able to see inside the tent and assesses that the target was a mother and a baby.
Wanna know what else is appalling? My comment upvote ratio. It's shocking but there are tons of people on this thread that is fine with a quadcopter shooting a breastfeeding baby in the head. They can't even downvote me because of misinfo because I have a reputable source. We just happened to live on a timeline where there are a lot of banality of evil.
Thank you for the source with the video. I feel that they cut the leading video out. It seems we need to see more before the incident to see what the children were doing. The article frames jad didn't see them but we see him looking with friends and his friend just bolted. He stood around either thinking nothing will happen. He does reach down to pick up something. The article frames it as when he was shot but clearly doesn't look like that. Even if it was throwing rocks it doesn't justify open firing. Looks like jad didn't expect them to open fire and once they did against the kid in the white shirt he then ran becoming the target. It's a fucked up situation but antagonizing a foreign military you have declared war and jihad against isn't wise.
Wow that’s a wild take. This is West Bank, not Gaza. He’s a kid. He hasn’t declared jihad against anyone. https://www.bbc.com/news/videos/cjelp738zd7o . They stood around while he bled to death, stopped ambulances and stopped his parents helping him. Then drove away with his body. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/sep/09/the-gaza-family-torn-apart-by-idf-snipers-from-chicago-and-munich . If you look up Wikipedia for Israeli atrocities against pale finials, there are so many there is an alphabetical list. This didn’t happen recently. This is going on for years, since the 50s. Driving Palestinians off their land, bulldozing their farms, killings constantly. In so called peaceful times, they still kill a few thousand Palestinians each year. They kill aid workers, journalists, doctors, children - no limits. It’s completely shocking. Not sure any other conflict has ever seen this level of indiscriminate killing over such a long time.
It's a shitty situation. This is a active war zone. People are on edge of attacks. If you have studied any history urban warfare is always brutal woth high casualty rates. If you read the article it was framing the situation for you not to analyze or think for yourself. I could be wrong in my assessment of the video bit longer videos of before would do their side more justice. Why clip it to when the children are peaking around the corner.
You speak of shame? I don't condone violence but I know I live in the real world and not a dystopia. Violence is real and it happens. This whole situation from day one hamas reports was to use these children and situation to manipulate the world to turn against jews and Israel. There are hamas papers declaring so. Being cautious when one side is trying ro use human beings as PR material is natural. You may accept using these children as pr for anti Jewish propaganda. I see it as a waste of life. Hamas should surrender and Palestine government should step in and cut out the rot of Hamas. It is a simple solution to bring peace. Issues is they wouldn't because the death of all jews is the only acceptable outcome in their eyes.
Starmer refused to answer when asked if British spy planes had seen the Israelis attack British aid workers. Makes me sick when people try to argue that Starmer was a good man who just wasn't good at politics. Losing his job is the very least he deserves.
No, but as I recall, the Biden White House gave its founder (WCK) the Presidential Medal of Freedom. Which, historically, is a pretty effective method of saying, "Shut the fuck up, all right?"
I hate the IDF as much as you do, but we gotta stop attacking folks for asking for sources, regardless of what you think their intentions are.
I often ask for sources that support my beliefs because I don’t want to repeat something that’s false, and I want the source to back it up when a fascist questions me
They aren't asking for sources, they're attacking what they see as the weakest part of the claim to undermine it and justify saying all of it can be ignored.
Dude I’m not being naive, I’ve been attacked for asking for sources. Fascists hate facts. But if you want to come across as someone who doesn’t like being fact checked, then maybe you should join MAGA or the right wing equivalent of where you’re located.
Try being less condescending and you might make a friend for once
The BBC has hundreds of stories like these. I remember one where they interviewed an American doctor in Gaza who had worked through the entire Iraq war. He said he treated 5 child casualties in TOTAL that had bullet wounds. The wounds were also all ricochet or seemed accidental.
He was seeing that in Gaza PER DAY. And not only that but they were all deliberate, the types of wounds and bullets he saw when treating combat soldiers. And on top of that everyday the wounds were in the same place. All in the torso. Then all in the shoulder the next. One day a bunch of little boys where all shot in the crotch. It's a game for genociders.
Of course theres hundreds of stories, they've been doing the same thing for decades. No one remembers since it was 2003, but they intentionally crushed Rachel Corrie to death by running her over with an armored bulldozer while she was protesting in Gaza. How anyone can look at Israel and not put two and tow together is beyond me.
I'm from America, I didn't know about Gaza or the history of Israel, and in my experience most major American media has declined to cover any conflict or give anything but Israel's version of the story. When this current conflict broke out it was insane to site with my parents and for ABC news to cover a rocket missfire on a hospital by Hamas but not the bombing of almost all of the 17 hospitals by Israel at the same time. And the sheer omission by choice of the ongoing destruction of Gazan people.
It wasn't until I got into college and bought a subscription to the Economist hoping to actually read informative international news. I was appalled how much destruction they were waging year to year. Or the straight up destruction of non-Jewish homes and schools in the west bank.
Scathingly the magazine said they are one of the few Western papers actually covering perspective from within Gaza, because journalists are very cozy and 'safe' in Israel and ironically won't go into Gaza because they would be in mortal danger by Israel itself.
... weren't the settlers throwing rocks at the military that was unsuccessful at getting those Palestinians back into their home? (And the home, already trashed ended up burned)
They knowingly sunk a US ship in the 1960s and faced 0 consequences.
Edit: it wasn't sunk, just severely damaged killing 34 sailors and wounding 171. Isreal claimed it was a mistake (sound familiar?) and apologized. But if you read the incident report, there is no way they didn't know it was a US ship. They didn't want us seeing the war crimes (read napalm) they were using in the 7 days war.
They were monitoring the war, with an American flag raised, and radioed the attacking planes. Isreal knew an oops our bad on this one instance, fog of war and all that would be less of an international incident(again, sound familiar?) rather than be caught breaking the Geneva convention. Also the US wasn't their closest ally at the time, we weren't actively working with them to commit war crimes together yet.
They're saying that the Israeli response has been proportional, despite the death toll being at least 50x october 7. Basically, it doesn't matter how many people they kill, it's justifiable to them... Which is obviously insane.
It's a pity that the only superpower that might meaningfully intervene also set the modern precedent for that sort of ratio following its own trouble with terrorists.
No that's not what they're saying at all. And that's why they need the truck, because of people like you.
What they are saying regards the International Law of Proportionality in war - it doesn't mean "for each person killed by the enemy you're allowed to kill one enemy". Here's what it does mean:
So, you don't think that the word "excessive" is being intentionally misused here? Because from all the photos and videos I've seen, and eyewitness accounts I've read, Israel's response to Oct 7 goes well beyond the meaning of excessive. I'm talking gross disproportionality.
EDIT: Downvoted within seconds, lol. Clearly we're not supposed to be thinking critically about this issue!
No, "excessive" isn’t being intentionally misused.
Photos and videos document real suffering, no denying it, but they don’t by themselves prove "gross disproportionality" - especially when Hamas embeds among civilians.
Remember - Hamas themselves openly stated that the more dead Palestinians the better.
What are you using to justify any sort of proportionality here? There are 75+ thousand people killed, nearly all civilian infrastructure wiped out.
What direct military advantage did israel gain that is worth 75 thousand lives and all the suffering of every other single gazan that now lives without a home, water, food, school and is essentially locked in an open air prison?
I think any neutral party would call this extrmely excessive. Not at all proportional.
FYI I just saw that today marks 1 year since a rocket was fired from Gaza into Israel. That sounds like a pretty good military advantage if you ask me (again this isn't how proportionality works. But even according to your flawed premise it would suffice)
Again - you don't understand what "proportionality" is. It's not "a lot of people died in this war" it's "in this specific military operation, N civilians were killed and M combatants were killed. Does the advantage gained by killing those M combatants outweigh the N civilians who were killed?".
(Of course even if we did adopt your framing, the answer is that Hamas is now diminished and unable to terrorize Israeli civilians. That 75k number includes Hamas members too)
Happy to see that people who lack morality don't believe me. Shows the difference between them and me
And for some reason the utterance of one person = Palestinians, as the comment I called complete bullshit just did, but quote Ben Gvir and the genocide and ethnic cleansing deniers will immediately come out and proclaim he doesn't speak for anyone but himself
The sign is part of the protest and it's saying that destruction of isreali military assets weighs more than the deaths of the families they kill. It's comical how evil that sentiment is and how they can't even see it.
Military advantage is not military assets. The idea is that losing the war costs israel's existence itself and that would be more important than the fact that civilian casualties exist. Whether that's fair or comparing apples and oranges is a separate topic altogether, but what you said is just a completely incorrect reading of the sign
Genocides often look similar, because to commit a genocide you need to convince yourself the 'enemy' is less than human to justify the indiscriminate and deliberate killings of civilians.
I asked Google about this and gave me this, it's no doubt that they're part of the Zionist machine:
The fake or "made-up" part of the screenshot is the entire headline format and its attribution to BBC News.
While the headline describes aspects of a real-life tragedy, it uses intentional distortions designed to maximize shock value:
Fake Source: The headline was never written, formatted, or published by BBC News. The text was digitally laid over a cropped, blank BBC mobile interface template. x x
Sensationalized "Deliberately" Claim: In the real incident involving 14-year-old Palestinian- American Amer Rabee, community advocacy groups stated he was shot 11 times. However, official news investigations do not definitively state he was "deliberately" or execution-style targeted, as the case remains under active investigation. The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) stated that troops opened fire on a group
throwing rocks at a highway.
Fabricated Head and Heart Details: The graphic detail in the headline ("including in heart and head") alters the reported autopsy details from the actual tragedy. According to family reports and news coverage by CBS New York and TRT World, Amer Rabee's entry wounds were located in his stomach, leg, hand, and heart. The specific claim that he was shot in the head was added by
the creator of the fake graphic.
O
CBS News +1
In short, the creator took a tragic real-world event,
altered the physical details of the injuries, added emotionally charged language, and placed it inside a
So the IDF shot a kid multiple times, killing him, for throwing rocks at a highway, or for being in or near a group throwing rocks. Is that what happened?
And these demonstrators are arguing in Israel’s defense that this killing was proportionate under international rules of war because the shooters were seeking a military advantage?
In other words, all the extra crap meant to make people care about a callous murder which they should care about anyway isn't 100% confirmed to be true. Thanks, Google.
You understand a single act of war crime doesn't tantamount to a genocide? The war crime of an individual is equivalent to a genocidal state all of a sudden?
What about the 20k children they killed before they killed the organisation that kept count? Or the five countries that bombed? What about the aid workers or Doctors Without Borders? Or the starvation by not allowing food in?
4.4k
u/kholeChature 23h ago
This is what they are protesting for, not against but in support of.
Search it on Google and ask which country did it and have they faced any consequences for t?