Looking at the two big news publishers in my country. One isn’t reporting about the current bombings at all, while the other one is phrasing their words mostly anti-Palestinian.

Is there some neutral coverage I can keep up to? Where do you guys get your info from?

    • i3c8XHV@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      This seemingly simple comment already tells me you are pro-palestinian. Also, for someone that is interested enough in this matter to take part in this discussion, you show impressive ignorance.

      So just to to troll you a bit, let me answer this way: Thinking that this crisis started when seven Arab armies attacked Israel with the proclaimed goal of “sweeping the Jews into the sea and pillaging the millions they invested in the country” is extremely short sighted.

    • Hegar@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      So glad someone beat me to this comment.

      “It’s just a centuries old intractible conflict”, says imperialist culture which drew the borders on purpose to destabilize the region.

      • i3c8XHV@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        “It’s the imperialist culture that drew the borders”, says person who apparently is completely unaware of the history of the middle east in the past few hundred years, nor in the geo-political forces behind the conflict in the past 75 years.

    • PeleSpirit@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      That area, because of so many religions centered on it and/or the power it holds, has been fought over since Solomon’s Temple.

      • Hegar@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        That area, because of so many religions centered on it and/or the power it holds, has been fought over since Solomon’s Temple.

        Nope! Solomon’s temple was built 1000-600 BCE. From then till christianity took over it’s mostly been a backwater, or buffer zone.

        It only seems important because we have writing from people who lived there (the Torah, etc.) saying how important it was, then that writing got the official stamp of truth when the Roman empire took over Christianity.

        To the extent it was fought over, it was mostly because it was between much more important areas - the Egyptians and other powers like the Hittites, Babylonians or Assyrians.

        Even then the neo-babylonians for example seem to have left the region largely depopulated - it’s not like they actually wanted it for any reason

        • PeleSpirit@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          What happened to the First temple?

          On your edit,

          What happened to the 2nd (actually 3rd) temple? Why does the Waq in Jordon oversee anything Temple Mount? Finally, Crusades anyone?

          • Hegar@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            What happened to the First temple?

            The neo-babylonians sacked Jerusalem, among many other cities and temples. Temples are where much of the wealth and power was kept, sacking the first temple had little to do with the potency of their specific religion. At that time the religion was just the normal Canaanite pantheon.

            Judaism as we think of it, with the covenant between the special people and a single all powerful god - that only begins after the first temple is destroyed and Judah is largely depopulated, around the 500-200BCE time period.

            What happened to the 2nd (actually 3rd) temple

            The Romans destroyed it 70CE. ~600 years between major sacks of your city shows it’s not that important.

            Don’t forget, Crusades anyone?

            Yes, during the medieval period Jerusalem finally starts to become an important goal of religious conflict - 2-2.5 thousand years later than the building of the temple of Solomon

            • PeleSpirit@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              So, you agree, since the destruction of the first temple, there has been some issues that have cropped up. Should I say 2nd temple then? I feel like you’re an archaeology student/pro that is getting lost in the weeds. It’s still millennia. (Or maybe 50 years short, if you’re going to be technical. I bet you’re going to be).

              Also, stop editing everything, it’s a pain in the ass. That area has been in conflict over one of the religions since at least 70 CE.

              The Romans destroyed it 70CE. ~600 years between major sacks of your city shows it’s not that important.

              Right, not important enough to build an arc de triumph, oh wait…

              Last comment, you still haven’t talked about the Waq, I wonder why.

      • Cockmaster6000@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        If Scotland and England staring waring would we say “it’s just been that way for thousands of years?”

        The current conflict has a very specific cause and it’s folly to ignore the reasons.