The text of the deal prevents Hezbollah from carrying out “any operations” against Israel, but it states that Israel will refrain from “any offensive military operations” against Lebanese targets. “It’s kind of a bit insidious where they say ‘offensive,’ meaning somehow there’s this little kind of wiggle room for what they will interpret as defensive, which in Israeli logic and discourse and action means anything,” Makdisi said. “Anything can happen. They can say, ‘Well, this is defense.’ Even the genocide in Gaza, as far as they’re saying, is defensive.” Both Netanyahu and Biden emphasized that the ceasefire was conditioned on the principle that Israel would not be bound by the same rules as Lebanon. “Let me be clear: If Hezbollah or anyone else breaks the deal and poses a direct threat to Israel, then Israel retains the right to self-defense consistent with international law, just like any country when facing a terrorist group pledged to that country’s destruction,” Biden said. He offered no comment on the rights of the Lebanese to protect themselves from Israeli violations or direct threats to their security.

Yeah very little chance this lasts long since Israel has stated everything they do is “defensive”. Murdering unarmed children, bombing hospitals, a literal genocide is all “defensive” to them.

The report documents how Israel’s extensive bombing campaign in Gaza has decimated essential services and unleashed an environmental catastrophe that will have lasting health impacts. By early 2024, over 25,000 tons of explosives—equivalent to two nuclear bombs—had been dropped on Gaza, causing massive destruction and the collapse of water and sanitation systems, agricultural devastation, and toxic pollution.

I knew it was a lot but the equivalent of 2 nukes really puts it into perspective.

Biden has had literally all the evidence you could need to trigger the Leahy Laws and stop the arms shipments but has been complicit in this the entire time.

Not really, if you read my other comment they’re actual journalists that have a solid history of good reporting.

They started this spin off of the intercept project relatively recently so that’s probably why.

Not sure on the down votes but my guess is that you mentioned the media bias sites and people would rather you come to your own conclusions based on the sources history kinda like you ended up doing by looking up the creators instead of relying on those sites.

I personally stopped interacting with the .worlds world news community after they forced the clearly biased mb/fc bot on everyone despite a lot of complaints.

On the about section of drop site news page:

Founded by Ryan Grim, Jeremy Scahill, and veterans of The Intercept.

Feel free to look them up they do good work.

Going to add this report from Amnesty International back in 2009 showing Israel is the one using human shields

Thank you! I know they only recently spun off from the intercept with this, so I believe a website is on the way but will try not to post from here until then unless it’s some unique reporting I’m not seeing on any actual websites.

Very odd article, nothing in it suggests they’re “embracing” trump, at most the article mentions a poll on who they think is likely to win.

Can’t remember the specifics but the Mali government was allowing free (or super cheap) use for awhile so that was the reason.

Many within the South African business elite actively lobbied for an ANC-DA partnership, fearing an alternative that was termed by the DA as a “doomsday coalition” between the ANC and one of its far leftist split-offs in the EFF and/or MK party. The fear included the possibility of the government seizing land and assets currently owned by wealthy, predominantly white business owners.

The ANC ultimately decided against the MK party’s ultimatum, instead forming a coalition with the DA, and a number of its smaller right-wing party allies — including the white nationalist Freedom Front Plus or “FF Plus.” In this way Ramaphosa was able to keep his position as South African President in exchange for a number of executive cabinet positions, which had been previously reserved exclusively for high ranking ANC party members.

More notable, the leader of the white nationalist FF Plus, Pieter Groenewald, was appointed Minister of Correctional Services. It’s the first and only cabinet position that the party has ever obtained and is a remarkable advancement for them considering they actually lost votes and were only able to secure around 2% of the vote.

Rather than side with leftists, they went with white nationalists. Sure that’ll work out great /s

The fact that the government recognized the issue and stepped in to take control of the industry in order to prevent issues is a win compared to how things are allowed to just burn out and fail potentially causing larger issues in for the economy in other countries.

Most countries wouldnt be able to say no to capital and it would meant the resources would continue to cheaply get extracted at the expense of the long term health of the counties industry.

So what’s your issue here?

If prices are falling low enough that it’s causing financial issues for some of these companies that would tell you that there’s too much supply relative to demand so you’d obviously slow production. By your own post you’re saying it’s so the refineries can stay in business, that would mean the price is too low for it to be economically viable.

If you let things continue eventually one would go bankrupt if they don’t slow production so one way or another the supply would come down.

so they use debt to build a port or whatever

You should actually look into it and not just repeat bs. Here’s what actually happens which is that China restructures the debt.

Edit:

Also providing direct source but there’s a paywall

There’s some legitimate reasons to not like him still tho.

Thank you for all the hard work!

Oh 100% they should be too, I just went with the easiest recent one.

Maybe not actively but there’s a lot of past presidents that should be charged if the world was fair. Most obvious example is Bush.

That really only applies if your vote can change the election which isn’t going to happen outside of the maybe 4 swing states.

With your same logic if your voting for Biden in one of the states he’s guaranteed to win or lose then your morally supporting a genocide for no actual change.

The most brain dead reply I’ve read today. Not sure why this math is hard to understand for people but if someone votes 3rd party trump does not get an additional vote, so no it’s not the same as supporting trump.

If Biden wants to earn their vote then maybe he should not fund and supply a genocide then?

If you’re able to please donate, people’s dispatch is matching all donations up to $100k.