Almost 90 bombs were dropped in one region in just 24 hours.

Russia unleashed an unprecedented bombardment in southern Ukraine overnight in what local officials described as a “massive attack” in the conflict which has continued to rage even as the international community’s attention has moved to the war between Israel and Hamas in Gaza.

The Ukrainian Internal Affairs Ministry on Monday morning said Russia dropped at least “87 aerial bombs on populated areas of the Kherson region - the largest number for all time.” At least eight people were also injured in other Russian strikes carried out in the Odessa region further to the west on Sunday night.

  • YoBuckStopsHere@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    81
    ·
    1 year ago

    There is a lot of misinformation in your comment.

    The United States didn’t fund Israel’s iron dome system.

    There isn’t a genocide (race / tribe killing) in Gaza. That’s a population transfer or eviction of lands.

    Ukraine and the United States are working together to implement a air defense system. A likely defense treaty and a 100 year lease on military bases in exchange for infrastructure rebuilding is on the table.

    • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      63
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      There isn’t a genocide (race / tribe killing) in Gaza

      Genocide isn’t just killing…

      In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

      Killing members of the group;

      Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;

      Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;

      Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;

      Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

      https://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/genocide.shtml

      And even if that was just indiscriminate killing based on race/ethnicity, the UN is already saying what Israel is doing amounts to that

      https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2023/11/gaza-running-out-time-un-experts-warn-demanding-ceasefire-prevent-genocide

      Your opinion is your opinion.

      But what is/isn’t a genocide is clearly defined in the Geneva convention. And even if you’re definition was correct, the UN disagrees with you about Israel meeting that definition.

      • ParsnipWitch@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        The UN’s humans rights body is heavily biased against Israel. And in general not a neutral party as you seem to think.

        Of the 193 countries which make up the UN, the majority (133) are non-democratic states. 48 are countries belonging to the OIC (Organisation of Islamic Cooperation).

        Of the 280 human rights condemnations the UN has found world wide between 2006 and 2023, 103 where in Israel. They found none in, for example, China, Pakistan or Saudi Arabia. They also didn’t cry genocide during the genocide in Rwanda.

        I 100 % believe Israel commits war crimes against Palestine. But I do not believe that Israel alone is responsible for almost 40 % of all human rights violations world wide since 2006.

        • jarfil@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          Some wars are about who gets control over some resources, or who will be collecting the taxes, without trying to wipe out the other side.

            • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              22
              arrow-down
              6
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              If that was true, then I’m sure there’s lots of statements from human rights organizations world wide clarifying how it’s wrong.

              Do you mind linking one?

              Quick edit:

              Also, that doesn’t mean Israel isn’t breaking the Geneva Convention…

              In fact, it seems to be admission that they are…

              • YoBuckStopsHere@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                5
                arrow-down
                21
                ·
                1 year ago

                It will take a bit to pull it from the 1948 archive but Raphael Lemkin used it because it was a loaded word to mean killing millions of people.

                The actual UN definition added any transfer of children from one ethnic group to another in the last week of negotiations in 1948. Even by that definition it doesn’t meet the UN term with what is happening in Gaza.

                • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  14
                  arrow-down
                  4
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  So to clarify, you agree that Israel is violating the Geneva Convention?

                  Your issue is just that the Genocide section is called that?

                  If all this is really that pedantic and you understand that human rights abuses are bad, and Israel is committing human rights abuses, I guess I’ll take what I can get.

                  But it seems like you’re defending the acts Israel are committing on the basis that the section of the genocide section of the Geneva Convention is more in depth than just saying “don’t exterminate every single person in a group”.

                  Because by that logic, there wasn’t a genocide in North America for over a century against the indigenous people…

                  Even by that definition it doesn’t meet the UN term with what is happening in Gaza.

                  Your still ignoring the majority of what the Geneva Convention says…

                  I’ve linked it multiple times, and even quoted it once so you don’t have to click the link…

                  https://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/genocide.shtml

                  Specifically

                  Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;

                  And

                  Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;

                  But the link really goes into specifics that you should know, just read the link.

                  • YoBuckStopsHere@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    4
                    arrow-down
                    19
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    Because by that logic, there wasn’t a genocide in North America for over a century against the indigenous people

                    I don’t agree there was a genocide against the waring tribes of the Southeastern United States. The results of the Indian Removal Act wasn’t a genocide but a forced migration after the War of 1812 due to to the local tribes joining the British and slaughtering civilians. If you read the Act you will see it was a direct response to the actions the tribes took against civilians.

                    The Souix Nation on the otherhand saw their children taken from them and placed in religious boarding schools, that would qualify.

                  • YoBuckStopsHere@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    20
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    I don’t see anything Israel is doing that is a crime at this time. Governments get a lot of leeway when dealing with terrorism and Israel is dealing with the aftermath of a wide scale terrorist attack against civilians.

        • PupBiru@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          13
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          and literally literally means literally but now we use it to mean figuratively

          turns out language is about use, not origin

        • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          35
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Ethnic cleansing is the systematic forced removal of ethnic, racial, or religious groups from a given area, with the intent of making a region ethnically homogeneous. Along with direct removal, extermination, deportation or population transfer, it also includes indirect methods aimed at forced migration by coercing the victim group to flee and preventing its return, such as murder, rape, and property destruction.[3][4][5] It constitutes a crime against humanity and may also fall under the Genocide Convention, even though ethnic cleansing has no legal definition under international criminal law.[3][6][7]

          https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_cleansing

          • YoBuckStopsHere@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            36
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Yes, stupid people (United Nations for example) use the wrong word, all the time, especially when it’s translated from another language. Genocide is the wrong word to use. Israel is not wiping out nor trying to wipe out the Palestinians.

            • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              27
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              Since you’re the top mod, can I just remind you that you broke rule 5?

              Or do I need to report your comment?

              You’re still not understanding though, and it’s very important as a mod you understand this issue. Otherwise I’d have stopped replying already.

                • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  20
                  arrow-down
                  4
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Yes, stupid people use the wrong word, all the time

                  I assumed that was an insult directed at me.

                  Were you calling the UN and everyone that signed the Geneva Convention stupid instead?

                  Even the “misinformation” claim, clearly the UN and Geneva Convention have a definition that’s different than yours, are you saying the Geneva Convention is misinformation?

                  You’re free to disagree as a personal opinion, but that’s like me insisting an apple is a yellow fruit from South America that you need to peel before eating…

                  It doesn’t change the definition everyone has agreed on.

            • BarqsHasBite@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              19
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              This ain’t an etymology thing. Definitions are clarified for legal purposes. I think you have to ask yourself why you’re trying to dig your heels in against a literal definition. They didn’t define it wrong, it’s literally defined in excruciating and exacting detail for legal purposes.

              • YoBuckStopsHere@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                16
                ·
                1 year ago

                Where are the examples of Israel taking Palestinian child to convert them to Judaism? That is the line you’re trying to imply. Forced relocation is not genocide. It’s a population transfer.

                  • YoBuckStopsHere@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    15
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    What is being cleansed, which means wiping out the entire race or tribe? Relocation isn’t killing, it’s inconvenient and will create more problems, but the population is being kept together.

                    Don’t get me wrong, I totally understand your hatred of Israel, but I haven’t seen an attempt at diplomacy this century by the Palestinian government. They wanted violence and they got violence.

                    Hopefully we can get a ceasefire, put a third party military in Gaza to secure the peace, remove all military weapons, arrest all the terrorists, and the Palestinian people can live their lives peacefully for awhile.

          • YoBuckStopsHere@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            35
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Incorrect word.

            The use of a loaded latin word like genocide is used to invoke mass killing and wiping out a population completely. If you see it used you know the source is extremely biased and should not be taken as fact.

            Use the correct language so you don’t look like a fool.

            • ASeriesOfPoorChoices@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              Genocide is an English word with English definitions.

              You can argue about its roots and such, but that’s a different discussion.

              It’s like “decimate”. Decimate is an English word with a different definition to the Latin word its based on. It used to mean “kill one in every ten”, now it means “to kill/destroy almost, but not completely”. (Almost the opposite meaning)

            • SkippingRelax@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              You keep repeating this like you believe it. Find an English dictionary you’ll realise it’s an English word and it has a precise meaning that is not what you think it is. The fact you don’t agree with that meaning is your problem only, you don’t get to decide