A reminder that its still a hard fight for Israel on the ground going door to door fighting.

 

Ten soldiers, including two senior officers, killed in Gaza fighting and deadly ambush

9 troops of Golani Brigade, Air Force’s Unit 669, killed in one of the deadliest incidents of ground offensive so far, taking toll to 115; combat engineer killed in separate clash.

Ten Israel Defense Forces soldiers, including two senior commanders and several officers, were killed in heavy fighting in Gaza, the army said Wednesday, bringing the death toll in the ground offensive to 115.

Nine of the soldiers were killed in a battle in the heart of Shejaiya, one of the deadliest single encounters since troops pushed into the Strip.

https://www.timesofisrael.com/ten-soldiers-including-two-senior-officers-killed-in-gaza-fighting-and-deadly-ambush/

 

 

1 hour ago, placeholder said:

And what are those pieces on related issues? Care to share a link?

And I don't think it would take much guesswork to reason that if his articles were as you described, the Washington Post wouldn't have used his services.

And it was you who raised the issue of his relation to Hezbollah:

"Considering this involves Hezbollah, expecting him to be openly critical, weary or even objective regarding this is an choice. "

 

 

Guess everything needs spelling out with some posters. Let's go. I did not imply that he is some super hater or anything, but that the position he writes from is not a favorable one. Whether one wishes to attribute this to his own sentiments, or to the effect and realities of his where he lives and works - that's of lesser importance.

 

There are two main ways such connections play out. Either the freelancer gets the story and via direct contact, industry friends or an agent, touts it to the news paper. The other way is that the newspaper gets a lead and lacking someone in place, hire the freelancer (again, through whichever means). The 'vetting', in my experience, can be anything: a google search, the word of someone trusted, an agent whom the newspaper works with and trusts, an interview and so on. It rarely goes beyond that, unless it's a seriously heavy duty story. There's some etiquette and politics involved when choosing someone who works for other publications, either as a regular or freelancer. The short version - it's not on par with a serious job interview, most times.

 

I think the WP is/was aware that there are some issues involved, hence some of the qualifying ways the story was presented in. As stories go, it's a good one, if it can be nailed. If not, there will be some backlash. So decisions would be a balance between the two. Again, pretty routine. The way the present it leaves enough room for corrections if such are required, and I guess they were expecting (probably correctly) that there won't be a direct challenge - not in the IDF and Israel's interests to do so.

 

Yeah, and while you think you've got something with the Hezbollah bit - you don't. Hezbollah is criticized on venues associated (or leaning toward) with political rivals, and of course those outside of the country. In this context, what you have is akin to ticking a box, no more. Relative to his output its not much.

2 hours ago, CharlieH said:

to qualify the above, "credible" means mainstream source(BBC,CNN etc), not just anyone or any obscure media outlet with "news" tagged to its name.

What about Al Jazeera? 

11 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

Guess everything needs spelling out with some posters. Let's go. I did not imply that he is some super hater or anything, but that the position he writes from is not a favorable one. Whether one wishes to attribute this to his own sentiments, or to the effect and realities of his where he lives and works - that's of lesser importance.

 

There are two main ways such connections play out. Either the freelancer gets the story and via direct contact, industry friends or an agent, touts it to the news paper. The other way is that the newspaper gets a lead and lacking someone in place, hire the freelancer (again, through whichever means). The 'vetting', in my experience, can be anything: a google search, the word of someone trusted, an agent whom the newspaper works with and trusts, an interview and so on. It rarely goes beyond that, unless it's a seriously heavy duty story. There's some etiquette and politics involved when choosing someone who works for other publications, either as a regular or freelancer. The short version - it's not on par with a serious job interview, most times.

 

I think the WP is/was aware that there are some issues involved, hence some of the qualifying ways the story was presented in. As stories go, it's a good one, if it can be nailed. If not, there will be some backlash. So decisions would be a balance between the two. Again, pretty routine. The way the present it leaves enough room for corrections if such are required, and I guess they were expecting (probably correctly) that there won't be a direct challenge - not in the IDF and Israel's interests to do so.

 

Yeah, and while you think you've got something with the Hezbollah bit - you don't. Hezbollah is criticized on venues associated (or leaning toward) with political rivals, and of course those outside of the country. In this context, what you have is akin to ticking a box, no more. Relative to his output its not much.

"The position he writes from is not a favorable one"? Really? That's all you've got? I'm looking at all this person's articles. It's not exactly favorable to be living in Lebanon and writing very critical articles about Syria. In fact, it's quite dangerous. Yet he does that. A lot.  He also writes articles critical of the government in Lebanon. And of Jordan. He doesn't act like someone who writes out of fear or whose operating principle is discretion is the better part of valor. In fact, he reports like a very principled journalist. But on this issue, he's going to take an excursion into dodginess? Really?

18 minutes ago, Neeranam said:

What about Al Jazeera? 

Clearly we are not going to list every network, basically "mainstream" recognised news/media.Moderators may use their discretion as per rule 18.

 

Members can draw their own conclusions as to bias credibility or whatever of mainstream media.

1 hour ago, placeholder said:

"The position he writes from is not a favorable one"? Really? That's all you've got? I'm looking at all this person's articles. It's not exactly favorable to be living in Lebanon and writing very critical articles about Syria. In fact, it's quite dangerous. Yet he does that. A lot.  He also writes articles critical of the government in Lebanon. And of Jordan. He doesn't act like someone who writes out of fear or whose operating principle is discretion is the better part of valor. In fact, he reports like a very principled journalist. But on this issue, he's going to take an excursion into dodginess? Really?

 

What are you going on about? Criticism of Syria is very much a thing in Lebanon. Some of the political factions and parties were essentially about resistance to Syria's control (and later, meddling) in Lebanon's affairs. Depending on publication, this is quite mainstream. Same goes for being critical of the Lebanese government. Everyone's at it. When it comes to Hezbollah, people are generally more careful.

 

Again, you can put the guy on a pedestal, that's your choice. My take is different.

 

Still doesn't change the other stuff mentioned, and which you're reluctant to address.

 

11 hours ago, Morch said:

 

Israel's possible, presumed, war crimes might be.

Hamas's war crimes (much more clear cut) actually do.

 

Whenever Hamas launches a rocket at Israel, that's a war crime.

Whenever Hamas uses a school, hospital, clinic or civilians as shelter to operate from, that's a war crime.

Every day Hamas holds on the hostages,......I think you get the picture.

 

Israel's possible war crimes would need investigating in order to be solidly proved.

I'm not denying that there may be such.

 

And no, when it comes to your posts, there was no question of balance.

Not now, not earlier.

 

 

Is Israel holding Palestinian civilians without legal proceedings? When it's a state actor they're called "prisoners" but when it's a non state actor they're called "hostages".

5 hours ago, ozimoron said:

 

Is Israel holding Palestinian civilians without legal proceedings? When it's a state actor they're called "prisoners" but when it's a non state actor they're called "hostages".

 

 When it's barbaric terrorists they are defiantly hostages.

 

You keep forgetting things.

6 hours ago, ozimoron said:

 

Is Israel holding Palestinian civilians without legal proceedings? When it's a state actor they're called "prisoners" but when it's a non state actor they're called "hostages".

Couple of days ago. Hamas said no hostage would leave Gaza alive unless their demands are met. Some already been killed. Others including children sexualy abused.

 

Starting to see the difference here? The are numerous other reasons but even you should know you'll be digging another hole you can't get out of if you try to stretch this one out.

8 hours ago, ozimoron said:

 

Is Israel holding Palestinian civilians without legal proceedings? When it's a state actor they're called "prisoners" but when it's a non state actor they're called "hostages".

 

How about you actually address points made in response to your post, rather than move the goal posts or cherry pick?

 

 

 

 

Is President Biden lying again or just confused? 

 

Biden takes a tougher stance on Israel’s ‘indiscriminate bombing’ of Gaza | PBS NewsHour

 

3 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

Time to throw Israel under the bus, we have an election to win,,,

 

Biden takes a tougher stance on Israel’s ‘indiscriminate bombing’ of Gaza | PBS NewsHour

 

There's at least one ongoing topic dedicated for that already.

As for 'throwing under the bus', I suggest you read the full transcript, nothing of the sort.

I get it that you feel you need to do your bit for the election campaign, though.

13 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

There's at least one ongoing topic dedicated for that already.

As for 'throwing under the bus', I suggest you read the full transcript, nothing of the sort.

I get it that you feel you need to do your bit for the election campaign, though.

Fixed it. 

An unattributed post has been removed

As to why certain things are the way they are:

 

The IDF said the Hamas terror group has fired at least 116 rockets from the recently designated  al-Mawasi “humanitarian zone” in southern Gaza toward Israel. [ref]   MAP

 

38 of the projectiles fell short into the Strip.

 

Not to mention frequent robberies of humanitarian goods from Gaza citizens.

14 minutes ago, rabas said:

As to why certain things are the way they are:

 

The IDF said the Hamas terror group has fired at least 116 rockets from the recently designated  al-Mawasi “humanitarian zone” in southern Gaza toward Israel. [ref]   MAP

 

38 of the projectiles fell short into the Strip.

 

Not to mention frequent robberies of humanitarian goods from Gaza citizens.

All of us know why things are the way they are, a poor attempt to justify the slaughter of 18,000 (and growing) people. 

This report is over a month old, it is probably double now. 

 

According to the Euro-Med Human Rights Monitor, Israel has dropped more than 25,000 tonnes of explosives on the Gaza Strip since October 7, equivalent to two nuclear bombs.

 

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/longform/2023/11/9/israel-attacks-on-gaza-weapons-and-scale-of-destruction

Slogans and catchphrases are great.

 

'We all know' - when what's actually evident from these topics is that people have different takes on things.

 

'18,000' - a figure which includes Hamas men, naturally occurring deaths, and those hit by misfired Palestinian rockets. Not to mention they'd be alive if not for the Hamas 7/10 attack

 

'two nuclear bombs' - sure, only that those dropped on Japan resulted in a death toll estimated at 120,000-220,000. Compared with the 18,000 figure....

49 minutes ago, Neeranam said:

All of us know why things are the way they are, a poor attempt to justify the slaughter of 18,000 (and growing) people. 

So short, simplistic, and many mistakes.

 

No, not everyone knows, no, not everyone knows the same things, and I was not justifying the slaughter of 1000s. My point was about Hamas' treatment of humanitarian efforts. Fire at Israel from humanitarian camps, draw in fire to kill more civilians and human shields, then steal their aid anyway.

 

So do you want to know why there are so many dead Gazans? Because Hamas.

All them dead Gazans were alive on the morning of 7/10.

Bizarre...

 

1 hour ago, Neeranam said:

This report is over a month old, it is probably double now. 

 

According to the Euro-Med Human Rights Monitor, Israel has dropped more than 25,000 tonnes of explosives on the Gaza Strip since October 7, equivalent to two nuclear bombs.

 

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/longform/2023/11/9/israel-attacks-on-gaza-weapons-and-scale-of-destruction

Not that I would believe anything Al Jazeera puts out there, but you can blame hamas for every one of those bombs dropped.

@SecBlinken: "This could be over tomorrow if Hamas got out of the way of civilians - instead of hiding behind them - if it put down its weapons, if it surrendered. And what there ought to be...is a call on behalf of the entire world for Hamas to do just that."

 

 

 

 

1 hour ago, Neeranam said:

B izarre

and pathetic. Does he think the bombs that kill them were dropped by Hamas?

2 hours ago, Neeranam said:

All of us know why things are the way they are, a poor attempt to justify the slaughter of 18,000 (and growing) people. 

and over 7,000 children. Nothing justifies that.

I would like to read a post from you condemning the treatment of the Israeli and international hostages that were and are still held by the terrorists first.

 

 

 

Ten IDF soldiers, including two senior officers, killed in Gaza fighting and deadly ambush.

 

https://www.timesofisrael.com/ten-soldiers-including-two-senior-officers-killed-in-gaza-fighting-and-deadly-ambush/

 

2 Lt Colonels, 3 Majors, 1 Captain, 1 Lieutenant, 3 Sergeants,...all this for one ambush that had to be rescued 3 times...

19 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

and pathetic. Does he think the bombs that kill them were dropped by Hamas?

 

@thaibeachlovers

 

No one is claiming that bombs are dropped by Hamas. Though, the failed rockets that do kill Gazan may qualify.

The point made, and which I doubt you did not understand is that the bombs drop on Gaza for a reason, and as a response to the Hamas attack.

2 minutes ago, Thorgal said:

Ten IDF soldiers, including two senior officers, killed in Gaza fighting and deadly ambush.

 

https://www.timesofisrael.com/ten-soldiers-including-two-senior-officers-killed-in-gaza-fighting-and-deadly-ambush/

 

2 Lt Colonels, 3 Majors, 1 Captain, 1 Lieutenant, 4 Sergeants,...all this for one ambush that had to be rescued 3 times...

Already posted..............

 

19 hours ago, Bkk Brian said:

A reminder that its still a hard fight for Israel on the ground going door to door fighting.

 

Ten soldiers, including two senior officers, killed in Gaza fighting and deadly ambush

9 troops of Golani Brigade, Air Force’s Unit 669, killed in one of the deadliest incidents of ground offensive so far, taking toll to 115; combat engineer killed in separate clash.

Ten Israel Defense Forces soldiers, including two senior commanders and several officers, were killed in heavy fighting in Gaza, the army said Wednesday, bringing the death toll in the ground offensive to 115.

Nine of the soldiers were killed in a battle in the heart of Shejaiya, one of the deadliest single encounters since troops pushed into the Strip.

https://www.timesofisrael.com/ten-soldiers-including-two-senior-officers-killed-in-gaza-fighting-and-deadly-ambush/

 

 

 

19 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

and over 7,000 children. Nothing justifies that.

 

@thaibeachlovers

 

Hamas leader called Gazan casualties 'necessary sacrifices for the cause'.

He seemed to justify the death.

 

Them kids weren't dead on the morning of 7/10.

They would have been alive now if Hamas did not choose to attack and sacrifice them.

Biden aide: Israel taking steps to protect civilians that even US might not have done

https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/biden-aide-israel-taking-steps-to-protect-civilians-that-even-us-might-not-have-done/

 

I think this was mentioned several times on past topics.

War is ugly, and while there are 'rules' most armies don't really bother that much.

Relative to that, while not reaching the impossible bar, Israel's actions aren't the worst, as some here try to paint.