* * *

AP and Reuters have run with the initial claims coming from Hamas that the hospital was struck by an Israeli airstrike. This article disputes that.

  • donuts@kbin.social
    263·
    2 years ago

    I mean… Do we really believe that propaganda is something that only one side of this conflict engages in?

    Hamas claims it was Israel, and Israel claims it was Hamas.
    Both have a possible motive, and both had the opportunity.
    Both have every reason to lie about it or otherwise spin up a narrative that will embolden their support.

    The fact remains that one of them did it, either intentionally or incidentally, and they are both certain to blame the other regardless. In the end, I don’t know the truth, nor do you, or the media, or even the victims of the attack themselves. It’s just another sad example of the cycle of needless violence and the massive humanitarian disaster that this situation is, has been, and will only continue to be for the foreseeable future. No matter which way we look, its the innocent people who seem to suffer the most.

    We can only hope that the genuine objective truth behind this attack somehow comes to light and whoever is responsible for it is held accountable.

    • xe3@lemmy.worldEnglish
      616·
      2 years ago

      I think you are falling into whataboutism.

      Just because they expressed skepticism of one sides propaganda doesn’t mean they would accept the other side’s propaganda at face value.

      • donuts@kbin.social
        164·
        2 years ago

        I don’t think what I said is whataboutism–at least that wasn’t my intent.

        I’m simply pointing out the few facts as we know them right now, as well as the extremely high degree of uncertainty around what actually happened.

        I’m not on Israel’s side, I just want the truth…

        Sadly, and to my point, truth is not something we can expect from either side of this conflict. Because as I was trying to point out, both sides might have had motive, both sides certainly had the opportunity, and both sides are basically certain to blame the other side regardless of what happened. So…

        Both sides have provided the exact same amount of evidence, zero. Maybe wait before hoping back on the […] bandwagon.

        I think I tend to agree with the comment up the chain, that the best and most reasonable course of action is to wait for whatever evidence exists to surface before we collectively decide to buy into either side’s narrative about what happened. Talk is cheap, but I think anything that’s true can be proved, given enough time.

      • dumdum666@kbin.social
        31·
        2 years ago

        Please explain where he used whataboutism? Where did he relativise one evil with another?