“No one is looking at us or the extent of this disaster or the crimes that we are experiencing in Gaza,” he said. Still holding his microphone, he slid off his flak jacket marked with the word PRESS and unstrapped his helmet.

“These protection jackets and helmets don’t protect us,” he said, flinging the equipment to the ground. “Nothing protects journalists. … We lose our lives for no reason.”

  • Cleverdawny@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    1 year ago

    The ceasefire meant that Gaza wasn’t subject to military action on the scale of a war, like it is today. A low, simmering conflict involves a few hundred deaths a year, a war is orders of magnitude more vicious. You know this. Why are you deliberately being obtuse?

    • jet@hackertalks.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      conflicts like this have multiple participants, who have multiple viewpoints, and you’re not doing justice to the conflict by saying there was peace before October.

      I’m not being obtuse, I’m trying to use English correctly:

      https://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/cease-fire#English

      cease-fire (plural cease-fires)

      In warfare, an agreed end to hostilities for a specific purpose. (Typically only temporary).

      By pointing out the continued history of violence, we have demonstrated that there was not a end of hostilities, that there was not an agreement between the belligerent parties, there was not a ceasefire.

      I will agree with you, however before October, Gaza strip was being ignored. The world was more or less happy with the situation, but the gazans weren’t.