https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia%3AReliable_sources%2FPerennial_sources

There is consensus that The Electronic Intifada is generally unreliable with respect to its reputation for accuracy, fact-checking, and error-correction. Almost all editors consider The Electronic Intifada a biased and opinionated source, so their statements should be attributed.

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/electronic-intifada/

Overall, we rate Electronic Intifada Left biased based on political editorial perspectives that favor a socialist perspective and strong pro-Palestinian and anti-Israeli bias. We also rate them Mixed for factual reporting due to a lack of transparency regarding funding, one-sided reporting, and a false claim. (D. Van Zandt 5/13/2016) (D. Kelley 5/8/2017) Updated (12/10/2023)

Misinformation is already against the sub rules. Maybe try reporting it?

Odd interpretation.

I’m truly lost here, I don’t get where this is coming from (or really understand the first part). I’m not denying any sovereign country a right to self defense.

Thank you for confirming I said exactly not that.

How about you take another stab at it?

I don’t get the reference.

Wow yea COVID huh.

No other way… Huh odd.

I said that?

Til Wikipedia untrustworthy.

Interesting characterization.

You should let Wikipedia know then.

Ah yes, historic grievances again. The context of the article is clearly spelled out, as described previously. My discussion of the matter is pertinent to the content of the article, and I myself am not attempting to broaden context in order to force an angle the article isn’t making.

I find none of this funny. And I’m similarly finding no justification for hiding behind civilians.

At least I know what side Russia and Turkey are on, and that’s incredibly telling information to me.

This appears to be a clear false dichotomy to me (and wildly speculative opinion), there is obvious room between those two positions, and I won’t respond to what I consider bad faith discussion.

Have a good day!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma

A false dilemma, also referred to as false dichotomy or false binary, is an informal fallacy based on a premise that erroneously limits what options are available. The source of the fallacy lies not in an invalid form of inference but in a false premise. This premise has the form of a disjunctive claim: it asserts that one among a number of alternatives must be true. This disjunction is problematic because it oversimplifies the choice by excluding viable alternatives, presenting the viewer with only two absolute choices when, in fact, there could be many.

Considering Hamas hid behind them (and Palestinian civilians), I wholeheartedly disagree with your opinion.

When Russia, Turkey, Hamas, and Iran condemn you, I find little reason to believe their collective arguments.

https://www.timesofisrael.com/russia-turkey-hamas-and-others-blast-israels-killing-of-terror-chief-nasrallah/

Russia also criticized Israel for killing Nasrallah, with a statement from the country’s foreign ministry saying it “decisively condemn[s] the latest political murder carried out by Israel” and “once again insistently urge[s] Israel to immediately cease military action.”

Rich coming from the guy who failed to assassinate Zelensky. This really puts all this into perspective for me.

This criticism seems pedantic considering the “rest” of the quote. I’m pretty over this discussion.

Have a good day!

Agree, the dispute over which was it’s use militarily. Israel escalated in that attack, and Iran escalated further in it’s response by directly attacking a sovereign state. Cool that you’ve been to the middle east.

I’m honestly confused by the rest of your comment. Including the need to mention your travels.