Looking at the two big news publishers in my country. One isn’t reporting about the current bombings at all, while the other one is phrasing their words mostly anti-Palestinian.
Is there some neutral coverage I can keep up to? Where do you guys get your info from?
Neutrality isn’t necessarily the right word and you’re catching flak for it, but I get what you mean. Staying neutral in the face of injustice is just another form of injustice and part of the disinformation problem. Telling us what what Hamas or Israeli liars have to say isn’t responsible reporting if they report the lies without challenging them.
But finding honest news is difficult. Reuters and AP are your gold standards. BBC is often well regarded but not for this issue, they definitely have a pro Isreal spin to their coverage.
People saying conflict is endemic to the region are themselves victims of bad news. Modern conflict in Asia/Middle East, like Latin America and Africa, is largely upheld by western activity. Coups, colonies, redrawn maps-- keeping people poor and infighting under despots where natural resources exist ensures the wealth flows into the pockets of the rich and powerful in other countries and provides a cheap labour source to do your harvesting where it matters. This arrangement is literally what keeps our economy churning. The US just did it again in Bolivia a few years ago for Lithium. The same people who benefit from this arrangement also own most of the news and social media. This isn’t shadowy secret world council tinfoil hat stuff, this is public record.
BBC is often well regarded but not for this issue, they definitely have a pro Isreal spin to their coverage.
And yet they find themselves being accused of “blood libel” by the government of Israel.
I’m with OP, I don’t know where to find facts that I can be assured are being related without (conscious) bias.
I just wish people of either side and outside could stop being shitty to each other for five goddam minutes.
Are you genuinely interested?
In knowing what’s happening? Yes, definitely.
Modern conflict in Asia/Middle East, (…) is largely upheld by western activity
That’s a funny way to spell Iran
Iran is a big one, but Kuwait, Lebanon, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, Iraq, Yemen, they’ve all suffered western destabilization efforts. They aren’t in the news as much, so most people don’t even know about it, but that’s exactly my point.
Do you in all seriousness consider the current conflict in Yemen a Western plot?
A western plot? No, this isn’t a movie, this is real life. Has western influence made the region worse in modern history? Very VERY yes: https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/yemen-crisis
Yemens borders today are set by westerners, it has been colonized by the Ottomans and British, it’s very first leader, a despot, was an American installation, and now the rebels are armed with weapons from Saudi Arabia. Where does Saudi Arabia buy it’s weapons again? Oh yeah, the US.
Iran funds an insurgency, Saudi intervenes, and it’s all the fault of the West. I see.
Do you believe there are significant conflicts in the world that aren’t a result of Western plotting? How guilty do you consider the West of the civil war in Myanmar, for example?
“Western Plotting”? I’m not saying that. Again: This isn’t a movie, this is real life. I’m not saying the west is guilty of anything, I’m talking historical facts. I’m saying in geopolitics, the welfare of foreigners in foreign countries is a priority far below things like boosting your economy or political career or personal portfolio at home. And not just politics, international private entities care more about creating value for their shareholders than international accord, too. Short term, domestic thinking with destabilizing consequences abroad, not shadowy council tinfoil hat stuff. Many complex, moving parts, many of which don’t have the middle east’s best interests at heart despite having lots of dealings there.
What you said was that modern conflicts are upheld by Western activity. I’m trying to illustrate that you will usually have to dismiss the proximate causes, and sometimes construe very stilted and tenuous explanations, to make that statement fit reality.
America is very powerful and has a presence over much of the world. In virtue of this power, their involvement, or lack of involvement, is always an important factor in conflicts. This does not mean that they cause those conflicts.
