DUBAI, United Arab Emirates (AP) — When Ellie, a British-Iranian living in the United Kingdom, tried to call her mother in Tehran, a robotic female voice answered instead.
“Alo? Alo?” the voice said, then asked in English: “Who is calling?” A few seconds passed.
“I can’t heard you,” the voice continued, its English imperfect. “Who you want to speak with? I’m Alyssia. Do you remember me? I think I don’t know who are you.”
Ellie, 44, is one of nine Iranians living abroad — including in the U.K and U.S. — who said they have gotten strange, robotic voices when they attempted to call their loved ones in Iran since Israel launched airstrikes on the country a week ago.
They told their stories to The Associated Press on the condition they remain anonymous or that only their first names or initials be used out of fear of endangering their families.
Five experts with whom the AP shared recordings said it could be low-tech artificial intelligence, a chatbot or a pre-recorded message to which calls from abroad were diverted.
It remains unclear who is behind the operation, though four of the experts believed it was likely to be the Iranian government while the fifth saw Israel as more likely.
Only the second most terrifying story I’ve read today
Well according to the Democrats, I should always support the lesser of two evils, so now Iran is good. /s
For real though, it’s called critical support. You can support Iran’s right to defend against genocide while simultaneously criticizing their human rights abuses.
So it’s ok for you to give “critical support” to an authoritarian regime, but super bad for someone to give “critical support” to Israel for fighting against an authoritarian whose proxies massacred villages? Why isn’t Iranian proxies massacring villages, Iran itself firing missiles at civilian populations (including a hosptial) something you don’t consider to be genocide?
How do you determine which genocide you support and which genocide you’re against?
Attacking civilians doesn’t automatically make it a genocide. If that were true, then pretty much every war ever was a genocide.
So why is the Israel-Hamas war considered a genocide? Is it a numbers thing? Most other wars throughout history had many more civilian casualties than there’s been in the Israel-Hamas war.
What makes the Israel-Hamas war a genocide and for example, the Vietnam war not be considered a genocide?
Because Vietnam was a war of ideologies, not a land grab intended to wipe out the current occupants so they could be entirely replaced by a “superior, chosen” people not of the ethnicity of the current residents.
This is such a mindblowingly stupid attempt at a gotcha question. Ffs, you literally had over a million Vietnamese fighting on the same side as the US in the ARVN during the course of the war. The belligerent parties in a conflict both being composed of largely the same peoples fighting each other tends to preclude it being described as a genocide.
Not menitioning the events of October 7 and the fact that Hamas is still holding Israelis hostage is a rather glaring omission there.
Iran has stated many times their goal to wipe Israel off the map. Is that not them saying they only want their “chosen people” living in the area? So under your definition of genocide, Iran is committing a genocide. If the fact that Israel was attacked on October 7 is irrelevant, then the fact that Israel attacked Iran in this iteration of hostilities between them is also irrelevant. Iran has the officially stated goal of wiping Israel off the map, Iran has killed Israeli civilians, therefore Iran has committed genocide (according your definition of it).
Kindly refrain from putting such stupid words in my mouth, and keep them in your own, where it seems they rightly belong, thank you.
You asked about Israel and Hamas, then instantly conflated this particular conflict with a broader conflict to come between Israel and Iran, which are not the same thing. That’s beyond moving the goal posts, we’re no longer even discussing the same events. You’re also conflating Israel with Jews as a whole here. Calling for the state of Israel to no longer exist and calling for all Jewish residents within its borders to be either killed or displaced are two rather distinct things.
I know of no definition in which a single attack in isolation, or merely killing civilians during a war, is considered to constitute genocide. Even if this were the case, the civilian casualties in the many conflicts between Israel, Hamas, and more or less all of Israel’s neighbors in the region have been decidedly lopsided. Israel suffers far fewer civilian deaths than those they inflict on others, so even if we were to entertain the notion that Hamas’ resistance to Israel’s occupation of Palestinian territories constitutes a genocide and we accept that the Iranian regime is in some major capacity responsible for such actions because they provide funding and support to Hamas (which, lol, even Israeli media admits Israel did, too), just going by the casualties, we’d have to conclude that Israel is either a decidedly more genocidal regime, better at genocide, or both.
Israel continues to interfere in the affairs of other sovereign nations, support settlers stealing other peoples’ land and is actively engaging in a brutal genocide. If the Israeli state were to be dismantled and Israel ceased to exist as a nation, I could only say that it’s past time for it to happen. And before you put more hysterical words in my mouth, note well: Israel no longer existing as a sovereign theocratic ethnostate and the Jews who currently live in the region being in any way harmed are two entirely separate things. Calling for a particular state to no longer exist is not a call for genocide, in and of itself.
Tl;dr: Get lost with your hasbara attempts, they’re woefully transparent.
I think both Iran and Israel are guilty of atrocities, and Israel has been worse recently in their treatment of Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank. I don’t think either amounts to genocide, since genocide has the intent of eliminating a race from existence (e.g. Jews in the Holocaust). I don’t think Israel wants to eliminate Palestinians (the people), they just want to eliminate Palestine (the country). I don’t think Iran wants to eliminate Jews or Israelis, they want to eliminate Israel (the country).
Be careful, even suggesting that Israel isn’t committing genocide might get you banned from communities on lemmy.
To give a better idea of how Iran wants to eliminate Israel (the country):
“Either you must choose ‘gradual death’ in hellish life in shelters or save your lives from the 24-hour missile rain and flee as soon as possible from the lands usurped by your ancestors, so that you may survive.” - IRGC Statement https://iranwire.com/en/news/142321-irgc-says-it-fired-2000-kilometer-range-missiles-at-israel/
Iran’s goal is to make Israelis flee from the lands “usurped by your ancestors”. So they recognize that Jewish people in Israel were born there, and they want to force them to leave their lands. So… ethnic cleansing.
There have been attempts by Israel in the past to have a peace plan with Palestine. Land for Peace. And remember Israel unilaterally withdrew both the military and their settlements from Gaza. There was a brief time when we were all hopeful as Gaza was free from Israeli occupation. They could trade with Europe easily and become a place of peace and prosperity. Once that happened we could pressure Israel to withdraw from the West Bank as there’s no way they could claim that occupying it was for security anymore. There was a clear path opened towards a free Palestinian state.
Then Hamas took power with a plurality of the vote and it all went to shit. It’s going to very difficult to convince Israel that ending the occupation will improve security for their people after what happened on October 7. But who knows, maybe a group of Palestinians that are tired of constant war might be able to get power and change things.
I feel like most Israelis want peace, just they also don’t want to be murdered in their sleep by a Hamas terrorist. I don’t think it’s a land thing, though obviously in a democracy different politcal parties will have different agendas. Israel has shown a willingness in the past to trade land for peace. It’s more of a problem of Israelis not trusting Palestinians. And October 7 means that it will probably be at least a generation and a change in Palestinian leadership before Israelis can trust Palestinians on a land for peace kind of deal. But that change in leadership has to come from within. There also needs to be a change in leadership in Israel, but that’s kind of automatic since Israel is a democracy.
The last time Israel gave up ground, Palestinians voted for Hamas. It seems Israel conceding territory is seen as a sign of weakness by too many Palestinians. Maybe the next generation will think differently. At least I hope.
I’d be better off for it then. If a power hungry mod cares more about their feels than the truth, then that’s a community I don’t want to be a part of.
And yeah, Iran, like most majority Muslim countries, wants Israel out of the Holy Land for religious reasons, and politically, they don’t want strong western influence in the region. Israel likewise wants to retain control of the Holy Land and maintain western allies to help keep them secure. Both sides have legitimate reasons to hate the other, and, neither side seems interested in murdering everyone on the other side, they just want their religious and political objectives met, which consists solely of control over the Holy Land.
And yeah, of course Israel wants peace, their objectives are met by holding that territory. The problem is that most Muslim-majority countries don’t see Israel as legitimate, because it was created arbitrarily by western powers by taking land away from Muslims.
I hope so too, on both sides. Israel needs to accept that Palestinians deserve self-rule, and Palestinians need to accept that Israel has that same right. The boundaries will need some changes, but hopefully there’s a resolution that’s acceptable to most people on both sides.