I also think that the Israeli attacks are related to Iran’s nuclear program but I don’t think they are related to this alleged leak. Here is a 25 min long al jazeera podcast for more on this:

Why is Israel attacking Iran now?

Thank you for your input. Even tho I find this to be totally faisable, from what the cradle article provides, I cannot verify much:

• fars looks like it’s an Iranian outlet I personnaly don’t know if I can trust or not, regardless of mbfc
• the informed sources are not named
• I didn’t manage to find the documents mentionned*

Apart from that at some point it mentions that Grossi said in Times of Israel that “We have seen some reports in the press. We haven’t had any official communication about this.”, but it is about Iran stealing Israeli documents.

Anyways, if you or anyone has more on this, please share.

Edit: *I mean deducted, or something

I would say, it’s much longer than 40 years.

This is what the United Nations, use as starting point:

1917 – 1947: British mandate

Palestine was among former Ottoman territories placed under UK administration by the League of Nations in 1922. All of these territories eventually became fully independent States, except Palestine, […]

She is banned but there is an appeal in place. The court’s decision on this appeal will be issued in 2026, so before the next french elections.

For more on this, I suppose we have to wait for part 3 of this three-part series articles

Yes, you are right. In Oct 2023 they said they won’t do military business with Israel. But in 2025:

However, on April 17 as Spaniards geared up for the Easter holiday weekend, the government filed paperwork confirming the deal on the government tenders website. The purchase, worth 6.6 million euros ($7.53 million), includes the acquisition of more than 15 million 9-mm rounds from Israel’s IMI Systems, owned by Elbit Systems (ESLT.TA), opens new tab and represented in Spain by Guardian LTD Israel.

It’s only only after pressure threats that the government decided to do as they had pledged in 2023:

The decision drew a sharp rebuke on Wednesday from coalition partner Sumar, with one of the groups within Sumar, Izquierda Unida, threatening to withdraw from the minority coalition government.

This is not exactly what you asked for, but it’s the closest thing I can think of. The Forensic Architecture site has some accurate info for Gaza, Palestine but they date back to 2024. Still, I think it’s worth keeping an eye out for any new investigation they might do.

A Cartography of a Genocide

Not too sure how effective this is tho, as a solution.

It seems to me like a diplomatic escalation in the sense that banning the Russian ambassador from attending this commemoration event gives Putin something to instrumentalise anyways, at least for internal consumption. In the same time this move does not apply any kind of actual pressure on Russia. So I honestly don’t know what good can come out of this move.

I believe your comment was clearly about the outlet. I just took the opportunity to say where I stand on this topic, as well.

I think I just understood our main point of difference. Maybe.

For me, the problems in the middle-east / West Asia for example, have been created due to colonialism. More specifically, because eurpean colonisers carved up the area when the Ottoman Empire started to crumble. In a way, I look further back in time to find the root cause, which is not that long ago, if you think about it. Btw, I also consider the US power-house as a problem that derived from european colonialism. Similarly, Australia and Canada even if they don’t seem to have the US power ambitions on global geopolitics.

This is why I also see migration as such a difficult issue, but as you might have noticed I didn’t talk about solutions. The prosperity of western societies was created and is maintained due to the exhaustive exploitation of other parts of the world. I believe before the west addresses that, there can be no solutions, and and-aid legislation (best case scenario that is) cannot help the healing of such deep wounds.

That is because you are describing the EU as an union of colonizers,

Not at all. Yes they started with their neighbors. You mentioned a couple of examples, another would be Ireland and the UK. Still, some common things tho between european colonisers was their sense of superiority and their brutal practices towards indigenous peoples and their environment.

On the one hand, the current refugees are not coming to Europe from old European colonies, but from Russian ones.

This is not my understanding, for 2 main reasons

• Practically such a huge amount of the world has been colonised by europeans. Btw check out the maps in the wiki page of the colonial empire.
• About the Russia thing, I don’t think so. I found these stats that present a different picture about the countries of origin. See our world in data (sort by Refugee by country of origin). If you have some info that changes significantly this picture, please share.

Edit: I moved around some sentences to make it more coherent. Hopefully.

I also believe that migration, refuge status and asylum are very difficult topics but I don’t agree with the framing you make because it seems to me you present the issue as something that came out of the blue.

For me, the context mainly derives from European colonialism, since this is how global inequalities have been established in the first place. European countries have exhausted the resources from formerly colonised places for their benefit. We also need to examine if this so-called “post-colonial era” has really shifted towards decolonisation or to a neo-colonialism in practice.

Without using taking into consideration these aspects, I don’t think we can have a meaningful conversation on the topic.

Of course, and I should have specified that the military occupation of Palestinian territories is illegal according to international standards, as well as the longest one in modern history.

For Lebanon and Syria, I believe you are right.

For Gaza, not so sure because it is part of the Occupied Palestinian Territory by Israel, for many decades now.

I don’t like the Washington Post neither. After reading a few articles on this topic from other outlets that are compatible with this community’s rule about MBFC, I chose to post this one because it’s content was relatively ok imo.

Maybe I missed a better article? Sure.

At the same time, kinda tragic of the state that western mainstream media are? I would argue, totally.

I found a site called Committee to Protect Journalists and I though of sharing some relevant info:

As of April 16:

• 175 journalists and media workers were confirmed killed: 167 Palestinian, two Israeli, and six Lebanese.
• 93 journalists were reported injured.
• 2 journalists were reported missing.
• 84 journalists were reported arrested.
• Multiple assaults, threats, cyberattacks, censorship, and killings of family members.

Do you think that morality is relative to each person’s view point or do you think that moral facts do not exist at all?

I think that morality is relative to each person and in the same time it is shaped from social and cultural norms.

In relation to your answer to my question, I came to realise that I don’t think that I will get a satisfactory one, because of our different backgrounds. What I mean is that you talk with philosophical terms to a commoner. For example (and to my understanding) you talk about moral facts as a given term, and for me this notion doesn’t even exist. Don’t get me wrong, good for you!

Also, taking into consideration that our answers are getting longer and longer, maybe this could be a good exit point. So, I would like to thank you for the time you spent on this conversation, because I enjoy thinking and you gave me food for thought.

I was not satisfied by my previous answer, so I thought of deleting it and giving it another try.

So your suggestion is that we can keep our moral judgments out of practical considerations without espousing the objective truth of moral facts?

Not at all. I would be extremely hesitant to suggest something on this topic, for all people. In a way, this is the reason why I talked about how I see things on a personal level, specifically.

About the category error, once more I don’t know the terms you use, so I will answer from what I understand by the way you describe them.

My question was related to a notion (objective morality), and not a physical object (i.e. a rock). Notions exist - to my understanding - because we use language, so we should be able to define them. An object like a rock, is there even if language is not used. So I don’t see where the category error could be.

Finally, I will rephrase my 2-part question for clarity, because only half of it got kind of answered:

Since you claim that morality is objective I would assume that you would be capable of tracing where this objectivity comes from, how it emerged, and how it stays that way. I’m not too sure how to phrase this as a question, but it’s something along those lines.

Also, if it were objective for all people, I imagine we would all know its content. But, for example, the terms morally good & morally bad even tho they are commonly used in modern languages, they often have different content. So, it seems clear to me that the terms morally good and bad are not objective. So which morality is objective? Please, describe the content of this notion you claim to be objective.

deleted by creator

I don’t know the term you mentioned so I’ll be talking about the points you made, not the term itself.

So, I don’t need morality to condemn the human suffering that slavery, female genital mutilation, or genocide creates. I don’t need a moral lens for this, just a practical one – out of solidarity, for freedom, equity, equality etc, for everyone on this planet. This is why it’s easy for me to justify any fight for social justice. These fights are by default systemic so against the status quo. I hope it is clear why I don’t need an objective moral truth.

I would like to ask you, when you say morality is objective who defines it and what is it?