4 ms·
Isn't it broken with Israel continuing their war against Lebanon?
by wodenokoto 7mo ago
Isn't it broken with Israel continuing their war against Lebanon?
- jMyles 7mo agoAs best I can tell, the Iranian regime and Sharif both said that they ceasefire included a cease to strikes on Lebanon, Netanyahu explicitly said that it did not, and the Trump admin, Lebanon, and Hezbollah have not yet commented either way. Links to Pakistan and Israel statements here: https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2026/4/8/us-iran-ceasefire-deal-what-are-the-terms-and-whats-next https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2026/4/8/us-iran-ceasefire-de...
- GeoPolAlt 7mo agoTrump and Leavitt have both said that Lebanon is not part of the ceasefire
- deleted 7mo ago[deleted]
- overfeed 7mo agoIran gets a vote, and ceasefires need belligerents' unanimity, by definition.
- Pay08 7mo agoLebanon has also said that the ceasefire doesn't apply to Hezbollah, since they insist that both them and Israel are at war with Hezbollah, not with each other. The only parties that say it does are Hezbollah and Pakistan. Also, I really wouldn't suggest using aljazeera.
- bradleyankrom 7mo agoI've found Al Jazeera's (English) coverage of the region to be informative. YMMV.
- Pay08 7mo agoPerhaps informative as a study of institutional bias and government interference.
- bradleyankrom 7mo agoNo? Sources? It's possible that Qatar's government has some editorial control over the Arabic content, but my understanding is that the English operations are separate.
- Pay08 7mo agoIt's the same company, English operations can't be separate. https://factually.co/fact-checks/media/should-i-trust-al-jazeera-how-to-verify-its-international-reporting-1eadb9 https://factually.co/fact-checks/media/should-i-trust-al-jaz... https://apnews.com/article/b39b94d6847f4ee6acafd6ad2da7e963 https://apnews.com/article/b39b94d6847f4ee6acafd6ad2da7e963
- bradleyankrom 7mo agoThose don't really add to your argument. The Kashmir issue sounds like a mistake that Al Jazeera tried to address. The Factually analysis indicates that Al Jazeera is generally reliable for news, with caution advised for coverage of highly-political events and editorials, which I think is typical of any media organization.
- M_bara 7mo agoHonestly, it’s a good counter to get both sides of the coin. At the moment you’ll find BBC, CNN, NYT et al on one end and Al Jazeera on the other. I also look at DW for a more balanced approach. Don’t consume from one camp!
- Pay08 7mo agoFair call on CNN and DW, but the NYT has always been at least somewhat aligned with Al Jazeera, and the BBC switches around with whatever the current government is.
- jMyles 7mo ago> Also, I really wouldn't suggest using aljazeera. Yeah, I agree - I have the same objections to ajazeera that I have to RT, CNN, Fox News, NYT, etc. - they are each overwhelming pressure from controlling corporations and states that they can't shine light where it needs to be shone. But in this case, I was really only pasting them for links to the statements by Pakistan and Iran, which I do trust them to link / quote faithfully. It wasn't meant as an endorsement of their editorial or news-gathering quality.
- fernandopj 7mo agoIran is ATM saying it closed the Strait again, implied that it will wait until Israel stand down at least. Even if USA insist on Israel-Hezbollah (and so Lebanon) be kept apart from any deal to end their war in Iran, it would still mean a terrible strategic and diplomatic disaster between USA and Israel, because Israel Gov' will be left with two terrible scenarios: 1) Trump Admin' will concede to Iran they'd be leaving the region and leaving Israel to defend itself alone, because the Hormuz being open for business and the Gulf states being spared would be enough; or 2) USA will have to resume hostilities, meaning domestically Trump will have to explain the US Military is obliged to continue the war effort for as long as Israel want. IMHO don't see how Israel-US can politically survive those two scenarios.
- MarsIronPI 7mo ago> IMHO don't see how Israel-US can politically survive those two scenarios. Is that such a bad thing?
- bamboozled 7mo agoProbably for the actual innocent people who live in Israel , yes
- spaghetdefects 7mo agoIsrael is a modern day Nazi Germany. I wouldn't call anyone there over the age of 18 "innocent".
- ndiddy 7mo agoI think that's unfair. There are some people with sane politics there, although it's definitely a small minority. For example: https://www.teenvogue.com/story/taylor-swift-fan-account-twitter-creator-israeli-military-prison https://www.teenvogue.com/story/taylor-swift-fan-account-twi...
- mancerayder 7mo ago
- belorn 7mo agoDefinitively if they agreed to it as part of the ceasefire. What did each part actually agree to when they agreed to a ceasefire? There doesn't seem to be much concrete information about that part.
- vrganj 7mo agoI think Trump and the Iranians agreed to two different ceasefires and now both pretend they won.
- belorn 7mo agoSeem now like both are also saying that the other side has now broken the ceasefire. Two different ceasefires are not a very stable ground.
- TitaRusell 7mo agoYou can watch Nixon's speeches on YouTube. He certainly tried to spin the Vietnam war... But ultimately Nixon was right. America getting out of Vietnam was a good thing.
- halflife 7mo ago[flagged]
- nickthegreek 7mo agoIran stated that it needed to be. I know Israel/US said it isnt, but that isnt how a ceasefire works. All sides actually have to agree to the terms of a ceasefire to have a ceasefire. https://www.axios.com/2026/04/08/lebanon-attacks-israel-iran-ceasfire https://www.axios.com/2026/04/08/lebanon-attacks-israel-iran...
- halflife 7mo agoSo if both sides do not agree to that request it’s not part of the ceasefire, pretty simple.
- lesuorac 7mo agoIf both sides don't agree on the terms of a ceasefire you don't have a ceasefire.
- sysguest 7mo agohmm so the iranian diplomatic side can't even read english...? I mean, I wouldn't expect a random diplomat to read iranian... but would 99.999999999% expect to read english those iranian side who didn't point out "hey english version is different!" are all bonkers
- nemothekid 7mo ago1. The version of the ceasefire that you are got third hand from Twitter or American news outlets are not accurate. 2. Iranians can't read. Which do you think is more likely?
- lesuorac 7mo ago
- PowerElectronix 7mo agoI think only the US is not bombing anyone for the time being. I think, and hope, they will slowly pull out of there and not fuck up the status quo any further.
- bamboozled 7mo agoThe US can’t just walk away now because the straight is not open / secure for trade ships.
- geysersam 7mo agoThey can. It would be a defeat, but at least it would be a less costly defeat than Afghanistan.
- LorenPechtel 7mo agoMuch more costly--a defeat in effect hands the world to the Iranian-backed terrorists.
- geysersam 6mo agoAfghanistan was a 20 year long war. It was more costly in terms of troops, material etc. Why would ending the war mean handing the world to the Iranian regime? That seems exaggerated. The iranians will charge a small toll for oil passing Hormuz, why would the US care? They have oil.
- LorenPechtel 6mo agoThis isn't about the straight. It's about the Iranian-backed terrorists all over the region. It's about the genocides in Africa. Most of the horrible things in the world outside Ukraine are being instigated by Iran.
- PowerElectronix 6mo agoThey don't have a way to reopen it without either a forever war in Iran or giving concessions to Iran to get it to open it. And an unsactioned, nuclear Iran is way worse than a booth toll in the strait.
- ndiddy 7mo agoThe ceasefire agreement was mediated by Shehbaz Sharif, the prime minister of Pakistan. He announced yesterday that the US and Iran had agreed to a ceasefire everywhere, including Lebanon. They agreed to base negotiations on Iran's 10-point proposal. [1] Trump released his own statement that the US was agreeing to the ceasefire, again using Iran's 10-point proposal as a basis. [2] Benjamin Netanyahu announced that Israel would comply with the ceasefire. [3] Hours later, Israel carried out a brutal strike on dense commercial and residential areas in Southern Lebanon without warning, killing at least 254 people and injuring more than 1,000 others. [4] The IRGC announced that if Trump didn't rein in Israel, Iran would exit the ceasefire arrangement. [5] Trump then told a reporter that Lebanon was not in the deal, contradicting Sharif's statement. [6] In response, Iran's speaker of the parliament released a statement outlining how the US had violated three of Iran's 10 points and that he viewed a bilateral ceasefire as now being unreasonable. [7] [1] https://x.com/CMShehbaz/status/2041665043423752651 https://x.com/CMShehbaz/status/2041665043423752651 [2] https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/1163657967133 https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/1163657967133... [3] https://x.com/IsraeliPM/status/2041714151374856232 https://x.com/IsraeliPM/status/2041714151374856232 [4] https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2026/4/8/hundreds-of-casualti https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2026/4/8/hundreds-of-casualti... [5] https://x.com/Tasnimnews_EN/status/2041886432239788297 https://x.com/Tasnimnews_EN/status/2041886432239788297 [6] https://x.com/ElizLanders/status/2041878299454955640 https://x.com/ElizLanders/status/2041878299454955640 [7] https://x.com/mb_ghalibaf/status/2041943537386958858 https://x.com/mb_ghalibaf/status/2041943537386958858
- dlubarov 7mo ago> Benjamin Netanyahu announced that Israel would comply with the ceasefire. [3] That's not really what the source says. There is no ceasefire agreement in force at all (only a basis for negotiations with Iran), let alone one that covers Hezbollah.
- ndiddy 7mo agoYou're right that Netanyahu's statement contradicts Sharif's statement, which says that "the Islamic Republic of Iran and the United States of America, along with their allies" agreed to the immediate ceasefire. It makes me wonder what was going on behind the scenes.