You guys can give your thoughts; the issue for me is just too far away for me to actually care.
Israel v Palestine
Posts
Total:
71
-->
@TheUnderdog
Ahhhhhhhh. Thats right .
The Olympics starts in a couple of days.
Israel for sure.
What about .
China v. USA
In the medal tally.
USA hey ?
Not in the soccer but.
I can't wait.
China v Russian will be a good match.
In the Taekwondo.
What about
USA v Mexico ?
In the fencing.
China V. USA
In sailing .
What about the clean and jerk.
Palestine in shot put.
USA to win the pistol shooting
If only Monkey bar racing was an Olympic event.
As I've seen some pretty skilled monkey barers .
-->
@Deb-8-a-bull
I destroy my 8 year old at this, and then I mock him for weak upper body strength. He is on the 2.5 pound dumbbells every day getting strong and he just asked me for 5 pound dumbbells
-->
@WyIted
I destroy my 8 year old at this, and then I mock him for weak upper body strength
Thats mean lol
Ok Im off to bed.
Hey If i could please guys , can i get one of yas to make up a joke about
☆☆☆☆☆☆ ( israel competing in the JUDO at the Olympics ) ☆☆☆☆☆☆☆
I look forward to laughing at it in the morning.
Good game.
Good game.
Hey If i could please guys , can i get one of yas to make up a joke about
☆☆☆☆☆☆ ( israel competing in the JUDO at the Olympics ) ☆☆☆☆☆☆☆
I look forward to laughing at it in the morning.
Good game.
Good game.
Imagine a moment
Imagine palastine compeating against Israel in some event at the olypics andddddd one of them goes down and the other then helps the other out.
Big smiles all round.
hugs .
Everyone instantly starts crying and Israel and palastine live happly ever after.
Just One Israely and one palastine inyin could realy go down in history setting this up. .
It would be like standing infront of a army tank.
Picture an American sitting across from a Chinese bloke playing battelships.
BIG SMILES .
Its Just a moment.
Its just a moment.
The answer to this is simple. Israel's government is evil, Hamas is evil, Israel is the better government to live under if you're on Israel's side but Israel is also the one doing the invading and ethnic cleansing while playing the victim.
So the answer is that both Israel and Hamas need to be destroyed, but the true victims in all of this are the citizens of Palestine.
So the answer is that both Israel and Hamas need to be destroyed, but the true victims in all of this are the citizens of Palestine.
-->
@FishChaser
Israel is also the one doing the invading.
That is a myopic view:
Hamas attacked Israel. Israel COUNTERATTACKED.
"Since October 7, 2023, Israel has been at war with the Palestinian Sunni Islamist group Hamas (aU.S.-designated foreign terrorist organization, or FTO), which led an attack that day from theGaza Strip into Israel. More than 1,200 Israelis and foreign nationals (including at least 35 U.S.citizens in Israel) were killed on October 7, and Hamas and other groups also seized some 252hostages. " (https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R47828#:~)
-->
@prefix
Hamas attacked Israel. Israel COUNTERATTACKED.
that's true. But it's like someone punches you in the face, so you go and get your gun and you murder them, and their wife, and their children, and their dog. It is true that they attacked 1st, but the actions of both sides are not even comparable.
-->
@HistoryBuff
So now the question is about how the counterattack is being conducted?
Israel's goals were:
Release all hostages from Hamas
Remove Hamas government
New elections without a party whose tenet includes the death of Israel.
Tactically Hamas is, and has been, placing its own citizens in danger.
it's like someone punches you in the face, so you go and get your gun and you murder them, and their wife, and their children, and their dog.
That is a bad analogy.
Remove Hamas ; then the wife, children and dog all survive.
-->
@prefix
Israel's goals were:
lol no. you listed the things they say publicly. Bombing refugee centers does not help with any of those goals. They are carrying out a genocide. They just pretend like they aren't. Israel wants the Palestinians gone, one way or another. A final solution if you will.
Remove Hamas ; then the wife, children and dog all survive.
ok, but the wife, children and dog are not in a position to do that. So you are murdering them because someone else exists. That still murder. Israel is carrying out a genocide. There is no hypothetical crime hamas could commit that would justify Israel's actions.
-->
@HistoryBuff
12
"Hamas relies on the Israeli government’s aim to minimise collateral damage, and is also aware of the West‘s sensitivity towards civilian casualties.
Hamas’ use of human shields is therefore likely aimed at minimising their own vulnerabilities by limiting the Israeli Defense Forces’ (IDF) freedom of action.
It is also aimed at gaining diplomatic and public opinion-related leverage, by presenting Israel and the IDF as an aggressor that indiscriminately strikes civilians.
Hamas’ most common uses of human shields include:
Firing rockets, artillery, and mortars from or in proximity to heavily populated civilian areas, often from or near facilities which should be protected according to the Geneva Convention (e.g. schools, hospitals,or mosques).
Locating military or security-related infrastructures such as HQs, bases, armouries, access routes,lathes, or defensive positions within or in proximity to civilian areas. Protecting terrorists’ houses and military facilities, or rescuing terrorists who were besieged or warned by the IDF.
Combating the IDF from or in proximity to residential and commercial areas, including using civilians for intelligence gathering missions.
By engaging in these acts, Hamas employs a win-win scenario: if indeed the IDF uses kinetic power, and the number of civilian causalities surges, Hamas can use that as a weapon in the lawfare it conducts. It would be able to accuse the IDF (and Israel) of committing war crimes, which in turn could result in the imposition of a wide
array of sanctions. On the other hand, if the IDF limits its use of military power in Gaza to avoid collateral damage,Hamas will be less vulnerable to Israeli attacks, and thereby able to protect its assets while continuing to fight." https://stratcomcoe.org/cuploads/pfiles/hamas_human_shields.pdf
-->
@TheUnderdog
Israel has to defend itself. The reaction that Israel gave is pretty similar to when I was a kid and I antagonized my big brother. I would run up and slap him while he was reading a book (or something of that sort) and he finally had enough of me doing this and turned around and slugged me HARD on the arm. I was taken back as my little slaps were hardly painful and on the edge of annoying. When I said indignantly "I didn't hit you that hard!", he just said, "So?"
Point of my story is the antagonizor does not get to dictate the severity of the response of the antagonized.
If Israel wants to blow Hamas off the map, then that's their business. Go Israel!! Get those terrorists!!
-->
@prefix
Give me your house, and you better not treat me like a home invader when I move in without your permission or I'll kill you and say you attacked me first.
-->
@prefix
"Hamas relies on the Israeli government’s aim to minimise collateral damage, and is also aware of the West‘s sensitivity towards civilian casualties.
1) they are literally bombing hospitals and refugee camps and cutting off food for civilians. So no, this is factually false. They are intentionally targetting civilians. So in that sense, there is no collateral damage. Because collateral damage is an accidental killing of civilians when targeting someone else. This is intentional, widespread murder.
2) this document covers activity up to 2014. so it's not super relevant to the genocide being carried out right now. historical things done by hamas don't justify mass murder today.
By engaging in these acts, Hamas employs a win-win scenario: if indeed the IDF uses kinetic power, and the number of civilian causalities surges, Hamas can use that as a weapon in the lawfare it conducts.
I agree that hamas uses shitty tactics. I also know Israel are intentionally bombing civilians. It is a campaign of genocide. And it doesn't matter what hamas or anyone else has done, genocide is pure evil. I can condemn hamas for their evil and also call out Israel for their evil which is 50x worse.
-->
@DavidAZZ
Israel has to defend itself.
Not with the US taxpayer dime. I believe in America first, not Israel first. Same thing with Ukraine.
You may say:
Israel is our ally
The left says the same thing about Ukraine.
Or:
Israel helps us against the Muslims!
The left says the same thing about Ukraine and the Russians.
Funding Ukraine or Israel is not putting America first!
You want to help the Jews? Then let them move to the US documented or not. MAGA world won't allow that though.
-->
@FishChaser
Read ....The United Nations report "The Question of Palestine" https://www.un.org/unispal/history/
Read it, don't just watch the YT video.
Read it and get back to me.
-->
@HistoryBuff
#16
The report explained the situation.
"Hamas’ use of human shields is therefore likely aimed at minimising their own vulnerabilities by limiting the Israeli Defense Forces’ (IDF) freedom of action.
It is also aimed at gaining diplomatic and public opinion-related leverage, by presenting Israel and the IDF as an aggressor that indiscriminately strikes civilians." ( cited above ).
-->
@prefix
You expect me to side with the side that is blowing up thousands of civilians every day just because the UK and the UN decided they owned that land at some point? You must also be in favor of the cops shooting innocent people because the government decided to give them a badge and a gun. The UK told the palestinians "nah this shit belongs to the Jews now" and the Palestinians were like "fuck that" so the UK and the UN were like "Ok we're going to murder you and take it by force, but we're going to give keep giving you chances to consent to something you don't consent to". It's not much different from a rapist who pauses in between rapings to ask "Are you SURE you don't want to consent?" and when the rapee continues to struggle their like "ok, I guess I'll just have to keep raping you then".
-->
@FishChaser
So you didn't read the report?
-->
@prefix
The report explained the situation.
Why are we repeating ourselves? Yes hamas uses shitty tactics. That is bad. Israel is engaging in a campaign of mass murder with the goal of exterminating or expelling all palestinians. That is genocide. Nothing Hamas has or could theoretically do would justify that. Israel is the far worse offender.
-->
@HistoryBuff
Here is an equally true statement......" Yes Israel uses shitty tactics. That is bad. Hamas is engaging in a campaign of mass murder with the goal of exterminating or expelling all Israelis . That is genocide. Nothing Israel has or could theoretically do would justify that. Hamas is the far worse offender. "
"It's all in the mind" ( R. Starr ).
-->
@prefix
Here is an equally true statement
As the tit for tat “who is worse” arguments can go on ad nauseam regarding Israel and Palestine, I try to look for more fundamental reasons (or biases) why people side with one over the other. Muslims and Jews are generally pretty easy to understand as far as which side they favor. Westerners favoring Israel is also pretty straightforward. But when white westerners favor Palestinians? That is more difficult to understand. I have observed that it involves one or more elements which are all rooted in postmodernist thought.
The western education system has become very postmodern, teaching that the world should be judged through the lens of power structures as opposed to recognizing similar value systems. The power structure lens encourages an oppressor vs oppressed binary:
Palestinian = non Western = poor = oppressed = inherently good
Israel = Western = rich and powerful = oppressor = inherently bad
There is also what I call “morality by casualty rate”:
High casualties = defenseless = oppressed = inherently good
Low casualties = powerful = oppressor = inherently bad
Once a people group has been judged as oppressed, no amount of malevolent action will make them decidedly bad. Conversely, when a group has been deemed an oppressor, no amount of benevolent action will cause them to be viewed as good.
Of course, the Holocaust throws a curveball in this binary of Israelis as oppressors, which is why that historic tragedy is often minimized, ignored, negated, or the argument is made that Palestinians have undergone similar at the hands of the Jews.
-->
@cristo71
non Western = poor = oppressed = inherently good
oof, there a big dose of racism.
rich and powerful = oppressor = inherently bad
lol no. Oppressor=oppressor. no one objective can look at what Israel has been doing to the palestinians and think they are not oppressive.
no amount of malevolent action will make them decidedly bad.
this is false. Hamas is bad. Palestinians are not. Most people can see that distinction. In the same sense that the KKK is bad, white people are not.
Conversely, when a group has been deemed an oppressor, no amount of benevolent action will cause them to be viewed as good.
i guess that's true. if you are murdering 10's of thousands of children you are going to be seen as bad no matter how many puppies you're nice to.
or the argument is made that Palestinians have undergone similar at the hands of the Jews.
yes, that argument is made because Israel is committing genocide.
-->
@HistoryBuff
Your views exemplify exactly what I am talking about… to a T.
-->
@cristo71
Your views exemplify exactly what I am talking about… to a T.
someone who examines global events rationally? You didn't even attempt to argue why anything I said was incorrect.
As an Irishman with our history of terrorist recourse against a much powerful foe I empathise with the Palestinians. We were classier about it than Hamas though.
Can't see how Israel isn't always the chief bastard in this situation tbh. Sounds like Israel has been treating Palestinians like animals for decades. If so, then they created Hamas.
-->
@DavidAZZ
I would run up and slap him while he was reading a book (or something of that sort) and he finally had enough of me doing this and turned around and slugged me HARD on the arm. I was taken back as my little slaps were hardly painful and on the edge of annoying. When I said indignantly "I didn't hit you that hard!", he just said, "So?"Point of my story is the antagonizor does not get to dictate the severity of the response of the antagonized.
Clearly the antagonist does not get to dictate the severity of the response, I agree...but that's quite different from saying what your brother did was justified, right? Can we agree that if his response was to punch you in the balls, then as your writhed in pain on the floor, kick you in the back until you had three broken ribs, then punch your face until both your eyes closed, then drag you out of the house to take a piss on your back, that such a response is not justified?
Or are all responses to aggression justified?