-61
or even both if you want to play safe?
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 13 Oct 2023
-61 points (14.1% liked)
Asklemmy
43974 readers
957 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- !lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
Check out all the downvoters supporting terrorists... Not saying what Hamas did was appropriate, but when you've been treated like scum for 56 years and nobody in the world is willing to lend a hand, people are going to lash out any way they can. Take care of the Israeli terrorists first and the Hamas "problem" will simply go away.
I keep hearing a "but" every time this issue comes up. It's always "what the Palestinians did was wrong, but..." but there is no "but". There is a gradient scale on the appropriateness of certain ways to do war. On one end, you have the act of simply not engaging in conflict, but this leads to innocent peoples' innocence being taken advantage of and so nobody does it. Then near the other end, you have things like what happened on the 7th which has been compared to Pearl Harbor and 9/11. The victims that day, who Hamas could've simply preached to if they wanted to, never saw it coming, never had any reason to deserve it except for the fact they just happened to come into the world where they live, and will never live to realize what happened. That one "but" is the closest thing they have to any kind of defense and it's sometimes never even used. Keep in mind I don't approve of any form of war that isn't defensive (and am wondering if Palestine finds it fitting that the people the terrorists gave PTSD have a bad opinion of them now, who would've thought) and especially don't approve of war drafts. Naturally, I don't hesitate to compare what happened to that.
this is exactly what I was understating. all the so call lefty pro-life just demonstrated their true face. You don't have to be from any border, the Isreali response is just inexcusable, not justifiable. bombing, cutting water, electricity, food (even in prisons) ?
Careful who you're calling out, I'm not sure where you're from but in the US the "pro-lifers" are on the extreme right with no concern over who is killed by their policies (as long as it's not white men), while those on the left are the only ones I've ever heard who even give a damn about what's happening in Palestine. Of course the US isn't exactly known for its fair responses, hell the last time we were attacked we didn't even retaliate against the right country.
Why is everyone suddenly bringing up peoples' views on abortion, in a debate about Israel and Palestine? I care about innocent lives, that's the most accurate way to describe what "side" I'm on, and here people are saying "where is your Palestinian flag, good guys" and "look at the downvoters supporting terrorism" like people trying to pressure everyone to join a side. My pro-choice views have nothing to do with that (and neither do peoples' race, it makes it sound personal to say "it's all white people").
My response was specifically to OP's statement about pro-life people, and I was simply pointing out how things are viewed where I am from which might be vastly different from OP's part of the world. If you want to take issue with that, then yes... in the US the people who call themselves "pro-life" are very much working against the health of the mothers and literally passing laws that are killing people. And every one of those laws are designed to take away the rights of women. Funny how when it involves a woman's body they call it a "life", but when one of those idiots jerks off it's simply a clump of cells. And if you don't believe this is not also a racial issue, then you haven't been paying attention to how lop-sided these laws have been towards oppressing people of color. Take note that despite being an older white male myself, I still take great issue with the way this subject has been treated recently, and I feel the same way about how Israel has been oppressing Palestine, and the way Russia is attempting to oppress Ukraine.
And no, none of this has any business being discussed under the current thread, but you had to make an issue of it instead of reading it for what it was -- simply an attempt to clarify for OP how their wording might be taken differently depending on where they are, and an explanation of what that wording means here in the US.
I know, I don't exactly agree with either of you on that (in this case in that pro-lifers and pro-choicers are inherently a certain wing... or that any one stance discussed makes someone a certain wing, wasn't sure how different the angles you two were coming from were). Or that any of the people of any stance are dominantly of each other stance. I agree on the point of different people seeing an issue differently, unfortunately this might explain why Russia (and North Korea) is backing Palestine right now.
I don’t get it. There’s a war going on because of terrorists who attacked Israel, these terrorists want their supposed nation to be independent, and people are complaining Israel cut off food/water/electricity? Imagine if you were at war with an independence movement and were like “hey, my good enemies, we’re trying to put you down because you insist you’re determined to be independent enough to make your own, but here, have some food and water and free electricity”. Nobody is obligated to give stuff, that’s how sanctions work.
If you're running a prison, and the prisoners riot killing guards, killing the families of the guards, and you locked the prison down, not letting food, water, medicine inside. You're killing the prisoners, the prisoners have no other ability to survive their dependent on food water and medicine coming in. You're running the prison, you have obligations when you run a prison, even when the prisoners riot.
The analogy would work better if Palestine was an enclosed system as opposed to a wannabe independent nation that never stopped advocating terrorism to achieve those ends.
The Gaza strip is a closed system. Thats what the big deal is. They can't leave, they can't do bo business they can't trade, they can't be independent... It's literally a closed system
I meant in the sense of your analogy. Everything given to the people there or anywhere comes off as a potential trap in the making, as is the nature of what happens in guerilla escalations, something Egypt as much as Israel has had to come to terms with. That elaboration may/would've helped, and if however/whatever I phrased, it's why.
Because, in each and every country, it's the inept and childish leadership that has ruined everything for us all. Israel's government is corrupt. HAMAS are terrorists. How many governments are made up of the original native population from the region? Every country has been created by murdering the innocent.
You say that as if Israel hasn't been there since ancient times and that randomly killing oblivious civilians is the same thing as amassing a military to fight a military.
To use an analogy, suppose this were Hetalia and countries were individual human personifications who "won" territory from one another through fencing. The forces attacking Israel did the equivalent of taking a blade and slashing Israel's eyes as he slept. That ain't fencing. And then Russia and North Korea, who have abused Ukraine miserably because he wanted to be left alone, come to take fruits from the conflict, unquestioned by Palestine, as if by design.
After all that, and after letting terrorists infiltrate the Palestinian territory in the first place by setting up shop, again uncondemned, under their nose, I'd argue both Israel and Palestine are corrupt, but that the nation that makes a deal with the devil is moreso, but that you don't deal with corrupt nations by killing random people unprovoked. Even if killing innocent people to achieve goals was a commonality, I still object to the many pro-Palestinian people who say it should be considered normalized because it supports their side of things.
Exactly. Each and every country is built on blood.
But is every country built on fear of existence? Clearly some nations go about what you call "being built on blood" better than others.
My point was that the countries who are trying to be the good guy have at one point tried to kill off the native population. I'm not saying things are equal. Are you trying to say Israel was built on fear of existence? They aren't being good neighbors. And Israel is a manufactured country by the "winners" of WW2. I'm not saying the jews are bad. I'm saying those that are in power are the ones fucking it up for the rest of us. There is no pure good entity. As humans, we are all animals. Some are disgusting animals. The ruling class are the problem. Until there are no classifications of higher or lower human, there will always be problems. Are we all equal in every way? No of course not. But we need to try to help the less fortunate until they are no longer less fortunate.
There are two versions of history regarding how Israel formed. One of them was Moses incited a rebellion against the pharaoh and then escaped with his followers into Israel, fighting the Canaanites when they got there (but definitely not through terrorism and by far not the whole Canaanite territory, which stretched far to the East) and settling in what's roughly considered their current territorial borders.
The other version of Israelite history began with them simply forming into existence on an area surrounded by Canaanite land (this view is often held by those who doubt the pyramids used unwilling slaves), similar to many city-states, and that the Israelites are in fact the Canaanites.
Neither of these began with indiscriminate extermination or fear of existence.
Modern Israel, which was given to the inhabitants after British occupation which also followed periods of Babylonian, Roman, and Ottoman occupation, was founded on the chaos caused by the British being as good at drawing borders than they were, a complaint which has also been spoken by India and Pakistan, who themselves are destined for a third war this century (I can almost smell it). Which leads us to the following...
That's kind of the biggest point, there is a distinction NOT being made by Hamas or even the majority of Palestine. While also not encourageable, fedai warfare, which was even invented by Muslims, would've been 110% more peaceful than what Hamas did and what Palestine continues, which is highly collateral and reckless in its aggression, deception, and urge to drag people in, such as with the OP but also with the fact Russia and the whole Ummah just had to join, making it more than just par for the course.
There's also the fact there's one Jewish homeland and more land operating in the sphere of the Islamic world than there is land on most continents, which itself is only a factor because Palestine considers itself inseparable from Islam (if it wasn't, the spheres of Islam and Judaism wouldn't be used as reference points to where their lands begin, it would just be "another factor" and thus no alienation if Palestine wanted Israel's land).