84

This is the typical throwaway line used by liberals when it's pointed out that Israel should stop doing war crimes, but I'm not sure what it's trying to convey.

Rights are always a tricky abstraction, doubly so at the international level, so I'm not sure what asserting the existence of some right is supposed to do. Israel obviously has the capability to defend itself^1^, so what good is asserting some intangible right to do so? Are they actually saying "We should not stop Israel from doing what it wants to defend itself"? I imagine even they would object to Israel use of sarin or nuclear weapons, so I don't think that's what they mean. Is it "Israel should be given wide but not unlimited latitude by the US to respond as it sees fit"? Cause if that's what they mean, the easy answer is "not with our tax dollars".

Anyway this just seems like one of those empty pat expressions used during arguments I hate.


  1. When they aren't busy doing racialist dismissiveness of Palestinian military capability.
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] usernamesaredifficul@hexbear.net 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

It's a legitimate state in that it has an army and land and you can't really illegitimately have those things it's a matter of possession

they are carrying out an ongoing genocide so they are a legitimate state that has apartheid laws that is actively seeking to destroy an ethnic group. Germany and South Africa didn't need to be illegitimate states for that to be a breach of international law and immoral

[-] Awoo@hexbear.net 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)
this post was submitted on 04 Nov 2023
84 points (100.0% liked)

chapotraphouse

13521 readers
1050 users here now

Banned? DM Wmill to appeal.

No anti-nautilism posts. See: Eco-fascism Primer

Gossip posts go in c/gossip. Don't post low-hanging fruit here after it gets removed from c/gossip

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS