313
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 21 Nov 2023
313 points (95.1% liked)
World News
32315 readers
841 users here now
News from around the world!
Rules:
-
Please only post links to actual news sources, no tabloid sites, etc
-
No NSFW content
-
No hate speech, bigotry, propaganda, etc
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
A reminder that the number one priority of this "war" for Israrl is to eliminate Hamas(while laying waste to Gaza, making it inhabitable), while the hostage is second. The longer they drag the likelier the hostages is gonna end up dead, and Netanyahu is complicit on their death.
Like fuck. The number one goal of this genocide is to eradicate Palestinians.
Fuck off zionist
This fits the definition of both apartheid and genocide
Propaganda for better solutions that don't involve bombing city blocks because one gang thug had an RPG outside a hospital.
Maybe I am not comfortable with Israel's aim
Maybe I am not comfortable with killing children and teenagers for the sins of a gang of thugs.
Maybe I am not comfortable with killing civilians if it is going to lead to a broader war.
Either way, what really irks me, is that everyone is okay with it. If this happened in any other place in the world, we would be clawing bloody murder, but because it happens in un-wealthy Gaza. I am a propagandist?
Guess it's okay to kill kids so long as they are poor and (possibly) Muslim? What kind of propaganda are you spewing?
@HuddaBudda
@stopthatgirl7 @Annoyed_Crabby @OurTragicUniverse\
i will keep saying this until i am dead.... war is terrible. you don't like it? then don't get in one. when a group locates legitimate targets among civilians and human shields, THAT IS THE WAR CRIME HERE. you deal with that by attacking anyway and demonstrate to the enemy that tactic does not work and will not be tolerated. you want to get mad? then direct the anger where its deserved. at the group which purposely uses their own people as propaganda by using them as human shields and crying about civilian deaths.
the situation is beyond the point of tiptoeing around world opinion and rose-colored glasses wearing people like you. any org that employs the tactics hamas has used should be wiped out. period. i said the same thing about the taliban years ago and i'll say it again.
what you see is what happens in war. civilians die. don't like it? then do whatever you have to in order to avoid it.
And when that doesn't work you do it again
and again
and again
and again
and again
...
Because it's more important to demonstrate that you absolutely will kill innocents who have been put in harm's way in order to show Hamas (and the rest of the world) exactly what your version of justice looks like than it is to try something different.
And we're paying attention, I can promise you that.
@be_excellent_to_each_other
no. its a demonstration that the tactics of terrorists will not be a deterrent. what will paying ransoms to hostage takers get you? more hostages. what will not attacking targets with human shields get you? more human shields. you fucking people don't seem to realize you are justifying and enabling those actions. its not justice. its war. justice would be prosecuting the terrorists. terrorists ARE NOT SOLDIERS. hamas ARE NOT SOLDIERS. people need to get that through their collective heads.
@stopthatgirl7 @Annoyed_Crabby @OurTragicUniverse @HuddaBudda
You know what attacking targets with "human shields" gets you? More dead innocent people. Try not to forget the "human" part of that word.
Edit: Gonna start adding this article to a lot of my replies on this topic. More people should read this and encourage this kind of future. When I figure out what sub it belongs in, I'll post it as a thread there.
https://lifeisasacredtext.substack.com/p/hand-in-hand
@be_excellent_to_each_other
tell that to the organization that is actively using the human shields. then tell the palestinians that it will all stop when they stand up to hamas.
and my edit.
by all means keep your link in mind, never forget it, and shout it at the top of your lungs any time you see a terrorist kill civilians, any time you see a rocket launcher in front of an apartment complex, any time you see a terrorist turn his weapon on a person who is not a uniformed soldier, or does that just apply to empathy for palestinians?
You really do not give 1 shit about children do you? You keep telling people that this is what you get if you start a war. Did the children start that war? No. Then why keep bombing them?
Even if Hitler himself hides under a hospital or school, you do not bomb that place. It really is that simple. The fact that you are a-ok with bombing children speaks volumes about your character.
Surprise me with insights on why you think it is ok to bomb children and please do not involve hamas, terrorists or some form of anti-antisemitism. Keep focused on bombs on the heads of 5 year old, babies and justify that without involving adults that these children have zero control over.
OK thank you for your input, have a nice day!
Like when Israel bombed a refugee camp to get a single Hamas Leader?
Oh, maybe you meant when Hamas targeted the preschools on Oct 7?
There are no saints in this war.
Hamas, seems to be doing fine, it's the people of Gaza that have to take the hits. Also not a warm idea for the hostages you've doomed to death.
Empathy, the word you are looking for is called Empathy.
Agreed, use better tactics, aim, and FFS stop hitting the children.
@HuddaBudda
hmm. spoken by someone that shows zero understanding of the real world. "Like when Israel bombed a refugee camp to get a single Hamas Leader?"-----yes. exactly that.
"Oh, maybe you meant when Hamas targeted the preschools on Oct 7?"
"Empathy, the word you are looking for is called Empathy"
do you have empathy for those killed on oct 7? do you have empathy for those crammed in shelters due to indiscriminate or blatant attacks on civilians by hamas? while their rockets may not be precision accurate, the ballistic characteristics alone offer enough accuracy to avoid them dropping in the middle of population centers in israel. do you have empathy for that?
empathy goes out the window after what happened oct 7. i watched the twin towers fall on 9/11 in new york. there was no talk of empathy. from anyone. but i heard a few comments about the world needing a reminder of what a nuke can do.
we are beyond empathy here. eliminating hamas and their underground infrastructure requires the tactics israel is using. THAT IS WAR. you want to talk empathy? have at it. civilians always lose in war. but don't talk like israel is the unholy offender here. hamas deserves what they are getting and palestinians need to oust hamas themselves to get my empathy. the video of them dancing in the streets the day after 9/11 tells me all i need to know about them.
@stopthatgirl7 @Annoyed_Crabby @OurTragicUniverse
We call this multi-tasking, but yes. Generally one can feel empathy for more then one party, it isn't a zero sum game.
It is a shame people only watched our rage, and didn't learn the lesson 10 trillion dollars later, and all our hard work evaporating in 3 days.
Hypocrite that I am, fool I am not. Learn from our mistakes or be doomed to repeat them.
I disagree, there are better methods, more informed methods, safer methods for sure, if we thought about this any other way beside treating bombs like magic pixie dust that makes problems disappear.
Lol love hearing jackasses say "you don't understand the real world" when it's actually them that doesn't understand the real world and as an excuse to justify a genocide.
When the US took out Osama, it didn't do it with bombs. It was with special forces. Same is needed here.
@xerazal
most of you don't. the real world isn't rainbows and unicorn color farts.
calls me a jackass and then proceeds to somehow confuse 1 man with an organisation. nice job. if this is the best you can come up with then you are NOT doing yourself any favors.
you show me 1 special ops org in the world that can eliminate hamas by itself. there isn't one. anywhere. that requires these things called "armies". which have well equipped soldiers with support units, lines of communication and resupply, things you bleeding heart armchair wannabe generals don't know about.
and btw, look up the definition of genocide, how the term has been used historically, and then understand why it doesn't apply here. because there is a difference in scale, motivation, and outcome. and i'll ask this of all those who spout this shit.....if its a genocide then why aren't israeli's invading west bank? and no, a few raids and strikes doesn't count.
which all says its a campaign against hamas. which has little power in west bank.
try again.
https://jewishcurrents.org/a-textbook-case-of-genocide
Ah I see you've already rejected this publication because it's too "bleeding heart" for you lol.
Well, I don't have an article from Fox News or OANN, but:
https://www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2023-11-19/israel-hostages-gaza-bombing-civilians-genocide-holocaust-studies
https://time.com/6334409/is-whats-happening-gaza-genocide-experts/
https://theweek.com/politics/the-genocide-debate-in-gaza
The most ambiguous of those says maybe not yet, but it's evidence that we need to act before it becomes reality.
Nope.
https://jewishcurrents.org/a-textbook-case-of-genocide
@IchNichtenLichten
ah yes a nonstop chain of left biased sources spewing loaded words.
great source. try again. this time how about something from international policy experts. how about from ANY PEER REVIEWED CREDIBLE SOURCE?
i doubt you nor anyone else here can or will put in the effort to.
Just out of curiosity - do you think you need to tag people in order for them to see your replies to them? Because you don't.
I think it's federation from mastodon
Ah, fair enough.
I would post the UN human rights council's analysis but I already know you would just move the goalposts and say the UN aren't "international policy experts" so why even bother
no. i would say to take a look at who's been leading it and what their agenda is.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Human_Rights_Council#Accusations_of_bias_against_Israel
Speaking at the IDC's Herzliya Conference in Israel in January 2008, Dutch Foreign Minister Maxime Verhagen criticized the actions of the Human Rights Council actions against Israel. "At the United Nations, censuring Israel has become something of a habit, while Hamas's terror is referred to in coded language or not at all. The Netherlands believes the record should be set straight, both in New York and at the Human Rights Council in Geneva", Verhagen said.[146]
At UNHRC's opening session in February 2011, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton criticized the council's "structural bias" against the State of Israel: "The structural bias against Israel – including a standing agenda item for Israel, whereas all other countries are treated under a common item – is wrong. And it undermines the important work we are trying to do together."[147]
In March 2012, the UNHRC was criticized for facilitating an event in the UN Geneva building featuring a Hamas politician. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu castigated the UNHRC's decision stating, "He represents an organization that indiscriminately targets children and grown-ups, and women and men. Innocents – is their special favorite target". Israel's ambassador to the UN Ron Prosor denounced the speech stating that Hamas was an internationally recognized terrorist organization that targeted civilians. "Inviting a Hamas terrorist to lecture to the world about human rights is like asking Charles Manson to run the murder investigation unit at the NYPD", he said.[148]
The United States urged UNHRC in Geneva to stop its anti-Israel bias. It took particular exception to the council's Agenda Item 7, under which at every session, Israel's human rights record is debated. No other country has a dedicated agenda item. The US Ambassador to UNHRC Eileen Chamberlain Donahoe said that the United States was deeply troubled by the "Council's biased and disproportionate focus on Israel." She said that the hypocrisy was further exposed in the Golan Heights resolution that was advocated by the Syrian regime at a time when it was murdering its own citizens.[149]
I just want to point out that amidst all the death and destruction, you're problem is how people are using a word. What can be more bad faith than ignoring the reality and fighting over the signifier?
Words are not reality; you cannot drive home in the word "car".
Words explain ideas, improper definitions lead to miscommunications. Words matter and changing definitions has always been a sign of an attempt to smuggle ideas in.
"Genocide" used to mean a concerted attempt to actively exterminate a group of people based on their race. Now it just means "anything that disrupts local culture." It's like watering down the word "murder" to mean "physical assault." It's not that assaulting people is ok, it's that it's not murder.
"Words don't matter" is some of the most smooth brain bullshit I've ever seen, as if our entire conceptualization of ideas isn't rooted in what words we use to define them.