Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[bloop_bleep]

 I'd like to add that this is not actually just like any other war done by a modern military.

https://www.businessinsider.com/israel-dropped-as-many-bombs-in-gaza-us-afghanistan-2019-2023-11

Israel dropped close to as many bombs in a week as the US dropped in Afghanistan in any one year.

And then, Afghanistan is 252,000 square miles. The Gaza Strip has an area of 140 square miles. If you do the math, that's 93,600 times the bombs per unit time and area.

This is why people are calling it an ethnic cleansing, and not just another brutal conflict.

[hector13]

… and the quotes with evidence of your assertions on my positions?

OK. Here is what you wrote on the day of the barbaric attack, before Israel started a major air strike campaign.

I mean… Gaza is basically under siege by Israel. They control land, sea, and air access (with Egypt) and are quite happy to allow their citizenry to abuse and harass Palestinians if it makes them leave - a situation which is not limited to Palestinians.

This is the same Israel with a far-right government that passed a law that only Jews are entitled to self-determination in Israel.

So yeah, without going into more detail on the horrific things allowed by the Israeli government enacted upon the Palestinians, I don’t condone at all what Hamas are doing, but when their back is to the wall and they keep getting pushed by someone that wants to eliminate them, physically, culturally, or both, and the international community has basically abandoned them to that fate… what other option do they have?

Jews are evil. Jews are blockading Gaza. Jews are genociding Palestinians. I don't kinda support Hamas's attack but they were basically forced to do it by Jews who took all other options away from them.

Where did I say Jews were evil? I specifically mention the Israeli government, and in case it escapes your notice, that’s not representative of all Israelis, not all Israelis are Jews, and not all Jews are Israeli, Law of Return notwithstanding. The first link is about extremists att

I don’t know why I’m wasting time explaining this to you. You’ve shown a repeated willingness to completely disregard any evidence counter to your own beliefs so whatever. If you want to conflate Israel and Jews. Palestinians and Hamas, criticism of Israel with anti-semitism, then that’s your problem, and if anybody is swayed by the nonsense spewed forth from your keyboard, they’re as braindead as you are.

[dragdeler]

And then, Afghanistan is 252,000 square miles. The Gaza Strip has an area of 140 square miles. If you do the math, that's 93,600 times the bombs per unit time and area.

Goes a long way of showing the premisse of modern warfare... Turns out you typically do not simply empty a city, conventional explosives are quite inneffective at actually killing every last person hiding in the rubble.


During the cold war, west germans called east germany a "Unrechtsstaat", part justifiably part unjustifiably. I think the perspective of those legal doctrines is invaluable... Again substract the whole ethnic conflict, and you're still left with a shithole country. I'm so incredibly triggered when people call it the only democracy in the middle-east, what the fuck are they smoking? It doesn't even work as a technicality if you're super indoctrinated and consider the west can do no wrong, because turkey is right there. It's probably just plain racist to call israel the only democracy in the middle east.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

The German term Unrechtsstaat (German: [ˈʊnʁɛçt͡sˌʃtaːt] ⓘ; pl. Unrechtsstaaten, German: [ˈʊnʁɛçt͡sˌʃtaːtn̩] ⓘ) is a pejorative approximately meaning "unconstitutional, unjust, undemocratic or unlawful state" used to refer to a state in which the exercise of major aspects of governmental power is not constrained by the law, as opposed to a Rechtsstaat (constitutional state).[1] It is used not only as a jurisprudential term but also as a political one.[2] The origin of the term is attributed to the Prussian Catholic politician Peter Reichensperger, who in 1853 used the term to imply that Prussia would become "unjust" if it curtailed the rights of its Catholic subjects.

...Unrechtsstaat (a non-Rechtsstaat with the capacity to become one after a period of historical development).

In a Rechtsstaat, the power of the state is limited in order to protect citizens from the arbitrary exercise of authority. The citizens share legally based civil liberties and can use the courts. In continental European legal thinking, the Rechtsstaat is contrasted with both the police state and the État légal.

Contrary to the police state – where the law is arbitrary, unequally applied, and its making outside of non-state control – and to the Rechtsstaat ("state of rights") – in which constitutional rights are viewed as preceding and superseding the authority of the law – the état légal is a form of rule of law where the law is applied equally – i.e. to the people and to the state – as it is decided, that is without, or with reduced, constitutional limits upon the will of the lawmaker.

[Great Order]

Jews are evil. Jews are blockading Gaza. Jews are genociding Palestinians. I don't kinda support Hamas's attack but they were basically forced to do it by Jews who took all other options away from them.

...I think your position of "Israel *is* the Jewish people" is the thing that's antisemetic here. Conflating a whole ethno-religious group with a nation? Furthermore, conflating them with a government that's not representative of the Jewish or even the Israeli people as a whole?

Yes, people hide their antisemitism behind antizionism, but not everyone who's antizionist is antisemitic, and in this case there's no indication that hector's even being antizionist so much as anti-current-Israeli-government.

I was opposed to the Trump government and levied frequent criticism against it, does that make me anti-American?

[Strongpoint]

… and the quotes with evidence of your assertions on my positions?

OK. Here is what you wrote on the day of the barbaric attack, before Israel started a major air strike campaign.

I mean… Gaza is basically under siege by Israel. They control land, sea, and air access (with Egypt) and are quite happy to allow their citizenry to abuse and harass Palestinians if it makes them leave - a situation which is not limited to Palestinians.

This is the same Israel with a far-right government that passed a law that only Jews are entitled to self-determination in Israel.

So yeah, without going into more detail on the horrific things allowed by the Israeli government enacted upon the Palestinians, I don’t condone at all what Hamas are doing, but when their back is to the wall and they keep getting pushed by someone that wants to eliminate them, physically, culturally, or both, and the international community has basically abandoned them to that fate… what other option do they have?

Jews are evil. Jews are blockading Gaza. Jews are genociding Palestinians. I don't kinda support Hamas's attack but they were basically forced to do it by Jews who took all other options away from them.

Where did I say Jews were evil? I specifically mention the Israeli government, and in case it escapes your notice, that’s not representative of all Israelis, not all Israelis are Jews, and not all Jews are Israeli, Law of Return notwithstanding. The first link is about extremists

Heh. You are so good in this game. Noted. OK. I'll be speaking very literally with you. In the quoted message, you are clearly supporting one side over the other. You offered no condolences, expressed no disgust over the attack, and ultimately put all the blame on that one side. Technicalities of Israeli Government\Israeli\Jews are just that, technicalities. This conflict has sides, and those entities are on one side. You clearly blamed both Israel (all of it) and the Israeli Government. So yes, I concede, I was inaccurate, in your words Israel is Evil, not Jews(c).

What you said is exactly like going on 9/11/2001 with the take of "I don't condone the attacks, but policies of the USA and the American government left the other side any other ways to act"

"I don't condone but" is also very, very similar to the classic "I am not a racist\sexist\homophobe" but... It is used when people just can't say what they actually think because they understand how it looks and they try to soften it. You didn't say "I am horrified, disgusted, appalled" You chose the mildest form of disapproving of an act of sheer barbarity.

And then, Afghanistan is 252,000 square miles. The Gaza Strip has an area of 140 square miles. If you do the math, that's 93,600 times the bombs per unit time and area.

This is why people are calling it an ethnic cleansing, and not just another brutal conflict.

? Per square mile? Why would USA bomb huge sways of empty mountains in Afghanistan? Per unit of time? Why would USA need to bomb anything in Afghanistan for a year 24/7? If any metric is rational, then it is bombs used per square area of targets over the course of active fighting

And why do we use Afghanistan and not... hmm... lets say... Gulf War of 1991? I know! Numbers will be not as impressive because in that war the coalition did use a shitton of bombs over the span of weeks. There will be no emotional manipulation.

Also, using many bombs is not a war crime per se. Neither it is ethnic cleansing. There are no such international treaties and it doesn't meet the basic logic of what war crime is. Using many bombs is using many resources to inflict the maximum damage on the enemy. If Ukraine had thousands of missiles to strike Russian territory, we would use them all, using more bombs against the enemy is more effective than using fewer bombs against the enemy. Israel using many bombs means that, unlike Ukrainians, they were better prepared for a war.

You still need to prove the criminal use of those bombs.

[hector13]

condone /kən-dōn′/
transitive verb
To overlook, forgive, or disregard (an offense) without protest or censure. synonym: forgive.
Similar: forgive
To pardon; to forgive.
Similar: condoned

I’m sorry my condemnation of Hamas wasn’t strong enough for you Strongpoint. Whatever your feelings on that, again, it’s not my problem.

I’m not going to waste my time again trying to make you understand the details of my post. It doesn’t matter that we’ve spent weeks arguing over this and have reams of posts to choose from, you take one post that you can spin and ignore the rest in which I put the blame on both sides. It’s the same story over and over and over of you ignoring anything which doesn’t gel with your view.

It’s a sad way of being, having to be right all the time even if you have to distort reality to do it… but you’re not my responsibility.

[dragdeler]

And why do we use Afghanistan and not... hmm... lets say... Gulf War of 1991? I know! Numbers will be not as impressive because in that war the coalition did use a shitton of bombs over the span of weeks. There will be no emotional manipulation.

Oh mean the war with the biggest tank battle of the 20th century?

Spoiler: why oh why (click to show/hide)

[Strongpoint]

Hector13, Common... You asked me to provide you with an example of your position. You asked for it twice. I provided an example. I will not go through each and every one of your messages to show how biased they are. You may point me in the direction of anything positive you said about Israelis or anything negative said about Palestinians.

You could limit yourself to acknowledging my position that I see you as extremely biased and white and black in this conflict, being firmly on the Palestinian side denying their hateful behavior (example: excusing the genocidal slogan of "from the river to the sea") and demonizing Israeli side (example: in the day of genocidal attack on Israel accuse THEM of "erasing" Palestinians)

I know that you think the opposite of me but I don't require your explanations why you think so. I acknowledged that and went on. I think my words speak for myself, everyone is free to interpret my opinion in any way they like. I even made a long boring post of what I think of the current war in Gaza and why I am firmly on the Israeli side in it (so far).

I am not writing what I think about all the entirety of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict because it will be a novel and entire chapters of it will be - "I kind of think this way but I am very unsure because it's complicated and my knowledge isn't deep". But it sure isn't - "Evil Israelis made genocide of Nakba because of their hate and poor innocent Palestinians suffered all the time"

__________________________

To bring it back to somewhat on-topic

Tomorrow, if everything goes well, Israel and Hamas should exchange 50 Israelis for 150 Palestinians. Many "neutral" media write it as 30 hostages for 150 hostages or 50 prisoners for 150 prisoners. Needless to say, it makes me facepalm so hard.

Kidnapped civilians are not prisoners, and arrested, let's call them "members of armed resistance", are not hostages. At best, they are prisoners of war but it is generous to call people who attack random civilians that. IMO, Convicted terrorists is a more fitting term. But I can accept hostages for prisoners.

[hector13]

Our discussion about “from the river to the sea” was regarding western protestors - all of which you labeled anti-Semitic - not Palestinians, and I posted reasons for Hamas’ motivations for October 7th, I didn’t “blame the Jews” or “blame Israel”.

Keep twisting, one day reality might even change to fit what you think it is.

[anewaname]

...
I was opposed to the Trump government and levied frequent criticism against it, does that make me anti-American?

'Patriotism is supporting your country all the time, and your government when it deserves it. ''

[Schmaven]

It seems like most people know the implied meaning (at least by now they should) of "from the river to the sea" and though they might be protesting for peace, they're using that particular slogan because it is upsetting to Israelis and their supporters.  Even if they won't go as far as explicit calls for genocide, they see Israel as oppressors, and want to make them upset.  Very ironic how most of those protestors are likely concerned about 'microaggressions' and yet have absolute zero sensitivity for how that slogan is heard by the Jewish people.

[Loud Whispers]

It seems like most people know the implied meaning (at least by now they should) of "from the river to the sea" and though they might be protesting for peace, they're using that particular slogan because it is upsetting to Israelis and their supporters.  Even if they won't go as far as explicit calls for genocide, they see Israel as oppressors, and want to make them upset.  Very ironic how most of those protestors are likely concerned about 'microaggressions' and yet have absolute zero sensitivity for how that slogan is heard by the Jewish people.

Just a casual reminder that you shouldn't erase Jewish protesters or claim Israel's government speaks for "the Jewish people." It doesn't even speak for a majority of Israel's people

[Strongpoint]

It seems like most people know the implied meaning (at least by now they should) of "from the river to the sea" and though they might be protesting for peace, they're using that particular slogan because it is upsetting to Israelis and their supporters.  Even if they won't go as far as explicit calls for genocide, they see Israel as oppressors, and want to make them upset.  Very ironic how most of those protestors are likely concerned about 'microaggressions' and yet have absolute zero sensitivity for how that slogan is heard by the Jewish people.

Just a casual reminder that you shouldn't erase Jewish protesters or claim Israel's government speaks for "the Jewish people." It doesn't even speak for a majority of Israel's people

Do you know who those charismatic Jews at the beginning of the video are? Those are highly religious Jews who, if you simplify a lot, believe that the whole idea of Zionism is wrong because it is up to God to recreate the kingdom of Jews and it is blasphemous to try and force it yourself.

Note that even in this video they advocate not for peace but for the abolishment of Israel. Read their slogans!

While it is a curious orthodox movement in Judaism, using them as an example of many Jews who do not support the government of Israel is... not very honest. It is a small minority among the world's Jews who oppose not some actions of Israel but its very existence.

____________

The second part is more interesting, AFAIU, these are these guys - https://www.jewishsocialist.org.uk/ , possibly with some random Jewish Britons joining the crowd. Again, presenting a rather radical group as an example of "not all X are" is a dubious practice.


By this kind of metric, no one represents anyone. For example, By this metric, I can't say Ukrainians resist Russian invasion because not all actually do. Neither I can say that supporting Russia War Crimes is anti-Ukrainian because some Ukrainians not only support those, they participate in them as willing collaborators. As much as I would love to say - "they are no longer Ukrainians"... it is not exactly how the reality works.

[Starver]

We're getting firmly into the territory of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman

[Schmaven]

I'm not erasing anyone, just merely pointing out some absurdities involved with using such a charged slogan for the supposed purpose of peace.