Print

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

[Leafsnail]

Yeah I guess supporting a noted genocidal dictator is just a funny joke.  Ha ha.

[Shadowlord]

Yes, yes, they're not ˾literally identical practices. ̚ Just close enough in sentiment and execution the parallels are more than a little obvious. And I guess, being fair, the US hasn't actually gone through with a blanket ban against a religious/ethnic group! Yet.

It's still morbidly amusing to see a country with large swaths of the population calling for exactly what kuwait is doing making a fuss about it. Hell, if the polls are even remotely resembling representative there's more people in the US that's professing support for that kind of behavior than kuwait has people, period.

Mind, m'not exactly saying kuwait shouldn't be shit on from on high for the practice, but still. S'maybe just a wee bit of hypocrisy going on.

A country isn't calling for anything. :V
There's Donald Trump, with some supporters. He holds no office, has no power, and won't become President.

Because there's no stateside call for the complete extermination of muslims and Israel has no history of aggression and/or terrorist acts, of course

1) The states would not actually do that. If they tried it, they would be very quickly get out of power by the hands of federal forces.
2) Israel has a long history of living alongside people who openly call for murdering every single jew and have been constantly attempting to make that a reality by bombarding them with terroristic missile strikes and sending in madmen with knifes to randomly kill anyone they see, while simultaneously being subject to lingering anti-semitism sentiments from the world (as can be seen in the sheer amount of UN's anti-Israel resolutions). Their "aggression" and "terrorist acts" are perfectly justified.

1. You've misunderstood the meaning of the word "stateside." It means "in the United States of America," and has nothing to do with individual states.
2. Israel seems to think that retaliating with far more force and precision than they were attacked by, killing innocents, destroying schools and hospitals, etc, will somehow cow the Palestinians instead of enrage them.

Good to see so many of you are one trumped up news article away from supporting genocide

They're just parroting the politicians and pundits in the US who say that we should never have invaded Iraq the second time, because ISIS wouldn't have arisen if we had just left Saddam in place (since it came from AQI which was started there after the invasion because Saddam kept AQ out).

How does it advocate genocide?

Not eliminating Saddam. See his history.

[smjjames]

Yeah, the Middle East is one of those screwed up places where even the alt-history looks bad in some respects.

[IronyOwl]

2) Israel has a long history of living alongside people who openly call for murdering every single jew and have been constantly attempting to make that a reality by bombarding them with terroristic missile strikes and sending in madmen with knifes to randomly kill anyone they see, while simultaneously being subject to lingering anti-semitism sentiments from the world (as can be seen in the sheer amount of UN's anti-Israel resolutions). Their "aggression" and "terrorist acts" are perfectly justified.

This is exactly why some Americans want to kill all the Muslims, because they're terroristic madmen with history of killing everyone with anti-semitic knives, while simultaneously being subject to lingering accusations of being racist. How is this statistically negligible threat different from that other statistically negligible threat?

[smjjames]

2) Israel has a long history of living alongside people who openly call for murdering every single jew and have been constantly attempting to make that a reality by bombarding them with terroristic missile strikes and sending in madmen with knifes to randomly kill anyone they see, while simultaneously being subject to lingering anti-semitism sentiments from the world (as can be seen in the sheer amount of UN's anti-Israel resolutions). Their "aggression" and "terrorist acts" are perfectly justified.

This is exactly why some Americans want to kill all the Muslims, because they're terroristic madmen with history of killing everyone with anti-semitic knives, while simultaneously being subject to lingering accusations of being racist. How is this statistically negligible threat different from that other statistically negligible threat?

Because Israel isn't a superpower and for them, it's not a statistically negligible threat. Heck, I don't think they've ever had a significant period of time where they didn't feel threatened or need the backing of a superpower to not feel threatened.

[wobbly]

They're just parroting the politicians and pundits in the US who say that we should never have invaded Iraq the second time, because ISIS wouldn't have arisen if we had just left Saddam in place (since it came from AQI which was started there after the invasion because Saddam kept AQ out).

I wouldn't call it parroting when there's actually a pretty good chance the middle east is a more messed up place because of the 2nd Iraq war then it was before. Maybe the situation would of been worse, maybe better but don't pretend everyone who thinks the war was a mistake, can't think for themselves.

Also a big difference between supporting genocide & thinking the war left the middle east situation worse. No-one actually liked Saddam. Most people dislike what's replaced him even more.

[IronyOwl]

Because Israel isn't a superpower and for them, it's not a statistically negligible threat. Heck, I don't think they've ever had a significant period of time where they didn't feel threatened or need the backing of a superpower to not feel threatened.

They are relative to the region, and yes it is.

[Flying Dice]

Yeah I guess supporting a noted genocidal dictator is just a funny joke.  Ha ha.

Wait, wait, let me make sure I understand what you're saying perfectly clearly before I continue.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

That's it, yes? I mean, it's also possible that you're just incapable of understanding that saying "Bad Thing A was still less bad than Bad Thing B," isn't equivalent to saying "Bad Thing A was good," but surely your superior intellect is above such plebeian errors.

[IronyOwl]

Er, well...

The Kuwait response was to scrap all flights from New York to London.

We should have let Saddam Hussein keep Kuwait back in the days 

Seriously

The implication here is pretty strongly that a few gassed Kurds would have been greatly preferable to Jews (as per the original flamebait) being unable to fly a specific airline. That's not advocating or supporting Saddamic genocide in a vacuum, but it is "supporting a noted genocidal dictator" and, as per the previous challenge(s), "advocating genocide."

[Flying Dice]

Um. Except that the commonly understood context of that image is a generalized statement of "Holy shit, things are worse in the region now than when Saddam was in power."

But sure. Let's totally ignore pre-established knowledge every time we discuss something.

[Neonivek]

Yeah I guess supporting a noted genocidal dictator is just a funny joke.  Ha ha.

The joke is that as horrible as he was... The balance might have been that the world was better with him around.

Which is the unfortunate aspect of real life... Vietnam being a huge example... in that far more people died, and far more geopolitical destabilization, occurred BECAUSE of US interference then would have ever happened if they decided to simply stay home.

[Sergarr]

2. Israel seems to think that retaliating with far more force and precision than they were attacked by, killing innocents, destroying schools and hospitals, etc, will somehow cow the Palestinians instead of enrage them.

Last time Israel tried a peaceful solution with Palestine and the quality of life was rising there exponentially, their leadership has decided that this should not be and Second Intifada happened. Let's play a little game "spot the Second Intifada on these graphs":

Spoiler: it's a really easy game (click to show/hide)

Palestine's authorities do not want any actual peace with Israel, they want Israel's destruction, even at the cost of Palestine's prosperity. It doesn't matter if Israel plays nice or not, as long as these people are in power, there will be no lasting peace in Palestine.

[Leafsnail]

I was referring more to the OP, who expressed his regrets that Kuwait did not suffer under Saddam for longer as payback for the law that he made up. I don't feel strongly about the alt-history stuff one way or another.

[IronyOwl]

Um. Except that the commonly understood context of that image is a generalized statement of "Holy shit, things are worse in the region now than when Saddam was in power."

But sure. Let's totally ignore pre-established knowledge every time we discuss something.

Yes. That is true. The image is intended to convey that message.

What was the context of it being brought up?

2. Israel seems to think that retaliating with far more force and precision than they were attacked by, killing innocents, destroying schools and hospitals, etc, will somehow cow the Palestinians instead of enrage them.

Last time Israel tried a peaceful solution with Palestine and the quality of life was rising there exponentially, their leadership has decided that this should not be and Second Intifada happened. Let's play a little game "spot the Second Intifada on these graphs":

Spoiler: it's a really easy game (click to show/hide)

Palestine's authorities do not want any actual peace with Israel, they want Israel's destruction, even at the cost of Palestine's prosperity. It doesn't matter if Israel plays nice or not, as long as these people are in power, there will be no lasting peace in Palestine.

According to the Wikipedia article on it, the Second Intifada was a result of both sides being pissed and blaming each other over the failure of the Oslo Accords and the usual bullshit, then primed by factional rage over the perceived symbolism of Sharon visiting the Temple Mount, resulting in a Palestinian riot responded to with lethal force by Israeli police leading to/followed by more riots and more police.

I'm not sure where you're getting "PLO didn't want happiness so they declared war on Israel again" from that.

[Sheb]

Posting to Watch and pour fuel on the fire if it goes on about Israeli politics.