Raping and dismembering and killing civilians doesn't disqualify them? — schopenhauer1

Who, Israel? Clarify.

actual movement bent on PURPOSEFULLY using disgusting tactics — schopenhauer1

Again, Israel.

Oh wait, it’s only disgusting when it’s intentional. And as usual, we’re back to intention. Of course we are — since Israel has killed and dismembered, brutally and disgustingly, more people than Hamas, it must be because they do so with high tech weaponry and nothing but DEFENSE in their hearts and souls, it’s totally fine.

Never mind that they PURPOSEFULLY want the Palestinians gone, and have said so. But I suppose that’s just them blowing off steam — Hamas has a CHARTER that says so!

At some point the conversation comes to an end because people have made their points. There is not much more except arguing the same thing and just getting emotionally angrier over and over for no reason. I guess it's a way to get people's frustration out with the conflict, but that seems to eventually lead nowhere when it just goes on endlessly. You think you have one up me because you made your point, and I one upped you because I made mine? I'm pretty sure regarding this, we are just going to defend our points without being moved. So what's the point of continuing the same points on this thread over and over again? Go ahead and write your letters to your congressmen/parlimentarian, make a video to reach a broad audience, etc., but shouting at each other on an internet philosophy forum seems quite inane. There is nothing we are going to do. We don't even know each other personally, so there is no attachment there. And if you say I represent this or that, and you are symbolically trying to slay the dragon of your imagined enemy, save the value signaling.

[Edit: I had a whole thing summing up my points, but nah, I don't want to keep endlessly debating the same things with the considerations I said above].

The same aim as it has always been: remove all Palestinians from Palestine and create a greater Israel from the river to the sea with Apartheid in its borders; where non-Jews will have less rights than Jews and Mizrahi, Sephardic and Ethiopian Jews will be discriminated against by their right wing supremacist AshkeNazi "brothers".

Sounds like you sure know those Jews. They sound like a nasty bunch. Especially those Ashkenazi. You figure they hold special Ashkenazi only meetings behind closed doors where they talk down the other Jews? How do you know your Jews so well? Are you one of them? Or a highly adept goy who has caught on to their schemes? Welcome to the resistance.

Oohhh... An attempt at ridicule because the facts speak for themselves. Maybe read Israeli newspapers.

Speaking of which:
https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/security-aviation/2024-05-22/ty-article/.premium/this-is-what-israels-limited-operation-in-rafah-looks-like/0000018f-a063-d0e8-a79f-ac7b1e6f0000

"limited" to what they always do: destroy everything.

I was hoping you’d give me something on the Ashki plot to rule over their fellows Jews.

I keep hoping for interesting viewpoints and comments from you but I'm disappointed as well. Also, institutionalised racism isn't a plot.

@Baden

Just for you...


What do you think?

I don't really want to get involved in the thread but Netanyahu is a terrorist and a mass murderer. I've said from the start it doesn't matter who is doing the terrorism, it ought to be condemned. In terms of scale, the terrorism of the IDF is much more extreme than that of Hamas. In terms of brutality, there's little or no difference. Hamas threw grenades at innocent civilians; Israel bombs and burns them to death--in a conflict that did not start on October 7th except in the minds of the deeply ignorant.

I agree with the ICC that the leaders on both sides need to answer for their crimes. And eventually the West will catch up and realize that what it not only allowed but encouraged the Israelis to do is moral depraved and has put it on a level no more elevated than supporters and enablers of Hamas. A "war" like this, with 90% civilian casualties, is a war against civilians, i.e. a war of terrorism, not against terrorism, and many brave journalists, especially Israeli journalists btw, have exposed a deliberate policy of targeting / murdering non-combatants. Also, if you believe all civilians', and particularly all childrens', lives are equally valuable then ask a supporter of this slaughter what would justify killing 15,000 or more Israeli children. You'll just get blank stares. They can't answer without revealing their racism.

Through the skilful use of propaganda, this Israeli administration and their supporters, the only ones in the conflict who had a voice, made the ignorant believe that dropping huge bombs on apartment blocks full of civilians, destroying hospitals, schools, and mosques, starving children to death, murdering aid workers, and slaughtering starving refugees, in short, committing genocide was not only morally acceptable but morally necessary. That was a lie that can no longer be hidden from anyone except the utterly delusional.

So, this is a statement of what should now be blindingly obvious. I'm not interested in replies from trolls or cheerleaders for Israeli terrorism and I don't intend to post here again. I ask of anyone if you still support this, please do not speak to me about it until you no longer do. I have turned my back on you and it will stay turned.

Well said. :up:

:100: :strong:

A path to peace talks is to sideline the extremists and fanatics on whatever side, them'gotta go, and whatever crimes dealt with.
Doesn't take a whole lot of zealots to sideline more accommodating moderates.
Why the heck would Muslims and Jews be attacked on other continents over this anyway?
"Righteous" attackers everywhere have a case (that can be found here in the thread), right?

Screw "the moderates" – both (all) sides, or peoples, need to mobilize their respective militant anti-extremists.

Another day, another “accidental” bombing of a school and innocent people being murdered. But war is hell and collateral damage and Hamas etc.

The genocide is not a narrative but fact largely self-documented by Israel. — boethius

I don't think Israel is saying this was an accident.

"The Israeli military confirmed it carried out the airstrike, which it said targeted a Hamas compound operating inside the school. Israeli military spokesperson Lt. Col. Peter Lerner later told journalists the military was not “aware of any civilian casualties.”

Lerner said “20 to 30 Hamas and Islamic Jihad” militants were targeted in the strike, and that those targeted were “using the facilities to plan and execute attacks” against Israeli forces. Militants who were involved in the October 7 attacks on Israel were among those killed, Lerner said."
https://www.cnn.com/2024/06/06/middleeast/israel-airstrike-un-school-gaza-intl-hnk/index.html

All roads lead back to WW2. The Allies killed thousands of innocent French civilians in preparation for D-Day. Was this a war-crime? No. Did the French demand justice for all the dead French civilians killed in bombing raids? No. Innocent people die in war. The French knew what the stakes were.

All roads lead back to WW2. — RogueAI

How tiresome.

By that logic, Hamas is also justified in what they did. Innocent people die in war — “too bad.” I suppose the Israelis shouldn’t demand justice for all the dead civilians. War is hell.

How tiresome.

By that logic, Hamas is also justified in what they did. Innocent people die in war — “too bad.” I suppose the Israelis shouldn’t demand justice for all the dead civilians. War is hell. — Mikie

No, Hamas and much of the Arab world fight for a belief system that oppresses women and LGBTQ people and basically anyone who's not a Muslim male. Screw that.

aware of any civilian casualties.” — RogueAI

Oh, cool! What a shocker. I’m sure Israel has the capability for precise targeting, after all, and that no innocent people will be among the dead.

Nothing to see.

No, Hamas and much of the Arab world fight for a belief system that oppresses women and LGBTQ people — RogueAI

Sorry, but war is hell. Collateral damage.

Oh and the IDF fight for a belief system of apartheid and ethno-nationalism. No thanks.

Sorry, but war is hell. Collateral damage.

Oh and the IDF fight for a belief system of apartheid and ethno-nationalism. No thanks. — Mikie

Would you rather live in a world run by Israel or Hamas? I think we both know the answer to that.

If you have the right belief system, killing people is fine.

Like the US in Iraq: spreading freedom and democracy. The “right” values. You have to burn a few babies alive to spread your superior Western values? Thems the breaks I guess.

How sickening.

Would you rather live in a world run by Israel or Hamas? I think we both know the answer to that. — RogueAI

You mean Likud or Hamas. Neither, because I dislike terrorists.

Would I prefer to live in Israel or Gaza? Israel, hands down. But that’s exactly the point.

You mean Likud or Hamas. Neither, because I dislike terrorists. — Mikie

:up: :up:

↪Mikie
The genocide is not a narrative but fact largely self-documented by Israel.
— boethius

I don't think Israel is saying this was an accident. — RogueAI

What makes it conclusively, unequivocally, for sure, take it to the bank, genocide is the starvation.

Trying to reduce the argument of genocide to one bombing is already just stupid.

If it was just bombings then you could play the game you want to play and claim Israel is fighting Hamas and not trying to kills the civilians, much less carrying out a genocide; the proof: Israel is letting in humanitarian aid and civilians are free to get out of the way of danger.

I.e. what the Russians are doing in Ukraine, blowing up a lot of buildings and reducing towns to moonscapes, but! not genocide as Russians give ample time for civilians to exit the battle area, create safe zones, and also don't interfere in humanitarian assistance to the civilian population on either side of the front line. Therefore, when Russian missiles and bombs blow stuff up they can legitimately claim they are trying to avoid that.

It would obviously be disproportionate to do the same in Gaza, where there is essentially no where to go, but obviously you'd have an easier time making your obnoxious apologetics.

However, announcing you are going to starve an entire civilian population, that nothing comes in, and promising to make it hell, and then going and doing that, there is no possible military justification.

It is simple, clearly, unambiguously genocide.

And that's just the starvation.

You can add the destruction of hospitals, murders of medical staff, obstructing delivery of medicine.

You could also add the destruction of other civilian infrastructure required to maintain life.

You could add the destruction of universities and other places of learning.

You can add the mass graves.

You can add a whole bunch of stuff, and also, indeed, the bombings.

But the starvation is already enough, you do not need more tools than that to carry out genocide and that is stated Israeli policy and has been carried out in practice with abundant proof.

There is nothing to equivocate.

> It is simple, clearly, unambiguously genocide.

Even if that's the case, Hamas and Palestinians who support Hamas are to be blamed for it. They provoked Israel. Israel has legitimate security concerns. They kept repeating this for decades. Given the disproportionate military capacity of Israel wrt Hamas this would be the likely conclusion. There is no single moment in which Hamas didn't lose the war to Israel. Palestinians should surrender and concede to Israel, to Netanyahu, whatever he asks of them. We should stop supporting Palestine. There was a time in which Palestinians could negotiate peace, but they refuse to accept because some dude from Iran told them to continue fighting. Israel could use nuclear bombs, etc. etc. etc. right?

Even if that's the case, Hamas and Palestinians who support Hamas is to be blamed for it. They provoked Israel. Israel has legitimate security concerns. They kept repeating this for decades. Given the disproportionate military capacity of Israel wrt Hamas this would be the likely conclusion. There is no single moment in which Hamas didn't lose the war to Israel. Palestinians should surrender and concede to Israel, to Netanyahu, whatever he asks of them. We should stop supporting Palestine. There was a time in which Palestinians could negotiate peace, but they refuse to accept because some dude from Iran told them to continue fighting. Israel could use nuclear bombs, etc. etc. etc. right? — neomac

The first big difference is the Russians aren't committing a genocide in Ukraine, as I just explained.

Russia is following the law of armed conflict pretty well: extremely far away from starving whole civilian populations to death. And this is born out in the stats of civilians killed during the conflict and in particular children.

The second big difference is that Russia is not implementing apartheid system and occupying parts of Ukraine without giving those occupied peoples any rights. The occupied people of the former-Ukrainian territory can get Russian citizenship, and if they don't they still have their Ukrainian citizenship; either way they are not stateless people kept in a big ghetto.

Third, the territories occupied by Russia have large portions, arguably a majority, of ethnic Russians that actually want to join Russia (hence the separatists fighting for 10 years), so there is not only an element of self-determination in the Russian speakers taking up arms against Kiev oppression of their language and culture, but also no one really cares all that much whether Russian speaking Ukrainians become Russian speaking Russians. Russia isn't conquering territory and then keeping Ukrainian speaking Ukrainians that don't want to be occupied by Russians in a giant ghetto with zero rights and lot's of murder, sexual abuse and so on, for the foreseeable future. Of course there will be exceptions, but in general there has been no insurgency against Russian occupation nor Ghettoizaton of conquered territory.

In otherwords, Russia is implementing a "one state solution" in their occupation of new territory. The one state solution is one of the two solutions that everyone agrees solves these kinds of problems, therefore all is well and you can rest your pretty little head.

The situation in Gaza is simply not similar at all to the situation in Crimea or the Donbas.

Israel does not offer Gazans citizenship and equal rights.

There is not one state or two state solution, but oppressed stateless people in a ghetto that have a right to fight the forces of oppression.

Now, Ukrainians in territory occupied by Russia would have the same right of insurgency against an occupying force (just it's less palpable because they are offered equal rights), but the fact no such insurgency seems to be occurring (perhaps because they are given rights and not kept in a ghetto) is one reason it's extremely foolish for non-occupied Ukrainians to try to reconquer the territory.

But again, mainly, the most important thing, is that Russia isn't carrying out a genocide whereas Isreal is.

So, your argument should be "Even if that's the case [i.e. Israel is committing a unequivocal and clear genocide] then that genocide is squarely the fault of Israelis and all participants in the genocide should be held accountable and the leaders hanged as we did in Nuremberg; they are free to present their defence that they were 'provoked' into genocide, but since that's idiotic they will certainly hang."

So there, fixed it for you.

Someone's

extremely — boethius

full of ‹redacted›. You've been given enough evidence already, yet keep going all "Putin's Russia is :up:" whether implicitly or explicitly. :down: At least you're right that the two situations aren't quite the same.

At least you're right that the two situations aren't quite the same. — jorndoe

Which is the point.

Now, whether Russia's war is a just war is a different issue to following the law of armed conflict once a war is started.

The law of armed conflict covers both sides of a war in which, presumably, one or both sides are at fault for fighting the war in the first place.

One can of course argue Russia's cause is not just, I haven't seen any good argument demonstrating that, but certainly it is possible to imagine.

What I care about is that Western policies were clearly designed to create a war (such as negotiating in bad faith the Minsk agreements and threatening to expand NATO infrastructure to Ukraine) and then once the war started strives to maximize the damage to Ukraine by drip feeding weapons (... just enough to prop it up at an incredible high cost to Ukraine). Of course, people can argue that Russia shouldn't respond to attacks on Donbas separatists nor respond to NATO expansion, which people have tried to do.

However, whether the war is just or not on Russia's part, there isn't a genocide.

Israel's genocide on the other hand is not only a genocide, which really should be the key takeaway here, but is also a conflict entirely created by Israel in occupying, oppressing and rendering Palestinians stateless people with essentially no rights.

Israel is responsible for the conflict in violating basic morality and international law in keeping people in a giant ghetto and randomly killing, kidnapping and abusing them (including child abuse), and obviously fully responsible for carrying out a genocide regardless.

It should also be noted that Israel fighting wars with other states cannot possibly form a justification for occupying and repressing and keeping the Palestinians in a ghetto in any case.

Where we certainly agree is that if Ukrainians have a right to resist occupation and thus slaughter Russians, Palestinians too have the same right to resist occupation and slaughter Israelis.

:mask: :up: