Israel protects their people, instead of investing everything into trying to destroy the enemy. Hamas even digs out water pipes to build more rockets. As per their own propaganda Video, no less. They are proud of that.
Everything you know about Hamas you've learned from Israel and the US government.
A counter example: X initiates violence. Y steps in to end this, and partially succeeds. X wants to continue. Y oppresses X to prevent it.
Not saying that resembles the Israel-Hamas conflict, just that the logic is a bit flawed. In most random street violence situations, the oppressed in the end was the person who initiated the violence.
It takes all parties to create peace, but as long as the initial assault continues there can ultimately only be one responsible party.
You can easily find Hamas own videos and learn from them.
They're not even pretending, they outright say they're running a jihadist war against Jews.
You can easily find videos attributed to Hamas. You can't verify that Hamas aren't funded by Israel. You can't verify that Hamas are Palestinian. You also can't blame the oppressed for any actions they take to rebel against their oppressors (If you have any integrity.)
Never in history has violence been initiated by the oppressed.
That may be the most historically inaccurate statement I've ever heard.
Like what was the French and Indian war then? This statement could excuse the initiation of violence of any group in history, including the Nazis.
The Indians didn't initiate that war. The French and British did by their colonizing presence.
Indians fought on both sides of that war, often against one another.
To be clear though, there is no war without the British and the French meddling with Indian affairs.
What? The whole reason the nations split they way they did is because they had a long history of war with one another. That's a pretty ignorant assertion.
There can be no split without colonization. It's amazing that you work so hard to be so ignorant.
What? Pre-European Natives fought one another. Warfare predates colonization.
There can be no SPLIT without colonization.
We're talking about a specific scenario, but if you want to move the goalposts, let's do that.
In each and every conflict, there is one party pushing their values or priorities at the cost of others, even in tribal conflicts. The aggressor is the colonizer (oppressor) and the other person is the aggrieved party (oppressed). In each of those conflicts, the oppressor is responsible for every atrocity that is committed because in their absence, there is NO CONFLICT.
That's such a simplification of human interaction that I'm not sure there's a single conflict I'm human history that fully fits that definition.
There's not a single conflict in human history that doesn't fit that description.
I learned it from Hamas propaganda Videos. Those they produce and make public. Like that one showing them removing water pipes to build more rockets.
You don't know that those videos weren't created by the IDF as propaganda. You don't know that Hamas isn't entirely made up of IDF. You only know the narrative that reinforces your world view. Israel loves to do things like bomb residential areas then cry that Hamas uses human shields. They love to respond to fireworks with carpet bombs.
So wild conspiracy theories are the new talking point, bizarre
Guess anything that goes against your opinion is staged propaganda/ai so we can jam our heads in the sand
It's no conspiracy to quote fascists' own words and actions.
Israel protects their people, instead of investing everything into trying to destroy the enemy. Hamas even digs out water pipes to build more rockets. As per their own propaganda Video, no less. They are proud of that.
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
propaganda Video
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I'm open-source; check me out at GitHub.
Everything you know about Hamas you've learned from Israel and the US government.
A counter example: X initiates violence. Y steps in to end this, and partially succeeds. X wants to continue. Y oppresses X to prevent it.
Not saying that resembles the Israel-Hamas conflict, just that the logic is a bit flawed. In most random street violence situations, the oppressed in the end was the person who initiated the violence.
It takes all parties to create peace, but as long as the initial assault continues there can ultimately only be one responsible party.
You can easily find Hamas own videos and learn from them.
They're not even pretending, they outright say they're running a jihadist war against Jews.
You can easily find videos attributed to Hamas. You can't verify that Hamas aren't funded by Israel. You can't verify that Hamas are Palestinian. You also can't blame the oppressed for any actions they take to rebel against their oppressors (If you have any integrity.)
That may be the most historically inaccurate statement I've ever heard.
Like what was the French and Indian war then? This statement could excuse the initiation of violence of any group in history, including the Nazis.
The Indians didn't initiate that war. The French and British did by their colonizing presence.
Indians fought on both sides of that war, often against one another.
To be clear though, there is no war without the British and the French meddling with Indian affairs.
What? The whole reason the nations split they way they did is because they had a long history of war with one another. That's a pretty ignorant assertion.
There can be no split without colonization. It's amazing that you work so hard to be so ignorant.
What? Pre-European Natives fought one another. Warfare predates colonization.
We're talking about a specific scenario, but if you want to move the goalposts, let's do that.
In each and every conflict, there is one party pushing their values or priorities at the cost of others, even in tribal conflicts. The aggressor is the colonizer (oppressor) and the other person is the aggrieved party (oppressed). In each of those conflicts, the oppressor is responsible for every atrocity that is committed because in their absence, there is NO CONFLICT.
That's such a simplification of human interaction that I'm not sure there's a single conflict I'm human history that fully fits that definition.
There's not a single conflict in human history that doesn't fit that description.
I learned it from Hamas propaganda Videos. Those they produce and make public. Like that one showing them removing water pipes to build more rockets.
You don't know that those videos weren't created by the IDF as propaganda. You don't know that Hamas isn't entirely made up of IDF. You only know the narrative that reinforces your world view. Israel loves to do things like bomb residential areas then cry that Hamas uses human shields. They love to respond to fireworks with carpet bombs.
So wild conspiracy theories are the new talking point, bizarre
Guess anything that goes against your opinion is staged propaganda/ai so we can jam our heads in the sand
It's no conspiracy to quote fascists' own words and actions.