Don’t fall into the trap of ‘picking sides’ over Gaza: Hamas’s attacks were unconscionable, razing Gaza to the ground would be abhorrent. In both cases, basic humanity is at stake --- [Opinion]

0x815@feddit.de to World News@beehaw.org – 373 points –
feddit.de
146

You are viewing a single comment

The article opens with "what about America's response to 9/11?". JFC, what a shitty justification. America was clearly wrong to war crime all over Iraq just as Israel is in the wrong for warcriming all over Palestine. I refuse to "both sides" imperialists and their victims. Frankly, "both sides" is the trap one should avoid.

Iraq

Afghanistan, Iraq was later and about fake WMDs.

Iraq was also a consequence of 9/11. It would never have happened without it.

Arguable, Iraq was Bush Jr. finishing what his father started in the late 80s. It may well have happened even without 9/11. Afghanistan however was a direct consequence of 9/11, and is a more apt metaphor for what Israel is doing now.

I think Bush would want to do it, but would never have been able to get the go along without the war fever.

Yes, first was Afghanistan. But the Iraq invasion was still under the "war on terror". Besides, I was simply referring to the author's argument:

But he added that we had to consider what the US did when attacked on 9/11: it invaded Iraq, with 200,000 [his figures] killed in three years.

Iraq may well have been invaded even without 9/11, as it was Bush Jr. finishing what his father started in the late 80s.

The direct consequence of 9/11 was Afghanistan, and thus is a more apt metaphor for what is happening with Israel right now.

There's no point raising a metaphor in the first place. A metaphor doesn't justify anything. It's just a rhetorical tool that is supposed to help deliver a point. However, all it does in this instance is mess and draw confusion.

Look at the OP's domain and then ask yourself why their post might have nazi vibes to it.