Imagine you, your friends and your family get killed and washed away from your land, and 2/3 of US people don't believe it's genocide.
Actually 1/3 said it is genocide, 1/3 said it isn't, and 1/3 said they didn't know. Also, only1/3 of Americans saying this is a genocide isn't great, but it does represent a huge shift in opinion in a short time. Both our political parties support Israel, our news media doesn't cover Palestinians very sympathetically, and our education system tells a very favorable version of Israel's founding (most Americans don't even learn about the Nakba). I don't think criticism of Israel has ever been this mainstream (at least in my lifetime).
Actually 1/3 said it is genocide, 1/3 said it isn’t, and 1/3 said they didn’t know
That means
1/3 believe it's genocide
1/3 believe it's not
2/3 do not believe it's genocide
I see what you're trying to say, but that's not really true. You could say, "2/3 of people would not say they thought it was a genocide," but that's not the same as saying, "2/3 do not believe it's genocide."
It's a small but important distinction. It's the equivalent of saying, "1/3 of people are religious, 1/3 of people are atheist, and 1/3 of people are agnostic," and then trying to say that means, "2/3 of people don't believe in God," instead of, "2/3 of people aren't religious."
Average Us public have no clue what is going on in their own country, it is actually amazing there 1/3 know at least there is a genocide taking place.
Murdering people at a music festival and taking hostages might have an effect on public perception.
The problem is, before they wemt on that murdering spree, the western world pretty much ignored their plight, or maybe tutted when they chucked a rocket or two over the border. But any kind of "proper" political solution was flatly ignored. It's not a justification, but I have to say that I umderstand why that situation led to a "fuck it, let's just rampage" attitude. And look, they actually have a tonne of eyeballs and attention on their shitty situation (and shitty leaders), so maybe something will come of this. Palestinians are paying an exorbitantly heavy price for it, though.
It’s not a justification, but I have to say that I understand why that situation led to a “fuck it, let’s just rampage” attitude.
Sure, but again - if you murder people at a music festival and take hostages, even if you might have reasons to do so - you can expect quite a lot of people to not be on your side. The only thing for sure is that terrorists won that one.
Sure, but again, if you indiscriminately kill innocent people in Gaza and destroy the very last university, even if you might have reasons to do so - you can expect quite a lot of people to not be on your side. The only thing for sure is that Israel won that one.
Absolutely. Not sure why you would think I don't understand the hatred Israel is getting.
The only thing for sure is that Israel won that one.
Not sure what Israel won, despite making sure there will be another generation of Palestinian freedom fighters with rather questionable methods.
I wasn't making a statement about you, I just wanted to demonstrate the statement can be made in any way.
I agree, Israel bred the Hamas of tomorrow for sure. But they did win in terms of getting closer to turning Gaza into a settlement.
I wasn’t making a statement about you, I just wanted to demonstrate the statement can be made in any way.
But you were responding to a actual person, me. So it would have helped if you clarified it wasn't about me - don't you think?
Israel bred the Hamas of tomorrow for sure. But they did win in terms of getting closer to turning Gaza into a settlement.
Even that sounds to me like a win for the terrorists - but I can see, people have different view.
It's directed to you. It just makes no statements about you personally, just responding to your opinion. Hope that clarifies it.
The terrorists won that one? Not sure they'd agree. I guess they thought they were going to retreat into the tunnels and nobody was going to blow the tunnels up on top of them.
The concept of terrorism in general. Once again it was able to achieve an escalation of violence and therefore create more terrorism.
So in your view there is no such thing as just war? Any war is terrorism?
How on earth did you arrive at this conclusion?
You said escalations of violence cause terrorism.
Any just war is an escalation of violence if nothing else.
Therefore by your logic, a just war causes terrorism.
The implication by your logic is that no war should be had so as not to cause terrorism.
I would agree if you said all war causes vengeful losers to resort to desperate acts of violence against innocent people. I do not agree that a just war should be called off because the enemy on the receiving end of that justice will probably lash out in its death throes. That would be called negotiating with terrorists.
If you are worried about more terrorists, I agree bombing terrorists causes more terrorists, but negotiating with them opens the floodgates. And it's not like we don't have enough bombs.
You said escalations of violence cause terrorism.
No, I said quite the opposite - that escalation of violence is the goal of terrorism. But I would agree that escalation of violence tends to create more terrorism, with the caveat: if the original conflict is not resolved in some manner.
Any just war is an escalation of violence if nothing else.
I have no idea what you mean by just war. But I would disagree that any war is just escalation of violence. Wars mostly have rather clear objectives.
The implication by your logic is that no war should be had so as not to cause terrorism.
Nope. That's not implication of my logic. But yes, in most cases wars will produce terrorism if the underlying conflict is not resolved. The underlying conflict might get resolved by war or intelligent occupation strategy (interesting to take a look at west and east Germany in that regard, especially in the context of the rise of the AfD, new german nazi party).
You don't understand the concept of just war?
I don't know what you specifically mean by it. People tend to have wildly different definitions. I for my part would struggle to call any war just, but for sure there is a spectrum of more and less justifiable reasons for and methods to conduct a war.
Two wrongs don't make a right. A county based on abrahamic religion should know that. It just proves that they don't actually believe in their own religion and only hide behind it whenever it's convenient for them, like saying anybody who disagrees with them supports Hamas.
Two wrongs don’t make a right
Absolutely agree.
A county based on abrahamic religion should know that
Dude, have you seen all the shit countries based on abrahamic religions have done through out the history?
ike saying anybody who disagrees with them supports Hamas.
And the other side says that anyone disagreeing with them is a genocidal nazi. I would say the whole discussion at this point is rather heated and fucked up.
I mean, Israel is committing genocide, that's not up for debate here.
And people who disagree with you?
They're either ingnorant or shills.
Do you think this about all people who disagree with you - or just on this particular topic?
I forgot the third one, trolls.
Must be great to live a simple in a simple world where you are always right.
Don't cut yourself in that edge kid 😂
I'm not your kid, pal.
Which Abrahamic religion are you referring to?
If anyone injures his neighbor, as he has done it shall be done to him, fracture for fracture, eye for eye, tooth for tooth; whatever injury he has given a person shall be given to him. Whoever kills an animal shall make it good, and whoever kills a person shall be put to death. (Leviticus 24:19-21)
What happens if you take both eyes? And the eyes of their family and their neighbors and the people didn't the street? Is that allowed or?
What happens if every single firstborn Egyptian son is killed overnight? Is that evil?
Religions don't always give the answers you might expect.
Well, did my family join Hamas and then force me to stay to die as a martyr inside a building that Israel just told us they were going to bomb?
I think I'd be fine with the US not calling that genocide. If they did I hope they'd at least blame the actually responsible party.
Hahaha. Nice fiction story.
Try doing some research. Pick one of your Isreali genocide crimes and research it top to bottom. See where you got it wrong. Maybe after you do you won't just repeat what you heard from on online news website.
Oh sure do you want the map of 2,000 pound bombs craters in residential areas? The statements of the Israeli government? Or maybe the evidence the IDF tends to shoot anyone not wearing an IDF uniform?
I've done the research.
Oh I've seen that map. Now do the one with the overlay of Hamas's tunnels system.
Or are you one of these people who, every time something blows up, you believe it when Hamas comes out and says 450 civilians were killed and zero members of Hamas were present and western ragebait media airs the story of "reports of 450 dead civilians killed in indiscriminate IDF airstrike."
Meanwhile the medical community says there are 50 dead and IDF says half of them were Hamas and IDF publishes the recordings of the cell phone call warnings it placed to every active phone in a three block radius.
Some of the time, some of the dead must be members of Hamas. And it's for this reason that Hamas has no credibility on reporting these things, and why Israel is more credible.
That's what the IDF claim are military tunnels. Hardly reliable when they decided any tunnel entrance in an urban area was a target.
The hospital was built by Qatar and then Qatari state media ran a story "disproving" that it was a tunnel. Stop posting bullshit from Al Jazeera. It's not a source of valid information.
Even if Hamas was lying about there being some of their number present at a given airstrike, how many Palestinian lives are worth sacrificing to hit one Hamas?
Every time a terrorist or nut job takes a building full of innocents hostage in nearly any other society, people who are trained to minimize casualties are brought in. With the way the IDF is handling their invasion, they would more likely bomb a building because there might be a terrorist, and that's giving them a significant benefit of the doubt that they aren't just explicitly killing innocent Gazans.
The IDF trains to minimize casualties and their tactics for doing so are taught all over the free world. There is no army more experienced in fighting an enemy that uses civilians as human shields in order to get international aid and sympathy. It's called lawfare.
Then where is the negotiation? The surgical strikes done only when they know exactly where the terrorist is? Where is the care for the former hostages that survive the encounter? The days-long standoff, where no action is taken for fear of killing Innocents? If the IDF were so good at it, why are they doing nothing we've come to expect of a professional anti-terror team? What of the harassment of even the people fleeing Gaza? How is that not anything less than genocide? They should be better than this, and you should too.
Good questions. I think your first impressions were not accurate and now you're dug in. You keep seeing half stories and "reports" that sound significantly worse than they actually are, especially with regard to "bombing safe zones" and "indiscriminate bombing," and that further entrenches your initial, malformed opinion. It happens.
And in fact this is Hamas's exact plan. Here are the actual facts and history on this tactic:
Whether there should ever be negotiations with terrorists, even to exchange hostages, is a matter of debate and many countries including my own, have a longstanding policy of not doing so. I think the reasoning is obvious but if you need me to explain say so.
You mean paid by Israel to pretend to be a terrorist so they would have an excuse to wipe away the final remnants of the war they have been fighting for about 80 years?
Imagine you, your friends and your family get killed and washed away from your land, and 2/3 of US people don't believe it's genocide.
Actually 1/3 said it is genocide, 1/3 said it isn't, and 1/3 said they didn't know. Also, only1/3 of Americans saying this is a genocide isn't great, but it does represent a huge shift in opinion in a short time. Both our political parties support Israel, our news media doesn't cover Palestinians very sympathetically, and our education system tells a very favorable version of Israel's founding (most Americans don't even learn about the Nakba). I don't think criticism of Israel has ever been this mainstream (at least in my lifetime).
That means
I see what you're trying to say, but that's not really true. You could say, "2/3 of people would not say they thought it was a genocide," but that's not the same as saying, "2/3 do not believe it's genocide."
It's a small but important distinction. It's the equivalent of saying, "1/3 of people are religious, 1/3 of people are atheist, and 1/3 of people are agnostic," and then trying to say that means, "2/3 of people don't believe in God," instead of, "2/3 of people aren't religious."
Average Us public have no clue what is going on in their own country, it is actually amazing there 1/3 know at least there is a genocide taking place.
Murdering people at a music festival and taking hostages might have an effect on public perception.
The problem is, before they wemt on that murdering spree, the western world pretty much ignored their plight, or maybe tutted when they chucked a rocket or two over the border. But any kind of "proper" political solution was flatly ignored. It's not a justification, but I have to say that I umderstand why that situation led to a "fuck it, let's just rampage" attitude. And look, they actually have a tonne of eyeballs and attention on their shitty situation (and shitty leaders), so maybe something will come of this. Palestinians are paying an exorbitantly heavy price for it, though.
Reminds me of this.
She's got the energy we all need if we're ever going to eat the rich.
Thanks. I’ve never seen the embodiment of my anger like this. Well done.
Sure, but again - if you murder people at a music festival and take hostages, even if you might have reasons to do so - you can expect quite a lot of people to not be on your side. The only thing for sure is that terrorists won that one.
Sure, but again, if you indiscriminately kill innocent people in Gaza and destroy the very last university, even if you might have reasons to do so - you can expect quite a lot of people to not be on your side. The only thing for sure is that Israel won that one.
Absolutely. Not sure why you would think I don't understand the hatred Israel is getting.
Not sure what Israel won, despite making sure there will be another generation of Palestinian freedom fighters with rather questionable methods.
I wasn't making a statement about you, I just wanted to demonstrate the statement can be made in any way.
I agree, Israel bred the Hamas of tomorrow for sure. But they did win in terms of getting closer to turning Gaza into a settlement.
But you were responding to a actual person, me. So it would have helped if you clarified it wasn't about me - don't you think?
Even that sounds to me like a win for the terrorists - but I can see, people have different view.
It's directed to you. It just makes no statements about you personally, just responding to your opinion. Hope that clarifies it.
The terrorists won that one? Not sure they'd agree. I guess they thought they were going to retreat into the tunnels and nobody was going to blow the tunnels up on top of them.
The concept of terrorism in general. Once again it was able to achieve an escalation of violence and therefore create more terrorism.
So in your view there is no such thing as just war? Any war is terrorism?
How on earth did you arrive at this conclusion?
You said escalations of violence cause terrorism.
Any just war is an escalation of violence if nothing else.
Therefore by your logic, a just war causes terrorism.
The implication by your logic is that no war should be had so as not to cause terrorism.
I would agree if you said all war causes vengeful losers to resort to desperate acts of violence against innocent people. I do not agree that a just war should be called off because the enemy on the receiving end of that justice will probably lash out in its death throes. That would be called negotiating with terrorists.
If you are worried about more terrorists, I agree bombing terrorists causes more terrorists, but negotiating with them opens the floodgates. And it's not like we don't have enough bombs.
No, I said quite the opposite - that escalation of violence is the goal of terrorism. But I would agree that escalation of violence tends to create more terrorism, with the caveat: if the original conflict is not resolved in some manner.
I have no idea what you mean by just war. But I would disagree that any war is just escalation of violence. Wars mostly have rather clear objectives.
Nope. That's not implication of my logic. But yes, in most cases wars will produce terrorism if the underlying conflict is not resolved. The underlying conflict might get resolved by war or intelligent occupation strategy (interesting to take a look at west and east Germany in that regard, especially in the context of the rise of the AfD, new german nazi party).
You don't understand the concept of just war?
I don't know what you specifically mean by it. People tend to have wildly different definitions. I for my part would struggle to call any war just, but for sure there is a spectrum of more and less justifiable reasons for and methods to conduct a war.
Before that murdering spree it was just other murdering sprees all the way back. Suicide bombings, bombing medical convoys. Hamas are terrorists.
Nobody is denying Hamas are terrorists.
But I doubt many people would act differently given the same circumstances.
This person... It never sticks with them. They think we are opposed to the IDF committing genocide because we like Hamas lol
Seems like people are denying that though. Got people all over Lemmy sucking Hamas off and copy and pasting Iranian disinformation.
Boooooo. This existed before Hamas.
Booooooo
Two wrongs don't make a right. A county based on abrahamic religion should know that. It just proves that they don't actually believe in their own religion and only hide behind it whenever it's convenient for them, like saying anybody who disagrees with them supports Hamas.
Absolutely agree.
Dude, have you seen all the shit countries based on abrahamic religions have done through out the history?
And the other side says that anyone disagreeing with them is a genocidal nazi. I would say the whole discussion at this point is rather heated and fucked up.
I mean, Israel is committing genocide, that's not up for debate here.
And people who disagree with you?
They're either ingnorant or shills.
Do you think this about all people who disagree with you - or just on this particular topic?
I forgot the third one, trolls.
Must be great to live a simple in a simple world where you are always right.
Don't cut yourself in that edge kid 😂
I'm not your kid, pal.
Which Abrahamic religion are you referring to?
What happens if you take both eyes? And the eyes of their family and their neighbors and the people didn't the street? Is that allowed or?
What happens if every single firstborn Egyptian son is killed overnight? Is that evil?
Religions don't always give the answers you might expect.
It's all made up and the points don't matter!
Well, did my family join Hamas and then force me to stay to die as a martyr inside a building that Israel just told us they were going to bomb?
I think I'd be fine with the US not calling that genocide. If they did I hope they'd at least blame the actually responsible party.
Hahaha. Nice fiction story.
Try doing some research. Pick one of your Isreali genocide crimes and research it top to bottom. See where you got it wrong. Maybe after you do you won't just repeat what you heard from on online news website.
Oh sure do you want the map of 2,000 pound bombs craters in residential areas? The statements of the Israeli government? Or maybe the evidence the IDF tends to shoot anyone not wearing an IDF uniform?
I've done the research.
Oh I've seen that map. Now do the one with the overlay of Hamas's tunnels system.
Or are you one of these people who, every time something blows up, you believe it when Hamas comes out and says 450 civilians were killed and zero members of Hamas were present and western ragebait media airs the story of "reports of 450 dead civilians killed in indiscriminate IDF airstrike."
Meanwhile the medical community says there are 50 dead and IDF says half of them were Hamas and IDF publishes the recordings of the cell phone call warnings it placed to every active phone in a three block radius.
Some of the time, some of the dead must be members of Hamas. And it's for this reason that Hamas has no credibility on reporting these things, and why Israel is more credible.
That's what the IDF claim are military tunnels. Hardly reliable when they decided any tunnel entrance in an urban area was a target.
Lol remember when there was a hospital hatch they showed and claimed was a tunnel opening and it turned out just to be a water tank
The hospital was built by Qatar and then Qatari state media ran a story "disproving" that it was a tunnel. Stop posting bullshit from Al Jazeera. It's not a source of valid information.
Even if Hamas was lying about there being some of their number present at a given airstrike, how many Palestinian lives are worth sacrificing to hit one Hamas?
Every time a terrorist or nut job takes a building full of innocents hostage in nearly any other society, people who are trained to minimize casualties are brought in. With the way the IDF is handling their invasion, they would more likely bomb a building because there might be a terrorist, and that's giving them a significant benefit of the doubt that they aren't just explicitly killing innocent Gazans.
The IDF trains to minimize casualties and their tactics for doing so are taught all over the free world. There is no army more experienced in fighting an enemy that uses civilians as human shields in order to get international aid and sympathy. It's called lawfare.
Then where is the negotiation? The surgical strikes done only when they know exactly where the terrorist is? Where is the care for the former hostages that survive the encounter? The days-long standoff, where no action is taken for fear of killing Innocents? If the IDF were so good at it, why are they doing nothing we've come to expect of a professional anti-terror team? What of the harassment of even the people fleeing Gaza? How is that not anything less than genocide? They should be better than this, and you should too.
No need to ponder about how the IDF would handle this, since we now know that some of those killed on October 7th were Israelis who fell victim to the IDF that sometimes shot at anything that moved
Wow friendly fire in the chaos of mass shootings? Have you ever heard of the felony murder rule?
Is it not the long standing official policy of Hamas not to wear military uniforms so as to confuse the enemy and increase their "martyrdom"?
Good questions. I think your first impressions were not accurate and now you're dug in. You keep seeing half stories and "reports" that sound significantly worse than they actually are, especially with regard to "bombing safe zones" and "indiscriminate bombing," and that further entrenches your initial, malformed opinion. It happens.
And in fact this is Hamas's exact plan. Here are the actual facts and history on this tactic:
https://stratcomcoe.org/cuploads/pfiles/hamas_human_shields.pdf
Whether there should ever be negotiations with terrorists, even to exchange hostages, is a matter of debate and many countries including my own, have a longstanding policy of not doing so. I think the reasoning is obvious but if you need me to explain say so.
You mean paid by Israel to pretend to be a terrorist so they would have an excuse to wipe away the final remnants of the war they have been fighting for about 80 years?
See, I can make things up as well.