Jjang Posted January 28 Posted January 28 23 minutes ago, Harrier said: Y'all misinterpreting his statement here, idk whether intentionally or not. He says "the right number of civillian deaths is zero" not the "true" number. What this means in context is that the morally correct number of civillian deaths is zero. He is saying Israel should strive for fewer civillian deaths. It is clear if you actually watch the clip. I don't agree with his overall argument and I do agree Israel is committing genocide, but that's besides the point here. The thread should be closed I fear That’s true actually - it’s probably what he meant anyway. However, it still remains a moot and radically offensive statement when at least 34,000 civilians have died from direct Israeli aggression. At least 20,000+ from them women and children. He had no issue calling the aggression on Ukraine for what it is. 1
Harrier Posted January 28 Posted January 28 10 minutes ago, Communion said: One could be applied grace over misinterpreting his word salad given he literally denies the ICJ ruling that found Israel is potentially committing genocide in literally his next breath. Sis you and I both know he is not saying no civillians have died in Gaza. No argument to be had here I don't disagree with what you guys r saying about the rest of his statements It's not tomato tomato like we need to be clear about what we are saying. Y'all are so god damn messy. Like you get called out on spreading misinformation, immediately backtrack and say well it doesn't matter anyway bc he's still bad!! Well I agree, but why then spread untruths - why not just make your arugentns without doing hyperbole/misinformation/lies? Edit: "Israel's war in Gaza does not constitute genocide" vs "No civillians have died in Gaza". Like these are vastly different statements. One is an mostly semantic/framing based argument while the other is straight up reality denialism. Distinction is important. 1
Communion Posted January 28 Posted January 28 (edited) 1 hour ago, HungryByTheBuffet said: Drop the fantasy, according to UN's own Guterres at least 9 staffers were directly involved in Oct7, one is dead, 2 missing https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/guterres-un-punish-staffers-involved-terror-urges-unrwa-funding-2024-01-28/ This is not at all what your link says. It says they vow to punish anyone who is found to be involved, sweaing to follow through with thorough investigations now that the US has threatened to withhold funding. Why is the source of the allegations the Israel government's intelligence agency performing torture on captive Gazans? Edited January 28 by Communion
ClashAndBurn Posted January 28 Posted January 28 28 minutes ago, Harrier said: Y'all misinterpreting his statement here, idk whether intentionally or not. He says "the right number of civillian deaths is zero" not the "true" number. What this means in context is that the morally correct number of civillian deaths is zero. He is saying Israel should strive for fewer civillian deaths. It is clear if you actually watch the clip. I don't agree with his overall argument and I do agree Israel is committing genocide, but that's besides the point here. The thread should be closed I fear Doesn't need to be closed, but the title is a bit misleading. The fact that he's even engaging in genocide denial is damning enough.
Jjang Posted January 28 Posted January 28 8 minutes ago, Harrier said: Sis you and I both know he is not saying no civillians have died in Gaza. No argument to be had here I don't disagree with what you guys r saying about the rest of his statements It's not tomato tomato like we need to be clear about what we are saying. Y'all are so god damn messy. Like you get called out on spreading misinformation, immediately backtrack and say well it doesn't matter anyway bc he's still bad!! Well I agree, but why then spread untruths - why not just make your arugentns without doing hyperbole/misinformation/lies? you surely would love for this thread to be closed wouldn’t you 1
Harrier Posted January 28 Posted January 28 Just now, Jjang said: you surely would love for this thread to be closed wouldn’t you Now that you've changed the title to reflect reality, couldn't care less 1
Communion Posted January 28 Posted January 28 1 hour ago, Harrier said: I think the left is adopting the wrong argument here with this denialism. The UNRWA has thousands of employees - the fact that some small number may have participated in Oct 7th is in no way impossible or even unlikely. This doesn't mean its an arm of Hamas or even that it's corrupt - it just means it employs a lot of Palestinians. If Israel is going to argue it's worthy of cutting funding, it should present evidence of widespread corruption, not of a dozen employees out of 30,000 participating in violence. Cutting off aid to an essential organisation that is keeping Palestinians alive is a wildly disproportionate and unconsciable action. Better to make that argument than attempt to do denialism, when the evidence may be damning for those individuals we don't know, and thus play in to Israel's framing. 48 minutes ago, Harrier said: The language speaking to Hezbollah's strength compared to Israel's weakness, the eagerness and glibness about escalation is just typical chauvinism - no different to right wingers who do it anywhere else. Nevermind the immense danger that full scale war between Hezbollah and Israel poses to civillians on both sides. Putting aside Israel entirely, if members cared one iota about the people of Lebanon they would call for descalation immediately. Wish that the more sensible members would speak on this mess, but they don't Genuinely would be terrified for what your views would be during the time of 9/11. The worst strand of liberalism. 2
ClashAndBurn Posted January 28 Posted January 28 29 minutes ago, Luckitty said: this is the reason why Israel has been trying to end UNRWA for decades, so that they can end the right of return for Palestinians They’re admitting that this is their motivation when they speak in Hebrew, thinking that the West can’t read subtitles. They can’t help themselves. “Palestinians should be denied right of return because their ancestors’ claim to the land was fraudulent to begin with” is an objectively evil take, but I’m sure the “more sensible members” won’t speak out on that either 4
Harrier Posted January 28 Posted January 28 8 minutes ago, Communion said: Genuinely would be terrified for what your views would be during the time of 9/11. The worst strand of liberalism. Riiight, the person calling for ceasefire and descalation between Hamas/Hezbollah and Israel is the war mongerer You're just saying **** at this point
Communion Posted January 28 Posted January 28 (edited) 32 minutes ago, Harrier said: Riiight, the person calling for ceasefire and descalation between Hamas/Hezbollah and Israel is the war mongerer You're just saying **** at this point Notice how a Western liberal can fully convince themselves they are calling for an end to violent conflict while fully repeating, endorsing, and validating rhetoric and arguments that only serves to justify the usage of large scale by the West? There's a clear racial bias happening here. I'm sorry but it's impossible to ignore at this point and why comparisons to war on terror rhetoric is being used. You see users brag about Israel being a powerful army in response to Lebanon not backing away from provocations from Israel and are silent. Yet then claim people are ~celebrating terrorists~ when users are responding to this pro-Israel bragging - including users from Lebanon - by contextualizing HOW it is Israel baiting the US because Israel knows that Hezbollah's military capacities have greatly expanded since 2006. You do this constantly. People contextualizing the reality at hand and not immediately rebuking Israel and America's enemies as terrorist nations is what you're upset about. See even the UN allegations. Suddenly now there's "UNRWA DENIALISM". The word terrorist can be used and it's like some part of your frontal cortex turns off and your eyes glaze over. It's not "DENIALISM" to make the argument that the things accused don't actually amount to terrorism. I don't care how many UN teachers in Gaza texted each other happy tears and texts seeing Hamas break down the border fence. You cannot make the claim Hamas is a oppressive terrorist group who rule Gazans with a heavy fist but then also claim someone whose house is used to hold a Israeli political prisoner - the most serious accusatoon - is also a terrorist themselves. You fundamentally believe in some inherent moral difference between Western countries and non-Western countries and thus come back to this pov in these discussions. Western violence is lessened by the morality you believe its perpetrators have and innocuous Palestinian actions are damned by the lack of morality you believe they possess as "Islamists". "It's clear we can hold the US to show restraint in Iraq without denying that some of those people in Guantanamo Bay deserve what's being done to them!" Edited January 28 by Communion 3
Eat The Acid Posted January 28 Posted January 28 Zero? Genocide deniers have been constant throughout history! I wonder if he believes his own lies or if he’s just an evil deceitful monster?
Harrier Posted January 28 Posted January 28 54 minutes ago, Communion said: Notice how a Western liberal can fully convince themselves they are calling for an end to violent conflict while fully repeating, endorsing, and validating rhetoric and arguments that only serves to justify the usage of large scale by the West? There's a clear racial bias happening here. I'm sorry but it's impossible to ignore at this point and why comparisons to war on terror rhetoric is being used. You see users brag about Israel being a powerful army in response to Lebanon not backing away from provocations from Israel and are silent. Yet then claim people are ~celebrating terrorists~ when users are responding to this pro-Israel bragging - including users from Lebanon - by contextualizing HOW it is Israel baiting the US because Israel knows that Hezbollah's military capacities have greatly expanded since 2006. You do this constantly. People contextualizing the reality at hand and not immediately rebuking Israel and America's enemies as terrorist nations is what you're upset about. See even the UN allegations. Suddenly now there's "UNRWA DENIALISM". The word terrorist can be used and it's like some part of your frontal cortex turns off and your eyes glaze over. It's not "DENIALISM" to make the argument that the things accused don't actually amount to terrorism. I don't care how many UN teachers in Gaza texted each other happy tears and texts seeing Hamas break down the border fence. You cannot make the claim Hamas is a oppressive terrorist group who rule Gazans with a heavy fist but then also claim someone whose house is used to hold a Israeli political prisoner - the most serious accusatoon - is also a terrorist themselves. You fundamentally believe in some inherent moral difference between Western countries and non-Western countries and thus come back to this pov in these discussions. Western violence is lessened by the morality you believe its perpetrators have and innocuous Palestinian actions are damned by the lack of morality you believe they possess as "Islamists". "It's clear we can hold the US to show restraint in Iraq without denying that some of those people in Guantanamo Bay deserve what's being done to them!" My post was in response to users literally celebrating the escalation to violence betrween Hezbollah and Israel. Don't make me pull up the posts. & Nowhere did I even use the word terrorism in my UNRWA post - you are projecting the arguments of others onto me. I said what I said and nothing you said in this essay is even really related to what I argued - instead, you attempt to psychoanalyse me and tell me what my views are. Spoiler This has been your entire way of dealing with me, from the beginning. Highlighting small parts of posts and going off on irrelevant tangents about how dangerous liberals like me are. Calling me a racist off cooldown. Your entire view of me is informed by the projections of your absolutist, simplistic worldview that consistently frames every possible issue through an idpol'd lens of oppression. I offer a different perspective informed by my background in History, that acknowledges the shared humanity of all groups. That emphasises the ability of all people - regardless of idpol - to engage in violence, demogoguery, nationalism, genocide, terrorism, and all brands of right-wing politics that I view as dangerous. Your black and white worldview cannot make sense of this position, and so you interpret it as Western chauvinist or racist because it includes criticisms of many non-Western factions. Because that's what everyone is in your binary world - either an advocate for the global north or the global south. If this thread was full of unchallenged Zionists going off on bizarre rants, I'd be fighting that battle. Instead, there is no one else in here pushing back on y'all and your blood and soil with socialist characteristics, without themselves doing dumb apologia for Israel or Biden. So I will keep fighting no matter how much you try to call me a racist. Sorry.
Both Sides Now Posted January 28 Posted January 28 Oh please. The Wikipedia-readers once again lecturing people FROM THE REGION why their balanced & nuanced understanding of the conflict is correct. You don’t sound intelligent. Anyway, I just donated to UNRWA. 2
ZeroSuitBritney Posted January 28 Posted January 28 15 minutes ago, SmittenCake said: What a ******* moron In honesty he said “the right” not “the true”. I believe he means that 0 be the ideal number of deaths. 1
Luckitty Posted January 28 Posted January 28 16 minutes ago, SmittenCake said: What a ******* moron USA & UK are complicit in the genocide, in a fair and just world they would be punished but that would never happen because they (& everyone allied to them) are above the international law international law only applies to "3rd world countries"
Aethereal Posted January 28 Posted January 28 1.) Hezbollah started attacking Israel in Oct 8th before Hamas demanded ceasefire and Israel had yet to attack Gaza. 2.) Israel has been guilty of bombing hundreds or thousands (depending on which year before October), Palestinians in Gaza to death and there was no intervention from Hezbollah. So this is clearly an Iran backed attack from them.
ClashAndBurn Posted January 28 Posted January 28 @Communion this is PEAK Democrat brain worms on display 7
Aethereal Posted January 28 Posted January 28 4 minutes ago, ClashAndBurn said: @Communion this is PEAK Democrat brain worms on display Why would Putin want a ceasefire in Gaza? Isn't Israel a burden on US already and it will block Ukraine into getting more aid? Also there are higher demands for ceasefire in Ukraine from the public as the Palestinian crisis started.
ZeroSuitBritney Posted January 28 Posted January 28 Do you ever ask yourself how we have gotten here as a country? 2
ClashAndBurn Posted January 28 Posted January 28 10 minutes ago, Aristotle said: Why would Putin want a ceasefire in Gaza? Isn't Israel a burden on US already and it will block Ukraine into getting more aid? Also there are higher demands for ceasefire in Ukraine from the public as the Palestinian crisis started. Contrary to popular belief, Israel aid makes Ukraine aid more likely, due to the fact that Dems want to tie the two together. The holdup to both is the Freedom Caucus threatening Johnson with a motion to vacate if he allows Ukraine aid to be brought to the floor.
Trent W Posted January 28 Posted January 28 Democrats have become too comfortable putting any opposition on Putin and Trump They think they can get away with anything just putting the bill on them
Cesar Posted January 28 Posted January 28 saying ur constituents are connected to russia isn’t the serve she think it is. just lazy 1 1
Recommended Posts