rihannafan Posted May 6 Posted May 6 Just now, Ryan said: I am not the one who banned him, but you can surely join him if you'd like. Cause I'm really over you at this point. If that is a threat, I don't care. I said nothing wrong. 11
rihannafan Posted May 6 Posted May 6 Trump: bans muslims Liberals: oh no, worst person in the world (rightfully) Biden: aids the killing of 30k palestinian in a few months liberals: but he's not THAT bad Trump is an awful, awful person. Not many people hate him as much as I do. He is also deeply idiotic on top of that. Make no mistake though, everyone here defending Israel is no better than Trump. 1
Earth Ripper Posted May 6 Posted May 6 13 minutes ago, Ryan said: Because the IDF are terrorists and get away with it because of the incredible sway it has over its allies (like the US) who turn a blind eye and do nothing except give them billions of dollars in aid. It doesn't. But that member stated "What Hamas did was horrible, but it also was resistance violence in retaliation to decades of occupation." I don't see how excusing/justifying/minimizing what Hamas did is acceptable. They played right into the IDF's hands. And they used that to justify the genocidal behavior they've been doing on the world stage. Who's to say the IDF wouldn't have found another reason to attack them? They would have for sure. But this specific round of war crimes is literally being justified because of what Hamas did on 10/7. I get what you're saying, ánd... ...you should also be able to see that writing "They played right into the IDF's hands" is a form of minimizing what the IDF did as well Israel used the Hannibal Directive against Israeli civilians on October 7th. We literally have no clue about how the responsibility of the violence that day is to be divided yet. This is being investigated still, so I suggest we actually wait for that outcome. I just think it's weird that you keep referring back to this for that very reason, especially when Israel has been publicly and repeatedly exposed for spreading lies about the scale of violence ánd the details about October 7th. You seem to be aware that the IDF would have found ways to massacre Gazans regardless, so what exactly is the relevance of bringing up that particular event over and over then? I am all for never downplaying Hamas' history of violence but October 7th isn't even a great example of that. So to even imply (and you did way more than that) that Hamas' actions that day can be rightfully seen as the "trigger" for the genocide unfolding now is actually just repeating part of Israel's propaganda. So even if you don't feel like you're doing that, it's just what it looks like, which explains why people are getting so triggered by you. 5
Kassi Posted May 6 Posted May 6 31 minutes ago, Earth Ripper said: I'm not getting what you're saying. You seem to imply that those who support Palestine are unwilling to compromise? Strange given, yes, the fact that we have history to reflect on and learn from. The Oslo Accords aren't even that old. The perfect example of a compromise that could've been and could've resulted in peace right about now. And Israel strategically broke them exactly to not have to compromise, despite Palestine's incredible (and controversial) concessions. This is how it has always gone. Israel simply does not want peace. Period. How can you ask Palestinians and those who support them to compromise with a party that wields and has wielded a stance like that? As far as Oslo goes, the basic problem is that the same factions that messed things up in the '90s are still influencing the situation today. It was groups like Hamas and far-right Israelis who deeply opposed the Oslo Accords, and from whose midst Rabin was assassinated. And while we're quick to acknowledge how Netanyahu's adverse actions inflame the situation, there's a noticeable hesitation to equally acknowledge how significantly Hamas has contributed to derailing peace talks. Moreover, this issue is often exacerbated by Western pro-Palestinian activists running with slogans like "from the River to the Sea" and pushing the narrative that "Israel shouldn't exist." These actions and rhetoric only further polarize the situation. I'm saying we have to be better, because the possible outcomes only get worse for both parties as the decades go on. So far, it's been more occupation for Palestinians and less security for Israelis.
Communion Posted May 6 Author Posted May 6 (edited) 1 hour ago, Ryan said: Youre right, Communion. You're always right. Forgive me for ever disagreeing or doubting you. You've finally won be over. They're two sides of the same coin. The literal same evil. Please direct me to which write in candidate I should support. Forget the fact that I wasn't even defending Biden or whatever else your last couple of dissertations have covered, I was acknowledging one thing about why the deal wasn't likely accepted and you've spun it off into this unnecessary narrative. You're in one breath arguing that people aren't open to disagreement and being hateful, but then disparage those who disagree with you as "defending the indefensible". You take offense at people making implications over your views or you not holding positions but then do the same thing on the last two pages to people who do not agree with you that Palestinians shoulder some blame for being occupied by Israel. I wouldn't be engaging how I am if you didn't approach those *you* disagree with so definitively. But because your posts read as choosing as side, even it may not be your intention, I respond to them at odds with the side you've chosen. "I wasn't defending Biden" -> Who decides what America's foreign policy is? Biden's admin made the decision to reject the deal. You're trying to contextualize America rejecting Palestinian statehood - is that not a defense of Biden? "Why the deal wasn't accepted" -> But you're not doing that? You're rationalizing the Biden administration's decision and essentially betraying the logic you yourself seemingly understand. Because the deal would have removed Hamas from power? "I'm just explaining why Hamas can't be left in power" - but the proposal literally removes them from power? So what are you trying to contextualize? You haven't acknowledged that what you're arguing in defense of was already part of the deal and that America's motives are likely just objectively nefarious. Why is it hard to imagine America purposefully works toward subjugating Palestinians? What part of American foreign policy has shown the country to be on the right side of history at all in this issue? No one is trying to "win". Some people just don't agree with their nation enabling genocide and disagree with other Americans using partisanship to obfuscate that reality. Edited May 6 by Communion 6
Delirious Posted May 6 Posted May 6 I feel sorry for the mods who have to deal with the usual mob who LOVE putting words into people's mouths. They're ALWAYS right and there's nothing you can do about it. And if you want to have a civil conversation with them, that's not going to happen because they're going to gaslight you and say that you said something when you never said it. 1 7
Delirious Posted May 6 Posted May 6 55 minutes ago, GhostBox said: Welcome to the forum where this happens on a daily basis with communion 💀 I'm literally losing brain cells by reading this thread lol 5
Earth Ripper Posted May 6 Posted May 6 (edited) 20 minutes ago, Kassi said: As far as Oslo goes, the basic problem is that the same factions that messed things up in the '90s are still influencing the situation today. It was groups like Hamas and far-right Israelis who deeply opposed the Oslo Accords, and from whose midst Rabin was assassinated. And while we're quick to acknowledge how Netanyahu's adverse actions inflame the situation, there's a noticeable hesitation to equally acknowledge how significantly Hamas has contributed to derailing peace talks. Moreover, this issue is often exacerbated by Western pro-Palestinian activists running with slogans like "from the River to the Sea" and pushing the narrative that "Israel shouldn't exist." These actions and rhetoric only further polarize the situation. Of course there's hesitation. Netanyahu invested in Hamas' presence exactly to derail the peace talks What I see as the basic problem, instead, is that people like you suddenly pretend that Israel and Palestine/Hamas are equal players in the game when we start talking peace processes. They are not and have not been. Palestine is being colonized. Israel is a colonizing power. This has to be the bottom line. Why? It sets the stage correctly. Would you also have asked South Africans to compromise with white colonizers? Would you have said "geez, it's so unhelpful that people who support South Africans are further polarizing the situation by saying these colonizers shouldn't be there"? I mean, the answer could be yes. And I guess, good for you. But you can't expect that from everyone, because your kind of rhetoric has also been proven to embarrassingly fail. Palestinians compromised in the past because they longed for an independent freedom, a right to exist. Israel, as a territorial power with far greater international support to cover their asses, took advantage of that longing to expand their colonialism and their apartheid while pretending to discuss (and stall) a peace plan they would never respect. So, yes, that previous member was right. It is cruel and inhumane to suggest that Palestinians need to compromise even more, by abandoning the very idea of independence and freedom which has motivated them to make compromises to begin with. The situation could not possibly be further polarized. It's very cynical to blame Western activists for derailing the peace process by ideational slogans when they mostly just want international law to be upheld. This is why they also can't be blamed for "exacerbating" extremist voices in Palestine. What ties activists and protestors together is that they want international law to be upheld, respected, and applied. This, by default, sets them apart from the extremist voices you're trying to connect them to. Edited May 6 by Earth Ripper 2 2
rihannafan Posted May 6 Posted May 6 8 minutes ago, Delirious said: I'm literally losing brain cells by reading this thread lol On the bright side, it doesn't seem like you use them much 1 9
Johnny Jacobs Posted May 6 Posted May 6 11 hours ago, Ryan said: Is Hamas not the terrorist group that started this latest conflict? They never answer that simple question. They know the answer tho. Condeming hamas doesn't mean supporting Israel. It means standing up against terrorism. Thank you for that Ryan. 1
rihannafan Posted May 6 Posted May 6 2 minutes ago, Johnny Jacobs said: They never answer that simple question. They know the answer tho. Condeming hamas doesn't mean supporting Israel. It means standing up against terrorism. Thank you for that Ryan. Literally answered it right after 2
State of Grace. Posted May 6 Posted May 6 (edited) Great. The thread turned into full on Nakba denial. Go Kassi. Just say that you want Palestinians killed. I'm outta here Edited May 6 by State of Grace. 1
rihannafan Posted May 6 Posted May 6 1 minute ago, State of Grace. said: Great. The thread turned into full on Nakba denial. Go Kassi. Just say that you want Palestinians killed. I'm outta here When the administrator bans people who know what happened because they live in the area and keep people like Kassi who read rhe wikipedia page about the "conflict", this is what happens 6
Luckitty Posted May 6 Posted May 6 11 hours ago, rihannafan said: IDF will not actually be in control if the deal passes Can you please bring Jjang back? They banned jjang but not the raging racists and islamophobes? (some of whom are in this thread) 1
Delirious Posted May 6 Posted May 6 4 minutes ago, rihannafan said: On the bright side, it doesn't seem like you use them much But just enough to know that you all don't argue in good faith!
Communion Posted May 6 Author Posted May 6 34 minutes ago, rihannafan said: Trump: bans muslims Liberals: oh no, worst person in the world (rightfully) Biden: aids the killing of 30k palestinian in a few months liberals: but he's not THAT bad Trump is an awful, awful person. Not many people hate him as much as I do. He is also deeply idiotic on top of that. Make no mistake though, everyone here defending Israel is no better than Trump. It's ironic that so much of this liberal defense of Israel and both sides'ing of the issue is directly related to Biden being far-right oh the issue and the sole motivation being "protect Biden at all costs"....only for the behavior displayed in this thread to make the case that voting for Biden is just as harmful as voting for Trump by virtue of how his own personal conservatives views have forced liberals to pivot to similar defenses. Not a single user here would be defending Israel's genocide if Trump was the one making the call. So if Biden's personal views effectively make his presidency no different than Trump's in impact...? 4
Delirious Posted May 6 Posted May 6 Just now, rihannafan said: When the administrator bans people who know what happened because they live in the area and keep people like Kassi who read rhe wikipedia page about the "conflict", this is what happens Just now, Luckitty said: They banned jjang but not the raging racists and islamophobes? (some of whom are in this thread) Jjang got banned get over it. Yikes. Everyone on ATRL has to abide by the same rules. Noone gets a pass. They got ZTP 3 times already. And luckitty you've been saying this narrative for the past 2 years don't you get tired of it? 4
Delirious Posted May 6 Posted May 6 You: Bring Jjang back! Bring Jjang back he did nothing wrong ATRL policy: 3 bans = perma ban You: But...but bring Jjang back because they're better than everyone else and because they're my friend!! 4
Communion Posted May 6 Author Posted May 6 7 minutes ago, Johnny Jacobs said: They never answer that simple question. They know the answer tho. Condeming hamas doesn't mean supporting Israel. It means standing up against terrorism. Thank you for that Ryan. Just now, Delirious said: Jjang got banned get over it. Yikes. Everyone on ATRL has to abide by the same rules. Noone gets a pass. They got ZTP 3 times already. And luckitty you've been saying this narrative for the past 2 years don't you get tired of it? If conservatives from Israel and Australia are rejoicing in this, It's clear to me my vote as an American must be used against Biden and not for him. Thank you for illuminating the moral clarity about Biden's fascism with your posts. 3
Earth Ripper Posted May 6 Posted May 6 1 minute ago, Johnny Jacobs said: They never answer that simple question. They know the answer tho. Condeming hamas doesn't mean supporting Israel. It means standing up against terrorism. Thank you for that Ryan. People don't answer that question because it's quite literally and unironically part of a deliberate propaganda strategy of an illegal, colonialist state People have condemned Hamas and their violence, and they've done it way more than enough at this point. They've also acknowledged that Hamas is an armed resistance group that has the right to resist illegal occupation, while Israel does not have the right to defend itself, as an illegally occupying force. And that is always when the pro-Israelis go silent... Allergic to international law as always. If y'all cared about standing up against terrorism, you'd understand that Hamas has been able to terrorize people with direct support from the Israeli government, another terrorist entity. But somehow we never ever hear that, hm? 2
Luckitty Posted May 6 Posted May 6 2 minutes ago, Delirious said: Jjang got banned get over it. Yikes. Everyone on ATRL has to abide by the same rules. Noone gets a pass. They got ZTP 3 times already. And luckitty you've been saying this narrative for the past 2 years don't you get tired of it? Hit dogs holler
Johnny Jacobs Posted May 6 Posted May 6 5 minutes ago, rihannafan said: Literally answered it right after No you didn't. It's a simple yes or no question. No need for an assay. Do you see Hamas as a terror organization? Also... Many users here that i don't agree with at least speak with a certain level of decency. That user you desperately want back didn't. I know that from experience. Many users were banned because they deserved it. From both sides. 1 2
Delirious Posted May 6 Posted May 6 1 minute ago, Communion said: If conservatives from Israel and Australia are rejoicing in this, It's clear to me my vote as an American must be used against Biden and not for him. Thank you for illuminating the moral clarity about Biden's fascism with your posts. Noones rejoicing this? Who said that? You're back to circle arguments and gas lighting again which is very usual for you. 1 minute ago, Luckitty said: Hit dogs holler But this won't change the fact that Jjang is banned no?
Johnny Jacobs Posted May 6 Posted May 6 2 minutes ago, Communion said: If conservatives from Israel and Australia are rejoicing in this, It's clear to me my vote as an American must be used against Biden and not for him. Thank you for illuminating the moral clarity about Biden's fascism with your posts. All of this because i thank Ryan for standing up against a terror group? Sure, your welcome. I guess. You just love twisting things. Aren't you? 1 1
Recommended Posts