BaldProphet @ BaldProphet @kbin.social

2 Kings 2:23-24: A story about what happens when you make fun of bald dudes

---

Read more

Posts

0

Comments

413

Joined

2 yr. ago

Well then, they should oust Hamas and the Palestinian Authority. Then they can return to the bargaining table, but they shouldn't expect to receive the same generous concessions that were offered previously, imo. I don't see Israel being so willing to put its national security up for compromise as it did before.

Hamas killed the two-state solution. Israel bent over backwards to try to compromise with and accommodate the Palestinians, which it had no legal obligation to do, and Hamas and its ilk rejected those offers because they didn't want two states--they wanted one state, sans Jews.

I'm not a fan of what Israel has been doing in the West Bank, but don't lie to me and act like those actions are why a two-state solution isn't working. Palestine didn't want to exist in a world that included Israel.

Way to completely ignore what I actually wrote.

Resorting to violence when democracy fails is different to outright rejecting democracy and going straight for violence, which is what Hamas and other Islamist terror groups in that region do. Hamas (and, I guess all Palestinians, since you're lumping them together?) have rejected political solutions to their conflict with Israel because they do not desire to coexist, they want to eject all Israeli Jews from the region, or, if possible, slaughter them. They don't desire peace. They desire war and terror and the genocide of the Jews.

I'm not sure what the ANC is, but the Viet Cong were absolutely not justified in their actions. They were part of an attempt to force communism on South Vietnam. In effect, they used force of arms in lieu of democracy to get what they wanted. They committed atrocities and were unjustified in their actions.

Any group that rejects political and democratic solutions to its problems in favor of violence is unjustified. Violence is a last resort.

Wow, guy is seriously trying to justify terrorism.

Do some cursory research into the history of that slogan. It originated as a call for the genocide of Israeli Jews.

Trying to reclaim it now as a "peaceful liberation protest" slogan would be like trying to reclaim the Nazi salute. Only an antisemite would attempt either.

1. Israel didn't kick the Arabs out, Britain did.
2. Jews are the original inhabitants of the Land of Israel. A more correct analogy would be a bunch of Aztecs walking into Mexico City, being granted a small part of it by Mexico, and then Mexico forcibly evicting all non-Aztecs from that area.

There's nothing colonial about Israel. If anything, it is a reclamation of a displaced people of its original land. It has attempted repeatedly to compromise with the Palestinians, but nothing short of genocide against it appeals to them. They have outright rejected all attempts at political compromise, even though Israel was originally under no obligation to compromise with them.

In case anyone is curious and doesn't know, "Do Not Track" was originally a proposed Internet standard from 2009-2018, but was never formally adopted by the W3C. Its successor is called Global Privacy Control (https://iapp.org/news/a/is-gpc-the-new-do-not-track/). I'm guessing that Grafana is playing games by saying there is no technology standard for DNT, because technically the new standard has a different name. I wouldn't consider a company that plays semantic games like this to be trustworthy when it comes to privacy.

Many people expressing support for Palestine and warning about genocide in Gaza are using talking points created by Hamas that call for the elimination of the state of Israel.

The bias is evident in the article. It heavily implies that the strike must have been the IDF without outright stating as much. That's what bias is, a slant in a particular angle.

You are outright lying. In the first few paragraphs of Hamas' founding document, it clearly calls for the "obliteration" of the state of Israel. It's about genocide against Israel, not "Palestinian lives and rights".

Yes. War is horrific, which is why international laws of war exist. Hamas commits war crimes as its standard procedure, while Israel is forced into impossible situations to defend itself legally. The reason conducting military operations out of civilian places like schools and hospitals is a war crime is because doing so turns those locations into legitimate military targets.

If you don't want your refugee camp to be a military target, don't conduct military operations from the middle of it. Clearly, Hamas got the result it wanted: Dead refugees that it could spin as martyrs to fuel anti-Israel support in the international community.

You've bought the terrorists' propaganda hook, line, and sinker.

I mean... They could form a new, democratic government? This isn't rocket science. Why are the only choices that current, dysfunctional regimes? They wouldn't be the first country in living memory to create a new democracy, if they chose to attempt it.

This coverage is biased. Where is the evidence that it was actually the IDF that did this, and not Hamas?

I don't believe it is reasonable, but as I said, I am surprised by how many people are unreasonably supportive of Hamas, despite otherwise priding themselves on being progressive forward-thinkers.

I don't think they did it because they had the chance to kill Hamas militants. They actually did kill Hamas militants, who in cowardly and illegal fashion used refugees as human shields.

In the Northern Hemisphere, one can always expect the sun to be somewhat south of overhead at noontime. The close to the equator you live, the more directly overhead it will be.

Maybe Hamas should... checks notes not hide out in refugee camps and use refugees as human shields?

There is nothing legitimate about Hamas. It is a terror organization.