FourPacketsOfPeanuts @ FourPacketsOfPeanuts @lemmy.world

Posts

8

Comments

992

Joined

2 yr. ago

They were not delivering food, but it was a WCK car. There were people unrelated to WCK with them at the time. Ultimately this comes down to whether or not one believes Israel. What Israel and WCK say is not contradictory, WCK just says they didn't know if the person participated in the Oct 7 terror attacks or not. Israel says they did. If you maraude around another country stabbing women and children any car you get in in the future is liable to get a rocket through the roof. It's not on Israel to risk its soldiers apprehending someone like that. Cowardly of that particular person to seek to hide amongst civilians. That's if Israel is to be believed.

On the contrary, the most effective "I'm sorry Jon"s are the ones that juxtapose the banality of everyday with horror. If you did a 4 panel Garfield "cartoony" cartoon, but in the last panel just had a subtle tentacle lying on the table. That could be quite effective! Lol

That is as unreasonable as me saying you're pro-Hamas.

I would consider industrialised total war to be using terrorism as a weapon, yes. Whether that's the British firebombing civilian areas of Germany or the Germans indiscriminately dropping rockets on London. Both actions are designed to terrorise the populace. So, 'terrorism'. I would judge the rest of your examples by that criteria.

Whether or not I think various causes in history were just or not is a separate consideration. So in some cases I would support 'terrorism', yes. Though I would struggle to find an actual clear cut example where I think that's the moral thing to do.

The cycle of violence between Jews and Palestinian Arabs has existed before the state of Israel even existed. Since each side has been continually justifying their actions based on what the other did it is very difficult to point to any moment in living memory where either exist "in a vacuum". They have progressively created each other.

I realise you don't agree with this. But I'm not saying it to be "pro Israel". Quite the contrary.

Israel has the upper hand and should stop its terrorism against gaza civilians. But I think you, and others here should realise that even if Israel were to give Hamas all their demands it's not like Islamic terrorism against Jews would stop. The ideology pre-dates Israel and even Zionism in general..

Can you explain whether or not you are in fact pro-Hamas because that would go along way to explaining why you're objecting to what I said.

There are genocidal religious fanatics on both sides. Israel just has the capacity to carry it out.

I really don't get this whole "Israel is evil so we can't say anything bad about Hamas" schtick that's going around.

Israel are killing civilians on a gross scale and must stop. But if anyone thinks Hamas aren't ideologically committed to killing as many Jews as possible no matter where they find them, then they have they head in the sand.

Why do people not seem to be able to cope with the fact that just because Israel are doing evil it doesn't make Hamas the good guys??

Genocide is wrong. That doesn't mean one has to be pro-Hamas. How are you looking at it in such a simplistic way?

How are you misunderstanding this?

Genocide is wrong. The indiscriminate killing of civilians is wrong.

That's not taking sides, that's saying neither Israel nor Hamas is right.

It's non combatants of both sides who are innocent here and the Palestinian civilians are in dire need of help.

Mortimer and Winehouse gone fishing.

Want a seat next to two comedy legends as they enter their chill years and ponder things while fishing? Look no further

https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episodes/b0b7r2k6/mortimer-whitehouse-gone-fishing

It's very difficult to talk about this kind of thing without sounding like one is taking sides. So let me make this clear first: Israel is committing war crimes, there should be a ceasefire in Gaza immediately, and humanitarian aid should be supplied under international protection.

Ok?

Now, just because Israel is committing war crimes doesn't mean Hamas aren't doing what Israel accuses them of. Is that an ok observation to make around here?

They are a nihilistic extremist Islamic organisation that many other extreme Islamic groups want nothing to do with. They engage in guerilla fighting, a prominent tactic of which is hiding amongst the regular civilian population. Do I have proof Hamas fires rockets from residential back yards? Personally, no. But would it surprise me? Also no. Have Hamas taken up day time 'civvie' jobs in aid agencies? Apparently yes. Would it surprise me if it turned out they coordinated with a hospital boss to use the space? It would not surprise me in the least.

Is bombing a hospital ok? No, of course not.

Is Hamas' guerilla network completely independent of Gaza civilian life? Only someone who has no idea how guerrilla forces work would think so.

Does that make the deaths of civilians and children ok? No, of course not.

Reddit isn't there for you, Reddit is there for the shareholders. Now make inoffensive, engaging content like a good little pleb /s

What kind of evidence would actually be convincing? I've seen photos, call transcripts and surveillance footage released in the past as justifications for various things. All are dismissed as fake or exaggerated. Or, in other cases apparently just ignored.

for example: https://www.nytimes.com/live/2023/12/07/world/israel-hamas-war-gaza-news#israel-claims-about-al-mawasi-add-to-concerns-that-nowhere-in-gaza-is-safe-for-civilians

That's the problem in a conflict like this as far away as it is. The truth died long ago. Whether one wants to see Hamas as the real psychopaths or Israel as the real psychopaths, any and all evidence presented so far by both sides can be twisted to suit whichever worldview the reader wants to have.

I boil it down to this, Israel has more than enough reasons to be lying and exaggerating: there are extremist factions in Israel who ideologically want to possess the land and they'll commit genocide to achieve it. Israel had military hegemony in the area, and especially with American backing, and so can count on being able to kill and squeeze Palestinian civilians in plain view until their goals are achieved. I get it.

But also, Hamas had more than enough reasons to also be lying. They are religious extremists who want to kill all Jews at any cost routinely hide among civilians and fire weapons from civilian areas. The West lost its collective mind over terror attacks by several dozen Islamic extremists. Israel has ~30,000 members of Hamas's genocidal terror brigades sitting on their doorstep. It's a different scale of threat than what the West has ever dealt with.

I get that Israel is terrible enough to make this stuff up. But have you considered that Hamas is terrible enough for this to actually be true?

I don't think that the time difference between the two events would be significant enough for the drop in birth rate to be that damaging

Let's hope so!

Best thing you can do is to not participate.

Welcome to nuclear deterrent.

"I'm sorry Jon" calls you!

Example 1

Example 2

Not to come across as a total pedant or anything, but are you saying that because Israel has killed a lot of civilians or are you saying that because Israel has actually said that?

somewhere in the kremlin a phone rings, goes unanswered

Also rational people: Israel could well be lying. But also Hamas could well have chosen to hide amongst aids workers.

The ability to tell which of these is true from the distance we're sat went out the window long ago.

Israel lying about information on a Hamas member to bomb a random civilian vehicle? Totally believable.

A Hamas member hiding as a staff member of World Central Kitchen and getting found out? Also totally believable.