Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)ME
Posts
0
Comments
167
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • Vancouver is quite expensive, I'll be honest. If you are okay with a commute, you can live in surrey, Langley, or even abbotsford/chilliwack. Long commute to Vancouver, but anywhere from 10-30+% cheaper rent last I checked.

    Canada should be seen as a time-delayed America in a cultural+political sense. A thing that happens in america will generally occur in a similar manner 1-10 years later here. Our Liberal and NDP (Progressive) parties continually move further to the right at differing paces, and all of our parties & leaders have major issues (in differing amounts):

    Trudeau (LPC) is a proven corrupt man who has abandoned the working class more every time he shuts down a major strike (every major strike).

    Poilievre (CPC) is a less charismatic, cryptofascistic version of trump, and is very likely to win the next national elsction. This could be any time between tomorrow and Oct 20, 2025 and could be catastrophic for Canadians.

    Singh (NDP) is a very lovely man, but has a tendency to make decisions that give his party less bargaining power (See: canceling supply and trade agreement without trying to use it as a threat first)

  • Sorry, i dont want to be rude, but do you actually have any arguments other than gesturing at the article & giving both-sides-isms?

    Hamas has committed war crimes, yes, however it shouldn't be ignored that Israel is currently engaged in terrorism, genocide, land grabs, torture of prisoners and more. Simply saying "both sides bad" lays the blame more evenly than it should be laid.

  • The article also mentions that Israel has started using it in their own propaganda videos. showing the triangle over targets as they're hit, and when you flip it like that there's a very clear implication of destroying the symbol of freedom... Which is to say, I still fail to see your ultimate point. You're just pointing at the news article and saying "SEE! THEY SAY ITS BAD!"

    Could you provide some actual argumentation to go with that?

    And just so it doesnt seem like I'm running, "Targeting reticle" would imply a weapon optic or similar, hence my confusion. "using it to mark targets" would have been clearer.

  • Now I might just be too stupid to understand what I'm displaying, but last I checked, the red triangle has been a symbol of pro-Palestinian support since the Palestinian Revolt in uhhhh... 1938. It's possible Hamas might have co-opted it, but then you might as well ban the Palestinian flag as well since that's the source of the triangle, and it has also existed since 1917, I'm failing to follow how this is a symbol of Hamas

  • To be clear, that wasnt me you just responded to, but I was the one who asked you the questions. You seem to be making a lot of bad faith assumptions about my intent with those questions.

    You're asking a rhetorical question in the hopes of getting a gotcha.

    Well, it is rhetorically framed, but I was trying to see if you and I are both working with frameworks built on reality.

    Your primary goal here is not to deepen any kind of understanding.

    Again, ouch. The tone of the questions may have come across that way, but my intent is never to "gotcha"... You'll just have to take my word for it obviously.

    If you did, you would be a lot more honest in your questions. You'd open up with a clear argument, based on specifics, with dates, people, events etc.

    This is a forum on internet, not debate club. Like I said above, I'm sorry if my questions came across as being bad faith, but I'm not obligated to serve you a rhetorically perfect and fallacy-free set of questions, just as you are not obligated to engage with my questions if you feel they're trying to uh... "Gotcha"

    If you did, you would be a lot more honest in your questions. You'd open up with a clear argument, based on specifics, with dates, people, events etc.

    I'm not totally sure how I'm responding with catch phrases. Honestly, if nothing else I'd love for you to clarify this

    You want a nuanced discussion that delves into the specifics of the geopolitics of the region? Start a thread that's not just diluted meaningless sentences, such as this nugget:

    Why should the US president be in regular contact with the perpetrator of an ongoing genocide?

    I'm sorry, I'm not being intentionally obtuse, but I can't tell if you're using the above as an example of a "diluted meaningless sentence" or whether it's meant to be a good question.

    Ultimately, I don't feel I was acting in bad faith considering I was trying to evaluate your framework. If you feel it was done poorly, that's okay, you dont need to respond.

    Also:

    Who are "you guys"?