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/)OC
Posts
5
Comments
770
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • So do you think Israel should go to war with Iran? Or are you happy with innocent Palestinians and Lebanese paying the price instead?

    But I will say, when Israel does something, the blame lies with Israel. The blood of the dead is on Israel's hands and it will never wash off.

  • Are you addressing this comment to people who think Iran is.... good? You're right that they are not nice.

    I think I understand your point: Iran is just in it to hurt Israel and doesn't actually care about Palestinians.

    But then isn't the enemy Iran? How is killing some Lebanese child alongside a "terrorist" going to stop the next attack? Iran will just continue funding, surely? Probably with more willing recruits.

    Obviously nobody wants war with Iran, I get that. So, and I know this is crazy, but maybe this is a problem you can't murder your way out of? Just an idea.

  • He is a coward. He got off easy with Biden taking the attention away from him, but at the Harris debate, his stupidity and ignorance was on full display for everybody to see. He would embarrass himself again and he knows it.

    She should get the air time even if Trump is too much of a coward to show up. Let him seethe about it.

  • So a low estimate of deaths (not counting people under the rubble for instance) and Israel's claim on the number of Hamas dead.

    Absolutely it will take years! So all claims about civilian to militant ratio in Gaza are unreliable and we should probably not make them

  • It’s generally not allowed under international law to target civilians. Civilians getting killed when military objectives are targeted are legal. Proportionally and necessity come into play here.

    This is true but it's only fine if you target "fighters" according to the blog. So it depends on the details of who these people exactly were, just being in Hezbollah is not enough. As you said it's whether it's truly proportional and necessary.

    And for the targeting thing I think the main issue is whether it was possible in this case to control or even minimize the collateral damage. Since you don't really know the situation you're setting a bomb off in:

    The targeting law concern will be more likely to centre on whether adequate consideration was given to the incidental injury and damage to be expected from these explosions, given, as is assumed to be the case, that those planning and conducting the operation cannot have known the circumstances that would pertain where each of the large number of explosions took place.

    As you said, don't confuse targeting with who gets hurt at the end. It didn't come out too bad (by Israel's standards at least) but that doesn't mean they exercised the due care in how they did it, legally.

    Compare that go Gaza, which has about 2 to 3 civilians per combatant killed.

    Would be interested to see where you got those numbers

  • Very informative! Basically if I understand correctly: exploding pagers are illegal weapons anyway. But putting that to one side, if all of the targets were "fighters" (and not just Hezbollah in some other political/organizational/whatever capacity) then it might be ok, depending on the details of the targeting law the blog doesn't cover much. But it seems they also weren't all fighters sooo....

    Even the targeting thing is debatable because they clearly couldn't really predict the exact situation at the time, so how could they take the care to avoid civilian casualties?

  • The genocidiers have us by the balls, folks. Nothing you can do but voice your full throated support for one of them.

    Not only that, you must also shout down anybody who says they don't want to support genocide. Only full loyalty is acceptable.

    Oh so you're likely voting dem anyway because you aren't stupid and/or racist but you also say Harris should abide by US law and stop arms sales to Israel? WOW LOOKS LIKE WE HAVE A TRUMP SUPPORTER HERE BOYS

  • You will likely get the accusations anywhere you are omitting the part about voting for Harris despite opposing an endorsement.

    Yeah absolutely. But I don't really see why anyone should need to add a voting disclaimer if they are criticising the government's support for a genocide. People can downvote all they want, some things are just more important than party politics.

    That is due to the prolific MAGA campaigners on here urging people to vote third party and using this issue as the reason.

    Yeah I'm sure there are such people and they can get fucked. But in my experience the people receiving these accusations mainly just don't want the government to support Israel unconditionally. But as you said, without the disclaimer, these people are accused of a bunch of stuff.

    Is it really so hard for people to believe that others actually just care about preventing mass murder? The fact someone can say something like that and get many responses talking about Trump and the electoral college system rather than acknowledging the legitimacy of the problem being raised is truly disgusting to me.

  • What makes you say that? Is there something I'm missing?

    The Uncommitted group “opposes a Donald Trump presidency, whose agenda includes plans to accelerate the killing in Gaza while intensifying the suppression of anti-war organizing,” the statement continues. Additionally, the group is “not recommending a third-party vote in the Presidential election, especially as third party votes in key swing states could help inadvertently deliver a Trump presidency given our country’s broken electoral college system.”

    I agree with them. Including about this:

    Vice President Harris’s unwillingness to shift on unconditional weapons policy or to even make a clear campaign statement in support of upholding existing U.S. and international human rights law has made it impossible for us to endorse her

    Although I would say obviously people should still vote for her because the political system is broken.

    I was responding to this "news" because it is what many of us have been saying the whole time, only to be met with accusations that this must mean we think trump is better. Obviously he would be much worse for this and everything else. But that doesn't excuse the dems position.

  • Sure, we can criticise Team Blue for slow-dragging their feet on protecting Palestinians.

    Incredibly generous way to put it. They are providing the weapons that maim and kill the innocent children. I criticise them for the blood on their hands

  • Unsurprising. While people opposed to any criticism of the democrats' self defeating and inhumane policy on this issue like to pretend it's all a pro Trump psy op, it's actually more of a DON'T SUPPORT GENOCIDE YOU EVIL FUCKS type of thing.

    But for the dems it's fine because the electoral college has the whole country by the balls I guess ¯(ツ)/¯ who are you going to vote for dumb dumb? Orange hitler? Spoiler candidates? Lol didn't think so, send the bombs boyos