rivermonster @ rivermonster @lemmy.world

Posts

2

Comments

222

Joined

2 yr. ago

Russia doesn't have the ability to conventionally attack Finland in any sustained or meaningful way. Their only deterent is nukes. So I agree it's just Saber rattling, not a credible threat.

They've already lost 300,000+ soldiers in Ukrain, and can't equip the ones they've conscripted.

Reddit and Lemmy are excellent places to track radicals and radicalization. Thanks for your contribution.

Every person in Ohio should recognize that when the rule of law is corrupted and broken, then [logical corrilary omitted bc it violated group rules].

Texas is a 4th world shithole.

Eww mines are such a horrible problem worldwide. I get the intent, though.

They've done permiter security at crazy levels already. Hamas with the help of Quatar, Iran, Iraq, Hezbolla, etc... they have failed. To a spectacular degree. October's attack makes trying to build a better wall or mined areas not likely as an effective solution.

Plus, then you get all the recriminations Bout racist apartheid, and nothing gets better.

There have been negotiations. But negotiating with terrorists is a debatable strategy, at the very least, right? Don't have to disagree or agree, I'm just saying we are both aware that's a strategy that has proponents and opponents for a reason.

The UN has had decades to inject a peacekeeping force. But the sad truth is that UN peacekeeping missions have a terrible failure rate, for many reasons, and I'm not just throwing stones at the UN here. But the reality is the outcomes from their deployment have been wanting.

That said, I'd love Israel to pull put and have an UN force in there instead. Even with the UN schools having taught anti-Israel sentiments and militarism in the UN printed text books.

Even with the UNs hostility towards Israel, I definitely would prefer them there. With the responsibility for preventing further attacks on Israel and Gaza and real repercussions for failure.

But no more mines. I wish mines were banned. I know they won't ever be... but so awful.

I'll say I appreciate your sincerity and taking the time to answer. And just because I disagree that this would help, doesn't mean I don't respect your position. We just disagree. I do sincerely want to find a convincing alternative to the current state of affairs as well. And know that my position is what it is because I don't see a clear alternative atm. I'd love for that to change.

If someone pulled an October attack on me and killed my family, there would be no safe haven for them anywhere.

If someone pulled a Hamas on my family intentionally drawing fire to them and getting them killed, same thing. No safe haven.

I am glad for your place of privilege where you can judge and condem without needing reason or experiencing the nuances involved here. Would you also like to talk to their manager?

Close quarters urban combat doesn't happen like a turn based video game where you get to slowly decide your every move with the luxury of thinking through every move and variable. In fact, it's full of chaos, uncertainty, adrenaline, and mistakes--tragic mistakes happen. Nobody is celebrating it, but you are condemning it from the safety of your keyboard ... wow.

There wouldn't even be a Bibi without them. He would have lost, and Perez would have moved forward with two states and Arafat (who Hamas would have also had a harder time removing).

The bottom line is I think we can agree they're bedfellows, yeah? Hamas has been trying to make this conflict happen their entire existence. They want maximum Palestian casualties in the hopes of expanding the war to more nations than just their allies like Quatar, Iran, and the Houthis.

Never look to me to defend Bibi and the Likud. Many war criminals there I'd like to see taken to the Hague.

The faster we can kill every member of Hamas, the better. The sooner we can ease the suffering of the Palestinians being used by Hamas, the better.

This is awful, but far more nuanced than the comments.

Friendly fire happens in war, especially with an enemy who uses civilians as shields and seeks to maximize civilian deaths for PR. They are trained to attempt to appear as friendlies and civilians. And in the thick of combat, mistakes are easy to make.

This horrible situation is similar to when little kids were shot during the war in Iraq. Children were used as suicide bombers and more effective because they looked less like a threat. This tragically caused non-threat children to sometimes be mistakenly killed as well.

An enemy that uses children and civilians, like Hamas, is a horrible cancer in the world and must be eliminated and removed completely.

You diminish the term genocide when you misuse it. And yes, Hamas murdering 18,000 civilians by using them as shields and intentionally trying to force as many civilian casualties as possible is horrific. It's part of why I support hunting them all down and killing them.

The difference is Hamas ALWAYS has and openly targets civilians. The IDF is trying to minimize them in one of the densest urban war theaters ever (chosen by and forced by Hamas who is co-locating and using it as a shield).

You don't seem to understand the civilian casualties that would occur if the IDF were intentionally seeking to target civilians. You'd be looking at hundreds of thousands or even millions. And you would NOT risk your troops on the ground with that plan. They have the ability to end this with no troops on the ground, but not while minimizing casualties.

I'm with you, I hate the Likud party, and Hamas is the reason Bibi and them are in power. If you don't understand that, just do a little historical research.

And blanket stating that the IDF is terrorists is ridiculous. I know it's hip and trendy right now to say, but that doesn't make it true.

Your apology for terrorists and war crimes of the elected government of Gaza says everything.

Out of curiosity, what do you think is the right thing to do? Ignore the terrorist attack by the legitimately elected Gaza government? Why wouldn't they keep doing it if you did that?

They've done that for a long time with rockets fired at (and killing civilians) in terrorist attacks that NO other country on earth would tolerate.

No, he's saying they could have removed ALL of Gaza without any invasion, IF they didn't care about avoiding civilian casualties.

Pretending they're intentionally trying to murder civilians like the elected government of Gaza did in October is disingenuous.

If Israel were intentionally targeting civilians, they'd have killed WAY more than 18,000--by literally magnitudes.

Which actually is true. You should spend your time condemning the terrorist elected government of Gaza, Hamas needs to be eradicated.

Wouldn't genocide be an effort to kill all Palestinans everywhere, like the millions in other Arab states?

You know, instead of focusing on the elected government of Gaza (who still has 57%+ support amongst Gazan civilians), who targeted 1200+ civilians intentionally in one of the worst terroist attacks of recent memory?