|
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
On March 22 2026 18:46 baal wrote:Show nested quote +On March 22 2026 13:25 XenOsky wrote:
The Jews who stayed probably stayed due to a lack of resources, not a lack of will. Sure they had no feet... Mexicans with a couple of bucks and worn out shoes cross the desert to go to the US with just economic incentive every fucking day. Show nested quote +It's always the working class that pays the price and puts the dead... The problem is never religious or ethnic; it's always a class problem. racism and religion are excuses of the oligarchy to carry out their strategy... The Jewish bourgeoisie cared little for the fate of their "comrades"... they were only interested in protecting their class privileges. Some more humanitarian probably wrote a letter to the editor of a newspaper or something symbolic, the rest continued living happily in the United States or South America while complaining about Nazism, having tea and eating cookies with their friends on the Sabbath + Show Spoiler + (or whatever it is that Jews do on the Sabbath) ... think about it, the Jews cared so little about what happened to the rest that they had to wait for the harshest repression to begin to defend themselves among themselves and take up arms. Armed resistance and direct action began to occur when the entire Jewish bourgeoisie had already left Europe like the cowards they are In fact, their commitment to human life was so little that one of them ended up making the genocide of Hiroshima and Nagasaki possible ROFLMAO an anti-semitic communist what a shock
If by communist you mean Marxist, then u're wrong...
if by communist you mean Libertarian (original use of the term) you're right.
if by anti-semitic you mean anti-Jew, then u're wrong again...
if by anti-semitic you mean Anti-Zionism, then u're right...
I consider myself an anarcho-syndicalist, strongly opposed to the Marxist vision of a centralized state.
I champion Bakunin and his ideas, and I radically despise Marxism-Leninism, which you're probably referring to.
Not all left-wing ideology is communist, in a Marxist sense, but I think that would be too much reading for you; the complete works of Marx and Bakunin combined form a canon of around 100,000+ pages. That's without considering my readings of Flores Magon, Lenin, Kropotkin, Proudhon, Emile Armand, Engels and so on...
You probably have no idea what Zapatismo, Spanish anarcho-syndicalism, or Latin American socialist movements are; you just throw the word "communist" at anything that sounds leftist to you, and that reflects your ignorance. Nor do I think you even have the slightest understanding of what's happening in Kurdistan or Chiapas...In fact, I don't think you could even describe which policies you approve or disapprove of; you just repeat media propaganda, and you bark communism even at the most wavering sectors of social democracy.
I've dedicated half my life to trying to understand their positions; it's absolutely insulting that you appear out of nowhere calling me a communist, without even knowing what the hell you're talking about. If you want to insult me at least use the right terminology.
|
You are offended by being called communist but not by being called anti semitic? Your text about "the jews" during the Nazi Regime was certainly not anti-zionist, because those jews you were talking about were not in Israel, they were literally staying in europe or the US and did not fight for some idea. Sounds like you are talking in very broad strokes about just "the jews" to me.
|
On March 26 2026 01:27 WombaT wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2026 00:46 GreenHorizons wrote:On March 25 2026 09:27 WombaT wrote:On March 25 2026 08:13 GreenHorizons wrote:On March 25 2026 07:38 WombaT wrote:I’m still unsure what the point of this tangent is overall. + Show Spoiler +
That the Dems are bad for going ‘hm, we hope x is our opponent in the election because we think they’re a great matchup for us’ and getting that wrong? Something basically every political party does, if not publicly then certainly in private?
I think it would be a different kettle of fish if the Dem machine was sneakily funding Trump’s rise or something like that, then yeah they’re not guilty merely of misjudging things, but actively culpable.
But as far as I’m aware that isn’t the case
Basically just Jankisa and Light spinning up a strawman in response to this: On March 25 2026 02:51 GreenHorizons wrote:On March 25 2026 02:38 WombaT wrote:On March 25 2026 02:13 GreenHorizons wrote:On March 25 2026 01:58 KwarK wrote:On March 24 2026 23:23 GreenHorizons wrote:On March 24 2026 12:14 KwarK wrote:
There is no “walk away” option for the US. Abandoning the Persian Gulf entirely would be an absolute surrender. There are a dozen reasons for Iran to keep the strait closed for a long time.
Iran has, so far this war, taken orders of magnitude more damage than the US. The US has lost a handful of planes and crew and a lot of interceptors. Iran has lost its navy, air force, hardened bunkers, warehouses, stockpiles, bases etc., in addition to the new Supreme Leader having had his father, wife, and teenage son killed.
As I keep repeating, the US and Israel peak immediately, they do the most damage on day 1 where they destroy all the highest value targets. On day 2 they destroy the second highest value targets because they can't destroy the highest value targets a second time. On day 3 the third. The longer the war goes the less damage bombing can do. They already killed his wife, they can't do it again.
Iran's retaliation grows steadily over time but doesn't even start to kick in until day 150 or so. There is significant latency between crude oil leaving the Gulf and the diesel in a gas station. Consumers haven't actually seen any impact in supply yet. The prices increases are speculative, suppliers don't want to sell today if they think that the price will be higher tomorrow and they won't have oil tomorrow to sell. And even once the supply does drop the strategic reserves have enough to cover months of the missing output from the Gulf. As the strategic reserves run low the prices will increase. As prices increase additional more expensive sources of oil will be brought online which will be priced accordingly. The longer it goes the higher the price gets.
That is Iran's retaliation. It hasn't started yet and it won't have any deterrence impact if they sign an early ceasefire. Even if Israel and the US stop bombing entirely they still need to interdict it, or charge such high transit fees that prices are higher. They need people to remember that 2026 was the year where there was a global recession caused by high oil prices so that the next time someone wants to bomb Iran they think twice. If Iran opens the strait early then they have no deterrent. They'd be saying "feel free to bomb the shit out of us for a week, we'll announce a disruption but as long as you stocked up the reserve ahead of time you can weather it". They'll get bombed by Israel once a year.
The idea that the US and Israel can beat the shit out of Iran, kill the leader's wife, kill his son, and then call a timeout before he hits back is absurd to me. It would undermine every single part of their publicly stated strategy of using the strait as a last resort deterrent bargaining chip. They constructed this strategy over decades, they know this. It would be national suicide.
The idea that Iran, one of the largest oil exporters in the world, has nothing to gain from spiking oil prices is nuts. The regime and country have been absolutely savaged. I've been hating on American strategy a lot here because the American strategy is nonsensical but that doesn't mean that the USAF can't demolish buildings. They were in terrible shape before and much worse shape now than they were then. If the regime is to survive they need hard foreign currency. They need their oil on the market and as few of their competitors as possible as a matter of national survival. The rebuilding project will not be cheap and there are a lot of regime loyalists who will need to be paid.
Additionally it simply wouldn't make sense not to continue the position that they control the strait. Free navigation of the seas is a postwar American invention enforced by the US Navy. Lots of countries would like to declare that actually they own this bit of water or that bit of water and that everyone has to pay them transit fees or whatever but they haven't been able to because the US Navy will disprove that notion. These waterways aren't just open by default, they're national territory by default, open is an artificial state of affairs that has been constructed and maintained by the US Navy. If the US declares that they're no longer interested in keeping the strait open then it won't suddenly revert to free neutrality under a ceasefire. It'll be owned by the strongest.
This is existential for Iran. Either they establish a convincing deterrent by confronting the US Navy over the strait and winning (which includes the US Navy forfeiting) or they die. There's no deal to be made here where the strait is reopened any time soon, it'll stay closed until such a time as a country with sufficient force projection to open it opens it. Can/should the world make the US a pariah state for an illegal war of choice leading to global recession? How about the European countries facilitating it? Or is the US integrated into the global economy (and their European accomplices dependent) in such a way that they can't be held accountable for their crimes? What would any of that look like? Those are general questions not specific to Kwark btw. + Show Spoiler +The question doesn't really make sense.
Let's imagine a town filled with people. And not civic minded Nordic people who pick up litter when they go for a walk in the woods, let's imagine it's filled with people who would steal Amazon packages from each others' porches. Fortunately there's a chief of police and a police force and they mostly get everyone to behave and as such everyone in the town can benefit from the predictable order of law, they can order things from Amazon, they can leave the house to go to work and still have their stuff when they come home etc. If you start breaking the rules then you're excluded from the society, people won't let you in their shops, they won't sell you gasoline, you get disconnected from utilities, it's a bad time.
Now let's imagine the chief of police fires the police force and burns down the courthouse.
What you're asking is what he should be convicted of and how long he should spend in jail.
It doesn't work.
That is absolutely not the same thing as him getting away with the crime of burning down the courthouse, it's just no longer functional to think of burning down the courthouse as a crime. Getting away with a crime would be continuing to benefit from the society built on a system of rules without being held accountable for breaking them (Israel gets away with having nukes for example). What he has done is remove the rules entirely and return the town to the natural state of anarchy. + Show Spoiler +That is not to say that there won't be consequences, it's just the concept of being prosecuted has gone. The consequences will show up with the power goes off because someone decided to steal the copper in the substation for scrap metal. They'll be more or less self imposed.
In the scenario in which the US engages in an illegal war and sends the world into a global recession while destroying its own alliance system there are no more pariah states and there is no more accountability. This is what Carney was explaining so beautifully at Davos . https://www.weforum.org/stories/2026/01/davos-2026-special-address-by-mark-carney-prime-minister-of-canada/ I think we're largely in agreement, though I believe Israel's ongoing genocide of Palestinians and the US's aiding and abetting of it was enough already. We knew the story of the international rules-based order was partially false that the strongest would exempt themselves when convenient, that trade rules were enforced asymmetrically. And we knew that international law applied with varying rigour depending on the identity of the accused or the victim.
This fiction was useful, and American hegemony, in particular, helped provide public goods, open sea lanes, a stable financial system, collective security and support for frameworks for resolving disputes.
So, we placed the sign in the window. We participated in the rituals, and we largely avoided calling out the gaps between rhetoric and reality. Basically there's always been "winners and losers" in this scheme (my personal perspective is a bit different), and people like Carney are basically saying that if they're slipping into the "losers" side then it's a good time to abandon ship. This bargain no longer works. Let me be direct. We are in the midst of a rupture, not a transition.
Over the past two decades, a series of crises in finance, health, energy and geopolitics have laid bare the risks of extreme global integration. But more recently, great powers have begun using economic integration as weapons, tariffs as leverage, financial infrastructure as coercion, supply chains as vulnerabilities to be exploited.
You cannot live within the lie of mutual benefit through integration, when integration becomes the source of your subordination. From my particular British/European perspective, in both a general sense but also something I argued specifically in the Israel/Palestine instance, was that keeping Trump out of assuming office was so important precisely because other nations and institutions either lacked the capacity or will to rein in a US that abandons all pretence of a lawful world order. Illusory though it might be I know the point you're trying to raise and we don't disagree that keeping Trump out of office was an inflection point. We disagree on how that could/should have been done. The fact is that Democrats tried what they wanted (including elevating Trump to the leader of Republicans in the first place) and lost. Twice. Then Biden failed to use the potential power the SCOTUS gave him to prevent Trump from taking office. They fixated on misunderstanding the parenthetical at the expense of the point. If they misunderstood the parenthetical what did you actually mean by it? I'd rather not make the same mistake with you, so let's try again without it. I know the point you're trying to raise and we don't disagree that keeping Trump out of office was an inflection point. We disagree on how that could/should have been done. The fact is that Democrats tried what they wanted and lost. Twice. Then Biden failed to use the potential power the SCOTUS gave him to prevent Trump from taking office. What did you mean by saying ‘elevating Trump to the leader of Republicans in the first place’ then? + Show Spoiler +
You seem to delight in saying things and then getting indignant when people ‘straw man’ you by interrogating what you yourself say.
And so the merry dance goes another round…
*sigh* If you insist: Democrats had a deliberate strategy (of whatever depth and effectiveness people want to believe AFAIAC at this point) to elevate Trump/make him a "leader of the pack" while moving the more established candidates (and Republican party) further to the right, and that it is an unfortunate example of something they didn't fail at.
|
|
|
I neither have nor want an Instagram account, can you summarize the contents of your link please?
|
On March 26 2026 05:54 Broetchenholer wrote:
You are offended by being called communist but not by being called anti semitic? Your text about "the jews" during the Nazi Regime was certainly not anti-zionist, because those jews you were talking about were not in Israel, they were literally staying in europe or the US and did not fight for some idea. Sounds like you are talking in very broad strokes about just "the jews" to me.
Anti-zionist is a tricky term, because it can basically mean anti-semite or it can mean you are against Israel expanding. The actual definition would be existing, but it is used as both. And if you are meaning existing you are anti over 90% of the Jews (religious or not).
That is not saying that everyone who says anti-zionist is racist, just that it is a fairly easy way for a racists to spread their views with low to no consequences.
|
On March 26 2026 07:07 LightSpectra wrote:
I neither have nor want an Instagram account, can you summarize the contents of your link please?
I don't have an account either.
In the link there's a video footage from Iranian FPV drones entering the US base in Iraq, destroying blackhawks, radars etc. and the guy comments on how woefully unprepared the US army is for the realities of post-UA/RU war. Still going with the assumption that nothing can touch them outside of the direct conflict zone so there are no protective nets, no jammers, expensive assets just sitting in the open and waiting to be targeted by cheap drones. And this goes not only for the direct vicinity of Iran but pretty much across the globe, as Ukrainians have shown with their Operation Spiderweb you can target enemy assets way outside of the theater of war operations.
|
On March 26 2026 05:54 Broetchenholer wrote:
You are offended by being called communist but not by being called anti semitic? Your text about "the jews" during the Nazi Regime was certainly not anti-zionist, because those jews you were talking about were not in Israel, they were literally staying in europe or the US and did not fight for some idea. Sounds like you are talking in very broad strokes about just "the jews" to me.
Did the Jewish communities act as I described in the post or did I lie in that post?
I spoke specifically about the Jewish bourgeoisie who abandoned Europe and their 'comrades' and then I said that those who had to suffer the consequences of Nazi repression took an eternity to take up arms. is this a lie?
Did I lie about the facts? Or did I describe the facts as history presents them?
I am not particularly interested in Jews; in fact, I am not interested in any religion. tbh maybe I am interested in ancient Hellenic paganism, thats it... Christians, Jews, Islam, all same shit to me
I only point out the historical facts of a religious group whose customs have been considered aberrant by civilized societies since 1st century Rome... perhaps long before.
Manetho claimed that the ancestors of the Jews were not slaves freed by miracles, but a group of lepers and people with impure diseases who had been expelled from Egypt by the advice of the gods to 'purify' the country. that was 300 years before Jesus the Christed was running arround molesting children in Palestine...
Moreover, why would it offend me to be called anti-Semitic, if the Palestinian people are Semitic and I have defended them since I learned at 14 years old about the Israeli occupation of their territory.
FUCK ISRAEL btw
|
Northern Ireland27056 Posts
On March 26 2026 07:48 Billyboy wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2026 05:54 Broetchenholer wrote:
You are offended by being called communist but not by being called anti semitic? Your text about "the jews" during the Nazi Regime was certainly not anti-zionist, because those jews you were talking about were not in Israel, they were literally staying in europe or the US and did not fight for some idea. Sounds like you are talking in very broad strokes about just "the jews" to me. Anti-zionist is a tricky term, because it can basically mean anti-semite or it can mean you are against Israel expanding. The actual definition would be existing, but it is used as both. And if you are meaning existing you are anti over 90% of the Jews (religious or not). That is not saying that everyone who says anti-zionist is racist, just that it is a fairly easy way for a racists to spread their views with low to no consequences.
I disagree that one is necessarily anti-Jewish to have issues with the state of Israel existing in its current form. I don’t generally think it’s especially desirous to create a state under those conditions as a general rule of thumb.
I mean I do also live in the real world. Once such a state is firmly established and we’ve passed through generation after generation, it’s not really something one can hit the undo button on without causing a lot of pain and upheaval to folks who’ve only known that locale and culture, and who had no input on prior decisions. So while I may both have issues with its foundation, and aspects of its current course as a state, I’d definitely not argue that it should exist now
I imagine I’d think this anyway if I was born and reared elsewhere, but it’s definitely rammed home by being a Brit in Ireland.
I’m probably unnecessarily splitting hairs here, but I think one can hold a more ‘strict’ anti-Zionist line without necessarily being anti-Jewish
Although I think the post that prompted this chain of discussion was kinda well, absolutely into yikes territory. In tone as much content
|
On March 26 2026 09:10 XenOsky wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2026 05:54 Broetchenholer wrote:
You are offended by being called communist but not by being called anti semitic? Your text about "the jews" during the Nazi Regime was certainly not anti-zionist, because those jews you were talking about were not in Israel, they were literally staying in europe or the US and did not fight for some idea. Sounds like you are talking in very broad strokes about just "the jews" to me. Did the Jewish communities act as I described in the post or did I lie in that post? I spoke specifically about the Jewish bourgeoisie who abandoned Europe and their 'comrades' and then I said that those who had to suffer the consequences of Nazi repression took an eternity to take up arms. Did I lie about the facts? Or did I describe the facts as history presents them? I am not particularly interested in Jews; in fact, I am not interested in any religion. tbh maybe I am interested in ancient Hellenic paganism, thats it... Christians, Jews, Islam, all same shit to me I only point out the historical facts of a religious group whose customs have been considered aberrant by civilized societies since 1st century Rome... perhaps long before. Manetho claimed that the ancestors of the Jews were not slaves freed by miracles, but a group of lepers and people with impure diseases who had been expelled from Egypt by the advice of the gods to 'purify' the country. that was 300 years before Jesus the ChristedMoreover, why would it offend me to be called anti-Semitic, if the Palestinian people are Semitic and I have defended them since I learned at 14 years old about the Israeli occupation of their territory. FUCK ISRAEL btw
How exactly do you figure that the Nazi's stole between 380 bn and 533 bn (todays money) in Jewish money which funded roughly 1/3 of their war effort if all the rich ones left?
In reality most of the ones that got out to SA before ww2 were not wealthy and were talking about 100,000.
You are a racist, you make abhorrent hateful posts. That include holocaust denial, seperate "blogs" of Jewish hate. That you think what you are spreading is "facts" only makes you more of a racist.
|
On March 26 2026 09:30 WombaT wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2026 07:48 Billyboy wrote:On March 26 2026 05:54 Broetchenholer wrote:
You are offended by being called communist but not by being called anti semitic? Your text about "the jews" during the Nazi Regime was certainly not anti-zionist, because those jews you were talking about were not in Israel, they were literally staying in europe or the US and did not fight for some idea. Sounds like you are talking in very broad strokes about just "the jews" to me. Anti-zionist is a tricky term, because it can basically mean anti-semite or it can mean you are against Israel expanding. The actual definition would be existing, but it is used as both. And if you are meaning existing you are anti over 90% of the Jews (religious or not). That is not saying that everyone who says anti-zionist is racist, just that it is a fairly easy way for a racists to spread their views with low to no consequences. I disagree that one is necessarily anti-Jewish to have issues with the state of Israel existing in its current form. I don’t generally think it’s especially desirous to create a state under those conditions as a general rule of thumb. I mean I do also live in the real world. Once such a state is firmly established and we’ve passed through generation after generation, it’s not really something one can hit the undo button on without causing a lot of pain and upheaval to folks who’ve only known that locale and culture, and who had no input on prior decisions. So while I may both have issues with its foundation, and aspects of its current course as a state, I’d definitely not argue that it should exist now I imagine I’d think this anyway if I was born and reared elsewhere, but it’s definitely rammed home by being a Brit in Ireland. I’m probably unnecessarily splitting hairs here, but I think one can hold a more ‘strict’ anti-Zionist line without necessarily being anti-Jewish Although I think the post that prompted this chain of discussion was kinda well, absolutely into yikes territory. In tone as much content
Thoughts on all the non-indigenous North American's? They came over with much less reason, and were WAY WAY worse about it and with less of a reason. It has only been longer.
Not saying it is right, not saying it is not hella complicated. Just that the hate Jewish people and Israel gets is WAY more than a bunch of other places that have done comparable or worse things.
|
On March 26 2026 09:33 Billyboy wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2026 09:10 XenOsky wrote:On March 26 2026 05:54 Broetchenholer wrote:
You are offended by being called communist but not by being called anti semitic? Your text about "the jews" during the Nazi Regime was certainly not anti-zionist, because those jews you were talking about were not in Israel, they were literally staying in europe or the US and did not fight for some idea. Sounds like you are talking in very broad strokes about just "the jews" to me. Did the Jewish communities act as I described in the post or did I lie in that post? I spoke specifically about the Jewish bourgeoisie who abandoned Europe and their 'comrades' and then I said that those who had to suffer the consequences of Nazi repression took an eternity to take up arms. Did I lie about the facts? Or did I describe the facts as history presents them? I am not particularly interested in Jews; in fact, I am not interested in any religion. tbh maybe I am interested in ancient Hellenic paganism, thats it... Christians, Jews, Islam, all same shit to me I only point out the historical facts of a religious group whose customs have been considered aberrant by civilized societies since 1st century Rome... perhaps long before. Manetho claimed that the ancestors of the Jews were not slaves freed by miracles, but a group of lepers and people with impure diseases who had been expelled from Egypt by the advice of the gods to 'purify' the country. that was 300 years before Jesus the ChristedMoreover, why would it offend me to be called anti-Semitic, if the Palestinian people are Semitic and I have defended them since I learned at 14 years old about the Israeli occupation of their territory. FUCK ISRAEL btw How exactly do you figure that the Nazi's stole between 380 bn and 533 bn (todays money) in Jewish money which funded roughly 1/3 of their war effort if all the rich ones left? In reality most of the ones that got out to SA before ww2 were not wealthy and were talking about 100,000. You are a racist, you make abhorrent hateful posts. That include holocaust denial, seperate "blogs" of Jewish hate. That you think what you are spreading is "facts" only makes you more of a racist.
Brother, the state of Israel has a clear plan: to take over the Middle East and acquire the political power of the US and Latin America, that is already happening, I do not want a Palestine in America, neither in the north nor in the south.
If you cannot understand that part then you are an idiot who reflects your racism onto me... just bcuz i call pears pears and apples apples...
I do not support the genocide in Gaza, I am against the Mossad's infiltration into the affairs of other countries, I am completely against the plan of 'Greater Israel,' what the hell does that have to do with racism?
Are you so stupid that you don’t see what is happening with Israel? That it hides behind the excuse of being a religious country to commit atrocities and crimes against humanity left and right?
I am not going to be politically correct to please a group of right-wingers on TL, I am going to say it like I would say it on the street, at a protest, on a strike, in a damn graffiti...
This has nothing to do with Semitism, it has to do with Zionism. If you don't understand the difference, then go and read a bit.
|
Northern Ireland27056 Posts
On March 26 2026 09:10 XenOsky wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2026 05:54 Broetchenholer wrote:
You are offended by being called communist but not by being called anti semitic? Your text about "the jews" during the Nazi Regime was certainly not anti-zionist, because those jews you were talking about were not in Israel, they were literally staying in europe or the US and did not fight for some idea. Sounds like you are talking in very broad strokes about just "the jews" to me. Did the Jewish communities act as I described in the post or did I lie in that post? I spoke specifically about the Jewish bourgeoisie who abandoned Europe and their 'comrades' and then I said that those who had to suffer the consequences of Nazi repression took an eternity to take up arms. is this a lie? Did I lie about the facts? Or did I describe the facts as history presents them? I am not particularly interested in Jews; in fact, I am not interested in any religion. tbh maybe I am interested in ancient Hellenic paganism, thats it... Christians, Jews, Islam, all same shit to me I only point out the historical facts of a religious group whose customs have been considered aberrant by civilized societies since 1st century Rome... perhaps long before. Manetho claimed that the ancestors of the Jews were not slaves freed by miracles, but a group of lepers and people with impure diseases who had been expelled from Egypt by the advice of the gods to 'purify' the country. that was 300 years before Jesus the Christed was running arround molesting children in Palestine... Moreover, why would it offend me to be called anti-Semitic, if the Palestinian people are Semitic and I have defended them since I learned at 14 years old about the Israeli occupation of their territory. FUCK ISRAEL btw
You really seem to have a problem with Jews, might wanna seek help for that…
If you don’t, you’re doing a damn good impression of someone that does
|
On March 26 2026 09:38 WombaT wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2026 09:10 XenOsky wrote:On March 26 2026 05:54 Broetchenholer wrote:
You are offended by being called communist but not by being called anti semitic? Your text about "the jews" during the Nazi Regime was certainly not anti-zionist, because those jews you were talking about were not in Israel, they were literally staying in europe or the US and did not fight for some idea. Sounds like you are talking in very broad strokes about just "the jews" to me. Did the Jewish communities act as I described in the post or did I lie in that post? I spoke specifically about the Jewish bourgeoisie who abandoned Europe and their 'comrades' and then I said that those who had to suffer the consequences of Nazi repression took an eternity to take up arms. is this a lie? Did I lie about the facts? Or did I describe the facts as history presents them? I am not particularly interested in Jews; in fact, I am not interested in any religion. tbh maybe I am interested in ancient Hellenic paganism, thats it... Christians, Jews, Islam, all same shit to me I only point out the historical facts of a religious group whose customs have been considered aberrant by civilized societies since 1st century Rome... perhaps long before. Manetho claimed that the ancestors of the Jews were not slaves freed by miracles, but a group of lepers and people with impure diseases who had been expelled from Egypt by the advice of the gods to 'purify' the country. that was 300 years before Jesus the Christed was running arround molesting children in Palestine... Moreover, why would it offend me to be called anti-Semitic, if the Palestinian people are Semitic and I have defended them since I learned at 14 years old about the Israeli occupation of their territory. FUCK ISRAEL btw You really seem to have a problem with Jews, might wanna seek help for that… If you don’t, you’re doing a damn good impression of someone that does
i have a problem with the Catholic church too and fucking islam, does that makes me racist?
|
On March 26 2026 09:37 Billyboy wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2026 09:30 WombaT wrote:On March 26 2026 07:48 Billyboy wrote:On March 26 2026 05:54 Broetchenholer wrote:
You are offended by being called communist but not by being called anti semitic? Your text about "the jews" during the Nazi Regime was certainly not anti-zionist, because those jews you were talking about were not in Israel, they were literally staying in europe or the US and did not fight for some idea. Sounds like you are talking in very broad strokes about just "the jews" to me. Anti-zionist is a tricky term, because it can basically mean anti-semite or it can mean you are against Israel expanding. The actual definition would be existing, but it is used as both. And if you are meaning existing you are anti over 90% of the Jews (religious or not). That is not saying that everyone who says anti-zionist is racist, just that it is a fairly easy way for a racists to spread their views with low to no consequences. I disagree that one is necessarily anti-Jewish to have issues with the state of Israel existing in its current form. I don’t generally think it’s especially desirous to create a state under those conditions as a general rule of thumb. I mean I do also live in the real world. Once such a state is firmly established and we’ve passed through generation after generation, it’s not really something one can hit the undo button on without causing a lot of pain and upheaval to folks who’ve only known that locale and culture, and who had no input on prior decisions. So while I may both have issues with its foundation, and aspects of its current course as a state, I’d definitely not argue that it should exist now I imagine I’d think this anyway if I was born and reared elsewhere, but it’s definitely rammed home by being a Brit in Ireland. I’m probably unnecessarily splitting hairs here, but I think one can hold a more ‘strict’ anti-Zionist line without necessarily being anti-Jewish Although I think the post that prompted this chain of discussion was kinda well, absolutely into yikes territory. In tone as much content Thoughts on all the non-indigenous North American's?
Bunch of genocidal fucks that killed millions under the same God of Israel...
On March 26 2026 09:38 WombaT wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2026 09:10 XenOsky wrote:On March 26 2026 05:54 Broetchenholer wrote:
You are offended by being called communist but not by being called anti semitic? Your text about "the jews" during the Nazi Regime was certainly not anti-zionist, because those jews you were talking about were not in Israel, they were literally staying in europe or the US and did not fight for some idea. Sounds like you are talking in very broad strokes about just "the jews" to me. Did the Jewish communities act as I described in the post or did I lie in that post? I spoke specifically about the Jewish bourgeoisie who abandoned Europe and their 'comrades' and then I said that those who had to suffer the consequences of Nazi repression took an eternity to take up arms. is this a lie? Did I lie about the facts? Or did I describe the facts as history presents them? I am not particularly interested in Jews; in fact, I am not interested in any religion. tbh maybe I am interested in ancient Hellenic paganism, thats it... Christians, Jews, Islam, all same shit to me I only point out the historical facts of a religious group whose customs have been considered aberrant by civilized societies since 1st century Rome... perhaps long before. Manetho claimed that the ancestors of the Jews were not slaves freed by miracles, but a group of lepers and people with impure diseases who had been expelled from Egypt by the advice of the gods to 'purify' the country. that was 300 years before Jesus the Christed was running arround molesting children in Palestine... Moreover, why would it offend me to be called anti-Semitic, if the Palestinian people are Semitic and I have defended them since I learned at 14 years old about the Israeli occupation of their territory. FUCK ISRAEL btw You really seem to have a problem with Jews, might wanna seek help for that…
Are you some kind of Freudian or smth? He was Jew btw he just didn't like the fairy tail part...
|
Northern Ireland27056 Posts
On March 26 2026 09:37 Billyboy wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2026 09:30 WombaT wrote:On March 26 2026 07:48 Billyboy wrote:On March 26 2026 05:54 Broetchenholer wrote:
You are offended by being called communist but not by being called anti semitic? Your text about "the jews" during the Nazi Regime was certainly not anti-zionist, because those jews you were talking about were not in Israel, they were literally staying in europe or the US and did not fight for some idea. Sounds like you are talking in very broad strokes about just "the jews" to me. Anti-zionist is a tricky term, because it can basically mean anti-semite or it can mean you are against Israel expanding. The actual definition would be existing, but it is used as both. And if you are meaning existing you are anti over 90% of the Jews (religious or not). That is not saying that everyone who says anti-zionist is racist, just that it is a fairly easy way for a racists to spread their views with low to no consequences. I disagree that one is necessarily anti-Jewish to have issues with the state of Israel existing in its current form. I don’t generally think it’s especially desirous to create a state under those conditions as a general rule of thumb. I mean I do also live in the real world. Once such a state is firmly established and we’ve passed through generation after generation, it’s not really something one can hit the undo button on without causing a lot of pain and upheaval to folks who’ve only known that locale and culture, and who had no input on prior decisions. So while I may both have issues with its foundation, and aspects of its current course as a state, I’d definitely not argue that it should exist now I imagine I’d think this anyway if I was born and reared elsewhere, but it’s definitely rammed home by being a Brit in Ireland. I’m probably unnecessarily splitting hairs here, but I think one can hold a more ‘strict’ anti-Zionist line without necessarily being anti-Jewish Although I think the post that prompted this chain of discussion was kinda well, absolutely into yikes territory. In tone as much content Thoughts on all the non-indigenous North American's? They came over with much less reason, and were WAY WAY worse about it and with less of a reason. It has only been longer. Not saying it is right, not saying it is not hella complicated. Just that the hate Jewish people and Israel gets is WAY more than a bunch of other places that have done comparable or worse things.
And the Brits have been in Ireland longer still.
Time is a great healer and all that, the world has shifted so much there’s kinda nothing to be mad at in some instances. I mean yeah colonialism was frequently ethically horrendous. I can acknowledge that, and also how events then shaped the world as it is today still (global wealth inequality and me having a higher standard of living than many especially), but I can’t really maintain any contemporary emotional anger for long.
Israel’s foundation is still within collective living memory, and probably will be for a wee while longer. So for that reason alone you’re probably going to naturally see more anger.
You have other elements too, I mean the Holocaust was a rather reasonable rationale to establish such a state. But to then see some of the subsequent behaviour of the state, does stick in the craw of many. There’s being this great ally of nations in which some of us reside, but especially the US as well I guess
I would 100% agree that Israel gets a disproportionate amount of attention compared to other conflicts and upheaval the world over. Although I think Israel gets its fair share of criticism, the issue is more many others do not for me
|
On March 26 2026 09:10 XenOsky wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2026 05:54 Broetchenholer wrote:
You are offended by being called communist but not by being called anti semitic? Your text about "the jews" during the Nazi Regime was certainly not anti-zionist, because those jews you were talking about were not in Israel, they were literally staying in europe or the US and did not fight for some idea. Sounds like you are talking in very broad strokes about just "the jews" to me. Did the Jewish communities act as I described in the post or did I lie in that post? I spoke specifically about the Jewish bourgeoisie who abandoned Europe and their 'comrades' and then I said that those who had to suffer the consequences of Nazi repression took an eternity to take up arms. is this a lie? Did I lie about the facts? Or did I describe the facts as history presents them? I am not particularly interested in Jews; in fact, I am not interested in any religion. tbh maybe I am interested in ancient Hellenic paganism, thats it... Christians, Jews, Islam, all same shit to me I only point out the historical facts of a religious group whose customs have been considered aberrant by civilized societies since 1st century Rome... perhaps long before. Manetho claimed that the ancestors of the Jews were not slaves freed by miracles, but a group of lepers and people with impure diseases who had been expelled from Egypt by the advice of the gods to 'purify' the country. that was 300 years before Jesus the Christed was running arround molesting children in Palestine... Moreover, why would it offend me to be called anti-Semitic, if the Palestinian people are Semitic and I have defended them since I learned at 14 years old about the Israeli occupation of their territory. FUCK ISRAEL btw
Please seek mental help.
|
Northern Ireland27056 Posts
On March 26 2026 09:48 XenOsky wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2026 09:37 Billyboy wrote:On March 26 2026 09:30 WombaT wrote:On March 26 2026 07:48 Billyboy wrote:On March 26 2026 05:54 Broetchenholer wrote:
You are offended by being called communist but not by being called anti semitic? Your text about "the jews" during the Nazi Regime was certainly not anti-zionist, because those jews you were talking about were not in Israel, they were literally staying in europe or the US and did not fight for some idea. Sounds like you are talking in very broad strokes about just "the jews" to me. Anti-zionist is a tricky term, because it can basically mean anti-semite or it can mean you are against Israel expanding. The actual definition would be existing, but it is used as both. And if you are meaning existing you are anti over 90% of the Jews (religious or not). That is not saying that everyone who says anti-zionist is racist, just that it is a fairly easy way for a racists to spread their views with low to no consequences. I disagree that one is necessarily anti-Jewish to have issues with the state of Israel existing in its current form. I don’t generally think it’s especially desirous to create a state under those conditions as a general rule of thumb. I mean I do also live in the real world. Once such a state is firmly established and we’ve passed through generation after generation, it’s not really something one can hit the undo button on without causing a lot of pain and upheaval to folks who’ve only known that locale and culture, and who had no input on prior decisions. So while I may both have issues with its foundation, and aspects of its current course as a state, I’d definitely not argue that it should exist now I imagine I’d think this anyway if I was born and reared elsewhere, but it’s definitely rammed home by being a Brit in Ireland. I’m probably unnecessarily splitting hairs here, but I think one can hold a more ‘strict’ anti-Zionist line without necessarily being anti-Jewish Although I think the post that prompted this chain of discussion was kinda well, absolutely into yikes territory. In tone as much content Thoughts on all the non-indigenous North American's? Bunch of genocidal fucks that killed millions under the same God of Israel... Show nested quote +On March 26 2026 09:38 WombaT wrote:On March 26 2026 09:10 XenOsky wrote:On March 26 2026 05:54 Broetchenholer wrote:
You are offended by being called communist but not by being called anti semitic? Your text about "the jews" during the Nazi Regime was certainly not anti-zionist, because those jews you were talking about were not in Israel, they were literally staying in europe or the US and did not fight for some idea. Sounds like you are talking in very broad strokes about just "the jews" to me. Did the Jewish communities act as I described in the post or did I lie in that post? I spoke specifically about the Jewish bourgeoisie who abandoned Europe and their 'comrades' and then I said that those who had to suffer the consequences of Nazi repression took an eternity to take up arms. is this a lie? Did I lie about the facts? Or did I describe the facts as history presents them? I am not particularly interested in Jews; in fact, I am not interested in any religion. tbh maybe I am interested in ancient Hellenic paganism, thats it... Christians, Jews, Islam, all same shit to me I only point out the historical facts of a religious group whose customs have been considered aberrant by civilized societies since 1st century Rome... perhaps long before. Manetho claimed that the ancestors of the Jews were not slaves freed by miracles, but a group of lepers and people with impure diseases who had been expelled from Egypt by the advice of the gods to 'purify' the country. that was 300 years before Jesus the Christed was running arround molesting children in Palestine... Moreover, why would it offend me to be called anti-Semitic, if the Palestinian people are Semitic and I have defended them since I learned at 14 years old about the Israeli occupation of their territory. FUCK ISRAEL btw You really seem to have a problem with Jews, might wanna seek help for that… Are you some kind of Freudian or smth? He was Jew btw he just didn't like the fairy tail part...
Well if your issue is with religions and Freud wasn’t religious, why casually mention that he’s Jewish. Bit weird
On March 26 2026 09:38 WombaT wrote:
If you don’t, you’re doing a damn good impression of someone that does
As I said, the whole tone of your communication, dropping references to Jews apropos of nothing… Kinda a bad look dude.
The normal response for say, someone who doesn’t have an issue with Jews tends to be explanatory, or ‘wait, is that how I’m coming across’ not like, ‘hey wanna hear more Jew truth bombs?’
|
On March 26 2026 09:43 XenOsky wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2026 09:38 WombaT wrote:On March 26 2026 09:10 XenOsky wrote:On March 26 2026 05:54 Broetchenholer wrote:
You are offended by being called communist but not by being called anti semitic? Your text about "the jews" during the Nazi Regime was certainly not anti-zionist, because those jews you were talking about were not in Israel, they were literally staying in europe or the US and did not fight for some idea. Sounds like you are talking in very broad strokes about just "the jews" to me. Did the Jewish communities act as I described in the post or did I lie in that post? I spoke specifically about the Jewish bourgeoisie who abandoned Europe and their 'comrades' and then I said that those who had to suffer the consequences of Nazi repression took an eternity to take up arms. is this a lie? Did I lie about the facts? Or did I describe the facts as history presents them? I am not particularly interested in Jews; in fact, I am not interested in any religion. tbh maybe I am interested in ancient Hellenic paganism, thats it... Christians, Jews, Islam, all same shit to me I only point out the historical facts of a religious group whose customs have been considered aberrant by civilized societies since 1st century Rome... perhaps long before. Manetho claimed that the ancestors of the Jews were not slaves freed by miracles, but a group of lepers and people with impure diseases who had been expelled from Egypt by the advice of the gods to 'purify' the country. that was 300 years before Jesus the Christed was running arround molesting children in Palestine... Moreover, why would it offend me to be called anti-Semitic, if the Palestinian people are Semitic and I have defended them since I learned at 14 years old about the Israeli occupation of their territory. FUCK ISRAEL btw You really seem to have a problem with Jews, might wanna seek help for that… If you don’t, you’re doing a damn good impression of someone that does i have a problem with the Catholic church too and fucking islam, does that makes me racist?
Your ignorance knows no bounds. Do you not know that Jewish is both a religion and race. Where as Islam and Catholicism are just religions. Are you aware that just over half of the Jews in Israel even consider themselves religious and only about quarter go synagogue each week? So you are hating a Race of people not just the Religious ones. Not that hating people for practicing a religion on a mass scale isn't basically as awful.
But I don't want to split hairs so if you prefer hateful prejudiced bigot, I'll oblige.
|
On March 26 2026 10:08 WombaT wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2026 09:37 Billyboy wrote:On March 26 2026 09:30 WombaT wrote:On March 26 2026 07:48 Billyboy wrote:On March 26 2026 05:54 Broetchenholer wrote:
You are offended by being called communist but not by being called anti semitic? Your text about "the jews" during the Nazi Regime was certainly not anti-zionist, because those jews you were talking about were not in Israel, they were literally staying in europe or the US and did not fight for some idea. Sounds like you are talking in very broad strokes about just "the jews" to me. Anti-zionist is a tricky term, because it can basically mean anti-semite or it can mean you are against Israel expanding. The actual definition would be existing, but it is used as both. And if you are meaning existing you are anti over 90% of the Jews (religious or not). That is not saying that everyone who says anti-zionist is racist, just that it is a fairly easy way for a racists to spread their views with low to no consequences. I disagree that one is necessarily anti-Jewish to have issues with the state of Israel existing in its current form. I don’t generally think it’s especially desirous to create a state under those conditions as a general rule of thumb. I mean I do also live in the real world. Once such a state is firmly established and we’ve passed through generation after generation, it’s not really something one can hit the undo button on without causing a lot of pain and upheaval to folks who’ve only known that locale and culture, and who had no input on prior decisions. So while I may both have issues with its foundation, and aspects of its current course as a state, I’d definitely not argue that it should exist now I imagine I’d think this anyway if I was born and reared elsewhere, but it’s definitely rammed home by being a Brit in Ireland. I’m probably unnecessarily splitting hairs here, but I think one can hold a more ‘strict’ anti-Zionist line without necessarily being anti-Jewish Although I think the post that prompted this chain of discussion was kinda well, absolutely into yikes territory. In tone as much content Thoughts on all the non-indigenous North American's? They came over with much less reason, and were WAY WAY worse about it and with less of a reason. It has only been longer. Not saying it is right, not saying it is not hella complicated. Just that the hate Jewish people and Israel gets is WAY more than a bunch of other places that have done comparable or worse things. And the Brits have been in Ireland longer still. Time is a great healer and all that, the world has shifted so much there’s kinda nothing to be mad at in some instances. I mean yeah colonialism was frequently ethically horrendous. I can acknowledge that, and also how events then shaped the world as it is today still (global wealth inequality and me having a higher standard of living than many especially), but I can’t really maintain any contemporary emotional anger for long. Israel’s foundation is still within collective living memory, and probably will be for a wee while longer. So for that reason alone you’re probably going to naturally see more anger. You have other elements too, I mean the Holocaust was a rather reasonable rationale to establish such a state. But to then see some of the subsequent behaviour of the state, does stick in the craw of many. There’s being this great ally of nations in which some of us reside, but especially the US as well I guess I would 100% agree that Israel gets a disproportionate amount of attention compared to other conflicts and upheaval the world over. Although I think Israel gets its fair share of criticism, the issue is more many others do not for me
Yeah. It is a really really shitty situation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
