|
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. |
On November 22 2023 10:31 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On November 22 2023 10:23 Nebuchad wrote:On November 22 2023 10:18 JimmiC wrote:On November 22 2023 10:03 Nebuchad wrote:On November 22 2023 07:50 JimmiC wrote:On November 22 2023 07:44 Nebuchad wrote:On November 22 2023 07:33 JimmiC wrote:On November 22 2023 07:19 Nebuchad wrote:On November 22 2023 07:07 Gorsameth wrote:On November 22 2023 06:54 Magic Powers wrote:
[quote]I'm not comparing Israel to North Korea. That was only my first comment (and I was comparing Israel to South Korea, because it was about their military might). South Korea is able to hold off North Korea. Likewise Israel should be able to hold off Hamas.
My second comment was about Palestinians getting bombed (by Israel) vs not getting bombed (by Hamas). Despite both Israel and Hamas being horrible regimes, at least Hamas doesn't intend to bomb tens of thousands of Palestinians. The problem with Israel/Hamas is that Hamas doesn't have enough to lose. I think there's merit to the argument that if Hamas had something to lose then it wouldn't really exist, or it would exist in a form that is very different from what we see today. Hamas like cults exist in most of the world. You’re again going back to dangerously close to really it’s their own fault they were raped and murdered. Do you think Israel has the right to exist where it is now? In terms of proportion of population there are not cults like Hamas in most of the world, no. You are wrong. 20000-25000 out of 2.5 million is a lot. The question that you asked is a bit silly but I'm going to assume you mean whether I believe Israelis have a legitimacy to live in Israel, and the answer is yes. No my question is does Israel have a right to exist, not your question which is easy. I do not see huge differences between Hamas, ISIS, Taliban, al-Queda, hezbollah, and so on. I do not know all the proportionality but I'd guess the Taliban is not that different. It also feels like grasping at straws. I think the question of "right to exist" is actually easier, and it's yes, obviously. But it brings less to the conversation than my first answer imo so that's why I thought you meant that. The taliban in that list is probably the closest to Hamas, you are correct. I did a quick google and found that there are about 60000 talibans, for a country of 40 million. I would imagine that Talibans are more prevalent in certain regions of Afghanistan than others and if that's the case the relevant number is not 40 million, but it's hard for me to be more specific without making an effort. Either way I think I can safely say that I doubt it's a similar number to that of Hamas/Gaza in terms of proportion of population, and also "Afghanistan" isn't "most of the world", so I believe my argument stands. How can Israel exist if it does everything that you want? Like if the west stops supporting Israel militarily for example. The chain of events would be, the West stops support, then Israel, seeing that it doesn't have the West's support, stops its ethnic cleansing campaigns both in Gaza and in the West Bank, and if they truly stop those then there's no issue with supporting Israel again if that becomes necessary. For example if Arab countries start to attack Israel after this and it looks like we're in a position where Israel is in danger of being ethnically cleansed, we should absolutely support Israel. Can you be more specific with "ethnic cleansing" do you just mean the settlements or what are the actual policy that needs to stop? Should Aid be cut off from Hamas controlled areas as long as they fire rockets, and conduct missions to kill as many people in Israel as possible? Question both in current situation and if they stopped "ethnic cleansing" Also, what should be done about all the Jewish people that have been killed or forced out of all the Arab nations surrounding Israel? A quick google search shows all those nations have been FAR more effective with their ethnic cleansing in spite of the power imbalance. BTW, I'm not trying to be condescending here. I think some sort of plan that says If Israel does X,Y, Z the world will do this and if they do not the world will do this, is a good place to start. You just have to be specific and not use such emotionally charged vague language. And I also think that there needs to be promises and consequences for the other groups involved.
- Generally all of the Apartheid policies, in my ideal world including the policies that target Israeli Arabs but we're going to go with Palestinians first because they're the most threatened. I'm not willing to go into specifics with you because I don't believe your interest is genuine based on previous interactions.
- I'm not entirely clear on the mechanics of aid tbh but I would assume we continue to give aid wherever it's necessary. We still give aid to Afghanistan don't we?
- Nothing.
|
@JimmiC out of curiosity how credible do you think your "IDF only attacks military targets" when seeing e.g sth like this?
Like either the official numbers of the amount of Hamas fighters residing in Gaza are way off or what you were proposing can hardly be true.
Israel has dropped between 6000 - 25.000 TONS of bombs (numbers vary because of date and source..) and you are telling me they are doing "military targets strikes" only.
Reasonable take? I personally dont think so.
Yeah.. totally looks like "military target strikes" to me >_<
|
|
|
|
|
On November 22 2023 11:15 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On November 22 2023 10:49 Nebuchad wrote:On November 22 2023 10:31 JimmiC wrote:On November 22 2023 10:23 Nebuchad wrote:On November 22 2023 10:18 JimmiC wrote:On November 22 2023 10:03 Nebuchad wrote:On November 22 2023 07:50 JimmiC wrote:On November 22 2023 07:44 Nebuchad wrote:On November 22 2023 07:33 JimmiC wrote:On November 22 2023 07:19 Nebuchad wrote:
[quote]
I think there's merit to the argument that if Hamas had something to lose then it wouldn't really exist, or it would exist in a form that is very different from what we see today. Hamas like cults exist in most of the world. You’re again going back to dangerously close to really it’s their own fault they were raped and murdered. Do you think Israel has the right to exist where it is now? In terms of proportion of population there are not cults like Hamas in most of the world, no. You are wrong. 20000-25000 out of 2.5 million is a lot. The question that you asked is a bit silly but I'm going to assume you mean whether I believe Israelis have a legitimacy to live in Israel, and the answer is yes. No my question is does Israel have a right to exist, not your question which is easy. I do not see huge differences between Hamas, ISIS, Taliban, al-Queda, hezbollah, and so on. I do not know all the proportionality but I'd guess the Taliban is not that different. It also feels like grasping at straws. I think the question of "right to exist" is actually easier, and it's yes, obviously. But it brings less to the conversation than my first answer imo so that's why I thought you meant that. The taliban in that list is probably the closest to Hamas, you are correct. I did a quick google and found that there are about 60000 talibans, for a country of 40 million. I would imagine that Talibans are more prevalent in certain regions of Afghanistan than others and if that's the case the relevant number is not 40 million, but it's hard for me to be more specific without making an effort. Either way I think I can safely say that I doubt it's a similar number to that of Hamas/Gaza in terms of proportion of population, and also "Afghanistan" isn't "most of the world", so I believe my argument stands. How can Israel exist if it does everything that you want? Like if the west stops supporting Israel militarily for example. The chain of events would be, the West stops support, then Israel, seeing that it doesn't have the West's support, stops its ethnic cleansing campaigns both in Gaza and in the West Bank, and if they truly stop those then there's no issue with supporting Israel again if that becomes necessary. For example if Arab countries start to attack Israel after this and it looks like we're in a position where Israel is in danger of being ethnically cleansed, we should absolutely support Israel. Can you be more specific with "ethnic cleansing" do you just mean the settlements or what are the actual policy that needs to stop? Should Aid be cut off from Hamas controlled areas as long as they fire rockets, and conduct missions to kill as many people in Israel as possible? Question both in current situation and if they stopped "ethnic cleansing" Also, what should be done about all the Jewish people that have been killed or forced out of all the Arab nations surrounding Israel? A quick google search shows all those nations have been FAR more effective with their ethnic cleansing in spite of the power imbalance. BTW, I'm not trying to be condescending here. I think some sort of plan that says If Israel does X,Y, Z the world will do this and if they do not the world will do this, is a good place to start. You just have to be specific and not use such emotionally charged vague language. And I also think that there needs to be promises and consequences for the other groups involved. - Generally all of the Apartheid policies, in my ideal world including the policies that target Israeli Arabs but we're going to go with Palestinians first because they're the most threatened. I'm not willing to go into specifics with you because I don't believe your interest is genuine based on previous interactions. - I'm not entirely clear on the mechanics of aid tbh but I would assume we continue to give aid wherever it's necessary. We still give aid to Afghanistan don't we? - Nothing. Why should nothing be done? You are not generally opposed to genocide? Or once it is done it is ok?
I don't see what we can do that makes sense. What should be done about the Nakba? Well, nothing. What should be done about the Native American genocide? Well, nothing.
We can say it's bad, I guess. Or maybe you have a better idea, what do you think we should do?
|
@JimmiC
This isnt even about Vietnam dude. It was about Definitions.
WAR
ATTACKING
DEFENDING
IF TWO NATIONS (or in case of Gaza/Palestine a territory) are at war.. they are both engaging in war. However the attacking fraction is the one who is located on the "turf" of the defending nation/territory.
How can you not get that?
Dont split hairs. You can use a example that fits better. Holy cow.
So when my own nation (Germany) started invading Poland during WW2. Does that example fit?
Germany was ATTACKING and Poland was DEFENDING.
edit: Also let me reiterate: the attack/defend quote from me was adressed at RenSC2. You mixed that up.
|
|
|
Now terms have been reached. For the third time, all it took was personal intervention by Sisi, and Biden for four days of truce... if it holds. Makes me wonder if will only be Israeli hostages not international ones...
|
|
|
On November 22 2023 11:25 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On November 22 2023 11:18 Nebuchad wrote:On November 22 2023 11:15 JimmiC wrote:On November 22 2023 10:49 Nebuchad wrote:On November 22 2023 10:31 JimmiC wrote:On November 22 2023 10:23 Nebuchad wrote:On November 22 2023 10:18 JimmiC wrote:On November 22 2023 10:03 Nebuchad wrote:On November 22 2023 07:50 JimmiC wrote:On November 22 2023 07:44 Nebuchad wrote:
[quote]
In terms of proportion of population there are not cults like Hamas in most of the world, no. You are wrong. 20000-25000 out of 2.5 million is a lot.
The question that you asked is a bit silly but I'm going to assume you mean whether I believe Israelis have a legitimacy to live in Israel, and the answer is yes. No my question is does Israel have a right to exist, not your question which is easy. I do not see huge differences between Hamas, ISIS, Taliban, al-Queda, hezbollah, and so on. I do not know all the proportionality but I'd guess the Taliban is not that different. It also feels like grasping at straws. I think the question of "right to exist" is actually easier, and it's yes, obviously. But it brings less to the conversation than my first answer imo so that's why I thought you meant that. The taliban in that list is probably the closest to Hamas, you are correct. I did a quick google and found that there are about 60000 talibans, for a country of 40 million. I would imagine that Talibans are more prevalent in certain regions of Afghanistan than others and if that's the case the relevant number is not 40 million, but it's hard for me to be more specific without making an effort. Either way I think I can safely say that I doubt it's a similar number to that of Hamas/Gaza in terms of proportion of population, and also "Afghanistan" isn't "most of the world", so I believe my argument stands. How can Israel exist if it does everything that you want? Like if the west stops supporting Israel militarily for example. The chain of events would be, the West stops support, then Israel, seeing that it doesn't have the West's support, stops its ethnic cleansing campaigns both in Gaza and in the West Bank, and if they truly stop those then there's no issue with supporting Israel again if that becomes necessary. For example if Arab countries start to attack Israel after this and it looks like we're in a position where Israel is in danger of being ethnically cleansed, we should absolutely support Israel. Can you be more specific with "ethnic cleansing" do you just mean the settlements or what are the actual policy that needs to stop? Should Aid be cut off from Hamas controlled areas as long as they fire rockets, and conduct missions to kill as many people in Israel as possible? Question both in current situation and if they stopped "ethnic cleansing" Also, what should be done about all the Jewish people that have been killed or forced out of all the Arab nations surrounding Israel? A quick google search shows all those nations have been FAR more effective with their ethnic cleansing in spite of the power imbalance. BTW, I'm not trying to be condescending here. I think some sort of plan that says If Israel does X,Y, Z the world will do this and if they do not the world will do this, is a good place to start. You just have to be specific and not use such emotionally charged vague language. And I also think that there needs to be promises and consequences for the other groups involved. - Generally all of the Apartheid policies, in my ideal world including the policies that target Israeli Arabs but we're going to go with Palestinians first because they're the most threatened. I'm not willing to go into specifics with you because I don't believe your interest is genuine based on previous interactions. - I'm not entirely clear on the mechanics of aid tbh but I would assume we continue to give aid wherever it's necessary. We still give aid to Afghanistan don't we? - Nothing. Why should nothing be done? You are not generally opposed to genocide? Or once it is done it is ok? I don't see what we can do that makes sense. What should be done about the Nakba? Well, nothing. What should be done about the Native American genocide? Well, nothing. We can say it's bad, I guess. Or maybe you have a better idea, what do you think we should do? About aboriginals in North America, how much time to you have? We could probably start a whole thread about it. I was part of our local commission on Reconciliation and while there is lots of work to be done and it does not make anything that happened "ok" I do think that the process is helpful. It sure beats the hell out of things like residential housing. https://www.rcaanc-cirnac.gc.ca/eng/1450124405592/1529106060525
While I don't think this works really as an example of "something we're doing about a past genocide", I think the main counter I have about this is that this is something that Canadians are doing, within Canada. So it's not something that "we"'re doing about it. I don't believe that, for example, the United States should take action to force Canada to do something like this.
|
On November 22 2023 11:33 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On November 22 2023 11:21 MaGic~PhiL wrote:
@JimmiC
This isnt even about Vietnam dude. It was about Definitions.
WAR
ATTACKING
DEFENDING
IF TWO NATIONS (or in case of Gaza/Palestine a territory) are at war.. they are both engaging in war. However the attacking fraction is the one who is located on the "turf" of the defending nation/territory.
How can you not get that?
Dont split hairs. You can use a example that fits better. Holy cow.
So when my own nation (Germany) started invading Poland during WW2. Does that example fit?
Germany was ATTACKING and Poland was DEFENDING.
edit: Also let me reiterate: the attack/defend quote from me was adressed at RenSC2. You mixed that up.
It is a stupid argument that over simplifies complex situations. When the Ukraine uses some ACTM's to take out Helicopters in in Russia, they are now the attackers? But they are only doing it because Russia is using those copters to attack them and commits countless unarguable (meet every definition) war crimes. Your silly argument is akin to a really bad "gotcha" because everyone who is arguing that the IDF is using self defense (which I am not one of) knows that they are not fighting in Israel. To actually change someone's mind you have to understand their point and argue against it. You are completely unwilling to even put in the slightest bit of effort or understand anyone else's point of view and so your arguments fall completely flat and instead of having any self realization you portray yourself as the victim. Wait you do not like it when people pull sentences you are writing to other people out of context and then talk down to you about it? Well frick, maybe do not do it to others over and over again.
It wasnt even an argument. Listen. Please read this.
I was just replying to RenSC2 about an issue 10 pages ago. Where he said the following
"However, that's not what has happened. The war has changed venue, but it's still being fought. Hamas is still attacking. It's just that they're only able to attack the IDF and it's now happening in Hamas's territory."
I didnt like how he phrased that. I confronted him with that. I did not say as a GENERAL STANCE on this conflict that it is as easy as saying "IDF attacks Hamas defends". I never said that. Please really GET THAT.
Im not saying it is this easy. I just replied to his stance.
It isnt a gotcha either. I was just extremely flabbergasted when he phrased it in a way that makes u think that a fight located IN GAZA means that Hamas is attacking IDF. Whilst it is blatantly obvious that the IDF is attacking / making an offensive military maneveur.
|
|
|
|
|
On November 22 2023 11:54 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On November 22 2023 11:37 Nebuchad wrote:On November 22 2023 11:25 JimmiC wrote:On November 22 2023 11:18 Nebuchad wrote:On November 22 2023 11:15 JimmiC wrote:On November 22 2023 10:49 Nebuchad wrote:On November 22 2023 10:31 JimmiC wrote:On November 22 2023 10:23 Nebuchad wrote:On November 22 2023 10:18 JimmiC wrote:On November 22 2023 10:03 Nebuchad wrote:
[quote]
I think the question of "right to exist" is actually easier, and it's yes, obviously. But it brings less to the conversation than my first answer imo so that's why I thought you meant that.
The taliban in that list is probably the closest to Hamas, you are correct. I did a quick google and found that there are about 60000 talibans, for a country of 40 million. I would imagine that Talibans are more prevalent in certain regions of Afghanistan than others and if that's the case the relevant number is not 40 million, but it's hard for me to be more specific without making an effort. Either way I think I can safely say that I doubt it's a similar number to that of Hamas/Gaza in terms of proportion of population, and also "Afghanistan" isn't "most of the world", so I believe my argument stands. How can Israel exist if it does everything that you want? Like if the west stops supporting Israel militarily for example. The chain of events would be, the West stops support, then Israel, seeing that it doesn't have the West's support, stops its ethnic cleansing campaigns both in Gaza and in the West Bank, and if they truly stop those then there's no issue with supporting Israel again if that becomes necessary. For example if Arab countries start to attack Israel after this and it looks like we're in a position where Israel is in danger of being ethnically cleansed, we should absolutely support Israel. Can you be more specific with "ethnic cleansing" do you just mean the settlements or what are the actual policy that needs to stop? Should Aid be cut off from Hamas controlled areas as long as they fire rockets, and conduct missions to kill as many people in Israel as possible? Question both in current situation and if they stopped "ethnic cleansing" Also, what should be done about all the Jewish people that have been killed or forced out of all the Arab nations surrounding Israel? A quick google search shows all those nations have been FAR more effective with their ethnic cleansing in spite of the power imbalance. BTW, I'm not trying to be condescending here. I think some sort of plan that says If Israel does X,Y, Z the world will do this and if they do not the world will do this, is a good place to start. You just have to be specific and not use such emotionally charged vague language. And I also think that there needs to be promises and consequences for the other groups involved. - Generally all of the Apartheid policies, in my ideal world including the policies that target Israeli Arabs but we're going to go with Palestinians first because they're the most threatened. I'm not willing to go into specifics with you because I don't believe your interest is genuine based on previous interactions. - I'm not entirely clear on the mechanics of aid tbh but I would assume we continue to give aid wherever it's necessary. We still give aid to Afghanistan don't we? - Nothing. Why should nothing be done? You are not generally opposed to genocide? Or once it is done it is ok? I don't see what we can do that makes sense. What should be done about the Nakba? Well, nothing. What should be done about the Native American genocide? Well, nothing. We can say it's bad, I guess. Or maybe you have a better idea, what do you think we should do? About aboriginals in North America, how much time to you have? We could probably start a whole thread about it. I was part of our local commission on Reconciliation and while there is lots of work to be done and it does not make anything that happened "ok" I do think that the process is helpful. It sure beats the hell out of things like residential housing. https://www.rcaanc-cirnac.gc.ca/eng/1450124405592/1529106060525 While I don't think this works really as an example of "something we're doing about a past genocide", I think the main counter I have about this is that this is something that Canadians are doing, within Canada. So it's not something that "we"'re doing about it. I don't believe that, for example, the United States should take action to force Canada to do something like this. Um, I'm Canadian, so saying something "we're" doing is completely appropriate (not to mention I participated). And it is something that could (likely should) be done elsewhere as part of the process to heal.
The point is that you were clearly looking for something that should be done by us. Like, if Tunisians decide to do something progressive and positive for and with the few remaining Jews that are still in Tunisia, that's obviously great and I'm in favor of it. But I don't think it should count as an answer to your question, which is why I said "nothing".
|
On November 22 2023 11:56 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On November 22 2023 11:43 MaGic~PhiL wrote:On November 22 2023 11:33 JimmiC wrote:On November 22 2023 11:21 MaGic~PhiL wrote:
@JimmiC
This isnt even about Vietnam dude. It was about Definitions.
WAR
ATTACKING
DEFENDING
IF TWO NATIONS (or in case of Gaza/Palestine a territory) are at war.. they are both engaging in war. However the attacking fraction is the one who is located on the "turf" of the defending nation/territory.
How can you not get that?
Dont split hairs. You can use a example that fits better. Holy cow.
So when my own nation (Germany) started invading Poland during WW2. Does that example fit?
Germany was ATTACKING and Poland was DEFENDING.
edit: Also let me reiterate: the attack/defend quote from me was adressed at RenSC2. You mixed that up.
It is a stupid argument that over simplifies complex situations. When the Ukraine uses some ACTM's to take out Helicopters in in Russia, they are now the attackers? But they are only doing it because Russia is using those copters to attack them and commits countless unarguable (meet every definition) war crimes. Your silly argument is akin to a really bad "gotcha" because everyone who is arguing that the IDF is using self defense (which I am not one of) knows that they are not fighting in Israel. To actually change someone's mind you have to understand their point and argue against it. You are completely unwilling to even put in the slightest bit of effort or understand anyone else's point of view and so your arguments fall completely flat and instead of having any self realization you portray yourself as the victim. Wait you do not like it when people pull sentences you are writing to other people out of context and then talk down to you about it? Well frick, maybe do not do it to others over and over again. It wasnt even an argument. Listen. Please read this. I was just replying to RenSC2 about an issue 10 pages ago. Where he said the following "However, that's not what has happened. The war has changed venue, but it's still being fought. Hamas is still attacking. It's just that they're only able to attack the IDF and it's now happening in Hamas's territory." I didnt like how he phrased that. I confronted him with that. I did not say as a GENERAL STANCE on this conflict that it is as easy as saying "IDF attacks Hamas defends". I never said that. Please really GET THAT. Im not saying it is this easy. I just replied to his stance. It isnt a gotcha either. I was just extremely flabbergasted when he phrased it in a way that makes u think that a fight located IN GAZA means that Hamas is attacking IDF. Whilst it is blatantly obvious that the IDF is attacking / making an offensive military maneveur. Ukraine is certainly attacking Russia in Ukrainian territory. The IDF was attacking Hamas inside their territory. It is a silly and pointless argument and your not even right so it is very odd that you are choosing it as the hill to die on and getting so mad at other people.
But he didn't write that IDF is attacking hamas inside their territory. He wrote that Hamas is attacking IDF inside gaza/hamas territory.
Which is weird. Again Israel started an offensive
So IDF is attacking
It really isn't that complicated.
If u are using attacking as a substitute for armed fight I can see the confusion.
I'm thinking of 'who is doing the offensive'..
And thus it feels absurd to me. In the same vein as someone saying..
During ww2 Poland was attacking Germany
No. Germany was attacking Poland
And after the terror attacks on 7 October..
Israel started attacking palestine/hamas/Gaza
This isn't rocket science
|
|
|
|
|
On November 22 2023 12:34 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On November 22 2023 12:08 Nebuchad wrote:On November 22 2023 11:54 JimmiC wrote:On November 22 2023 11:37 Nebuchad wrote:On November 22 2023 11:25 JimmiC wrote:On November 22 2023 11:18 Nebuchad wrote:On November 22 2023 11:15 JimmiC wrote:On November 22 2023 10:49 Nebuchad wrote:On November 22 2023 10:31 JimmiC wrote:On November 22 2023 10:23 Nebuchad wrote:
[quote]
The chain of events would be, the West stops support, then Israel, seeing that it doesn't have the West's support, stops its ethnic cleansing campaigns both in Gaza and in the West Bank, and if they truly stop those then there's no issue with supporting Israel again if that becomes necessary. For example if Arab countries start to attack Israel after this and it looks like we're in a position where Israel is in danger of being ethnically cleansed, we should absolutely support Israel. Can you be more specific with "ethnic cleansing" do you just mean the settlements or what are the actual policy that needs to stop? Should Aid be cut off from Hamas controlled areas as long as they fire rockets, and conduct missions to kill as many people in Israel as possible? Question both in current situation and if they stopped "ethnic cleansing" Also, what should be done about all the Jewish people that have been killed or forced out of all the Arab nations surrounding Israel? A quick google search shows all those nations have been FAR more effective with their ethnic cleansing in spite of the power imbalance. BTW, I'm not trying to be condescending here. I think some sort of plan that says If Israel does X,Y, Z the world will do this and if they do not the world will do this, is a good place to start. You just have to be specific and not use such emotionally charged vague language. And I also think that there needs to be promises and consequences for the other groups involved. - Generally all of the Apartheid policies, in my ideal world including the policies that target Israeli Arabs but we're going to go with Palestinians first because they're the most threatened. I'm not willing to go into specifics with you because I don't believe your interest is genuine based on previous interactions. - I'm not entirely clear on the mechanics of aid tbh but I would assume we continue to give aid wherever it's necessary. We still give aid to Afghanistan don't we? - Nothing. Why should nothing be done? You are not generally opposed to genocide? Or once it is done it is ok? I don't see what we can do that makes sense. What should be done about the Nakba? Well, nothing. What should be done about the Native American genocide? Well, nothing. We can say it's bad, I guess. Or maybe you have a better idea, what do you think we should do? About aboriginals in North America, how much time to you have? We could probably start a whole thread about it. I was part of our local commission on Reconciliation and while there is lots of work to be done and it does not make anything that happened "ok" I do think that the process is helpful. It sure beats the hell out of things like residential housing. https://www.rcaanc-cirnac.gc.ca/eng/1450124405592/1529106060525 While I don't think this works really as an example of "something we're doing about a past genocide", I think the main counter I have about this is that this is something that Canadians are doing, within Canada. So it's not something that "we"'re doing about it. I don't believe that, for example, the United States should take action to force Canada to do something like this. Um, I'm Canadian, so saying something "we're" doing is completely appropriate (not to mention I participated). And it is something that could (likely should) be done elsewhere as part of the process to heal. The point is that you were clearly looking for something that should be done by us. Like, if Tunisians decide to do something progressive and positive for and with the few remaining Jews that are still in Tunisia, that's obviously great and I'm in favor of it. But I don't think it should count as an answer to your question, which is why I said "nothing". I disagree, if Tunisian did something like that we should celebrate it and try to repeat it as much as possible, maybe even improve on it. It also strikes me as generally odd that you seem more mad at the country that you are really sure is going to commit ethnic cleansing vs the places that have already succeeded. Makes me wonder if the people in Israel that support ethnic cleansing are like, "see just get it over with and then no one will care any more".
It's not that I'm "really sure [it's] going to commit ethnic cleansing", it's that it is currently doing it. But nicely done, I didn't catch that one at first.
It doesn't strike me as odd to care more about what happens today than about what happened in the past. The past can't be changed. Even when it comes to what happens today, I will spend way more of my time talking about Palestine than about what happens for example to the Rohyngia or to the Uyghurs, because I'm part of the West and I'm not comfortable with the position of the West on this topic. I wouldn't be inclined to go to a protest in Switzerland for the Uyghurs, because the West already opposes the persecution of the Uyghurs.
|
|
|
Looking forward to discussing the hospital that gets bombed during this ceasefire with all of you. I am sure the discussion will be fruitful and we’ll quickly reach a shared conclusion regarding who is responsible.
I place the odds of the ceasefire not including fire for the duration at somewhere around -999999999%.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/F_f9bbXWoAA8MqY?format=jpg&name=medium)
![[image loading]](https://foreignpolicy.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/gaza-satellite-GettyImages-1064190772.jpg?resize=1000,666&quality=90)
