EPTThis has nothing to do with nazi racist pseudo science about different races of homo sapiens (which do not exist).
Things Aren’t Peaceful in Palestine - Page 363
| Forum Index > General Forum |
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. | ||
|
KT_Elwood
Germany935 Posts
This has nothing to do with nazi racist pseudo science about different races of homo sapiens (which do not exist). | ||
|
Nebuchad
Switzerland12171 Posts
On October 23 2024 20:40 KT_Elwood wrote: Spanish dudes with metal swords were "superior" to south american natives with sharpsticks. Why? | ||
|
Acrofales
Spain17981 Posts
On October 23 2024 20:40 KT_Elwood wrote: Spanish dudes with metal swords were "superior" to south american natives with sharpsticks. This has nothing to do with nazi racist pseudo science about different races of homo sapiens (which do not exist). Were Spanish dudes superior? Or did they have better weaponry (and smallpox)? | ||
|
Magic Powers
Austria4091 Posts
A Jewish capitalist destruction of nations was his thesis, and religion was absolutely not at the core of his hatred. I'm not even sure if religion had anything at all to do with the persecution. 2) "Be it human subspecies.." What the hell? | ||
|
Biff The Understudy
France7888 Posts
So the genocide of the Native American their enslavement, exploitation, extermination, the destruction of their culture happened because they were « inferior » to the Spanish that « naturally » replaced them? Is that your position? Yeah, i wonder why people call you a nazi. | ||
Liquid`Drone
Norway28665 Posts
Because if it's just technology then why introduce it unless the point you're trying to argue is that the west should stop giving military aid to Israel, as their technological superiority is enabling them to displace the palestinians - something we've seen groups with superior technology do countless times throughout history? However, you also started out with 'cultural supremacy', and you've drawn more than one parallel to how neanderthals went extinct. I guess it's good that you're trying to backtrack because it shows that you might understand that your initial point was kinda horrid but it'd be better if you did a more solid job. | ||
|
Jockmcplop
United Kingdom9641 Posts
On October 23 2024 18:29 KT_Elwood wrote: You are clearly interpreting what I said in bad faith, and now trying the ad hominem approach based on what you claim I said. Theory: "Middle east is the place where nobody listens,and everbody calls each other Nazi." I don't advocate for killing people because of ther religion or heritage, I said it's understandable for israel trying to kill combatants that launch rockets at their cities, have racist convictions and won't stop trying. Killing people for their religion.. is what got Nazi germany..rightfully..bombed back in to the stoneage and what happens to iranian proxies at the moment. I don't defend settlers behaving like racists dicks in Westbank.. but that's going on apart from the war in gaza and lebanon. Since it's a war, and war always suck, there will be civilian casualties. I also said that throughout history replacement has happend. The scientific explanation is that the "new" population was - in some way- superior to the old. This is just pure logic. If there wasn't one group of humans with an advantage + tribalism.. they wouldn't have outperformed the other group in any metric. Be it human subspecies.. or technologic advancement... or migration/fertility. Also it's not always a "fight".. you can have things like "Chinatown" in Brooklyn. Chinese migrants come here. People born to chinese migrants stay here. If you want to sort it on a good/problematic scale.. you are flying close to racism. I see this as a very contradictory post. Let me explain. First you say: I don't defend settlers behaving like racists dicks in Westbank.. but that's going on apart from the war in gaza and lebanon. You then go on to say this: I also said that throughout history replacement has happend. The scientific explanation is that the "new" population was - in some way- superior to the old. This is just pure logic. If there wasn't one group of humans with an advantage + tribalism.. they wouldn't have outperformed the other group in any metric. So you are making an amoral argument as to why Israel should behave the way they are - which could be applied to the West Bank just as easily as the war -, combined with a moral argument for why you don't agree with it in the case of the West Bank. So which is it? Is it perfectly justifiable what Israel is doing in the West Bank due to their cultural superiority or whatever, or is it morally wrong, or both? Do you think the 'cultural superiority'/replacement argument is primary over the moral argument, or vica versa? | ||
|
Biff The Understudy
France7888 Posts
That’s where the comparison with spanish colonialism in the americas, or with neandhertal falls short. We don’t live in the same moral frame than 500 years ago, where catholics sincerely believe that amerindians didn’t have a soul. | ||
|
Uldridge
Belgium4763 Posts
| ||
|
Magic Powers
Austria4091 Posts
https://edition.cnn.com/2024/10/21/middleeast/gaza-war-israeli-soldiers-ptsd-suicide-intl/index.html I said it long ago, this war is not about protecting Israeli citizens, that's never been the goal. Otherwise IDF lives would also matter, but clearly they don't. Several hundred of them have died in 2024 alone. The survivors are suffering immensely. And that's just from the soldiers' perspective. Multiply this suffering several times to perhaps understand what Gazans are going through. It's also been two weeks of little to no food deliveries. What's Biden's take on that? | ||
|
Billyboy
1005 Posts
This is not a Israeli thing its a war thing. | ||
|
Elroi
Sweden5595 Posts
| ||
|
Biff The Understudy
France7888 Posts
On October 24 2024 05:28 Elroi wrote: Israel just killed the next (current?) Hezbollah leader, Hashem Safieddine. They are really speedrunning Hezbollah at this point, easier than anyone could have predicted. That initial pager attack must have been a real knock out blow. It's a stark contrast to the sluggish reaction to the October 7 pogrom. Yeah, because history has shown that killing the bad guy really was the way to solve that conflict. I expect them to go back to annexing land, stealing water, bulldozing houses, protecting illegal colonists, humiliate palestinians every day until the next « « « « pogrom » » » ». They are that smart, as a country. On a very side note, the use of the word pogrom is of extremely bad taste, and i myself am coming from a family of ukrainian jews that fled to Argentina because of actual pogroms. | ||
|
Elroi
Sweden5595 Posts
| ||
|
Biff The Understudy
France7888 Posts
On October 24 2024 06:29 Elroi wrote: Why is it in bad taste? It seems to be an appropriate word to describe the murder/torture/rape spree that Hamas perpetrated, which targeted Jews? Because pogroms were neighbors targeting neighbors, which who they had always lived in peace, because of religious hatred. Not a terror attack from an oppressed people living in an open air prison against the citizen of a country that steals their land. The hamas attacks were horrendous, but they didn’t kill those people because they don’t like Jews, and they didn’t kill their peaceful neighbors with whom they lived in peace. You can chose to call every act of violence where the jews are on the receiving end a « pogrom ». Then the word becomes a slogan. Call it a massacre, call it a terror attack. Don’t call it a pogrom. It’s not a pogrom. | ||
|
Billyboy
1005 Posts
On October 24 2024 08:23 Biff The Understudy wrote: Because pogroms were neighbors targeting neighbors, which who they had always lived in peace, because of religious hatred. Not a terror attack from an oppressed people living in an open air prison against the citizen of a country that steals their land. The hamas attacks were horrendous, but they didn’t kill those people because they don’t like Jews, and they didn’t kill their peaceful neighbors with whom they lived in peace. You can chose to call every act of violence where the jews are on the receiving end a « pogrom ». Then the word becomes a slogan. Call it a massacre, call it a terror attack. Don’t call it a pogrom. It’s not a pogrom. There can be more than one reason to hate people, you stated some but another reason is because they are Jewish. We know this from them. | ||
|
PremoBeats
378 Posts
You guys do realize that being a child soldier is not only about active combat, right? We have documentation of minors being used as smugglers We have documented summer camps of indoctrination and fighting for minors We have documentation of minors being used as suicide bombers We have documentation of children watching firing mortars from extremely close distance, so that if the mortar gets hit by a rocket, the children would die too We have ridiculous amounts of tunnels under schools, where children unknowingly are put in danger. And these are only the cases that actually surfaced… the number of unreported cases naturally is much higher due to the nature of the phenomenon. But somehow all of this isn’t proof that children are put in harm’s way actively or used as soldiers? Or that all of this will lead to higher casualty rates among children, especially as the Gazan population is so child-heavy? And it is completely implausible that these exact minors listed above are also used as messengers or spies/observers, even if there is no actual proof? How would one even prove this, if not for catching a minor observer/messenger/smuggler/suicide bomber and at the same time having Hamas’ documentation of the minor being in their ranks? Are you people seriously suggesting that these kids act on their own? That they simply find explosives on the street or miraculously know where the terrorists hide and out of pure kindness they access damage situations and report them back out of their own agency? Seriously, your hatred towards Israel is blinding this discussion to such extreme levels that it is hard to find words. You hand wave away “singular incidents” of children being used, but intellectually are not even remotely able to do the same for Israel when comparing overall numbers to singular incidents you so happily cite and post. At least more and more users here openly admit, that they simple are here to shit on Israel. (I seriously wonder if the same people bring equal effort and spirit to the table when talking about conflicts that are much worse in almost any regard). https://stratcomcoe.org/cuploads/pfiles/hamas_human_shields.pdf We have known for years that Hamas is using minors and civilians as human shields to inflate casualty numbers. How all of this is being questioned now, seems completely absurd. If you would put only 10% of your let’s-hate-on-Israel-time in actually understanding how much these tactics inflate civilian casualties and especially minors, you’d understand the context of the statistics and the difficulties the IDF faces a lot better. On October 22 2024 04:22 GreenHorizons wrote: I don't know that we should accept at face value that "Israel has a right to exist". It's at least worth further examination imo. Why would you want to examine any country's right to exist? Or only Israel's? On what principle would you challenge this right and why wouldn't the same principle be applied to other countries? On October 20 2024 05:36 WombaT wrote: What could you possibly referring to new Liqudian? I chuckled. On October 22 2024 06:57 WombaT wrote: I mean there is the slight problem that, idk I’m not a Jew from 1945 but I’m not sure I would have been enthusiastic in having a newly established enclave in that particular area I don’t personally think establishing a state where other folks live based on an old, old ethnoreligious claim for a disparately spread group of people was ever the best of ideas. I’ve long thought the morally courageous thing would have been for various countries to just stop being anti-Semitic shitbags to varying degrees and embrace their Jewish populations as part of the social fabric. On the flipside to that, that people went through trauma that’s unfathomable to any modern reader. You can read as much as you want, have a great knowledge of the history but I mean, we haven’t lived anything remotely comparable. Would you take a ‘ok well this won’t happen again it’ll be fine’ versus the alternative of a Jewish state? I sure as fuck don’t blame many for going for the latter. Going back to GH’s point I don’t think anyone really has some right to a homeland. Especially the older and more distant the claim is. If you’ve some diffuse population, the various constituent parts should be enfranchised and able to exercise whatever culture. Maybe over time your nation state changes (I envisage it taking a while but I may reside in Ireland one day, politically) I mean it’s not like fucking up something in a database, reverting to an old backup and fixing it. There’s no rewind button to fix many historical inequities without causing more. This does go the other way though in that to me Israel exists so, you can’t really rewind the clock on that. The dilemma you point out as well as the reality that to correct past injustices will only lead to present ones are both things I completely agree on. The abominable injustice done to the Palestinians as well as the desperation of the Jews that faced extermination in many countries are both simple facts of history. An issue most overlook when putting up the principle that "no one has the right to a homeland" is, that this principle then must also apply to Palestinians who now claim the land where Israel exists as their homeland. The more times passes, the weaker this claim becomes, given it was there in the first place after the war was lost. We will soon enter a phase where no one who was alive in 1947 will be left on this planet. By the way, I didn't see another response by you - just to make sure, I didn't overlook anything. On October 23 2024 16:26 stilt wrote: I wonder what would be the final death toll of this mass slaughter ? 200k ? 1 millions ? Maybe even more When would you expect these numbers to become a reality? Next century? Because the fatalities peaked at the end of the initial phase and have been steadily going down since then. If the projection comes true, you'd probably have to wait until 2100 for the casualty rate to reach 1 million. On October 19 2024 19:29 Magic Powers wrote: Israel creates child soldiers with violence and oppression. It's only logical that Hamas has some in their ranks. There's not much more to say about it. The idea that Hamas is responsible for the radicalization of a child who lost its family and subsequently wants to destroy Israel is fairly absurd. Their deaths are on Israel, even moreso than the deaths of adult soldiers. Seriously your commenting gets worse and worse and your text as usual contains several fallacies. 1. False Cause (Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc): While Israeli military actions may contribute to conditions foster anger and resentment, this does not justify or directly lead to Hamas's recruitment of child soldiers. The responsibility for child soldiers lies with the organization that recruits and uses them, which in this case is Hamas, and it is a violation of international law. Also: Hamas would attack Israel simply for existing as explained in their charter - the ensuing fighting would lead to reasons to foster hate towards Israel anyway. 2. Moral Equivalence: You suggest that because children may have suffered due to Israeli actions, it is logical for them to join Hamas, and that Hamas is not primarily responsible for their radicalization. This commits a moral equivalence fallacy, where it equates the suffering inflicted by one party with the actions of another. Using children in conflict as soldiers or shields is a war crime, regardless of the underlying reasons for their radicalization. The suffering of Palestinian children under Israeli policies does not negate Hamas's responsibility for recruiting them. 3. Appeal to Emotion: You heavily appeal to emotional reasoning by referencing the tragic loss of family and suggest that this would naturally drive children to "destroy Israel." While emotions are a significant factor in conflicts, this over-simplifies a complex issue. It downplays Hamas's role in systematically indoctrinating and recruiting children into its ranks, placing sole blame on Israel for the outcome, without recognizing the agency and responsibilities of Hamas. Again: They would also do it, if Israel simply existed, as it displayed in their charter. 4. Red Herring: The statement that "their deaths are on Israel, even more so than adult soldiers" diverts attention from the issue of Hamas's use of child soldiers by blaming Israel entirely for their deaths. This distracts from Hamas's violation of international laws concerning child soldiers and their use of human shields, focusing instead on Israel’s military actions without addressing the immediate issue of recruitment. 5. Straw Man Fallacy: "The idea that Hamas is responsible for the radicalization of a child... is fairly absurd" sets up a straw man by suggesting that the argument against Hamas's responsibility for child soldiers is about radicalization alone, ignoring their active recruitment and use of children in conflict. The real issue is not just about children being radicalized, but that Hamas actively trains and uses children in military roles, as pointed out above. On October 24 2024 08:23 Biff The Understudy wrote: Because pogroms were neighbors targeting neighbors, which who they had always lived in peace, because of religious hatred. Not a terror attack from an oppressed people living in an open air prison against the citizen of a country that steals their land. The hamas attacks were horrendous, but they didn’t kill those people because they don’t like Jews, and they didn’t kill their peaceful neighbors with whom they lived in peace. You can chose to call every act of violence where the jews are on the receiving end a « pogrom ». Then the word becomes a slogan. Call it a massacre, call it a terror attack. Don’t call it a pogrom. It’s not a pogrom. Absolutely ludicrous. It is stated in Hamas’ charter from 1988 that they want to destroy the state of Israel. It also cites jihad as a religious duty for Muslims to reclaim Palestine, contains anti-Semitic references, equating the conflict with a broader war against Jews and includes language about fighting non-believers and infidels. Article 7: "The Day of Judgment will not come about until Muslims fight the Jews, when the Jew will. hide behind stones and trees. The stones and trees will say, O Muslims, O Abdullah, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him". Article 15: "When our enemies usurp Islamic land, jihad becomes a duty binding on all Muslims. With regard to the fight against Jewish people, who have usurped Palestine, it is compulsory that the banner of Jihad will be raised." Conspiracy elements include: "They stirred revolutions in various parts of the world... they were behind the French Revolution, the Communist Revolution, and most revolutions we heard and hear about... They were behind World War I, when they were able to destroy the Islamic Caliphate... they were behind World War II." Why don't you think a single jew lives in Gaza? Because they'd be progrom'ed the minute they'd show up in Gaza city. Hamas has been hell bent to murder Jews and destroy Israel since decades - of course these people were slaughtered because they were Jews. Seriously, some people here are so god damn ignorant and uneducated about this conflict, it is hard to believe, how you formulate such nonsensical ideas with such vigor. | ||
|
Jockmcplop
United Kingdom9641 Posts
The reason I don't accept single instances of child soldiers in Hamas as evidence that they employ enough child soldiers to artificially inflate child casualty numbers is because it isn't evidence of that, and there never has been any evidence of that. The documents billyboy posted seem to prove the opposite, saying that there isn't any evidence of systematic child soldier usage. | ||
|
PremoBeats
378 Posts
On October 24 2024 16:09 Jockmcplop wrote: Just a quick point premo: The reason I don't accept single instances of child soldiers in Hamas as evidence that they employ enough child soldiers to artificially inflate child casualty numbers is because it isn't evidence of that, and there never has been any evidence of that. The documents billyboy posted seem to prove the opposite, saying that there isn't any evidence of systematic child soldier usage. We can discuss, if summer camps which are proven by video footage, already constitutes systematic use of children as soldiers or simply for future usage. The problem stays the same imo: Children get incorporated into the ranks, when they should not. We can also discuss, if 170 enlisted children already counts as "systematic". Or that the undocumented numbers probably is much higher and will never be proven. I went over the article by searching for Hamas. I didn't see that opposite you speak of. What exactly do you mean? And simply because the UN doesn't find evidence, doesn't mean it isn't happening... for reference see UNIFIL who supposedly didn't notice the digging of terror tunnels by Hezbollah 100 meters away from their compound. And it doesn't even necessarily need to be malice or ill will towards Israel/good will towards Gaza. Proving systematic usage of children as messengers, suicide bombers, observers, etc. is simply hard to prove. | ||
|
Jockmcplop
United Kingdom9641 Posts
On October 24 2024 16:56 PremoBeats wrote: We can discuss, if summer camps which are proven by video footage, already constitutes systematic use of children as soldiers or simply for future usage. The problem stays the same imo: Children get incorporated into the ranks, when they should not. We can also discuss, if 170 enlisted children already counts as "systematic". Or that the undocumented numbers probably is much higher and will never be proven. I went over the article by searching for Hamas. I didn't see that opposite you speak of. What exactly do you mean? And simply because the UN doesn't find evidence, doesn't mean it isn't happening... for reference see UNIFIL who supposedly didn't notice the digging of terror tunnels by Hezbollah 100 meters away from their compound. And it doesn't even necessarily need to be malice or ill will towards Israel/good will towards Gaza. Proving systematic usage of children as messengers, suicide bombers, observers, etc. is simply hard to prove. We can discuss, if summer camps which are proven by video footage, already constitutes systematic use of children as soldiers or simply for future usage. The problem stays the same imo: Children get incorporated into the ranks, when they should not. We can also discuss, if 170 enlisted children already counts as "systematic". Or that the undocumented numbers probably is much higher and will never be proven. Remember this conversation started as a branch from a conversation about the ridiculously high number of child deaths in the conflict. 170 enlisted children isn't anywhere near enough to be responsible for artificially bumping up the figures or explaining or justifying the problem. 'Probably much higher', given the bias with which you argue (no offense, I'm also biased), doesn't really say anything. Is it 'systematic'? Maybe. Again given that we can't prove it it comes down to just insisting that its true with no evidence, in which case its no wonder people are arguing against this stance. Does it look bad having training camps for teenagers? Yeah, but like I said before my school did military training for teenagers every week for the last 3 years I was there. Clever use of a camera and some editing and you could make that look very sinister indeed. And simply because the UN doesn't find evidence, doesn't mean it isn't happening... for reference see UNIFIL who supposedly didn't notice the digging of terror tunnels by Hezbollah 100 meters away from their compound. Again you're technically right in this statement, but whether or not you are right says nothing about Hamas use of child soldiers. The most we can really get out of all of this is 'they might be', or 'I assume they are and expect everyone to also assume that'. My argument has never been that they don't use child soldiers, or that doing so isn't wrong in every instance. My argument is that we have no idea whether that means twenty kids being used as messengers, or thousands of them charging the enemy with AKs. It certainly isn't widely reported as a big problem anyway, so I'm very reticent to accept the insistence that it is in lieu of evidence. This puts us at an impasse, which is fine and I'm happy to leave it there. | ||
| ||
