| 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. | ||
|
Jankisa
Croatia1114 Posts
On December 03 2025 02:23 mindjames wrote: Truly. If only those damned Zionists didn't love killing children so much! Well, if a self professed liberal Israeli is having this kind of flippant attitude to 8 and 11 year olds being blown up in their name no wonder this keeps happening. | ||
|
mindjames
Israel433 Posts
| ||
|
Jankisa
Croatia1114 Posts
| ||
|
mindjames
Israel433 Posts
| ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland26225 Posts
I realise I’m not exactly one to talk given my propensity to fouling up many a thread over the years, but this is ridiculous. | ||
|
Nebuchad
Switzerland12386 Posts
| ||
|
Ryzel
United States540 Posts
I’ll concede that the “collecting firewood for wheelchair-bound father” line, while certainly plausible, could be false. I’ll concede that they could be trained combatants or what have you. I’ll concede that maybe they crossed the part of the “yellow line” that’s actually marked with physical markers, so that “the kids should have known better”. I’ll concede that they maybe walked within 10 meters of IDF personnel. There’s a lot we can’t ever really know about what happens at ground zero in one of these situations. The thing is though, there are some things we CAN know. We CAN know that 2 small children were killed by Israeli military. We CAN know that there is absolutely no justification for killing small children unless your life / loved one’s lives are immediately threatened somehow. We CAN know that for small children to be immediately threatening people’s lives, they need to be handling some deadly weapon, like a gun. We CAN know that there would be physical evidence of weapons like this at the kill-site, regardless of their condition. We CAN know that the Israeli military have access to the kill-site, and it would be in their best interest to present such evidence to the media if it existed. But they haven’t. We CAN know that rules of engagement exist to promote ethical handling of war and militaries. We CAN know that, given the global attitude of how Israel is handling the war, it would be in Israel’s best interest to allow international journalists around the areas they are conducting military operations to document how well they are upholding said rules of engagement, so that they can regain global support. But they don’t. | ||
KwarK
United States43538 Posts
| ||
|
Legan
Finland553 Posts
On December 03 2025 04:59 KwarK wrote: But the yellow line. That makes it okay under the yellow line rule. All terrorists, etc., are just stupid for not realising that these weird tricks would make so many things they do okay, but they do not seem to do them. Just publicly declare your own yellow line, and you are free to do whatever you want. Surely the yellow line explanation would work for them too. | ||
|
blomsterjohn
Norway472 Posts
On December 03 2025 04:19 mindjames wrote: Good discussion today, guys. This is so much easier than talking about real positions with real people. Maybe Kwacky was onto something! I've appreciated your general input previously (even though I personally don't necessarily agree with some of it) but this stuff is incredibly weak sauce shit. | ||
|
mindjames
Israel433 Posts
| ||
|
mindjames
Israel433 Posts
What, no? Oh. Then fuck off with your lecturing. | ||
|
blomsterjohn
Norway472 Posts
So it's just very strange to see you seemingly insisting on dying on this hill so aggressively You came into the discussing, about children getting killed over a very very low and dubious bar, saying: On December 02 2025 11:15 mindjames wrote: I haven't read the last page or two but I will caution anyone attempting to have a good discussion right now to try and avoid the 1-Liner Brigade. The amount of substantive and charitable engagement you can expect from them is very limited. Heads up. Followed by a stream of - if I may - very much "low quality / unnecessarily smug / unproductive posts". It's hard to even gauge what your actual point it, and why you felt it so necessary to insert it (whatever it is) here and now. | ||
|
mindjames
Israel433 Posts
On December 03 2025 06:31 blomsterjohn wrote: There are plenty of areas within this topic/thread where one could take a nuanced form of perspective, but this one really aint? So it's just very strange to see you seemingly insisting on dying on this hill so aggressively You came into the discussing, about children getting killed over a very very low and dubious bar, saying: Followed by a stream of - if I may - very much "low quality / unnecessarily smug / unproductive posts". It's hard to even gauge what your actual point it, and why you felt it so necessary to insert it (whatever it is) here and now. I'll spell it out for you because you don't seem to get it. Every single time I've come here to try and argue my actual positions, I received a barrage of unbelievably bad faith, snide and smug responses, sometimes replying with a single line, to posts that I put a lot of thought and effort into; often completely mischaracterizing what I said or reducing it to absurdity, and very often attempting to scold me with performative moral indignation. So I decided to follow the example of this website's mods: never answer any question directly, never engage substantively, always make the worst assumptions about the other guy's position, and always make sarcastic jokes. By calling out my posts today as low quality you are LITERALLY MAKING MY POINT. Just look at what happens when literally 1 more person deliberately acts like this. The whole board becomes smug one-liners. You guys all participated in this, I didn't have to do much at all. To be clear, I'm happy to engage with people like Cuddly, Ryzel, or anyone who don't seem as ridiculously partisan as Nebuchad or as abhorrently bad faith as Kwark. I promise to actually do that once they either stop defending Kwark's behavior or agree to push for better discourse in this thread, hopefully moderated by a responsible adult. Until that happens, you can't point at my posts and go "hey that's unproductive" when I'm literally mirroring people whose behavior you haven't called out before, perhaps because their zingers were to your liking. | ||
|
Ryzel
United States540 Posts
What are your actual thoughts on what happened with this situation mindjames? This isn’t defendable right? | ||
|
blomsterjohn
Norway472 Posts
It's not a "one-line zinger" to say stuff like "killing children really ought not to be controversial", its just very much what everyone should agree on (with this current instance of it being no different) | ||
|
mindjames
Israel433 Posts
On December 03 2025 06:57 Ryzel wrote: I don’t think two wrongs make a right, but I definitely agree mindjames’ posts (last two pages excluded) reflect meaningful thought and effort, and the responses to said posts are overall obviously bad faith / indicate a total lack of respect. What are your actual thoughts on what happened with this situation mindjames? This isn’t defendable right? I literally still have not looked into the situation, but your last post here seemed wholly agreeable to me. I would just add a couple of things: the word "yet" - there hasn't "yet" been stuff shared by IDF that makes the situation look any better. They have a tendency to take their time to investigate cases like this and often times we get some kind of conclusion / evidence months later. IDF has also not been too shy to admit wrongdoing / atrocious mishaps such as WCK, or the accidental shooting of Israeli hostages, so I don't automatically assume they will engage in coverups. I would also add that a hundred rogue actions are not indicative of policy, and that at the same time there could potentially be an issue with accountability for rogue actions, which if true is shameful and wrong. There is a lot of complexity around creating accountability in this situation, we could go into that if I find the patience. | ||
|
mindjames
Israel433 Posts
On December 03 2025 07:04 blomsterjohn wrote: This is what's puzzling. To come in here to barge that point in at this particular moment is just incredibly poor timing and a strange moment to make this... protest (?), and its not doing you any favors. It's not a "one-line zinger" to say stuff like "killing children really ought not to be controversial", its just very much what everyone should agree on (with this current instance of it being no different) I don't really care how you read Kwark's post, or what the timing seems like to you, I rather you tell me if you understand my last post and if you generally want the same end goal. | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland26225 Posts
On December 03 2025 06:31 blomsterjohn wrote: There are plenty of areas within this topic/thread where one could take a nuanced form of perspective, but this one really aint? So it's just very strange to see you seemingly insisting on dying on this hill so aggressively You came into the discussing, about children getting killed over a very very low and dubious bar, saying: Followed by a stream of - if I may - very much "low quality / unnecessarily smug / unproductive posts". It's hard to even gauge what your actual point it, and why you felt it so necessary to insert it (whatever it is) here and now. I think some of this stance/critique isn’t entirely without merit, but this is almost the worst time to make it. Especially if you’re embarking upon it having said you haven’t actually read the thread. I’d also echo you in saying mindjames generally is a great contributor to the thread, and especially valuable to hear from as an Israeli contributor. | ||
|
KwarK
United States43538 Posts
| ||
| ||
|
|
Replay Cast
HomeStory Cup
Replay Cast
Replay Cast
Wardi Open
WardiTV Invitational
The PondCast
WardiTV Invitational
|
|
|
EPT
