|
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 October 01 2026 23:37 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On October 01 2026 23:31 WombaT wrote:
Somebody has to be right.
I’m relatively moderate versus many of my countrymen and women on Israel believe it or not, and I felt the state had a right to respond to the Hamas attacks.
But there’s got to be limits on what such a response looks like, and I feel Israel has massively transgressed that.
Israel’s lost a lot of international goodwill from its own actions, not because everyone is innately hostile to the state or Jews in general, although that cohort also exists Let's imagine we were amoral for a second. Morality aside, Israel's response is ineffective at achieving Israel's long term security objectives. We don't need to go "it's a tough scenario and there's no right answer" because there's still definitely wrong answers.
For Israel’s interests yes, for Netanyahu’s political interests no. And I hate this timeline that what’s good for a countries long term success is not good for leaders political ambitions. I get that they have never been perfectly aligned but I don’t think they have ever been further apart.
|
On October 01 2026 23:08 WombaT wrote:Show nested quote +On October 01 2026 22:16 dyhb wrote:On September 18 2026 05:25 WombaT wrote:On September 18 2026 04:25 Jankisa wrote:
"the substance of your posts" is hilarious.
You won't engage because you know you are full of shit.
Because you know you are full of shit you engage with anything else.
Instead you are going on "this is a tragedy".
No, a tragedy is when a lightning strikes and kills a family, a tragedy is when a child dies of cancer.
This is murder, deliberate, targeted, targeted at journalists and kids.
You still did not address any of the clear examples of murder I provided, because, again, you know you can't because it's clearly murder, not a tragedy, not an unfortunate mistake, a series of murders. It’s fine they can be investigated after the cessation of hostilities and I’m sure the perps will face censure… It’s just endless cope masquerading as nuance really. If the IDF was behaving in largely exemplary fashion, having foreign (especially Western) journalists embedded, or given freedom to operate is the easiest PR win in the world. As to why not? Occam’s Razor isn’t always the correct maxim but it’s pretty easily applied here. On October 01 2026 22:06 WombaT wrote:
Why are Israel so restrictive on access to journalists from foreign organisations then?
Hey we’re behaving exemplarily but we’ll block access to the folks who could verify that. Well, we've gone from the IDF not having foreign journalists embedded, to they're embedded, but too restrictive. In two weeks, that's pretty good. In another two weeks, who knows? Maybe some acknowledgement of security concerns, and the obvious point that any embedded foreign journalist that dies in the embed (while going off independently, free of restrictions) will just be blamed on the IDF like all the rest. Maybe even so far as to acknowledge that some outlets refuse to participate? Well I mean you’re taking 1 and 1 and getting 4 there, not really what I said was it? Not even sure how you came to that conclusion. They’re not contradictory points in the slightest. War correspondents operate in all sorts of hazardous conflict zones the world over, death is an occupational hazard. Somehow it’s only in Israel where this is a particular issue and Israel will be apparently be blamed so can’t let foreign journalists catalogue things. I mean the BBC is such a horrendous organisation that they couldn’t get people on the ground at aid sites and had to rely on 3rd parties and IDF whistleblowers to document the thousands of people who’ve died at aid sites. More people have died at aid sites alone than in the entirety of the Irish troubles, but hey that’s all fine and dandy nothing to see here Who’s claiming more than 3,500 died at aid sites? I assume you’re talking about UN distributions of food during the war?
|
On October 01 2026 23:16 WombaT wrote:Show nested quote +On October 01 2026 06:16 dyhb wrote:On October 01 2026 05:30 WombaT wrote:
The IDF sure kills a lot of civilians and journalists for an organisation not trying to I nominate WombaT for telling every nation that's ever fought urban battles his groundbreaking idea to try harder to not kill civilians. Can someone tell the IDF that? No, you gotta tell every nation that’s fought in urban battles. Israel is unexceptional in this regard. They just need your apt encouragement to try, apparently.
|
Northern Ireland27436 Posts
On October 02 2026 02:18 dyhb wrote:Show nested quote +On October 01 2026 23:08 WombaT wrote:On October 01 2026 22:16 dyhb wrote:On September 18 2026 05:25 WombaT wrote:On September 18 2026 04:25 Jankisa wrote:
"the substance of your posts" is hilarious.
You won't engage because you know you are full of shit.
Because you know you are full of shit you engage with anything else.
Instead you are going on "this is a tragedy".
No, a tragedy is when a lightning strikes and kills a family, a tragedy is when a child dies of cancer.
This is murder, deliberate, targeted, targeted at journalists and kids.
You still did not address any of the clear examples of murder I provided, because, again, you know you can't because it's clearly murder, not a tragedy, not an unfortunate mistake, a series of murders. It’s fine they can be investigated after the cessation of hostilities and I’m sure the perps will face censure… It’s just endless cope masquerading as nuance really. If the IDF was behaving in largely exemplary fashion, having foreign (especially Western) journalists embedded, or given freedom to operate is the easiest PR win in the world. As to why not? Occam’s Razor isn’t always the correct maxim but it’s pretty easily applied here. On October 01 2026 22:06 WombaT wrote:
Why are Israel so restrictive on access to journalists from foreign organisations then?
Hey we’re behaving exemplarily but we’ll block access to the folks who could verify that. Well, we've gone from the IDF not having foreign journalists embedded, to they're embedded, but too restrictive. In two weeks, that's pretty good. In another two weeks, who knows? Maybe some acknowledgement of security concerns, and the obvious point that any embedded foreign journalist that dies in the embed (while going off independently, free of restrictions) will just be blamed on the IDF like all the rest. Maybe even so far as to acknowledge that some outlets refuse to participate? Well I mean you’re taking 1 and 1 and getting 4 there, not really what I said was it? Not even sure how you came to that conclusion. They’re not contradictory points in the slightest. War correspondents operate in all sorts of hazardous conflict zones the world over, death is an occupational hazard. Somehow it’s only in Israel where this is a particular issue and Israel will be apparently be blamed so can’t let foreign journalists catalogue things. I mean the BBC is such a horrendous organisation that they couldn’t get people on the ground at aid sites and had to rely on 3rd parties and IDF whistleblowers to document the thousands of people who’ve died at aid sites. More people have died at aid sites alone than in the entirety of the Irish troubles, but hey that’s all fine and dandy nothing to see here Who’s claiming more than 3,500 died at aid sites? I assume you’re talking about UN distributions of food during the war?
Ok so merely more civilians died at aid distribution centres than civilians who died in the Troubles, allegedly, which was what I was looking at. More in the Troubles if you include military, security personnel and paramilitaries
That’s much better!
Why have thousands died at aid distribution sites? Why do we have to do this continual smarmy dance about ‘nuance’ when there’s some really obviously heinous shite going on?
Are the IDF and USAid so incompetent they can’t avoid massacring civilians at aid sites they administer or what?
|
Northern Ireland27436 Posts
On October 02 2026 02:19 dyhb wrote:Show nested quote +On October 01 2026 23:16 WombaT wrote:On October 01 2026 06:16 dyhb wrote:On October 01 2026 05:30 WombaT wrote:
The IDF sure kills a lot of civilians and journalists for an organisation not trying to I nominate WombaT for telling every nation that's ever fought urban battles his groundbreaking idea to try harder to not kill civilians. Can someone tell the IDF that? No, you gotta tell every nation that’s fought in urban battles. Israel is unexceptional in this regard. They just need your apt encouragement to try, apparently.
Not sure they need my encouragement to try to kill civilians frankly
|
On October 02 2026 02:31 WombaT wrote:Show nested quote +On October 02 2026 02:18 dyhb wrote:On October 01 2026 23:08 WombaT wrote:On October 01 2026 22:16 dyhb wrote:On September 18 2026 05:25 WombaT wrote:On September 18 2026 04:25 Jankisa wrote:
"the substance of your posts" is hilarious.
You won't engage because you know you are full of shit.
Because you know you are full of shit you engage with anything else.
Instead you are going on "this is a tragedy".
No, a tragedy is when a lightning strikes and kills a family, a tragedy is when a child dies of cancer.
This is murder, deliberate, targeted, targeted at journalists and kids.
You still did not address any of the clear examples of murder I provided, because, again, you know you can't because it's clearly murder, not a tragedy, not an unfortunate mistake, a series of murders. It’s fine they can be investigated after the cessation of hostilities and I’m sure the perps will face censure… It’s just endless cope masquerading as nuance really. If the IDF was behaving in largely exemplary fashion, having foreign (especially Western) journalists embedded, or given freedom to operate is the easiest PR win in the world. As to why not? Occam’s Razor isn’t always the correct maxim but it’s pretty easily applied here. On October 01 2026 22:06 WombaT wrote:
Why are Israel so restrictive on access to journalists from foreign organisations then?
Hey we’re behaving exemplarily but we’ll block access to the folks who could verify that. Well, we've gone from the IDF not having foreign journalists embedded, to they're embedded, but too restrictive. In two weeks, that's pretty good. In another two weeks, who knows? Maybe some acknowledgement of security concerns, and the obvious point that any embedded foreign journalist that dies in the embed (while going off independently, free of restrictions) will just be blamed on the IDF like all the rest. Maybe even so far as to acknowledge that some outlets refuse to participate? Well I mean you’re taking 1 and 1 and getting 4 there, not really what I said was it? Not even sure how you came to that conclusion. They’re not contradictory points in the slightest. War correspondents operate in all sorts of hazardous conflict zones the world over, death is an occupational hazard. Somehow it’s only in Israel where this is a particular issue and Israel will be apparently be blamed so can’t let foreign journalists catalogue things. I mean the BBC is such a horrendous organisation that they couldn’t get people on the ground at aid sites and had to rely on 3rd parties and IDF whistleblowers to document the thousands of people who’ve died at aid sites. More people have died at aid sites alone than in the entirety of the Irish troubles, but hey that’s all fine and dandy nothing to see here Who’s claiming more than 3,500 died at aid sites? I assume you’re talking about UN distributions of food during the war? Ok so merely more civilians died at aid distribution centres than civilians who died in the Troubles, allegedly, which was what I was looking at. More in the Troubles if you include military, security personnel and paramilitaries That’s much better! Why have thousands died at aid distribution sites? Why do we have to do this continual smarmy dance about ‘nuance’ when there’s some really obviously heinous shite going on? Are the IDF and USAid so incompetent they can’t avoid massacring civilians at aid sites they administer or what? Who’s claiming more than 3,500, or whatever you’re adjusting it to? I’m guessing “died” is to include Hamas kills at aid sites, and maybe you’re going to add in any deaths along the convoy route, but you’ve made no specific statement with source, so who knows.
|
On October 02 2026 02:32 WombaT wrote:Show nested quote +On October 02 2026 02:19 dyhb wrote:On October 01 2026 23:16 WombaT wrote:On October 01 2026 06:16 dyhb wrote:On October 01 2026 05:30 WombaT wrote:
The IDF sure kills a lot of civilians and journalists for an organisation not trying to I nominate WombaT for telling every nation that's ever fought urban battles his groundbreaking idea to try harder to not kill civilians. Can someone tell the IDF that? No, you gotta tell every nation that’s fought in urban battles. Israel is unexceptional in this regard. They just need your apt encouragement to try, apparently. Not sure they need my encouragement to try to kill civilians frankly You have a problem with every major power if you’re singling out the IDF, given the various estimates of civilians vs combatant dead, so I assume you’re quite ready to say every power just needed to try harder, and not just Israel.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
