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 May 19 2025 05:34 KwarK wrote: The two conflicts are simply not comparable in the way that some people want them to be. You might as well go “well you’re against murder so surely you’re against abortion”. No, one does not necessarily follow from the other. They’re not the same.
Like why does Palestine get to play the part of Ukraine? Is Israel not the party who was attacked at the start of this most recent war? Hamas can play the part of Russia reasonably well. Is Hamas not openly and unambiguously committed to a policy of destroying both the state and population of Israel? Could we not equally say “if you recognize Ukraine is the victim then you must recognize Israel is the victim”?
The problem with that is that Israel is the more militarily powerful of the two in that conflict and so the comparison doesn’t really work. But none of the comparisons work. People should stop trying them. Not everything needs to be boiled down to the stupidest possible comparisons and sides. Situations can be nuanced and that’s okay.
Don't see where someone has compared the two conflicts. And yeah of course you can say anything you want, the only thing that's going to happen is that you're going to make me cringe, I think you should be okay with that outcome.
(Vote): Ukraine & Israel (Vote): Ukraine & Palestine (Vote): Russia & Israel (Vote): Russia & Palestine
Kinda weird pool. Why do you have to support either Israel or Palestine? That's not a situation that is binary black and white, evil vs good, such as Russia and Ukraine.
The choices are simple depending on what reason you use to support the stance.
If you are against expansionist wars you are pro Ukraine and Palestine.
If you are against slow genocide you are against Russia and Israel.
If you are against the initial aggressor in a conflict or their political leadership then you are against Russia and the other choice gets messy.
The difference is that if Palestine was in Israel's place, they'd do exactly the same as Israel does. Or probably a lot worse, as we're still only at 2 - 2.5% deaths.
If that was happening, would you see all of the nuance and complexity in that situation? Do you think the West would?
On May 19 2025 06:24 KwarK wrote: You’re so weird.
If you are not okay with the outcome of making me cringe, you've been posting very very incorrectly for about a year and a half.
It’s weird that you feel so strongly about me and want so desperately for me to know how every one of my posts, no matter who it was directed at, has impacted you. You are way, way more in to me than I am in to you. The fact that your immediate response was to assume I care whether you’re cringing is very telling. I don’t care about anything you do. You’re really weird. That’s all.
On May 19 2025 06:36 KwarK wrote: It’s weird that you feel so strongly about me and want so desperately for me to know how every one of my posts, no matter who it was directed at, has impacted you. You are way, way more in to me than I am in to you. The fact that your immediate response was to assume I care whether you’re cringing is very telling. I don’t care about anything you do. You’re really weird. That’s all.
I apologize, I thought that your initial post was directed at me, I'm sorry. My mistake.
On May 18 2025 23:59 Sent. wrote: Wombat if you compare your first reactions to anything GH and Blackjack posts you might get the idea why he's thinking you and a group of other posters are giving the former a pass. I think he's mostly wrong but it's easy to get an impression that moderate lefties here will go out of their way to twist GH's statements into something acceptable. The few controversial right wing posters who remain active can't expect the same.
Obviously that's just how I see it, I'm not saying it's some objective truth.
Aye that’s sometimes fair, although I feel it’s often more a case of interpersonal relations and various foibles than necessarily being due to political alignment. And yeah sometimes it’ll be political in nature too. I think it’s a pity we don’t have more conservative voices and have said so many times,
To quote myself on what prompted this particular tangent:
Has GH ever expressed those kind of Pro-Hamas sentiments though?
I think he’s massively off-base on Russia/Ukraine but I don’t recall him doing that.
To which one can answer, yes, despite you not recalling, he has in fact done this. Or, alternatively, actually that might have been hyperbolic and he has not done that. Or whatever.
Far as I’m concerned, GH has provided several miles of rope with which to criticise him on this specific topic. But is that part of it?
I’m not sitting here printing my #TeamGH tees or plotting my daily white knighting session, I was making a very specific point.
(Vote): Ukraine & Israel (Vote): Ukraine & Palestine (Vote): Russia & Israel (Vote): Russia & Palestine
Kinda weird pool. Why do you have to support either Israel or Palestine? That's not a situation that is binary black and white, evil vs good, such as Russia and Ukraine.
The choices are simple depending on what reason you use to support the stance.
If you are against expansionist wars you are pro Ukraine and Palestine.
If you are against slow genocide you are against Russia and Israel.
If you are against the initial aggressor in a conflict or their political leadership then you are against Russia and the other choice gets messy.
The difference is that if Palestine was in Israel's place, they'd do exactly the same as Israel does. Or probably a lot worse, as we're still only at 2 - 2.5% deaths. There are no good sides in that conflict. As for Ukraine, it's a question of sovereignty. Say Mexico made a deal with China and allowed them to build a military base on their territory close to the US border, what would happen? Would US try to use it's influence to get rid of it? Would they bomb the base? Or attack Mexico to make sure it gets removed? Is Mexico ever to be (partially) blamed, as they're a sovereign country and did not do anything wrong?
Except in this case Russia was the only country with a military base in Ukraine (Crimea). There weren't any plans for a NATO base in Ukraine despite Russian propaganda.
On May 18 2025 23:59 Sent. wrote: Wombat if you compare your first reactions to anything GH and Blackjack posts you might get the idea why he's thinking you and a group of other posters are giving the former a pass. I think he's mostly wrong but it's easy to get an impression that moderate lefties here will go out of their way to twist GH's statements into something acceptable. The few controversial right wing posters who remain active can't expect the same.
Obviously that's just how I see it, I'm not saying it's some objective truth.
Aye that’s sometimes fair, although I feel it’s often more a case of interpersonal relations and various foibles than necessarily being due to political alignment. And yeah sometimes it’ll be political in nature too. I think it’s a pity we don’t have more conservative voices and have said so many times,
To quote myself on what prompted this particular tangent:
Has GH ever expressed those kind of Pro-Hamas sentiments though?
I think he’s massively off-base on Russia/Ukraine but I don’t recall him doing that.
To which one can answer, yes, despite you not recalling, he has in fact done this. Or, alternatively, actually that might have been hyperbolic and he has not done that. Or whatever.
Far as I’m concerned, GH has provided several miles of rope with which to criticise him on this specific topic. But is that part of it?
I’m not sitting here printing my #TeamGH tees or plotting my daily white knighting session, I was making a very specific point.
A very specific point that you only make to me and only for the people who identify as communists. A standard you don't hold yourself too, to the point that even when corrected you hold your assumption above what has been directly stated to you.
If GH thinks I misrepresented him and he believes that Hamas is evil org that does not give two shits about the Palestinians and is only about the destruction of Israel, killing the all the Jews and their supporters and is a proxy army of Iran who is just a different oppressor. No one is stopping him.
On May 18 2025 23:59 Sent. wrote: Wombat if you compare your first reactions to anything GH and Blackjack posts you might get the idea why he's thinking you and a group of other posters are giving the former a pass. I think he's mostly wrong but it's easy to get an impression that moderate lefties here will go out of their way to twist GH's statements into something acceptable. The few controversial right wing posters who remain active can't expect the same.
Obviously that's just how I see it, I'm not saying it's some objective truth.
Aye that’s sometimes fair, although I feel it’s often more a case of interpersonal relations and various foibles than necessarily being due to political alignment. And yeah sometimes it’ll be political in nature too. I think it’s a pity we don’t have more conservative voices and have said so many times,
To quote myself on what prompted this particular tangent:
Has GH ever expressed those kind of Pro-Hamas sentiments though?
I think he’s massively off-base on Russia/Ukraine but I don’t recall him doing that.
To which one can answer, yes, despite you not recalling, he has in fact done this. Or, alternatively, actually that might have been hyperbolic and he has not done that. Or whatever.
Far as I’m concerned, GH has provided several miles of rope with which to criticise him on this specific topic. But is that part of it?
I’m not sitting here printing my #TeamGH tees or plotting my daily white knighting session, I was making a very specific point.
A very specific point that you only make to me and only for the people who identify as communists. A standard you don't hold yourself too, to the point that even when corrected you hold your assumption above what has been directly stated to you.
If GH thinks I misrepresented him and he believes that Hamas is evil org that does not give two shits about the Palestinians and is only about the destruction of Israel, killing the all the Jews and their supporters and is a proxy army of Iran who is just a different oppressor. No one is stopping him.
You said:
But Hamas entering Israel and killing >1000 civilians taking hostages and getting all their citizens bombed is good leadership
Has GH expressed such overly positive sentiments towards Hamas or not? It’s a pretty simple question.
On May 18 2025 23:59 Sent. wrote: Wombat if you compare your first reactions to anything GH and Blackjack posts you might get the idea why he's thinking you and a group of other posters are giving the former a pass. I think he's mostly wrong but it's easy to get an impression that moderate lefties here will go out of their way to twist GH's statements into something acceptable. The few controversial right wing posters who remain active can't expect the same.
Obviously that's just how I see it, I'm not saying it's some objective truth.
Aye that’s sometimes fair, although I feel it’s often more a case of interpersonal relations and various foibles than necessarily being due to political alignment. And yeah sometimes it’ll be political in nature too. I think it’s a pity we don’t have more conservative voices and have said so many times,
To quote myself on what prompted this particular tangent:
Has GH ever expressed those kind of Pro-Hamas sentiments though?
I think he’s massively off-base on Russia/Ukraine but I don’t recall him doing that.
To which one can answer, yes, despite you not recalling, he has in fact done this. Or, alternatively, actually that might have been hyperbolic and he has not done that. Or whatever.
Far as I’m concerned, GH has provided several miles of rope with which to criticise him on this specific topic. But is that part of it?
I’m not sitting here printing my #TeamGH tees or plotting my daily white knighting session, I was making a very specific point.
A very specific point that you only make to me and only for the people who identify as communists. A standard you don't hold yourself too, to the point that even when corrected you hold your assumption above what has been directly stated to you.
If GH thinks I misrepresented him and he believes that Hamas is evil org that does not give two shits about the Palestinians and is only about the destruction of Israel, killing the all the Jews and their supporters and is a proxy army of Iran who is just a different oppressor. No one is stopping him.
But Hamas entering Israel and killing >1000 civilians taking hostages and getting all their citizens bombed is good leadership
Has GH expressed such overly positive sentiments towards Hamas or not? It’s a pretty simple question.
I've already answered your question. I'm not sure what your whole point of questioning was or is. The white knighting is so tiring, like did you parents not teach you to worry about yourself?
On May 18 2025 23:59 Sent. wrote: Wombat if you compare your first reactions to anything GH and Blackjack posts you might get the idea why he's thinking you and a group of other posters are giving the former a pass. I think he's mostly wrong but it's easy to get an impression that moderate lefties here will go out of their way to twist GH's statements into something acceptable. The few controversial right wing posters who remain active can't expect the same.
Obviously that's just how I see it, I'm not saying it's some objective truth.
Aye that’s sometimes fair, although I feel it’s often more a case of interpersonal relations and various foibles than necessarily being due to political alignment. And yeah sometimes it’ll be political in nature too. I think it’s a pity we don’t have more conservative voices and have said so many times,
To quote myself on what prompted this particular tangent:
Has GH ever expressed those kind of Pro-Hamas sentiments though?
I think he’s massively off-base on Russia/Ukraine but I don’t recall him doing that.
To which one can answer, yes, despite you not recalling, he has in fact done this. Or, alternatively, actually that might have been hyperbolic and he has not done that. Or whatever.
Far as I’m concerned, GH has provided several miles of rope with which to criticise him on this specific topic. But is that part of it?
I’m not sitting here printing my #TeamGH tees or plotting my daily white knighting session, I was making a very specific point.
A very specific point that you only make to me and only for the people who identify as communists. A standard you don't hold yourself too, to the point that even when corrected you hold your assumption above what has been directly stated to you.
If GH thinks I misrepresented him and he believes that Hamas is evil org that does not give two shits about the Palestinians and is only about the destruction of Israel, killing the all the Jews and their supporters and is a proxy army of Iran who is just a different oppressor. No one is stopping him.
You said:
But Hamas entering Israel and killing >1000 civilians taking hostages and getting all their citizens bombed is good leadership
Has GH expressed such overly positive sentiments towards Hamas or not? It’s a pretty simple question.
I've already answered your question. I'm not sure what your whole point of questioning was or is. The white knighting is so tiring, like did you parents not teach you to worry about yourself?
You haven’t answered my question at all. Has GH proffered opinions such as Hamas being ‘good leadership’, or any kind of positive feelings on the events of October 7th?
Has he done this? You said he holds these views, not me. So it should be pretty trivial to show your working.
On May 19 2025 09:09 ZeroByte13 wrote: Common, guys, this has nothing to do with the war between Russia and Ukraine. It's started as a bit off-topic and now it's full-on off-topic.
On May 19 2025 09:09 ZeroByte13 wrote: Common, guys, this has nothing to do with the war between Russia and Ukraine. It's started as a bit off-topic and now it's full-on off-topic.
Unfortunately, it's a modest package, much weaker than originally planned, as Trump undermined them in the 11th hour. Video explaining it in a bit more detail:
In any other timeline, this would be seen as a direct attack and trigger article 5. But so would so much else that ends up never getting mentioned again..
On May 19 2025 09:09 ZeroByte13 wrote: Common, guys, this has nothing to do with the war between Russia and Ukraine. It's started as a bit off-topic and now it's full-on off-topic.
Unfortunately, it's a modest package, much weaker than originally planned, as Trump undermined them in the 11th hour. Video explaining it in a bit more detail: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VApJtIyMEec
In any other timeline, this would be seen as a direct attack and trigger article 5. But so would so much else that ends up never getting mentioned again..
You will see these "analysts" flipflopping. just go back to what they said a year or two ago, how peace isn't an option etc, Russia wants a quick war. And now they are all up and arms about how the US is not enabling the ceasefire, let's not forget the US was the one to put ceasefire back into the spotlight. Peace talks could last a year before any kind of a deal, so much time were wasted all while losing ground.
Let's put the comparison in real terms. A nice what if scenario, we just move the dials a bit on the power balances. Important note: Putin and Russia for some reason decide that they won't threat with nukes or consider using them at all.
Let's say that on Feb 22 Russia attacked, just like they did. Let's say that the US has been preparing for this since 2014, after Crimea and Donbas and Luhansk Obama declared unlimited friendship and providing of the most modern weapons US has to give, F-35's, 2000 LB bombs, best AA and other systems, on top of unlimited intelligence sharing.
Then, in 2022 the attack gets repelled and squashed within 3 days, Russians are driven away from around Kyiv, Kherson, Kharkiv, then Ukrainian forces march on and during the next few months they, with support from US who parked an aircraft Carrier group in the Black Sea and provided support to Ukrainian navy who crushed and driven Russian one all the way to Sevastopol.
Ukrainians then proceed to bomb the shit out of Crimea, indiscriminately raining 2000 LB bombs on top of hospitals and civilian infrastructure that they claim was being used by Russian forces. They take Crimea.
They proceed and start a relentless bombing campaign and with thousands of civilian casualties over the next few months take whole Donbas and Luhansk.
They then set their sights at Kursk and Belgograd and start bombing campaigns.
I think we are around here on the timeline comparison, Israel is now doing things with an excuse of "stopping Hamas" that are completely unnecessary, but they "need their security", and I don't see why Ukraine shouldn't create a nice little buffer zones along border regions, taking a few cities and sending a message by bombing them relentlessly.
How many of you guys who are here with "but Hamas wants to destroy them" would be OK with Ukraine going this far?
I genuinely want to know, because to me everything beyond the first 3 months of Israel's operations in Gaza is collective punishment that constitutes war crimes and yes, at least an attempted genocide and 100 % ethnic cleansing.
I know that, for me, after Ukraine got it's territory back I would back the fuck up from my support of them as soon as they dropped a single bomb on actual Russian territory. I know that I'd probably start being very squirmy way before that, is it really, really necessary to bomb hospitals? Is punishing actual Crimean population really fair, after all, they joined Russia on false pretenses, with a rigged referendum, should they really be punished?
On May 19 2025 09:09 ZeroByte13 wrote: Common, guys, this has nothing to do with the war between Russia and Ukraine. It's started as a bit off-topic and now it's full-on off-topic.
Bears repeating. Let's end this discussion, and this inane attempt to compare the two situations. They just are not comparable, and any attempt at it is disingenuous and purposefully leaves at all the details that actually makes them different (such as the long history, the cultures, the generations of hateful feelings of everyone involved, the oppressions - in both directions, etc.)
If you want to talk about Israel and Palestine, there's a separate thread for that. It does not belong here
This is the opposite of a comparison. By modifying the Ukraine conflict to match Israel, he's displaying that they aren't the same. If the conflicts were the same he wouldn't have to do that.
Sorry, I came in to the discussion after the weekend and wanted to chime in after reading the backlog, I thought it would be OK since I first called out GH about the negotiations and that devolved into the I/P comparison.
Sorry if it's off topic for too long by now but I wanted to throw in my 2 cents, since I feel like some posters here are missing that the "we need security and we need to respond to this aggression" argument can't be valid indefinitely.
On May 19 2025 18:31 Jankisa wrote: Let's put the comparison in real terms. A nice what if scenario, we just move the dials a bit on the power balances. Important note: Putin and Russia for some reason decide that they won't threat with nukes or consider using them at all.
Let's say that on Feb 22 Russia attacked, just like they did. Let's say that the US has been preparing for this since 2014, after Crimea and Donbas and Luhansk Obama declared unlimited friendship and providing of the most modern weapons US has to give, F-35's, 2000 LB bombs, best AA and other systems, on top of unlimited intelligence sharing.
Then, in 2022 the attack gets repelled and squashed within 3 days, Russians are driven away from around Kyiv, Kherson, Kharkiv, then Ukrainian forces march on and during the next few months they, with support from US who parked an aircraft Carrier group in the Black Sea and provided support to Ukrainian navy who crushed and driven Russian one all the way to Sevastopol.
Ukrainians then proceed to bomb the shit out of Crimea, indiscriminately raining 2000 LB bombs on top of hospitals and civilian infrastructure that they claim was being used by Russian forces. They take Crimea.
They proceed and start a relentless bombing campaign and with thousands of civilian casualties over the next few months take whole Donbas and Luhansk.
They then set their sights at Kursk and Belgograd and start bombing campaigns.
I think we are around here on the timeline comparison, Israel is now doing things with an excuse of "stopping Hamas" that are completely unnecessary, but they "need their security", and I don't see why Ukraine shouldn't create a nice little buffer zones along border regions, taking a few cities and sending a message by bombing them relentlessly.
How many of you guys who are here with "but Hamas wants to destroy them" would be OK with Ukraine going this far?
I genuinely want to know, because to me everything beyond the first 3 months of Israel's operations in Gaza is collective punishment that constitutes war crimes and yes, at least an attempted genocide and 100 % ethnic cleansing.
I know that, for me, after Ukraine got it's territory back I would back the fuck up from my support of them as soon as they dropped a single bomb on actual Russian territory. I know that I'd probably start being very squirmy way before that, is it really, really necessary to bomb hospitals? Is punishing actual Crimean population really fair, after all, they joined Russia on false pretenses, with a rigged referendum, should they really be punished?
Not your actual question to the what if scenario, but with the conflict going as it was going, I think energy infrastructure and military buildings inside Russian borders are fair game. Schools, hospitals and shopping malls not so much. Sooner or later Russian military would probalby use those mentioned buildings for military purposes. Then they become fair game as well (in the hope civilians have evacuated and are not used as meatshields by Russian military).
On May 19 2025 18:31 Jankisa wrote: Let's put the comparison in real terms. A nice what if scenario, we just move the dials a bit on the power balances. Important note: Putin and Russia for some reason decide that they won't threat with nukes or consider using them at all.
Let's say that on Feb 22 Russia attacked, just like they did. Let's say that the US has been preparing for this since 2014, after Crimea and Donbas and Luhansk Obama declared unlimited friendship and providing of the most modern weapons US has to give, F-35's, 2000 LB bombs, best AA and other systems, on top of unlimited intelligence sharing.
Then, in 2022 the attack gets repelled and squashed within 3 days, Russians are driven away from around Kyiv, Kherson, Kharkiv, then Ukrainian forces march on and during the next few months they, with support from US who parked an aircraft Carrier group in the Black Sea and provided support to Ukrainian navy who crushed and driven Russian one all the way to Sevastopol.
Ukrainians then proceed to bomb the shit out of Crimea, indiscriminately raining 2000 LB bombs on top of hospitals and civilian infrastructure that they claim was being used by Russian forces. They take Crimea.
They proceed and start a relentless bombing campaign and with thousands of civilian casualties over the next few months take whole Donbas and Luhansk.
They then set their sights at Kursk and Belgograd and start bombing campaigns.
I think we are around here on the timeline comparison, Israel is now doing things with an excuse of "stopping Hamas" that are completely unnecessary, but they "need their security", and I don't see why Ukraine shouldn't create a nice little buffer zones along border regions, taking a few cities and sending a message by bombing them relentlessly.
How many of you guys who are here with "but Hamas wants to destroy them" would be OK with Ukraine going this far?
I genuinely want to know, because to me everything beyond the first 3 months of Israel's operations in Gaza is collective punishment that constitutes war crimes and yes, at least an attempted genocide and 100 % ethnic cleansing.
I know that, for me, after Ukraine got it's territory back I would back the fuck up from my support of them as soon as they dropped a single bomb on actual Russian territory. I know that I'd probably start being very squirmy way before that, is it really, really necessary to bomb hospitals? Is punishing actual Crimean population really fair, after all, they joined Russia on false pretenses, with a rigged referendum, should they really be punished?
Not your actual question to the what if scenario, but with the conflict going as it was going, I think energy infrastructure and military buildings inside Russian borders are fair game. Schools, hospitals and shopping malls not so much. Sooner or later Russian military would probalby use those mentioned buildings for military purposes. Then they become fair game as well (in the hope civilians have evacuated and are not used as meatshields by Russian military).
With that, I firmly believe 2 things, I might be wrong, but that's what I believe:
1. If that happened, I think that Ukraine wouldn't bomb hospitals and civilian buildings no matter what kind of targets are there, for a few reasons, main one being the morality of such actions and secondary being how it would look outwardly 2. If Ukraine did it, none of their allies would be OK with it and pretend like it's a normal thing to bomb hospitals in a different country in order to secure yours
EPT
