5 ms·

Since this question revolves around words and their effect… "most populated" > "crammed" > "jailed" > "the new warsaw ghetto" there must be a word that descri

Since this question revolves around words and their effect… "most populated" > "crammed" > "jailed" > "the new warsaw ghetto" there must be a word that describes your question of why: The word you're looking for also describes what's enabling the cognitive dissonance of putting Gaza in the same category as a Singapur, a Tokio or Hong Kong without blinking: Economic powerhouses that draw talent from developing and developed nations worldwide vs. a town with an economy that only consists of NGOs, the Hamas and UN-Organizations (The wage gap between ordinary gaza citizens and those working for the state is 50%). But instead of owning that word, it's easier to just keep uttering "Israel is bombing one of the most densely populated places in the world".

geofft 5y ago
What's the phrasing you'd prefer? "Children were once again murdered in cold blood in Gaza, a metropolis that could be just like Singapore, Tokyo, or Hong Kong given its dense population and prime geographic location, were it not under constant military oppression from a country whose illegal nuclear weapons program is more successful than that of North Korea"? I think a lot of people would find that uncomfortably partisan, so news organizations tend to self-censor, unfortunately.
- three14 5y ago
  Whatever criticism Israel may or may not deserve over its current bombing campaign, you aren't going to convince anyone if you misuse phrases like "murdered in cold blood". That's just not what those words mean.
  - geofft 5y ago
    Can you explain why I am misusing the phrase? I believe it to be objectively accurate. Again, that phrasing might make people uncomfortable. as I wrote above. I understand that, and I understand why people desire to censor it. But I don't believe it's incorrect, which is another thing entitely.
    - woodpanel 5y ago
      You can have your beliefs, but that doesn't make them facts. Meanwhile a cleptocratic regime is firing missiles at civlians using as launching pads hospitals, kindergartens or office buildings housing international journalists.
      - modo_mario 5y ago
        >office buildings housing international journalists. Weird how those journalist agencies themselves missed that. What's the slow colonisation with settlements about? Liberation of land controlled by evil terrorists? Also as far as Israel is concerned there is no recognised regime or other such government there. It's apparently a stateless area with stateless people to be slowly ethnically cleansed.
        34679 5y ago
        https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-middle-east-57136883 https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-middle-east-57136883 "Israeli PM Netanyahu defends Gaza press building bombing Benjamin Netanyahu has insisted that destroying the Jala high-rise block in Gaza on Saturday was justified."
        dragonwriter 5y ago
        > Benjamin Netanyahu has insisted that destroying the Jala high-rise block in Gaza on Saturday was justified There’s a pretty big difference between a politician (even one less flagrantly corrupt than Netanyahu) making a claim about their conduct of war and that claim being true.
        34679 5y ago
        I agree. I unsuccessfully tried finding an article I read a couple days ago that contained quotes from the head of the BBC office declaring that Hamas had no presence in the building. They said they actively check to the best of their ability because Israel is known to bomb media buildings and blame it on Hamas' presence. They also stated Israel has provided no proof of its claims.
  - sofixa 5y ago
    What do you call it when a military air force with enormous reconnaissance capabilities bombs civilian targets and civilians, including children, die?
    - three14 5y ago
      I don't understand your argument. You want to point out that this is terrible, and in an ideal world, no one should be bombing anyone? Of course! That doesn't mean you should say, e.g. that Israelis are cannibals just because cannibalism is bad.
      - Nasrudith 5y ago
        How is it not cold blooded murder then? The bombing is a killing. It is deliberate. It is done with ample preparation time and not under fire. You said it was misuse of the term. What keeps it from being proper to not call it cold blooded The nations can do what they want special pleading is the only argument I can see against murder but it would be an inconsistent one. Fiven the sheer number of state acts called murder completely unchallenged as such. Since WWII at least "at war" isn't an excuse for murder. While they may have called retaliatory executions for partisans war it was never called anything but murder in WW2.
        ehvatum 5y ago
        > While they may have called retaliatory executions for partisans war it was never called anything but murder in WW2. You’re completely unaware of the indiscriminate aerial bombing that typified WW2, or you’re entirely dishonest.
  - runarberg 5y ago
    We like arguing in hypotheticals here on HN so lets bring a modified trolley problem into the discussion: This modified version has the trolley heading steady on course to the next station, there is nobody on the track and nothing will happen if you leave it alone. However you stand next to a lever, and if you pull the lever you will divert the trolley and it will hit 200 people (some are criminals but most aren’t). You have ample time to think it over. If the trolley passes, you still have the option to pull the lever and the next trolley will hit those 200 people. You know full well what happens if you pull the lever. You also know you will not be punished if you do. Say you are an observer in this modified version, and you observe me pulling the lever. 200 people are now unessisary dead because of my action. Do you consider me a cold blooded murderer?
    - three14 5y ago
      This is not a good-faith simplification of the situation in Gaza.
      - runarberg 5y ago
        I know its not, that was sort of the point here. I made sure to qualify this with arguing in hypotheticals before coming up with the scenario. Starting this sub-thread with a debate about what makes a cold blooded murder is another way of taking the debate into arguing hypotheticals and is not a good-faith tactic. What I did here is simply taking the bait and continuing to the logical next step.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- bronzeage 5y ago
  You mean that land which Israel withdrew from unilaterally, let it have a chance at prospering and instead of minding its own business they elected a terrorist organization, turned it into a millitary base and concentrated on firing rockets and kidnapping soldiers instead of showing they can responsibly control their land? Gaza is prime example of where Arabs and Palestinians tendencies lead them when left alone. Every single horror coming from there they brought upon themselves. They proved they are incapable of civilized behavior. All they had to do is behave like rational human beings after the disengagement. Palestinians aren't rational human beings like you would expect. Every chance they get at peace they will intentionally ruin, even if all they have to do is absolutely nothing.
  - sequoia 5y ago
    Downvoting because this is dehumanizing rhetoric, the kind used to rationalize all kinds of violence and oppression of a group of people. This kind of demonizing of one side or the other is exactly what I’m objecting to; both populations should be humanized and considered with empathy, neither side should be characterized as demonic or subhuman. No progress will ever be made in resolving this conflict if one side or the other is dehumanized and has all the blame heaped on them. It is unfortunate that Gazans elected a party with an explicit platform of genocide against the Jews, yes. Its still not appropriate to dehumanize them is and it’s definitely not productive.
    - bronzeage 5y ago
      But it is productive. It reminds you what happens if you are accidentally naïve enough to give Palestinians a chance to hurt you. They will take that chance at any cost and price because they do not care about their own wellbeing. And they did well in brainwashing the rest of their people into being bloodthirsty savages, the damage is already deep in their minds and hearts. Just taking a look at their schools and propaganda. The Palestinians already chose to dehumanize themselves. They choose to teach their own children that nothing matters more than killing Israelis. They choose to raise their children into a brainwash of shahids. Nothing short of a massive generational counter-brainwash can fix this problem. It's damage rooted deep in the minds of Palestinians and no leader can fix it because no peaceful leader can arise and lead people who have been brainwashed into war since they were born.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
nl 5y ago
@dang there is something odd going on here. The comment I'm replying to from user woodpanel says (in part): ""most populated" > "crammed" > "jailed" > "the new warsaw ghetto"... The word you're looking for also describes what's enabling the cognitive dissonance of putting Gaza in the same category as a Singapur, a Tokio or Hong Kong without blinking... a town with an economy that only consists of NGOs, the Hamas and UN-Organizations" This dead comment[1] from user idownvoted says: "You're missing the intention of those pushing this claim: Painting Israel as running a prison intentionally bad, or vice-versa making Gaza the new Warsaw-Ghetto. If other commentators can't note the rediculousness of putting Gaza next to Tokio, Singapur or Hong Kong, I will: A place with virtually no economy outside of NGOs, the Hamas and UN-Orgs vs. economic beacons that draw talent from all over the world." [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27188683 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27188683
- user982 5y ago
  Don't look directly at the hasbara.
  - woodpanel 5y ago
    Of course, I'm a typical German troll farm run by the mossad. You clearly have incorporated the word I was hinting at. Why not own it?

geofft 5y ago

What's the phrasing you'd prefer? "Children were once again murdered in cold blood in Gaza, a metropolis that could be just like Singapore, Tokyo, or Hong Kong given its dense population and prime geographic location, were it not under constant military oppression from a country whose illegal nuclear weapons program is more successful than that of North Korea"? I think a lot of people would find that uncomfortably partisan, so news organizations tend to self-censor, unfortunately.

three14 5y ago
Whatever criticism Israel may or may not deserve over its current bombing campaign, you aren't going to convince anyone if you misuse phrases like "murdered in cold blood". That's just not what those words mean.
- geofft 5y ago
  Can you explain why I am misusing the phrase? I believe it to be objectively accurate. Again, that phrasing might make people uncomfortable. as I wrote above. I understand that, and I understand why people desire to censor it. But I don't believe it's incorrect, which is another thing entitely.
  - woodpanel 5y ago
    You can have your beliefs, but that doesn't make them facts. Meanwhile a cleptocratic regime is firing missiles at civlians using as launching pads hospitals, kindergartens or office buildings housing international journalists.
    - modo_mario 5y ago
      >office buildings housing international journalists. Weird how those journalist agencies themselves missed that. What's the slow colonisation with settlements about? Liberation of land controlled by evil terrorists? Also as far as Israel is concerned there is no recognised regime or other such government there. It's apparently a stateless area with stateless people to be slowly ethnically cleansed.
      - 34679 5y ago
        https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-middle-east-57136883 https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-middle-east-57136883 "Israeli PM Netanyahu defends Gaza press building bombing Benjamin Netanyahu has insisted that destroying the Jala high-rise block in Gaza on Saturday was justified."
        dragonwriter 5y ago
        > Benjamin Netanyahu has insisted that destroying the Jala high-rise block in Gaza on Saturday was justified There’s a pretty big difference between a politician (even one less flagrantly corrupt than Netanyahu) making a claim about their conduct of war and that claim being true.
        34679 5y ago
        I agree. I unsuccessfully tried finding an article I read a couple days ago that contained quotes from the head of the BBC office declaring that Hamas had no presence in the building. They said they actively check to the best of their ability because Israel is known to bomb media buildings and blame it on Hamas' presence. They also stated Israel has provided no proof of its claims.
- sofixa 5y ago
  What do you call it when a military air force with enormous reconnaissance capabilities bombs civilian targets and civilians, including children, die?
  - three14 5y ago
    I don't understand your argument. You want to point out that this is terrible, and in an ideal world, no one should be bombing anyone? Of course! That doesn't mean you should say, e.g. that Israelis are cannibals just because cannibalism is bad.
    - Nasrudith 5y ago
      How is it not cold blooded murder then? The bombing is a killing. It is deliberate. It is done with ample preparation time and not under fire. You said it was misuse of the term. What keeps it from being proper to not call it cold blooded The nations can do what they want special pleading is the only argument I can see against murder but it would be an inconsistent one. Fiven the sheer number of state acts called murder completely unchallenged as such. Since WWII at least "at war" isn't an excuse for murder. While they may have called retaliatory executions for partisans war it was never called anything but murder in WW2.
      - ehvatum 5y ago
        > While they may have called retaliatory executions for partisans war it was never called anything but murder in WW2. You’re completely unaware of the indiscriminate aerial bombing that typified WW2, or you’re entirely dishonest.
- runarberg 5y ago
  We like arguing in hypotheticals here on HN so lets bring a modified trolley problem into the discussion: This modified version has the trolley heading steady on course to the next station, there is nobody on the track and nothing will happen if you leave it alone. However you stand next to a lever, and if you pull the lever you will divert the trolley and it will hit 200 people (some are criminals but most aren’t). You have ample time to think it over. If the trolley passes, you still have the option to pull the lever and the next trolley will hit those 200 people. You know full well what happens if you pull the lever. You also know you will not be punished if you do. Say you are an observer in this modified version, and you observe me pulling the lever. 200 people are now unessisary dead because of my action. Do you consider me a cold blooded murderer?
  - three14 5y ago
    This is not a good-faith simplification of the situation in Gaza.
    - runarberg 5y ago
      I know its not, that was sort of the point here. I made sure to qualify this with arguing in hypotheticals before coming up with the scenario. Starting this sub-thread with a debate about what makes a cold blooded murder is another way of taking the debate into arguing hypotheticals and is not a good-faith tactic. What I did here is simply taking the bait and continuing to the logical next step.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
bronzeage 5y ago
You mean that land which Israel withdrew from unilaterally, let it have a chance at prospering and instead of minding its own business they elected a terrorist organization, turned it into a millitary base and concentrated on firing rockets and kidnapping soldiers instead of showing they can responsibly control their land? Gaza is prime example of where Arabs and Palestinians tendencies lead them when left alone. Every single horror coming from there they brought upon themselves. They proved they are incapable of civilized behavior. All they had to do is behave like rational human beings after the disengagement. Palestinians aren't rational human beings like you would expect. Every chance they get at peace they will intentionally ruin, even if all they have to do is absolutely nothing.
- sequoia 5y ago
  Downvoting because this is dehumanizing rhetoric, the kind used to rationalize all kinds of violence and oppression of a group of people. This kind of demonizing of one side or the other is exactly what I’m objecting to; both populations should be humanized and considered with empathy, neither side should be characterized as demonic or subhuman. No progress will ever be made in resolving this conflict if one side or the other is dehumanized and has all the blame heaped on them. It is unfortunate that Gazans elected a party with an explicit platform of genocide against the Jews, yes. Its still not appropriate to dehumanize them is and it’s definitely not productive.
  - bronzeage 5y ago
    But it is productive. It reminds you what happens if you are accidentally naïve enough to give Palestinians a chance to hurt you. They will take that chance at any cost and price because they do not care about their own wellbeing. And they did well in brainwashing the rest of their people into being bloodthirsty savages, the damage is already deep in their minds and hearts. Just taking a look at their schools and propaganda. The Palestinians already chose to dehumanize themselves. They choose to teach their own children that nothing matters more than killing Israelis. They choose to raise their children into a brainwash of shahids. Nothing short of a massive generational counter-brainwash can fix this problem. It's damage rooted deep in the minds of Palestinians and no leader can fix it because no peaceful leader can arise and lead people who have been brainwashed into war since they were born.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

nl 5y ago

@dang there is something odd going on here. The comment I'm replying to from user woodpanel says (in part): ""most populated" > "crammed" > "jailed" > "the new warsaw ghetto"... The word you're looking for also describes what's enabling the cognitive dissonance of putting Gaza in the same category as a Singapur, a Tokio or Hong Kong without blinking... a town with an economy that only consists of NGOs, the Hamas and UN-Organizations" This dead comment[1] from user idownvoted says: "You're missing the intention of those pushing this claim: Painting Israel as running a prison intentionally bad, or vice-versa making Gaza the new Warsaw-Ghetto. If other commentators can't note the rediculousness of putting Gaza next to Tokio, Singapur or Hong Kong, I will: A place with virtually no economy outside of NGOs, the Hamas and UN-Orgs vs. economic beacons that draw talent from all over the world." [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27188683 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27188683

user982 5y ago
Don't look directly at the hasbara.
- woodpanel 5y ago
  Of course, I'm a typical German troll farm run by the mossad. You clearly have incorporated the word I was hinting at. Why not own it?