5 ms·

I really don't know much about Czech history but I Googled: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prague_uprising https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prague_uprising https:

by YZF 3y ago

I really don't know much about Czech history but I Googled: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prague_uprising https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prague_uprising https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expulsion_of_Germans_from_Czechoslovakia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expulsion_of_Germans_from_Czec... Lots of nasty stuff. I obviously won't defend the Nazis but Czechs didn't exactly play by the rules of law against the Nazis who also didn't play by the rules of law. The Germans seem to have a reasonable grounds to claim parts of your land. If 3000 Germans armed to the teeth with assault rifles, heavy machine guns and RPGs went on a rampage through Prague killing 1000 civilians, taking hostages, and retreating back to Germany... What would be your take on that? Maybe it's not a good analogy, I'm totally ignorant of European history like most are about middle eastern history, point is that without context you can't make a moral judgement. Smotrich is an idiot. The PA has no interest in making peace. But Israel and the PA do collaborate because the PA corrupt officials want to remain in power and their people will slaughter them without Israel's protection just like they did to the Fatah in Gaza. EDIT: So why aren't Europeans killing each other all the time when basically every inch of land there was stolen from someone in some war not too long ago? They were for a long time. Because at some point you move on and you stop thinking that you're going to solve the problem by killing your neighbor. The Palestinians are just not willing to move on. Israel has been willing to move on a long time ago but its neighbors want to kill it. Those neighbors also don't generally share the values of the west at all. Just look at the human right situation in the middle east and how neighboring countries (unrelated to Israel) treat each other. It's not Western Europe. EDIT2: this is ancient history but since we've gone back to WW-II: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amin_al-Husseini https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amin_al-Husseini ... I am not super familiar with this guy's history but supposedly the family originates from: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Husayn_ibn_Ali https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Husayn_ibn_Ali who lived in Medina (modern day Saudi Arabia) and not in "Palestine". I've heard some Palestinians claim they're the descendants of the Canaanites https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canaan https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canaan ... anyhow, context history and such. I do feel on a human level for the individuals who are suffering and being pawns in a bigger game.

megous 3y ago
> The Germans seem to have a reasonable grounds to claim parts of your land. If 3000 Germans armed to the teeth with assault rifles, heavy machine guns and RPGs went on a rampage through Prague killing 1000 civilians, taking hostages, and retreating back to Germany... What would be your take on that? People would be pissed, but that's about as much as they could do. Czech would have to negotiate. I can certainly make a judgement that killing 100x more children than were killed during Oct 7 is more immoral. Don't need any history for that.
- YZF 3y ago
  First of all I don't believe "people would be pissed". Unless you guys over there are made of a different kind of human vs. the rest of us. True pacifists who would rather die, or see their family mutilated and tortured, than hurting an ant. A 17yo Hamas combatant counts as a child btw. It is terrible that children are dying. Most of that is on the Hamas. Hamas intentionally aimed their attacks at children. Hamas kidnapped babies. Executed children in front of their parents. Israel asked people to evacuate and at least in theory is targeting Hamas in an extremely densely populated area where Hamas is using population as human shields. I can't deny that seeing images of dead children on the Palestinian side is deeply disturbing. Not getting to those Hamas terrorists is not an option. What is the option? Another by the way there is that this monstrosity of Hamas was created with international help and pressure on Israel and now somehow it's all Israel's fault. There's also a clear propaganda war going on here as well and what I'd call double standards. If Israel could get at Hamas without hurting a single child that would definitely be preferable. You're asking Israel to sit back and be slaughtered. This isn't only about the Israeli children already murdered and taken hostage, it's also about the safety of the rest of the children. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Children_in_the_Israeli%E2%80%93Palestinian_conflict https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Children_in_the_Israeli%E2%80%... EDIT: just in case you say the option is to "negotiate" this current state is a result of the historical negotiations. How do you negotiate with a brutal enemy that wants you dead? The theory was that they've given up on wanting Jews dead. EDIT2: Another thought experiment to engage in is if the Hamas was even more successful in their attack, and the other settlements and towns where they were repelled failed, and they killed 10000 Israeli children would there be a different morality? I don't think the ratio of dead people is necessarily a morality factor at war. That does not mean it's good that people (including children) are getting killed. EDIT3: Interesting the NY Times is also asking similar questions: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M7K327quaEc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M7K327quaEc ... I didn't listen to it yet.

by YZF 3y ago

megous 3y ago

> The Germans seem to have a reasonable grounds to claim parts of your land. If 3000 Germans armed to the teeth with assault rifles, heavy machine guns and RPGs went on a rampage through Prague killing 1000 civilians, taking hostages, and retreating back to Germany... What would be your take on that? People would be pissed, but that's about as much as they could do. Czech would have to negotiate. I can certainly make a judgement that killing 100x more children than were killed during Oct 7 is more immoral. Don't need any history for that.

YZF 3y ago
First of all I don't believe "people would be pissed". Unless you guys over there are made of a different kind of human vs. the rest of us. True pacifists who would rather die, or see their family mutilated and tortured, than hurting an ant. A 17yo Hamas combatant counts as a child btw. It is terrible that children are dying. Most of that is on the Hamas. Hamas intentionally aimed their attacks at children. Hamas kidnapped babies. Executed children in front of their parents. Israel asked people to evacuate and at least in theory is targeting Hamas in an extremely densely populated area where Hamas is using population as human shields. I can't deny that seeing images of dead children on the Palestinian side is deeply disturbing. Not getting to those Hamas terrorists is not an option. What is the option? Another by the way there is that this monstrosity of Hamas was created with international help and pressure on Israel and now somehow it's all Israel's fault. There's also a clear propaganda war going on here as well and what I'd call double standards. If Israel could get at Hamas without hurting a single child that would definitely be preferable. You're asking Israel to sit back and be slaughtered. This isn't only about the Israeli children already murdered and taken hostage, it's also about the safety of the rest of the children. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Children_in_the_Israeli%E2%80%93Palestinian_conflict https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Children_in_the_Israeli%E2%80%... EDIT: just in case you say the option is to "negotiate" this current state is a result of the historical negotiations. How do you negotiate with a brutal enemy that wants you dead? The theory was that they've given up on wanting Jews dead. EDIT2: Another thought experiment to engage in is if the Hamas was even more successful in their attack, and the other settlements and towns where they were repelled failed, and they killed 10000 Israeli children would there be a different morality? I don't think the ratio of dead people is necessarily a morality factor at war. That does not mean it's good that people (including children) are getting killed. EDIT3: Interesting the NY Times is also asking similar questions: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M7K327quaEc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M7K327quaEc ... I didn't listen to it yet.