5 ms·

> > The US is funding an openly genocidal regime that is killing a child every ten minutes, saying there's "no red line". > That's your political opinion. Not

> > The US is funding an openly genocidal regime that is killing a child every ten minutes, saying there's "no red line". > That's your political opinion. Not really, no. They have said as much themselves. "There is no red line" is a direct quote. Zionists, aka the ones committing and supporting this particularly heinous genocide, consider it a political view - no one else. Zionists say it's complicated, it's self defense; even as they openly state their true intent [0]. But the entire rest of the fucking planet considers it wanton murder, genocide, and ethnic cleansing. We're heartbroken, we're furious, and we'll not stop talking about it until it ends. > I don't see why it's not an obvious truth that sometimes people prefer not to have to think about politics or political ideology. I explained why, as did other commenters. If you want to be ignorant and apathetic towards 'politics' (inequality and genocide and the planet burning for profit) that's your problem. Not mine. But it's a bit rich to then complain that you can't find good character driven stories, that enable and support such an apathetic and delusional choice of worldview. > to suggest art or entertainment devoid of political ideology is "drivel" or for people without "good souls and hearts" is baffling. I didn't. I 'suggested' that if you want good stories devoid of 'political content' then maybe you can't find them because vapid and ignorant and soulless people don't write very good stories. If you can find them, then why bother complaining that other people are discussing and enjoying 'political' content. 0 - https://law4palestine.org/law-for-palestine-releases-database-with-500-instances-of-israeli-incitement-to-genocide-continuously-updated/ https://law4palestine.org/law-for-palestine-releases-databas...

flumpcakes 3y ago
[flagged]
anjel 3y ago
As a thought exercise: What would happen next if the Palestinians laid down their arms and renowned warfare? What would happen next if the Israelis laid down their arms and renounced warfare?
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- mandmandam 3y ago
  I'd like to know: What value you think lies within your hypothetical? Do you think either of those scenarios are possible? Do you really think that if Hamas (not to be confused with the civilians who are being murdered) "laid down their arms" then Israel would start to treat Palestinians like humans? ... Really? Do you think that Palestinians who lost their homes, their families, their whole world to this 3 month orgy of atrocity are more or less likely to take up arms than people with something to lose? 30,000 Palestinians have been murdered. A million people are facing death by starvation and disease. It needs to stop.
  - anjel 3y ago
    >I'd like to know: What value you think lies within your hypothetical? >Do you think either of those scenarios are possible? You either missed the part about thought exercise or slipped in a bad-faith query. One side has tried repeatedly to compromise, the counter-party is fundamentally opposed to any compromise. Try gaming that out and see how you might succeed in reaching a successful compromise for peace. >Do you really think that if Hamas (not to be confused with the civilians who are being murdered) "laid down their arms" then Israel would start to treat Palestinians like humans? ... Really? What happened when Egypt was offered land for peace? What happened when the PA was offered 95% of the west bank in exchange for peace? Are you familiar with the "Peace Now" movement from the 1990s? It was way too large to call it a fringe movement? The response was suicide bombings. That was a quarter century ago and the last 25 years have made it rather bleak to realistically find peace, unless you think "the river to sea" as a peace proffer, perhaps. Do you? Really?? Granted its radicalizing for sure. Can you see how Palestinian if not Perso-Palestinian tactics would be as radicalizing on Israelis? Is one radicalization better than the other? >30,000 Palestinians have been murdered. A million people are facing death by starvation and disease. It needs to stop. Casualty stats are like polls. Its quasi data at best. OF COURSE it needs to stop. BILATERALLY. Have you heard one Palestinian person so much as nuance that their misery is a reaction to a Palestinian act of atrocity? Its a glaring double standard. Its a race to the bottom, and pretending that the Palestinians are pure victims while the Israelis are pure evil only illuminates your one-sidedness in this matter. Until both sides are able to find empathy for each other's existence, the race to the bottom is a sure thing. One last question for you: Can someone name a large-scale armed military conflict in which the civilian population caught in that conflict weren't treated as expendable?

flumpcakes 3y ago

[flagged]

anjel 3y ago

As a thought exercise: What would happen next if the Palestinians laid down their arms and renowned warfare? What would happen next if the Israelis laid down their arms and renounced warfare?

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
mandmandam 3y ago
I'd like to know: What value you think lies within your hypothetical? Do you think either of those scenarios are possible? Do you really think that if Hamas (not to be confused with the civilians who are being murdered) "laid down their arms" then Israel would start to treat Palestinians like humans? ... Really? Do you think that Palestinians who lost their homes, their families, their whole world to this 3 month orgy of atrocity are more or less likely to take up arms than people with something to lose? 30,000 Palestinians have been murdered. A million people are facing death by starvation and disease. It needs to stop.
- anjel 3y ago
  >I'd like to know: What value you think lies within your hypothetical? >Do you think either of those scenarios are possible? You either missed the part about thought exercise or slipped in a bad-faith query. One side has tried repeatedly to compromise, the counter-party is fundamentally opposed to any compromise. Try gaming that out and see how you might succeed in reaching a successful compromise for peace. >Do you really think that if Hamas (not to be confused with the civilians who are being murdered) "laid down their arms" then Israel would start to treat Palestinians like humans? ... Really? What happened when Egypt was offered land for peace? What happened when the PA was offered 95% of the west bank in exchange for peace? Are you familiar with the "Peace Now" movement from the 1990s? It was way too large to call it a fringe movement? The response was suicide bombings. That was a quarter century ago and the last 25 years have made it rather bleak to realistically find peace, unless you think "the river to sea" as a peace proffer, perhaps. Do you? Really?? Granted its radicalizing for sure. Can you see how Palestinian if not Perso-Palestinian tactics would be as radicalizing on Israelis? Is one radicalization better than the other? >30,000 Palestinians have been murdered. A million people are facing death by starvation and disease. It needs to stop. Casualty stats are like polls. Its quasi data at best. OF COURSE it needs to stop. BILATERALLY. Have you heard one Palestinian person so much as nuance that their misery is a reaction to a Palestinian act of atrocity? Its a glaring double standard. Its a race to the bottom, and pretending that the Palestinians are pure victims while the Israelis are pure evil only illuminates your one-sidedness in this matter. Until both sides are able to find empathy for each other's existence, the race to the bottom is a sure thing. One last question for you: Can someone name a large-scale armed military conflict in which the civilian population caught in that conflict weren't treated as expendable?