4 ms·

That definition of Terrorism would make Israel a terrorist state.

by aaomidi 1y ago

YZF 1y ago
[flagged]
- creatonez 1y ago
  [flagged]
  - YZF 1y ago
    [flagged]
    - memonkey 1y ago
      [flagged]
    - TimorousBestie 1y ago
      As a point of fact, at least one “flour massacre” does exist: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flour_Massacre https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flour_Massacre Here is a news article where the IDF is quoted directly, admitting that troops opened fire on “dozens of people” at that location at that time: https://edition.cnn.com/2024/03/08/middleeast/gaza-flour-massacre-idf-report-intl/index.html https://edition.cnn.com/2024/03/08/middleeast/gaza-flour-mas...
    - lolmfaowe 1y ago
      [dead]
ithkuil 1y ago
I guess it's hard to define words. Surely terrorism has this vague meaning of doing very evil and violent things. But a picked up a random dictionary and it says: "the unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims". I struggle to understand what political aim Israel is pursuing when using unlawful violence and intimidation. If you believe that Israel is performing a genocide what is the point of explicitly instilling more fear in the victims? Just sadism? I genuinely don't understand what advantage would Israel have in employing terror tactics against Palestinians. Is the idea that they do so in order to make them even more angry so they can justify their genocide? Is that the argument? Or am I not giving the same meaning to the word "terrorism" as you do? I don't want to argue about which side is on the right side or whatnot; I found that this kind of conversation is is highly unproductive online. But I am interested in understanding how words have changed their meaning over time. Is terrorist now just a synonym for "murdering civilians"?
- TimorousBestie 1y ago
  I appreciate the synchronicity between your username and words being hard to define! If only I had the spare time to pick up such a difficult conlang.
- jhanschoo 1y ago
  Based on that definition alone, the occupation of the West Bank and the discrimination against its original people breaks international law, is enforced by violence and intimidation against civilians, and from the unlawful settlement in it, seems to be in service of the political Zionist aim of settling the region, let alone Gaza.
  - parineum 1y ago
    Traffic laws are enforced by violence and intimidation.
    - ithkuil 1y ago
      If any form of coercion and prevarication is labeled terrorism we then lack a word to describe the act of plowing through a crowd with a truck or planting a bomb in an everyday place with the intention of instilling terror in the population. Those acts are different from military occupation or apartheid or genocide. It's not a judgement of value. It's a description of a method. My point is that the word "terrorism" transcended the description of a technique for reaching certain goals, to a general blanket term used to describe "pure evil" and so people started to use it to describe very bad things even if they are not technically terrorism
      - jhanschoo 1y ago
        Make no mistake, occupiers can and frequently will use terror tactics. They don't plow through a crowd with a truck or plant a bomb in an everyday place because they don't need to do that to instill terror, those are tactics of the weak. No, they disappear the people around you, with the same aim, and from a position of power. Which is the greater terror? A truck that detonated downtown or knowing a relative that got killed, locked up, or tortured? Apartheid and genocide are worse terrors than that, and by a stronger oppressor. Many Palestinians in the West Bank have to pass through military checkpoints daily just to go about their daily lives, and at every point, one wonders if it is on that day that their life goes sideways.

That definition of Terrorism would make Israel a terrorist state.

YZF 1y ago

[flagged]

creatonez 1y ago
[flagged]
- YZF 1y ago
  [flagged]
  - memonkey 1y ago
    [flagged]
  - TimorousBestie 1y ago
    As a point of fact, at least one “flour massacre” does exist: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flour_Massacre https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flour_Massacre Here is a news article where the IDF is quoted directly, admitting that troops opened fire on “dozens of people” at that location at that time: https://edition.cnn.com/2024/03/08/middleeast/gaza-flour-massacre-idf-report-intl/index.html https://edition.cnn.com/2024/03/08/middleeast/gaza-flour-mas...
  - lolmfaowe 1y ago
    [dead]

ithkuil 1y ago

I guess it's hard to define words. Surely terrorism has this vague meaning of doing very evil and violent things. But a picked up a random dictionary and it says: "the unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims". I struggle to understand what political aim Israel is pursuing when using unlawful violence and intimidation. If you believe that Israel is performing a genocide what is the point of explicitly instilling more fear in the victims? Just sadism? I genuinely don't understand what advantage would Israel have in employing terror tactics against Palestinians. Is the idea that they do so in order to make them even more angry so they can justify their genocide? Is that the argument? Or am I not giving the same meaning to the word "terrorism" as you do? I don't want to argue about which side is on the right side or whatnot; I found that this kind of conversation is is highly unproductive online. But I am interested in understanding how words have changed their meaning over time. Is terrorist now just a synonym for "murdering civilians"?

TimorousBestie 1y ago
I appreciate the synchronicity between your username and words being hard to define! If only I had the spare time to pick up such a difficult conlang.
jhanschoo 1y ago
Based on that definition alone, the occupation of the West Bank and the discrimination against its original people breaks international law, is enforced by violence and intimidation against civilians, and from the unlawful settlement in it, seems to be in service of the political Zionist aim of settling the region, let alone Gaza.
- parineum 1y ago
  Traffic laws are enforced by violence and intimidation.
  - ithkuil 1y ago
    If any form of coercion and prevarication is labeled terrorism we then lack a word to describe the act of plowing through a crowd with a truck or planting a bomb in an everyday place with the intention of instilling terror in the population. Those acts are different from military occupation or apartheid or genocide. It's not a judgement of value. It's a description of a method. My point is that the word "terrorism" transcended the description of a technique for reaching certain goals, to a general blanket term used to describe "pure evil" and so people started to use it to describe very bad things even if they are not technically terrorism
    - jhanschoo 1y ago
      Make no mistake, occupiers can and frequently will use terror tactics. They don't plow through a crowd with a truck or plant a bomb in an everyday place because they don't need to do that to instill terror, those are tactics of the weak. No, they disappear the people around you, with the same aim, and from a position of power. Which is the greater terror? A truck that detonated downtown or knowing a relative that got killed, locked up, or tortured? Apartheid and genocide are worse terrors than that, and by a stronger oppressor. Many Palestinians in the West Bank have to pass through military checkpoints daily just to go about their daily lives, and at every point, one wonders if it is on that day that their life goes sideways.