3 ms·

> Would you agree that "Palestinians should suffer for what Hamas did" is a decent summary of the view you describe I'm not the person you are responding to, b

> Would you agree that "Palestinians should suffer for what Hamas did" is a decent summary of the view you describe I'm not the person you are responding to, but sheesh that is an unsympathetic reading of their comment. I do not know if the person you replied to does or does not believe that, but nothing in their comment would imply that. > I do not pretend to have or be able to gain any knowledge that could help this thousand year conflict. Well first step would be listening to what people say instead of adding your own interpretations.

xorcist 1y ago
Yeah, I realize that was dangerously close to ragebait territory, sorry about that. It's just that I saw it as an opportunity to glimpse into the reasoning made and I couldn't find myself with a charitable interpretation that didn't include something very similar to that statement, so why not pop it out there to find out more what the person disagrees with? Feel free to ignore the question, it probably won't change anyone's view anyway.
- bawolff 1y ago
  I don't know why people find the reasoning so shocking. It plays out the same in pretty much every country. Look at US during 9/11 or world war 2. Some sort of attack happens, people get scared (often legitamently), they support measures they think will get their security back. Sometimes those measures are reasonable, sometimes they are more wtf, more often they are somewhere in between. As the saying goes: hurt people hurt people. That's not to say they are neccesarily illogical. There are real threats out there and sometimes the options to defend one self are limitted to unsaoury things. Most people if given the choice between shooting someone or being shot themselves, chose to shoot the other person. No matter where you live, you have probably seen people react this way, even if just on a very small scale.

xorcist 1y ago

Yeah, I realize that was dangerously close to ragebait territory, sorry about that. It's just that I saw it as an opportunity to glimpse into the reasoning made and I couldn't find myself with a charitable interpretation that didn't include something very similar to that statement, so why not pop it out there to find out more what the person disagrees with? Feel free to ignore the question, it probably won't change anyone's view anyway.

bawolff 1y ago
I don't know why people find the reasoning so shocking. It plays out the same in pretty much every country. Look at US during 9/11 or world war 2. Some sort of attack happens, people get scared (often legitamently), they support measures they think will get their security back. Sometimes those measures are reasonable, sometimes they are more wtf, more often they are somewhere in between. As the saying goes: hurt people hurt people. That's not to say they are neccesarily illogical. There are real threats out there and sometimes the options to defend one self are limitted to unsaoury things. Most people if given the choice between shooting someone or being shot themselves, chose to shoot the other person. No matter where you live, you have probably seen people react this way, even if just on a very small scale.