Ghazi Hamad, of terror group's politburo, hails the major assault in which civilians were systematically murdered, saying 'there will be a second, a third, a fourth'
Fucking deranged tankies man, their Lord and Savior Hasan Abi has been going off about how “baby settlers” are valid military targets. These people yearn to live under a propaganda-military dictatorship.
Bro like literally 90% of Lemmy has a throbbing boner for Hamas and his stated antisemitic terrorists, even in this thread, terrorists apologizers abound
Weird that as a Jew who is pretty damn sensitive to antisemitism since I faced a lot of it growing up in religious Indiana, I haven’t noticed this support for antisemitic terrorists on Lemmy. I’ve seen a lot of support for innocent people being slaughtered because of Israel’s response to antisemitic terrorists, but that’s a separate issue.
People in the U.S. protested the war in Afghanistan. Does that mean they supported Al Qaeda? Because this is some real “you’re either with us or you’re with the terrorists” thinking from my perspective.
They shouldn’t have any fucking supporters. This is the shit all the anti-Israel people are supporting. I’m no fan of Netanyahu but wtf do they expect Israel to do? It’s like everyone forgot what prompted this and thinks Israel just woke up one morning and decided to raze everything because they were bored.
It’s a disproportionate response, and misdirected. But it is definitely a response to something real, which the more rabid anti-Israel types seem to gloss over.
Yes it’s a humanitarian disaster through and through, and the government response is internationally humiliating for Israel. I felt the same way when the USA started carpet bombing Baghdad after 9/11, although that was far worse and made much less sense.
I’m not arrogant enough to think I have sufficient knowledge or access to reliable enough information to make that judgement. I can certainly say it’s a humanitarian disaster and tragedy.
What did you expect? Do you think that hitting a wasp nest with a rod just once means you’ll only be stung once because you only hit it once?
There’s no rule stating that the wasps must respond with equal magnitude. If people are now getting hurt, it’s because someone provoked the wasps. The notion that reactions must be proportionate to the offense is quite naive.
Idk what’s more hilarious here, the implication that a Palestinian baby deserves to die because of what Hamas did or the implication that Jews are hyperaggressive animals that are completely incapable of moral reasoning.
Are you focusing solely on the casualties involving children? Does that mean any location with children is off-limits for retaliation, providing a shield for adversaries because children are present? This is not a simple game of hide and seek, nor is it your idealistic world where a slap is met with a turned cheek.
It’s a common misconception that supporters of Israel are indifferent to the death of children or any civilian, for that matter, and you seem to be perpetuating this narrative. You choose the most objectionable point about an opponent to make an accusation, and, much like someone obstinately arguing without listening to reason, you consider yourself morally superior and in the right.
What, in your opinion, would be a suitable response to an attack from Hamas? Would peaceful protests, international condemnation, or sanctions suffice?
If you’ve discarded your spine, don’t assume everyone else has done the same. An entity without the ability to react appropriately can only succumb.
Your narrative would hold if it weren’t flawed; it’s an oversimplification. Let’s take your perspective where Hamas is the bees that stung Israel, and now Israel is retaliating against the land harboring the bee nest. (I use ‘bees’ here to distinguish from my earlier wasp analogy).
If your neighbor disliked the bees as much as you and agreed the nest was a problem, then certainly, destroying it with care to avoid collateral damage would be wise. However, the situation changes if your neighbor is a beekeeper who shields the bees in his home to protect them from you. If those bees become aggressive and harm your family, naturally, you’d first request the neighbor to remove the bees. Should they refuse, you’d have every right to seek external help. But what if the authorities do little, leaving you to suffer the stings while your neighbor faces minimal consequences? Rather than passively endure this, you might feel compelled to act independently to prevent future stings and deter the beekeeper from maintaining this threat.
Okay, then let’s hypothetically say Israel forms a terrorist organization that doesn’t overlap with the Israeli government itself, would they then have the right to attack Gaza? This organization would essentially be in the same position relative to Israel as Hamas is to the Palestinians.
The way you debate reminds me of someone who might have abandoned their education prematurely. Are you going to complain to the teacher because you cannot acknowledge that your reasoning is flawed, incomplete, and biased? Your approach to this discussion is quite frankly, absurd.
They’re not doing their supporters any favours with these sort of comments lol
It’s easy to support Palestinian statehood. Anyone that supports Hamas is a moron.
I was about to say, who’s out there supporting hamas
The tankies are all over it, actually.
Fucking deranged tankies man, their Lord and Savior Hasan Abi has been going off about how “baby settlers” are valid military targets. These people yearn to live under a propaganda-military dictatorship.
It’s crazy because I’m pretty sure a lot of them would be considered “undesirables” in the societies they claim to want to live in.
That’s it. I’m never voting for a tankie again.
Bro like literally 90% of Lemmy has a throbbing boner for Hamas and his stated antisemitic terrorists, even in this thread, terrorists apologizers abound
Weird that as a Jew who is pretty damn sensitive to antisemitism since I faced a lot of it growing up in religious Indiana, I haven’t noticed this support for antisemitic terrorists on Lemmy. I’ve seen a lot of support for innocent people being slaughtered because of Israel’s response to antisemitic terrorists, but that’s a separate issue.
People in the U.S. protested the war in Afghanistan. Does that mean they supported Al Qaeda? Because this is some real “you’re either with us or you’re with the terrorists” thinking from my perspective.
You’ve not been in these threads for very long, have you?
You’d be surprised, they’re out there
Considering Hamas is the organization governing Gaza right now, the two are often intertwined in these discussions
Governing is a generous term
Israel controls the borders
Yes Egypt also doesn’t exists
They’re the same picture.
They shouldn’t have any fucking supporters. This is the shit all the anti-Israel people are supporting. I’m no fan of Netanyahu but wtf do they expect Israel to do? It’s like everyone forgot what prompted this and thinks Israel just woke up one morning and decided to raze everything because they were bored.
I expect them not to commit war crimes at a bare minimum.
Yes, not indiscriminately murdering civilians would be nice.
Are you suggesting that when Israel bombs a refugee camp and kills all those innocent people that somehow that is a reasonable response?
It’s a disproportionate response, and misdirected. But it is definitely a response to something real, which the more rabid anti-Israel types seem to gloss over.
Israel has a right to defend itself, but they’re bombing refuge camps.
Yes it’s a humanitarian disaster through and through, and the government response is internationally humiliating for Israel. I felt the same way when the USA started carpet bombing Baghdad after 9/11, although that was far worse and made much less sense.
It’s genocide.
I’m not arrogant enough to think I have sufficient knowledge or access to reliable enough information to make that judgement. I can certainly say it’s a humanitarian disaster and tragedy.
Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.
What did you expect? Do you think that hitting a wasp nest with a rod just once means you’ll only be stung once because you only hit it once? There’s no rule stating that the wasps must respond with equal magnitude. If people are now getting hurt, it’s because someone provoked the wasps. The notion that reactions must be proportionate to the offense is quite naive.
Idk what’s more hilarious here, the implication that a Palestinian baby deserves to die because of what Hamas did or the implication that Jews are hyperaggressive animals that are completely incapable of moral reasoning.
Are you focusing solely on the casualties involving children? Does that mean any location with children is off-limits for retaliation, providing a shield for adversaries because children are present? This is not a simple game of hide and seek, nor is it your idealistic world where a slap is met with a turned cheek.
It’s a common misconception that supporters of Israel are indifferent to the death of children or any civilian, for that matter, and you seem to be perpetuating this narrative. You choose the most objectionable point about an opponent to make an accusation, and, much like someone obstinately arguing without listening to reason, you consider yourself morally superior and in the right.
What, in your opinion, would be a suitable response to an attack from Hamas? Would peaceful protests, international condemnation, or sanctions suffice?
If you’ve discarded your spine, don’t assume everyone else has done the same. An entity without the ability to react appropriately can only succumb.
If I get stung by a wasp nest sitting on my neighbor’s house, I do not have the right to burn down my neighbor’s house with them in it.
Hamas, the IDF, and the Israeli are all murderers. They all have blood on their hands.
Your narrative would hold if it weren’t flawed; it’s an oversimplification. Let’s take your perspective where Hamas is the bees that stung Israel, and now Israel is retaliating against the land harboring the bee nest. (I use ‘bees’ here to distinguish from my earlier wasp analogy).
If your neighbor disliked the bees as much as you and agreed the nest was a problem, then certainly, destroying it with care to avoid collateral damage would be wise. However, the situation changes if your neighbor is a beekeeper who shields the bees in his home to protect them from you. If those bees become aggressive and harm your family, naturally, you’d first request the neighbor to remove the bees. Should they refuse, you’d have every right to seek external help. But what if the authorities do little, leaving you to suffer the stings while your neighbor faces minimal consequences? Rather than passively endure this, you might feel compelled to act independently to prevent future stings and deter the beekeeper from maintaining this threat.
Bullshit.
No government nor military should not get a carte blanche for murdering innocent civilians in the process of fighting a terrorist organization.
If you can’t figure that one out on your own, I’m not debating with you.
Okay, then let’s hypothetically say Israel forms a terrorist organization that doesn’t overlap with the Israeli government itself, would they then have the right to attack Gaza? This organization would essentially be in the same position relative to Israel as Hamas is to the Palestinians.
The way you debate reminds me of someone who might have abandoned their education prematurely. Are you going to complain to the teacher because you cannot acknowledge that your reasoning is flawed, incomplete, and biased? Your approach to this discussion is quite frankly, absurd.
being both anti-israel and anti-hamas at the same time is the only correct position i don’t understand why this isn’t obvious
Yeah, what prompted this already ? can you remind us ?
What prompted this? You mean the decades of occupation? Or are you suggesting history only began with the Hamas attack?