@pm_me_passion's banner p

pm_me_passion

אֲנָשִׁים נֹשְׂאֵי מָגֵן וְחֶרֶב וְדֹרְכֵי קֶשֶׁת וּלְמוּדֵי מִלְחָמָה

0 followers   follows 1 user  
joined 2022 September 05 06:00:05 UTC

				

User ID: 464

pm_me_passion

אֲנָשִׁים נֹשְׂאֵי מָגֵן וְחֶרֶב וְדֹרְכֵי קֶשֶׁת וּלְמוּדֵי מִלְחָמָה

0 followers   follows 1 user   joined 2022 September 05 06:00:05 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 464

You’ve just now looked up the ‘48 war, then came up with a bunch of quotes to support your new-found opinion that just happens to mirror the same talking points as every other pro-Hamas person in the world? Is that supposed to be believable?

Re: NYT, it’s a stand-in for media in general. I couldn’t care less about the NYT specifically.

Gell-Mann amnesia is exactly what’s on display here. Like it or not, this is a perfect example: trusting a media report about a subject he’s less familiar with, despite already knowing how the media falsely represents subjects he’s closely familiar with.

I know he doesn’t understand Israeli politics by the things he says in the post. Again, thinking that 10% of Israelis want to because they vote for the same party they’ve always voted for is as ridiculous as thinking anyone who votes R wants to strip women of rights, and everyone who votes D wants to trans all the kids. It’s not even surface level understanding, it’s cartoonish thinking.

“You’ve been controversial for decades”, said the people living on lands stolen by genociding the natives and importing slaves. Who cares what you think?

Morality requires knowledge

Oh, did you guys miss “though shalt not murder” back then?

Thanks for the timestamps.

I think she was trying to ambush them, which is why she had the pot boiling to begin with. Her motivation is likely “being crazy”. That said, the shoot could have been avoided by backing off behind the corner, but the cop may have had other considerations such as protecting his partner. It’s pretty hard to say from the videos.

If your position is practical, rather than moral, wouldn't it be simpler and cheaper to stop sending aid to Gaza and Yemen, and let the populations there starve to death? It would be much more effective than bombing weapons caches, and nobody seems to care about starving Yemenis anyway.

So far Hamasniks have been surrendering just fine. They’re also perfectly capable of dying en-mass. Only their leadership in Qatar remains untouchable to us (Israelis) for now, but hopefully that will change once the hostages are out, or at least accounted for.

What do you mean "why"? If you want to stop the Houthis from blocking trade routes, surely their disappearance would achieve that goal. Dead people cannot initiate hostilities.

You're welcome to try to "befriend the arab states", though you'll have to choose which ones. Currently you're on the Saudi-Sunni axis, which is one of the reasons the Iranian don't like you. Rest assured that your support for Israel is a minor issue at best.

They know the outcome, and they are acting on it. The international community has been doing everything in its power to prolong the Arab-Israeli conflict as much as possible. There’s the very existence of UNRWA as one clear example, and this current iteration is just one more example - albeit one with an alibi.

I can’t quite find the motive, other than just Jew-hatred, but action speaks clear enough.

Gazans already had Gaza on 10.6, they didn’t need any offers. Now they might have occupation back.

Who is going to fight for them and why?

This is not the position of strength you imagine it to be. In fact, threatening non-participation is a lose-lose-lose position for anyone not absolutely and forever essential - which is almost everyone.

Imagine that young natives don’t join up the fight, but young immigrants do. Now you have immigrants taking over your armed forces from the bottom. Whichever amount of immigrants die in war is replaced by more immigration. Natives lose.

Now imagine that neither natives nor immigrants join. The natives will be forcibly drafted, since they obviously won’t organize as a community to resist a draft. The immigrants will organize and not be drafted. Natives die off in war and their relative numbers further decline. As draftees they are ejected back at the end of the war, worse off than before. Natives lose again.

If only natives join up and immigrants don’t, then the threat is seen for the bluff that it was and the natives earn nothing but death at the front lines. Natives lose.

That’s one benefit of stretching the war, then - they’ll grow up to a killable age!

More seriously though, if their society collapsed they’d likely have to move somewhere else anyway. In my fever dreams I hope Trump is elected and disbands UNRWA somehow, and then those refugees might even integrate in their host countries. That being unlikely, I’ll accept them just being further away and thus less likely to cause damage.

Phoenix is a strong example because on its own it provides between hundreds to thousands of individual cases of central-example assassinations, which refutes any claim that similar Israeli actions could ever be unique. It’s also an example that you couldn’t possibly blame the Jews for. The specific perpetrators, official policy, subsequent public outrage or cessation of it don’t matter one way or another since my point isn’t “America bad”, it’s “assassinations aren’t uniquely Israeli”. Once again, the existence of the Order of Assassins should have been sufficient and obvious as well.

Do note that the only one doing any denial here is you. You’ve also ignored all other examples, I assume because they’re simply undeniable.

Why not? It’s creating an incentive structure in the correct direction. Until now, Hamas leadership was feeling perfectly safe and comfortable sending their people to die for them while they sit on a growing pile of money in Qatar. Now they might feel they have skin in the game.

Would it matter to you if roughly half of the Arabs between the river and the sea are actually descended from recent Egyptian / Levantine work migrants, who moved to mandatory Palestine in the early 1900’s?

If you tell someone practically anything at the same time you point a gun at them, you know, chances are they aren't going to process it because they are busy processing a gun being pointed at them.

My experience is that innocent people will freeze and back off. Non-innocent people… depends on what they were trying to do to begin with.

Frankly, I don’t believe you. You’ve already stated that you think Israel “should never have existed”, and that we should “forgive Hitler” - whatever forgiveness to a dead man even means. Maybe he should apologize first. Of course, I have no way to prove that one way or another.

But if you really are new to the subject, I ask you to consider: before 1947, Jews were spread out all over mandatory Palestine. In Hebron, in east Jerusalem, in Kfar Etzion in Samaria. After 1949, every place conquered by the Jordanians and Egyptians - formerly mandatory Palestine - suddenly became judenfrei. The Jews were all mysteriously gone. On the other side of the armistice line, there still existed a mixed population. In fact, this happened all over the Middle East, where Jewish communities would suddenly vanish from Muslim countries. So tell me, please, why do you think these countries have any right to exist? They also have their own sectarian violence going on until today, of course, where minorities have not been totally wiped out yet.

(That article is awful, by the way. The kind of foreign misunderstanding that’s close to getting it, but then misses the mark so widely it almost makes me want to defend the government I was just protesting against. He actually thinks anyone wants to shut down electricity on Shabbat? Jesus, how about shutting up?)

This is one of those - it can work only once things.

It happened again today, this time with PTT radios. This is great, I hope it keeps happening and people treat known Hizballah members like lepers.

Everything you’re describing is:

  1. A result of one side participating in civic institutions with the express goal of changing it from within, i.e “the long march through the institutions”. A communist in 1950’s America would have said the same thing as you, about not being allowed to ruse in the ranks. Now look at how their ideology has spread to the upper echelons of your society. Zoomed out, this is proof against your claims

  2. Not an actual hard cap on any person rising through the ranks, just a difficulty. Again, see how the Marxists did it.

  3. Because of 1 and 2, reversible in the long term. It requires actual work, sacrifice and ideological commitment but over the long term you can get there. Like I said, though, you won’t get there by lying down.

For that instance specifically, and with the benefit of hindsight, I’d tell them to join for the arms and training.

In this instance, what exactly is keeping your tribe from rising in the ranks of institutions? Especially given that you already were there. Is it some analogue of the patriarchy or institutional racism?

It benefits you to be hegemon, and it benefits your camp to be in the institutions of hegemony. It doesn’t matter if the fighting happens in Taiwan, Korea, or the Department of Education

Where is the part where you, your children and your culture flourish? You won’t get there by losing a war to China, of all things.

Because your denial is so weak, you appeal to a single CIA operation which was mostly executed by the South Vietnamese themselves;

No, that one single example is so strong that it is simply sufficient, all on its own, to refute your claim. Nothing else is needed, despite your denials. If you feel otherwise, we can go into all the other CIA assassinations - both failed and successful - and tally those up. Castro alone is like 8 times.

You are just playing dumb. You don't understand the difference between a firefight among insurgents and an occupying force, and car-bombing a Palestinian political writer? Or sending a mail-bomb to factory workers?

As I said, simply count how many instances in the list are the former and how many are the latter. I’ll grant you a few tens of the latter. Most of that list, and especially from 2000 onwards, is basically just some militant getting airstriked.

I’d take that deal. Utah’s fantastic, and mormons are way better than haredim. I would prefer a slightly more northern location though, but that’s just haggling.

Sure, that might be the rationalization this time around. It doesn’t explain all the other times this happens, or all the other replies here arguing that the Nazis aren’t actually Nazis, but it works for understanding this one decision this one time. I personally don’t buy it, because I’d prefer to see the overall pattern rather than zoom in on this one instance.