zeke5123
2yr ago
The initial report was 40 killed babies with some decapitated. The first is undoubtedly true. The second claim seems arguably true.
May I suggest that the argument “not all of the babies were decapitated” isn’t quite the winning argument?
zeke5123
2yr ago
And you should be able to leave your keys in a convertible with the roof down in a shitty part of town. But that doesn’t really provide much solace when your car is stolen.
Sure, it would be great if we didn’t have to take precautions against bad actions but telling people to not take reasonable precautions because “that’s victim blaming” is “victim creating” behavior.
zeke5123
2yr ago
Yes but sage advice. Just like the sage advice to a young woman is “don’t drink a lot especially around young men you don’t know” or “don’t dress like a slut.” Sure — it is “victim blaming” but the concept makes zero sense. The world isn’t perfect. Telling people “don’t put yourself in a shitty situation” isn’t victim blaming but trying to prevent victims in the first place.
zeke5123
2yr ago
To be clear about your point, are you saying non progs think causal sex is a good deal or that non progs are happy to state it is bad?
zeke5123
2yr ago
I imagine the US told Israel and Iran “we are putting two carrier groups close to Israel. Israel will not attack Iran. If Iran does anything the carrier groups will attack Iran.”
Really decreases the odds either party “starts” something.
zeke5123
2yr ago
I think the concern is that Iran gets involved, the US responds, but is a paper tiger of sorts causing China to take Taiwan.
zeke5123
2yr ago
-
Reddit is dominated by a particular kind of young person. The question is how representative is the modal Reddit user compared to their cohort?
-
As you allude to, will their politics age as they get older? Maybe a lot probably depends on whether you think their beliefs are deeply held or merely fashionable beliefs.
zeke5123
2yr ago
There is no morally satisfying answer. And indeed, international law is really only on the edges. The point is trying to push towards a workable outcome; not some morally platonic ideal (that doesn’t exist).
zeke5123
2yr ago
The comparison isn’t exactly one for one since common law has a sovereign. The question is where there is no sovereign should we import concepts like SoL in terms of morality. And I think the answer is yes — we are probably into fourth generation Israelis at this point.
It doesn’t matter if Palestine has “contested” the issue (assuming the land was rightfully Palestinian land in the first place). You are basically creating a situation where you will cause a massive amount of short term harm (by moving out the fourth generation Israeli) while also encouraging states to utterly quash any other “claimants” (because if they shut up because they are decimated — in the figurative sense — they lose their claim).
I think the logic of things like AP and SoL is at some point the past needs to be the past. That logic can still work even when there is no sovereign.
zeke5123
2yr ago
It isn’t a one for one but same idea. If government A has operated as the de facto government for 30 years it’s enough to say government A is the proper government (and honestly maybe not that long)
The whole thing gets really messy. If a people can claim particular group of property, does that mean any sufficiently large sub population can claim territory within the larger group?
zeke5123
2yr ago
Adverse possession is generally 15 years. Why not double that and call it a day?
zeke5123
2yr ago
The pro Palestine argument is that Israel is colonial power and that Palestine deserves freedom. The chant is “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free.”
In the minds of most of these people, it is Israel that is keeping the Palestinians down. Yet Hamas, the regime in charge of Gaza, hasn’t held an election since 2006. They are an autocratic dictatorship. Why is the focus solely on Israel as “oppressors” and not the shitty, despotic regime in charge of Gaza?
zeke5123
2yr ago
Re your comment “it has to stop somewhere” why not today as opposed to 70 years ago?
zeke5123
2yr ago
There is no way in hell Europe is going to take in Palestinian refugees. It is already a hot button issue and politicians would be suicidal to let in people who just committed one of the largest terrorist attacks in recent history.
zeke5123
2yr ago
This is also the view of OBL. American civilians voted for the government that had soldiers in Saudi Arabia. For that reason, OBL thought it allowable to kill American civilians.
zeke5123
2yr ago
Of course, this all ignores what happened prior to this. Including Hamas dismantling systems to attack Israel. Your history starts too late. Gaza has been and continues to be the shittier party in this play.
But of course my statement wasn’t dishonest. I was breaking it down into bite size pieces. I was saying “first start with X.” Was then going to move onto the next.
zeke5123
2yr ago
I said we needed to go step by step. So do you still maintain Israel is obligated to provide resources to Hamas before we get to blockade issue.
zeke5123
2yr ago
It seems like all of these arguments boils down to “we will let Hamas utilize their population to protect Hamas.”
zeke5123
2yr ago
Wasn’t that basically what happened back in the mid 2000s followed by Hamas fucking it up?
zeke5123
2yr ago
This is literally insane. You are claiming that if side A attacks side B, that side B is required to continue to provide services to side A. Since that has never been required in the history of war I’ll suggest that it is not customary international law.
zeke5123
2yr ago
Does Israel have an obligation to send water or electricity to Gaza? Let’s start there. Are you saying Israel has an obligation before we move on to any blockade.
This is getting to be Alex Jones and Sandy Hooks level denial
More options
Context Copy link