Is all of it shit, or you just can't find the good stuff? "The struggle will completely shift to how to get traffic" is from the business side, and you're experiencing it from the customer side.
We've backstabbed the Kurds after asking for their help twice now, and one of those times was by Trump himself! It would be crazy of them to fall for it a third time, especially since everyone knows Trump absolutely doesn't want boots on the ground in Iran and definitely won't be coming to their aid if this goes tits-up.
Killing kids on camera, burning people in hospitals alive, running them over in bulldozers is pretty much genocide. You can easily find these videos on internet (I don't recommend watching them even if you watch cartel beheadings for fun)
No, these things do not constitute a genocide. Genocide is the purposeful extermination of a people. What you’re describing are other alleged war crimes. While it’s a catchy and horrifying word that’s very useful against Israel, it’s dishonest to use it in this case.
All the things you described are indeed horrifying on their own, and I believe there are cases where Israeli forces did some of these things unjustifiably.
You must be asking yourself what the hell could be justified. Well, I’ve heard first accounts of kids being sent first as scouts in the battlefield, into a kill box, trying to pinpoint Israeli forces. Once the scout goes back and reports on the force’s location, an accurate barrage of RPGs will be shot at them. You can’t go into the kill box to stop them by arresting them. What would you have done? I do not envy the person that has to make that call, they are now scarred for life.
Justified? No? You pick between the life of that kid and the lives of the people under your command. Both choices are bad, this isn’t Hollywood.
Most of what you watch is edited purposefully and doesn’t give you any context for the purpose of recruiting the public opinion. It’s working amazingly.
These populists, so called leaders, don't represent everyone and are hated by many. In war everyone loses, and you seem to ignore the fact that there are two sides here. Normative people don't wake up in the morning wanting to murder children for fun. Your cartoonish image of Israelis as some kind of horned monsters is ridiculous.
I keep hearing that Israel is the only democracy of Middle East. And they keep getting elected, which means they are not some kind of extremists, but represent opinion of general population
The American/Israeli media empire is 100x larger than anything Hamas can disseminate. The "media is dishonest" excuse doesn't apply to Hamas any more than it does to the Israeli Military Censor: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_Military_Censor
I don't watch, I talk to real people who are first hand witnesses.
Second, Israel doesn't own any media empire, what exactly do you mean?
Third, Hamas doesn't need to dismantle any media organization, they got Qatar with their own world wide media empire of AlJazeera.
This is wrong. The gotcha underpinning this point denies reality of the situation, that Ukraine had warheads and the technical capability to take control of those warheads. There is no discussion here.
That's an idiosyncratic take on the facts that basically everyone else agrees to interpret otherwise.
Ukraine and weapons of mass destruction
Ukraine, formerly a republic of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) from 1922 to 1991, once hosted Soviet nuclear weapons and delivery systems on its territory.[1] The former Soviet Union had its nuclear program expanded to only four of its republics: Belarus, Kazakhstan, Russia, and Ukraine. After its dissolution in 1991, Ukraine inherited about 130 UR-100N intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBM) with six warheads each, 46 RT-23 Molodets ICBMs with ten warheads apiece, as well as 33 heavy bombers, totaling approximately 1,700 nuclear warheads that remained on Ukrainian territory.[2] Thus Ukraine became the third largest nuclear power in the world (possessing 300 more nuclear warheads than Kazakhstan, 6.5 times less than the United States, and ten times less than Russia)[3] and held about one third of the former Soviet nuclear weapons, delivery system, and significant knowledge of its design and production.[4] While all these weapons were located on Ukrainian territory, they were not under Ukraine's control.[5]
In 1994, Ukraine agreed to transfer these weapons to Russia for dismantlement and became a party to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, in exchange for economic compensation and assurances from Russia, the United States and the United Kingdom to respect Ukrainian independence and sovereignty within its existing borders.[6][7] Almost twenty years later, Russia, one of the parties to the agreement, invaded Ukraine in 2014 and subsequently also from 2022 onwards.
Btw, reference [5], used to justify the absurd claim that those weapons were in Ukraine's territory but not under its control, goes like this:
{{cite Hansard |url=https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm199293/cmhansrd/1993... |title=Nuclear Weapons |speaker=[[Jeremy Hanley]] |position=Minister of State for the Armed Forces |house=[[House of Commons (United Kingdom)|House of Commons]] |volume=227 |date=June 22, 1993 |column=154 |access-date=September 9, 2018 |quote=Some weapons are also possessed by Ukraine, Kazakhstan and Belarus, but these are controlled by the Commonwealth of Independent States.}}
So it's basically the words of a UK MP assuring his audience that, nooo, don't worry, Ukraine doesn't control its WMD.
Nothing justifies the attack on civilians because collective punishment is a war crime and a crime against humanity.
The military objectives were entirely justified though (taking out IDF bases, attempting to capture IDF soldiers, and attempting to liberate several-thousand Palestinians being held by Israel)
Of the 6000 people from Gaza who entered Israel that day, at most 12% were responsible for one of the 800 civilian casualties in Israel. If you consider that the minority who decided to target civilians were likely responsible for targeting multiple civilians, and that some number (at least 4 who are known) of those deaths resulted from the actions of the IDF, it's entirely possible fewer than 8% of insurgents targeted and killed civilians.
All told, fewer civilians were killed proportionately than have been killed in Israel's response.
What type of resistance would you have recommended Palestinians engage in prior to October 7? They tried non-violent resistance and were met with lethal force.
Attacking the people who stole your land and murdered your family is justified in my book. I don't think I'm alone, very few people globally support Israel.
By the wide definition of of "the people who stole your land" that you're using (meaning, no Hamas person checked who stole what land), almost everyone on earth is someone who stole someone's land. If not now, than in the previous generation. In my case as an Israeli, ~4 generations ago. In your case? I don't know. Either the people your family stole the land from X years ago have the right to attack you, or your family just managed to kill all of them years ago so there's no one to demand the land back.
> By the wide definition of of "the people who stole your land" that you're using (meaning, no Hamas person checked who stole what land), almost everyone on earth is someone who stole someone's land. If not now, than in the previous generation. In my case as an Israeli, ~4 generations ago.
Thanks for saying that (not sarcasm, I mean it). Peace can only start when both sides admit they’ve done wrong too.
Would you say both sides did wrong with the Nazis vs Jews? This is an identical situation (possibly worse since the Zionists actively invaded Palestine to commit genocide).
It is not identical, and it not even similar situation. You are sick in your head to compare the killing of 6 million people, unarmed, in gas chambers, with two nations that have a strong link to a place fighting over the land. The Jews never had anything against Germany - on the contrary, they wanted to integrate in it. Jews have real a historical connection to the land that even a Quran believer cannot deny, not to mention an archeologist.
Your failure to see things through the eyes of the other side is exactly the kind of thing that makes the Middle East a terrible place to live in.
The power differential between Zionists and Palestinians is much more extreme than Nazis and Jews. Zionists also have incredible control over my country (the US) than the Nazis ever did. In the 21st century Zionism is much worse than Nazism (which isn't even around any more in a significant way).
No, the Nazis had an army that took over all of Europe and some of Africa. The Jews had no weapons at all. Palestinians have weapons, they receive support in military training, and often coordinated their attacks with other armies from the countries surrounding Israel.
The "influence over the US" metric is ridiculous, the US was an enemy of the Nazis, of course they didn't have control over it. It's like saying the Nazis never had such a strong influence over Iran as the Palestinians do.
Prior to WWII the Jews were so powerful that the Rothschilds were able to get the UK to give them Palestine. The Balfour Agreement is very well documented. The Palestinians can't even return to their homes stolen from them during the Nakba.
It doesn't even need to involve an actual wrongdoing, even a Holocaust survivor might admit that Jews being a socially separate group in Europe may have contributed to the Nazis scapegoating them (just stating a widely accepted fact, not blaming the victims). A 100% victim mindset is rarely helpful.
I'm indigenous like the Palestinians (who also did not steal anyone's land). Zionism was created in the late 1800s with the mission to steal land and ethnically cleanse Palestine. These are concrete and well documented actions that justify Hamas's resistance.
Saying that it was Hamas who casted the first stone on 7 oct, is basically saying nothing happened before. Which is plain wrong. It's the consequence of decades of oppression, crimes, and unstopping massacre from the colonial occupier.
If you're going back decades, then Palestinians started started multiple civil wars against Jews before the founding of Israel. It's almost as if the Jews knew they couldn't peacefully coexist with most Palestinians on the same land.
That is simply wrong. Palestinians were first attacked by the British, supporting the Zionists, in the 1930s. Then, in 1947, during plan Dalet, Israel attacked Palestine and the surrounding Arab states.
Before that, of course, they colonized Palestine under the shield of the British empire.
An easier way to disarm this argument is: Why did the Zionists come and displace the Palestinians? And who would respond peacefully if you try to displace them?
That's rich. If "talk of colonization" is propaganda, why did Herzl write about "important experiments in colonization" in Palestine? and why did Jabotinsky say "Zionism is a colonization adventure"? Why did Max Nordau say: "the existing and promising beginnings of a Jewish colonization shall be looked after and maintained till the movement will be possible on a large scale"?
Why would the founders of Zionism engage in "ahistorical propaganda" against themselves?
Zionism is one of the most brutal examples of colonialism ever, and the founders of Zionism don't disagree. Zionists are equivalent to Nazis in their treatment of the "other" and their belief in a pure ethnostate, the consequences of these beliefs are exactly the same. And young people are finally waking up to this.
I never mentioned jews and the point remains : It is untrue to say that Hamas started everything on 7th of oct and it is untrue to say that they were the first.
Stop diverting attention from the causes of what happened.
reply