|
emanresu tnuocca posted:maybe I hope so, because if it's from some sort of test simulation, 
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 17:35
|
|
but that's a clip from a videogame yes?
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 14:11 |
|
|
Volkerball posted:I hope so, because if it's from some sort of test simulation, There's a nametag above the plane which is visible right after it finishes the loop, I didn't notice it myself some guy in the comments points this out and says it's a clip from BF4.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 17:41
|
|
|
I'll admit that I'm not entirely sure that "US tax dollars support them" is the main reason why so many people tend to focus on Israel. The reason why I focus on it more (and I suspect the reason many others do as well) is simply because there's actually an opposing side to that argument. There's no argument to really be had on whether ISIS is bad, but plenty of people will always jump to Israel's defense. I find the Israel issue more interesting solely because there's a huge, active opposition to my views regarding it. Insect Court's posts are dumb because he could literally be making the exact same posts about South Africa prior to the end of apartheid (why are you focusing on South Africa and not (insert other country where atrocities are occurring)???). Does he think that people cared about that issue because of anti-South African bigotry or something?
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 18:06
|
|
|
Ytlaya posted:Insect Court's posts are dumb because he could literally be making the exact same posts about South Africa prior to the end of apartheid (why are you focusing on South Africa and not (insert other country where atrocities are occurring)???). Does he think that people cared about that issue because of anti-South African bigotry or something? Well accusations of a focus on South African Apartheid compared to atrocities in other countries being a cover for anti-white racism was often used by the apartheid propagandists of the day...
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 18:09
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Well accusations of a focus on South African Apartheid compared to atrocities in other countries being a cover for anti-white racism was often used by the apartheid propagandists of the day... Didn't a lot of those supporting the South African Apartheid government even insist we should support them because they created 'order' and 'protected democracy?'
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 18:11
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:Didn't a lot of those supporting the South African Apartheid government even insist we should support them because they created 'order' and 'protected democracy?' Yup Anne-Marie Kriek, a lecturer in international politics at the University of South Africa, is on sabbatical in Ft. Collins, Colo. OCTOBER 12, 1989 posted:
Both "Why are you picking on us when others are so much worse" and "look at how modern we are and how they benefit from out governing" arguments were common. Also edited out was the old "Black people arrived in South Africa after White people" arguement.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 18:33
|
|
|
team overhead smash posted:Also edited out was the old "Black people arrived in South Africa after White people" arguement. How is South Africa doing nowadays, anyways? The only things I've heard recently are generic "now that black people rule themselves, they hosed up everything and are still attacking white farmers" stuff.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 19:13
|
|
|
This may be a bit too domestic for all of you to be interested, but there was a huge oil spill just north of Eilat, near the border with Jordan, from the Eilat-Ashkelon oil pipeline, right inside a nature preserve. If there's no rain it may be possible to clear up the oil, but irreversible damage has already been caused, and the extraction process will probably cause more. Residents are complaining of a foul smell in the north of the city. Eilat's mayor still wants to go ahead with the Triathlon, though. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 00:41
|
|
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:This may be a bit too domestic for all of you to be interested, but there was a huge oil spill just north of Eilat, near the border with Jordan, from the Eilat-Ashkelon oil pipeline, right inside a nature preserve. If there's no rain it may be possible to clear up the oil, but irreversible damage has already been caused, and the extraction process will probably cause more. Residents are complaining of a foul smell in the north of the city. Hope they put some corexit on it so it can combine my two least favorite events of 2011.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 00:45
|
|
|
syscall girl posted:Hope they put some corexit on it so it can combine my two least favorite events of 2011. That would actually be a bad idea. This being the desert, the oil has not sunk too deep into the soil or into the waterways. You want the exact opposite of something that would break it down and further entrench and spread it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 00:48
|
|
|
Xander77 posted:An empty land for a people without one. I believe I've heard this one before (in Canada. Obviously.) As someone not living there any more, it's hard to tell. My parents in the western cape (apparently the best-run province) and friends say it's pretty good, but they're experiencing rolling blackouts / load shedding because the power infrastructure has not kept up with the electricity demand. When I was growing up there (was living there late 70's to mid 00's) that was never a problem. My one friend who is a farmer in kwazulu-natal (who is a really reasonable person but comes from a place of white privilege) is a farmer and is finished with SA, she's waiting (and waiting, and waiting, and waiting, and complaining, and throwing fits, etc) to get her childrens' birth certificates and SA passports so she can leave, but the process is taking forever. As someone who left myself in 2004, I found life there 'totally normal' and still miss it quite a lot, but one thing that struck me after being away for a few years, is how normal it was to experience theft or live in fear of having your car or house broken into. Like if I were to go back I'd consider it unacceptable, but living there I was like, 'yeah this is normal'. That definitely needs to be taken into account when asking south africans their experience of south africa. That said, I read some stats which show that crime is a lot better than it used to be. My farmer friend is saying some things that are fairly can-of-worms-ish: she claims that she was told flat out that since her business is not black-majority-owned, nobody wants to buy her stuff. She says that she was told that she could sign it over to someone who they had lined up, who wouldn't interfere with business and would take a cut in order to enable them to carry on doing their thing and selling their product, now as a black-majority-owned business. She said 'gently caress it' and is now headed to the uk if she can ever get all of her and her kids documents together.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 00:59
|
|
|
Miftan posted:I agree with you, but Gazans electing Hamas (a known terrorist organization) isn't exactly a point in their favour. I realise that they a lot of them probably feel that it is their only choice, and it might point to how horrible Israel is being towards them, but it definitely isn't a pro in their campaign. It's more of a con in Israel's policy. Similar to whenever we have to support coups or bombing whenever a Muslim Bro.hood affiliate gets elected democratically my instinctive response to this is "gently caress off, its their country, Mr Imperialist." Anyone whose like "well it justifies bombing civilian centres can go wait patiently against the wall too. E: Likud and Hamas are both one-staters with terrorist roots anyways, right? Communist Thoughts fucked around with this message at 04:55 on Dec 5, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 04:53
|
|
|
nopantsjack posted:Similar to whenever we have to support coups or bombing whenever a Muslim Bro.hood affiliate gets elected democratically my instinctive response to this is "gently caress off, its their country, Mr Imperialist." Yeah, I don't really see how a country voting so many religious, nationalist, and racist extremists to parliament that they constantly end up dominating coalition governments has any leg to stand on as far as judging other people's voting patterns. Just negotiate with what you're dealt. ETA: quote:E: Likud and Hamas are both one-staters with terrorist roots anyways, right? I am not sure how apt a comparison that is. Hamas were voted in while they were terrorists, while Likud's former terrorists (from Irgun and Stern gang, providing the prime ministers Begin and Shamir, respectively) only got to power decades after they had laid down their arms, during which time it was progeny of a less terroristy militant organization, the Haganah, which were much more subservient to their political wing. Absurd Alhazred fucked around with this message at 04:59 on Dec 5, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 04:56
|
|
|
i think it's just a matter of how you define terrorism. if you say terrorism is politically motivated violence against civilians in order to sow fear, then yes both are pretty unambiguously terrorist organizations. if you exclude state violence from that definition, which many do, than likud's terrorist bona fides are more ambiguous
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 05:30
|
|
|
Jagchosis posted:i think it's just a matter of how you define terrorism. if you say terrorism is politically motivated violence against civilians in order to sow fear, then yes both are pretty unambiguously terrorist organizations. if you exclude state violence from that definition, which many do, than likud's terrorist bona fides are more ambiguous They're at this point a party whose expression of political violence goes through the state, thus implicating everybody. Irgun and the Stern Gang were bona fide terrorist organization in the sense that they conducted their own, unfiltered violence. I would say that the organizations behind the "Price Tag" attacks and pogroms are genuine contemporary terrorist organization, but I am not entirely sure who their political wing is; although they are associated with some people in Jewish Home, I think it's more the Ben Ari type Kachniks who are a better bet, and they weren't able to get in last time; I guess we'll see how they fare now.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 05:35
|
|
|
Jagchosis posted:i think it's just a matter of how you define terrorism. if you say terrorism is politically motivated violence against civilians in order to sow fear, then yes both are pretty unambiguously terrorist organizations. if you exclude state violence from that definition, which many do, than likud's terrorist bona fides are more ambiguous I view terrorism as something that states use to demonize large groups of people for the actions of the few*. The perpetrators of 9/11 died on 9/11. Their collaborators, co-conspirators or facilitators (call them what you like) should have been pursued by legal means and the country or countries shielding them should have faced sanctions. *I am not a truther and don't have any reason to believe that the MIC or their political minions caused any terrorist attacks but rather chose to profit from them in capital and political capital respectively and gave zero shits about the incidents that got them paid/reelected.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 05:39
|
|
|
syscall girl posted:I view terrorism as something that states use to demonize large groups of people for the actions of the few*. The perpetrators of 9/11 died on 9/11. Their collaborators, co-conspirators or facilitators (call them what you like) should have been pursued by legal means and the country or countries shielding them should have faced sanctions. It's ridiculous how much of the success of terrorism comes down to not responding to it as a crime. Imagine if extradition options were exhausted, and the organizers and facilitators were caught and put on trial, and that's it. Al Qaeda would be feeling mighty silly being relegated to the realms of ideologically-skinned criminal enterprise. Instead we already have two Al Qaeda like franchises running around recruiting more and more people.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 05:41
|
|
|
Jagchosis posted:i think it's just a matter of how you define terrorism. if you say terrorism is politically motivated violence against civilians in order to sow fear, then yes both are pretty unambiguously terrorist organizations. if you exclude state violence from that definition, which many do, than likud's terrorist bona fides are more ambiguous syscall girl posted:I view terrorism as something that states use to demonize large groups of people for the actions of the few*. The perpetrators of 9/11 died on 9/11. Their collaborators, co-conspirators or facilitators (call them what you like) should have been pursued by legal means and the country or countries shielding them should have faced sanctions. Absurd Alhazred posted:It's ridiculous how much of the success of terrorism comes down to not responding to it as a crime. Imagine if extradition options were exhausted, and the organizers and facilitators were caught and put on trial, and that's it. Al Qaeda would be feeling mighty silly being relegated to the realms of ideologically-skinned criminal enterprise. Instead we already have two Al Qaeda like franchises running around recruiting more and more people.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 06:03
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:I don't know if you remember, but we actually did give the Taliban on opportunity to hand over Al Qaeda's leaders. They didn't, obviously, which is why we overthrew them. The Pakistanis rolled over on the guys on their side of the border, which is how Khalid Sheikh Mohammed ended up in Guantanamo. To my understanding they were willing to extradite if given sufficient evidence, which the US did not supply, choosing to bomb, instead. I'm not some big city international law buff, but I think it's pretty legitimate to ask for evidence before you turn somebody in to a foreign country. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 06:11
|
|
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:To my understanding they were willing to extradite if given sufficient evidence, which the US did not supply, choosing to bomb, instead. I'm not some big city international law buff, but I think it's pretty legitimate to ask for evidence before you turn somebody in to a foreign country. Come on, it was right after 9/11. You don't ask for evidence, you turn over the head of the world's most wanted terrorist or we invade. We may still invade if we don't agree with how you turned over his head. They chose the 'we invade' option. There is no negotiating on this issue, there is only turning over Bin Laden or death.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 06:14
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:Organized violence by the state is generally separate from terrorism for the same reason that taxation and eminent domain are separate from theft. i'm aware it's not a real legal concept, but it's hard to argue that "state terrorism" is not a political concept, it's been part of the discourse for a while.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 06:14
|
|
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:To my understanding they were willing to extradite if given sufficient evidence, which the US did not supply, choosing to bomb, instead. I'm not some big city international law buff, but I think it's pretty legitimate to ask for evidence before you turn somebody in to a foreign country. Jagchosis posted:i'm aware it's not a real legal concept, but it's hard to argue that "state terrorism" is not a political concept, it's been part of the discourse for a while.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 06:20
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:Come on, it was right after 9/11. You don't ask for evidence, you turn over the head of the world's most wanted terrorist or we invade. We may still invade if we don't agree with how you turned over his head. And that resulted in a terrible precedent for international relations for which we are still suffering the consequences. Dead Reckoning posted:Spoiler alert: there was no evidence they would have considered sufficient. After exhaustion were proven, the situation would have been, perhaps, different.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 06:20
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:So you define terrorism in a way completely different from the way everyone else uses the word. Got it. That's exactly what the terrorists want. The fact that lazy or corrupt politicians and war profiteers want it that way doesn't change the relationship between the criminal and the populations that suffer far greater harm from the state response. The death of innocents by actions of states greatly outweigh the death of innocents at the hands of terrorists, and you can make a pretty penny doing it. "They that can give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." This is way off track but pretend Palestinians had any say about their liberty or safety.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 06:21
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:Spoiler alert: there was no evidence they would have considered sufficient. i suppose it could have meaning if it is constrained to state violence that has no apparent legitimate military or legal objective. there are certainly historical acts that would fit the bill, such as kristallnacht, as far as one may regard that as state action. i'm not really arguing in favor of the concept but i am saying that it's there and can and will be used as an accusation against the israeli government for some of its actions.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 06:30
|
|
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:After exhaustion were proven, the situation would have been, perhaps, different.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 06:34
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:What? Bin Laden was the leader of a terrorist network that we had determined was responsible for the 9/11 attacks. That's pretty much prima facie grounds for extradition. We're not going to send a bunch of guys to drink tea with illiterate warlords while their Islamic court wrestles with the question of whether it really counts as evidence when an infidel testifies. Considering recent verdicts shat out by the American legal system, I would not be so smug about it in comparison to whatever the Taliban had. How do you think that looks from the outside. What if a grand jury did not choose to pursue someone that it was clear to Pakistan should have been tried or extradited to them? Would you stand behind them attacking US targets until this was rectified?
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 06:45
|
|
|
Terrorism isn't the worst thing in the world(tm). Even if the word doesn't apply to Israel, it's just as bad or worse then Hamas by every conceivable metric.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 07:02
|
|
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:Considering recent verdicts shat out by the American legal system, I would not be so smug about it in comparison to whatever the Taliban had.  This is just like that time a grand jury didn't indict a cop based on conflicting eyewitness testimony! quote:What if a grand jury did not choose to pursue someone that it was clear to Pakistan should have been tried or extradited to them? Would you stand behind them attacking US targets until this was rectified?
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 07:30
|
|
|
nopantsjack posted:Similar to whenever we have to support coups or bombing whenever a Muslim Bro.hood affiliate gets elected democratically my instinctive response to this is "gently caress off, its their country, Mr Imperialist." Absurd Alhazred posted:Yeah, I don't really see how a country voting so many religious, nationalist, and racist extremists to parliament that they constantly end up dominating coalition governments has any leg to stand on as far as judging other people's voting patterns. Just negotiate with what you're dealt. They can definitely elect whoever they want, and you could possibly even argue that Likud is worse because at least with Hamas you know what you're getting, but goddamn the whole thing just makes me sad for them. I can only really hope that when they do finally get a country whoever they elect will be smart enough to keep that business inside Palestine and not provoke Israel any more than they do just by having the country. In other news, ynet posted this morning that Gideon Sa'ar was considering coming back to Likud to run against Bibi and should be giving his answer next week about that! Gideon Sa'ar is another slimy politician who was actually voted higher than Bibi in the last 2 Likud primaries if I'm not mistaken. Ynet also said that according to a recent survery he has a wider support in the Likud base than Bibi. I'm not sure how to feel about this because Sa'ar catered to the religious vote heavily by trying to shut down all supermarkets in Tel-Aviv on Saturday before he quit the government last year, and is widely known to be kind of an opportunist dick. Bibi 2.0 if you will.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 08:51
|
|
|
I think I've managed to work out the definition of terrorist and some of the problems people have with its application. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kmBnvajSfWU
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 08:54
|
|
|
Jagchosis posted:well you wanted to know what was extraordinary about israel's human rights abuses, compared to all the other evil that goes on in the world Thank you for agreeing with me. I guess we would differ on whether "government media hypocrisy" is a better reason to focus on a particular party's human rights abuses than, say, "slaughtering entire villages and dumping their bodies in mass graves". CommieGIR posted:Yeah, I don't buy this. I suppose that as someone whose supposed concern for the Palestinian people has as its primary visible manifestation an intense loathing of Israelis, it might be easy for you to miss the more temperate remarks of someone whose primary concern is the welfare and safety of both Palestinians and Israelis.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 09:19
|
|
|
The Insect Court posted:I suppose that as someone whose supposed concern for the Palestinian people has as its primary visible manifestation an intense loathing of Israelis, it might be easy for you to miss the more temperate remarks of someone whose primary concern is the welfare and safety of both Palestinians and Israelis. If you ever posted something sincere, how would we know it? That's why it's hard to believe.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 09:27
|
|
|
Fellow posters, if you're enjoying TIC's "liberals are the real racists" routine you should drop by the Freep thread. Freep was doing it long before it was cool and they offer a much bigger variety that will certainly satisfy all your strawmaning needs.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 09:45
|
|
|
The Insect Court posted:Thank you for agreeing with me. I guess we would differ on whether "government media hypocrisy" is a better reason to focus on a particular party's human rights abuses than, say, "slaughtering entire villages and dumping their bodies in mass graves". Why do you focus so much on the Israel/Palestine conflict when there are so many other tragedies in the world that you should be caring so much about? If the rationale you've stated is your actual belief, there are other conflicts you should be far, far more interested in.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 10:51
|
|
|
eric-garners-summary-execution-on-a-sidewalk.png
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 13:55
|
|
|
"I sure am upset with Israel for their gross human rights violations, continuous ethnic cleansing and utter disregard for human life. I wish they'd stop." "i personally am concerned that the Palestinians are suffering gross human rights violations, continuous ethnic cleansing and utter disregard for human life. I don't understand why you'd bring up Israel, here in the I/P conflict thread though. I'll just imply that you're an anti-Semite instead of engaging any of the reasons Israel could be relevant." There, that's the logical conclusion of any argument in which you engage TIC. Now please don't. Dead Reckoning posted:Organized violence by the state is generally separate from terrorism for the same reason that taxation and eminent domain are separate from theft. I'm not really sure how those are comparable. What supposed benefit do the Palestinian people gain from being terrorized?
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 13:59
|
|
|
Can also ask if this differentiation between state violence and terrorism holds much merit in a scenario in which a foreign occupier declares itself to be the state and labels any opposition as terrorism.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 14:06
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:It's an emotive term people use to describe state violence they don't like. It doesn't have a real meaning. Terrorism is an emotive term people use to describe non-state violence they don't like. It doesn't have a real meaning. State terrorism is an emotive term people use to describe state violence they don't like. It doesn't have a real meaning. Seems like a pretty straightforward parallel to me.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 14:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 14:11 |
|
|
eSports Chaebol posted:Terrorism is an emotive term people use to describe non-state violence they don't like. It doesn't have a real meaning. I'd specify political violence. You rarely call a mugging terrorism.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 14:31
|
|