|
Marenghi posted:Care to point to those, especially ones who tried the peaceful route and were suppressed. Another commonly cited example of successful nonviolent resistance to colonialism is India's push for independence from Britain after World War II, championed by Mahatma Gandhi. Malcolm X is one of many who have cited it, in "The Autobiography of Malcolm X"; he called it "twisting the British lion's tail". I don't know anywhere near enough about political science or history to judge whether that movement should be compared to the Palestinian struggle for independence and/or equal human rights. One obvious difference is that India has a huge landmass and population, while Palestine doesn't. India's independence was followed by the partition of land into India and Pakistan, and Hindus and Muslims perpetrated horrific massacres upon each other during that time. Estimates of the total number of people killed range from 200,000 to 2 million, according to Wikipedia. Afterward, India and Pakistan fought three wars. All of that is way beyond the scope of this thread; I mention it only as a reminder that independence, or partition, isn't always enough by itself to stop the slaughter of civilians.
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2023 21:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 16:25 |
|
|
Mid-Life Crisis posted:Have they publicized an outcry for external helicopter transport to get the critical out so they can move the rest who are naively thinking the hospital at this point is a shelter, or have they just been crying victim to hope to affect the outcome of the war? The Hippocratic oath persuades them to heal anyone who comes, even if they grab a gun and shoot their neighbor after recovering. It doesn’t demand they put thousands in harms way to save a few. The doctors are effectively using the civilians sheltered there as shields at this point. There’s not 5000 critical patients in the hospital, but there are people. The doctors are effectively playing politics and it’s emotional at this point to argue otherwise. I don't think I can possibly imagine the horror of being a doctor and living through this experience, seeing the extraordinary cruelty and human depravity on display from the bombs dropping outside, and the terror and pain that my patients are going through. I cannot fully form the image in my brain and of what I can form, it makes me want to drink. I cannot do that, let alone lecture any of these first responding professionals in a massacre zone how they should handle this situation. Maybe you mean well but you are coming across as callous. There is no right answer for these brave people. Just as there was no right answer for people living in concentration camps. They are doing everything they can to survive and even save others. Israel must stop bombing hospitals and humanitarian zones. They are the ones making choices.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2023 21:05
|
|
|
The IRA's actions extended over a 30 year long campaign, involving multiple sub-factions and splinter groups, faced multiple phases of British response as well as an even more splintered and fractious Loyalist underground, and involved everything from carefully targeted killings of people who worked for the British state, to deliberate massacres of innocent Protestants, to simple horrific fuckups like the bombing that accidentally killed my 7 year old cousin, and other family members, because someone hosed up a timer and a bomb detonated prematurely. They very often called in bomb warnings ahead of time, but then again you've got Omagh where (whether by accident or design) the warning caused people to be evacuated towards the bomb.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2023 21:09
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:As Typo says this is a goal impossible without a mountain of Israeli corpses. If I say "I wish to destroy the Chinese Communist Party" this would be without a doubt genocidal rhetoric by any reasonable metric, because there is no plausible scenario today where that can happen without millions of people dying. Even though China is not the same thing as the CCP, it's kinda hard to get at Xi without going through the PLA and a lot of Chinese cities. The ANC's goal was to destroy the National Party's monopoly on power (or white parties' monopoly since the NP was elected and occasionally another white nationalist party did win, but only white people were allowed to vote for the parts of the government with real power), and they did this without killing millions of people. Boris Yeltsin's goal (eventually) was to destroy the CPSU and he didn't have to kill millions of people and defeat the Red Army. The ANC's goal was also to destroy the existing Republic of South Africa as a state, and they did, completely, replacing it with the new Republic of South Africa with an entirely new constitution. Again did not require killing millions of people or annihilating the SADF by force of arms. VitalSigns fucked around with this message at 21:12 on Oct 24, 2023 |
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2023 21:09
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:I'm struggling to see how this argument would not be just as applicable to apartheid south africa? Well no, because that's not what I wrote. Israeli self-determination doesn't require putting Palestinians in ghettos, that's absolutely not what I said nor is it a logical consequence of a hypothetical equitable two-state solution. And even if it did, I'm not sure that would justify the reverse. The point is Israel, just like Palestine or any other sovereign state and many of nations non-sovereign nations are all equally deserving of self-determination; the ideal and valid and internationally supported by law lowest common denominator position here is a two-state solution where both groups have independent states whose borders and rights are mutually respected. To use an analogy using positive and negative freedoms, my right to liberty and freedom doesn't mean the right to infringe your freedoms and the point of the law, and the state in the case of individuals is to mediate a middle ground (i.e taxation of the rich to feed the poor) with the goal of a maximally optimum situation for all parties. In the context of international relations this means Israel ending its occupation of the West Bank and Gaza, ceasing its violent acts against Palestine, agreeing to some sort of compromise on outstanding issues with Palestine's government who likewise also agree to compromise on some outstanding issues and of course no longer are engaging in violent acts either because now its borders and internal affairs are being respected. shades of blue posted:Sweden is not a settler state in the year 2023 and afaik while the Swedish (and Norwegian and Finnish) government has pursued assimilatory policies, those are very meaningfully distinct from settler policies. I don't really agree with this, because clearly there were lands that once belonged to another people that Sweden now owns, this just means Sweden was more successful because it happened to occur much earlier along the timeline. By definition all states were at one time settler states. Adenoid Dan posted:They are taking the stance that all of Israel is stolen land, which is unambiguously true. The "legality" of it does not change that one iota. The poster I responded to specified legality, and by the only legal international structure yes Israel existing is legal (but not necessasarily every boundary claimed or occupied by Israel since the Arab-Israeli armistance except those negotiated and signed into force of law by treaty). And yeah it is pretty unreasonable to suggest that the negotiating position has "Israel gone?" as a position, especially in TYOOL2023. That's just a nonstarter and not serious and isn't going to help the Palestinian cause at all and just feeds the narrative of Israeli propaganda. Israel exists and the people there would like to keep existing. They don't need to exist while oppressing Palestinians though and that's what should be advocated for by anyone actually interested in the Palestinian cause reaching a fruitful conclusion as soon as possible that minimizes harm. VitalSigns posted:This isn't necessarily true. Right, I very carefully worded it to be about circumstances. It's a lot more feasible for a powerful Russian politician with popular support and control of government institutions to do as you say without things spiralling out of control. The point is to consider the factual circumstances on the ground and consider what the ramifications would be for careless "modest" proposals. Raenir Salazar fucked around with this message at 21:14 on Oct 24, 2023 |
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2023 21:10
|
|
|
Paladinus posted:How much was Sharon's decision to dismantle settlements in Gaza dictated by the threat Hamas posed before they won the election? Strengthening the blockade on Gaza was definitely presented as retaliation to Hamas' rise to power, but I'm not sure it wasn't just mostly internal Israeli politicing. Not Hamas specifically, but Palestinian militants in general (though Hamas did play a prominent role). The disengagement from Gaza came in the context of the Second Intifada, a years-long campaign of intense Palestinian militancy and terrorism in response to the perceived failure of the peace process. Despite aggressive military actions and plenty of collective punishment, Israeli troops found themselves unable to sufficiently defend the settlements, or even to defend themselves. Numerous Israeli patrols around the settlements fell victim to ambush attacks from militants, and there were plenty of settler casualties as well. Reprisal attacks, land seizures, and assassinations by the IDF proved insufficient to deter the ongoing violence. In the end, Israel was unable to stop the insurgency through military force alone. After a couple hundred dead Israeli soldiers and several hundred dead Israeli civilians, Sharon eventually settled on a two-pronged approach to halting it: 1) Withdrawal from Gaza, which reduced the amount of settlers and soldiers directly exposed to potential attacks, and also gave some appearance of progress in the Israeli withdrawals that had been promised in the Oslo Accords 2) Israeli carrot-and-stick negotiations with Mahmoud Abbas, offering concessions such as freeing prisoners, withdrawing from some settlements, and allowing him to form a Palestinian security force - but only if he stopped the militants by any means necessary, even if it meant using that new security force against the militants While that did accomplish the desired effect of reducing Palestinian militancy (particularly the suicide attacks, which the IDF had found especially difficult to stop), it also confirmed the views of many of the more militant Palestinians that Israel would be more willing to give up concessions in response to violence. After all, the peaceful negotiation camp wasn't able to achieve such concessions until Israel needed their help to stop militants. Typo posted:not everyone no but if hamas like gets an army and conquers Israel next year rest assured there will be lots and lots of dead Jewish Israelis Where is that army going to come from? Israel is the dominant military power in its immediate neighborhood. Israel has repeatedly defeated several of its neighbors all working together at the same time, and that was before Israel became a close US ally and a beneficiary of massive US military aid! Where is Hamas going to get a military capable of invading and conquering Israel? Without an answer to that question, there is no point in talking about what might happen if a hypothetical Hamas military hypothetically crushes the IDF and hypothetically invades and conquers Israel. Would this imaginary Hamas military occupation of Israel lead to miserable or dead civilians? Maybe. Is the actual real military occupation of Gaza by Israel, which is happening right now, leading to an absolute fuckton of miserable or dead civilians? Yes, definitely. And the real atrocities that are happening right now are far more important than the hypothetical atrocities that might happen in an unrealistic made-up scenario. Marenghi posted:Care to point to those, especially ones who tried the peaceful route and were suppressed. While MLK Jr himself was peaceful, he was just one of numerous figures in the civil rights movement, which had a number of different factions with widely varying perspectives on violence. And generally speaking, MLK's peaceful tactics weren't all that effective on their own. As far as I've been able to tell, he was much more effective when the violent factions were also working in the same area that he was, as the influence exerted by those violent factions convinced white authorities that they needed to cut deals with the peaceful factions in order to vent the black population's anger. On the other hand, even if he was able to negotiate peaceful deals without any activity from the violent factions, white authorities tended to quickly betray those agreements unless the pressure of real riots or violence was around to dissuade them from doing so.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2023 21:18
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:The poster I responded to specified legality, and by the only legal international structure yes Israel existing is legal (but not necessasarily every boundary claimed or occupied by Israel since the Arab-Israeli armistance except those negotiated and signed into force of law by treaty). And yeah it is pretty unreasonable to suggest that the negotiating position has "Israel gone?" as a position, especially in TYOOL2023. That's just a nonstarter and not serious and isn't going to help the Palestinian cause at all and just feeds the narrative of Israeli propaganda. Israel exists and the people there would like to keep existing. They don't need to exist while oppressing Palestinians though and that's what should be advocated for by anyone actually interested in the Palestinian cause reaching a fruitful conclusion as soon as possible that minimizes harm. Buddy I don't know how to break this to you but many atrocities have been and are legal. Israeli propaganda does not need to be fed by anything, it has always been a genocidal state that has always portrayed Palestinians as subhuman no matter what tactics Palestinians have used. When Israel wants peace it will unilaterally give human rights and negotiations over details can proceed from there. "Israel gone" is a serious starting position because Israel is an apartheid state. If the successor state shares that name maybe that's acceptable but it is unreasonable to expect Palestinians to not oppose the existence of the state that has been committing genocide on them for 75 years.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2023 21:22
|
|
|
.
mannerup fucked around with this message at 18:41 on Nov 5, 2023 |
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2023 21:23
|
|
|
mannerup posted:when do they cease to be ‘settler states’? this definition doesn’t make sense because a future State of Palestine will be a settler state from its inception by this logic Settler colonialism is a structure, not an event. Countries stop being settler states when they stop viewing colonization as a national interest and dismantle the colonial structure supporting it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2023 21:28
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:
Not possible in the circumstances of the 1950s. And yet there were Soviet dissidents in the 50s who did want to see the CPSU destroyed but it would be ridiculous to accuse them all of wanting to kill millions of people since that was they only way it could've happened in 1950. Maybe some of them did, but others surely were just hoping to bring about a change in circumstances
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2023 21:29
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:While MLK Jr himself was peaceful, he was just one of numerous figures in the civil rights movement, which had a number of different factions with widely varying perspectives on violence. And generally speaking, MLK's peaceful tactics weren't all that effective on their own. As far as I've been able to tell, he was much more effective when the violent factions were also working in the same area that he was, as the influence exerted by those violent factions convinced white authorities that they needed to cut deals with the peaceful factions in order to vent the black population's anger. On the other hand, even if he was able to negotiate peaceful deals without any activity from the violent factions, white authorities tended to quickly betray those agreements unless the pressure of real riots or violence was around to dissuade them from doing so. Would strongly recommend the book "This Nonviolent Stuff'll Get You Killed: How Guns Made the Civil Rights Movement Possible" by Charles E. Cobb Jr. for an examination of exactly this topic
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2023 21:30
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:This isn't necessarily true. The ANC also had Nelson Mandela, who was both a credible leader of the resistance but was also just about able to convince De Clerk that dismantling apartheid wouldn't lead to an instant massacre of the whites. And he basically had to devote his presidency to national reconciliation. And South African politics is still hosed up 30 years later and lately the country has been locked in a downward spiral. There are zero of the conditions anyone would expect for a one state solution to be remotely viable, not least that nobody who actually lives in Israel/Palestine is seriously proposing it. e: but I broadly agree with the thesis on this page. The most successful movements are the ones that match the use or threat of force with a credible diplomatic offer.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2023 21:32
|
|
|
.
mannerup fucked around with this message at 18:41 on Nov 5, 2023 |
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2023 21:34
|
|
|
Adenoid Dan posted:Buddy I don't know how to break this to you but many atrocities have been and are legal. I'm not sure what you're arguing for here, if its for Israel to stop being an apartheid state, that's not a problem for me insofar as a poster I have opinions and positions because in my view Israel can still be an independent country with its own government and borders distinct from Palestine and not be an apartheid state this is all possible; demanding one step further and for Israel to stop existing as an independent state is what's not reasonable for you or anyone else to have and is basically never going to happen without just as bad things happening that you presumably object to happening currently. And we're not discussing what Palestinians want but positions like I said come in! are advocating for which are what I am specifically responding to. It doesn't really make sense to oppose the existence of a state, even when its doing bad things. You can oppose the bad things they are doing, nothing about the states existence implies or mandates the bad things. Vietnam didn't oppose the existence of the US, it opposed their interference in their internal affairs. Heck, North Vietnam and North Korea technically oppose the existence of their rival governments, but neither government is currently opposing those governments in turn, are they actually not allowed to do so? I don't think this logically makes sense and just seems pointlessly self-defeating and doesn't even make sense from a "aim high to get something lower" bargaining strategy. To use another analogy, in WW2 the Allies and the USSR wanted to destroy the Nazi state; but there was no desire to destroy Germany; borders got moved around a bit but ultimately Germany the State with borders got to remain. It would be a lot more reasonable of a position to say "I wish to destroy the Apartheid regime" or "Apartheid Israel" because it would be clearer that you don't oppose Israel existing in some fashion with its internationally recognized borders the problem is the specific current government and its policies, not its people. mannerup posted:when do they cease to be ‘settler states’? this definition doesn’t make sense because a future State of Palestine will be a settler state from its inception by this logic I mean yeah, if they "destroyed" Israel and evicted millions of people from within the green line, two wrongs don't make a right. VitalSigns posted:Possible in the circumstances of the 1990s A Russian exile wanting to destroy the CPSU in the 1950s is absolutely ignoring the suffering such an effort would require, that's precisely the point. Raenir Salazar fucked around with this message at 21:43 on Oct 24, 2023 |
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2023 21:38
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:It would be a lot more reasonable of a position to say "I wish to destroy the Apartheid regime" or "Apartheid Israel" because it would be clearer that you don't oppose Israel existing in some fashion with its internationally recognized borders the problem is the specific current government and its policies, not its people. I can get behind this fully and agree with it, yeah. This makes sense. But anyways, like someone else already pointed out, the U.S. will never allow Israel to just cease to exist, they are too important of an ally to U.S. and its own interests, especially militarily for that to happen. If even a whiff of that becomes possible, the U.S. would step in.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2023 21:41
|
|
|
The state by design has never viewed Palestinians as people on their own land. They do not want that state to continue existing. That is not difficult to understand. The tiny bit of empathy required to understand this is in fact the first precursor to any real attempt at peace. (A state is not its people) Adenoid Dan fucked around with this message at 21:48 on Oct 24, 2023 |
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2023 21:43
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:I'm not sure what you're arguing for here, if its for Israel to stop being an apartheid state, that's not a problem for me insofar as a poster I have opinions and positions because in my view Israel can still be an independent country with its own government and borders distinct from Palestine and not be an apartheid state this is all possible; demanding one step further and for Israel to stop existing as an independent state is what's not reasonable for you or anyone else to have and is basically never going to happen without just as bad things happening that you presumably object to happening currently. And we're not discussing what Palestinians want but positions like I said come in! are advocating for which are what I am specifically responding to. Germany the state literally did not get to remain, they had west and east germany, neither of which I think constitute "the german state"? If you want a USSR analogy, could the USSR as a state contiue to exist while assuring the welfare of the various constituent areas that constituted it? Many former members of it would probably disagree. You appear to be loosely conflating ethnicity with nationality because states absolutely have been destroyed and/or established quite a lot in response to people not being happy with what they constituted. OwlFancier fucked around with this message at 21:55 on Oct 24, 2023 |
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2023 21:52
|
|
|
mannerup posted:by this definition, a future State of Palestine would be at least initially a settler state since the process of colonization would be a core national interest in actually achieving that goal, as for ‘dismantle the colonial structure supporting it’, would they need to then dissolve the state itself as a colonial structure? No, but they would need to dismantle the specific colonial infrastructure and policies that enabled them to, say, support the creation of new settlements and migration policies to make it enticing, and a security apparatus to provide protection. Things like that which are no longer needed to specifically colonize areas you aren't currently in control of.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2023 21:57
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:Germany the state literally did not get to remain, they had west and east germany, neither of which I think constitute "the german state"? Germany literally still exists today this doesn't make any sense. If not for the cold war and opposed geopolitical interests Germany wouldve been back to being a single state in the 1950s. I don't understand the definition you're using here.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2023 21:59
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:Germany literally still exists today this doesn't make any sense. If not for the cold war and opposed geopolitical interests Germany wouldve been back to being a single state in the 1950s. The country called Germany today is not the same state or political body as the one called Germany in, say, 1938.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2023 22:02
|
|
|
Muscle Tracer posted:The country called Germany today is not the same state or political body as the one called Germany in, say, 1938. You could say the same of the united states.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2023 22:05
|
|
|
And I don't at all understand how it could be understood to be the same one as between the end of the second world war and before reunification either. And what was it in the early 1800s? I can't imagine an understanding that views all of those different periods and polities as expressions of the natural and eternal "germany"Hieronymous Alloy posted:You could say the same of the united states. And of a lot of countries yes, what constitutes "the UK" has certainly changed a lot in the past couple of centuries and it seems likely to continue changing into this one, and I don't understand at all the idea of an inherent and inviolable legitimacy to any of those states, past, present, or future.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2023 22:13
|
|
|
Muscle Tracer posted:The country called Germany today is not the same state or political body as the one called Germany in, say, 1938. I didn't say it was. I'll clarify my argument, which is that as a result of WW2, Germans still got to have Atleast one state with borders they got to control, but the criminality of the Nazis was still brought to an end.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2023 22:14
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:You could say the same of the united states. No you couldn't. The US never lost a war and saw it carved up into two separate states that were later reunited. The closest thing is the civil war and the existing state won and kept power. The current Federal Republic of Germany was formed in 1949
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2023 22:14
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:The ANC also had Nelson Mandela, who was both a credible leader of the resistance but was also just about able to convince De Clerk that dismantling apartheid wouldn't lead to an instant massacre of the whites. And he basically had to devote his presidency to national reconciliation. And South African politics is still hosed up 30 years later and lately the country has been locked in a downward spiral. Well what someone wants and what they are capable of are two different things. South Africa also had international sanctions on it and the NP government started to doubt its ability to maintain military supremacy forever. I was simply pointing out that wanting to destroy a political regime or a state does not necessarily mean wanting to kill millions of people. But yeah of course if the state you want to destroy is stronger than you and has the support of its people you gotta convince them that you don't want to kill them by the millions or they're not going to want to negotiate with you about how to dismantle the state they believe is protecting them. E: Raenir Salazar posted:
I mean this is just historical fact, dissidents did work against the Soviet Union for decades, and did eventually destroy the CPSU and they didn't have to kill everyone to do it, and there were 1950s dissidents who were still alive to see it happen. VitalSigns fucked around with this message at 22:27 on Oct 24, 2023 |
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2023 22:23
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:I didn't say it was. I'll clarify my argument, which is that as a result of WW2, Germans still got to have Atleast one state with borders they got to control, but the criminality of the Nazis was still brought to an end. As a result of WW2, Germany explicitly got turned into two states whose borders they did not control and the criminality of the Nazis was brought to an end.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2023 22:28
|
|
|
Also as was noted earlier, the UK specifically has had to give up control of the border in northern ireland as part of the good friday agreement, the obsession with border control as the expression of the sovereignty of the nation is more than a little bit strange to me.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2023 22:32
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:I didn't say it was. I'll clarify my argument, which is that as a result of WW2, Germans still got to have Atleast one state with borders they got to control, but the criminality of the Nazis was still brought to an end. White South Africans no longer got to have at least one state with borders they got to control after 1994, but South Africans still got to have a state with borders they control (many, well most, for the first time!) You make it sound like this is the equivalent of genocide, but like white South Africans still exist, they still have a country, a country that treats everyone with political equality and human dignity, it's really not such a bad thing. I'm not saying it's necessarily better than a two-state solution but it's certainly not genocide to live in a diverse country with political equality for all. Israel doesn't seem interested in a two state solution though because building settlements is in direct opposition to such a goal.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2023 22:35
|
|
|
HonorableTB posted:As a result of WW2, Germany explicitly got turned into two states whose borders they did not control and the criminality of the Nazis was brought to an end. This isnt responding to the point? I already addressed this.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2023 22:36
|
|
|
Y’all are goony as gently caress. Stop being pedantic nerds about what a “state” is and argue about the underlying issue with regards to possible outcome(s) (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2023 22:37
|
|
|
Israel/Palestine 2023: Strip of Theseus
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2023 22:43
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:This isnt responding to the point? I already addressed this. I saw you addressed it and you were still wrong, because neither German statelet got to determine their own borders until they reunified. Unless you're trying to say that the reunified Germany of 1990-91 was a result of WW2, which I mean, technically it was in the same way that the entire 50 year stretch between the end of WW2 and the beginning of unified Germany was a result of WW2.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2023 22:50
|
|
|
Randalor posted:Mid-Life Crisis was advocating killing doctors and bombing hospitals was a-ok, does that count as "defending atrocities"? No, they said that the doctors were doing so for political motivations so it's okay if they are killed
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2023 22:54
|
|
|
Well this would presumably be a new low, if it's true. "Salama Marouf, spokesman for the Government Information Office in Gaza: We noticed tangible changes on the bodies of the martyrs due to the occupation’s use of internationally prohibited weapons, which cause the skins of the martyrs and the wounded to melt and char, and the upper and lower limbs to dissolve." If it is true I would assume we'll hear UN/WHO confirmation sooner rather than later. Edit: Ah poo poo, I don't see comments on my end because I don't have an account. Killing the link and tagging it. gently caress sake. Can you please break the link in your quote. Lovely Joe Stalin fucked around with this message at 23:04 on Oct 24, 2023 |
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2023 22:55
|
|
|
Lovely Joe Stalin posted:Well this would presumably be a new low, if it's true. There is some extremely graphic content in the comments, so do not click. [edit] Fixed! Right, I should have thought about that and that is my bad. Lovely Joe Stalin posted:Edit: Ah poo poo, I don't see comments on my end because I don't have an account. Killing the link and tagging it. gently caress sake. Its all good! Twitter is horrible. I said come in! fucked around with this message at 23:05 on Oct 24, 2023 |
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2023 22:59
|
|
|
HonorableTB posted:I saw you addressed it and you were still wrong, because neither German statelet got to determine their own borders until they reunified. Unless you're trying to say that the reunified Germany of 1990-91 was a result of WW2, which I mean, technically it was in the same way that the entire 50 year stretch between the end of WW2 and the beginning of unified Germany was a result of WW2. I'm not wrong because you're not considering the argument I am responding to and it's context, which is that the Allies did not intend to split Germany into two independent states, that wasn't what was agreed at Potsdam and Tehran when they agreed to occupation zones, the emergence of East and West Germany are historical quirks of geopolitical circumstances of the cold war, not the predetermined goal to impose on Germany in response to its crimes, otherwise why wasn't Japan split? Who also got to be their own country after a brief period of occupation. Which maybe would've been the better example to go with. This isnt addressing my underlying argument which is that I object to the premise that the only way to end the suffering of palestinians is to Quixotically insist one the complete dissolution of Israel as a country to be merged wih Palestine. That's just not what is required, it didn't need to happen to Japan (if Germany is a little too complicated to serve as an example) it doesn't need to be the case here.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2023 23:04
|
|
|
Lovely Joe Stalin posted:Well this would presumably be a new low, if it's true. What kind of weapon would cause something like that?
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2023 23:05
|
|
|
I said come in! posted:There is some extremely graphic content in the comments, so do not click. Thank you, and sorry again. Willo567 posted:What kind of weapon would cause something like that? Possibly it's 'just' talking about WP, maybe something chemical. Seems like it's going to be best to wait for a more independent source to comment on it. I assume Al Jazeera Arabic is a reliable reporting source, but the video was just a local government official giving an open air press conference. Lovely Joe Stalin fucked around with this message at 23:17 on Oct 24, 2023 |
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2023 23:11
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:I don't recall the Chinese Red Army engaging in atrocities under Mao despite both the IJA and KMT doing so and that's what I had in mind. You uh, recall wrong. The CRA were just as bad if not worse than everyone else.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2023 23:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 16:25 |
|
|
Willo567 posted:What kind of weapon would cause something like that? White phosphorous, which would match with the numerous reports that the IDF has been using it on Gaza. It's really, really hosed-up poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2023 23:14
|
|