|
Believe what you want I don't really care. Didn't expect you to fall apart so quickly tho.
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2015 22:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 12:19 |
|
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:While we're in "we are all Catholic married to our hyperbole What the heck do you mean by Catholic married? I can't imagine any interpretation that isn't offensive.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2015 22:40
|
|
|
Kaal posted:What the heck do you mean by Catholic married? I can't imagine any interpretation that isn't offensive. One where you can't divorce. What's offensive about that? Has the Catholic Church changed its dogma about that without me noticing?
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2015 22:42
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:To force Hamas out of power by inflicting collective punishment against the population in hopes that they will respond to poor living conditions by rising up against Hamas. If Hamas were removed from power and replaced by a peaceful faction willing to cooperate with Israel, and the violent factions were cracked down on by the new government, it's safe to say that the oppression of Gaza would quickly be drawn down, approaching West Bank levels within 10 years. I don't think that that is safe to say, but even if it is - it still doesn't provide a moral or valid reason to engage in the systematic eradication of the people of Gaza. What's happening right now is still genocide even if you pretend that it will end once the Israeli Government gets its way. Absurd Alhazred posted:I bet by "you people" you mean Jews because you're an antisemite. I think that that was a pretty valid point and I'd like to hear a real answer, instead of intentionally avoiding it by being snarky.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2015 22:43
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:To force Hamas out of power by inflicting collective punishment against the population in hopes that they will respond to poor living conditions by rising up against Hamas. If Hamas were removed from power and replaced by a peaceful faction willing to cooperate with Israel, and the violent factions were cracked down on by the new government, it's safe to say that the oppression of Gaza would quickly be drawn down, approaching West Bank levels within 10 years. Thats still a very violent life.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2015 22:48
|
|
|
captainblastum posted:I think that he has a pretty valid point and I'd like to hear a real answer, instead of intentionally avoiding it by being snarky. Talking about "you people" and ascribing convenient arguments to general stereotypes of opponents is exactly the kind of hyperbole that is right now making this a worse thread. If he wanted actual answers he could read the past couple of pages which actually did go over the Native American example, and argued specific points with specific people.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2015 22:48
|
|
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:One where you can't divorce. What's offensive about that? Has the Catholic Church changed its dogma about that without me noticing? Catholics get divorced all the time. Beyond that, talking about getting "Catholic married" is a bit like talking about getting "Jewed" or an "Indian trade" when referring to a bad deal. It invokes a pretty unnecessary amount of discriminatory stereotyping. Not to be all "check your privilege" about it, but if you said that in the states then it would invariably come across as Catholic bashing. Kaal fucked around with this message at 22:57 on Nov 5, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2015 22:51
|
|
|
It seemed clear to me that that comment was referring to specific posters in this thread, but I'll let them clarify if they want to, or not if they don't.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2015 22:51
|
|
|
One school of academic thought defines genocide not as a discrete act, but as a process with a series of stages. Consider the 10-step model of Gregory Stanton, and with the current escalations of tensions Israel is currently in stage 6. http://www.genocidewatch.org/genocide/tenstagesofgenocide.html "Mere" ethnic cleansing, purification, counterterrorism, or "preemptive self-defense" are noted as frequent justifications used to rationalize stepping past polarizing rhetoric and into actions. One of the problems with the international definition of genocide is that it's viewed as a singular event rather than a process. This makes it a reactive label that can only be applied after a massive calamity has occurred, and prevents any chance of intervention. Paul MaudDib fucked around with this message at 23:05 on Nov 5, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2015 22:54
|
|
|
Woozy posted:Remind me again what the danger is in "cheapening comparisons to Nazi Germany"? What does that even look like? Just answer clearly and explicitly what the absolute worst case scenario is that takes place when the comparison is permitted to stand. It's mainly that if you 'compare' Israel to Nazi Germany, nobody who matters anywhere in the whole world is going to take you seriously. You either get why or you don't I guess? I don't know how to explain it other than 'the Nazis did what the Nazis did, and were who they were, and the Israelis do what the Israelis do, and are who they are."
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2015 22:54
|
|
|
Kaal posted:Catholics get divorced all the time. Beyond that, talking about getting "Catholic married" is a bit like talking about getting "Jewed" when referring to a bad deal. It invokes a pretty unnecessary amount of religious stereotyping. Not to be all "check your privilege about it, but if you said that in the states then it would invariably come across as Catholic bashing. Really? I didn't know that. I do apologize, it's just a really common phrase in Hebrew.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2015 22:57
|
|
|
Living conditions in Gaza have been getting worse, in a large part due to Israel's deliberate targeting of its infrastructure and refusal to allow access to the building materials that could repair them. Gaza could be uninhabitable in 5 years - what do you think will happen to Gazans then? Are we to believe (without any basis at all) that Israel is planning to stop doing this at some point in the next 5 years?
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2015 22:57
|
|
|
zeal posted:Absurd Alhazred, do you honestly believe that the sieges, slaughters and general oppression have an end goal other than the final annihilation or removal of the Palestinians? I can suggest an alternative motive and end goal - pacification.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2015 22:58
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:To force Hamas out of power by inflicting collective punishment against the population in hopes that they will respond to poor living conditions by rising up against Hamas. If Hamas were removed from power and replaced by a peaceful faction willing to cooperate with Israel, and the violent factions were cracked down on by the new government, it's safe to say that the oppression of Gaza would quickly be drawn down, approaching West Bank levels within 10 years. Except that's bullshit. If that was the case, why did Israel target "Fatah tower" in Gaza City, one of the few high buildings which was the symbolic headquarters of the Strip's more moderate professional class? How does bombing the headquarters of the "moderate" opposition fit in with a campaign to promote political moderatism in the GS? If that's the case, why did Israel decide to unilaterally invade the Gaza Strip last year in order to prevent the formation of a unity government which would have required Hamas to moderate its positions? If that's the case, why has Israel repeatedly attacked moderate and non-violent parts of the Palestinian rights movement with the goal of radicalizing them? Simple: because Palestinian militancy is no significant threat to Israel whereas Palestinian and international activism is. Israel wants Hamas because with Hamas, they can avoid topics like occupation, ethnic cleansing, right of return, etc. and simply point to a convenient (though ultimately powerless) boogeyman. The Israeli government knows full well that collective punishment only strengthens Palestinian resistance, but it particularly strengthens the most violent and cynical factions, which is one reason Israel uses it so much. When Israel withdrew from the Gaza Strip, it was precisely to allow the IDF more room to engage in mass violence without worrying about casualties in the settlements(ie, the lives that actually matter to Israel.) The blockade of Gaza began before Hamas took over and every attempt on Hamas' part to become more moderate has been met with violence. To believe that Israel's policy in the Gaza Strip is to create a "moderate" government which will finally "allow" them to end the blockade is absurd. A moderate government is precisely what Israel doesn't want; its actions have long been targeted at provoking radicalism. This is an old playbook: this is the main reason for instance why Israel invaded Lebanon in 82(to fracture and radicalize a PLO which had begun to gain international recognition as the spokespeople of the Palestinians and had agreed to pursue a 2-state solution)
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2015 22:58
|
|
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:Really? I didn't know that. I do apologize, it's just a really common phrase in Hebrew. No worries, I figured as much since you were simultaneously advocating for less of that sort of language, but I wanted to clarify your meaning.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2015 22:58
|
|
|
Kaal posted:No worries, I figured as much since you were simultaneously advocating for less of that sort of language, but I wanted to clarify your meaning. Thanks, I guess I really need to second- and maybe third-guess my literal translations of idioms from Hebrew in future. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2015 23:03
|
|
|
Irony Be My Shield posted:Living conditions in Gaza have been getting worse, in a large part due to Israel's deliberate targeting of its infrastructure and refusal to allow access to the building materials that could repair them. Gaza could be uninhabitable in 5 years - what do you think will happen to Gazans then? Are we to believe (without any basis at all) that Israel is planning to stop doing this at some point in the next 5 years? Yeah, Gaza infrastructure is basically gone, and the West Bank is not fairing much better.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2015 23:03
|
|
|
Irony Be My Shield posted:Living conditions in Gaza have been getting worse, in a large part due to Israel's deliberate targeting of its infrastructure and refusal to allow access to the building materials that could repair them. Gaza could be uninhabitable in 5 years - what do you think will happen to Gazans then? Are we to believe (without any basis at all) that Israel is planning to stop doing this at some point in the next 5 years? This is what I don't get- there's clearly a process in place that will result in the death or displacement of all Palestinians in greater Israel. We're not ramping up to that- it's here, it's happening now, and if the status quo remains in place, there will be no Palestinians in israel 25 years from now. Is genocide not a matter of process, but rather of progress? We have to wait until it's been more successful before we can call this what it is? At this point, it's like global warming. We could stop it now, but I'm just kind of assuming we won't.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2015 23:10
|
|
|
30.5 Days posted:This is what I don't get- there's clearly a process in place that will result in the death or displacement of all Palestinians in greater Israel. We're not ramping up to that- it's here, it's happening now, and if the status quo remains in place, there will be no Palestinians in israel 25 years from now. Is genocide not a matter of process, but rather of progress? We have to wait until it's been more successful before we can call this what it is? How are they going to force them all out in 25 years, but through extreme and not deniable state violence? Look I could see it, but the blowback would be catastrophic for them. Crowsbeak fucked around with this message at 23:21 on Nov 5, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2015 23:13
|
|
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:So, again, you're defending it as hyperbole that you think has the proper emotional charge, rather than whether or not it is merited by the evidence. Why should we bother even collecting evidence or defining anything if all we want is to provoke the appropriate level of moral outrage? Mind you, this is misguided, because while it might shock some people on the fence to side with you, others will be taken aback, making the easier prey for apologists for the Occupation and other crimes committed by past and present Israeli governments to completely dismiss criticism. No. I'm defending the word because it tracks intuitively with what I know to be the case about the occupation, about the symbol G-E-N-O-C-I-D-E, and how both of those relate to other unambiguous cases of genocide. Look, you don't get to make the rules about this. Like I said, calling Gaza an "open-air prison" isn't technically accurate, but for you its intuitively within the boundaries of acceptable rhetoric. Fine, I don't disagree, but don't pretend that where you draw that particular line has something to do with "evidence". The line doesn't just suggest itself. It's as ideological as anything. I'm sure if I cited international law you'd just quibble about "intent" or "destroy" or some other bullshit. You have a right to do that but don't mistake what your motivation for doing so actually is--emotional, ideological, all the same things that led people to agree that "genocide" was an apt term to begin with.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2015 23:13
|
|
|
Crowsbeak posted:How are they going to force them all out in 25 years, but through extreme and not deniable state violence? LOok I could see it, but the blowback would be catastrophic for them. The blowback should have already been catastrophic for them. It hasn't been. Why should it be if they ramp it up slowly enough, they get away with nearly everything else.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2015 23:15
|
|
|
Crowsbeak posted:How are they going to force them all out in 25 years, but through extreme and not deniable state violence? Look I could see it, but the blowback would be catastrophic for them. Yes can you imagine if Israel committed large-scale violence against the Gaza strip? You can claim resources and blockade supplies until you force Gazans to choose between committing violence and drowning Syrian refugee style in the Mediterranean. Then when you're attacked, use that to justify collective violence, sparking another round of rafts and attacks. There is no "plan" of any sort, but the "hope" is clearly that if you make life tough enough for Palestinians, they'll leave you the land. I don't think the end will work out all that well for Israel at ALL, but I do think that they can absolutely justify the level of violence they need to kill or displace enough Palestinians to settle all of greater Israel without there being any sort of international response. And when all the land is yours, displacing the remaining Palestinians without violence is very easy.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2015 23:22
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:The blowback should have already been catastrophic for them. It hasn't been. Why should it be if they ramp it up slowly enough, they get away with nearly everything else. It would require the settlers to be murdering families every day, to be engaging in full on pogroms.That would turn Israel into a Pariah even in America.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2015 23:22
|
|
|
Crowsbeak posted:It would require the settlers to be murdering families every day, to be engaging in full on pogroms.That would turn Israel into a Pariah even in America. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_settler_violence Hmmmm.... And hilariously, 90% of attacks never lead to an indictment against the attacks, and Palestinians are specifically forbidden from responding to an attack. quote:Palestinian police are forbidden from reacting to acts of violence by Israeli settlers, a fact which diminishes their credibility among Palestinians.[12] UN figures from 2011 showed that 90% of complaints filed against settlers by Palestinians with the Israeli police never led to indictment.[3] So, you were saying? Even with increasing claims of the IDF cracking down on such attacks, very little is actually done and for the most part the Israeli's side with the settlers more often than not. CommieGIR fucked around with this message at 23:29 on Nov 5, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2015 23:27
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_settler_violence None of those links describe daily family murder, so I'm not sure why you linked it. I did LOL at "the majority of settlers don't engage in violence". Apparently stealing arable farmland and clean drinking water from a population with very little of both isn't violence.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2015 23:30
|
|
|
Woozy posted:No. I'm defending the word because it tracks intuitively with what I know to be the case about the occupation, about the symbol G-E-N-O-C-I-D-E, and how both of those relate to other unambiguous cases of genocide. Look, you don't get to make the rules about this. Like I said, calling Gaza an "open-air prison" isn't technically accurate, but for you its intuitively within the boundaries of acceptable rhetoric. Fine, I don't disagree, but don't pretend that where you draw that particular line has something to do with "evidence". The line doesn't just suggest itself. It's as ideological as anything. I'm sure if I cited international law you'd just quibble about "intent" or "destroy" or some other bullshit. You have a right to do that but don't mistake what your motivation for doing so actually is--emotional, ideological, all the same things that led people to agree that "genocide" was an apt term to begin with. I actually do get to set some rules for discussion in this forum due to my role as a moderator. As is appropriate, I have recused myself from doing so this very instance because it is inappropriate when I am engaging in a conversation myself. You, on the other hand, get to set the rules neither here nor in international law and relations. Can you support your following contention? (my bold) Woozy posted:"Isreali leaders are a pack of loving Nazis currently engaged in what most authorities on the issue think of as genocide" If you're going to keep insisting that you shouldn't need to actually support your arguments or address criticisms in D&D because you are clearly right and people asking you to do so are clearly doing so because of ideology you feel it is beneath you to engage with, maybe this isn't the forum for you.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2015 23:31
|
|
|
Crowsbeak posted:How are they going to force them all out in 25 years, but through extreme and not deniable state violence? Look I could see it, but the blowback would be catastrophic for them.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2015 23:32
|
|
|
Irony Be My Shield posted:How about the continuation of the status quo which will leave Gaza unlivable in 5 years? There is already a chronic shortage of clean water and that will only get worse. They said all Palestinians being forced out of Israel.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2015 23:32
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_settler_violence Yeah, but settler attacks are usually low-intensity: arson, assault, vandalism, theft, etc. Remember the burned-to-death family in Duma? It made news because it was a relative rarity; settler terrorists frequently terrorize but they (relatively) rarely kill. I think things would be different if the settlers were producing a Baruch Goldstein-type event on a daily or weekly basis.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2015 23:33
|
|
|
30.5 Days posted:None of those links describe daily family murder, so I'm not sure why you linked it. What, I thought the Settlement program already did that? FreshlyShaven posted:Yeah, but settler attacks are usually low-intensity: arson, assault, vandalism, theft, etc. Remember the burned-to-death family in Duma? It made news because it was a relative rarity; settler terrorists frequently terrorize but they (relatively) rarely kill. I think things would be different if the settlers were producing a Baruch Goldstein-type event on a daily or weekly basis. The state does the rest.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2015 23:34
|
|
|
Crowsbeak posted:They said all Palestinians being forced out of Israel. Do you think that the west bank is immune to the same strategies that have worked in Gaza? If so, why? Or are you claiming that the arab "citizens" in east jerusalem and central Israel are immune to displacement somehow, despite the fact that collective punishment aimed at displacing any arabs who knew an arab criminal is in place, right at this moment, seemingly for the express purpose of finding excuses to displace Israel's arab population?
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2015 23:35
|
|
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:Talking about "you people" and ascribing convenient arguments to general stereotypes of opponents is exactly the kind of hyperbole that is right now making this a worse thread. If he wanted actual answers he could read the past couple of pages which actually did go over the Native American example, and argued specific points with specific people. Oh you just don't know what hyperbole means now it all makes sense. This could also be a deflection. Maybe both? I dunno neither would surprise me. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2015 23:45
|
|
|
hakimashou posted:I can suggest an alternative motive and end goal - pacification. Pacification would involve actually doing the whole negotiating thing. It seems more reasonable that the Israeli strategy is to just wall off Palestinian population centers and letting them govern themselves while controlling all the transit, borders, and infrastructure while stalling on negotiations in order to increase their level of incursion. The Likud government and Israeli security apparatus probably find Hamas to be a convenient neighbor, actually, given their strategy. Panzeh fucked around with this message at 23:57 on Nov 5, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2015 23:54
|
|
|
Plus there was that whole thing were HAMAS actually did decently when a asked for a ceasefire and Israel broke it anyway because gently caress you. The idea they give a gently caress about HAMAS is laughable.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2015 00:00
|
|
|
captainblastum posted:I don't think that that is safe to say, but even if it is - it still doesn't provide a moral or valid reason to engage in the systematic eradication of the people of Gaza. What's happening right now is still genocide even if you pretend that it will end once the Israeli Government gets its way. It's super safe to say. Why else do you think Gaza started getting different treatment from the West Bank, mostly starting in 2007? It's a good thing the people of Gaza are not being "systematically eradicated", then. What's happening in Gaza is neither "systematic" nor "eradication". It's very carefully calibrated to make Gazans as miserable as possible and ruin their quality of life, but the terms you're using are way way way too strong. That doesn't make it moral, of course, it's still absolutely cruel and inhumane oppression of a population - but it's not even close to "eradication". Whether it's "valid" is a more interesting question; blockades and embargoes intended to cause regime change by starving out the civilian population have a long and illustrious history, and are often far from humane. The blockade of Germany during WW1 comes especially to mind here - it violated international law even at the time, but Germany found little sympathy when it complained about this British war crime preventing even basic necessities from reaching German civilians. Paul MaudDib posted:One school of academic thought defines genocide not as a discrete act, but as a process with a series of stages. Consider the 10-step model of Gregory Stanton, and with the current escalations of tensions Israel is currently in stage 6. According to that page, merely recognizing the existence of minority groups is stage two of genocide. A perfect example of diluting the term. 30.5 Days posted:Yes can you imagine if Israel committed large-scale violence against the Gaza strip? Gotta kill a lot more than a thousand people to depopulate Gaza.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2015 02:27
|
|
|
Denying people access to food and clean water does not merely make their lives worse, it either forces them to leave or kills them.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2015 02:37
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:What, I thought the Settlement program already did that? It doesn't regularly do that though. If it was doing what you're describing it would cause tremors through international Zionism. You'd probably see Israel denounced even in congress. The ADL might even say Israel needs to be moderate. 30.5 Days posted:Do you think that the west bank is immune to the same strategies that have worked in Gaza? If so, why? Or are you claiming that the arab "citizens" in east jerusalem and central Israel are immune to displacement somehow, despite the fact that collective punishment aimed at displacing any arabs who knew an arab criminal is in place, right at this moment, seemingly for the express purpose of finding excuses to displace Israel's arab population? A pogrom of the Scale you're suggesting would require a very large campaign of bloodletting by Israel, and would pprobably lead to Israel becoming a bigger pariah then North Korea.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2015 02:38
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:According to that page, merely recognizing the existence of minority groups is stage two of genocide. A perfect example of diluting the term. Actually no - recognizing minorities as different is stage 1. Stage 2 is a group having traits or symbols that can distinguish them as an Other- for example the star of David for Jews. Basically - having a way to identify a minority is a prerequisite for effectively going after them. As the theory notes, symbolization is a universal human act and it's only problematic when it begins to be used as a targeting symbol for hate. So I'd put stuff like hijabs into that category. Maybe beards too. Paul MaudDib fucked around with this message at 02:51 on Nov 6, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2015 02:43
|
|
|
Why would they kick out all the West Bank arabs when they could place them in ghettos and make them work in sweatshop factories? Or as janitors and other menial labor? I don't know if Israel could actually function as a first world nation without the arab underclass.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2015 03:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 12:19 |
|
|
Crowsbeak posted:How are they going to force them all out in 25 years, but through extreme and not deniable state violence? Look I could see it, but the blowback would be catastrophic for them. Could you elaborate on the blowback Israel has faced for creating a situation where the Palestinian diaspora is significantly bigger than the Palestinian population in Palestine? I try to avoid getting entangled in arguments about genocide or the like because usually you'll end up with a Dershowitz saying 'oh but look, Israeli Arabs [note, never Palestinian-Israelis] can walk on the streets without being thrust into gas chambers' or 'actually, the population of Gaza has increased!' What these arguments don't tend to account for are: 1) it has more-or-less been Israeli policy since the late sixties/early seventies to try to concentrate Palestinians in the least fertile bits of the West Bank and seize land with as much resource as possible while thrusting the population at the Jordanians. This didn't start with Netanyahu, Golda 'there are no Palestinians' Meir was a staunch advocate. Something like this is designed to effectively put an end to the Palestinian people, whose national aspirations are inextricably tied to their land; 2) Gaza isn't just an open air prison. It's significantly worse. Another poster's linked to the uninhabitable in five years claim but actually it's pretty uninhabitable now. Malnutrition is rife. Water is entirely unsafe to drink. Power is rationed. Nobody has real work. The black market is cracked down on. Incidentally, these conditions aren't dissimilar to those in the Warsaw Ghetto. The aim here isn't to extricate Hamas, Israel could do that if it wanted to. The primary aim is to consistently have a group they can point to as a block to peace. Ben Gurion and Meir had Nasser who wasn't a real partner. Rabin, Begin, Shamir and Sharon had Arafat, who wasn't a real partner. Netanyahu has Hamas and Abbas who aren't real partners. The pattern is the same. The secondary aim is to kill the national aspirations of Palestinians in Gaza. If 1.5 million Palestinians want freedom, make their primary priority eking out a basic existence instead. When they get to the stage where they have leadership willing to suppress them on Israel's behalf then maybe they'll start having slightly more than the basics. Until then, we'll start to see life expectancy reduced in the Gaza Strip and the continued rise of massive, chronic health issues. 3) cleansing areas of Gaza and the West Bank won't take murder on an industrial scale. You just need a few Deir Yassins and Qibyas, alongside the lack of Palestinian conurbation expansion. 4) Israeli political leadership is quite bald-faced regarding its genocidal intent now. Take Shaked for one; Bennett for another. These aren't Kahanists stewing in obscurity. These are Ministers with portfolios who talk of never having a Palestinian state and how Palestinian civilians are the enemy. How Israel should be doing significantly more than mowing the lawn etc. We're a step away from Assad-style violence. Assad doesn't get billions in aid from the US. There aren't powerful political groups in the US or the UK dedicated to whitewashing or enabling Assad either. When the inevitable happens and the next lawnmowing incident next year ends with tens of thousands rather than mere thousands killed, so what? Let's focus on the massive and ongoing war crimes and crimes against humanity Israel is perpetrating than getting bogged down in arguments about just how efficient Israel is at literally killing every single Palestinian.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2015 03:28
|
|
