Anti-Semitism
- Thread starter Teufel
- Start date
Bro here's my issue with you. Every time anyone even remotely suggests Israel is bad, you go on and on about how they have a right to defend themselves or something like that. Tell me bro, what's the justification for this?
www.bbc.com
Ironbite-go on...defend it.
Lebanese journalist killed in targeted Israeli airstrikes, officials say
Lebanon's prime minister accused Israel of war crimes after IDF attacks on Red Cross vehicles also stopped rescuers from reaching the site.
www.bbc.com
Ironbite-go on...defend it.
I believe there needs to be a clear delineation between Israel the state and the Jewish people. The state of Israel, led by criminal Netanyahu, is committing atrocities and war crimes. This doesn't take away from what's been done to the Jewish people, but is a statement of fact that stands on its own. The atrocities and war crimes are being done, at least in part, to keep Netanyahu from the consequences of his criminal behavior. He has pushed this war so he can remain in power despite his criminal actions.
Hamas, has also committed atrocities. It has also been responsible for acts of terrorism. No one is taking anything away from that. But much like how Netanyahu and his allies have pushed that to support the Jewish people you have to support the state of Israel, Hamas has also pushed that in order to support the Palestinians, you have to support Hamas. Neither of these things are true, but leadership on both sides has pushed this to give themselves an air of legitimacy in their attacks on the other.
At this point I believe that both the government of Israel and Hamas are criminal organizations. I believe the best thing for the civilians who are paying the blood toll is the removal of both. Israel needs a fully new government, with Netanyahu and his cronies all removed, stripped of their power, and criminally charged for their war crimes. Additionally, the terrorist leadership of Hamas needs to be removed from all governmental functions and be tried for their own crimes.
Hamas, has also committed atrocities. It has also been responsible for acts of terrorism. No one is taking anything away from that. But much like how Netanyahu and his allies have pushed that to support the Jewish people you have to support the state of Israel, Hamas has also pushed that in order to support the Palestinians, you have to support Hamas. Neither of these things are true, but leadership on both sides has pushed this to give themselves an air of legitimacy in their attacks on the other.
At this point I believe that both the government of Israel and Hamas are criminal organizations. I believe the best thing for the civilians who are paying the blood toll is the removal of both. Israel needs a fully new government, with Netanyahu and his cronies all removed, stripped of their power, and criminally charged for their war crimes. Additionally, the terrorist leadership of Hamas needs to be removed from all governmental functions and be tried for their own crimes.
This is all true. The trillion-dollar question is, how does one simultaneously force regime change in a country that has the world's #1 superpower eating out of the palm of its hand (or is it the other way around?) and wipe out the force that's currently fighting the hardest to make that happen?
So many have rallied around the idea of doing just one or the other of those things, and that's partly because online activists have spent the past decade and change turning "both-sides-ism" into the worst kind of reputational poison. But I think it's also because... the idea of one side managing to eliminate the other at least feels hypothetically achievable? Whether they're in the right or not, it's an easier way to end the conflict than strip the entire power structure of the region down to zero and start over.
It's also not how we've been raised by the media to think about anything. Name a single book or movie where the central conflict is solved by somehow eliminating the leaders of both sides of the conflict, rather than one side triumphing over the other. Hell, name a single conflict in actual human history that ultimately ended that way.
So many have rallied around the idea of doing just one or the other of those things, and that's partly because online activists have spent the past decade and change turning "both-sides-ism" into the worst kind of reputational poison. But I think it's also because... the idea of one side managing to eliminate the other at least feels hypothetically achievable? Whether they're in the right or not, it's an easier way to end the conflict than strip the entire power structure of the region down to zero and start over.
It's also not how we've been raised by the media to think about anything. Name a single book or movie where the central conflict is solved by somehow eliminating the leaders of both sides of the conflict, rather than one side triumphing over the other. Hell, name a single conflict in actual human history that ultimately ended that way.