Trying to focus on the slaughter of regular Israelis and whether it's good or evil to attack civilians is just such a ridiculous approach to me. The question has no meaning in this context. If you don't want kernels to pop take the pot off of the flame, if you refuse to do that then shut the fuck up about it.

Like obviously it sucks that everyday people were intentionally killed but the blame is just being put on the entirely wrong place, it's just individualist moralism that works to strip the event of any context. It feels like it's a rhetorical funnel whose function is to push those who engage in this moralizing to the next logical point in the talking-point journey: whether Israel has a right to defend itself.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] SnAgCu@hexbear.net 19 points 2 years ago (1 children)

If an someone breaks into your house and locks you in the basement for twenty years, do they have "the right to defend themself" when you break out and throttle them?

Well, probably not. But already, the conversation is absolutely asinine because somehow we're talking about this and not that you were locked in your basement for 20 years.

[–] RyanGosling@hexbear.net 10 points 2 years ago

maybe-later-kiddo yes but the HOA declared that any damages done to a homeowner’s property must be compensated. Therefore, the man in the basement shouldn’t have broken out and instead write an appeal letter to the HOA