I've always really loved Zarbon. He has a cool design that fits his snobbish attitude and then when he sacrifices his looks to transform into his grotesque true form, to was a good foreshadowing of Frieza.
Also the Ginyu Force, of course. Ginyu himself is great and even the oft-overlooked Guldo is pretty interesting (and DBZ needs more weird bullshit powers like his).
Some of the time it makes sense that they would say it simply because they are sliding towards fascism and therefore need a group of untermensch to call for the destruction of.
Sees the state oppress workers on behalf of the capitalist class
o wow, almost as bad as they have it under gommunism. Wonder what it could be, since it can't be money 🤔
As far as Israel’s founding, yeah fine I’m not that old afaic the world fucked up by letting Israel happen but once they’re all there what now?
Well, there is (or was) continuous immigration to Israel from various other (almost exclusively white) countries as part of the project of continuous growth to settle new territory. A lot of them can just go back to their home country and a number already have on at least a temporary basis because of the war.
For the sake of argument we can say there are recent settlers who really cannot go back, and for them the answer is to rehouse them, since obviously no one here wants genocide, that's just a Zionist myth.
But it should be the duty of the founders and masters of Israel, those being the US and UK, to rehouse Israelis in their borders. The same should go for other major sponsors of the Zionist project, like Canada, Australia, and of course Germany. All of these countries (especially America) can afford to do so.
That wouldn't eliminate the Jewish population, but the goal has never been to eliminate the Jewish population.
I mean, I think religion is stupid but
They're much more of an ethnostate than a theocracy, though they have features of both
neither side is ever going to stop fighting because religion.
You are severely misunderstanding the lines of the conflict, but you're misunderstanding them in exactly the way you were told to by the neoliberal media trying to both sides a conflict that was always, always a settler-colonial state trying to exterminate and replace the indigenous Palestinian population. The Palestinians are not fighting to exterminate Jews, they are fighting to destroy the settler-colony that ousted them from most of their land. There's no shortage of evidence of Palestinian society being basically pluralist, allowing Christian churches to stand for centuries (until Israel bombed them) and taking care of Jewish graveyards and so on.
It is not a religious war, it's a colonialist war.
What do you think a relationship between Trump 2.0 and Netanyahu looks like? You care about Palestinians and you want to risk a second Trump term?
I think Biden was already fully supporting Bibi. Trump can't "fully support him but even more now".
I agree, but Merriam-Webster remains a bad way to try to squash claims of nuance. You are correct independent of the bad and redditor-esque method of argument you chose. You should know very well that texts with actual authority exist that better establish these things, like the DSM in this case.
Here's the thing, taking your paraphrased quotes as accurate (and I believe they are) she is not appending any condition on arming Israel. She did not say "If Congress apportions funds, I will arm Israel," [let alone "If and only if,"] she said "I will continue to arm Israel," without any conditional, which Biden has demonstrated the President can do at least to some extent through unilateral executive authority in addition to Congress being able to do it. Therefore, the statements are equivalent. I therefore maintain that "lol/lmao" is a valid response to claiming they are different.
I’m no fucken liberal
Voteblues are liberals, sorry
We should have cut Israel loose 30 years ago
Assuming it had to be founded, it should have been destroyed 70-something years ago
She has not promised to “keep sending Israel bombs”. She has said that she would continue to arm Israel
lol
Fair enough, apologies for presuming.
You shouldn't try to answer clinical questions with Merriam-Webster. It's a very redditor thing to do and just as incorrect as that would suggest.
There is a substantial difference between "being suicidal" in the clinical sense and having decided to commit suicide. We have no reason to believe, lacking an avenue for the "self expression" of immolation, that he would have jumped from a bridge or hung himself in the attic. As far as we can tell, he looked at the present political situation and judged that the most effective thing he could do to accomplish what he believed had to be accomplished was by doing something that required the investment of dying. That's not the same thing as "being suicidal", though you and I both disagree with his choice for our respective reasons.
Seems like campaign finance reform is a more pertinent question then.