nonailsleft

joined 2 years ago
[–] nonailsleft@lemm.ee -1 points 10 months ago

Sure, but people that pull this argument almost always refuse to look at history from the Israeli side. I'm leaving out the pro-Arab arguments for this purpose but bear with me for what is always conveniently forgotten when lemmings say "they deserved it":

The Gaza strip only came under Israeli control in '67, so in reality the 80 years you mention are 56 years.

From '67 to '91, people could travel freely between Gaza and Israel. After the violence of the First Intifada, this changed, and Israel started requiring personal permits to make sure people coming to Israel had legitimate business there.

The escalations in violence led to the Oslo accords. Groups like Hamas and Islamic Jihad vowed to continue the violence until Israel was destroyed, and torpedoed the accords from their side with a series of deadly suicide bomb attacks on public buses in Israel. This led Israel to further tighten the border checkpoints.

Israel withdrew from within Gaza and following the 2007 takeover by Hamas, practically closed the border except for work and medical reasons.

The blockade mostly stopped ground attacks, but Hamas switched their MO to firing missiles. This led to Egypt and Israel progressively tightening their blockade to stop these weapons from being smuggled into Gaza. And Israel to work on a very expensive missile defense, and Israelis living within rocket distance to have to run to shelters almost daily.

And as the daily rocket attacks didn't bring any improvement for Hamas, they planned for the oct 7 attacks.

As I said the above story is onesided, but when I ask someone what else Israel should have done to stop Hamas from wanting to destroy them, the answer always boils down to "don't exist".

[–] nonailsleft@lemm.ee 1 points 10 months ago (3 children)

I'd suggest they find something better than religion to put their hope in.

Claiming this conflict isn't about religion is like claiming the US civil war wasn't about slavery. In the end it's jews that wanted the territory to be jewish, and muslims that wanted the territory to remain muslim. If judaism and islam hadn't existed, all of the 'deeper' reasons and divisions just fall away.

[–] nonailsleft@lemm.ee 0 points 10 months ago (2 children)

Those are all valid points, most of which I can agree with. But that doesn't mean that Hamas was helping us build a better world when they went on their killing and kidnapping spree. They wanted to restart the hostilities and that's not some noble goal that should make us lie about what they did or act like they're not responsible for the deaths of those they took.

[–] nonailsleft@lemm.ee 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

the humanitarian values that religion supposedly have

you have been duped

[–] nonailsleft@lemm.ee 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

1st off, I think the nazi-card is pulled too often in these discussions and it kinda trivialises or cheapens the significance. Saying someone is 'a nazi' or 'acting just like the 'Itler ' really comes off more like a cheap attempt at a veiled insult than a real argument that helps the discussion in even the slightest way.

When I confronted one off my friends who I discuss politics with why she was always so, so eager to make comparisons with the nazi's when discussing Palestine, I guess I got an honest answer when she told me it's because she thinks "that's what would annoy/anger the Israelis the most"... It's like I'm in some bizarro world where no-one remembers why Godwin's Law was one of the internet memes of old, and the joke is no longer on those throwing out that card like it's free (it is) . With the added bonus that it's "just to hurt the jews" lol

So I'm afraid that if you want your discussion forum to rise above a certain level of shit you'll need to sanitize that kind of dumbfuckery somewhat. Not because of 'grave personal insult' but because Godwin.

2ndly, I think moderation should be used very, very sparingly. Like, very. Sometimes people get emotional in political discussions and that should be allowed.

I've actually reported two users myself since Lemmy, but those were for stalking me with a copypaste and someone wishing me to kill myself or something (imagine going against the grain in discussions on Palestine hah)

So I'd say moderation should preferably be used to warn users not to act childish to eachother. We are all children that need to be reminded to act like adults from time to time.

With the above in mind I think it's good this is called out once in a while by a mod, but I don't think it should be more than that. Ffs I'm someone who can enjoy a joke about children starving - I don't require a safe space.

Thirdly, if you're flat out asking me whether I feel like he called me a nazi: yes, I do. As you quoted him he said I was doing the same thing the nazis did. If we ask eachother not to call eachother nazis, or as he said being a nazi, that clearly means to compare someone to a nazi in the intellectual sense. Saying you're only breaking that rule when you say that someone is sitting behind their computer with a nazi uniform on and an authentic membership card of the NSDAP in their pocket is just plain dishonest.

So to conclude: I'd say no shadowban needed but they should be forced to join the "IOF". Plenty of communists in there btw

[–] nonailsleft@lemm.ee -1 points 10 months ago (12 children)

How many of these people do you think would be dead if Hamas hadn't kidnapped them?

[–] nonailsleft@lemm.ee 0 points 10 months ago (2 children)

The 'scale of this conflict' is still very small if you compare it to, say, the Syrian, Yemeni or Sudanese civil wars.

Of course you're one of those reactionary evangelists who'll claim none of these have anything to do with religion and the people in the region are just puppets waiting for the secularist liberals to pull their strings.

Or maybe they're just donuts

[–] nonailsleft@lemm.ee 6 points 10 months ago (24 children)

You'd be hard pressed to find a cartoonist more fond of mocking neo-nazi's than the one who drew this

It's mocking adults who'd prefer to die for their religion for condemning their kids (and their kids) to do the same. If you believe they're starving their kids directly then this newspaper is too difficult for you

[–] nonailsleft@lemm.ee -1 points 10 months ago (4 children)

This war/famine is a religious construct

Israelis (in general) are no better or worse in this regard

[–] nonailsleft@lemm.ee 1 points 10 months ago (31 children)

I see it as a joke on how religious fundamentalists would rather condemn their children to die over their own religious choices (which includes waging religious wars)

[–] nonailsleft@lemm.ee -3 points 10 months ago (6 children)

Ha, that is funny though. Sad on those people saying the caartoonist should be murdered for it

On a sidenote: after one year of fighting, most residents of Gaza now believe that the Holy Attack was not worth it. I think that this cartoon rightly mocks the idea of a 'Holy War', even if some of its victims never made that choice

view more: ‹ prev next ›