8 hours ago, Arthur Jackson said:

What is Hxmas?

A hybrid muslim/christian holiday?

The correct spelling is Hamoss

9 hours ago, DrPhilly said:

The correct spelling is Hamoss

I’m not pro-Hamas.  Just anti-genocide.

2 minutes ago, Dave Moss said:

I’m not pro-Hamas.  Just anti-genocide.

so you think Israel is trying to destroy Gaza/Palestinians? or Hamas?

how are they supposed to target Hamas without conveniently fitting in to such a broad definition that basically equates targeting of any homogeneous population in a given geographic area as genocide?

they could certainly conduct war in a "safer" manner, but that also must be balanced against successful prosecution of the war on Hamas.

Hamas specifically targeted Israeli Jews on Oct 7th. but you "forgive" them more for that because it fits the oppressor/oppressed paradigm that is the current dominant thought process around such actions.

the problem with the oppressor/oppressed consideration is that it throws out any notion of who is actually right subjectively.

it makes no consideration of the fact that there are cases where some are rightfully oppressed, as they represent a threat to broader society.

7 minutes ago, Dave Moss said:

I’m not pro-Hamas.  Just anti-genocide.

when that starts you can have an issue. 

Just now, JohnSnowsHair said:

so you think Israel is trying to destroy Gaza/Palestinians? or Hamas?

how are they supposed to target Hamas without conveniently fitting in to such a broad definition that basically equates targeting of any homogeneous population in a given geographic area as genocide?

they could certainly conduct war in a "safer" manner, but that also must be balanced against successful prosecution of the war on Hamas.

Hamas specifically targeted Israeli Jews on Oct 7th. but you "forgive" them more for that because it fits the oppressor/oppressed paradigm that is the current dominant thought process around such actions.

the problem with the oppressor/oppressed consideration is that it throws out any notion of who is actually right subjectively.

it makes no consideration of the fact that there are cases where some are rightfully oppressed, as they represent a threat to broader society.

they have to do it while making sure not one innocent person gets killed. because thats reality. 

 

7 minutes ago, JohnSnowsHair said:

so you think Israel is trying to destroy Gaza/Palestinians? or Hamas?

how are they supposed to target Hamas without conveniently fitting in to such a broad definition that basically equates targeting of any homogeneous population in a given geographic area as genocide?

they could certainly conduct war in a "safer" manner, but that also must be balanced against successful prosecution of the war on Hamas.

Hamas specifically targeted Israeli Jews on Oct 7th. but you "forgive" them more for that because it fits the oppressor/oppressed paradigm that is the current dominant thought process around such actions.

the problem with the oppressor/oppressed consideration is that it throws out any notion of who is actually right subjectively.

it makes no consideration of the fact that there are cases where some are rightfully oppressed, as they represent a threat to broader society.

I get the argument.  Thomas Jefferson argued that blacks were rightfully oppressed because they were inferior to whites.  Of course he also owned a bunch of slaves…

6 minutes ago, Dave Moss said:

I get the argument.  Thomas Jefferson argued that blacks were rightfully oppressed because they were inferior to whites.  Of course he also owned a bunch of slaves…

You need to make a successful argument that Gazans/Palestinians are being oppressed because of their race or religion before being able to compare to the two.

They were being oppressed because since the day Israel was created Gazans/Palestinians have been waging a war on them.

To be sure this is a careful area we need to navigate, but this stupid notion that all oppressed groups are automatically granted the moral high-ground is divorced from reality. It's as ignorant as the noble savage fallacy.

11 minutes ago, Dave Moss said:

I get the argument.  Thomas Jefferson argued that blacks were rightfully oppressed because they were inferior to whites.  Of course he also owned a bunch of slaves…

Dude, come on.  Black people weren't launching missiles into plantations.  Everything can't immediately turn to civil rights-style racism arguments.  It's lazy and honestly pretty insulting to what was a just movement in the 60's.

6 minutes ago, JohnSnowsHair said:

You need to make a successful argument that Gazans/Palestinians are being oppressed because of their race or religion before being able to compare to the two.

They were being oppressed because since the day Israel was created Gazans/Palestinians have been waging a war on them.

To be sure this is a careful area we need to navigate, but this stupid notion that all oppressed groups are automatically granted the moral high-ground is divorced from reality. It's as ignorant as the noble savage fallacy.

There already plenty of folks that have made successful arguments on this issue.  You just have your head in the sand.

1 minute ago, VanHammersly said:

Dude, come on.  Black people weren't launching missiles into plantations.  Everything can't immediately turn to civil rights-style racism arguments.  It's lazy and honestly pretty insulting to what was a just movement in the 60's.

Fwiw the argument that a racial or ethnic group is rightfully oppressed is garbage.  That’s a NSDAP-style argument.

1 minute ago, Dave Moss said:

There already plenty of folks that have made successful arguments on this issue.  You just have your head in the sand.

successful? I disagree.

"genociders" don't typically announce their intentions to invade here or there ahead of time, telling the alleged target of their genocide to evacuate so they can target hostiles.

1 minute ago, Dave Moss said:

Fwiw the argument that a racial or ethnic group is rightfully oppressed is garbage.  That’s a NSDAP-style argument.

the question is what to do when the Venn diagram of a "racial or ethnic group" and "aggressive hostiles" overlaps to a great degree.

nobody is arguing that oppressing a group "because" they belong to a particular racial or ethnic group is tolerable.

but oppressing a group that is repeatedly attacking your population does not present the same question.

6 minutes ago, Dave Moss said:

There already plenty of folks that have made successful arguments on this issue.  You just have your head in the sand.

wrong. when one starts with the false narrative of genocide, you already lost the debate. 

5 minutes ago, Dave Moss said:

Fwiw the argument that a racial or ethnic group is rightfully oppressed is garbage.  That’s a NSDAP-style argument.

When you're launching missiles into a more powerful country, committing mass terrorist attacks, turning down solutions that give you independent states, continually voting in radicals, etc, you better be prepared to deal with the consequences. The whole situation is awful and I don't wish death on any innocents, but they're only as oppressed as they allow themselves to be.

1 minute ago, VanHammersly said:

When you're launching missiles into a more powerful country, committing mass terrorist attacks, turning down solutions that give you independent states, continually voting in radicals, etc, you better be prepared to deal with the consequences. The whole situation is awful and I don't wish death on any innocents, but they're only as oppressed as they allow themselves to be.

Btw, since you brought up the civil rights movement here’s what MLK Jr had to say

 

 

@Dave Moss made a trip to Eastern Europe today

 

1 hour ago, Dave Moss said:

Btw, since you brought up the civil rights movement here’s what MLK Jr had to say

 

 

Cool but a lot's changed over there since the 60's.  The only thing Israel could do to ease the tensions at this point is cease to exist.

Look, it's all sheet and has been forever.  We should've implemented the VanHammersly plan in the '40s and given the Jews Montana.  But instead we forced them into their ancestral homeland and created what will certainly be a forever war. 

But that war has bad actors on all sides and it's not in anyway comparative to the plight of black people in slavery or during the civil rights movement.  The far left has got to stop comparing everything to it's favorite protest era.  It's silly and it doesn't apply most of the time.

looks like the biggest reach of the day award got wrapped up before noon today. 

34 minutes ago, VanHammersly said:

Dude, come on.  Black people weren't launching missiles into plantations.  Everything can't immediately turn to civil rights-style racism arguments.  It's lazy and honestly pretty insulting to what was a just movement in the 60's.

The problem is that the plight of African Americans is at the core of the oppressor/oppressed rubric in the US.  Followed closely by apartheid which plays larger on the international level which is why seemingly one country seems to be at the forefront of all genocide claims at the ICC...

40 minutes ago, JohnSnowsHair said:

successful? I disagree.

"genociders" don't typically announce their intentions to invade here or there ahead of time, telling the alleged target of their genocide to evacuate so they can target hostiles.

Dude, the genocide is EVERYWHERE.  Example: Israel tells Gazans in parts of eastern Rafah to evacuate

47 minutes ago, JohnSnowsHair said:

the question is what to do when the Venn diagram of a "racial or ethnic group" and "aggressive hostiles" overlaps to a great degree.

nobody is arguing that oppressing a group "because" they belong to a particular racial or ethnic group is tolerable.

but oppressing a group that is repeatedly attacking your population does not present the same question.

Israel is targeting a group not a race/ethnicity.  The targeted group happens to be composed of a single ethnicity but that's simply a coincidence.  If the IDF encountered Hamas soldiers who were of another ethnicity/race, say Asian, they would still kill them.  If the IDF encounter Palestinians who are not Hamas they are spared.  Thus, the situation in Gaza is not a genocide.

Of course the innocent casualties are quite high (too high of course) which is due to a combination of the Hamas tactics and for sure mistakes made by the IDF.

1 hour ago, Dave Moss said:

I’m not pro-Hamas.  Just anti-genocide.

Sure you are  

1 hour ago, Dave Moss said:

I’m not pro-Hamas.  Just anti-genocide.

You are quite obviously misguided on this topic.

What is happening in Sudan is a genocide but no one seems to give two craps

The United States on Monday implored all countries supplying weapons to Sudan’s warring parties to halt arms sales, warning that history in the vast western Darfur region where there was a genocide 20 years ago "is repeating itself.”

U.S. Ambassador Linda Thomas-Greenfield told reporters after an emergency closed meeting of the U.N. Security Council that El Fasher, the only capital in Darfur not held by paramilitary forces, is "on the precipice of a large-scale massacre.”

https://ny1.com/nyc/all-boroughs/politics/2024/04/30/us-genocide-sudan-weapons-darfur

3 minutes ago, DaEagles4Life said:

What is happening in Sudan is a genocide but no one seems to give two craps

Biden gives two craps.

In his pants.

 

 

HIS PANTS!