politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
Was there a no-fly zone and recognition of an independent state in 1949? Why are you treating right-wing genocidists as though they are a force of nature?
Seems like quick work for the armored bulldozers so beloved by the occupiers, if karma is a real thing....
Oh! A no-fly zone! Of course! THAT is what would have solved it all. My bad.
The solution is not enabling the settlers and ultra-orthodox.
Another option is destroying / blockading the last functioning Zionist port, I expect that will get results real quick. They have decided to build their civilization inspired by the worst excesses of the West, so it will quickly collapse in the absence of endless imports.
Once you turn the grim logic of destroying houses and resource starvation back on the occupiers, you don't have to keep pretending that they are mysterious, incomprehensible, and immovable.
So you agree then. It's one genocide or another.
If you want to really squint and generously apply false equivalence, you could compare the decades-long ecocide, driving indigenous people off the land, deprivation of rights, apartheid and more to the possibilities I outlined I guess.
Funny how the supposed theoretical genocide of an extremely militarized society somehow justifies the continued perpetuation of a genocide against an impoverished society and people.
The occupier is always the victim in the eyes of the media they control.
Or, I could read about that impoverished society's goals Right column, first new paragraph.
One side getting it worse than the other doesn't matter. It's the zero wiggle room either side provides that does.
That's it? Your big trump card is that they call for the destruction of the occupier state? After 70 years of land theft and genocide, wouldn't you? Would you call for 'civility' and 'dialogue'?
Yes I would and do.
More importantly, not only do your agree that both sides are trying to genocide, you support Hamas' goal. That's all I wanted. Honesty regarding what is really being called for here.
I certainly don't grant "Israel has a right to exist" from the jump. What right? From whom? For the record, I don't think the settlers in the United States have any right over stolen native lands.
I don't grant that the dissolution of a colonialist theocracy state is the same thing as a genocide. States are not peoples. Decolonization is not genocide.
One of the elements of genocide per the ICC: The perpetrator intended to destroy, in whole or in part, that national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such.
Again, this is an essential distinction. States are not peoples. A national group is the people of a state, not the state itself.
The axis states ceased to exist after world war II. Despite gratuitous bombing by allied forces, the peoples of the states continue to exist, and largely inhabit the same territory.
Seemingly by your argument, land can be seized, people expelled, war crimes committed, but if you have created a state, it would be inherently wrong to dislodge you. I personally don't regard states as a magic blanket that rules out decolonization by definition.
Um, the axis states all continued to exist. They just had a regime change. That is not what Hamas wants.
I'm sorry, but the definition is clear and it encapsulates Hamas' goals entirely.
Now it seems we've reached a "verbal argument" where it's just an argument over definitions, which I'm not interested in.
This is where I'm personally going to leave this:
Some people see the 70 -year genocide of the Palestinians as an unspeakable atrocity that plainly justifies violent and non-violent resistance.
Some people want to center the fears of the occupiers in the discussion, and use that to throw up their hands and shut down any action or solution that isn't on the occupiers' terms.
It's not 'fears'. It's 80 years of constant assault with intent to annihilate. The issue isn't semantics. It's your refusal to acknowledge the fact that Israel aren't exactly fighting angels here. Both sides are fighting an existential war. You just think the wrong side is winning and the UN mandate which created Israel, giving it a right to exist, says otherwise.
So we're just making up serious sounding phrases to try and balance the scales? Which side is bulldozing houses and stealing land? Which side is practicing brutal apartheid? Which side FUCKING BOMBS SCHOOLS AND HOSPITALS?
Jesus fucking Christ get outside of your media bubble every once in awhile.
I suspect that you can't because you have built a comfortable occupier existence for yourself, so you can't look at the pile of bodies forming the foundation of your existence.
I'm not justifying anything. I'm explaining reality. It doesn't matter who is when both sides would if they could. All radical islamists need to do to overcome this critical detail is to stop with the wanting to destroy Israel. It's that simple. If all Imams proclaimed Israel had a right to exist and Hamas, etc all swore to lay down their arms and obey the edict I would sign up for the UN peacekeeping forces to go arrest all war criminals and force a 2 state solution myself.
I don't really give a shit if resistance fighters check all the right civility boxes. The occupiers were already given most of the land in 1949, but that just wasn't enough. Fuck genocidal setters. Fuck false equivalence. Fuck apartheid. The PLO has played the civility game all these years, how has that worked out for them? Israel is an evil and corrupt society (the US is too).
There we go. Now you're being honest. Appreciate it far more than the disingenuous 'oh the humanity' BS.
I'll just remind you that Israel literally existed for all of a week and the surrounding nations declared war. They weren't the ones that started all this. Doesn't make their hands clean ofc, but trying to justify terrorism that way is going to fail too so save your breathe.
Ahhh, of course, we are going to reach for the "Anti-Zionism = Anti- Semitism" defense. For the record, I make common cause with any Jewish people who oppose colonialism and genocide, like these honest and noble folks: https://www.jewishvoiceforpeace.org/
Interesting, I wonder what happened immediately before the state of Israel declared Independence? Funny how you and the other occupiers never want to talk about the Nakba. Funny how you want to talk about declaring independence but not about displacing hundreds of thousands and destroying or colonizing hundreds of villages and towns.
How about this: return all the land that was taken in the Nakba, then we can stop talking about the destruction of the occupier state. Is that civil and fair enough for you? Or was it always about stealing the land from the beginning?
You mean the Palestinian war against a UN mandate? Where again, Palestinians were violent first? I don't think this is the support you think it is.
Anyways, I'm done. You showed your true goals so there's no point continuing this debate. We'll just agree to disagree until it gets settled the hard way.