submitted 1 day ago by GrymEdm to c/tenforward
[-] GrymEdm 20 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

That sounds like the perfect beverage to keep my reactions razor sharp while I enjoy the split-second thrills of playing League of Legends with my attractive, ethnically diverse friends.

[-] GrymEdm 7 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Oops, my mistake. I think I read that she represents Georgia and mistook that to mean more than is actually the case. I'll edit that and thanks for correcting me! At least that makes it a bit better if not exactly great.

[-] GrymEdm 27 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

I have no idea how/why some people decided that she's the exemplar that should be representing them.

[-] GrymEdm 15 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Just to get it out of the way at the start - Hamas is terrible. They are violent fundamentalists and do not deserve support. Neither Israel nor Hamas are "good" and the only side that deserves support and recognition are the civilians, Israeli or Palestinian, suffering because of/under their evil regimes. Now on to the rebuttal.

Israel needs no "baiting" to kill or otherwise abuse Palestinians - it's their policy and has been for a long time. From the Nakba until today, the history of Israeli human rights violations, violence, lies, etc. is well-established. "Look at what you made me do" is such a typical excuse used by abusers that it's almost a trope. Moreover, Netanyahu's government deliberately kept Hamas in power as a useful bogeyman and an way to divide/foil Palestinian statehood. There is ample evidence that Israel has directly supported Hamas and other extremists for decades.

"Hamas, for its part, is alleged to have emerged out of the Israeli-financed Islamist movement in Gaza, Israel’s then-military governor in that territory, Brig. Gen. Yitzhak Segev, disclosing in 1981 that he had been given a budget for funding Palestinian Islamists to counter the rising power of Palestinian secularists."

"In a 1994 book, “The Other Side of Deception,” Mossad whistleblower Victor Ostrovsky contended that aiding Hamas meshed with “Mossad’s general plan” for an Arab world “run by fundamentalists” that would reject “any negotiations with the West,” thereby leaving Israel as “the only democratic, rational country in the region.” Avner Cohen, a former Israeli religious affairs official involved in Gaza for over two decades, told a newspaper interviewer in 2009 that, “Hamas, to my great regret, is Israel’s creation.”

As far as the nature of the demands: "one-sided deals" is a matter of opinion, but "we need guarantees you'll actually leave, stop killing/injuring many tens of thousands of civilians, destroying hospitals/schools/aid, etc." seems like a pretty standard request at peace negotiations. Especially since Israel has repeatedly promised to continue to prosecute the war and establish long-term armed forces in Gaza.

[-] GrymEdm 34 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

If he can follow up on even a portion of what he promises, a 2nd Trump presidency will bring the USA to a halt at multiple levels like a car hitting a reinforced wall. The best version of a Trump presidency is him raging daily as he's blocked constantly by legal challenges and bureaucratic measures thus getting nothing done. The worst version is that he succeeds in his goals, reforms the USA into a right-wing autocracy and destroys things like checks/balances and separation of church and state.

[-] GrymEdm 4 points 3 days ago

There's nothing damning after the "but" though. What part specifically of "but unfortunately they are the folks bargaining for Gazans" do you take issue with? That's the provable reality of the negotiations. I even call it unfortunate.

[-] GrymEdm 57 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

Israel has repeatedly stated their intent to continue the war in Gaza regardless of international approval. Netanyahu, among others, has stated intent to establish a long-term/permanent security presence in Gaza.

Since Oct. 7th the Israeli military has either directly killed or provided protection to lethal settler attacks in the West Bank, resulting in over 500 deaths in a section of Occupied Palestinian Territory that theoretically isn't at war. So there's Israeli military presence, violence, and oppression of Palestinians even where Hamas isn't in control.

Hamas are not good guys by any stretch, but unfortunately they are the folks bargaining for Gazans. In the face of continued Israeli aggression, disregard for international approval/law, and stated plans it's no wonder they're demanding that any deals have rock-solid guarantees on an enforceable timetable.

[-] GrymEdm 7 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

No. You said "Biden is great". I said, "I acknowledge he's done some good, I still disagree, and here's a concise list of reasons why. In spite of that, I'm willing to get on board to fight Trump". You replied (and this is an exact quote): "I talk about how Biden’s done great, and you talk about how he’s not Trump", completely disregarding that I directly addressed why I don't think Biden is great. I did NOT just talk about how he's not Trump.

How am I arguing in bad faith? That is the sequence of events, and it's easily confirmed. I'm also not calling you out just because you didn't watch the video. I'm saying you didn't watch AND disregarded that I explicitly gave you the video as a source for my disagreement with you to instead say I focus on "not Trump". Now you've doubled down with a response that paints me as arguing in bad faith and linking that to insults/abuse. I never insulted you. Disagreeing is not inherently a slur or abusive, nor is pointing out the holes in an rebuttal. If you don't have time to watch the vid that's understandable but wait to respond until you do or at least don't say I only focused on "not Trump" when that's provably not the case.

[-] GrymEdm 10 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

So you won't spend 90 seconds to watch the criticisms laid out, but you'll take the time to tell me they are all either nonexistent or invalid?

[-] GrymEdm 9 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

Biden has done some good things. I disagree that he's great. If you want specifics, the first 90 seconds of that Sanders video is him detailing several grievances I agree with in a clear, concise and fairly complete list. However, to quote Sanders: "But while we may have our disagreements with Biden, it's important to take a minute to think about what a Trump presidency would mean to our country, and in fact the world."

I know what needs to be done which is why I stopped encouraging/supporting 3rd party or undecided voting months ago. I could go on a lot longer, but that's the bottom line. I'll join the effort to stop Trump - just don't ask me to agree that my concerns are invalid or have been adequately addressed.

[-] GrymEdm 10 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

Historical misinformation spreads most readily simply by being repeated and undisputed.

This is admittedly a bit nitpickey, but I specifically said you address misinformation with facts and sources to back up those facts. That's the opposite of repeating and/or letting it go undisputed.

Disagreeing with someone civilly acknowledges the validity of their point or position.

No. You can say, emphatically, "you're wrong" without also calling someone idiotic, etc.

is “Every political position, even the one I’m part of, has flaws” really that bad in your eyes?

I've said right from the start that I agree with some points you make, and I stand by that. Being aware that everyone is wrong sometimes is undeniably a virtue.

That’s the right approach, honestly.

Thank you :) I appreciate that, and respect that you're willing to give me that even if we have had our disagreements today.

[-] GrymEdm 7 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

how am I supposed to respond to a blatant bad faith effort to spread historical misinformation?

With facts and sources to back up those facts. You can disagree with someone in a civil manner. If you actually care about my point about delivery, please watch that Bernie video.

Your meme does indeed make fun of all quadrants, but I used it because it's an example of the type of the insults. And let's be honest, there's evidence in those other posts that some of those opinions are not JUST satire for you. I mean, you called me out for being naively kind and employing "flower power", aka chances are you think I'm one of the useful idiots.

Aside from that, like I said - I can't stop you from insulting people. Your arguments seem to point to a belief in your right to do so. I don't think I would force you even if I could since I usually try to convince people instead. If I didn't change your mind, maybe I will change the minds of some others who may read this.

submitted 4 days ago by GrymEdm to c/tenforward
submitted 2 weeks ago by GrymEdm to c/tenforward
Top Dakka (lemmy.world)
submitted 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) by GrymEdm to c/grimdank
submitted 2 weeks ago by GrymEdm to c/tenforward
submitted 3 weeks ago by GrymEdm to c/[email protected]
submitted 3 weeks ago by GrymEdm to c/tenforward
submitted 3 weeks ago by GrymEdm to c/tenforward

I'm taking linguistic liberty by not saying "the ICU". People say "sent to or discharged from hospital" all the time, so I'm trying to get away with it because the wording works better.

submitted 3 weeks ago by GrymEdm to c/world

Israeli Foreign Minister Israel Katz said on Friday, May 24, that he had decided to "sever the connection" between Spain's diplomatic mission and Palestinians in the occupied West Bank over Madrid's recognition of a Palestinian state.

"I have decided to sever the connection between Spain's representation in Israel and the Palestinians, and to prohibit the Spanish consulate in Jerusalem from providing services to Palestinians from the West Bank," Katz said in a post on X. It was not immediately clear how Israel would carry out the threat.

Asked by Agence France-Presse (AFP) about the practicalities and consequences of Katz's announcement, the Foreign Ministry did not immediately comment. Katz said his decision was made "in response to Spain's recognition of a Palestinian state and the anti-Semitic call by Spain's deputy prime minister to (...) 'liberate Palestine from the river to the sea.'"

submitted 3 weeks ago by GrymEdm to c/tenforward
submitted 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) by GrymEdm to c/tenforward

So I decided to do a week of these posts and then see how it was going. It seems to have gone well enough, but it's probably time for me to take a break from this format specifically for a while. In true Star Trek spirit though I want to get some use out of the misfit ideas so here's the memes I didn't pick each morning for whatever reason.

submitted 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) by GrymEdm to c/world

Israel will not transfer much-needed funds to the Palestinian Authority in the wake of the decision by three European countries to recognize a Palestinian state, the country’s finance minister said on Wednesday, as its foreign minister denounced the European moves as giving “a gold medal to Hamas terrorists.”

The decision by the finance minister, Bezalel Smotrich, a far-right leader who opposes Palestinian sovereignty, threatened to push the Palestinian government into a deeper fiscal crisis. He said in a statement that he had informed Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that he would no longer send tax revenues to the authority, which administers parts of the Israeli-occupied West Bank in close cooperation with Israel.

Mr. Smotrich’s office signaled that the decision was at least partly a response to Spain, Norway and Ireland recognizing Palestinian statehood, and that the Palestinian leadership bore responsibility for campaigning for the move.

view more: next ›


joined 3 months ago