• RageAgainstTheRich@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    94
    arrow-down
    15
    ·
    2 months ago

    I know the comments are immediately filled by these assholes but I’m glad they are being down voted and OP is being up voted.

    Its so akward to engage with people like that… it’s like people supporting russia because ukraine is supported by america. 2 can be shit at once. Its not that hard.

    If isis starts attacking israel, that does not mean you need to support isis…

    • switchboard_pete@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      51
      ·
      2 months ago

      if in some bizzare, hypothetical fantasy world, isis somehow invaded israel and stopped the ongoing genocide there and delivered a perfect two state solution overnight, would you be morally against specifically that action because it was isis who did it?

      to be clear, i’m not asking whether you’d be against isis as a whole: just whether you’d be against isis ending the current israel-palestine situation peacefully

      • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        58
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        If they did that I’d be grateful to them. And if I had wheels I’d be a wagon.

        • switchboard_pete@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          2 months ago

          so you agree that a group can do bad things, or even be on the whole bad by a very wide margin, but still do something good worthy of praise?

            • switchboard_pete@fedia.io
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              2 months ago

              If isis starts attacking israel, that does not mean you need to support isis…

              it was a response to this, which in the context of the original post, has a sentiment that directly contradicts what you just agreed with

              • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                7
                ·
                2 months ago

                Acknowledging that a terrible organization has done something good doesn’t mean I support them.

                • switchboard_pete@fedia.io
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  2 months ago

                  the meme never mentions supporting houthis, it says praising them

                  acknowledging somebody has done something good is praising them

                  hence “If isis starts attacking israel, that does not mean you need to support isis…” is a bad response

      • almar_quigley@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        51
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        2 months ago

        This is you “so what if hypothetically Putin solves world hunger, homelessness, and redistributed all wealth so everyone was on equal playing field. Oh, oh. And he disarmed all their nukes and led the disarmament of all nuclear armed nations? Oh AND He helped solved climate change? Then would think he’s a good guy?” Like those hypotheticals are bonkers and useless.

        • switchboard_pete@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          2 months ago

          it’s called a thought experiment

          do i think anybody is realistically going to kidnap me and plumb my kidneys into a world famous violinist? no. but i can still use that hypothetical to make a point. do i think anybody is likely to run into a barn at 0.9c while holding a long ladder? no, but i can still use that to learn something.

          based on your response, i presume you agree that a group can do bad things, or even be on the whole bad by a very wide margin, but still do something good worthy of praise?

          • almar_quigley@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            2 months ago

            Yeah but being bad and doing a good thing from time to time doesn’t make you good. Your thought experiment doesn’t provide any value because no one is saying everything the bad groups do is always and forever bad. It’s more like the severity of badness outweighs any good they are doing when it comes to the perception of them.

            I’m sure Hitler gave his friends very nice and thoughtful presents. At the same time he was ordering a genocide. Are those presents then bad? Not on the surface. Is he redeemable because of that? No.

            • switchboard_pete@fedia.io
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              2 months ago

              Yeah but being bad and doing a good thing from time to time doesn’t make you good.

              sure, and i’m not saying that the hypothetical would make isis good

              i’m saying that it would make fantasy isis worthy of praise for this specific hypothetical achievement

            • AlexanderTheDead@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              6
              ·
              2 months ago

              Idek the historical context or anything that’s going on in this situation right now, but your inability to see nuance and your insistent strawman is telling and exhausting.

  • PugJesus@lemmy.worldOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    63
    arrow-down
    18
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    I just want to oppose Israeli genocide without saying that the “A Curse Upon The Jews” folks targeting random countries’ civilian shipping are kosher (ha) because they said they’re doing it for A Really Good Cause, Promise™, despite the utter lack of apparent effect on that cause, and dubious mechanisms for even its theoretical effect on that cause.

  • Forester@yiffit.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    30
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    That’s how I got banned from 196 calling out bs like that. Pretty sure /u/Moss is a full blown tankie

      • Forester@yiffit.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        31
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        Go have a conversation with Moss about Hamas. I’m paraphrasing here because it’s been half a year, but what I said that got me banned was that the Hamas leadership and the Israeli leadership both spend the lives of Palestinians like Monopoly money. It’s in the best interest of the leadership of both parties for the conflict to continue. Neither side wants peace and the civilians are fucked because of it.

        I was banned for being a genocide Apologist. While also condemning the genocide…

        Fundies and tankies there never was a better match made.

        • Keeponstalin@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          2 months ago

          Hamas has already agreed to no longer govern the Gaza Strip, as long as Palestinians receive liberation and a unified government can take place. Israel has been the only one to reject the UN Resolution 3-Stage Permanent Ceasefire put forth by the US. So how do you think that both sides don’t want peace? One side wants the end of a violent apartheid settler colonialist occupation, the other wants the complete ethnic cleansing of Palestinian people from Palestine.

          Quote

          During the current war, Hamas officials have said that the group does not want to return to ruling Gaza and that it advocates for forming a government of technocrats to be agreed upon by the various Palestinian factions. That government would then prepare for elections in Gaza and the West Bank, with the intention of forming a unified government.

          Before that, both Hamas and Fatah have agreed to a Two-State solution based on the 1967 borders for decades. Oslo and Camp David were used by Israel to continue settlements in the West Bank and maintain an Apartheid, while preventing any actual Two-State solution

          Israel has always been the obstacle for peace, because it is a Settler Colonialist Ethnostate founded on, and ever continuing, ethnic cleansing

          Settlements

          Israel justifies the settlements and military bases in the West Bank in the name of Security. However, the reality of the settlements on-the-ground has been the cause of violent resistance and a significant obstacle to peace, as it has been for decades.

          This type of settlement, where the native population gets ‘Transferred’ to make room for the settlers, is a long standing practice.

          The mass ethnic cleansing campaign of 1948:

          Further, declassified Israeli documents show that the Occupation of the West Bank and Gaza Strip were deliberately planned before being executed in 1967:

          While the peace process was exploited to continue de-facto annexation of the West Bank via Settlements

          The settlements are maintained through a violent apartheid that routinely employs violence towards Palestinians and denies human rights like water access, civil rights, etc. This kind of control gives rise to violent resistance to the Apartheid occupation, jeopardizing the safety of Israeli civilians.

          State violence – official and otherwise – is part and parcel of Israel’s apartheid regime, which aims to create a Jewish-only space between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea. The regime treats land as a resource designed to serve the Jewish public, and accordingly uses it almost exclusively to develop and expand existing Jewish residential communities and to build new ones. At the same time, the regime fragments Palestinian space, dispossesses Palestinians of their land and relegates them to living in small, over-populated enclaves.

          The apartheid regime is based on organized, systemic violence against Palestinians, which is carried out by numerous agents: the government, the military, the Civil Administration, the Supreme Court, the Israel Police, the Israel Security Agency, the Israel Prison Service, the Israel Nature and Parks Authority, and others. Settlers are another item on this list, and the state incorporates their violence into its own official acts of violence. Settler violence sometimes precedes instances of official violence by Israeli authorities, and at other times is incorporated into them. Like state violence, settler violence is organized, institutionalized, well-equipped and implemented in order to achieve a defined strategic goal.

          One or Two State Solution

          The settlements represent land-grabbing, and land-grabbing and peace-making don’t go together, it is one or the other. By its actions, if not always in its rhetoric, Israel has opted for land-grabbing and as we speak Israel is expanding settlements. So, Israel has been systematically destroying the basis for a viable Palestinian state and this is the declared objective of the Likud and Netanyahu who used to pretend to accept a two-state solution. In the lead up to the last election, he said there will be no Palestinian state on his watch. The expansion of settlements and the wall mean that there cannot be a viable Palestinian state with territorial contiguity. The most that the Palestinians can hope for is Bantustans, a series of enclaves surrounded by Israeli settlements and Israeli military bases.

          • Avi Shlaim

          How Avi Shlaim moved from two-state solution to one-state solution

          ‘One state is a game changer’: A conversation with Ilan Pappe

          One State Solution, Foreign Affairs

          Hamas officials should be held accountable for all war crimes committed, same as all Israeli officials. That said, there are many parallels between the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising and Gaza.

          In the Shadow of the Holocaust by Masha Gessen, the situation in Gaza is compared to the Warsaw Ghettos. The comparison was also made by a Palestinian poet who was later killed by an Israeli airstrike. Adi Callai, an Israeli, has also written on the parallels in his article The Gaza Ghetto Uprising and expanded upon in his corresponding video

      • saltesc@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        Well it seems most self-proclained “lefties” here have an appalling understanding of what that is and below the shallows they are quite misaligned with that side of the spectrum. Their words they one thing, their behaviour and outbursts a much more truthful thing. The term is nothing more than a Get Out of Jail FREE card for them.

  • zante
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    2 months ago

    Comments removed for trolling…… on a meme sub.

    That’s novel.

  • TankovayaDiviziya@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    2 months ago

    I was on the side of Houthis after being oppressed by American-backed, Saudi-led military forces. But now it became clear they are lackeys of Iran who attack innocent sailors, who have no dog in the geopolitical dick measuring contest.

    • PugJesus@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Yeah. I was never on the side of the Houthis, but I considered our support for Saudi-backed murderers instead of Iranian-backed murderers to be utterly pointless, except negatively insofar as it involved us backing a bunch of vile fuckers in a conflict we had no business being in.

      Still wouldn’t support the Saudis if it were up to me. But now I certainly support retaliating against the Houthis until they stop attacking international civilian shipping.

  • acargitz@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    Yeah those guys are weird. Almost as weird as the “progressive except for Palestine” crowd.

    Edit: actually, exactly like that crowd. Both are making exceptions to their progressivism for Palestine. Only some do it in a pro-Israeli and some in an anti-Israeli way. “Except for Palestine” both ways.

  • MataVatnik@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    Ideology aside, as geopolitical players they do kinda fuck compared to their peers. Constantly underestimated.

  • Ð Greıt Þu̇mpkin@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    17
    ·
    2 months ago

    Fucking psychopaths would see the Palestinian laborer crushed under the boot of theocracy purely because “they shoot at jews sometimes tho.”

  • sweetpotato@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    12
    ·
    2 months ago

    One can do a good action and a bad action at the same time. They can support a national liberation struggle and oppress their citizens at the same time. I don’t know why you’d have to make a final verdict, countries are not people you should hang out with. They are bureaucratic entities with interests that are a lot of the times opposite to those of the people. How about all counties are bad?

    Also I don’t understand why you would hold the poorest country in the world that was facing a genocide and the worst humanitarian crisis in earth 5-10 years ago by the Saudis and the US to the same social standards as the West. These people are hungry, poor, destroyed in every way and up until recently had to fight to gain their independence. Who do you expect to rule except for these Houthi fighters? If the west and the Saudis had let them live, then we could talk. I see this stupid take so often like with Afghanistan, it’s frustrating.

    • PugJesus@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Who do you expect to rule except for these Houthi fighters?

      Holy fucking shit, please look into the history of the Yemeni Civil War. The idea of the Houthis as fighting for the independence of the Yemeni people is beyond absurd.

      That’s some “Who do you expect to rule except the Taliban” level take-

      I see this stupid take so often like with Afghanistan, it’s frustrating.

      … of course.

      • sweetpotato@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        2 months ago

        Once you realize that the reason they are not treating women equal is because they’ve been uneducated and starved to death by imperial powers to reach the point to have this government, and not because they are stupid or something, then we can talk. Oh and once you learn to read how I never said it’s acceptable, but rather that we can applaud them for one thing and condemn them for another.

        If you let them live for a couple of decades they will sort it out is the main idea.

        • blackris@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          Hey, just maybe they are uneducated and starved nearly to death by imperial powers and also absolute motherfuckers. Sounds like that.

        • PugJesus@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          2 months ago

          Once you realize that the reason they are not treating women equal is because they’ve been uneducated and starved to death by imperial powers to reach the point to have this government

          It’s incredibly racist how you assume no agency on the part of anyone who isn’t white. But that seems to be par for the course for a certain section of the online left.

          • sweetpotato@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            2 months ago

            You are literally twisting my words to the point it is disgusting. I said the exact opposite, this is so toxic or your reading comprehension is very bad.

    • PugJesus@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      It’s insane how people lecturing others about how “the lesser evil is still evil, and evil is unacceptable” are going all in to lick the boots of a bigoted fascist theocracy that rules over its stretch of Yemen by naked force for attacking civilians unrelated to the cause they’re supposedly supporting.

  • switchboard_pete@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    38
    ·
    2 months ago

    what’s your position on western sanctions on russia? innocent russians have definitely died as a result of the sanctions

    do you agree with the notion of a blockade but not with the specific group doing it? can an action be bad solely because of the party that’s enacting it?

    • PugJesus@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      38
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      2 months ago

      what’s your position on western sanctions on russia?

      My position is that intentionally attacking civilians with military force is indefensible. I don’t know why that’s suddenly popular on some corners of the online left.

      do you agree with the notion of a blockade but not with the specific group doing it?

      • I dispute that the Houthis are genuinely attempting to blockade Israel

      • I dispute that, even if they were, that their actions constitute in any way a viable way to blockade Israel

      • I dispute that, even if their blockade was successful, that it would meaningfully impact Israel’s ongoing genocide, considering that most trade that passes through the area isn’t going to Israel, and that the amount of trade that does pass through to Israel through Eilat is not nearly significant enough to damage their ongoing efforts, which are not exactly stymied by a lack of cars from China or a lack of diamonds from India.

      • I dispute that attacking civilians, a war crime, is morally acceptable. There are laws in the modern day, it’s not the fucking Bronze Age.

      • switchboard_pete@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        2 months ago

        I dispute that, even if they were, that their actions constitute in any way a viable way to blockade Israel

        so their actions are bad because you don’t think they’ll be effective? honestly, pressuring global trade has historically been a pretty good way of achieving goals in capitalism

        I dispute that attacking civilians, a war crime, is morally acceptable.

        again, sanctions on russia have definitely killed people

        so you’re fine with people dying, just so long as they do it from freezing to death in their homes rather than by direct military action?

        • PugJesus@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          so their actions are bad because you don’t think they’ll be effective? honestly, pressuring global trade has historically been a pretty good way of achieving goals in capitalism

          Thanks for giving up the game and admitting that you support this not because it blockades under 10% of Israel’s trade, but because it disrupts non-Israeli trade.

          again, sanctions on russia have definitely killed people

          I’m sorry that the words ‘attack’ and ‘war crime’ mean nothing to you.

          • switchboard_pete@fedia.io
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            2 months ago

            because it disrupts non-Israeli trade

            so, just to set a baseline here, are we agreed that

            • what israel is doing is bad
            • stopping israel from doing what they’re doing is good
            • stopping israeli trade might stop what they’re doing
            • therefore stopping israel from trading is good

            given that trade is definitionally between two separate parties, one of the countries in the equation has to not be israel

            how can you stop israel from trading without impacting other countries?

            tldr: the sanctions on russia also have an impact on global trade, so if this is your redline, you should be anti-sanctions

            I’m sorry that the words ‘attack’ and ‘war crime’ mean nothing to you.

            are you saying the blockade is different to sanctions because russia attacked ukraine and is committing war crimes?

            i’m not sure if you’ve paid attention to things in israel recently

            • PugJesus@lemmy.worldOP
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              2 months ago

              how can you stop israel from trading without impacting other countries?

              tldr: the sanctions on russia also have an impact on global trade, so if this is your redline, you should be anti-sanctions

              A desperate backtrack after giving up the game. Sorry that “Let’s hurt trade between everyone we can, not just those trading with Israel” isn’t what most people would regard as just.

              are you saying the blockade is different to sanctions because russia attacked ukraine and is committing war crimes?

              Brush up on your English.

              • switchboard_pete@fedia.io
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                2 months ago

                fucking christ can you stop wanking yourself off with rhetoric for 5 minutes and actually address something i’m saying? ta

    • Ð Greıt Þu̇mpkin@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      30
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      2 months ago

      Enforcing a punitive economic strategy isn’t the same as engaging in glorified pirate terrorism because Iran told you to but you totally insist it’s for palestinian liberation toats mcgoats my dudes!

      Speaking as a Palestinian, fuck the houthis and their opportunistic bullshit with a hot iron.

    • MrMakabar@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      2 months ago

      Sanctions are not a blockade. Sanctions would be the Houthis stopping all of their own trade with Israel for example. The Houthis blockading Israel mesns they try to stop everybody from trading with Israel by force. Hence a blockade is an act of war.

      And no I do not believe somebody being vegan is an act of war.

      • switchboard_pete@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        Hence a blockade is an act of war.

        but we’re not talking about something being an act of war

        we’re talking about whether it’s morally justifiable

        are you saying any offensive war is automatically unjustifiable?

        • MrMakabar@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          Right now the Houthis in practise blockade the Bab-el-Mandeb for everybody. The first ship they sunk Rubymar, was Belize flagged and Lebanese operated and ultimatly owned. It also caused a massive enviromental disaster in the region, due to carrying fertilizer.

          What I am saying, is that an act of war against Lebanon, is not a moral response to actions of the state of Israel.

          However you clearly disagree with that and consider any and all action justified as long as somebody labels them anti Israel.

          • switchboard_pete@fedia.io
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            presumably if somebody’s shipping weapons to israel, you’d be fine with the houthis sinking that ship? so you don’t disagree with the blockade in principle, you just think it’s being implemented too strictly?