Varysblackfyre321

Yeah up until they’re daddy actually says stop it this spoiled arrogant child will go as far as it physically can damned everyone else.

Oh so you should also prioritize using speacial forces to go after hamas leadership and more targeted strikes and pressuring/bribing states that shelter Hamas into giving them up right? Instead of doIng a ground invasion that will see a lot more soldiers dead, the thing that can launch the region into a bigger war, and the thing that could lead to tens of thousands of death’s(if not hundreds), and millions of people displaced and primed for radicalization?

What’s actually the worst thing that can happen to Israel if they didn’t bomb a refugee camp?

Well at least this time it’s getting more public push back. Young people, people Biden needs are furious with him and aren’t going along with the notion the terrorist group that’s presented as existential evil to the world and is so bad there’s absolutely no freedom lost or civilian death toll too high that’d stop us from rooting out that terrorist group.

Really? Is any hamas commander good enough to bomb a refugee camp?

Define from that location? And what’s being fired that’s bad enough to kill and injure all the refugeess?

Notice the /s

Yeah this may be a job for speacial forces

There response has been worse than America’s post-911.

Okay but what if that Hamas commander was just about to create nuclear bomb and single handily nuke Israel and kill everyone there!?/s

Double post sorry. I meant to say Israel and its supporters constantly equating disliking Israel’s barbarism with disliking Jews fuels anti-semitism.

This shot actually helps legit anti semites, because Israel and it’s supporters constantly disliking child murder with disliking them and loving terrorists

This shot actually helps legit anti semites, because Israel and it’s supporters constantly disliking child murder with disliking them and loving terrorists

https://time.com/6330102/biden-israel-gaza-arab-americans-trump/ A poll is only showing 17 Arab Americans going to Biden. I don’t want my country to re-elect a fascist even if means not ANNILATING HAMAs whatever the fuck that means I’m sure whatever geopolitical consequences for the world and even region is not worth the risk.

The Former PM legitimately seemed enraged at the notion of rebuilding Gaza after the war and answering what could Israel actually do with Gazans after they’ve “annilated” hamas. There’e also been a think-tank headed by a Netanyahu ally which flat out advocating exploiting the conflict to do full on ethnic-cleansing.

What was that about catching flies with honey? Suckered: Burned. Just…this use of hyperbolic language communicates an exaggerated air of persecution that we could do without. It was a bit vague to me yes hence asking for clarification. If I’m confused or curious on what you meant by something instead of imagining what you meant and going off of that I think it’d be more productive to ask what you meant. She did. Birthing bodies does sound pretty stupid and in a close interpersonal setting already addressing a woman it’s wholly unnecessary. But it’s okay to sometimes use pregnant or person who can become pregnant in legal or medical documentation or even some form of advertisement and there’s no significant push by to erase the term “women” I understand and accept some of my positions are unpopular or at least atypical. That has absolutely no bearing by itself if my position is reasonable or not or the people who hold the standard view are being sensible on it. 40% of Americans literally believe in creationism that the world is 6000 years old, there were talking snakes and god turned women into salt. Over a hundred million people hold that position. I’m comfortable saying all of them are wrong and they’re not being sensible on the issue of the age of the earth and beginning of life. If the amount of Americans who believed in that stuff shot up to 90% creationism wouldn’t become a more reasonable position to hold. If it plummeted to five percent it wouldn’t become a less reasonable position to hold. I’m all for better tactics so please tell me how should I statement disagreement with with you and Ana on this particular in a more productive way.

Elaborate please. What can they practically do worse than what they were pre-October 7th that justifies the risk for tens of thousands of civilians being killed and millions displaced?

Good essay. @Fragile Bird this documentary delves a bit more in their queerphobia and misogyny trying to attach actual real issues—systemic racism—to their nonesense.

Hamas has less chance at succeeding at killing all Jews than the Nazis. On some domestic policies they’re alright. It’s they’re foreign policy people usually have a problem with and they keep electing right wing war hawks sooo…

This really screams panic buy. I don’t think fretful and anxious people make the best gun carriers. Yeah I just saw a video from a well beloved tankie on YouTube with kinda the exact same spiel. moaning how often authoritarian is used especially in the context of justifying western imperialism and asked maybe we should retire the term for its over-broadness. He for context sake defends the government of China and North Korea. Anyway my point is sometimes a term with negative connotations is appropriate. Sometimes it’s okay to call someone a nazi, or fascist or an authoritarian or even a terf. For example couple years ago Philly pride demonized the trans women at stonewall as men in dresses who merely unjustly attacked the police—one of which was even a woman—who were just trying to do their jobs. I’m fine using terfish to describe that stunt. I wouldn’t call Sarah Huckleberry sanders a terf because she generally doesn’t guise her transphobia with feminist concern. To the bolded how about people who menstraute is that a fair enough compromise lol? Edit. Anyway I don’t think it’s right wing or oppressive to wince at terms such able-bodied or neurotypical. I don’t go as far as they’re slurs and wax on right wing podcasts on how progressive circles are going to do things rename themselves to things like Able bodied and disabled workers alliance or something. Yeah this is just conspiracy brained. Hey I get how sometimes terms conjured up to be more inclusive don’t work and people aren’t bigots for not being comfortable with them, but when the ACLU uses the term birthing person they’re not trying to provoke people or get people canceled. The president of the ACLU isn’t hoping for rich white cis women into going on Twitter and typing out how this is a real war on women and if we’re not careful the next women’s march will be the XX march or something. They just want to be inclusive to trans men and legally precise on who they’re referring to. edit. It’s fine Kenjani Browm didn’t just answer women when pressed by Hawley (an actual fascist), on she meant when referring to people who can get pregnant I don’t believe anyone alarmed at her response was acting sensibly.

Worded what better specifically? To reiterate again, she literally attacked AOC, one of the most progressive people in congress for using birthing person even when she didn’t. I don’t think that particular complaint is sensible. Are you really saying Unless one agrees with you on even that complaint being sensible they’re obviously in a eco-chamber? Jesus Christ again with this undue sanctimony. And lowly regular folk? You make it sound as if we’re talking about some random woman immersed in poverty espousing rhetoric that’s socially premised in her neighborhood instead of a rich white academic who lives around relatively well off people and interacting with other academics and rich people largely. What is even the prescription here exactly? If someone learns what a “lowly regular person” thinks on an issue do they have to then readjust whatever position they have on that particular issue? Im genuinely asking here because it sounds like if I ever try to say they’re wrong on something and give an argument as to why they’re wrong I’m just demonstrating as having been in an eco-chamber. Again with this ludicrous false dichotomy . One either has to agree with you—that it’s sensible to be afraid of the term “women” being taken out of progressive activism just because some random individual women said they feared it—or do a great amount of violence.

Is that appropriateness on strictly on what is militarily effective in the removal of hamas in gaza(at least for the moment?)

Does removing Hamas justify any and all military expenditures by Israel?

It’s more like a person moving a trolley he knows will squish hundreds of children , but does so because a murderer is also on the track and he’s trying to get re elected by people who want to squish the murderer.

Do you think Netanyahu would be so distraught at an Israeli soldier dying or two? Why do you think he’s been reluctant to meeting and communicating with the families of the hostages?