189
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 19 Oct 2023
189 points (87.1% liked)
politics
19159 readers
4564 users here now
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
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Except it provably isn't. Calling for evacuations before military strikes is an easy and obvious example.
Allowing Hamas to bombard them with thousands of rockets for years is another really obvious one that no one ever seems to recognize.
https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/israel-palestine-war-gaza-area-bombed-after-warning-to-move
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/israel-bombs-egypt-border-crossing-it-had-touted-as-an-escape-route-for-besieged-palestinians/ar-AA1hYfk2
Man, I'm not going to get into a tit for tat with you. Hamas has blood on their hands. That doesn't mean I'm going to pretend Israel doesn't.
I'm in my 50's; this is at least the third or fourth time I can remember having the reaction of "Wow, Israel gives no shits who they hurt" during an event like this.
How about those illegal settlements which are a 24/7/365 provocation?
Hamas isn't innocent, but Israel damn sure isn't either.
This is not a rebuttal to anything I've said.
Read what I quoted from your comment, and tell me which of the links I posted supports it.
The rest is just because I had my dander up at the continuous implication from some that we're supposed to support Israel uncritically.
Endeavoring to minimize civilian casualties does not mean there will not be civilian casualties.
The argument that Israel is aiming for civilian casualties is nonsensical.
So you didn't read the articles or you claim they are false?
Edited to add - I know the cartoon inserted was from a previous time we were all shaking our head at Israel, but that's exactly what it looks like overall.
Edited again to say - at best they are giving lip service to watching out for civilians but taking no care to actually do so. I reject the premise that this would have been a proportional response even if I believed they actually were trying not to hit them. I don't think the folks calling the shots care whatsoever about civilians being on the other end.
I also think they haven't considered what actions belong in the "Guaranteed" category when considering actions that are 100% going to create additional generations who feel they have a legitimate reason for future acts of violence against Israel.