• DarkGamer@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Calling this genocide is like crying wolf, it merely provides cover for actual genocides by diluting the term until it’s meaningless. Israel could certainly suffer fewer casualties if they were to fire bomb or nuke Gaza, but they won’t because they’re not fucking genocidal.

          • RealFknNito@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Overwhelmingly scientists agree climate change is a thing. Overwhelmingly genocide experts agree the Israel-Palestine conflict is a genocide.

            I am begging you to stop being retarded.

            • DarkGamer@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Your claim: “Overwhelmingly genocide experts agree the Israel-Palestine conflict is a genocide.”
              Your Evidence: A quote by one historian. Not even a link, mind you, a screenshot. It was from the same source I provided, so if it was a normal link that same article would show other experts who disagree with him below his quote.

              Do I need to explain to you why you are being intellectually dishonest here?

              Here’s yet another source that shows there isn’t a consensus among experts:
              https://time.com/6334409/is-whats-happening-gaza-genocide-experts/

              • RealFknNito@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 year ago

                A screenshot to the wikipedia article you linked me. You did read it, didn’t you? You didn’t just link something and hoped to god it supported your claim, did you? Boy howdy that’d be embarrassing.

                Uh oh, a second person who agrees it’s genocidal.

                Also, your link is over a month old. Let’s find something more up to date.

                https://www.cnn.com/2023/12/29/middleeast/south-africa-icj-israel-genocide-intl/index.html

                Oops, looks like the South African government agrees too.

                • DarkGamer@kbin.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Two whole people! Wow I guess that means that the entirety of experts must be <4. Also, that second person says they are “moving towards a ‘genocidal campaign.’” Not that they have committed one.

                  And South Africa, too! lol. I bet you can find some Muslim states who agree as well.

                  I’m done here, you’re clearly not willing to discuss this in good faith.

  • DarkGamer@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    25
    arrow-down
    14
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Hi, I see in the modlog that [email protected] 's post was removed for “violating rule 1,” which is, “be civil and nice.”

    Israel is discriminating non-citizens like every other state while e. g. Arabic citizens have full civil rights. As much as you might hate Israel, this is not Apartheit.

    What isn’t nice or civil about this post? They shared their opinion, one I consider reasonable, in a way that was inoffensive. Can the mods please elaborate on your mod policy here, are only anti-Israel opinions allowed?

    (original comments still visible on kbin, though site is unstable atm)

  • some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    1 year ago

    The end line was so unexpected that I had a good laugh. That a truth was snuck in unexpectedly was excellent.

  • Random_user@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Ben’s version of batman was best batman. Not much who was playing him, but how batman acted and handled himself.

  • rifugee@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Disregarding acting ability, I don’t think Pattinson had the physicality for it; he didn’t look big enough to me to be believable. You could really tell the Batman costume had a lot of padding when you saw him as Bruce Wayne. I think he’s just too lithe, for the lack of a better descriptor, for the character, you know?

    • 0ops@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’ve heard that the Batman was supposed to show a younger, less-experienced Batman. So maybe he’ll bulk up more for the next one, idk

  • Chemical Wonka@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Let’s make one thing clear: This “country” that proclaims itself as Israel is not the same Israel as described in Bible but a Zionist State where its ideological pillars were forged, in a Europe still at the time submerged in colonialist ideology. This is just to say the basics

    • Tartas1995@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      What is your point?

      Like why I care about whether or not it is the one in the bible?

      What are you trying to get at?

      It seems a bit “fun fact that is kinda related to the post but not really at the same time”. I mean obviously Israel is a Zionist state. It is literally the movement that made the state. How does it relate to apartheid? Now colonistic idealogy has a link to apartheid. But then again, Jews didn’t had the best experience with colonism within Europe which is what Hilter did. So you could easily argue against the sentiment, while I personally won’t argue either way as I don’t believe that I know or understand enough.

      In short, I might agree with you if I would understand what you want to tell us. But I don’t, care to help me?

  • rdri@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    15
    ·
    1 year ago

    Deep down we know that doing terrorism will not solve any problems.

    • DragonTypeWyvern@literature.cafe
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Fun History Fact:

      The Black Hands terrorist organization, the ones that killed Archduke Ferdinand, hoped that by doing so they would start a civil war that would result in a victory for Serbia, specifically creating a “Greater Serbia” from the dissolution of the Austro-Hungarian Empire where they had dominance over their regional neighbors.

      Obviously, that didn’t happen.

      Instead WW1 happened.

      Which ended in the dissolution of the Austro-Hungarian Empire and the creation of Yugoslavia, a constitutional monarchy with a Serbian royal family, capital in Serbia.

      (And then they made everyone hate them because they were assholes both as a monarchy and a communist state)

      Second, Bonus Fun History Fact:

      Terroristic tactics have left Afghanistan as the only nation to have defeated occupations by the British Empire, the Soviet Union, and America, the three most powerful states since the collapse of the Mongol Empire.

      • rdri@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        What you propose:

        “Terrorists might’ve done something good actually. In some foreseeable future we might see changes in the world that would actually benefit them in the result, making their terrorism not useless”

        What I propose:

        “No human can see the future. But hamas could perfectly see what would happen if they launched such a violent attack - invasion with the purpose of removing hamas as an entity. If I can’t blame them for not surrendering by now, I will blame them for not making anything to defend their citizens.”

    • Alsephina@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Viet Cong’s success in reuniting Vietnam says otherwise.

      Attacking villages, taking hostages, and using guerilla tactics (like both Viet Cong did and Hamas are doing) are just the most effective ways of driving out an occupying force, and they wouldn’t be necessary if the oppressors weren’t there in the first place.

      • rdri@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        So you’re telling that hamas didn’t do anything wrong and they will succeed?

        It’s interesting how some people blame Israel for being oppressors while others blame it for establishing hamas.

        It’s also interesting how some people say terrorism is not useless because there is “some” history, but others are upset by how Israel is doing it too, apparently.

        • Alsephina@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          None of these are mutually exclusive statements. You can understand that Israel propped up Hamas to label their aggressive tactics as “terrorism” and use that against all Palestinians, while understanding that those “terrorist” tactics can indeed be effective.

          The US propped up the Taliban and other right-wing terrorist groups in Afganistan in the 80s to oppose their then secular Socialist gov and the supporting USSR, and we all know how that came back to bite them later. Just because a country props a group up doesn’t mean it’ll always keep doing things beneficial to them.

          are upset by how Israel is doing it too

          “Terrorist” tactics (or anything really) used for the sake of driving out a settler colonial ethnostate (a good thing) - like Hamas are doing and Viet Cong did - is good, while those tactics when used to oppress and commit genocide on a native population (a bad thing) - like Israel is doing - is bad. This isn’t that hard to understand.

          • rdri@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            1 year ago

            Israel propped up Hamas to label their aggressive tactics as “terrorism”

            Can’t seem to identify the bad actor here. Would you help out?

            The US propped up the Taliban and other right-wing terrorist groups

            You mean Taliban good, USA bad?

            “Terrorist” tactics (or anything really) used for the sake of driving out a settler colonial ethnostate (a good thing) - like Hamas are doing and Viet Cong did - is good, while those tactics when used to oppress and commit genocide on a native population (a bad thing) - like Israel is doing - is bad. This isn’t that hard to understand.

            I understand that you think hamas will succeed in driving Israel out. Since all the current events are the result of hamas’ actions and the expected process of driving Israel out, I don’t see why wouldn’t we just sit and watch it till the end. Since terrorism is excusable, all the casualties are the price of Palestine getting real independence.

        • OtakuAltair@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          Seeing libs both-siding a genocide and colonialism in the present day honestly makes it much easier to understand how slavery was so prevalent for so long.

          Decolonization is violent; if you don’t like it, don’t colonize in the first place.

          • rdri@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            Decolonization is violent

            This is like saying nuclear bomb kills a lot of people. I agree. But is it happening in current reality?