Count042

Their Oct 1 attacks were in response to the assassination of Nasrallah, in combination with a response to the assassination of a visiting diplomat in Tehran from a separate attack from Israel.

Iran agreed not to respond to the assassination because the US promised that if Iran didn't respond, the US would secure a peace deal for Gaza.

The fact that they delivered and the US didn't is well known to the Persian people, even if it isn't here. And, the lack of response was considered internally there as encouraging Israeli aggression.

The whole 'nothing is more important than the US election' is far less accurate than you think it is.

Iran has it's own internal politics and factions it needs to appease.

This is true of most countries too.

The US invasion of Iraq had far more to do with internal politics than it did with any actions of Saddam.

The current elected leader of Iran was actually the concillatory to the west candidate, elected when tensions were not quite as high.

Now that tensions are high, he has to prove he's not too weak to his own constituency, as the Persian people come together under what they consider to be an unjust attack.

Again, this is true in general for most countries. Foreign policy is driven far more by domestic politics then most people consider.

This analysis ignores the internal motivations for foreign policy.

(unless they start compromising on issues).

Something Democratic politicians are completely unknown to do.

Right.

Right?

Right?!

I'm upset that you want to equate ~1000 to ~150000. And it is extremely stupid to think that it won't be noticed that you think pointing out the disparity between those numbers is the same thing as defending Hamas. Why is that? You still didn't answer that. Almost like you're afraid to address that. At least have the courage of your beliefs.

By the standard of 'civilians have been killed' every country ever involved in a war is equally evil, which is occipitally not true.

Look at the moderator of News on Lemmy.world using this proven false narrative used to justify the murder of civilians and trying to cover up the number of murdered civilians.

Also, and I am making a small assumption here: downvoting anyone that points out what shitty propaganda their point is.

Edit: I wonder how long it will take to get my downvote?

Israel uses the Hamas label to indicate that someone is okay to assassinate in order to justify the murder of trashmen, policemen, hospital administrators and every civilian government worker.

This perfidity is clear to everyone now.

Do you think every civilian that is in the IDF reserves is a legitimate target?

That's the standard Israel uses for everyone else.

I'm making dinner right now, and won't have the time to respond until tomorrow. However, I will say that I appreciate your obviously thought out (even if I disagree with it) response, and not knee-jerk calling me a Russian stooge.

Good job responding to something I didn't say to try and discredit what I did.

Don't think that goes unnoticed.

I'm not excusing Hamas. The fact that you read what I did says that you are either responding in bad faith, didn't read my response very carefully, or are stupid. I'll go with the middle one to be generous.

I don't excuse Hamas. I don't control Hamas, and much more importantly, I don't pay for the weapons that Hamas use.

I pay, or rather my country pays, for the weapons that Israel uses to bomb apartment building, schools, and hospitals.

Hamas has killed somewhere between 1000-2000 civilians in this conflict, and that is being generous because we know that a large number of causalities were from Israel enacting the Hannibal directive and intentionally killing their own to keep them from being made prisoners (If Israel gets to grab 11,400 West Bank civilians without trial or due process and call them prisoners, then Hamas gets to do the same). Furthermore, if we count anyone who was in the IDF or the IDF's military reserves as active military, then the number of civilians goes WAAAAY down. Remember that the IDF considers the trashmen, police, and hospital administrators as active combatants with Hamas affiliation. So, once again, if that is the standard that Israel is setting then it applies to all parties, including Israelis.

Israel, by all best estimates, has killed somewhere between 100,000-200,000 civilians. That is between 5% - 10% of the ENTIRE POPULATION OF GAZA. In all honesty, the number is probably higher.

That is completely ignoring the systemized rape and torture camps that Israel has set up, and the Israeli media discovered. Also, something that there is no evidence that Hamas has set up.

Acting like those two numbers are equivalent, or pointing out that Israel is quantitatively a minimum of 2 orders of magnitude worse, or that the two sides are the same is either stupidity, or evil. Take your pick.

None of this is justifying Hamas. It is pointing out how much more fantastically, cartoonishly fucking evil the Israeli government is.

You should ask yourself why you view the above as justifying Hamas. You might discover something.

Fucking press the goddamn enter button. Do you have any idea how painful quoting you to respond on a phone is?

proposed a "peace plan" that was actually just carving up Palestine into a bunch of little pieces that could never constitute a viable state and giving Israel control of the paths between, effectively wishing to formalize Israeli control of the entire region)

What do you think the situation is now?

From my point of view, any action that brings him closer to getting back in power is asking to throw gasoline on a genocidal fire,

What practical changes do you think that Trump will make that could speed things up?

What actions do you actually think Biden is taking to slow things down.

From my point of view, any action that brings him closer to getting back in power is asking to throw gasoline on a genocidal fire, and saying that one's motive for doing so is being against genocide is sickening in the kind of way that it would be if you saw someone suggest that Hitler should have won ww2 because of all the evil stuff that Winston Churchill was responsible for. Consider for a second what people making your argument look like, from that lens.

This is the wrong analogy.

The analogy that you are arguing is to vote for Gregor Strasser as an moderating influence on the Nazi Party.

Consider for a second what people like making your argument look like, from that lens.

I'm impressed you are aware of the intentional genocide of 4 million Indians caused by Churchill. I am not impressed by your apparent lack of awareness of other lessons from that same time period.

I'm also not impressed by people that believe they can protect their outgroup by backing someone happy committing genocide.

The Democratic party has long signaled it would be happy to throw out the T to protect the LGB. Those that think it would stop there need to re-read this poem:

First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—
     Because I was not a socialist.

Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out—
     Because I was not a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
     Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

We either live in a democracy where all votes matter, or we live in an oligarchy where we get to choose from choices presented to us.

Did you vote for Harris in the primary?

Was Biden illegally the only candidate on the ballot in some States where there were other contenders in the primary that met the requirements to be on the ballot?

I'm not morally responsible for things outside of my control in the same way as I'm not responsible for the sins of my father.

You want to try and make an argument that shove responsibility for a genocide that you're fine with being complicit in, you're going to need more than 2 sentences.

They also don't have systemized rape and torture camps paid for with your taxes.

By any quantitative value system, Hamas commits less evil than the state of Israel

Comparing them is as useful as comparing the relative brightness between the sun and a lightbulb. The two sides are not comparable. One is committing genocide. Trying to gloss over that fact is propaganda trying to cover up the fact that we're paying for the weapons doing the killing.