I do agree on both points again.
Out of curiosity, does "modern social standards" matter in determining what is right or not for you though? For me it doesnt, though it will effect how i judge a persons mental state.
I do agree on both points again.
Out of curiosity, does "modern social standards" matter in determining what is right or not for you though? For me it doesnt, though it will effect how i judge a persons mental state.
1) I totally agree with your messager here. 2) out of curiosity do you also feel its inappropriate for black people to use that word in a similar setting and context?
LAWL
It goes way before the trauma though. Religion drove them to think they had a right to steal a land from a people and exterminate them. The trauma came later.
Honestly I dont mind people being hypocritical IF they are currently int he right. People can change their opinions for the situation. But the fact that he does it simply to win an argument, rather than a realization of any meaning is the real damning part.
Also its just such a shit excuse.. like I know plenty of people who literally lived their whole lives in israel or palestine and clearly are so biased by their personal expiernces couldnt even begin to see the situation objectively or clearly. Sometimes NOT being in the situation can give you greater clarity than someone on the ground.
When I was in israel i had bombs blowing up all around me sent from Palestine as I sat in my high rise home, constantly needing to hide in a bunker. Most people would develop a clear bias and hate towards Palestine due to that personal experience regardless of the details around it. For many going there can be what makes you biased. I am just exceptionally good at emotional detachment (though not perfect), so for me that didnt really bias me strongly and I was more effected by my time getting to know the people on both sides and understanding their views.
Yea once he went down that road my eyes rolled so very hard they almost got stuck there. That was the moment he lost any chance of me taking him as an objective party in the conversation.
Yea, I mean the other guy knew he was lying to himself on some level, thats why he used the traps/smoke and mirrors at all. He knew if he actually debated ont he facts he wouldnt have a leg to stand on.
You can be... but being right doesnt mean your words have value either.
And Dave's position wasnt wrong, he just did a shit job at arguing because he left Douglas's bad faith argument lead the direction of the debate, he was reactive rather than proactive in the debate, and when you do that against a bad faith actor you will have a weak position whether you are right or not.
Oh in that case I flip my comments as i though the other guy was Dave... Sounds like Dave was reasonable and the Douglas guy was just being intentionally dishonest (perhaps even with himself).
The power was in Gaza, the stealing of land designated for the palestinians was in the west bank. It also wasnt a one-time thing but a repeated pattern of Israel, to steal Palestinian land and settle it during peace time despite agreed upon borders.
It was basically done int he 2 years leading up to the Oct 7th attack and was one fo the major motivating factors for the attack.
The other one was that Israel completely disregarded the Palestinian border and were settling Palestinian lands despite the agreement to the contrary and peace. Why would Palestine maintain peace when Israel just comes and takes up land and settles it whenever they feel like it even if they are being peaceful?
the issue around them leveling an area with civilians in it is certainly a legit concern. But to me the bigger issue and what is more telling is how they intentionally attack, punish, and torture the citizens where there is no military justification. In the 2 years I was there they had a huge region of palestine with power cut off intentionally as punishment. It was one of the huge issues brought up in international court when Israel was to be tried for war crimes and of course Israel refused to even show in court.
Youc an always make excuses as to why they killed too many civilians, and the details are nebulous. But when you have long-standing quality of life attacks directly and intentionally on the people, while the death toll might not be as infuriating, it far more reflects on their terrorist mentality than anything else.
They should do exactly what every other nation does. Go in, but take extra risk in how you do it to ensure you keep the civilians reasonably safe as you do. That means you dont level an area with civilians with bombs, you go in with snipers or targeted amunition and make an attempt to reasonably limit civilian death, even if that puts your own military at a slightly higher risk. Because thats what good people do, they risk their lives for the innocent.
Wait maybe i confused who dave smith was here... Is Dave Smith the guy who has the british accent and sounds like a wanker relying mostly on appeals to authority? The pro Israel guy? Cause he is who i was talking about.
That other dude that was largely negative about both Israel and Palestine, him I found to be reasonable and agreed with in general however felt his argument was, as often is the case, focusing on the wrong things. Who is doing evil things now is only relevant if we look at the context of the things done to get here.
The most impiortant aspect of my stance is, Israel used the worst imaginable form of terrorism, a form that Palestine has to this day not used (biological warfare). They used it to win, get the upper hand, and trap the palestinians in a horrific state. Only once they used those tactics, and won, and completely suppressed the other side did they even try to pretend to be the good guys (and still fail at even that). It is not the least bit surprising that the underdog would use terrorist tactics that are more mild than the terrorist tactics used against them, now that they are on the loosing side.
If you just ignore the 100 some years of what was done against them and try to play it like just the last year is all that existed you make a very poor and dishonest argument, and its what a lot of people defending palestine keep getting goated into.
I barely had the time to do the deepdive on that last one. But I agree it was largely a circus.. i mean just some guy saying some shit like "everyone lies about israel" without really a hard look at facts to justify it. The vast nmajority of what was said was just wasted air and I couldnt really even comment on it meaningfully if i wanted to. Now the parts he did say something meaningful, mostly specific jabs at palestine I can address, but they were far and few between for how much hot air was spewed.
Its hard for me to see how that could work, but if the tool does what you say and does it well somehow that could be a game changer.
I'm familiar with much of the early history. But I was there largely to see the modern state of things and hear peoples opinions. One thing i learned is palestinians are quite proud of their long term presence in the area. Most palestinians living in palestine have as a central figure in their home huge family trees showing their ties to the region going back many generations. Meanwhile most Isralis havent been there more than a generation or two and have no clue if their lineage has any roots in the area or not in most cases (other than perhaps biblical references to some people practicing a similar religion to them).
I would imagine most people see what they want to see. Im not sure its the IDF intentionally being misleading so much as them just being on their best behavior when they are under the eyes of a foreigner to some extent, and also just the fact that there isnt much to see other than the fact that they just dont let much shit in or out.
You see much more when you see starving uneducated kids in the street with no power because israel had, for months, cut the power to the area as a punishment.
I think its pretty idiotic to claim an appeal to authority in and of itself. Everyone is welcome to an opinion. However i agree that someones experiences (such as visiting the area) should be a factor in someone judging the credibility of an opinion. But that is not the same as saying a person shouldnt have an opinion.
That said I moved to Israel and lived there for over 2 years recently in part specifically so i could get to know both sides in the war first hand and have a real on-the-ground opinion. I found that to be a rewarding experience that has certainly effected my view and refined it.
@chris And do you think trump responding in this way is acceptable or not? Again I know trumps excuses for violating due process and the constitution. The question is, do you support this violation and his excuses or not? Are you ok with it?
๐ Doc Freemo :jpf: ๐ณ๐ฑ
Jeffrey Phillips FreemanInnovator & Entrepreneur in Machine Learning, Evolutionary Computing & Big Data. Avid SCUBA diver, Open-source developer, HAM radio operator, astrophotographer, and anything nerdy.Born and raised in Philadelphia, PA, USA, currently living in Utrecht, Netherlands, USA, and Thailand. Was also living in Israel, but left.Pronouns: Sir / Mister(Above pronouns are not intended to mock, i will respect any persons pronouns and only wish pronouns to show respect be used with me as well. These are called neopronouns, see an example of the word "frog" used as a neopronoun here: http://tinyurl.com/44hhej89 )A proud member of the Penobscot Native American tribe, as well as a Mayflower passenger descendant. I sometimes post about my genealogical history.My stance on various issues:Education: Free to PhD, tax paidAbortion: Protected, tax paid, limited time-frameWelfare: Yes, no one should starveUBI: No, use welfareRacism: is realGuns: Shall not be infringedLG
GNU social JP is a social network, courtesy of GNU social JP็ฎก็ไบบ. It runs on GNU social, version 2.0.2-dev, available under the GNU Affero General Public License.
All GNU social JP content and data are available under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 license.