Controversial General Political Discussion

[Roo]

Are you comparing the Palestinians who lived there before the mass migration of Jews to cannibals?
The situation is long past this stage anyway.

Are you retarded?

Post automatically merged: Apr 9, 2024

wall of text

They did try means other than violence, look up the multiple two state deals they tried to work with. The PS/Arab forces basically told them to fuck off and kept attacking them

 

[Toby D. Dog]

The whataboutism in this thread is off the charts. Not to mention how everytime that creep Lerrera opens his mouth we all take brain damage.

 

[Bisoromi Bear]

Are you retarded?

So you have nothing else to say then?

any state would be able to call their opposition "terrorist" and suppress them that way while being justified. Sometimes acts of terrorism considered by one nation are actually acts of resistances for another.

this is basically what states always have been doing

 

[Herrera95]

Tell me, in an anarcho capitalist society. Are the boss and the employee paid the same ?

Of course not.

 

[AL sama]

Not all of it, you asked “all this time” and I don’t think Israel is crazy for at some points putting its national security and of its citizens above everything

so you're in between just like a rational person should be I see

 

[Roo]

So you have nothing else to say then?

If you can’t engage with hypotheticals then no, you’re too retarded to engage with

 

[Toby D. Dog]

If you can’t engage with hypotheticals then no, you’re too retarded to engage with

You're using a hypothetical that uses a false equivalence between Palestinians and Cannibals. You can't blame him for not engaging with that premise.

 

[Roo]

so you're in between just like a rational person should be I see

Yeah at some points Israel probably had a good reason to be that anal about Palestinians. Modern day? Nah. I’ve said several times the war can’t go for long and they’re wrong for the occupation of the West Bank

Post automatically merged: Apr 9, 2024

You're using a hypothetical that uses a false equivalence between Palestinians and Cannibals. You can't blame him for not engaging with that premise.

False equivalency? It perfectly tracks. If one poses a reasonable threat to the other violence may be needed.

 

[AL sama]

except the countries where they are the majority and oppress&forcefully convert religious minorities

I don't know where you got this from but forceful conversion is strictly forbidden in islam

 

[Toby D. Dog]

False equivalency? It perfectly tracks. If one poses a reasonable threat to the other violence may be needed.

By that logic, Israelis pose an existential threat to Palestine as well. Even more so since from their perspective they're an invading force.

 

[Logiko]

They did try means other than violence

Yes.
They tried oppression and suppressions of rights
They tried the the impronment of an entire population within walls
They tried checkpoints
They tried profiling from soldier onto kids and innocent people
They tried land appropriation
They tried arbitrary prisonners

..They actually tried a lot of BAD things. Not the actual things that were needed:

- The end of colonization
- The renunciation of Palestinian lands in the limits of 1948
- The freedom of people of Gaza
- The stop of the oppressions of Palestinian minorities in Israel
Etc.

Of course not.

I suppose the employee can reinvest their money in their business if they want to in an anarcho capitalist society, right ?

this is basically what states always have been doing

Hence why its important not to recognize the word "terrorism" in international laws. Its a way to protect nation that could be under oppression.

so you're in between just like a rational person should be I see

Nuance is not always a rationnal mindset. It can also be a symtom of biases.

 

[Roo]

By that logic, Israelis pose an existential threat to Palestine as well. Even more so since from their perspective they're an invading force.

Now ask me if I think their war against Israel in 48 was justified

Post automatically merged: Apr 9, 2024

- The end of colonization
- The renunciation of Palestinian lands in the limits of 1948
- The freedom of people of Gaza
- The stop of the oppressions of Palestinian minorities in Israel
Etc.

you do realize 90% of this is achieved if they settled with Israel in 67 right

 

[AL sama]

Nuance is not always a rationnal mindset. It can also be a symtom of biases.

have you ever managed to convince me

 

[Logiko]

Now ask me if I think their war against Israel in 48 was justified

This (timestamp in) might answer your question:

 

[Roo]

This (timestamp in) might answer your question:

Bruh that’s a propaganda channel. I also asked him to ask me, aka my opinion. I don’t regurgitate propaganda

 

[Logiko]

have you ever managed to convince me

I don't think so no. But some of you did on multiple occasions and this despite my radical mindset.

So It might be time for you guys realize who is really biased and who is not here. And why the injonction for nuance is actually not the brightest move there is.

Because when I'm explaining how meritocracy impacted my life in all its aspect during 10 years and what I get in reply is "you use the term wrong".. there is a bit of a problem of understanding between us. So its your turn to understand that I'm making a LOT of efforts to reach you guys.

And my hand is still open.

Bruh that’s a propaganda channel. I also asked him to ask me, aka my opinion. I don’t regurgitate propaganda

No. Just a religious and militant channel. This is actually a pretty clear explanation of the conflict. You should watch it. There is nothing complicated in understanding why Palestinian were revolted by the land divisions at the time.

But go ahead, if you have a better explanation of the conflict. Do give me the link and I will add it to the library !

 

[Uncle Van]

 

[AL sama]

I don't think so no. But some of you did on multiple occasions and this despite my radical mindset.

So It might time for you guys realize who is really biased and who is not here. And why the injonction for nuance is actually not the brightest move there is.

Because when I'm explaining how meritocracy impacted my life in all its aspect during 10 years and what I get in reply is "you use the term wrong".. there is a bit of a problem of understanding between us. So its your turn to understand that I'm making a LOT of efforts to reach you guys.

And my hand is still open.

 

[Logiko]

Case

And point.

 

[Uncle Van]

The bar is so low that if you think you have ANY semblance of control over anything in your life, in any specific circumstance, then you're a full fledged believer and pusher of meritocracy. There is no room for nuisance. "It depends" doesn't exist apparently.