ICJ orders Israel to prevent genocide in Gaza, stops short of ordering ceasefire

"A Journalist asked him" "how many children, how many people could be killed, to justify this operation? Is there an upper limit, where you think this is just to much this does not compute this does not add up?

"That congressman, couldn't give a number. And I thought to myself, -that man has been corrupted. That man has lost himself. He's lost himself in humiliation. He's lost himself in vengeance. He has lost himself in violence.

I keep hearing this term repeated over and over again "the right to self defense"

What about the right to dignity? What about the right to morality? What about the right to be able to sleep at night?

Because I know that If I was complicit, and I am complicit, in dropping bombs on children. In dropping bombs on refugee camps. No matter who is there. It would give me trouble sleeping at night, and I worry for the souls of people who can do this, and can sleep at night." -Ta-Nehisi Coates

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_df_u7yJj3k

Give them school, art, romance, the option to travel the world, choose their career... and they probably won't care as much about their parent's grievances. Give them no such options and you are guaranteed to have more combatants.

No one said it would be quick or easy. This will take multiple generations. It requires the Israelis to make a bet on the Palestinian youth.

Edit: sorry this took me so long. Here are my thoughts based on past experience:

It's not helpful to look at other accounts as "propagandists", "trolls", "bots" (or "shills", "astroturfers" or all the other similar terms internet commenters use), because there's no reliable way to distinguish between someone who is arguing for views they earnestly hold vs. someone who might be engaged in a propaganda campaign. The majority of commenters are sincerely arguing for what they sincerely think. A few may be doing something more sinister—but most people don't do such things, and there's no way to pick out the ones who are. Trying to pick them out will drive you crazy. Moreover, it doesn't matter in the end, because everyone is ultimately working with the same tool: arguing things in comments. Even the propagandists can't do more than that.

When people feel like someone else is a troll, propagandist, or bad faith actor, it's usually because that person's views are so distant from your own that it seems like nobody could possibly hold them in good faith. In reality, what's usually going on is that people on the internet underestimate how different each other's backgrounds are. It feels like you're talking to someone who is either insane or lying, but most likely you're talking to someone whose background is so different from yours that it's hard for the two of you to relate to each other. I wrote about this last year, if anyone is interested: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35932851.

I think the only way to handle this is by responding to bad arguments with better arguments and to false information with correct information—and to do this as neutrally as possible. Focus on clear information, and try not to let your feelings turn into aggression toward the other person. This is not easy, but it's in your interest to do it, because when commenters get aggressive with each other, fair-minded readers recoil.

For extra influence, if you can manage it: look for a way to connect with the other person, acknowledge some aspect of what they're saying, and implicitly make it clear that you're not trying to defeat or destroy them, but rather to understand. This is a big multiplier on how persuasive your comments become.

As for leaving bullshit unchallenged, I know it's hard to walk away from a thread that one feels is dominated by falsehood and distortion, but walking away is sometimes the most effective thing you can do. Here are a few thoughts which I try to remember in such situations:

(1) The internet is wrong about approximately everything. You can't change that, and you'll burn out trying.

(2) The one who walks away first usually comes across as stronger.

(3) Other people are not that different from you. When someone seems crazily wrong, they're most likely not bad or evil, but ignorant: they don't know what you know because they haven't experienced what you've experienced. For this reason, sharing your personal experience is probably the most effective thing you can do.

(4) When other people say things that produce strong feelings, try to let the feelings run their course in you before coming back to react. This is painful and hard, but it's in your interest.

You may not feel you owe the other person better, but you owe this community better if you're participating it; especially given the intended spirit that I attempted to describe at the top of this thread.

Denouncing others as monsters without humanity is what fuels this entire horror. The least we can do is not allow that on Hacker News.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html