621–630 of 673 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hospitals and schools that are used by Hamas.
There is zero evidence that Hamas used hospitals for military purposes. Unless you are saying that people use schools to get education and hospitals to get medical treatment, well then yes.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alleged_military_use_of_al-Shi...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think I hate this website.
> I hate this This is a natural response to divergent opinions [1]. It’s the mechanism through which social media polarises populations [2][3]. Our brains simply didn’t evolve to deal with multiple hypotheses and different opinions, and most of us never get the training to do so calmly and effectively. [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_sorting [2] https://pnas.scienceconnect.io/api/oauth/authorize?ui_locale.…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Israel is blatantly violating international laws Bombing military targets is allowed. Hospitals, mosques, etc. lose their protected status if they are being used for military operations, which they are.
I'm relying on Amnesty International's evaluation of the situation and not taking Netanyahu's propaganda at face value, since he is a known liar and is disingenuous in virtually everything he says.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It isn't only his opponents who hated him, it's the countless families and friends of the innocent bystanders who got caught in Kissinger's crossfire.
The victims "were on the receiving end of his work", like I said. The man served the US and the US first and wasn't shy about sacrificing left and right for his perceived greater good. In the trolley problem, he was clear eyed. You may disagree with his trolley problem solution, but then would you have one, or would you stall and do nothing in the face of this problem?
[flagged]
Ah and OF COURSE I get downvoted. I know it. This fucking site is filled with braindead morons, almost as bad as Reddit. But also some people with brains who point out who he really was. A disgusting war criminal and nothing less. But you gonna honor a war criminal because the MSMBS media brainwashed you into praising him as a good man and great advisor or whatever the fuck they tell you to believe. He was the person…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The claim isn’t just that he passed along some dry academic trivia but enough specific details for Nixon to successfully convince the Vietnamese government not to accept the deal on offer, claiming he’d make a better deal of he was elected. Nixon never did say who tipped him off that the peace talks were happening, although he acknowledged how unusual it was, but if true that entire chain of events started on Kissing…
Yes I still find this absurd. So, first of all, here's an article on the Nixon campaign's efforts to prevent a peace deal. [0] It doesn't mention Kissinger at all . If any single person should be 'blamed' for this, surely it's Nixon? But secondly, there's no evidence at all that these efforts actually had anything to do with the failure of the Johnson administration to reach a peace agreement: > Moreover, it cannot b…
> According to Haldeman’s notes, Kissinger alerted the Nixon campaign in late September, and again in early October, that something was up. Johnson was willing to halt the U.S. bombing of the North, and with the Soviets applying pressure on Hanoi to meet certain American conditions, the odds were never better for an early settlement of the conflict, which had already claimed 30,000 American lives and torn America apart.
https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/08/06/nixon-vie...
No, that doesn't mean that the responsibility is entirely his – Nixon in particular shouldn't have been ignored after impeachment – but it does raise the question of how many people would have lived had Kissinger not bought his way into the National Security Adviser. He must, after all, have delivered something of value to have not only switched sides (he'd previously been affiliated with Nixon's opponents) but done so moving into a prestigious position without any prior government service.
[flagged]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
While I agree to an extent, this begs an obvious question: How far do we take this line of thinking? Is an attack like 9/11 justified since even the twin towers were used by the US government indirectly, owing to nearly everyone within paying taxes that supported US wars and expeditionary-ism? Likewise, I'd want to keep in mind things like relative size and options on the table. WW2 incendiary and atomic bombing is o…
>While I agree to an extent, this begs an obvious question: How far do we take this line of thinking? It be cool if military and geopolitical leaders got together to define some of these things. They could get together and have a convention of sorts, maybe in a central, neutral place, like Geneva. >Is an attack like 9/11 justified since even the twin towers were used by the US government indirectly, owing to nearly e…
Thus I'm suggesting that it can be justifiable to bomb a hospital or school in which enemy combatants are launching attacks from, yet also justifiable to do an act of violence on enemy taxpayers + potential conscripts in general.
By this reasoning, my personal opinion is that if we can use less force to get the same goals, or if we can avoid causing as much collateral damage via longer term planning decisions, it's probably a better choice.
In this case they've had an on-and-off military occupation + extreme restrictions on travel and trade and even foreign aid packages. That's a huge source for anger, and it makes it hard to justify often cutting the strip off from the world as much as possible but then bombing first rather than simply admitting they should either give them agency and self determination or make this occupation total and send boots on the ground to go stop Hamas terrorists in a way that might just kill a few less innocents along the way.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I hate this This is a natural response to divergent opinions [1]. It’s the mechanism through which social media polarises populations [2][3]. Our brains simply didn’t evolve to deal with multiple hypotheses and different opinions, and most of us never get the training to do so calmly and effectively. [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_sorting [2] https://pnas.scienceconnect.io/api/oauth/authorize?ui_locale.…
Yeah I watched that kurzgesagt video yesterday too. You're still a ghoul if you defend a man who was personally involved in bombing 150,000 civilians.
If you can't see the difference between defending a person and defending the meaning of a statute, sure. It makes life simpler when we turn up the contrast to absolutes.