1047
This meme is from 2004. History repeats itself.
this post was submitted on 13 Oct 2023
1047 points (78.3% liked)
Memes
51589 readers
2051 users here now
Rules:
- Be civil and nice.
- Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.
founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
No. Thousands will die in response to hundreds dying. The comic is still fully accurate even if "a single missile" is still condemnable.
Just look at the US military, we already have
This isn't a good reason
I felt just like this after 9/11. I don't know enough about your country to tell you what the right thing to do is. But I wish that the USA could go back in time and just gradually assassinate Al Queda with the CIA instead or something. Those occupations were doomed from the start.
The CIA is literally the reason the Al Queda exists. has consistently been the biggest force funding and training terrorists groups around the world. Al Queda is just the modern iteration on the Mujahideen whom US was propping up in the 80s.
Yup. Listen to the latest season of Blowback podcast. CIA sheltered/evacuated a bunch of Al Quaeda leaders right before the invasion of Afghanistan began.
The US government at the time did not want to do any such thing. Project For A New American Century, the think tank most of the Bush administration officials came from, openly wrote about how they were hoping for a "new Pearl Harbor" they could use to take the US into war with Iraq. Later, President Bush got a memo about how Al Qaeda was going to attack the US mainland and he did nothing. Then 9/11 happened and the government lied the country into a war with Iraq. What part of this makes you think they were going to do anything about Al Qaeda (other than giving them more funds maybe)?
You're right, I wish they had done the opposite.
Would've been living in a better world. (Cue that one Al Gore alternate reality SNL skit.)
Where did I mock the victims? Do not put words in my mouth. Can you not make a half-sound argument without lying?
From what I can see, @matcha_addict@lemy.lol is not mocking the victims of this tragedy, but rather criticising the media for writing about the israeli deaths caused by the hamas attack, yet hardly making a sound about the palestine deaths caused by israel.
It IS NOT a disproportionate representation. THAT'S THE POINT.
I am very sorry you fail to realize what death Israel will doll out in response, but this comic is completely accurate in the proportions displayed.
You LITERALLY have fighter jets and bombers striking back against ... paragliders with guns...
Again, NO ONE except fucking losers are saying Hamas did anything good. That doesn't make murdering dozens of thousands of Palestinians OK.
I don't think disproportionate response doctrine from countries like the US and Israel should come as a surprise after more than half a century of conflict. Why murder 100 innocent people of your opponent when you know they will murder 1000 innocents of your people in response?
The issue isn't whether anyone is surprised by it.
It may not be a surprise but it's still disgusting and worth calling out.
Take 9/11 for an example, in response to a few thousand dying, America invaded Iraq (who was not even responsible) and killed several orders of magnitude more people. As well as looting their wealth, subordinating their government and economy to American interests, and effectively occupying them for two decades. Anytime an American says "never forget" they should be reminded how thoroughly soaked in blood they are.
Likewise, when zionists shed crocodile tears for a few hundred dead festival goers who were depraved enough to go raving only a few short kilometers from the world's largest concentration camp. They must be reminded of what they have done to Palestine. Invasion. Displacement. Occupation. Ethnic cleansing. Apartheid. Imprisonment. Genocide.
"history repeats itself" as in the people who only condemn needless killing when Hamas does it, but ignore the Palestinian cause the rest of the time.
It's almost like motivation, methods, intentions, and circumstances matter and not just body count. For example, intentionally targeting civilians to maximize civilian deaths is not the same as accidentally killing civilians with collateral damage while trying to minimize civilian deaths.
When Israeli soldiers are bragging about raping and torturing people, it's very clear what their intentions are
Source?
That's troubling if true, and if it is, do you believe said soldiers speak for the entire Israeli government? Hamas's atrocities are official policy.
Hamas' official policy is resisting occupation and massacre, not committing it.
https://www.timesofisrael.com/ending-censorship-idf-admits-officer-jailed-in-2017-raped-a-palestinian-woman/
Thanks for the link.
So one officer 7 years ago, who had the book thrown at him for his crimes by Israel. His actions are clearly opposed by his government and he was punished for his behavior. This isn't the smoking gun @matcha_addict was implying it is.
Do you think Hamas will punish its own rapists, murderers, and kidnappers?
Hamas is not a state or government. It is a militia to fight occupation. It is nowhere near as organized as Israel with its governing body. You cannot equate the two.
Israel does not oppose this. There are mountains of evidence of Israelis torturing and raping children, pregnant women and elderly Palestinians. There is mountains of evidence of Palestinians being burned alive, or forced to destroy their own homes with their bare hands. The magnitude of cruelty is unmatched.
Do you want more evidence? I am happy to provide. But it seems you reject it even when presented evidence.
That's just one of countless examples from a two seconds of googling. It's the height of intellectual dishonesty to try and frame it as an isolated incident.
Yes, it's not a perfect caricature, Crimea river
Rules of the internet: you can safely discard everything that comes before the ", but"
If ignoring context helps you feed your bias, go for it.
The soundness of your argument should not depend on your stance. It is a common tactic to state that you are "pro-X" but criticize X, because people are more likely to sympathize with your criticism that way. The commenter you replied to is simply reminding us of this.