[-] Makfreeman@lemmy.world 10 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

So since they oppose helping Ukraine they must be wrong about Israel as well? Mind sharing where they suggest Ukraine accede to Russian demands and bend over as you say?

[-] Makfreeman@lemmy.world 48 points 1 month ago

Do you really give a flying fuck what Hezbollah says? Or are you asking to make sure the blame for the proposal to fail can be shifted to Hezbollah. The party to cease fire are the Israelites.

[-] Makfreeman@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago

It seems to me like you are trying to make people be pro Harris. It is not a question, ah least for me, between the two options for us president Harris to my mind is the clearly better one. Your entire argument on weapons assumes that Israel is defending itself when it is not and that somehow the "guardrails" are going to keep the weapons from being used offensively. Unfortunately Israel has been using the weapons offensively, the US has been supporting them knowing the weapons are being used offensively. What did the US invasion of Afghanistan achieve? When US went out of Afghanistan dis they leave a paradise behind? It is the same here, US' presence in this conflict is empowering one party and that needs to stop. You talk about a future plan while disregarding the present. Israel's actions need to be condemned, the war on Palestinian people stopped. Who gives a flying fuck about 10 years down the road when you are killing an entire generation, starving am entire generation.

[-] Makfreeman@lemmy.world 8 points 2 months ago

It is not just money and sale of weapons. US has been using veto power in support of Israel. Out of 89 uses of veto in the security council about 45 have been in support of Israel. US vetoed the Dec 8 resolution calling for a humanitarian aid. Givven how israel is conducting its war, how is own ministers are calling for murder and the reports from UN observers it is boggling to my mind how you can still have doubts and say "if they wanted to commit genocide". The restrictions you are so adamant will save the Palestinian people are Flagrantly being disregarded by Israel and the US has in it's own report said that Israel's use of US weapons is inconsistent with humanitarian law, but since the US lacks specific evidence of specific weapons bring used so Israel is being given the benefit of the doubt. This is so bafflingto me, you don't give benefit of the doubt to the person who is killing, you give it to the person being killed.

[-] Makfreeman@lemmy.world 31 points 5 months ago

As many times as I can before dying. The family gets the money, I'm gone. Win win.

[-] Makfreeman@lemmy.world 14 points 5 months ago

Your question without all the rhetoric is: Does self defence justify elimination of an entire nation, country, ethnicity or people? The simple answer is no. Elimination of a nation, country, people or ethnicity is the textbook definition of genocide. If you read the article, you would know that ICC is charging hamas for war crimes as well as the Israeli regime, because war crimes by one party do not justify war crimes by the other party. So you do not need to think where the line should be drawn. The line already exists and Israeli regime has crossed it.

[-] Makfreeman@lemmy.world 21 points 7 months ago

How is that even a point of comparison. Legitimizing such an invasive option by any government should be a red flag.

[-] Makfreeman@lemmy.world 20 points 10 months ago

Wtf happened to their faces.

[-] Makfreeman@lemmy.world 13 points 11 months ago

Jerusalem Post really looks like a moderate and balanced source of exemplary journalism. /s

[-] Makfreeman@lemmy.world 14 points 1 year ago

You can find the 2024 version on LibGen.is

[-] Makfreeman@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

Wouldn't proportionality be a thing here? Reprisals would be acceptable if they did not result in a disproportionate loss of innocent civilians. Unfortunately it seems like Palestinian children's lives are much cheaper than Israeli lives. I hate saying it because I think all children deserve protection regardless of the actions of the people in power, be it hamas or idf.

[-] Makfreeman@lemmy.world 37 points 1 year ago

Might be a fun fact but it is not correct. Article 52 of the fourth convention is not related to hospitals. Article 52 of the 1st additional protocol is related to hospitals and it does not mean what you are saying it does. Geneva conventions do not define war crimes, that definition is given in the ICC Rome statutes.

view more: next ›

Makfreeman

joined 1 year ago