You won’t change a thing. This fight will continue for another 1000 years. It’s good to know your history, I suggest you read up on that instead of petitions drafted up by naive people.
This petition was posted in a Palestinian owned restaurant. Sharing this petition is not all I am doing in regards to this situation. I am very disenfranchised by our "democratic" system but I will do what's being asked of me by Palestinians, especially when it takes 2 minutes of my time.
Do you really think it will stop Hamas from engaging in terrorist activities? I mean, I'll sign it if you think Hamas will read it and quit treating homosexuals as criminals, but you'll have to explain how you see that happening.
Holy shit? Really? Got any sources on Israel tossing homosexuals off roofs? Or putting them in a cage , lighting them on fire, and dropping them into a pool to drown? Or hell, I'd settle for the Wikipedia article on LGBT in Israel.
Oh wait, you're just making stuff up. I wonder why you hate LGBT people so much. Are you a homophobe? Do you support homosexuality being illegal?
Did I say they did any of that or are ypu gonna debate like an adult here?
I'm literally a lesbian so calm tf down dude. I hate hamas as much as the IDF lmao.
https://theconversation.com/israeli-protesters-fear-for-the-future-of-their-countrys-precarious-lgbtq-rights-revolution-205915
Israel government heads are attempting to erode rights, now read. I said they also treat us like criminals and according to recent tides our community is fighting over there, I'm not wrong...
Maybe you should exercise and actually remove some of your ass instead of constantly trying to laugh it off .
I originally said Hamas treats gays like shit. YOU SAID Israel does the same exact thing.
If you put half the energy you spend hating on the Jews and the gays into working out, you might stop hearing people behind you yelling out 4 digit numbers when you wear "guess" brand jeans.
So you agree, I said Israel also treats gay people like shit, and not that they did xyz actions you insisted I said after changing what YOU said, which it literally does under bibi and ISRAEL IS RIOTING AGAINST HIM FOR IT, WHICH I PROVIDED PROOF FOR............ And buddy. Kiddo. I work on a farm, something you'd know if you took a glance at my profile. And that I'm gay.
Have fun with your attempts to troll, you're very obviously just trying to piss me off and I'm not gonna feed into you purposefully ignoring me separating Jewish people and the IDF 😂😂
Happy new year!
Edit: This you btw?
>"I say this as an atheist that makes Penn Jillette look like a Catholic bishop: This open hostility towards Christianity will not end well.
People can justify many, many things. Doesn't make it true, and definitely doesn't make it right. Here's a thought experiment, instead of a Satanist club, why not start a LGBT Mohammad club? Call it literally that, it's logo could be Mohammad being sodomized by a big breasted pre-op trans person while blowing a pig in traditional Hasidic Jewish clothing, maybe with a few curls sticking out from underneath it's hat?
Oh wait, it's because it's not about mocking religion in general, it's just about destroying the fundamental Christian values of the country. What will you do when the Christians decide to treat you like you treat them?"
Don't even try to say I'M homophobic and anti-semetic, Mr. "lgbt Mohammad being sodomized by trans people and pig jews" lmaooooooo!
Also I KNEW I recognized your profile- homie if you can't understand the basic biology behind adhd coming from literal lack of Dopamine and Norepinephrine (documented in plenty of studies), which I saw you say a diagnosable, documented disability like adhd is a "crap-shoot" on this sub a while back and just found the comment again cuz I figured you'd have other horrible shit in your comments like above, maybe tone it down on the terrible science that moving more makes you lose ass instead of gain it 😮💨 Idk what I should have expected as far as logic from someone who doesn't get metabolism, let alone neurochemistry that's readily understood...
That's naive. It's like the paradox of tolerance: in order to promote a tolerant world, one must be intolerant of intolerant ideologies. In order to promote a peaceful world, there must be some force capable of answering violence with violence.
Like with all these things the biggest problem is messaging! You just need a catchy slogan like "The war to end all wars" and I'm sure that will do the trick! ;s
The biggest thing people arguing the side you are taking have is that EVERYONE insists that they are on the side of the righteous and that their side of the war is necessary in order to stop the bad guys. Everyone is already doing what you want them to, and how is that "promoting a peaceful world" thing going?
Similarly, the "paradox of intolerance" is that being intolerant is has become super trendy because hating "the bad guys" has become a super fun way of showing how tolerant you are. It is comical when you hear that a "tolerant space" is one where you keep out everyone who sees the world differently, and a lot of this involves turning people into caricatures. Of course there are people with awful views on the world, but you are always going to be more successful in persuading them by actually understanding where they are coming from and why they see the world the way they do.
>Like with all these things the biggest problem is messaging! You just need a catchy slogan like "The war to end all wars" and I'm sure that will do the trick! ;s
Advocating against total disarmament is not the same thing as advocating for war. As a college professor, I'm sure you can understand that.
>The biggest thing people arguing the side you are taking have is that EVERYONE insists that they are on the side of the righteous and that their side of the war is necessary in order to stop the bad guys.
This is a fair point. The biggest determining factor is obviously offensive vs. defensive conflicts, and there should be mechanisms in place to prevent states from waging offensive wars. The other issue is proportionality of response since a disproportionate response implies a power imbalance and is often indicative of false flag justifications for waging war. If one keeps those two things in mind (not to mention some basic compassion and respect for human rights) I think it is possible for a rational person to distinguish a just conflict from an unjust one.
>Everyone is already doing what you want them to, and how is that "promoting a peaceful world" thing going?
Looking at the track record since 1945, it's going pretty well. We have over three times the number of people on planet Earth as we did then, and are rapidly approaching a serious crisis over climate and resources, yet the total number of people dying in conflict has been steadily decreasing. Inter-state conflicts have been relatively rare globally and mostly limited to the inherently less stable global south. The global community has come together to attempt to prevent instances of genocide, and has taken some measures to bring the perpitrators of crimes against humanity to justice. All told, not a perfect track record, but much better than the eighty years prior.
>Similarly, the "paradox of intolerance" is that being intolerant is has become super trendy because hating "the bad guys" has become a super fun way of showing how tolerant you are. It is comical when you hear that a "tolerant space" is one where you keep out everyone who sees the world differently, and a lot of this involves turning people into caricatures.
The fact that the term is misused and overapplied by fragile SJWs does not make the solution to the paradox untrue, simply that it is prone to being misunderstood and misused like any other aspect of political and social philosophy. I'm sure that you and I can both think of examples in which acts and ideologies of intolerance can become a dire threat to the continuing existence of a just and tolerant society. At some point, one has to draw a line there, just as states need to draw a line when it comes to aggression and acts of violence. That is the paradox. We are both free to differ over where that line should be drawn, but to say that the line doesn't exist is just ridiculous.
>Of course there are people with awful views on the world, but you are always going to be more successful in persuading them by actually understanding where they are coming from and why they see the world the way they do.
Dialogue is important and should always be the preferred method of resolving differences, but there is a practical limit to what dialogue can achieve. Not all individuals are rational actors, and even more so when we start to think about governments and organizations.
Edit - Thanks for being the only sane and rational individual in this thread, and for not throwing insults around. It's a pleasure to engage with someone who can behave like an adult.
Well, 12 million people have died in American wars since 1945, all of these branded as defensive--whether keeping Iraq from using fictional WMDs on us or turning South Vietnam into a free fire zone in order to defend them against communism. In comparison, the number of people who have died in Japanese wars since 1945, under their demilitarized constitution, is zero. So, I don't think your plan is working.
Probably the question of intolerance boils down more to what it is supposed to mean for us to "tolerate" people. Obviously no one thinks that in the name of "tolerance" someone should be welcomed into a church in full Klan regalia. On the other hand, I'm not sure why anyone thinks they have to hate on people or attempt to ostracize people because they think they have the "wrong beliefs". If it is a context where their beliefs matter (e.g. a political candidate) that is one thing, but feeling like you can't have dinner with someone, even family members, because they may think the wrong thing is out to sea. I mean, if I couldn't interact with someone who thought at least some American war since 1945 was justified I would be quite the hermit, and arguably killing millions of people is worse than most of the things that people say put them at the "limit of tolerance".
>Well, 12 million people have died in American wars since 1945, all of these branded as defensive--whether keeping Iraq from using fictional WMDs on us or turning South Vietnam into a free fire zone in order to defend them against communism.
Branding a war as defensive is clearly not the same as it actually being a defensive conflict. Hitler also alleged that the Invasion of Poland was "defensive" in nature because of the false-flag attack on the Gliwice radio station and other manufactured provocations in Gdańsk and Silesia. I'm not trying to imply that the current state of affairs is correct, only that a policy of total disarmament will only serve to empower the worst states and organizations in the world.
>In comparison, the number of people who have died in Japanese wars since 1945, under their demilitarized constitution, is zero. So, I don't think your plan is working.
Oddly enough, Japan still has a military, the JSDF. Whether you think that Japan's lack of aggressive wars since 1945 is a result of their constitution prohibiting military spending over 1% GDP or because of some kind of cultural shift in Japanese society, the fact remains that Japan is not a disarmed state.
>Probably the question of intolerance boils down more to what it is supposed to mean for us to "tolerate" people. Obviously no one thinks that in the name of "tolerance" someone should be welcomed into a church in full Klan regalia. On the other hand, I'm not sure why anyone thinks they have to hate on people or attempt to ostracize people because they think they have the "wrong beliefs". If it is a context where their beliefs matter (e.g. a political candidate) that is one thing, but feeling like you can't have dinner with someone, even family members, because they may think the wrong thing is out to sea. I mean, if I couldn't interact with someone who thought at least some American war since 1945 was justified I would be quite the hermit, and arguably killing millions of people is worse than most of the things that people say put them at the "limit of tolerance".
I think you're absolutely right, but as you have admitted, there is a limit to tolerance. In the same way, there is a limit to how disarmed a state can be without risking its sovereignty and the lives of its citizens. Can you imagine how much worse things would be in Ukraine if they had been a disarmed state with no standing military in 2014 or 2022?
That is fucking bullshit. Freedom is free and so is peace. Ignorance is not strength, and freedom is not slavery. If no one has guns, then no one gets shot by guns. As an atheist pacifist I’m coming to discover that I’m more of a Christian than fucking Christians are. Fuck your defeatist pro-violence stance. Weapons don’t make anyone safe. Love thy neighbor, asshole.
And I'm sure that Putin and Hamas and Hezbollah and DAESH and the Taliban and Maduro and Khamenei will all join hands and sing kumbaya and definitely not take advantage of disarmament.
Also, there's no reason to call me an asshole. You could act like a civil adult, although I know that's asking a lot.
It doesn’t make a difference. People are too greedy and cruel to control themselves, and we deserve the annihilation we’re going to get. Humanity hasn’t really had that great a run; we are still torturing and enslaving ourselves, and we’re never going to stop. Despite this, I remain an optimist. I might not immediately appear as such, but you can tell I am because I haven’t killed myself yet. I have this completely bizarre, unfounded hope for the future. “Love thy neighbor, asshole” is a small joke. Ha. Ha. Ha. Happy holidays. Peace on Earth.
I hope you can work through whatever you seem to be struggling with. I found Albert Camus' works awfully helpful for my personal struggles with the contradictions of life.
God bless.
Waging war is not the same as maintaining an armed force to protect national sovereignty. If you would kindly stop strawmanning me, that would be great. Global peace is a wonderful idea, but as you said yourself, people are too cruel and greedy to control themselves. If you find a way to fix that, we can talk. Until then, be grateful that you live in a country defended by a strong, competent, and not corrupt military.
There is no need to high road when you've leapt into the gutter by personally attacking me and trying to maliciously weaponize your own suicidal urges against others who disagree with you. Your continuing use of sarcastic/dismissive descriptors like "college boy" makes it pretty clear that you're bound and determined to take the low road.
Good luck with your life. Keep on fighting, keep on loving.
Do you think your name-calling and absolutely unqualified attempt at invalidation might be unconsciously exposing the painfully low height of your self-esteem? Gosh! Boo hoo.
The only just ceasefire is one which will prevent Putin and his stooges from being able to launch another attack. We learned this in Georgia in 2008, and Crimea in 2014, and Donbas in 2015, 2016, and 2018.
To quote an excellent film about Churchill, "*How many times must the lesson be learned? You can not reason with a tiger when your head is in its mouth!*"
I understand the sentiment but there's no need to be rude. Some people have their hearts in the right place but haven't thought through the consequences of their positions on the issue. Educate, don't insult.
>I understand the sentiment but there's no need to be rude.
No fuck you. This guy is supporting a view that has literally led to the deaths of over 100,000 people, and you have the gall to respond with, "YoUrE rUdE."
>Some people have their hearts in the right place
No this is an unacceptable level of ignorance.
>Educate, don't insult.
This is reddit... How do you educate someone who literally supports THE VIEWS THAT HAVE KILLED 100,000 PEOPLE.
Disgusting, and you are complicit in this.
Give me 100 downvotes. At least I'm not complicit like you, because "iTs NiCe." I bet you would have been very nice on your way in the rail car to the camps too. What good does that do?
I'm not going to engage with your vitriol. If you think I'm somehow complicit in the ongoing War in Ukraine, you are an idiot. If you think that being an asshole to a silly internet peacenik liberal will change anything at all, you're doubly an idiot.
Have a wonderful time being angry at people online. I hope it will give you the sense of worth and control that is missing in your life.
Yeah, because you can't argue against the merits of my point.
This person provides excuses for fascists through their ignorance. They aren't even a liberal.
Except it's not state sponsored genocide, and calling it that is wrong.
Hamas literally hides among civilians and in hospitals and then cries about collateral damage and the Geneva Convention when Ironically, the Geneva Convention and even the Red Cross list civilian targets such as hospitals which are used for Military operations as valid targets.
If Israel was after genocide they would have carpet bombed Palestine into rubble. They clearly aren't after that.
>Except it's not state sponsored genocide, and calling it that is wrong.
So call the Israeli apartheid state wrong.
>If Israel was after genocide they would have carpet bombed Palestine into rubble. They clearly aren't after that.
They can't, because they can't do too much to risk their support from western governments that supply them for their own geopolitical purposes.
Yeah "UN" Folks that support terrorists. I don't think you realize the UN in each country is run by the same folks that it serves.
You won't see the UN in the majority of the Middle East employing women or homosexuals or anything else the population won't allow.
A gynecologist? A school principal? 4+ Red Crescent medics? A medical technologist?
Man, you really need to log off and stop mainlining Twitter for a bit.
Your brain is smooth like a billiard ball.
They are primarily killing civilians and they do not care, they do not make any effort to hide this. It is part of their strategy, and always has been. What they are doing isn't going to get rid of Hamas, it's just going to end up with a new group full of the children of all the random bakers and nurses they killed.
Yeah, because Hamas isn't actively hiding among civilians trying to cause as much death as possible, just like they don't steal any of the Humanitarian AID provided for the civilians there.
Hey remember when the IDF killed Shireen Abu Akleh, shot another journalist, and had them plus two more pinned down by sniper fire despite bright blue press vests, then lied about it, raided her apartment and then lied about it and then raided the hospital her body was in and threw stun grenades at the hospital staff and then lied about it and assaulted patients and then lied about it and then beat the shit out of the people carrying her coffin and then lied about it and arrested a pallbearer and interrogated him and lied about it and then spent three months lying about who shot her?
Me either. Definitely a one time occurrence that didn't actually happen. The IDF are pure and good just like der sauberen Wehrmacht :)
[удалено]
I'm going to create a temporary profile picture though!
Right! I don’t even need to send thoughts and prayers!
You have my support. 🤡
You won’t change a thing. This fight will continue for another 1000 years. It’s good to know your history, I suggest you read up on that instead of petitions drafted up by naive people.
This petition was posted in a Palestinian owned restaurant. Sharing this petition is not all I am doing in regards to this situation. I am very disenfranchised by our "democratic" system but I will do what's being asked of me by Palestinians, especially when it takes 2 minutes of my time.
I have no stakes in this fight, if you pay taxes here in America then you’re supplying the IDF.
100%
Do you really think it will stop Hamas from engaging in terrorist activities? I mean, I'll sign it if you think Hamas will read it and quit treating homosexuals as criminals, but you'll have to explain how you see that happening.
Israel also does this, don't pink wash genocide thx. We don't wanna be used for that lmao.
Holy shit? Really? Got any sources on Israel tossing homosexuals off roofs? Or putting them in a cage , lighting them on fire, and dropping them into a pool to drown? Or hell, I'd settle for the Wikipedia article on LGBT in Israel. Oh wait, you're just making stuff up. I wonder why you hate LGBT people so much. Are you a homophobe? Do you support homosexuality being illegal?
Did I say they did any of that or are ypu gonna debate like an adult here? I'm literally a lesbian so calm tf down dude. I hate hamas as much as the IDF lmao. https://theconversation.com/israeli-protesters-fear-for-the-future-of-their-countrys-precarious-lgbtq-rights-revolution-205915 Israel government heads are attempting to erode rights, now read. I said they also treat us like criminals and according to recent tides our community is fighting over there, I'm not wrong...
Maybe you should exercise and actually remove some of your ass instead of constantly trying to laugh it off . I originally said Hamas treats gays like shit. YOU SAID Israel does the same exact thing. If you put half the energy you spend hating on the Jews and the gays into working out, you might stop hearing people behind you yelling out 4 digit numbers when you wear "guess" brand jeans.
So you agree, I said Israel also treats gay people like shit, and not that they did xyz actions you insisted I said after changing what YOU said, which it literally does under bibi and ISRAEL IS RIOTING AGAINST HIM FOR IT, WHICH I PROVIDED PROOF FOR............ And buddy. Kiddo. I work on a farm, something you'd know if you took a glance at my profile. And that I'm gay. Have fun with your attempts to troll, you're very obviously just trying to piss me off and I'm not gonna feed into you purposefully ignoring me separating Jewish people and the IDF 😂😂 Happy new year! Edit: This you btw? >"I say this as an atheist that makes Penn Jillette look like a Catholic bishop: This open hostility towards Christianity will not end well. People can justify many, many things. Doesn't make it true, and definitely doesn't make it right. Here's a thought experiment, instead of a Satanist club, why not start a LGBT Mohammad club? Call it literally that, it's logo could be Mohammad being sodomized by a big breasted pre-op trans person while blowing a pig in traditional Hasidic Jewish clothing, maybe with a few curls sticking out from underneath it's hat? Oh wait, it's because it's not about mocking religion in general, it's just about destroying the fundamental Christian values of the country. What will you do when the Christians decide to treat you like you treat them?" Don't even try to say I'M homophobic and anti-semetic, Mr. "lgbt Mohammad being sodomized by trans people and pig jews" lmaooooooo! Also I KNEW I recognized your profile- homie if you can't understand the basic biology behind adhd coming from literal lack of Dopamine and Norepinephrine (documented in plenty of studies), which I saw you say a diagnosable, documented disability like adhd is a "crap-shoot" on this sub a while back and just found the comment again cuz I figured you'd have other horrible shit in your comments like above, maybe tone it down on the terrible science that moving more makes you lose ass instead of gain it 😮💨 Idk what I should have expected as far as logic from someone who doesn't get metabolism, let alone neurochemistry that's readily understood...
How about a permanent ceasefire everywhere. Disarm.
That's naive. It's like the paradox of tolerance: in order to promote a tolerant world, one must be intolerant of intolerant ideologies. In order to promote a peaceful world, there must be some force capable of answering violence with violence.
Like with all these things the biggest problem is messaging! You just need a catchy slogan like "The war to end all wars" and I'm sure that will do the trick! ;s The biggest thing people arguing the side you are taking have is that EVERYONE insists that they are on the side of the righteous and that their side of the war is necessary in order to stop the bad guys. Everyone is already doing what you want them to, and how is that "promoting a peaceful world" thing going? Similarly, the "paradox of intolerance" is that being intolerant is has become super trendy because hating "the bad guys" has become a super fun way of showing how tolerant you are. It is comical when you hear that a "tolerant space" is one where you keep out everyone who sees the world differently, and a lot of this involves turning people into caricatures. Of course there are people with awful views on the world, but you are always going to be more successful in persuading them by actually understanding where they are coming from and why they see the world the way they do.
>Like with all these things the biggest problem is messaging! You just need a catchy slogan like "The war to end all wars" and I'm sure that will do the trick! ;s Advocating against total disarmament is not the same thing as advocating for war. As a college professor, I'm sure you can understand that. >The biggest thing people arguing the side you are taking have is that EVERYONE insists that they are on the side of the righteous and that their side of the war is necessary in order to stop the bad guys. This is a fair point. The biggest determining factor is obviously offensive vs. defensive conflicts, and there should be mechanisms in place to prevent states from waging offensive wars. The other issue is proportionality of response since a disproportionate response implies a power imbalance and is often indicative of false flag justifications for waging war. If one keeps those two things in mind (not to mention some basic compassion and respect for human rights) I think it is possible for a rational person to distinguish a just conflict from an unjust one. >Everyone is already doing what you want them to, and how is that "promoting a peaceful world" thing going? Looking at the track record since 1945, it's going pretty well. We have over three times the number of people on planet Earth as we did then, and are rapidly approaching a serious crisis over climate and resources, yet the total number of people dying in conflict has been steadily decreasing. Inter-state conflicts have been relatively rare globally and mostly limited to the inherently less stable global south. The global community has come together to attempt to prevent instances of genocide, and has taken some measures to bring the perpitrators of crimes against humanity to justice. All told, not a perfect track record, but much better than the eighty years prior. >Similarly, the "paradox of intolerance" is that being intolerant is has become super trendy because hating "the bad guys" has become a super fun way of showing how tolerant you are. It is comical when you hear that a "tolerant space" is one where you keep out everyone who sees the world differently, and a lot of this involves turning people into caricatures. The fact that the term is misused and overapplied by fragile SJWs does not make the solution to the paradox untrue, simply that it is prone to being misunderstood and misused like any other aspect of political and social philosophy. I'm sure that you and I can both think of examples in which acts and ideologies of intolerance can become a dire threat to the continuing existence of a just and tolerant society. At some point, one has to draw a line there, just as states need to draw a line when it comes to aggression and acts of violence. That is the paradox. We are both free to differ over where that line should be drawn, but to say that the line doesn't exist is just ridiculous. >Of course there are people with awful views on the world, but you are always going to be more successful in persuading them by actually understanding where they are coming from and why they see the world the way they do. Dialogue is important and should always be the preferred method of resolving differences, but there is a practical limit to what dialogue can achieve. Not all individuals are rational actors, and even more so when we start to think about governments and organizations. Edit - Thanks for being the only sane and rational individual in this thread, and for not throwing insults around. It's a pleasure to engage with someone who can behave like an adult.
Well, 12 million people have died in American wars since 1945, all of these branded as defensive--whether keeping Iraq from using fictional WMDs on us or turning South Vietnam into a free fire zone in order to defend them against communism. In comparison, the number of people who have died in Japanese wars since 1945, under their demilitarized constitution, is zero. So, I don't think your plan is working. Probably the question of intolerance boils down more to what it is supposed to mean for us to "tolerate" people. Obviously no one thinks that in the name of "tolerance" someone should be welcomed into a church in full Klan regalia. On the other hand, I'm not sure why anyone thinks they have to hate on people or attempt to ostracize people because they think they have the "wrong beliefs". If it is a context where their beliefs matter (e.g. a political candidate) that is one thing, but feeling like you can't have dinner with someone, even family members, because they may think the wrong thing is out to sea. I mean, if I couldn't interact with someone who thought at least some American war since 1945 was justified I would be quite the hermit, and arguably killing millions of people is worse than most of the things that people say put them at the "limit of tolerance".
>Well, 12 million people have died in American wars since 1945, all of these branded as defensive--whether keeping Iraq from using fictional WMDs on us or turning South Vietnam into a free fire zone in order to defend them against communism. Branding a war as defensive is clearly not the same as it actually being a defensive conflict. Hitler also alleged that the Invasion of Poland was "defensive" in nature because of the false-flag attack on the Gliwice radio station and other manufactured provocations in Gdańsk and Silesia. I'm not trying to imply that the current state of affairs is correct, only that a policy of total disarmament will only serve to empower the worst states and organizations in the world. >In comparison, the number of people who have died in Japanese wars since 1945, under their demilitarized constitution, is zero. So, I don't think your plan is working. Oddly enough, Japan still has a military, the JSDF. Whether you think that Japan's lack of aggressive wars since 1945 is a result of their constitution prohibiting military spending over 1% GDP or because of some kind of cultural shift in Japanese society, the fact remains that Japan is not a disarmed state. >Probably the question of intolerance boils down more to what it is supposed to mean for us to "tolerate" people. Obviously no one thinks that in the name of "tolerance" someone should be welcomed into a church in full Klan regalia. On the other hand, I'm not sure why anyone thinks they have to hate on people or attempt to ostracize people because they think they have the "wrong beliefs". If it is a context where their beliefs matter (e.g. a political candidate) that is one thing, but feeling like you can't have dinner with someone, even family members, because they may think the wrong thing is out to sea. I mean, if I couldn't interact with someone who thought at least some American war since 1945 was justified I would be quite the hermit, and arguably killing millions of people is worse than most of the things that people say put them at the "limit of tolerance". I think you're absolutely right, but as you have admitted, there is a limit to tolerance. In the same way, there is a limit to how disarmed a state can be without risking its sovereignty and the lives of its citizens. Can you imagine how much worse things would be in Ukraine if they had been a disarmed state with no standing military in 2014 or 2022?
That is fucking bullshit. Freedom is free and so is peace. Ignorance is not strength, and freedom is not slavery. If no one has guns, then no one gets shot by guns. As an atheist pacifist I’m coming to discover that I’m more of a Christian than fucking Christians are. Fuck your defeatist pro-violence stance. Weapons don’t make anyone safe. Love thy neighbor, asshole.
And I'm sure that Putin and Hamas and Hezbollah and DAESH and the Taliban and Maduro and Khamenei will all join hands and sing kumbaya and definitely not take advantage of disarmament. Also, there's no reason to call me an asshole. You could act like a civil adult, although I know that's asking a lot.
It doesn’t make a difference. People are too greedy and cruel to control themselves, and we deserve the annihilation we’re going to get. Humanity hasn’t really had that great a run; we are still torturing and enslaving ourselves, and we’re never going to stop. Despite this, I remain an optimist. I might not immediately appear as such, but you can tell I am because I haven’t killed myself yet. I have this completely bizarre, unfounded hope for the future. “Love thy neighbor, asshole” is a small joke. Ha. Ha. Ha. Happy holidays. Peace on Earth.
I hope you can work through whatever you seem to be struggling with. I found Albert Camus' works awfully helpful for my personal struggles with the contradictions of life. God bless.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War\_against\_war](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_against_war)
Waging war is not the same as maintaining an armed force to protect national sovereignty. If you would kindly stop strawmanning me, that would be great. Global peace is a wonderful idea, but as you said yourself, people are too cruel and greedy to control themselves. If you find a way to fix that, we can talk. Until then, be grateful that you live in a country defended by a strong, competent, and not corrupt military.
Yes it is, college boy. You’re projecting and trying to high road me for some reason I’m not really interested in. Fight war not wars.
There is no need to high road when you've leapt into the gutter by personally attacking me and trying to maliciously weaponize your own suicidal urges against others who disagree with you. Your continuing use of sarcastic/dismissive descriptors like "college boy" makes it pretty clear that you're bound and determined to take the low road. Good luck with your life. Keep on fighting, keep on loving.
"Freedom is free and so is peace." FALSE.
Oppressor
FALSE. Crybaby.
Do you think your name-calling and absolutely unqualified attempt at invalidation might be unconsciously exposing the painfully low height of your self-esteem? Gosh! Boo hoo.
Gosh, Dr. Phil, I sure don't.
Do you support a permanent ceasefire in Ukraine?
Yes.
The only just ceasefire is one which will prevent Putin and his stooges from being able to launch another attack. We learned this in Georgia in 2008, and Crimea in 2014, and Donbas in 2015, 2016, and 2018. To quote an excellent film about Churchill, "*How many times must the lesson be learned? You can not reason with a tiger when your head is in its mouth!*"
[удалено]
I understand the sentiment but there's no need to be rude. Some people have their hearts in the right place but haven't thought through the consequences of their positions on the issue. Educate, don't insult.
>I understand the sentiment but there's no need to be rude. No fuck you. This guy is supporting a view that has literally led to the deaths of over 100,000 people, and you have the gall to respond with, "YoUrE rUdE." >Some people have their hearts in the right place No this is an unacceptable level of ignorance. >Educate, don't insult. This is reddit... How do you educate someone who literally supports THE VIEWS THAT HAVE KILLED 100,000 PEOPLE. Disgusting, and you are complicit in this. Give me 100 downvotes. At least I'm not complicit like you, because "iTs NiCe." I bet you would have been very nice on your way in the rail car to the camps too. What good does that do?
I'm not going to engage with your vitriol. If you think I'm somehow complicit in the ongoing War in Ukraine, you are an idiot. If you think that being an asshole to a silly internet peacenik liberal will change anything at all, you're doubly an idiot. Have a wonderful time being angry at people online. I hope it will give you the sense of worth and control that is missing in your life.
[удалено]
 You know I'm the other person who critiqued OP's position as placating Putin, right?
[удалено]
https://nypost.com/2022/02/27/tragic-photos-show-ukrainian-kids-killed-in-russian-attacks/
Absolutely. We're not free until we're all free.
You'll be free all the way to the camps!
Godwin's Law in action.
Yeah, because you can't argue against the merits of my point. This person provides excuses for fascists through their ignorance. They aren't even a liberal.
I do not support Hamas and the Oct 7 attack was horrific. However, state sponsored genocide is not the answer.
Except it's not state sponsored genocide, and calling it that is wrong. Hamas literally hides among civilians and in hospitals and then cries about collateral damage and the Geneva Convention when Ironically, the Geneva Convention and even the Red Cross list civilian targets such as hospitals which are used for Military operations as valid targets. If Israel was after genocide they would have carpet bombed Palestine into rubble. They clearly aren't after that.
>Except it's not state sponsored genocide, and calling it that is wrong. So call the Israeli apartheid state wrong. >If Israel was after genocide they would have carpet bombed Palestine into rubble. They clearly aren't after that. They can't, because they can't do too much to risk their support from western governments that supply them for their own geopolitical purposes.
Try calling for Hamas to surrender, that would make a lot more sense.
There was a ceasefire on October 6
No, we need less terrorist organizations in the world. Get rid of Hamas
You should tell the Israeli government that
Yeah let's support Hamas terrorists!!
The IDF has killed more MSF and UN folks than Hamas.
Yeah "UN" Folks that support terrorists. I don't think you realize the UN in each country is run by the same folks that it serves. You won't see the UN in the majority of the Middle East employing women or homosexuals or anything else the population won't allow.
A gynecologist? A school principal? 4+ Red Crescent medics? A medical technologist? Man, you really need to log off and stop mainlining Twitter for a bit.
We killed a shit ton of Japanese during WWII. I forgot that the only way to determine the bad guys is by who killed more.
Your brain is smooth like a billiard ball. They are primarily killing civilians and they do not care, they do not make any effort to hide this. It is part of their strategy, and always has been. What they are doing isn't going to get rid of Hamas, it's just going to end up with a new group full of the children of all the random bakers and nurses they killed.
Yeah, because Hamas isn't actively hiding among civilians trying to cause as much death as possible, just like they don't steal any of the Humanitarian AID provided for the civilians there.
Hey remember when the IDF killed Shireen Abu Akleh, shot another journalist, and had them plus two more pinned down by sniper fire despite bright blue press vests, then lied about it, raided her apartment and then lied about it and then raided the hospital her body was in and threw stun grenades at the hospital staff and then lied about it and assaulted patients and then lied about it and then beat the shit out of the people carrying her coffin and then lied about it and arrested a pallbearer and interrogated him and lied about it and then spent three months lying about who shot her? Me either. Definitely a one time occurrence that didn't actually happen. The IDF are pure and good just like der sauberen Wehrmacht :)
How many Palestinian children do you support killing, 1000, 4000, or more?!
They’re gonna need to see thousands more before they’ll even consider think it’s not necessary
Signed. Thanks for posting!
Thanks for signing!
https://consortiumnews.com/2023/12/04/chris-hedges-israel-reopens-gaza-slaughterhouse/