Thanks for playing, Rudolph Jitler, but no prizes for a performance like that.

That’s not a reason to continue to actively fuel a genocide.

Why did Netanyahu sacrifice Israelis to refuse multiple ceasefires and hostage exchanges?

…but more relevantly, for the 4th time, you genocide defending piece of shit, why did Israel fund Hamas’ displacement of the secular moderates with predictable results?

There’s a reason you’re refusing to answer the question - it’s perfectly clear that Netanyahu is willing to sacrifice Israeli lives if it means that he can kill more Palestinians. You keep stating the obvious in an incredulous tone because you don’t have an alternative explanation - there isn’t one. You tell us you see the truth, then get all shy about it.

Go cheer for more dead Israelis, ya antisemitic piece of shit.

https://preview.redd.it/ltfnge7l9vy61.jpg?auto=webp&s=e9b8baf98417ef9c01dd37e1ed3ac6cb38976b18

People have run the numbers on this - Bezos is far richer than even the greediest dragons sitting atop their mountains of gold.

For the third time - why did Israel fund Hamas’ displacement of the secular moderates with predictable results?

Kill the Palestinians, take their land - you know - exactly what they’ve been doing for decades, and were able to dramatically accelerate after October 7th.

What’s your explanation for Israel funding the terrorists’ displacement of the secular moderates with predictable, deadly results?

What - you think Netanyahu cares about Israelis given his refusal of ceasefire after ceasefire and hostage exchange after hostage exchange? How quaint.

Seems straightforwardly clear that it was to manufacture the pretext for the current genocide.

The PLO were in power, Israel knew who Hamas were, and funded their rise to power (for what reason other than to manufacture the pretext for this genocide?), they also created and maintained the conditions that would motivate and justify violent resistance, so yes - Israel are responsible for Hamas.

In maintaining the horrible conditions I pointed to, Israel further motivated people to push back by any means necessary while giving them as little as possible to live for.

You don’t get to tell us you want peace as you defend a genocide. You don’t get to tell us about atrocities as the IDF gleefully document dozens per day, and you don’t get to tell the people you’re genociding that they’re wrong.

With that all clarified, what would justifiable Palestinian self-defence look like, and do those principles apply equally to Israel?

How about Brigadier General Yitzhak Segev, the Israeli military governor in Gaza in the early 1980s.

Oh look - a New York Times reporter saved us the trouble. Turns out that he had helped finance the Palestinian Islamist movement as a “counterweight” to the secularists and leftists of the Palestine Liberation Organization and the Fatah party, led by Yasser Arafat (who also corroborated this statement).

…there’s that, and the whole military occupation to maintain an apartheid state in an open air concentration camp, the decades-long annexation campaign. You’ll be surprised to learn that people find that kind of thing upsetting.

I disagree - I think the majority know they’re lying, and support the genocide - they’re just cowards too gutless to say so.

You give these monsters any sort of push, and they start using Palestinian and Hamas interchangeably which really gives the game away… keep going, and they start screaming their support for wiping Palestine off the map.

70% of Hamas aren’t.

What does this tell us about Israel’s goals?

So we should deport Israelis because Israel backed Hamas’ displacement of the secular moderates with predictable results?

Don’t pretend your hatred is principled.

I think it’s pretty straightforwardly reasonable to say that we should above all else, remove their ability to continue to do harm. There’s going to be a range of views on exactly what that should look like - mostly based on your view of how punitive we should be. Options would include confinement, exile, medication, lobotomy, and execution.

Personally, I think ending someone through death, lobotomy, and the like is unnecessarily barbaric. Confinement in one form or another seems like the most reasonable option, and I think consentual alternatives are debatable.

A war of aggression started in October by Hamas.

Yeah - history started 13 months ago, and the genocide being committed in Palestine is actually a Hamas war of aggression. Is it because it’s all Israeli territory and therefore that genocide is justified?

Once again LBGTQ+ individuals would be killed, jailed and persecuted even without the current conflict with Israel.

You don’t get to weaponise the LGBTQ+ community, who Israel is exterminating at a far quicker rate than everyone else in the region combined to justify the extermination of those LGBTQ+ people, their families, and everyone they care about.

Once again Lebanon is an active war zone.

Yes - Israel invaded them.

Simple Israel is fighting a war that was thrust on it by Hamas in October. Nazis fought a war of aggression. The fact that you can’t tell the difference is sad.

That’s probably less defensible than the argument that the Jews were sabotaging the German economy in defence of the Holocaust - it’s definitely less defensible than arguing Hitler had no choice but to start WWII because of the economic carve-up following WWI.

Congratulations - you’re just as genocidal as the Nazis and use even stupider arguments than they do. The tankies can go fuck themselves - but my prescription for you would defy TOS, Rudolph Jitler.

Yawn

History started 13 months ago (but only as it relates to the genocide Israel is committing) - but you’d better not pay attention to who has been killing the most LGBTQ+ people (and straight people, civilians, children…) in the region.

I’m the one brushing aside reality, eh?

You don’t ever look at the fact that you’re defending a genocide and question yourself? That you’re weaponising the Palestinian LGBTQ+ population whose extermination you’re actively supporting exterminating to justify that extermination?

…nah - better to just say I’m off my meds.

You wouldn’t have to tie yourself in bizarre knots to defend a genocide if you simply decided not to defend the indefensible. You don’t have a moral framework, you don’t have a logical framework - you have “Israel gud, so genocide gud.”

Your prescription seems to assume that either:

1. Everyone can be rehabilitated, which no society has ever achieved.

2. That it’s preferable to push a well understood risk to people’s lives back into the community than it is to keep that risk in the care of the state where they can’t kill more people.

…but you strike me as too sensible to prescribe that kind of thing, so what have I missed?

Hold it in Palestine, get murdered by Israel.

Hold it in Iran, get murdered by Israel.

Hold it in Lebanon, get murdered by Israel.

…but Israel is less homophobic than them, so Israel’s genocide is good, actually.

Are you able to explain why the Nazis were bad in a way that doesn’t implicate Israel?

It’s not complex - bigotry is bad, genocide, as the most extreme possible outcome of bigotry, is far worse. Some bigotry in a population isn’t justification for a genocide - that would be an apocalyptic prescription if applied consistently.

You do understand why people would look at your prescriptions and think that you’re either a world-ending lunatic or genocidal piece of shit, right? Why would we be wrong?

I’ll ask again because you dodged the important question - Does Palestine have the right to defend itself like Israel and what would that look like to you?

Which specific 2 state solutions are you referring to? I assume it’s the ~1994 deal that collapsed because Israel couldn’t stop their terrorism and assassinations throughout the negotiations, and the Partition Plan that violated the UN charter with respect to national self-determination and carved out the majority of the territory to the minority Israeli population.

To defend the genocide of Palestine as a necessary lesson reveals a let’s say… interesting moral framework - particularly as Israel escalates aggression against Iran and Lebanon. Putting aside the obvious genocidal intent, rhetoric, and action, how does an exterminated population learn any lesson?

Your argument is the best possible case one could make for the genocide of Israel - they are the regional threat and aggressor - they are the ones that (by your sickening logic) need to be exterminated to teach them a lesspn. The outcomes of the actions you’re defending have civilisation-ending consequences one way or another, and zero benefit - why do you hold these positions?

My bigotry and genocide is fine because other countries have bigotry, actually.

What do you think you stand for, exactly?