6 ms·

Care to explain how preventing an organization from attacking civilian ships is bullying?

by tety 3y ago

Cyph0n 3y ago
I’ve replied with my thoughts elsewhere in this comment chain.
Morte42 3y ago
[flagged]
- ycombinete 3y ago
  Please don’t post racism, or flamebait here.
  - Morte42 3y ago
    I was just trying to make a joke about racism because of the thinly veiled racist viewpoints in pretty much every post here but I guess I picked on the wrong guys. Okay I'm done, sorry.
    - flandish 3y ago
      It’s not racism to remind people that nothing ever makes genocide ok. What israel and the US support is doing is a genocide.
      - deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]
      - tety 3y ago
        I am not sure that's the definition of genocide. The only clear instance of genocide in this war is the October 7 attacks. I'll remind you it included attacking all population centers in a specific geographic area, going house to house and killing whoever was inside, as well as burning the houses in order to prevent the population from returning. You could argue Israel evacuating the northern of Gaza strip is ethnic cleansing, but that would only be valid if they are not allowed later on to return. The difference between Palestinians civilian deaths in Gaza is that these were not systematic, not concentrated in a single space (for example all houses in a location) and were done mostly for a military purpose (attacking a defacto non-uniformed military). Choosing to evacuate the population before attacking was done to minimize casualties, although they are still massive even when removing the Hamas members from the statistics and their inflated nature.
        maxglute 3y ago
        > only clear instance of genocide in this war is the October 7 attacks. That's clearly a military operation with some war crimes thrown in, which is about expected. Then went in and out, there's no systematic intent in the mission to destroy israel for the simple reason that Hamas can't. Hamas is physically incapable of committing genocide despite what the preach. VS Israel's systematic destruction of Gaza with enough dogwhistles from senior leadership that can credibly push Israeli campaign into genocide territory. Whether that matters under international law is another Q, but the difference when it comes to international opinion (well, global south), is Hamas can't genocide Israel because they don't have the capabilities vs IDF can actually genocide Palestine/Gaza and optic wise, is looking well on their way as mass starvation as systemic blockade settles in. Like if west can delude themselves into thinking Uyghurs are being genocided despite very few systemic killings and leaks from leadership that intent is counterterrorism/deradicalization, then case for Israel doing a genocide is much stronger considering the actual destruction, body count and mask off rhetoric from Israeli politicians.
        tety 3y ago
        About your regard of the oct 7 as a military operation with some war crimes thrown in, it was a military operation concentrated almost completely on civilian centers, so the war crimes aspect was pretty central. I do not doubt they would continue if not stopped, but maybe you think otherwise. Is that a universal thing that what politicians say is being taken in such a high regard? Especially the many Israeli ministers of nothing that have no actual ability to affect the situation. Judging by how the war is going on, I don't see any scenario where the Palestinian population disappears from Gaza, and I don't see any Israeli action that is advancing that. However, you are right that due to the sheer cruelty of Oct 7 there is a major process of radicalization in Israeli society, and if Hamas dreams of recreating this attack 'again and again' materialize, I do think the Israeli side will begin to level its moral base to that of its enemy, which might end in actual genocide. Which is why I believe removing this organization is in the best interest of both people, even though it is causing much suffering currently, it is not impossible it can turn very much worse yet.
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
- tety 3y ago
  There's a moral difference and an international law difference between attacking valid military targets and killing civilians in the process and when your stated goal is attacking uninvolved civilian targets (international shipping passing by). Also, GP saying 'bullying' seemed to me detached from the facts of what was going on. About being white, as far as I know I am not considered white both in the 19th century scientific racism sense and even in its modern extension of dividing the American population by the extension of that original theory. But if I am considered white, do you think it undermines my arguments?
theironhammer 3y ago
Because Israel is attacking civilian targets in Gaza. USA not doing anything about that. In fact no one is except the Houthis.
- tety 3y ago
  you’d might want to google the amount of civilian casualties in the yemen civil war, its proportion to deaths in the Gaza war and houthis involvement in said civilian deaths. You might be surprised how preoccupied they are with ‘preventing’ civilian death
  - thiagoharry 3y ago
    Following the same logic, we also have plenty of examples of how US is (not) worried about democracy, free trade and attacks against civil targets. And therefore, we can dismiss its statements about these issues. No problem, it's a tie. Therefore, what remains to discuss is just how legitimate is the stated purpose of Houthi's attacks that is claimed to uphold article 1 from Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide from UN. According with that convention, which is signed by Yemen, their members must act to prevent genocide whenever it is happening, either during war or peace. A blockade is indeed a way to act against this crime.
    - tptacek 3y ago
      Not legitimate at all, since the Houthis were doing this before the Gaza war, and they themselves are laying siege to Ta'izz.
      - thiagoharry 3y ago
        They were for other reasons. Likewise, US were also bombing people and launching missiles before for other reasons and also make economical sieges against other targets in other contexts. I'm confused why this should mean that any future attack and reasoning made by US or Houthis should be dismissed because of this. THESE particular bombings were because the blockade and sanctions that they did in the region and they justify with the genocide happening in Palestine.

Care to explain how preventing an organization from attacking civilian ships is bullying?

by tety 3y ago

Care to explain how preventing an organization from attacking civilian ships is bullying?

Cyph0n 3y ago

I’ve replied with my thoughts elsewhere in this comment chain.

Morte42 3y ago

[flagged]

ycombinete 3y ago
Please don’t post racism, or flamebait here.
- Morte42 3y ago
  I was just trying to make a joke about racism because of the thinly veiled racist viewpoints in pretty much every post here but I guess I picked on the wrong guys. Okay I'm done, sorry.
  - flandish 3y ago
    It’s not racism to remind people that nothing ever makes genocide ok. What israel and the US support is doing is a genocide.
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
    - tety 3y ago
      I am not sure that's the definition of genocide. The only clear instance of genocide in this war is the October 7 attacks. I'll remind you it included attacking all population centers in a specific geographic area, going house to house and killing whoever was inside, as well as burning the houses in order to prevent the population from returning. You could argue Israel evacuating the northern of Gaza strip is ethnic cleansing, but that would only be valid if they are not allowed later on to return. The difference between Palestinians civilian deaths in Gaza is that these were not systematic, not concentrated in a single space (for example all houses in a location) and were done mostly for a military purpose (attacking a defacto non-uniformed military). Choosing to evacuate the population before attacking was done to minimize casualties, although they are still massive even when removing the Hamas members from the statistics and their inflated nature.
      - maxglute 3y ago
        > only clear instance of genocide in this war is the October 7 attacks. That's clearly a military operation with some war crimes thrown in, which is about expected. Then went in and out, there's no systematic intent in the mission to destroy israel for the simple reason that Hamas can't. Hamas is physically incapable of committing genocide despite what the preach. VS Israel's systematic destruction of Gaza with enough dogwhistles from senior leadership that can credibly push Israeli campaign into genocide territory. Whether that matters under international law is another Q, but the difference when it comes to international opinion (well, global south), is Hamas can't genocide Israel because they don't have the capabilities vs IDF can actually genocide Palestine/Gaza and optic wise, is looking well on their way as mass starvation as systemic blockade settles in. Like if west can delude themselves into thinking Uyghurs are being genocided despite very few systemic killings and leaks from leadership that intent is counterterrorism/deradicalization, then case for Israel doing a genocide is much stronger considering the actual destruction, body count and mask off rhetoric from Israeli politicians.
        tety 3y ago
        About your regard of the oct 7 as a military operation with some war crimes thrown in, it was a military operation concentrated almost completely on civilian centers, so the war crimes aspect was pretty central. I do not doubt they would continue if not stopped, but maybe you think otherwise. Is that a universal thing that what politicians say is being taken in such a high regard? Especially the many Israeli ministers of nothing that have no actual ability to affect the situation. Judging by how the war is going on, I don't see any scenario where the Palestinian population disappears from Gaza, and I don't see any Israeli action that is advancing that. However, you are right that due to the sheer cruelty of Oct 7 there is a major process of radicalization in Israeli society, and if Hamas dreams of recreating this attack 'again and again' materialize, I do think the Israeli side will begin to level its moral base to that of its enemy, which might end in actual genocide. Which is why I believe removing this organization is in the best interest of both people, even though it is causing much suffering currently, it is not impossible it can turn very much worse yet.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
tety 3y ago
There's a moral difference and an international law difference between attacking valid military targets and killing civilians in the process and when your stated goal is attacking uninvolved civilian targets (international shipping passing by). Also, GP saying 'bullying' seemed to me detached from the facts of what was going on. About being white, as far as I know I am not considered white both in the 19th century scientific racism sense and even in its modern extension of dividing the American population by the extension of that original theory. But if I am considered white, do you think it undermines my arguments?

theironhammer 3y ago

Because Israel is attacking civilian targets in Gaza. USA not doing anything about that. In fact no one is except the Houthis.

tety 3y ago
you’d might want to google the amount of civilian casualties in the yemen civil war, its proportion to deaths in the Gaza war and houthis involvement in said civilian deaths. You might be surprised how preoccupied they are with ‘preventing’ civilian death
- thiagoharry 3y ago
  Following the same logic, we also have plenty of examples of how US is (not) worried about democracy, free trade and attacks against civil targets. And therefore, we can dismiss its statements about these issues. No problem, it's a tie. Therefore, what remains to discuss is just how legitimate is the stated purpose of Houthi's attacks that is claimed to uphold article 1 from Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide from UN. According with that convention, which is signed by Yemen, their members must act to prevent genocide whenever it is happening, either during war or peace. A blockade is indeed a way to act against this crime.
  - tptacek 3y ago
    Not legitimate at all, since the Houthis were doing this before the Gaza war, and they themselves are laying siege to Ta'izz.
    - thiagoharry 3y ago
      They were for other reasons. Likewise, US were also bombing people and launching missiles before for other reasons and also make economical sieges against other targets in other contexts. I'm confused why this should mean that any future attack and reasoning made by US or Houthis should be dismissed because of this. THESE particular bombings were because the blockade and sanctions that they did in the region and they justify with the genocide happening in Palestine.