While actively funding and supporting a genocide too.
West Germany was never denazified.- More Nazis in German justice department after WWII than during Third Reich: study>Fully 77 percent of senior ministry officials in 1957 were former members of Adolf Hitler’s Nazi party, a higher proportion even than during the 1933-45 Third Reich, the study found. - businessinsider.com/former-nazi-officials-in-germ…> From 1949 to 1973, 90 of the 170 leading lawyers and judges in the then-West German Justice Ministry had been members of the Nazi Party.
>
>Of those 90 officials, 34 had been members of the Sturmabteilung (SA), Nazi Party paramilitaries who aided Hitler’s rise and took part in Kristallnacht, a night of violence that is believed to have left 91 Jewish people dead.
data that ends before the BIRTH of the majority of Germans
Look, I’m not saying that Germany doesn’t have a problem with an increase in far right politics and violence in recent years, but to claim that they never stopped being a Nazi country is some ahistorical tankie edgelord bullshit.
Until recently, Germany has been a near-pacifist country almost pathologically careful to “Nie wiederholen, nie vergessen” (never repeat, never forget) and pretending otherwise doesn’t accomplish anything except expose your very shallow and underdeveloped understanding of the world.
I dunno man, Germany just can’t help itself from committing or supporting genocide throughout their history. Are Nazi’s flying flags in Germany? No. Is Germany passing laws and carrying out foreign policy as if they were still run by Nazi’s? Most definitely yes.
Their line that they would stop if there was a ceasefire in Gaza convinced only a few.
I love how this is completely unsubstantiated and there’s no alternative explanation for what the supposed “truth” is. And this is just thrown in there completely unattributed to anyone. Who didn’t believe it? Who are the “few” whom it convinced? And libs just eat this up.
You gotta love how western media keeps pretending the blockade is about anything other than genocide. The west can easily prove their theory by stopping support for the genocide.
Yeah, they already throw in all the specifics of “senior” officials “from the capital city”, but attacks are still so common there that they have to add in “relatively”.
They still support Ukraine. But to bring Ukraine’s grain into the country is a no go for them. Domestically Poland have to deal with the farmers, constitutes a large demographic chuck of their voters, who can’t compete with the cheaper Ukraine’s grain and ended up suffer financially.
The motivation from the previous nationalist PiS government in Poland was mainly anything they could to do against Russia or against Germany.
So by supporting Ukraine with military equipment, they were acting against Russia. But at the same time slowed down German support for Ukraine, by blocking maintenance and factories for Ukrainian equipment in Poland. Leading to long transports across to other countries e.g. Latvia for maintenance.
Now, with the grain, this has no Russian involvement and their own farmers are unhappy. So there is no way to go against Russia or against Germany. Also there is a new government in Poland, so I guess we have to see how that develops now.
The farmers liked the old party being in charge, not the new one. Also wouldn’t be terribly shocked to learn some of these actions are being encouraged by individuals whose paychecks are covered by the Kremlin, considering the impact this is having in the region.
They protested no matter the party lmao. The issue is that the grain that was supposed to go through Poland as transit was being sold at lower prices than local grain, while not needing to meet the same standards (because it’s just in transit here right? Right?) Farmers basically feel like their calls earlier were ignored by Warsaw and Brussels. Russophiles were very quick to come in and make this a russophile thing.
Whole crisis was manufactured by previous government because wouldn’t you know, there was a lot of money to be made when some of the “transit” grain disappeared and was sold
Probably time to remind everybody the Judiciary branch can’t actually enforce its rulings. If they’re going to go full on religious crazy we can just start ignoring them.
Law gets enforced if power finds it useful to enforce. Ignoring it is not an option, for people actually in danger of having the law enforced against them.
Just to explain: Their demands are mainly loosening the blockade (which is a humanitarian crisis in its own right) and freeing hostages Palestinian detainees.
“rejects any alternative to the full and complete liberation of Palestine, from the river to the sea” … “the Day of Judgment will not come about until Muslims fight Jews and kill them.”
Y'all are conveniently ignoring the fact that this an outdated charter and can't find such language in the new one. Just another day clocking in to the genocide defence factory, don't forget the emojis.
It’s also interesting that Hamas literally calls for genocide or in their more “PR friendly” new draft only ethnic cleansing, and then Hamas ball garglers claim Israel is commiting genocide.
Don’t get me wrong, there have been war crimes, collective punishment is a war crime. But it’s not genocide.
They don’t want to kill all Jews. They want the expulsion of all Jews from Israel/Palestine. At least according to their original manifesto, they’ve changed it to remove this part to be fair.
It can be argued that the Israeli government wants the same thing for the Palestinians.
“rejects any alternative to the full and complete liberation of Palestine, from the river to the sea” … “the Day of Judgment will not come about until Muslims fight Jews and kill them.”
Some members have stated as such but have been corrected by the leadership. Hamas, at least publicly, only said that they wanted to forcefully displace the Jews and that they would not hesitate to kill civilians to attain that objective.
Well yes ? How else would you want to do this. I just gave you an example of a senior Hamas officer saying kill all Jews and Hamas saying they do not agree.
I have no doubt Hamas leadership is a bunch of genocidal maniacs but their official stance has been in the past the forceful displacement and nowadays it’s the return to pre 1967 borders. They are ready to admit to the existence of Israel, not by pleasure mind you, but their official stance nowadays is that they are partially open to a two state solution if the right to return is put in place.
This might be a bunch of lies, but it is their official position.
Oh that’s all? Thank goodness forcible displacement using coercive threats on a civilian population isnt a war crime. I don’t understand why you are splitting hairs on the goals of this openly genocidal group. Supporting Palestinians doesn’t mean you have to go to bat for Hamas.
It really didn’t take much to get you in the mood to justify a targeted attack on civilians did it. I’m consistent in my view that it’s wrong to murder civilians, but it doesn’t seem like you are.
Yeah just 75 years of brutal oppression and all forms of peaceful protests being massacred like the March to Return in 2018.
Was Ukraine targeting civilians when they invaded Crimea too? Some Russian civilians sure died from it.
Just forget all the propaganda you’ve been reading and look at the sheer numbers of miliary Vs civilian deaths.
You’re really far gone down the IDF propaganda drain if you still believe Oct7 was just an attack on civilians.
It was a targeted attack on IDF military bases and also hostage takings on the Kibbutzes nearby. Yes “civilians” were killed but the amount is low compared to the amount of soldiers. Furthermore the israeli “civilians” were extremely heavily armed.
Those videos of Hamas throwing grenades inside shelters? IDF Soldiers were inside.
If Hamas was going for civilian casualties they would have planned pushing in further and would have likely been able to kill at least 10k
Where do you see that I’m supporting them? I literally reiterated in many comments that what they want is a war crime. No need to invent some other objectives they are plenty awful enough.
OP is misleading. Hamas has a new 2017 charter, which has change a lot. As far as I can remember, they had alterd their demand/charter, where the main clause is to have the Israel/Palestine border to be as of 1967.
Given that Jews are not likely to voluntarily leave Israel, this is de facto a call to violently expel or kill all Jews in the area, which is nearly half of the world's Jews.
While yes, going from "Kill all Jews" to just "Kill half of all Jews" is an improvement, it's still not "let's all hold hands and find a way to get along!". This isn't to say that the Israeli far right is all that much better really, though they're better at knowing what parts to say out loud.
Yes it is a clear war crime don’t get me wrong. But exaggeration has no use when reality is awful enough.
Hamas is a terrorist organisation that will not hesitate to kill civilians to achieve their ideals. They do not publicly at least want to kill all Jews.
TBF, so is the IDF. They have killed, what, nearly 20,000 Palestinians, mostly women and children non-combatants, since they declared war on Gaza? They claim to care about not killing civilians, but they sure aren’t putting a lot of effort into not killing them.
What’s a reasonable ratio of combatants to non-combatants killed? 1:1? 1:10? If Israel has to kill one hundred civilians in order to kill a single Hamas militant, is that acceptable?
This is plain wrong and disinformation. Israel has killed way more civilians than is usual or acceptable in a war but nowhere near the numbers you cited.
Seeing as 1/3 of the deaths are children and the other 1/3 women it’s pretty easy to confirm that there is no targeting involved. It’s just genocide.
Israel was already unecessarily killing and starving civilians before Oct 7. And there’s literally no reason they need to starve anyone right now aside israel comitting genocide.
You seem to have a weird impression of them. Genociding all Palestinians is israels goal, it’s not a “byproduct” of the war. Netanyahu has publicly stated this.
But you’re right since they dared to enter Gaza and fight instead of just bombing civilians while Hamas was in the tunnels underground, their civilian casualty rate has probably decreased. Maybe they got 500 now?
Where did I say that one side didn’t want to genocide the other ? Hamas is more public about it and won’t even try to justify their civilian killings, but Netanhyu government has made it clear again and again that they are willing to do collective punishment. The high civilian death rate is of course intentional.
Hamas has also killed plenty of civilians, and they don’t even try to pretend that it was accidental. That said you are close to their ratio which is three civilians for every military death.
Israel’s civilian deaths to militant deaths is probably higher due to the usage of bombs (10 civilian deaths per explosion) and intentional starvation but it isn’t 100:1.
Hamas’ strategy of hiding behind civilians is also a war crime since it obviously increases the number of civilians killed.
If you believe Israeli propaganda, they have killed 5000 Hamas militants. Reality is probably smaller than that, but since Hamas intentionally doesn’t publish their militant casualties we won’t have a good estimation. That said 500 Israeli soldiers have died and seeing the asymmetry in warfare, you can expect much more Hamas militants to have died. I have not been able to find an estimate from an independent source.
So, here’s the thing - which is more awful? A group that publicly says they want to do genocide but is really, really ineffective at it? Or a group that claims they only want to stop bad people, but happens to be really effective at committing genocide while purportedly killing bad people?
I strongly suspect that the only way Israel can claim that 5k Hamas militants have been killed is by counting every male that appears to be at least a teenager as a militant.
Frankly both are awful and both should not be allowed to take control of Israel/Palestine. I have no idea what solution there is to this conflict honestly, I just want things to stay somewhat factual.
I agree that the 5000 figure seems highly improbable. Israel has been quite effective at killing high members of Hamas but I doubt they have killed 5000 out of the 30000 militants.
The solution is two states, where Israel returns to the 1947 UN borders, and allows the Palestinian Authority to have full control of Palestinian territory. Hamas exists as a powerful force because Israel consistently refuses to work towards a two-state solution in good faith.
The other solution is for the UN to de-militarize both the Palestinians and the Israelis, occupy all the land currently held by Israel, and force a power-sharing agreement and a new constitution so that Israel is no longer a Jewish state. Of course, the last time that Israel was occupied, you had a whole bunch of far-right Jewish terrorists that did things like assassinate diplomat’s families.
Netanyahu literally said publicly that he saw wants to kill all Palestinians including the women and children and his deeds match his words.
For Hamas that’s “more public about” it they sure do their best not to kill kids.
As long as the demographic chart of Palestinians murdered by the IDF looks like the actual Palestinian population demographic (1/3 women, 1/3 kids) it’s safe to assume that there is absolutely no real targeting taking place.
As long as the demographic chart of Palestinians murdered by the IDF looks like the actual Palestinian population demographic (1/3 women, 1/3 kids) it’s safe to assume that there is absolutely no real targeting taking place.
Yes, there is a bump if you look at the Hamas fighting population demographics but it is a minority. The large majority of people killed in this war are civilians there is no doubt about that. I was denying the 1:100 figure. For example Hamas has 1\3 of female victims, yet have a 1:4 casualty rate.
Netanyahu literally said publicly that he saw wants to kill all Palestinians including the women and children and his deeds match his words.
No he didn’t and you know it. Why lie ?
Some senior Hamas executives have had such a discourse for Jews before being very softly reprimanded by Hamas but no executive from the Israeli government. There have been plenty of dog whistles, but they are not stupid enough to say it literally.
Edit : I didn’t realize it but you were the person calling for the massacre of civilians in an earlier comment. Explains why you would lie, you need to dehumanise your enemy. I’m not spending more energy on this. You’re too far gone.
From 2007 to 2017, the Telegraph was actually one of four European newspapers that published Russia Beyond The Headlines (a project from Russia's state news outlet) as a supplement.
The Telegraph Group has recently been in financial trouble and bailed out by a company run by the vice-president of the UAE Mansour bin Zayed Al Nahyan. While Putin is visiting the UAE next week, Mansour is probably best known in the UK as owner of top-flight football team Manchester City, so him doing stuff in the UK is not anything new. On the other hand there is a government probe in to this acquisition, perhaps unsurprising considering that the Telegraph is one of the four newspapers of record in the UK despite how shit it is
To be clear Bowen did not from my recollection say that the strike was from Israeli. He did, however, incorrectly say that the hispital had been "flattened" based in drone footage he was looking at on screen.
No. The programme as a whole said responsibility hadn’t been determined. The news was breaking as Bowen was on air - he didn’t say anything about responsibility
I think I just have to agree to disagree. It's a simple philosophy problem in my head
"Hospital got flattened"
"Hamas doesn't have munitions to flatten hospital"
"Israel flattened the hospital"
If you're reporting about a flattened hospital in Gaza, you're tactically supporting the idea Israel did it by simply reporting that a hospital got flattened. It also shouldn't suprise you that's how many people online ran with it.
The report of a massive explosion outside the hospital would have lead the same people who made assumptions about Israel being responsible to assume that Israel was responsible.
Yeah it would lead neutral observers to beleive Israel flattened a hospital since they are the only ones immediately in the region with the munitions to do so. Both things can be true
But there was a massive explosion outside the hospital. Are you really saying that that shouldn’t have been reported with the caveat ‘we don’t know who is responsible’ because people would have assumed it was Israel ?
No, im saying the reporting the explosion in the parking lot of a hospital as "flattening the hospital" was irresponsible and it's no wonder it would make people think Israel blew it up by simply stating those things as facts. It was irresponsible to report it this way, especially since there was no evidence to suggest that was the case.
Yeh. We agree, he fucked up by making a hasty assumption about the hospital explosion, based on the drone footage he was seeing.
I’m saying that if he had reported accurately- a large explosion outside of the hospital - people would still have made the same assumption that Israeli action caused it.
You're probably right but I think the bigger issue is he can use cover of "well people would have ran with whatever narrative anyways so it's really not relevant to people jumping to that conclusion." In my opinion, we 100% should criticize him and recognize that it helped foster the sentiment it was an Israeli attack. Either way, the bigger issue is he doesn't think he did anything wrong reporting that way and I think thats a problem. Appreciate the back and forth.
He's asked if he regrets anything he said that evening and he says no - then he's challenged on the "flattened" comment and he says "Oh yeh - well, I got that wrong. I was looking at the pictures .... and that was my conclusion looking at the pictures and I was wrong on that".
He basically comes across as pissed off that the Israeli's wont open the borders so that reporters can observe directly. But yes - he should have started with "that was a cockup on my part"
And Trump did not tell the traitors to stormthe building, amiright?
Jesus, the way you Hamas bootlickers refuse to listen to anything that disagrees with your agenda reminds me of the MAGA crowd. In fact it is the same thing, just on the left.
I was correcting a factual inaccuracy. If you can find anything in my post history that suggests that I support Hamas, then feel free to point it out. Otherwise - zip it.
I am, however a fan of the BBC - and while it is far from perfect, I'm happy to defend it where the Telepgraph gets it wrong.
Somehow both unbelievable and completely believable that he is going to try and blame his child for making the stupid decision to pay so much for Twitter and for waving due diligence, which would have given him space to back out of the deal.
telegraph.co.uk
Top