There have been multiple accounts created with the sole purpose of posting advertisement posts or replies containing unsolicited advertising.

Accounts which solely post advertisements, or persistently post them may be terminated.

stolid_agnostic ,

I have noticed a change in tone from the colonel. He was very much all fire and bluster before while explaining why it’s Palestinians’ fault they are dying. Now he comes across as far gentler while explaining why it’s Palestinians’ fault they are dying.

SankaraStone ,
@SankaraStone@lemmy.world avatar

Have you ever seen a politician make the rounds on Sunday news shows? They, especially Republicans, sound extremely different on Fox News vs. the rest of media (Democrats sounds different on mainstream media vs. progressive independent media). This colonel is doing the exact same thing. He learned from the clip going viral and the way people are reacting to it to sound like he’s concerned and feels for the Palestinians rather than saying it’s their own fault like he was in the Blitzer clip.

TokenBoomer OP ,

Flak in the propaganda model.

SankaraStone ,
@SankaraStone@lemmy.world avatar

I’m more interested in what the term is for folks who wear different masks for different audiences and in particular folks who react to criticism by putting on a mask later all while saying the same thing. It was astonishing seeing this guy on Erin Burnett’s show after seeing him on Wolf Blitzer’s show. It was like watching Lindsey Graham on the Daily Show or Meet the Press vs. seeing him on Fox News Sunday discussing the exact same stuff.

Edit: I’d only listened to the Burnett interview. They’re different people.

TokenBoomer OP ,

Duplicitous?

TokenBoomer OP ,

See, people can change.

antidote101 ,

It’s a religious holy war, nothing else… And it’s irrational because of it.

Religion has darkened politics for the past decade in particular ways. In America it’s shown Christians will support fascism. In the middle east it’s showing Jews will do as well…

…religion is the root cause. Anyone over there is there for religious reasons. I think perhaps it would be best if, whenever peace is achieved, the secularist west nuke the entire area, with a particular focus on long term irradiation of all holy sites. This version of humanity in the current era can’t handle organised religion, and it needs to be prohibited with an automatic means of early death. It needs to be made abstract and reasonable… and only the irrationality or nuclear irradiation can be its metaphorical equal.

Nuke religion. Nuke religious wars. Irradiated holy sites.

Krudler ,

Religion, mysticism, magical thinking are expressions of our innate biology. So attempting to eradicate it is a sad impossibility.

legion02 ,

Bullshit.

Krudler ,

Oh wow! Such intelligent dialogue!

Since nothing I can say can match your immense wit, I’ll just say go read.

GONADS125 ,

The burden of proof is on the one who is staking claims.

You can be devoid of religion and mysticism and function fine. Religion is not a requirement of spiritual health or spiritual beliefs, which can be as simple as a perceived interconnectedness with the universe.

That other user’s response may have seemed brash, but I agree with his use of the literal philosophical term: bullshit.

This was taught to me in philosophy courses. There’s lying, bullshitting, and most heinous is mind-fucking. Those terms were written on the board and I was tested on them.

You made a bullshit claim. One that was bold, sweeping, and completely lacking supporting evidence. You cannot turn around now and demand others prove your claim wrong. The burden of proof is on you.

Krudler ,

You can really talk down hey? I’m an atheist, spare me.

But seriously go do some research on biology. You telling me in a sneering way and calling bullshit on modern behavioral science / biology is laughable.

I’ll even suggest some search terms for you to get you going: “biology and religion”.

GONADS125 ,

What’s laughable is you continuing to talk out of your ass and now talking down to someone who’s educational background is in psychology. I only took philosophy courses as a second passion.

You need to follow your own advice and read. And maybe take a critical thinking course from even a community college in your area.

Also, I wasn’t being a dick; you’re just hypersensitive. If you made a lie and I called out a lie, that’s not being a dick. Here, all I did was call out bullshit and point out that the burden of proof is on you. Just because you don’t like what I tell you, it doesn’t mean I’m being an asshole.

HeyThisIsntTheYMCA ,
@HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world avatar

Oh wow. Medium. That’s a respectable source.

tocopherol ,
@tocopherol@lemmy.dbzer0.com avatar

The source isn’t really ‘Medium’ but “Ethan Milne”, the author, Medium can be great depending on the author.

GONADS125 ,

It’s a decent introductory breakdown of bullshit. It’s based on the published 1986 piece “On Bullshit” and you can follow the citations.

Here’s another source on the topic.

Here’s the Oxford reference.

From Plato.

Or if you want to drop $10, you can buy the actual On Bullshit publication from Princeton.

TokenBoomer OP ,

Username checks out.

Illuminostro ,

Oh look! Another edgelord teenager decided he was an atheist!

tocopherol ,
@tocopherol@lemmy.dbzer0.com avatar

You are correct, magical thinking is a natural part of the human psyche. But, unless we have some sort of disorder, we can practice to recognize it and work with our more logic based mind when making decisions, instead of basing our decisions on emotion or superstition.

rckclmbr ,

This is absolutely not a religious war. I understand why you say that. But if it were, Muslim countries would come to the aid of Palestinians. But there’s a reason Egypt is standing still. And it’s not religion.

SirToxicAvenger ,

Egypt has tried to get rid of Israel already. history shows us what happened - they know better than to get involved.

tocopherol ,
@tocopherol@lemmy.dbzer0.com avatar

With the US carrier group in the area I’d be pretty hesitant to interfere if I was Egypt or anyone else really. At least in any direct way that could be retaliated against militarily, right now.

SirToxicAvenger ,

it might come to that. sure hope not but… maybe

merthyr1831 ,

Jews, Muslims, and Christians all lived in the region of Israel-Palestine (well, just Palestine) before 1948. Israel was a concept by nationalists and Europeans who saw an opportunity to get rid of Jewish refugees as well as project European military interests into the Arab world.

Religion was a useful tool in dividing these people, but nationalism and colonialism played the role in turning these divisions into wars.

krashmo ,

Disclaimer: what I’m about to say is not in support of any action, it’s just philosophical musing.

Isn’t the whole concept of a war crime sort of hypocritical? War is inherently barbaric and uncivilized. Yet we seem to think we can make it something other than that by placing restrictions on parts of it. The goal is to defeat your enemy but society says it’s not gentlemanly to do it in a particular way, as if treating it like a sporting event with ineffectual referees will fundamentally change what’s happening. At the end of the day we’re still giving the green light to kill a bunch of people. I get why we do it, it just seems insincere to stop short of saying any amount of killing is immoral. We’ll only allow you to kill these people in these places under these circumstances.

I don’t know how this helps anybody it’s just something I was thinking about.

slinkyninja ,

I think the idea is that a ‘good’ war (lolwut?) is one they would surgically cut out that opposition like a tumor without affecting everybody else.

Madmen see the world as a thing they can change with simple actions, wielding power only to hurt.

Seasoned_Greetings , (edited )

If war is unavoidable, wouldn’t it be a good idea to have an international council capable of condemning tactics that lead to total destruction?

The concept of war crimes and international courts aren’t there to concede that war is acceptable. They are there to grapple with the fact that war is inevitable and try to mitigate the worst, most horrific and lasting consequences.

If the international courts had the power to stop war crimes they would, but they don’t have that power. All they do is condemn. Why is it hypocritical that they condemn war crimes when they don’t have the power to stop wars either?

krashmo , (edited )

Condemning something you believe to be inevitable is a rather pointless exercise in my opinion. It may not be wrong but it’s not exactly useful either unless you believe it can be avoided, in which case it is no longer inevitable.

In any case, you’re speaking from a UN perspective and I’m speaking from the perspective of individuals. The way we speak of war as if it’s something that can be noble so long as the enemy “deserves” it. Nevermind the fact that your enemy thinks the same of you. We’re fine with dehumanizing and killing large groups of men but women and children is a step too far. It’s perfectly acceptable to bomb a factory full of workers but not a hospital. The concept of innocence in war presupposes that those who participate in it are not worthy of the same consideration as those who do not, despite the fact that in many cases a small group of people directed the actions of everyone else equally. Maybe that’s a valid point but it does seem to clash with Western ideals of equality and judicial review.

Seasoned_Greetings , (edited )

Woah dude, you’re putting a lot of words in my mouth.

It may not be wrong but but it’s not exactly useful unless you can believe it can be avoided

There’s no metric saying that war crimes weren’t avoided by condemning them.

Also, we don’t use mustard gas anymore. We don’t use zyclon d. Or agent orange. There are plenty of tools of war we don’t utilize anymore because we condemn them as war crimes, even if there’s no actual, tangible punishment for utilizing them.

There’s plenty of evidence for the effectiveness of just calling those things war crimes and condemning them.

Are you going to say that you prefer a world where we didn’t condemn and phase out more brutalistic forms of warfare in the name of alleviating hypocrisy? Because grandstanding about how not all war crimes, or war, can be averted, is advocating for a world that’s much worse off for the lack of restraint.

Edit: I’m not deaf to your point that the individual participants of war are no more deserving of death than anyone else. But is preventing some death in the name of sparing women and children morally the same as just letting everyone be killed for a concept of equality and justice?

shrugal , (edited )

War parties usually don’t want to completely eradicate the opponent’s population, just break their fighting power and force them to surrender. The “tolerated” form of war is a power struggle between those who want power (incl. keeping it, so defending yourself), and it should leave out those who don’t as much as possible. So the idea is that you only fight the people on the other side who actually signed up for fighting, and spare those who would rather flee or accept defeat. Ofc in reality it’s never that clear cut, soldiers can be forced to fight against their will for example.

bitwaba ,

The Geneva Conventions laws were built around the idea that while War is hell, War is also inevitable. The purpose was to provide a framework around the way war can be waged while trying to limit the atrocities committed while it is happening. Providing protections to prisoners of war and civilians in combat zones is beneficial to both sides because without those protections in place, it leads to an circle of escalation by both sides’ armies against those not actively engaged in combat against you (i.e. army A kills civilians, army B kills civilians asl retaliation, army A’s soldiers mistreat POWs as retaliation, army B’s soldiers no longer accept surrender from Army A in battles and executes those surrendering, etc)

So yes, admitting war is inherently barbaric and uncivilized. But that doesn’t do anything to help prevent the fact that war crimes happen in war. The goal of defining war crimes isn’t to make them something other that barbaric and uncivilized. It’s simply to try and set a soft limit on the level of crap an organized military can and/or should do to non combatants in order to facilitate a quicker end to the conflict instead of needing to eliminate every last living member of the other side in order to declare victory.

DoomBot5 ,

Those same conventions also have clauses around the usage of civilians to defend military targets. These same clauses make Israel’s strikes in fact not war crimes by the same Geneva Convention that people love quoting.

Also, another thing you have wrong. The Geneva convention isn’t as much laws as an agreement between countries, and more of a suggestion to other countries not part of it.

bitwaba ,

The Geneva Conventions are international humanitarian laws consisting of four treaties and three additional protocols that establish international legal standards for humanitarian treatment in war.

It’s the first line of the Wikipedia page. They’re laws because they are enforceable, and you have a trial for those that have violated those laws.

SirToxicAvenger ,

“War is simply the continuation of political intercourse with the addition of other means.” - Clausewitz

jimbo ,

I’m all for Israel defending themselves, but they’re not even trying to hide the fact that this is about revenge, not security.

ArbitraryValue ,

They apparently managed to kill Ibrahim Biari - he was near the top of the Hamas hierarchy. I’m impressed that they knew he was there.

TinyPizza ,
@TinyPizza@kbin.social avatar

Wolf seemed less impressed.

TWeaK ,

But how have they confirmed his death?

Death_Equity ,

They found his passport, Hamas ID, frequent Jihadi card with 9 punches, copy of his dental records, and most of his renowned holographic Pokemon card misprint collection.

bloopernova ,
@bloopernova@programming.dev avatar

And 3 copies of The Sims.

T00l_shed ,

No, not THOSE Sims, the other ones.

Zaktor ,

This whole thing follows on the crowning jewel of intelligence fuckups, so I wouldn’t take any of their claims too seriously.

ale ,

And it only took 4,000 dead children to get him. Yay!

SirToxicAvenger ,

if hamas wasnt hiding under that pile of bodies & had the courage to actually fight it out like armies are supposed to, not involving civilians at all then this conflict would have been over a few weeks ago

ale ,

If a bank robber takes hostages, do you order an air strike on the bank?

SirToxicAvenger ,

when has that ever happened?

ale ,

Just one of the most famous bank heists ever.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norrmalmstorg_robbery

conditional_soup ,

I think the average person knows something like sixty or seventy other people, IIRC. Israel flat out killed that many to get one guy; imagine every single person you know getting deleted instantly but the government saying “don’t worry, we got him, so it’s all good.” That’s without talking about the injured, that’s just the people who got immediately killed. Spree shooters have better target discipline than these fucks.

ArbitraryValue ,

You’re presupposing that a way to kill him without killing civilians existed, but I don’t think it’s a coincidence that so many civilians just happened to be around him. As long as he’s near civilians, Israel either has to avoid killing him or triggers international outrage, so of course he’s going to stay near civilians.

birthday_attack ,

Ah so the civilians were asking for it by standing in the vicinity of a Hamas leader. They should have moved to… where exactly? Considering the IDF has been bombing the exact same areas they marked for civilians to move into.

nbafantest ,

Hamas doesn’t seem to be enjoying this particular Finding Out phase.

ikidd ,
@ikidd@lemmy.world avatar

Neither are about 3000 children so far. And counting.

SirToxicAvenger ,

lol and it’ll be even less enjoyable next week.

Destraight ,

deleted_by_author

    •
    Neon ,

    ahh, yes, “the jews”…

    SirToxicAvenger ,

    if hamas werent cowards they wouldnt try (and fail) to hide in civilian camps. they do it because they have no actual chance in a real war. end result is more civilian casualties.

    tocopherol ,
    @tocopherol@lemmy.dbzer0.com avatar

    Can you show me the Hamas flags, vehicles, uniforms, etc that proves there even was a military target there?

    T1000 ,

    Why the fuck is a Scottish guy defending this

    SankaraStone ,
    @SankaraStone@lemmy.world avatar

    Yeah, the complex reality of Judaism, the Jewish people, Israel, and Israelis is fascinating. But it pales in comparison to the horror of what’s going on right now, and that needs to stop.

    TokenBoomer OP ,

    Fat Bastard was busy eating baaabies.

    Comfortably_Wet ,
    @Comfortably_Wet@lemmy.world avatar

    Technical speaking by hosting military units it became a legitimate target.

    War is hell, isn’t it?

    Thief_of_Crows ,

    You got any proof of that beyond “The genocidal state attacking them said so”? And further, since Israel is attacking all refugees, wouldn’t they thus all be enemy combatants? In which case it’d be like the Nazis saying they’re justified having concentration camps because they are at war with the Jews.

    atyaz ,

    This isn’t a war. A powerful and western-backed military state dropping chemical weapons on innocent civilians in response to a terrorist attack that those civilians had nothing to do with isn’t a war. It’s just a slaughter.

    Comfortably_Wet ,
    @Comfortably_Wet@lemmy.world avatar

    Stop using bad drugs. They make your stupid.

    Sparlock ,

    Technical speaking by hosting IDF military units the music festival became a legitimate target.

    Can you see how stupid and you sound?

    TimewornTraveler ,

    It’s not about what’s right and wrong, it’s about who will stop them. This is America’s war.

    WuTang ,
    @WuTang@lemmy.ninja avatar

    OK CNN, so ? at least you get clicks and time views.

    where’s the fucking flag "we stand with " you were throwing up at our face during Ukraine invasion ???

    thegoodyinthehoody ,

    Did he have a Scottish accent?

    TokenBoomer OP ,

    He did.

    kfet ,
    @kfet@lemmy.ca avatar

    I was talking about Chomsky. He is not trustworthy.

    ledtasso ,

    wat

    Rockyrikoko ,

    No one asked

    CosmicCleric ,
    @CosmicCleric@lemmy.world avatar

    Actually, that guy over there did. /points

    alwaysfallingupyup ,

    Im sure Hamas wasnt among them

    fosforus ,

    Oh? Why are you sure about that?

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • [email protected]
  • random
  • lifeLocal
  • goranko
  • All magazines
    •