Trump : Palestinians, please move out of GAZA. We (USA) will clean it up and make it the Riviera of the middle east. Then you can come back.

[bver_hunter]

Sorry bud. It was you making the loud and "noble" declaration that you condemn all terrorism. I challenged your assertion with valid reasons why I don't accept it at face value.

You have yet to refute my statement that when you provide what you consider "justifications" for the terror of Oct.7, you are not condemning it but promoting it. It is YOU who needs to start answering questions first because this is where our conversation began and you have provided no answers. Here's your chance.

Please reconcile how providing justifications for the Oct.7 terror attack fits in with condemning all terrorism.

I think that you are confused as hell. If I have condemned the acts of terrorism by Hamas on October 7th and in my past posts was even pissed off with when and why the Israelis did not move to protect these innocent ones giving Hamas a lot of time to conduct other attacks on residence in addition to the festival killings. How is that "justified" in your Fairy Tale Novel?
Clearly, the Israelis want a full investigation into the response or lack of it from the IDF at that time and place!!

So if Hamas was taken out at that time and place for their acts of terrorism, then I would have applauded the Israeli Army for eradicating them then and there and in a concise way!!
Hence you not sure why you think I justify those hideous acts of terrorism by Hamas!!

Another issue with your argument is the manner in which you lump these Hamas militants with the civilians who in your opinion is "justified" in their deaths, severe injuries and total destruction to their livelihoods and homes!!

 

[shack]

Then what is your issue in the first place when I condemned both Hamas for the Oct 7th killings as well as The Israeli killings of over 60,000 Palestinians, mainly women and children?
But I have not come across anyone condemning an act of killings and then stating in the same sentence that they were "justified" for it!!

But that's exactly what you did when you say that you condemned Oct,7 and then immediately referenced decades of occupation as justification/the root cause.

I have condemned both Hamas for what they did on Oct. 7th as well as Netanyahu's response with the indiscriminate killings of those Civilians.
The root cause is the Israeli resistance to the two State solution. Most Nations around the world agree with a separate Palestinian Homeland and not the illegal occupation that has been on the rise over the decades!!

And in your next post, here is the "whataboutism" justification.

Maybe you have not been aware that once upon a time there were Israeli terrorists such as The Irgun, and the Lehi, and designated as "Terrorists" by the British Government
They were conducting themselves in a similar manner to how Hamas

The only difference is that I was direct and blunt and in an "in your face" kind of way so that your insincere (IMO) condemnation of hamas terrorism was easier to see.

Our arguments may be worded differently, but they are exactly the same. We condemned something and then immediately gave justification for the thing we condemned.

If you want your posts to stand as is, with their justifications, then you have to accept my justification for Israel's response. Terrorism is terrorism and it is not a matter of degree. And either it is condemned fully and completely, full stop, or it has not been condemned.

 

[Frankfooter]

It keeps you morally pure.

Yes, once you decide you can vote for evil you lose all moral high ground.

Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect.

It brands you as no different than MAGA and means that all arguments about the rule of law or morality are a charade.
It becomes an argument about whether you should actively support killing 60,000 people or 1+ people instead of actively choosing to say 'don't kill people'.

 

[Frankfooter]

Which is why I asked you earlier what you'd have expected the US to do after October 7.
And if there was any attack in the past that equaled or exceeded the October 7 attack in magnitude.
You are holding on to an oversimplified narrative and your expectations of what the US should have done seems naive.
So Hamas attacks and kills 1200 Israelis, Israel responds and you'd have expected the US, an extremely close ally of Israel to pull support for Israel and ask them to stand down?
Trump had the benefit of coming to power when Biden negotiated the ceasefire.
But you'd still hold him above Biden, even with his history of signing EOs to ban Muslim entry into the US, advocate for creating Muslim registries, and his calls for ethnic cleansing in peace time?
Is there any doubt that, not 45000, but perhaps 90000 could have died if Trump was in power on October 7, followed by an ethnic cleansing?

You asked the wrong question.

You should ask what the US could have done to make sure an Oct 7 wouldn't happen. That would have been to force Israel to end apartheid, the blockade and the illegal occupation.

 

[Frankfooter]

But that's exactly what you did when you say that you condemned Oct,7 and then immediately referenced decades of occupation as justification/the root cause.

And in your next post, here is the "whataboutism" justification.

The only difference is that I was direct and blunt and in an "in your face" kind of way so that your insincere (IMO) condemnation of hamas terrorism was easier to see.

Our arguments may be worded differently, but they are exactly the same. We condemned something and then immediately gave justification for the thing we condemned.

If you want your posts to stand as is, with their justifications, then you have to accept my justification for Israel's response. Terrorism is terrorism and it is not a matter of degree. And either it is condemned fully and completely, full stop, or it has not been condemned.

Palestinians have the right to use force against an illegal occupation, according to international law.
If you want to end the resistance, end the illegal occupation.

UN General Assembly demands Israel end ‘unlawful presence’ in Occupied Palestinian Territory

 

[Frankfooter]

But there is no false dilemma being posed here.
You made the positive case for Trump in post 330.

Do you really think calling someone 'hitler lite' is making a positive case for them?

 

[Frankfooter]

Indeed, this gets directly to our differing views of what voting means.
If you view voting is about expressing/demonstrating a moral opinion, then saying there are only two choices is indeed a false dilemma.
If you view voting as selecting a government, then since there were only two viable winners, it isn't a false dilemma at all.

The logical conclusion to this is that you should always vote for the person who is likely to win, in this case trump.
Otherwise you wasted your vote.

 

[Frankfooter]

It doesn't actually.
Do the math.



Which is obviously something you can't assume.

The number of people who voted for Biden in 2020 and then voted for someone else or stayed home (not including those who died) isn't a number anyone has right now.
It will, in fact, be an incredibly difficult number to get.
Like I said elsewhere, Pew (which does some very serious voter validation work) will probably get closest to a realistic number sometime later this year or early next.

On the one hand you say the numbers are not clear and on the other hand you say I'm wrong to use reported numbers.

Right now, the most accurate numbers I've seen say that 12 million fewer people voted for Harris than Biden. That number is supported here.

Voter turnout in United States presidential elections - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

You are working very hard to discount the possibility that the poll that says 29% of those who voted for Biden and didn't vote for Harris did so because of her support of genocide.

It is not at all unreasonable to argue that Harris lost to Trump because of her support of genocide.

 

[Klatuu]

You asked the wrong question.

You should ask what the US could have done to make sure an Oct 7 wouldn't happen. That would have been to force Israel to end apartheid, the blockade and the illegal occupation.

There is the tiresome attempt to exceptionalize Oct 7 which inherently privileges Israeli lives. It’s flat out racist. But he’ll overlook a genocide of Palestinians to launder Biden and the Democrats. The racism stinks to high heaven.

 

[mandrill]

And there's this piece of dumbass shit from earlier today.

 

[Frankfooter]

There is the tiresome attempt to exceptionalize Oct 7 which inherently privileges Israeli lives. It’s flat out racist. But he’ll overlook a genocide of Palestinians to launder Biden and the Democrats. The racism stinks to high heaven.

Yes, zionists will back all attacks on Palestinians, claiming self defence of their illegal occupation and then declare only Oct 7 counts in a 76 year long occupation.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1715650896829309272

 

[mandrill]

 

[mandrill]

This is getting close to the point where Congress is going to have to impeach Trump and remove him.

Trump can't do the job any more.

Either that, or 25 him out of the WH.

 

[Shaquille Oatmeal]

You asked the wrong question.

You should ask what the US could have done to make sure an Oct 7 wouldn't happen. That would have been to force Israel to end apartheid, the blockade and the illegal occupation.

So that means every administration prior is guilty?
The pro-Palestinian vote did not sway the election.
The moderate Democrats in the swing states did.
So you need the Dems more than the Dems need you.
Unless of course you think Trump is the better moral choice, then, ok.
You made your bed, you lie in it.

 

[Klatuu]

You only think that because you do not accept the "you are picking a government" model.



Yes, all of that is the "My vote is a moral statement" model.
You take that as a given (after all, it is how it normally sold to people about why voting is important, so that's common).

But the US works under a system where that is at odds with the reality of voting.

Everybody voter knows they are voting for a government. It’s presupposed by the process. As for this moral statement model you refer to, it’s abundantly clear you have no idea what the word moral means. This is just some wacko personal view you’ve constructed.

 

[Frankfooter]

So that means every administration prior is guilty?
The pro-Palestinian vote did not sway the election.
The moderate Democrats in the swing states did.
So you need the Dems more than the Dems need you.
Unless of course you think Trump is the better moral choice, then, ok.
You made your bed, you lie in it.

Circular logic.

The US had the biggest protests since BLM, with 29% of those who voted for Biden and didn't vote for Harris saying the genocide was reason #1.
Every POTUS has been different in their support for Israel, but every one has had the option of backing peace.

Stein would have been the better choice, Sanders or AOC would have been a better choice.
trump and Harris were the worst choices.

You choose to accept that supporting genocide is better than working towards change.
That's your choice, not mine and not the choice of enough people to keep Harris out of power.

 

[Shaquille Oatmeal]

Only - and only - because Trump has not done it yet.

Trump wont do it even though he says the US is going to own Gaza.
He will give the go ahead and Netanyahu will do it.
This is why the pro-Palestinians had to choose Harris if they did not want that to happen.
But looks like punishing the Dems or voting their moral conscience was more important than practicality.

The logical conclusion to this is that you should always vote for the person who is likely to win, in this case trump.
Otherwise you wasted your vote.

How is that the logical conclusion?

 

[Klatuu]

So that means every administration prior is guilty?
The pro-Palestinian vote did not sway the election.
The moderate Democrats in the swing states did.
So you need the Dems more than the Dems need you.
Unless of course you think Trump is the better moral choice, then, ok.
You made your bed, you lie in it.

Inane

 

[Shaquille Oatmeal]

There is the tiresome attempt to exceptionalize Oct 7 which inherently privileges Israeli lives. It’s flat out racist. But he’ll overlook a genocide of Palestinians to launder Biden and the Democrats. The racism stinks to high heaven.

I dont exceptionalize October 7.
I understand it is part of a larger, long standing conflict.
I dont think anybody is saying that on October 6, everything was perfectly peaceful.
But October 7, and the subsequent Israeli response do stand on their own.
Without the October 7 attack, Gaza would still be standing. Miserable, yet standing.
When you want to resolve the conflict, perhaps considering the last 80 years is useful to set context.
But if you are discussing Israeli bombing of Gaza in 2023/24/25, you'd have to consider this on its own and then critique US reaction to it.
I dont understand where you see racism in all this.

 

[Klatuu]

You need to get your story straight. In one post you say Pro Palestinian votes had no impact and a couple of posts later you say if they had voted for Harris it would have made a difference.

The pro-Palestinian vote did not sway the election.

This is why the pro-Palestinians had to choose Harris if they did not want that to happen.