Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)R
Posts
0
Comments
10
Joined
3 yr. ago

  • "Real world Russian capabilities are shown to be lacking, so the Red Menace are now Red Wizards."

  • You mean the canal that is entirely within Egypt? That argument seems like a stretch to me, and clearly wasn't the argument the above was trying to make either.

    They're a democracy and have historically been opposed to many counties the West was already opposed to. Their strategic importance is military, not oil.

    1. Unarmed protest is always an option. It's a harder option, but it is an option.
    2. Hamas could keep their weapons, and target actual military targets in Gaza.
    3. Israel already withdrew from Gaza in '06, but Hamas is happy to launch rockets at civilian targets in Israel.
    4. Hamas could launch rockets at civilian targets in Israel from non-civilian locations in Gaza, instead of using schools and hospitals.

    Hamas has consistently picked the most hostile options because Hamas doesn't just want a free Palestine, Hamas wants the destruction of Israel and rejects any territory existing as an Israeli state. Gaza isn't even fully isolated by Israel, but Egypt wants nothing to do with Hamas either.

    I'm not even saying armed resistance is wrong, but what Hamas does is. And yes, Israel's government is also just as wrong, if not more so.

  • Hey, don't forget those of us who made this mess and walked away,

    The early 20th century British Empire?

    through our continued oil addiction.

    Israel, let alone Gaza, don't exactly produce a lot of oil, and I certainly don't know that they sell it.

    This whole conflict in Israel is more about land, and the West supports Israel bEcAuSe DeMoCrAcY in an otherwise unfriendly region. The region as a whole might be messy "because oil," but that's rather tangential to this conflict.

  • Why should they not? They posted an inquiry, looking for advice. That is their reason for posting.

    They do not owe personal information beyond what is required to answer the question. And typically, with regards to anything resembling a legal matter, the less information posted publicly, the better.

  • I mean, kinda? They're also heavily descended from 7th Century AD Arabic conquerors, but yes, many other natives may have adopted Arabic culture, language and religion at that time.

    But Jewish culture is also derived from the Canaanite culture, with arguably more overlap. Jewish culture in the region can be traced back to at least the 9th Century BC, with the literal Kingdom of Israel. So the argument of "Well who was there first?" does not necessarily favor the Palestinians over the Israelis.

    This has always been happening though. It's not like the Ottomans took over the region peacefully. It's been conquered and re-conquered by Babylonians, Egyptians, Greeks, Romans...

  • That's been happening for the last 5,000 years in that region though, since the Canaanites.

    It's not like the Palestinians were the first there.

  • And where these are most popular, the police would choose not to do anything anyway.

  • There's nothing more capitalist than pushing coal and oil.

    And any rational green energy advocate knows it'll take us decades to build enough solar/wind to fill the fossil fuels gap, but would only take us a couple years to fill that demand with nuclear and also produce fewer emissions. That's simple numbers.

    So are you just irrational or a coal-snorting capitalist yourself?