Comment by reliabilityguy | Hacker News Reader

Comment by reliabilityguy | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

> is being an apologist really the noble calling you think it is? Both are just words, mappings to concepts in our minds; "genocide" is an invented term, but it has a widely shared definition that the UN helped formalize

Great. Which describes a very specific thing. good.

> and in the minds of many, many people all over the world, the term applies here.

In minds of many people many things were acceptable. I am not sure this kind of reasoning is a good strategy. In minds of many Hutu, Tutsi did not deserve to live. Were Hutu right?

> "War" could one day be waged against whatever group you belong to, as well. You may wish for the country waging it to follow the Geneva Convention so that your sons gain a small chance of becoming POWs and returning to you, instead of being destroyed by an autonomous drone.

This is very good point. Unfortunately, Palestinians did not follow Geneva convention. Firing unguided rockets in barrages towards population centers with the goal of overwhelming air defense systems is very much non-conventional.

> Comments like yours endorse the actions that are being done;

How come? Do you see a difference between saying "it's okay to kill civilians" and debating the merits of using one term vs. another to describe an event?

> we're beginning to recognize the term "hasbara" for them.

It seems to me an easy way out. Why discuss the merits of an argument, if you can simply say "it's hasbara" and walk away?

> Were Hutu right?

I don't need to involve other conflicts in this situation. This is a "whataboutism". Wrongful actions in another conflict do not justify future conflicts. The actions the world has seen do not simply go away because of your comment. I don't need to rehash every factual news article on the topic to justify my position, nor do I need you to rehash the glazing opinion pieces that justify yours; we won't move the needle that way, will we?

> if you can simply say "it's hasbara" and walk away

I'm not walking away, but surely we can both see that there will be no agreement between us. All that I request is that you do not place an explosive device in a pager and send it to me, as that would be very inconsiderate; my neighbour works the night shift and the resulting shockwave would ruin his daytime sleep.

> I don't need to involve other conflicts in this situation. This is a "whataboutism".

No, “whataboutism” is using shifting a conversation to a different issue. For example:

Person A: "The democrats did X!"

Person B: "But the republicans..."

Person B is engaging in whataboutism.

I am not discussing Hutu. What I am doing is I am providing you an example why the reasoning that majority is never wrong is a fallacy via an example.

> Wrongful actions in another conflict do not justify future conflicts. The actions the world has seen do not simply go away because of your comment.

Neither because of yours. Palestinians shoot rockets towards civilians for the past 20 years. Tells us quite a lot who’s the “genocidal” here.

> I don't need to rehash every factual news article on the topic to justify my position, nor do I need you to rehash the glazing opinion pieces that justify yours; we won't move the needle that way, will we?

I am not trying to change your mind. I am posting here for others to see your double standards and flaws in your reasoning. They will see and judge themselves.

> All that I request is that you do not place an explosive device in a pager and send it to me, as that would be very inconsiderate; my neighbour works the night shift and the resulting shockwave would ruin his daytime sleep.

Interesting choice of words here. Should I ask you not to blow yourself on the bus, or in a cafe? Or in a wedding? This is good that you wrote it, it shows exactly what I wanted to see.

> Tells us quite a lot who’s the “genocidal” here.

I'll just quote Wikipedia for you:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Gaza_war

> As of 21 February 2026, at least 75,226 people (73,188+ Palestinians[4] and 2,039+ Israelis)[7][8][9][10] have been reported killed in the Gaza war according to the Gaza Health Ministry (GHM) and Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs, including 248 journalists and media workers,[11] 120 academics,[12] and over 224 humanitarian aid workers, a number that includes 179 employees of UNRWA.[13] Scholars have estimated 80% of Palestinians killed were civilians.[6][5][14] A study by OHCHR, which verified fatalities from three independent sources, found that 70% of the Palestinians killed in residential buildings or similar housing were women and children.[15][16]

> Should I ask you not to blow yourself on the bus, or in a cafe?

Nope, that's the wrong prejudice for my intersectional group, but it certainly reveals some of your own biases.

> I'll just quote Wikipedia for you:

And? What do these figures tell you? You are accepting a very lazy explanation for the disparity in the number of casualties and calling a day.

I will give you an example where with the same logic you will arrive to an unconventional conclusion. There was order of magnitudes more German civilians killed by the US forces during WW2 than the other way around. Does it mean that Nazi Germany are the good guys here? Probably no.

One alternative explanation why there was more Palestinians killed than Israelis is because:

1. Israelis have shelters, so they have places to hide from rockets

2. Israelis have Iron Dome and alert systems to alert civilians of incoming rockets

Palestinians did not have these things. Moreover, Gaza's government used underground facilities only for military purposes and did not allow civilians to hide there for the duration of hostilities.

As a result, it is reasonable to assume that there will be more causalities on the side that has fewer defenses.

But, you can stick to your intellectually lazy argument that paints a very specific picture.

> Nope, that's the wrong prejudice for my intersectional group, but it certainly reveals some of your own biases.

You have no idea what my biases are. You were the one who went with personal insinuations, not me. I just showed you that this type of discourse is not very productive as it lead nowhere.

So, what did your pager anxiety outburst tell us about your biases?

> So, what did your pager anxiety outburst tell us about your biases?

It told me to avoid public places for a few days until you move on to pestering some other commentator with your pro-genocide views.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com